MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, RR: 37 Posted (2 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2312 times:
Maastricht Airlines, who was supposed to start flying on monday 25 March, announced today that they will postpone their start of services between Maastricht, Amsterdam, Berlin, Munich til 1 May.
They claim the aircraft, 2 Fokker 50s, aren't ready yet. Pity, I was supposed to fly on one of their first AMS-MST services on 26 march with 2 other Airliner.netters, cheap rates of about 40 euro O/W were still widely available when we booked.
In Dutch we say, 'Uitstel is afstel' I hope that's not true in this case and this postponing will not mean the airline is not cancelling their plans all together.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
9MMPQ From Netherlands, joined Nov 2011, 243 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (2 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1980 times:
Are former YL-BAO & YL-BAV not already in MST ? I know PH-MUJ has been sitting in MST & this one is rumoured to be their 3rd aircraft which is intended to serve as a spare aircraft initially. Surely by now at least one of these has to be operational & available. Maybe it's not the availability of the aircraft but financing or perhaps having underestimated the time required to get the AOC ?
I think this is more a novelty then something which will actually go into operation & survive. If history with other operators is anything to go by their furture does not look good & with the exception of their lowest economy fare the train is cheaper & the time difference with everything being said & done is probably going to be minimal. Then there's also the mentioned intended codesharing with 30 other carriers which would provide them with some feed, have not seen or heard anything further on that one.
I'm afraid this could become one of those scenarios where local government will loose the money invested & where employees & passengers will be left to deal with the aftermath, though of course for everyone involved i would like to be proved wrong.
Quoting MEA-707 (Thread starter): cheap rates of about 40 euro O/W were still widely available when we booked.
On another forum i follow someone has posted today only 260 bookings have been received so far. Don't know of course how true that might be but if you're having to fill 4 daily flights that's not too encouraging.
I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
On one of the two aircraft Maastricht Airlines wants to use corrosion has been found near the toilet. This needs to be repaired first. Because of this the aircraft delivery is postponed for 4 weeks.
This will cost the airline a lot of money plus its reputation. And bookings are not looking great.
SXI899 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2008, 194 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (2 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1917 times:
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 1): Are former YL-BAO & YL-BAV not already in MST ? I know PH-MUJ has been sitting in MST & this one is rumoured to be their 3rd aircraft which is intended to serve as a spare aircraft initially.
To my knowledge, neither the MSN20189 (YL-BAO) or MSN20190 YL-BAV are in MST. Last I heard they were both in BGY.
The PH-MUJ is/was planned for another operator, however that may have changed recently.
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4142 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (2 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1797 times:
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 1): Then there's also the mentioned intended codesharing with 30 other carriers which would provide them with some feed, have not seen or heard anything further on that one.
They haven't signed a single interline agreement yet (at least according to a recent press article).
9MMPQ From Netherlands, joined Nov 2011, 243 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1535 times:
Quoting 1stspotter (Reply 2): Some more information on the reason for the delay here:
Thank you for that bit of information.
Their start just got more difficult. Refunding the 260 bookings is one (normal) thing but then offering those passengers their next ticket for free is something which i have my doubts about. Can they afford it ?
I think any ACMI lease is going to cost them more then refunding the 260 passengers that have booked. Call me a pessimist but i have some serious doubts about this venture.
I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
Thomas_Jaeger From Switzerland, joined Apr 2002, 2266 posts, RR: 31 Reply 7, posted (2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1503 times:
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 6): Their start just got more difficult. Refunding the 260 bookings is one (normal) thing but then offering those passengers their next ticket for free is something which i have my doubts about. Can they afford it ?
If they have only received 260 bookings so far, that is probably a very important reason for the delay and it will unlikely get any better later.
Swiss aviation news junkie living all over the place
BrouAviation From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 981 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (2 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1446 times:
Quoting Thomas_Jaeger (Reply 7):
If they have only received 260 bookings so far, that is probably a very important reason for the delay and it will unlikely get any better later.
The amount of bookings are no reason for delay, as the airline estimated to operate the first three months without any ticket revenue (as all start-up airlines have to according to European regulations).
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 6):
Their start just got more difficult. Refunding the 260 bookings is one (normal) thing but then offering those passengers their next ticket for free is something which i have my doubts about. Can they afford it ?
I think they can, for the reason described above.
Quoting LJ (Reply 5):
They haven't signed a single interline agreement yet (at least according to a recent press article).
Of course not. They will have to fly first before any airline will sign an agreement with them. The likes of LH and KL aren't going to risk their reputation by selling tickets for flights operated by an airline that a) doesn't exist yet and b) isn't theirs.
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 1):
I think this is more a novelty then something which will actually go into operation & survive. If history with other operators is anything to go by their furture does not look good & with the exception of their lowest economy fare the train is cheaper & the time difference with everything being said & done is probably going to be minimal.
You are focussing too much on the MST-AMS route, which actually is just a filler route (and a nice PR opportunity) and not at all the backbone of the airline as you might believe.
I will be on board the first delivery from BGY coming friday, flying BGY-MST. But as always, nothing is set in stone. I will let you know how things work out.
Never ask somebody if he's a pilot. If he is, he will let you know soon enough!
debonair From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2097 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (2 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1443 times:
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 8): I will be on board the first delivery from BGY coming friday, flying BGY-MST. But as always, nothing is set in stone. I will let you know how things work out.
9MMPQ From Netherlands, joined Nov 2011, 243 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (2 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1240 times:
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 8): You are focussing too much on the MST-AMS route, which actually is just a filler route (and a nice PR opportunity) and not at all the backbone of the airline as you might believe.
I don't think i've put a particular focus on any destination or named any route as the backbone, perhaps the only exception being that i've noted the fact that on MST-AMS the train provides a quite competitive alternative to flying.
Calling MST-AMS a filler route doesn't seem quite right though, it's always been one of the important points for local government & i doubt Maastricht Airlines would have gotten much of any financial backing from local government if they had presented it ''as just a filler route''.
But out of the first 3 destinations (AMS/BER/MUC) history on AMS (KLM & Exel) and BER/SXF (Germanwings) doens't paint a particular rosy picture with low loadfactors & yields and mind that this was in better economic times. I don't know if anyone has ever tried MST-MUC though ?
As i've said before, for the sake of everyone involved (including Brouaviation) i'd like to see this work out but there's a lot of history going against Maastricht Airlines. i wish them the best of luck.
Agree with Debonair, please do share with us how the delivery goes.
I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
CrimsonNL From Netherlands, joined Dec 2007, 1616 posts, RR: 42 Reply 11, posted (2 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1219 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CHAT OPERATOR
It's a shame that they have such a troubled startup. The only plus side for me personally is that I now have a seat on the "new" inaugural AMS MST. I've been skeptical about the airline from the start but I do hope they can make it work!
BrouAviation From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 981 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (2 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1170 times:
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 10):
Calling MST-AMS a filler route doesn't seem quite right though, it's always been one of the important points for local government & i doubt Maastricht Airlines would have gotten much of any financial backing from local government if they had presented it ''as just a filler route''.
That's exactly what I mean: it's a route which gains some attention (being the only domestic route in NL) but in fact, looking at the flight schedule from an ops POV, the AMS-MST v.v. rotations are a perfect way fill up the gaps that are too short for an additional destination (Say LCY, or Paris).
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 10): As i've said before, for the sake of everyone involved (including Brouaviation) i'd like to see this work out but there's a lot of history going against Maastricht Airlines. i wish them the best of luck.
True. But then again: Ryanair offers multiple examples how government funding or other local support can make a route work. I guess we will have to see and wait. The airline has a low-cost structure, and some very strong and eager investors behind it.
EDIT: You will have the pictures as soon as I have them .
[Edited 2013-03-20 06:06:41]
EDIT2: Just got the news that the aircraft is delayed again, so no delivery flight friday. When it happens and I am able to join, I will report it here of course.
[Edited 2013-03-20 06:53:05]
Never ask somebody if he's a pilot. If he is, he will let you know soon enough!
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4142 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 961 times:
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 12):
That's exactly what I mean: it's a route which gains some attention (being the only domestic route in NL) but in fact, looking at the flight schedule from an ops POV, the AMS-MST v.v. rotations are a perfect way fill up the gaps that are too short for an additional destination (Say LCY, or Paris).
First, they have no plans to serve LCY (or did I miss something) and it won't be difficult to predict how MST-CDG would be doing (we know what happened to EIN-CDG). The only route which gained attention was MST-MUC, but trying this without a inetrline agreement is also close to suicide.
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 10):
Calling MST-AMS a filler route doesn't seem quite right though, it's always been one of the important points for local government & i doubt Maastricht Airlines would have gotten much of any financial backing from local government if they had presented it ''as just a filler route''.
Indeed, the airline wouldn't get any funding from local government if they wouldn't have started MST-AMS.
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 8): Of course not. They will have to fly first before any airline will sign an agreement with them. The likes of LH and KL aren't going to risk their reputation by selling tickets for flights operated by an airline that a) doesn't exist yet and b) isn't theirs.
We're talking about an ailrine which mentioned they had "30 partners" in their initial press release. Moreover, why would fly them without an interline agreement in place? Finally, if you have a financially sound venture, you will probably get an interline agreements as it doesn't cost you too much (and there is no reputational risk if the tickets aren't sold on our ticket stock).
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 8):
The amount of bookings are no reason for delay, as the airline estimated to operate the first three months without any ticket revenue (as all start-up airlines have to according to European regulations).
It is a lame excuse if you say prior to lauch that you expect low loadfactors. Moreover, if you count the averrage number of pax they wouyld have had in the first two weeks than you come to a load which is even worse than Loganair reportedly had on Norwich - Den Helder (pulled the plug last Friday). Just for those interested, according to their schedules they would have performed 80 flights a week. They delay the launch with 4 weeks, which mean they won't perform 320 flights. if they really had only 260 bookings for the period between start S13 and April 30th, than the average number of pax is below 1.
BTW why start on May 1st? don't they know Germany is closed on this day?
9MMPQ From Netherlands, joined Nov 2011, 243 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (2 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 792 times:
Quoting LJ (Reply 13): First, they have no plans to serve LCY (or did I miss something)
There were some press release that from 2014 they are intending to launch services to London, Paris & Copenhagen, no mention of specific airports such as LCY though. But I'd say lets see how they get along in 2013 with the first three destinations.
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 8): The amount of bookings are no reason for delay, as the airline estimated to operate the first three months without any ticket revenue (as all start-up airlines have to according to European regulations).
Quoting LJ (Reply 13): It is a lame excuse if you say prior to lauch that you expect low loadfactors.
To be completely fair to BrouAviation .... he means the airline has to show they have sufficient funds or backing available to at least be able to operate three months regardless of losses or profits during those three months. It's a form of protection which helps to prevent just anybody starting a business and have it fold (with all consequences) within a very short time. In other words, Maastricht Airlines has at least three months to find it's feet and start turning a profit.
Quoting LJ (Reply 13): BTW why start on May 1st? don't they know Germany is closed on this day?
Maybe a good date to get some Germans into MST for the day ? The route is a gamble anyway.
I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
BrouAviation From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 981 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (2 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 738 times:
Quoting LJ (Reply 13):
First, they have no plans to serve LCY (or did I miss something)
You can't know everything in life .
Quoting LJ (Reply 13): and it won't be difficult to predict how MST-CDG would be doing (we know what happened to EIN-CDG).
Assuming you are referring to the AF ATR42 that operated on that route if memory serves me right, I believe that MST-CDG has a larger market (especially leisure-traffic) than EIN-CDG, and I also think Maastricht Airlines has lower operating costs than the AF-route.
Quoting LJ (Reply 13): The only route which gained attention was MST-MUC, but trying this without a inetrline agreement is also close to suicide.
Interline agreements are vital yes, but it is not uncommon to start without them.
Quoting LJ (Reply 13):
Indeed, the airline wouldn't get any funding from local government if they wouldn't have started MST-AMS.
The airline gets its funding for the jobs it creates in the Maastricht area (a specified amount on a specified educational level) and carrying the name of the city on their fuselage, not for the routes it operates.
The airline originally started under another name, but had to change its name to receive the government funding.
Quoting LJ (Reply 13): Finally, if you have a financially sound venture, you will probably get an interline agreements as it doesn't cost you too much (and there is no reputational risk if the tickets aren't sold on our ticket stock).
Any examples?
Quoting LJ (Reply 13):
It is a lame excuse if you say prior to lauch that you expect low loadfactors.
Its no excuse. It's the law.
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 14): In other words, Maastricht Airlines has at least three months to find it's feet and start turning a profit.
Or - at least - reduce its losses. Because a profit in three months is very optimistic - not to say completely unrealistic, the investors are well aware of that.
Never ask somebody if he's a pilot. If he is, he will let you know soon enough!
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4142 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (2 months 19 hours ago) and read 559 times:
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 14): To be completely fair to BrouAviation .... he means the airline has to show they have sufficient funds or backing available to at least be able to operate three months regardless of losses or profits during those three months. It's a form of protection which helps to prevent just anybody starting a business and have it fold (with all consequences) within a very short time. In other words, Maastricht Airlines has at least three months to find it's feet and start turning a profit.
I was referring to the statement by Maastricht that they expect an average loadfactor of 15% during the first year of operation on AMS-MST (or was it higher?). If an airline like Loganair can't sustain these types of loadfactors (they need 50% to break even) and pull the plug on a route. it's not the law that you mention such low expected load factors in your press statements.
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 15): Assuming you are referring to the AF ATR42 that operated on that route if memory serves me right, I believe that MST-CDG has a larger market (especially leisure-traffic) than EIN-CDG, and I also think Maastricht Airlines has lower operating costs than the AF-route.
Yet AF/KL doesn't have to make money on EIN-CDG as they can offset losses on the EIN-CDG leg with profits on the long haul part. Maastricht Airlines does not have this luxury. Moreover, the area around Eindhoven has much more economic activity than Maastricht (hence why EIN is much bigger these days). Yes, Maastricht has more tourist potential, but Maastricht Airlines is not a LCC. Finally, I recall that one of the reasons AF/KL cancelled EIN-CDG was the fact that the distance was too short and that they yield of the connecting pax wasn't so great.
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 15):
The airline gets its funding for the jobs it creates in the Maastricht area (a specified amount on a specified educational level) and carrying the name of the city on their fuselage, not for the routes it operates.
The airline originally started under another name, but had to change its name to receive the government funding.
I know, initially, they have to create 66 or so jobs and growing to 100, but wasn't the entire selling point that Maastricht Airlines would connect Maastricht with a major hub (AMS) so that they wouldn't need to go to BRU or DUS?
First, they have no plans to serve LCY (or did I miss something)
You can't know everything in life
If they're really serious about LCY I hope they know that AF/KL will axe EIN-LCY as of S13. If AF/KL (an airline which is known to the London public) can't make it work, why does Maastricht Airlines think they can make MST-LCY work (which also has much less business potential than EIN-LCY).
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 15): Interline agreements are vital yes, but it is not uncommon to start without them.
However in Maastrich Airlines case they communicated to have "30 partners", which implied they had already signed agreements lined up. Moreover, I recall that Suckling Airlines had an interline agreement from strat date. However, I agree that was years ago (times may have changed).
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 15):
Or - at least - reduce its losses. Because a profit in three months is very optimistic - not to say completely unrealistic, the investors are well aware of that.
If you read the press statements of Maastricht Airlines you get the idea that the chances of profits are very slim. Then again, isn't a saying that investing in an airline is the best way of becoming a millionaire when being a billionaire?
nuckleuz From Netherlands, joined Dec 2005, 49 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (2 months 16 hours ago) and read 464 times:
Despite the fact that it is a pity the entry of service is postponed, it actually doesn't come as a complete surprise I think. But I sure hope they have a successful start of their services!
Is there anyone who knows which company is going to handle the flights at AMS when they start?
Quoting 9MMPQ (Reply 14): There were some press release that from 2014 they are intending to launch services to London, Paris & Copenhagen, no mention of specific airports such as LCY though.
There was some information on their website for a while that they're planning to start services to SEN, not to LCY.
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jan 2008, 194 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2097 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Apr 2002, 2266 posts, 
.
Printer friendly format 
