Thursday, January 5, 2017

EX-YU airlines silent on 2016 financial performance


The national carriers from the former Yugoslavia have been noticeably silent on forecasting their profit margins for 2016, in contrast to previous years, raising questions about the health of their respective businesses.

Air Serbia, which posted a 3.9 million euro net profit in 2015 and talked up its positive business trends and annual profit margins as early as October 2015, has made no mention of its financial outlook for 2016. During the year, the airline launched long haul flights to New York, which undoubtedly had an impact on its business. While the carrier has been encouraged by better than expected passenger demand and revenue from cargo on the route, the Serbian Prime Minister has said that the service would likely generate losses during the first two years of operations. On the other hand, Air Serbia's reduced 2014/15 winter schedule is said to have increased profits, the average load factor and revenues according to CEO Dane Kondić. Under a takeover agreement between Etihad Airways and the Serbian government, Air Serbia had been exempt from paying for a number of services at Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport. However, these subsidies ended on January 27, 2016, after which the carrier began making payments.

Croatia Airlines has also been cautious in forecasting its 2016 financial results, unlike the year before. Through its own admission, the Croatian carrier has said that, due to the seasonal nature of the local market, the third quarter is the only profitable one for the company, covering losses from the first, second and fourth quarters. Croatia Airlines posted a net profit of 1.9 million euros in 2015. However, during the first three quarters of 2016, the Croatian carrier’s consolidated net profit fell by 33% to 609.600 euros, down on 2015's 910.260 euros, and well below 2014's 5.6 million euro profit. Critics have said that the airline propped up its 2015 result by selling its subsidies and property, however, the company has denied such claims. Plans to sell slots at London's Heathrow Airport will not have had an impact on its financial performance in 2016 as a transaction has not taken place yet. Croatia Airlines said it was confident in posting a profit in 2015 as early as September of that year. No similar predictions have been made in 2016.

Adria Airways kept quiet on its 2015 net loss of 9.2 million euros for nine months. In spite of this, the Slovenian carrier's new management vowed to swing the company back to profit within a year through cost reductions, including cuts to unnecessary passenger services and aircraft handling services. Adria's CEO, Arno Schuster, previously said, "Under new ownership, the company enhanced its capital and launched intensive restructuring that will lead to an improvement in results in the business years to come". During 2016, the Slovenian airline sold a Bombardier CRJ200 aircraft but also saw its commercial cooperation agreement with Estonia's Nordica terminated. It has never been disclosed how much of a financial incentive Adria received for its partnership with Nordica, which was negotiated by the carrier while it was still in state hands. According to unverified reports from the Slovenian media, Adria recorded a three million euro loss during the first three quarters of 2016, which is only slightly lower than the year before. It has also been suggested that the airline has sold its 55-year-old brand name and is now renting it instead.

Montenegro Airlines was the worst performer out of the national carriers in 2015, recording a historic net loss of 10.4 million euros, while its debts totalled sixty million euros. Last week, the carrier said its consolidation measures throughout 2016 have reduced its long-term liabilities from 81 to 37 million euros. Through network reductions and a better average cabin load factor, the airline generated 3.2 million euros in savings. Lower fuel prices also contributed to the airline lowering its expenses. During 2016, Montenegro Airlines terminated the lease of an Embraer E190 jet. The carrier said the move would produce three million euros in savings. Over the past years, the Montenegrin government covered the leasing costs for the jet, however, since January 2016, the airline has been obliged to do so alone, following protests from the European Commission that further assistance would breach strict European Union rules on state aid.

129 comments:

  1. If Air Serbia pulls out a profit for 2016 it will be the pinnacle of creative accounting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree and I think that with New York and the end of BEG subsidies it will be impossible to do so.

      What I don't get is this obsession to report a profit from the very start. Does anyone expect them to do so? Of course not. Jat's losses were over €70 million per year. They would need at least 5 years to consolidate so as to break-even.

      I think it has become clear that Dane should go just like so many CEOs left AB and other EY affiliates. Time for someone else to step in.

      Delete
    2. Well, that would then put them in the very same basket as OU, minus the physical asset disinvestment. The other two are not even worth mentioning.

      Delete
    3. It will also be interesting to see how JU will be affected by the fact that it has to make payments to Belgrade Airport.

      Delete
    4. Based on above doubt JU will post a profit. Little wonder EY want out. Another bad investment decision, unfortunately.

      Delete
    5. Completely agree that it was very shortsighted to present profits in early years. Now you are almost expected to have a massive profit otherwise the (often unreasonable) public will attack you. But they brought it on themselves.

      Delete
    6. @ AnonymousJanuary 5, 2017 at 9:28 AM
      And where did you get that EY wants out. It's the opposite. JU is the least of their worries.
      http://www.exyuaviation.com/2016/12/no-knowledge-of-etihad-shift-from-air.html

      Delete
    7. Well whether long haul flights generated a loss is one thing. But realistically speaking it was probably the best year to venture into the long haul market if you are already planning to do so considering how low fuel prices are. Plus they launched the route with minimal cost since the plane was from the Etihad group, training, logistics etc.

      Delete
    8. The time would have been right if they had cash reserves and a decent network which would feed these flights. JFK should have happened in 2020, not 2016.

      Delete
    9. @Anonymous January 5, 2017 at 9.31 AM. I'm guessing that EY will be committed to JU in the hope that they 'may' turn a profit in 2019. Cash reserves are fast running out. Yep. Commercial reality takes precedence, unfortunately.

      Delete
    10. JU's losses are eclipsed by those at AB, AZ and even EY. For them Air Serbia is a stable and strong airline.

      Delete
    11. If you think that it is a stable and strong investment, I suggest buying it when it comes up for sale. Probably pick it up for 1 Euro and comes with a bonus. Debt!

      Delete
    12. Ja tebi serdare, ti meni vojvodo. Sit se covek naprica sa samim sobom :D

      Delete
    13. Without JFK flights, JU would have been stable. Not necessarily profitable, but stable. With long haul eating up the reserves, JU has to drop its boutique airline philosophy and follow the leader in the European market, i.e. Lufthansa - introduce fares without baggage, charge for seat assignment, meals, etc - in order to try getting some extra cash. Hopefully, they award loyalty in some way, or their pax will just turn to the another cheapest airline out there.

      The biggest mistake was trying to sell as better than everybody else at rock bottom prices. Which they were! But now, expectations are (unrealistically) high, and as someone said, commercial reality takes precedence. I don't see anyone trashing OE for Do&Co meals they charge 15+ euros, but you can take it to the bank JU will have a hard time should they introduce something similar.

      Delete
    14. I agree with you Last Anon. They should have gone for an evolutionary process, not a revolutionary one.
      The big difference between JU and LH is that the latter is based in Europe's number 1 economy and it can fill its premium cabins without any problem. Air Serbia should have transitioned from Jat into an airBaltic style airline.
      I fear that 2017 will be a painful one for the airline but it's better to introduce these changes while oil is still affordable.

      I fear that if JU goes too far in trashing its legacy status by introducing ancillary fees then the difference between them and any lowcost out there won't be as great.

      Delete
    15. 'I fear that if JU goes too far in trashing its legacy status by introducing ancillary fees..'

      Forgot to add: by introducing way too many ancillary fees...

      Delete
    16. They wanted to go this way from the onset. It took time to change to new GDS and reservation system which would allow them to do this. Otherwise, why spend the money and resources on it.

      On the other hand, subsidies to Air Serbia will continue in 2017 as well according to the official budget proposal: http://www.parlament.gov.rs/upload/archive/files/cir/pdf/zakoni/2016/3081-16.pdf (page 100 of the budget)

      Delete
    17. My good that is almost 100 million EUR for those companies where Air Serbia is included.

      It is written there "By contract of foundation". I wonder how that is true? Till now they payed to Air Serbia 157 million, and old debts are not including in that number. Obligation was 100 million. So they are 57 million more than Etihad. So, what is the reason to proceed with those subventions without same share of Etihad?

      Delete
    18. Interesting read. So the government will spend in 2017 €7.769.230 on repaying loans it took for Air Serbia?

      Then I see that JU was also classified among subventions as a company of special national interest. The total budget for these companies is 11 billion Dinars or €88.000.000.

      So what happened with all those who were claiming that JU is not getting any subventions from the government?

      Delete
    19. There is also another part of the budget where the government must pay the loan back since it was a guarantor. Does that mean JU took a loan but then stopped paying for it?

      Along with JU there are several other government institutions that will have their loans paid by the government.

      Total amount for these is €338.306.452

      Delete
    20. What a shock!
      People where just lying when they where writing again and again the ASL stopped getting subventions and that the Government and EY are equal partners.
      They have the shame number of shares but the Government is investing a whole lot more onto the airline that EY.
      No wonder it is the only European investment of the EY group that they are not trying to get rid off.
      Tee state budget makes sure that the Arabs will not lose any money on the ASL project.

      Delete
    21. But what will happen one day when SNS is no longer in power? This is their pet project.

      Delete
    22. "Without JFK flights, JU would have been stable"
      True to certain extent. Launching JFK was a rushed and unecceasry thing to do even with the low oil prices. Aegean, Ukraine International (minus the long haul flights) and Air Baltic models are what can save JU.

      Delete
    23. My impression is that you are not sure yourself what these numbers you cited actually mean (old multi-year arrangements, old debts or something completely new). Second, you have no idea how much money is actually allocated to Air Serbia.
      You may be right, you may be wrong. Until that is clear, please do not speculate.
      Half-truths and wild guesses serve no other purpose than to deceive and harm.

      Delete
    24. "But what will happen one day when SNS is no longer in power? This is their pet project."
      SNS will be for a very long time in power unfortunately. When looking from outside, it seems that the vast majority of people in rural areas are voting for them. At the same time urban centres will vote for a wide range of candidates which results in many candidates/parties receiving only a few percent and when you add all things up SNS will win. I could be very wrong on this one, but that is my view I have from abroad

      Delete
    25. Anon 4.16

      There is only one truth, Air Serbia is still milking the national budget. Also, the loans are Air Serbia's not Jat's. They were taken out when the government was investing in them.

      The truth is out...

      Delete
    26. If that was true, EU Commission would quickly react to punish ASL, which would lose major rights and freedoms in EU.
      There is a reason you are not more specific. You have no idea what these numbers actually mean. You are simply trolling.

      I see a lot of it on news portals in Serbia and it is very annoying. Please don't do it.

      Delete
    27. Huh? The EU wouldn't do anything to Serbia because it doesn't have the right to. That would be like banning Turkish Airlines from flying into the EU because they get government funds. LOL

      Just stop embarrassing yourself.

      Delete
    28. You are the one embarrasing yourself. Read the last sentence of the article or simply google a bit to educate yourself on what rights the EU has with candidate countries.

      Delete
    29. You should go educate yourself. The Serbian parliament has yet to modify the constitution which would allow the EU to implement these directives in the country.

      Delete
    30. Anon 16.59 is right.
      Your claims are also very arrogant. Media scene in Serbia is not in great shape, but there are still few good economic journalists, who would dig up such scandalous state behavior and write about it.

      They have their good reputation to protect and would need solid facts and numbers. You, on the other hand, can make as wild claims as you like that fit best in your black & white worldview. No responsibility.

      Delete
    31. Turkey is a candidate country since 2005.

      Delete
    32. Yeah, my black and white world which is powered by black and white facts taken from the national budget. Why don't you go and read it yourself before writing absolute nonsense on here.

      It clearly says that over 7 million will be paid this year for Air Serbia's loans since the government is the guarantor. Plus JU will get more millions since its a of vital importance to the country.

      It's all there. You would know if you actually bothered to read it.

      Delete
    33. Look, I think that you probably have good intentions. Your wild speculations and blanket accusations, do more harm than good.
      Solid and specific data and an analysis based on it, not on emotions would help your case much more. But first you have to be very specific and reliable.

      Delete
    34. Ok, I am sorry, I will try not to quote the national budget the next time. :)

      Delete
    35. While Serbia may not yet be an EU member, the fact is that for the purposes of aviation, it is. The ECAA of which Serbia is a part of, obliges Serbia (read, Air Serbia) to comply with all aspects of EU law in order for it to avail itself of the rights and privileges that the ECAA open skies agreement provides. This includes all forms of govt funding - meaning anything that could be construed as state aid.

      There is no shortage of airlines in the EU who would not hesitate to raise a complaint to the EU if they felt that they were being disadvantaged in any way.

      So, for the time being, Air Serbia seems to be in compliance with these obligations, or else its wings would for sure be clipped.

      Remember, the EU spent 2 years closely investigating the issue of effective control and state aid before giving a green light last year...

      Delete
    36. Turkey is a candidate for the EU since 2005.
      Yet the EU Commission can do nothing to it regarding all the subsidies that TK has received over the years.

      So instead of attacking the messengers try t justify the message.
      Why is the state's contribution to the ASL venture so much bigger than EY's and why is the state responsible for all of its loans.
      Serbia assumes all the risk but owns only half of the airline.
      Abu Dhabi can not lose with this investment, Serbia will cover all their loses and more.

      Delete
    37. It can't enforce it on Turkey because Turkey is not a membet of the European Common Aviation Area. Jeez you are thick.

      Delete
    38. Anonymous @ 6.26pm .... and Jat Airways was better for the bottomless pit that it was for the last 20 years of its existence ?

      The govt decided that it wanted a strategic investor and remember, that it tried twice (unsuccessfully) to find one until Etihad came along.

      You cannot deny that wht it has today is infinately better than what Jat was, bringing so much economic benefit to the economy in terms of jobs, people paying their taxes, local suppliers winning business and not least of all, what it has done for BEG airport - where the govt will achieve a windfall gain when it privatises the airport this year.

      Even if Etihad walks away, the govt will be left with a much better airline than the one it got ride of in 2013.

      Moreover, the broader economic benefit that Air Serbia has delivered will in itself pay for its investment many times over ....

      Delete
    39. Anon 6:43 PM
      Thank you for finally admitting what everyone else was saying all along.
      ASL is a government prestige project that is subsidized by the tax payers and whatever happens the tax payers will be there to continue funding it.

      Delete
    40. And JAT wasn't ?

      Delete
    41. Nice that we continue on that same road...

      Delete
    42. @ An. 9:39

      JAT wasn't. Jat Airways was. Jugoslovenski Aerotransport, at those times, was something today's ex-yu peanut airlines will never be. And if you want to comment on this blog, please learn the difference between Jat and JAT. Best regards from ex-JAT (not Jat) employee !!!

      Delete
    43. JAT operated in a much larger country with more airports than what "peanuts" have at their disposal. It also operated with heavy government support and in completely different, fully regulated aviation market. Perhaps not in the first decade or two, but later JAT really was a prestige project for Tito, he was personally involved in DC-10 puchase. There is no point in comparing JAT with Air Serbia, Adria etc...

      Delete
    44. Well, Vucic was personally involved in launching New York and in inteoducing the A332. Kind of the same. Air Serbia is SNS' vanity project.

      The whole point of this discussion is the fact that JU still receives money from the government even though many have claimed this wasn't the case while all those who claimed otherwise were called haters.

      Delete
    45. So did JAT/Jat (and whatever else you want to call it).... Infact, JAT/Jat received significantly more money than did/does Air Serbia and the return on both could not be more starkly different...

      Delete
    46. Vucic is involved in opening everything including school backyards, does that make them his vanity projects too? Not even close to Tito's involvement in DC-10. I researched that part of JAT history and it's wrong to suggest two are the same.

      JU receives investment as planned and laid out at the onset, still below levels that had to be invested in Jat for many years before 2013 plus all the debt in 2013. You have to be financially illiterate or plain hater if you don't recognize Air Serbia rebirth as a good decision. It's 2017, move on.

      Delete
  2. I don't think it was a good year for any airline which is why they are so silent, which is a shame considering most airlines in Europe had a better year especially because of record low fuel prices.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "It has also been suggested that the airline has sold its 55-year-old brand name and is now renting it instead".

    wow how low can you go?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Desperate times call for desperate measures. They needed cash fast and that was the only way at that time.

      Delete
    2. It was the only thing left to sell. All other property has been sold. All they had was the last plane they owned - the CRJ200 and the brand. Now both are gone.

      Delete
    3. What's interesting that the brand has been sold to 4K Invest parent company. So they keep the money in the family.

      Delete
    4. And if they go bust 4K will own the name and can charge millions for it to be bought.

      Delete
    5. There will be a lot of creative accounting coming from them for last year.

      Delete
    6. There is no creative accounting in the Milky Way galaxy that could magically turn a few million euros loss into profit.

      Delete
    7. The thing is, Adria's new owners were only looking at the income side of the balance sheet when they bought the company. They thought by optimising the business process, the company would suddenly be making a profit. Aviation ain't that easy.

      Delete
    8. Given that there is no more property left to sell and no funds from the government, it might be the last year of JP...

      Delete
  4. Croatia Airlines will probably have a small profit but I doubt it will be near 2015 result. There was nothing to sell in 2016.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, since they were stopped short of their creative machinations with London slots, they might very well end the year with a big fat minus.

      Delete
    2. It will all depend how Q4 performed. Q3 which is their only profitable month like the article says did not perform as good as previous years so it is possible they will have a minus.

      Delete
    3. Did they sell anything in 2016? In 2015 it was a plane, Pleso prijevoz, share in amadeus Croatia I think.

      Delete
    4. What plane did they sell in 2015, for how much and who bought it?

      Delete
    5. They sold an A320 for spare parts. It was taken apart in the Netherlands (this might have happened in 2014 I might have mixed up the years).

      Delete
    6. Alen Šćuric PurgerJanuary 5, 2017 at 9:04 PM

      Not true about A320. One A320 was sent back to lessor in 2012 (begging of restructuration), so it was not sold. There were some sell and lease back after that but not for spare parts. CTN still use those.

      Delete
  5. Maybe Daliborka left Montenegro when she realised the loss the airline will report.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hahah are you serious? She probably got offered an embassy post or an important position in the new government. If she didn't leave because of 10,4 million EUR loss in 2015 it wouldn't have been the reason in 2016 either.

      Delete
  6. It will be interesting to see how ASGS performs in 2014, 2015 and 2016.

    Their 2013 numbers weren't as great.

    Iznos iznad visine kapitala: €5.158.887

    ReplyDelete
  7. I also noticed that none of them were boasting about how great and how big of a profit they will have.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are right and for the first time we saw Kondich admit that they made mistakes and that they are 'wiser' now. What I wonder is who will pay for their lack of wisdom?

      Delete
    2. The biggest mistake about NY was how late ticket sales began and had the *subject to government approval notice next to them which is a major turn off for any perspective customer. Plus many had already bought their tickets with other airlines by that time for the summer.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous at 9:43 AM
      Many posters were saying that last year but the standard response was to call them "haters" and to delete their posts...

      Delete
    4. Anon at 9.43am .... your post is misinformed - JU had load factors over 80 over the summer on their JFK service, which contradicts what you wrote.

      As for the "subject to govt approval" notice, this was imposed by the FAA, not JU, so they were simply complying with the regulations in accordance with the authorities.

      Hope all you want, but the JFK service is here to stay

      Delete
    5. Anon at 6:35 PM
      JFK flights were offered at rock bottom prices.
      So the point of the 9:43 PM stands, this route will have a very negative effect on JU 2016 financial results.

      Delete
  8. The longer it takes to find out the financial results the more you know they were bad :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep waiting to hear what kind of spin each airline will put on the results. Usually they love to avoid their consolidated profits/losses and instead just write how they have record revenue.

      Delete
  9. We should have bets on who each CEO will blame for their poor performance. No doubt Kucko will blame LCCs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MGX will say the loss is because of the previous management (which was replaced 4 years ago!). That has been their go-to catch phrase for everything bad at the company.

      Delete
  10. My prediction is that OU had a -1 loss, Air Serbia around -5, Adria -6 and Montenegro -8 (million)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why the hell do you think OU will have smaller loose then JU.Only unsold thing in OU is Kucko's underwear but not for so long they will sell even that.

      Delete
    2. Because OU didn't have any major adventures, their business model didn't change that much and they did launch 4 routes where three were definitely profitable.

      Delete
    3. What is their business model? To sell property for 4 years to show barely a profit at the end of the year?

      Delete
    4. If it is so good, why don't we ask them when they money for LHR slots kicks in.But i guess they will sell something else.Like their brand,.

      Delete
    5. No one is saying their business model is good but their expenses have not increased dramatically this year. Their loss will be between €1 and €5 million. Not more than that.

      Air Serbia on the other hand is looking at a loss between €10 and €20 million. They are a bigger airline that launched unprofitable long-haul flights.

      Delete
    6. Time will tell but for sure NYC flight cant be that money loosing.

      Delete
    7. It is because from Jan to May it will fly only three weekly. Lease will still have to be paid.

      Delete
    8. On the other hand, A330 flew a little more than six months, not a full year.
      Plus the first half of the year should have been more profitable than the same period in 2015 (they decreased money-losing routes).
      The summer was very nice for ASL.
      Fuel was relatively cheap.
      Eventual losses could be created primarily in the last quarter.
      And by paying airport fees.
      How much it could be is a fair question.
      A break-even or small eventual profit would not surprise me to much however.

      Delete
    9. It is not just about cost of leasing A330, but also cost of crews which are home doing nothing but still get paid. Than insurance, maintenance, airport tax for storage...

      Delete
  11. Balkan way of doing business. Don't tell anyone :).

    ReplyDelete
  12. My prediction: OU - +1M, JU - -17M, JP - -5M, YM - -7M

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not so sure about OU. They wanted to sell LHR slots to finance engine maintenance. Not a great sign

      Delete
    2. For sure OU -1M but hey lets put JU on -17M.JU is at least not on then knees, like OU is so please when you want to say something, think about it in your case twice.JU -17M you just made me laught.Good luck when results come.And when they do conspiracy theories will kick in.

      Delete
  13. It means something needs to change in 2017 at all airlines.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Montenegro and then Air Serbia will be the greatest losers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have the stats?

      Delete
    2. My prediction biggest loss maker will be JU -20m, YM -9m, JP -8m and OU will do a profit +1m

      Delete
    3. JU loss will be -39m, my predictions

      Delete
    4. ...And OU profit around +4m

      Delete
    5. Lol -10000000000000. Would be a dream come true for many.

      Delete
    6. @11.42 so you think they have a profit of +4 million but have to sell SLOTS to pay for engine repair. Sure.

      Delete
    7. Shall we guess how much JU would be in the red without government subventions?

      Delete
    8. Just wanted to see poor Serbian crybabies whine when someone dares to touch into their political holy cow, ha ha! Pathetic really.

      Delete
    9. Ne razumem ljude. Prizeljkuju da susedu crkne krava.
      Ja bih eto voleo kada bi OU imala visok profit i kada bi otela deo letnjeg jadranskog kolaca od stranaca.
      Uprkos svemu, draze mi je da oni budu uspesni, nego Nemci, Turci ili Rusi. Verujem da dobar deo ljudi koji posecuje ovaj ex-yu (!) blog misli isto.

      Delete
    10. You raise a good point .... i too am curious to understand why so many people on this blog wish for nothing more than for JU to fail.

      Delete
  15. OMG, this site is full of wannabe Nostradamuses.

    ReplyDelete
  16. vau. kako vi ljudi dolazite do ovih brojeva? kojom metodom? gledanjem u pasulj? čitanjem iz šolje? gledanjem u svinjska ili jagnjeća rebra? baš bih voleo da znam, da i ja pogledam, da dam svoju prognozu

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ama ziv se pokidah pokusavajuci da smirim ove baba Vange koje predvidjaju neverovatne cifre i profite onima kojima se njima svidja.

      Delete
    2. OU +1M, JP -1M, JU -6M

      Delete
  17. Record low oil prices will help all the airlines. We will see what the results are like. It is notable that neither JU or OU came out to brag about how fantastic their finances are like last year.

    ReplyDelete
  18. It's a do or die year for Adria. Now that they are in private hands there will be no more bailouts and state aid. More transparency from the new owners on finances, passenger numbers and future plans would be nice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree at least they could give out some info on passenger numbers. I'm surprised Slovenian media don't ask them. Everyone gives out their pax figures.

      Delete
    2. The problem isn't the Slovenian media. We ask them. I'm sure this site has asked them too. The issue is Adria which does not communicate with the media at all in most cases. They have even threatened some media a few months ago when they wrote some negative articles on their finances.

      Delete
    3. meh. they'll just hand it over to LH, who'll merge it into either E2 or CL, or even both

      Delete
    4. Interesting. They don't communicate with their employees either. All I know is, they were pretty upset when they unexpectedly lost the Nordica deal.

      Delete
    5. It's a private company, there is no requirement to publish any of such data, other than very brief financial report at the end of the year.

      Of course, they would release it if they had anything positive to announce.

      Delete
  19. What is interesting that both Croatia Airlines and Adria Airways went through restructuring which lasted several years after which you would think they would be performing much better financially. At least that was the purpose of the restructuring. But now we see Adria with big losses and Croatia Airlines likely to be loss making. That is terrible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This reflects the EU strong preference for private ownership and active discouragement of alternative ownership arrangements.

      Delete
    2. Private ownership usually yields better results than government one.

      Also, you can't restructure these airlines without takin serious cuts everywhere and hire some fresh blood to change people's mentality. Aviation now is not what it used to be in the 80's, but some people don't want to accept it.

      Delete
    3. USA su vadili iz problems svoje velike privatne aviokompanije tri puta od 80's. Avijacija je takav biznis u kome se uvek grebu za budzetske pare ili kao do skoro Adrija, JAT ili LCC kompanije o lokalne budzete.

      Delete
    4. In aviation a "critical mass" is essential to positive financial results which neither of the EX-YU airlines has. That given it will be very difficult for any of them survive in the long term. Croatia should consider joining Eurowings to survive while the others will have a hard life ahead of them.

      Delete
    5. I am not so sure that it has so much to do with ownership. Both Malev and Sky Europe failed. Malev forced bankruptcy under EU pressure was taken as a proof that state ownership is bad, bad, bad (despite the fact that there are many more major similar state-owned or para-state owned companies that are doing well).
      On the other hand Sky Europe demise was not used by anyone to prove that private ownership does not work.

      It is not so much about economy. It is set of values from the 1980s and the 1990s that are built in EU. Their are failing now because the world is changing. It is time to re-examine old dogmas.

      Delete
  20. what a dumb comment section today with people making predictions that come from their a*s.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Don't worry folks, + or - 1 million of profit or loss...in 5 years most probably none of the airlines mentioned above will be existing in the current form...

    ReplyDelete
  22. JU relies entirely on the so called EY Group project, OU is trying to compete with LCC and be more innovative, YM is an epic failure, JP has no intentions of focusing entirely on LJU and well MK has W6 as their official flag carrier, so it´s quite normal I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Nadam se da ce ASL imati uspeh i da ce imato novih linija i veceg uspeha .
    INN-NS

    ReplyDelete

EX-YU Aviation News does not tolerate insults, excessive swearing, racist, homophobic or any other chauvinist remarks or provocative posts with the intention of creating further arguments. A full list of comment guidelines can be found here. Thank you for your cooperation.