LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 23461 posts, RR: 50 Posted (3 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 40431 times:
Struggling Alitalia has hired investment bank to help tackle a liquidity crisis that may see it running out of cash before the end of the year.
The move is aimed at finding ways to raise more than EUR€400 million to keep the loss-making carrier afloat, according to sources.
The airline, which grew its net loss to €280 million in 2012, said in July it needed EUR€300 million this year to keep running, however has yet been able to reach a deal for a capital increase with its investor owners.
Additionally news is out that a consortium of Italian banks that took part in the carriers 2008 bankruptcy proceedings might seek to sell their stakes as soon as mid October once their lockup period expires.
TheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2483 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (3 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 40456 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter): The airline, which grew its net loss to €280 million in 2012, said in July it needed EUR€300 million this year to keep running, however has yet been able to reach a deal for a capital increase with its investor owners.
It will have to be someone very brave, who's not scared of taking risks.
Another 400 mil Euro is a big ask, I wish them luck with that.
Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
usflyer msp From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1973 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (3 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 40353 times:
When is AZ NOT facing a cash crisis? They just lurch from crisis to crisis to crisis and never actually solve any of their fundamental problems. It is probably time to just let AZ die or be absorbed by a stronger, well managed carrier...
But regardless, the AZ situation is pretty scary consider the massive bleeding they are taking and desperation of running out of money on regular basis.
I don't know how many times the company can hold its hat out and seek recapitalization from its owners.
There are massive structural problem at hand with enterprise which never seem to be properly resolved.
MasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 4973 posts, RR: 7 Reply 10, posted (3 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 39425 times:
Quoting usflyer msp (Reply 2): They just lurch from crisis to crisis to crisis and never actually solve any of their fundamental problems.
That's Italy. Trenitalia, over the last ten years, has laid off 100,000 railroad workers, about half their labor force, and they are *still* considered to be overmanned by about 15% compared to other European railroads.
usdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 820 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 38960 times:
I have always wondered whether AZ should have retained its hub at MXP in lieu of moving it to FCO, and if that move has had anything to do with the carrier's fortunes. I'm not sure there is a need for a huge hub in Rome when Milan is much more of destination for business travelers.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 8270 posts, RR: 26 Reply 12, posted (3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 38921 times:
The best Italian hub airport is Monaco, aka Munich. It can be reached far better from the wealthy north Italian commiunities than MXP or FCO. In addition, MUC has a better range of destinations and frequencies.
If AZ cannot sustain itself they have to bite the dust. No other carrier and certainly not AFKL can afford to cross subsidíze their operations. State help is against EU regulations
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3448 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 38432 times:
Quoting awacsooner (Reply 13): I wonder if it's time for LH to resurrect their LH Italia brand...except make it out of both FCO and MXP
FCO is much more a VFR/tourism destination. High load factors, perhaps, but low yield. I don't think Lufthansa Italia is coming back anytime soon, but if it is, it'll be focused on Milan again unless the economic center of Italy shifts.
My guess is, unless Etihad invests (which I doubt), somehow it is back to 2008.
Then, the profitable routes and assets of the then-government-owned Alitalia were transferred into privately-held Compagnia Aerea Italiana (the current Alitalia) and the rest was left for a bankruptcy judge to deal with. I think we will soon see history repeat itself, minus the losses hopefully.
As far as the network is concerned, I'd go with a MXP hub serving key European cities and two or three intercontinental Skyteam hubs (JFK, ICN and ATL). FCO should be no more than a focus station.
The biggest issue in this plan is the sake of the AirFrance-KLM stake in Compagnia Aerea Italiana.
mercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 885 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 37482 times:
Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 11): I have always wondered whether AZ should have retained its hub at MXP in lieu of moving it to FCO, and if that move has had anything to do with the carrier's fortunes. I'm not sure there is a need for a huge hub in Rome when Milan is much more of destination for business travelers.
We have been through this discussion a million times, but hubing at Malpensa is not feasible as Milan is split into two airports. With the in-city Linate being the local favorite, going to MXP is hardly attractive option unless you are flying longhaul which means airline must discount seats at MXP versus LIN, and in AZ case it was competing against itself at the two airports.
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12): The best Italian hub airport is Monaco, aka Munich.
For a while I think it was MUC airport, or Air Dolomiti even advertising this. MUC was connected to more Italian airports than anywhere outside Italy I recall.
Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 14): Moving to a regional carrier (Europe/Middle East) would likely struggle to compete with its competitors, along with a need to further reduce its cost base. The latter point wont be easy.
I recall reading, that AZ says its most profitable segment was longhaul as competition in domestic area and shorthaul Europe was very intense with all the LCCs.
While a smaller more Europe focused AZ does sound logical, unless the cost base drops significantly to match LCCs this would be futile.
RGFC From Italy, joined Jul 2013, 55 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 37052 times:
FCO as a hub has never worked. When AZ was a state-owned airline, it operated quite a lot of routes out of FCO, but how many of them were profitable ? Obviously at that time profitability didn't matter ... Residents of Northern Italy (where most tickets are sold, especially business tickets) rarely used AZ from FCO, going instead to FRA, LHR, CDG, AMS, ZRH (not necessarily to fly on the home-based carrier, but also on other carriers such as for instance SQ or CX to Asia).
MXP as a hub was therefore the most logical choice, but in order for this to work (a) LIN should have been closed and (b) AZ should have offered a better service, since it actualy had to "steal" Northern Italian customers from other airlines. LIN was not closed due to various reasons and AZ's service remained poor, and therefore MXP as a hub was a failure (also as a consequence of KL's divorce from AZ). Additionally, AZ actually never "moved" to MXP, since it maintained a good number of flights at FCO (and the crew were also mostly Rome-based): two hubs in Italy ? It was already difficult to have one ...
Returning to FCO only made matters worse for AZ: you have a good tourist traffic in summer and Christmas at FCO (but these are low-fare passengers who book their tickets well in advance) but little business traffic and virtually no cargo (i.e. empty bellies), especially on LR.
In the meantime, MXP has become a kind of "Gulf" airport, with Gulf airlines having taken over the majority of the Milan area traffic towards Asia and Oceania, whilst European airlines continue to carry Milan area passengers all over the world (not so much to Asia) via their hubs departing from LIN. Last but not least, EZY has a good hub at MXP Terminal 2 (and EZY's European service today is absolutely acceptable, especially in relation to the price paid).
It is now too late for AZ to return to MXP, because the market for AZ is simply not there anymore. I personally will not miss AZ, especially after it tried (it is still trying, actually) to prevent EK from operating the MXP-JFK route: AZ does not invest in MXP (actually, AZ has virtually no flights from MXP) but it does not want other carriers to fly from this airport ! I fear however that the Italian state will avoid AZ's bankruptcy at taxpayers' cost (until the next time ... and the next bailout ... and so on ...)
mow From Israel, joined Dec 2005, 186 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (3 months 2 days ago) and read 35608 times:
Why is everybody under impression that MIL market is bigger and more important than ROM?
ROM is 15% bigger than MIL (MXP LIN included) traffic-wise and is slightly positive in growtn, whereas MIL is seriously negative. In terms of high-yield traffic volume ROM is only 10% behind MIL and also positive unlike MIL.
india777 From Italy, joined Mar 2006, 4 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 34948 times:
The only right way to change the balance of AZ is to move the intercontinental operations from FCO to MXP, mainly the North American operations, because for the business travelers and also because the flight time MXP to North America is less the the FCO-North America due the polar routes.
Then they have to reduce to the minimum the LIN-FCO-LIN operations and transfer the most important international and national routes to LIN into MXP to help to forward the passenger in the MXP operations worldwide.
From the 1th of October there will be a new daily flight to JFK and will be made by Emirates with a 777-300, this means that there is a market to work on it and to catch!
RGFC From Italy, joined Jul 2013, 55 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 34903 times:
Quoting mow (Reply 21): Why is everybody under impression that MIL market is bigger and more important than ROM?
It's not only Milan. The Lombardy region is by far the most productive in Italy (and it has a population of almost 10 million people). If you add Piedmont, Veneto and Emilia Romagna, it is still one of the most economically developed areas in Europe. Without a direct competition from LIN (for which Milanese people only have to blame themselves, since it is first and foremost Milanese people that want to keep LIN open, being close to the city and thus easy to use) and other "small" Northern airports (now even Brescia wants to have its own!) MXP could develop into an important European airport even without a hub carrier.
I think instead that no airline can be profitable with (only) FCO as a hub, since FCO is simply not able to attract North Italian and European passengers in sufficient numbers (AZ's intercontinental network from FCO is laughable). AZ's fate is the litmus test of this assertion