Is The GVA-NYC Route Still Profitable?

HBJZA · Sun Oct 28, 2007 3:30 pm

Hi everyone,
I'm just wondering if the three daily runs to NYC from GVA are still profitable for the airlines. LX used to be the sole operatore of the route for many years on the daily GVA-JFK. Then came CO with a daily EWR and now QR have started serving EWR (I think) 3 or 4 times a week.
How many airlines can compete on a tiny market like GVA ? Will we see a 4th airline using GVA to serve NYC ?
Thanks in advance for your replies.

ANother · Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:53 pm

I was surprised to see QR come into this market - I would have thought GVA - IAD would have been a better, higher revenue, opportunity. From the prices in the market they seem to be struggling.

They won't be the first carrier to operate this leg temporarily - We did have PA and TW, Swissworld, and Gulf - to name just a few.

behramjee · Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:59 pm

fyi...QR is currently bleeding a whole load of $$$ on its new EWR and IAD flights (especially on the latter).

UN_B732 · Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:05 pm

I hear CO EWR-GVA is great, with heavy paid bizFirst traffic (pharma) QR is going to try to eat into that, but I don't see it working for them.

Qantas744er · Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:21 pm

LX does great on this flight! It is almost always packed 100% escpecially because of the huge UN presence on both ends the J and F seats are almost always booked to the max.

Leo

dutchjet · Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:29 pm

LX and CO do very well with their Geneva services.....while the demand is limited, there is lots of high yeilding government, diplomatic and, of course, UN traffic to keep both the J and Y cabins filled with good loads.

Quoting Behramjee (Reply 2):
fyi...QR is currently bleeding a whole load of $$$ on its new EWR and IAD flights (especially on the latter).

I have heard the same, GVA may not have been a great idea for QR.

schipholjfk · Sun Oct 28, 2007 5:43 pm

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 4):
LX does great on this flight! It is almost always packed 100% escpecially because of the huge UN presence on both ends the J and F seats are almost always booked to the max.

Another example of UN wasting money... why are they not flying economy? After all they are public officials and not some hot shot CEO who has to produce and post office. You see it around Manhattan all the time... tiny little poor countries and their diplomats wasting valuable resources by driving around in Mercedes and eating at expensive restaurant. It's a shame UN officials waste public money by traveling J and F classes.

HBJZA · Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:26 pm

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 5):
I have heard the same, GVA may not have been a great idea for QR.

But how come then that CO and LX are greatly profitable and QR isn't able to get a part of the cake ? Is it due to reputation or because connexions provided by CO at EWR, LX in GVA and codeshare in JFK ? I really can't figure this out !!
By the way, does CO offers codeshare agreements for GVA connecting PAX ?

elmothehobo · Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:41 pm

Quoting UN_B732 (Reply 3):
I hear CO EWR-GVA is great, with heavy paid bizFirst traffic (pharma) QR is going to try to eat into that, but I don't see it working for them.

Continental also gets all US government traffic going to/from Geneva.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 5):
LX and CO do very well with their Geneva services.....while the demand is limited, there is lots of high yeilding government, diplomatic and, of course, UN traffic to keep both the J and Y cabins filled with good loads.

Though it isn't Basel or Zürich, a lot of banking traffic.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 5):
I have heard the same, GVA may not have been a great idea for QR.

As a terminus GVA was a great idea for QR. A lot of Gulf Arabs, including folks from Qatar have houses and apartments in and around Geneva.

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
Another example of UN wasting money... why are they not flying economy

The UN has similar travel rules to US government traffic. They don't go around flying full F and J, they get corporate discounts just like most all other companies. Plenty do fly economy. Get your facts straight.

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
After all they are public officials and not some hot shot CEO who has to produce and post office.

Yes, and public officials in most countries fly J/F. Public officials flying J/F can be justified as they remain more productive flying in those classes.

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
tiny little poor countries and their diplomats wasting valuable resources by driving around in Mercedes and eating at expensive restaurant.

The UN doesn't pay for that. The individual country pays for that.

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
It's a shame UN officials waste public money by traveling J and F classes.

It's shame that you don't know what you're complaining about. National representatives' travel to and from the UN in Geneva and New York is paid for by their respective country, not the UN. The only people the UN pays for are UN employees. Ambassadors and their entourages are for the most part not UN employees.

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 7):
But how come then that CO and LX are greatly profitable and QR isn't able to get a part of the cake ?

QR doesn't fly daily. US officials can't fly Qatar Airways to Geneva because of the fly american policy (CO gets most all of that traffic).

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 7):
By the way, does CO offers codeshare agreements for GVA connecting PAX ?

No, though I wouldn't be surprised to see CO eventually offer an LX style codeshare on the SBB services from Geneva to other cities in Switzerland.

Quoting HBJZA (Thread starter):
Will we see a 4th airline using GVA to serve NYC ?

Certainly could be justified. Back in the day Geneva had service to several cities in North America on a number of airlines. The only remaining city is New York (EWR/JFK). Another US carrier (DL or AA) could launch GVA and operate it profitably.

dutchjet · Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:46 pm

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 7):
But how come then that CO and LX are greatly profitable and QR isn't able to get a part of the cake ?

Firstly, QR has not been flying the route for a very long time and it will take time for Qatar to establish itself in the market...it may or may not succeed. Second, Qatar is not yet a well known airline either in Europe or North America, that will also take time. Third, Qatar is taking on two very established airlines in this market....Swissair and Swiss has flown between Geneva and NYC forever and CO is also well established. Next, CO operates the flight into its huge EWR hub, thus offering not only service to the NYC area but also one-stop service to just about every major city in North America. Also, much business traffic is controlled by corporate contracts and specialize corporate agents....CO and LX clearly have the advantage here as they each offer far more transatlantic travel opportunities. And, I dont think that QRs EWR or IAD flights to GVA are daily, a big problem for business travelers in this type of market. Another factor, frequent flyer miles....CO is Skyteam, Swiss is Star, Qatar is? Business travellers do like earning miles for future vacations or upgrades.

Finally, there is the general issue of airlines operating fifth freedom flights........its a difficult business case and many airlines do not find success with their fifth freedom services. For example, SQ did very poorly with its EWR-AMS segment (the flight continued to SIN); Air India offers some very very low fares on its JFK-LHR service (which of course continues to Indian destinations) simply to keep the seats filled on the segment and make some revenue, EK has not found much success on its JFK-HAM flight (that continues to Dubai), and this list continues. Flying between the US and Switzerland? A US or a Swiss carrier come to mind.....not an airline from Qatar. Thus, it will be interesting to see if QR continues to fly via GVA.

dutchjet · Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:53 pm

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 8):
As a terminus GVA was a great idea for QR. A lot of Gulf Arabs, including folks from Qatar have houses and apartments in and around Geneva

Clearly, I meant GVA as the stopover city on services beween the Gulf and the US....

HanginOut · Sun Oct 28, 2007 7:44 pm

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 8):
Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
tiny little poor countries and their diplomats wasting valuable resources by driving around in Mercedes and eating at expensive restaurant.

The UN doesn't pay for that. The individual country pays for that.

ElmoTheHobo is correct, to a point. Individual countries will pay for their Ambassador to have a car and to eat at expensive restaurants, but not for the rest of their diplomats in NYC (that's because Ambassadors have to entertain for business reasons and also countries want to ensure the prestige of their Ambassador). The reason other diplomats, who aren't Ambassadors, have expensive cars and can eat at expensive restaurants is because those diplomats usually come from the ruling elites and/or from wealthy families in their home countries. Thus, they can afford it (please note that I am/was not one of those diplomats driving around NYC in a fancy car or going to expensive restaurants, but was trying to afford to live in one of the most expensive cities in the world on my meagre Canadian salary!).

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 8):
Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
It's a shame UN officials waste public money by traveling J and F classes.

It's shame that you don't know what you're complaining about. National representatives' travel to and from the UN in Geneva and New York is paid for by their respective country, not the UN. The only people the UN pays for are UN employees. Ambassadors and their entourages are for the most part not UN employees.

Diplomats accredited to the UN do not work for the UN! They work for the governments of their home countries. On the issue of who pays for travel, again ETH is correct, it is the home countries responsibility to pay for the travel of their diplomats. When my Ambassador had to travel for UN business, our Government paid for it. Even if the UN were to pay, it would be national governments paying the bill at the end of the day as it is the dues from member states that pay for everything at the UN.

[Edited 2007-10-28 12:45:10]

STT757 · Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:46 pm

CO this Summer flew 767-400s on EWR-GVA, if they did'nt have such a widebody shortage EWR-GVA would be a year round 767-400. The US Government traffic is great, but the Pharmeceutical industry (which is huge in New Jersey and have large contracts with CO) are the driving force on this route.

Viscount724 · Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:40 pm

Quoting HBJZA (Thread starter):
LX used to be the sole operatore of the route for many years on the daily GVA-JFK. Then came CO with a daily EWR and now QR have started serving EWR (I think) 3 or 4 times a week.
How many airlines can compete on a tiny market like GVA ?

Don't forget that for many years when GVA was much smaller TWA and Swissair both operated GVA-JFK nonstop. GVA was one of TW's first desinations in Europe in the late 1940s. Before alliances and codeshares took over, American, Pan Am, Delta and United all operated their own aircraft to GVA for varying periods of time, but as tag-ons from other points in Europe. AC also served GVA for a while as a tag-on from CDG. OS also operated GVA-IAD daily with an A310 for several years in the 1990s in a 3-way codeshare with Swissair and DL; the flight operated VIE-GVA-IAD. IAD is probably one US market that could again justify direct service to/from GVA due to a lot of government/diplomatic travel.

While GVA isn't a huge city (about 450,000), the catchment area is about 1 million including neighboring regions in both Switzerland and France. As others have mentioned, GVA generates much more air traffic than most cities its size due to the high concentration of UN and other international organizations (Word Trade Organization, IATA etc.) with either their headquarters or major operations here. It's also the European headquarters for several major multinational companies. Not many cities GVA's size have 49 scheduled carriers.

semsem · Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:53 pm

I fly this route 3 x a year on CO and LX (not a fan of these 2 airlines) and most of the time their flights are full. I also use IB and AF which I think offer better inflight service in Y. Quite a few travellers also use KLM and BA connections on this route. I noticed that Qatar Airways fares are more expensive than LX or CO if you buy on consolidator websites. I cannot fly Qatar but if I could I would have given them a try as I am coinvinced they offer much better service than LX or CO. I believe they offer miles on the Miles and More and United programs. I am sure that most of their traffic is from the Far East / India and Gulf. Geneva also benefits from the French region as GVA is located on the border.

semsem · Mon Oct 29, 2007 1:16 am

Viscount the TWA flights in the 1970s from JFK to GVA were not doing all that well and were extended to Milan and Nice / Monte Carlo as used to be written in the timetables. It was tough for TWA using B707s to compete with Swissair because their service was much better and they were using B747s and DC-10s. Pan Am also started with B747 to Zurich and B727 to Geneva and Istanbul. Then Delta with an A310 through Paris buty it was discontinued. In the 1940s / 1950s TWA used Connies that originated in Bombay on to Dharan, Cairo. Stopped in Geneva on to New York, La Guardia Airport as Idelewild / JFK was built in the late 1950s.

Presently, LH also offer competetive fares on this route. So CO and LX though they offer nonstop service do lose traffic to other airlines.

SQ7345 · Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:11 pm

If the pharma traffic is so good on the CO GVA-EWR flight, why isn't there a flight out of BSL? Novartis and Roche have their HDQ in BSL and not in GVA!

AEROFAN · Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:18 pm

so then CO and LX are only doing well because of their corporate contracts, is that it? Perhaps QR should try to get a piece of that pie as well. After all, if all A netters are to be believed QR's service is a helluva lot better

elmothehobo · Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:31 pm

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 17):
so then CO and LX are only doing well because of their corporate contracts, is that it?

No, Geneva is also a business center, and a very, very wealthy city.

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 17):
Perhaps QR should try to get a piece of that pie as well.

QR should boost its frequencies to at least 6 weekly flights (preferably daily) AND codeshare with Swiss. Then we can talk about corporate contracts.

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 17):
After all, if all A netters are to be believed QR's service is a helluva lot better

Good service doesn't make up for their lack of frequency.

Quoting SQ7345 (Reply 16):
Novartis and Roche have their HDQ in BSL and not in GVA!

There are numerous rail connections between Basel and Geneva, and the ride isn't all that long either.

dank · Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:52 pm

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):
There are numerous rail connections between Basel and Geneva, and the ride isn't all that long either.

Twice as long as it is from ZRH and you could use AF as a partner from CDG, for example (if you want to go to the Basel area). If the pharma traffic was what drives the CO flight to GVA, it would make much more sense to fly it to BSL.

cheers.

sandrozrh · Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:58 pm

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):
There are numerous rail connections between Basel and Geneva, and the ride isn't all that long either.

Albeit a lot longer than to ZRH. BSL-ZRH is only about 50 minutes and there are numerous direct trains a day, hence i doubt that people go from Basel to GVA for air travel.

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):
AND codeshare with Swiss

I doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon seeing as LX just recently gave up their codeshare with QR on the ZRH-DOH route operated by QR, also there would be no benefit whatsoever for LX in such a codeshare.

flydreamliner · Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:04 pm

Quoting Behramjee (Reply 2):
fyi...QR is currently bleeding a whole load of $$$ on its new EWR and IAD flights (especially on the latter).

here is more news, QR is bleeding plenty of money in general. I believe the airline has not ever been profitable... it's a money hole. Maybe someday it will find profitability, but right now it seems like a strategic investment to help build up and diversify the economy of Qatar.

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 7):
But how come then that CO and LX are greatly profitable and QR isn't able to get a part of the cake ? I

Part of it is that they have much larger presence on either end of the flight, whereas QR doesn't have the same recognition in either of these markets, certainly not for this route. Additionally, as has been mentioned, LX and CO have contracts.

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 17):
so then CO and LX are only doing well because of their corporate contracts, is that it? Perhaps QR should try to get a piece of that pie as well. After all, if all A netters are to be believed QR's service is a helluva lot better

If you search the forum, there are a surprising number of threads that talk about a general dissatisfaction with the service on QR... don't get me wrong, there are many, many positive opinions on QR, and I'm sure they offer an impressive product, I'm just saying there appear to be a good number of people who aren't all sunshine about QR... just like almost every other airline.

dutchjet · Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:13 pm

Quoting SQ7345 (Reply 16):
If the pharma traffic is so good on the CO GVA-EWR flight, why isn't there a flight out of BSL? Novartis and Roche have their HDQ in BSL and not in GVA

A nonstop to BSL has been discussed but never happened. Doesnt one or more of the major pharma companies actually run their own corporate shuttle between EWR and BSL?

Quoting Semsem (Reply 14):
I fly this route 3 x a year on CO and LX (not a fan of these 2 airlines) and most of the time their flights are full. I also use IB and AF which I think offer better inflight service in Y. Quite a few travellers also use KLM and BA connections on this route.

Some passengers will always use connecting services instead of nonstop service for a variety of reasons, this is hardly unique to the NYC-GVA route. IB offers better inflight service than LX??? I have never heard that before.

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 17):
so then CO and LX are only doing well because of their corporate contracts, is that it? Perhaps QR should try to get a piece of that pie as well

QR offers only one route from the NYC area to Europe and it is not daily, its gonna be rather hard for QR to attract corporate clients.

Quoting Aerofan (Reply 17):
After all, if all A netters are to be believed QR's service is a helluva lot better

Some a.netters, not all think that QR is supeior to LX or CO........and the a.net crowd is not the ones booking corporate travel.

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):
No, Geneva is also a business center, and a very, very wealthy city.

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):
QR should boost its frequencies to at least 6 weekly flights (preferably daily) AND codeshare with Swiss. Then we can talk about corporate contracts

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):

Good service doesn't make up for their lack of frequency.

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):
There are numerous rail connections between Basel and Geneva, and the ride isn't all that long either.

I agree on all counts, these are the ""real-life"" considerations.

sandrozrh · Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:16 pm

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 22):
IB offers better inflight service than LX??? I have never heard that before.

Me neither, but then again, Semsem has been on a vendetta against LX ever since i frequent this forum Wink

ZRH · Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:46 pm

Quoting Semsem (Reply 14):
I also use IB and AF which I think offer better inflight service in Y.

This is the most funny statement I ever read. Not long ago I had a few flights with IB and it was one of the worst airlines in Europe I ever experienced (bad service, unfriendly f/a, very poor seat pitch).

foxxray · Mon Oct 29, 2007 6:04 pm

I have flown from GVA/ZRH to JFK and EWR with LX and the flights were always full from GVA but not from ZRH...

aviationmaster · Mon Oct 29, 2007 6:05 pm

Quoting Semsem (Reply 14):
I fly this route 3 x a year on CO and LX (not a fan of these 2 airlines) and most of the time their flights are full. I also use IB and AF which I think offer better inflight service in Y.

Why the hassle of flying LX or CO if you are not a fan of the two airlines?

Next time, fly AF or IB to JFK and spear us of this unnecessary LX/CO bashing. Gracias!

HBJZA · Mon Oct 29, 2007 6:53 pm

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 22):
A nonstop to BSL has been discussed but never happened.

Are you sure it was just discussed ? As I remember, LX (SR swissair at the time) did fly BSL-EWR ! However I'm not 100% sure about my facts...

dutchjet · Mon Oct 29, 2007 7:01 pm

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 27):
Are you sure it was just discussed ? As I remember, LX (SR swissair at the time) did fly BSL-EWR ! However I'm not 100% sure about my facts...

SR did fly EWR-BSL, first with the A310 and then with the A332 (which was too big for the route).....LX, as far as I recall, never resumed the BSL service.

I am sorry that I was unclear......there has been discussion from time to time about nonstop service being relaunched, there were very strong rumors a couple of years ago that CO was considering flying EWR-BSL with a 752, but with only 16 bizfirst seats, its really not the right airplane for the BSL route which has a high proportion of premium demand. There was also concern that the BSL flight would compete with the GVA service and adversely affect results on that route. Thus, CO did not start service.

EWR-BSL seems like a route that could work with a Privatair type aircraft....is there enough demand?

sandrozrh · Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:15 pm

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 28):
There was also concern that the BSL flight would compete with the GVA service and adversely affect results on that route

Actually, I'd be more concerned that it would compete with their ZRH service, which is, after all, only a mere hour away from BSL. I myself even occasionally take the journey to BSL just to get LX's cheaper fares out of BSL.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 28):
LX, as far as I recall, never resumed the BSL service.

They did not indeed.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 28):
EWR-BSL seems like a route that could work with a Privatair type aircraft

That's what I was thinking, but I know for a fact that fellow a.netter RJ100 can give you a hand here, as he has great insight into everything concerning BSL.

Viscount724 · Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:48 pm

Quoting Dank (Reply 19):
Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):
There are numerous rail connections between Basel and Geneva, and the ride isn't all that long either.

Twice as long as it is from ZRH

Almost 3 times as long. Fastest trains from the main station in downtown BSL to GVA airport 2hr. 51min. vs 1hr. 9 min. to ZRH airport.

dank · Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:08 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 30):
Almost 3 times as long. Fastest trains from the main station in downtown BSL to GVA airport 2hr. 51min. vs 1hr. 9 min. to ZRH airport.

Yep, I underestimated the time. The cost of tickets would have to be low enough to justify the extra transit time (or because i wanted to visit friends in Geneva).

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 28):
EWR-BSL seems like a route that could work with a Privatair type aircraft....is there enough demand?

Seems like the perfect type route for something like that, but I guess LX feels that the EWR-ZRH route is sufficient?

Quoting SandroZRH (Reply 29):
Actually, I'd be more concerned that it would compete with their ZRH service, which is, after all, only a mere hour away from BSL. I myself even occasionally take the journey to BSL just to get LX's cheaper fares out of BSL.

Not knowing what the loads are, I wonder if this is more due to the fact that due to lower loads, it's easier to get a ticket to GVA, so people who would prefer going through ZRH are choosing GVA instead?

cheers.

semsem · Tue Oct 30, 2007 12:17 am

Swissair did start an A310 flight from EWR to Basle and it continued to Zurich but it did not last very long.

I don't consider saying "I am not a fan of LX or CO" bashing.That's all I said in view of "sensitivity". It is indeed hilarious
that I found Iberia (A340) long haul service among the best, considering all the "Iberia bashing". Also Madrid Airport is among the most pleasant airports I have visited.

I started flying SR back in the 50s and I have watched the long haul inflight service during more than half a century go down from best to among the lower bottom. Why can't they be as good as OS which I find excellent ? They are both owned by LH. Anyway CO is worse. My opinion.

[Edited 2007-10-29 17:21:05]

elmothehobo · Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:10 am

Quoting Semsem (Reply 32):
They are both owned by LH.

Austrian is independent, though they are in the same alliance and uses LH's Miles and More as their FFP.

Quoting SandroZRH (Reply 20):
Albeit a lot longer than to ZRH. BSL-ZRH is only about 50 minutes and there are numerous direct trains a day, hence i doubt that people go from Basel to GVA for air travel.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 30):
Almost 3 times as long. Fastest trains from the main station in downtown BSL to GVA airport 2hr. 51min. vs 1hr. 9 min. to ZRH airport.

Forgot about that

Either way Geneva has plenty of business traffic to complement the UN, NGO and diplomatic traffic.

Quoting SandroZRH (Reply 20):
I doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon seeing as LX just recently gave up their codeshare with QR on the ZRH-DOH route operated by QR, also there would be no benefit whatsoever for LX in such a codeshare.

I certainly don't think they would, but for Qatar to be competitive in the market, they would need to consider that and a few other things.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 28):
EWR-BSL seems like a route that could work with a Privatair type aircraft....is there enough demand?

Definitely. BSL isn't just Basel, it's Mulhouse, Fribourg (DE) and all of the surrounding areas. IIRC Basel (BS or BL?) has the highest per capita GDP of all the Swiss cantons

SmokinL1011 · Tue Oct 30, 2007 9:31 pm

I don't know if it's any general indication but I've been on LX 2 times on this route in the past year and it was packed both times. On the most recent trip they needed quite a few voluntary bumbs.

Quoting Semsem (Reply 14):
I cannot fly Qatar but if I could I would have given them a try as I am coinvinced they offer much better service than LX or CO.

It's a bit off topic, but why can't you fly Qatar if it's a route that doesn't go anywhere near Qatar? Is it because the airline itself won't allow you to be on board because you are an Israeli citizen or because the Israeli goverment won't allow it for security reasons?

RJ100 · Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:49 am

Quoting SandroZRH (Reply 29):
EWR-BSL seems like a route that could work with a Privatair type aircraft

That's what I was thinking, but I know for a fact that fellow a.netter RJ100 can give you a hand here, as he has great insight into everything concerning BSL.

According to a congress held in BSL yesterday, the Basel to New York route shows the 4th largest business demand after BSL to London, Paris and Frankfurt. The airport therefore will make it a key project again to find a carrier for this route.
However I must say that I believe when I see it as there are several difficult things to solve: Large companies that ask for massive discounts, proximity to ZRH and a general high offer on the New York-ZRH route now with sometimes cheap prices.

cheers
Thomas

SQ7345 · Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:27 am

The BSL to NYC route has a long history. I remember Pan Am flew the route for Point Mulhouse with their 707's. Then it was UTA who wanted to fly but finally Air France started the route with A310's. Then there were DC-8's involved form a company that i forgot the name. And also Swiss World wanted to start the route but Swissair knocked them out of business and started with A310's and A330's.
Sad do see that nothing lasted for long. But as Thomas sayd - the proximity to ZRH, and generally the high frequencies from other Airports not too far away makes it difficult.
Maybe a Oneworld Member would be the better choice than a StarAlliance
memeber since LX/LH already have a strong appearance in BSL. AA with winglet 757's would be cool!

bsbisland · Wed Oct 31, 2007 3:48 pm

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
Another example of UN wasting money... why are they not flying economy? After all they are public officials and not some hot shot CEO who has to produce and post office. You see it around Manhattan all the time... tiny little poor countries and their diplomats wasting valuable resources by driving around in Mercedes and eating at expensive restaurant. It's a shame UN officials waste public money by traveling J and F classes.

I strongly agree with you. I live in the capital of Brazil and I often see people from African Embassies and other countries having the lifestyle the richest people in any part of the world would have, while in their countries there are huge social problems with millions dying of hunger, AIDS, diseases and so on. If a country has lots of money sponsored by its own people to give away, then of course it's a different story.

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 8):
Yes, and public officials in most countries fly J/F. Public officials flying J/F can be justified as they remain more productive flying in those classes.

Well, how much more productive? How much more to the society they would give if they spend something like 8 hours in a C or F seat instead of an Economy seat. Worth paying like $3000+ ? In some some cases I would agree, but for a lot of them, not.

It's all about a "group" that has the power and tell how things should be done, like flying C or F. Not sure if it is about the real value of the "increased productivity".

goodmanr · Wed Oct 31, 2007 4:00 pm

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
It's a shame UN officials waste public money by traveling J and F classes.

They don't fly J/F, they fly Y. What other professionals fly Y on long-haul?? We owe them a debt of gratitude for their service.

Quoting Schipholjfk (Reply 6):
tiny little poor countries and their diplomats wasting valuable resources by driving around in Mercedes and eating at expensive restaurant

Blah blah blah, the US with our oh so superior budget management and perfectly uncorrupted government doesn't pay for this anyways.

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 8):
Yes, and public officials in most countries fly J/F. Public officials flying J/F can be justified as they remain more productive flying in those classes.

Most public officials do not fly J/F without a medical reason to do so. Y is the required class of service for 99% of public employees.

Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 18):
No, Geneva is also a business center, and a very, very wealthy city.

Yep - you are correct. It is very very wealthy and also very international. Whenever I fly this route, even at off-peak times, the cheapest Y far I can find is $1400 or so.

Flying Belgian · Wed Oct 31, 2007 4:26 pm

Quoting Behramjee (Reply 2):
fyi...QR is currently bleeding a whole load of $$$ on its new EWR and IAD flights (especially on the latter).

Speaking of QR, and though I'm sliding slightly off-topic, I just saw a picture of their cabin on jp.net, their A332 was flying with 24 pax on board from KIX to DOH !!! And the authour claims it's regulary the case !

Is this so common at QR ?

FB.

semsem · Wed Oct 31, 2007 9:40 pm

Smokinl they don't allow us in. So why provoke? Life is complicated enough. It would be dumb. As to Swiss World, they only lasted about 6 months. My cousin flew them and she showed me the menu. You had to buy your food but it was out of this world. Her flights were empty. They operated GVA to EWR.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net