The new leisure subsidiary previously under the name Project Ocean, will be named Eurowings Discover.

Eurowings Discover will be based in Frankfurt plans to launch summer 2021 with three Airbus A330s to long-haul leisure markets. Longer-term a network from Munich is also envisaged.

https://www.aero.de/news-38319/Lufthans ... cover.html
https://www.air-journal.fr/2021-01-25-g ... 25561.html

=

Not very creative, nor very exciting.

And the difference from the regular Eurowings is?

No difference , same thing just the crew is getting paid even less! Lack of service, high pricing, welcome to Luftha...I mean Germanwin...ehmm, Chaoswings..no , Eurowings....Discover !

Seems they try the same thing every few years..... whether through LH or euro wings or something else.

Is this supposed to replace the Cityline longhaul subfleet (A343s)? Or the current Eurowings? Or both?

kh1 wrote:

Seems they try the same thing every few years..... whether through LH or euro wings or something else.

And do they ever make any profits on them? Not at all.

Its funny how they used to make handsome profits. Then the new CEO decided everything was wrong, turned half their hubs over to a low-cost subsidiary, cut service completely and they just keep making losses year after year. They keep trying to chase Ryanair to the bottom, a method that clearly isn't working.

Well it's a better name than Jump, that's for sure.

So what are we thinking, FRA-LPA/MCO/FLL/RSW/CUN? Could we finally see another connection from BDA to mainland Europe?

Anyone know about former Eurowings routes? DUS-EWR/JFK?

So is it that German labor is super expensive or is it that they aren't making enough revenue and thereby have to cut costs to try to get profit? What is the point behind all of these efforts to make subsidiaries every few years?

Really interested in where those 3rd and 4th FRA aircraft will go.

Based on EuroWings' current schedule:
RSW, MIA, JFK, and EWR will get the DUS based ships. Probably enough slack for an SFO or LAX rotation as well.

LAS, ANC, and PHX account for two FRA ships (because none of the above are daily)-- but that leaves considerable room for additions, while still allowing for an operational spare. Realistically, 2-3 new routes, when you factor in crew logistics, turnaround, and the fact that some may be 3x or 4x/wk. But LH still has quite a bit to work with there.

And they currently have no longhauls from BER, so will be interesting to see where those go.

Someone83 wrote:

And the difference from the regular Eurowings is?

Simplifying the Eurowings structure. The current Eurowings is, or rather was, flying a weird mix of SunExpress Germany and Brussels Airlines aircraft and crews on long haul. And of course it is impossible to make any money with this constellation. This new airline, it really is an entirely new airline with a separate AOC, gets rid of this structure. And any fair payment for that matter.

VSMUT wrote:

Its funny how they used to make handsome profits. Then the new CEO decided everything was wrong, turned half their hubs over to a low-cost subsidiary, cut service completely and they just keep making losses year after year. They keep trying to chase Ryanair to the bottom, a method that clearly isn't working.

The thing is, though, try making money with the business model inherited from Wolfgang Mayrhuber and Christoph Franz. Low Cost Carrier are here. They are for years now and they are here to stay. Aviation used to to be a thing for mail and freight - only on occasion was it that rich passengers could join the bumpy ride. All this changed, when global business took off and business had to be done face to face. Companies needed to spend big money on Business and First Class tickets for their employees as this was the only way to seal the deal. Of course there were also airlines which very much bet on the leisure (long haul) market, while providing a reasonable amount of service of reasonable money. But how many of them are left today?

With the irreversible rise in digital meeting systems, demand for such seats is dropping. That is, unfortunately, a fact. Leisure traffic will become ever increasingly important to airlines. And so are profit margins. You simply cannot fill an aircraft with people on a budget and provide service. Lufthansa needs to reposition itself as a premium carrier but that comes at the cost of fleet-size and passenger volume. If masses of people want to fly - and apparently they do - it needs to be affordable. And this can only be done with bare-bone fares.

BelowTheWing wrote:

The thing is, though, try making money with the business model inherited from Wolfgang Mayrhuber and Christoph Franz. Low Cost Carrier are here.

Low cost carriers have been here for over 20 years. They aren't a new phenomenon any more, nor were they when Mayrhuber left. What has changed is that Wolfgang and Christoph were both engineers who worked out in the real world and knew what they were dealing with. Carsten Spohr is a beancounter who spent his career cut off from the real world in a cubicle. And that's not something I came up with myself, I have it from a former CEO of an airline that worked closely with Lufthansa, who knew them all personally.

BelowTheWing wrote:

only on occasion was it that rich passengers could join the bumpy ride.

And that is where we are going to return to when airlines are soon going to find that they can't get enough new pilots who are willing to spend a million to earn less than unemployment benefits.

BelowTheWing wrote:

With the irreversible rise in digital meeting systems, demand for such seats is dropping. That is, unfortunately, a fact. Leisure traffic will become ever increasingly important to airlines. And so are profit margins. You simply cannot fill an aircraft with people on a budget and provide service. Lufthansa needs to reposition itself as a premium carrier but that comes at the cost of fleet-size and passenger volume. If masses of people want to fly - and apparently they do - it needs to be affordable. And this can only be done with bare-bone fares.

With the ever more decrepid service in those classes (or any class for that matter), it is clear why those travellers with money to spend are running away or saving the money altogether and flying with airlines that actually charge reasonable prices for the same lousy service.

BelowTheWing wrote:

Someone83 wrote:

And the difference from the regular Eurowings is?

Simplifying the Eurowings structure. The current Eurowings is, or rather was, flying a weird mix of SunExpress Germany and Brussels Airlines aircraft and crews on long haul. And of course it is impossible to make any money with this constellation. This new airline, it really is an entirely new airline with a separate AOC, gets rid of this structure. And any fair payment for that matter.

VSMUT wrote:

Its funny how they used to make handsome profits. Then the new CEO decided everything was wrong, turned half their hubs over to a low-cost subsidiary, cut service completely and they just keep making losses year after year. They keep trying to chase Ryanair to the bottom, a method that clearly isn't working.

The thing is, though, try making money with the business model inherited from Wolfgang Mayrhuber and Christoph Franz. Low Cost Carrier are here. They are for years now and they are here to stay. Aviation used to to be a thing for mail and freight - only on occasion was it that rich passengers could join the bumpy ride. All this changed, when global business took off and business had to be done face to face. Companies needed to spend big money on Business and First Class tickets for their employees as this was the only way to seal the deal. Of course there were also airlines which very much bet on the leisure (long haul) market, while providing a reasonable amount of service of reasonable money. But how many of them are left today?

With the irreversible rise in digital meeting systems, demand for such seats is dropping. That is, unfortunately, a fact. Leisure traffic will become ever increasingly important to airlines. And so are profit margins. You simply cannot fill an aircraft with people on a budget and provide service. Lufthansa needs to reposition itself as a premium carrier but that comes at the cost of fleet-size and passenger volume. If masses of people want to fly - and apparently they do - it needs to be affordable. And this can only be done with bare-bone fares.

You're making a jump from the business model in the 1920's to ULCC's of today.

Airlines like Delta made absolutely handsome profits selling top notch products.

LAX772LR wrote:

Really interested in where those 3rd and 4th FRA aircraft will go.

Based on EuroWings' current schedule:
RSW, MIA, JFK, and EWR will get the DUS based ships. Probably enough slack for an SFO or LAX rotation as well.

LAS, ANC, and PHX account for two FRA ships (because none of the above are daily)-- but that leaves considerable room for additions, while still allowing for an operational spare. Realistically, 2-3 new routes, when you factor in crew logistics, turnaround, and the fact that some may be 3x or 4x/wk. But LH still has quite a bit to work with there.

And they currently have no longhauls from BER, so will be interesting to see where those go.

PHX was removed from EW schedule last October, prior to the removal it was scheduled to start March 28, 2021.
LAS was also increased to 5 weekly from March 28.
ANC was announced (second attempt) on October 1st for June 3, 2021 service which has been pulled again.

I can't belive that someone gets paid for coming up with this nonsense

They are going to take Germans on vacation. To the places they have always gone.

VSMUT wrote:

BelowTheWing wrote:

The thing is, though, try making money with the business model inherited from Wolfgang Mayrhuber and Christoph Franz. Low Cost Carrier are here.

Low cost carriers have been here for over 20 years. They aren't a new phenomenon any more, nor were they when Mayrhuber left. What has changed is that Wolfgang and Christoph were both engineers who worked out in the real world and knew what they were dealing with. Carsten Spohr is a beancounter who spent his career cut off from the real world in a cubicle. And that's not something I came up with myself, I have it from a former CEO of an airline that worked closely with Lufthansa, who knew them all personally.

So, what big European legacy carriers were consistently making good margins in the last decade? I get that you don't like the service-lite model... but what has worked better?

Varsity1 wrote:

BelowTheWing wrote:

Someone83 wrote:

And the difference from the regular Eurowings is?

Simplifying the Eurowings structure. The current Eurowings is, or rather was, flying a weird mix of SunExpress Germany and Brussels Airlines aircraft and crews on long haul. And of course it is impossible to make any money with this constellation. This new airline, it really is an entirely new airline with a separate AOC, gets rid of this structure. And any fair payment for that matter.

VSMUT wrote:

Its funny how they used to make handsome profits. Then the new CEO decided everything was wrong, turned half their hubs over to a low-cost subsidiary, cut service completely and they just keep making losses year after year. They keep trying to chase Ryanair to the bottom, a method that clearly isn't working.

The thing is, though, try making money with the business model inherited from Wolfgang Mayrhuber and Christoph Franz. Low Cost Carrier are here. They are for years now and they are here to stay. Aviation used to to be a thing for mail and freight - only on occasion was it that rich passengers could join the bumpy ride. All this changed, when global business took off and business had to be done face to face. Companies needed to spend big money on Business and First Class tickets for their employees as this was the only way to seal the deal. Of course there were also airlines which very much bet on the leisure (long haul) market, while providing a reasonable amount of service of reasonable money. But how many of them are left today?

With the irreversible rise in digital meeting systems, demand for such seats is dropping. That is, unfortunately, a fact. Leisure traffic will become ever increasingly important to airlines. And so are profit margins. You simply cannot fill an aircraft with people on a budget and provide service. Lufthansa needs to reposition itself as a premium carrier but that comes at the cost of fleet-size and passenger volume. If masses of people want to fly - and apparently they do - it needs to be affordable. And this can only be done with bare-bone fares.

You're making a jump from the business model in the 1920's to ULCC's of today.

Airlines like Delta made absolutely handsome profits selling top notch products.

This is going off-topic, but:

(1) The USA is about a decade behind Europe in the growth of ULCCs. They are not yet anywhere near as ubiquitous in the US. This is just a hunch, but I think that the a Covid recovery (and drop in business traffic) could be something of a watershed moment for ULCCs in the US, but that is definitely a discussion for another thread.

(2) Delta is not “top notch”. They has provide a solid middle-of-the-market product that appeals to a broad cross-section of corporate and leisure travellers. In some ways this is what Lufthansa found was being increasingly threatened by the lower cost competition (circle back to 1)

Can/Will they fly to New York?

RyanairGuru wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

BelowTheWing wrote:

Simplifying the Eurowings structure. The current Eurowings is, or rather was, flying a weird mix of SunExpress Germany and Brussels Airlines aircraft and crews on long haul. And of course it is impossible to make any money with this constellation. This new airline, it really is an entirely new airline with a separate AOC, gets rid of this structure. And any fair payment for that matter.



The thing is, though, try making money with the business model inherited from Wolfgang Mayrhuber and Christoph Franz. Low Cost Carrier are here. They are for years now and they are here to stay. Aviation used to to be a thing for mail and freight - only on occasion was it that rich passengers could join the bumpy ride. All this changed, when global business took off and business had to be done face to face. Companies needed to spend big money on Business and First Class tickets for their employees as this was the only way to seal the deal. Of course there were also airlines which very much bet on the leisure (long haul) market, while providing a reasonable amount of service of reasonable money. But how many of them are left today?

With the irreversible rise in digital meeting systems, demand for such seats is dropping. That is, unfortunately, a fact. Leisure traffic will become ever increasingly important to airlines. And so are profit margins. You simply cannot fill an aircraft with people on a budget and provide service. Lufthansa needs to reposition itself as a premium carrier but that comes at the cost of fleet-size and passenger volume. If masses of people want to fly - and apparently they do - it needs to be affordable. And this can only be done with bare-bone fares.

You're making a jump from the business model in the 1920's to ULCC's of today.

Airlines like Delta made absolutely handsome profits selling top notch products.

This is going off-topic, but:

(1) The USA is about a decade behind Europe in the growth of ULCCs. They are not yet anywhere near as ubiquitous in the US. This is just a hunch, but I think that the a Covid recovery (and drop in business traffic) could be something of a watershed moment for ULCCs in the US, but that is definitely a discussion for another thread.

(2) Delta is not “top notch”. They has provide a solid middle-of-the-market product that appeals to a broad cross-section of corporate and leisure travellers. In some ways this is what Lufthansa found was being increasingly threatened by the lower cost competition (circle back to 1)

The USA doesn't have the population density to support ULCC point to point service. PDEW between small to midsize US cities is often under 100 passengers per day, sometimes far less.

Most people / organisation learn from their mistakes. Lufthansa does not.

They launch every 2 year a new Germanwings / Eurowings DUS / Eurowings FRA etc. It is always the same approach; try to solve their high cost problem by introducing an airline charging slightly less to the passengers while offering them a very degraded service compared to a normal legacy carrier.

The result is highly predictable; it will not work this time either. Tut mir leid, Carsten.

RyanairGuru wrote:

(1) The USA is about a decade behind Europe in the growth of ULCCs. They are not yet anywhere near as ubiquitous in the US.

Nor will they likely ever be, since the US population density is barely 1/3rd of the EU's (34 per km/sq, vs 117 km/sq); so it's a bit unrealistic to make direct comparisons, in regard to being "behind."

The US isn't at peak saturation for ULCC service, which is what the likes of Breeze is banking on.... but it's still rather doubtful that we'll see much more than supplementation of current flows: the two ocean coasts, intra-California, intra-Texas, intra-Florida, and very small amount of intra-Midwest or intra-Southeast outside of FL.

Varsity1 wrote:

The USA doesn't have the population density to support ULCC point to point service.

Obviously it does, seeing as it's got several, and among them is its fastest growing (and marginally most profitable) major airline for years on end. Just that that capability is generally limited to the coasts, and the interiors of the three largest states.

RyanairGuru wrote:

(2) Delta is not “top notch”. They has provide a solid middle-of-the-market product that appeals to a broad cross-section of corporate and leisure travellers.

And in the last half decade, delivers them more money than nearly all other similar carriers on the planet, even accounting for size variances.... so gonna go out on a limb and say that their definition of "top" is different than yours, as I'm sure they care fare more than the $$$ than who's got a few inches more seats, or whose FA's smile better.

m007j wrote:

So is it that German labor is super expensive or is it that they aren't making enough revenue and thereby have to cut costs to try to get profit? What is the point behind all of these efforts to make subsidiaries every few years?

Per one of the offered articles;

https://www.air-journal.fr/2021-01-25-groupe-lufthansa-ocean-sappellera-eurowings-discover-5225561.html"Les syndicats sont vent debout contre cette nouvelle organisation, qui entrainerait de facto des baisses de salaires : pour les PNC par exemple, UFO a expliqué à aero.de que le salaire de base serait de 2000 euros par mois pour 75 heures – avec initialement un temps partiel à 70%, donc un salaire brut de 1400 euros. « Dans le sillage de la crise, le groupe tente de concrétiser son projet Océan pour une nouvelle fois créer des emplois sans l’influence des syndicats », accuse UFO."

So, it seems as if the move is to cut out the Unions ('accuse UFO'), and also reduce costs the base salary would be 2,000 euros per month for 75 hours - initially with a 70% part-time, therefore a gross salary of 1400 euros). I would really appreciate our members more closely versed in the living costs/standards and wages/expectations for the nation/region to be able to provide a more fleshed out reality of how this compares - to the past contract/working conditions, to competing offers/carriers, and to the current realities.

armagnac2010 wrote:

Most people / organisation learn from their mistakes. Lufthansa does not.

They launch every 2 year a new Germanwings / Eurowings DUS / Eurowings FRA etc. It is always the same approach; try to solve their high cost problem by introducing an airline charging slightly less to the passengers while offering them a very degraded service compared to a normal legacy carrier.

The result is highly predictable; it will not work this time either. Tut mir leid, Carsten.

What does this mean : Tut mir leid, Carsten ? As a German I pretty good understand what Spohr has in his mind ! Since he acted as CEO the LH Group always had a net profit over 1 billion € at least ! ( so much for the beancounter therory )
Covid 19 changed alot in the industry. Business travelers will be more absent and his job is to keep the campony alive and Condor's reaction to Eurowings Discover says it all !

Related, from the same article;

https://www.air-journal.fr/2021-01-25-groupe-lufthansa-ocean-sappellera-eurowings-discover-5225561.htmlAutre obstacle pour Eurowings Discover, la plainte pour pratique monopolistique et cartel déposée contre le groupe Lufthansa par la rivale Condor,... « Cette étape est devenue nécessaire parce que Lufthansa a poursuivi une stratégie d’abus à grande échelle dans laquelle elle exploite sa position de monopole sur le trafic intérieur allemand, ainsi que sa position dominante dans le trafic européen », a justifié la filiale du groupe Thomas Cook.

Thus, the complaint for monopoly and cartel practice has been filed against the Lufthansa group by the rival Condor (Thomas Cook).

Wow, also another interesting angle - as this would obviously have broad reaching effects on the German market, especially at such a crucial time. I wonder what some of the most likely remedies would be?

Also, of note...

https://www.air-journal.fr/2021-01-25-groupe-lufthansa-ocean-sappellera-eurowings-discover-5225561.html
conservant a priori la configuration tri-classe des A330-300 d’Eurowings (mais avec une livrée portant le mot Discover).

Umm, 3 classes? Business, Economy Plus, and Economy?

Is it safe to assume that they're going to takeover the A330s that used to be operated by SunExpress Germany?

MIflyer12 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

BelowTheWing wrote:

The thing is, though, try making money with the business model inherited from Wolfgang Mayrhuber and Christoph Franz. Low Cost Carrier are here.

Low cost carriers have been here for over 20 years. They aren't a new phenomenon any more, nor were they when Mayrhuber left. What has changed is that Wolfgang and Christoph were both engineers who worked out in the real world and knew what they were dealing with. Carsten Spohr is a beancounter who spent his career cut off from the real world in a cubicle. And that's not something I came up with myself, I have it from a former CEO of an airline that worked closely with Lufthansa, who knew them all personally.

So, what big European legacy carriers were consistently making good margins in the last decade? I get that you don't like the service-lite model... but what has worked better?

Agreed. Consumers have moved on to prioritising low fares over frills. You can love it or hate it but you can't turn back that tide. If you want to compete on short haul routes, you have to do it price. The few people happy to pay more aren't going to cut it.

A little off topic but at least one route is working for Eurowings. FRA-WDH

https://www.namibian.com.na/98209/read/ ... to-Namibia

Quite how going from three to five is "doubling" I'm not sure but I do know that the current flights are full.

I think LH is right in its assumption that they need to strengthen their leisure footprint, also in order for them to drive in the post C19 world. The service their competitors are offering, DE and X3 (if they start long haul ops from Germany) is not necessarily better than what is being proposed at EW Discover. Therefore this seems to be the level of service that the long haul leisure market is expecting and what potential customers are willing to pay for.

The only question I have in my mind is why LH does not just simply enter the long haul leisure market through the existing EW AOC and framework, but rather create again a new airline under a new AOC?

EW is already appalling. Never had such a bad flight than with EW. I still do not believe this is the way forward. I understand the issues that you are closing in on a commodity product with little means of differentiation, but nevertheless I expected more.

TheSonntag wrote:

EW is already appalling. Never had such a bad flight than with EW. I still do not believe this is the way forward. I understand the issues that you are closing in on a commodity product with little means of differentiation, but nevertheless I expected more.

Now that Air Berlin is gone Eurowings doesn’t even have to try anymore.

AB was a good, safe and friendly airline with just a disastrous management and business strategy. It could have worked if they didn’t change strategy every year.

A.net seems to have more than its fair share of people who expect 5 star service when flying. Air Berlin may have provided the service you wanted, but they lost large amounts of money for many years and eventually went bankrupt. Aviation is not some magic industry - it has to follow the normal rules of economics, namely that while it can have the occasional loss-making year, airlines have to make a profit most years. If you want reliably excellent customer service - then buy a business class ticket on Lufthansa

In 2019, one of the most profitable airlines in Europe was Ryanair - I struggle to accept that Eurowings gives consistently and significantly worse customer service than Ryanair

I think when you want to argue about ULCC and Legacy airlines on how they make money, there are several points to consider:

1, Inflation and CPI.
You must wonder what tosh I am on. But consider this, when ULCC and LCC is booming back 20 years to last decade, people's average income is much lower in many European countries, especially eastern block and peripheral to the secondary markets.. But thanks to the several rounds of quantitative easing, Gold price spikes, Oil shock after 2011 and minimum wage increases, if we see in a particular market a €500 return air fare was considered expensive by 60% of the consumer, after 2%-3% CPI increase year after year, a €500 return air fare today is really not that much, and may only be considered as expensive by less than 35% of the consumer. So 10-15 years, a further discount of €50 might make an average consumer going to LCC or ULCC in exchange of complimentary food and beverage and extra 2-3 inches of comfort, it MAY no longer be the case today.

2, Location and Convenience
LCC and ULCC boom in Europe also has the advantage of location and convenience. The case of British aviation is the best prove. Look at Ryanair, its success is not in London Heathrow, Gatwick nor a hub. Its success is linked to providing direct link from secondary British airports to Ireland, Poland and sun destinations. It went to Gatwick, but could only support a Gatwick-Dublin route. It has a large footprint in Dublin and Stanstead but could not operate neither airports as transfer hub. Its success is simplified point to point operation bypass the mega hubs. Whereas Eurowings Discover, it already operates from an expensive hub airport, it means its price structure will be higher than LCC or ULCC from the airport charges and landing fees alone. Whereas Ryanair and Wizz can get local airport subsidies and support as often they are the only scheduled airlines there, Eurowings Discover and LEVEL etc do not have that luxury. So it is always questionable why a legacy carrier would compete with LCC/ULCC as they hardly touch their core market. The legacy carrier exited the market as it is not enough money for them and their cost is high to operate p2p routes. Legacy carrier needs to recognise that they can not compete with a LCC unless they abandon the hub structure and cost structure completely.

3, Profit center
In legacy airlines, business traffic is important in past decades because it provides last minute purchases. It is not very often but it is important. The business 101 in US legacy airline system is as follows: the first 50% of the seats sold are loss making. The next 30-35% makes even. And the last minute 15%-20% of the premier seats starts to see a small profit. So the airline emphasis the importance of the last 15-20% premier sales. From a cash price point of view, the business/first class ticket are subsidising a lot of economy/coach ticket sales. So what British Airways had done in history was to go for premier heavy. It reduced the coach section by half, put in a lot of premier seats and squeezed in premier economy. There are pros and cons for airlines to go premium heavy. We don't need to discuss here. What I am trying to say, using the example of BA is that you can also achieve profitability by not chasing the loss making market, instead, trying to up your games in providing more accessible premier seats. Sure, the average price of business/first is becoming cheaper and cheaper, but remember, the CPI are rising in last decade and wages are growing, at one point there would be a golden cross that there would be more flyers consider a €1500 return business class ticket super dirt cheap than 10 years ago. That is when a premier legacy carrier get its reward and the 10% premier seats carrier would get punished as they would be stuck with 90% of the seats in the loss making market. Sure BA has the advantage of owning LHR. But if it had not gone through the premier heavy route, many secondary routes it operated pre Covid would never be possible.

Of course Covid will change everything I said above. But we need legacy carriers to be legacy and LCC to be LCC. With choices consumers benefit. If Legacy operate as LCC in order to chase LCC away, flyers suffers and the market suffers. Legacy pretends to be LCC only benefits the real LCC, it means LCC can raise the price on the routes legacy operates towards the legacy level and still be able to steal the passengers from the legacy. Would bean counters realise that? I highly doubt it.

PM wrote:

A little off topic but at least one route is working for Eurowings. FRA-WDH

https://www.namibian.com.na/98209/read/ ... to-Namibia

Quite how going from three to five is "doubling" I'm not sure but I do know that the current flights are full.

Or they're trying to dump capacity and push the few other carriers on this route out. The only other non-stop option from Europe is Air Namibia to FRA. One-stop options are also limited, with KL (via LAD), BA or LH (via JNB), ET (via ADD) or QR (via DOH).

If one or two competitors give up, yields could be sufficient for EW to make money. Air Namibia in particular is reported to be on the brink of bankruptcy.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

A.net seems to have more than its fair share of people who expect 5 star service when flying. Air Berlin may have provided the service you wanted, but they lost large amounts of money for many years and eventually went bankrupt. Aviation is not some magic industry - it has to follow the normal rules of economics, namely that while it can have the occasional loss-making year, airlines have to make a profit most years. If you want reliably excellent customer service - then buy a business class ticket on Lufthansa

In airberlin's case, there were very murky financial dealings as the holding company was based in Florida. Its ill-fated merger with dba and then Germania was the nail in the coffin. Some operational decisions on financial level were questionable. It went too fast by merging with smaller carriers while its merger with dba was still trying to sort out itself. And the delay of new Berlin airport really damped its ambition and changed the course of history.

I am sure some Germany based a.netters can tell you more. If airberlin did not pursuing all those smaller carriers in Europe like Etihad, it would have survived as a smaller carrier.

chonetsao wrote:

davidjohnson6 wrote:

A.net seems to have more than its fair share of people who expect 5 star service when flying. Air Berlin may have provided the service you wanted, but they lost large amounts of money for many years and eventually went bankrupt. Aviation is not some magic industry - it has to follow the normal rules of economics, namely that while it can have the occasional loss-making year, airlines have to make a profit most years. If you want reliably excellent customer service - then buy a business class ticket on Lufthansa

In airberlin's case, there were very murky financial dealings as the holding company was based in Florida. Its ill-fated merger with dba and then Germania was the nail in the coffin. Some operational decisions on financial level were questionable. It went too fast by merging with smaller carriers while its merger with dba was still trying to sort out itself. And the delay of new Berlin airport really damped its ambition and changed the course of history.

I am sure some Germany based a.netters can tell you more. If airberlin did not pursuing all those smaller carriers in Europe like Etihad, it would have survived as a smaller carrier.

Air Berlin never acquired or had any ownership over Germania.

Air Berlin’s primary issue was that it was always confused on what exactly it wanted to be (LCC, leisure focus, traditional, hybrid?) which of course meant it did nothing particularly well and just confused customers.

mxaxai wrote:

PM wrote:

A little off topic but at least one route is working for Eurowings. FRA-WDH

https://www.namibian.com.na/98209/read/ ... to-Namibia

Quite how going from three to five is "doubling" I'm not sure but I do know that the current flights are full.

Or they're trying to dump capacity and push the few other carriers on this route out. The only other non-stop option from Europe is Air Namibia to FRA. One-stop options are also limited, with KL (via LAD), BA or LH (via JNB), ET (via ADD) or QR (via DOH).

If one or two competitors give up, yields could be sufficient for EW to make money. Air Namibia in particular is reported to be on the brink of bankruptcy.

Well...

Air Namibia haven't operated the FRA route for months and won't be doing so any time soon.

QR haven't been seen at WDH for months and the earliest they may return is April.

KLM have gone and the rumour is they won't be coming back.

Flights between WDH and JNB are very few. (Just Airlink, as far as I know.)

So the only other scheduled service into WDH is ET and I don't see them being squeezed out.

My guess is that EW are making money on the WDH route and will make more in March and April with five flights a week.

VSMUT wrote:

Low cost carriers have been here for over 20 years. They aren't a new phenomenon any more, nor were they when Mayrhuber left. What has changed is that Wolfgang and Christoph were both engineers who worked out in the real world and knew what they were dealing with. Carsten Spohr is a beancounter who spent his career cut off from the real world in a cubicle. And that's not something I came up with myself, I have it from a former CEO of an airline that worked closely with Lufthansa, who knew them all personally.

When Mayrhuber left, LCC were not yet so much into the lucrative business-model as, for example, easyJet is nowadays. Nor were they ever so present at big international airports, such as Frankfurt, Madrid, Rome, etc. As a matter of fact, Ryanair was still very much subsidized by local governments for flying to secondary airports at that time. The market share and - most importantly - the business attitude of LCC have changed in the last ten years since Mayrhuber has left. And Franz did little to foresee the changing environment. Spohr, and at this point, I'd like to point out that I am not a fan of him either, took the seat of a company that was under pressure from growing competition. With no notable changes in any direction. People tend to forget. The "race to the bottom" is the result of a growing demand for cheap seats in an expensive to operate industry.

VSMUT wrote:

And that is where we are going to return to when airlines are soon going to find that they can't get enough new pilots who are willing to spend a million to earn less than unemployment benefits.

I highly doubt that. There are still plenty of desperate young pilots looking for a jump into the cockpit. It is an unfortunate circumstance, but it is a fact. And especially with the massive lay-offs that have been done and lay ahead of us. Again, I do not approve of this exploitation, but it's the sad reality.

VSMUT wrote:

With the ever more decrepid service in those classes (or any class for that matter), it is clear why those travellers with money to spend are running away or saving the money altogether and flying with airlines that actually charge reasonable prices for the same lousy service.

Is that so? Do tell me, where they actually are running to. Other than ZOOM, Hangouts, Skype, or Teams. Because that is where all this is headed for. First Class is dead and Business Class will play a significantly smaller role in the pursuit of revenue. Simply because the passengers are missing. What's left is the growing demand for leisure travel. And travelers with money, well, they fly general aviation anyway.

Varsity1 wrote:

You're making a jump from the business model in the 1920's to ULCC's of today.

Airlines like Delta made absolutely handsome profits selling top notch products.

I did not. I pointed out that flying was never something for the masses. Until people noticed that those flying machines can be used to make business all around the world. At this point, airlines began to offer good service to well-paying customers and decided to fill the rest of the aircraft with economy seats. Economy Class, for legacy carriers that is, was always about making additional profit. That is where the massive boom came from. Suddenly, people who could not afford a ticket could fly. Because the economy ticket was - to some extend - subsidized by the business and first-class tickets. Business Class paid for the flight. The majority of people cannot and will never be able to afford tickets that pay for the flight. Unless you cut corners with operating costs and service. And that is what LCC did. And this is also exactly, what leisure airlines do. And we will end up with a significant shift in market share between Premium Carrier and Low Cost / Leisure Carrier. Premium Carriers will remain. But way smaller than they are today. The rest will be covered by Low Cost and Leisure Carriers.

And Delta, well, I like them. And I know them. Very well, in fact. But they do not offer top-notch - Delta offers a decent product and they try to improve themselves. But they are not always what I'd call affordable. Furthermore, Delta is able to significantly cut costs for fuel (or increase revenue if you shift perspectives) with their very own refinery. Furthermore, the US market contributes a significantly higher share to the overall profit than the European market does. Passenger's expectations and demands are also, to some extent, different from what European people are looking for.

Basically the changes to the old EW longhaul are: One AOC, which is completely part of the group (in comparison to XG). Integration into the global LH distribution, which started recently for EW LH in the transition process already.

Basically, the strategy is to have an AOC to grow the German hub business on, without relying on the highest cost structure in the group. (Yes, people at LX earn less + higher productivity than at LH... and no, they wouldn't be better off with unemployment benefits... Same at DE...)

The name doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.

How long before people start calling it "EW Disco" or just "Disco"?

Maybe we should just call it "Diss" since EW et al are an attempt of the LHG to diss its customers and its future underpaid employees...

Revelation wrote:

The name doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.

How long before people start calling it "EW Disco" or just "Disco"?

Maybe we should just call it "Diss" since EW et al are an attempt of the LHG to diss its customers and its future underpaid employees...

With "Disco" I could live but "Diss" ??? The name is probably a bit of a stretch !
Underpaid employees ? In a time where this industry is so hurted and no end in sight I believe they`re better off to take the job. Like "DUSZRH" said they wouldn't be better off with unemployment benefits.
Strange that many here ignore that other airlines in Europe have been living for years from dubious machinations and underpaid employees, which are far worse than Eurowings

Well we know two routes to be operated by the Discover brand.

Both Montego Bay in Jamaica and Varadero in Cuba to be served 3x weekly each for the winter 2021/22 season.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/29/br ... mpetition/

Is it true or just a rumor that they're going to get ex-OS A319s?

Westerwaelder wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

Low cost carriers have been here for over 20 years. They aren't a new phenomenon any more, nor were they when Mayrhuber left. What has changed is that Wolfgang and Christoph were both engineers who worked out in the real world and knew what they were dealing with. Carsten Spohr is a beancounter who spent his career cut off from the real world in a cubicle. And that's not something I came up with myself, I have it from a former CEO of an airline that worked closely with Lufthansa, who knew them all personally.

So, what big European legacy carriers were consistently making good margins in the last decade? I get that you don't like the service-lite model... but what has worked better?

Agreed. Consumers have moved on to prioritising low fares over frills. You can love it or hate it but you can't turn back that tide. If you want to compete on short haul routes, you have to do it price. The few people happy to pay more aren't going to cut it.

...and it's not as if the low cost model is averse to this type of traveller either. It can also provide many of the same amenities (at a cost), and often better network results than many of the carriers with higher costs (whose costs make adding frequencies even more difficult). This carrier is actually suggesting to have three classes of service (on the longer haul aircraft, I assume), and with a Buy-On-Board product - said consumer can simply chose to buy their bliss. A matter of proper marketing could make that 'transition' easy for what travel remains, with this new product showing a stronger product where costs and leisure matter, and the incidental premium/business class for those that wish it (and can pay for it). With the financials, route analysis and network at LH, and the marketshare within Germany - the winning equation of costs and efficiencies will, redefine the market, almost certainly in favor of increased use of this carrier.

Varsity1 wrote:

RyanairGuru wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

You're making a jump from the business model in the 1920's to ULCC's of today.

Airlines like Delta made absolutely handsome profits selling top notch products.

This is going off-topic, but:

(1) The USA is about a decade behind Europe in the growth of ULCCs. They are not yet anywhere near as ubiquitous in the US. This is just a hunch, but I think that the a Covid recovery (and drop in business traffic) could be something of a watershed moment for ULCCs in the US, but that is definitely a discussion for another thread.

(2) Delta is not “top notch”. They has provide a solid middle-of-the-market product that appeals to a broad cross-section of corporate and leisure travellers. In some ways this is what Lufthansa found was being increasingly threatened by the lower cost competition (circle back to 1)

The USA doesn't have the population density to support ULCC point to point service. PDEW between small to midsize US cities is often under 100 passengers per day, sometimes far less.

You are basing your assumptions at the current fare level that is being currently charged. Bring in a ULCC at one 3rd the fares charged and watch the ridership jump just like it did in Europe. The US3 don't want this and that's why the concept never gets off the ground in the USA. GRR ridership has skyrocket with the addition of an ULCC in that market so much so that G4 is now the top airline there in terms of enplanement. Few people are to going to pay $500 to fly from RST to MSP but if a ULCC cam in and did the job for $49 you'd see the amount of enplanements rise considerably.

A321Lufthansa wrote:

Is it true or just a rumor that they're going to get ex-OS A319s?

I thought this was for long-haul to replace the previous EW long haul and LH Jump fleets?

Wouldn't surprise me if LH tried to add short haul aircraft too, though, to make use of its lower wages.

RyanairGuru wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

BelowTheWing wrote:

Simplifying the Eurowings structure. The current Eurowings is, or rather was, flying a weird mix of SunExpress Germany and Brussels Airlines aircraft and crews on long haul. And of course it is impossible to make any money with this constellation. This new airline, it really is an entirely new airline with a separate AOC, gets rid of this structure. And any fair payment for that matter.



The thing is, though, try making money with the business model inherited from Wolfgang Mayrhuber and Christoph Franz. Low Cost Carrier are here. They are for years now and they are here to stay. Aviation used to to be a thing for mail and freight - only on occasion was it that rich passengers could join the bumpy ride. All this changed, when global business took off and business had to be done face to face. Companies needed to spend big money on Business and First Class tickets for their employees as this was the only way to seal the deal. Of course there were also airlines which very much bet on the leisure (long haul) market, while providing a reasonable amount of service of reasonable money. But how many of them are left today?

With the irreversible rise in digital meeting systems, demand for such seats is dropping. That is, unfortunately, a fact. Leisure traffic will become ever increasingly important to airlines. And so are profit margins. You simply cannot fill an aircraft with people on a budget and provide service. Lufthansa needs to reposition itself as a premium carrier but that comes at the cost of fleet-size and passenger volume. If masses of people want to fly - and apparently they do - it needs to be affordable. And this can only be done with bare-bone fares.

You're making a jump from the business model in the 1920's to ULCC's of today.

Airlines like Delta made absolutely handsome profits selling top notch products.

This is going off-topic, but:

(1) The USA is about a decade behind Europe in the growth of ULCCs. They are not yet anywhere near as ubiquitous in the US. This is just a hunch, but I think that the a Covid recovery (and drop in business traffic) could be something of a watershed moment for ULCCs in the US, but that is definitely a discussion for another thread.

(2) Delta is not “top notch”. They has provide a solid middle-of-the-market product that appeals to a broad cross-section of corporate and leisure travellers. In some ways this is what Lufthansa found was being increasingly threatened by the lower cost competition (circle back to 1)

Thats arguable. For long haul? absolutely true. Though the US3 are certainly all getting much better where in most cases they now have the same hard product in C that "top notch" carriers have sometimes better. Of course most on a.net don't get that because for whatever reason people don't know the difference between C and F. The soft product is probably better on the Euro legacies but in a lot of cases I'd personally rather have the better hard product.....and in some cases Euro C is an absolute joke, even to some of the older US3 lay-flats.


but when we look at short haul, the US3 have by-far, it isn't even close, a MUCH better product than the Euro airlines. I don't believe that anyone with a straight face can tell me 28in pitch in 3-3 (even with the middle seat blocked) is better than any of the US3's domestic first class product.


and that might be changing in the US. I personally don't think so and so far US executives agree with me. If anything we will see smaller F cabins but I certainly don't see Euro style C class heading to the US any time soon.





Anyways, to come back to LH/Eurowings. One of the real reasons this is happening in Europe and not the US is scope. US airlines can't outsource flying like Euro carriers can, and i highly doubt we will ever see the US carriers be able to do so. So setting up a sub airline to "fight LCCs, ULCCs" doesn't work in the US because its still legacy employees (with legacy costs) working the flights. Hints why Song, Ted, etc. etc. all failed.

Aren't Southwest, Frontier, Spirit and Allegiant LCCs/ULCCs that have made it in the US as p2p low-cost carriers and have managed to conquer a considerable share of the domestic market, in spite of the prevalence of the big US3?

The thread title made me do a double take, lol.


"Look at that, a new airline! It was right next to Swiss the whole time!"