pylon101 From Russia, joined Feb 2008, 1391 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1616 times:
S7 has been building its business with slower pace (compared to UN) - but its buisness plan is more conservative.
Though they have a charter program - their main revenue is from domestic market.
Yes, it's a private carrier.
No, never heard of North America plans.
pylon101 From Russia, joined Feb 2008, 1391 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1470 times:
I don't think.
Even though S7 had financial troubles, I still believe they would save their identity.
And they have a completely different strategy compared to UN or SU.
And they have the greatest livery I have ever seen!!!
Aeroflot777 From Russia, joined Mar 2004, 2957 posts, RR: 30 Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1332 times:
Quoting pylon101 (Reply 1): S7 has been building its business with slower pace (compared to UN) - but its buisness plan is more conservative.
Very well put! Rapid, international expansion for S7 could be a deadly mistake. Sibir is a well-established carrier with an enormous domestic network web that definitely works to their advantage. They are actually able to offer customers great options for traveling out of quite a few focus cities. While charters would be a bit different, as a company they don't seem to be ready to tackle the international side of scheduled, revenue flights. The slow pace of their business endeavors, are characteristic of a "caution" approach - they test out the markets before setting their foot in completely. This is directly against what SU and UN are known for.
I'm interested in hearing you logic on that one! What would you suggest as a strategy?
From what I'm seeing, S7 and UN are polar opposites in almost everything they do - only similarity is their common use of the DME airfield. S7 is a steadfast, established carrier with one of the best corporate identities in the world. Their colors and brand is easily recognizable and has been linked to their strong domestic network, operated by what now is a modern, clean, and efficient fleet (since the ILs and TUs are being retired). UN, on the other hand, is known for operating its fleet of long-haul, second/third-hand aircraft that are in poor interior condition, on their ever-drastically expanding international leisure market. Everything from types of customers, to fleet commonality, business model, and re-branding stages differ amongst the two carriers. A proposed merger would be very tough on S7, more so than on UN. They would lose everything they have worked hard on in the last few years - during which they have emerged as a solid, well-known and respected carrier.