Open Aviation Debate


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 56
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Cayman View Post
    UL and CMB considered EK and DXB their enemy, but for the wrong reasons.

    EK transformed UL, what then amounted to a Nigerian tuk-tuk service to something that people can actually fly.

    But then they declared war on EK and chased them away, at a time when EK’s might was absolutely crucial for the survival of UL. Rest, as they call is history!

    UL today is surviving on handouts (tax payer money) with a begging bowl in its hands.

    Don't get me wrong, I want UL to succeed and I am happy to see them taking a few good measures recently such as cutting down on 'pride routes' and increasing the frequency to profitable destinations. But they need to do more if they ever want to be in the black.

    The real question is "do they want to"?

    That’s way too much of an exaggeration.

    UL was doing relatively well even in 1998, even making profit (we all know what happens to that extra $$$). Don’t forget the deal with Emirates was not one way, Emirates gained immensely and started stealing from SL, including pilots, staff, landing rights and much more. They did squat to help UL out after the 2001 attack, instead used that as an opportunity to take more of ULs business.

    Emirates has been around since 1985, UL much longer and much more established. Emirates during its “turn around” in that period in the 2000s needed something to help them along and they used and abused UL.

    Not to mention Emirates also gets massive cash injections courtesy of UAE’s oil wealth. Which is what helped Emirates jump start.

    Everyone thinks the deal with Emirates was some kind of “perfect dream” which was a godsend to UL, but it was not. People should remember that.

    The PROBLEM with UL, like many things in SL, is management. We HAVE good CAPABLE people in every field. Sadly they are crushed and driven away by donkeys who get appointed as their bosses to positions of authority which they never earned or deserved, only grabbing them by being a good bootlicker, friend or relative.

    Oh well, SL pays a big price for being a demo-crazy.

    Those who want to work hard and push themselves and better the country are brutally crushed by those that who are only interested in themselves.

    The real question is "do they want to"?
    Obviously, they do not. This is the thing in SL over all. People do not have a collective sense of betterment for everyone, it’s all “me me me, and how best can I further myself and my own happiness which I shall do no matter how many people I need to crush in the process”. Not to mention how they like to drag down others who do better than them. I’ve seen this so many times in Sri Lanka. When someone is doing brilliantly an idiot who is not as good gets jealous and does their best to undermine this person to cover up for his/her own inadequacies, rather than improve themselves.

    Remember all the protests by three wheel drivers against the nano cabs when they started? I heard one drive blasting the Nano cab service saying “they are offering a better service than us for the same price…this is not fair, we’ll lose our business”. Toss in demo-crazy with a political idiot hunting for votes, and you know why the country stagnates.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Praetorian View Post
    Not to mention Emirates also gets massive cash injections courtesy of UAE’s oil wealth. Which is what helped Emirates jump start.
    This is actually not true. Emirates has been run as a commericial operation since its inception in 1985 and has made a profit every year.

    Currently they dont get ANY subsidies from the Dubai government. The only thing they probably get is infrastructure in the the form of Terminal 3 and a monopoly. EK's ultimate owner is one of my companies clients so I see their accounts (which are public) and have analysed their credit strengths and competitive positioning so I know this to be true.

    UL has the exact same but is ridiculous compare to EK.

    Dont get me wrong, I am not sayin UL needs to be like EK. Just better than it is now and money making. There is huge potential to emulate the hub and spoke model employed by EK, EY etc given our location but we dont seem to be able to do it.

    I heard QA is lining up a partnership with EK routing all QA Europe bound traffic through Dubai. We could easily do something like that. But no, we are so short sighted its painful

  3. #23
    Just to add, Emirates is owned by Dubai, not the UAE, therefore it has no oil wealth support. That is funneled into EY which is owned by Abu Dhabi. Incidently EY has still not made a profit even though its been in operation since 2006?

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by NeatStuff View Post
    This is actually not true. Emirates has been run as a commericial operation since its inception in 1985 and has made a profit every year.

    Currently they dont get ANY subsidies from the Dubai government. The only thing they probably get is infrastructure in the the form of Terminal 3 and a monopoly. EK's ultimate owner is one of my companies clients so I see their accounts (which are public) and have analysed their credit strengths and competitive positioning so I know this to be true.

    UL has the exact same but is ridiculous compare to EK.

    Dont get me wrong, I am not sayin UL needs to be like EK. Just better than it is now and money making. There is huge potential to emulate the hub and spoke model employed by EK, EY etc given our location but we dont seem to be able to do it.

    I heard QA is lining up a partnership with EK routing all QA Europe bound traffic through Dubai. We could easily do something like that. But no, we are so short sighted its painful

    Emirates was essentially unknown till the 2000s.

    From what i gathered Emirates got cash injections to get it off the ground and then thanks to proper managment and vision (espically around the very late 90s and early 2000s) they are now going sky high.

    No way am i comparing this to UL, where cash injections for UL is basically sticking money in a black hole.

    Emirates is run properly with goals in mind and a proper business model which is raking in the profits.

    Dont get me wrong, I am not sayin UL needs to be like EK. Just better than it is now and money making.
    Whats lacking is long term vision and a long term goal to be THE BEST. They need to set a goal to climb high like Emirates. UL needs to aim big to become big.

    We don't need to have 100s of aircraft and hundreds of destinations right away, as you say. But UL and various bigwigs in SL need to think out of the box and rid themselves of "small island mentality". They should think, "lets make UL like emirates", "lets dominate the skies".

    But whats happened? Idiots in charge playing hell, pocketing money for themselves, letting their buddies do what they want, and treating the airline like some Lego toy.

    This is the problem in SL overall. No one has proper vision, they have “island syndrome”. Just because we are a small island it doesn’t mean we should just wait like this, we can be so much MORE and should aim for that, we can become one of the “big boys”. I hate this "we're a small country, we should know our place as nobodies in the world" attitude prevalent within SL.
    Last edited by Praetorian; 31-07-2012 at 07:38 PM.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by NeatStuff View Post
    I heard QA is lining up a partnership with EK routing all QA Europe bound traffic through Dubai. We could easily do something like that. But no, we are so short sighted its painful

    But but but we need to "preserve the national carrier". So lets limit how many other airlines fly to SL and the frequencies they are allowed to operater to thus let CMB be a small airport forever that never grows. Because guaranteeing UL it's monopoly is more important...
    Last edited by Praetorian; 31-07-2012 at 07:40 PM.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by NeatStuff View Post
    Just to add, Emirates is owned by Dubai, not the UAE, therefore it has no oil wealth support. That is funneled into EY which is owned by Abu Dhabi. Incidently EY has still not made a profit even though its been in operation since 2006?
    Actually EY made a profit last year, their very first since inception.

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/97e85...#axzz22Ex3y6dX

    I totally and completely agree that EK does not get any government money, instead they pay royalties to the coffers of the Dubai government, who are somewhat cash strapped.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Praetorian View Post
    That’s way too much of an exaggeration.

    UL was doing relatively well even in 1998, even making profit (we all know what happens to that extra $$$). Don’t forget the deal with Emirates was not one way, Emirates gained immensely and started stealing from SL, including pilots, staff, landing rights and much more. They did squat to help UL out after the 2001 attack, instead used that as an opportunity to take more of ULs business.
    1. When UL was under EK management, there was an agreement in place not to cross recruit. This was actually somewhat detrimental to UL staff at the time, because they never got any opportunity with EK.

    However, as soon as EK was kicked out, they went on a recruiting spree taking the cream de la crème of cabin crew and pilots. Peter Hill then accompanied some of the best operational people to EK and then the rest of the good people to Oman Air when he became the CEO there. So, in summary, NO, EK did not poach UL staff (cockpit crew or otherwise) during the time of their managing UL.

    2. Except for ZHR, EK never used UL landing rights to fly any route that UL WANTED to fly. Sure, they used UL flight numbers on their second JFK flight and perhaps some other destinations that UL never wanted or did not have in their business plan to fly, but not to the detriment of UL.

    3. EK never abandoned UL during the 2001 attack. It is widely believed in the aviation circles that might of the EK is what actually saved UL when half their fleet went up in smoke (that and the fantastic work by the UL staff). In the light of loss of the long haul metal (A343s and A332s) EK asked UL to fly CMB-DXB-CMB shuttle service with their remaining A320 and wide bodies and they picked up the passengers that were headed to Europe and put them in their flights from DXB, thereby allowing UL not to cancel the tickets and pay refund + penalties. I am sure EK must have charged UL for the sectors they undertook, but I am not privy to the details of that arrangement.

    4. I think the "free money and free fuel for EK" fallacy has been firmly put to death in here and elsewhere, so I am not even going there.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Cayman View Post
    1. When UL was under EK management, there was an agreement in place not to cross recruit. This was actually somewhat detrimental to UL staff at the time, because they never got any opportunity with EK.

    However, as soon as EK was kicked out, they went on a recruiting spree taking the cream de la crème of cabin crew and pilots. Peter Hill then accompanied some of the best operational people to EK and then the rest of the good people to Oman Air when he became the CEO there. So, in summary, NO, EK did not poach UL staff (cockpit crew or otherwise) during the time of their managing UL.
    And in any case, even if EK decides to poach or not .. you can't stop people leaving for greener pastures .. just take a look at SQ - you will be amazed by the number of applicants from UL reaching them every month ..

    2. Except for ZHR, EK never used UL landing rights to fly any route that UL WANTED to fly. Sure, they used UL flight numbers on their second JFK flight and perhaps some other destinations that UL never wanted or did not have in their business plan to fly, but not to the detriment of UL.
    And they did feed a lot, lot and lot of traffic INTO CMB - and in essence, CMB was making money in the landing charges ..

    3. EK never abandoned UL during the 2001 attack. It is widely believed in the aviation circles that might of the EK is what actually saved UL when half their fleet went up in smoke (that and the fantastic work by the UL staff). In the light of loss of the long haul metal (A343s and A332s) EK asked UL to fly CMB-DXB-CMB shuttle service with their remaining A320 and wide bodies and they picked up the passengers that were headed to Europe and put them in their flights from DXB, thereby allowing UL not to cancel the tickets and pay refund + penalties. I am sure EK must have charged UL for the sectors they undertook, but I am not privy to the details of that arrangement.
    Well, actually, I recall a large airline business which took off with their tails tucked between their legs, when the 2001 attack happened, even sinking a few million $ in the evacuation, simply because their insurance cover didn't cover 'war' ... EK made a brave decision to stay and stay put and despite the rising insurance cost - did feed traffic into and out of the country -

    4. I think the "free money and free fuel for EK" fallacy has been firmly put to death in here and elsewhere, so I am not even going there.
    if at all the freebie that EK gets is - landing privileges in DXB - which is also now becoming dicey as DXB Inc is struggling to finance a lot of ventures !!!

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Cayman View Post
    1. When UL was under EK management, there was an agreement in place not to cross recruit. This was actually somewhat detrimental to UL staff at the time, because they never got any opportunity with EK.

    However, as soon as EK was kicked out, they went on a recruiting spree taking the cream de la crème of cabin crew and pilots. Peter Hill then accompanied some of the best operational people to EK and then the rest of the good people to Oman Air when he became the CEO there. So, in summary, NO, EK did not poach UL staff (cockpit crew or otherwise) during the time of their managing UL.

    2. Except for ZHR, EK never used UL landing rights to fly any route that UL WANTED to fly. Sure, they used UL flight numbers on their second JFK flight and perhaps some other destinations that UL never wanted or did not have in their business plan to fly, but not to the detriment of UL.

    3. EK never abandoned UL during the 2001 attack. It is widely believed in the aviation circles that might of the EK is what actually saved UL when half their fleet went up in smoke (that and the fantastic work by the UL staff). In the light of loss of the long haul metal (A343s and A332s) EK asked UL to fly CMB-DXB-CMB shuttle service with their remaining A320 and wide bodies and they picked up the passengers that were headed to Europe and put them in their flights from DXB, thereby allowing UL not to cancel the tickets and pay refund + penalties. I am sure EK must have charged UL for the sectors they undertook, but I am not privy to the details of that arrangement.

    4. I think the "free money and free fuel for EK" fallacy has been firmly put to death in here and elsewhere, so I am not even going there.


    Thanks for sharing. Guess i was off the mark.

    I still believe UL needs a big goal/aim to become big. The mentality of "why can't we be number 1"? needs to be drilled into peoples heads. The potential exists. Just never realised. Having poor and pathetic management is the biggest problem.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by ecureilx View Post

    ... EK made a brave decision to stay and stay put and despite the rising insurance cost - did feed traffic into and out of the country -

    if at all the freebie that EK gets is - landing privileges in DXB - which is also now becoming dicey as DXB Inc is struggling to finance a lot of ventures !!!
    Yes, EK never abandoned CMB, though they very smartly replaced the higher value 772 frames used for the CMB run with dilapidated (by EK standards) A310s in the immediate aftermath of the attack. I am not sure of this, but what I heard at the time was that the insurer of the 722s simply refused to cover them at CMB, while the company that insured A310s agreed to cover at a higher premium, which EK must have worked out was not that great, given the frames themselves were old and less expensive.

    I am by no means being naïve here to suggest that EK did all this out of the goodness of their hearts. They are truly run like a for profit business (not a charity) and identified the strategic importance of CMB as a destination as well as the essential necessity of having CMB up and running for the survival of UL, in which they had a vested interest.

    The pleasant side effect of all this was that CMB remained opened, country remained connected and UL survived the worst attack on any airline in the history of commercial aviation.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by slaviator View Post
    For all the people who were talking about Protectionism and all the Virgin Atlantic stuff not being allowed on the CMB-UK route...here you go...British Airways back in Colombo via Gatwick from March 2013..........

    http://www.sundaytimes.lk/120805/bus...2013-7625.html
    Ok, let me help you out...here you go; policy statement...straight from the horse's mouth

    http://www.lankabusinessonline.com/f...?nid=303408010
    Last edited by Speedbird; 06-08-2012 at 12:43 AM.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Speedbird View Post
    Ok, let me help you out...here you go; policy statement...straight from the horse's mouth

    http://www.lankabusinessonline.com/f...?nid=303408010
    Horses mouth or not! This is an unofficial jibe at companies like Emirates and Qatar. They go by financial might and basically outcompete other airlines simply based on Financial power and strength....which is very possible in Sri Lanka because we are too small a market to compete comprehensively with the goliaths in the sky(in terms of affordability and the % of the population flying regularly and the income capacities and in terms of tourists coming through)....

    I've explained this before and don't really wish to repeat myself with regards to governments around the world and the nationalistic measures they take to protect their airlines...it happens.....regardless where you are from..some will provide money...some will restrict access....others will ensure that airlines aren't privately owned....I can go on and on....there is no such thing as a completely democratic airline operating in a completely liberalized manner and haven't ever had some form of restriction placed on them...if you believe so...well that's a naive and a well not well thought-out opinion...but everyone is entitled to their own opinions...


    we are coming out of a 30 year war...the fact that Sri Lankan is even flying is a blessing....many airlines would have gone bust with the history Sri Lanka and the airline (blown up long-haul planes, night curfews on top of everything else thats happening in the Aviation market with epidemics, GFC's...not many airlines have had to endure in recent memory) itself has had....we have a tiny tourism market, 1 million maybe this year (for the first time ever).....how many Sri Lankan actually fly on a yearly basis....I'm sure the total flying capacity must be around 1/2 to maybe a months worth in a lot of other countries with flying capabilities...we don't have that big a flying population to warrant a massive growth of airlines coming in especially when most of the major airline hubs are a couple of flying distance away....our location to China and India and possibly Africa is our chance and opportunity....

    ....if Sri Lankan makes a loss on the routes to Europe...the European legacy carriers won't be able to survive...they are simply too Expensive per km.... and in a market like Sri Lanka...we are not there yet that we would pay a good $400-500 more to fly to Europe (im talking about the average citizen)...only a certain bracket and that is a minority....will do so and airlines target that and they know which markets that they will be able to compete in and in markets that they won't be able too...why do you think BA is starting with 3 flights...it's to test the waters and also possibly look at establishing formal relations on the basis of OneWorld....

    case in point...in September from Syd...all have stops...if I was flying to LHR....if I was willing to spend I would fly emirates and not the European carriers...its a more comfortable flights and better service...why would I pay more for inferior service...if cost is a barrier...Id fly China Southern...save myself a 1000 for spending money....
    to LHR - British Airways/Qantas - $2800
    to LHR - Virgin Atlantic - $2700
    to LHR - Emirates - $2500
    to LHR - China Southern - $1800...


    ...we don't have the population or the income to supplement such a growth not at least for now....the middle Eastern carriers thrive on the tax-free aspects...the financial backing of oil (leverage for acquiring financial backing of banks - how do you think the half-constructed oasis in Dubai exists and why the grandiose plans to make something out of a fast receding oil supply almost spectacularly failed) if not for oil profits themselves....if just Australia represent close to a 1/4 of of Emirates profits, l do start to wonder how much they actually make from some of the other destinations they fly to....and that in a well managed airline....

    The fact that we even have a small growing fleet is a good thing...the new planes being added is another good thing..investing in things like simulators...upgrading the IFE...one world membership....these are things previous managements didnt even have the balls to invest in...but is much needed because we've upto now never added value to the goal of making a minor flying hub...a transit point to the sub-continent for the rest of the world is where we can thrive....we have a long way to go agreed....but it has to start somewhere...this is as a good start as I've seen...

    Sri Lankan airlines will never have the might or finances to expand and add new planes and items as a lot of you'll are suggesting....the case of replacing an entire ageing fleet is not a clear-cut exercise and without investment there will be no return....even if we have private investors or a partner airline that is no guarantee that the airline will expand....with the losses in the current aviation market finding a buyer who will procure a sizable share base in another airline is a joke other than for ferrying passengers to their Hub to whisk away to high yielding destinations...case in point BA and Iberia...Etihad and Virgin Australia....Emirates wooing Qantas to name a few....

    At the end of the day...take a long term view of things....taking a naive, cynical and short-term view is a Sri Lankan trait that's hard to shake-off....you guys need to look at things with a more open mind and idea of how things are run and what's being geared up for the future...there will be a barrage to this post from you guys who'll harp on the fallacy and failed policies and lots of other things and reply to this with similar sentiments..i dont expect anything different..we are after all typical Sri lankans aren't we...cynical is our middle name...

    Soo to cut a long story short....some good things are happening....there will be mistakes and acts of stupidity...I have no doubt and have seen some too....but all I can say is wait and see.....it's not all that bad....analyzing airline business Structures is what I do for a living....hint look at Virgin's turnaround....Borgahetti didn't turn Virgin around just by himself you know...there were lots of little people involved....
    Last edited by slaviator; 06-08-2012 at 10:19 AM.

  13. #33
    Another quick note to add...

    Banuthev & KFlyer I've been reading your posts since before this forum...on the previous SL Aviation discussions....I remember those forums with a fair amount of nostalgia due to the level of intellect and general awareness that everyone had and also for incisive and generally well thought-out comments and arguments...

    Thank you for your valuable contributions and insight even back then...

  14. #34
    You have raised some valid points no doubt.

    But our gripe is the management of UL.

    When the boss Nishantha is living a life of extravagant luxury eating the airline’s profits, it’s a problem.

    When the president wants to take some jaunt somewhere he steals a plane.

    When Government honcho’s want to fly, not only do they steal planes, they do not even pay.

    ULs Management’s and Government’s “favourites” (i.e. best sycophants and relations) get promoted over those who have brains and skill and actually care for the airline. These clowns then make idiot decisions purely designed for their own enjoyment.

    Inflight service by the Cabin crew is atrocious. I hate most the “white first” mentality, its disgusting how the cabin crew do not give a damn for us, but will wade hand and foot for a “white god” on board.

    I flew in the 90s with Air Lanka –there was no personal inflight entertainment, but the crew were amazing and the food the best in the world. Not the case anymore. The Cabin crew seem always lost and not that bothered, unless you’re white of course.

    Can you also explain to me what business sense there is in the State running TWO airlines? Why is Mihin being kept afloat? Does it make sense for passengers who pay for the cheaper Mihin tickets to be “upgraded” to the more expensive UL. Does it make sense that the boss and CEO of Mihin and UL are the same? What is going on with regards to Mihin Lanka? It SERVES NO PURPOSE other than being a burden. There is no commercial sense or business model behind it. It is just there because the Preso’s name is on it.

    This protection racket to “preserve the national carrier” would be “ok” if UL was THE BEST and the service was perfect that people will be trampling over others to get on board. In fact if that was the case, UL would not need an idiot monopoly to be “protected”.

    So long as this idiot short sighted “trick” is done to “preserve the national carrier” Colombo will never grow and become a hub. You talk about thinking long term, but every decision made by UL and SL governments past and present is SHORT TERM and stupid. You want Colombo as a hub but also want to “preserve the national carrier”. The latter prevents the former.


    Those of us "on the attack", are not doing this because we enjoy it or becaise we want UL to fail. We want UL to BE THE BEST. When we see the ugly, stupid decisions made by the management and Government interference we will say something. The service is BAD when compared to other airlines in the same class as UL and so many people are avoiding UL because of this.
    Last edited by Praetorian; 06-08-2012 at 12:04 PM.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by slaviator View Post
    Another quick note to add...

    Banuthev & KFlyer I've been reading your posts since before this forum...on the previous SL Aviation discussions....I remember those forums with a fair amount of nostalgia due to the level of intellect and general awareness that everyone had and also for incisive and generally well thought-out comments and arguments...

    Thank you for your valuable contributions and insight even back then...
    Nice to finally notice someone talking something sensible - the very same cause why I have stayed away from this forum. This place has gotten too political and personally attacking as of late. Unfortunately, not many people always realise that knowing too little can sometimes be a dangerous thing.
    The opinions above are solely my own and do not reflect those of my employer or clients

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Kflyer View Post
    Nice to finally notice someone talking something sensible -the very same cause why I have stayed away from this forum. This place has gotten too political and personally attacking as of late. Unfortunately, not many people always realise that knowing too little can sometimes be a dangerous thing.

    Well please do share so we know more.

    And i didn't know things have become "personal"?

    As for things becoming "political" -no one is promoting politics or the opposition here or calling for Government change or things like that. Whether you like it or not all Governments past to present have tinkered with the airline and done stupid things, and their decisions have an affect on the aviation industry in SL.

    Wasn't it too long ago that a correct business decision to scrap flights to Italy was over turned by the President because "the cardinal" had made such a request? (Does Malcom Ranjit really need to fly to Italy/have direct airlinks to Italy for him to do is job? Isn't this guy "always" connected to his buddy upstairs?).


    If you do not want people who know little saying wrong things, then take it upon yourself to enlighten them.

    I’d love to know the logic behind keeping Mihin Lanka afloat. And that is a serious question.
    Last edited by Praetorian; 06-08-2012 at 02:24 PM.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by slaviator View Post
    Horses mouth or not! This is an unofficial jibe at companies like Emirates and Qatar. They go by financial might and basically outcompete other airlines simply based on Financial power and strength....which is very possible in Sri Lanka because we are too small a market to compete comprehensively with the goliaths in the sky(in terms of affordability and the % of the population flying regularly and the income capacities and in terms of tourists coming through)....

    I've explained this before and don't really wish to repeat myself with regards to governments around the world and the nationalistic measures they take to protect their airlines...it happens.....regardless where you are from..some will provide money...some will restrict access....others will ensure that airlines aren't privately owned....I can go on and on....there is no such thing as a completely democratic airline operating in a completely liberalized manner and haven't ever had some form of restriction placed on them...if you believe so...well that's a naive and a well not well thought-out opinion...but everyone is entitled to their own opinions...


    we are coming out of a 30 year war...the fact that Sri Lankan is even flying is a blessing....many airlines would have gone bust with the history Sri Lanka and the airline (blown up long-haul planes, night curfews on top of everything else thats happening in the Aviation market with epidemics, GFC's...not many airlines have had to endure in recent memory) itself has had....we have a tiny tourism market, 1 million maybe this year (for the first time ever).....how many Sri Lankan actually fly on a yearly basis....I'm sure the total flying capacity must be around 1/2 to maybe a months worth in a lot of other countries with flying capabilities...we don't have that big a flying population to warrant a massive growth of airlines coming in especially when most of the major airline hubs are a couple of flying distance away....our location to China and India and possibly Africa is our chance and opportunity....

    ....if Sri Lankan makes a loss on the routes to Europe...the European legacy carriers won't be able to survive...they are simply too Expensive per km.... and in a market like Sri Lanka...we are not there yet that we would pay a good $400-500 more to fly to Europe (im talking about the average citizen)...only a certain bracket and that is a minority....will do so and airlines target that and they know which markets that they will be able to compete in and in markets that they won't be able too...why do you think BA is starting with 3 flights...it's to test the waters and also possibly look at establishing formal relations on the basis of OneWorld....

    case in point...in September from Syd...all have stops...if I was flying to LHR....if I was willing to spend I would fly emirates and not the European carriers...its a more comfortable flights and better service...why would I pay more for inferior service...if cost is a barrier...Id fly China Southern...save myself a 1000 for spending money....
    to LHR - British Airways/Qantas - $2800
    to LHR - Virgin Atlantic - $2700
    to LHR - Emirates - $2500
    to LHR - China Southern - $1800...


    ...we don't have the population or the income to supplement such a growth not at least for now....the middle Eastern carriers thrive on the tax-free aspects...the financial backing of oil (leverage for acquiring financial backing of banks - how do you think the half-constructed oasis in Dubai exists and why the grandiose plans to make something out of a fast receding oil supply almost spectacularly failed) if not for oil profits themselves....if just Australia represent close to a 1/4 of of Emirates profits, l do start to wonder how much they actually make from some of the other destinations they fly to....and that in a well managed airline....

    The fact that we even have a small growing fleet is a good thing...the new planes being added is another good thing..investing in things like simulators...upgrading the IFE...one world membership....these are things previous managements didnt even have the balls to invest in...but is much needed because we've upto now never added value to the goal of making a minor flying hub...a transit point to the sub-continent for the rest of the world is where we can thrive....we have a long way to go agreed....but it has to start somewhere...this is as a good start as I've seen...

    Sri Lankan airlines will never have the might or finances to expand and add new planes and items as a lot of you'll are suggesting....the case of replacing an entire ageing fleet is not a clear-cut exercise and without investment there will be no return....even if we have private investors or a partner airline that is no guarantee that the airline will expand....with the losses in the current aviation market finding a buyer who will procure a sizable share base in another airline is a joke other than for ferrying passengers to their Hub to whisk away to high yielding destinations...case in point BA and Iberia...Etihad and Virgin Australia....Emirates wooing Qantas to name a few....

    At the end of the day...take a long term view of things....taking a naive, cynical and short-term view is a Sri Lankan trait that's hard to shake-off....you guys need to look at things with a more open mind and idea of how things are run and what's being geared up for the future...there will be a barrage to this post from you guys who'll harp on the fallacy and failed policies and lots of other things and reply to this with similar sentiments..i dont expect anything different..we are after all typical Sri lankans aren't we...cynical is our middle name...

    Soo to cut a long story short....some good things are happening....there will be mistakes and acts of stupidity...I have no doubt and have seen some too....but all I can say is wait and see.....it's not all that bad....analyzing airline business Structures is what I do for a living....hint look at Virgin's turnaround....Borgahetti didn't turn Virgin around just by himself you know...there were lots of little people involved....
    Oh dear...

    I will keep my comment very very short

    your post #1816 and few previously implies that there are no protectionism in Sri Lankan aviation policy; but again the above post implies yes there is protectionism...
    conflicting analogy eh!

    thank for the rant; let stick to the point which is protectionism...As I said before there are 100's of airlines that does not have government protectionism and gone bust...since you live in OZ; that remind me of Ansett Australia

    Unfortunately Sri Lankan Airlines cannot be run as a Sri Lankan Government monopolistic corporation like CEB or CPC...why...coz need to respect bilateral treaties.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Praetorian View Post
    Well please do share so we know more.

    And i didn't know things have become "personal"?

    As for things becoming "political" -no one is promoting politics or the opposition here or calling for Government change or things like that. Whether you like it or not all Governments past to present have tinkered with the airline and done stupid things, and their decisions have an affect on the aviation industry in SL.

    Wasn't it too long ago that a correct business decision to scrap flights to Italy was over turned by the President because "the cardinal" had made such a request? (Does Malcom Ranjit really need to fly to Italy/have direct airlinks to Italy for him to do is job? Isn't this guy "always" connected to his buddy upstairs?).


    If you do not want people who know little saying wrong things, then take it upon yourself to enlighten them.

    I’d love to know the logic behind keeping Mihin Lanka afloat. And that is a serious question.
    Of course, I am in no position to answer that last question as that is not a decision you or I can make. But if possible, I would like you to analyze the most recent financial reports of both airlines. You may then realise that on an operational level MJ is now making a better return than UL. If used in the right way, MJ's business model is the perfect one that fits SL as the majority in SL cannot afford a full service air ticket. And the advantage of having a common management is that you can then use MJ as a tool for UL to fight the LCCs expanding rapidly into CMB. Again this all depends on the execution, but it is a sound model in theory.
    The opinions above are solely my own and do not reflect those of my employer or clients

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Kflyer View Post
    .... too little can sometimes be a dangerous thing.
    Yes that's true...when Sajin Vass Gunawardena was appointed CEO of Mihin; I wondered which business school did he attend... When he left we all know what was end result was right?

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Speedbird View Post
    Yes that's true...when Sajin Vass Gunawardena was appointed CEO of Mihin; I wondered which business school did he attend... When he left we all know what was end result was right?
    How about former UL CEO Manoj Vaas Gunawardane?

    And the current CEO Chandrasena?

    Do they had/have any experience about Airline Management?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts