Serbian regulator blocks Ryanair’s new Niš service


The Serbian Civil Aviation Directorate has refused to issue a permit to Ryanair to operate its planned new service from Hahn to Niš Constantine the Great Airport, which was due to launch on January 13, 2020. Although the regulator has not commented on the matter, Ryanair has accused the Directorate of protectionism and announced plans to move the service to Banja Luka instead. Air Serbia introduced two weekly flights between Niš and Hahn this summer as part of a dozen new routes designated to be of public interest by the Serbian government but lacking commercial viability. Therefore, the service is subsidised by the state. Under European Union regulations, routes selected to be of public interest and awarded to a particular carrier can not be launched by a competitor, although this only applies for flights within the bloc.

In a statement issued yesterday, the low cost carrier said, “Ryanair’s Niš route, which was approved by the German Civil Aviation Agency, has been blocked by the Serbian Civil Aviation Directorate in favour of Air Serbia’s monopoly. Since the route does not qualify as a PSO [Public Service Obligation] route, nor is it designated as such by the European Commission, it should therefore be open to competition”. It added, “All affected customers have been contacted and offered full refunds or alternative re-routing. Ryanair will switch this capacity to a new route from Frankfurt Hahn to Banja Luka in Bosnia and Herzegovina which will start in February 2020”. The new Hahn - Banja Luka service will launch on February 3 and run twice per week. Further flight details can be found here.

Ryanair’s Chief Commercial Officer, David O’Brien, said, “Ryanair regrets the forced cancellation of the Frankfurt Hahn - Niš route due to the Serbian Directorate’s decision to block traffic rights. Ryanair apologises to intending passengers on this route, who will now be subject to the high-fare Air Serbia monopoly. On the other hand, visitors to, and consumers in, Bosnia and Herzegovina will now benefit from a Ryanair new low fares service between Frankfurt Hahn and Banja Luka, which will start in February 2020”. Ryanair is set to introduce services from Malta to Niš next week, while Hahn will become the airline’s fifth destination to be served from Banja Luka.

Niš Constantine the Great Airport noted in June that the subsidised Air Serbia flights were not aimed against Ryanair and Wizz Air, which have been serving the city for several years. The Serbian national carrier will receive some five million euros per year over the next five years for its Niš operations. On the other hand, the two budget airlines enjoy a low three euro fee for handling, landing and passenger services under their current contracts with the airport which run until 2021. "These low cost airlines won't be chased out. Traffic from Niš will continue to develop and there will be more demand and the need for more carriers", the General Manager of operator Airports of Serbia, Mihajlo Zdravković, said at the time.




Comments

  1. What a stupid decision.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lol you can fly on Air Serbia to Hahn for €85 next week. Ryanair is full of hot air, tickets are cheap. They should stick to other markets, for example BVA.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha air Serbia is acting like a dictatorship. They don't even allow Nis to have its own international airport cos it will take away customers from Belgrade Airport. So people have to travel some 300km to the airport in Belgrade. Corruption at its best.

      Delete
  3. Well I assume the same rules applies for this tender as those in the EU so if the route is declared of public interest it can't be operated by another airline. Ryanair should have applied for the tender.

    ReplyDelete
  4. BNX is getting some interesting flights :) Hahn in January and Vienna from March. Also they should announce one more route in the next few days, or that's the Hahn?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Let's see how BNX-Hahn performs especially since FRA is served multiple times a day from ZAG and Wizz flies it from TZL. My guess is that BNX has more demand to Hahn than TZL but let's see.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think HHN will be a bomb counting all the Bosnians living in the area

      Delete
  6. The only think that the government manages is to kick out airlines with this decision. Shame on them!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to defend the government but FR was stupid to announce this route which was already subsidized. Why not go for other larger markets like Paris or even London? I am sorry but this time around FR is the stupid one.

      Delete
    2. I have a feeling they didn't even know the route was subsidized.

      Delete
    3. So what??!! Why is prohibited to a second airline fly to a same destination if they want to?!!

      Delete
    4. 09:07

      Bingo.

      But another thing is symptomatic. Look at all the comments attacking Ryanair instead. The troops have been mustered.

      Delete
    5. What troops? What are you going on about? We can say that FR's troops are out in full force. You do realize JU launched flights no one else wanted to? There is a reason they didn't launch Malta, Paris, London, Eindhoven, Charleroi, Weeze, Barcelona, Dusseldorf... because those were left to W6 and FR.

      There should be rational limits to your bashing of JU.

      Delete
    6. Sorry mate, I'm only bashing the government. I don't really care about JU.

      Delete
    7. Yes and your arguments about government bashing makes no sense, the fact FR is launching MLA is best proof of it. For INI JU is better because at least for the next five years they are staying there, FR can't guarantee that.

      Delete
    8. However you try to spin it, there is only one fact being discussed here.

      The Serbian government officially and publicly prevented free market access to Ryanair.

      It is contrary to international agreements signed by the government with the EU.
      So the real question is - is this the first signal of counter-EU politics following Macron's moves to prevent further EU expansion?

      Delete
    9. I will just remind you that this same Serbian CAD refused to issue a license to FlyEgypt this summer to operate Hurghada-Nis. Has nothing to do with EU.

      Delete
    10. The moment INI-HHN got subsidies, free market economy went out of the window. You are comparing apples to oranges here. Too much ado about nothing really.

      Delete
    11. Oh, you mean why even pretend there was a free market economy to begin with?

      I agree.

      Delete
    12. Is there really such a thing as pure free market economy? LO is subsidized in BUD. They filled WAW to the gills to block any competition. They lobbied the Polish government to introduce a night curfew after 23.00 to mess with W6. They opened Modlin to push LCCs out to reduce competition... I can go on but I guess you get the picture.

      This is Poland we are talking about which is in the EU and they discriminate against others to protect LO.

      And I am saying there is free market economy in Serbia but there are some exceptions. FR was free to launch Malta without an issue because the Serbian government did not offer subsidies for that route. HHN is a different story, they had their chance and they missed it.

      Delete
  7. Who needs Ryanair when you can fly Air Serbia for less!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shouldn't you at least have the choice?

      Delete
    2. Not when it's a route that is subsidized.

      Delete
  8. Free market anyone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just because there is free market doesn't mean some should abuse it.

      Delete
    2. Like Air Serbia?

      Delete
    3. No, Air Serbia did not abuse it. They launched flights no one else wanted. FR has been flying for two years to INI and HHN was never on their mind until JU launched.

      Delete
    4. How did Ryanair abuse it? Under which regulation or law is this route no longer allowed to be launched by another airline?

      Delete
    5. Well there obviously isn't free market.

      Delete
    6. There was obviously a plan to launch all these routes and the gov't stepped in to prevent further LCC expansion. This last action is just further proof.

      Delete
    7. How in the world is launching routes abusing free market?

      Delete
    8. The Serbian government had a call for subventions and FR ignored it. They didn't want to fully commit to the Serbian market and that's fine, there are others that want to. Anyway, FR launched Malta and no one banned them for it. Hahn was a stupid move on their part and the fact they are not fighting the government goes to show they agree with the decision.

      Delete
    9. Why would they fight? They'll just find another route in Europe.

      This just shows everybody in the world how backwards the aviation really is in this part of Europe.

      Delete
    10. Such political games exist everywhere. Remember when FR wanted to buy Aer Lingus but they were blocked because they didn't want that to happen and because they wanted to fix it for IAG? 'Backward' tactics happen everywhere.

      Delete
    11. The reason why FR wasn't allow to buy more of Aer Lingus (they did own a significant amount of it at one point) is because it would mean they would have a monopoly in Ireland.

      Hardly the case with FR and INI.

      Delete
    12. The case with FR in INI is that EU legislation bans them from flying on a subsidized route. So you are right, it's a different story as this is all about PR for Ryanair.

      Delete
    13. 12:49

      Incorrect.

      The case with FR in INI is that Serbia government CHOSE to prevent Ryanair from starting up the route (which is within their rights in accordance to EU legislations). They could've let them fly, but they chose not to.

      Delete
    14. Of course they didn't let them, there is no reason to do so. FR has been adding and cancelling flights out of INI for quite some time now. They are unreliable as a partner.

      Delete
  9. The statement they made about "high fare" Air Serbia is not correct. Prices are cheaper from Nis then for some of Ryanair's flights.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Great news for BNX! The city is not small and its catchment area is large. I am certain this route will be extremely successful. Flights from ZAG to FRA are not cheap, LH is rarely under €200 especially in summer, OU can be found for less. Hopefully they respond to this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. 800.000+ people live in north-western part of Bosnia with Banja Luka as the largest city. Sanski Most, Bihać, Doboj... everything is relatively close and many Bosnians who live abroad fly to Zagreb. This will work.

      Delete
    2. Also aren't they building a highway from Banja Luka towards eastern Srpska and the Serbian border? That should make BNX more accessible.

      Delete
    3. Exactly, and they said the expansion of the terminal should start very soon!

      Delete
    4. but it is neither cheap nor fast to get from Hahn to Frankfurt,
      it is just deceptive to call Hahn Frankfurt-Hahn

      and no, BL is a small city, without other large cities close by,
      and even compared to other parts of poor BIH, it has just average spending power

      Delete
    5. Banja Luka is not a small city by ex-YU standards, it's home to some 200.000 people. For comparison's sake, Tuzla has 120.000 inhabitants.

      Also, not everyone lives in Frankfurt city,many live throughout Hesse. Plus it's easier to drive to Hahn and fly to BNX than to take a bus to Banja Luka or to fly to ZAG and then drive. That's the whole point.

      Delete
  11. Yet another senseless decision.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What a shock!
    JU's flights from Nis were just another way for the government to subsidize it and protect it from LCC competition!
    Who would have thought?
    I am shocked, shocked I tell you!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Whose interest is the CAA working for? The passengers or certain airlines?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If it could the directorate would have been blocking every LCC airline from flying to Serbia.

      Delete
    2. 09:17 Or perhaps they have blocked further expansion, you just don't know about it. And now it's the first time it's actually public since Ryanair doesn't play the Balkan game the way Wizz does. They don't care for local sheriffs.

      Delete
    3. Dude FR is literally starting Malta next week from INI. What blocking are you talking about?! Government had a call for subsidies for routes no one wanted to operate. FR had two years to launch Hahn and they didn't. Now they are angry someone got a piece of cake they ignored for so long.

      Delete
    4. I thought airlines were free to launch EU-Serbia routes as part of open sky, even when the same route is subsidised by thr government?

      Delete
  14. Serbian government finally showing it's true colors. Now it's obvious why Wizz Air is not expanding either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. +1000.

      The only thing they show to airlines is that there id only one airline allowed to freely operate in Serbia. The one, the great, the best of the best.

      Delete
    2. JU routes from Nis started this summer.
      How long before that didn't Wizz air open any new route from Nis? They were even closing some.

      Delete
    3. Wizz Air is increasing MMX-INI to 4 weekly and they launched VIE a few months ago.

      Delete
    4. Wizz Air did not permanently suspend any routes from INI, you confused them with FR. ;)

      Wizz temporarily suspended MMX because their base in Poznan was shut down. Now they brought it back and it's even being increased this summer. Also wasn't Basel increased from 2 to 3 this summer? Also I think Memmingen was also increased recently.

      So what are you going on about? Wizz Air does just fine in INI.

      Delete
    5. Anon 09.27

      You mean LO which is launching BUD-BEG which is subsidized by the Hungarian government and because of which Belavia was kicked out of BUD-BEG? Or are you referring to Air France which launched flights this year? Or maybe is it easyJet which launched Berlin where JU was present or Basel where Wizz Air operates? Or are we talking about Tarom which increased BEG to 9 weekly last year or maybe is it Qatar which had 10 weekly this summer, up from 7. Or are you referring to Transavia which increased BEG to 6 weekly this winter.
      Or is it maybe Aeroflot which destroyed JU to SVO? Or is it maybe WZ which flies unopposed from DME?

      Which of the great ones are you talking about?

      Seriously the amount of fake news comments regarding Serbia on this blog is crazy.

      Delete
    6. What is crazy is the amount of ignorance of international aviation law considering it's an aviation blog.

      Delete
    7. Anon 09.49 well since you are an expert why not share your valuable opinion with us? :)

      Delete
    8. Anon 09:35

      Which new route did they open from INI?

      None


      Even from Belgrade they changed LYS from year round to seasonal and brought nothing new.

      W6 is joke in Serbia

      Delete
    9. Oh, I have all right, but you choose not to listen. It's a real pity the lengths people go to in order to justify their government's malpractice.

      Delete
    10. They launched Vienna a few months ago and they brought back Malmo which then they increased after increasing Basel and Memmingen. Nis region is not particularly wealthy, they can't expand as fast as in Vienna or Luton.

      Wizz Air is far more reliable and stable in INI than FR. FR already discontinued Weeze and who knows what might happen with NYO.

      Delete
    11. Оk if you are so smart and competent then why don't you offer your legal service to FR? after all they seem to be throwing in the towel, help them protect their commercial interests in Serbia.

      Delete
    12. Hahah one route for how many years?

      Pathetic

      Delete
    13. Anon 09:35,

      Wizzair did permanently suspend Eindhoven.

      Delete
    14. Because of Ryanair's Weeze which they cut later on :(

      Delete
  15. So now we know why the government picked these routes, so they could block LCCs from launching them in the future.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why didn't FR open that route before JU?
      Why didn't FR apply for tender?

      Delete
    2. They could not apply for the tender since no other company except Air Serbia met the tender requirements.

      Delete
    3. Yes because airlines rushed to open these routes, right? Why is FR ignoring other markets with more potential than Hahn that's already served by JU? Also FR is unpredictable, just look at how fast they closed Nish-Weeze.

      They could launch BVA, CRL, BCN, HAJ, EIN, STN ... which are all larger markets than HHN.

      Delete
    4. But they could have started HHN before JU did it.

      Delete
    5. Well they could have committed to the Serbian market by expanding their presence here. They chose not to.

      Delete
    6. Exactly.

      And now buahh buahh

      Delete
  16. Ryan nije morao da aplicira za dozvolu? O cemu se ovde zapravo radi?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It does. It's a formality but you have to have official approval from both regulators to start a route from an EU country to a non EU country even if it is a signatory to the Free Skies Agreement.

      Delete
    2. Могао је да аплицира што су и учинили. Држава их је одбила јер је та линија већ субвенциоисана од стране државе те нема смисла да је покрећу. Све друге пријаве су одобрили до сада.

      Delete
    3. Vi ocigledno ne razumete da je to sve marketinska kampanja RA.

      Delete
    4. Држава нема права да оцењује тржишну оправданост приликом евалуације дозволе летова ка ЕУ.

      Delete
    5. Vi ocigledno ne razumete sta slobodno trziste pretstavlja.

      Delete
  17. Just open the entire market!

    ReplyDelete
  18. So far this year Serbian CAA has blocked Fly Egypt from launching Hurghada - Nis and Ryanair from launching Hahn - Nis. Whose next?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You forgot that the government forced JU to discontinue INI-BUD or did you omit that one because it doesn't suit your narrative.

      Delete
    2. What exactly does that have to do with CAA blocking airlines from flying to Nis? The Serbian government "forced" them to suspend Budapest because they had an average of 5 passengers on each flight (makes you wonder which expert did the study on routes that are of public interest). And the route was obviously chosen in fear of Wizz Air starting the flights.

      Delete
    3. Do you have any source to back your claim it was a preemptive strike against Wizz? If anything LO's BUD-BEG is a preemptive strike against Wizz Air because now LO can get Hungarian subsidies for the route since Belavia was forced out.

      Delete
    4. Since you have no arguments you have completely changed the topic. Neither does LO get subsidies to fly to BEG, neither was Belavia "forced out" from Belgrade route.

      Delete
    5. Riiiiiight it's just a coincidence B2 had to leave BUD-BEG the moment LO decided to step in. Btw LO can apply for government subsidies for Balkan routes since they have the whole infrastructure in Hungary. And of course I have an answer, the CAD is RUN by the government, it is the government... hello ... it's basically one and the same.

      The animosity towards JU on here is staggering. So JU launches BUD to block Wizz but there is no way in Hell LO could ever do such a thing beause they are the most perfect, innocent business out there. LOL!!!!!!!

      Delete
    6. Ok you obviously have no clue what you are talking about. Government subsidies for Balkan routes was run 3 years ago. It did not include Belgrade. There are no new government subsidies for Balkan routes, nor has Belgrade been added to that list. So that is complete rubbish what you are talking about. The difference between this case with Ryanair and B2 is that they didn't have to leave nor were they forced to leave. They left because their Minsk route matured enough that they didn't need a stop in Budapest. This is supported by the fact that they added a third weekly nonstop Minsk - Belgrade route recently.

      What staggering is your blind defece of the Serbian governmen't decision. Nothing else.

      Delete
    7. Backwards Eastern European governments preventing free market access by fighting it with whatever means they can? Pretty much. Only the Serbian one is choosing to do it with direct intervention, which takes it up a notch.

      Delete
    8. Yeah yeah yeah the Serbian government is at fault here not some Irish airline that senslessly decide to launch HHN. What is happening here is that this is pure PR trick for them. Now all media will write about this and whole of Serbia will read about Ryanair. Michael O'Leary said there is no such thing as bad publicity and that is what is happening here.

      They are launching Malta in 4 days, that's a market that is important for them from INI, not HHN. You are obviously missing the big picture here. FR is losing dominance in INI from JU and W6 so they need to do something about it my good friend. ;)

      Delete
    9. Excellent written!

      Delete
    10. What is happening here is Serbia's government is overstepping its boundaries to protect an economically unreasonable route flown by its own airline.

      Given the moral support provided here I don't have the slightest doubt they will sell it successfully in the domestic media.

      Delete
    11. The "moral support" is mostly by one person who has been writing comments here all day. Most people are shocked by this.

      Delete
    12. Anon 10.23

      Aha yes, of course it has to be one person because how can the world go against Ryanair and support the evil, big wolf known as Air Serbia.

      Ryanair is a predator, if we were in the ocean they would be a bull shark. They are not someone we should feel sorry for especially not when their PR campaign is extremely successful mostly because of people like you.

      Delete
  19. I do not understand why are they complaining now? EU regulations state that if the route is of a public interest and receives subs, other airline can not start the same route. Even though Serbia is not in the EU, by being a candidate member it is logical to follow EU regulations. Next.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Serbia is not an EU member state and as such not subject to EU PSO rules defined in EC 1008/2008.

      Delete
    2. "EU regulations state that if the route is of a public interest and receives subs, other airline can not start the same route."

      Somebody mentioned fake news. Here you go.

      Delete
    3. You should show that to the aviation law expert above who is accusing the Serbian government of malpractice. LOL!!!

      Delete
    4. You must be referring to the following from EC 1008 / 2008.

      "9. Notwithstanding paragraph 8, if no Community air carrier
      has commenced or can demonstrate that it is about to
      commence sustainable scheduled air services on a route in
      accordance with the public service obligation which has been
      31.10.2008 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 293/11
      imposed on that route, the Member State concerned may limit
      access to the scheduled air services on that route to only one
      Community air carrier for a period of up to four years, after
      which the situation shall be reviewed."

      With their move, Ryanair are proving there is commercial interest and thus the government is stepping in to protect JU from failing like they did in BUD and further unmasking the lopsided nature of this PSO.

      Delete
    5. First 10:17: The difference is one of us knows what they are talking about.

      Delete
    6. Nije glupo.

      Objavis javni konkurs, niko se sem JU ne javi, sve organizujes i pokrenes i onda ti dodje jedan pametnjakovic koji nije hteo da se javi na konkurs i to ti sve porusi.

      Delete
    7. A jos se potrudis da na konkurs ne moze niko sem JU da se javi....

      Delete
    8. 10:27 Bingo.

      Delete
    9. Anon 10.27

      Hmm like the Hungarian public call? Or the Greek island PSO routes? How many airports in France or Spain specifically made the requirements so that FR can win it? Some were even illegal so FR had to pay back the money. But sure let's concentrate on Serbia alone.

      Delete
    10. Ah yes, good old 'whataboutism'. So if others break the rules why should we be any better, is that it?

      Because growth and progress.

      Delete
    11. It's like Adria's employees. Because government throws millions per year into railways, they should throw extra millions to Adria as well.

      Throwing money around like there's no tomorrow.

      Delete
    12. The legislation was there before FR decided to launch INI-HHN, they knew the outcome which is why they are not taking the Serbian government to court. I would understand if JU was ripping people off to HHN but you can literally fly next week for €85. Why are you complaining? Let FR launch Malta which will nicely complement their offer from the city.

      Delete
  20. Some years ago there were news about negotiations between Ryan Air and the Government of Serbia. I was sure they were working together on this matter.

    Anyway, Ryan Air could have opened that route before Air Serbia did. Yet, it did not. Now, when it's declared as PSO, it can't be doubled by other airlines. They still have many unserved routes left.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Now, when it's declared as PSO, it can't be doubled by other airlines."

      Fake news. See above.

      Delete
    2. Ne kuzim....natjecaj je zavrsio. FR ne moze do tog kolaca vise.

      U cem je frka ako FR ima interese pokrenuti vec postojecu liniju?

      Delete
    3. it is not fake news. The decision is on point, especially because flights from INI with a VERY low handling fee is a way of sub itself. Having 2 carriers serve the same destination from such a small city and airport is absurd. Ryan better develop a new route.

      Delete
    4. It is fake news. The exclusivity is not explicit, Serbia gov't *chose* to apply it.

      Delete
    5. Yes, they chose to apply it because there are regulations that ALLOW it. If something is LEGAL and of your INTEREST, you have the right to CHOOSE it.

      Delete
    6. Of course they chose to apply it, the last thing they need is for JU's HHN to become another BUD.

      Delete
    7. Of course they choose to apply it. The whole point of the PSO was to prevent competition, not to start up routes of public interest where commercial grounds aren't sufficient.

      Delete
    8. What a stupid comment. Of course the whole point was not to block competition. If that was their goal then JU would have launched BVA, EIN, CRL, BCN in stead of some rural, tertiary airports around Europe. The only central airport they fly to is FCO, a destination that can barely survive from BEG.

      Delete
    9. Stupid? I wonder how the moderator allows these types of comments.

      They launched the typical Ryanair / WIzz routes, which are the only real threat to JU. The 'main destination' logic doesn't make sense. Actually, the opposite does - if this was a proper PSO, proper destinations would've been selected instead.

      Delete
  21. To some extent Iunderstand the government decision to prevent FR from adding this route. I see no point in introducing the same route that someone else already serves. They shall attempt finding some new route. Both Air Serbia and Ryanair are subsidized to fly from INI in some way. So there must be some rules such as diversifying the routes.

    They can instead expand frequency INI-SXF which I am sure is in high demand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whether you personally see a point in launching this route or not is irrelevant. There is no reason why GoS should be banning airlines from starting routes!

      Delete
  22. Some people on here behave as if FR was kicked out of Serbia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Free market has been kicked out of Serbia, in black and white this time.

      Delete
    2. No, it has not. Stop spamming the portal with your dramatic nonsense. FR is still free to launch any other route as long as it is not in direct competition with a PSO service.

      Delete
    3. I wish you prosperous future in your prosperous PSO driven country.

      Delete
    4. Yeah I am certain you wish us a prosperous future...

      Delete
    5. I sincerely do. I don't expect it but I wish it. I worked hard to enable it but you guys just don't want a free market. End of story.

      Delete
  23. Ovo je propis EU vezano za PSO (tako da je samo primenjen propis koji važi i u EU za PSO)

    6.4. Consequences of granting the exclusive right to operate the route

    79.

    During the period of exclusivity, access to the concerned route will be refused to any air carrier other than the air carrier selected by the tender. The duration of the exclusive right to operate the route cannot exceed four years; however, this period may be up to five years if the PSO is imposed on a route to an airport serving an outermost region, as defined today in Articles 349 and 355(1) TFEU (60). If the original contract is concluded for less than the maximum period fixed in Regulation No 1008/2008 (i.e. 4 or 5 years) (61), then the contract can be renewed up to the applicable maximum, provided that this option has been clearly and transparently mentioned in the tender documents and contract. If the contract is for the maximum period from the start, then a new tender needs to be organised, should the Member State consider that the conditions justifying this still exist, as according to Article 16(9) of the Regulation it is necessary to review the situation. In accordance with Article 17(4) of the Regulation, in case the tender concerns a route to which the access had already been limited to one air carrier in accordance with Article 16(9) of the Regulation, the invitation to tender will be published at least six months before the start of the new concession in order to assess the continued necessity of the restricted access. No renewal beyond the maximum periods mentioned is possible, as a regular review is due and this would close the market for new entrants for an excessively long period.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nisi citirao pravi propis.

      Propis je citiran gore, clan 9 iz 1008/2008. Nije eksplicitno 'refused' vec Vlada ima pravo da odbije druge linije AKO dokaze da nema javnog interesa. A vlada je jedino dokazala da nema interesa za PAKET linija uz uslove PSO-a krojene za jednu kompaniju. Ryanair dokazuje da interes postoji. I sta sad?

      Dakle, iako ne vazi, Vlada ce se vaditi na citirano. Dali ce se Ryanair cimati? Nece. Boli njih briga za par linija. Dali ce ovo usporiti dalju ekspanziju LCC-a u Srbiji? Hoce.

      Delete
    2. i ovaj član važi, jer je air serbia dobila exclusivity right za linije iz PSO...

      Delete
    3. Vlada Srbije je *odlucila* dodeliti exclusivity right na osnovu gorenavedenog PSO-a.

      Mala razlika, ali sustinska.

      Delete
    4. Ili ako bas hoces, evo jedan clan koji prethodi clanu koji si citirao, iz istog dokumenta:

      71. Concretely, Article 16(9) of the Regulation permits that access to the scheduled services on the PSO route be
      limited to only one EU carrier only if no such air carrier has commenced or can demonstrate that it is about to
      commence sustainable scheduled air services on that route. In this context, the demonstration that the air carrier
      is about to commence sustainable services corresponding to the PSO should be firm and credible, meaning that
      the air carrier would need to commit to the provision of such services for a certain period specified in the PSO
      conditions within a clear and limited time frame and accept the possibility of penalties being imposed on it if it
      fails to honour this commitment. The limitation of the PSO regime to one air carrier may or may not be combined with a financial compensation, as specified in the Regulation (
      53).

      https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017XC0617(01)&from=EN

      Delete
    5. I za kraj clan koji je najblizi problematici - sta ako ima interesa?

      74. In case the tender concerns a route to which the access had already been limited to one air carrier in accordance
      with Article 16(9), Article 17(4) of the Regulation provides for a publication of the information notice six months
      before the new contract period starts. The key objective of this prior notice is to give the air carriers interested in
      operating the route without compensation the chance to pre-empt, in accordance with the criteria of
      Article 16(9), a fresh limitation to a single air carrier selected in accordance with Article 16(9) to (12) and
      Article 17 of the Regulation (cf. previous point).

      Delete
    6. odlično...sledeći tender za PSO će država objaviti nakon isteka 4 i po godine :-) pa nek Ryanair aplicira ako su zainteresovani...

      Delete
    7. I haven't been following the news recently, but since when has Serbia become an EU member state, that this regulation would be applicable?

      Delete
    8. Svi navedeni članci su vezani uz PSO pravilnik u EU. Kako Srbija može imati PSO ako nije u EU.

      Delete
    9. Po istim pravilima po kojima mora pitati EU za subvencije svom nacionalnom avio prevozniku iako nije clan EU

      Delete
    10. Serbia needs EU approval to subsidise JU?

      That's new.

      Delete
    11. no, it isn't

      "Vlada Srbije može jedino kad dobije dozvolu Evropske komisije, što je dobila za prve tri godine poslovanja Air Srbije. Sada će, nemamo zvanične potvrde za to, ali verovatno će hteti ući u nove pregovore i onda će i država Srbija morati da se bori pred EK za nastavak subvencija", kaže Vojinović

      http://balkans.aljazeera.net/vijesti/avijacija-u-regiji-svi-u-zraku-samo-bih-prikovana-za-zemlju

      Delete
  24. Why do we need to subsidize a route if a commercial airline wants to fly it without subsidies? JU bots have lost their minds. Unfortunately, hatred of capitalism and free markets will never die in Serbia which is why we will be continue to be this "prosperous".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If JU did not start flights, Ryan would most likely not be interested to initiate these flights ... it is all a game of mouse and car.

      Delete
    2. Aha and what happens after two months when Ryanair realizes there is no commercial interest to operate INI-HHN? Who will lose the most here? Or shall JU be forced to return just because FR behaved like a d*ck? If they really want to fly it then why not pay penalties if they suspend it before a five year term is over? How about that?

      You know, FR is free to launch FRA-INI if they are so confident in their success. ;)

      Delete
    3. Nije igra macke i misa. Ryanair i Wizz Air bi se potepeno sirili i mic po mic ugrozavali Air Serbijin deo kolaca. Ocigledno je da je PSO slozen kako bi se to saseklo u koren i uz to dala finansiska inekcija JU. Dve muve jednim udarom. I sad kao vlada je morala da spreci Rajanar. Jeste malo morgen. Ma nista, placacemo mi i dalje 5 miliona godisnje i busacemo se u grudi kako smo najpametniji.

      Delete
    4. Ма дај молим те, мани се тих празних прича. Погледај листу дестинација ка којим ЈУ лети из Ниша, све сем Рима су трећекласни градови из којих нико годинама није планирао да лети. Уз све то, како то да се Визер не жали већ они миц по миц појачавају своје присуство у Нишу. У две године повећали су Базел и Меминген са 2 на 3 а ускоро Малме са 3 на 4.

      Да је то што пишеш истина, ЈУ би успоставио летове из Ниша ка много већим тржиштима. Како то да се Рајанер баш ухватио Хана а да притом игнорише Париз, Брисел, Барсу или било који град у том рангу?

      Као што је неко горе написао, ово је чист маркетинг јер ће медији сада преносити како је Хан одбијен али ето Рајенер ипак успоставља летове ка Малти. И онда ће сви који читају а планирају да летују тамо да провере њихову понуду из Ниша.

      Брилијантан маркетиншки потез.

      Delete
    5. Samo ti i dalje spinuj. Blago nama.

      Delete
  25. Good job! No complain. Air Serbia offers one way 25-30Euro. :) They should add more frequencies.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Wow, Ryanair's horrible relationship managing both with the EU (look at the dozens if not hundreds of public rants that Michael O'Leary launched against them over the decades) and with Serbia (the departed Mr. Berger being deported from Serbia for example some 10+ years ago for being rude to a Minister) are having consequences. Just wait for the day (god forbid) when there's a Ryanair crash and there will be the entire aviation industry out there looking to dig their grave. Payback is a b*tch as they say...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can you enlighten us on the deportation details? This is the first time i heard of it.

      Thanks.

      Delete
  27. Ryanair abused and distorted EU aviation market for decades when it was in their interest, examples are too many to list. Ryan for a couple of years had a chance to start any route from INI including HHN but didn't. With some minimal investment (for a company of Ryanair size) they could have applied and won the subsidy at INI but they didn't apply. They still have plenty of commerical routes unserved from INI to Germany, France, Belgium and other markets but they are not launching them. Cry me a river Michael.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said.

      Delete
    2. Ryanair never intended to fly INI-HHN. They always try to avoid starting routes with any competition in the first place. If they wanted to "offer choice to consumers" by competing against subsidized competitor, they would have started same flights from BUD to Balkan destinations already served by subsidized Wizz flights. Or from SKP to any of Wizz subsidied routes. Or from LJU to BRU against subsidized Adria flights. But they didn't do ANY of those, ignoring consumers. All Michael wanted was free promotion for their upcoming BNX service, so he or some other equally devious mind came up with "let's ask for INI-HHN and when we get rejected, announce that service from BNX"! Evil genius!

      Delete
  28. here you have your "glitch" now

    ReplyDelete
  29. Not trying to defend JU here, but why wouldn't any other carriers bid for the PSO flights from Niš?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because it was for a bundle of routes (12), it was an all or nothing deal, and there were specific requirements which only Air Serbia satisfied.

      Delete
    2. You don't enter a rigged race, that would just validate a 'fair competition' charade.

      Delete
    3. That explains why Wizz was the only one to enter the race for subsidies in SKP last year. Three times in a row.

      Delete
  30. I see many are asking where are the flights to top destinations, why just these unknown places. It is because big airports are expensive(slots) and Balkans doesnt have much tourism demand beyond diaspora i Western Europe.
    Which is way nobody wants to fly to place like Paris.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And also because these are the typical Ryanair and Wizz Air destinations.

      Bolje spreciti nego leciti.

      Delete

Post a Comment

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.