Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Foreign Airlines Vs. US  
User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2891 times:

I was wondering if foreign airlines are run differently than the us airlines. It seems to me that the foregin carriers such as ANA (to be able to order 50 7E7s) and other airlines are doing pretty good...what are they doing that the us carriers are not doing. I have never flown on a foreign carrier but when i go overseas this year i would like to fly one  Big thumbs up


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineANA From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 294 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2881 times:

Well, the unions for a start.

User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2863 times:

what about the unions..i do not know a whole lot about the foreign airlines and am curious to know the differences, etc.


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5824 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2863 times:

Our carriers here have got themselves in a bind. We have an ENTIRELY different operating environment- we have to deal with AirTran, Southwest, Frontier, JetBlue, ATA, et al. The majors have to offer better service at a low price to compete with loco's. Unfortunately, that equation doesn't add up, and the majors have a VER LOW profit margin. So when times get bad, their world crumbles, while Southwest and Airtran keep raking in the dough.

HUGELY different rules in the gamebook.


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 852 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2860 times:

How do you mean "run differently"? I guess SAS runs the same way as US carriers, but not THAT good I´m afraid  Sad
Hejdå

Michael//SE



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineIndustrialPate From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2842 times:

I'd expect somebody who lists their occupation as a lawyer to be higher-educated. Different airlines operate in different operating enviroments... fares within Asia are generally higher-yield (in fact, it often costs as much to fly JFK-SIN as it does NRT-SIN, even though one may connect via SIN)... there's little LCC compeition... even in Europe, LCC don't fly to premium airports like LCC do -- and when they do, fares are higher.

One can fly transcontinental within the USA for OW$79-$129 restricted. Try finding a similiar fare across a similar distance elsewhere in the world, keeping in mind economics.......

That's just a start.


User currently offline7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2814 times:

My occupation has nothing to do with airline economics...your comment is flawed. That is like asking a doctor who has never flown before to take control and fly a plane. Going to law school is not going to school to learn about airline economics or economics for that matter.


The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
User currently offlineAirPortugal310 From Tokelau, joined Apr 2004, 3641 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2788 times:

I agree with 7E72004: since when does your occupation have to do with how much you know about the aviation industry? Please...

I must not know anything because Im not a lawyer. Damn it  Sad



I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
User currently offlineANA From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 294 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2763 times:

Well, non-unionised airlines don't have the same pressures put on them that the majors have on wage/pension/healthcare issues. Views of course vary on unionisation.

I think lo-cost has a lot to do with this issue. To a degree incumbent euro airlines have had the same issues as the US majors competing with the lo-cost market, which has lead to big changes in the way the large carriers, such as BA, now operate their short-haul fleet. But also lo-cost don't have long-haul operations, which are more price sensitive as well as suffering more from external fears (SARS/terror). The Asian market has only just seen serious lo-cost carriers emerging; expect a change in the price of 1 - 3 hr routes in south east Asia.

There are of course loads of other reasons the big us carriers have trouble which the lo-costs have minimized including

hub and spoke costs inc aircraft waiting on the ground
historical over-burdened head offices
distribution/sales costs
mixed fleets
higher crew costs
base op costs
ATC costs
high maintenance costs

all with downward pressureon prices - it goes on forever!

Anders


User currently offlineIluv2pilot From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2726 times:

Airlines in Europe and Asia face the same LCC issue that we do here in the states. Asia is adding them almost monthly, and Europe has seen them grow the last few years. As ANA has stated there are a myriad of reasons that there are many reasons that some airlines are doing better, regardless of location.
I believe there is a perceptions here in the states that foreign airlines are doing better. In fact most of the flag carriers from Europe were subsidized and only recently have been privatized. Every carrier has face financial pressure and problems regarldess of what flag is on the tail.


User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8380 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2700 times:

It's simple: They have lower operating costs and higher yields. But this is painting the whole canvas with a wide brush. There are plenty of airlines around the World living on a day-to-day basis too.
Another difference is customer demand driven by culture. In the US all that matters really is price. People will put up with any kind of crap if the "price is right". Turn the TV on, you'll see people eating dog sh*t for a quick buck. What this does is it causes companies to slim down, lower their margins, and live on the edge. If the slightest thing goes wrong, they're toast.
In Asia, and to a lower extent Europe, service still matters. People expect good service. They can provide this service because of what I said above, lower operating costs and higher yields. They have a greater buffer zone to keep the company above water during bad times.

In short, companies respond to market forces. In some parts of the World people are willing to pay a bit more for service. Here we're not. It's as simple as that.


User currently offlineRichard28 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 1619 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2567 times:

Airbazar, I think its simplistic to say price matters less in Europe.

Ryanair's famous 1p (plus tax) fares are very common, and are a headache for competing LCC's, let alone the majors.

LCC's are also not just a US thing, there are many LCC's in Europe - I can think of 6 in the UK alone - although I'm sure there are more.

The trick the US majors seem to be falling into, is to lower their ticket price, without proportionately reducing their cost base, whilst at the same time reducing customer service.

To compound things, some majors have then launched LCC's, with better on board service than the main product (IFE for example), the effect being promoting LCC's more, and harming their brand and bottom line.

I'd suggest that the BA tactic of reducing prices to a reasonable surplus above average LCC tickets, whilst still differentiating their service by offering food and drinks service, keeps the pax - indeed I understand that BA's euro operation is now in profit, after years of being subsidized by their longhaul ops.

BA also learnt the lesson of selling their LCC (Go) at an early stage, to concentrate on their core business.

Rich.



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...
Foreign Airlines Flying US Routes posted Thu Sep 5 2002 03:17:40 by Penguinflies
Which Foreign Airlines Have US-to-Canada Routes? posted Tue Jan 22 2002 04:34:48 by Bobcat
Which Foreign Airlines Have US-Canada Rights? posted Wed Dec 5 2001 00:32:33 by Bobcat
What Foreign Airlines Have US-to-Canada Flights? posted Sun Oct 7 2001 17:32:37 by Bobcat
Foreign Airlines With US "N" Regs. posted Mon Jul 24 2000 18:59:12 by LanFan
Home-grown Vs Foreign Airlines posted Mon Aug 29 2005 22:26:55 by AnsettB727
US Airlines Vs Rest Of The World posted Fri Aug 19 2005 01:38:14 by CO737800
Opinions - Foreign Vs. US Carriers posted Sun Jul 18 2004 02:29:49 by Ssides
Flight Attendants: U.S. Vs. Foreign Airlines posted Mon May 24 2004 00:21:20 by Texdravid
Foreign Airlines In The US posted Fri Nov 21 2003 22:03:21 by KaiGywer