Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5675565/

Topic: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-29 11:48:26 and read 15306 times.

Considering that AZ is in the red again should it try to trim its money-losing routes, which would be pretty much all its long-haul destinations. I doubt the yields are any good out of FCO, so I think AZ should focus on being an inter-european feeder airline and give up all the long-haul flying to AF/KL. I think I see AZ going the way of Olympic. Any thoughts?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: flyyul
Posted 2013-01-29 11:50:12 and read 15301 times.

Absolutely not. Longhaul is the only way they will survive. How is CSA/Malev/Olympic doing without Longhaul?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: santos
Posted 2013-01-29 12:05:04 and read 15159 times.

Quoting miaintl (Thread starter):
which would be pretty much all its long-haul destinations

Probably the problem is not long-haul, but short-haul.
LH, AF, BA, all struggle to make a profit on their short-haul routes, hence new ideas/airlines have been created to operate short-haul flights.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: Navion
Posted 2013-01-29 12:12:39 and read 15074 times.

Quoting santos (Reply 2):
Probably the problem is not long-haul, but short-haul.

You're right. Shorthaul is where most of the erosion of Alitalia's market (and subsequent lower yeilds) has occurred, mainly due to Ryanair and Easyjet. Longhaul seems to do pretty well. For example, AZ's loads out of MIA are usually pretty good. The 2 times I've flown them to FCO they were completely full 772's and each time I've priced them, their cost has been as high or higher than the competition (which involves and extra stop compared to AZ's nonstops). It is ironic to me that the original poster on this thread has a name miaintl given his idea AZ should give up longhaul and AZ's longhaul prowess from MIA.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: cargolex
Posted 2013-01-29 12:12:42 and read 15075 times.

Going short-haul only would leave the airline directly in competition with the European LCCs, who would eat AZ's lunch. It would be better to dump unprofitable short-haul routes but keep the long haul routes and improve their yields by trying to appeal to premium travelers.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-29 14:03:32 and read 14596 times.

As long as they are based out of FCO their yields will always be crap. Only out of MXP can AZ operate long-haul profitably. There is no reason for AZ to fly long-haul anymore in this current environment. They have no hub system to feed their long-haul routes and they have no premium traffic helping either. Rome and southern Italy are low-yield and not premium oriented. There is a reason FCO can never be a hub like AMS/CDG. So going forward AZ should just feed all of its long-haul traffic to CDG ad AF and just be a feeder carrier.

[Edited 2013-01-29 14:13:47]

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: WAC
Posted 2013-01-29 17:34:03 and read 14177 times.

AZ lost the battle long ago, losing out to lucrative corportate accounts to LH, AF_KL, and BA. The whole rational behind CAI's takeover was to consolidate with AP and for basically the owners to "motivate" other italian based companies to switch contracts back to AZ (CAI is made out of the main industrial and finacial powerhouses oi Italy (sans FIAT and baboon Berlusconi).

With the de-hubbing of Milan intercontinental routes, and poor scheduling of the remaining long-haul from MXP, this has become unattractive.

AZ has come a long way since it was taken over but the global financial crisis followed by the Euro crisis has not helped.

Italy can support a MIL based long haul carrier while FCO can have a seasonal/charter long haul carrier. I now do not think AZ can continue to be that airline.

CAI should done an LX whereby transferring all assets and brand to AP.

Regrettably as most things happen in Italy it not what the potential of country that shines through but concoction of despicable politicians, a powerful underground criminal lobby (which today is more and more involved in business activities) sucks the innovation and entrepreneur spirit out of this great country.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: AA94
Posted 2013-01-29 17:42:35 and read 14133 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 5):
As long as they are based out of FCO their yields will always be crap. Only out of MXP can AZ operate long-haul profitably. There is no reason for AZ to fly long-haul anymore in this current environment. They have no hub system to feed their long-haul routes and they have no premium traffic helping either. Rome and southern Italy are low-yield and not premium oriented. There is a reason FCO can never be a hub like AMS/CDG. So going forward AZ should just feed all of its long-haul traffic to CDG ad AF and just be a feeder carrier.

This does not compute.

I agree that the region is low-yielding, but that's just it; long-haul flying with premium cabins is the closest thing to profitability that they have. Becoming a short-haul "feeder carrier" on incredibly low-yielding, ultra-competitive routes is an all but certain suicide. At that point, AZ should just pack up and go home. It would be impossible to climb back out from that hole.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: enilria
Posted 2013-01-29 17:47:56 and read 14117 times.

Quoting miaintl (Thread starter):
Considering that AZ is in the red again should it try to trim its money-losing routes, which would be pretty much all its long-haul destinations.
Quoting santos (Reply 2):
Probably the problem is not long-haul, but short-haul.
LH, AF, BA, all struggle to make a profit on their short-haul routes, hence new ideas/airlines have been created to operate short-haul flights.

Exactly, I bet short-haul is as bad or worse.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: behramjee
Posted 2013-01-29 18:08:26 and read 14021 times.

Quoting flyyul (Reply 1):
Absolutely not. Longhaul is the only way they will survive. How is CSA/Malev/Olympic doing without Longhaul?

totally correct 100% as you need long haul to feed the short haul and v.v

if you only rely on short haul, then for a carrier like AZ it would become heavily reliant on O&D traffic bound to Italy as its geographical location within the EU is not as attractive as FRA/MUC/ZRH which are central to enable Western EU to connect nicely to the East and Centre via a short transit. Plus O&D in Europe is engulfed with LCC competition leading to yields being not as high as they are on domestic USA flights.

AZ's cost structure is indeed a problem and going into a broad based alliance with Etihad should in the long run help them as it would allow them to sell many offline points in Asia with EY via AUH on a code share basis rather than operating it unprofitably using their own metal.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: cedarjet
Posted 2013-01-29 19:01:27 and read 13854 times.

They do well flying from both FCO and MXP to NRT, most of the pax are high yield Japanese tourists. AZ are the only airline flying between Italy and Japan so fares are pretty high* and the product is very good. NRT gets 12 flights per week and I think they also serve KIX (not sure freq / origin).

* except when they're accidentally selling daytrips to Asia for €99 - I only did two of those! One a.netter did two back to back!

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: jayunited
Posted 2013-01-29 19:15:56 and read 13800 times.

If AZ gives up all long haul flying what will they have left??
There is no way all of their long haul routes are loosing money and if they cut all long haul flights they might as well go out of business because they can not compete against European LCC's.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: AR385
Posted 2013-01-29 19:23:46 and read 13755 times.

Quoting miaintl (Thread starter):
Considering that AZ is in the red again should it try to trim its money-losing routes
Quoting miaintl (Reply 5):
As long as they are based out of FCO their yields will always be crap. Only out of MXP can AZ operate long-haul profitably. There is no reason for AZ to fly long-haul anymore in this current environment. They have no hub system to feed their long-haul routes and they have no premium traffic helping either. Rome and southern Italy are low-yield and not premium oriented. There is a reason FCO can never be a hub like AMS/CDG. So going forward AZ should just feed all of its long-haul traffic to CDG ad AF and just be a feeder carrier.

Well. After four responses, you seem to have made up your mind and answered your own question...

I don´t think AZ´s troubles are with long haul. Not even short haul. Their problem is their service, which is like IB´s. Not as bad, but in the same league. And their crappy management. It does not help that Milan has two airports, MXP and Linate.

If customers that used to fly AZ are flying FR and Easyjet, well, AZ then needs to model istself in short haul after one of those two. Kind of what IB is attempting to do.

[Edited 2013-01-29 19:39:03]

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: IL96M
Posted 2013-01-30 01:31:54 and read 11761 times.

AZ should stop flying, full stop. Or more exactly, be allowed to go the way of SN and SR and collapse, and be reborn as a new national carrier that is privatised and really works. The current AZ fails to shake off the old shackles of Italian state-run businesses and here is the result.

  

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: CARST
Posted 2013-01-30 01:39:11 and read 11679 times.

I agree that this is not a question of longhaul vs shorthaul, it is not that only one of the areas can be profitable.

It they can fill their longhaul aircraft with average prices and even have some freight to fill the bellies there is no reason to give up longhaul flying.

Regarding shorthaul I might agree that a good number oft their routes might not be profitable anymore. Perhaps they should only sustain their shorthaul routes into their hubs to feed the longhaul aircraft and stop flying all non-hub spoke-to-spoke routes. Or like mentioned by other users above they could create a LCC like LH (4U), AF (hop) and IB (IB Express) have done and let the LCC do all the spoke-to-spoke flying, with AZ keeping its hub-to-spoke routes to get enough feed into their longhaul-network.


If they can NOT fill their longhaul planes, the above mentioned plan would make no sense, too. In this case they could only lower service standards and wages to compete on a LCC basis with FR, U2, etc. and just feed into AMS and CDG. But I don't see that happening as the Italian unions would never accept lower income.
So for AZ the only option is to make their longhaul-network a profitable one. Or they can go into liquidation right away.


Basically that is the problem for all European network carriers, they are profitable longhaul (or have to be profitable on this sector), but are loosing on the shorthaul side. Perhaps they can turn that around with the LCC model on their spoke-to-spoke routes. But most of the times a race to the bottom will always have some winners and some losers, it is never a win-win situation for every player involved in the game.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: CARST
Posted 2013-01-30 01:41:56 and read 11659 times.

To add to my last post: I agree with others here, that longhaul flying out of MXP would probably much more higher yielding and profitable compared to FCO. And it would help MXP remain a strong hub and not loose more and more flying to LIN, which just has the advantage of being closer to the city center.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-30 03:21:08 and read 10945 times.

Quoting CARST (Reply 15):

The reason why short-haul is not profitable for AZ is because of FCO. Passengers have to back-track to connect to AZ long-haul flights. The whole Rome as hub idea needs to be scrapped because it does not work. I think an anetter named Wisdom already demonstrated that.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: CARST
Posted 2013-01-30 04:14:10 and read 10511 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 16):

Not counting the O+D market, they still have enough opportunity to connect a lot of worldwide points from FCO.

North America - Africa/Southeast Europe/Russia/Asia
Africa - all Europe/Russia/Asia

Heck, the more southern location of FCO might even be an advantage. Would I go FRA-CDG-ADD? I don't think so. But would I go FRA-FCO-ADD? Oh yes, no backtracking involved.

Don't quote me on saying FCO is a better hub than MXP, I am all for MXP, much wealthier O+D market in Northern Italy, but still, FCO is not as bad as sometimes pointed out here on a.net. The location has its pros and cons, with the cons being its location as transit hub for Europe to NA/Asia, as long as 1 hour more on a 12 hour flight is really important to the traveller. ^^

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: AIR MALTA
Posted 2013-01-30 06:01:09 and read 9530 times.

Quoting CARST (Reply 17):
Heck, the more southern location of FCO might even be an advantage. Would I go FRA-CDG-ADD? I don't think so. But would I go FRA-FCO-ADD? Oh yes, no backtracking involved.

You're right. Africa is still underserved and AZ should go down that road and increase its coverage of Africa. It could fly smaller A319s to many Saharan and North African destinations (Libya and Algeria mainly) and connect them to the world.
BTW, AZ is starting flights to Oran in Algeria. Might be a sign of things to come.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: chootie
Posted 2013-01-30 06:13:32 and read 9394 times.

Quoting CARST (Reply 14):
LCC like LH (4U), AF (hop) and IB (IB Express) have done and let the LCC do all the spoke-to-spoke flying, with AZ keeping its hub-to-spoke routes to get enough feed into their longhaul-network.

.... Lets see how these LCC within a company pan out. There is, as of now, NO financial stats on just how well they are--will be doing. In this industry, it is all on shakey ground.

FWIW, I really do not think the LCC within a company model will prove to be advantageous.         

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: KL577
Posted 2013-01-30 06:54:56 and read 8930 times.

Quoting flyyul (Reply 1):
How is CSA/Malev/Olympic doing without Longhaul?

Malev decided to both do away with long-haul and short-haul flying. Didn't work out too well for them!

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-30 07:49:24 and read 8418 times.

Is there a chance that AZ will ever move its hub back to Milan or are they really commited to keeping Rome as the main hub? Is it the main reason that AZ is losing money on short-haul flights is that passengers from other parts of Europe have to backtrack to get to AZ? I think that the choice to keep the hub at FCO is mostly due to political pressure and lobbying not becasue it makes any sense from a buisness and financial persepective. But after all this is Italy, when was the last time you have seen Italians make good buisness descisions or even run a company profitably?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-01-30 08:18:58 and read 8104 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 5):
As long as they are based out of FCO their yields will always be crap. Only out of MXP can AZ operate long-haul profitably.

Catch-22, choose your poison.

Rome, a larger but lower yielding market.

Milan a smaller volume but more a business market.

Volume wise you can support more destinations at Rome then smaller Milan.

Quoting WAC (Reply 6):
Italy can support a MIL based long haul carrier while FCO can have a seasonal/charter long haul carrier.

You realize that FCO is a larger market right? Look at longhaul airlines that service Milan, its less then Rome.

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 10):
They do well flying from both FCO and MXP to NRT, most of the pax are high yield Japanese tourists.

High yielding Japanese tourist  

Japanese tourist are known around the world as being one of the lowest yielding.
Japanese are a nation where travel is very much built around mass group tourism and tour companies that negotiate very favorable low rates from airlines. Individual tourism is not a very popular thing in Japan.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 21):
Is there a chance that AZ will ever move its hub back to Milan

The split airport situation in Milan makes a Malpensa hub not feasible. When domestic and European capital services opt for Linate, your MXP hub losses its connectivity and feed.

This is a huge achilles heel in anyone trying to turn MXP into a hub.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: delimit
Posted 2013-01-30 09:35:26 and read 7454 times.

AZ is part of the AF/DL/KL JV. You can bet all of that flying is profitable for them.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: cedarjet
Posted 2013-01-30 09:47:19 and read 7314 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 22):
Quoting cedarjet (Reply 10):
They do well flying from both FCO and MXP to NRT, most of the pax are high yield Japanese tourists.

High yielding Japanese tourist  

Japanese tourist are known around the world as being one of the lowest yielding.
Japanese are a nation where travel is very much built around mass group tourism and tour companies that negotiate very favorable low rates from airlines. Individual tourism is not a very popular thing in Japan.

I knew when I typed this that any leisure traveller is not as high yield as a biz traveller who doesn't even know the fare; but the Japanese do pay extra for quality. I am sure there are cheaper ways of reaching southern Europe from Japan (sandbox carriers, or SU, PK, etc) but AZ command a premium with nonstop flights, Japanese cabin crew, Japanese catering etc.

PS I hope this is true or Skymark are going to have a problem with their low density leisure A380s, which my Japanese friends tell me will be a good fit for the market. I hope so!

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-30 10:47:57 and read 6954 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 22):

If that is the case then why do London and Paris operate numerous airports without it harming their LHR and CDG hub? What makes Milan different than those other cties. Even Tokyo operates two large hubs without it causing problems for eachother. Linate can also be expanded and a second runway can be added aswell as a large midfield terminal where AZ can operate its long-haul flights. There is plenty of room for expansion east of Linate. Or the other option is to close Linate and move everything to MXP.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-01-30 11:24:52 and read 6614 times.

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 24):
AZ command a premium with nonstop flights, Japanese cabin crew, Japanese catering etc.

Unfortunately the numbers don't really show this.

Per IATA BSP data - here is the average ticket fare (in Euros) earned by 10 airlines between Tokyo and Italy.

NRT - FCO
LH: 579
KL: 555
LX: 551
AZ: 537
EK: 533
AF: 528
TK: 524
BA: 510
AY: 474
OS: 447

NRT- MXP
LX: 737
LH: 690
AF: 648
OS: 638
BA: 636
KL: 622
AZ: 598
EK: 586
AY: 551
TK: 493

So even with a nonstop to a home market, AZ in many cases earns less per passenger then what competitors generate.

(data is for 12-month period through June 2012)

Quoting miaintl (Reply 25):
What makes Milan different than those other cties.

Tokyo, Paris or London are huge global cities, and are centers of population, travel and commerce for their respective countries, they support multiple airports.

Milan's population is mere 1.3mil (your Dade County has double the population) - or about 5.2 million if the entire regional urban area is considered.

Northern Italy is also a very fragmented market full of other local airports (Venice, Bologna, Genoa, Torino, etc) plus people that automatically look to across the border options. (maybe you have heard Munich referred to "Italy's Northern most airport".)

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: jfk777
Posted 2013-01-30 11:49:38 and read 6478 times.

Rome is the problem, its too far south. Milan and Northern Italians love Munich and Zurich, they are Italy's "two Northern Airports." AZ has a limted network of destinations on any continent, it doesn't fly to Hong Kong or Singapore in Asia, Mexico City, Johannesburg , Houston, San Francisco, Washington, Atlanta or Montreal. EZE, GRU and GIG while important cities do not make a significant Latin Ameruan Network, its most VFR passengers.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-30 12:55:56 and read 6336 times.

Then what is the solution for AZ going forward? If they cannot move their hub to Milan then what does it need to do to make a profit?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: CARST
Posted 2013-01-30 13:14:57 and read 6248 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 26):
Unfortunately the numbers don't really show this.

Per IATA BSP data - here is the average ticket fare (in Euros) earned by 10 airlines between Tokyo and Italy.

I assume these numbers are only for O+D pax ending their flights at FCO/MXP?

Because I think to have a clear picture on the money earned by AZ on the NRT routes we have to look at the connecting pax, too. When I flew FCO-NRT in November, nearly all Y pax were made of two Japanese travel groups, one coming in from LHR, while the other one came in with me on the A321 from CDG (I think I was one of three Europeans on a nearly sold out A321). I know I can't judge by one longhaul flight, but it makes me think they might be doing good to Japan connecting travel groups from Japan to all over Europe and back...

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: flyyul
Posted 2013-01-30 14:13:19 and read 6172 times.

Miaintl - you're really out of touch with the market it seems. You're aware that more international carriers fly to Rome because the market is bigger and more profitable  

Alitalia has to do as follows (in my opinion)
1- build more long-haul. Alitalia should be in markets such as Shanghai, Delhi, Dubai, Montreal, Jo'burg, Washington.

2- reduce their unit cost by enhancing seating density. Seating density is the largest controllable cost for an airline. 10 abreast on all 777s - reduce size of magnifica class. Get overall seat count up to 320. Dump the 330-200 for 330-300s or reducing size of magnifica on 332s to enhance total seating. Alitalia has 2 ex-Air One A330-200 with 281 seats... this is the model they need to adopt

This is the KLM model - take a hint AZ!

3- reduce domestic services to minimum feed role in/out of Malpensa/Fiumicino.

Italy is a huge market and although Rome is a bit removed from Northern Italy - it serves very well as the airport for Toscana, Umbria, Lazio, Campania etc.

Alitalia really needs to focus. It will only survive if it becomes a better 6th freedom airline, and focus on driving profits volume through leisure traffic. The market potential is certainly there. Italy is not a huge premium market - it needs to let a portion of that business go to LH/LX.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-01-30 14:14:12 and read 6160 times.

Yes its only O&D.

If you want to look at beyond points such as CDG for example AF earns almost €150 over what AZ earns. LHR is even greater with BA generating €200 more over AZ connection on the segment.

Another item that could be of interest could be the AZ market share.
For example on NRT-FCO AZ has a market share of 40% of the 12-month traffic while NRT-MXP is lower at 32%.

The only meaningful beyond markets where AZ has marketshare from Japan are domestic - Naples(57%), Bologne(24%), Venice(15%). They dont exceed 5% in any beyond European city. (atleast the big ones which I quickly looked on).

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-01-30 14:48:57 and read 6085 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 31):
Another item that could be of interest could be the AZ market share.
For example on NRT-FCO AZ has a market share of 40% of the 12-month traffic while NRT-MXP is lower at 32%.

I assume those market share numbers only consider direct services, and not the many thousands of passengers who connect at other European hubs, either online or interline?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-01-30 15:07:31 and read 6047 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 32):
I assume those market share numbers only consider direct services, and not the many thousands of passengers who connect at other European hubs, either online or interline?

No, the market share is inclusive of connections.

Considering there is no other scheduled nonstop service between Japan and Italy, AZ has 100% of the nonstop marketshare, but hardly anything close to that when the entire traffic pie is looked at with bulk of passengers routing via other airlines.

So in summary what the market share number mean in case of Milan is that 7 of 10 Tokyo passenger utilize multistop routings to get between the cities. AZ only captures 3 of the 10 with its nonstop.

[Edited 2013-01-30 15:20:06]

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: WAC
Posted 2013-01-30 17:45:33 and read 5883 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 22):
You realize that FCO is a larger market right? Look at longhaul airlines that service Milan, its less then Rome.

FCO is only larger market due to the fact that there is only one airport .. CIA is very small and not much room to grow . Add BGY, MXP, MIL (and let us put LUG) and you will find that the MIL market is far larger and higher yielding.

Having more long-haul airlines at FCO makes more sense for a MIL based long-haul carrier has there is less competition.

MXP could be a super hub if they had more high-speed rail services to the rest of Italy (currently 2) make LIN a domestic and GA only airport.
FCO does even have high speed rail station.
MIL has both more potential, a larger more lucrative market, and in-fact has public transport infrastructure (in particular high speed rail and motorways). And it is getting better all the the time, with rail connections to LUG, and already Bellinzona, the Varese-Como-Bergamo, motorway presently being built will mean shorter and faster to Eastern Italy.

Add that MIL cargo loads are for 10000000000000000x better than anything that goes to FCO, MIL is the market to be in not FCO.
(please also note pre-prioritization 100% of AZ crew were based at FCO and lived in a Rome, so for cost reasons this meant a MIL hub was cumbersome and expensive (half the planes FCO-MXP were with crew back in MXP hub days))

Politics and corruption along with trade unions which enjoy fascist era powers are the market forces in Italy.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: CARST
Posted 2013-01-30 23:48:16 and read 5684 times.

Quoting WAC (Reply 34):
make LIN a domestic and GA only airport.

I am overall agreeing with you WAC, but perhaps instead of making LIN a domestic airport only I would prefer a LGA based system of a distance-limit. Like a maximum of 300nm or something like this. That would stop complains from other nations that AZ gets an advantage for being to only (legacy) being allowed to operate to LIN. If you limit it by distance, because the airport is so small / to close to the city center etc. (or by slots which are auctioned off perhaps?) no EU court ruling could kill that plan to boost MXP and reduce LIN.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-31 02:13:02 and read 5574 times.

Can LIN be expanded in order to accomodate widebody and longhaul traffic? Can a new terminal and second runway be built?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: CARST
Posted 2013-01-31 02:58:53 and read 5502 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 36):

I'd say YES. At least theoretically. But practically this would be another case. We know what happens today if you want to build an airport or extend one. In this case it is very close to the city center and a lot of NIMBYS might pose a problem, too.

Lots of room east of the airport for expansion east of Mezzate:
http://maps.google.de/maps?q=linate&...51788831972905568&t=h&z=14

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-31 03:38:39 and read 5446 times.

What is your prediction for the future of AZ? Can they continue to operate a hub out of FCO profitably or do they have to switch the operations back to MXP somewhere down the line?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: jfk777
Posted 2013-01-31 04:06:29 and read 5429 times.

AZ should stop flying to Japan and sell its 777 fleet. Its should fly only its lighter A330-200 concentraing long haul to flights under 11 hours, no more LAX. Alitalia doesn't need to fly everywhere there are 100,000 people of Italian descent, Argentina is a country they don't need to fly to.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-31 05:55:03 and read 5314 times.

Exactly AZ should really cut alot of its long-haul flying. There is no reason why it should have premium-configured 777s out of FCO. It should only focus on long-haul flights to JFK, MIA and YYZ. But I truly believe that alot of its problems are due to it being based in FCO. The Italian government wants to bail out AZ on Monday by giving it a 200 million dollar loan. Is this not againts the EU constitution??

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: leftyboarder
Posted 2013-01-31 06:00:47 and read 5303 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 40):

Exactly AZ should really cut alot of its long-haul flying.

Italy is Europe's 4th largest economy, right? I don't get how it can't support a fraction of what AF/BA/LH can in terms of long haul. Heck, it is even behind IB/KL/LX and not too much larger than AY in terms of long haul.

BTW, I do't understand why AZ can't exploit its location like BA, AY or IB/TP do. IB/TP are close to LatAm so they focus there, BA focuses on North America, AY on Asia... Can't AZ rival SN or AF to Africa?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-31 06:17:58 and read 5273 times.

AZ can only compete with those other airlines if it is based at MXP. As long as it is based in FCO it will be at a disadvantage and remain uncompetetive. AZ is only expanding to places north of Rome and Italy which makes no sense if it were to base its hub at FCO:

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: flyyul
Posted 2013-01-31 06:50:46 and read 5230 times.

You have trouble understanding that AZ lost many billions of dollars at Malpensa.

Last time AZ reported a profit was Q3 last year, and the hub was at FCO

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: CARST
Posted 2013-01-31 07:12:33 and read 5187 times.

Quoting flyyul (Reply 43):
You have trouble understanding that AZ lost many billions of dollars at Malpensa.

But that was still was a double-hub philosophy at FCO and MXP.

The question is would it be better for them to have chosen MXP instead of FCO as the sole remaining hub? And could they still change back to MXP without the costs killing them?

Like I said before, I think a European shorthaul operation is only doable either with a LCC model or a (accepted) money-loosing hub-to-spoke model which gets subsidized by the longhaul division of the airline. And the longhaul hub should be placed where all the money is. That would be MXP, not FCO.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: flyyul
Posted 2013-01-31 07:46:45 and read 5169 times.

Quoting CARST (Reply 44):
But that was still was a double-hub philosophy at FCO and MXP.

The question is would it be better for them to have chosen MXP instead of FCO as the sole remaining hub? And could they still change back to MXP without the costs killing them?

Like I said before, I think a European shorthaul operation is only doable either with a LCC model or a (accepted) money-loosing hub-to-spoke model which gets subsidized by the longhaul division of the airline. And the longhaul hub should be placed where all the money is. That would be MXP, not FCO.

There was no "double hub". FCO had service to NRT, EZE, GRU, JFK..and seasonal service to YYZ/EWR.

MXP had service to PVG, DXB, DEL, YYZ, IAD, KIX, EZE, GRU, CCS, JFK, EWR, ORD, MIA, NRT, SFO etc etc.

The problem is there's no yield in the hub and spoke system. The yield comes from local traffic - where revenue isn't pro-rated over two legs. In Milan - Linate has all the local traffic. Nobody flies to MXP when LIN is the preferred option. The feeder business becomes a huge loss making entity has the only yield onboard is cheap traffic support long-haul.

AZ would then have to do the following;
1.) Increase the long-haul critical mass significantly (assuming profit was being made on MXP international services) to compensate for a horribly performing feed operation

and or

2.) Reduce all LIN ops. So LIN-LHR/CDG/FCO/NAP/CTA/PMO/SUF/ZRH/AMS/FRA/MUC would all be flown by the competition - weakening AZ in the domestic market and losing the profits made in the business segment of "ultra-high yielding" MIL market.

3.) Give up on FCO entirely. FCO is a HUGE market with significant profit potential for AZ - and there's no guarantee that AZ could recapture a meaningful portion of the FCO market through MXP - when competitors such as Emirates, Turkish, Qatar, American, Lufthansa, Air Canada, United, Korean exist.


Again you can't create a hub in dual hub city. AZ has to make best efforts at FCO. AZ needs to cheapen its cost base by enhancing seating density - and focus on valuable feed markets to support longhaul (where local market demand also exists).

The MIL support keep dancing around the issue. Nobody wants to tackle the real problem at AZ - its COST BASE! The biggest driver of cost, seating density. This also drives market positioning. AZ can't compete in the high-end market, time to downscale and become more of a KLM type of operator.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: dc9northwest
Posted 2013-01-31 09:04:13 and read 5054 times.

They will stay in FCO. They made their choice.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 42):
AZ can only compete with those other airlines if it is based at MXP. As long as it is based in FCO it will be at a disadvantage and remain uncompetetive. AZ is only expanding to places north of Rome and Italy which makes no sense if it were to base its hub at FCO:

I can only ask, what happened to you in Rome?

Anyway, I disagree. I'd expand strongly in Africa before it's too late, leaving the hub in FCO, where the yields are much better than in North America or Asia. You can have a short-haul hub in LIN taking care of some European connections, although I believe LIN is close to capacity now. You cannot move the hub back out to MXP, as you'll lose the high yielding traffic.

Quoting flyyul (Reply 45):
In Milan - Linate has all the local traffic.

Right. At least the traffic that makes an airline its money.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-01-31 09:29:23 and read 5036 times.

But FCO has little to no high-yielding traffic. AZ is not expanding to places like Africa and the Middle East but is instead expanding to places like VIE, PRG, and ZRH, three destinations that are not worth flying from FCO. What kind of Feed can AZ offer to these flights? Certainly not long-haul feed since AZ almost has none. The only feed they can provide is to Southern Italy and North Africa, which are both money-losing low-yielding high density markets. If AZ was smart they would sell all their 777 and 330 aircraft and let AF/KL operate the long-haul traffic. AZ can feed Southern Italy to CDG/AMS and fullfill its niche that way. The days of every european airline flying long-haul are over. These days only BA, AF, KL, LH/LX, and to a lesser extent IB can fly long-haul profitably. I think there is a reason Olympic could not make a ATH hub work, because like FCO Athens is a low-yielding poorly located destination.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: flyyul
Posted 2013-01-31 09:37:49 and read 5036 times.

Miaintl - if Rome is such a lousy premium destination, then why do Emirates/Thai/Korean/United/American/Delta/Singapore/Cathay participate in this market?

We talked about how to mitigate low-yielding - its called densing up cabin configs.

Italy is a country of 60 million people, a huge tourism draw, and in a strategic geographic area. Alitalia can support longhaul but management needs to re-focus on an economic model that works for the reality of the market. Alitalia need only look at KLM and draw some lessons on how to make money in a low-yield environment.

Now can you please consider people's arguments before you respond

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: ComeAndGo
Posted 2013-01-31 16:45:54 and read 4844 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 22):
You realize that FCO is a larger market right? Look at longhaul airlines that service Milan, its less then Rome.

On the face it looks like that but in reality in past governments foreign airlines had a choice of either serving Rome or serving Rome and the destination they actually wanted to serve. If say and Asian airline wanted to fly to Venice the airline would be required to have an established flight to Rome first and then it would be given the possibility to apply for rights to serve Venice as well. It was only in the last Berlusconi government where this BS was stopped.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-01 08:26:44 and read 4611 times.

Quoting flyyul (Reply 48):

I am considering your arguments however they still fall flat. FCO is good as an O&D destination not as a transfer hub. AZ is exapnding in all the wrong places, places it should not expand to if it wants to operate an effecient hub at FCO. Places like CPH, KRW, ZRH are better served from a Milan hub. Plus once AZ gets taken over by new shareholders Monday a move back to MXP will be inevitable. AZ has no other option if it wants to stay afloat. The 777s are all premium configured which is why AZ should sell them.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: AR385
Posted 2013-02-01 08:39:21 and read 4592 times.

Can anybody provide some hard numbers that prove FCO is such low yield? I find this very hard to believe, but I may be wrong.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-02-01 09:25:23 and read 4562 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 50):
a move back to MXP will be inevitable.

And huge losses to go along with it.


Lets look at this from maybe an angle you can understand.

Linate is close to your home and for our discussion is Miami Intl - an airport close to the city center so its close to the population and commerce. Instead of multiple runways like MIA, its a single runway facility that see frequent and popular domestic and European flights. But due to size and space it cant support longhauls.

Malpensa however is up in Palm Beach, or somewhere in the Everglades. It has room, ample runways and is where you can operate longhauls from. However its rather unattractive due to distance for the local and visitor coming in on domestic or European services.

So the airline is left running a split operation. Popular European and domestic services remain at the consumer attractive close by LIN, while long-hauls are stuck at distant MXP. However Milan is not a very big market to support so much longhauls on its own so it needs feed. The airline then must add duplicate domestic and European flights to help feed the MXP hub, however it also ends up discounting these flights and compete against its own and competitors LIN service trying to fill them.

So back to the Miami analogy. If you are simply going up to NYC or Atlanta would you not prefer to do it from nearby MIA Intl instead of driving to PBI or somewhere out in the Everglades? Same happens to the millions in Milan which happily choose Linate over Malpensa for their travel needs.

AZ going back to MXP would simply be a repeat of the past disasters.
Atleast with Rome even with its more tourist bent it can run a hub with everything under a single roof at single airport.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-01 09:47:28 and read 4520 times.

Then they should close LIN and operate everything out of MXP and under a single-roof. MXP will be Milan sole airport, or at the least LIN can be handed over to the LCC and MXP gets AZ completely. FCO is not a profitable hub for AZ it involves too much backtracking to serve as a conveniant connecting point. I would like to see numbers that prove that FCO is profitable, I can assure you AZ's short-haul routes are not.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: dc9northwest
Posted 2013-02-01 09:54:16 and read 4506 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 53):
Then they should close LIN and operate everything out of MXP and under a single-roof.

Alitalia, out of business.

I guess that's the headline you're looking for with that move.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-01 10:04:27 and read 4469 times.

Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 54):

They can provide high-speed rail service from MXP so that passengers can reach the city center quicker. Plus we are not talking about O&D but transfer passengers that will make MXP work. AZ is going out of buisness by operating out of FCO which is giving up Italy to the low-cost carriers.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-02-01 10:20:58 and read 4444 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 53):
Then they should close LIN and operate everything out of MXP and under a single-roof.

You can try. Maybe except making environmentalist happy, I don't believe there is any viable push to close Linate.

It be like closing LGA or DCA in the US.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 53):
or at the least LIN can be handed over to the LCC and MXP gets AZ completely.

And the consumer will still choose to fly from LIN, whether on competitors like EasyJet, Lufthansa, Air France, Swiss, etc.. at the expense of AZ.

Alitalia would be hurting even more if it losses its popular domestic and European services from LIN.
Its likely if anything is profitable at AZ, its the dense domestic and European markets from LIN where AZ holds the majority of slots at.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 53):
I would like to see numbers that prove that FCO is profitable

AZ is losing reported €630,000 daily.

But one thing is clear. The bleeding since consolidating at FCO has been less.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-01 10:51:58 and read 4378 times.

MXP can serve all of Italy domestically with AZ. AZ can still offer tons of European and Italian destinations from MXP. The only real alternative to this problem is to expand LIN and turn it into a super hub like another anetter said. I dont know how reasonable expanding LIN is at this point though.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: mercure1
Posted 2013-02-01 10:58:53 and read 4384 times.

Making hub only at MXP is suicide for AZ.

Even Air France does not consolidate at CDG fully and maintains some 200+ flights daily at close in Orly airport, because many people prefer the nearby airport especially on domestic and short regional service. Why spend 1 hour getting to airport when you have one inside the city center almost. Milan is the same.

Also Northern Italy like mention is very fracture market with many many airport choices.
Unlike France where population and economy is much more centralized focus on Paris, Italians in North don't need to look to Milan as their sole gateway. You can fly direct to many places domestic and Europe from local home airports. People also do things like cross border to catch flights.

So maybe Rome is not perfect location for Italian hub, but it is the largest single airport in Italy in passengers, capital of country, and worldwide popular destination.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-02-01 11:07:04 and read 4363 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 55):
Plus we are not talking about O&D but transfer passengers that will make MXP work.

First hubs require some local O&D which helps increases your yield.

But to have an effective hub, you need lots of flights, to lots of cities. Since the nature of connection flow can be fickle and vary greatly from flight to flight, you need to sell the remaining seats with O&D traffic. However trying to sell O&D seats to Rome, Paris or London from Malpensa is harder (read you must discount heavier) versus Linate.

Its no coincidence the largest airline at Malpensa today is EasyJet - it has the ability to sell low enough fares to attract people out and to MXP over LIN.

For AZ to do so it would be a repeat of the past disasters. It would have this huge capacity at MXP that it must discount heavily to fill.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: Heavierthanair
Posted 2013-02-01 11:19:48 and read 4338 times.

G'day

Quoting miaintl (Reply 55):
They can provide high-speed rail service from MXP so that passengers can reach the city center quicker

The Malpensa Express train connects Malpensa with the city center in 30 minutes, about the time required to get to Linate using public transportation. Not everyone can or wants to use public transport though, you need to get to the closest subway/tram/bus station carrying or dragging your luggage in rain, snow or sunshine, plan to make your connection to the train and see you are not returning Fridays which is the day public transport strikes take place.

Much easier to just drop your bags in the trunk of your car, then Linate has definite advantages in being closer

Cheers

Peter

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: mercure1
Posted 2013-02-01 13:23:43 and read 4254 times.

Quoting Heavierthanair (Reply 60):
Much easier to just drop your bags in the trunk of your car, then Linate has definite advantages in being closer

  

And for taxi also. Last time in Milan taxi from Linate to destination was about €18 and took about 15min.

Same trip from Malpensa would be a whopping €90-100 as the taxis charge all inclusive flat fares from MXP to Milan city and take maybe 50-60 minutes depending on traffic.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-02 03:12:41 and read 3976 times.

But if AZ comes under AF management I dont see it being transformed into a major global carrier like KL. It will must likely become a feeder airline to CDG. However a hub move to MXP can transform AZ into a major carrier which can give star alliance and LH serious competition. By the way was it not AF's decision to move AZ's hub to FCO back in 2007? If that is the case then we can imagine what they plan to do with AZ.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: jfk777
Posted 2013-02-02 04:45:34 and read 3903 times.

How much of Alitalia's loses are from flying to Tokyo ?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: justinlee
Posted 2013-02-02 05:08:52 and read 3854 times.

They have already stopped FCO-PEK. What a pity!

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: LJ
Posted 2013-02-02 05:33:10 and read 3820 times.

Quoting flyyul (Reply 1):
How is CSA/Malev/Olympic doing without Longhaul?

Well, CSA will have a long haul flight as of S13...

Quoting miaintl (Reply 47):
If AZ was smart they would sell all their 777 and 330 aircraft and let AF/KL operate the long-haul traffic.

Which already happens, though it doesn't work out well (AZ/KL just closed AMS-TRN and AMS-FLR is temporarily downgauged to an ERJ175/190 till S13).

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 59):

Its no coincidence the largest airline at Malpensa today is EasyJet - it has the ability to sell low enough fares to attract people out and to MXP over LIN.

And even easyJet wanted (and now gets) 5 daily FCO-LIN slots. As you correctly mention, domestic and intra-European traffic traffic prefers LIN above MXP.

Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 54):
Quoting miaintl (Reply 53):
Then they should close LIN and operate everything out of MXP and under a single-roof.

Alitalia, out of business.

And the political party which proposes this will loose a lot of votes next election.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-02 06:51:44 and read 3740 times.

As long as FCO is the hub AZ will bleed cash. They need another alternative because the termination of FCO-PEK is proof that long-haul is not profitable from AZ apart from O&D which is already served by Air China. AZ was depending on connections to make the flight work but it offers little connectivity from FCO so the flight got axed. A MXP-PEK is more prone to succes than FCO since a MXP hub can offer better connections to the rest of Europe.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: delta2ual
Posted 2013-02-02 09:53:27 and read 3581 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 66):
As long as FCO is the hub AZ will bleed cash.

OMG, you sound like a broken record! We all agree with you-something needs to be done, but unless Alitalia can convince the government to close Linate, there is no way they can compete at MXP. A transfer hub is only as good as its O&D; without that, you can't make money.
In a perfect world, Alitalia would fly direct from FCO to top major markets either year round or seasonally (i.e., NYC/MIA/YYX/LAX/ORD/NRT/PEK/LHR/CDG/FRA etc.); Linate would be closed to all but general aviation; everyone would be forced to use MXP and Alitalia would use MXP as its major connection complex serving unique destinations to connect Europe to the Middle East, Africa, and N & S America. They would upgrade their aircraft and offer a competitive product and add seats to Y class to decrease costs.
We can armchair here all day long, but unless things clearly change, that's probably not going to happen. Maybe AF can turn things around, but I'm not holding my breath.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-02 11:02:17 and read 3501 times.

AF will most likely make AZ a smaller carrier which feeds AF's long haul routes. I don't see AZ becoming like KL or FCO like AMS.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: dtfg
Posted 2013-02-02 11:26:18 and read 3464 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 66):
As long as FCO is the hub AZ will bleed cash. They need another alternative because the termination of FCO-PEK is proof that long-haul is not profitable from AZ apart from O&D which is already served by Air China. AZ was depending on connections to make the flight work but it offers little connectivity from FCO so the flight got axed. A MXP-PEK is more prone to succes than FCO since a MXP hub can offer better connections to the rest of Europe.

Air China also serves PEK-MXP and PVG-MXP, plus PEK-FCO and MU's PVG-FCO. After AZ quits Beijing the market is completely served by Chinese carriers. AFAIK, CA and MU will increase frequencies of PVG-MXP and PVG-FCO to daily. So I guess it is AZ itself that has problems...

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: Flighty
Posted 2013-02-02 11:37:37 and read 3443 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 47):
I think there is a reason Olympic could not make a ATH hub work, because like FCO Athens is a low-yielding poorly located destination.

Exactly. I vote Italy does not have a city that can work as a hub.

MXP has potential, but Rome does not. And MXP's potential could be best explored by entities other than AZ.

[Edited 2013-02-02 11:39:33]

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-03 03:28:37 and read 3115 times.

MXP should be explored by AZ. Other entities like LH have already tried to operate a hub at MXP but it did not work. In an ideal world MXP would be AZ's sole hub and would be skyteams third major hub in Europe after AMS and CDG.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: flyyul
Posted 2013-02-03 07:30:54 and read 2957 times.

miaintl- you don't listen to anybody on this forum. Truth of the matter is there's a lot of qualified and smart people that work at Alitalia who simply know better than us. If you feel you know better, I recommend you apply for a job at La Magliana where AZ's HQ is.

FCO is going to stay the hub e basta.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: delta2ual
Posted 2013-02-03 09:20:11 and read 2851 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 71):
Other entities like LH have already tried to operate a hub at MXP but it did not work.

This makes no sense; LH could not make MXP work, but you are sure that AZ could?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: mandala499
Posted 2013-02-03 10:10:37 and read 2781 times.

Quoting miaintl (Reply 71):
MXP should be explored by AZ.

Sure, by the same argument, maybe Edinburgh/Glasgow should be explored by BA and Nice by AF?   

AZ's problem is the politics of FCO, LIN and MXP. Want to make MXP work? Well, U also got BGY with LCCs on it... Milan is literally split into 3 airports.

So if you want MXP to work, go and close LIN from all but general aviation... then your MXP obsession can have half a chance!

MXP hub would only work by building it's O&D. Force the connections out of it, well, you're asking for trouble. Sorry, that airport is not ideal for a large connecting hub... (but a large O&D hub is a different story and sets of requirements altogether).

Comparative yield of AZ and it's competitors out of FCO is better than MXP... it simply cannot compete with its competitors out of MXP.

The problem with AZ is not FCO vs MXP... it's AZ itself, the politics of AZ, etc... Fix AZ within, and then it doesn't matter if it's at FCO or MXP...

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-03 14:14:46 and read 2635 times.

AZ also faces plenty of competition in FCO. But FCO is not an ideal connecting hub either. The truth is that Italy does not have a viable hub anywhere so AZ should stop being a hub carrier and just focus on becoming a feeder carrier to AF. AZ long-haul is no longer viable especially with poor yields and bad connections.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: flyyul
Posted 2013-02-03 18:22:17 and read 2515 times.

If AZ has poor yields as you say MIAINTL - then AZ has to focus on getting more seats on their airplanes to offset lower yields.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-04 10:31:23 and read 2277 times.

Was AZ going to have a 200-million dollar fund injected into it today? How about its frequent flying program be sold and liquidated?

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: northstardc4m
Posted 2013-02-05 08:33:13 and read 2019 times.

Just to throw a wrench into these operations discussions...

The reason AZ can't compete with LH, AF, BA, etc or make money is less to do with tourist vs business travel or the economy and far more to do with the horrid reputation of AZ and travel through Italy. Everybody has horror stories about being stuck in Italy due to XYZ going on strike (or X, Y AND Z) and having to practically assault someone to get even a food voucher, being yelled at, etc etc... True or not, many many MANY long haul flyers will avoid AZ and flying through Italy because of the perceived risks of delays due to labor action and reputation for poor service. Connecting traffic on AZ is badly affected as a result. Therefore AZ has to fly as a nearly 100% O/D carrier which will never do as well in today's market.

Topic: RE: Should AZ Stop All Longhaul Flying?
Username: miaintl
Posted 2013-02-05 14:40:47 and read 1849 times.

AZ may now link-up with SU. I wonder what consequences that will have? How do these two carriers even compliment each other?


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/