Air Serbia looks to soften Covid blow

Air Serbia A330 aircraft in flight

Air Serbia is undertaking a number of cost saving measures in order to alleviate the effects of the coronavirus Covid-19 pandemic. The airline said it has rationalised its fleet and renegotiated leasing terms for its aircraft, with power by the hour contracts concluded, where leasing costs are accounted based on the number of hours the aircraft has been utilised rather than a fixed rate. The carrier has returned one Airbus A320 and one ATR72 turboprop to their owners following the expiry of their leases, while planned new leases have been put off for now. The company reduced airport fees at a select number of destinations and managed to defer air navigation tax payments until 2021. “Up to this day, Air Serbia continues to meet its obligations towards all key and strategic suppliers”, the company noted. It added that it launched a program entitled “Deliver” back in March, aimed at reducing capital investments and services which are not of vital importance for the company. “This continues to significantly contribute to the company’s liquidity. Furthermore, the company has used the suspension of slot rules in Europe and the United States, as well as its primary markets, to secure the same slots for 2021”, Air Serbia said.

The Serbian carrier has secured credit lines from commercial banks up until December 31 and has deferred deposit requests from several airports. Based on its financial report, Air Serbia was the beneficiary of 19.7 million euros in donations last year. The government has said it will provide assistance to the carrier this year as well but noted the amount will depend on the final financial fallout from Covid-19. It added it was difficult to approximate an exact sum but said the assistance would be continuous and in line with the government’s priorities, needs and possibilities.

Air Serbia said the situation on the market remains unpredictable. “At this point, there is very little demand due to ongoing restrictions and constant changes to entry regulations state by state. These restrictions, as well as worries over Covid-19, have had a significant impact on demand. The company Is actively following the situation and will respond effectively as the impact of Covid-19 evolves. This will depend on a number of factors, including the further spread of the virus, measures and restrictions imposed by countries, as well as passenger behaviour. None of these can be predicted with a high degree of certainty”, the airline said. It added, “The management has discussed a number of potential scenarios keeping in mind the aviation sector has been faced with a significant decline in demand”.

Comments

  1. Anonymous09:04

    Personally I find it remarkable that they got less than €20 million last year. Is that the lowest sum JU received from the government in the last 20 years? Seems like they are doing something right after all.

    By the way, the smartest thing was launching Oslo. That seems like a solid route for them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:05

      IST as well, it's the busiest destination out of BEG, TK sends a few times per week the A321 while JU sent the A320 yesterday.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:12

      The TK codeshare starting in 5 days will help even more with that route.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:14

      Didn't TK already announce BEG to be increased to double daily? I guess they expect this deal with JU to help them out.

      Delete
  2. Anonymous09:04

    Good to see they are taking some concrete action.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous09:06

    Why would they care. The government will bail them out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:10

      Actually all today's article speaks against your negativism

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:15

      Starting with the fact that they got less than 20 million in subsidies which is new, a big decrease.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:47

      It is good and right that states bail out their ailing airlines now.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous09:58

      the state is willing to help.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous10:34

      I can only imagine how much help Air Serbia will get, on top of all the financial help it's gets when everything is normal.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous10:42

      On top of all? Proportionally from all ex-YU carriers JU received the least. Even compared to RO it received less, Romania plans on injecting close to €60 million into RO.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous10:53

      @anon 10:42

      +100

      Delete
    8. Anonymous11:00

      In the past 7 years JU recived more money than RO and OU so I dont know what is he talking about.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous11:03

      How much did JU receive in the past seven years? I know OU is around €130 million.

      Also he said proportionally, don't forget JU is much larger than they are and has long-haul flights to one of world's most premium destination.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous11:20

      Receiving more than OU is very, very difficult especially as there are no the same rules being there for OU and JU.

      OU is EU company (before entering EU Croatia Airlines received more than 100 mil of direct Government help) and until this criris it was forbidden by EU laws to receive any cash. Despite it OU received 33 million "loan" cash and it is still to be confirmed by EC if it was legal. If not legal the same destiny awaits OU as it was the case with Malev, Estonian Air, Cyprus Airways etc. Belly up.

      Air Serbia is not EU company and same as YM does not have limitations that OU has.

      From the other side except illegal financial help received in 2019 and on beginning of 2020 Croatia Airlines also received money from udruzeno oglasavanje fund as well as for EACH domestic routes it operates in Croatia for ages. Only for 2019 it was around 11 million EUR.

      Let's not forget indirect way of helping OU by forbidding almost any LCC to fly out from ZAG. At the same time you have in Serbian capital Wizzair with planes based in BEG, easyJet, Norwegian, Transavia, Pegasus, Eurowings (planned from this year) and Vueling (flew until crisis).

      And you still say JU received more than OU. Joke.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous11:36

      "Let's not forget indirect way of helping OU by forbidding almost any LCC to fly out from ZAG. At the same time you have in Serbian capital Wizzair with planes based in BEG, easyJet, Norwegian, Transavia, Pegasus, Eurowings (planned from this year) and Vueling (flew until crisis)."
      From where did you get this if I can ask.

      "Despite it OU received 33 million "loan" cash and it is still to be confirmed by EC if it was legal."
      It is illegal. It is a fact and it has no any connections with how much money did JU recived.

      "From the other side except illegal financial help received in 2019 and on beginning of 2020 Croatia Airlines also received money from udruzeno oglasavanje fund as well as for EACH domestic routes it operates in Croatia for ages. Only for 2019 it was around 11 million EUR."
      Correct, but PSO is not the same thing as state aid, and we are now talking about the state aid not PSO which is BTW in Croatia given to the other private airlines and companies.

      "Air Serbia is not EU company and same as YM does not have limitations that OU has."
      And what does this mean? We are talking about how much did OU recived and how much did JU. You cannot justify state aid on this way.

      "And you still say JU received more than OU. Joke."
      Well last year JU recived 20 million just from a state and not from a PSO in INI and KVO. People are saying how this is the smallest amount ever recived, so by that logic if JU exist 7 years, every year gets something and 20 million last year was the smallest amount ever, then it recived more than 140 million. Plus add to that 158 million from the 2013. and who know how much more money they recived when contract with Etihad is still a secret.



      Delete
    12. Anonymous12:01

      There was an article here on how ZAG is protecting OU by limiting LCC offer, you can find it. Also don't forget that Zagreb is the only European capital, so European not EU, not to have an LCC link with London.

      Delete
    13. Anonymous12:02

      He said relatively less compared to others, please read more carefully.

      Delete
    14. Anonymous12:10

      "There was an article here on how ZAG is protecting OU by limiting LCC offer, you can find it. Also don't forget that Zagreb is the only European capital, so European not EU, not to have an LCC link with London."

      1. ZAG Airport which is under the concession has no any connections with the Goverment of the Republic of Croatia and state aid given by the same institution.

      2. If you read the article about same topic, can you show it to me? I will be very glad if you can show it to me.

      Delete
    15. Anonymous12:14

      "He said relatively less compared to others, please read more carefully."
      Then please define "relatively less".

      Delete
    16. Anonymous12:20

      From where did you get this if I can ask.

      Yes, you can. Just have a look on ZAG timetable and try to find Wizzair, easyJet or Pegasus flights. Nothing? Tried with Ryanair or Lauda? Still nothing?

      Did you know that ZAG is the only EU capital that has no direct LCC connection to London? Ring a bell or still nothing?

      There you are.

      It is a fact and it has no any connections with how much money did JU recived.
      Sorry, but I was not the one who said "I can only imagine how much help Air Serbia will get, on top of all the financial help it's gets when everything is normal." It was either you or some of your fellows, but my reply was direly answering of that claim.

      PSO is not illegal, but it is direct state aid. We have the examples PSO is given for ZAG-DBV route in the middle of summer season. It is not just the aid, it is very nicely packed gift being given to OU every single year (and it lasts for years!) for every single domestic route.

      And what does this mean? We are talking about how much did OU recived and how much did JU. You cannot justify state aid on this way.
      It means there are differencies in rights and obligations between EU and non EU airlines.
      EU airline as OU could fly without any problems LJU-ATH for example without asking for any special permissions. Non EU airline as JU can't do it.

      From the other side OU can't be financially helped by its Government on the way JU can and that is the part of the puzzle Croatian Government together with Croatia Airlines intend to forget or ignore. How convinient.

      Let's not forget that Air Serbia had its predecessor called Jat Airways that had huge debts someone had to pay back. So all the money poured into Air Serbia is not just financial help, but also debts that had to be paid back.
      Let me remind you that JU received only for last year PSO help for KVO and INI flights and in Croatia it lasts long, very long...And for each year it is at least 10 mil EUR with intention to be increased! So do your math.

      After it we are coming to very "transparent" udruzeno oglasavanje fund where nobody actually knows how much money is given to foreign airlines as well as to OU just to keep flying to Croatia. One more artificial way of sponsoring airlines including your own.

      If we add to the quaotatios that OU received 106 mil EUR at the end of 2012 and did actually nothing clever with that money, we can see how successful they are.

      https://www.argophilia.com/news/croatia-airlines-aid/27511/

      From the other side with all the money invested in Air Serbia we have at least TATL flight BEG-JFK year round as well as the biggest expansion out of BEG done in 2019 (BCN, MAD, HEL, CAI, KBP, KRR, ZAD, NCE) and planned for 2020 (AMM, ROV, GVA, LWO, FLR, KVI) and stopped only because of the pandemic. Despite pandemic BEG-OSL has been introduced.

      I see nothing of it in ZAG.


      Delete
    17. Anonymous12:39

      "Yes, you can. Just have a look on ZAG timetable and try to find Wizzair, easyJet or Pegasus flights. Nothing? Tried with Ryanair or Lauda? Still nothing?

      Did you know that ZAG is the only EU capital that has no direct LCC connection to London? Ring a bell or still nothing?"
      I will ask you again the same question, from where did you get the information that Goverment is helping OU on the way of prohibiting other airlines from flying to ZAG?

      "We have the examples PSO is given for ZAG-DBV route in the middle of summer season. It is not just the aid, it is very nicely packed gift being given to OU every single year (and it lasts for years!) for every single domestic route."

      OU gets about 10 € per seat for domestic flights. So while during the season you dont need it on some routes, in winter it is very usefull to have and more then 10 € per seat. So let we say OU is payed 20 € per seat on a winter flights which is a fair price in comparasion how much Air Corsica gets. And still PSO is not a state aid.

      "And what does this mean? We are talking about how much did OU recived and how much did JU. You cannot justify state aid on this way.
      It means there are differencies in rights and obligations between EU and non EU airlines.
      EU airline as OU could fly without any problems LJU-ATH for example without asking for any special permissions. Non EU airline as JU can't do it.

      From the other side OU can't be financially helped by its Government on the way JU can and that is the part of the puzzle Croatian Government together with Croatia Airlines intend to forget or ignore. How convinient.

      Let's not forget that Air Serbia had its predecessor called Jat Airways that had huge debts someone had to pay back. So all the money poured into Air Serbia is not just financial help, but also debts that had to be paid back.
      Let me remind you that JU received only for last year PSO help for KVO and INI flights and in Croatia it lasts long, very long...And for each year it is at least 10 mil EUR with intention to be increased! So do your math.

      After it we are coming to very "transparent" udruzeno oglasavanje fund where nobody actually knows how much money is given to foreign airlines as well as to OU just to keep flying to Croatia. One more artificial way of sponsoring airlines including your own.

      If we add to the quaotatios that OU received 106 mil EUR at the end of 2012 and did actually nothing clever with that money, we can see how successful they are.

      https://www.argophilia.com/news/croatia-airlines-aid/27511/

      From the other side with all the money invested in Air Serbia we have at least TATL flight BEG-JFK year round as well as the biggest expansion out of BEG done in 2019 (BCN, MAD, HEL, CAI, KBP, KRR, ZAD, NCE) and planned for 2020 (AMM, ROV, GVA, LWO, FLR, KVI) and stopped only because of the pandemic. Despite pandemic BEG-OSL has been introduced.

      I see nothing of it in ZAG."

      Let we say everything is correct what you said and we are sharing the same oppinions about the growth and development of these two airlines, but still this is not proving that JU recives relatively less money than other neighbouring airlines. My point of this is to show you that you are wrong when you say "JU recives relatively less money then OU".

      Delete
    18. Anonymous12:49

      Here are some articles that were published on here, if you want more feel free to look in the archive, don't be lazy.

      https://www.exyuaviation.com/2019/08/croatia-airlines-fends-off-lcc.html
      https://www.exyuaviation.com/2019/11/zagreb-airport-shrugs-off-performance.html

      As mentioned by many on here, at least Air Serbia receives, relatively speaking, less than OU but the market it serves has much more benefits. Last year JU got €19.7 million while OU got €33 million. Previous years OU still sold more assets than JU got in aid. How much did they receive from the LHR slot sale?

      So as long as ZAG keeps high charges and chases away LCCs the market won't profit.

      Delete
    19. Anonymous13:21

      Let's not forget Plijeso prijevoz as well "sell and lease back" of airplane engines

      Delete
    20. Anonymous13:27

      Last year OU got 18 million, not 33 as you are saying.

      First link that you provided does not prove you sentece is right; "Let's not forget indirect way of helping OU by forbidding almost any LCC to fly out from ZAG. At the same time you have in Serbian capital Wizzair with planes based in BEG, easyJet, Norwegian, Transavia, Pegasus, Eurowings (planned from this year) and Vueling (flew until crisis)." You said goverment is helping OU on the way of forbidding all LCCs to fly to ZAG and that link is not proving that.

      I really dont know what does sale of LHR slots has connection with the aid given to OU.

      Still, Purger says that JU recived overall about 500 million from the state, while OU recived about 140 million, you said 106 in 2012. + 18 in 2019. whic is about 124 million.

      Still i OU does not recive relatively more then JU.

      Delete
    21. Anonymous13:46

      Aha so whatever Purger says has to be taken as a fact? What did he base his argument on? Remember that's the same guy who said EK coming to ZAG is the biggest even in ex-YU. Whatever he says I would take with a big grain of salt.

      And when they say relative it means relative to the size and the expansion. JU has expanded in BEG, INI, KVO and BNX while subsidies it received have been going down. OU on the other hand has failed in pretty much all markets besides ZAG where extremely high costs have chased away any potential LCCs as seen in the articles posted above. Government owns OU and as such as it pretty much dictates to the Turks running the airport that their child must be protected at all cost because we've seen on the coast what happens when OU is faced with LCCs.

      So yes, when you look at the bigger picture it's pretty clear. JU gets less and less for more and more in return while with OU they need more and more while offering less and less.

      Delete
    22. Anonymous14:25

      I can find you a bunch of articles which are saying how much money is given to JU. And what is wrong with his statement about EK in ZAG is the biggest success in terms of routes in the ex-yu? It is correct.

      "Government owns OU and as such as it pretty much dictates to the Turks running the airport that their child must be protected at all cost because we've seen on the coast what happens when OU is faced with LCCs."
      Goverment dictates to the Turks? Wow I heard this for a first time. And how is that possible? Is this your immagination or you just do not understand how shity is contract for the ZAG conncesion? You should know that the Turks will need to spend probably 100 millions fotr the new terminal expansion when they hit 5 million passangers. Thats why they have high costs at the airport because they dont want to hit 5 million and automaticly invest everything they make in the previous years. There is a problem. If they have LCCs at the airport, they will have more passangers, they would reach 5 millions next year which means they will need to invest all of their money they make into an expansion. And there is no protectionsim of OU in ZAG.

      "So yes, when you look at the bigger picture it's pretty clear. JU gets less and less for more and more in return while with OU they need more and more while offering less and less."

      That is true, but again you are changing the course of this conversation. Point is, JU recives far more then OU on the number of passangers and aircraft in the fleet. And do not forget the 115 million € loan from JU which will be payed by a goverment because airline is not profitabile to pay its loans.

      Delete
    23. Anonymous15:22

      He said that EK arrival to ZAG is much bigger project than whole Air Serbia.

      Biggest fail ever!

      Delete
    24. Anonymous15:25

      Im not sure he said EK in ZAG is bigger then Air Serbia project. For me that has no sence at all.
      And what does this mean biggest fail ever?

      Delete
    25. Anonymous15:56

      Yes,he said that in live TV discussion.

      It means that it was one of the biggest false statements some airline expert ever made.

      Knowing he could make such a huge mistake I would not trust his words especially about Air Serbia

      Delete
    26. Anonymous15:58

      He said Emirates in ZAG is bigger then Air Serbia project or?

      Delete
    27. JATBEGMEL16:24

      The numbers for the over 500 million EUR subsidies for Air Serbia includes incorrect calculations, mixing USD and EUR figures and debts made during Jat Airways times. The comments and breakdown can be found here:

      https://www.exyuaviation.com/2014/12/government-to-take-over-jat-debt.html

      We have to take into consideration that ALOT has been done with the investment in Air Serbia. People seem to forget the period of Jat Airways.

      Delete
    28. Anonymous16:32

      Yes, he said that.

      Not only once said but also few times defended that silly theory.

      Delete
    29. Anonymous18:09

      Few times on here as well.

      Delete
    30. Anonymous21:02

      Air Serbia and Jat Airways are the same companies, only difference is in the name, managment and ownership.

      Delete
    31. Anonymous07:37

      Yes, all the same except

      - name
      - management
      - ownership
      - head office
      - fleet
      - logo
      - FF program
      - business policy
      - service
      - ICAO code

      Delete
  4. Anonymous09:06

    So the loss not counting health crisis is only 10 mil EUR.

    And it includes JFK route, all the current and not so favorable leasing rates, new routes opening, LCC competition in BEG etc.

    Not bad at all.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Two former Adria Airbus A319 aircrafts are waiting for entering the fleet. YU-APN and YU-APL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:11

      I believe they have been even painted in JU colors.

      It is good that Air Serbia could postpone their arrival.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:11

      I wonder if they will take those.

      Delete
    3. Nemjee09:18

      I think they will have to next summer as those 733s don't have much life in them. I don't know how much longer they can keep on using them. So if the situation keeps on improving it would make sense. Personally I think the only one who somewhat profited from corona was BEG, I fear they would have fallen apart if airlines kept their plans for summer 2020. At least like this they will have a few more bus gates before next summer.

      What's interesting is that YU-ANJ was retired, the same one that was held hostage in IST. One would think it would have more hours left than the two currently flying.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous09:23

      Maybe YU-ANJ had one D check less than YU-AND?

      Delete
    5. Nemjee09:48

      Could very well be. I wouldn't be surprised if it had a year or two left after the D check so it wasn't worth it. That said, didn't it receive new engines a few years ago?

      Delete
  6. Anonymous09:07

    Can someone explain to me the slots which are mentioned? Does that mean that they got better slots this year as there was little traffic and they will keep them in 2021?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:11

      for FRA for sure

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:13

      @9.07

      Yes

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:18

      Can they get better slots at JFK?

      Delete
    4. Anonymous09:19

      I think their slots are quite good there. No need to change.

      Delete
    5. Nemjee09:20

      FRA, AMS and VIE got new and much improved slots. For example, afternoon AMS no longer returns at BEG at 23.30 but now it's before 23.00. Like that the flight manages to catch almost all connections expect those that depart at 23.10 (CAI, ROV and AMM).
      With the 23.30 arrival it missed LCA, KRR, BEY and SVO.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous09:24

      That is great to hear. At least they have used this to proactively improve something in their operations.

      Delete
    7. Nemjee09:24

      This is the revised timetable for Amsterdam.

      BEG-AMS 17.15-19.45
      AMS-BEG 20.30-22.45

      In the past, with the less favorable slot, AMS used to leave BEG at 17.50.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous09:27

      FRA got new slots but previous (evening slots) are the same, not improved.

      New slots are 3 pw in morning hours during the summer season and are the same like they had in all other days during winter season.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous11:58

      In the past JU (JAT) used to fly to FRA daily in the early morning and return to Beg around 14h. Then with Djindjic coming into power almost right away LH took over the morning departure from Beg and somehow JU lost the morning slots in FRA.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous12:04

      That morning slot was lost when the codeshare agreement was terminated in 2009. Nothing to do with Dinkic. Also LH has been operating overnight flights to Belgrade for close to 30 years now.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous13:17

      I know that back in 2003 JAT Yugoslav Airlines had following flight schedule to FRA

      BEG-FRA
      12:00 - 14:00
      JU350

      FRA-BEG
      14:50 - 16:40
      JU351

      It was later on taken over by Jat Airways and this schedule took place until Air Serbia took over flying BEG-FRA.

      So 17 years ago JU did not fly to FRA in morning hours.

      Delete
    12. JATBEGMEL14:32

      In 1999 the timetable for FRA was the following:

      JU350 BEG FRA 1535 1735 Mon
      JU350 BEG FRA 1545 1745 Wed, Thur
      JU350 BEG FRA 1520 1720 Fri
      JU350 BEG FRA 0840 1040 Sat
      JU350 BEG FRA 1515 1715 Sun
      JU352 BEG TIV FRA 0635 1040 Sat

      Delete
    13. Anonymous16:11

      @13:17 Many years ago I flew to FRA by JU in morning hours and connecting to Delhi on Air India, if I recall the departure was at 07:55AM

      Delete
    14. Anonymous16:46

      I believe you, but it was surely before 2003.

      Delete
  7. Anonymous09:19

    It's going to be a difficult year.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous09:19

    They will pull through this.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous09:20

    What will happen to the A330 YU-ARA, if the JFK route is losing money is there really a need to keep it? Where could they fly a second frame profitably if they were to really give a focus on long haul?
    ORD, YYZ, PVG, ICN?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:33

      NYC is here to stay, they will not pull out of NYC no matter what. This has been confirmed and repeated many times.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:36

      Vucic said just 2 or 3 months ago that Air Serbia negotiated better rates for handling at JFK or something like that. So it doesn't seem the route is going anywhere.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:40

      Why would it go anywhere now when it surely makes less money bleeding than at the time it got introduced?

      Delete
    4. Anonymous09:45

      They should replace A330 with newer smaller and more fuel efficient aircraft which will cost less than A330 for leasing. Something like A321XLR would be great for them.

      Delete
    5. Nemjee09:55

      I don't think A321XLR can make it all the way to New York, don't forget that there are many different things that need to be considered like non-direct routing or winds. I read somewhere that this plane can reach as far as Boston from Budapest. I doubt it's the right choice for JU. Also don't forget JU carries a lot of cargo to New York, there was even article about it on here, I think it was last year.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous10:06

      The A321XLR is an excellent aircraft but simply cannot operate to the US from BEG at max capacity/payload. The resulting payload restrictions would render the flights uneconomical.

      A332s will be plentiful on the market soon so JU could definitely scoop up something more attractive... as for the other types, they are all much more costlier in leasing terms than A332s which is a very capable and good aircraft.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous10:31

      You are wrong!
      A321LR currently operates flights between Toronto and Basel by Air Transat. A321LR has a range of about 7400 kilometers while A321XLR has a range of about 8400 kilometers. So then answer me on this question, how much there are kilometers between Basel and Belgrade if aircraft with 1000 km more of range cannot operate flights to Belgrade?

      Delete
    8. Anonymous10:41

      Just to add something more on my previous comment,
      Air Transat ordered A321LR and A321XLR, and they said how A321XLR will make possible flights to many European destinations with less demand for widebodies or infrastructure which cannot sustain widebody operations. With this they add how Split will be perfect destination for the A321XLR. And duration of the flight between Toronto and Split is longer than between Belgrade and New York.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous10:45

      First of all, Air Transat operates Toronto-Basel with a stop in Montreal, it's not a non-stop flight. Montreal-Basel is 07 hours and 15 minutes which is some two hours shorter than BEG-JFK. In conclusion, no, the A321XLR can't make it my friend.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous10:56

      So have you read what I said or not?
      Air Transat operates these flights with A321LR not A321XLR which has 1000 km more of range. And how Air Transat thinks that flights from Toronto to Split are possible but shorter flights from NYC to Belgrade and somehow not?
      And why is Airbus selling A321XLR as an aircraft which can make from Tokyo to Sydney which is about 7,800 km while that same aircraft cannot make fly on 700 km shorter route?

      Delete
    11. Anonymous11:04

      They will probably have a stop in Montreal like they have with Basel and like they had with ZAG in the past. Anyway, why are we even discussing this when JU has no issues filling the A330 so a downgrade is not something they are looking for.

      Delete
    12. Anonymous11:07

      It makes no sense to ditch the A330. If there wasn't for corona JU would be using the A330 on charter flights. Kon Tiki was planning flights to Italy with them but then all this happened.

      I think it's more likely JU would get a second A330 than to introduce an expensive and unproved aircraft like the A321XLR.

      Delete
    13. Anonymous11:08

      They never operated ZAG with a stop in Montreal. There were just 3 one off flights from Montreal in all these years.

      Delete
    14. Anonymous11:49

      Well I just want to say A321XLR is a great aircraft for the smaller airlines on long haul market. Its cheaper, smaller and more fuel efficient then A330 so I dont know why do you think unproved when bunch of important players ordered it.

      JU has no problems with filling it in the season when LF is about 70 to 80% but in the winter it has LF of only 50% on 2/3 weakly flights which is not profitabile at all. Also do not forget that BEG-JFK route lost 11 million € in 2017. and state was resposible for covering losses. So I think A321XLR would be the best aircraft for JUs long haul operations because losses will be smaller, fuel efficiency higher and you will be able to have more long haul flights out of BEG.

      Delete
    15. Anonymous11:54

      Air Transat operates mostly tourist leasure flights with 20kg luggage limitation per pax and rarely they have any cargo so A321XLR would not be an option for JU

      Delete
    16. Anonymous12:05

      JU losses to JFK would be larger with the A321 because they would lose all the cargo, especially in winter. Don't forget that cargo traffic is not as seasonal as passenger traffic is.

      Delete
    17. Anonymous12:06

      JU losses to JFK have been going down a lot lately and right now it is the best performing route in the network.

      Delete
    18. Anonymous12:21

      "Air Transat operates mostly tourist leasure flights with 20kg luggage limitation per pax and rarely they have any cargo so A321XLR would not be an option for JU"
      If A321XLR or LR is not the option for JU because of cargo and luggage limitations, why is then same aircraft orederd by Swiss, Aer Lingus, Air Astana, United Airlines, American Airlines, Scandinavian Airlines, TAP Air Portugal, Iberia, British Airways, Czech Airlines, Saudia, Qatar Airways, Middle East Airlines and so on. Why are then A321XLR and LR so popular among the legacy carriers but is not good aircraft for JU.

      "JU losses to JFK would be larger with the A321 because they would lose all the cargo, especially in winter. Don't forget that cargo traffic is not as seasonal as passenger traffic is."
      Actually its opposite. A321XLR cost less for leasing, it needs less employed people around it and it is saving more fuel than 13 years old A330-200 whit just 70 seats more.

      Delete
    19. Anonymous12:53

      BEG-JFK is ten hours on a normal day, this can be longer if there are winds which is usually the case in winter. Also, how much less cargo A321 can take compared to the A330? Also do you honestly think JU would go for maximum capacity which would mean there would be no business class onboard? Not to mention that such a configured plane simply couldn't make it on BEG JFK market.

      I know you are desperately trying to discredit the A330 at JU but you simply don't have good enough arguments.

      Delete
    20. Anonymous13:14

      Im not talking about the classic A321 or A321neo or A321LR, im talking about A321XLR which is promoted by its producer Airbus as aircraft which can make from Tokyo to Sydney which is longer distance than from NYC to Belgrade.

      I dont know where did you find that I said JU should go for a 220 seats on board. I said about 70 seats less than A330-200 which is about 180 seats on board. Same has Aer Lingus on its A321LR.

      Im giving you a lot of answers and arguments on your statments and questions. You said how A321XLR cannot make a flight from BEG to NYC, I used my arguments and proved that you are wrong.

      Same as you said how A321XLR is not a good aircraft for JU because it is legacy while Air Transat is leisure carrier, I proved you are wrong by using a fact that bunch of airlines who ordered it are legacies.

      You said how A321XLR will make more losses then A330, I proved you are wrong because A321XLR costs less then A330 for lease by about 50%, it needs less crew and people around it, it makes roations faster by a hour and you can easliy fill it during a winter months.

      So im not sure these are bad arguments because you are providing litarally none.

      Delete
    21. Anonymous13:51

      You do realize that all you've done is show examples based on theories. Show me one airline that's operating the A321XLR on a ten to eleven hour flight? I am not interested what Airbus is advertizing. After all, Boeing didn't advertize its MAX planes coming crashing down yet here we are. Furthermore, JU would have to have much less seats than 180 because it would also have to have a dedicate business class product similar to the one it has on the A330. It's business class has really good loads to and from JFK. So in the end JU will be having around 120-130 seats on the A321 similar to the ones B6 or AA have for their domestic flights on their domestic flights.

      So you really think JU can make more money with that than with their 250 seat A330 that can take tonnes of cargo? I highly doubt it.

      Delete
    22. Anonymous14:11

      So you want to say that A321XLR has no range of 8400 km but somehow they have 300 orders? Interesting. But still, when Airbus prove that it has a range 8400 still it will be the best aircraft for a transfer strategy at JU. A321XLR is literally made for JU.

      Do you know that you cannot buy these business class seats anymore because they are too outdated and simply no one wants them anymore? Simply, then you will change business class seats as every airline which wants to improve passanger expirience. And guess what, Aer Lingus has 180 seats on board with 16 business class fully flat bed seats.

      As far I know JU carriers cargo, 250 passangers and losses on their A330. And with A321XLR you will be able to make more profits and you can simply have more destinations and frequencies for less money. More flights also mean more chances for passangers to connect via BEG on JU. You can open flights to Beijing, Boston, Washington, Montreal and Toronto without any problems with 3 A321xlr. Simply it is an aircraft of the future and it would be especialy goog for JU if it wants to expand more on a long haul market.

      Delete
    23. Nemjee14:16

      JU makes money on JFK from May to October so your whole argument regarding A321XLR is wrong. JU's main problem is its relatively weak regional network. Once that is improved their profitability will be expanded into other months as well.

      Furthermore, just because the airline is losing money doesn't mean every route it operates is loss-making. It just means that the sum of its income is less than the sum of its expenses.

      As for other airlines ordering the aircraft, I doubt many are doing it so that they can operate 10-11 hour flights but rather 8 to 10 ones.

      Delete
    24. Nemjee14:18

      Also, please note that Aer Lingus' A321LR has 168 seats in economy class but with 31 inch seat-pitch. JU on its A330 has 32 inch legroom.

      Delete
    25. Anonymous14:35

      Well it lost 11 million in the 2017. on that route. I still do not understand why do you think A330 is better then A321xlr for a small airline like JU? Building transfer strategy with A321XLR is far more profitabile then with A330.

      "JU makes money on JFK from May to October so your whole argument regarding A321XLR is wrong." No its not. Its opposite. Half of the year they are losing money so their operations to JFK are unprofitabile. With A321XLR you would lose less money and probably make profits.

      Aer Lingus has 184 seats in total on A321LR.

      Still this is not proving that A330 is better for JU then A321XLR because they are losing money on their current long haul operations.

      Delete
    26. JATBEGMEL14:52

      I dont see the case for JU taking the A321, what ever letters you want to throw next to it. Their A320 was not very active outside the summer season, so A321 on the Euro-Med sectors I doubt would be any better.

      A321 is slower than the A330, so that increases the flight time and throws out the advantage of the outstation rotation time mentioned above. Sitting on a narrow body for several hours isnt something pleasant might I add.

      Plus the lease rates for the A321 isnt that much cheaper to the A330.

      https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1449067

      Not to mention the winds over the Atlantic, especially in the winter. Making refuelling stops means JU loses its competitive edge, where onward transfers become 2 stops rather than 1 via other European hubs. And the refuelling stop would mean transfer pax would likely lose their connecting flights ex BEG.

      Delete
    27. Anonymous15:14

      I think both of you guys are wasting your time to be honest :)

      Air Serbia's fleet planning management is not the most proactive generally, because everyone thinks that the government will sort that out for them or they simply don't care to sit down and look at the data for the next 10 years... They don't operate like that.. That's more Lufthansa or Air Canada style:)

      JU still operates 737s and beat up ATRs, which are ok in some ways but are waaaaaaay over due for replacement. But, if you bring that up, you will get attacked instantly or the argument will end with simply that there is no money.

      But I suggest your write to them because yes, A321XLR is a great aircraft but on the other hand I would hate to be on a 8-10hr flight on a single isle aircraft... And yes, the cargo is limited compared to A330...

      Good luck and let us know if they reply;)

      Delete
    28. JATBEGMEL15:17

      Regarding JFK, the 2 pw winter ops is what loses them any gains they make during the summer. 1 destination 1 aircraft ops isnt working, and is something JU needs to work on. Adding more regional frequencies would help. Its a waste of resources for their ATR's spending 5-6 hours rotating on regional destinations, where realistically it could pull off 2.

      A second aircraft could increase the cash made during peak times to allow break even, or a small profit for full year ops. Perhaps:

      BEG PVG 1350 0720+1
      PVG BEG 0900 1420

      BEG YYZ 1700 2100
      YYZ BEG 2230 1215+1

      which could allow 3 pw PVG and up to 4 pw YYZ. PVG would connect to the full West European network, while YYZ to all regional destinations except IST and ATH.

      Delete
    29. JATBEGMEL15:25

      @ 15,14

      I dont think fleet planning is as limited as is finance. B733's still had some life in them and was a cheaper way to add capacity in the peak summer months. I see the Aviolet brand more to disassociate the Air Serbia brand from the B733's, and wouldnt be surprised to see that brand disappear the moment the B733's are fully retired.

      However, they did have intentions with changes and additions to the fleet this summer. Small airline makes smaller changes and takes smaller steps. Alot of time and finances was lost with an improper model during the initial phase of its rebranding afterall.

      Delete
    30. Anonymous15:27

      I just want to say, A321XLR is made for the airlines like JU and it would be perfect for their long haul operations.

      Delete
    31. Anonymous16:27

      Maybe for some other markets but not for BEG-JFK.

      Delete
    32. Nemjee18:14

      You do realize that in the period that they are making money, by switching to an A321 they would be actually recording smaller profits from transporting fewer passengers and less cargo. Thus making the whole operation less viable.

      Once again, just because it can be done on paper doesn't mean it will work well in practice. A330 works fine for JU and it's a plane that fits their needs. The months when they are losing money can be improved by enhancing connectivity thus making their product more appealing and competitive. Yes, they lost 11 million, that's not a secret but do you mind sharing with us how much they lost the year before. ;)

      A321XLR would make sense if they decide to tap into the Indian market by launching BOM or DEL flights which are around 7 hours and where they couldn't rely on healthy yield from the start.

      Delete
    33. Anonymous18:45

      What if they make the 321XLRs their main fleet type...? They could use it for long/medium or short haul... But, and that's a big buy, someone in marketing needs to sharpen their pens and fill those birds during slow months as well during regular months.

      Delete
    34. Anonymous18:49

      They struggled filling A320s. JU needs more regional jets to make A330s work in their fleet.

      Delete
    35. Anonymous18:56

      Still, for the smallest legacy in the Europe with scheduled long haul flights, A321XLR is the best option for long haul flights. You can easliy enter on the new markets with less money and higher chances for profitability. I really dont know how does A330 fits for JU if they are losing money on long haul operations from November to April. Can you please explain me that?

      If you have 80% LH in July what is aprox. 200 passangers on every flight and you changed these flights to a A321XLR with 184 seats, you will have 16 passangers less per flight. Totally insignificant for profitability in July while you will pay less for lease for about 45%. You will have about 150.000 € less in sold passangers ticket while you will save about 300.000 € for lower lease rates, fuel efficiency, less crew and lower airport handling taxes.

      If you are losing money on long haul, you should change something and the first right step for Air Serbias long haul operation would be replacing A330 with A321XLR. Also you can expand on other markets which cannot sustain A330 even in summer while building its network. Many airlines decided to take this plane because of same reason. And this step would be great for a airline which is losing money on long haul.

      Delete
    36. Nemjee20:05

      And how many airlines dropped their larger planes to replace them with the A321XLR? As mentioned in my previous post, losses to JFK are going down meaning the airline is on the right track. Anyway like someone already said, it's questionable if the plane can even make it from BEG to JFK.

      Delete
    37. Anonymous21:00

      Why it is questionable? Because you want to see just larger plane in Air Serbia so you are just hoping that im wrong or?

      Well why would anyone drop larger plane if it is making profit with it? Air Serbia is not making profit with it so that means you should change something. And please tell me how much airlines need 4 or more years to stop losing money on one route? Probably none, because that kind of route would be already cannceled. Airline is still not on track if they have so bad loads during a winter months. Thats why they should change something and ordering more A330 in the future would be hilarious.

      Still you didnt answer it why it is a perfect plane for JU while it is losing money?

      Are you escaping from the facts or not? Because it seems you have no problems with money losing routes at Air Serbia.

      Delete
    38. Anonymous02:46

      Ne mogu vise da citam ovo. Razlog sto A321XLR nije dovoljan je sto potpuno popunjen nece moci da leti nonstop potencijalne buduce linije BEG-ORD i BEG-PVG.

      Delete
    39. Nemjee06:55

      Jesus Christ. Because for the time being, it's what fits the best especially since their financial performance is improving. What guarantees do you have that the XLR will be better? Pure theory and speculation while we are providing you with actually improved results JU had on this route using this aircraft. After all, didn't they boost JFK to 6 weekly last year?

      Furthermore, looking at Airbus' website, I see they advertise the plane as having a range of 4.700 nm. Meanwhile, the shortest flying distance, as the crow flies, between Belgrade and New York is 3.920 nm. Obviously no plane flies the shortest route which means that the actual distance is well over 4.300 nm. In other words, a fully loaded A321XLR can not make it from Belgrade to New York making your whole argument, as well as this discussion, pointless.

      https://www.flightglobal.com/airbus-indicates-a321xlr-would-have-over-100t-mtow/130271.article

      Delete
    40. Anonymous09:12

      Air Serbia transports tons of cargo to JFK that A321 simply can't take.

      Delete
    41. ASC BEG09:20

      It's been posted above but the lease rates for A321XLR or any variant of A321 actually) is very close to the one of A330-200.
      Paying the same rental cost and generate less revenue (because less seats and cargo) will not improve the route economics, probably the opposite. A330 is the best sized aircraft for the route, the question is more if the route is needed at all?

      Delete
    42. JATBEGMEL13:10

      Needed, no. But since theyve invested into the route the past 4 years, itll be a waste to suddenly cancel it. A second aircraft would improve the economics of their long haul adventure.

      To give example, as above, the second aircraft being used for launching 2 routes. For the example, I'll use YYZ and PVG. Both can be operated 3 pw with current max utilisation of 6 days per week as we see with YU-ARA. Current winter utilisation with YU-ARA in the winter is 33%, while 2 pw on 3 destinations would give a utilisation of 50%. At worst, while an aircraft is down for maintence, at least there would be no need to suspend ops or lease capacity with crew.

      Delete
    43. Nemjee13:40

      JFK as a route is needed, unfortunately it was prematurely launched. Before they ventured into long-haul they should have first established a decent regional network. If it weren't for corona their Balkan network would have been really fine this year. As JATBEGMEL wrote, the route is here so why not make the most of it. After all, that route did boost many regional destinations like TIA, OTP, ATH or TGD.

      Delete
    44. Anonymous16:19

      More A330 in JU would make just bigger losses on long haul. Air Serbia should contretate on better short haul network and launching regional jets in the fleet. That would help at least to make less losses on long haul if not profits. Just look at LOTs strategy with regional jets and widebodies. Im not saying that JU is comparable to LO or it will be any time soon, but copy pasting their strategy in smaller amount would be very usefull for making JU less dependant on the state aid.

      Simply there is a way to make this airline as successful carrier with profitabile long haul. Maybe you dont like it as idea, but A321XLR would be perfect for buliding better long haul transfer strategy.

      Delete
  10. Anonymous09:25

    I was on a JU flight recently and I find it funny that they now only offer a bottle of water. I wonder how is contact between crew and passengers increased since they used to hand water and chips/biscuits at the same time as water. Just a sorry excuse to cut costs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:29

      I asked myself the same question and I believe it has nothing to do with contact between crew and passengers.

      I believe their idea (or beter to say justification for cost cutting) was that water can be drunk without direct touch with hands while sweets or chips needs to be taken into hands in order to be eaten. And as long as you directly touch the food the risk for infection gets increased.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:39

      If touching food was the problem, they could have innovated and made something packaged with a packaged spoon or fork.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:42

      And it would mean additional costs...

      Probably they were led by the idea that if TK with all their onboard product can cut it why can't they?

      It will be back for sure, but it is the question of time.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous10:48

      Poenta je da se maska sto manje skida sa lica,zato daju samo vodu

      Delete
    5. Anonymous15:17

      Ma sve se vrti oko love, kakve maske i rukavice.. To je za decu priča

      Delete
  11. Anonymous09:43

    When will they finally change that awful livery on YU-ARA?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:54

      Probably when the next D check is scheduled. Not sure when that is considering it had one last year.

      Delete
  12. Anonymous10:01

    I wonder if Etihad will keep its stake in Air Serbia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:17

      For now, it seems they are staying.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous10:17

      The government said that will depend on whether EY covers part of the corona losses.

      Delete
  13. Anonymous10:01

    The show must go on.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous10:01

    Good!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous10:02

    This was to be expected.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous10:03

    If they were able to secure credit lines it means banks are generally satisfied with their finances and ability to pay off debt, contrary to what people write in the comments here.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous10:08

    JU will be ok in the long run.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:23

      JU has survived much worse than Covid. So I think it will be fine.

      Delete
  18. Anonymous10:14

    Have the salaries of pilots and crew that are working in Air Serbia be effected?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous10:17

    The travel restrictions must be having a big impact on their bottom line unfortunately.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:24

      It's having a big impact on every single airline in the world...

      Delete
    2. Anonymous10:27

      Except maybe Widroe. They became one the busiest airlines in the first half of the year.

      Delete
  20. Anonymous10:33

    Good luck to every Ex-Yu-Airline in this crisis! Hopefully everybody will survive this!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anonymous10:34

    This is more than expected and the losses will be seen by all airliners.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous11:16

    What people here tend to forget is that Corona crisis has changed our way of life and this will go one and one. It is a big revolution, the economy is changing and very probably people will travel less. This is not something that will magically disappear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:53

      EK CEO disagrees with you.

      Delete
    2. JATBEGMEL15:35

      As if someone can trust anything from the EK CEO. They were only several months ago slamming airlines for not taking on more A380's.

      Delete
  23. Anonymous16:15

    Are YU-ALV and YU-APG leaving the fleet or they left already BEG?
    Does anybody know, for which airline they gonna fly?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JATBEGMEL16:32

      Both have had their liveries removed.

      YU-APG had a test flight prior to return on June 12th, while YU-ALV had it on June 28th.

      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.