Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 13
 
leghorn
Posts: 1297
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 10:37 am

I advise you to compare the financial reports of both companies in 2019 and see which is the better company.
At the moment from my perspective as a taxpayer the better company isn't the one trying to get the Government to bail them out with the fewest strings attached.
 
cityshuttle
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:56 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 10:41 am

airhansa wrote:
The point is that in the immediate aftermath there will be a vacuum where there are no alternatives left. It's not similar to the US where several major airlines compete over the same routes. LH has a de facto monopoly in the German speaking world.

To expand on the point I made about LH consolidation, I would prefer for the Lufthansa brand to take over all its subsidiaries except EW, but for the company to retain the hubs (except for BRU which I believe is best replaced with high speed rail services to AMS etc...).

I actually take back what I said about a KLM and LH merger, since I think that KLM is a strong brand and airline that would be wasted by merging with LH. Instead, it would be better for KLM to merge with SAS, since most of the SAS long haul operations already fly from CPH, hence it would be easy to move these flights to AMS and use SAS as a feeder system.


Sorry but your post makes no sense at all, especially in regards to moving all long haul flights from CPH to AMS after a KLM-SAS merger ... :banghead:

I do agree that I a possible brand consolidation within the LH Group is favorable, actually they could have used the "general and not national name" EW if they had not ruined the brand since it sounds more universal. Keeping all those national brands is outdated within an airline group ... but for traffic rights it is necessary to keep each AOC.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4465
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 12:30 pm

oldJoe wrote:
Of course critical ! Tell me wich country of this world want to see their flag carrier to fail ? Think about the attached jobs which could be lost outside the airline.


Exactly. This is realpolitik. Most big countries are going to try and stop their flag carrier going under. Countries that don't will see those flag carriers go insolvent and their national hubs will see a substantial fall in traffic.

Phosphorus wrote:
Oh, really? Malev was forced to close down, despite being their country's flag carrier. Because state aid was in breach of the rules. Fair enough. But if state aid to LH is in breach of the rules, than it's only fair this state aid is denied. Would be unfortunate, but not more unfortunate than extinction of Malev.


Malev was run into the ground. It's failure had nothing to do with the aviation industry itself. Nothing was stopping Malev flying other than a lack of funds. The present situation with air travel coming to a standstill and many, many borders closed is completely unprecedented and was forseen by noone.

calstanford wrote:
zkeoj wrote:
zkojq wrote:



How much emergency PPE has Ryanair, Easyjet and Norwegian brought to the Bundesrepublik?



Exactly. And how many Germans have those carriers repatriated from around the world? Ooops, apart from Norwegian they wouldn't even have the equipment to repatriate from New Zealand...


Condor repatriated people from NZ too.
When you’re bitching, at least know what you’re talking about.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/2 ... ation.html


Remind me again how many german citizens Ryanair repatriated from New Zealand? Remind me again what jurisdiction Ryanair pays taxes on their profits? Remind me again what percentage of Ryanair "employees" are actually "independent contractors" so as to minimize payroll taxes and social security contributions. How many of Lufthansa's employees are employed in such a manor?

CFRPwingALbody wrote:
AFAIK the state aid president was set in the US. The US airlines were the first to receive state support. I think support for the mayor airlines is justified.


Indeed. We live in an interconnected world, not a vacuum. Once one country offers financial assistance to their flag carrier(s) then the playing field is uneven and everybodyelse has to step up and do the same (or something very similar). Or you have to collectively agree to let all the big international carriers fail and that's not in anybody's interest (MOL aside).

leghorn wrote:
I'd put it to you that Lufthansa are more so the unacceptable face of capitalism than the LCCs. Poorly run, inefficient and when the sh!t hits the fan they socialize loses while privatising profits.


Oh please, Ryanair and MOL take a tonne of government aid in the form of local government subsidies. They are the long term leaches here.
First to fly the 787-9
 
airhansa
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 1:05 pm

cityshuttle wrote:
airhansa wrote:
The point is that in the immediate aftermath there will be a vacuum where there are no alternatives left. It's not similar to the US where several major airlines compete over the same routes. LH has a de facto monopoly in the German speaking world.

To expand on the point I made about LH consolidation, I would prefer for the Lufthansa brand to take over all its subsidiaries except EW, but for the company to retain the hubs (except for BRU which I believe is best replaced with high speed rail services to AMS etc...).

I actually take back what I said about a KLM and LH merger, since I think that KLM is a strong brand and airline that would be wasted by merging with LH. Instead, it would be better for KLM to merge with SAS, since most of the SAS long haul operations already fly from CPH, hence it would be easy to move these flights to AMS and use SAS as a feeder system.


Sorry but your post makes no sense at all, especially in regards to moving all long haul flights from CPH to AMS after a KLM-SAS merger ... :banghead:

I do agree that I a possible brand consolidation within the LH Group is favorable, actually they could have used the "general and not national name" EW if they had not ruined the brand since it sounds more universal. Keeping all those national brands is outdated within an airline group ... but for traffic rights it is necessary to keep each AOC.


To address the first point, most SAS long haul flights are to the Americas, and most of them depart from CPH. There's no need to have two nearby long haul hubs in a merged KLM-SAS venture, especially since AMS has wonderful ground transport connections to the rest of Western Europe. AMS is better suited to act as a hub for Northern Europe and the islands of Western Europe (UK, Ireland, Iceland...), and there's a lot of potential to be opened up if KLM part ways with Air France and focus on being a hub airline. All the long haul passengers from SAS can be transferred onto KLM long haul flights instead.

LH's geographic area corresponds to some of the best high-speed rail services in Europe and very good low cost airline competition, so I doubt there's much use in using a "Euro" brand which will make people think it's a intra-European airline, and hence why I prefer to close the BRU hub.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 25042
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 2:21 pm

I'm not sure why LH is getting so much 'shine' for flying repatriation flights. They are government charters. If LH didn't exist, the government would ring up some other carrier who would be happy to do a government charter.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10448
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 2:25 pm

Revelation wrote:
I'm not sure why LH is getting so much 'shine' for flying repatriation flights. They are government charters. If LH didn't exist, the government would ring up some other carrier who would be happy to do a government charter.

It shows up carriers like FR who complain about state aid and unfair competition while not buying a/c large enough to do the same thus offering the governments an alternative at lower cost.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 25042
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 3:14 pm

par13del wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I'm not sure why LH is getting so much 'shine' for flying repatriation flights. They are government charters. If LH didn't exist, the government would ring up some other carrier who would be happy to do a government charter.

It shows up carriers like FR who complain about state aid and unfair competition while not buying a/c large enough to do the same thus offering the governments an alternative at lower cost.

Yeah, well, FR should STFU. If FR wasn't doing its best to dodge taxes, maybe they would be eligible for more aid.

Yet LH shouldn't be praised just because it has idle wide body aircraft available for charter.

I'm sure if they were flying these flights for free they would have told us by now, and since they haven't, I think we can assume they're making a decent profit.

It's not like the LH wide body fleet exists to fetch stranded tourists during epidemics, and it's absurd to expect FR to buy wide bodies just for IROPS.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Vicenza
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 3:25 pm

Revelation wrote:
par13del wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I'm not sure why LH is getting so much 'shine' for flying repatriation flights. They are government charters. If LH didn't exist, the government would ring up some other carrier who would be happy to do a government charter.

It shows up carriers like FR who complain about state aid and unfair competition while not buying a/c large enough to do the same thus offering the governments an alternative at lower cost.

Yeah, well, FR should STFU. If FR wasn't doing its best to dodge taxes, maybe they would be eligible for more aid.



They are quite entitled to the aid,nor was any denied, but then maybe you aren't fully aware of what their point was. \that not withstanding, tell me an airline that doesn't do it's best avoid taxes....or even have the 'opportunity' to screw all investors, creditors and staff while still being allowed to operate 'normally'
 
Vicenza
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 3:33 pm

par13del wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I'm not sure why LH is getting so much 'shine' for flying repatriation flights. They are government charters. If LH didn't exist, the government would ring up some other carrier who would be happy to do a government charter.

It shows up carriers like FR who complain about state aid and unfair competition while not buying a/c large enough to do the same thus offering the governments an alternative at lower cost.


Just curious why you mention FR specifically.....I don't recall airlines such WN etc offering any. Are you making a particular point or suggesting all airlines should buy large aircraft just in case governments need charters.
 
oldJoe
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 3:40 pm

Revelation wrote:
par13del wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I'm not sure why LH is getting so much 'shine' for flying repatriation flights. They are government charters. If LH didn't exist, the government would ring up some other carrier who would be happy to do a government charter.

It shows up carriers like FR who complain about state aid and unfair competition while not buying a/c large enough to do the same thus offering the governments an alternative at lower cost.

Yeah, well, FR should STFU. If FR wasn't doing its best to dodge taxes, maybe they would be eligible for more aid.

Yet LH shouldn't be praised just because it has idle wide body aircraft available for charter.

I'm sure if they were flying these flights for free they would have told us by now, and since they haven't, I think we can assume they're making a decent profit.

It's not like the LH wide body fleet exists to fetch stranded tourists during epidemics, and it's absurd to expect FR to buy wide bodies just for IROPS.


For sure LH did not do this flights for free. Every pax on this flights will pay the bill and right so. In the article I provided above is a very interesting sentence :

Thousands of Germans are more or less indebted around the world due to stricter entry requirements as a result of the spread of coronavirus. The fatale: Among them are very many who even traveled abroad at a time when it was already clear that the corona epidemic was spreading around the world
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2189
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 3:46 pm

Revelation wrote:
Yeah, well, FR should STFU. If FR wasn't doing its best to dodge taxes, maybe they would be eligible for more aid.

Yet LH shouldn't be praised just because it has idle wide body aircraft available for charter.

True. In the same sense, LH is a critical part of European infrastructure especially for long haul passenger and freight services. A collapse would impact all other industries.

On the other hand, passengers and cargo would find other ways; most probably through carriers that did get subsidies. Sure a few nonstop flights would be lost but no single airline is at all relevant in a global context.

What this bailout - any bailout - is about is to mitigate the short term effects of bankrupcties and mass layoffs. An economy can sustain the collapse of a single large company; look at the (lack of) impact the failure of BE and TC had on UK air travel. Someone else will fill the void sooner or later. Even if LH were to fail entirely, an LH mk.2 would rise from the ashes in a few years. Same for AZ. But you can't let everybody fail simultaneously. Looking at US carriers, there's a reason why the CARES act only guarantees employment until fall 2020 - you can "flatten the curve" in terms of unemployment.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 25042
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 4:28 pm

mxaxai wrote:
True. In the same sense, LH is a critical part of European infrastructure especially for long haul passenger and freight services. A collapse would impact all other industries.

On the other hand, passengers and cargo would find other ways; most probably through carriers that did get subsidies. Sure a few nonstop flights would be lost but no single airline is at all relevant in a global context.

What this bailout - any bailout - is about is to mitigate the short term effects of bankrupcties and mass layoffs. An economy can sustain the collapse of a single large company; look at the (lack of) impact the failure of BE and TC had on UK air travel. Someone else will fill the void sooner or later. Even if LH were to fail entirely, an LH mk.2 would rise from the ashes in a few years. Same for AZ. But you can't let everybody fail simultaneously. Looking at US carriers, there's a reason why the CARES act only guarantees employment until fall 2020 - you can "flatten the curve" in terms of unemployment.

I agree with all of the above.

Also I'd say it's clear LH is the DE government's favored airline.

I said during the Air Berlin shutdown that it was clear the government was more interested in keeping jobs rather than fostering competition, and was glad to have LH take the mess off their hands before election time. Nothing FR says is going to change things.

Governmental urges to keep jobs and avoid handing ammunition to political foes is what makes it very difficult to get any changes into the airline power structure.

Even allegedly right leaning governments drop their pretenses and start handing out the dosh when their corporate sponsors come knocking.

We are OK with unbridled capitalism till the spam hits the fan, then all of a sudden socialism is in style, at least for corporations.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9872
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 6:27 pm

Revelation wrote:
mxaxai wrote:
True. In the same sense, LH is a critical part of European infrastructure especially for long haul passenger and freight services. A collapse would impact all other industries.

On the other hand, passengers and cargo would find other ways; most probably through carriers that did get subsidies. Sure a few nonstop flights would be lost but no single airline is at all relevant in a global context.

What this bailout - any bailout - is about is to mitigate the short term effects of bankrupcties and mass layoffs. An economy can sustain the collapse of a single large company; look at the (lack of) impact the failure of BE and TC had on UK air travel. Someone else will fill the void sooner or later. Even if LH were to fail entirely, an LH mk.2 would rise from the ashes in a few years. Same for AZ. But you can't let everybody fail simultaneously. Looking at US carriers, there's a reason why the CARES act only guarantees employment until fall 2020 - you can "flatten the curve" in terms of unemployment.

I agree with all of the above.

Also I'd say it's clear LH is the DE government's favored airline.

I said during the Air Berlin shutdown that it was clear the government was more interested in keeping jobs rather than fostering competition, and was glad to have LH take the mess off their hands before election time. Nothing FR says is going to change things.

Governmental urges to keep jobs and avoid handing ammunition to political foes is what makes it very difficult to get any changes into the airline power structure.

Even allegedly right leaning governments drop their pretenses and start handing out the dosh when their corporate sponsors come knocking.

We are OK with unbridled capitalism till the spam hits the fan, then all of a sudden socialism is in style, at least for corporations.


On the other hand the employees of airberlin that went to Eurowings made a much better deal than those going to Laudamotion. The same can be said right now. The LH group employees are in a better position than the Laudamotion employees, as the Laudamotion crews are already forced to either accept a very serious pay cut or loose their jobs, regardless of government help being available to FR/Laudamotion or not. In addition we are in a situation that is a classic situation for subsidies, as airlines are complete victims of the consequences of the virus. It is neither a scenario they could prepare nor one they control nor one they have the ability to adjust to, as the government took active measures that practically destroyed the business of the airlines.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 6:55 pm

How big is the proposed/imposed salary cut at Lauda? Austrian Airlines is reducing salaries by 13%.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10448
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 7:16 pm

Vicenza wrote:
par13del wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I'm not sure why LH is getting so much 'shine' for flying repatriation flights. They are government charters. If LH didn't exist, the government would ring up some other carrier who would be happy to do a government charter.

It shows up carriers like FR who complain about state aid and unfair competition while not buying a/c large enough to do the same thus offering the governments an alternative at lower cost.


Just curious why you mention FR specifically.....

Read the earlier post....on the LH repatriation flights...
 
oldJoe
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 7:55 pm

Blerg wrote:
How big is the proposed/imposed salary cut at Lauda? Austrian Airlines is reducing salaries by 13%.


For April and May 50 % and after that time layoffs are not excluded.
Generally they want contracts were benefits are cut. Salary cut for Captains 15 % and cabin crew 5% and the deal done until 20. May or shutdown of Lauda
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Sun May 10, 2020 10:16 pm

calstanford wrote:
zkeoj wrote:
zkojq wrote:



How much emergency PPE has Ryanair, Easyjet and Norwegian brought to the Bundesrepublik?



Exactly. And how many Germans have those carriers repatriated from around the world? Ooops, apart from Norwegian they wouldn't even have the equipment to repatriate from New Zealand...


Condor repatriated people from NZ too.
When you’re bitching, at least know what you’re talking about.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/travel/2 ... ation.html


I am well aware of that, but the poster I referred to only talked about Ryanair, Easyjet and Norwegian - and has any of them repatriated from NZ? Glasshouses, anybody (re bitching)?
 
User avatar
calstanford
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:16 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Mon May 11, 2020 6:59 pm

zkeoj wrote:
I am well aware of that, but the poster I referred to only talked about Ryanair, Easyjet and Norwegian - and has any of them repatriated from NZ? Glasshouses, anybody (re bitching)?


You are right, zkeoj. I apologise sincerely.
 
zkeoj
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:00 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Mon May 11, 2020 9:15 pm

calstanford wrote:
zkeoj wrote:
I am well aware of that, but the poster I referred to only talked about Ryanair, Easyjet and Norwegian - and has any of them repatriated from NZ? Glasshouses, anybody (re bitching)?


You are right, zkeoj. I apologise sincerely.


no harm, all good.

Stay safe :-)
micha
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 4:51 am

Overpaid EU bureaucrats have spoken. According to the link below, the European Commission says that if a government gets involved in a business due to corona, an exit strategy must be present. If the government is still involved after six years, a new restructuring plan must be presented. During this period, dividends as well as bonuses can not be paid.

So far the EU approved around €1.9 trillion in state aid across the union with 52% coming from Germany. In distant second spot with 17% was France and then Italy with 16%.

Greens in Germany have rejected a silent partnership (similar stance as the SPD) while using Air France's domestic network cuts as an example of what Germany needs. They insist on LH cutting 50% its CO2 emissions on long and medium-haul by 2030 and on domestic flights by 2024.

Any destination that can be reach by train in 4 hours should not be operated by a plane ... according to the Green Party.

"A rescue according to the ideas of the Lufthansa Executive Board in the form of a silent participation is out of the question for us," said Green Party politician Daniela Wagner. "In the case of a partial nationalization, the state must not be in a worse position than a private investor - that is necessary just out of responsibility towards taxpayers."

Link: https://www.airliners.de/eu-exit-strate ... lfen/55322
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9872
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 5:02 am

Nice to see the EU developing a backbone. I like the idea to use the government influence to reduce the number of flights in Germany.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 5:15 am

seahawk wrote:
Nice to see the EU developing a backbone. I like the idea to use the government influence to reduce the number of flights in Germany.


Yes but the reduction of some domestic flights might impact Lufthansa's connectivity and competitiveness. Imagine someone is flying from BEY to DUS. He has the option of flying on TK or LO straight to DUS while, thanks to the Greens, Lufthansa is forcing him to collect his luggage, carry it to the train station and drag it with him to his final destination. There is a reason why Lufthansa operates some domestic flights.
 
RvA
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 7:31 am

Blerg wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Nice to see the EU developing a backbone. I like the idea to use the government influence to reduce the number of flights in Germany.


Yes but the reduction of some domestic flights might impact Lufthansa's connectivity and competitiveness. Imagine someone is flying from BEY to DUS. He has the option of flying on TK or LO straight to DUS while, thanks to the Greens, Lufthansa is forcing him to collect his luggage, carry it to the train station and drag it with him to his final destination. There is a reason why Lufthansa operates some domestic flights.


Yes and KLM for example flies to airports including within Germany that are less than 4 hours by train too.

Does the 4 hours include delay time? I’ve never had an on time train in Germany maybe that can shave off some time. :)

In seriousness though this actually would inconvenience a lot of people. Not everyone lives in the city centre of Dusseldorf for example and it may work out much better to carpool to DUS and park there instead and then fly out.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 11:31 am

RvA wrote:
Blerg wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Nice to see the EU developing a backbone. I like the idea to use the government influence to reduce the number of flights in Germany.


Yes but the reduction of some domestic flights might impact Lufthansa's connectivity and competitiveness. Imagine someone is flying from BEY to DUS. He has the option of flying on TK or LO straight to DUS while, thanks to the Greens, Lufthansa is forcing him to collect his luggage, carry it to the train station and drag it with him to his final destination. There is a reason why Lufthansa operates some domestic flights.


Yes and KLM for example flies to airports including within Germany that are less than 4 hours by train too.

Does the 4 hours include delay time? I’ve never had an on time train in Germany maybe that can shave off some time. :)

In seriousness though this actually would inconvenience a lot of people. Not everyone lives in the city centre of Dusseldorf for example and it may work out much better to carpool to DUS and park there instead and then fly out.


I also can't see this happen long-term. I think they will insist on CO2 reductions while dropping the train request.


Meanwhile SN Brussels also announced the firing of 25% of its staff while Austrian Airlines considers going into administered bankruptcy. I wonder if they are doing this to put more pressure on local governments in order to speed up the issuing of aid.
 
Eikie
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:15 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 12:06 pm

RvA wrote:

Yes and KLM for example flies to airports including within Germany that are less than 4 hours by train too.


That would be Düsseldorf and Köln only, maybe Frankfurt of you catch the right train.
And there are increasing voice in the Netherlands to ban short flights (below a certain distance) bit no firm demands have been set for the loans KLM (probably) gets.
 
LJ
Posts: 5454
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 12:22 pm

RvA wrote:
Yes and KLM for example flies to airports including within Germany that are less than 4 hours by train too..


Yes, but the Dutch government will probably ask KLM to cut flights when they're 2 hours by train. This means for KLM only Brussels till the ICE will terminate at Amsterdam Zuid (or Schiphol) instead of Amsterdam Cenraal (scheduled 2028 - 2030).
 
RvA
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 12:22 pm

Anyway all that that would do in the short term is just move traffic around other hubs. LHG would move DUS-FRA to MUC and just increase frequency or gauge there. If AMS gets the restriction maybe AF can take over some (north)western Germany etc.
 
Westerwaelder
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:27 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 12:33 pm

RvA wrote:
Blerg wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Nice to see the EU developing a backbone. I like the idea to use the government influence to reduce the number of flights in Germany.


Yes but the reduction of some domestic flights might impact Lufthansa's connectivity and competitiveness. Imagine someone is flying from BEY to DUS. He has the option of flying on TK or LO straight to DUS while, thanks to the Greens, Lufthansa is forcing him to collect his luggage, carry it to the train station and drag it with him to his final destination. There is a reason why Lufthansa operates some domestic flights.


Yes and KLM for example flies to airports including within Germany that are less than 4 hours by train too.

Does the 4 hours include delay time? I’ve never had an on time train in Germany maybe that can shave off some time. :)

In seriousness though this actually would inconvenience a lot of people. Not everyone lives in the city centre of Dusseldorf for example and it may work out much better to carpool to DUS and park there instead and then fly out.


Rail & Fly is already a proven concept. There will always be people better off and some worse off if you move the departure location (from station to airport or vice versa). That is not an argument. If this becomes a Europe wide initiative than it's a good thing. Something in aviation will have to give if we are to get climate change under control. And not just a 50% eduction by 2050 or similar vague promises. The challenge will be to provide capacity on the rail network.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 12:42 pm

Westerwaelder wrote:
RvA wrote:
Blerg wrote:

Yes but the reduction of some domestic flights might impact Lufthansa's connectivity and competitiveness. Imagine someone is flying from BEY to DUS. He has the option of flying on TK or LO straight to DUS while, thanks to the Greens, Lufthansa is forcing him to collect his luggage, carry it to the train station and drag it with him to his final destination. There is a reason why Lufthansa operates some domestic flights.


Yes and KLM for example flies to airports including within Germany that are less than 4 hours by train too.

Does the 4 hours include delay time? I’ve never had an on time train in Germany maybe that can shave off some time. :)

In seriousness though this actually would inconvenience a lot of people. Not everyone lives in the city centre of Dusseldorf for example and it may work out much better to carpool to DUS and park there instead and then fly out.


Rail & Fly is already a proven concept. There will always be people better off and some worse off if you move the departure location (from station to airport or vice versa). That is not an argument. If this becomes a Europe wide initiative than it's a good thing. Something in aviation will have to give if we are to get climate change under control. And not just a 50% eduction by 2050 or similar vague promises. The challenge will be to provide capacity on the rail network.


You are exaggerating, you make it sound as if aviation is responsible for global warming. A few years ago I had to go to Strasbourg so I flew to FRA on LH and then I took a Lufthansa bus. It was a horrible experience I will not look to repeat ever in the future. I'd rather fly to my final destination that go through that again. I can imagine the experience with the train is similar.

Furthermore, most electricity today in Europe doesn't come from renewable energy sources. This means that if you force more people to take the train there will be more energy consumption which will lead to more pollution. People forget that trains are not 100% green. Maybe they should first make trains completely eco-friendly before launching a Jihad against airlines and aviation, an industry which has done so much to reduce pollution.
 
Boavida
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 12:42 pm

SN has just announced it will be cutting:

- 1000 jobs
- 10 planes (2 long haul and 8 short haul)
- 22 destinations

They want to grow again as from 2023.

In the meantime it's still waiting for a bailout deal between the Belgian government and LH Group. The government is willing to spend millions, but wants some guarantees from LH in return. They haven't forgotten the fact that LH wanted to basically terminate SN and turn it into a LCC (Eurowings) not so long ago... LH looks reluctant to give these guarantees.
 
Westerwaelder
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:27 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 12:53 pm

Blerg wrote:
Westerwaelder wrote:
RvA wrote:

Yes and KLM for example flies to airports including within Germany that are less than 4 hours by train too.

Does the 4 hours include delay time? I’ve never had an on time train in Germany maybe that can shave off some time. :)

In seriousness though this actually would inconvenience a lot of people. Not everyone lives in the city centre of Dusseldorf for example and it may work out much better to carpool to DUS and park there instead and then fly out.


Rail & Fly is already a proven concept. There will always be people better off and some worse off if you move the departure location (from station to airport or vice versa). That is not an argument. If this becomes a Europe wide initiative than it's a good thing. Something in aviation will have to give if we are to get climate change under control. And not just a 50% eduction by 2050 or similar vague promises. The challenge will be to provide capacity on the rail network.


You are exaggerating, you make it sound as if aviation is responsible for global warming. A few years ago I had to go to Strasbourg so I flew to FRA on LH and then I took a Lufthansa bus. It was a horrible experience I will not look to repeat ever in the future. I'd rather fly to my final destination that go through that again. I can imagine the experience with the train is similar.

Furthermore, most electricity today in Europe doesn't come from renewable energy sources. This means that if you force more people to take the train there will be more energy consumption which will lead to more pollution. People forget that trains are not 100% green. Maybe they should first make trains completely eco-friendly before launching a Jihad against airlines and aviation, an industry which has done so much to reduce pollution.


It is exactly that attitude that no longer washes. Every industry needs to stop pointing fingers and see what it can do. The share of renewable energy is constantly increasing across Europe but particularly Germany so the train gets greener all the time. Just because it's not totally green already is not a reason to sit on your hands. There is a journey to be made here by all of us. Just because step one doesn't already take us across the finish line doesn't mean we shouldn't start walking.

I don't think a LH bus to Strassburg is anywhere near to taking an ICE to Cologne or Dusseldorf from Frankfurt.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 2:56 pm

Westerwaelder wrote:
Blerg wrote:
Westerwaelder wrote:

Rail & Fly is already a proven concept. There will always be people better off and some worse off if you move the departure location (from station to airport or vice versa). That is not an argument. If this becomes a Europe wide initiative than it's a good thing. Something in aviation will have to give if we are to get climate change under control. And not just a 50% eduction by 2050 or similar vague promises. The challenge will be to provide capacity on the rail network.


You are exaggerating, you make it sound as if aviation is responsible for global warming. A few years ago I had to go to Strasbourg so I flew to FRA on LH and then I took a Lufthansa bus. It was a horrible experience I will not look to repeat ever in the future. I'd rather fly to my final destination that go through that again. I can imagine the experience with the train is similar.

Furthermore, most electricity today in Europe doesn't come from renewable energy sources. This means that if you force more people to take the train there will be more energy consumption which will lead to more pollution. People forget that trains are not 100% green. Maybe they should first make trains completely eco-friendly before launching a Jihad against airlines and aviation, an industry which has done so much to reduce pollution.


It is exactly that attitude that no longer washes. Every industry needs to stop pointing fingers and see what it can do. The share of renewable energy is constantly increasing across Europe but particularly Germany so the train gets greener all the time. Just because it's not totally green already is not a reason to sit on your hands. There is a journey to be made here by all of us. Just because step one doesn't already take us across the finish line doesn't mean we shouldn't start walking.

I don't think a LH bus to Strassburg is anywhere near to taking an ICE to Cologne or Dusseldorf from Frankfurt.


Your comment makes no sense because aviation has already done so much to get greener and I think some people have lost their compass and need to be reset. Some 15 years ago we still had B727s, B732s, F70s... flying around. Compared that to the A220 and you will see how much effort airlines have made.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 2:57 pm

Boavida wrote:
SN has just announced it will be cutting:

- 1000 jobs
- 10 planes (2 long haul and 8 short haul)
- 22 destinations

They want to grow again as from 2023.

In the meantime it's still waiting for a bailout deal between the Belgian government and LH Group. The government is willing to spend millions, but wants some guarantees from LH in return. They haven't forgotten the fact that LH wanted to basically terminate SN and turn it into a LCC (Eurowings) not so long ago... LH looks reluctant to give these guarantees.


Do you know which narrowbody aircraft they are going to be retiring?
 
Ishrion
Posts: 3272
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 3:02 pm

Blerg wrote:
Boavida wrote:
SN has just announced it will be cutting:

- 1000 jobs
- 10 planes (2 long haul and 8 short haul)
- 22 destinations

They want to grow again as from 2023.

In the meantime it's still waiting for a bailout deal between the Belgian government and LH Group. The government is willing to spend millions, but wants some guarantees from LH in return. They haven't forgotten the fact that LH wanted to basically terminate SN and turn it into a LCC (Eurowings) not so long ago... LH looks reluctant to give these guarantees.


Do you know which narrowbody aircraft they are going to be retiring?


https://mobile.twitter.com/AAF_Aviation ... 6065859585

2 A330s, 8 A320s.

For the A330s, I’m assuming it’s the remaining two -200s?
 
blooc350
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 3:23 pm

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
We should make no bones about it: the big legacies will use this opportunity to eliminate LCC competition. Just as the Mega Corps will use this to eliminate small business competition.

You don't deserve choice.


Wow are you an airline CEO?
 
Westerwaelder
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:27 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 3:29 pm

Blerg wrote:
Westerwaelder wrote:
Blerg wrote:

You are exaggerating, you make it sound as if aviation is responsible for global warming. A few years ago I had to go to Strasbourg so I flew to FRA on LH and then I took a Lufthansa bus. It was a horrible experience I will not look to repeat ever in the future. I'd rather fly to my final destination that go through that again. I can imagine the experience with the train is similar.

Furthermore, most electricity today in Europe doesn't come from renewable energy sources. This means that if you force more people to take the train there will be more energy consumption which will lead to more pollution. People forget that trains are not 100% green. Maybe they should first make trains completely eco-friendly before launching a Jihad against airlines and aviation, an industry which has done so much to reduce pollution.


It is exactly that attitude that no longer washes. Every industry needs to stop pointing fingers and see what it can do. The share of renewable energy is constantly increasing across Europe but particularly Germany so the train gets greener all the time. Just because it's not totally green already is not a reason to sit on your hands. There is a journey to be made here by all of us. Just because step one doesn't already take us across the finish line doesn't mean we shouldn't start walking.

I don't think a LH bus to Strassburg is anywhere near to taking an ICE to Cologne or Dusseldorf from Frankfurt.


Your comment makes no sense because aviation has already done so much to get greener and I think some people have lost their compass and need to be reset. Some 15 years ago we still had B727s, B732s, F70s... flying around. Compared that to the A220 and you will see how much effort airlines have made.


Well then, what is there to complain about? You clearly haven't grasped the challenge yet. This is not about replacing a 727 with an A220 and voila planet saved. What makes no sense is your inability to see the challenge ahead. If you think airlines have done enough, then good luck to you.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 3:36 pm

Westerwaelder wrote:
Blerg wrote:
Westerwaelder wrote:

It is exactly that attitude that no longer washes. Every industry needs to stop pointing fingers and see what it can do. The share of renewable energy is constantly increasing across Europe but particularly Germany so the train gets greener all the time. Just because it's not totally green already is not a reason to sit on your hands. There is a journey to be made here by all of us. Just because step one doesn't already take us across the finish line doesn't mean we shouldn't start walking.

I don't think a LH bus to Strassburg is anywhere near to taking an ICE to Cologne or Dusseldorf from Frankfurt.


Your comment makes no sense because aviation has already done so much to get greener and I think some people have lost their compass and need to be reset. Some 15 years ago we still had B727s, B732s, F70s... flying around. Compared that to the A220 and you will see how much effort airlines have made.


Well then, what is there to complain about? You clearly haven't grasped the challenge yet. This is not about replacing a 727 with an A220 and voila planet saved. What makes no sense is your inability to see the challenge ahead. If you think airlines have done enough, then good luck to you.


So just because I don't agree with you I am somehow missing the big picture? Dogmatic much?
Governments should not have the right to restrict where airlines fly. If Lufthansa sees commercial interest in flying their B748 from FRA to CGN then it's their right. If Green Party hippies feel this world is about to melt from pollution then they might as well pressure companies that manufacture planes to come up with greener products. Or you know, put greater pressure on countries like India to actually do something about pollution which affects the world we live in much more than a short, regional flight does.

EU already said that governments need to exit these companies within a six year time-frame. What Green Party can do is put a time restriction on these flights.

Anyway, Green Party will not risk LH Group collapsing and if they had to chose between protecting daisies and willow trees or hundreds of thousands of jobs and millions in tax income, it's obvious what they will chose.
 
Albert12
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue May 12, 2020 3:34 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 3:39 pm

Spohr already said in the last days what conditions he can accept and at what piont he prefers bunkrupcy.
 
Westerwaelder
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:27 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 3:47 pm

Blerg wrote:
Westerwaelder wrote:
Blerg wrote:

Your comment makes no sense because aviation has already done so much to get greener and I think some people have lost their compass and need to be reset. Some 15 years ago we still had B727s, B732s, F70s... flying around. Compared that to the A220 and you will see how much effort airlines have made.


Well then, what is there to complain about? You clearly haven't grasped the challenge yet. This is not about replacing a 727 with an A220 and voila planet saved. What makes no sense is your inability to see the challenge ahead. If you think airlines have done enough, then good luck to you.


So just because I don't agree with you I am somehow missing the big picture? Dogmatic much?
Governments should not have the right to restrict where airlines fly. If Lufthansa sees commercial interest in flying their B748 from FRA to CGN then it's their right. If Green Party hippies feel this world is about to melt from pollution then they might as well pressure companies that manufacture planes to come up with greener products. Or you know, put greater pressure on countries like India to actually do something about pollution which affects the world we live in much more than a short, regional flight does.

EU already said that governments need to exit these companies within a six year time-frame. What Green Party can do is put a time restriction on these flights.

Anyway, Green Party will not risk LH Group collapsing and if they had to chose between protecting daisies and willow trees or hundreds of thousands of jobs and millions in tax income, it's obvious what they will chose.


This is well beyond agreeing with me or not. Fundamentally, I subscribe to the school of thought that organisations have a responsibility. To their shareholders. To their customers. To their staff. And to society. And they need to act responsibly.

Interesting choice of words: green party hippies. Dogmatic much?

I would say we will not see eye to eye. You believe companies have the right to ruin the planet. I believe they do not.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 3:49 pm

Westerwaelder wrote:
Blerg wrote:
Westerwaelder wrote:

Well then, what is there to complain about? You clearly haven't grasped the challenge yet. This is not about replacing a 727 with an A220 and voila planet saved. What makes no sense is your inability to see the challenge ahead. If you think airlines have done enough, then good luck to you.


So just because I don't agree with you I am somehow missing the big picture? Dogmatic much?
Governments should not have the right to restrict where airlines fly. If Lufthansa sees commercial interest in flying their B748 from FRA to CGN then it's their right. If Green Party hippies feel this world is about to melt from pollution then they might as well pressure companies that manufacture planes to come up with greener products. Or you know, put greater pressure on countries like India to actually do something about pollution which affects the world we live in much more than a short, regional flight does.

EU already said that governments need to exit these companies within a six year time-frame. What Green Party can do is put a time restriction on these flights.

Anyway, Green Party will not risk LH Group collapsing and if they had to chose between protecting daisies and willow trees or hundreds of thousands of jobs and millions in tax income, it's obvious what they will chose.


This is well beyond agreeing with me or not. Fundamentally, I subscribe to the school of thought that organisations have a responsibility. To their shareholders. To their customers. To their staff. And to society. And they need to act responsibly.

Interesting choice of words: green party hippies. Dogmatic much?

I would say we will not see eye to eye. You believe companies have the right to ruin the planet. I believe they do not.


So Lufthansa is destroying our planet because they are running a few regional flights? Please tell me this is a joke. This move by the Green Party is nothing more and nothing less than a PR stunt to please their fired up base.
 
RvA
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 3:55 pm

Westerwaelder wrote:
RvA wrote:
Blerg wrote:

Yes but the reduction of some domestic flights might impact Lufthansa's connectivity and competitiveness. Imagine someone is flying from BEY to DUS. He has the option of flying on TK or LO straight to DUS while, thanks to the Greens, Lufthansa is forcing him to collect his luggage, carry it to the train station and drag it with him to his final destination. There is a reason why Lufthansa operates some domestic flights.


Yes and KLM for example flies to airports including within Germany that are less than 4 hours by train too.

Does the 4 hours include delay time? I’ve never had an on time train in Germany maybe that can shave off some time. :)

In seriousness though this actually would inconvenience a lot of people. Not everyone lives in the city centre of Dusseldorf for example and it may work out much better to carpool to DUS and park there instead and then fly out.


Rail & Fly is already a proven concept. There will always be people better off and some worse off if you move the departure location (from station to airport or vice versa). That is not an argument. If this becomes a Europe wide initiative than it's a good thing. Something in aviation will have to give if we are to get climate change under control. And not just a 50% eduction by 2050 or similar vague promises. The challenge will be to provide capacity on the rail network.


Rail & Fly is not a proven concept. It exists yes, is it optimal? No. Is it capable to fully replace flights over short distances? No. A big part of the problem is the reliability of Deutsche Bahn and just how well connected and punctual it is. Also what will be very important to do this right is the connectivity in systems to work together. That barely exists today and is enormously clunky with rail and fly. 9B segments that are flat rate etc. is not fit for purpose especially if it’s meant to be a replacement for flights.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 4:22 pm

After being pressured by the Socialists, Lufthansa presents a list of its companies in tax heavens:

https://www.airliners.de/lufthansa-druc ... asen/55360
 
User avatar
TLLBRU
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue May 12, 2020 4:43 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 5:24 pm

In the mean time, seems Belgian Government offered €390 mio for 25% of the stakes.

LH said no

source:
https://www.lalibre.be/belgique/politiq ... 3845d2b534
 
bralo20
Posts: 501
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:05 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 6:29 pm

TLLBRU wrote:
In the mean time, seems Belgian Government offered €390 mio for 25% of the stakes.

LH said no

source:
https://www.lalibre.be/belgique/politiq ... 3845d2b534



During the VTM News, the deputy prime minister Decroo was interviewed and was asked if they would give state aid without having a say in the company (like Carsten Spohr wants, he wants to avoid political input) and he gave a clear message to LH: "If they don't want political input, they should not ask for financial aid"

Seems that our government is putting their foot down and saying take it or leave it to LH (after LH already (presumably) declined it). Think LH will have to give in to get the state aid from the Belgian government.
 
cityshuttle
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:56 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 6:42 pm

Makes me think of those negotiations with OS & SN [and their respective governments] are in favour of Carsten Spohr ... maybe the strategy is to not (!) get state aid from Austria & Belgium and then send both airlines to insolvency court, transferring the slots to EW and continue with less costs at VIE and BRU ...
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 7:46 pm

But could the Belgian government do much with 25%? Or did they ask for blocking rights like SPD wants in Germany? For me what's extremely interesting is that most other major airlines got aid without problem while LH is facing major problems even in its home market. Really interesting situation.
 
LJ
Posts: 5454
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 8:02 pm

Blerg wrote:
But could the Belgian government do much with 25%? Or did they ask for blocking rights like SPD wants in Germany? For me what's extremely interesting is that most other major airlines got aid without problem while LH is facing major problems even in its home market. Really interesting situation.


You cannot do not much with 25% but you do get a seat on the Board. As for AF/KL and IB, they probably have good contacts. Lufthansa has the problem that is has to deal with the German Austrian and Belgian governments, all just woke up and realised that they sold (or in case of Germany let it buy) their airline years ago without taking the necessary steps to safeguard its interests. The Dutch and French government both have a stake in AF/KL, thus no incentive for them to demand influence (they already have the direct contact with the AF/KL CEO). Moreover, they have a financial interest to approve a package. The same in Italy. Spain really needs IAG and thus agreed quickly. The UK is in a difficult position as aid for IAG will mean it have to give it to Virgin and easyJet as well. Norway has enough money and need air travel. As such saving the Norwegian part of Norwegian makes sense (and it's a way of rationalising that airline).
 
smartplane
Posts: 1612
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 8:03 pm

Blerg wrote:
Westerwaelder wrote:
It is exactly that attitude that no longer washes. Every industry needs to stop pointing fingers and see what it can do. The share of renewable energy is constantly increasing across Europe but particularly Germany so the train gets greener all the time. Just because it's not totally green already is not a reason to sit on your hands. There is a journey to be made here by all of us. Just because step one doesn't already take us across the finish line doesn't mean we shouldn't start walking.


Your comment makes no sense because aviation has already done so much to get greener and I think some people have lost their compass and need to be reset. Some 15 years ago we still had B727s, B732s, F70s... flying around. Compared that to the A220 and you will see how much effort airlines have made.

Aviation has done very little (nothing really) to get greener, other than by accident. Aircraft replacement with greener models was driven by economies of scale, reliability, noise and fuel efficiency. Emissions were a happy coincidence.

Commercial aviation (and shipping) have been fighting for years, lobbying privately against Kyoto and Paris Agreement, but publicly showing a very different face.

Problem with using carbon per capita, is developing countries want to benchmark against developed countries like the USA and EU, a not unreasonable argument.

Then we have airlines who want carbon to be attributed to nationalities on board each flight and ultimate destination of freight, rather than the operator's country.

Airlines have already asked for CORSIA stages to be suspended. For obvious reasons airlines don't want 2020 to be part of the baseline calculation, as it will curtail growth in later years. On the other hand, COVID acts as a launch pad for the industry to leap forward.
 
Blerg
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 8:09 pm

LJ wrote:
Blerg wrote:
But could the Belgian government do much with 25%? Or did they ask for blocking rights like SPD wants in Germany? For me what's extremely interesting is that most other major airlines got aid without problem while LH is facing major problems even in its home market. Really interesting situation.


You cannot do not much with 25% but you do get a seat on the Board. As for AF/KL and IB, they probably have good contacts. Lufthansa has the problem that is has to deal with the German Austrian and Belgian governments, all just woke up and realised that they sold (or in case of Germany let it buy) their airline years ago without taking the necessary steps to safeguard its interests. The Dutch and French government both have a stake in AF/KL, thus no incentive for them to demand influence (they already have the direct contact with the AF/KL CEO). Moreover, they have a financial interest to approve a package. The same in Italy. Spain really needs IAG and thus agreed quickly. The UK is in a difficult position as aid for IAG will mean it have to give it to Virgin and easyJet as well. Norway has enough money and need air travel. As such saving the Norwegian part of Norwegian makes sense (and it's a way of rationalising that airline).


I understand all that and that's perfectly reasonable, I am just surprised that Germany is being so difficult (well, mostly SPD) when they profit the most from LH Group's success. I guess in the end it will all turn out ok but still, quite odd. We will have to wait and see how much longer Austrians and Belgians keep this up.
 
GLANKG
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 9:19 am

Re: Lufthansa: 10B EUR bailout - Update

Tue May 12, 2020 8:32 pm

https://www.ft.com/content/a58fdfe9-a4b ... 2090f41fed

“For years the airline industry was supreme and resisted calls to reduce emissions. Now they are coming cap in hand to ask for help and we can’t waste this chance,” said a senior EU official. Unlike other industries such as cars — where Brussels has wielded its regulatory clout with tough emissions targets — the EU has limited tools to get aviation to bow to green targets. At most, airlines are subject to the EU’s emissions trading scheme, which sets a market price on carbon for polluters.

With governments now forking out billions in bailouts, political pressure for a kerosene tax is also growing. Before the crisis hit, the likes of Frans Timmermans, commissioner in charge of the green deal, came out in favour of a kerosene tax that would specifically target airline emissions. Brussels is planning a review of its sensitive energy taxation directive next year in the hope that it could pave the way for an EU-wide airline levy.

Surely it's not unreasonable when governments move to prop up grounded carriers, thoughts turned to what taxpayers should demand in return.
P.S. it is about gradual and measured change towards less emission, not revolutionary slaughter of all short haul flying at once, it's not easy and it requires the whole EU to act together to avoid some countries cutting corners. But we have to start somewhere, today 60% of DB operations run on green energy and it expects to be 100% by 2038.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 13

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos