Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Jet Airways To Make MXP A Hub  
User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4716 posts, RR: 44
Posted (6 years 1 week 6 days ago) and read 9211 times:

Jet Airways of India has decided upon making MXP-Milan, Italy its second international long haul scissors hub similar to the one it currently operates at BRU-Brussels. 9W wants to use MXP's business potential on strong O&D routes to USA as AZ has suspended a majority of its MXP-USA routes due to shifting its hub back to FCO-Rome. 9W says that from 2009, it will fly via MXP to North America and is looking at nonstop flights to YVR and LAX from MXP. All MXP flights though are to originate from HYD/BLR/CCU & AMD.

Source : http://www.travelbizmonitor.com/Arti...spx?aid=2551&sid=15&sname=Aviation

My comments :

This is an interesting strategic move undertaken by 9W by wanting to make MXP a scissors hub for its expansion to USA. Obviously, the Italian Govt and MXP Airport Officials must have played a key role by offering all sorts of incentives for 9W to undertake such an investment after witnessing the de-hubbing of Alitalia at MXP. Northern Italy, is the business, financial and commercial core of Italy and MXP is the gateway airport into this region thus having huge amounts of high yielding J class traffic. 9W definitely seems to have realized this and AZ pulling out also helped sway this decision of theirs in favor of it.

However, what 9W should not do is to fly from AMD via MXP to USA because for AMD, flights need to be routed via BRU as the state of Gujarat, India is the world's 3rd largest diamond production, manufacturing area with heaps loads of business bound for Belgium year round. There is hardly any traffic from AMD bound for Italy!

Also via MXP, 9W should first target cities not flown nonstop to USA by the American carriers and AZ alike which have good amount of O&D demand. This should be done as it would provide 9W with a monopoly stranglehold which in turn would allow it to dictate prices especially in the high yielding J class cabin. Routings that come to mind are MXP-IAD daily A 332, MXP-IAH and MXP-ORD.

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days ago) and read 9120 times:

The problem with scissors-hubs is, that as many pax from India need to deplane (and end their journey there) as new customers from MXP are to be taken to the U.S.
Would this really work out for MXP ?
-HT



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineVtnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 277 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 week 6 days ago) and read 9019 times:

Instead of getting its finger in to a whole of lot of different pies, 9W better concentrate on getting it's BRU up to it's full potential.


First Flight, PA001 DEL-FRA-LHR-JFK; Dream- JFK-COK on a B6 787
User currently offlineGlareskin From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 1295 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 8851 times:



Quoting HT (Reply 1):
Would this really work out for MXP ?

Yes this will work and it is a very good decision from 9W. AZ or it's new owner will be suffering from de-hubbing MXP.



There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8303 times:



Quoting Glareskin (Reply 3):
Quoting HT (Reply 1):Would this really work out for MXP ?
Yes this will work and it is a very good decision from 9W. A

My question was: In order that Northern Italy profits from the flights to both the U.S. and to India there need to be vacant seats. If those a/c are completely sold out all the way from the U.S. to India and v/v by connecting pax, no additional pax would be able to board at MXP.

To put the question in other words:
Would 9W prefer to sell all available seats for the complete trip US <-> India, or would they go and set aside a viariable amoung of tickets for sale out of / into MXP only ?
Selling two tickets probably would give a better revenue to 9W, but it also would increase the (negative) chances that a seat remains empty on one of those two legs ...

Last time I checked, AI was offering flights out of their scissors-hub FRA to the U.S. ...
-HT



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineBOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1973 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8223 times:

A lot of people flew AZ to connect to India. I think that MXP would work, but geographically somewhere in Scandinavia would do better. America has a lot of demand for Europe, so I think that having scissor hubs there is a good idea. However if they start BOS, I would prefer they fly here out of BRU since there aren't any flights there, and MXP will be operated by AP.


2013 World Series Champions!
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32192 posts, RR: 72
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8193 times:

While I realize the Miami-India market is small, the Miami-Milan market is quite large, and combined with their AA partnership, I would like to see them give MIA-MXP a try if AirOne doesn't. Miami is one of Milan's most important North American business markets. Banking, fashion-houses, cruise ship corporations, and boat manufacturing are among the strong industry ties between South Florida and northern Italy. Miami is Milan's second largest U.S. O&D market after New York/Newark. It all depends on how much local traffic 9W would mind getting, because from Miami they sure wouldn't get that much going on to India.

[Edited 2008-04-09 16:37:48]


a.
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8140 times:

IMO, too many hubs--BRU, PVG, and now MXP. It reduces substantially the number of possible one-stop city pairs between India-NA markets.

MXP clearly has higher O&D potential than BRU; I wonder if 9W may consider closing BRU if MXP provides better yields.

IIRC, India-NA flights through BRU have load factors around 60%. Adding more city pairs through BRU would have helped increase load factors/yield.

[Edited 2008-04-09 16:56:11]

User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32192 posts, RR: 72
Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8123 times:



Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 7):
MXP clearly has higher O&D potential than BRU

For whatever reason, Northern Italy-USA market isn't substantially large as one would think. It's a primary reason why AZ struggled on their trans-Atlantic routes outside of NYC/MIA. They relied too much on connections.



a.
User currently offlineKLMD11L From New Zealand, joined Dec 2007, 121 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8061 times:

Very smart decision, MXP-N. America is quite a lucrative market, especially now MXP is no longer an AZ hub, any plans for 9W to serve Down Under non-stop?


KLM MD-11...The Ultimate Flying Machine!
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16948 posts, RR: 48
Reply 10, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 7920 times:

This is one of the dumbest route strategies I've seen in a long time. Never mind the fact that I think scissor hubs are a guaranteed loser, splitting your meagre network over two hubs that are only a few hundred miles apart is something USAir (not USAirways) would do, not an airline in 2008.

Quoting KLMD11L (Reply 9):
any plans for 9W to serve Down Under non-stop?

Well clearly they'd need another bloody scissor hub in Kuala Lumpur and Denpasar first Yeah sure



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 7918 times:



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 10):
Well clearly they'd need another bloody scissor hub in Kuala Lumpur and Denpasar first 

DPS would make sense now that BI is pulling out of that market ...  Wink



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineSflaflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7715 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 6):
While I realize the Miami-India market is small, the Miami-Milan market is quite large, and combined with their AA partnership, I would like to see them give MIA-MXP a try if AirOne doesn't.

That is interesting...I completely forgot about 9W's code share with AA - How close are they these days?

I was wondering if this news would force AA to make a decision about adopting MIA-MXP, but if they code share, would AA be better off letting Jet Airways handle the flight rather than flying their own equipment. Would that be alot for the flight to handle, Indian originating passengers (albeit small as MAH states), MXP originating passengers on 9W and AA code share passengers, plus possible Latin America and Caribbean passengers? Seems like alot for an AZ flight that left almost 100% full.


User currently offlineMk777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7617 times:

i think this is quite a dumb move in my opinion, you don't even have BRU doing full capacity and you want to start a scissor hub in MXP. How many pax are going to go from milan to AMD or CCU or BLR or HYD,why can't 9W just fly these routes from BRU-IAD, ORD, LAX and YVR

I though LAX was going to be from PVG but i guess not.

Will 9W have 8 A332's to do this route or only LAX and YVR will operate from MXP and maybe they will find a 3rd european hub to do IAD and ORD...

9W has started to remind me of AI with their route planning strategy.

I hope it works but i doubt it.



come fly with me
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 14, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7558 times:



Quoting Mk777 (Reply 13):
9W has started to remind me of AI with their route planning strategy

 checkmark 

I hope they either stick to BRU or completely switch over to MXP.

IT should try out making BLR a hub for one-stop India-NA flights. There will not be significant backtracking for BOM/HYD. It should cede the North India market and focus on South/West India markets for intl. flights. It could also attract UK passengers to Australia via BLR in the future


User currently offlineOjas From India, joined Mar 2008, 2920 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7517 times:

I personally too think that MXP as a hub may not be a good idea especially if BRU is not used at full capacity.

PVG is s good decision to make a hub for operations to LAX , SFO , YVR.

MXP , I seriously cannot think what can be their motive behind this. I can just make a wild guess that they might use MXP as a hub to serve some Latin/American cities.

Another guess would be, they would operate to the same cities from MXP but at different times, so as to give a "double daily" effect.

But as history of Jet Airways tells us , they hardly made any so called "stupid" , "insane" business moves. The BRU hub was the right solution at the time where the infrastructure at the Indian metro airports is the biggest constraint.

We just have to wait and find out what their plans would be. As per their plans the N. American destinations they would like to serve now are ORD, IAH , LAX, YVR. Maybe they would not expand much after that till they get the B787's. And I think all these routes can be done with the existing hubs (BRU , PVG)



A lion does not concern himself with the opinions of the sheep
User currently offlineHimmat01 From India, joined Dec 2004, 1045 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7453 times:

I believe its a good idea to have a second hub in Europe. If 9W plans to operate flights from multiple points of orgin in India to NA, it will be difficult to co ordinate the arrivals at BRU.

If 9W plans to operate flights from BOM, DEL, BLR, HYD, AMD, COK, MAA, CCU and ATQ to various points in the USA and Canada, flying all these flights into BRU on schedule and transferring the passengers to connecting flights may be difficult. It maybe a better idea to divide the flights between two hubs.

Flights from BOM, AMD, MAA , DEL and ATQ may fly through BRU and flights from BLR, COK, CCU and HYD may fly through MXP.



An airplane might disappoint any pilot but it'll never surprise a good one.
User currently offlineMk777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days ago) and read 5875 times:

Quoting Himmat01 (Reply 16):
Flights from BOM, AMD, MAA , DEL and ATQ may fly through BRU and flights from BLR, COK, CCU and HYD may fly through MXP.

So, for example, i want to fly from EWR to COK and back on 9W, i would have to fly EWR-BRU-MXP-COK-MXP-BRU-EWR. Why in the world would i want to do that now???

The whole idea of a scissor hub becomes obsolete.

Sorry but I still feel 9W really needs to rethink its strategy.

All 9W needs are the following routes if they have the a/c's, though i am sure they will wait for the 787 for some routes

AMD-BRU-ORD (A332)
CCU-BRU-IAH (A332)
HYD-BRU-IAD (A332)
ATQ-BRU-YVR (A332)
BLR-PVG-LAX (B77W)

[Edited 2008-04-10 08:05:32]


come fly with me
User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 7874 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5793 times:



Quoting Vtnyc (Reply 2):
Instead of getting its finger in to a whole of lot of different pies, 9W better concentrate on getting it's BRU up to it's full potential.

I agree. I fail to see how an airline as small as 9W can justify the need for 2 international hubs.


User currently offlineBlrBird From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 578 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 5603 times:



Quoting Airbazar (Reply 18):
I agree. I fail to see how an airline as small as 9W can justify the need for 2 international hubs.

You forgot their 3rd hub @ PVG  Smile

Did some route planner from AI join 9W?  duck 



from star dust....
User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 24
Reply 20, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5358 times:



Quoting Mk777 (Reply 17):
Quoting Himmat01 (Reply 16):
Flights from BOM, AMD, MAA , DEL and ATQ may fly through BRU and flights from BLR, COK, CCU and HYD may fly through MXP.
So, for example, i want to fly from EWR to COK and back on 9W, i would have to fly EWR-BRU-MXP-COK-MXP-BRU-EWR. Why in the world would i want to do that now???

HOw I understood Himmat01's post was that some flights should route trough BRU while others should route through MXP. No flights should call at both airports ...
-HT



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineHimmat01 From India, joined Dec 2004, 1045 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5229 times:



Quoting Mk777 (Reply 17):
So, for example, i want to fly from EWR to COK and back on 9W, i would have to fly EWR-BRU-MXP-COK-MXP-BRU-EWR. Why in the world would i want to do that now???

I have stated that some flights will fly through MXP and some will fly through BRU.



An airplane might disappoint any pilot but it'll never surprise a good one.
User currently offlineFCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5102 times:

ATWonline said , 9W will open CDG next year , as soon as they will get new WBs.
Is it realistic to open CDG , when BRU is only 300kms far from Paris ?


User currently offlineMk777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days ago) and read 4932 times:



Quoting Himmat01 (Reply 21):

I have stated that some flights will fly through MXP and some will fly through BRU.



Quoting HT (Reply 20):
HOw I understood Himmat01's post was that some flights should route trough BRU while others should route through MXP. No flights should call at both airports ...

I understand that, but then dividing flights into 2 hubs doesn't make economic sense, wouldn't it be better to just operate all flights via BRU especially since they had decided to use it as a scissor hub, IMO, MXP will just prove unfruitful.

Also, AI and IT are offering non-stops along with the other american carriers, so i don't know how long these hubs will last for 9W, im not being a pessimist but just don't understand this 2 hub strategy.



come fly with me
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16948 posts, RR: 48
Reply 24, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days ago) and read 4909 times:



Quoting FCKC (Reply 22):
Is it realistic to open CDG , when BRU is only 300kms far from Paris ?

CDG is a large market on its own, but if they really wanted to focus on BRU they could just partner with TGV and funnel everything through BRU. They wouldn't get much Paris point-of-sale that way but they're probably not going to get much regardless.



E pur si muove -Galileo
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...
Starting Jan.5, Jet Airways To Doha, KWI, BAH posted Sun Dec 16 2007 10:38:44 by QatarA340
Jet Airways To Start BOM-PVG-SFO In Feb. 2008 posted Sun Oct 28 2007 20:27:41 by LAXDESI
Now Jet Airways To JFK posted Tue Sep 18 2007 17:33:56 by Flying lsd
India's Jet Airways To The Gulf posted Fri Sep 14 2007 23:37:01 by KissK
Jet Airways To JFK Now Loaded posted Wed Aug 29 2007 04:25:46 by Flyguy1
Jet Airways To YYZ posted Wed Apr 18 2007 20:35:07 by EnviroTO
Jet Airways To Newark In August, SFO In October posted Wed Jan 10 2007 04:00:31 by LAXDESI
Jet Airways To YYZ? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 02:34:29 by RicardoFG
Jet Airways To Begin BOM-BRU-EWR In Summer 07'! posted Sun Nov 12 2006 08:20:43 by Flying Belgian
Jet Airways To Go Cargo posted Wed May 24 2006 10:31:24 by Flying-Tiger
Jet Airways Wants To Make HYD Hub? posted Sun Feb 13 2005 03:03:46 by United777
Jet Airways To Fly To Milan. Leases 5 A330-300's! posted Mon Sep 20 2010 22:34:07 by jayeshrulz
Jazeera Airways To Quit Dubai Hub! posted Fri May 8 2009 06:42:31 by QatarA340
United - Jet Airways To Codeshare And FF Partner posted Mon May 19 2008 10:32:05 by LAXintl
Starting Jan.5, Jet Airways To Doha, KWI, BAH posted Sun Dec 16 2007 10:38:44 by QatarA340
Jet Airways To Start BOM-PVG-SFO In Feb. 2008 posted Sun Oct 28 2007 20:27:41 by LAXDESI
Now Jet Airways To JFK posted Tue Sep 18 2007 17:33:56 by Flying lsd
India's Jet Airways To The Gulf posted Fri Sep 14 2007 23:37:01 by KissK
Jet Airways To JFK Now Loaded posted Wed Aug 29 2007 04:25:46 by Flyguy1
Jet Airways To YYZ posted Wed Apr 18 2007 20:35:07 by EnviroTO