ELY001
Hi
Not sure where you get your misinformation from.
1. LAX is not even a daily 777 flight, how can you possibly see it supporting an A380. At most it's 5x weekly for 3-4 months of the year.
2. EWR is a daily 777, don't see that supporting A380 daily year round.
3. As for BKK it's only seasonal.


The only possible use for an A380 is for JFK. (With the popularity of Luton, no need for A380 at LHR either)
Not going to happen. :) sorry.

I am now going to ask the more informed people in the group ... What happened with the loan Boeing gave LY?
Wasn't it subject to LY ordering 787 by the end of 2012?
So have LY secured any leased 787's???

Hi LY787, no news concerning the 787 deal, infortunately.

LY787.

1. LAX is not daily b/c LY does not have enough 772's to make it daily. The flight goes out consistently booked and LY could, with relative ease, could fill a 744 on the route but they do not send a 744 there b/c it costs too much by way of operating expenses (fuel plus poor dispatch reliability).

2. EWR is actually a mix of 772 and 744. They alternate. In fact, I flew on 4X-ELE from EWR and last week when I was at EWR I saw 4X-ELE parked at the hard stand. If you ever go on FlightRadar24 you would also see that LY always alternates between a 772 and 744 on the EWR run. From my conversations with EL AL insiders, I know they want(ed) to do double daily service to EWR, particularly during the summer, but could not b/c of Israel's former category 2 status and a lack of slots. Who knows, perhaps now they can go double daily to EWR, at least during the summer.

3. I was under the impression LY flies to BKK year round. I will have to look into that, but even if BKK is only seasonal, they consistently utilize a 744 on that route which goes out nearly full, which indicates they could likely fill an A380 as well.

Just because you don't EL AL being able to make use of an A380 to LHR doesn't mean they wouldn't be able to. Also, if Lutton was so popular, as you say, then why did EL AL recently cancel several flights there? There was a thread on this forum about that! If they can fill a 744 on that route, which they routinely do, then it is not a stretch to surmise they could fill an A380 on that route as well, and enjoy a lower operating cost for those flights.

I hope the points highlighted above served to inform you better.

As far as the $40 million loan from Boeing is concerned, the terms of it are well publicized and easy to decipher via a simple google search. Basically, LY put up as collateral one of its older 772's in order to get the loan and LY must either purchase 1 787 or lease two 787's before 2016 otherwise they will have to pay the loan back rather quickly. Incidentally, according to EL AL's VP of Finance, Nissim Malki, LY is seriously considering the A330 and A350 over the 787 as a 767 replacement.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8H723720120607

:D

Ha Ha, very funny

Outside of the 3rd daily flights from JFK, this flight routinely underperforms outside of peak periods. This is why all El Al staff non-rev on this flight. The schedule on the return to TLV is so bad but moving it to an evening departure would mean that LY002 would have to be a daytime departure so that they could use the aircraft to other destinations. The day that this flight does best is Thursdays when the ultra-orthodox fill this flight as it lands so early in the morning that they don't worry about violating the Jewish Sabbath.

I am not 100% sure what the RASKs are on this flight with the 777 versus the 747, but my gut feeling is that outside of JFK, the 747 should not be used in the network. The overcapacity on the EWR route has meant the availability of low yield fares on the return flight's daytime departure for years now.

LTN was started as an answer to BD's introduction of services from LHR when LY couldn't get another slot. Once BD disappeared, the yields on LTN increased. Then U2 entered the fray (and even added services from MAN) and LTN once again became the cheap VFR route it always had been. It remains to be seen though if BA down gauging TLV will result in better yields for LY. My gut tells me 'not immediately' as we are in the low season.

If they want to go after more EDI, GLA and offline traffic, they will have trouble now as DL will be pulling strings at the domestic VS. They should probably look at DUB where there is seasonal demand and offline fares from the British Isles are higher. This is just a thought though. I haven't had a chance to see any MIDT for the O&Ds I just mentioned.

What if they sent out the 027 an hour earlier, say 23:30ish so that it would arrive EWR before 5:00 . . . . and then send the 028 back at 7:00am, with a TLV arrival at 23:00pm?

1. So you say there are enough 777 in the summer for LAX almost daily but not now in the winter???? The problem for LAX is not availability of the a/c, it's the pax.
If you were ever around TLV you would see at least 2 777's constantly on the ground at Ben Gurion.

2. Does not warrant an A380!

3.

4. Maybe you should make that google search you recommended ... you will find out, that LY needs to secure the lease or purchase of the 787's by year end of 2012. That date passed 7 days ago ....
(Not 2016)
"Boeing has provided the loss-making flag carrier with a $40 million loan contingent on it committing to buy or lease new 787 Dreamliners by the end of the year, while Airbus has offered to repay the loan if El Al switches allegiance and buys the European company's planes for the first time."

1. I never said that LAX should be an A380 daily. If you bother reading through the history of my posts what I was saying was that the A380 could be used to LAX. I also said the same thing about using the A380 to LHR. Never once said that an A380 could or should be used daily to either LAX or LHR. You seem to be the one injecting the word daily and needlessly taking a hostile posture. What I said was that since LY currently or in the past has used a 744 to both LAX and LHR that they could utilize an A380 on that route. Never once did I say daily. Airlines often switch a/c depending on bookings, etc. Where I think LY could certainly utilize an A380 near daily is to NYC (both JFK and EWR) as well as occasionally use the A380 to places such as LAX, LHR, and BKK. Most high density 744 routes could easily fill an A380...just as Qantas, Singapore Airlines, Lufthansa, and Korean air (to name a few) who have replaced the 744 with the A380 on their high density routes.

Also, just because you've seen 2 772's sitting around when you've been to Ben Gurion means nothing. Those a/c could have just landed from a trip, or are being turned around. LY is known for utilizing their a/c to the max (except for on Shabbat) and do not have spare 772's lying around to make LAX daily or re-start Miami. You consistently appear to be a proponent of facts that do not exist, such as EWR being exclusive 772 and then have the chutzpah to say I don't know my facts...its pretty funny!

2. That's your opinion and everyone is entitled to one of those whether rooted in rational fact driven analysis or not.

3. Re-read the article I provided the link for and engage in some deductive reasoning to come up with an answer to the original question you posed.

That is actually an interesting idea. I think it may be worth investigating in the future, but that would mean a complete loss of a day. The reason why travelers love LY002 and LY008 is the ability to get most of a day in (work, school, touring etc.) Since LY carries for the most part VFR traffic (unlike UA/DL), this would probably not be a good move.

What they should look to do is use the 737 more to CDG and LHR while canceling all flights to LED, ATH & SOF until they can get smaller Embraer jets for those routes. That would free up some wide body aircraft to improve the schedule to EWR and perhaps even use it to start ORD.

Other carriers who code share with AA through ORD receive between 40% and 60% of their sales through the offline points offered by AA. This would be a great move for LY to get a larger share of the premium traffic from SFO, SEA etc.

Not related to the back and forth here, but I do want to comment on the flights that LY fill. They can fill every flight in their network and they have from many of the points mentioned. The issue is that they are not profitable. This is what they need to tackle. They need to bring the unions to the table, come up with a vision (much like you have mentioned in previous posts). Just because there is demand, it doesn't mean that it is the right demand.

Not related to the back and forth here, but I do want to comment on the flights that LY fill. They can fill every flight in their network and they have from many of the points mentioned. The issue is that they are not profitable. This is what they need to tackle. They need to bring the unions to the table, come up with a vision (much like you have mentioned in previous posts). Just because there is demand, it doesn't mean that it is the right demand. >>>NYC2TLV

NYC2TLV,

This is very true. For the past several years, market conditions were extremely favorable towards EL AL attaining record profits, however they have not been able to do so. The fact that they can't post profits despite having an over 80% load factor, record passenger volumes, and the high fares charged by all airlines flying USA to TLV (a typical Y ticket to China from NY which is a significantly longer segment costs several hundred less rt than a Y ticket between the USA and Israel) coupled with the fact that TLV is one of the top 5 most profitable routes for US, DL, and UA, all points to the fact that LY is woefully inefficient.

To set themselves on the right course the following needs to be done:

1. Fleet rationalization around no more than 3 highly efficient a/c types.
2. Hard product standardization
3. Revamping of the Matmid program to make it more friendly towards Elites and non-elites
4. Membership into an alliance (or at minimum expanding the size and scope of codeshare agreements)
5. Streamlining management--there are approximately as many managers as aircraft in the fleet.
6. More concessions from unions while at the same time offering them profit sharing as a motivating factor.
7. Generating additional revenue streams; such as perhaps expanding cargo ops, etc.
8. Trying to turn their TLV hub into more than just an o/d one. Perhaps offer flex fares between the US/Europe to Asia and Africa via TLV to fill seats. This would involve improving the website so that such fares can actually be searched on it.

If EL AL is to ultimately survive, most of the current management needs to go and people with fresh ideas unencumbered by the remaining vestiges of EL AL's state run corporate enterprise culture needs to take the helm and both proffer and implement ideas that are aligned with global industry/economic trends.

*renames thread to LY board meeting*

Just a small comment about the A380/B744:

According to the airlines now flying the A380, it works out more economical per passenger than the 744 even when the A380 has no more passengers on board than a 744. So it is not true to say that it EL AL can only fill a 744 the A380 will not be economical for them. On the contrary, its maintenance costs will also be lower as it would be replacing older aircraft.

This is assuming ideal market conditions. As each O&D has its own fare structure and a different competitive nature, we cannot assume that there have been enough premium or high revenue economy passengers currently on the B747, that can be used on an A380. As far as we all know now, the company is underperforming (with 747s), so before LY floods the market with more capacity (which probably will mean that they will have to take more low yield passengers from SU or TK), they should take the steps necessary to ensure that they start to control costs while maintaining share.

With regards to the number of management positions, I couldn't agree more. In fact, the nepotism and incestuousness of LY is extremely disheartening for those who join the company full of optimism.

It is quite shocking that EL AL is financially under-performing with the 744 while at the same time DL's 744 service from JFK to TLV is exceeding their financial expectations. I am wondering whether this is so because EL AL's cost structure is too high. I suppose once I get to take a look at the revenue books i'll learn the real answer. My suspicion is that it has everything to do with cost structure.