Wizz expects travel restriction uncertainty until year’s end


Low cost carrier Wizz Air, which boasts bases across the former Yugoslavia, expects for travel restrictions and entry bans introduced by governments without much prior warning to have an impact on its business within the next five months. The carrier has been forced to temporarily suspend over a dozen routes from Skopje, Belgrade, Tuzla, Ohrid, Pristina and Podgorica due to travel restrictions imposed onto nationals from these markets by other European states. “An upcoming period within the range of five months will feature a lot of uncertainty and the industry will have to learn how to be flexible in adapting to new route networks and adjusting capacity”, Wizz Air’s CEO, Jozsef Varadi, said.

Mr Varadi noted his airline has already embarked on a strategy to mitigate the effects of the ongoing pandemic. He cited the expansion of its Airbus A321 fleet in Belgrade, the establishment of its first Russian base in St Petersburg along with the restart of its Kiev base, the launch of fourteen new routes between Ukraine and Italy, the resumption of flights from markets such as Hungary and Macedonia, as well as its venture into the Middle East. In the coming period, Wizz Air plans to launch nine new routes from Belgrade, introduce its first year-round service to Croatia and commence new flights to Montenegro. “We have been trimming capacity in our existing markets, but at the same time we have also created a new network of routes and operating bases, so we are opening six or seven new bases just as we speak”, Mr Varadi said. The airline is now flying at 77% of its 2019 levels. The carrier noted that even with the coronavirus, it expected to grow its capacity by roughly 9% this year.

Commenting on Wizz Air’s strategy, which has vastly differed from its competitors during the ongoing crisis, Mr Varadi noted, “The very worst situation for us is when we don’t operate. The moment we operate, we only operate on a cash contribution basis. You have to run your businesses for the long run and liquidity and cash are critical components of your business model. We all know that short haul flying is a commodity business and in a commodity business the lowest cost prevails, and now we’re the lowest cost producer so I think our competing position has just gotten better”. He added, “Ten years ago when the last economic crisis hit the world, we were simply not strong enough and not big enough to take advantage of the situation. This time around I think we have the scale. We have the financial capacity to actually benefit from this and be one of the winners in this situation”.

Comments

  1. Anonymous09:01

    "The airline is now flying at 77% of its 2019 levels."

    That's impressive

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:09

      if its true

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:10

      Why would it not be true?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:11

      Yes ops are at 77% of 2019 levels- the question is at what level the passenger levels are?

      I read somewhere that they are at around 40%.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous09:11

      cause its all PR these days

      Delete
    5. Anonymous09:26

      Their LF is around 50%. New restrictions from the UK and Germany to Spain will hurt them big time.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous09:28

      @Anon 09:11: Exactly. I doubt their LF is even at break-even, so they are still loosing money with most of the flights.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous09:28

      It will for sure. They have already delayed new roites from UK to Spain.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous10:00

      Plus many countries are introducing additional restrictions which is bad news for them.

      Delete
    9. Petar10:58

      FR and U2 are far, far more exposed in the UK and Germany to Spain market than W6 is.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous15:02

      @anon 9:10 bcz this airline is full of BS

      Delete
    11. Anonymous20:43

      Varadi started to look for excuses already to explain the failure of his tactic of dumping capacity while there is still no demand. Wizz Air had a loss of 108 million EUR in the last quarter (April-June) according to the report published today. The shareholders voted yesterday against allowing him to take a 533.000 EUR bonus as the company did not reach the neccessary result in the last financial year (ending in March). This is a company which fired 1000 employees, the majority of whom would not make money equal of his single yearly bous for 20-30 years.
      BTW the 50% load factor is not the actual number of passengers on board but the number of tickets sold. The actual number of pax boarded is 10-20% less than that. Even this low figure could only be "reached" on a way that Wizz Air did not cancel flights where governments did not ban flying explicitly (even though the passengers did not show up and there were hardly any passengers on board) to avoid them being entitled to rebook/refund so that they could retain the money.

      Delete
  2. Anonymous09:03

    The only solution in my opinion is to introduce rapid testing at airports.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous16:05

      It is a solution but it is very expensive.

      Delete
  3. Anonymous09:04

    Good to see Wizz Air isn't in any major problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous16:06

      They have rich backers so it's easier.

      Delete
  4. Anonymous09:04

    I'm surprised how many flights they are operating all things considered.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous16:06

      Something like 160 new routes this summer. Crazy.

      Delete
  5. Anonymous09:06

    So they expect to come out as winners from all of this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:07

      Well that's exactly what he says.

      "We have the financial capacity to actually benefit from this and be one of the winners in this situation”.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:10

      Considering who their owner is, they probably will come out as winners.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:39

      And who is their owner ?

      Delete
    4. Anonymous09:46

      JP Morgan

      Delete
    5. Anonymous11:00

      Their biggest shareholder is Indigo Partners of Texas.
      They also have controlling shares in Frontier Airlines (US), JetSmart (Chile) and Volaris (Mexico).

      Delete
    6. Anonymous11:04

      Yes but who is behind Indigo Partners?

      Delete
    7. Anonymous11:31

      The Illuminati!

      Delete
    8. Anonymous16:07

      lol

      Delete
    9. Anonymous16:07

      Indigo Partners is a private equity firm co-founded by managing partner William Franke. The company focusses on air transportation investments, particularly in the establishment of low-cost carriers worldwide. Based in Phoenix, AZ, Indigo has been pivotal in the development of Spirit Airlines and Tiger Airways (which later merged into Scoot Tigerair Pte. Ltd in Jul-2017). The equity firm's current airline portfolio consists of the following:

      Frontier Airlines
      JetSMART
      Wizz Air
      Volaris
      Volaris Costa Rica (through its minority stake in parent carrier, Volaris)
      Indigo Partners LLC joined a consortium of Canadian investors to rebrand Enerjet as a ULCC in 2019.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous20:44

      A few months ago Indigo announced their intention to sell their shares in Wizz.

      Delete
  6. Anonymous09:07

    I'm also uncertain like Wizz Air

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous09:07

    Wish them all the best !

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous09:09

    Well even the World Health Organization yesterday said that travel bans are pointless.

    It will be impossible to keep borders shut for the foreseeable future, said WHO emergencies programme head Mike Ryan.

    “Economies have to open up, people have to work, trade has to resume,” he said. "...Continuing to keep international borders sealed is not necessarily a sustainable strategy for the world's economy, for the world's poor, or for anybody else."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:13

      yeah the same organization that denied man-to-man transmission in the beginning.
      In WHO we trust

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:16

      So what do you suggest? All borders should be shut until further notice?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous10:01

      Movement of goods is ensured anyway and trade HAS resumed.
      It is more about the free movement of people spreading the disease. Some countries have reduced the number to close to 0 (at the expense of tourism, hospitality, etc) others are cheating with the numbers or doing nothing. I fully understand if the former want to shut down the borders

      Delete
  9. Anonymous09:10

    they are nothing but gambling

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous09:19

    Looks like W6 will be winners after the crisis while exyu national airlines and pretty much every flag carrier in Europe will be the losers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:20

      +1

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:22

      All governments around the world will financially support their airlines.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:26

      Low cost travel relies much less on business travelers, which are not coming back to 2019 levels for years, if ever.

      Companies have seen they can do business just as effective online without spending a crazy amount of money on hotels, flights, etc. just for short meetings.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous09:38

      what can Wizz do with the billions of state support for national carriers ...

      Delete
    5. Anonymous10:14

      I've been reading about this "companies can be just as effective working online" for quite some time since this outbreak happened- and this nonsense is being ruminated by people who probably never needed to leave an office or their homes for work in their lives.
      There are so many businesses where there is no way you can replace a face2face meeting with an online meeting: sales people, technicians, attending conferences,etc. and furthermore I've been working in an intl. environment for most of my career now and these "online meetings" have been in the talks for years, in the past to save costs or "because of co2 emissions" and after a while it always got back to having the same meetings in person.
      So, while some meetings (and employees for that matter) may be made redundant, the majority will at some point in (near) future just return to meeting in person, and for that
      in most instances you will need to take a flight.

      Delete
  11. Anonymous09:22

    Bad news for Wizz haters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure sure, coffin corner meme will be heard around january 🤣

      Delete
  12. Anonymous09:33

    At least they don't destort the market.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:35

      Getting various airport and state subsidies is not a distortion of the market?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:37

      pick one airline that doesnt

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:47

      They distort it much less since they don't get preferential treatment or endless millions from tax payers

      Delete
    4. Anonymous11:08

      Like zdruzeno oglasavanje?

      Delete
  13. Anonymous09:35

    It's a gloomy future for the non-EU western balkan countries. EU will keep its borders closed to passengers from Western Balkan who are not resident in EU or do not have an EU passport.
    The likelihood is that the pandemic will continue at least until next January/February when the vaccine may become available. Until then the aviation industry will suffer a lot in the region.
    The odds are that the winter schedule will be even more minus that the summer. The only chance for people from Serbia, NM, Montenegro, Kosovo, B&H, Alb to travel to EU is if the EU will allow passengers from WB to travel if they have a negative COVID-19 test.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:43

      I love Nostradamus predictions.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous10:44

      It is gloomy future for countries that heavily depend on tourism having one of the lowest living standards in EU as their economical decrease will be supported by the fact that they won't have even the close the number of guests they had last year.
      Certain information are already circulating that it will affect salaries in public sector as the first measure.
      Who knows what kind of more difficult consequences it will cause to countries like Croatia.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous11:11

      And they will fly freely to jfk via beg and ist.

      Delete
  14. Anonymous09:36

    It's great to see at least one airline expanding.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous09:37

    Would love to see them expanding their network in Ljubljana!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:39

      they should first create one

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:50

      For that to happen, Ljubljana would have to approach them with a good deal.

      Delete
  16. Anonymous09:46

    Reading what this guy is saying is like I am reading big president's interview. I think he is making things look better than they actually are. Giving us numbers he wants us to see, not showing us numbers that actually matter.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Cancel Wizz09:59

    IATA just said that travel will not return to 2019 levels before 2024, longer than previously expected.

    Slap in the face for Wizz CEO and his unfounded predictions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:00

      And where did he say it would return to 2019 levels earlier?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous10:04

      What is more concerning is that you are happy with IATA's prediction just so Wizz CEO could get a "slap in the face". Crazy.

      Delete
    3. Cancel Wizz10:10

      One more thing that works directly against rosy Wizz views of the future is expectation that fuel tax will be introduced as airlines are returning from COVID19. That will hurt worst CO2 polluters, LCCs like Wizz and Ryan, more than other type of airlines.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous10:18

      Can you tell me where did Varadi say that the industry would recover earlier? Since that is what you claim in your original post.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous10:20

      Ah, the "worst CO2 polluters" guy is back.

      LCCs have one of the lowest possible CO2 emissions per pax km.

      Delete
    6. Cancel Wizz10:31

      Ryan has just been slapped for false claims about low CO2 emissions. In fact, Ryan has been called the new coal. Since 2018 Ryan has been on the top 10 list of CO2 polluters in the EU. All 9 other entries on the list are massive coal plants. What's worse, Ryan just like other LCCs has been growing CO2 emissions at terrifying pace, unlike coal plants that are slowing down.

      Wizz is not yet the size of Ryan but it is the worst offender in terms of growth of CO2 emissions in this part of Europe.

      https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/01/ryanair-new-coal-airline-enters-eu-top-10-emitters-list

      Delete
    7. Cancel Wizz10:45

      Consequently, we concluded that the claims 'Europe's… Lowest Emissions Airline' and 'low CO2 emissions' were misleading," the regulator said. ... Ryanair said it would comply with the ruling

      Above quote is from BBC. Wizz should also stay away from false greenwashing.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous10:48

      And how much is LH group effecting environment? They have about 700 aircraft in the fleet. Should we cancel them also?

      Delete
    9. Cancel Wizz10:56

      No other airline was on the top 10 polluters list. Other airlines including Austrian are starting to replace some routes with rail service. Wizz is doing the opposite by continuing overall growth of CO2.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous11:06

      "No other airline was on the top 10 polluters list."

      Which other airline in Europe has 450+ aircraft?

      You're comparing apples to oranges, unfortunately. You have to apply scale to the emissions. Sure, Wizz Air, Ryanair, Easyjet pollute a lot - but they've got large fleets. But a 180-seat aircraft with 90% LF is more efficient fuel and emissions-wise than a 90-seat aircraft with 70% LF (let's say your typical regional for hub flying).

      Delete
    11. Anonymous11:18

      Oh its the Cancel Wizz troll... Why do people treat him as he s being serious?

      Delete
    12. Cancel Wizz11:29

      Trolls don't use facts. Everything posted above is a fact.

      Governments are expected to keep national airlines while transforming them into more sustainable mode of operations. Lowcosters are not expected to be protected. They are disposable assets.

      Delete
    13. Anonymous11:55

      "Other airlines including Austrian are starting to replace some routes with rail service."
      I gave you an explanation for this and you just ignore it! Wizz Air was never flying on a short regional routes with dashes as OS did! Thats why Wizz is not replacing anything with rail because they never operated these kinds of short routes! Do you know a Wizzs route which is under 350 km and can be replaced with rail? Do you know any W7s route which originates on the Balkans and can be replaced with high speed railways like in Austria or Netherlands?

      "No other airline was on the top 10 polluters list."

      So there is no LH with 700 aircraft on that list? There is no AF/KL with 500 aircraft on that list? There is no Aeroflot group with 400 aircraft on that list? There is no TK with 400 aircraft on that list? There is no IAG with 600 aircraft on that list? Why you dont want to cancel these airlines? You said they are not on the list. Who is then on that list? Can you show us "your" list than?

      "Trolls don't use facts. Everything posted above is a fact."

      You are maybe using some facts, but in reality you are ignoring most of them.

      "Governments are expected to keep national airlines while transforming them into more sustainable mode of operations."

      And Wizz and Ryan are not doing that? They are not buying new aircraft? They are not going to make their fleet more efficiant? And what are you saying about 737s Classics in JUs and ROs fleets? Are these airlines more fuel efficiant with these stone age aircraft than Wizz with brand new A321neos?

      Delete
    14. Cancel Wizz17:45

      Why ask redundant questions before checking provided links first? Ryan is the only airline on the top 10 list, coal plants are the other 9.

      Why repeat questions about A321NEO being fuel efficient? That was debunked in earlier posts when Wizz was a news item. Wizz volume, growth and revenue model based on unneeded travel places it into top airline polluters by growth of CO2 in this region. If you are new, go back and read up before making comments.

      Similar claims in advertisments by Ryanair have been banned: "Ryanair adverts banned for making 'misleading' CO2 emissions claims" and "Both the company's radio and TV adverts reference "low CO2 emissions" while the text advert claimed "Ryanair has the lowest carbon emissions of any major airline":

      https://news.sky.com/story/ryanair-adverts-banned-for-making-misleading-co2-emissions-claims-11926471

      LCC model is unable to transform itself. Partnership with Rail, other modes of sustainable transport, hub model, essential travel market are incompatible with Wizz and others. Add upcoming government regulations, taxes on fuels, value added taxes on international tickets, funding to keep and transform flag carriers, changes in airport policies will all have devastating effect on LCCs.

      This pandemic is the extinction event that will take out LCC dinosaur model. Wizz is a dead man walking.

      Delete
    15. Anonymous18:24

      Partnership with rail? With what rail and on which routes? Where is infractuture for changing air corridors with rail ones? I asked you that before and you still didnt answer it. Austrian replaced just these short routes with rail, while Wizz was never operating these ones.

      If LCC is a dead model, why are these airlines growing then?

      Wizz has one of the largest CO2 emisions growth in the region, but also it is carrying far larger number of passangers. Or for enviroment are beter JUs 737s and OUs A320s?

      Do you know that diaspora used to get home by car and now they are doing it with Wizz, so in reality you are not going to make anything useful for invoriment with cancel it. A320 to Memingen will going be replaced by 4 old buses and I dont see anything good for enviroment.

      If we should cancel Wizz, we should than also cancel every other airline, but your logic is in that there is no logic. You just want to cancel Wizz without any good reason...

      Delete
    16. Anonymous18:38

      Just to add

      What does "esential travel market" means? Are you one of the guys which are reading OneMileAtATime where guy is flying from Manila to Toronto just for a review while usually there are people bashing Wizz because young people want to discover the world for cheap prices? Are we going to ban tourist flights because they are not esential? And who are you to say Wizz passangers are non esential? Visiting your family or going to work in Germany is not esential to you?

      Did you know that people who are traveling to their final destinatios via hub are using more flights than these who are traveling with direct flight? And more flights means more CO2 emisions? Has a sence to me actually.

      Delete
    17. Anonymous21:34

      Anon 18:24 and 18:38: Start researching more about this topic and you will find answers. For example, Air France will get money but they will have to exit some domestic routes that can be replaced by short duration rail trips. LCC were growing in the past but the circumstances are changing against them and as a result will start shrinking over time. There is a reason national airlines are keepers unlike LCCs but you have to find out why on your own. Wasteful and nonessential consumption has been well explained. Getting a 10eur Wizz ticket just to get a coffee in another city is a not essential by any means. Electric long range inter-city bus is here and will replace services where rail connections are not possible. Regional electric/hybrid aircraft are being developed, and so on. Industry will be unrecognizable in 10-15 years.

      Delete
    18. Anonymous23:55

      I still dont know which route from Wizz can be replaced by rail. There are bunch of them in legacy carriers networks while I dont know any route from LCC that can be replaced by rail.

      Replacing air routes with buses sounds hilarious to me. 2 hours of flight is equal to the 20 hours of driving.

      As far I understand you there will be no intra european flights because all be replaced by busses and trains.

      Regional electric aircraft will not be here for at least more 20 years.

      I do not understand what do you mean when you said legacies are "keepers"?

      Delete
    19. Anonymous17:58

      +100 Anon 11h55, 18h24, 18h38!!!

      Delete
  18. Anonymous10:22

    Wizzair - one of the worst employers in aviation.

    https://www.aerotime.aero/rytis.beresnevicius/25514-wizz-air-labor-safety-criticism

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous10:32

    W6 has done a travel revolution in Eastern Europe and Balkana.
    Today, it's connecting more and more cities together showing the importance of O&D traffic in the region.
    SKP is probably the stellar example when it comes to W6 success as well as TZL of course. God bless Wizzair!

    ReplyDelete

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.