ELBOB wrote:

okjet wrote:

Now official, WW is over

WOW Air was not an IATA member so referring to them as WW is incorrect.

WW is/was their official IATA code. They don’t have to be a member to be referred to by their IATA code.

Sorry to have woken up to this news morning as WOW were a very helpful airline to deal with in my professional life at Gatwick. The staff were always helpful and very quick to action what I was asking of them. I for one am sorry to see them go in that regard & wish the staff all the best for the future.

I would assume some sort of 'rescue fair' might be offered by other airline for pax's who held bookings with WOW and are currently stranded?

Cheers

Ben

It's the end of WOW. WOW Officially ceased operations with 10 aircraft (All A321's) grounded.

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/0328 ... r-flights/

I wonder which airline will ceased next after WOW?

https://www.icelandair.com/support/cont ... getmehome/

Iceland Air has setup special hotlines and offering special fares for those holding WOW tickets.

FlapsOne wrote:

Being on the receiving end of people stereotyping an entire nation is just part and parcel of being British so I’m not bothered either way.

Fair enough, you all do have bad teeth, after all.

[ Yes, I'm joking! ]

FlapsOne wrote:

I don’t think there’s a way to rise from the ashes on this one. Once an airline is dead, it’s dead. Unless you’re Pan Am 2.0 or Eastern 3.0 both of which have been total disasters.

I wasn't saying WOW would rise from the ashes.

I was saying IMHO there is a profit to be made undercutting the legacies on the TATL routes, and I think in due time some one better organized than WOW was will come fill the void.

And it took Icelandair all of 10 seconds to increase their fares by 100%

Wow air has stop operation according to a news story

akb88 wrote:

And it took Icelandair all of 10 seconds to increase their fares by 100%

Perhaps yes. But they are offering pretty cheap fares for those stranded by WOW.

a350lover wrote:

What was the final total pax number of WOW Y2018?

Interestingly, back in 2012 Keflavik hand't even reached the barrier of the 3M pax. Last year there were nearly 10M. Surely WOW wasn't the only actor but it contributed very much to this growth. Will KEF airport still need the terminal expansion planned?

3,5 million pax. According to their financial statements, they lost around 50€ on every single one of them.

Seems as though the ULCC business model, particularly to the US, just isn't really working. Maybe the idea of flying some kind of Spirit type operation 8 hours plus is a real turnoff. Even our Wal Mart possessed culture won't go that far to save a relative small amount of money.

Maybe AA can pick up those 10 321s as addition to their fleet.

Does that include ancillary revenue or just ticket price?
Their model was based on high cost add ons. Baggage, on board sales, priority packages etc.
Theres a lot of whats-ifs. The biggest one for me would be if they would still be in this situation if they expanded slower and stuck to the core routes for longer that they ended with rather than what appeared to be dart board expansion.
Sadly they were hit by disruption issues quite often which they struggled to recover from, this could well have also hurt their reputation as well

caaardiff wrote:

Does that include ancillary revenue or just ticket price?
Their model was based on high cost add ons. Baggage, on board sales, priority packages etc.
Theres a lot of whats-ifs. The biggest one for me would be if they would still be in this situation if they expanded slower and stuck to the core routes for longer that they ended with rather than what appeared to be dart board expansion.
Sadly they were hit by disruption issues quite often which they struggled to recover from, this could well have also hurt their reputation as well

That number includes all revenue.

And the a.net world rejoices it's hard to believe that there are those who would be happy on this sight when an airline goes under. Doesn't benefit anyone at all when a company goes out of business. Make no mistake everyone loses here because WOW Air has shut down.

santi319 wrote:

RIP WOW

Long haul low cost in the western world just doesnt work...

People got used to cheap air fares and think it's normal to pay money for tickets, which barely cover the costs and provide low wage jobs. So unfortunately others will try, fill the gap ...and probably fail too. I blame the passengers, who want to pay less and less for a ticket (but expect full service). Yes, I agree, low cost air fares have opened the air travel market to people who would otherwise travel less, or not travel at all. But obviously in the longterm it's not viable/sustainable.

I feel sorry for the staff of WOW.

caaardiff wrote:

Does that include ancillary revenue or just ticket price?
Their model was based on high cost add ons. Baggage, on board sales, priority packages etc.
Theres a lot of whats-ifs. The biggest one for me would be if they would still be in this situation if they expanded slower and stuck to the core routes for longer that they ended with rather than what appeared to be dart board expansion.
Sadly they were hit by disruption issues quite often which they struggled to recover from, this could well have also hurt their reputation as well

I agree and the fact that they tried to replicate what Icelandair did at some stations having aircraft sit idle for almost 24 hours before making their return flight. Anything outside of the same day turns was really unviable for an airlines their size. We can't say their business model didn't work because they lasted a long time before going under but the expansion was way to much to soon.

FlapsOne wrote:

I don’t think there’s a way to rise from the ashes on this one. Once an airline is dead, it’s dead. Unless you’re Pan Am 2.0 or Eastern 3.0 both of which have been total disasters.

Well there's always Frontier.

klm617 wrote:

And the a.net world rejoices it's hard to believe that there are those who would be happy on this sight when an airline goes under. Doesn't benefit anyone at all when a company goes out of business. Make no mistake everyone loses here because WOW Air has shut down.

I don't think people here are happy that people are losing jobs. No one here wants to see people lose their jobs, especially if it's under dire circumstances. I think it's more of a case of "I told you so", of people saying that they knew this wouldn't last despite fans claiming the contrary. I know that A.net has a reputation for "armchair analysis", but it is actually a good point to speculate if WOW was doomed from the start or if they could have survive had they done things differently.

I guess the moral of the story of WOW Air (and many other airline closures) is that, no matter how positive or negative feelings of passengers are for an airlines, at the end of the day, finances win out at the end.

SRQKEF wrote:

a350lover wrote:

What was the final total pax number of WOW Y2018?

Interestingly, back in 2012 Keflavik hand't even reached the barrier of the 3M pax. Last year there were nearly 10M. Surely WOW wasn't the only actor but it contributed very much to this growth. Will KEF airport still need the terminal expansion planned?

3,5 million pax. According to their financial statements, they lost around 50€ on every single one of them.

That's a very broad statement because I'm sure there were markets they flew to that they didn't lose money. When you fly and A330 from LAX/SFO to Europe and charge less than $500 round trip you are losing more money than $60 a head. There had to be routes that made money for them.

Also I guess it's safe now to rename the thread since they're now officially gone.

AIRT0M wrote:

santi319 wrote:

RIP WOW

Long haul low cost in the western world just doesnt work...

People got used to cheap air fares and think it's normal to pay money for tickets, which barely cover the costs and provide low wage jobs. So unfortunately others will try, fill the gap ...and probably fail too. I blame the passengers, who want to pay less and less for a ticket (but expect full service). Yes, I agree, low cost air fares have opened the air travel market to people who would otherwise travel less, or not travel at all. But obviously in the longterm it's not viable/sustainable.

I feel sorry for the staff of WOW.

It seems like you want air travel to regress to the way it was in this picture. I'm not talking about the way people dressed; instead I'm referring to how only the select few could afford to travel by air. I disagree with you and I think we need more airlines like WOW. Air travel, especially long haul, should be available to as many people as possible.

filipinoavgeek wrote:

FlapsOne wrote:

I don’t think there’s a way to rise from the ashes on this one. Once an airline is dead, it’s dead. Unless you’re Pan Am 2.0 or Eastern 3.0 both of which have been total disasters.

Well there's always Frontier.

klm617 wrote:

And the a.net world rejoices it's hard to believe that there are those who would be happy on this sight when an airline goes under. Doesn't benefit anyone at all when a company goes out of business. Make no mistake everyone loses here because WOW Air has shut down.

I don't think people here are happy that people are losing jobs. No one here wants to see people lose their jobs, especially if it's under dire circumstances. I think it's more of a case of "I told you so", of people saying that they knew this wouldn't last despite fans claiming the contrary. I know that A.net has a reputation for "armchair analysis", but it is actually a good point to speculate if WOW was doomed from the start or if they could have survive had they done things differently.

I guess the moral of the story of WOW Air (and many other airline closures) is that, no matter how positive or negative feelings of passengers are for an airlines, at the end of the day, finances win out at the end.

I disagree just read through this thread at the negativity about WOW Air and how they did business. Why is "I told you so" so important over the fact of the well being of those who worked and were customers of WOW Air to me that's gloating at the loss of WOW Air and being right is more important than supporting the airline that was trying to be innovative and try something different. Sorry but I'm going to be always rooting for the underdog because to me that is more honorable than being right.

max999 wrote:

AIRT0M wrote:

santi319 wrote:

RIP WOW

Long haul low cost in the western world just doesnt work...

People got used to cheap air fares and think it's normal to pay money for tickets, which barely cover the costs and provide low wage jobs. So unfortunately others will try, fill the gap ...and probably fail too. I blame the passengers, who want to pay less and less for a ticket (but expect full service). Yes, I agree, low cost air fares have opened the air travel market to people who would otherwise travel less, or not travel at all. But obviously in the longterm it's not viable/sustainable.

I feel sorry for the staff of WOW.

It seems like you want air travel to regress to the way it was in this picture. I'm not talking about the way people dressed; instead I'm referring to how only the select few could afford to travel by air. I disagree with you and I think we need more airlines like WOW. Air travel, especially long haul, should be available to as many people as possible.

Yes we do need more airlines like WOW Air..

akb88 wrote:

And it took Icelandair all of 10 seconds to increase their fares by 100%

Yes. Probably close to actual operating cost now.

The low fares were unrealistic. It was really a matter of time which Icelandic carrier shut down first.

It is always sad to see an airline fail.
But for Iceland it is also a chance for more sustainable tourism without flooding the sparsely populated island with tourists just going there because the airfare was so incredibly cheap, completely overloading the local infrastructure.
There will always be competition from abroad, just not always dumping fares, which are no good for no one.

It is difficult to challenge direct TATL competition, because fares on the TATL market are comparatively low anyway.
South America fares are usually much higher, and even there competition gloriously failed (e.g. Air Madrid).
It's just not that simply, in the end the bills need to be paid.

klm617 wrote:

I disagree just read through this thread at the negativity about WOW Air and how they did business. Why is "I told you so" so important over the fact of the well being of those who worked and were customers of WOW Air to me that's gloating at the loss of WOW Air and being right is more important than supporting the airline that was trying to be innovative and try something different. Sorry but I'm going to be always rooting for the underdog because to me that is more honorable than being right.

I meant to say that it's not people here wanted to see them fail, but more of "we knew it was going to fail, the question was not if but when". Like I said, many views of WOW have been positive, and even on the internet many are lamenting its demise. It's just that, at their current business model, it was difficult to survive. It's markets that speak, not reviews. Positive reviews can only get you so far if your business model isn't working out. It kind of reminds me of a post here on A.net that I saw the other day: imagine if someone opened a steakhouse that sold eat-all-you-can Wagyu beef for $20, they would surely get a lot of customers and excellent reviews but they'd also go out of business quickly.

max999 wrote:

AIRT0M wrote:

santi319 wrote:

RIP WOW

Long haul low cost in the western world just doesnt work...

People got used to cheap air fares and think it's normal to pay money for tickets, which barely cover the costs and provide low wage jobs. So unfortunately others will try, fill the gap ...and probably fail too. I blame the passengers, who want to pay less and less for a ticket (but expect full service). Yes, I agree, low cost air fares have opened the air travel market to people who would otherwise travel less, or not travel at all. But obviously in the longterm it's not viable/sustainable.

I feel sorry for the staff of WOW.

It seems like you want air travel to regress to the way it was in this picture. I'm not talking about the way people dressed; instead I'm referring to how only the select few could afford to travel by air. I disagree with you and I think we need more airlines like WOW. Air travel, especially long haul, should be available to as many people as possible.

And who should pay for that? As markets have deregulated, we’ve seen a massive wealth transfer from airline employees to passengers. Maybe we decide that’s a good thing, but we can’t just ignore the other side of the coin.

I’m sure that Air Canada would love to have the A321s to replace their 737MAX fleet through July...

Cubsrule wrote:

max999 wrote:

AIRT0M wrote:

People got used to cheap air fares and think it's normal to pay money for tickets, which barely cover the costs and provide low wage jobs. So unfortunately others will try, fill the gap ...and probably fail too. I blame the passengers, who want to pay less and less for a ticket (but expect full service). Yes, I agree, low cost air fares have opened the air travel market to people who would otherwise travel less, or not travel at all. But obviously in the longterm it's not viable/sustainable.

I feel sorry for the staff of WOW.

It seems like you want air travel to regress to the way it was in this picture. I'm not talking about the way people dressed; instead I'm referring to how only the select few could afford to travel by air. I disagree with you and I think we need more airlines like WOW. Air travel, especially long haul, should be available to as many people as possible.

And who should pay for that? As markets have deregulated, we’ve seen a massive wealth transfer from airline employees to passengers. Maybe we decide that’s a good thing, but we can’t just ignore the other side of the coin.

The airlines and their shareholders are trying to squeeze as much money out of the consumer as possible. So on the opposite side, I think it's within every right of the passenger to do the same and leverage their advantage in searching for lower fares.

Of course no one likes to see other lose their jobs, particularly people like me that have been laid off and suffered financially. However, the ULCC 28-29 inch seat pitch, skinny seat, pay for everything airline model just doesn't seem to work long haul, at least in the West. To anyone that has flown in a fully packed coach long haul flight you can only imagine that with less room albeit the legacy airlines are approaching ULCC territory. I wonder if this business model will come back to bite the legacies on their butt once their 777/787/330/350 a/c begin to resemble the seating of Wow. A holiday abroad becomes far less attractive when you arrive in physical discomfort. When the human body cannot move around for extended periods of time bad things happen, like intense constipation. Not exactly the way one wants to start their dream holiday.

Remember taking a trip to Europe even flying an airline like Wow is not cheap and something few Americans can afford. The Americans that can afford to go to Europe have other alternatives for holiday.

akb88 wrote:

And it took Icelandair all of 10 seconds to increase their fares by 100%

TRANSLATION: It took Icelandair all of 10 seconds to increase their fares to sustainable levels which offer a more realistic possibility of covering costs or achieving a smalll profit.

Norwegian next please!

Gulfstream500 wrote:

I’m sure that Air Canada would love to have the A321s to replace their 737MAX fleet through July...

They already have a WOW a321 flying for them

Detroit313 wrote:

Norwegian next please!

Why?? What's good about any airline collapsing?? What's good about thousands of employees losing their jobs and airfares becoming more expensive?

As someone who loves to travel but has to do it on a librarian's salary, low-cost carriers are the best thing that's ever happened to the travel industry. They've played a huge role in opening up the world to people who might not otherwise be able to travel.

Detroit313 wrote:

Norwegian next please!

I don't understand this. Do you want to live in a world with less competition and less options for more people to see the world and learn the cultures around them? Get to their families that may otherwise be inaccessible due to expense? More people living their dream of traveling the world while working for an airline be put out of work? Are you being force to fly Norwegian in some capacity?

I'd flown into KEF on FI this past Sunday at the beginning of my spring break and immediately landing behind us was TF-DTR from BWI. The WOW bank to Europe was starting as we were being bussed in and the shuttle passed by TF-JOY. While sure it was only 6 in the morning and I was managing my bags and it was dark out I regret not taking any photos of any WOW jets (not like the camera focus was satisfied with the lighting). Woke up next morning to Indigo pulling out and the dominos falling by way of repossession, and finally the cancelled flights this morning. Has been interesting to follow during my stay here to say the least.

Might be equally interesting to see what KEF is like upon flying out this coming Sunday.

3.5 millon flown in 2018 by WOW will probably mean that Keflavik will decrease this year around -30% compared to Y2018.

Gulfstream500 wrote:

I’m sure that Air Canada would love to have the A321s to replace their 737MAX fleet through July...

Yesss

Revelation wrote:

FlapsOne wrote:

Being on the receiving end of people stereotyping an entire nation is just part and parcel of being British so I’m not bothered either way.

Fair enough, you all do have bad teeth, after all.

[ Yes, I'm joking! ]

FlapsOne wrote:

I don’t think there’s a way to rise from the ashes on this one. Once an airline is dead, it’s dead. Unless you’re Pan Am 2.0 or Eastern 3.0 both of which have been total disasters.

I wasn't saying WOW would rise from the ashes.

I was saying IMHO there is a profit to be made undercutting the legacies on the TATL routes, and I think in due time some one better organized than WOW was will come fill the void.

We actually have some of the best teeth and best dental health in the world now But we digress.

https://www.puresmiles.co.uk/post/4224/
https://www.beckersdental.com/news-and-analysis/33391-top-10-counties-with-best-dental-health-denmark-ranked-no-1.html

I literally watched them pull a plane off the gate in BWI. Looked as if they were heading out on a flight and then get towed over to Remote Area parking .

Would this be a perfect opportunity for a carrier like easyJet to start a transatlantic hub using KEF as a 'halfway' base?
Common equipment available to the current fleet (less the 330s), would relieve any pressure (if there is any) on the current fleet during the summer.

codyul wrote:

Gulfstream500 wrote:

I’m sure that Air Canada would love to have the A321s to replace their 737MAX fleet through July...

Yesss

Was thinking the same thing...at least for the CEOs, although AC could sure use the NEO about now to cover off the new Bordeaux route.

Either way those 321s won't sit idle for very long.

Revelation wrote:

FlapsOne wrote:

Being on the receiving end of people stereotyping an entire nation is just part and parcel of being British so I’m not bothered either way.

Fair enough, you all do have bad teeth, after all.

[ Yes, I'm joking! ]

FlapsOne wrote:

I don’t think there’s a way to rise from the ashes on this one. Once an airline is dead, it’s dead. Unless you’re Pan Am 2.0 or Eastern 3.0 both of which have been total disasters.

I wasn't saying WOW would rise from the ashes.

I was saying IMHO there is a profit to be made undercutting the legacies on the TATL routes, and I think in due time some one better organized than WOW was will come fill the void.

Yes its all bad teeth, bowler hats, rain and queuing over here.

As a Scotsman I also eat haggis most of the time (as you alluded to in the Edinburgh/Dusseldorf thread), and I am sitting in Central London in my kilt. It is part of my 'everyday range'.

Enjoy your cheeseburger tonight!

P.S. I forgot to mention the stereotypical heavy doses of sarcasm

klmtom wrote:

Would this be a perfect opportunity for a carrier like easyJet to start a transatlantic hub using KEF as a 'halfway' base?
Common equipment available to the current fleet (less the 330s), would relieve any pressure (if there is any) on the current fleet during the summer.

Why would they need to use KEF? They - like RyanAir or anybody else - could fly nonstop from their own European hubs, and save the extra hassle (and KEF has become a real mess) of stopping in Iceland.

For anyone who wants a stopover, FI is there.

klmtom wrote:

Would this be a perfect opportunity for a carrier like easyJet to start a transatlantic hub using KEF as a 'halfway' base?
Common equipment available to the current fleet (less the 330s), would relieve any pressure (if there is any) on the current fleet during the summer.

Maybe not quite on the same scale, but see WOW in India. Overextending when you're already in a safe zone can be really damaging.

klm617 wrote:

And the a.net world rejoices it's hard to believe that there are those who would be happy on this sight when an airline goes under. Doesn't benefit anyone at all when a company goes out of business. Make no mistake everyone loses here because WOW Air has shut down.

It benefits FI, but I agree 100% with you. People saying ”who’s next to go out of business” turns my stomach a bit. It’s gonna be about 20 minutes before this turns into another Norwegian bashing thread. A lot of people seem perfectly happy for 3 JVs to own 100% of the Atlantic market.

FlapsOne wrote:

a350lover wrote:

FlapsOne wrote:

It’s very sad to see it go and I feel a chapter is closing on LCC TATL flights. Soon it will go back to the preserve of the middle classes and today’s inclusive offerings whereby everyone can afford to fly is sadly drawing to a close. I feel we take a step back in the evolution of the industry.

I don't think so. The model of low fares TATL is here to stay. The issue is the economies of scale, which for players like WOW were terrible and continue to be challenging for all little airlines which have little level of cooperation or integration. We have several brands/airlines which are doing sort of "the same thing" powered by big air groups like Lufthansa (Eurowings) or IAG (LEVEL). I don't see the low fares going...

I hope you’re right. I always support the little guy and the underdogs and I’m genuinely sad it didn’t work out as I was Primera.

One good thing about it being a leased fleet and A320 type is that Icelandair can’t simply pick over the carcus and cherry pick the last pieces of meat on WOW’s bones. There’s no 737MAX, used 737-800 won’t be as easy to come by, the 757 even more difficult. It’s not like WOW can be absorbed into Icelandair which I think is good. Bringing a new type in house isn’t going to be quick and easy.

Was there overcapacity into KEF though? FI might still own some of that 20-order B738 order it did in the 2000s (these planes have the code 737-808), but again, they have no pilots qualified on the 737-800. They would have to scout the market for any secondhand B752s that freight forwarders haven't already purchased.

klmtom wrote:

Would this be a perfect opportunity for a carrier like easyJet to start a transatlantic hub using KEF as a 'halfway' base?
Common equipment available to the current fleet (less the 330s), would relieve any pressure (if there is any) on the current fleet during the summer.

As a shareholder I certainly hope not. Connections are a small part of the easyJet ethos and even then it’s a limited amount of virtual connections through a small amount of hubs. TATL hub in KEF would add complexity that they simply don’t need to do. Point to point throughout Europe is how easyJet always has and hopefully always will make money. Chasing after someone else’s dream of a low cost hub in KEF would be worrying times and the share price has taken enough of a hit and that’s before we mention Primera or the reduction in Norwegian point to point TATL.

enilria wrote:

It benefits FI, but I agree 100% with you. People saying ”who’s next to go out of business” turns my stomach a bit. It’s gonna be about 20 minutes before this turns into another Norwegian bashing thread. A lot of people seem perfectly happy for 3 JVs to own 100% of the Atlantic market.

You missed this

Detroit313 wrote:

Norwegian next please!

For WW - I flew with them last summer. They did their job getting me across the pond, is not even that bad to fly with (I sat all the way in the back b/c I was too cheap to even pick a seat), and overall the vibe is not bad at all. Sad that overexpansion and those unsustainable fares done them in.

The question is who is going to grab the gate slots and aircraft ASAP. B6 just got early Christmas gift

klm617 wrote:

SRQKEF wrote:

a350lover wrote:

What was the final total pax number of WOW Y2018?

Interestingly, back in 2012 Keflavik hand't even reached the barrier of the 3M pax. Last year there were nearly 10M. Surely WOW wasn't the only actor but it contributed very much to this growth. Will KEF airport still need the terminal expansion planned?

3,5 million pax. According to their financial statements, they lost around 50€ on every single one of them.

That's a very broad statement because I'm sure there were markets they flew to that they didn't lose money. When you fly and A330 from LAX/SFO to Europe and charge less than $500 round trip you are losing more money than $60 a head. There had to be routes that made money for them.

That's certainly true. The 50€ number is just total revenue (or lack of it) divided by total passenger numbers.

DL747400 wrote:

akb88 wrote:

And it took Icelandair all of 10 seconds to increase their fares by 100%

TRANSLATION: It took Icelandair all of 10 seconds to increase their fares to sustainable levels which offer a more realistic possibility of covering costs or achieving a smalll profit.

100% this. Airlines are not a charity, they're a business. While I hate every single airline that goes bankrupt because I want there to be as much variety in the skies as possible, people sometimes tend to forget that the role of airlines isn't to allow US college kids to see Paris for a 100$ but to make money with sustainable fares so they can continue operating for a long time.