Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BA Better Off Without IB  
User currently offlinemartinrpo1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 63 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 15593 times:

Was the BA/IB merger a bad move for BA? Would a BA/LX or BA/KL merger made more sense and prove better economic results today?

140 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 15499 times:

Quoting martinrpo1 (Thread starter):

To my understanding the key thing for BA was to gain access into a very lucrative South American market (not sure how satisfied BA is on this front so far) I was really hoping that BA-IB tie up would bring a more enhanced network especially for the UK travellers. Having flown on IB metal 2 times (long haul and short haul) I must say that their product delivery is something one would describe as very unattractive and rather poor. BA and IB long haul product simply do not match up each other. IB's economic performance is putting a heavy burden on BA too. It's becoming very costy for IB to operate their long haul fleet. Trimming some latino routes won't put a big smile on W. Walsh's face either ... However I don't think that BA had many options at that time since AF/KL had already sealed the deal. It was a good move for MAD's strategic location. Let's hope BA will utilize this opportunity better in the end.

[Edited 2013-01-14 20:33:47]

User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 15004 times:

I really think, better off without. But at the end of the day it's up to IAG to make the decision not BA although I am positive BA must have some " get out Clause"

Iberia is not a match, it was Willies attempt to get into the lucrative South America, that's all, and why has IAG not brought more airlines into the group? TAP, EI ect?.

As said above they should have paired up with KLM a few years back, a much better product and stable airline, KLM are probably thinking the same too now....


User currently offlineoffloaded From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2009, 873 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 14810 times:

Yes, bad move for sure. I had this very discussion last week with a friend at BA. The cultures are vastly different, the attitude to customer service is also varies wildly. My friend complained frequently of attending meetings in MAD when colleagues from IB rolled up an hour or more late for meetings, if they showed up at all.


To no one will we sell, or deny, or delay, right or justice - Magna Carta, 1215
User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 807 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 14733 times:

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 2):
But at the end of the day it's up to IAG to make the decision not BA although I am positive BA must have some " get out Clause"

IAG is a listed company and IB and BA are two separate trading subsidiaries of IAG. There would be no get out clauses for BA as they technically have no say in anything to do with IB.

If at some point IAG decide that IB was a mistake and decide they don't want it in the group they would have to find a buyer or in extremis close it down.

While IBs/Spains problems might be greater than WW contemplated when the merger was first mooted many years ago I would be pretty sure he was expecting a rough ride in the early years as IAG reshapes the IB operations. In the short term the IAG group results would be a lot better off without IB but you don't buy major subsidiaries 'with problems' for short term gains but for long term benefits - such as the access it gives IAG to landing slots in Madrid [when their ability to grow Heathrow operations is severely constrained].

Maybe if BA had known of the opportunity to buy BD and so have a once in a life time chance to gain a chunk of extra LHR slots they would have been less keen to merge with IB as the BD acquisition does provide them with an [at the time] unexpected opportunity to expand into new markets.


User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2757 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 14707 times:

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 2):
As said above they should have paired up with KLM a few years back, a much better product and stable airline, KLM are probably thinking the same too now....

Heavens...... if it were BA/KL, that would have left AF/IB, and would that be left now?

 Wow!


User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 14649 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 5):

Funny I was thinking that too ha ha, they would be a match made in heaven...


User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 14571 times:

It's easy to forget that at the time BA had very little scope for growth at LHR and had to look elsewhere for growth and BA was not in good financial shape three years ago.

BA has turned around. I don't see why Iberia can't be turned around (although it won't be easy). And the flipside there is a lot of expertise and experience of the restructuring of BA over the past ten years that can be applied to Iberia and not just cost cutting but also improving direct distribution, revenue management etc.

[Edited 2013-01-15 03:42:59]

User currently offlinecv990coronado From South Africa, joined Nov 2007, 337 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 14562 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Oh if only a BA/KL deal had been done. It would have made a GREAT partnership and gone a long way to solving the 3rd runway at LHR problem. What a pity. A big loss for BA and I think KLM would have had a better future too.


SSC-707B727 737-741234SP757/762/3/772/WA300/10/319/2/1-342/3/6-880-DAM-VC10 TRD 111 Ju52-DC8/9/10/11-YS11-748-VCV DH4B L
User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 14365 times:

Quoting cv990coronado (Reply 8):

Yes, definitely. KL has extensive network across the UK whereas IB is not a big player .... . the lack of runway capacity is more damaging for the UK economy. .. BA is not a victim as such. They got balls to play around ...

[Edited 2013-01-15 04:44:26]

[Edited 2013-01-15 04:45:41]

User currently onlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8322 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 14271 times:

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 4):
IAG is a listed company and IB and BA are two separate trading subsidiaries of IAG. There would be no get out clauses for BA as they technically have no say in anything to do with IB.

Exactly. It may not be good for BA but it's good for IAG who are now the dominant company in the TATL market. If anyone is going to dump IB it will be IAG not BA. People need to remind themselves that IAG is not BA.


User currently offlineAIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2499 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 14240 times:

Quoting cv990coronado (Reply 8):
Oh if only a BA/KL deal had been done. It would have made a GREAT partnership and gone a long way to solving the 3rd runway at LHR problem. What a pity. A big loss for BA and I think KLM would have had a better future too

Or even a BA/LX deal would have been great.



Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4325 posts, RR: 36
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 14214 times:

Spain is now in a financial recession. I think BA should just be patient and in a few years they can develop a powerhouse which will connect Europe to Latin America. The America's are and will be doing fine economically and Spain will also be back on its feet in a couple of years and then they can return to the stations they left with new A-330s which will have IFE.
Yes, Iberia has a minimal onboard product and their service mentality leaves a lot to be desired but BA was like that as well in the 1980s and they might be able to explain IB how they turned around.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8344 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 14116 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cv990coronado (Reply 8):
Oh if only a BA/KL deal had been done. It would have made a GREAT partnership and gone a long way to solving the 3rd runway at LHR problem. What a pity. A big loss for BA and I think KLM would have had a better future too.

KLM would have been the "pretty blond prom queen" to merge with, IB was the over weight unattractive girl. KLM-BA would have been the best merger in Europe.


User currently onlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1712 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 14075 times:

Quoting ely747 (Reply 9):
Yes, definitely. KL has extensive network across the UK whereas IB is not a big player .... . the lack of runway capacity is more damaging for the UK economy. .. BA is not a victim as such. They got balls to play around ...

London Schiphol airport..


Personally I think IB's weakness is their dire product... They offer a dreadful service on their long haul and short haul flights! No PTVs, and buy onboard service in economy. They need to align with their bigger brother.



Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-IAH (744-BA), MSY-LGA (319-DL), JFK-LHR (744-BA)
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2718 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13993 times:

Having flown IB Business Plus on long haul routes like EZE and GRU, I can say that their hard product is really not bad. It's their people and their culture that are to their shame. So long as I can sleep and don't have to deal with their disinterested, soviet style cabin crew, It's a good flight. The only place I've ever seen this level of disinterest in passengers in a premium cabin is in the US.


When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineAirGabon From Switzerland, joined Dec 2003, 881 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13802 times:

But for KL it is more interesting to be with AF.

I don't think KL is unhappy with AF, and before the merger with AF, KL never had such a huge development and expansion.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13750 times:

I would say another relevant question is: IB better off without BA? It should be noted that (contrary to BA), IB had benefits for 10 years running prior to the merger into IAG. SInce then, alas, only losses...


AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13619 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 17):
I would say another relevant question is: IB better off without BA? It should be noted that (contrary to BA), IB had benefits for 10 years running prior to the merger into IAG. SInce then, alas, only losses...

Not this again.

So, tell us. What has BA/IAG done to make Iberia worse off?

As Iberia's highest revenue earning route is reported to be one it doesn't even operate (LHR-JFK) you could ask how much worse off it would be without BA/IAG.

[Edited 2013-01-15 06:06:19]

[Edited 2013-01-15 06:06:38]

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 12384 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 18):
What has BA/IAG done to make Iberia worse off?

I don't know. What I reported are facts, not theories. Maybe one could ask: what has IAG done to improve IB? Invest in the fleet? No. Expand the market presence of IB? No, quite the opposite. Try to build bridges with the employees? No. Instead, all the profit in the IAG group has gone to cover the huge hole in BA's pension fund.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7478 posts, RR: 17
Reply 20, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12283 times:

As others have pointed out the ownership of BA as well as a poor performing IB by IAG does not really impact BA in a bad way. However it does have some direct and measurable benefits to BA operations.

For example five former BD aircraft were repainted into BA livery by IB at MAD when they could have been repainted at either LHR or EMA. So I assume BA saw some advantage in using the IB paint shop.

Another example is the BA LHR-MAD service. By transferring the late evening LHR-MAD flight to IB at the same time as the late evening IB MAD-LHR flight was transferred to BA both airlines have lowered costs by avoiding an overnight stop and the additional expenses that involves.

But this is all small beer.

If you access the "Capital Markets Presentation" made by IAG here:

http://www.iagshares.com/phoenix.zht...?c=240949&p=irol-presentations

and go to Slide 13 you will see that IAG were forecasting an increase in revenue of 180 million Euros and a Cost Saving of 90 million Euros for 2012 as recently as last November as a result of the tie up.

It is clear that at a substantial proportion of this increase in revenue and saving in costs, be it 25 per cent or 75 per cent or some other figure, must have accrued to BA. But how much we shall probably never know.


User currently offlinebabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12196 times:

Would I buy a ticket to South America knowing I had to transfer in Madrid and continue with Iberia? The answer is no.

Iberia is a terrible airline in terms of service and attitude and it is the last airline I'd want to spend 10 hours with.

The BA / IB tie up was a mistake. What were they thinking?

With the 787 due to BA soon, surely BA can muster the capacity on their own to operate those 'lucrative' South American routes out of LHR.


User currently offlineMIAspotter From Spain, joined Nov 2001, 2761 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 11972 times:

The only solution for IB to get their act together is to completely restructure itself, putting knowleadgeable people in charge of the company, not a friend of a friend of the CEO chosen by fingerpointing.

Then create a fair working environment for the employees, ground staff, etc.

Renew their product, cabins, IFE, etc

All under guidance and supervision from BA.

and Voila! a new Iberia...

However this is Spain and that´s never going to happen.

MIAspotter.

[Edited 2013-01-15 08:51:40]


I think, therefore I don´t fly Ryanair.
User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 11942 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 19):
I don't know. What I reported are facts, not theories. Maybe one could ask: what has IAG done to improve IB? Invest in the fleet? No. Expand the market presence of IB? No, quite the opposite. Try to build bridges with the employees? No. Instead, all the profit in the IAG group has gone to cover the huge hole in BA's pension fund.

If you understood the terms of the merger you would know that you last assertion is factually incorrect.

IAG has announced investment in the fleet. New A330s are on their way with new vastly improved economy and business class products.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 11890 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 23):
If you understood the terms of the merger you would know that you last assertion is factually incorrect.

I do understand the terms of the merger, and what I wrote is factually correct.

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 23):
IAG has announced investment in the fleet. New A330s are on their way with new vastly improved economy and business class products.

Yep. 8 A330s. Wow.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 25, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12433 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 24):
I do understand the terms of the merger, and what I wrote is factually correct.

So provide evidence for your assertion that all of IAG's profits have been used to fund the deficit in BA's pension fund.


User currently offlinemusapapaya From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1089 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12424 times:

Quoting MIAspotter (Reply 22):
The only solution for IB to get their act together is to completely restructure itself, putting knowleadgeable people in charge of the company, not a friend of a friend of the CEO chosen by fingerpointing.

Then create a fair working environment for the employees, ground staff, etc.

Renew their product, cabins, IFE, etc

All under guidance and supervision from BA.

Is BA that good themselves? Or LH better? They have done an awesome job turning LX round!



Lufthansa Group of Airlines
User currently offlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4369 posts, RR: 19
Reply 27, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12711 times:

Remember that BA's biggest reason for wanting to join forces with Iberia was to take advantage of the (theoretically) lower labor and sourcing costs of Spain compared to the United Kingdom. The ability to progressively transfer most of BA's non-operating cost base to Spain over time is a big deal, and should reap hundreds of millions of dollars to the BA bottom line once all is said and done. Iberia ultimately benefits as utilization of various parts of its operation increases from servicing both IB's and BA's needs.

IMHO, VS entered into the arrangement with Delta with a similar goal in mind. The UK is an awful place to base an airline from a cost standpoint, and so the name of the game in the 21st century is for British carrier to site as much of their cost base as possible outside of the United Kingdom, by any means necessary.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineMIAspotter From Spain, joined Nov 2001, 2761 posts, RR: 25
Reply 28, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12626 times:

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 26):
Is BA that good themselves?

Maybe, with the right people and with the right means, why not.

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 26):
Or LH better? They have done an awesome job turning LX round!

Exactly, I think LH was slightly interested in buying JK... but I guess they quickly ran away when they saw the mess it was... and I guess you know what happenned to JK.

MIAspotter.



I think, therefore I don´t fly Ryanair.
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 29, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12639 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 25):
So provide evidence for your assertion that all of IAG's profits have been used to fund the deficit in BA's pension fund.

At the time of the merger BA's pension fund had a deficit of almost €5b. IB's had no pension liability whatsoever. IB almost waked away from the merger because of this. And in hindsight it would probably have been better for all parties involved.

The pension deficit now has been reduced to €3.75b or so. How? Where has the money come from?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 30, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12541 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 29):
At the time of the merger BA's pension fund had a deficit of almost €5b. IB's had no pension liability whatsoever. IB almost waked away from the merger because of this. And in hindsight it would probably have been better for all parties involved.

The pension deficit now has been reduced to €3.75b or so. How? Where has the money come from?

Not from Iberia. The two airlines operate independently financially and do not cross subsidise each other and each airline has to raise its own funds. Hence, why IAG has said Iberia has to fund its restructuring from its own resources.

To say BA's pension fund has been plugged at the expense of Iberia is wrong. The value of the deficit is more likely to be influenced by the performance of the stock market (which has rallied over the past year) than anything else.

[Edited 2013-01-15 09:10:04]

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 31, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12266 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 30):
The two airlines operate independently financially and do not cross subsidise each other

Yet the deficit in the pension fund is now an IAG liability. Not BA's.

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 30):
The value of the deficit is more likely to be influenced by the performance of the stock market (which has rallied over the past year) than anything else.

The FTSE 100 is now at the same level it was when IB and BA merged, two years ago. So this is not the explanation.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinefactsonly From Montserrat, joined Aug 2012, 882 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12143 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 13):
KLM would have been the "pretty blond prom queen" to merge with, IB was the over weight unattractive girl. KLM-BA would have been the best merger in Europe.

Not so sure if I would agree with this point of view. Though general cost savings and efficiency benefits apply to both BA/KL and AF/KL combinations in varying degrees, the biggest differences are actually in network and hub airports.

A BA/KL merger would have brought two big competitors together with lots of overlap in their networks. KLM tends to be strong where BA is strong; North Atlantic, East Africa, Middle East, Asia. Each airline would have added little 'uniqueness' to the merger. Therefore the two airlines would have had to re-align networks significantly to change from overlap to complementarity. In addition, though LON is a large market, LHR is not a great hub airport with lots of connectivity and expansion potential. KLM would have gained LON market, but AMS would have been - even more so - the prime transfer hub for UK regions. BA would not have gained much here.

The reason AF/KL may be the better option is that complementarity was there from the start. AF is focussed on Latin America and both Francophone Caribbean & Francophone Africa. AF is weaker in Middle East and Asia, but strong in Japan and Russia. In addition CDG & AMS both have growth potential, thus offering multiple benefits to both airlines.

As for culture, you may be right. Plenty of successful UK/NL companies operating globally, perhaps fewer so French/Dutch.


User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 33, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12070 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 31):
Yet the deficit in the pension fund is now an IAG liability. Not BA's.

No pension funds still sit with BA, not IAG. Again, there is no evidence that BA's pension deficit has been plugged at the expense of Iberia. The merger was always set up so that responsibility for the BA pension funds rested solely with BA and no-one else.


User currently offlineAirGabon From Switzerland, joined Dec 2003, 881 posts, RR: 2
Reply 34, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 11935 times:

Quoting factsonly (Reply 32):
AF is weaker in Middle East and Asia

Not that much in Asia: 14/7 HKG, 14/7 PVG, 14/7 PEK, 21/7 NRT, 7/7 ICN, 7/7 KIX, 7/7 SIN, 5/7 SGN, 3/7 BKK + new routes in China and soon KUL.

And I don't add to those routes the code-share with CZ, MU, VN, KE and JL.


User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 11788 times:

Quoting babybus (Reply 21):




Not sure if someone raised this but MAD leads the table on lost luggage and so.... Although I must say I really enjoyed walking around the terminal building ... Very classy and spacious, a bit empty though ... Airport experience quite important in rebuilding the airline's reputation ....

[Edited 2013-01-15 09:57:48]

User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 11626 times:

Quoting avek00 (Reply 27):

To what extent is this feasible? We are talking about the two countries with different cultures, whereas the Dutch and the British can get with each other relatively easy...


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 37, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 11440 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 33):
Again, there is no evidence that BA's pension deficit has been plugged at the expense of Iberia.

It has been plugged at the expense of IAG. Hence, indirectly, of IB.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8344 posts, RR: 7
Reply 38, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 10580 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting factsonly (Reply 32):
A BA/KL merger would have brought two big competitors together with lots of overlap in their networks. KLM tends to be strong where BA is strong; North Atlantic, East Africa, Middle East, Asia. Each airline would have added little 'uniqueness' to the merger.

KLM flies to almost as many places in Latin America as Iberia and some it does( dutch caribean). KLM flies to Caracas, Panama, Lima, Guayaquil, EZE, GRI & GIG. The only major city it is alergic to is Bogota.


User currently offlineSCL767 From Chile, joined Feb 2006, 8808 posts, RR: 5
Reply 39, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 10347 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 38):
KLM flies to Caracas, Panama, Lima, Guayaquil, EZE, GRI & GIG. The only major city it is alergic to is Bogota.

KL does not operate into CCS.
AF=BOG, CCS, CUN, EZE, GIG, GRU, HAV, LIM, MEX, PUJ, SCL, SDQ
KL=EZE, GIG, GRU, GYE, HAV, LIM, MEX, PTY, UIO


User currently offlinefactsonly From Montserrat, joined Aug 2012, 882 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 10091 times:

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 39):
KLM flies to almost as many places in Latin America as Iberia and some it does( dutch caribean). KLM flies to Caracas, Panama, Lima, Guayaquil, EZE, GRI & GIG. The only major city it is alergic to is Bogota.
Quoting SCL767 (Reply 39):
KL does not operate into CCS.
AF=BOG, CCS, CUN, EZE, GIG, GRU, HAV, LIM, MEX, PUJ, SCL, SDQ
KL=EZE, GIG, GRU, GYE, HAV, LIM, MEX, PTY, UIO

Today yes, but not at the time of the BA/KL discussions. KLM was not doing that well at that time (late 1990s) and closed many low frequency station EZE, MVD, SCL, BOG (briefly operated D10), GIG, PTY, GUA, SJO, CCS (closed after the AF merger).

- EZE, GIG, HAV, PTY are recent returns to the network.


User currently offlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4369 posts, RR: 19
Reply 41, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 9764 times:

Quoting ely747 (Reply 36):
To what extent is this feasible? We are talking about the two countries with different cultures, whereas the Dutch and the British can get with each other relatively easy...

It's highly feasible -- in fact, strategic cross-border siting of cost and income bases is key to the success of many multinational corporations. For most non-core activities, it's cheaper for IAG to perform the activity in Spain than in the UK. Iberia of course has some real structural issues to work out, but as those are resolved, expect to see the IB side of the house insource as much work from BA as possible.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 42, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 9596 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 37):
It has been plugged at the expense of IAG. Hence, indirectly, of IB.

No it hasn't. You need to learn how the IAG structure works. Each airline stands on its own two feet, has its own credit identity and raises its own funds. IAG does not finance the member airlines. No member airline cross subsidises the other.


User currently offlineedina From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 744 posts, RR: 9
Reply 43, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 9473 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 42):

I was just about to say the same thing....you beat me to it! It's an open structure....no smoke & mirrors....



Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 44, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 9391 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 42):
No it hasn't. You need to learn how the IAG structure works. Each airline stands on its own two feet, has its own credit identity and raises its own funds. IAG does not finance the member airlines. No member airline cross subsidises the other.

This is what Expansión, the leading Spanish business newspaper, had to say about the pension situation:
http://www.expansion.com/2012/12/12/...a1886b5594d79fc477ece&t=1358270387
Unfirtunately, only in Spanish.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineATL From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9127 times:

Quoting babybus (Reply 21):

Would I buy a ticket to South America knowing I had to transfer in Madrid and continue with Iberia? The answer is no.

Iberia is a terrible airline in terms of service and attitude and it is the last airline I'd want to spend 10 hours with.

The BA / IB tie up was a mistake. What were they thinking?

With the 787 due to BA soon, surely BA can muster the capacity on their own to operate those 'lucrative' South American routes out of LHR.


Completely agree. I have no idea what BA was doing. I mean, I suppose they don't have any more space at LHR so maybe they need MAD...

Aren't AA and BA close enough to strike some sort of Latin America deal? AA has ridiculous South American coverage..

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 15):
The only place I've ever seen this level of disinterest in passengers in a premium cabin is in the US.

Dude. You have to stop trying to crap on America in every single thread. I've had excellent service on Delta, Southwest, US, United.. Especially Delta (in my experience). I've flown on a boatload of airlines in a range of classes and let me tell you that I personally put SLC based Delta crews a the top of my list with regards to how they treat passengers. I do agree with AA needing a lot of improvement with regards to how they treat passengers..


User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2718 posts, RR: 4
Reply 46, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9064 times:

Quoting ATL (Reply 45):
I've flown on a boatload of airlines in a range of classes and let me tell you that I personally put SLC based Delta crews a the top of my list with regards to how they treat passengers.

Really, you're a teenager and you've "flown on a boatload of airlines in range of classes"? Non-rev family travel?



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 47, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8986 times:

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 39):
EZE, GIG, GRU, GYE, HAV, LIM, MEX, PTY, UIO

you forgot SAL and GUA in that list



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 48, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8821 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 44):
This is what Expansión, the leading Spanish business newspaper, had to say about the pension situation:
http://www.expansion.com/2012/12/12/...a1886b5594d79fc477ece&t=1358270387
Unfirtunately, only in Spanish.

Unfortunately for your arguments, the article says that it is BA that might have to increase its contributions to the pension fund. It does not say that IAG will! Furthermore, its says that teh pension fund managers will insist on the restriction on BA of transferring money *to* IAG and IB:

Pero los gestores de los fondos han advertido en reuniones con sus beneficiarios que “el déficit es bastante mayor que hace un año” y van a pedir a BA “el mayor volumen de contribuciones posible”. Además, quieren mantener las restricciones impuestas a la aerolínea británica para que no trasvase dinero a IAG e Iberia.

The pension funds can be very fluid and its a situation that can change from a year to the next depending on the investments. BA needs to increase its contributions, it can afford it, as it is making money.
Iberia's situation is something else. You may be under the illusion that there is no reason why IB is losing money, as it made a profit whilst Spain was riding an economic bubble with limited competition. The fact is that the bubble has burst, and the competition is more substantial -and will be increasingly more on both the European side and the the America's with LATAM, AM, AV looking lean.

It would be silly for IB to increase its market presence under the current situation as more offer would simply mean more losses. It needs to do the restructuring, focus on better service (for that the improvement of the fleet will help, but staff and procedures will also have to improve), then it can re-launch its image, and as the economy heals, it should be able to grow for the future.

BA has already done the homework, grounded 747s, got rid of the 757s, lost thousands of staff -re-negociated contracts, including the new mixed fleet. It was not pain or trouble-free, but BA s now in a position to grow.
The crisis in Spain hit later than in the UK/US, and it is deeper, but restructuring IB looks messy.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 49, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8545 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 48):
Furthermore, its says that teh pension fund managers will insist on the restriction on BA of transferring money *to* IAG and IB

Exactly! I'm certainly not accusing BA of transferring money to IB! Quite the opposite!

The article goes on to quote an HSBC analyst: "One of the largest risks for IAG is the issue of BA's pensions, which could imply a huge loss of cash [for IAG]." And

Quoting summa767 (Reply 48):
You may be under the illusion that there is no reason why IB is losing money, as it made a profit whilst Spain was riding an economic bubble with limited competition.

Limited competition? While IB was having its streak of 10 profitable years it had to contend with JK, UX, VY, U2, FR.... Tell me a European country with more competition. At that time BA was losing money year after year... with much less competition.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 50, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8543 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 29):
The pension deficit now has been reduced to €3.75b or so. How? Where has the money come from?

From BA?

Quoting UALWN (Reply 31):
Yet the deficit in the pension fund is now an IAG liability. Not BA's.

Incorrect

Quoting UALWN (Reply 37):
It has been plugged at the expense of IAG. Hence, indirectly, of IB.

Laughable. Provide some proof.



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 51, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8426 times:

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 50):
Laughable. Provide some proof.

Read the article I linked above. Laughable indeed.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 52, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8103 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 49):
The article goes on to quote an HSBC analyst: "One of the largest risks for IAG is the issue of BA's pensions, which could imply a huge loss of cash [for IAG]." And

The main reason that IAG shares have lost 40% of their value since the merger is to the bad performance of IB. Simple.
The market's main concern is whether a company can attract more income than its spends on its bills. BA does that. IB does not.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 49):
Limited competition? While IB was having its streak of 10 profitable years it had to contend with JK, UX, VY, U2, FR.... Tell me a European country with more competition. At that time BA was losing money year after year... with much less competition.

Look, IB has a for a few years now said that its short haul has been losing money. Of course that it's to do with the European LCCs. IB had to offer a LCC service, with buy on board and dense seating as it tried to compete.

*But* IB made its money on LatAm routes and that is where it did have limited competition. It's in the last few years that it has been increasing. In the last 3 years particularly AF/KL have opened new routes and increased capacity (KL to GIG/EZE, PTY now daily -more than IB!-, UIO/GYE dedicated, AF to LIM), LH opened BOG and it's now daily. LA has increased capacity from its different countries to MAD (soon to be 787) AV now flies 3 times daily to Spain in A330s (must b 5 years ago t was a 767-200 once a day). UX has ventured to new places too: MEX, LIM, and before that EZE.

So more competition in the markets that matter most, combined with IB's lack of appeal can only be reflected in the bottom line. On top of that, lack of demand, due to Spain's economy, it's really not difficult to see how a company can go from having a profit margin to going into the red.



[Edited 2013-01-15 15:05:41]

User currently offlineautothrust From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 1595 posts, RR: 9
Reply 53, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7532 times:

This whole thread islike a bash contest on IB, MAD, Spain.   If BA looses money (or IAG shares go down) it's hardly believable it was only attributed by IB.

After all IAG and BA knew about the crisis in Spain when they approved the merge. They also knew how IB worked.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 52):
The main reason that IAG shares have lost 40% of their value since the merger is to the bad performance of IB. Simple.

Says who? You?



“Faliure is not an option.”
User currently offlineATL From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 54, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7335 times:

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 46):
Really, you're a teenager and you've "flown on a boatload of airlines in range of classes"? Non-rev family travel?

Yes. I was privileged enough to travel around the world, and as a result fly all the time.

I hope you're not actually trying to maneuver around my point: Stop trying to go anti-US in every thread. Particularly when I've had fantastic experiences on some US flights.


User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 55, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6763 times:

Quoting autothrust (Reply 53):
This whole thread islike a bash contest on IB, MAD, Spain.   If BA looses money (or IAG shares go down) it's hardly believable it was only attributed by IB.

Not only, but if you observe the major share price movements, are as a result of the company's performance news (where BA has made money, but IB has lost more).
There was a price rally just recently when IB unions announced they they would not strike, raising hopes of a successful restructuring at IB. This is obviously important to the market.

I do think that MAD will be important for IAG's future, and do think that it has plenty of room for growth, chiefly due to its role as gateway to an emerging Latin America that has plenty of growth ahead.
However, there has been increasing competition, and this will only increase. Hence IB needs to sort out its costs, and its service if it is to thrive.


User currently offlinebaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2028 posts, RR: 27
Reply 56, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6731 times:

BA might be able to reshape IBs product, route network and operations, but...

The cultural difference in service delivery is something BA can't change. This is not to say that IBs service delivery is BAD...people must draw their own conclusions on that point. My experience with IB has been generally positive. Then again, I'm a non-rev most of the time, so beggars never complain (at least this one doesn't).

Having worked at Alitalia, I learned that the onboard product is reflective of the culture. Again, I don't view this in the context of good or bad, simply different. I've had some absolutely marvelous flights on AZ and IB. Same on BA.

Now when you talk about US airline service in the international market? Well, let me say we just need to do it better and leave it at that.

baw716



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 57, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6572 times:

Quoting autothrust (Reply 53):
If BA looses money (or IAG shares go down) it's hardly believable it was only attributed by IB.
IAG breaks down its operating results by airline. The relative performance of BA and IB is on the IAG investor relations website for all to see.

IAG also produces monthly traffic statistics and you can see the relative performance of RPK growth compared to ASK growth for each airline as well as the performance of cargo. There's a stark difference.

[Edited 2013-01-16 00:55:34]

[Edited 2013-01-16 01:26:12]

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 58, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6537 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 52):
The main reason that IAG shares have lost 40% of their value since the merger is to the bad performance of IB. Simple.

That's not what that HSBC seemed to think.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 52):
So more competition in the markets that matter most, combined with IB's lack of appeal can only be reflected in the bottom line. On top of that, lack of demand, due to Spain's economy, it's really not difficult to see how a company can go from having a profit margin to going into the red.

Of course the state of the economy has something to do with the current situation. But the economy was already bad in 2010, and IB made a profit. And the economy across Europe is not in a much better shape anyway. Now about the competition. Same about the competition. all that apparent increase (there have been many reductions too, but you don't mention them) has happened in the last 7-8 years. IB was profitable until 2010.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6187 posts, RR: 30
Reply 59, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6535 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I´ve flown IB in:

1988 service was horrible, with a granny FA actually yelling at me
1996 service was horrible
2000 service was horrible
2002 service was horrible

and on and on and on until my last flight with them, in 2010.

So, when are they going to change that? What will it take for them to change that?

Sure, the hard product in J is somewhat nice. But nothing too memorable.

Nowadays I have given up. If I have to fly to MAD I either take AM, if I absolutely need to be there within a certain time frame or I take LH, AF or whatever is available and connect. I´m done with IB.

Let me venture another idea why they loose money: Their O&D traffic out of MAD is really broke these days, due to the Spanish economy being a shambles. Add to that the high yield passenger from other places avoids them like the plague. The result? They loose money.

Unless they overhaul their cabin, ground and pretty much all types of services that relates to the passenger, they´ll continue going downhill. People have more choice now than they did 10 years ago. And they are just choosing not to give their business to IB.

[Edited 2013-01-16 01:39:11]


MGGS
User currently offlineedina From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 744 posts, RR: 9
Reply 60, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6485 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 58):

It's quite clear you haven't read the second part of Summa767s post in reply #53 regarding competition.

As to the financial facts......they are out there! You're basing your argument on one subjective newspaper report, wheras other posters are basing their information that is made available to the press/public under UK accounting/reporting reulations.



Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 61, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6404 times:

Quoting edina (Reply 60):
It's quite clear you haven't read the second part of Summa767s post in reply #53 regarding competition.

Actually I did read it. I even replied to it:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 58):
Same about the competition. all that apparent increase (there have been many reductions too, but you don't mention them) has happened in the last 7-8 years. IB was profitable until 2010.

I guess you didn't read my reply.

Quoting edina (Reply 60):
As to the financial facts......they are out there!

And I have read them. Have you?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineedina From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 744 posts, RR: 9
Reply 62, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6318 times:

Iberia's CEO doesn't blame the BA pension deficit......

Mr Sanchez-Lozano said "the Spanish and European economic crisis has impacted on Iberia, but its problems are systemic and pre-date the country's current difficulties."

http://news.sky.com/story/1009108/ba...wner-iag-hit-by-iberia-performance



Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 63, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6295 times:

Quoting edina (Reply 62):
Iberia's CEO doesn't blame the BA pension deficit......

Mr Sánchez Lozano is not exactly IB's CEO. He's the "Consejero Delegado," which is close to a CEO but not quite. IB's real boss is Mr Antonio Vázquez, IB's "Presidente Ejecutivo."

Anyway, Mr Sánchez Lozano doesn't blame BA. However the employees do...



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 6211 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all.

This is very interesting to read.

However, when you read press like.....

LONDON - International Airlines Group posted a slight rise in December traffic, as a robust performance from British Airways again made up for weakness at Spain's Iberia.

and...

IAG's December traffic edges up on BA strength.

and...

British Airways owner IAG soars to the top of the FTSE 100 after upgrade.

UBS analysts raise recommendation for airline on hopes of Iberia restructuring and prospect of global growth.

It does all seem to point to the fact that this weeks IAG share price rally is due to BA's STRENGTH and the prospect of a restructured IB.

Incidentally Lufthansa shares (which one could fairly argue could be used as a European benchmark) were hit by a broker 'downgrade' this week so one can deduct from this that Mr Walsh and company are definitely doing 'something' right !


User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 807 posts, RR: 0
Reply 65, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6162 times:

I think there is a 'cultural' thing here - the Spanish contributors don't want to admit that IBs problems are combination of their own making and the general economic situation in Spain and that the BA pension deficit is irrelevant to their trading performance. Meanwhile the British contributors like to be just a bit smug as BA happens to be recovering quicker from the economic mess faster than IB, and do'nt seem to be too keen to recognise that a few years ago BA was a bit of a basket case but has come round - so given time IB will come round and the IAG merger will once again seem to have been a good idea.

User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6033 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 65):
Meanwhile the British contributors like to be just a bit smug as BA happens to be recovering quicker from the economic mess faster than IB

I'm not sure that being 'smug' has got anything to do with it ?

BA is recovering due to hard graft and the difficult implementation of new ways of doing things.

BA succumbed to the pressures imposed by the LCC's and Middle Eastern carriers along time before other European airlines due to the way global and LCC airlines seem to covet access (understandably) to London Heathrow and the greater UK aviation industry.

These 'other' European airlines are now in the same 'do or die' situation that BA was once in. One wonders how the 'huge' Lufthansa group will manage when full exposure to the 'new reality' in Europe has come to fruition. How the same airline can operate A380's and 748i's but still have other long-haul aircraft in its fleet without PTV's is a mystery to me. It is a small example granted but indicative of a rather egocentric ambition to expand that may well cause problems in the not too distant future.

AF....I wouldn't even know where to start with them. Good airline like LH but 'head in the sand' management seldom bears fruit but they seem to be learning 'fast' !

BA has done the hard bit.

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 65):
and do'nt seem to be too keen to recognise that a few years ago BA was a bit of a basket case

There isn't one airline in Europe and certainly the United States that hasn't been at some point or another a 'basket case' so BA are in good company.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 67, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6000 times:

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 65):
the Spanish contributors don't want to admit that IBs problems are combination of their own making and the general economic situation in Spain and that the BA pension deficit is irrelevant to their trading performance.

First, I'm not Spanish, although I do live in Spain. Well, in Barcelona... Second, no mater how many times you write it, it will still be false that the BA pension deficit is irrelevant for IAG, and, hence, for IB. It's like saying that IB's loses are irrelevant for BA, which would negate the need for a thread titled "BA better off without IB."



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 68, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5972 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 58):
all that apparent increase (there have been many reductions too, but you don't mention them) has happened in the last 7-8 years. IB was profitable until 2010.

Look, it's simple! competition has increased from carriers that are more competitive than IB. On the reductions I can only think of Air Madrid and Air Comet that followed it. Each of them were boom and bust. But the fact of the matter is that real competition, from more serious European airlines, lean Latin american carriers is real and not *apparent*. I have already named and expansion by AF/KL, LH, LA, UX, AV, LA.
But of course, competition alone is not to blame for Iberia's woes. Its lack of appeal and of course the economy play their part too.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 58):
IB was profitable until 2010

That is false and you know it!
2009 was a year of historic losses. 2008 showed a net profit of €32m through asset sales, but operational profit, which is the one that matters was non-existent. It had an operational loss of €79m.
http://www.publico.es/dinero/297905/...-registra-unas-perdidas-historicas
http://www.cnnexpansion.com/negocios.../iberia-registra-ganancias-en-2008

2010 saw an improved operational results resulting in less losses than the massive ones the previous year -indeed the Spanish economy did actually see positive growth for the first 2 quarters of growth before flat lining. That positive growth was just a blip of course and probably due to the government spending as it tried to stimulate the economy, but the damage lying deeper down, meant that recovery would not be sustainable.

So in 2010 IB posted an €89m net profit, but there were operational losses of €26m. The fact is that IB obtained earnings from Vueling's profit (from which it obtained (€23m) and from the sale of a stake in Amadeus (€99m) that resulted in a net profit.
http://80dias.revista80dias.es/notic...-2010-gracias-Vueling-Amadeus.html

To try to blame IB's woes on the merger with BA is just plain ridiculous.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 69, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5962 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 68):
That is false and you know it!

IB posted a profit every year from 1998 until 2010 (when it merged with BA), except for 2009. You can check the filed statements. Now I'm too lazy to check BA's statements, but I seem to remember a very different story...



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 70, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5928 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 69):
IB posted a profit every year from 1998 until 2010 (when it merged with BA), except for 2009. You can check the filed statements. Now I'm too lazy to check BA's statements, but I seem to remember a very different story...

Just click on the links I gave you! They are in Spanish.
I have looked at the filed accounts in detail before. IB has not made an operational profit since 2007. It is that simple.


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 71, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5891 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UALWN (Reply 69):
IB posted a profit every year from 1998 until 2010 (when it merged with BA), except for 2009. You can check the filed statements. Now I'm too lazy to check BA's statements, but I seem to remember a very different story...

The entire country of Spain posted a profit until everyone realised it was all built on debt. Not having a go at Spain.....god knows they weren't alone !!

Once the economy collapsed the airline collapsed.

Unfortunately for IB.....MAD is no LHR.

To blame IB's current woes on its profitable and far leaner/efficient other half (BA) is ludicrous.

IB's predicament is down to the state of the Spanish economy, increased competition and a desperate need to restructure and 'up' its game.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 69):
Now I'm too lazy to check BA's statements, but I seem to remember a very different story...

Are you inferring that BA never has and never will be profitable ? The once 'worlds favourite airline', the airline that due to its 50% plus slot holding at arguably the worlds pre-eminent airport is the envy of said worlds airlines ? The airline that along with AA dominates the most lucrative civil aviation routes in the world ? The airline that brought us the flat bed and made double daily scheduled supersonic flights from London to New York pay ?

If BA management can see off Virgin Atlantic, Easyjet, Ryanair, Emirates etc etc I'm damn sure related IAG management have the wherewithal to lick IB into shape and no mistake.

It wont be easy and many toys will fly out of many prams as with BA, LH and AF but the 'right' management is in place.

And for that UALWN.......IB should be grateful !!!


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 72, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5890 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 70):
Just click on the links I gave you!

Why should I waste my time on those when one can easily find the yearly financial statements?
http://www.es.iairgroup.com/phoenix....html?c=240950&p=irol-reportsannual

Quoting summa767 (Reply 70):
They are in Spanish.

As you may have understood by now, I can read English just fine. And French and Catalan, for that matter. Thank you.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 70):
IB has not made an operational profit since 2007.

The 2008 report that you can find in the link above states: "Resultado neto de las operaciones: €5m". That's an operational profit in 2008.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 70):
It is that simple.

Apparently it isn't.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 73, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5854 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UALWN (Reply 67):
. It's like saying that IB's loses are irrelevant for BA, which would negate the need for a thread titled "BA better off without IB."

IB's losses are irrelevant to BA. IB could go bust tonight they would not drag BA down with them.

Believe me, the financial markets would be far less patient with IB were it not for its affiliation with BA and its faith in the proven track record of IAG management.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 74, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5854 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 71):
The entire country of Spain posted a profit until everyone realised it was all built on debt.

I don't see what this has to do with anything but anyway. Do you happen to know the debt of Spain as a fraction of GDP in October 2012 (latest numbers I could find; it's probably slightly worse now)? 75%. Do you happen to know the UK's debt? 85%.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 71):
Are you inferring that BA never has and never will be profitable ?

Of course not. I'm just saying that, in the 10 years prior to the merger, IB was in better shape than BA.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 71):
The airline that along with AA dominates the most lucrative civil aviation routes in the world ?

Would that AA be the same airline that is currently bankrupt?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 75, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5849 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 72):
The 2008 report that you can find in the link above states: "Resultado neto de las operaciones: €5m". That's an operational profit in 2008.
OK, €5 m profit for one year andit includes third party mx and handling. Well done Iberia! Way to go!

I must correct my statement above to "Iberia has not made an operational profit since 2008". Only just!

It stills disprove your point about IB being profitable until it merged with BA, which is, of course, false.
Not only it had historic losses in 2009, but the year before it only managed €5m in operational profits.
And yet all is blamed on somebody else, foreign if possible.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 74):
I don't see what this has to do with anything but anyway. Do you happen to know the debt of Spain as a fraction of GDP in October 2012 (latest numbers I could find; it's probably slightly worse now)? 75%. Do you happen to know the UK's debt? 85%.

Spain: Estimated at 85% at end of 2012 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...ins-debt-gdp-idUSBRE88S05420120929
UK: 67.9% at end of Oct http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/334/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/

More important, though, is output and employment. they are reflected on demand.

[

[Edited 2013-01-16 06:31:33]

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 76, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5834 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 73):
IB's losses are irrelevant to BA. IB could go bust tonight they would not drag BA down with them.

Then why on earth are we having a thread titled "BA better off without IB"??



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinePRAirbus From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2005, 1137 posts, RR: 1
Reply 77, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5778 times:

Why does it seem any "merger or consolidation" attempts by BA get messy? BA/US, BA/KL (proposed?). Perhaps it's a coincidence and sure many facts are behind IB's issues but I perceive BA's practices are so conservative unlike LH (acquisition thirst) and the ever innovative DL!

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 78, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5761 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 75):
I must correct my statement above to "Iberia has not made an operational profit since 2008".

So that would leave 2009 and 2010, since in 2011 it was already merged with BA.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 75):
It stills disprove your point about IB being profitable until it merged with BA, which is, of course, false.

How exactly have you disproved that? 12 out 13 years being profitable until the merger..

Quoting summa767 (Reply 75):
Not only it had historic losses in 2009, but the year before it only managed €5m in operational profits.

How did BA fare in 2009? And in 2010? Do I need to tell you? Hint: you can find the numbers in the link I provided above. OK, I'll give you the answer: a loss of 401m pounds in 2009 and a loss of 532m pounds in 2010. Compared to that IB's numbers were simply stellar.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 75):
And yet all is blamed on somebody else, foreign if possible.

I didn't start a thread about how IB and Spain in general are bad for BA and the UK.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 79, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5752 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UALWN (Reply 74):
Do you happen to know the debt of Spain as a fraction of GDP in October 2012 (latest numbers I could find; it's probably slightly worse now)? 75%. Do you happen to know the UK's debt? 85%.

Unfortunately for Spain it's not about debt it's about far more going out of the government coffers than is 'now' coming in. To say it is unsustainable is an understatement. The welfare bill alone for 25% unemployment........

Quoting UALWN (Reply 74):
Of course not. I'm just saying that, in the 10 years prior to the merger, IB was in better shape than BA.

Yes but what was that 'better shape' built on ? A house of cards that was never going to last. A fools paradise if you will.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 74):
Would that AA be the same airline that is currently bankrupt?

The same. Also the most dominant American airline in IB's back yard i.e South America. IB is in Oneworld, AA is in Oneworld....pretty soon giant South American Latam will be in Oneworld so it's not all doom and gloom for IB.

Just a case of playing......'the long game'


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 80, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5722 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 79):
Unfortunately for Spain it's not about debt it's about far more going out of the government coffers than is 'now' coming in.

Tha'ts called deficit. And it's what creates the debt. So if the UK has more debt it must mean thatn it the past it must have run higher deficits.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 79):
To say it is unsustainable is an understatement.

Indeed. Once cannot sustain deficits in the long term because they create a large debt burden. But again, the UK's debt burden is larger now than that of Spain. This may change in 2013 though.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 81, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5713 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 78):
So that would leave 2009 and 2010, since in 2011 it was already merged with BA.

and so totally disproving your point that IB was profitable until it merged with BA.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 78):
How exactly have you disproved that? 12 out 13 years being profitable until the merger..

There is nothing to disprove. The accounts are there. Each company has its own markets, income and expenditure.
If you want to prove that BA is stealing money from IB and that explains its losses, you go ahead and prove it.



Quoting UALWN (Reply 78):
How did BA fare in 2009? And in 2010?

I think that everybody knows that! Everybody knows that BA was losing money after financial crisis that hit in 2008 (just that it took longer to hit Spain, but that turned out to be worse)
Everybody knows that BA grounded planes, shed staff and restructured and that it is now making money,and taht if the world economy further improves it can make much more. It did not blame anybody else for its difficulties, just got on with the necessary restructuring.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 78):
I didn't start a thread about how IB and Spain in general are bad for BA and the UK.

Nor did I.
The merger was obviously a bad business for former BA shareholders that now have IAG shares and that are not in for the long haul.
My point of view is that in the medium and long term the merger has the potential to be very successful. The synergies will increase (not least on savings and mx on the next combined plane order due soon), and general commercial and operational efficiencies. But it requires IB to be competitive. But that is easier said than done.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 80):
Tha'ts called deficit. And it's what creates the debt. So if the UK has more debt it must mean thatn it the past it must have run higher deficits.

The UK does not have a higher debt to GDP ratio than Spain. I already gave figures in an earlier post.



[Edited 2013-01-16 07:20:49]

User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7478 posts, RR: 17
Reply 82, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 5685 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 29):
The pension deficit now has been reduced to €3.75b or so. How? Where has the money come from?

The deficit or surplus in any pension fun is determined by the market value of the fund's underlying assets.

As of 1 June 2010 the FTSE 100 Index stood at 5,183. This week it stands at 6,089. That is it has increased by 18 per cent over the last 30 months.

BA has two pension funds. They were reported to have net asset values of approximately £15 billion at the last actuarial valuation in 2012. If 40 per cent of the assets of these two funds are invested in UK stocks and shares then the value of the funds will have increased by about £1.0 billion purely because of the increase in value of the stocks and shares that will make up a significant proportion of the funds assets.

Additionally because of the concerns expressed by IB's management prior to the formation of IAG, BA management undertook to not only pay the normal employer contributions into the fund but to also pay an additional £330 million from BA's own resources each and every year until 2026. This additional payment was written into the agreement creating IAG. The net result of this should be a decline in the funds deficit of £825 million over the period June 2010 to December 2012.

Overall the effect of these two factors should have resulted in the deficit in the BA pension funds decreasing by £1.9 billion or €2.3 billion at today's exchange rate. Here it is worth pointing out that the decline in the value of the Euro against Sterling over the last 30 months is another factor that has contributed to the decline in deficit when expressed in Euros. This factor applies to the whole of the value of the fund and not just that part invested in stocks and shares.

There will be other factors that will effect the value of the funds but they are possibly relatively minor although this would depend on the precise nature of the assets held by the funds.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 83, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 5615 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 81):
The UK does not have a higher debt to GDP ratio than Spain. I already gave figures in an earlier post.

Really? Check here:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cac...4102012-AP/EN/2-24102012-AP-EN.PDF

Quoting VV701 (Reply 82):
As of 1 June 2010 the FTSE 100 Index stood at 5,183. This week it stands at 6,089. That is it has increased by 18 per cent over the last 30 months.

But the merger took place in January 2011, when the FTSE was roughly at the same level it is now.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 84, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 5574 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

UALWN...the bottom line is that IB has the potential to be a great airline with healthy books.

I'm sure you would agree.

Willie Walsh and his team knows this. They are not trying to sink IB !!

For many reasons that we are all familiar with BA is now in the best position that it has ever been in.

These two airlines together in Oneworld are a great duo to work with AA and Latam across the north and south Atlantic.

It is actually rather fortunate that the KL and LX mergers with BA fell through.

BA's increased slot portfolio will allow it to expand to those all important Asian ports whilst still maintaining momentum across the Atlantic.

When all the dust of restructuring has settled IB and BA will be mutually appreciative of each other I assure you.

People don't make massive business deals based solely on current climates....they plan and look to the future........something BA has become very adept in through bitter experience.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 85, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5549 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 84):
UALWN...the bottom line is that IB has the potential to be a great airline with healthy books.

I'm sure you would agree.

Actually, I'm not so sure about that. This may come as a shock to some but I do all I can to avoid flying IB: I can't stand the attitude of their FAs and their ground personnel. But this has little to do with the facts about gains and losses that I've been posting in this thread.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 86, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5484 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 83):
Really? Check here:

Yes, really. I clicked and all I found was the data for Q2 last year. I already provided more up to date figures.

here are more:
Spain Q3 2012 : 79.5% Expected to be 85% when announced for Q4 http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2012/09/14/economia/1347611917.html

UK Nov 2012: 68.5% http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/psf.pdf

But as it has already been said, it is economic output and employment that are more relevant for demand, and that includes air travel. With 26% unemployment and the economy shrinking it's only understandable that demand has fallen.

[Edited 2013-01-16 09:08:16]

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 87, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5448 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 86):
Spain Q3 2012 : 79.5% Expected to be 85% when announced for Q4 http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2012/0....html

Uh? The link above only repeats the 76% for Q2 2012 I already mentioned.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 86):
UK Nov 2012: 68.5% http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/psf.pdf

No. The UK treasury uses a different method to measure the debt. The EU link I provided uses the same method for every country: it's an apples to apples comparison. You surely didn't believe that the UK's debt went from 86% in Q2 2012 to 68.5% in November 2012, right?

Using the EU's measure, the UK will be around 85% at the end of 2012, while Spain will be slightly below (82-83).



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7478 posts, RR: 17
Reply 88, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5415 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 83):
But the merger took place in January 2011, when the FTSE was roughly at the same level it is now.

And? What possible relevance is the date of the implementation of the merger?

No actuarial evaluation of the BA Pension Funds was carried out in January 2011. So clearly the FTSE 100 Index as at January 2011 is totally irrelevant to this subject.

Commonsense tells us that when we are comparing or calculating times series, the time intervals must be the same. The pension deficit figure that caused IB management concern during the negotiations was that published in June 2010. That is why I used the June 2010 FTSE Index to determine an approximate change in the asset value of the pension plans. If I had used any other date it would have been wrong if not deceptive.


User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 89, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5384 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 87):
Uh? The link above only repeats the 76% for Q2 2012 I already mentioned.

But it gives a government forecast for the end of the year.
If the UK uses a different measure, I am not about to argue that. But what is true is that you are using this sort of tangencial arguments as a smoke screen. Again, economic output and employment is what will be reflected in demand for air traffic.
The fact of the matter is that there are good reasons for Iberia to be losing money, and what is really unbelievable is that there are people like you who are looking for the blame in foreigners.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 90, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5345 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 88):
And? What possible relevance is the date of the implementation of the merger?

The point is to see how the pension deficit has evolved since the merger, not since 7 months before the merger.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 91, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5317 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 89):
But it gives a government forecast for the end of the year.

Where? I don't see it.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 89):
But what is true is that you are using this sort of tangencial arguments as a smoke screen.

Uh? I didn't bring the debt up. I was just replying to post #71. And I started my reply (#74) saying that I thought debt was irrelevant.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 89):
what is really unbelievable is that there are people like you who are looking for the blame in foreigners.

When did I say that? And why does it mater if BA is "foreign"? People here tend to think that IB is and has always been a "basket case." Well, it's not true: up to the merger with BA, IB was in much better shape than BA. And that's just a fact. Since then, the economy has tanked here, there and everywhere. BA has managed to shore up partially their huge pension deficit. No money has gone from BA to IAG. Those are facts. And this is all I'm saying.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 92, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5245 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 91):
When did I say that? And why does it mater if BA is "foreign"?

Here you go:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 49):
I'm certainly not accusing BA of transferring money to IB! Quite the opposite!

That, against all evidence. That such an idea is in your head must be otherwise explained.
You tell me why you believe that IB's losses can be blamed on BA? How the money is being funneled?

You have said such things in other threads too. And have falsely stated that IB was profitable until it merged with BA, which as it has been made absolutely clear, IB had historical losses in 2009 - pre-merger, operational losses in 2010, and only scraped through in 2008.

We know very well that a part of society will have a natural tendency to blame foreigners when there are problems.
It has been repeated in history time after time, and of course in the present the rise in extremists parties is evident.

In Iberia we have seen workers with placards at T4 stating "British go home" and such things where the xenophobia is clear, and SEPLA have made spurious statements that have forced BA to take them to court.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 93, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5152 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 92):
Quoting UALWN (Reply 49):
I'm certainly not accusing BA of transferring money to IB! Quite the opposite!

That, against all evidence.

Maybe you misunderstood, or I didn't make myself clear. You, in reply #48, mentioned that the BA pension fund administrators forbid BA from sending money to IAG or IB. From your wording, it seemed to me that you thought that, somehow, that proved that IB had not sent money to BA. Clearly, it doesn't prove that. That's all I meant.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 92):
IB had historical losses in 2009 - pre-merger, operational losses in 2010, and only scraped through in 2008.

Again with this? IB outperformed BA by miles in the decade before they merged. When they merged, BA was wound while IB was healthy. These are facts. The rest is just rhetoric and hair-splitting. For instance, those "historical" IB losses in 2009 where a third of the losses BA incurred in the same period (fiscal year 2009).

Quoting summa767 (Reply 92):
We know very well that a part of society will have a natural tendency to blame foreigners when there are problems.

Look, I was born in Andorra, have a US passport and live in Spain. Who are those foreigners I should have a natural tendency to blame for "my" (I don't work at IB and have to IAG stock) problems?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 94, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5093 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 93):
Again with this? IB outperformed BA by miles in the decade before they merged. When they merged, BA was wound while IB was healthy

IB was not healthy at all. Historical losses in 2009 and no operational profit in 2010. and in 2008 only scraped through. That is NOT a healthy operation! That IB had done better in previous years can be explained by the economic bubble and limited competition in the long haul -where IB made its money. But bubble burst.
I am sorry that you are mortified by the fact that BA is now making money. It restructured, its traffic and esp premium has recovered after the crisis. It has made large profits before, and its set to do even better. May IB follow.

Many employees, and certainly the pilots union, and also "observers" have the head in the sand and are blaming the "British". That is absolutely clear.
Whether you subscribe to that view is your problem.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 95, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5071 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 94):
Historical losses in 2009 and no operational profit in 2010. and in 2008 only scraped through. That is NOT a healthy operation!

By the standards of aviation as a whole, it certainly is. Any profit (in 2008 and 2010) is. Now, by comparison with BA's performance in the same period, it's simply stellar.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 94):
I am sorry that you are mortified by the fact that BA is now making money.

So now you know my innermost feelings? This is too laughable to even merit a reply.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 96, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5026 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 95):
By the standards of aviation as a whole, it certainly is. Any profit (in 2008 and 2010) is. Now, by comparison with BA's performance in the same period, it's simply stellar.

Stellar it certainly is not. You fail to grasp that in 2009 the loss was huge! and that 2010 there was *no* profit from operations, but a loss. Not healthy at all, as you claim.
That BA lost money after the crisis that hit in 2008 everybody knows. Its business relies a lot on premium traffic, so when things are good it makes large profits, and when they are bad the losses can be large.
The crisis took longer to affect Spain, as its finances were rosier on the outset that they were in reality, and the deterioration happened quite quickly, with only a brief blip in H12010 as the stimulus was administered.

BA has of course recovered thanks to its restructuring and improving markets. Its profits are not yet at the levels before the crisis hit, but if the world economy continues its steady improvement, and the US in particular, it should get there.

In the years before the crisis hit, BA's operational profits were £556m in 2005, £694 in 2006, £602 in 2007 and £875 in 2008. At today's exchange rate (it would have been more at the time), those figures in Euros are €667m, €833m, €772m and €1050m.

[Edited 2013-01-16 12:54:58]

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 97, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 4982 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 96):
You fail to grasp that in 2009 the loss was huge! and that 2010 there was *no* profit from operations, but a loss.
Quoting summa767 (Reply 96):
In the years before the crisis hit, BA's operational profits were £556m in 2005, £694 in 2006, £602 in 2007 and £875 in 2007.

You seem fixated with operating profits/losses, which, while relevant, fail to take into account many financial issues,like BA's provisions for its pension fund deficit.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 98, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4953 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 97):
You seem fixated with operating profits/losses, which, while relevant, fail to take into account many financial issues,like BA's provisions for its pension fund deficit.

BA, as it has already been mentioned has increased its contributions to the fund, which counts as an expenditure and so it is accounted before the bottom line. And yet, with more contributions it is still making money, and it still can make much more.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 17):
I would say another relevant question is: IB better off without BA? It should be noted that (contrary to BA), IB had benefits for 10 years running prior to the merger into IAG. Since then, alas, only losses...

I had missed this earlier post. perhaps you would like to reconsider it now, taking into account the information of IB operational performance in 2008, 2009 and 2010, *before* the merger and that whilst BA did not have 10 years in a row of profits, these were handsome before the credit crunch hit in 2008.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 99, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4899 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 98):
BA, as it has already been mentioned has increased its contributions to the fund, which counts as an expenditure and so it is accounted before the bottom line.

Good. I was pointing out that the operating profits you quoted do not take these provisions into account, and, therefore, do not tell the whole picture.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 98):
I had missed this earlier post. perhaps you would like to reconsider it now, taking into account the information of IB operational performance in 2008, 2009 and 2010, *before* the merger and that whilst BA did not have 10 years in a row of profits, these were handsome before the credit crunch hit in 2008.

Let me repeat again: IB had profits in 2008 and 2010, while it had a loss in 2009. Why you choose to keep implying that, somehow, it lost money also in 2008 and 2010 is beyond my comprehension.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 100, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4855 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 63):
However the employees do...

I'm sure they're very informed.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 67):
Second, no mater how many times you write it, it will still be false that the BA pension deficit is irrelevant for IAG, and, hence, for IB.

The BA pension deficit fund is relevant to BA and only BA.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 67):
It's like saying that IB's loses are irrelevant for BA, which would negate the need for a thread titled "BA better off without IB."

IB's losses are basically irrelevant to BA. There is no need for this thread, as has already been pointed out.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 76):
Then why on earth are we having a thread titled "BA better off without IB"??

Because someone who wasn't thinking very carefully posted it?

Quoting UALWN (Reply 83):
ut the merger took place in January 2011, when the FTSE was roughly at the same level it is now.

How is that relevant? The entire argument that we are putting forward here is that the IAG merger has had *no* effect on the BA pension deficit, at least not to its (or IB's) detriment. A valuation of BA's pension deficit is not available for the time of the merger, so we're taking the difference between a valuation in 2010 that we know about, and a more recent valuation, and comparing it with the difference in the FTSE 100 - and guess what, the market explains it.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 90):
The point is to see how the pension deficit has evolved since the merger, not since 7 months before the merger.

But there's no relevant data.



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 101, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4834 times:

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 100):
There is no need for this thread, as has already been pointed out.

By me, and as a rhetorical question.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 102, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4812 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 99):
Let me repeat again: IB had profits in 2008 and 2010, while it had a loss in 2009. Why you choose to keep implying that, somehow, it lost money also in 2008 and 2010 is beyond my comprehension.

No operational profit in 2010, a huge operational (and net) loss in 2009 and just 5m operational profit does not make for a healthy airline as you claim.
I will spell it out: It means that it made no money from flying in 2010, but a loss. A huge loss in 2009 and and 2008 it made a pittance. Was it from flying? I bet it was third party maintenance.
IB has made more money from its investment in Vueling than from its own operation, then it may just as well shut down ops and save itself the bother of flying, and concentrate on its investments and maintenance. Selling the assets and putting the money in the bank would give it better returns. That would be healthy, just not an airline.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 103, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4682 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 102):
I will spell it out: It means that it made no money from flying in 2010, but a loss. A huge loss in 2009 and and 2008 it made a pittance. Was it from flying? I bet it was third party maintenance.

You are mixing things up... again. IB made a tiny (€3m, from memory) operational loss in 2010, but an overall profit. Was the loss it from flying? We don't know, but you state "it made no money on flying." In 2008 it had a small operational profit (€5m). Was it from flying? We don't know, but you state it was due to third party maintenance.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 102):
Selling the assets and putting the money in the bank would give it better returns.

As you probably know, that is sadly true of most airlines in the world,. ROI in the single digits is the norm in the industry, even, yes, in BA.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 104, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4502 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 103):
You are mixing things up... again. IB made a tiny (€3m, from memory) operational loss in 2010

Not right. The overall operational loss was €26m., made up of €3m recurent, $23m non-recurrent
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_...L/24/240949/Informe_Anual_2010.pdf page 16


Quoting UALWN (Reply 103):
In 2008 it had a small operational profit (€5m). Was it from flying? We don't know, but you state it was due to third party maintenance.

For a years it has been stated that third party maintenance is constantly profitable.
For instance, in 2009 when Iberia made a loss of €517m Euros flying (Please note that this is pre-merger), maintainance made a 57m profit.
http://www.diariosur.es/v/20100322/e...viones-unico-negocio-20100322.html

Even in a report today, Iberia's maintenance division director *confirms* that that sector of the company is *still* profitable. http://www.preferente.com/noticias-d...ento-entre-2013-y-2017-236169.html
Maintenance has,thus, only offset some of the losses of flying. With that in mind, it is easy to conclude that IB has not made a profit from flying since 2007.


User currently onliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2619 posts, RR: 1
Reply 105, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4467 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 19):
Maybe one could ask: what has IAG done to improve IB? Invest in the fleet? No. Expand the market presence of IB?

Right now is probably a better time to consolidate & optimize existing routes than expand... but not to retreat either (and give away market to competitors). As for the fleet, I agree that a lot more can and must be done.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 17):
I would say another relevant question is: IB better off without BA?

Both questions are valid. Right now it seems the merger is not having a positive effect on either one. Before the merger I actually thought there was a lot to gain, with their complementary route networks and the potential of MAD. While I have my doubts right now, I still think there is still a lot of potential for the combined airlines (adding the AA ATI into the mix) assuming IB is correctly restructured (not cut down to the bone).

Quoting babybus (Reply 21):
With the 787 due to BA soon, surely BA can muster the capacity on their own to operate those 'lucrative' South American routes out of LHR.

If BA starts taking LatAm routes from IB, then the conspiracy theories will be proven true. I hope that does not happen and that they remain conspiracies.

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 23):
IAG has announced investment in the fleet. New A330s are on their way with new vastly improved economy and business class products.

A long overdue stopgap measure, but 8 A333's won't help much against the swarm of LA & AV 787's that will be taking over the South Atlantic. I hope IAG has better plans than that for the long term.

Quoting ATL (Reply 45):
I suppose they don't have any more space at LHR so maybe they need MAD...

MAD is definitely the future for IAG. LHR is gradually losing transfer pax to eventually become a premium O&D airport.

Quoting ATL (Reply 45):
Aren't AA and BA close enough to strike some sort of Latin America deal? AA has ridiculous South American coverage..

The US is a no-go as transfer point due to visa requirements. The UK being outside of Schengen only adds to the problem. No non-US/UK citizen will willingly go through the double hassle of transferring through UK and US.
AA-BA-IB need to further boost their current setup: AA for North-South America, AA-BA for North Atlantic, IB for South Atlantic - further develop the US-EU-LatAm triangle.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 106, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4415 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 104):
Not right. The overall operational loss was €26m., made up of €3m recurent, $23m non-recurrent

The non-recurrent part is due to one-off exceptional items. The relevant number is (€3m).

Quoting summa767 (Reply 104):
With that in mind, it is easy to conclude that IB has not made a profit from flying since 2007.

It is easy to assume this, but not to conclude it.

In any case, let me say it for the 5th (?) time: IB made a profit every year from 1996 up to its merger with BA in 2011, except for a one-off loss in 2009. IB was profitable in 14 out of the 15 years before the merger. These are the facts. The rest is noise.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7478 posts, RR: 17
Reply 107, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4393 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 90):
The point is to see how the pension deficit has evolved since the merger, not since 7 months before the merger.

This is simply impossible. This is because there was no actuarial evaluation of the pension funds at the date of the merger. So neither you nor I nor anyone else can have any accurate idea as to value of the pension funds assets at that date. Comparing a base figure for the change in asset value of the funds from June 2010, a figure that sent alarm bells ringing with IB management, with the change in the FTSE 100 index since January 2011 is not, to borrow a phrase, an

Quoting UALWN (Reply 87):
apples to apples comparison

It is also pretty difficult to understand the point you are trying to make. It seems to be that the asset value of the BA pension funds has not fallen as the published figures indicate. Here I would make two points:

1. If a purposefully incorrect figure was published it would be illegal because it is fraudulent.

2. BA's principle connections with the BA Pension Funds is as, along with BA employees, a fund provider. Six of the twelve trustees who oversee the running of the funds are those who will benefit or currently benefit from the assets of the fund, BA employees and retireesw. Four of these trustees are elected by BA staff, two by retired employees. Since it was discovered in 1991 that Robert Maxwell, owner of Mirror Group Newspapers, had been raiding his company's pension fund in order to keep the company afloat British Law requires that there is effectively a fire wall between all companies and their employees pension funds. So the British Airways Pension Funds are owned by British Airways Pension Services Ltd that is not part of IAG.

So BA (or IAG) can only impact the published asset value of the BA Pension Funds by the size of the contributions it makes to those funds and with the agreement of the elected representatives of their employees and retired pension scheme members. However if the funds are under funded BA is ultimately responsible for meeting any deficit.

The deficit in the funds was of significant concern to IB management but NOT at the time of the implementation of the merger in January 2010 at which time the issue had been discussed and then addressed. It was addressed in the negotiations made prior to the fixing of the merger date.

IB management had been concerned that BA would pass the responsibility for deficit on to a newly formed IAG and that it would then adversely impact IB. They therefore threatened to break off merger negotiations because of the deficit that existed BEFORE the merger was finally agreed and BEFORE it was implemented. As I have previously stated, in order to avoid this outcome BA management agreed to pay an additional £330 million in each and every year up until 2026 into the funds from its own resources. This met the concerns of IB management.


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 108, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4348 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting r2rho (Reply 105):
MAD is definitely the future for IAG.

??

Even if BA never adds another slot to its LHR portfolio with over 50% LHR will 'always' be the jewel in IAG's crown !

(and Oneworld for that matter)

Quoting r2rho (Reply 105):
LHR is gradually losing transfer pax to eventually become a premium O&D airport.

Transfer pax in Europe is yesterdays news. The middle eastern carriers will see to that.

Luckily for LHR or more precisely BA (with its BMI slots) O&D routes east will replace lost transfer business which let's face it is a far better market to be in.


User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 109, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4316 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 106):
It is easy to assume this, but not to conclude it.

Of course it is, and it's on black and white in IB's report for 2010 anyway:

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_...L/24/240949/Informe_Anual_2010.pdf
page 118 is explicit: Loss for flying: €72m for 2010, whereas maintenance's profit was €61m, €7m on handling.
In 2008 the loss for flying was even worse at €115m. I just don't understand why you don't accept the obvious: Iberia has not made a cent on flying since 2007. It has onlylost money on that. The fact that mx, invesments such as Vueling and sale of assets embellished the results (still not enough to cover the massive losses in 2009 -before the merger) does not detract from the fact that Iberia's main business: transport of passengers and cargo has been declining for years before the merger with BA, and to try to blame its troubles on that is preposterous.

IBs CEO's acknowledges that had it not been for the synergies of the merger, the losses today would be even worse.

[Edited 2013-01-17 08:05:11]

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 110, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4306 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 109):

I have nothing to add to my previous reply. Now spin away. I'm out.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 106):
In any case, let me say it for the 5th (?) time: IB made a profit every year from 1996 up to its merger with BA in 2011, except for a one-off loss in 2009. IB was profitable in 14 out of the 15 years before the merger. These are the facts. The rest is noise.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 111, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4285 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 110):
I have nothing to add to my previous reply. Now spin away. I'm out.

I am not surprised.
I have proven that the claims about IB being profitable before the merger are false, but further, that IB has not made profit from flying since 2007.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 112, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4290 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 111):
I have proven that the claims about IB being profitable before the merger are false

Sorry, sir, I don't know what's your problem, but no, you haven't proven that:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 106):
In any case, let me say it for the 5th (?) time: IB made a profit every year from 1996 up to its merger with BA in 2011, except for a one-off loss in 2009. IB was profitable in 14 out of the 15 years before the merger. These are the facts. The rest is noise.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 113, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4195 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 112):

Sorry, sir, I don't know what's your problem, but no, you haven't proven that:

Just have a look at the figures. 2009 huge loss. And no profit from transport of pax/cargo since 2007.
I am sorry to other readers for having to be repetitive, but inuendo about IB's problems having come about after the merger with BA need to be dispelled with all clarity.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 114, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4093 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 113):
inuendo about IB's problems having come about after the merger with BA need to be dispelled with all clarity.

And yet they did come about after the merger with BA. For whatever reason.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 115, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4056 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 114):

And yet they did come about after the merger with BA. For whatever reason.

Yeah right. Fortunately the facts are now on the table, so rigorous minds know your suggestions to be anything other than objective.
Historic losses in 2009 -before the merger- of €475m and you still think that those ought be be ignored, and pretend to call IB healthy at that point? Preposterous.


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 116, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3895 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

17th January...

Markets: IAG helps push market to fresh high.

British Airways owner IAG flew to the top of the FTSE 100 risers’ board yesterday on reports that it had reached an agreement in a long-running dispute with Spanish unions.

http://www.scotsman.com/business/mar...ush-market-to-fresh-high-1-2745143

I think it is clear that IB is moving in the right direction.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 117, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3788 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 115):
Historic losses in 2009 -before the merger- of €475m and you still think that those ought be be ignored, and pretend to call IB healthy at that point? Preposterous.

Wrong again: IB's loss in 2009 was €273m. You can keep calling it historical, you can call it whatever you want, but a) it was a one-year loss in the middle of a 15- (fifteen-) year profit streak; and b) it was about half BA's loss in fiscal 2009.

OK, now I realize why you keep calling "historical" IB's 2009 loss: it was the first IB loss since at least 1995 (I haven't bothered to look for IB's financial records prior to 1996), So, indeed it was "historical"  



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 118, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3696 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 117):
Wrong again: IB's loss in 2009 was €273m. You can keep calling it historical, you can call it whatever you want, but a) it was a one-year loss in the middle of a 15- (fifteen-) year profit streak; and b) it was about half BA's loss in fiscal 2009.

€273 net, but operational was €475. Not healthy by any measurement and that was *before* the merger with BA. So stop spreading inuendo about Iberia's performance being related to BA. Not that you have any credibility anyway.
On the scale of losses, BA's were certainly bigger in 2009, and yet the year before its profits were over a billion Euros.
In fact, in the previous 4 years to 2009 the profits made up $3.15 billion, and after the 2008 crisis interlude, it's nice to see BA making money again. Obviously you don't share the same view.
You see, there are factors that play in the profitability or not of airlines. Blaming somebody else for not being in profit is not only small minded, but it is not going to help bottom line. At all.


User currently offlineEagleBoy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1821 posts, RR: 2
Reply 119, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3659 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UALWN (Reply 17):
I would say another relevant question is: IB better off without BA? It should be noted that (contrary to BA), IB had benefits for 10 years running prior to the merger into IAG. SInce then, alas, only losses..

I think the current financial crisis and massive unemployment in Spain may be more of a factor than joining IAG. Its not as if IAG are stealing the proits.....


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 120, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3624 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EagleBoy (Reply 119):
I think the current financial crisis and massive unemployment in Spain may be more of a factor than joining IAG. Its not as if IAG are stealing the proits.....

  


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 121, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3582 times:

Quoting summa767 (Reply 118):
€273 net, but operational was €475.

Oh, but you didn't say you meant operational. Anyway, you're still fixated with the operational loss. Who knows why. Maybe because it shows IB in a poorer light? Nah, it can't be that.

Quoting summa767 (Reply 118):
So stop spreading inuendo about Iberia's performance being related to BA.

You already said that. And, just as before, you are missing an "n" in "innuendo."

Quoting summa767 (Reply 118):
You see, there are factors that play in the profitability or not of airlines.

Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks for enlightening me.  
Quoting summa767 (Reply 118):
Blaming somebody else for not being in profit is not only small minded, but it is not going to help bottom line.

Exactly. But, let me remind you that this thread was originally about how IB was supposedly dragging down BA. Oops. Pot? Kettle?

Quoting EagleBoy (Reply 119):
I think the current financial crisis and massive unemployment in Spain may be more of a factor than joining IAG.

Of course the state of the economy has a lot to do with the recent losses. However, the real state of the Spanish economy, although bad, is by no means as bad as it seems to be perceived from outside. As for joining IAG, let's say that it doesn't seem to have helped much at all.

Quote:
Its not as if IAG are stealing the proits.....

Well, some people do accuse IAG of doing something like that. Not stealing, just not investing enough, for instance. Or moving profitable routes to BA. Things like that. I'm not sure about the value of these accusations.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 122, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3552 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UALWN (Reply 121):
. As for joining IAG

IB didn't 'join' IAG.

BA and IB created IAG together and mutually much as Air France and KLM created Air France-KLM etc

Quoting UALWN (Reply 121):
Or moving profitable routes to BA

Which routes ?


User currently offlinesumma767 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2559 posts, RR: 6
Reply 123, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3485 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 121):
Oh, but you didn't say you meant operational. Anyway, you're still fixated with the operational loss. Who knows why. Maybe because it shows IB in a poorer light? Nah, it can't be that.

Because operational reflects the performance of its core activities. In any case a €273m LOSS (before the merger, I just remind you one more time) does not show IB in any great light. But the fact that it has not made a profit from flying since 2007 is equally telling.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 121):
Exactly. But, let me remind you that this thread was originally about how IB was supposedly dragging down BA. Oops. Pot? Kettle?

I have NEVER said that IB was dragging down BA. Nor did I start the thread, which threw a simple question, but my replies have been to you because the false statements and unfounded and biased suggestions about BA merger having to do with the problems at IB.

I have said that both airlines have already benefited from the synergies and believe that there is potential for much further benefit. Former BA shareholders would undoubtedly be better off today with holding BA stock than of IAG, but if IB gets sorted, IAG has plenty of potential.


User currently onliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2619 posts, RR: 1
Reply 124, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2976 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 108):
Transfer pax in Europe is yesterdays news. The middle eastern carriers will see to that.

That is correct for most cases. But not for example, for LatAm-EU or NorthAmerica-Africa traffic, for which Middle Eastern carriers are not suitable, but for which MAD is the ideal location. LHR may be the crown jewel but it will not be any more than a premium O&D airport with little growth - the growth potential lies in MAD.


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 125, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2928 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting r2rho (Reply 124):
LHR may be the crown jewel but it will not be any more than a premium O&D airport with little growth - the growth potential lies in MAD.

Good point but I think you underestimate the growth that is still available at LHR considering BA's enhanced presence and the introduction of the A380 which will when mature in numbers within the BA fleet free up more slots too. Not limitless granted but enough to be going on with. Ventures with IB and AA also nowhere near maturity.


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 126, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2890 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 125):
Good point but I think you underestimate the growth that is still available at LHR considering BA's

Most people when they talk about the future growth potential of LHR are not talking about BA, they are talking about LHR, procedural adjustments in operations can only do so much until the reality of concrete returns.


User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 127, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2916 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 101):
By me

And others.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 110):
I have nothing to add to my previous reply.

Figures.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 121):
Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks for enlightening me.  

Well, you hadn't seemed to have worked it out.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 121):
Exactly. But, let me remind you that this thread was originally about how IB was supposedly dragging down BA. Oops. Pot? Kettle?

Why do you keep coming back to this? This thread was denounced very early on as having little merit, and everyone you're "arguing" with now has said that IB is NOT dragging BA down, so you can drop that point.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 121):
As for joining IAG, let's say that it doesn't seem to have helped much at all.

Certainly true. Nobody has realised any real benefits from IAG...yet. But they will. Certainly neither is worse off.



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2987 posts, RR: 7
Reply 128, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2903 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting par13del (Reply 126):
Most people when they talk about the future growth potential of LHR are not talking about BA, they are talking about LHR, procedural adjustments in operations can only do so much until the reality of concrete returns.

Disagree the two are inextricably linked.

Other growth (None oneworld alliance) could and will take place elsewhere.

O&D traffic for none aligned carriers into the London and extended UK market does NOT HAVE to be at Heathrow.


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 129, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2904 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting par13del (Reply 126):
Most people when they talk about the future growth potential of LHR are not talking about BA,

That's quite a remarkable thing to say. BA now has massive growth potential at LHR, more so than any other carrier.

Who are they talking about ?

As the dominant carrier at LHR and therefore fully able (and very willing) to take adavantage of and utilize its recently greatly enhanced slot portfolio one can really only talk about BA when talking about growth at LHR. As LH found out to its great cost....BA is the only carrier that can utilize a large increase in its slots at the airport which coincidentally is also the best outcome for the UK, it's economy and its links to up and coming areas of the world.

Until another runway is built other carriers other than increasing aircraft size aren't going to get much of an improvement on their current set-ups (in terms of actual increased number of flights) at the airport.

BA has a hell of alot of catch-up to do and now has the ability to do it.

There is going to be quite considerable growth in terms of new routes and increased capacity on old 'and' new routes on the BA network.

I would even wager that post the BMI slots the lack of a third runway is actually ( in the medium term anyway) to BA's advantage.

All also very good news for IAG 'and' IB !!

[Edited 2013-01-19 06:15:56]

User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2763 posts, RR: 2
Reply 130, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2760 times:

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 127):
Figures.

Cute.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 127):
Well, you hadn't seemed to have worked it out.

Cuter. You've earned a lollipop. Contragulations.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 131, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2675 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 128):
Disagree the two are inextricably linked.

To a point, BA just increased their slots by purchase of a defunct carrier, how many new slots has the airport been able to add, that will ultimately require more concrete, the operational changes will only do so much.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 128):
Other growth (None oneworld alliance) could and will take place elsewhere.

Which is what people have been saying, so where do we disagree?

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 129):
That's quite a remarkable thing to say. BA now has massive growth potential at LHR, more so than any other carrier.

Who are they talking about ?

I was talking about the ability of the airport to increase capacity which at this point in time is limited by runway capacity, procedural changes will allow more slots and probably more up tempo operations but as stated, that is limited.
However, if you are only looking at BA and they only control say 50% of slots, then yes, BA have a vast potential to increase their capacity at LHR till they reach 100%.


User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4420 posts, RR: 0
Reply 132, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2608 times:

Quoting r2rho (Reply 105):

A long overdue stopgap measure, but 8 A333's won't help much against the swarm of LA & AV 787's that will be taking over the South Atlantic. I hope IAG has better plans than that for the long term.

And UX which currently is in many of the important MAD - Latin America market... It's lookinmg as if IB is losing its grip on the Latin America somewaht, which is not a good sign.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 125):

Good point but I think you underestimate the growth that is still available at LHR considering BA's enhanced presence and the introduction of the A380 which will when mature in numbers within the BA fleet free up more slots too.

The A380 will mean more capacity but I doubt it will open many new slots. Moreover, as frequency is very important for the business traveller (better two daily LHR-HKG than one).


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 133, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2587 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LJ (Reply 132):
The A380 will mean more capacity but I doubt it will open many new slots

One LAX instead of two.

One SFO instead of two.

One MIA instead of two.

Shall I go on........

Quoting LJ (Reply 132):
. Moreover, as frequency is very important for the business traveller

Frequency is important when multiple flights leave throughout the day like JFK outbound.

Quoting LJ (Reply 132):
(better two daily LHR-HKG than one).
HKG certainly doesn't fall into that category. There are not that many longhaul routes that do actually.

[Edited 2013-01-19 12:10:23]

User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4420 posts, RR: 0
Reply 134, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2474 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 133):
Frequency is important when multiple flights leave throughout the day like JFK outbound.

However this also applies to SFO, LAX, BOS and MIA, all of which have departurees scattered over the day. I doubt that BA wants to loose its competitive edge against VS... Moreover 1 A380 isn't the same as 2 744s (or 2 777s).


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 135, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2338 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LJ (Reply 134):
However this also applies to SFO, LAX, BOS and MIA

No they don't. You cannot scatter 2 flights throughout the day. (I didn't mention Boston ?)

??

Quoting LJ (Reply 134):
Moreover 1 A380 isn't the same as 2 744s (or 2 777s).

From an economy class or premium economy and business class perspective ?


User currently offlineSCL767 From Chile, joined Feb 2006, 8808 posts, RR: 5
Reply 136, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2327 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LJ (Reply 132):

Quoting r2rho (Reply 105):

A long overdue stopgap measure, but 8 A333's won't help much against the swarm of LA & AV 787's that will be taking over the South Atlantic. I hope IAG has better plans than that for the long term.

And UX which currently is in many of the important MAD - Latin America market... It's lookinmg as if IB is losing its grip on the Latin America somewaht, which is not a good sign.

Yes, IB has serious issues and IB's unions seem to be in denial about these issues. Should BA and/or LA launch LHR-SCL, many pax traveling between SCL and Europe that typically connect via MAD on IB would jump ship and fly on BA/LA for obvious reasons. LATAM will increase flights into MAD in the near term operating 30 weekly flights into MAD from FRA, GRU, GYE, LIM, and SCL. LATAM also plans to launch BOG-MAD; should IB be worried? Of course not...


User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4420 posts, RR: 0
Reply 137, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1975 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 135):
No they don't. You cannot scatter 2 flights throughout the day. (I didn't mention Boston ?)

LAX: dep at 09:40, 12:05 and 16:15 (and an AA flight at 14:00). The competition offers only two daily (in the mormikng and afternoon)
SFO: dep at 11:35 and 14:00. The competition only offers 1 daily (morning departure)
MIA: dep at 11:15 and 13:35 (plus two AA flights at 09:45 and 12:15).
BOS: dep at 11:20, 15:25, 18:00 and 19:30 (latter two 777s)

If they're going to reduce LAX to 2 daily + 1 AA flight it means it will be on par with the competition (though due to ATI one should count the AA flight as well). Leaves combining only the evening flights to BOS, but there are slots around that time slot available.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 135):
From an economy class or premium economy and business class perspective ?

The BA A380 will be F14J97W55Y303. The 744s have a F14J70W30Y177 or F14J52W36Y227 configuration. The 777s have a F14J48W40Y127 configuration. This means that the A380 is not equal to two 744s but does equal twice the J and Y of a 777-200. Finally, there aren't many examples where the introduction of the A380 has led to less frequency. Yes, AF reduced CDG-LAX, but they didn't combine two 747s into 1 A380.

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 136):
Should BA and/or LA launch LHR-SCL, many pax traveling between SCL and Europe that typically connect via MAD on IB would jump ship and fly on BA/LA for obvious reasons.

Which would only fuel the distrust between IB employees and IAG management. Moreover, I wonder if this is a wise move from IAG point of view. Both AF/KL and LH/LX/SN/OS have some clear definition as to where they operate to, so they prevent competing with themselves. Thus a LHR-SCL flight by BA only makes sense if the market is large enough to absorb and/or if there is a very large O/D market. Needless to say LATAM doesn't have to care about what their actions will do for IAG, but to me this doesn't look as if the airlines within Oneworld undestand what the benefits of being in an alliance means.

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 136):
LATAM also plans to launch BOG-MAD; should IB be worried?

I think it's not only IB which must worry, but IAG as well.

Finally, the question whether BA is better of without IB is a stupid question. Not only is/was it impossible to predict the future, or determine BAs position in the European aviation market if IB wouldn't be part of IAG (but of AF/KL or LH Group). It's also something which is difficult to determine without knowing exactly how the revenue/cost flow within the company. You see the same topics regarding the AF/KL Group. Everyone looks at these cross border mergers from what they know or information which in the public domain. But when a company is located in multiple countries, you'll see a lot of transfer pricing whereby profits and losses are moved to the country where it is best for corproate minimising taxes. We know this happens within the AF/KL group, and no doubt this happens within IAG. Without knowing which kind of transfers happen within IAG it's impossible to judge wether BA is better of without IB or not. Then again, it does fill A.net on a regular basis (I recall a similar thread was opened a few months ago) and shows that discussions repeat themselves in the usual A.net fashion..


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 138, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1741 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LJ (Reply 137):
LAX: dep at 09:40, 12:05 and 16:15 (and an AA flight at 14:00). The competition offers only two daily (in the mormikng and afternoon)SFO: dep at 11:35 and 14:00. The competition only offers 1 daily (morning departure)MIA: dep at 11:15 and 13:35 (plus two AA flights at 09:45 and 12:15). BOS: dep at 11:20, 15:25, 18:00 and 19:30 (latter two 777s)

You're missing the point.

In future the BA A380's at LHR will enable the carrier to capture more of the market with less flights. The amount of people travelling between say London and the west coast United States will not stay at the same level as it is today.

Even if the actual frequency doesn't drop as a result of the A380 introduction it will still allow BA to absorb any future growth in the premium market (full fare economy upwards and any new London based frequent flyer loyalty scheme members) with the 'minimum' number of additional flights.

If passenger numbers drop (which could happen due to economic/financial shift) one A380 to LAX is better than a 'no mans land' scenario of balancing two flights (not always full) to maximize sales on days when the route is busy.

You have to think in 'real' terms here.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7478 posts, RR: 17
Reply 139, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks ago) and read 1604 times:

Quoting LJ (Reply 134):
Moreover 1 A380 isn't the same as 2 744s (or 2 777s).

BA are configuring their 380s for 469 passengers with 303 Y Class seats (F14 / J97 / W55 / Y303).

Currently BA operate twice daily to both MIA and SFO with 'Mid J' 744s each configured for a total of 337 seats with 235 Y Class seats, a total of 470. So replacing both flights on these routes with one of their 380s would result in a reduction in Economy Class capacity of 36 per cent. The overall reduction (all cabins) from 674 to 469 seats would be 30 per cent.

The situation on the LAX route would not be quite so bad as today BA normally operates one flight to LAX with a "Mid J" 744 the other with a "Hi J" aircraft configured for up to 299 passengers (F14 / J70 / W30 / Y185). The two aircraft in combination are therefore capable of flying up to 636 passengers. So replacing both with a 380 would "only" represent a decline in total capacity of 26 per cent.

When the replacement of the 763 and the initial replacement of some of the 744 fleet is completed by the deliveries of 788s and 380s that are scheduled to start this summer, BA will have a long haul fleet comprising:

214 seat 3-class 788s (J35 / W25 / Y154)
219 seat 4-class 772ERs (F12 / J48 / W32 / Y127)
233 seat 4-class 772As (F17 / J48 / W24 / Y144)
234 seat 4-class 772ERs (F14 / J48 / W40 / Y122)
275 seat 3-class 772ERs (F0 / J48 / W24 / Y203)
291 seat 4-class "Hi J" 744s (F14 / J70 / W30 / Y177)
298 seat 4-class "Hi J" 744s (F14 / J70 / W30 / Y185)
307 seat 4-class 77Ws (F14 / J56 / W44 / Y193)
337 seat 4-class "Mid J" 744s (F14 / J52 / W36 / Y235)
469 seat 4-class 380 (F14 / J97 / W55 / Y303)

Additionally they have 283 seat 3-class 772ERs (F0 / J40 / W24 / Y219). However these aircraft are dedicated to the LGW Caribbean and Florida holiday routes and so do not offer any additional flexibility on other routes.

Note in particular that a 380 is most suited to replacing two 772s on routes with a high proportion of premium class passengers and not replacing two 744s. However I would agree that the 380 is more likely to be used to replace aircraft to create more capacity rather than to generate additional LHR slots. This is at least indicated by BA's action in delaying deliveries of this type after the credit crunch reduced forecast passenger growth. If their master plan was to create slots and free up aircraft to operate in those slots on new routes, that delay would have been less likely.

Recognising the equivalency of the 788s to the long-haul 763s that they will replace when delivered, with this number of long haul configurations in their fleet and no doubt a very sophisticated system for allocating specific frames to specific flights, BA now has and will have in the future a total seat and seat-by-class flexibility that is only constrained by the numbers of frames in each category in their fleet.


User currently online1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 140, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1275 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

http://www.standard.co.uk/business/m...it-calms-spain-unions-8467173.html

Market round-up: British Airways’ owner takes off as it calms Spain unions .

IAG shares are really 'taking off' now (sorry) thanks to calming situation at IB and several broker up grades.

Good news !


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...
BA 777 Off Runway At LHR - Part 9 posted Mon Feb 4 2008 09:58:36 by WILCO737
Would TZ Better Off Ordering B-767-400ER? posted Sat Feb 2 2008 04:16:14 by KC135TopBoom
BA 777 Off Runway At LHR - Part 8 posted Thu Jan 24 2008 11:04:25 by Srbmod
BA 777 Off Runway At LHR - Part 7 posted Mon Jan 21 2008 13:07:39 by Srbmod
BA 777 Off Runway At LHR - Part 3 posted Thu Jan 17 2008 12:29:37 by Srbmod
BA 777 Off Runway At LHR - Part 2 posted Thu Jan 17 2008 06:58:20 by Pe@rson
BA 777 Off Runway At LHR posted Thu Jan 17 2008 05:03:31 by Virgin747LGW
BA To Bid For IB posted Sun Nov 4 2007 02:46:10 by FLVILLA
Asiana Takes Off Without Passanger Crew posted Sat Aug 12 2006 14:15:01 by Mortyman
BA's 747-400 Without Taxi Lights. posted Tue Aug 8 2006 21:19:34 by Qantas744ER