Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
KLM CEO: 'Size Preferred Over Frequencies'  
User currently offlinePW100 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2002, 2371 posts, RR: 11
Posted (6 years 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 8573 times:

A local Dutch aviation-news website quotes KLM CEO Peter Hartman saying he would seriously consider reducing flight frequencies on long haul flights in order to fight rising fuel costs.

http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?id=26889

Now this is not new of course as most airlines seems to plan exactly this. However he has some more interesting remarks. Unfortunately only in Dutch, but here are the bullets:

* KLM considers reducing long haul frequencies;
* Increase aircraft size to [partially] compensate for lost seat count;
* Difficult decisions, discussed almost on daily basis at top level;
* Cost wise it makes a lot of sense to reduce frequencies, but customers do like them;
* Multi-daily flight rotations to US prime candidate for frequency reductions;
* Frequencies not to drop below once daily;
* No larger airplanes, 77W provides sufficient capacity [425 seats . . . ! ] to replace 744.


From KL perspective I would guess this makes a lot of sense, cost wise. Of the long haul players, KLM probably has the least amount of premium revenue, so their average customer would be more focused on cost then on number of daily flights.
On the other hand, multiple daily frequencies do make the AMS airport hub system more efficient, as gate utilisation is increased. However that comes at a cost. Rising fuel cost will shift the optimum balance more towards larger aircraft, as long as at least a daily rotation can be maintained.

Also should be considered that KLM's long haul operation is a little unique in the sense that they do operate a pretty large numbers of 744, but the majority are combi's, which seat only 285 pax or so. Replacing them with 789 or 350 does make a lot of sense [minor detail, they will not be available for at least five years].

Would be interesting to see what this would mean for KLM DLNW hub-hub flights [AMS-DTW, AMS-MSP, AMS-ATL]?

Regards,
PW100


Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24869 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 8496 times:

Interesting path if KLM decides to go down it.

Clearly one of the reasons for KLM success all these years has been its ability to leverage AMS as a hub. Less frequencies mean less connection opportunities which very well could shift passengers onto other airlines.
While I can appreciate the logic from strictly a finance point of view -- frequencies in many ways are king especially in competitive markets where the consumer has wide range of flight choices.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24868 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 8442 times:



Quoting PW100 (Thread starter):
Also should be considered that KLM's long haul operation is a little unique in the sense that they do operate a pretty large numbers of 744, but the majority are combi's, which seat only 285 pax or so. Replacing them with 789 or 350 does make a lot of sense [minor detail, they will not be available for at least five years].

In the meantime KL could convert some of their 17 744 combis to all-passenger configuration.


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4498 posts, RR: 72
Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 8000 times:

The question is of course, what kind of frequencies he is talking about. Most US destinations have but one daily flight: IAD, ATL, ORD, DFW, LAX and SFO are served once daily. That leaves the MSP and DTW interhub flights, for which, by their very nature a higher frequency is mandatory in order to adequately support the hub and spoke models at both ends.

IAH has 13 weekly flights through the Privatair-operated all-business class flight, which was started because the daily B74M to IAH didn't offer enough premium capacity. Other than that, there is JFK, which sees twice daily KLM flights. I can't see KLM go back to a once daily JFK service.

So which destinations are they going to reduce in frequency? I guess both BOS (1 A333, 1 B752) and EWR (2 B752) are prime candidates then, but these flights are all operated by NW. Also, not in the US but still in North America, YYZ may lose some frequencies.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2):
In the meantime KL could convert some of their 17 744 combis to all-passenger configuration.

Apparently, only one of those aircraft, PH-BFH, can be converted to an all-passenger configuration. Don't ask me about the technical details, but that is what I read.


User currently offlineNwarooster From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1066 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7976 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As Air France has a controlling interest in KLM, it is very possible that Air France is influencing KLM's decisions about flight reductions.  old 

User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7940 times:

I wouldn't mind if next time I am at DTW or MSP we see some KL 77W taking the place of several KL and NW flights.


Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineDL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7929 times:

Something i have been saying for a while, will be interesting to see if US domestic service goes this way as well

User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7403 posts, RR: 57
Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 7807 times:



Quoting PW100 (Thread starter):
* No larger airplanes, 77W provides sufficient capacity [425 seats . . . ! ] to replace 744.

I am quite happy to see that what I kept on repeating for months on A.Net is now officially confirmed ... No more B744 and no B748i for KL (nor for AF)

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 3):
The question is of course, what kind of frequencies he is talking about. Most US destinations have but one daily flight: IAD, ATL, ORD, DFW, LAX and SFO are served once daily. That leaves the MSP and DTW interhub flights, for which, by their very nature a higher frequency is mandatory in order to adequately support the hub and spoke models at both ends.

AF is reducing CDG-IAH-CDG to 1 x Daily next winter instead of 2 x Daily ...
Nothing is decided yet whether AF will axe DTW and PHL or not ....


User currently offlineHardiwv From Brazil, joined Oct 2004, 8780 posts, RR: 50
Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 7657 times:



Quoting FlySSC (Reply 7):
I am quite happy to see that what I kept on repeating for months on A.Net is now officially confirmed ... No more B744 and no B748i for KL (nor for AF)



Quoting PW100 (Thread starter):
* No larger airplanes, 77W provides sufficient capacity [425 seats . . . ! ] to replace 744.

But the configuration of KL B77W, which is very high density, should also be the focus of the discussion now that we have a higher demand for premium travellers.

All in all, the business concept of KLM is at stake, and they are struggling to find a new concept, testament to that is new B77W which in my opinion is not fulfilling KLM ambitions.

Rgs,


User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4336 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7347 times:



Quoting DL767captain (Reply 6):
will be interesting to see if US domestic service goes this way as well

Doubtful. Remember that AMS is about as devoid of O&D as a global connecting hub can get, so KLM can reasonably reduce frequencies to once-daily, use a larger plane, and not take a massive financial hit.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineBlink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5480 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 7037 times:



Quoting Avek00 (Reply 9):

Doubtful. Remember that AMS is about as devoid of O&D as a global connecting hub can get, so KLM can reasonably reduce frequencies to once-daily, use a larger plane, and not take a massive financial hit.

Spot on. I connected through there yesterday. Probably 95% of the people on both of my full flights were connecting pax. Likewise, the Schengen-non Schengen customs clearance was extremely backed up.

Now, given AMS's legendary status as an easy connecting hub, couldn't AF-KL try to route as many connecting pax through AMS and try to keep the CDG flights mostly French/exclusively AF destination O&D pax?



Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
User currently offlineHardiwv From Brazil, joined Oct 2004, 8780 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 7002 times:



Quoting Blink182 (Reply 10):
Spot on. I connected through there yesterday. Probably 95% of the people on both of my full flights were connecting pax. Likewise, the Schengen-non Schengen customs clearance was extremely backed up.

For almost all KL long-haul flights the percentage of O&D is between 5% and 20%, depending on destination and market.

Rgs,


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6950 times:

One must remember that KLM flies a lot of combis and a plane like the 77W is a large capacity increase pax wise over a combi. The 77W is also a large increase over the MD11. They only have 5 VLA 744s in terms of pax count. Those have the same number of seats as the 77W they are buying.

So my guess is that the debate here is between more 77Ws or 787-9s, and they discuss it every day. The 789 matches the seat count of the MD-11 and Combi aircraft they fly. The 77W are much larger for them (10Y seating) and match the 744 seat count, so the debate is between frequency with the 789 or density with the 77W (which at 428 seats does not lose out in fuel efficiency to any plane on the market).



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12345 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (6 years 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6895 times:



Quoting PW100 (Thread starter):
KLM CEO: 'Size Preferred Over Frequencies'

Some women I know say the same thing.  Smile



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineMisbeehavin From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 914 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (6 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6813 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 13):
Quoting PW100 (Thread starter):
KLM CEO: 'Size Preferred Over Frequencies'

Some women I know say the same thing.

They say 'Duration Preferred over Frequencies or Size' (in my experience)  Wink


User currently offlineDLPMMM From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3589 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6748 times:

Quoting Hardiwv (Reply 8):
All in all, the business concept of KLM is at stake, and they are struggling to find a new concept, testament to that is new B77W which in my opinion is not fulfilling KLM ambitions.

What??? That might be your opnion, but from this:

Quoting PW100 (Thread starter):
* No larger airplanes, 77W provides sufficient capacity [425 seats . . . ! ] to replace 744.

It looks more like the 77W is fulfilling KLM's needs very well, since they said they will increase plane size but are not looking at anything bigger than the 77W, either the 748i or the 380.

[Edited 2008-07-24 08:00:19]

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 16, posted (6 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6678 times:



Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 15):
either the 748i or the 380.

Nope, I agree that they have never seriously considered either of these aircraft. Again, they only fly 5 VLAs now, and the 77W they fly directly matches it on seat count (but with fewer J seats). The Combi is really a mid-sized passenger plane towing a trailer, not a VLA when it comes to pax (400 seats or more).

The 77W at 10Y is very competitive in today's environment. It's why I believe that Boeing will look to try to get 17.2" seats into any 777NG at 10Y, making it more palatable to some (not me).



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineLambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (6 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6596 times:



Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 3):
The question is of course, what kind of frequencies he is talking about. Most US destinations have but one daily flight: IAD, ATL, ORD, DFW, LAX and SFO are served once daily. That leaves the MSP and DTW interhub flights, for which, by their very nature a higher frequency is mandatory in order to adequately support the hub and spoke models at both ends.

The factor that is not being included in the above theory is that NW is being merged into the DL network. DL who has incumbent hubs at ATL, JFK, SLC, CVG with TATL service, and NW who has incumbent TATL service from MEM, MSP, DTW, EWR, and BOS. Considering all of that the importance and focus of the MSP and DTW to AMS flights will be relieved in the merged network. Instead of focusing on MSP and DTW to AMS in bulk the merged airline can spread the AMS concentration more than well among the incumbent markets.

The merged airline will have absolutely no need for the current 3x A333 per day MSP-AMS and 1x 744, 2x 332, 1x 757 that are currently being flown on DTW-AMS. The services can be combined from MSP using only 2 flights per day, more than likely with 767-300 and then 787 equipment. From Detroit 2x per day with 767-300, and then 787 service. DL does not see the need to send VLA to the Amsterdam market because of the lack of O&D in the market. While NW-KL has an extremely close relationship both are becoming and are parts under other airlines KL under AF, and NW under DL.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 5):
I wouldn't mind if next time I am at DTW or MSP we see some KL 77W taking the place of several KL and NW flights.

The chances of a KL 77W ever flying to MSP are next to none. However, the merger is bound to shake things up on both sides of the pond. Aircraft are going to be moved around, and gateways are going to be shuffled.The chance of a KL 77W flying to DTW is greater, however there are other North American markets that are more likely to see the 77W before DTW and MSP. Namely those markets include:

SFO(summer) as it is a full pax 744 from April to October

JFK which can convert to 2x 77W instead of the current combination of equipment

LAX has an outside chance as the 74M is flown due to the large cargo volume and lust lackey year-round pax demand compared to SFO in summertime

YYZ which at current is a full pax 744 year round and an additional 772 during certain periods.


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4498 posts, RR: 72
Reply 18, posted (6 years 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 6493 times:



Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 17):
The factor that is not being included in the above theory is that NW is being merged into the DL network. DL who has incumbent hubs at ATL, JFK, SLC, CVG with TATL service, and NW who has incumbent TATL service from MEM, MSP, DTW, EWR, and BOS.

That's all nice and dandy, but where does that leave room for KLM to cut frequencies, which after all is the topic of this discussion? The airline doesn't fly its own metal to SLC, CVG, MEM, MSP, EWR and BOS. A frequency reduction to JFK is out of the question, so that could leave KLM-operated flights to ATL and DTW to be cut at best.

Furthermore, the article quoted above is refering to almost immediate measures to be taken in response to challenging economic conditions. So, I was wondering what frequencies KLM is considering to cut next winter.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 17):
YYZ which at current is a full pax 744 year round and an additional 772 during certain periods.

YYZ hasn't been 744 year round for quite a while now. It is currently seeing 4 weekly B74M, 2 weekly B744 and 7 weekly B772 and current plans call for the introduction of thrice weekly A332 next winter and 5 weekly MD11 next summer.

Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 17):
JFK which can convert to 2x 77W instead of the current combination of equipment

Not going to happen in the near future. There are very good reasons behind the current mixture of equipment (B744, B74M, B772, B77W) to JFK within the KLM longhaul operation, not to mention that the limited B77W resources are also needed elsewhere in the network.


User currently offlinePaneuropean From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 882 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5576 times:



Quoting Blink182 (Reply 10):
Now, given AMS's legendary status as an easy connecting hub, couldn't AF-KL try to route as many connecting pax through AMS and try to keep the CDG flights mostly French/exclusively AF destination O&D pax?

Now that would be so nice. I don't think Air France will back up this plan, unfortunately.


User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (6 years 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5455 times:

The CEO says "increased size" and then says "we're going to use planes with the same overall seat count at the expense of premium seats"???

I was expecting him to be announcing an A380 order based on the size comment. What he seems to be saying is that they will keep the SAME size and simply reduce high-value capacity and physical number of flights.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 21, posted (6 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5301 times:



Quoting Khobar (Reply 20):
I was expecting him to be announcing an A380 order based on the size comment. What he seems to be saying is that they will keep the SAME size and simply reduce high-value capacity and physical number of flights.

Again, he is talking about 77W vs. 789 it seems, not VLAs. Other than 5 744 pax models and the 2 77Ws so far, the entire KLM fleet is 325 seats or smaller. So buying more 77Ws and passing on the 789 would be "increased size" for them. And they would still have A330s for the midsize 1 frequency routes, and 77Es for higher demand routes and seasonal changes, but overall can cut down on frequencies vs. the "fly 2 x 787" model of planning.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineLambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5170 times:



Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 18):
YYZ hasn't been 744 year round for quite a while now. It is currently seeing 4 weekly B74M, 2 weekly B744 and 7 weekly B772 and current plans call for the introduction of thrice weekly A332 next winter and 5 weekly MD11 next summer.

Combine both flights into one and you have the demand for a single daily 77W year-round.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 18):
That's all nice and dandy, but where does that leave room for KLM to cut frequencies, which after all is the topic of this discussion? The airline doesn't fly its own metal to SLC, CVG, MEM, MSP, EWR and BOS. A frequency reduction to JFK is out of the question, so that could leave KLM-operated flights to ATL and DTW to be cut at best

Look at the KLM US network. Look at what routes are flown in redundancy. I have discussed JFK as it is a 2x per day operation. I never for one moment referred to dropping the winter scheds which call for 2x per day JFK-AMS. What I did say is operate the JFK-AMS route as a 2x per day 77W. Re-read what I wrote. The 2x daily is not going to be changed. All that I suggested was that the route be changed from a mixed fleet to a single fleet type, that being the 77W.


User currently offlineFlyLKU From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 800 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4730 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2):
In the meantime KL could convert some of their 17 744 combis to all-passenger configuration.

I doubt it. Just guessing but I'll bet the freight in the back of these Combi's earns more than if it were passengers.

Besides, freight does not eat, does not go to the bathroom, does not require entertainment, and it does not complain.



...are we there yet?
User currently offlineManfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4388 times:

My question is what will they do with the cargo that the combi carries going to all pax config?


757: The last of the best
25 Airportmanager : What would be a change for the UIO-GYE route? I doubt they can change that now can they?
26 JRadier : The only change I could see there is a non-stop AMS-UIO-GYE-AMS, although I'm not sure how that would work out loadwise without the BON stop. I've be
27 Airportmanager : Ohh well, a direct flight could affect the loads though. The stop in BON is very useful from what ive heard. Never the less, would mind seeing a 747 h
28 Mptpa : KL617/618 in Sept is using 777 (not sure if it is 772 or 77W).
29 474218 : I am a little confused about Mr. Hartman's statement that "size is preferred over frequencies". Is he saying that "size over frequencies" is his (KLM'
30 OldAeroGuy : Unless it's a race horse.
31 LACA773 : I know KL does very well with cargo out of LAX on the 74Es but do they have enough premium seating available to paying J passengers? How do they do l
32 JRadier : KLM's preference as it lowers costs. KLM is hauling a lot of cargo and especially horses on the LAX route so the 74M is a perfect fit. The 77W is too
33 FlyLKU : Indeed, something I know KLM is respected for. I sat next to a 5 time equestrian olympian on the way to SYD in 2000. He always tried to "ship" his ho
34 Asiaflyer : Not necessarily. Remember that AF/KL are looking to order the next generation WBs next year. Their choice is between 787 and A350, and Peter Hartmans
35 HB-IWC : Actually, the BON stop is definitely not there for the passenger loads. On average 30 passengers get on and off at Bonaire and the vast majority of p
36 JRadier : Fair enough, so a flight without BON would be feasible. The BON stop does however make a nice opportunity to increase Antilles capacity during the Du
37 DeltaL1011man : Don't forget the MD-11s.
38 HB-IWC : I am pretty sure that if and when KLM decides to go nonstop to Ecuador, a solution will be found for the BON service. Already now, KL operates an ext
39 JRadier : That sector does not offer the flexibility I was talking about. With the current setup KL can quickly shift extra capacity onto the BON route for a w
40 Glareskin : Whether KL is going VLA or not, this declaration is in favor of the A380 as I suspect more airlines to consider this path right now or in the near fut
41 LACA773 : How are KL's premium loads out of LAX & SFO? I suspect they do very well in both cities and since SFO uses a full passsenger a/c, they fill more seats
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...
AF/KLM CEO: No Plans To Raise AZ Stake posted Sat Apr 23 2005 08:38:41 by Scotron11
Delta: Reading & Sleeping Preferred Over IFE posted Wed May 12 2004 16:03:21 by IndustrialPate
KLM Dashes BA Hopes Over Buzz posted Sat Mar 23 2002 21:38:00 by Singapore_Air
Boeing CEO Claims 5-year Lead Over Airbus posted Fri May 23 2008 00:06:51 by Sofianec
Alitalia Take Over By Air France KLM Status? posted Sat Mar 15 2008 02:43:02 by Boeing777/747
Former Garuda CEO Jailed Over Onboard Murder posted Mon Feb 11 2008 06:41:40 by BuyantUkhaa
AF-KLM: No Take Over Of Air Berlin posted Wed Sep 5 2007 09:56:03 by LifelinerOne
KLM 744 Over BHX? posted Fri Jun 1 2007 23:13:50 by Dangould2000
Emotions Over CEO's Pay Run High At Northwest posted Thu May 10 2007 20:10:58 by Xbraniffone
Woman Sues JetBlue Over Size Of Sick Sack posted Thu Feb 1 2007 01:11:04 by Richierich