Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Airlines, Airports & Routes
Reload this Page >

O'Leary; Air France-KLM the next Alitalia

Wikiposts
Search
Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

O'Leary; Air France-KLM the next Alitalia

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 24th Jun 2017, 09:01
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
O'Leary; Air France-KLM the next Alitalia

I'm well aware comments from Michael O’Leary generally have to be taken with a massive pinch of salt. However recent comments regarding Air France-KLM did make me wonder.

Looking at the financial reports of the company over the last few years it seems their profit are falling massively behind their competitors while last years profit was largely contributed to selling off the silverware. Not surprisingly since their direct legacy competitors IAG and Lufthansa went through a massive reorganisation over the last few years as a result of increased pressures from the Middle Eastern carriers and Ryanair/easyJet/Norwegian.

How much longer can the French and Dutch pilot unions frustrate the reorganisations required at Air France-KLM? And more importantly how much longer will the company be able to survive without reorganisation and (hidden) French/Dutch state subsidies?

Ryanair : Air France connaitra le męme sort qu?Alitalia | Air Journal
Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary has compared Air France’s situation to Alitalia’s, noting a similar issue with high employee levels and operating costs compared to passengers carried. He said Air France 'is sick and will probably be the next to go to the hospital'. Air France has 70,000 employees and carried 50 million passengers in 2016. In comparison, Ryanair employs 11,500 staff and carried over 106 million passengers in 2016.
NoCtot is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 08:11
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Council Van
I feel a little back handed, behind closed doors bail out from the respective governments might be in order conviniently overlooked by the Brussels beurocrats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Legally a total minefield and such a clandestine approach that MO'L will forensically monitor very closely.
mik3bravo is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 08:29
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm sure the comparison would still be dramatic, but it would be fairer to compare passenger-km rather than just passengers. You also have to see what activities are outsourced by MOL, but are in house by AF-KLM.
inOban is online now  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 10:20
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Róisín Dubh
Posts: 1,389
Received 11 Likes on 4 Posts
Also KLM are a healthy, profitable airline. Air France are the problem
Una Due Tfc is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 10:22
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 950
Received 60 Likes on 31 Posts
Originally Posted by Una Due Tfc
Also KLM are a healthy, profitable airline.
You wonder what drove them into the arms of AF if that's the case.
Andy_S is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 10:43
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
Shortly before KLM decided to merge with Air France, they were in a somewhat awkward position. BA were being pig-headed over a possible merger, linking up with Lufthansa would have raised competition concerns, there was bad blood with Alitalia, Swiss was weak and KLM realised there would be room for just 3 global alliances rather than 4. Furthermore, KLM while fairly well run no longer had the critical mass to compete as a global network carrier against the larger European players
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 11:22
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by inOban
I'm sure the comparison would still be dramatic, but it would be fairer to compare passenger-km rather than just passengers. You also have to see what activities are outsourced by MOL, but are in house by AF-KLM.

Even outsourced there is not 70,000 people involved.
racedo is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 13:20
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
KLM are not that healthy, they are still somewhat bloated and every now and again the fat kid wins. There are a few too many office clowns running all sorts of weird and wonderful initiatives, too many lazy cabin crew flying once or twice a month, weird and wonderful restrictions that result in European cabin crew doing one or two sectors a day and frontline staff who are positively poisonous to everybody they come into contact with. But by comparison with AF they are a fit, lean fighting machine.

PM
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 14:08
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,363
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I've received pretty good service on board KLM both short and longhaul. Also the service centre has been very responsive when I've needed help. However their "new" business class is very dated and is a world away from today's market leaders. There is also no way I fancy a 12 hour trip on a near 30 year old 747 Combi, when there are so many better alternatives out there.
As for AF- well there is no way in the world I would step onboard one of their aircraft. (personal choice- you might like them)
One wonders if KLM were not saddled with AF, they might actually have still been up there with the big boys.
Mr A Tis is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 15:06
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: London
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
KLM not merging with BA (as Willie Walsh has said himself) was without doubt one of the greatest missed opportunities in aviation.
nguba is online now  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 15:34
  #11 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 67
Posts: 10,146
Received 62 Likes on 50 Posts
I'd suggest that, if KLM were not with AF, they would be married to one of the other big teams but not alongside them. The rundown by davidjohnson6 shows that they had limited room.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 15:39
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
too many lazy cabin crew flying once or twice a month
However their "new" business class is very dated and is a world away from today's market leaders.
There is also no way I fancy a 12 hour trip on a near 30 year old 747 Combi, when there are so many better alternatives out there.
It's quite interesting how we all have different perceptions about these kind of things.

I have never come across lazy KLM cabin crew.

I find KLM's Business Class more than adequate for the price I pay.

Flying on well maintained 30 year old B747 Combis (which I have done numerous times) doesn't bother me at all.

I believe the Combis are about to be phased out anyway aren't they?
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 15:52
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Piltdown Man
KLM are not that healthy, they are still somewhat bloated and every now and again the fat kid wins. There are a few too many office clowns running all sorts of weird and wonderful initiatives, too many lazy cabin crew flying once or twice a month, weird and wonderful restrictions that result in European cabin crew doing one or two sectors a day and frontline staff who are positively poisonous to everybody they come into contact with. But by comparison with AF they are a fit, lean fighting machine.

PM
I would tend to agree and disagree at the same time. KLM are probably not as unhealthy as Air France however they are still far from healthy themselves.

Where Air France has sorted out most of their pilot inefficiency problems (working till 65 and reduced pension benefits nowadays) they are still struggling with the cabin crew and other staff.
KLM is completely the opposite and have sorted out most of their office and support staff but are heaving a cabin and pilot work force which are highly inefficient (still retiring at 56 and pretty much a final salary pension while doing around 700 flying hours on an annual basis)

KLM does however manage to fill their aircrafts resulting in a very good load factor. However, their costs (mainly crew costs) are so extraordinary high they only manage to make a small profit mainly due to the low fuel prices.
NoCtot is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2017, 16:18
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"I'm well aware comments from Michael O’Leary generally have to be taken with a massive pinch of salt."

I'd say he has been a damn sight more accurate over the last 20 years than any other airline CEO - sure he likes to generate headlines and he really irritates people but he's done extremely well whereas most of the others..... haven't
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2017, 08:06
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't like MOL at all, BUT, the man has a clear vision. So he might be right. Especially with
AF, it is still one of the best paid salary job. But the question is how long it is sustainable. The only reason why it is still like this is because of the strong unions and very protective market.
dboy is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2017, 13:10
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norwich
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I use them frequently short-haul and find the cabins and crew really good, but as others have said longhaul I'll choose a better airline with a nicer product and newer aircraft rather than an ancient KLM one as it's often cheaper even though KLM via Schiphol is more convenient for me.

Maybe it's time for a demerger for AF-KLM?
azzbo is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2017, 23:46
  #17 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by azzbo
Maybe it's time for a demerger for AF-KLM?
Air France-KLM's future threatened by mutual distrust: Report | NL Times


But then the reason KLM had to merge was they wouldn't survive on their own.
NoCtot is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2017, 10:27
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But then the reason KLM had to merge was they wouldn't survive on their own.
I know that was the rationale but the real reason was that opportunities for growth would be constrained, I very much doubt rational minds thought actual survival was as stake. We too often talk in hyperbole to get our own way, it allowed the sale to proceed but I don't buy it.
Skipness One Echo is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.