Ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12365 posts, RR: 12 Reply 2, posted (3 years 2 months 3 days ago) and read 22360 times:
One critical factor for many airlines, for example USA based ones, is that the TATL and long distance international flights are among the most profitable, especially by business travelers who pay the higher fare bands in coach, business and first class. With the grounding of many international flights, it could put some over the edge of losses so severe it will put them out of business.
worldtraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (3 years 2 months 3 days ago) and read 21974 times:
I personally am beginning to believe that some of the big European airlines and the EU gov't are working together to put some of the smaller/medium sized airlines out of business.
The flimsy nature of the "science" behind these continued groundings - and no apparent gov't desire to find the truth - on top of the fact that all but southern Europe is grounded make it hard to believe that there isn't a concerted effort to put some airlines out of business.
Given that the EU has long been a much more vocal proponent of fewer airlines and consolidation, it does not seem too far fetched to believe they are willing to use this crisis to further their agenda.
When you also add in that the airline industry has been heavily blasted in Europe for what so many believe is its excess contribution to pollution, there have to be alot of people who are delighted at the lack of planes in the sky.
When you see people like Brown of the UK now saying that individuals and airlines should be compensated for this disaster which they are only making worse, my two questions are 1. where is the money coming from and 2. what people do you intentionally plan to exclude since the impact is affecting all of Britain....
it won'tt take very long before Europe finds out how essential air transportation is to their livelihood and lifestyle after all... or the balance of power in the world wll simply shift further away from Europe.
Life always throws crises at us - being able to deal with and recover from them is what sets leaders apart from everyone else.
UALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2349 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 21503 times:
Quoting worldtraveler (Reply 7): The flimsy nature of the "science" behind these continued groundings - and no apparent gov't desire to find the truth - on top of the fact that all but southern Europe is grounded make it hard to believe that there isn't a concerted effort to put some airlines out of business.
Yes, some evil EU bureaucrats were found in Iceland with explosives, soon before the volcano eruption began. You read it here first!
worldtraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 21417 times:
I wouldn't go that far but Europe has become the most unfriendly place for aviation in the world... it isn't too much of a stretch to think that there aren't interests that are trying to use events which none of us could orchestrate to accomplish their purposes.
lukeyboy95 From Papua New Guinea, joined Apr 2008, 953 posts, RR: 34 Reply 8, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 21211 times:
I think this will take on a Darwinian stance of 'Survival of the fittest'. Weaker airlines may find this is the rather cumbersome straw that brake the camels back. Metaphors aside.. airlines are going to have to be robust and strategic in the aftermath of this crisis in order to bounce back as this will be hitting very hard.
Its a curous thing the 'survival of the fittest' in a world were we are so eager to un-naturally support failing ventures, way beyond the point that ordinarily you would consider ventures to be highly unsustainable.
Perhaps if this had come at a healthy point in the aviation industry, read not in a recession, then airlines would have recieved greater support. However I feel with government purses strained already, many airlines will not recieve huge support and may fail. Perhaps this isn't an awful thing on the face-of it. In Scotland, we've had three airlines fail: Zoom/FlyGlobespan/Highland Airways and although disappointing at first, it means that stronger more competitive airlines can take their market place.
Have you seen their most recent figures? FR has such lower operating costs, that I am sure for something like this, it will be loosing the least amount of money in relation to customers carried. Compare for example, all the BA personnel that will be milling about. Furthermore, FR's netwrok coverage is such that it can continue operations in southern areas, so thats almost a small safety barrier.
I have a quick question about FR. We have been told that EU airlines are obliged to provide hotels and food. Does FR do this? I have never heard of this from them...
airbear From Australia, joined May 2001, 632 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 21170 times:
Quoting worldtraveler (Reply 9): ... it isn't too much of a stretch to think that there aren't interests that are trying to use events which none of us could orchestrate to accomplish their purposes.
Hi worldtraveler. I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but I seriously doubt that even the most rabid anti-aviation elements in influencial circles would be that self-destructive with their countries' own economies.
If this thing goes on much longer, the world economy - and the EU Zone & USA in particular - will just about grind to a halt. If anything, it should serve to show the anti-aviation/eco-green lunatics exactly what would happen if they REALLY had their way, in other words, a world without air travel. You can bet your life that they will be the ones to yell the loudest when they can't swan about to their environmental conferences, or indulge their passions for eco/sustainable tourism.
Quoting airbear (Reply 12): I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but I seriously doubt that even the most rabid anti-aviation elements in influencial circles would be that self-destructive with their countries' own economies.
My thoughts exactly...it seems like a good conspiracy theory, but really too good. I can understand the point being that many in the EU are proponents of mega airlines, similar to what Lufthansa has done/is doing in terms of gobbling up the smaller competition. Some of them may have hoped for something like this to happen to drive some of those smaller carriers into financial trouble, but to say that they're somehow rigging the decision-making process to keep millions of people pissed off and have the entire industry losing tens of millions each day...well...that's a little too conspiracy theory for me.
Personally, I think the UK authorities and BA are a little touchier on the issue because of BAW Flight 009. Granted KLM had an incident a few years back, but BA009 got so much media attention and praise for the pilots (oh yeah,and a trashed B742) that they're a little more cautious when it comes to volcanic ash. First-hand experience can make a difference in rare situations like these. BUT, that's just my two cents.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6192 posts, RR: 25 Reply 13, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 20864 times:
Quoting EZYAirbus (Thread starter): could this possibly spell the end for some airlines in Europe that are losing millions every day they are grounded?
Airlines in such cash flow problems that they cannot survive a few days shutdown are going to fail anyway.
All airlines are spending millions to tens of millions less each day than they would be while flying. The questions is can their cash flow handle the lack of income.
Most airlines do not depend on selling tickets on today's flight, or tomorrow's flight or even next week's flight to stay solvent. The problem today is that they have had your money for a week to a month to three months. And they have spend your money already. They need to sell tickets today for a flight in the future to pay the costs for your flight today.
But today they are not selling tickets for future flights, and they are having to refund money for yesterday's cancelled flights.
WAC From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 253 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 20681 times:
If you look back at 9/11 and the collapse of Swiss air and Sabena et al they were in a dire situation already. 9/11 just was the last straw.
Airliners which are in a precarious financial situation which undoubtedly there are will face collapse but they were heading that way already. This crisis is just speeding it up.
There will be other airlines which will survive but will need new capital to keep it running (BE comes to mind). They will need new capital to compensate the additional costs of this crisis. This could be raised by investors or even by governments. The EU commission has already stated that they will allow member states in giving financial aid to the aviation industry as long as they can prove the aid is appropriate to the cost of the close down of European air space.
As for actual big airline companies I think they will survive however they have been badly affected by the crisis but this is a short term cash-flow problem rather than anything else.
I do not expect any radical change in the European commercial air transport market. the cargo market is another story which already is suffering far more than the passenger side.
The basic outcome of the market will be the airlines that were on the path of closing will closer a few months/weeks earlier.
Quoting lukeyboy95 (Reply 10): Furthermore, FR's netwrok coverage is such that it can continue operations in southern areas, so thats almost a small safety barrier.
Relatively, FR and U2 will be probably suffering less than others.
1) They do not offer connections, so they don't have the trouble of thousands of pax stranded at your hub, waiting to be flown - so they have less aftermatch to cope with
2) They have a mixed network, so not everything is flying via their hubs. Quite some FR flights in Spain and Italy still operate.
3) Almost all of their airports in their network are within 2 days driving / train from each other. Getting crew to their home base or to their stranded aircraft is relatively easy, compared to the likes of BA, KL, LH, who have aircraft stranded in Asia, Africa or America.
4) They have all procedures in place and fully automated to offer refunds or rebookings; after all refunding people because of cancellations is something they do more often.
The fact now that they already said on Saturday that they'd cancel all flights untill wednesday, look likes they had their plan-de-campagne ready. Crew will likely be driven & flown to the stranded fleet in the coming days, to be able to start full operations on Wednesday. Looking at what's happening now, it seems like they were well looking ahead.
Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 14): I can understand the point being that many in the EU are proponents of mega airlines
The EU is fed up of state-supporting airlines that have / had no chance to survive. Before the take-over race started, every nation - how little it was - had it's own airline, many of them required government support. From a macro-economic point-of-view, it's better to have air services to the country assured by a foreign carrier, than to have a "own" carrier and pour money into it. Just look at the size of the airlines that are still independent or were until recently:
Austrian: ~90 aircraft
LOT: ~60 aircraft
CSA: ~50 aircraft
SN Brussels: ~45 aircraft
Olympic: ~40 aircraft
Malev: ~20 aircraft
And for OS, LO and SN, and until recently OK and MA, there are (were) even long-haul aircraft within this number. Now compare it to the size of US Carriers, the smallest of the carriers that fly widebodies on a scheduled basis, US Airways, is considerably larger than any of these carriers (~350 aircraft). That's bigger than all these carriers together.
Imagine that Alaska Airlines would operate a 6-strong 777-fleet to fly to some European and Asian destinations, and the state of Alaska or Washington would be pouring money in the carrier all the time, would you be happy about it?
Quoting WAC (Reply 16): Airliners which are in a precarious financial situation which undoubtedly there are will face collapse but they were heading that way already. This crisis is just speeding it up.
Indeed, it's just an accelerator of what's already happening.
Quoting WAC (Reply 16): The EU commission has already stated that they will allow member states in giving financial aid to the aviation industry as long as they can prove the aid is appropriate to the cost of the close down of European air space.
Indeed, some airlines have already asked for support. SN for example, is allowed to make use of the part-time unemployment benefits (SN pays half of the wages, the government the other half, as if the employees would be unemployed); as a similar law can be applied in the Netherlands too I wouldn't be surprised if KL makes a similar request.
TeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23 Reply 17, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 19924 times:
Quoting worldtraveler (Reply 7): I personally am beginning to believe that some of the big European airlines and the EU gov't are working together to put some of the smaller/medium sized airlines out of business.
Conspiracy theories can be fun, but you don't seem to be joking, worldtraveler.
If we want to joke, might as well declare this as Iceland's revenge for harsh treatment in the wake of their banking crisis.
They're erupting on purpose. Striking a blow against EU hegemony!
UALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2349 posts, RR: 2 Reply 19, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 19621 times:
Quoting joost (Reply 18): Now compare it to the size of US Carriers, the smallest of the carriers that fly widebodies on a scheduled basis, US Airways, is considerably larger than any of these carriers (~350 aircraft).
Actually, that would be Hawaiian Airlines, which has a fleet of 33 aircraft, 15 717s and 18 767s, with a few 330s about to enter service and a few 350s ordered, and it's actually much smaller than all the European airlines you mentioned.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6192 posts, RR: 25 Reply 20, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 19436 times:
Quoting UALWN (Reply 21): that would be Hawaiian Airlines, which has a fleet of 33 aircraft, 15 717s and 18 767s, with a few 330s about to enter service and a few 350s ordered, and it's actually much smaller than all the European airlines you mentioned.
Technically - yes
But in the context of this discussion - no
Hawaiian is not a 'regular' US airline - being focused on one state where wide-bodies actually make financial sense for one of their two separate operations. The 'domestic' fleet of 717s operates solely within their domestic market of the Hawaiian Islands. Their 'international' fleet of widebodies operates to connect their small island group with the rest of the US and a few other parts of the world.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. HA is a small airline, any way you look at it. Is their route network peculiar? Maybe. So is SN's, for instance, with their focus on Africa. Could they be swallowed up by, say, UA and become more efficient, reaping all sorts of economies of scale, just like OS will benefit from the acquisition by LH? You betcha. I see the situations very similar.
Indeed. I must abmit I didn't think about Hawaiian, but IMO they serve such a specific market that makes it possible to operate the way they do. And I don't even know how their financial shape is, actually.
I think it actually makes some sense. HA serves one state, like OS does (Austria as part of Europe), MA does (Hungary as part of Europe), LX does (Switzerland as part of Europe) etc. Or were you actually comparing the US with one of the countries in Europe?
For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
frmrCapCadet From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1512 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 18006 times:
res Hawaiian, it also serves very directly a primary economic interest of the Islands. tourism. And the citizens of Hawaii consider air access to the rest of the US a critical need. While the airlines are not subsidized I suspect there may be some favorable tax treatments.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
25 rfields5421: Do OS, MA or LX have no ability to fly short range flights outside their 'state'? Do they face a minimum 2,000 nm flight to any destination after the
26 c5load: Shouldn't they be covered under some form of disaster insurance?