Monday, August 21, 2017

Air Serbia's position "remains stable"


Air Serbia has said its position remains stable after two members of the Etihad Airways Partners group, Alitalia and Air Berlin, filed for insolvency over the last two months, while another, Darwin Airline, was sold to new owners. In a statement, an Air Serbia spokesperson said, “The latest developments in Air Berlin do not affect Air Serbia. As said previously, the Government of the Republic of Serbia and Etihad Airways are fully committed to the strategic partnership with Air Serbia. The national flag carrier has started the process of consolidating its business, reducing costs and increasing efficiencies, in response to changing market conditions".

The Serbian carrier acknowledged that the business environment remains difficult. "Despite the serious challenges facing the aviation industry on a global scale, the position of Air Serbia remains stable. Our national airline is the leading carrier in the region with a strong network of flights that serve a total of 42 destinations in Europe, the Mediterranean, the Middle East and North America, with passenger and freight services”, the company noted. Recently, the Etihad Aviation Group's Chairman of the Board, Mohamed Mubarak Fadhel Al Mazro, said, "The Board and executive team have been working since last year to address issues and challenges through a comprehensive strategic review aimed at driving improved performance across the group, which includes a full review of our airline equity partnership strategy". Former Etihad CEO, James Hogan, who has spearheaded the equity investment strategy, which has now unraveled, and is credited for expanding the Emirati carrier at an unprecedented rate, stepped down from his post in June.

Air Serbia recently posted a net profit of 900.000 euros for 2016, which is down 76.9% on the previous year, although the decrease has been put down to the significant investment made in the launch of the carrier's first long haul service to New York. However, according to various Serbian media reports, Air Serbia received some forty million euros from the government last year. Furthermore, the media has suggested that Etihad sold Air Serbia expensive loans, while the government continued to cover debts made by Air Serbia's predecessor Jat Airways. The Serbian carrier has not responded to the claims, noting only that it will focus on strengthening its commercial results, improving the efficiency of its operations and maintaining its focus on cost control and balance sheet discipline in 2017.

152 comments:

  1. It's interesting that the Serbian media seem to have kind of given up on Air Serbia. A year or two ago no one dared run a critical article about them in mainstream media (unlike Jat which was constantly bagged out even for things they were really not responsible for) but now that's completely changed. Air Serbia is getting a lot of negative press on all sides for various reasons, particularly their financial performance. So no wonder they have been forced to deny that they are in a worse position after the Air Berlin bankruptcy and the government has to constantly report how Etihad remains confident in JU.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well I'm glad it's like that. They got a free ride for way too long. They should be held accountable for their actions.

      Delete
    2. They have disappointed a lot of high expectations. For years they sold us the story that they are a best in class European airline, only to end up serving sandwiches on board, putting slimline seats, removing dedicated business seating, and slipping down on all service levels. On board wi-fi can't be used as a substitute for all of that.

      Delete
    3. And it's probably going to get even worse when they introduce pay on board food.

      Delete
    4. Anon 9:10,

      There is a tiny difference between being held accountable for your actions and being main subject in daily fabricated fake news and five dollar 'expertise' that directly or indirectly call on any available force to shut you down immediately. Ever since it was first announced, Air Serbia has been an object of political love or hate (mostly the latter). No one in Serbia is capable of having a sane and unbiased discussion on Air Serbia. The first such person lives in Zagreb and that pretty much sums it up.

      Delete
    5. The whole series of articles and stories during last couple of weeks was nothing but the dirty political campaign. They are closing retail shops in Uzice - the end is nigh. Come on, guys, let's get serious...

      Delete
    6. No but what they are doing is selling property - retail offices owned by Jat for over 40 years. Next they will shut down catering which has been an integral part of the company for 60 years and then ground handling as well. So yeah. It IS a big deal.

      Delete
    7. How on earth was it a "dirty political campaign". Journalists reporting on the actual state of things is now a dirty political campaign?

      Delete
    8. Only one of these retail shops was in ownership, for others the office space was rented. Catering and Ground are separate entities - owned by JU, but separate entities. There were not integral part of the company all the time. I.e. from 2003. Sorry, but you need to know the facts if you want to comment on something.

      Delete
    9. First of all 3 of the 5 offices are owned by Air Serbia. Second Jat Catering separated in 2008 but continued its sole purpose of serving Jat. Under the deal with EY it was reintegrated into JU. Now it will be shut down because of amazing business practice.

      Delete
    10. @9:41 that in the hell is this?

      catering and ground handling are 100% owned by JU and they appear in their final financial statement? kind of argument you just made is beyond me. logic rape at its best.

      Delete
    11. Property only generate cost. If you maintance of the property and people that works there pays more than they earn then you need to close it. It's not relevant how many years you own it. Smart people make changes when it's necessary. Only fools refuse to change.

      Delete
    12. @9:50
      ...or in this case only complete fools don't know how to make money in business with highest margin in airline industry (catering)
      ...or we just have diletants who dont know how to make money in this industry generally when everybody else is, on acoount of cheap oil

      Bottom line - what has been built for generations will now be completely demolished by a handfull of amateurs

      Delete
    13. "Property only generates cost" - hahahahaha this just made my day and it not even noon

      Delete
    14. "Bottom line - what has been built for generations will now be completely demolished by a handfull of amateurs"

      bingo

      Delete
    15. Closing few offices where JAT was selling tickets in time when people only was able to buy tickets in office and today almost nobody buying tickets on that way is not demolishing something built for generations. It's necessity if you want to cut the loss.

      Delete
    16. Trust me many people in Valjevo and Uzice still go to buy a ticket at an office and don't go to buy it on the internet, especially people over 40.

      Delete
    17. I know that there are still people that buys tickets on this way but question is there enough of them or these offices costs more than they make. Especially because there are tourist agencies where is possible to buy tickets if you don't know how to do on the internet and you have them in almost all towns in Serbia.

      Delete
    18. Samo se seti koliko su kukali za online checkin i sad isti kukaju za kupovanjem karata. Isti oni koji slabo lete samo pisu protiv ASa. Slabo im ide u zivotu

      Delete
    19. A otkud znas da su to isti? Zanima me posto su svi anonimusi

      Delete
    20. Slavni Purger koristi huge npr. Stil pisanja im je prepoznatljiv.

      Delete
    21. Alen Šćuric PurgerAugust 22, 2017 at 8:41 AM

      A jel? ja sam više korisnik izraza "extreme" nego huge, al ok...

      Delete
  2. Is there anywhere we can see the full financial report for 2016?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would also like to see that. People are claiming they have seen it but I can't find it anywhere, even on the APR website where everyone said they have seen it.

      Delete
    2. Me too. Someone should just put up a link.

      Delete
    3. 1. http://pretraga2.apr.gov.rs/pretragaObveznikaFI/



      2. u pretraga "po matičnom broju" upišeš "07044275"



      3. "Javno objavljeni finansijski izveštaji"



      4. u "vrsta finansijskog izveštaja" izabereš "konsolidovani godišnji finansijski izveštaj"



      5. 2016



      6. bilans uspeha



      7. tražiš liniju "ПРИХОДИ ОД ПРЕМИЈА, СУБВЕНЦИЈА,

      ДОТАЦИЈА, ДОНАЦИЈА И СЛ."

      8. Plačimo

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. ako je za utehu subvencije su manje za oko 10,000,000 eur nego 2015. ali opet su ogromni 40,000,000 eur

      Delete
    6. Alen Šćuric PurgerAugust 22, 2017 at 12:54 AM

      za 7,5 milijuna su manje. Ali je zato kreditna zaduženost veća.

      Čitajte detalje u sutrašnjem članku.

      ATR 72-200 idu u roportarnicu povijesti od 2018. do 2020.

      Delete
  3. 40 million covered by the government? No wonder they were "profitable".

    ReplyDelete
  4. I could also run an airline and claim to be stable if I had a government to cover up my losses, no problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why don't you try it, see what happens?

      Delete
    2. I won't try because I have some moral standards, and would never engage in shady business that burns my fellow taxpayers' money.
      I know it's hard to believe, but in the morally deeply rotten Serbian society there are still some people that couldn't do certain things.

      Delete
    3. 9:21 do you have a willing goverment in mind to throw taxpayer money at us?
      I would be interested too!

      Delete
    4. @ 11:06 Obican retard koji pise bezvezarije i nema nikakav biznis.

      Delete
    5. 11.06am and 11.11am - since you are both concerned taxpayers, i would be much more worried about what losses have been and still are incurred by Srbijagas, Galenika and Bor. Add to that the bloated public service and you can complain about that for 10 lifetimes !

      Delete
    6. We are worried about Srbijagas, Galenika... but we don't about those as this is an aviation blog.

      Delete
  5. Of course Etihad would never leave. They probably never found a dumber part owner who will pay for everything while Etihad takes the little piece that makes some money.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Blago nama da je Srbija ovako bogata..dala AS tolike milione svake godine a Italiani i Nemci teška sirotinja i samo mogu bakrotirati.E da naša država naravno ima i extra koji milion da prebaci Etihadu pošto i oni nemaju a mi smo ipak prebogati i treba te sve te "milione" iz media potrošiti negde. Samo da vas podsetim da je EU komisija prošle godine proverila poslovanje AS i da nije pronađena ni jedna subvencija iz Srpske vlade ili Etihadu..eto toliko

      Delete
    2. Lutko, EU nije istrazivala subvencije vec ko ima efektivnu kontrolu nad firmom. Ali dobro, baratanje sa cinjenicama nikada nije bila tvoja jaca strana.

      Delete
    3. hahha, you gotta love hot lane

      Delete
    4. Hot Lane = Топла трака (y преводy), a шта то значи? Hиje "hot line" = служба телефонске помоћи?

      Delete
  6. Of course that everything will remain stable - JU is not a problem for EY, quite the contrary! The times are difficult, but I believe this partnership will remain strong

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree but now it is the matter of weather it is worth it for Serbia.

      Delete
    2. The alternative is having no airline at all, loosing connectivity, growth at BEG and so on.

      Delete
  7. So if they got 40 million EUR would that mean their actual performance was a loss of 39.1 million?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No it means they have extra 40 million on the income side. There is no 'actual performance' there - state aid is a legitimate income that is not generated from core activities. Yes of course they would have been deep in red without state aid but they would have also cut many costs if they knew the state aid would decrease or completely stop. This is exactly what we are seeing in 2017 - considerable reduction in state aid is causing major cost cutting so that the airline's numbers can remain in green. If they succeed, it will be an indicator that once the state aid finally stops they will be able to survive on their own.

      Delete
    2. @ 9:25 AM

      LOL. there is actual performance there and it is ~€40mil of loss, why hiding it?

      Delete
    3. Because in the financial statements there is no such category as 'actual performance'. You have income from core activities and income from non-core activities. Together they make total income. You cannot calculate profit from core activities and then subtract non-core income from it in order to show loss and satisfy someone's emotional and political hopes. Sorry but you simply can't.

      There are many "if this number was not there the numbers would have been in red" moments when you read any company's financial statements. But they are just IFs, or as we say in Serbia ŠBB KBB. State aid goes on the income side and if it helps generate profit at the end of the balance sheet then it's just too bad news for the hater brigade. If you have an issue with International Accounting Standards or International Financial Reporting Standards feel free to write something new and have it passed on a global level. Until then, JU will be a profitable entity (with going concerns any good auditor would include in its report).

      Delete
    4. Thank you for the explanation.

      Delete
    5. It does go into Income, but not sure if it goes under Operating Income

      Delete
  8. In their report it is interesting how much revenue they get from running the Etihad contact center. Who would have thought.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It will be interesting to see how Air Berlin bankruptcy will affect JU.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well they say it won't

      “The latest developments in Air Berlin do not affect Air Serbia."

      Delete
    2. I think Air Berlin benefited much more from Air Serbia and the feed it provided than the other way around.

      Delete
    3. + 1000 last Anon

      Delete
    4. Ima jedna stvar koju ne razumete. Potpuno je bilo sumanuto da Etihad ulaze u Er Berlin koji posluje po drugacijim normama. Er Berlin je LCC koji je drzao i transatlanske letove i borio se na trzistu sa LH. Ne ide. Pukli su oni jos pre jedne decenije.

      Delete
  10. Cirkus Kolorado!

    ReplyDelete
  11. What I find hilarious is that when Etihad came with its management team to Jat they categorized everyone as losers, people that know nothing about aviation, communist dinosaurs that don't know the market, they were very arrogant, didn't want to listen to anyone, they started throwing out everything related to Jat, even model planes from offices. Then they launched their amazing boutique model which they now admit was a complete miss and waste of money. So much for their expertise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Air Serbia is far ahead of 2013 jat in number of planes, destinations, passengers, service... so much for your level of expertise and value of your frequently repeated "insight".

      Delete
    2. Ja sam tako slusao tri puta prosle nedelje jake novinare kako pricaju
      o ASu kako su nas Arapi opljackali i
      kako je Jat bio zakon.

      Delete
    3. pozdravi jake novinare. nije bilo pljačke, već samo ulaganja novca u firmu sa neprofitabilnim biznisom

      Delete
  12. I think people on here should give Air Serbia some credit and be less critical. I believe they are doing the best they can considering they are cornered by LLCs pretty much everywhere. It is obvious they are trying lots of new things, cancelling non profitable routes and even introducing hybrid stuff. I wonder what would happen if smart heads from this board would be running the company. Everyone whining about financial statement. Yes, we know, the company is making losses and it was like that for the past 25+ years, just losses are smaller now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which legacy carrier is not totally cornered by LCCs?

      Delete
  13. Will they be reducing their winter timetable?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am wondering if they will add new European routes in November when they stop flying to AUH or increase capacity on existing routes?

      Delete
    2. Some will be down, some will be up. At the end of the day similar ops to last winter. Not including the AUH cancellation.

      Delete
    3. @ anon 10.36 no chance. The new route will be Venice which started this summer and was not flown last winter. Other than that nothing new. The A319 used for AUH has been put up for seasonal lease.

      Delete
    4. Not reducing winter timetable 2017/18?! - With three A319s less in the fleet as announced?! - It is possible, but with three Aviolet B737s as a replacement.

      Delete
    5. It has been written numerous times that they have given up on the idea of leasing 3 A319s.

      "Air Serbia plans to continue moving forward with its consolidation plans but seems to have reversed its decision to lease out up to three Airbus A319 aircraft over the winter season. Although the airline listed three of the jets, registered YU-APA, YU-APD and YU-API, on the leasing market, two of the aircraft, YU-APA and YU-APD, have been removed from the lease listing as of last week. In a statement to "Ch-Aviation" the airline said, "One Airbus A319 aircraft has been listed as available for leasing to measure the level of interest in the market. This option is being considered to tackle the high seasonality of the business and especially the lower travel demand during the winter period"."

      Delete
  14. And will someone take the blame for this fiasco?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They will probably blame it on former Jat employees like always, if there is anyone left from then.

      Delete
  15. Pocivaj u miru, Air Serbija!

    ReplyDelete
  16. I never understood why EY burned billions on AB and AZ but did not invest much into JU.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same way like the UAE abolished visa restrictions for many European countries including some in ex-yu but not for Serbia even though they got many things practically for free.

      Delete
    2. Do UAE citizens need a visa to enter Serbia?

      Delete
    3. UAE visa for Serbian citizens is just a formality. You pay 4.050 RSD and get a visa straight away.

      Delete
    4. well, on one side you have 7mil serbs with average salary below 400€ and then you have germany's 83mil population with highest GDP in europe, and 60mil italians with around 50mil of tourist coming into country every year

      Delete
    5. Nije ti jasno da su ti turisti korisnici LCCa pa zato i Al Italia puca isto kao OU?

      Delete
    6. Viza za UAE kosta 80 eura

      Delete
    7. When Serbia gets into EU, you will probably get visa-free arrangement with UAE.

      Delete
  17. Have they managed to lease out that A319 for the winter?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Neverovatno je koliko ljudi mrze domacu avio industriju iako nas sve zajedno kosta samo po evro godisnje po glavi stanovnika poslednjih nekoliko godina. Vise izdvajamo za exZastavu i plate tamosnjih radnika i slicne industrijske poduhvate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. par evra za avio, par evra za bor, par evra za kragujevac... i odosmo u dupe

      Delete
    2. Pa mozda na autoforumu kritikuju Zastavu, na rudarskom forumu kritikunu Bor, itd. Na ovom forumu kritikuju avio kompaniju.

      Delete
    3. Molim te objasni nam taj racun po kome Air Serbia kosta EUR 7 miliona godisnje.

      Delete
    4. Znas li ti da citas? Ko je napisao Air Serbia? Avio industrija ukljucuje i aerodrom. Saberes dobitke i gubitke i vidis da vlada ne mora previse da dodaje ukupno. Vlada je suvlasnik u celom biznisu.

      Delete
  19. Correct. JU is not effected until the government is poring money into the company. However, it's effected by mismanagement of an arrogant and incompetent ceo whom EY hired and let him slowly diminish the value of JU.

    ReplyDelete
  20. All ex-yu airlines seem to be in quite a pickle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Adria seems to be doing fine.

      Delete
    2. Just on the surface. Montenegro Airlines was doing amazing, getting new planes and what not a few years ago and that it turned out it was a complete mess of an airline on the brink of bankruptcy.

      Delete
  21. Air Serbia has what Air Berlin and Alitslis don't have and that is low labour costs. So Etihad will probably stay and cut out the things that were provided for free like drinks and sandwiches

    ReplyDelete
  22. All this fuss about subsidies. But in fact those subsidies decreased in 2016 compared to 2015.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By some 10 million. From 50 to 40.

      Delete
    2. Does anyone know what this means from their report? Prihodi od zakupa sedišta u avionu. They didn't make anything on it in 2016 but seem to have made some cash the year before.

      Delete
    3. @ 11.23 but didn't they say those subsidies would end in 2016?

      Delete
    4. Yes they end at the end of 2016. They are technically not subsidies they are investments of majority owner and they are agreed on the beginning and they are as such legal. Serbia is not part of EU but have agreements signed with EU that makes subsidies illegal. If in the future Serbia want to invest in Air Serbia as owner it's possible but that must reflect in stake percentage unless Etihad invest the same amount.

      Delete
    5. @11:34 2016 included

      Delete
    6. Anon 12:07,

      But they finished with their initial investment. Even Mali said that ASL is of the government support as of mid 2016.

      It would be interesting to see what this money is for. Is it maybe some secret deal signed after the fact to cover cost of NYC flights for example. Otherwise, the state should be increasing equity stake.

      Delete
    7. ' They are technically not subsidies they are investments of majority owner and they are agreed on the beginning and they are as such legal.'

      And where is the majority owner finding the money to invest into ASL? ;)

      Delete
    8. Alen Šćuric PurgerAugust 22, 2017 at 12:57 AM

      Serbia invest till now 243 million USD + 300 million old Jat debts

      Etihad 100 million USD (out of this 40 million is loan)

      Not even near to equal, isn't it?

      Delete
  23. I doubt any action would be taken by EY before 1st january 2019 when their contract expires.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The only thing which could impact on Etihad leaving Air Serbia is a change in government in Serbia. And that is not going to happen any time soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True. Politics had a very strong hand in this deal between the government and the UAE.

      Delete
  25. Air Serbia will probably be the only one to survive Etihad divestment frenzy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I doubt it. Wishful thinking

      Delete
  26. The cost cutting at Air Serbia is understandable. When EY invested, oil was two to three times more expensive than today. They don't have enough money to throw for Air Serbia to aggressively grow anymore. imple as that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. Etihad is cutting costs themselves quite heavily. Emirates too.

      Delete
    2. Lower oil revenue in the UAE should really not affect Air Serbia which is 51% state owned. Whats more, lower oil prices should have a positive impact on their business.

      Delete
    3. It's quite funny with Gulf carriers. In the normal world, airlines are insanely happy when oil is dirt cheap, I imagine ME3 don't share this happiness.

      Delete
  27. Remember the 2017 budget also has planned subsidies for Air Serbia in it. Also there are rumors that the budget will be re balanced and as part of that more subsidies will be added for Air Serbia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i don't know about that, vujović's budget are rarely balanced.

      Delete
  28. Incentives and excessive milking = stable position.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Serbian non-partisan PM (with MBA, so she can read financial reports unlike some here) said recently: "Air Serbia is very important for the country". That's all you need to know. When they get initial lump-sum for the Belgrade airport concession, they can regain 100% ownership of Air Serbia, if EY wants out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. lol i have MBA too

      Delete
    2. But you are not a Prime Minister :)

      Delete
    3. "Non-partisan PM " LOL

      Delete
  30. Wizzair was let in way to fast. In a stage when JU was still building up a (wrong) strategy. Now JU feels the tremendous pressure against a model, which would have hardly worked in a regulated market like in the 70s/80s. BEG got the Pax in the short rund, the question is however for how long!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LCCs (Wizz Air) has by far the least market % in BEG in comparison to all other regional airports. Air Serbia's been overprotected so far if anything.

      Delete
    2. Serbia has not been overprotected. Wizz Air was free to expand, nothing was stopping them. They just chose not to.

      Delete
    3. Isn't it sad that you blame open market for failure of a national carrier?

      Delete
    4. 6:57

      Приче за малу децу.

      Delete
  31. There was a pretty good cartoon in the "Danas" newspaper over the weekend to sum up Air Serbia

    http://i.imgur.com/ygKWVZT.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The cartoon implies that the government decided to take subsidies from the agriculture sector and redirect them to Air Serbia. As far as I know this is not the case.

      Now for real: as a Serbian taxpayer I completely DO NOT associate myself with the poor 'srpski seljak' as illustrated on this cheap political cartoon. If there is one thing that Serbia should outlaw in a North Korea style, that would be the crocodile tears over the fate of poor Serbian taxpayer and his fellow agriculture worker.

      Delete
    2. when you wrote "now for real" i thought that something meaningful is about to come, but is even more crazier than the first part of the post

      Delete
    3. Something meaningful... that's a good one coming from a guy who live streamed his huge rush of joy and happiness over the fact that JU is having tough times financially.

      Delete
    4. Yeah, who needs subsidies for agriculture after the massive drought. Better to redirect these millions to JU so that Dane and his team can pretend to be businessmen.

      Delete
    5. +100 anon @4.45

      Delete
  32. Can JU find eur 40m in cost savings and/or incremental revenue ?
    I'm not sure that they can close the gap in a single year.
    Anyone know how 1H17 has been financialy ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They can't. Ideally they could reduce it by 15-20M each year, provided everything in the market goes extremely well for them.

      Delete
  33. Do not trust Etihad! Their investment in Europe was a complete failure!

    ReplyDelete
  34. How is Dane reacting to this situation with EY? Does he have any plan? Is he leaving, so he doesn't care?

    ReplyDelete
  35. What would be the impacts of a future (seemingly inevitable) withrawal by Etihad? Will AS be able to maintain A330 operations and the North America flights?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why is it obvious when they just said exactly the opposite to that.

      Delete
  36. Nema brige, dat će Vučić Er Srbiji u 10 godina blizu pola milijarde eura. Ima se, može se.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alen Šćuric PurgerAugust 22, 2017 at 1:06 AM

      U 10? Pa već je dao 205 za subvencije + 245 za stare dugove (plačeno bankama, NIS-u, aerodromima...) + 14 kredita. Fali još samo malo do pola milijarde EUR.

      Delete
  37. Nek' sklone vec jednom sve matore od 50-55 pa i oko 60 godina, koji jos uvek docekuju goste u kabini. Lepse je videti mlade, ljubazne, nasmejane face u avionima, nego nadrndane matorce koji frfljaju i mrmljaju preko razglasa, i tragikomicno izgledaju u Aviolet majicama.

    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.