Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
F27500 wrote:I still can't get over that ridiculous, undignified, almost vulgar sounding name "Wizz Air" .. come on.
vhtje wrote:F27500 wrote:I still can't get over that ridiculous, undignified, almost vulgar sounding name "Wizz Air" .. come on.
You've never heard the phrase "I'll just wizz over to <destination> to <objective>"? It's quite common in British English. In that sense, the name makes complete sense.
I think use of Wizz for urinating is an Americanism.
Galwayman wrote:Short term operational issues at Wizz are nothing compared to the structural issues at EasyJet …
Galwayman wrote:
It’s definitely about belief in the Management vision and effectiveness . Even the shareholders are not impressed by the EasyJet leadership and strategy. And clearly EasyJet cc staffing has become uncompetitive and inflexible - something Wizz can correct easily within the first six months
djpearman wrote:dutchflyboi wrote:A merger with Wizz would be very interesting. Although this bid was rejected, I see that mergers are coming in the post COVID 19 world.
I very much agree that there will be a string of mergers in the next few years. Both 9/11 and the financial crisis resulted in a slew of airline mergers and acquisitions as well as groups being formed (IAG, AF-KLM, LH Group, LATAM). It'll be interesting to see what happens. LH CEO Spohr was recently quoted as stating that Europe has too many airlines. In Europe in particular, this effectively results in each airline carving out a monopoly in their niche, hurting proper competition and making each less competitive globally.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/british-airline-easyjet-raise-17-bln-rejected-bid-offer-2021-09-09/
"EasyJet (EZJ.L) has rejected a takeover approach from Wizz Air that would have created a low-cost airline to rival Ryanair, opting instead to raise $1.7 billion from shareholders and go it alone in an industry battling to recover from the pandemic.
EasyJet said the all-share approach fundamentally undervalued its business, and added the potential bidder had since said it was no longer interested in a deal.
EasyJet said the fundraising, its second of the pandemic, would strengthen its balance sheet should the COVID-19 downturn continue and allow it to operate more aggressively once the recovery arrives. It has identified landing slots across Europe it could acquire, including in Paris, Amsterdam and Milan.
"I believe this is really a once in a lifetime opportunity," Lundgren said.
EasyJet, which during the pandemic sunk to its first ever annual loss and cut 4,500 jobs, wants to steal market share from legacy carriers like British Airways owner IAG and Air France-KLM as they retract their short-haul operations."
VolvoBus wrote:I did a quick search last night on Wizzair Holdings plc. Yes - plc - it is a British registered company.
This is a double edged sword. An all share takeover of easyJet would save a lot of strain on the balance sheet,but cuts with the other edge. My search produced a report on shareholder dissatisfaction with Varadi's potential compensation package,caused by the small number of EU shareholders allowed to vote.The search showed only one of the top ten or twelve shareholders as obviously EU, and that was Varadi at ~2.8%.Incidentally, Indigo Partners was second largest at 7.8%.The non-EU shareholders were not allowed to vote to maintain EU control. As easyJet is primarily British owned,an all share takeover would magnify this problem ,which raises the question - Would British investors accept Wizzair stock with very little say in the running of the company ?
LAXLHR wrote:Wizz has one of the cleanest balance sheets in the business, along with mega backers.
This is not a surprise.
Mergers are NEVER EVER good for customers.
Galwayman wrote:LAXLHR wrote:Wizz has one of the cleanest balance sheets in the business, along with mega backers.
This is not a surprise.
Mergers are NEVER EVER good for customers.
When it happens it will be a takeover not a merger
If it releases LGW slots to a lower fare airline like Wizz it's an instant win for the consumer
Galwayman wrote:LAXLHR wrote:Wizz has one of the cleanest balance sheets in the business, along with mega backers.
This is not a surprise.
Mergers are NEVER EVER good for customers.
When it happens it will be a takeover not a merger
If it releases LGW slots to a lower fare airline like Wizz it's an instant win for the consumer
dutchflyboi wrote:VolvoBus wrote:I did a quick search last night on Wizzair Holdings plc. Yes - plc - it is a British registered company.
This is a double edged sword. An all share takeover of easyJet would save a lot of strain on the balance sheet,but cuts with the other edge. My search produced a report on shareholder dissatisfaction with Varadi's potential compensation package,caused by the small number of EU shareholders allowed to vote.The search showed only one of the top ten or twelve shareholders as obviously EU, and that was Varadi at ~2.8%.Incidentally, Indigo Partners was second largest at 7.8%.The non-EU shareholders were not allowed to vote to maintain EU control. As easyJet is primarily British owned,an all share takeover would magnify this problem ,which raises the question - Would British investors accept Wizzair stock with very little say in the running of the company ?
This is currently already in place at easyJet. In order for easyJet to continue flying Intra-Europe, this was set up:
You can read this on the corporate section of the easyJet website:
https://corporate.easyjet.com/investors ... -ownership
Non-EU nationals (including UK nationals) would continue to be able to buy easyJet shares, although shares acquired by them may be subject to a suspension of voting rights. Shares most recently acquired by non-EU nationals (including UK nationals) would have their voting rights suspended first as the suspension of voting rights is being applied on a "last in, first out" basis.
aemoreira1981 wrote:How many planes in the W6/W9/5W fleet are actually owned?
Revelation wrote:djpearman wrote:dutchflyboi wrote:A merger with Wizz would be very interesting. Although this bid was rejected, I see that mergers are coming in the post COVID 19 world.
I very much agree that there will be a string of mergers in the next few years. Both 9/11 and the financial crisis resulted in a slew of airline mergers and acquisitions as well as groups being formed (IAG, AF-KLM, LH Group, LATAM). It'll be interesting to see what happens. LH CEO Spohr was recently quoted as stating that Europe has too many airlines. In Europe in particular, this effectively results in each airline carving out a monopoly in their niche, hurting proper competition and making each less competitive globally.
Sorry, but if you think fewer competitors means more competition, I think you're going to be disappointed.
djpearman wrote:Revelation wrote:djpearman wrote:LH CEO Spohr was recently quoted as stating that Europe has too many airlines. In Europe in particular, this effectively results in each airline carving out a monopoly in their niche, hurting proper competition and making each less competitive globally.
Sorry, but if you think fewer competitors means more competition, I think you're going to be disappointed.
I don't think that - I'm not sure where what I said led you to get that impression. What I'm trying to say is that the dominance of airline groups in their respective regions (Lufthansa in Austria, Belgium, Germany and Switzerland, IAG in Ireland, Spain and UK, AF-KLM in France and the Netherlands), despite giving the impression of a large amount of choice due to branding, does not constitute real competition whilst simultaneously, each group is not operating as a unified entity either. So, the end result is a combination of the drawbacks of a lack of competition coupled with the lack of scaling that could be achieved with larger coordinated operations. This hurts their ability to compete effectively on a global stage.
Imagine the clout of a well structured network airline operating throughout Europe (all of it) utilising the available resources fully - I know, wishful thinking what with so many different nations and associated identities and languages. However, LCCs with operations in multiple countries are already the largest European airlines in terms of RPK (Ryanair) and PAX (Ryanair, Easyjet), so at some point, someone is likely to have a stab at it. The COVID pandemic may just turn out to be a catalyst for this.
Revelation wrote:djpearman wrote:Revelation wrote:Sorry, but if you think fewer competitors means more competition, I think you're going to be disappointed.
I don't think that - I'm not sure where what I said led you to get that impression. What I'm trying to say is that the dominance of airline groups in their respective regions (Lufthansa in Austria, Belgium, Germany and Switzerland, IAG in Ireland, Spain and UK, AF-KLM in France and the Netherlands), despite giving the impression of a large amount of choice due to branding, does not constitute real competition whilst simultaneously, each group is not operating as a unified entity either. So, the end result is a combination of the drawbacks of a lack of competition coupled with the lack of scaling that could be achieved with larger coordinated operations. This hurts their ability to compete effectively on a global stage.
Imagine the clout of a well structured network airline operating throughout Europe (all of it) utilising the available resources fully - I know, wishful thinking what with so many different nations and associated identities and languages. However, LCCs with operations in multiple countries are already the largest European airlines in terms of RPK (Ryanair) and PAX (Ryanair, Easyjet), so at some point, someone is likely to have a stab at it. The COVID pandemic may just turn out to be a catalyst for this.
Sorry, I still don't see how the creation of a network Goliath of Europe would create "proper competition", it would create the opposite, IMO.
Revelation wrote:djpearman wrote:Revelation wrote:Sorry, but if you think fewer competitors means more competition, I think you're going to be disappointed.
I don't think that - I'm not sure where what I said led you to get that impression. What I'm trying to say is that the dominance of airline groups in their respective regions (Lufthansa in Austria, Belgium, Germany and Switzerland, IAG in Ireland, Spain and UK, AF-KLM in France and the Netherlands), despite giving the impression of a large amount of choice due to branding, does not constitute real competition whilst simultaneously, each group is not operating as a unified entity either. So, the end result is a combination of the drawbacks of a lack of competition coupled with the lack of scaling that could be achieved with larger coordinated operations. This hurts their ability to compete effectively on a global stage.
Imagine the clout of a well structured network airline operating throughout Europe (all of it) utilising the available resources fully - I know, wishful thinking what with so many different nations and associated identities and languages. However, LCCs with operations in multiple countries are already the largest European airlines in terms of RPK (Ryanair) and PAX (Ryanair, Easyjet), so at some point, someone is likely to have a stab at it. The COVID pandemic may just turn out to be a catalyst for this.
Sorry, I still don't see how the creation of a network Goliath of Europe would create "proper competition", it would create the opposite, IMO.
eurotrader85 wrote:Revelation wrote:djpearman wrote:I don't think that - I'm not sure where what I said led you to get that impression. What I'm trying to say is that the dominance of airline groups in their respective regions (Lufthansa in Austria, Belgium, Germany and Switzerland, IAG in Ireland, Spain and UK, AF-KLM in France and the Netherlands), despite giving the impression of a large amount of choice due to branding, does not constitute real competition whilst simultaneously, each group is not operating as a unified entity either. So, the end result is a combination of the drawbacks of a lack of competition coupled with the lack of scaling that could be achieved with larger coordinated operations. This hurts their ability to compete effectively on a global stage.
Imagine the clout of a well structured network airline operating throughout Europe (all of it) utilising the available resources fully - I know, wishful thinking what with so many different nations and associated identities and languages. However, LCCs with operations in multiple countries are already the largest European airlines in terms of RPK (Ryanair) and PAX (Ryanair, Easyjet), so at some point, someone is likely to have a stab at it. The COVID pandemic may just turn out to be a catalyst for this.
Sorry, I still don't see how the creation of a network Goliath of Europe would create "proper competition", it would create the opposite, IMO.
Agreed. When Carsten Spohr complains there are too many airlines, he is just annoyed there are too many nipping at the business of LH group. Whether that be larger groups such as TK where they have slashed reciprocal FF awards, FR building at their home base of FRA which caused a heated storm between LH and Fraport for the audacity to allow such a move, lobbying the government to limit German access rights to ME3 or any other small group taking Pax from the group.
The idea that customers flying from LGW to ATH, BUD, AGP or LTN to MXP etc are suddenly going to benefit from lower fairs and better service from an airline group with terrible service and suddenly has less competition on routes is frankly fanciful.
davidjohnson6 wrote:When you have a very small number of large companies in a market, you find that other smaller competitors leave that market or decide not to get involved, because they suspect the larger players may engage in abusive practices, eg price dumping. Compare, for example, prices between Frankfurt to Vienna (2 LH controlled hubs) and between Paris to Vienna. In the absence of real competition, prices quickly go high - there is little reason for Austrian Airlines to charge triple the airfare on widespread dates for a significantly shorter flight
Competition regulators in most countries are usually limited in resources and can investigate only the most serious cases of competition abuse. Govt regulators much prefer the existence of multiple companies competing against each other to ensure against widespread abuse.
It is fanciful to believe that Easyjet and Wizzair could merge without fares rising. If companies can charge their customers higher prices and thus achieve higher profits they will. Investors like companies that achieve fat profits and are always greedy for more. Strong competition between companies is what keeps companies honest and prices low
Delta777Jet wrote:There is no reason why easyjet is not flying more of their planes to more Destinations , the planes are all 90%+ booked but the with a very weak schedule.
davidjohnson6 wrote:Delta777Jet wrote:There is no reason why easyjet is not flying more of their planes to more Destinations , the planes are all 90%+ booked but the with a very weak schedule.
I flew yesterday from London Gatwick to Verona - Sunday morning and paid the equivalent of 45 euros one way, booking 6 days in advance. The aircraft was an A320 with at least 180 seats but I counted 38 pax on board. Granted there are some no-shows, but based on this and other flights during the summer, I am not sure load factor really is 90%+. I accept Ryanair has a high load factor, but some of their flights are likely sold at below-cost fares