Right. Where do I start. How about back in the ninties. SAS did not recognise the threat of running in the reds early enough. They had enough cash anyway. Some years later they stopped recruitment. All of a sudden, it was revealed that the big giant was stumbling. At that point, around 2002, SAS passed PNR. They've been top heavy for many years but never been able to change the 10 to 1 ratio. Compared to Ryanairs 1 to 10. They've begged the government for money several times. Last time a year ago, it was made clear that this was the last time. Now the SAS Director of Finance said recently that everything is sold off and now they have to make money. After 18 consecutive years making a loss. So, how can anyone want to rejoin such a company? I'm quite puzzled. Have I misunderstood something?
If this is a genuine question I can offer my ideas. I suspect they go back to SK to squeeze some more money out of the company with the hope of retirement coming before bankruptcy. With big fatass seniority in SK they will bypass the zero-seniority payscale of DY. If youre wondering why they don't come running to FR instead, that's because its crap.
There are many business models that work in the airline industry without being a LCC. However, IMHO the only way SAS can survive is to compare itself with eg. Lufthansa, S'pore etc (STAR). They are both profitable airlines.
It all boils down to a few simple lines to compare with and see where it all goes wrong in the glass palace(s).
Number of employees per a/c Seat Revenue Seat cost
The other issue SAS has to struggle with are the unions who clearly don't give a rats about how salaries impact the cost structure and thereby survivability in the long run.
As the old saying goes - one can both have and eat the cake.
In a recent article in Forbes the average ticket (incl 1st class) LAX - LGA was $506 and the costs: Fuel: 98 Labour:95 A/c ownership: 25 Non-A/c ownership: 17 Non-emploee labour: 32 Partners & merchants: 54 INterest: 12 other airline exp: 27 Taxes: 75 Misc: 37
The numbers don't necessarily relate to SAS alone but to any airline. The reason why I took numbers from the US is that the competitive environment is bigger and it shows the cost break down to arrive at a 7% net profit margin.
Remember that SAS is/was losing money. If you dig out the last annual report from SAS and compare them you can potentially see where SAS go wrong.
If you feel that Lufthansa is a more appropriate comparison, and they made E1 billion profit last year, you can also use those.
Riiiight. I guess I pushed the right button, there. Nevertheless, no reasonable answer to a legitimate question; as to why people leave their current company and go back, only to risk the fear of redundancy once again? However, I do understand the general hostility in here. With that said, I did not insult anyone nor did I refer to anything but general information. The feedback here is clearly quite unpleasant reading. That only goes to say there's a huge degree of loyalty towards SAS. Which to a certain extent is an excellent thing. But, remember there should always be room for criticism without people referring to wartime images and such. How on earth some of you think I'm trying to promote Ryanair....IN HERE... is beyond my understanding.
Quagmire85, jag kan tänka mig att det är tvärtom, man ställer flygplan pga. pilotbrist. För förutom en del killar som varit där sedan 2003, typ, och har blivit baskaptener och andra management piloter (läs RYR-738-JOCKEY) så flyr de flesta kuskar detta skämt till flygbolag. Nu när de flesta andra bolag börjar rekrytera så är FR ett av de bolag som tappar piloter först...
Where shall I start? I refrained from commenting during SAS' last financial somersault where they managed to postpone a bankruptcy. Fabulous effort by the management. So they don't go bust...for now. Two weeks later they post a loss of 120 million Euro and warn the market of a bad 1st quarter 13' but include the savings they've made from exhausting their employees into the total 2013 budget. Now, the danish cabincrew union should all be fired. They are the extremes in this farse. Had they only understood that being responsible for safety on board an aircraft, boils down to mainly serving tea and coffee. Simply because aviation is after all fairly safe. Keeping a group of pilots and cabincrew who on average are 47 years old is beyond my understanding. They are smart, they know the business and therefore demand more from the management. I have heard of several pilots going back during the last year. For pension. Uh...right, what on earth will be left for pension 20 years from now. Guys, this outfit is going tits up. The sooner you acknowledge that, the sooner we can move on. And suck up the leftovers. Looking forward to the responses from the "blind" pilots in SAS. My last words for now: Lets all do a review of this thread in Jan 2014. I can guarantee that SAS will hit rock bottom. It will either go bankrupt or be sold...cheap. I feel sorry for everyone in SAS, but even more so for the ones that still believe they're on the ball and doesn't anticipate the repurcussions of being laid off. Some of the pilots have always been "winners" and therefore refuse to accept defeat. I have never been pro-Ryanair and I do not advocate a similar model. A collective voice of the workers is vital against the voice of the management. But, 39 different unions with different agendas is quite frankly ridiculous.
Last edited by RYR-738-JOCKEY; 14th Dec 2012 at 21:33.
Then we have Norwegian that is contemplating moving to Sweden because their staff cost is too high in Norway. However the crew there will serve scandi only with all long haul flights originating BKK. Guess what. The compensation there is a wee bit lower.
Compare this to sas. Old overpaid stallions and goats flying carbon steel instead of carbon fibre accounting for 10-15% higher fuel consumption whilst cost per seat is staggering compared to Norwegian. Sas may have woken up but many years to late.
SAS may be in trouble but let's see how long it takes before Norwegian's balloon runs out of air. How on earth are they going to finance 350 planes and now getting fierce competition from some of the major players outside Scandinavia. They have a marginal profit and not much cash in reserve compared to companies like Ryanair, easyJet and BA. The clock is ticking in my opinion.
Last edited by The Flying Cokeman; 15th Dec 2012 at 18:45.
Those airplanes are for an irish man who the yanks and the french wish not to have any business with, an irish man that only has spoken well about Norwegian and has sent much of his management to, now they are rapidly moving into a uniform outfit. Also both he and Kjos has been talking about a Europe with only 3 airlines in it. You do the laughing and I do the math, and the unions will have jack knickers on em'
I wish I could accuse you of mere cynicism. . . but am forced to give credence to your theory.
And the Airbii ? well there was a story doing the rounds involving NAS management being seen on occasions in the Vueling HQ, so, why not get shot of them there, or indeed Easy. Doubt they will ever wear a Red Nose.
Last edited by captplaystation; 16th Dec 2012 at 08:52.
DY, FR, VY and U2 reigning Europe in the future, talk about the four horsemen of the Apocalypse.... All we can do is hope and, if you believe in anything but Richard Dawkins, pray that somehow SAS will survive....