Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SAS To Be Split Up  
User currently offlineZSSNC From Germany, joined Feb 2003, 428 posts, RR: 8
Posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5149 times:

According to German newspaper Handelsblatt SAS's board of directors will decide this Wednesday the breakup of SAS into four companies. One airline will serve exclusively longhaul routes while the other three will be locally based airlines in Denmark, Sweden and Norway.

Reasons for the breakup are allegedly that SAS became to inflexible because it always had to pay attention to quotas on their flights (i.e. there had to be a certain amount of cabin and cockpit crew from the three countries on each flight). The three national airlines are all supposed to keep SAS's logo but will get their own names.

ZSSNC


Airbus A340-600 - the longest temptation in the sky
31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5062 times:

SAS is splitting up because its easier to make negotiations that way. At the moment there are as far as I know 38 different unions in SAS. And they could never agree on anything at all. I wonder how it will work out for them. Im sure they will do much better than they do now. Thats for sure. And some good news are that ther passenger figures raised today with 10.1%. That was really nice to see. But It still isn't enough unfortunatly. but Its good to se that its going the right way for them.

User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6057 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5036 times:

The problem with 38 unions, is that every time one union agrees to get paid less, the other 37 unions have to agree to the same cut in the paycheck. Which happens just about 0.1% of the time.

Also, the quota systems is just bullocks - a remainder from the time where the airline was state owned.


User currently offlineNethkt From Thailand, joined Apr 2001, 1093 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4990 times:

Union Union Union. I hope they will all break up and get nothing soon!!!
Wish!!!  Smile



Let's just blame it on yields.
User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4981 times:

I must say that I am pretty amazed why they cant agree. Don't the people want to keep their job or what??? I would rather have a small paycut or a payfreeze than loose my job. And if they could just agree they would look back at this day in five years and say: Damn it was a good thing that we agreed about the paycut because we still got our job. But somehow they obviously don't think that far.


User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4937 times:

I remember this rumour started a few months back, but we haven't heard anything about it yet.

I hope it is broken up as it would mean greater competition in Scaninavia. More importantly it will give Norway and Sweden a chance to develop destinations served directly (especially long-haul routes) from the their respective capitals rather than through Copenhagen.



EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4880 times:

Horus

I don't think there will be a big change in the longhaul flights. Most of them will still go out via CPH. Since they have most connection flights of Sweden, Norway and DK there is no doubt about that one. And since CO have started OSL-EWR I don't think there will be a US flight with SK from Norway. And Sweden will keep the ones they are having at the moment, and hopefully they will increase the number of longhaul flights from ARN.


User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3224 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4891 times:

The SAS name should go to Stockholm, because that is my favourite(who says we're not allowed to play favourites?) and if that can't happen, I'd like to see the long haul airline called SAS.

I am interested in seeing Lufthansa's reaction to all of this. The idea of SAS becomming a part of Lufthansa was floated in the late 90s, but SAS claimed their brand could survive in its own right if they took over smaller carriers in the region and across the baltic. Well the fact that governments probably would not agree aside (can you imagine the finish government letting SAS absorb finnair into its system? I don't think so) if the carrier breaks up, I could well imagine it would only be a matter of time before they had seperate stock exchange listings, and the Swedish and Danish operations becoming very attractive to Lufthansa. Especially given whats happend with KLM and AF, and the fact that SAS and Lufthansa are like brothers. They've enjoyed a long very and intimate relationship, and i could see this as a natural extention of their operations. A lufthansa CPH hub could perhaps even be better suited than FRA for german cities like HAM or Berlin to connect in.
It would be a very very sad day to see the SAS brand disappear though. To me, it will always be something special. Lufthansa is just big and efficient.
What does everybody think?


User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4800 times:

Qlguy24

I would of thought one of the main reasons SAS doesn't operate many long-haul destinations out of Oslo ond Stockholm, was so they can strengthen their Copenhagen base. I am not saying that demand would be high out of Sweden or Norway, but I am sure there is a market to serve New York as well as Asian destinations (e.g Beijing, Hong Kong, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, etc) where many Norwegian and Swedish tourist go.

I just feel that Oslo and Stockholm can be developed as 'hubs' in their own right. That is why I am usually against airlines that are flag carriers for a number of countries as inevitably the airline will concentrate on developing one hub (in this case Copenhagen). A similar case to this is Gulf Air, which operates out of Bahrain, UAE (Abu Dhabi) and Qatar. Due to the fact the airline has been concentrating most of its development in Bahrain, the Omani government pulled out of Gulf Air in order to develop their own airline. The Qatari government who still partly own and support Gulf Air, have developed their airline, Qatar Airways. And most recently the launch of Etihad Airways in Abu Dhabi, which the UAE government owns along with Gulf Air. I know that Gulf Air has not been broken up and their are other fundemental differences between the two airlines, but I think each Scandinavian country should have its own airline.

But I do see your point  Smile



EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineJohnnybgoode From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 2187 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4704 times:

i highly doubt that this "split up" will lead to any changes when it comes to longhaul routes and the SAS`s hub system.
i´m pretty sure there will be such a thing as a SAS holding company which will 100% own all the other entities, just as AF and KL are doing it with their combined holding company.

this step would probably maintain synergies within the company, but also allow for much quicker adjustments and adaptations when it comes to changes in the respective national business environment.

it´ll be interesting to see how they will create the international longhaul division. SK obviously had to maintain certain quotas when it came to cabin crews and hopefully, they´ll find a way to do all this without triggering intervention from the unions and without putting any current flight crews at disadvantage.

rgds
daniel



If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
User currently offlineNavigator From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1230 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4636 times:

By tradition since the days when STO and OSL could not sustain flights nonstop on their own, SAS has concentrated it´s network to CPH. One reason is also a strong infuence from danish interests. Geographical reasons played a role in early days also when SAS flew long haul to Africa, South America etc. With most intercontinental SAS flights now being on the northern part of the globe, the geographical reasons to keep the traffic in CPH are not as strong as before. But since the hub has been built up it makes no sense moving traffic away since it would weaken the main hub at CPH.

Competing airlines have forced SAS to start nonstop services from STO and OSL bypassing CPH. This will probably continue and with much of the traffic originating from those cities that trend will continue, SAS liking it or not.

This split up will probable lead to a more flexible SAS able to compete more effectively with other airlines. But to survive in the norwegian and swedish markets SAS will have to increase their nonstop routes out of those countries as well.



747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
User currently offlineNCL From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2004, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4635 times:

SAS already consists of a single publicly traded company,SAS AB, which in turn is owned by SAS Denmark A/S (2/7), SAS Norge AS (2/7) and SAS Sweden AB (3/7). This creation came already in 2001. The rumour about splitting up into different four companies has been circulating for a while but I wouldn't pay to much attention to it as it would have to be approved by the Scandinavian governments, and no such plans exists at the moment. However, there has been talks about splitting the operations into one longhaul and shorthaul division but nothing about separate airlines.

bye


User currently offlineNavigator From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1230 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4578 times:

SAS MD Lindegaard is coming forward with a plan to split up SAS into four companies in the next few days, Longhaul, Swedish operations, Norwegian operations and danish operations.
And yes, this plan is very much existing right now. It will be separate companies.
The governments do not interfere in running SAS, that is up to the Board of Directors.



747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
User currently offlineCaravelle From Norway, joined Aug 2000, 666 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4372 times:

Navigator, as opposed to others on this thread, has a valid point. SAS can't be everything to everybody. Three international hubs, one airline? Come off it.
But what happens is that because everything is centered around CPH, SK looses customer loyalty.
Others are here to compete. CO (OSLO-EWR) a case in point. And Finnair daughter, DY, NB and others are here, too.
That should be very worrying to an old monopolist and a company which serves 14 million.
Soon, there'll be approx. 5 million left. All based in Denmark.
What a pity.

- caravelle



Trains and boats and planes....
User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4214 times:

That should be very worrying to an old monopolist and a company which serves 14 million.
Soon, there'll be approx. 5 million left. All based in Denmark.
What a pity.

What a load of crap!!

SAS would never loose 9 million pax. There are alot of international passengers flying SAS out of CPH. And the norwegians will keep flying SAS as well. I am pretty sure about that one. Just because CO will start flying EWR doesnt mean all pax will fly wit them. I´ll bet they will have the same amounts of passengers they have today..


User currently offlineVadheim From Norway, joined Jul 2000, 625 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4078 times:

SAS position in the Norwegian market is very weak. Today, they do'nt offer the Norwegian market anything better than e.g. KLM.

KLM see the Norwegian market as important and therefore they serve Amsterdam nonstop from Oslo Gardermoen (OSL), Oslo Torp (TRF), Stavanger Sola (SVG), Bergen Flesland (BGO), Trondheim Værnes (TRD) and soon Kristiansand Kjevik (KRS), at least as good product for the Norwegians as the product SAS offer the Norwegian regions.

33% of SAS international passengers are Swedish, 22% Norwegian and only 8% Danish so why should the hub be in CPH?


User currently offlineSk945 From Sweden, joined May 2002, 432 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3982 times:

Please don't make this a war between Norway, Denmark and Sweden.
I for one think this would be the best for SAS. All four new companies will stil be operated under the SK prefix and with the SAS name involed in some way.
SAS different hubs have since one year ago started to work much more independely from each other, wish already have had the effect that SAS from the summertimetable start new nonstop routes from ARN. The main hub will stil be in CPH.


User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3810 times:

SAS position in the Norwegian market is very weak. Today, they do'nt offer the Norwegian market anything better than e.g. KLM

They have Braathens to do it for them. And its doing great. So why should that be changed??


Please don't make this a war between Norway, Denmark and Sweden.

Don't worry, there will be now war. I also agre with you that this is the best thing to do.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy But there will always be someone who will complain about it.


User currently offlineJsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2074 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3712 times:

Will the split companies all keep the SAS name, or will that name go to the overseas division? If so, what will the Danish, Swedish and Norwegian divisions be named?

User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3680 times:

Im not sure, but I have heard some rumours that they will have their own names but still fly wit a small SAS logo. But Its only rumours.

User currently offlineNavigator From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1230 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3667 times:

Everything is indicating that all companies will continue using the SAS name and logo. It´s just that operations will be in different companies all under the SAS umbrella I presume. This will make decisionmaking etc more efficient.

So I think the planes and paint schemes will look the same. At least I have not heard that anything else is the case.

But again this proposal has not been made public yet. But the unions have seen it and made comments.



747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3622 times:

Personally I hope they will keep their paint scheme. I wouldn't be SAS if its painted in different paintschemes.
I hope they will get a solution on this rpoblem they are having as soon as possible.

To me SAS is more scandinavian then the danish royal family  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


User currently offlineHeisan67 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3521 times:

And 30 min ago the Norwegian Broadcasting company NRK announced that SAS and Braathens will become 1 airline company in Norway, and the will try to keep both SAS and Braathens name/paintscheme, so it might be quite strange. Tomorrow is it launched - the "new" SAS with number of employees, name and new routes.....

I was hoping for the name:
SAS Norway
SAS Denmark
SAS Sweden
SAS intercontinental
with similar paint scheme, but.......


User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3372 times:

It is now settled....
SAS will be splitted up in 3 companies after todays meeting. SAS has just told the news on a press comference....
I wonder how this will work out... I am really curious to see how this will work. And they will not make any further changes. The SAS will still provide the service they always has done. Thank god for that!
Good luck in the future SK!


User currently offlineCopenhagenboy From Denmark, joined Sep 2001, 599 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (10 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3317 times:

It makes sence, today most of SAS AB (on the stock) is owned by SAS Danmark, SAS Sweden and SAS Norway, they will change it the other way round. It is then possible to move faster in every area, instead of asking Stockholm. The intercontinental routes are stil under the umbrella of SAS AB.

25 QIguy24 : Ok.. That will make the whole thing easier. Do you know if Frösundavik still will be the swedish headoffice and do you have any ideas on where the Da
26 Copenhagenboy : Just came to the press and stockholders: Harmonization of legal structure provides conditions for profitable, regionally based units 2004-03-10 The SA
27 Heisan67 : And in Norway the SAS company will be called: "SAS Braathens"! A bad choice in my opinion. Most of experst in branding think that using both names is
28 QIguy24 : I think SAS Norway is the best name as well. Even thoug I will be sad to se tne name Braathens disapear, this is the best name to have.
29 Maersk737 : Heisan67: Is the name "SAS Braathens" confirmed by SAS? Cheers Peter
30 QIguy24 : Maersk737 They confirmed it yesterday. And the only need ok for it on the meeting the 23. march but It will not be any problem.
31 Maersk737 : Thanks QIguy24. I would also go for SAS Norway. The Braathens Brand could be saved for other purposes. Cheers Peter
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
SAS To Be Split Into 11 Separate Airlines posted Mon Dec 1 2003 15:32:22 by Britair
SAS Is To Be Split Into Four Companies posted Tue Mar 23 2004 23:47:33 by Eric
Early 777-200 To Be Broken-Up For The First Time posted Wed Nov 15 2006 10:35:03 by Leelaw
LGW To Be Put Up For Sale? posted Sun Jun 4 2006 13:55:19 by VV701
SAS To Be Grounded? posted Thu Oct 28 2004 21:36:15 by OYRJA
Bloomberg: Alitalia To Be Split Into 2 Companies! posted Tue Sep 7 2004 01:00:26 by ConcordeBoy
First 757 To Be Broken Up posted Tue May 11 2004 22:13:37 by Col
Latest Headline - Alitalia To BE Split posted Fri Apr 9 2004 08:04:02 by Alitalia7e7
USAir 737-300 And -400 Scheduled To Be Broken Up! posted Fri May 30 2003 08:19:52 by IslandHopper
"Airlines To Be More Up Front About Extra Charges" posted Thu Nov 21 2002 03:17:32 by Dash8King