|Quoting nasco2 (Reply 11):|
So I think SAS just have to continue to prove they are a healthy company that some one wants to buy. And I also think the governments can support them with more money, if the reason for empty pocket is extra posts, that do not have anything to do with the operations, as Span air bankruptcy and so on, but only if they continue to do efficiency, finally it can be a well driven company, as Scandinavia deserve a healthy SAS.
Hmm.. Continue to prove..? They have to TRY to prove that they are a company that deserves a position in the marketplace. So far they haven't been close. They did one good result the last 15 or so years and that was basically a fluke. It's really not rocket science in any way shape or form. You provide the public with a product they would like to buy and price it according to what the customer are willing to pay. If you add extras that customers want to pay extra for you charge extra, if you take stuff away and still charge the same price something's wrong. In the end you need to make sure that what comes in covers your costs, if not you need to start looking at what you're doing wrong.
tried to become a LCC by doing BOB and faster turnarounds and all that crap. Other companies understand that you can never compete with the likes of Ryanair or Easyjet on a level playing field and changed accordingly. They offer a product superior to the LCCs and take out a higher price, and it works. Instead of using its legacy and the power of the brand SK
started to compete with fares and once down that road you're doomed. One intelligent man once said that lowering prices is the easiest thing you can do, while raising prices is the absolute most difficult thing you can do. If you try to fight fire with fire you're soon gonna burn and if it wasn't for the incredibly incompetent Nordic governments SK
would be a thing of the past. To get SK
back on their feet and into a position where they deserve a position in the marketplace it needs to become a market oriented player and not an old dinosaur trying to follow what other are doing just to fail miserably. Looking at DY
and how easy it was for them to establish themselves on the nordic market just comes to show how lame and crippled SK
|Quoting Mortyman (Reply 12):|
and the Norwegian part. Atleast upp til recently it was the surpluss of the Norwegian part that payed for the Swedish and Danish losses. We are talking thye last 10 - 15 years.
They norwegians have claimed this for a while and even though the Norwegian side of SK
is less flawed it has it's own problems. And even though they might be better of they wouldn't survive without the Swedish and Danish parts of SK
. Braatens is a good example. But herein lies the whole problem. There's a constant fight between the SAS counterpart about who's best in the class and none considers working together. When I was at SK
just trying to negotiate with the Norwegians and Danes for whatever reason was insane.. Everybody trying to snatch as big as possible piece of the cake and something that would take one or two phone calls in a normal company took weeks through meetings and committees to get sorted. If you look up inefficiency in the dictionary there should be a SAS logo next to it. And it's both internal and external. Everybody is keeping their cards close to their chest and clinging to their seat.
Jeez.. I need to stop this before my head explodes..
I love the smell of Jet-A1 in the morning...