State to support Air Serbia as Etihad continues divestments


The Serbian government has said it will continue to provide support for its national carrier as minority stakeholder Etihad Airways continues re-sizing itself into a mid-sized airline after disposing of its stake in Air Seychelles. Etihad currently holds an 18% share in the Serbian carrier, making it the last remaining investment in its portfolio. The Abu Dhabi airline said it sold its 40% stake in Air Seychelles back to the Seychelles government. Although Etihad’s management contract at Air Seychelles has been terminated, the CEO and CFO appointed by the Emirati national airline will remain in their posts respectively until June 30, to assist with the transition.

The Serbian Prime Minister, Ana Brnabić, said, “I am proud of all the support the government of the Republic of Serbia has provided to Air Serbia. All of it. If there is a need, I will fully support any additional assistance required, in line with the European Union’s state aid rules. We pay careful attention not to be in violation of these rules as the penalties are extensive. However, anything else that is necessary for our national carrier will be provided by the government. Air Serbia saved us. Without it our citizens would be unable to return from abroad when everyone closed their boarders and cancelled flights. Without Air Serbia we would be unable to get vaccines as quickly as we have”.

Linus Benjamin Bauer, Managing Director of Bauer Aviation Advisory, a consulting firm exclusively working for the aviation industry, believes Etihad will dispose of its minority stake in Air Serbia in the coming period. “Selling its last stake in Air Serbia would be very much in alignment with Etihad's new strategy to become a boutique airline with a focus on premium in the post pandemic era”, Mr Bauer said. In mid-March, following talks with the de-facto ruler of Abu Dhabi, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić said the two discussed Air Serbia’s and Etihad’s partnership among other things, noting that “there will be more meetings concerning that matter”.


Comments

  1. Anonymous09:09

    Interesting, only Slovenia couldn't be bothered to save its own national carrier. I guess we know something that the rest don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:55

      Slovenia is in the EU, Serbia isn't. Different rules.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous10:26

      I guess Croatia, Italy, France, Germany etc., also aren't in the EU. You'll have to do better than that.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous10:32

      Lufthansa was a highly profitable carrier before Covid. If airline industry recovers, I don't see them not being able to pay back the loans.

      AF-KLM story is a complex one as it involves two countries and one part of the company more profitable than the other one.

      We are yet to see what will happen with OU state aid - remember that it can be deemed illegal years later, sending the company into bankruptcy (Malev).

      As for Alitalia, do you really wish Slovenia to have such a financial burden on its back as is Alitalia, for nearly 0 benefit?

      Delete
    4. LJU is a simple proof; no national carrier and no traffic. With or without COVID. Having national carrier may be not profitable, but traffic generated by carrier dissipates through national economy and multiplies through taxes, expenditure, related employment etc. Unfortunately, too complicated to comprehend for know it all politicians and net experts without a penny to them

      Delete
  2. Anonymous09:10

    Koja patetika: "Air Serbia daved us"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:32

      I'm not sure if she believes in her own B.S. or is trying to feed the rest of us with this B.S.

      Delete
    2. aww you pathetic guys.. learn how to spell and write before you form a opinion.

      Thank you to the serbian government and to Air Serbia, because you did indeed save us.

      Delete
    3. YU-RAR15:36

      You are the pathetic one ... learn which words should be capitalized before you form a sentence.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous15:43

      YU-RAR why does Air Serbia frustrate you so much? There has to be some underlying reason for it?

      Delete
    5. YU-RAR16:44

      What indication did you get from what I wrote that Air Serbia frustrates me?

      Delete
    6. Anonymous16:53

      Because of all your comments.

      Delete
  3. Anonymous09:12

    They got good money at inflated rates for all their services and now they will exit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous09:12

    Divesting from Air Serbia why not, should be OK .

    But why in gods name did they cancel their flights to Belgrade instead of simply continuing codesharing on that route with JU ?!
    Flights were full and as far as i know also profitable .
    The whole affair to me doesnt look reasonable, much more like an emotional decision .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:36

      Agree ... it is simply time to move on from the charade of EY having any form of meaningful stakeholding in JU. They haven;t for some time and the GoS hacks have been pulling the strings from behind the scenes now for a number of years.

      Now that the umbilical cord has been cut with Air Seychelles, it might make it easier for the GoS to say that our involvment with EY is over for us as well.

      Delete
    2. Nemjee10:20

      I think it might have to do with JU not being interested in cooperating with them. In recent months there was a shift towards TK. JU has simply shifted its focus from AUH to IST (and SVO).

      EY-JU was an arranged marriage where neither side ended up happy with what they got in return.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous10:59

      Under those terms EY might be called a 'prostitute' and not a wife since they didn't get anything from almost six airlines, and offered little in return.

      Delete
  5. Anonymous09:18

    "We couldn't find bread to eat, had Air Serbia not bring us flour."

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous09:28

    Why does she insists on obeying EU rules to the letter when Serbia is not part of EU? This PM leaves a lot to be desired in her support to Ju

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:31

      Because JU is a signatory to the ECAA, it must abide by all rules as other carriers who are also signatories to this agreement. So state aid rules apply, given that they take advantage of the EC open skies agreement ....

      Delete
    2. Anonymous14:45

      They should just do what is in their (JU) interest and say sorry to the rules; now is the time to treat rules in your favor as times are not normal. Look at leading countries changing diplomatic rules and stating it as the new norm. Everything is now "puj pike ne vazi"

      Delete
  7. Anonymous09:28

    I get the importance of Air Serbia to a small country such as Serbia. But to say that Air Serbia saved us and without it we would would not have got the vaccines as quickly as we did - says everything about how she takes Serbia's citizens as being blind idiots.

    Facts are that the overwhelming majority of vaccines have been shipped into Serbia by foriegn cargo operators. Moreover, how have shipments reached countries who don;t have a national airline ?

    Please ...

    Just stop treating people like imbeciles and you might just get more respect from a broader base of people ....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:57

      +1000.

      All this "we couldn't get couple of boxes shipped without national carrier" propaganda is a complete BS.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous10:31

      This is all part of the govt propaganda to overstate and inflate the "save us from life and death situation" spin in playing up the importance of a national carrier "at any cost" scenario - so people won;t jump up and down about how much money the govt needs to continue to pump into JU

      Delete
    3. Nemjee10:56

      You are very naive if you think the government needs an excuse to pump money into JU. They would have done it regardless of covid. After all, how many millions did we pump into Jat while getting virtually nothing in return.

      Delete
    4. They definitely did save us in many ways when Covid started . Just 330 alone brough to Serbia tons of medical supply and pcr test that every country was struggling with . Those were critical and if there was no JU no way Serbia would build 2 covid hospitals in 4 months and opened 2 small factors producing safety supply for hospitals. Negative people that we often see on here quickly forget what happened last year .

      Delete
    5. Anonymous12:43

      Anon, 9:28, I posted almost the same comment exactly one year ago, in the midst of the pandemic, and then, many called me a JU hater- I would imagine those were the very same people who take such statements from Serbian officials for granted.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous12:59

      For some JU is a waste that serves no purpose and needs to be shut down. No arguments are needed, it's just like that.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous15:34

      @Anonymous09:35

      Yes Serbia is a small country, any country with less than 20 million inhabitants is a small country. Netherlands has 17.5 million people, Dutch themselves describe their country as small.

      Delete
    8. Бежи бре!15:40

      @Anon 09:28 "how have shipments reached countries who don;t have a national airline ? Just stop treating people like imbeciles and you might just get more respect"

      I will treat you with respect you deserve. For example, Hungary asked Wizz air to use passenger planes to get supplies from China. Wizz planes didn't have the range and capacity so they had to make refueling stops and take several planes at a time. It wasn't efficient.

      As a result, government of Hungary decided to create a virtual government-owned airline and purchased A330, registration HA-LHU with the primary goal of bringing supplies and vaccines into Hungary. It is quite ironic they embedded this government airline within Wizz for bureaucratic reasons:

      https://www.aircargonews.net/freighters-world/hungarian-government-purchases-airbus-a330-200f-from-qatar-cargo/

      Example from Hungary shows it is more efficient for government to own and control it's own airline and own long haul aircraft, validating Serbia's approach. As promised, I didn't treat you like imbecile for not knowing this, did I?

      Delete
    9. Anonymous16:47

      Interesting about Hungarian government buying a A330. Did not hear about that.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous16:54

      Yes and I think they got A330 from Qatar.

      Delete
  8. Anonymous09:35

    Small county such as Serbia, yeah with a population bigger than most countries in Europe ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:38

      You suffering from small country sydnrome ?

      Delete
  9. Anonymous09:41

    @anon 09:28
    They shipped things other than vaccines, such as masks, gloves, antiseptic fluids and most important - mechanical ventilation units.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:49

      They would have got into the country without a national carrier too .... that's how other countries have rec'd the same items you mentione who don;t have their own national carrier ... that is the point that anon@9.28 I believe is trying to make

      Delete
    2. Nemjee10:15

      Of course they would have but at what price? In 2019 there was no spare cargo capacity so many countries suffered because of that. Some like Austria or Switzerland chartered their national carriers' widebody fleet to bring in supplies. Those who couldn't had to pay the price.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous10:21

      Nemjee - you're starting to sound like a Brnabic accolyte .... Covid took hold in 2020 my friend, not 2019 - so have no idea what you are banging on about

      Delete
    4. Anonymous10:34

      "Those who couldn't had to pay the price."

      And exyu national carriers were and still are run without any state aid, right? They just did those flights for free and certainly never receive any state aid whatsoever.

      Delete
    5. Nemjee11:00

      Yes that was a mistake, 2020. It still doesn't change the point I was trying to make. From your argument I don't see anything being presented besides a direct and personal attack directed at me.

      Anon 10.34
      And do you honestly think Vienna didn't use all those China charters on the B777 to pump money into OS? Or how much did Wizz Air get from Hungary to charter all those A321s to China via Kazakhstan?
      As for JU, they might not be profitable right now but they are on the right track to be in the next five to ten years. Direct state subsidies are around €20 million which is nothing when compared to how much Serbian Railways get.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous12:25

      So which point was that ? The fact that it wasn't 2019 but 2020, or, the fact that you say that there was no spare capacity ?

      Where have you been these past 16 mths ? Have you not seen how many aircraft have been grounded - more than an abundance of 'spare capacity'... and how many of these 'spare' pax aircraft were being used to transport cargo - incl JU ?? There was more capacity than you can poke a stick at ! So how on God's earth can you say that there was no 'spare capacity' ?

      Just because someone makes a contrary point or highlights a flaw in what you have said, it doesn;t constitute an attack on you - grow up.

      It is what it is ....

      Delete
    7. Nemjee12:31

      Huh? Governments weren't looking for grounded passenger planes to carry medical supplies and medical goods but rather cargo planes which were in short supply back then.
      It's exactly because of that shortage that they eventually opted to use their national airlines' passenger aircraft to carry the needed goods. On top of that, it was a convenient way to pump millions into them.

      So no, there was not enough cargo capacity to transport the needed goods and when there was an opening they were charging crazy amounts for the service. This was especially true in the early months of the pandemic when very few countries had the needed medical supplies.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous13:44

      Still have no idea what you are banging on about .... dude, it needs more cohesion, focus and definately more brevity

      Delete
    9. Anonymous15:31

      @Nemjee: Sure, a lot of countries used Corona cargo flights to pump in millions into state-owned national airlines.

      It still doesn't mean there if there wasn't for the national airlines, that the vaccines/masks/test/equipment wouldn't be delivered. There were - and still are - thousands of aircraft parked around, and I'm pretty sure if they approached Wizz/Easy/Ryanair/Jet2/TUI/Trade Air/any other airline really, they would be more than happy to offer their services in exchange for money.

      That's why the argument "if it wasn't for [insert flag carrier], we wouldn't have vaccines" is silly.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous15:35

      He didn't say there wouldn't be any but that they would be delayed until governments would wait for cargo planes to be available for them. Very few governments used foreign passenger aircraft for these goods to be transported last year. There has to be a reason for that.

      Anon 13.44
      He is saying what I wrote above. Looks like you only one that doesn't understand it. Countries didnt need passenger planes to move goods, they wanted cargo planes and there was a shortage of it last year. Why is this so complicated to understand?

      Delete
    11. Anonymous15:39

      So Air Serbia has exactly 0 cargo aircraft. How were only they (and no other airline) able to carry the Covid-related cargo?

      Delete
    12. Anonymous16:02

      Without passengers A330 has plenty of cargo capacity plus massive cabin (see pictures of cargo carried in the cabin posted here when ARA retired) and can fly nonstop to China. It serves as a better cargo aircraft than a dedicated narrowbody cargo jet for this purpose. Now you know.

      Delete
    13. Anonymous16:17

      Government used A330 because they didn't want to get ripped off for special and unreliable cargo flights. Now that JFK operates vaccines are coming on TK Cargo and Qatar.

      Delete
    14. Anonymous17:20

      So no other airline with A330 or other widebody aircraft was able to provide such a service?

      I seem to recall seeing a lot of pictures of them being parked worldwide.

      Delete
    15. Anonymous17:24

      Not at the same price, not at all.

      Delete
    16. Anonymous17:52

      How many millions has GoS sunk into JU in the last 20 years? Divide that per Covid cargo flight and tell us what would be less expensive.

      Delete
    17. Anonymous20:22

      Twenty years ago JU was JAT, not Air Serbia. Investments different governments made in national airline over that time period were not made for the purpose of Covid flights, so your math is ridiculous and senseless. If you still don't understand the benefits, read the earlier posts about Hungary purchasing an airplane during pandemic and post from SLO AIR at 14:18.

      Delete
  10. Nemjee10:11

    'Etihad's new strategy to become a boutique airline with a focus on premium in the post pandemic era.'

    Yes, nothing says boutique like teaming up with Air Arabia to widen your network. Etihad is clueless and it will be more of the same in the coming months and years. They have lost the race with Emirates and Qatar and it doesn't help that airlines such as Oman Air and Saudia are also trying to break into the transfer market.

    As for JU, yesterday we read that JFK has been profitable since 2020. Usually that was the case with summer months but the route seems to have matured which creates the possibility to expand the long-haul network from 2022.
    Most countries are trying to save their national carrier and JU might be many things but useless is not one of them. They are playing an increasingly important role in bringing foreign tourists to Serbia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:27

      "Profitable" has many forms and meanings and the CEO did not explicitly state whether the route was fully profitable to the famous "L4" - in other words, fully covering DOC, fixed costs and H.O. overhead .... it may only be 'profitable' at L1 or L2 - which is much more plausible.

      Delete
    2. Nemjee11:07

      You are right, he did not disclose their financial performance so let's engage in endless conspiracy theories. :)
      ...as if we don't have enough of those already.
      Seems like for many on here no aspect of JU's business can ever improve and that the airline will merely exist until the EU shuts it down over illegal subsidies.

      JU's BEG-JFK has consistently performed well once it was restarted. It was even reported on here that in October they had the best LF at JFK among foreign carriers. They also boosted it in March ahead of schedule. All this plus much more give us an indication that the CEO might not be making things up. Like I already wrote, this route has been operating for years and it seems to be maturing quite nicely.

      Delete
    3. Nemjee11:11

      Just to add, profitable means that when they took their income from the route and subtracted their total expenses there was money left.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous12:15

      Nemjee - go get a lesson on route profitability before making such an uninformed comment as your last one. Route profitability is measured and reported against a number of criteria and has different prisms through which it is viewed

      Delete
    5. Nemjee12:37

      It's Accounting 101.
      You basically look at expenses and revenue. Obviously it all depends what you label as an expenses and what you label as revenue. That's where creative accounting comes into play.
      However, in JU's JFK case their revenue from sales was probably enough to cover all of their operating costs. Unusual circumstances helped them boost their revenue on this route.
      This ongoing hate fest is getting old. If the CEO said the route was profitable then there is no reason to doubt him especially since it's no secret they have been performing really well on it.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous12:38

      JFK wasn't profitable in the good pre-Covid times, when JU were running full loads in the sumer mths flying 6 times per week - but in covid times, with travel restrictions, border closures, less flights and no flights for a period and with even less passengers overall - the route is suddenly profitable ???

      This sounds like something that came out of the PM's mouth ....

      C'mon people, let your logic and senses filter this B.S......

      Delete
    7. Anonymous12:49

      1. BEG-JFK was profitable in summer before covid
      2. when flying with JU and BEG you didn't have to isolate two weeks in the US. There was a transfer ban for Schengen airport transfers. Many had to fly with JU especially from destinations like TGD, TIA and so on that are not in Schengen. This helped JU make good business.

      That is why this winter they could charge more and make more money. No B.S. just your hate.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous12:50

      Yes Nemjee - but you need to get past Accounting 101

      Delete
    9. Anonymous13:00

      Why? What he said make sense. You have income which can come from tickets, government subsidies, cargo... then you hav expenses like overfly rights, crew, fuel... he just simplified it. These were not normal times and because of that JU can make a profit outside summer.

      Logic 101

      Delete
    10. Anonymous13:48

      Of course you can make money (and profit) when Govt pumps in copious amounts of money .... best 'revenue' any business can have and it will certainly be more than your expenses .... BINGO !!!..... and there you have it - Accounting and Logic 101 combined in one lesson

      Delete
    11. Anonymous15:36

      Only thing is that government did not pump millions into JFK flights. Those make money on their own so stop hating. Did you really think JFK would never start making money? You are a hateful troll my friend. :*

      Delete
  11. Anonymous11:43

    Airline business is one of the hardest businesses out there, but let's be realistic and honest - Air Serbia is nowhere near any profitability. In regular conditions, before state subsidies, they are making losses in the range of EUR 5m and 20m. In covid-19 conditions, we can just imagine their real financial situation and the burden for Serbian tax payers. The fact that JU is the last airline in the world probably to cut wages in covid-19 times doesn't help either, but rather shows that JU is a state/political project that is not connected to any business laws or reality. Whether one line is "profitable" or not is more than irrelevant and just bring focus to minor details.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:06

      JU reduced its workforce by 500 people and cut salaries by 30%. I don't understand what you are going on about

      Delete
  12. Anonymous11:59

    Will Etihad sell remaining 18% stake in JU?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:01

      Highly likely.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous12:30

      Who cares ?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous12:32

      Obviously I do if I'm asking the question.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous12:42

      Gee - you must be the sharpest tool in the shed ! The point means that it won;t make one iota of difference to how the company is run whether Etihad keeps its 18 % or not. The GoS decided long ago that they were gonna keep the company afloat at any cost

      Delete
    5. Anonymous12:45

      You are extremely rude and hostile. If you have nothing to contribute, which you don't, then stay out of the conversation. And try learning some manners.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous13:01

      He have several aggressive posts today. You can see from his style.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous13:02

      I noticed

      Delete
  13. Anonymous12:03

    Who would have thought this would be Etihad's last remaining investment.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous12:04

    My guess is Etihad will leave around October. In September the last Etihad Group loan has to be paid off and it will probably be paid by the govrnment. After that EY will leave.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous12:05

    Nice to see government committed to Air Serbia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would say opposite : I would say nice that Air Serbia using government commitment for growth, development and stabilisation. Unlike Croatia Airlines which receives the same or even bigger aid from the government, which aid is used to feed uhljebs, pay double leases to Misetic company, sponsoring sport teams and covering losses for services copy pasted from Yugoslav times or feeding Mutti

      Delete
    2. Anonymous15:37

      Exactly, Pozdrav. It takes time for an airline to start making money but that can happen only if the airline is using the money wisely.

      Delete
    3. Balkan Blues17:55

      With due respect to pozz. many of your comments shows your knowledge of the airline business, especially the ex-yu region, BUT, do you have to mention OU in almost every post, and how they missed an opportunity for long haul, etc. and how the 'uhljebs' have benefited from this. You say the say thing EVERY time. we all know your stand on this. Give it a rest. Respectfully, peace out.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous18:34

      His double daily Zagreb-Kansas City flight ideas are a real gem and truly show his extensive knowledge of the airline business.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous20:48

      good one!

      Delete
    6. Uhljebi na aparatima, a jedan lazljivac na trostrukom prikljucku LOL

      Delete
  16. Anonymous12:06

    What I find hilarious is aviation enthusiast on an aviation site routing for an airline's collapse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:51

      +1
      crazy isn't it. Not just on this topic but others too.

      Delete
  17. Anonymous12:08

    How much did the Seychelles government pay to buy back 40%?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:50

      $1

      https://www.arabianbusiness.com/transport/462850-seychelles-pays-1-to-acquire-etihads-stake-in-its-flag-carrier

      Delete
    2. Anonymous12:57

      wow thanks

      Delete
    3. Anonymous13:55

      $1 ??? They paid way TOO much !

      Delete
  18. Anonymous12:10

    Well done Serbia

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous12:17

    Air Serbia will be fine and is doing fine all things considered.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous12:22

    Without state support, Air Serbia would go bust

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:23

      So what would be the alternative? Finance Wizz Air in Hungary or let foreign airlines come in who have no intention of registering in Serbia, no intention of paying taxes in Serbia and who only look after their own interests which are in no way related to Serbia.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous22:53

      Without support majority of airlines would go bust ..

      Delete
  21. Anonymous12:24

    Good

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous12:24

    I do not mind state aid at all, on the contrary, I support it since when looking at the greater picture Air Serbia is indeed contributing a lot to Serbian economy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:53

      National carrier is vital for the economy. It is contributing immensely.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous13:01

      Oxford study proved that.

      Delete
  23. Anonymous12:48

    If Etihad leaves, does anyone knows what happens with the Air Serbia - Etihad Guest program. How has Air Seychelled approached this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:48

      * Air Seychelles.

      Delete
  24. Anonymous13:08

    I find it interesting that in Serbia people get peeved about subsidies or state support for Air Serbia but not to the dozen of other state owned dinosaurs who get the same assistance or even more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous13:19

      Probably because they were made to believe that after Etihad takes over there would be no more need for state assistance.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous13:58

      the simple fact of the other state owned 'dinosaurs' you speak of, is that they are HUGE employers of people - significantly more than Air Serbia - and they are also used by significantly more people than the small percentage of the Serbian population who can afford to fly. That's why they are the recipients of state subsidies

      Delete
    3. Anonymous15:39

      Serbian Railway gets €100 million in subsidies every year and very few people take the train compared to the buses. Also no tourists come to Serbia with train while they do with Air Serbia. So...

      Delete
    4. Бежи бре!16:22

      @Anon 13:58 "they are also used by significantly more people than the small percentage of the Serbian population who can afford to fly."

      Unlike government supported bus or railways operations, 100% of Air Serbia operations are international and by that very fact more exposed to international than just domestic population. Significant number of Air Serbia destinations are in function of serving diaspora that has available disposable income and is significant cash generator for economy of Serbia, unlike those domestic bus/rail passengers. That's just one of the reasons it is of clear economic advantage to support Air Serbia.

      Over years, Air Serbia hesitancy has been significantly reduced as positive developments and knowledge sharing enlightened those initially polluted by hate and mistrust. You're welcome!

      Delete
  25. Anonymous15:59

    "Small percentage of the Serbian population who can afford to fly" is B.S. Millions of people do fly in Serbia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous17:06

      Casual chauvinism against Serbs is very common in the comments here.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous20:46

      so what percentage of Serbs fly at least once per year?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous21:16

      I don't know, nobody ever bothered to do the math. Wanna finance that particular research? Out of my friends (though I do earn above average and consequentially hang out with a similar crowd), 100% of us fly multiple times yearly.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous21:51

      What would be your estimate based on the overall population?

      Delete
    5. Anonymous21:53

      -what percentage of Serbs fly at least once per year?

      When I boarded Alitalia flight no one complained that I am not an Italian. Airlines want all passengers, they don't care what percentage of Serbs or Italians or Qatari citizens fly. Importance of Qatar Airways for that country's economy has almost nothing to do with percentage of Qataris flying at least once per year.

      Some people are just not talented for understanding airline business regardless of how much info is presented to them. They are called: not the smartest ones.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous22:57

      Soooooo, what percentage of Serbs fly at least once per year?

      Delete
    7. Anonymous22:58

      56.3% according to my data. You will have to finance your own study if you believe my data is incorrect.

      Delete