Ba eclipsed by Norwegian between New York and Europe
Oct 8, 2018, 11:32 pm
#31
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
People on here have claimed Norwegian is going to go bust any minute now for several years ...
Just like the decades long and never ending "this latest BA budget cut is the beginning of the end of BA!", I don't think the majority of you know what you're talking about.
Though I will of course concede Norwegian is in a far more precarious stage of existence so a collapse is certainly plausible. I'd however wager they're more likely to temper their rapid growth and focus on margins than to collapse. The Primera comparison is nonsense - Norwegian is well established and, although is overreaching, is fundamentally profitable.
Just like the decades long and never ending "this latest BA budget cut is the beginning of the end of BA!", I don't think the majority of you know what you're talking about.
Though I will of course concede Norwegian is in a far more precarious stage of existence so a collapse is certainly plausible. I'd however wager they're more likely to temper their rapid growth and focus on margins than to collapse. The Primera comparison is nonsense - Norwegian is well established and, although is overreaching, is fundamentally profitable.
Oct 8, 2018, 11:32 pm
#32
Join Date: May 2013
Location: west coast best coast
Programs: TINDER GOLD, STARBUCKS GOLD, COSTCO EXECUTIVE!!
Posts: 3,989
Considering they rejected a IAG takeover, I'm sure they will be fine. If they anticipated headwinds I think the negotiations would not have went the way they did given their weaker position.
Oct 8, 2018, 11:38 pm
#33
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
Or could it be their vulnerability attracted IAG as a shareholder, giving them leverage over future potential 'spoils of war' such as LGW slots, aircraft (the ones not leased) and customer base etc?
Oct 8, 2018, 11:57 pm
#34
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,361
I think that's is one of the learnings from the Primera crash - it's not that simple. If you are overseas and about to return on a failed airline, your options - price wise - could be horrendously priced. Particularly if you absolutely have to travel (e.g. to return to work, kids getting back to school). Moreover people thought their insurance would cover this. Well I think it would be only a small minority whose insurance would cover this, many policies specifically exclude airline failure unless the SAFI component is purchased. For example the John Lewis Finance travel insurance policy doesn't include it at the Essential Level, you need the Plus or Premier levels to include this, and they are generally considered one of the better insurers out there. This also applies to those with expensive "component" holidays - hotels, car hire, excursions booked separately and the airline fails the day before travel. The credit card protection just covers the lost spend - which may be OK if you are months away from travel.
If your credit card is not a UK credit card or if it is a card not covered by s75 (such as a debit card, for instance) of you are in a situation which is not covered by s75 (such as buying via a travel agent rather than directly with the airline), this is a different story.
Oct 9, 2018, 1:02 am
#35
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GGL+GfL, ALL Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,499
The article and the associated stats are clear on that. The stats for 'NYC area' are based on LGA+JFK+EWR+SWF.
Last edited by orbitmic; Oct 9, 2018 at 1:18 am
Oct 9, 2018, 1:06 am
#36
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Cumbria
Programs: BAEC GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond, Starbucks Gold
Posts: 4,510
Out of interest, are these figures ‘actual’ passenger totals? It wouldn’t surprise me if this was the Arsenal of airlines and they are quoting tickets sold/seats available rather than actual passangers flown.
Oct 9, 2018, 1:08 am
#37
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,378
I've seen many people make that point. Whether they were exaggerating or not I don't know.
Oct 9, 2018, 1:17 am
#38
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GGL+GfL, ALL Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,499
Hmm... how do you make the jump from rightly noting that DY is only top transatlantic traffic among foreign airlines to assuming that all US majors have higher transatlantic traffic? We don't know that. For instance you might have only UA with higher TATL traffic and that would still justify the precautionary language. All we know is that the three majors US airlines have the highest international traffic but this includes flights to Canada, the Caribbean, Latin America etc which represent much higher numbers.
Again, this is LGA+JFK+EWR+SWF.
DY are not messing with anything. No doubt they are delighted by that specific figure, but they are not the source here, nor the people who keep track of traffic. And yes, sure, you could replace airlines by groups, in which case instead of this article being news, BA would have long lost this elusive 'top international transatlantic operator' title in favour of the LH group
These fly to JFK and EWR. From the definition given in this "press release" Norwegian operates something like 20 routes from all over Europe into 3, 4 or 5 airports that could possibly (not by anyone who actually knows what they are talking about) "NY airports", JFK, EWR, SWF, BDL and PVO. This is in no way Apples for Apples.
Again, this is LGA+JFK+EWR+SWF.
DY are not messing with anything. No doubt they are delighted by that specific figure, but they are not the source here, nor the people who keep track of traffic. And yes, sure, you could replace airlines by groups, in which case instead of this article being news, BA would have long lost this elusive 'top international transatlantic operator' title in favour of the LH group
Oct 9, 2018, 1:18 am
#39
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
OK, our experiences of FT over the several years you mention differ I think. I have seen many people make the point that Norwegian may fold, but I can't remember anyone making the point that it would be any minute now, the two points being very different. Again I may be wrong about this and happy to be corrected, but that's my recollection.
Oct 9, 2018, 3:21 am
#41
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Programs: Many. Too many. I came here to cut them down. I failed.
Posts: 2,999
Well, I find it interesting, but always understand that there are caveats! I've found them a joy to fly in Europe, and the numbers are impressive irrespective of BA's. We're seeing a bunch of sub £350 and even £300 economy fares from VS/BA to North America which is a joy, so they are having a positive impact for most of us even if we wouldn't touch them with a bargepole!
Oct 9, 2018, 3:42 am
#42
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Statistics can be made to say anything but at the end of the day competition is a good thing. It is because of the arrival of airlines like Norwegian that fares are at levels where long haul travel is available to the mass market.
A far cry from the old days of dirty tricks and collusion between the airlines.
A far cry from the old days of dirty tricks and collusion between the airlines.
Oct 9, 2018, 4:01 am
#43
Fontaine d'honneur du Flyertalk
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Morbihan, France
Programs: Reine des Muccis de Pucci; Foreign Elitist (according to others)
Posts: 19,161
Ultimately, whichever carrier sells its seats for less than it costs to provide them is not long for this world. I have no idea if this is the case chez Norwegian, but debt like that that (should those figures prove to be correct) takes a lot of cash to service.
Oct 9, 2018, 4:09 am
#44
Join Date: Sep 2014
Programs: BAEC GGL/CCR
Posts: 171
I flew Norwegian Premium from Gatwick to Boston this week and I can see why they are getting decent market penetration on TATL routes. I would normally fly J as per travel policy, but with the cost 20% of what BA wanted for CW (under half of WT+) and in sympathy for my travel budget I thought I'd give them a try.
Overall it was a great experience. Nice plane (787-9), plenty of leg room (more seat pitch and much more recline than WT+ I think, but it's a while since I flew that cabin), very attentive crew with plenty of drink topups, decent food. It also came with lounge access (No. 1 lounge at Gatwick), fast track security and priority boarding.
I will reserve final judgement for the return leg, but overall impressions were very good. I'd be sad to see them get into financial trouble.
Overall it was a great experience. Nice plane (787-9), plenty of leg room (more seat pitch and much more recline than WT+ I think, but it's a while since I flew that cabin), very attentive crew with plenty of drink topups, decent food. It also came with lounge access (No. 1 lounge at Gatwick), fast track security and priority boarding.
I will reserve final judgement for the return leg, but overall impressions were very good. I'd be sad to see them get into financial trouble.
Oct 9, 2018, 5:36 am
#45
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: BOS
Programs: BA - Blue > Bronze > Silver > Bronze > Blue
Posts: 6,812
As others have stated this in pretty much non news, LON-NYC would be a little more interesting and slightly more skewed in BA's favour.
Im all for DI though, sub 300 flights to LON from BOS in this day and age is a truly wondrous thing
