Based on nothing more than an amateur filming a take off from a passenger seat through a passenger window with a smart phone!
That would include the smart phone video taken out of the window of the B737 going off the end of Thessaloniki on landing, then.
You can market it any way you want however from start of rotation to end of runway is 5 seconds. Three seconds rotating till airborne (10 degrees pitch ish) then airborne for the 2 seconds before end runway. Whichever way you look at it that’s not cool!
I'll reserve judgment due to lack of facts about the takeoff performance calculation, but the above is true. The photo is referenced ground markings and they do not lie. The numbers might well have been correct, but the rotation technique not. If PF was fixated on the runway, and also PM, who then forgot to call "V1" or "Rotate" it could be that no-one was looking the ASI. PF saw the runway end closer than ideal, glanced inside, said WTF and rotated. It was not a 'haul off' the runway, but still a normal rotation suggesting no panic. But the CVR would have been interesting in those few seconds, and perhaps during a discussion once in crz.
Reference my earlier point about monitoring; I watched nearly every F/O, when PF, on CAVOK calm days, just fixated on the runway with blinkers and never once glancing around. It was if they had no idea what else was going on, anywhere, other than the tarmac rushing by. I expect there will be divergent opinions about that so let's not start a topic drift; I just throw it out there as to why there might have been a late rotation, because that seems to be the case.
There was one poster who was concerned about derate, assumed temp, and improved climb all together. Is that possible? I thought improved climb required full umph, or did I misunderstood the comments? I doubt improved climb was in play here, as excess runway is required, and I doubt 2011m gives any excess.