Originally Posted by
CPH-Flyer
I don't remember every Scanorama statement of his brief tenure. But if you read the annual reports he presided over, it is all about cutting unprofitable routes, and focusing on profitable flying that the home market is interested in.
Of which we saw no proof, his successors had to finally launch the profitable routes their home market had been interested in for a decade (LAX/SFO/HND). But hey, we had SVG-IAH for a while with no useful feeder flights!
The unprofitable state of Arlanda to BKK/PEK/PVG at the time stopped them. You can then always ask if they were truly unprofitable, or the Swedish led top management just had an interest in showing them as unprofitable. Any qualified controller working with top management could have made them look unprofitable at that time. There were enough losses to go around.
I think that we agree what (or who?) the problem was.