Air Serbia forecast to post €7 million profit in 2022


Air Serbia is expected to post a profit of some seven million euros this year, during which the carrier introduced a dozen new routes, retired its oldest aircraft and took on its second wide-body jet. Although the airline itself has not speculated on its final balance sheet, its main shareholder, the Serbian government, has said the company will come out of two years of Covid-induced losses with a seven-million-euro profit. Air Serbia’s CEO, Jiri Marek, was more cautious however, telling the Czech “Denik N” newspaper, “We would like to be in the black already this year. Covid taught us to react very quickly, which we can see even in today's circumstances, when fuel prices have skyrocketed. The season was successful, but now we have the harder part of the year ahead of us and no one can predict how inflation will affect people's will to travel, for example. For now, however, we remain optimistic”.

Mr Marek noted the airline has reduced its costs and views airBaltic’s pre-Covid business model as an example. “We look at airBaltic, which was very successful before the pandemic. We cannot become a low cost carrier, that is impossible for an airline of this type. We will never be able to buy a hundred aircraft at once, which is what low cost carriers do to reduce costs. However, we try to be efficient and have twenty to thirty percent lower costs than other legacy carriers”. Mr Marek said. He added, “You have to bring the costs closer to those of low cost carriers but offer passengers better service for which you can charge a fee. We see this, for example, on the route to Paris, where we fly twice a day and Air France only four times per week [seasonally]. We have a codeshare agreement with the French, and we are able to bring passengers to Paris cheaper than them, which is beneficial for everyone”.

Commenting further on its finances, the company’s CEO said, “In no case do we want to rely on the state. Our job is to be profitable and build long-term sustainability. We may be owned by the state, but we really operate as a commercial company”. Mr Marek noted the airline aims to become a leading regional carrier. “We perceive Belgrade as the centre of the region, which is the legacy left from Yugoslavia. The country continues to develop, the GDP is growing, and we are trying to respond to this. At the same time, we try to react to what is happening around us. When the Slovenian Adria went bankrupt in 2019, we immediately increased services to Ljubljana. We were the first to fill that gap. In addition, passengers from neighbouring countries also transfer onto our service to New York. Other than Athens and Istanbul, there is no airline operating wide-body aircraft anywhere in the region. That is also why we are thinking about expanding our services to China. We want to be a regional leader, connect the area well and take advantage of the consolidation that is happening throughout Europe”.



Comments

  1. Anonymous09:02

    Before or after government subsidies?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:06

      After, although we don’t know how much money they get from the state.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:27

      And of course, first comment is the passive aggressive one.
      Before or after subsidies is not important as they will generate a profit with big investments they made, which is not the case with many other subsidised or non-subsidised companies wider that ex-yu region.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:31

      They should get around €15.5 million from the budget which would be the smallest amount ever.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous11:26

      Subsidies or not, still a good result even though they replaced some planes and launched lots of new routes this year.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous13:15

      Negative, without the subsidies. Still loss making.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous13:26

      I don't mind that they keep support. They have improved service levels, brought down the age of the fleet, launched new routes, promoted Serbia at tourism fairs and events and employ many people.

      When you compare to other state owned dinasours that do nothing and just keep posting losses. This is good.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous13:35

      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
    8. Anonymous13:53

      I wrote this below but I guess it belongs here too. I will never understand why do people criticize Government for helping Air Serbia. I really think they did A LOT to improve aviation in Serbia. And it's not just Air Serbia. The entire aviation sector has developed. Airport got the concession at a huge price thanks to Air Serbia. Jat Tehnika is now converting widebodies into cargo planes, there is a whole facuty at university set up which works with the entire aviation sector to train aviation professionals, MTU is now producing engines in Serbia etc.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous21:35

      AeroSprdija obviously has own army of bots here. Probably joint venture with "government". Let noone even try to ask unpopular questions, like if we are all paying for AS expensive plays and toys.

      Delete
    10. Vlad23:31

      Any "concerned taxpayer" that talks about JU before EPS is a hypocrite of the highest degree.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous23:32

      Some people can't deal with Air Serbia being successful so they throw childish temper tantrums. There is a difference between profitable and successful. Your local fire station is not profitable but they are successful in stopping property and human losses. Once you grow up you might understand.

      Delete
    12. Anonymous09:00

      I thought that airline company is supposed to be a profitable one, and not a country's liability and charity, i.e. "successful" (btw success in this case is measured how? By being able to quickly burn taxpayers money for subsidised tickets?)

      Ones mentioning "EPS", stating "passive aggression" where there is no any, talking about AS being "successful" (when the company is still receiving money from government, non-transparently, even after almost 10 years of existence) and avoiding real talk are actually the ones exibiting childish tantrums and agression.

      Delete
    13. Anonymous14:33

      You thought wrong. Bring those thoughts to news articles about losses of EU airline from the EXYU region and you will get an earful.

      Delete
    14. Anonymous20:08

      So, in other words, fact that other airlines are making losses, too, makes it perfectly acceptable for AirSerbia's CEO to show losses as profit?
      And please, why should we talk about "news articles about ..." since particular article is about a) AirSerbia, b) AirSerbia CEO's statement that they are profitable, when they are not.
      More, what "EU airline from the EXYU region" (whichever that may be) has to do with Jiri Marek, AirSerbia, government of Serbia and tendency to use blatant lies when making PR/marketing?

      Delete
  2. Anonymous09:03

    Congrats & Good Luck

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous09:07

    Speculation on my part, but it might be that their ambitions are to grow into AirBaltic or SAS models for the ex-yu region + Albania

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vlad09:19

      Neither of the two IMO. They have a very clear hub-and-spoke strategy with a single hub. INI and KVO are outliers financed by the state.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous11:47

      @Vlad
      You do understand that INI doesn't need JU, it only restricts the development in the long run. JU is changing PSOs all the time, even to routes that Ryan was interested in, commercially, not as PSO. If Ryan or Wizz announce a new route, how long would it take JU to "declare" it PSO and get more budget money? Frankfurt Hann as a best example. INI was doing just fine without JU, growing nicely year after year.
      KVO is a different story at the moment, I agree.

      Delete
    3. Vlad12:32

      Sorry, I should have been more precise. When I said "INI and KVO are outliers financed by the state", I was referring to JU operations there. I have no doubt that INI is a viable airport in its own right (to an extent at least).

      Delete
    4. JATBEGMEL13:38

      @Vlad

      INI is definitely not viable on its own. The airport has a secondary source of income (parking fees in the city of Nis if I'm not mistaken) while all upgrade work is being carried out by the state budget. The fees that INI charges Wizz and Ryan Air to fly there are not viable.

      @11,47

      INI could definitely do with JU and the added connectivity that LCC's simply cannot offer. The way our government has gone about the PSO routes however is a different story. At least there is IST, BEG and soon ZRH to provide some connectivity. However, it surprises me that booking tickets from INI with transfers via IST isn't possible. Weirdly enough, it is possible to transfer in INI with a JU ticket.

      Delete
  4. Creative accounting and support from the taxpayer! Still it's better for a country to subsidize its own flag carrier that is reliable and sustainable rather then funding the likes of Wizz and Ryanair that only chase after profit and lets customers down all of the time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous01:13

      Exactly. We saw what happened in Sarajevo

      Delete
  5. Anonymous09:13

    Mr Marek is deluded! Of course Air Serbia received state support and subsidies. Yes they act as a commercial enterprise, but they would be unprofitable without government funding.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vlad09:21

      He is saying that they are actively trying to reduce their dependency on the state, not that they have already done so. Try to improve your reading comprehension before you call people "deluded" in a public discussion.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous13:04

      In my personal opinion the CEO is saying all the right things. At least it appears he has some sort of an objective.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous01:13

      ^ Agree. So far so good

      Delete
  6. Anonymous09:29

    With all those cancelation, wet leases, and plane faillures I really dont see how.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:32

      That's why you are not a successful manager in JU or anywhere else.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:36

      In the greater scheme of things, it really is inconsequential what you see (or chose not to). Bravo Serbia!

      Delete
    3. Anonymous13:02

      They had a total of 2% cancelled flights which is way below the avarage this summer in Europe.

      Delete
    4. JATBEGMEL13:06

      Wet leases would of brought profit (smaller than just dry leasing) and not losses. ACMI operators wouldn't exist if airlines would be making losses leasing their aircraft.

      JU cancelation rate wasn't that bad this summer, amongst the lower end in Europe. In fact, airlines such as easyJet, TK and BA made the top 10 list for July in terms of percentages. JU's biggest problem with cancelations was that airports couldn't handle the increased demand more than anything else, with AMS and LHR forcing JU to not only cancel flights but to reduce the pax load per flight.

      https://www.euronews.com/travel/2022/07/12/ba-easyjet-turkish-airlines-which-european-airlines-are-cancelling-the-most-flights-this-s

      https://www.exyuaviation.com/2022/07/air-serbia-ordered-to-reduce-amsterdam.html?m=1

      Delete
    5. Anonymous22:00

      Great logic Jatbegmel. If you dry lease plane and then he stuck in Moscow, you have some canelations, then you take plane in wet lease, so you pay 2 planes for week or so, then other plane wich is also on dry lease broke, and you have again some cancelations and you take again wet lease another plane, and so on, how can you be in plus? You say only 2% canceleled, and how many was late 3 or more hours? This year was great for AS. Are they in plus, no chance.

      Delete
  7. Anonymous09:35

    7 mil profits when
    debts >>> book value
    is shameful

    airfake

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:39

      Do expand on your observation and enlighten us about "debts" and "book value". We all love some juicy insider information, if that is what you are purporting to have. Or is your comment the "fake" bit?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:58

      istorija loših dugova ersbije je duga. počevši od onog genijalnog etihadovog kada su uzeli sa kamatom od 7% a stavili pare u banku na 2% i onda to sve spucali, pa vraćala vlada

      ako misliš da su dugovi, dve masne dokapitalizacije u 2 godine i subvencije smešne, onda naruči sebi neke lešnike, jer si veverica

      Delete
  8. Anonymous09:49

    Is long haul profitable? Are upcoming long haul lines going to be profitable like Chicago and Toronto?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous09:55

      Current New York light is one of the most profitable in the network.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous09:57

      Air Serbia mentioned New York service turned profitable. Upcoming long haul services are expected to eventually turn profit.

      Toronto has not been announced as a long haul destination. Fate of that service is in the hands of China Communist Party. Once CCP declares Beijing and Shanghai covid-free and allow Air Serbia to fly there, Air Serbia will lease third A330 and start flying there and to Toronto.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous09:59

      Due to fact that Tianjin flights are either sold out (after 5 days of open bookings) or prices are skyrocketing (because they are almost sold out) Tianjin will be profitable most probably from the first flight

      Delete
    4. Anonymous10:01

      what's the load factor of that thing for a 12m period?
      my guess is that sudden turn to profitability is fueled by subsidies that go into that route profitability

      Delete
    5. Anonymous11:18

      Well, takr into consideration that for example, most of today's JU flights from BEG are sold out. And it is the beginning of November, a.k.a. dead months

      Delete
    6. JATBEGMEL12:48

      @10,01

      There was a period in 2020 when JU had the highest load factor of any foreign carrier operating into JFK.

      https://simpleflying.com/air-serbia-new-york-load-factor/

      2019 shows 52.4% being the lowest CLF (February) while 96.2% the highest (April). Annual average CLF was 80.8%.

      https://www.exyuaviation.com/2019/06/air-serbia-registers-growth-on-us.html?m=1

      In the mean time, lease rate for the A330 dropped by around 50% (or roughly 1/3 of JU's losses when subsidies were not included in their balance to produce their profit), JU this winter is increasing capacity by around 30%. Additional flights and altered schedules will have added to the connectivity of the route.

      If JU was not satisfied with JFK performance it wouldn't be increasing the frequencies by so much this winter and boosting it to 7 pw next summer.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous12:57

      @anon 11.18, which flights are sold out today?

      Delete
    8. Anonymous13:39

      I am reading this right, Communist Party of China holds the key to Belgrade-Toronto flights? Am I the only one who thinks this is NOT normal? Why would any airline allow future route to Canada to become completely dependent on pandemic measures in China? This is not ok.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous13:43

      Because they don't plan to get a third A330 until they can add more flights to China which are obviously lucrative. The third A330 would be able to fly to Toronto as well.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous23:22

      Technically, both YU-ARB and YU-ARC are able to fly to Toronto.

      Delete
  9. Anonymous09:58

    They are lucky they are not a member of EU . Otherwise they couldn't hide their real financial numbers .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:07

      LOL

      Delete
    2. Anonymous11:00

      Yeah in the EU everything is perfect and transparent ...come on!

      Delete
    3. Anonymous12:46

      And long may they stay out of EU and its exceptionally green and sprouting grass of abundance. lol

      Delete
    4. Anonymous13:17

      It is not perfect, but it IS transparent.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous13:27

      At least state support is transparent in Serbia not covered under million different funds which have the same purpose just another name

      Delete
    6. Anonymous14:21

      Yeah, like the infamous udruženo oglašavanje in HR.

      Delete
  10. Anonymous12:48

    Considering how expensive their fares are, and how much they charge for flights to Russia, I’m really not surprised.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:50

      They are also charging a fortune for the new Tianjin flights, and tickets are selling out!

      Delete
    2. Anonymous12:57

      There is a lot of demand and little supply. Of course they will be expensive to China.

      Delete
    3. JATBEGMEL13:11

      Fares from AMS were expensive as well this summer. Often over 600€. It wasn't uncommon to see even Wizz from EIN charging over 400€. Supply and demand.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous21:51

      If you understood how airlines fare system works of course it is expensive when you are looking at flights close to travel dates such as nov and dec flights, if you check out jan prices they are 570 eur return which is reasonable as the flights are not full. There are various fares in the system loaded when they open up ticket inventory 6 months ahead, this is when you get cheapeast tickets. As the lower fares get sold out the system will jump to next available fare and so on until it reaches Y class fares which are usually most expensive. Basically the earlier you buy a ticket when the fares are loaded cheaper they are. Ttavel agents also hold net faresthat are not published online and you can get a good fare from them depending on ticket class availability. People take serious fare and ticketing courses to learn this as there is much more than this to know, so I suggest you do some more research other than ranting how expensive tickets are and why

      Delete
  11. Anonymous12:48

    They were lucky to have Arabs for partners and not Europeans, otherwise JU would be a story of the past long time ago. 

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous14:22

      While the cooperation with Etihad ended on a bad note, we should not forget what Jat was like in its last years prior to rebranding.

      Delete
  12. Anonymous12:48

    Does this include the 15 million EUR the government gave them as part of consolidation?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:51

      * recapitalization I mean

      Delete
    2. JATBEGMEL13:19

      Going by previous years, yes. No chance that JU has made profits without subsidies.

      Comparing 2019 when the overall loss was around 9.5 million Euros (when subsidies were taken away from the reported profit), and by going with the numbers above, it seems the loss has reduced. They seem to be growing into profitability which is a positive sign.

      Delete
  13. Anonymous12:55

    Much better than I expected. Well done!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous12:56

    Interesting piece of info about the Air France flights and costs.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous13:02

    It would be interesting to see which route makes them the most money.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous13:03

    Impressive

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous13:19

      Impressive loss considering the subsidies they got!!

      Delete
    2. Anonymous13:21

      Even if the subsidies are counted the losses are minimal, considering everything they have done this year.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous20:10

      > Even if the subsidies are counted the losses are minimal, considering everything they have done this year.

      Quite possible. But why there is a need for 'creative book keeping' if their losses are not so large?
      I wonder ...

      Delete
  17. Anonymous13:28

    Without state support, Air Serbia would go bust.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous13:35

      The return on investment is worth it.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous13:40

      ^ agree with above anon. 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. The money they get is nothing compared to what Serbia is getting in return.

      Delete
  18. Anonymous13:29

    That is what all airlines across Europe are doing. Getting hidden incentives from their governments, airports, tourist boards, regions etc. I don't know if you people know that Airbus regularly gets a grants from the EU for the development of new aircraft programs. Even if the program goes bust like the A340 they do not require to return any of it.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous13:31

    Just to put things ibto perapective. Serbian state owned telecomunications company and its cable TV operator paid 600 million EUROS. Yes 600 million EUR for Premiere league broadcast rights for 1 year. So 20 million in state subsidies to Air Serbia are peanuts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous13:41

      *into

      Delete
    2. Anonymous13:48

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

      Delete
    3. Anonymous13:50

      Much of the Serbian economy operates on subsidies. Much of the foreign investment in Serbia is attracted by subsidies which are provided for several years. Same as in Macedonia.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous14:14

      Not for one year. That 600. 000.000 $/€ is for six years contract. Internet is miracle.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous14:14

      Not for one year. That 600. 000.000 $/€ is for six years contract. Internet is miracle.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous15:04

      Correction: on 10 years.

      Delete
    7. JATBEGMEL15:15

      @13,48

      The biggest problem the Serbian population has with JU subsidies is that the public was lead to believe that EY investment into Jat Airways will finally bring profitability to the airline. Not only has JU not made a single Euro of profit, but finances in the airline for years were being mismanaged from which EY largely benefited from.

      Other state enterprises, although mismanaged, did not have the huge fan fare of radical transformation as did Air Serbia. This is the difference. And it's not as if there isn't any discontent with other state enterprises as well ie EPS, Serbia Rail, Belgrade's GSP just to start the list.

      Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the subsidies as they are being (finally) put to good use, but alot more could of been done for the amount pumped into the airline.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous16:07

      @Anonymous 14:14 and 15:04

      Thanks for correcting Anonymous 13:31 for the sake of correct arguments. However, you will agree that 60M/year is still astronomical and more than JU gets, all forms of government support included. While the goal of paying for Premier League rights is to increase media monopoly and is both financially and as an outcome extremely bad for people of Serbia, developing aviation, enabling decent connectivity from Belgrade and everything that comes with, including taxes collected, is a very good thing. Subsidising JU is not an ideal solution, but I think it can be justified all benefits taken into account (of which I can only speculate due to the lack of official data...). I believe this cannot be avoided, especially in the market that is already defined, with major players running the show, Serbia being outside of EU and late to the party at it... Let's hope within some 5 years they can break even and be of little burden to the country's budget.

      Delete
  20. Anonymous13:43

    Comparing state subsidies, number of destinations/number of annual passengers, how are three government-owned airlines in ExYu region performing? What airline gets most bang for the buck?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous13:46

      JU. Worst is Air Montebegro. The government even bought them their planes.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous13:53

      Found a very good explanation in a comment defending state subsidy for an EU airline: You need to see bigger picture here. Althought the airline is loss making, it has a positive overall impact on tourism and economy. It is countries third largest exporter and it ensures year round air connectivity with Europe and thus the world. It generates over 1500 jobs in aviation (as some companies are highly dependant on the airline as well as all costal airports outside of summer season) Also each sold ticket generates additional money in tourism services. In other words, much more damage would be made if airline was not going to be saved.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous13:07

      @Ano 13:46 That is not correct! The Government of Montenegro founded Air Montenegro with 30M and with that money Air Montenegro needed to buy two aircrafts for ~12M, did maintenance and insurance with ~5M.

      Going publicly saying State bought them aircrafts it absolutely without any proper numbers and with the intention to bring the company down. Shameful.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous13:10

      not to mention Air Montenegro needs to rent an engine as well... They have invested over 20M already in those aircrafts from founding capital

      Delete
    5. Anonymous13:13

      They have produced losses and have a grand total of 2 planes. That's what's shameful.

      Delete
  21. JATBEGMEL13:46

    EC-NUI, which will be replacing YU-ARB for the next couple of weeks, is making its descent into BEG.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous13:49

    It's a question of how did they cook the books in 2022.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous13:53

      I will never understand why do people criticize Government for helping Air Serbia. I really think they did A LOT to improve aviation in Serbia. And it's not just Air Serbia. The entire aviation sector has developed. Airport got the concession at a huge price thanks to Air Serbia. Jat Tehnika is now converting widebodies into cargo planes, there is a whole facuty at university set up which works with the entire aviation sector to train aviation professionals, MTU is now producing engines in Serbia etc.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous13:58

      Even private jet business have grown. There are about ten times more biz jets operating out of BEG compared to ZAG. Go figure.

      Delete
  23. Anonymous13:56

    Congratulations to JU. Seems like things are looking up .

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous14:01

    I don't understand webby they don't release their results instead we have to wait for APR to publish them until summer next year. I mean since they are going to post a profit, wouldn't it be good PR to publicize it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous14:27

      The year isn’t over?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous14:32

      They probably will. It's November.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous00:54

      They should release quarterly data

      Delete
  25. Anonymous18:21

    Even if state help is bringing back more than payed by improving whole aviation related market in Serbia, IT IS NOT CORRECT TO STATE THAT Air Serbia is turning profitable! The facts: 15-ish mil. help from the state, 7-ish mil. expected profit = 8-ish mil.of LOSS in fiscal year.

    That can still be better than ever and much better than expected, but it is NOT PROFIT!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JATBEGMEL00:03

      Air Serbia's losses is the least of our problems. At least there is light at the end of that tunnel. Meanwhile:

      - Putevi Srbije each year has over 1 million Euros of damage to vandalism alone. Road signs and barriers mainly.
      - Srbija voz for June 2021 to June 2022 reported 2.05 million Euros of damage to vandalism alone. Recent damage includes the multiple acts of vandalism on the newly completed high-speed rail connection between Belgrade and Novi Sad, which includes children stoning the trains for fun, causing enough damage to be pulled out of service.

      Just these 2 companies expenses on vandalism alone for someones entertainment (boredom) is a quater of JU expected loss for this year. More can be added to this list, where the total is probably higher than the expected loss for JU this year.

      Not to mention the corruption in EPS where Serbia went from being a net exporter of electricity to now importing it, 610 million Euros for the first 6 months alone this year and will surpass a billion Euros by the end of the year. This will continue another 2 years at least until EPS can recover.

      300-500 million Euros given in government subsidies to Fiat, for them to reduce the workforce by 3/4. Over 11 million Euros in subsidies alone to Geox only for them to pack up and leave. Bertex is the latest example of a government subsidised foreign investor that have packed up and left. All while local farmers, producers and businesses get peanuts in funding. Air Serbia at least isn't going anywhere.

      JU is not perfect but waaaaay down the list of problems.

      Delete
  26. Anonymous20:58

    It takes time for phoenex to raise from the ashes. At least something good survived the transition.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous00:53

    Good work

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous07:24

    Not bad if you take into account the major investments they've had this year.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous17:47

    Anon9:00 If you can't tell how successful is JU compared to 10 years ago or compared to other exyu airlines you are not objective.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous20:16

      I don't get the point of this article as comparision between AirSerbia now to JAT/AirSerbia from 10 years ago or to some other airline. It is plainly stated in comment above that "people can't deal with Air Serbia being successful". Just like that - "successful". What is the measure of success in this particular case? Making less loss than some other entity is NOT a success. It may be less of a failure, but it is not a success.
      So, my question, again is: what is the measure of AirSerbia's success, apart from obviously being successful in spending taxpayers' money?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous20:20

      Looks like you only have something against Air Serbia but no issues with other airlines? I thought so. If you can't tell how successful is JU compared to 10 years ago or compared to other exyu airlines you are not objective or fit to make statements about airline business. Find some other hobby.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous00:16

      This is article about AirSerbia, not about any other airline. So, I won't mention any other airline.

      It is about company declaring itself as profitable which is not the case. In other words: it is a blatant lie.
      Other things you wrote are just a bunch of attacks ad homini which are not to be discussed here. As well as there is no place to bring in the stories about EPS, Telekom, Lufthansa, Premier League and all other above mentioned and yet topics irrelevant for the story about PR "we are the greatest" that came from AirSerbia.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous02:48

      Not only do you know nothing about aviation, you know nothing about accounting. Air Serbia is profitable according to IFRS. I am not here to educate you about aviation or accounting but I will do my best to expose your ignorance, jealousy and hypocrisy.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous09:11

      Well nobody asked anybody here for "education" yet you are more than willing to state that you won't do it. Interesting.
      But come on, if this will make AirSrbia's PR stunt more digestable, yes please advise all of us here about creative accounting as well as economy, aviation and psychology too, why not? Obviously AirSerbia fans have huge knowledge in online psychoanalysis (in addition to economy and aviation, obviously), so why not offer here the complete package? Like all of Serbian universal experts which tend to denigrate the other person when facts do not suit them - then forum/online psychology treatments kick in.
      Waaay out of scope what Marek said and the first person just plainly asked: "Before or after government subsidies?". In my opinion question that is spot-on. Quite a bit of replies are plain BS.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous09:56

      Those like you are a proof Air Serbia is successful. Every once in a while a poor soul like you would come around and get destroyed here by facts. It has been more than 9 years since rebranding and most haters realized Air Serbia won't fade away by now, but there are still those like you hoping you could do something to stop Air Serbia. You can't, Air Serbia is only getting better every day.

      Delete