LHs strategy: discussion thread for customers, investors, consultants & armchair CEOs
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2005
Programs: Hyatt Lifetime Globalist, SQ PPS Solitaire
Posts: 3,574
LHs strategy: discussion thread for customers, investors, consultants & armchair CEOs
Lufthansa is presenting on SCORE in London today:
http://investor-relations.lufthansag...on-2013-10.pdf
The most interesting slide is page 4:
The operational KPI do not show the improvements they predicted:
While LH is selling more revenue seat kilometer (RSK, +1,4%), they could only do so for a lower price: the yield per revenue kilometer sold (revenue passenger kilometer, RPK) fell (!) by 0.7%.
That's pretty bad: Flyers have voiced their anger here that Lufthansa is trying to force up-sell customers to F and J and not opening lower booking classes. This should mean more money per revenue passenger kilometer but in the big picture that strategy did not work out: the yield overall did not increase, it fell! Passenger paid less (on average) than last year! Revenue management increased SLF but not yield, looks like there is a bit more work to be done.
Also interesting: cost per available seat kilometer fell by 1.5% and that's not LH's hard work, it's fuel prices going down: excluding fuel, cost only decreased by 0.8%! It would be interesting to see how much of this decrease is owed to the newer planes and the better economics of those planes.
Lufthansa is also claiming that premium traffic is doing well, again that should mean that the yield per revenue passenger kilometer should go up: it did not.
Bottom line, Lufthansa has made more profit but not because they increased pricing (they were not able to do that across all passengers). They increased the loads (RSK +1.4% while ASK +0.2%) but seemed to have done so for lower prices than anticipated and/or mostly in Economy. Falling fuel prices are helping them a lot: cost (CASK) is down 1.5%, excluding fuel only down 0.8%.
Fare earned divided by kilometers flown = yield for revenue passenger kilometer (RPK)
All seats offered times kilometers flown = available seat kilometer (ASK)
All seats actually sold times kilometers flown = revenue passenger kilometer (RPK)
All costs divided by ASK = cost per available seat kilometer (CASK)
http://investor-relations.lufthansag...on-2013-10.pdf
The most interesting slide is page 4:
The operational KPI do not show the improvements they predicted:
While LH is selling more revenue seat kilometer (RSK, +1,4%), they could only do so for a lower price: the yield per revenue kilometer sold (revenue passenger kilometer, RPK) fell (!) by 0.7%.
That's pretty bad: Flyers have voiced their anger here that Lufthansa is trying to force up-sell customers to F and J and not opening lower booking classes. This should mean more money per revenue passenger kilometer but in the big picture that strategy did not work out: the yield overall did not increase, it fell! Passenger paid less (on average) than last year! Revenue management increased SLF but not yield, looks like there is a bit more work to be done.
Also interesting: cost per available seat kilometer fell by 1.5% and that's not LH's hard work, it's fuel prices going down: excluding fuel, cost only decreased by 0.8%! It would be interesting to see how much of this decrease is owed to the newer planes and the better economics of those planes.
Lufthansa is also claiming that premium traffic is doing well, again that should mean that the yield per revenue passenger kilometer should go up: it did not.
Bottom line, Lufthansa has made more profit but not because they increased pricing (they were not able to do that across all passengers). They increased the loads (RSK +1.4% while ASK +0.2%) but seemed to have done so for lower prices than anticipated and/or mostly in Economy. Falling fuel prices are helping them a lot: cost (CASK) is down 1.5%, excluding fuel only down 0.8%.
Fare earned divided by kilometers flown = yield for revenue passenger kilometer (RPK)
All seats offered times kilometers flown = available seat kilometer (ASK)
All seats actually sold times kilometers flown = revenue passenger kilometer (RPK)
All costs divided by ASK = cost per available seat kilometer (CASK)
#2
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,253
Nice!
The above numbers do not segregate premium traffic from discounted offers. So the Nonstop You attraction of smelly backpackers could very well pull these indicators down even though premium pax had to pay more.
This would also go well with the "more seats sold". If these were Nonstop You chairs, it would explain everything else even with a steep increase in upsellinf C and F.
..That's pretty bad: Flyers have voiced their anger here that Lufthansa is trying to force up-sell customers to F and J and not opening lower booking classes. This should mean more money per revenue passenger kilometer but in the big picture that strategy did not work out..
This would also go well with the "more seats sold". If these were Nonstop You chairs, it would explain everything else even with a steep increase in upsellinf C and F.
#3
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SEA, ATL (wish it was still ORD)
Programs: AA EXP; DL Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Globalist (marriage perk)
Posts: 508
Interesting that nothing about M&M and not much details about Asia. I wonder how they wanna compare with Middle Eastern carriers.
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: VCE
Posts: 14,165
SCORE won't work on yield improvement.
Simple reason- if the product delivers more value- people will pay more for it. If the product does not- people won't pay. While it is true there are routes where Lufthansa (or any other airline for that matter) hold a practically captive audience- you don't need SCORE to improve yield there.
This reminds me of the time I was walking through Munich in the rain- and there was an umbrella vendor- as the rain got heavier he changed the price from 12 EUR to 20 EUR- I said "but 2 minutes ago it was 12 EUR!" to which he replied "and 2 minutes ago it wasn't raining". He didn't have SCORE, he didn't even had a computer, and he "yielded" 8 EUR more out of me at that moment- however I can tell you it would be a very difficult to imagine sunny day before I went back and bought something from that vendor.
Simple reason- if the product delivers more value- people will pay more for it. If the product does not- people won't pay. While it is true there are routes where Lufthansa (or any other airline for that matter) hold a practically captive audience- you don't need SCORE to improve yield there.
This reminds me of the time I was walking through Munich in the rain- and there was an umbrella vendor- as the rain got heavier he changed the price from 12 EUR to 20 EUR- I said "but 2 minutes ago it was 12 EUR!" to which he replied "and 2 minutes ago it wasn't raining". He didn't have SCORE, he didn't even had a computer, and he "yielded" 8 EUR more out of me at that moment- however I can tell you it would be a very difficult to imagine sunny day before I went back and bought something from that vendor.
#6
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: AMS
Programs: KLM Elite for life; LH Senator for life
Posts: 210
Very interesting reading material.
I believe LH made it clear that they have major problems in the Asian, ME and Africa market. "Under presure" means we have major problems in these market!!
LH is really hit by the Gulf carriers and does not know how to respond quality wise towards Premium- and Economy passengers in these markets.
Quote from LH presentation:
Asia and Middle East/Africa under pressure
�� Forex developments dilute APAC yields by ca. 4 %pts. year-on-year (Q2)
�� Weak Yen pressures Japan routes – JV with ANA eases effect on LH
�� Indian Rupee, competition and macro weakness pressures India routes
�� Chinese market is growing strongly, partnership options under evaluation
�� Gulf carrier competition remains intense
�� Strategy for the market includes introduction of two-class fleet and earning
capacity measures; successfully proven on first routes
I believe LH made it clear that they have major problems in the Asian, ME and Africa market. "Under presure" means we have major problems in these market!!
LH is really hit by the Gulf carriers and does not know how to respond quality wise towards Premium- and Economy passengers in these markets.
Quote from LH presentation:
Asia and Middle East/Africa under pressure
�� Forex developments dilute APAC yields by ca. 4 %pts. year-on-year (Q2)
�� Weak Yen pressures Japan routes – JV with ANA eases effect on LH
�� Indian Rupee, competition and macro weakness pressures India routes
�� Chinese market is growing strongly, partnership options under evaluation
�� Gulf carrier competition remains intense
�� Strategy for the market includes introduction of two-class fleet and earning
capacity measures; successfully proven on first routes
Last edited by Terbang; Oct 4, 2013 at 2:35 am
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2009
Location: FRA / YEG
Programs: AC Super Elite, Radisson Platinum, Accor Platinum
Posts: 11,874
I guess one could justify a 5* rating if one only looked at the F product.
Or are you suggesting the subpar C product, pretty average Y product, M&M and the terrible NEK product should also be taken into account?
I sometimes wonder how they come up with such nonsense and whether they actually believe it themselves.
Or are you suggesting the subpar C product, pretty average Y product, M&M and the terrible NEK product should also be taken into account?
I sometimes wonder how they come up with such nonsense and whether they actually believe it themselves.
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Point Place, Wisconsin
Programs: LH HON, BA Gold, EK Gold
Posts: 14,505
I guess one could justify a 5* rating if one only looked at the F product.
Or are you suggesting the subpar C product, pretty average Y product, M&M and the terrible NEK product should also be taken into account?
I sometimes wonder how they come up with such nonsense and whether they actually believe it themselves.
Or are you suggesting the subpar C product, pretty average Y product, M&M and the terrible NEK product should also be taken into account?
I sometimes wonder how they come up with such nonsense and whether they actually believe it themselves.
#10
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: UA*G(1K), PC Diamond Amb, Marriott Titanium, Accor Platinum
Posts: 4,664
#12
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,750
A 0.8% cost decrease excluding fuel is quite significant I think!
Does anybody know the trend for yield per revenue km in previous years, or a comparison with other airlines? I would be willing to bet that a big chunk of this yield reduction is due to external factors (i.e. competition to ME & Asia) and is impacting other airlines as well.
From a business point of view, the target of lowering costs and increasing customer satisfaction (i.e. become a 5 Star airline) is of course the holy grail....
Does anybody know the trend for yield per revenue km in previous years, or a comparison with other airlines? I would be willing to bet that a big chunk of this yield reduction is due to external factors (i.e. competition to ME & Asia) and is impacting other airlines as well.
From a business point of view, the target of lowering costs and increasing customer satisfaction (i.e. become a 5 Star airline) is of course the holy grail....
#13
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southern Bavaria, Germany
Programs: LH Blue, BA Blue, Hyatt Gold
Posts: 1,517
Thanks for sharing the link to the document. My "favourite" is topic 3 on page 6: Reduce short-haul fleet from 9 to 3 aircraft models and the following page.
This will lead to a reduction in complexity of the network as well as the frequency of operations especially on minor routes.
The consequence will be a further reduction of the number of full paying C/Premium pax due to the fact that schedule is not so convenient than before. The opportunity of business travel on the same day will be "enhanced".
I don't think that by this measures they will be able to initiate a trend to higher fares/premium pax.
This will lead to a reduction in complexity of the network as well as the frequency of operations especially on minor routes.
The consequence will be a further reduction of the number of full paying C/Premium pax due to the fact that schedule is not so convenient than before. The opportunity of business travel on the same day will be "enhanced".
I don't think that by this measures they will be able to initiate a trend to higher fares/premium pax.
#14
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,253
But then the trash carrier of the OneWorld, MH, also received a 5th star. So there is a large, prejudiced, uninformed, gullible, and easily manipulated army of morons out there who has the energy to vote for some airlines entirely undeserving of applause.
So given that LH is the flag carrier of the biggest monolithic market on Earth, with a further decrease of literacy and influx of non-integrated alines, there is an excellent chance that LH will soon be voted up by the Skytrax folks ....
#15
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2005
Programs: Hyatt Lifetime Globalist, SQ PPS Solitaire
Posts: 3,574
A 0.8% cost decrease excluding fuel is quite significant I think!
Does anybody know the trend for yield per revenue km in previous years, or a comparison with other airlines? I would be willing to bet that a big chunk of this yield reduction is due to external factors (i.e. competition to ME & Asia) and is impacting other airlines as well.
From a business point of view, the target of lowering costs and increasing customer satisfaction (i.e. become a 5 Star airline) is of course the holy grail....
Does anybody know the trend for yield per revenue km in previous years, or a comparison with other airlines? I would be willing to bet that a big chunk of this yield reduction is due to external factors (i.e. competition to ME & Asia) and is impacting other airlines as well.
From a business point of view, the target of lowering costs and increasing customer satisfaction (i.e. become a 5 Star airline) is of course the holy grail....
Yield per RPK: +2.0%
Cost (ex fuel): -0.2%
AF/KLM reported for the same period (1H 2013)
Yield per RPK: -2.5%
Cost (ex fuel): -1.5%