Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
aviator2000
Topic Author
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun May 20, 2018 11:19 am

Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:17 pm

In an interview with a Spanish newspaper Luis Gallego, current CEO of Iberia and set to become IAG's Chief executive next fall, commented on the future of Iberia, saying that the airline would shrink in the upcoming years and that the Air Europa adquisistion would be used to consolidate and strengthen the hub in Madrid. Gallego also mentioned that they didn't expect passenger numbers to reach 2019 levels untill at least 2023-24. With this, what movements should we expect from the rest of airlines in the group?
- Iberia: A340 retirement + MAD consolidation as a HUB with the help of AE
- British Airways: B747s gone? Dropping thin routes in its intercontinental network. Possible return to Gatwick?
- AerLingus: Focus on DUB, b757 retired?
- Vueling: severly affected until tourists recover confidence. Focus on Spain + BCN. Recover some of the routes operated by LEVEL Europe?
- Level (long haul): will IAG keep the brand + longhaul flying out of ORY+BCN?

Link to interview sum-up: https://www.investing.com/news/coronavi ... eo-2214383
Link to interview (SPANISH): https://elpais.com/economia/los-empresa ... ierra.html
 
Ishrion
Posts: 2566
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:27 pm

Didn’t Aer Lingus already retire its last 757?
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:44 pm

I expect about 10-12 747s to remain. BA has over 25 747s to retire all is a bit of a stretch. The high-Js are being replaced with the 77Ws. 4 expected this year with the first coming in August/September. With 8F/76J

I think most routes will remain but major reduced frequencies. Don’t expect more than 5 JFK flights a day MAX.

Aer lingus doesn’t need to do much in my opinion.

I think BA has the most work to do because their fleet is currently going through a restructuring so they’ll have to change plans. I.e what to retire what to hold on to, what leases not to extend etc.
 
Blerg
Posts: 3906
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:47 pm

Well I think the only certain thing at this point is that their Viennese adventure is officially over.

What will Willie Walsh do? Is he retiring or assuming another position?
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:47 pm

[*]
Blerg wrote:
Well I think the only certain thing at this point is that their Viennese adventure is officially over.

What will Willie Walsh do? Is he retiring or assuming another position?

Retiring in September
 
Blerg
Posts: 3906
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:51 pm

Opus99 wrote:
[*]
Blerg wrote:
Well I think the only certain thing at this point is that their Viennese adventure is officially over.

What will Willie Walsh do? Is he retiring or assuming another position?

Retiring in September


Thank you.
 
jghealey
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri May 11, 2018 5:46 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:55 pm

To me the obvious extra retirements would be the 747. They own them all, so they're easy to retire, and were already going to be retired by 2024 just when demand will start to recover. Their routes can easily be filled with other aircraft and most likely 777s. I'm sure many of their routes will be able to support a 747 as demand starts to recover, but you have to remember, would BA rather have 1 frequency with a 747 or several on smaller aircraft. The several frequency route means they can keep their advantage from the convenience perspective whilst also not letting go of any slots at Heathrow. Considering how inefficient and generally expensive to maintain the 747 is the small fleet option doesn't make sense to me. It makes so much more sense to cut down on fleet complexity and create added convenience at the same time.

Once demand starts to return the 777-9s will be coming in so they can reallocate slot capacity and return to 2019 levels relatively easily.

In the meantime as they're still taking delivery of A350s and 787s I would expect some 777-200s to be retired. Likewise at IB, the retirement of 17 A340-600s allows them to gradually restore capacity as more A350s come in.

I'd expect them to retire a handful of A320s across the group, mainly at BA and IB as that's where the oldest aircraft with expiring leases are, but short haul travel will recover more quickly so there is less of an urgent need for retirement. Maybe the A319s will go first. At Vueling the fleet is generally speaking newer so again no need for retirement, plus low prices are going to be crucial in the fight back for customers.
 
JFKIceman
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:00 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:01 pm

Opus99 wrote:
I expect about 10-12 747s to remain. BA has over 25 747s to retire all is a bit of a stretch. The high-Js are being replaced with the 77Ws. 4 expected this year with the first coming in August/September. With 8F/76J

I think most routes will remain but major reduced frequencies. Don’t expect more than 5 JFK flights a day MAX.

Aer lingus doesn’t need to do much in my opinion.

I think BA has the most work to do because their fleet is currently going through a restructuring so they’ll have to change plans. I.e what to retire what to hold on to, what leases not to extend etc.



I don't believe this. LHR-JFK-LHR is one of their most profitable routes. Im sure the B744's will be in the cycle consistently. As i get more info ill pass it along
 
User avatar
shamrock350
Posts: 5425
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:38 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:04 pm

Ishrion wrote:
Didn’t Aer Lingus already retire its last 757?

Yes. It was retired in late April and sent to the desert in early May. The pandemic had little to no effect on those plans, it just happened to coincide with the pre-planned retirement schedule.
Last edited by shamrock350 on Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
CarbonFibre
Posts: 707
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 4:02 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-plandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:05 pm

I can't see all of the 747s going at once.
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:05 pm

JFKIceman wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
I expect about 10-12 747s to remain. BA has over 25 747s to retire all is a bit of a stretch. The high-Js are being replaced with the 77Ws. 4 expected this year with the first coming in August/September. With 8F/76J

I think most routes will remain but major reduced frequencies. Don’t expect more than 5 JFK flights a day MAX.

Aer lingus doesn’t need to do much in my opinion.

I think BA has the most work to do because their fleet is currently going through a restructuring so they’ll have to change plans. I.e what to retire what to hold on to, what leases not to extend etc.



I don't believe this. LHR-JFK-LHR is one of their most profitable routes. Im sure the B744's will be in the cycle consistently. As i get more info ill pass it along

Yes it is, pre coronavirus. But I don’t see how in the near future they’re going to be filling 8 aircrafts a day to JFK? In these times? I doubt it
 
Blerg
Posts: 3906
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:12 pm

shamrock350 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
Didn’t Aer Lingus already retire its last 757?

Yes. It was retired in late April and sent to the desert in early May. The pandemic had little to no effect on those plans, it just happened to coincide with the pre-planned retirement schedule.


I am happy I managed to see it live before it was retired. How long did they operate it? It can't be more than two years.
 
aviator2000
Topic Author
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun May 20, 2018 11:19 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:14 pm

Blerg wrote:
shamrock350 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
Didn’t Aer Lingus already retire its last 757?

Yes. It was retired in late April and sent to the desert in early May. The pandemic had little to no effect on those plans, it just happened to coincide with the pre-planned retirement schedule.


I am happy I managed to see it live before it was retired. How long did they operate it? It can't be more than two years.


Ever since 2014, according to this article:
https://flyinginireland.com/2020/03/end ... er-lingus/
 
jghealey
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri May 11, 2018 5:46 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm

Opus99 wrote:
JFKIceman wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
I expect about 10-12 747s to remain. BA has over 25 747s to retire all is a bit of a stretch. The high-Js are being replaced with the 77Ws. 4 expected this year with the first coming in August/September. With 8F/76J

I think most routes will remain but major reduced frequencies. Don’t expect more than 5 JFK flights a day MAX.

Aer lingus doesn’t need to do much in my opinion.

I think BA has the most work to do because their fleet is currently going through a restructuring so they’ll have to change plans. I.e what to retire what to hold on to, what leases not to extend etc.



I don't believe this. LHR-JFK-LHR is one of their most profitable routes. Im sure the B744's will be in the cycle consistently. As i get more info ill pass it along

Yes it is, pre coronavirus. But I don’t see how in the near future they’re going to be filling 8 aircrafts a day to JFK? In these times? I doubt it

Aviation will probably recover but by the time it does, most of the 747s would have gone anyway even if they stuck to the original retirement schedule. The 777-9s will soon be coming in and that basically makes the need for the 747s redundant. I doubt BA could even fill 2-3 daily frequencies to JFK at the moment as the US is still very much showing no signs of recovery whatsoever. The US ban for Europe is still in place regardless and even if it wasn't no European passenger in their right mind would be heading to the US at the moment. As for the other way around as long as the travel ban is in place US citizens won't be visiting Europe either. That means for at least the foreseeable future (I'm talking next 6 months or so) demand is basically limited to emergency travel.

The recovery in frequencies will need to be gradual, there won't be some jump from 2 to 8 frequencies next year, especially not with 747s. I'd say we will probably see an increase of 2 frequencies per year, taking us to 2023 before we reach 8. The frequencies that there are will likely be filled with 777s and 787-9s.

Remember also that they have a fleet of 12 A380s if they really consider the demand to JFK to be big enough.
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:33 pm

jghealey wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
JFKIceman wrote:


I don't believe this. LHR-JFK-LHR is one of their most profitable routes. Im sure the B744's will be in the cycle consistently. As i get more info ill pass it along

Yes it is, pre coronavirus. But I don’t see how in the near future they’re going to be filling 8 aircrafts a day to JFK? In these times? I doubt it

Aviation will probably recover but by the time it does, most of the 747s would have gone anyway even if they stuck to the original retirement schedule. The 777-9s will soon be coming in and that basically makes the need for the 747s redundant. I doubt BA could even fill 2-3 daily frequencies to JFK at the moment as the US is still very much showing no signs of recovery whatsoever. The US ban for Europe is still in place regardless and even if it wasn't no European passenger in their right mind would be heading to the US at the moment. As for the other way around as long as the travel ban is in place US citizens won't be visiting Europe either. That means for at least the foreseeable future (I'm talking next 6 months or so) demand is basically limited to emergency travel.

The recovery in frequencies will need to be gradual, there won't be some jump from 2 to 8 frequencies next year, especially not with 747s. I'd say we will probably see an increase of 2 frequencies per year, taking us to 2023 before we reach 8. The frequencies that there are will likely be filled with 777s and 787-9s.

Remember also that they have a fleet of 12 A380s if they really consider the demand to JFK to be big enough.

I agree. They have 3 Freq scheduled for August. I think it will stay like that for a while.

They can’t use the 380 at JFK because terminal 7 AND I believe terminal 8 are not built for it
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 2630
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Re: Future of IAG post-plandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:40 pm

As others have mentioned, there is likely to be some movement of the fleet between OpCos, especially the narrowbodies. I think BA, EI and IB will have similar networks, but lower frequencies overall. Perhaps they will have more seasonal routes - for this summer BA LGW seems to be transplanted to LHR. If the 80/20 rule is maintained we can expect to see the BA A32x fleet remain almost the same in size, if not grow slightly to cover for a reduction in long-haul flying. I think most of the A319s were due to replaced by NEOs in the short term. As I say the 80/20 slot rule will determine much of the size and shape of BA.

CarbonFibre wrote:
I can't see all of the 747s going at once.

They are not currently doing any recurrent training on the 747 fleet, so make of that what you will. BA are/were big 747 and A380 operators, both of which will have a much smaller global fleet in the medium term. I wonder if that will encourage IAG to focus on the A330/A350 and 787/777 families for their long-haul fleets?

Overall IAG is fairly well placed to weather what will follow - LEVEL is their only significant underperforming area and LEVEL Europe has already been shut down. My feeling is that leisure travel will recover before business travel and VFR will be amongst the first to show signs of growth - for that reason Low Cost Long Haul might be a good space to be in.
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-plandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:42 pm

BrianDromey wrote:
As others have mentioned, there is likely to be some movement of the fleet between OpCos, especially the narrowbodies. I think BA, EI and IB will have similar networks, but lower frequencies overall. Perhaps they will have more seasonal routes - for this summer BA LGW seems to be transplanted to LHR. If the 80/20 rule is maintained we can expect to see the BA A32x fleet remain almost the same in size, if not grow slightly to cover for a reduction in long-haul flying. I think most of the A319s were due to replaced by NEOs in the short term. As I say the 80/20 slot rule will determine much of the size and shape of BA.

CarbonFibre wrote:
I can't see all of the 747s going at once.

They are not currently doing any recurrent training on the 747 fleet, so make of that what you will. BA are/were big 747 and A380 operators, both of which will have a much smaller global fleet in the medium term. I wonder if that will encourage IAG to focus on the A330/A350 and 787/777 families for their long-haul fleets?

Overall IAG is fairly well placed to weather what will follow - LEVEL is their only significant underperforming area and LEVEL Europe has already been shut down. My feeling is that leisure travel will recover before business travel and VFR will be amongst the first to show signs of growth - for that reason Low Cost Long Haul might be a good space to be in.

That’s exactly the plan. Minus the 330. BA has no need for it. Future long haul fleet will comprise of the Dreamliner set. (-8 to -10) 77W/779 and 350.
 
eurotrader85
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:45 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:51 pm

IMO from a BA perspective it makes more sense to get the frequency up and hold onto the slots then just add the capacity. That means the question mark is over the 380 fleet. It worked well for them in the good times, but now we are in the terrible. Its expensive and its cargo capability is weak. The 744 fleet is an obvious easier one as you can see across the IAG group, rightly so, the increased speed to get rid of gas guzzlers for cleaner/cheaper aircraft to run. Also what is the status of the MOU for the 737 Max jets? All this plus the obvious downing of the aircraft gives IAG an easy reason to walk away. Reality is we are all in guess mode atm to when traffic gets back to 1999 levels, whether its Airlines or passengers. There is no model that can account for where we are.
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:02 pm

eurotrader85 wrote:
IMO from a BA perspective it makes more sense to get the frequency up and hold onto the slots then just add the capacity. That means the question mark is over the 380 fleet. It worked well for them in the good times, but now we are in the terrible. Its expensive and its cargo capability is weak. The 744 fleet is an obvious easier one as you can see across the IAG group, rightly so, the increased speed to get rid of gas guzzlers for cleaner/cheaper aircraft to run. Also what is the status of the MOU for the 737 Max jets? All this plus the obvious downing of the aircraft gives IAG an easy reason to walk away. Reality is we are all in guess mode atm to when traffic gets back to 1999 levels, whether its Airlines or passengers. There is no model that can account for where we are.

With regards to the max the LOI is still very much in place. No further action will be taken until the MAX is recertified and I think action will be taken. IAG let A huge amount of options on the 320Neo for BA expire last year that was the first sign I knew they were serious. Secondly if you go back to June 2019. IAG awarded their component services agreement for the A320 and A320neo contract to Boeing According to Boeing that’s the first time that has ever happened. So I think they are very serious.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 7611
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:12 pm

jghealey wrote:
The recovery in frequencies will need to be gradual, there won't be some jump from 2 to 8 frequencies next year, especially not with 747s. I'd say we will probably see an increase of 2 frequencies per year, taking us to 2023 before we reach 8. The frequencies that there are will likely be filled with 777s and 787-9s.


I will take the other side of that argument. BA needs TATL frequencies to attract business travelers - essential to keeping average fares up. They need frequency to maintain connectivity. Business travelers won't tolerate a 6-hr connection at LHR if they can get shorter total travel times connecting in AMS/FRA/CDG.

As for the 77X coming... they won't be coming if they can't be financed. What has IAG said about capital spending for 2021, 2022, 2023? The math favoring expensive new asset with lower operating costs vs. paid-for, depreciated asset with higher op costs gets tossed on its head by a low utilization, cheap-fuel world.
 
jghealey
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri May 11, 2018 5:46 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:47 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
jghealey wrote:
The recovery in frequencies will need to be gradual, there won't be some jump from 2 to 8 frequencies next year, especially not with 747s. I'd say we will probably see an increase of 2 frequencies per year, taking us to 2023 before we reach 8. The frequencies that there are will likely be filled with 777s and 787-9s.


I will take the other side of that argument. BA needs TATL frequencies to attract business travelers - essential to keeping average fares up. They need frequency to maintain connectivity. Business travelers won't tolerate a 6-hr connection at LHR if they can get shorter total travel times connecting in AMS/FRA/CDG.

As for the 77X coming... they won't be coming if they can't be financed. What has IAG said about capital spending for 2021, 2022, 2023? The math favoring expensive new asset with lower operating costs vs. paid-for, depreciated asset with higher op costs gets tossed on its head by a low utilization, cheap-fuel world.

I did say in an earlier post that they needed frequencies... sorry if I wasn't clear. My point in the quoted post was that they cant keep several frequencies with the 747 as the post I was responding to had suggested. Frequencies are necessary but so is a gradual build up. The frequencies that there are will be filled by smaller planes. 2/3 frequencies through end 2020 or even into 2021 is entirely realistic based on the fact that business travel will be practically zero but obviously as soon as we start to recover there will inevitably be enough demand to support an increase.
 
ShamrockBoi330
Posts: 339
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:28 am

Re: Future of IAG post-plandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:12 pm

Opus99 wrote:
BrianDromey wrote:
As others have mentioned, there is likely to be some movement of the fleet between OpCos, especially the narrowbodies. I think BA, EI and IB will have similar networks, but lower frequencies overall. Perhaps they will have more seasonal routes - for this summer BA LGW seems to be transplanted to LHR. If the 80/20 rule is maintained we can expect to see the BA A32x fleet remain almost the same in size, if not grow slightly to cover for a reduction in long-haul flying. I think most of the A319s were due to replaced by NEOs in the short term. As I say the 80/20 slot rule will determine much of the size and shape of BA.

CarbonFibre wrote:
I can't see all of the 747s going at once.

They are not currently doing any recurrent training on the 747 fleet, so make of that what you will. BA are/were big 747 and A380 operators, both of which will have a much smaller global fleet in the medium term. I wonder if that will encourage IAG to focus on the A330/A350 and 787/777 families for their long-haul fleets?

Overall IAG is fairly well placed to weather what will follow - LEVEL is their only significant underperforming area and LEVEL Europe has already been shut down. My feeling is that leisure travel will recover before business travel and VFR will be amongst the first to show signs of growth - for that reason Low Cost Long Haul might be a good space to be in.

That’s exactly the plan. Minus the 330. BA has no need for it. Future long haul fleet will comprise of the Dreamliner set. (-8 to -10) 77W/779 and 350.


IAG certainly has room in its fleet, for EI.
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-plandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:13 pm

ShamrockBoi330 wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
BrianDromey wrote:
As others have mentioned, there is likely to be some movement of the fleet between OpCos, especially the narrowbodies. I think BA, EI and IB will have similar networks, but lower frequencies overall. Perhaps they will have more seasonal routes - for this summer BA LGW seems to be transplanted to LHR. If the 80/20 rule is maintained we can expect to see the BA A32x fleet remain almost the same in size, if not grow slightly to cover for a reduction in long-haul flying. I think most of the A319s were due to replaced by NEOs in the short term. As I say the 80/20 slot rule will determine much of the size and shape of BA.


They are not currently doing any recurrent training on the 747 fleet, so make of that what you will. BA are/were big 747 and A380 operators, both of which will have a much smaller global fleet in the medium term. I wonder if that will encourage IAG to focus on the A330/A350 and 787/777 families for their long-haul fleets?

Overall IAG is fairly well placed to weather what will follow - LEVEL is their only significant underperforming area and LEVEL Europe has already been shut down. My feeling is that leisure travel will recover before business travel and VFR will be amongst the first to show signs of growth - for that reason Low Cost Long Haul might be a good space to be in.

That’s exactly the plan. Minus the 330. BA has no need for it. Future long haul fleet will comprise of the Dreamliner set. (-8 to -10) 77W/779 and 350.


IAG certainly has room in its fleet, for EI.

Oh yes of course. I know EI will eventually get the 330neo
 
Jomar777
Posts: 543
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:32 pm

IMHO:

1) BA - will keep most of its present routes bearing in mind that they already pulled out of LGW. They might gradually return to LGW but on a very gradual scale and other routes will have reduced frequency until demand picks up. I really do not see any B747s returning unless if it is for "goodbye flights" maybe those that have a spacial livery. They have spare B777s coming from their LGW operations which, although on a different config, will cater for gradual increase until more B77Ws and the B779s come into play. Some old short haul planes might go to like the A319s. The only question mark for me is whether BA001 returns or no;
2) IB and UX - I believe that they will concentrate on the elimination of overlap between them in MAD (mainly...) save on routes where this is quite useful. For example, I do believe that IB will reduce frequence to South America to cater for Air Europa's presence. They are already retiring their A346s anyway (the will probably not return pos-COVID19 unless they do not have enough A359s to go along). It might depend, though on what happens with LATAM since, if they go for good, you might see IB plugging the gap by not reducing their frequency apart from COVID19 impact and keeping UX's (which definitely move from T2 to T3 in GRU for example);
3) Vueling: no change apart from what was caused by COVID19. They will probably recover since its their European LCC;
4) Air Lingus: will recover and operate all their routes with some reduced frequency;
5) LEVEL: big question mark. It was already a question mark given the acquisition of Air Europa. My bet is that they will close it down. Air Europa may fill the gap now.
 
Scotron12
Posts: 470
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:58 pm

BA's most important market is LHR-USA. Without this market, there's no need for the high J 747s...even the high J 777s.

The current travel ban is the big spoiler. Until the travel ban is lifted, it will cost IAG quite a bit

Fauci says the travel ban will last many months rather than weeks.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... he-british
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:08 pm

Scotron12 wrote:
BA's most important market is LHR-USA. Without this market, there's no need for the high J 747s...even the high J 777s.

The current travel ban is the big spoiler. Until the travel ban is lifted, it will cost IAG quite a bit

Fauci says the travel ban will last many months rather than weeks.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... he-british

I am not counting that ban being lifted before at least November
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7205
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:14 pm

Blerg wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
[*]
Blerg wrote:
Well I think the only certain thing at this point is that their Viennese adventure is officially over.

What will Willie Walsh do? Is he retiring or assuming another position?

Retiring in September


Thank you.

Plot twist. He goes to AA.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 965
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:10 pm

jghealey wrote:
To me the obvious extra retirements would be the 747. They own them all, so they're easy to retire, and were already going to be retired by 2024 just when demand will start to recover.

Isn't it impossible to tell when demand will start to recover? If a vaccin would be available early next year, why would it take three more years for travel to rebounce? As soon as flying is safe again, healthwise speaking, the public will start to book again.

jghealey wrote:
At Vueling the fleet is generally speaking newer so again no need for retirement, plus low prices are going to be crucial in the fight back for customers.

Why would low prices be crucial? During the past three months I saved quite a lot of money on airfare and hotels. Low prices are not crucial for me. What I really need to return to the sky is:
- open borders without health checks and covid tests
- no quarantine on arrival or coming home
- travel without mandatory face masks
 
User avatar
sjones1975
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:23 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:18 pm

Well, the pandemic has 'solved' BA's (and others') problem with lack of runways at LHR. ;-)
my longest flight in a 757: FRU-ADA-SNN-BWI
 
jghealey
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri May 11, 2018 5:46 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 6:19 am

MartijnNL wrote:
jghealey wrote:
To me the obvious extra retirements would be the 747. They own them all, so they're easy to retire, and were already going to be retired by 2024 just when demand will start to recover.

Isn't it impossible to tell when demand will start to recover? If a vaccin would be available early next year, why would it take three more years for travel to rebounce? As soon as flying is safe again, healthwise speaking, the public will start to book again.

jghealey wrote:
At Vueling the fleet is generally speaking newer so again no need for retirement, plus low prices are going to be crucial in the fight back for customers.

Why would low prices be crucial? During the past three months I saved quite a lot of money on airfare and hotels. Low prices are not crucial for me. What I really need to return to the sky is:
- open borders without health checks and covid tests
- no quarantine on arrival or coming home
- travel without mandatory face masks

The world and its population have taken a huge financial hit from the virus, it's not like that's going to suddenly change overnight as soon as the vaccine comes. I'm not saying demand won't come but the most likely prediction at this moment in time is 2023-4.

As for low prices, they'll help to spur demand for leisure especially as now many people will perhaps not be able to afford what they used to, due to pay decrease / unemployment, etc.
 
Amsterdam
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 12:52 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:18 am

These 2023/24 commemts are based not on facts. They cant know. Next summer things might be really good again.
And they keep saying 2019 levels, but 2017 and 2018 where already fantastic years. Getting back to 2017/18 levels is already great. De CEOs keep saying 2023/24 so they can fire more people.
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 8:33 am

sjones1975 wrote:
Well, the pandemic has 'solved' BA's (and others') problem with lack of runways at LHR. ;-)


I think an interesting thing to watch will be what happens at LGW (for IAG brand in particular, as well as others) over the next 5 year period and how that affects IAG when we are back in normal times thereafter.

Re airline plans at LGW - On the debit side, we know VS have gone, we think Norwegian will reduce their presence and we don’t yet know what BA intends but a reduced presence seems likely. On the credit side, EZY intend to close their base at STN (presumably to fortify LGW and LTN), and Wizz and Ryanair have made public comments about expanding into LGW.

I think it is reasonable to suppose that any spare capacity created at LGW by the withdrawal of airlines such as BA will be taken up by the likes of EZY, Ryanair and Wizz reasonably quickly. So, when demand gets back to 2019 levels (as noted above even 2017/18 levels) where do BA / IAG go if they are locked out of expanding at LHR or LGW? And how do they go about it (eg EI at DUB? BA at STN? Level?)
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4136
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 8:37 am

MartijnNL wrote:
Isn't it impossible to tell when demand will start to recover? If a vaccin would be available early next year, why would it take three more years for travel to rebounce? As soon as flying is safe again, healthwise speaking, the public will start to book again.


The vaccine is just wishful thinking. The fastest vaccine ever developed took 5 years, which was already a record pace. Then you need to produce and distribute enough to vaccinate 7 billion people, which could take a decade or more.
Then you have the economy crashing like in 2007. That mess took 7 years to recover from, and this is worse. Plus, the virus is accelerating faster than ever before, just Europe and parts of Asia have got it under control.

Face it, we won't be back to business as usual "next summer".

If you ask me, we are lucky if we return to 2000 levels, 2019 or even 2018 or 2017 is highly unrealistic.
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 8:44 am

VSMUT wrote:
MartijnNL wrote:
Isn't it impossible to tell when demand will start to recover? If a vaccin would be available early next year, why would it take three more years for travel to rebounce? As soon as flying is safe again, healthwise speaking, the public will start to book again.


The vaccine is just wishful thinking. The fastest vaccine ever developed took 5 years, which was already a record pace. Then you need to produce and distribute enough to vaccinate 7 billion people, which could take a decade or more.
Then you have the economy crashing like in 2007. That mess took 7 years to recover from, and this is worse. Plus, the virus is accelerating faster than ever before, just Europe and parts of Asia have got it under control.

Face it, we won't be back to business as usual "next summer".

If you ask me, we are lucky if we return to 2000 levels, 2019 or even 2018 or 2017 is highly unrealistic.

AstraZeneca vaccine are stage 3 trials (About to start production). If the clinical trials are successful is there something else that constitutes it taking 5 years. I assume vaccines that have taken 5 years we didn’t have the technology we do now nor was there the urgency. I don’t know any virus in mordent times that has caused as much disruption and life loss like coronavirus. If we have constant unsuccessful vaccine trials then yes. But if they are successful then what next?
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 8:53 am

Opus99 wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
MartijnNL wrote:
Isn't it impossible to tell when demand will start to recover? If a vaccin would be available early next year, why would it take three more years for travel to rebounce? As soon as flying is safe again, healthwise speaking, the public will start to book again.


The vaccine is just wishful thinking. The fastest vaccine ever developed took 5 years, which was already a record pace. Then you need to produce and distribute enough to vaccinate 7 billion people, which could take a decade or more.
Then you have the economy crashing like in 2007. That mess took 7 years to recover from, and this is worse. Plus, the virus is accelerating faster than ever before, just Europe and parts of Asia have got it under control.

Face it, we won't be back to business as usual "next summer".

If you ask me, we are lucky if we return to 2000 levels, 2019 or even 2018 or 2017 is highly unrealistic.

AstraZeneca vaccine are stage 3 trials (About to start production). If the clinical trials are successful is there something else that constitutes it taking 5 years. I assume vaccines that have taken 5 years we didn’t have the technology we do now nor was there the urgency. I don’t know any virus in mordent times that has caused as much disruption and life loss like coronavirus. If we have constant unsuccessful vaccine trials then yes. But if they are successful then what next?


https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/basics/test-approve.html

Here is the way of developing a vaccine and the regulatory process.

Now of course certain steps can be fast tracked but there is a real problem: Liability.
This is especially big in the US. So long term effect trials are somewhat necessary. So a fast tracked vaccine bears the risk of long term side effects that the manufacturer could be made liable for. This risk will either be priced into the vaccine what will make it not affordable for most of the population (or really really expensive for the govt to distribute) or the government guarantees to take over the tap if something goes wrong what could lead to lower standards as the risk is not with the manufacturer.
So yes the vaccine could be ready sooner but it might not be safe or not work with certain groups or could be dangerous in combination with certain medications etc.
I would never agree to take any fast tracked drug, no matter how promising it sounds first.
 
tobsw
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:29 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:15 am

Vaccine developments are not taking any short-cuts. From authorities and Government institutions, paperwork for COVID-19 vaccine development is being prioritised, but NO short-cuts are being made in the actual development.

A vaccine needs to be efficient (needs to provide immunity), reliable (that immunity is sustained across individuals) and SAFE (no side effects). And of course, any consequences of having a vaccine shot must be milder than suffering the disease itself. Let's say there's a vaccine for COVID-19, but taking it will cause you to have the same symptoms and same mortality rate than suffering the disease itself. This of course, would fail the vaccine development process.

Vaccine is just a long-term goal... press should prioritise on disease treatment and antivirals development (IMHO)... however, as it's the case with other coronaviruses... the success track record for developing these are close to zero. That's why the situation we are in is how it is - the only possible way to fight the virus now is to contain it. Many countries in Asia - which have experience with these emerging diseases - reacted very promptly. Others, like Europe and other Asian countries, reacted late, but still managed to control it. While other countries, mainly America (whole continent), it's just a total disaster. Zero efforts in virus containment. If people don't embrace and realise that the only way now to fight the virus is actually hijacking the way the virus is transmitted, there's nothing we can do.

Long haul passenger civil aviation will take a LONG time to recover. No country, which has the virus more or less under control, will let in citizens from countries which haven't got the virus under control.

In that matter, IAG is -perhaps- the worst affected airline group worldwide. Their focus on shuttling between Europe and America makes it an extremely weak player in current conditions. If there's no drastic U turn in Americas policy (both, north, central and south America) I don't see - honestly - IAG surviving in its current form.

LEVEL is likely to go under - wait until Spain stop the current COVID-19 furlough benefit. If IAG wants, in say 2-3 years another long-haul low cost carrier, they can always build LEVEL in a couple of months (remember, it's just a brand, it's not an airline). Back then they created LEVEL in a couple of months.

I also expect IB, BA and EI requesting state aid, like other traditional European carriers... their costs are elevated and their business model is not to shuttle tourists around Europe. Of course, prior to that, IB will have to acquire Air Europa - there doesn't seem to be an easy way out to escape the deal.
Last edited by tobsw on Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4136
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:17 am

Opus99 wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
MartijnNL wrote:
Isn't it impossible to tell when demand will start to recover? If a vaccin would be available early next year, why would it take three more years for travel to rebounce? As soon as flying is safe again, healthwise speaking, the public will start to book again.


The vaccine is just wishful thinking. The fastest vaccine ever developed took 5 years, which was already a record pace. Then you need to produce and distribute enough to vaccinate 7 billion people, which could take a decade or more.
Then you have the economy crashing like in 2007. That mess took 7 years to recover from, and this is worse. Plus, the virus is accelerating faster than ever before, just Europe and parts of Asia have got it under control.

Face it, we won't be back to business as usual "next summer".

If you ask me, we are lucky if we return to 2000 levels, 2019 or even 2018 or 2017 is highly unrealistic.

AstraZeneca vaccine are stage 3 trials (About to start production). If the clinical trials are successful is there something else that constitutes it taking 5 years. I assume vaccines that have taken 5 years we didn’t have the technology we do now nor was there the urgency. I don’t know any virus in mordent times that has caused as much disruption and life loss like coronavirus. If we have constant unsuccessful vaccine trials then yes.


The vaccine that took 5 years was the one against the Ebola epidemic in 2014, and was developed on the basis of several decades of research. We've had knowledge of Coronavirus for 7 months.


Opus99 wrote:
But if they are successful then what next?


The world only has the capacity to produce 5 billion vaccines per year. The majority of which are necessary somewhere, like the 1,5 billion flu vaccinations. Even if they halted all vaccines bar the flu, that's 2 years worth of production, in which time nobody is going to get any other vaccinations. That means risking letting nice stuff like Measles, Tetanus, Polio, Rubella, Chickenpox and Diphteria to run amok.
 
flyjay123
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 11:07 am

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:24 am

VSMUT wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
VSMUT wrote:

The vaccine is just wishful thinking. The fastest vaccine ever developed took 5 years, which was already a record pace. Then you need to produce and distribute enough to vaccinate 7 billion people, which could take a decade or more.
Then you have the economy crashing like in 2007. That mess


The We've had knowledge of Coronavirus for 7 months.


[quote="Opus99"

Coronavirus' have been known about since 1960's. A affective vaccine has so far never been found.
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:25 am

VSMUT wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
VSMUT wrote:

The vaccine is just wishful thinking. The fastest vaccine ever developed took 5 years, which was already a record pace. Then you need to produce and distribute enough to vaccinate 7 billion people, which could take a decade or more.
Then you have the economy crashing like in 2007. That mess took 7 years to recover from, and this is worse. Plus, the virus is accelerating faster than ever before, just Europe and parts of Asia have got it under control.

Face it, we won't be back to business as usual "next summer".

If you ask me, we are lucky if we return to 2000 levels, 2019 or even 2018 or 2017 is highly unrealistic.

AstraZeneca vaccine are stage 3 trials (About to start production). If the clinical trials are successful is there something else that constitutes it taking 5 years. I assume vaccines that have taken 5 years we didn’t have the technology we do now nor was there the urgency. I don’t know any virus in mordent times that has caused as much disruption and life loss like coronavirus. If we have constant unsuccessful vaccine trials then yes.


The vaccine that took 5 years was the one against the Ebola epidemic in 2014, and was developed on the basis of several decades of research. We've had knowledge of Coronavirus for 7 months.


Opus99 wrote:
But if they are successful then what next?


The world only has the capacity to produce 5 billion vaccines per year. The majority of which are necessary somewhere, like the 1,5 billion flu vaccinations. Even if they halted all vaccines bar the flu, that's 2 years worth of production, in which time nobody is going to get any other vaccinations. That means risking letting nice stuff like Measles, Tetanus, Polio, Rubella, Chickenpox and Diphteria to run amok.

oh okay, that makes sense, to be fair Ebola wasn't as widespread as coronavirus is, It usually clustered within Western Africa and died down pretty quickly, hence there was no world wide urgency to develop a vaccine.
 
davidjohnson6
Posts: 762
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:35 am

There isn't a comparable of a major pandemic in rich countries affecting aviation demand in recent years. We can however look back at recessions in 2009, 2002, 1991 and 1982 and see what happened to the number of people who flew via major airports. We can compare the number of years between peak-passengers just before a recession and the year that passengers reached the same level. It seems that 3 or 4 years is fairly common, but this varies a bit based on the major airport you choose. This suggests that demand not matching 2019 until maybe 2023 or 2024 is a plausible statement
 
Opus99
Posts: 732
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:40 am

davidjohnson6 wrote:
There isn't a comparable of a major pandemic in rich countries affecting aviation demand in recent years. We can however look back at recessions in 2009, 2002, 1991 and 1982 and see what happened to the number of people who flew via major airports. We can compare the number of years between peak-passengers just before a recession and the year that passengers reached the same level. It seems that 3 or 4 years is fairly common, but this varies a bit based on the major airport you choose. This suggests that demand not matching 2019 until maybe 2023 or 2024 is a plausible statement

But this makes me raise a question. That does a recovery now see us going back to flying though major airports as point to point demand maybe too low?
 
offloaded
Posts: 964
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:56 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:41 am

From ECTAA:

"Dear Members,



The airline Level Europe filed for insolvency and on 19 June 2020 insolvency proceedings were opened in relation to Level Europe GmbH https://cms.flyleveleurope.com/en/leveleurope

This affects only Level Europe with Vienna and Amsterdam operations, while Level still operates long haul flights out of Paris and Barcelona.

IATA confirmed to us that Level Europe did not participate in any BSP.



The email of the administrator is: [email protected]

There is a virtual creditor’s meeting on 27 July 2020.

Deadline to file claims is 15 July 2020.
To no one will we sell, or deny, or delay, right or justice - Magna Carta, 1215
 
User avatar
Aisak
Posts: 922
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:56 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:54 am

shamrock350 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
Didn’t Aer Lingus already retire its last 757?

Yes. It was retired in late April and sent to the desert in early May. The pandemic had little to no effect on those plans, it just happened to coincide with the pre-planned retirement schedule.


Did Aer Lingus have 757s of their own?? I thought the 4? of them were operated by ASL for the TATL short thin routes. Anyway, they couldn't go on using them for this purpose as US impossed a time limit on wetleasing of aircrafts under the EU-US open skies agreement.

eurotrader85 wrote:
IMO from a BA perspective it makes more sense to get the frequency up and hold onto the slots then just add the capacity. That means the question mark is over the 380 fleet. It worked well for them in the good times, but now we are in the terrible.

I could agree more with you on this. As much as I love aviation, routes and planing, I for sure would not enjoy working at BA these days. The uncertainty about the 80/20 rule on slots must be driving BA routing dpt. crazy.

There is nothing to guarantee that BA can get its hands on slots if flights are no longer scheduled. Look both VS and BA at LGW. They have stopped all longhaul flying there. What if some day over the next 2 years they want to come back, but the morning landing slots are taken by Wizz/Ryanair/Easyjet?
 
tobsw
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:29 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:01 am

I imagine de 80/20 slot rule exemption will be extended to include NW20/21 season. Probably the first 3-4 months of the NS20/21 season as well. I guess no Government wants to have planes flying just for the sake of it.
 
davidjohnson6
Posts: 762
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:07 am

If the 80/20 rule keeps on being suspended, it is possible an airline that wants slots goes to court
 
tobsw
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:29 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:17 am

davidjohnson6 wrote:
If the 80/20 rule keeps on being suspended, it is possible an airline that wants slots goes to court


The regulation is about the requirement to keep the right to use the slot in future seasons. Nothing to do with new slot assignments.

If the executive power decides to suspend the rule, based on demand, environmental and operations reasons, no judge will rule against that.
 
airhansa
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:26 am

I believe LGW will become a low cost carrier hub (or possibly just go under). IAG will attempt to purchase any slots becoming available at LHR as international carriers remove flights, allowing LGW slots to vacate. TUI may also just move to LHR if the slots become available.
 
davidjohnson6
Posts: 762
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:37 am

TUI will not pay a penny for Heathrow slots. The people who fly with TUI don't really care enoughabout the LHR v LGW thing to pay any extra.

If slots are available from LHR from the general pool without money changing hands and TUI can get enough of them to move their entire Gatwick operation, then the demand for air travel will be so awful that TUI will have gone bankrupt first
 
Scotron12
Posts: 470
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: Future of IAG post-pandemic

Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:47 am

Amsterdam wrote:
These 2023/24 commemts are based not on facts. They cant know. Next summer things might be really good again.
And they keep saying 2019 levels, but 2017 and 2018 where already fantastic years. Getting back to 2017/18 levels is already great. De CEOs keep saying 2023/24 so they can fire more people.


Yes, you are right, they are not based on facts. But in Walsh's talk with the Transport Select Committee, he said that the 2023/2024 timeframe was being best case. He added that full revovery could stretch out until 2025/2026!

Just yesterday, the EU reopened its borders for international travel. The USA is not included. That does not bode well for any carrier.

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