Covid-19; Impact on the aviation industry

Tenzor07

Saul88 wrote: »

Unfortunately I wouldn’t put too much faith in anything written by that journalist who is well known as having a click bait / shock style of writing and her normal area of expertise is show biz. Do a search on boards.
I wouldn’t trust her to be able to simply compile a truthful article from her interview notes.

I can't put any faith in the article that journo wrote as I'm not a subscriber to the Indo. Anyways, isn't that what they all do to get clicks and paying subsribers? Most of us are clever enough to make our own mind up.

Just liked the headline and have watched some of Professor Levitt's videos.

My point was to highlight the fact that borders are opening and flights resuming, this is a positive for the aviation industry..

Lapmo_Dancer

Trump to soon ease European ban:

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/tamarathiessen/2020/05/28/us-travel-trump-says-europe-arrivals-soon-welcome/amp/

Sheep Shagger

€10bn state bail out rubber stamped for the Germans...a kick in the bollocks for the likes of Aer Lingus and Ryanair

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2382PE?__twitter_impression=true

flanzer

Lapmo_Dancer wrote: »

Trump to soon ease European ban:

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/tamarathiessen/2020/05/28/us-travel-trump-says-europe-arrivals-soon-welcome/amp/

The way the US are handling the virus, it'll be more like EU banning flights to the US, or at least enforcing a quarantine when travelling back from the US

cson

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

€10bn state bail out rubber stamped for the Germans...a kick in the bollocks for the likes of Aer Lingus and Ryanair

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2382PE?__twitter_impression=true

That's not a bunch of roses for LH, giving up a decent whack of equity and landing slots for it. I'm pretty sure IAG or Ryanair shareholders wouldn't think the equivalent deal would be a good idea if they can raise capital and restructure on their own terms.

TheDriver

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

Given that this will include people who booked flights and summer holidays last winter, people who rebooked for July due to the difficulty of getting a refund for flights originally booked for March to June dates and given that it applies to a significantly reduced schedule, I don't actually think this is a particularly encouraging number at all.

It suggests that there have been extremely few recent bookings that weren't date changes for previously cancelled flights.

With random quotes from tourism ministers in Europe with doubt, there needs to be more certainty if they want guests.

Sheep Shagger

cson wrote: »

That's not a bunch of roses for LH, giving up a decent whack of equity and landing slots for it. I'm pretty sure IAG or Ryanair shareholders wouldn't think the equivalent deal would be a good idea if they can raise capital and restructure on their own terms.

Giving up some slots is better than giving them all up when you go bust.

You wouldnt mind but a lot of these legacy flag carriers are unionized inefficient job agencies masquerading as airlines.

billy few mates

Lapmo_Dancer wrote: »

Trump to soon ease European ban:

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/tamarathiessen/2020/05/28/us-travel-trump-says-europe-arrivals-soon-welcome/amp/

Yeah because we're all dying to visit that sh1tshow at the moment...

A friend of ours had booked the family package holiday for this summer but hadn't fully paid for it before this all kicked off. The tour operator gave them two options, pay the remaining balance in full or lose what they'd paid already for not fulfilling their side of the contract or don't pay the remaining balance and receive a non refundable voucher for a holiday next summer. Rather than lose what they'd paid they opted for the voucher but the travel agent then told them that what they'd paid was really only equivalent to a small deposit as next summer's holiday packages are going to be a lot more expensive than previous years.
If it's too expensive and they can't go they'll end up losing the value of the voucher.

Nijmegen

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

€10bn state bail out rubber stamped for the Germans...a kick in the bollocks for the likes of Aer Lingus and Ryanair

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2382PE?__twitter_impression=true

It's $10bn, €9bn in German dollars. So there's a lot of strings to this and to be honest it reads like a model bailout to me.

Of the €9bn, €300 million buys the German government a 20% stake in the company outright. Another €5.7bn is a capital injection with repayable coupons, that convert into another 5% of equity if repayments are missed. The coupon carries interest of between 4% and 9.5% depending on when it's repaid (to promote faster repayment) at a time when German government ten year bonds are being issued for -0.45% interest. There's then €3bn in loans from a variety of German banks private and underwritten by a state public bank, all of which have a term of 3 years.

A bung this ain't, and given everyone needs to prop up just about everything at the moment it's a good model for airlines and non-airlines alike where this level of a move is required.

Is it unfair on Ryanair? Sure, maybe, they like state aid when it's airport subsidies and the like to them. But Germany nor any other nation can let their major airlines go to the wall, it will slow their overall economic recovery.

cson

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

Giving up some slots is better than giving them all up when you go bust.

You wouldnt mind but a lot of these legacy flag carriers are unionized inefficient job agencies masquerading as airlines.

LH have been profitable for 13 of the last 15 years. They're a pretty well run operation. No business can survive a 95%+ evisceration of their revenue.

You should do some research before you go soap boxing, people would respect what you have to say a lot more, and probably may even take you seriously. What you're posting is the equivalent of 'talk to Joe'.

Blut2

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

Given that this will include people who booked flights and summer holidays last winter, people who rebooked for July due to the difficulty of getting a refund for flights originally booked for March to June dates and given that it applies to a significantly reduced schedule, I don't actually think this is a particularly encouraging number at all.

It suggests that there have been extremely few recent bookings that weren't date changes for previously cancelled flights.

The number of domestic EU flights booked 6months+ in advance is minimal. As the article states Ryanair in normal times would only be at 60% of seats booked for July as of this week - nevermind 6 months ago.

The fact that the data from both the US, and China, shows significantly increasing flight loads going forward would also quite strongly disagree with the theory that the only bookings are leftovers from before the crisis.

Nijmegen

Nijmegen wrote: »

It's $10bn, €9bn in German dollars. So there's a lot of strings to this and to be honest it reads like a model bailout to me.

Of the €9bn, €300 million buys the German government a 20% stake in the company outright. Another €5.7bn is a capital injection with repayable coupons, that convert into another 5% of equity if repayments are missed. The coupon carries interest of between 4% and 9.5% depending on when it's repaid (to promote faster repayment) at a time when German government ten year bonds are being issued for -0.45% interest. There's then €3bn in loans from a variety of German banks private and underwritten by a state public bank, all of which have a term of 3 years.

A bung this ain't, and given everyone needs to prop up just about everything at the moment it's a good model for airlines and non-airlines alike where this level of a move is required.

Is it unfair on Ryanair? Sure, maybe, they like state aid when it's airport subsidies and the like to them. But Germany nor any other nation can let their major airlines go to the wall, it will slow their overall economic recovery.

It is unfair to Ryanair but they'll survive. It is terrible for Aer Lingus who will have to retrench on German routes. In Germany nobody can figure out who will pick up the tiny few slots they have been forced to surrender due to all the limitations on their use.
Lufthansa will just retire a few small unprofitable CRJs and then they'll have satisified the requirement.
Lufthansa had around four times the turnover of Ryanair and were neck and neck on passenger volumes but considerably less profitable. This is social welfare for dinosaur and will cause other E.U. small airlines to waste away to nothing.
It is totally against the spirit of the E.U. and the coronavirus is a convenient excuse to funnel billions to lufthansa who would have really suffered in a normal 2020.
At the rate Lufthansa are burning cash they'll be back for another handout sometime before next summer.

LXFlyer

Deleted User wrote: »

It is unfair to Ryanair but they'll survive. It is terrible for Aer Lingus who will have to retrench on German routes. In Germany nobody can figure out who will pick up the tiny few slots they have been forced to surrender due to all the limitations on their use.
Lufthansa will just retire a few small unprofitable CRJs and then they'll have satisified the requirement.
Lufthansa had around four times the turnover of Ryanair and were neck and neck on passenger volumes but considerably less profitable. This is social welfare for dinosaur and will cause other E.U. small airlines to waste away to nothing.
It is totally against the spirit of the E.U. and the coronavirus is a convenient excuse to funnel billions to lufthansa who would have really suffered in a normal 2020.
At the rate Lufthansa are burning cash they'll be back for another handout sometime before next summer.

Exactly why will Aer Lingus have to retrench from the German market because of this?

They are still in a good financial condition.

They only compete with LH to/from Frankfurt and Munich and don’t exactly flood those markets with flights as it is (Max. 2 Fights per day).

If anything I would suggest it will be Lufthansa that cut back as the market won’t exist for the level of flights they have on the Frankfurt and Munich routes which won’t be sustainable.

The funding doesn’t mean that LH is able to charge bargain basement fares across its network.

Incidentally, LH have already stated that they’re retiring 100 aircraft and 10,000 employees - that’s a lot more than a few CRJs.

Sheep Shagger

cson wrote: »

LH have been profitable for 13 of the last 15 years. They're a pretty well run operation. No business can survive a 95%+ evisceration of their revenue.

You should do some research before you go soap boxing, people would respect what you have to say a lot more, and probably may even take you seriously. What you're posting is the equivalent of 'talk to Joe'.

I said a lot of these carriers, not all.

A business making a profit doesn't automatically mean it is well run. It could be fleecing customers and/or receiving preferential treatment on its home turf that is artificially propping it up.

I think everybody knows the French love their unions especially those in the transport sector.

Swiss, Air France, Alitalia and Lux Air are all legacy carriers that spring to mind as not being particularly efficient as some other carriers but they sure know how to pick up state aid to keep those inefficient
practices going.

The collapse of many of these legacy carriers would just be too embarrassing for their respective governments and that's been documented in the past.

Oh here's a few more billion for the Italians after how many historical bail outs Ailtalia has had over the years...

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/31/alitalia-too-italian-to-fail-293474

Sheep Shagger

EI are only surviving because of their parent - if they didn't have that it would (sadly) be toast by now.

Similar to NZ where the government had to prop up the national carrier, the Irish state would have had to do the same.

The other thing EI has going for it is the fact it has a robust business model, the old airline of the early 2000's would have been dead long ago.

LXFlyer

LXFlyer wrote: »

Exactly why will Aer Lingus have to retrench from the German market because of this?

They are still in a good financial condition.

They only compete with LH to/from Frankfurt and Munich and don’t exactly flood those markets with flights as it is (Max. 2 Fights per day).

If anything I would suggest it will be Lufthansa that cut back as the market won’t exist for the level of flights they have on the Frankfurt and Munich routes which won’t be sustainable.

The funding doesn’t mean that LH is able to charge bargain basement fares across its network.

Incidentally, LH have already stated that they’re retiring 100 aircraft and 10,000 employees - that’s a lot more than a few CRJs.

Let us hope that Aer Lingus aren't as complacent as you are.

LXFlyer

Deleted User wrote: »

Let us hope that Aer Lingus aren't as complacent as you are.

You didn’t answer the question.

All airlines will be retrenching in some form or another after this.

Why specifically should this particular bailout mean that Aer Lingus will have to cutback more in Germany than elsewhere as you seem to be suggesting.

Lufthansa have to fly. Staff have to be kept occupied. Lufthansa will fly and burn through their money while Aer Lingus and countless other small airlines will retrench.
Lufthansa will fly even though their business passengers will be working from home and not travelling on business trips for the next 18 months partly due to virus restrictions and partly so that their employers can economise on any costs possible.
Non-business flyers won't pay the outrageous business seat prices Lufthansa demands.

LXFlyer

Deleted User wrote: »

Lufthansa have to fly. Staff have to be kept occupied. Lufthansa will fly and burn through their money while Aer Lingus and countless other small airlines will retrench.
Lufthansa will fly even though their business passengers will be working from home and not travelling on business trips for the next 18 months partly due to virus restrictions and partly so that their employers can economise on any costs possible.
Non-business flyers won't pay the outrageous business seat prices Lufthansa demands.

So the 10,000 employee cutback won’t have affect services?

Come off it.

You’re being very simplistic.

Every airline will be retrenching, including the Lufthansa group.

I’d also suggest that the German government wouldn’t be too keen on the airline burning cash unnecessarily as opposed to maintaining key connectivity.

keen or not, the German Government won't have much control over their staff getting paid their wages every month and that alone is enough for them to run through the gift of 10Bn before next summer arrives.

TheDriver

I see the Greeks have done a change on incoming visitors. Now basing it on origin airport according to risk and EASA

Kcormahs

Will Aer Lingus get a bailout from the Irish Government too as Lufthansa did? Or not on the cards? Also any update on how many staff Aer Lingus is going to let go? Still 900 or more now with situation only getting worse?

Lockheed

Kcormahs wrote: »

Will Aer Lingus get a bailout from the Irish Government too as Lufthansa did? Or not on the cards? Also any update on how many staff Aer Lingus is going to let go? Still 900 or more now with situation only getting worse?

Doubtful because the Irish Government no longer own a majority stake in Aer Lingus. IAG is a Spanish company really so it'd be up to their government, i think the british government has already arranged for a bailout for BA but I'm not sure how that works

VG31

Lockheed wrote: »

Doubtful because the Irish Government no longer own a majority stake in Aer Lingus. IAG is a Spanish company really so it'd be up to their government, i think the british government has already arranged for a bailout for BA but I'm not sure how that works

Austria, Belgium and Switzerland bailed out Austrian Airlines, Brussels Airlines and Swiss respectively, despite them being part of the Lufthansa Group (a German company). Aer Lingus is still an Irish company.

fr336

Whenever I hear FR having a pop at Lufthansa I think back to when I was a kid and bought a toy model Lufthansa plane...on a Ryanair flight.

California Dreamer

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

EI are only surviving because of their parent - if they didn't have that it would (sadly) be toast by now.
.

Nice opinion, but I suppose the 1 billion they have in cash reserves might shield them. Why do you think they were such an attractive investment by IAG!?

stephenjmcd

https://twitter.com/etihad/status/1268456099646255105?s=19

goingnowhere

Best of luck getting to the airport with the travel distance limitations

Bussywussy

goingnowhere wrote: »

Best of luck getting to the airport with the travel distance limitations

Not gonna be a problem realistically

Micky 32

goingnowhere wrote: »

Best of luck getting to the airport with the travel distance limitations

Can they actually prevent someone leaving the country though if you booked a flight?