Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
El Al Seeks 4 More 777-200ER Or 777-300ER  
User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4217 posts, RR: 89
Posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5940 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

El Al Airlines have confirmed that they are in negotiations with Boeing to purchase an additional 4 x 772ER which will be convertible into the 77W if they need. Deliveries are set to commence in 2012 and the deal has yet to be finalised but final negotiations are underway and subject to Board approval over the next few weeks.

By David Rosenberg
March 12 (Bloomberg) -- El Al Israel Airlines Ltd., the country's largest carrier, said it is in talks with Boeing Co. to buy four 777-200 aircraft for delivery in 2012.

The carrier will have an option to upgrade the order to 777-300s by the end of this year, El Al, which is based near Ben Gurion International Airport, said in a statement to the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange today. Negotiations will take a ''number of weeks,'' with the final agreement contingent on approval by the carrier's board, it said.


[ END - Fair use excerpt http://www.bloomberg.com Subscriber only service. ]

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssI...tilitiesNews/idUSL1248697520080312 A link to Reuters.

If the deal is finalised and some converted to the 77W then they will be a new customer for the 77W

Regards, PanAm_DC10

[ EDIT - Correct Link ]

[Edited 2008-03-12 20:14:51]


Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineA380US From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5942 times:

Not a suprise.... now when will they order the 787?


www.JandACosmetics.com
User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8690 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5805 times:

A380US,

Knowing ELAL I think the 777 will be main long haul a/c in their fleet for years like the 747/767 was. LY is very notorious for keeping their a/c long period of time hence my above comment. I think the question is; what will replace the older 762's?

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5783 times:



Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Thread starter):
they are in negotiations with Boeing to purchase an additional 4 x 772ER

That's never specified, only assumed.

Granted, it would appear to make the most sense on the surface, due to the small size of their 777 fleet... but then again, if it's actually the 773ER they're interested in and not the 773A, then it wouldn't be much of a stretch for their 772s to be the 772LR instead.


User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5559 times:

Maybe LY is really considering to replace the B744's with B77W's in the next few years and convert their B744's as freighters as their B742 fleet is slowly really falling apart. But true it gets time to replace those B762's well maybe LX will lease / purchase further B763's for the meanwhile and first order B787 for deliverly by 2020 al is possible with them

User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6999 posts, RR: 63
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5433 times:



Quoting LXA340 (Reply 4):
maybe LX will lease / purchase further B763's for the meanwhile

Typo?!

Anyway, more 777-200ERs is excellent news for Derby!  bigthumbsup 


User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5428 times:



Quoting PM (Reply 5):

Typo?!

Yes indeed LY of course is what I meant Big grin


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5318 times:



Quoting PM (Reply 5):
Quoting LXA340 (Reply 4):
maybe LX will lease / purchase further B763's for the meanwhile

Typo?!

Anyway, more 777-200ERs is excellent news for Derby!

77Ws isnt though.

I wonder if they would look at the Trent-powered 773A to do their high density European and Asian routes? Unlikely given that it cant get to JFK without a massive load penalty, but they have the 744 and 77Es for that I guess.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineIAD380 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 804 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5301 times:

El Al needs to select the most fuel-effficent aircraft for its longhaul flights. According to an article in Haaretz yesterday, the cost of jet fuel, on average, accounts for 27.6 percent of the airline's turnover, but 57 percent of its turnover on flights to longhaul destinations. The article points out that flights to North America and the Far East generate about 53 percent of El Al's revenues. However, short-haul flights to Europe account for 18 percent of operating profits while flights to North America and the Far East generate only 8 percent of its operating profits. Further increases in the cost of jet fuel will cause El Al to raise ticket prices, which should ultimately weaken demand. According to Haaretz, many longhaul flights will become unprofitable if occupancy rates were to fall below 85 percent. The newspaper article specifically states that flights to MIA and YYZ may be axed if rising fuel costs lowers occupancy below the 85-percent threshold. LY operates old, fuel guzzling 767s on these two routes. I wonder if LY would achieve better financial results if it could deploy 777s or 787s on these routes.

User currently offlineDLPhoenix From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 420 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5135 times:

Every airline tries to balance fuel savings, capital costs and the additional revenue it can generate from offering a service that is perceived to be "premium".
In the case of LY the latter is insignificant, Fares to Israel are outrageous regardless of the airline.
But a decision to keep an old 762 because the depreciation on a new airplane is more expensive that the cost of fuel you save with the new model. I don't know what was the fuel cost they were using when they made this decision, but apparently it was less than $100/Barrel and now they are at risk of losing money on the routes where the operate the 762.

As for the additional 777s, I believe (speculate?) they will use them to convert 744s to cargo while retiring 742s.

DLP.


User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5115 times:



Quote:
LY is very notorious for keeping their a/c long period of time.

Well, given that LY planes only work six days of the week...  Wink

Actually, since El Al routes have to avoid some areas, long-range and ultra-long range planes are always going to be part of their plan. And while I agree ticket prices will rise, there will ALWAYS be a certain part of the public that will fly ONLY El Al, regardless of where they live. In this regard, that is unique to Israel and a percentage of Jewish travellers in the U.S.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33280 posts, RR: 71
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5102 times:



Quoting IAD380 (Reply 8):
The newspaper article specifically states that flights to MIA and YYZ may be axed if rising fuel costs lowers occupancy below the 85-percent threshold. LY operates old, fuel guzzling 767s on these two routes. I wonder if LY would achieve better financial results if it could deploy 777s or 787s on these routes.

They would. The 767s are extremely inefficient for these routes - the CASM is way too high. The Miami route averages ridiculously good load factors - 98% year-round. 777s would allow to sell more seats, more cargo space, and lower the CASM.



a.
User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5048 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 11):
They would. The 767s are extremely inefficient for these routes - the CASM is way too high. The Miami route averages ridiculously good load factors - 98% year-round. 777s would allow to sell more seats, more cargo space, and lower the CASM.

Personally I think that LY chose the wrong strategy in long term with making cosetics to their fleet and not operating a fuel efficent fleet but only having some newer some older and some very old planes especially now with the high fuel prices. Oh well I don't nderstand their management anyhow however they don't seem to make good decisions too often.


User currently offlineIAD380 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 804 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4976 times:

Perhaps, El Al management is belatedly trying to correct past errors by acquiring newer, more fuel efficient aircraft. However, rising fuel costs, a volatile currency market, strong competition from legacy airlines, and the entry of LCC carriers in the home market are squeezing profit margins and making fleet modernization difficult. Replacing the 757s and 767s with efficient new aircraft, and containing labor, fuel and other operating expenses are probably the two main priorities for LY management. Once El Al achieves these objectives, it then could slowly start expanding its route network.

User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4912 times:



Quoting IAD380 (Reply 13):
Once El Al achieves these objectives, it then could slowly start expanding its route network.

Great this will then still take a few decades. If a big fuss is made to order 4 new B772's for 2012 we are still far away regarding what happens to the B767 replacement. Besides that it's hard to get any B787's before 2012 or so as well as I doubt all the production slots are taken so unless LY will go for Airbus for the B767 replacement + fleet expansion which theoretically could involve up to 10 aircraft (A330's) it will take quite long as all of us know here LY ordering Airbus is as likely as LH ordering Russian planes Big grin LY is going to waste the next few years flying around with planes that are uneconomical but oh well this is what they wanted.


User currently offlineDLPhoenix From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 420 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4866 times:



Quoting LXA340 (Reply 14):
as all of us know here LY ordering Airbus is as likely as LH ordering Russian planes

LY has been privatized and is no longer under obligation to help the Israeli government satisfy its allies (in other words succumb to pressures from the US). I expect them to make business oriented decisions next time they plan a fleet renewal/expansion.

DLP


User currently offlineEl Al 001 From Israel, joined Oct 1999, 1063 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4673 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 11):
They would. The 767s are extremely inefficient for these routes - the CASM is way too high. The Miami route averages ridiculously good load factors - 98% year-round. 777s would allow to sell more seats, more cargo space, and lower the CASM.

Not the 1st time you write this and you are way out;
1. No matter what spill factors you are using, an annual load factor of 98% means that the airline can at least double its services due to incredible high demand.
2. If the load factor was 98% year round, prices would have been that high that the 762 could've actually make money on TLV-MIA-TLV and thats obviously not the case.
3. The future of MIA at LY is either upgrade it to 772 or axe it.
4. LY MIA load factor is somewhere over the lower 80s%, correspond with LY average load factor.

Annually 98% load factor, basically does not exist in the industry, the spill at such a number can be as high as 400% demand load factor which is insane!!!
98% load factor can be the unconstrained load factor of TLV-MIA....


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33280 posts, RR: 71
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4661 times:

Quoting El Al 001 (Reply 16):
2. If the load factor was 98% year round, prices would have been that high that the 762 could've actually make money on TLV-MIA-TLV and thats obviously not the case.

Nice try.

Like it or not, the load factor for LY at MIA is around 98% year-round, and that comes straight from MIA's online data available right here:

http://www.miami-airport.com/html/airport_statistics_.htm

Month after month after month, El Al is consistently the best performing airline at MIA when it comes to loadfactors, occasionally being surpassed by Alitalia but typically ranking at number one. Unfortunately, 98% loadfactor on an aging and gas-guzzling 762 flying for nearly fifteen hours is not a guarantee of profits.

Would you like to make up more data so that I can prove you wrong again?

[Edited 2008-03-14 02:38:24]


a.
User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4621 times:



Quoting DLPhoenix (Reply 15):
I expect them to make business oriented decisions next time they plan a fleet renewal/expansion.

Around 2 years ago when Airbus made LY a very good deal for B67 replacement including some more aircraft for growth (A330/A350) LY did not take the deal and they were already privatized at that point. This would've been the most economical and efficent way to have goten rid of their B767's and first planes would've been scheduled to be delivered as early as this year. Hence LY still doesnt make it's decisions based on business oriented decisions unfortunately. The same when it coems to seating they chose a Businsess Class product that slowly is already outdated and a First Class product that is a business class seat going fully flat


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4607 times:



Quoting El Al 001 (Reply 16):
an annual load factor of 98% means that the airline can at least double its services due to incredible high demand.

..."can", sure-- but why bother?


User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4540 times:



Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 19):
.."can", sure-- but why bother?

or at least operate with an efficient B772 and not a B762 who isn't made for such long flights normally.


User currently offlineEl Al 001 From Israel, joined Oct 1999, 1063 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4484 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 17):
Like it or not, the load factor for LY at MIA is around 98% year-round, and that comes straight from MIA's online data available right here:

http://www.miami-airport.com/html/ai..._.htm

I could not open the link. What is the pax number you have for LY's TLV/MIA/TLV route for 2007?
Do the math on your own, LY flies 3 weekly 762s to MIA which are equipped with 189 seats.
Whether your statistics count non-revs, and I assume they are, pax numbers that you'll have for LY on TLV/MIA/TLV will not get you there.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 17):
Unfortunately, 98% loadfactor on an aging and gas-guzzling 762 flying for nearly fifteen hours is not a guarantee of profits.

Once you get to 98% load factors on annual basis, its not the a/c "fault" anymore, its your revenue management, and again, this is not the case.

Spill factors, demand and capacity, yields, that does not make any sense to you or you are not so familiar with these.


User currently offlineLXA340 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2006, 2127 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 4461 times:



Quoting El Al 001 (Reply 21):

Spill factors, demand and capacity, yields, that does not make any sense to you or you are not so familiar with these

Well for flights of this lengtht the aircraft type could really be a problem. I could imagien that this route would be more profitable if it could fill more seats and use less fuel so for instance a B772 so he might actually be correct. Nevertheless the route does make some money with a 98% loadfactor otherwise LY management really does something wrong big time.


User currently onlineChiGB1973 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1619 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 4450 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 17):
Nice try.

Like it or not, the load factor for LY at MIA is around 98% year-round, and that comes straight from MIA's online data available right here:

Just going by 189 seats X 6 flights (inbound/outbound) X 52 = 58,968 seats/week.

Total passenger numbers are: 43572.

http://www.miami-airport.com/pdfdoc/finance/Fiscal07_Passengers.pdf

That is not even 75%.

Please break down how you came up with this number. If you are right, MIA is very low yield for MIA, LY absolutely does not have a bigger plane, or just does not want to expand in MIA.

The same would hold true for AA. If LY were getting 98% load factors and making money, AA would jump on it. It's not happening. If so, provide the sources and numbers. The link you provided does not work.

M


User currently offlineDLPhoenix From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 420 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 4444 times:



Quoting LXA340 (Reply 18):

Two years ago they made the decision to defer fleet renewal (I assume since they estimatedd the capital cost will be higher than the savings in fuel + the higher fares the could charge for a better service).
This is far from the fleet renewal process in 2000 when LY decided to purchase A330 and the decision was overturned following pressure applied by the US government.
We need to see how they handle themselfes next time they actualy decide to buy something.

DLP


25 Post contains links MAH4546 : Or, instead of trying to estimate the seats, you can simply look at the actual number of seats El Al operates at MIA, which they distribute. In the f
26 IAD380 : The Haaretz article that I cited earlier seems to confirm this. Right now, the MIA route seems to be profitable, and occupancy is probably around 85
27 ChiGB1973 : You are right. They are doing excellent. M[Edited 2008-03-14 12:53:18]
28 MAH4546 : In the first four months of the 2008 fiscal year, occupancy was 97.7%. It was a perfect 100% in January 2008 (it was actually technically above 100%
29 IAD380 : El Al flies to MIA only three times a week. Couldn't it pull a 772 from LHR, CDG, or BKK and deploy it to MIA three days a week? If MIA is a premium
30 MAH4546 : It is a route that requires an aircraft for approximately 33-35 hours - significantly more than LHR, CDG, or BKK. Good luck finding a 772 laying arou
31 BoeingFever777 : Was wondering are not LY's 777's RR powered? Could not find any info on their website... Guessing they are looking at the (2) different engines for th
32 LXA340 : Yes they are RR powered. Hence that was a factor why LY is not to sure about getting the B77W's and I think they even considered getting B773's becas
33 PM : For starters! What about All Nippon, JAL, Emirates?
34 BoeingFever777 : OK, did I state I was going to list them all? Yes, the older models they did run RR and PW engines.
35 Post contains images PM : Well, excuse me for trying to help.
36 Post contains images EK413 : Congratulations to LY... This just proves the confidence twins has grown over the years... So... How many B777 orders on the Boeing books to date... G
37 Post contains links Flying-Tiger : http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssI...tilitiesNews/idUSL1614330620080316 That should make it a firm order...
38 LY777 : Great news; I hope they will be converted in 77W though
39 Post contains images PM : I hope they won't!
40 LY777 : lol, why? You are fond of the 77E?
41 PM : Not particularly. (Though I've flown on 77Es of MH, SQ, KL and NZ.) But I am partial to RR Trents...
42 LY777 : BTW, why will these a/c be delivered only in 2012?!
43 LXA340 : They make a big fuss about 4 aircraft that are being delivered in 5 years time.
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...
SURPRISE: El Al To Buy Fourth Boeing 777! posted Tue Feb 20 2001 21:02:21 by El Al 001
EL AL Order More 737-800s posted Tue Dec 4 2007 23:56:05 by PanAm_DC10
El Al And More 747-400s? posted Mon Feb 26 2001 18:42:37 by CX747
El Al Update; A New 777, Summer Updates And More. posted Mon Jun 10 2002 10:55:40 by El Al 001
Back To The Dec 2007 Incident Onboard An El Al 777 posted Sun Mar 2 2008 16:56:37 by TodaReisinger
New EL AL 777 First Month Schedule - 4X - ECE posted Sun May 27 2007 18:57:41 by Amirs
ANA Orders 4 More 777-300ER, Sell 3 More 747-400 posted Tue Mar 6 2007 07:29:54 by Jimyvr
EL AL And Asiana 777's To LAX - Anyone Know When? posted Mon Nov 27 2006 03:50:39 by Access-Air
New Seats For El Al 777 posted Sun Jan 15 2006 13:52:10 by Amirs
El Al 777-200ERs Firm For 2007 Delivery. +Q... posted Tue Dec 13 2005 18:34:21 by DIA