Airlines in a Crisis

 Another retired armed forces top brass have been added to Boeing mgmt. This time a retired admiral. Yes I'm sure his nuclear bacground have made him very pedantic but do Boeing really need nuclear pedantry for its civilian airdraft production. Sounds expensive, not very productive and not something that would have a lasting effect. And not is there any actual nuclear apect to their civilian aircraft production program either. Another thing is that to reach the grade of admiral he has had to always toe the "company" line. That is not something you as a user of its products want in Boeings executive suite at this point in time. You would want somebody to shake things up a bit. Somebody with some diverging opinions and not just another yes man. Sounds like a press release friendly apointee thought out by finance people and lawyers and not what a engineering based top management would have been looking for. What Boeing need is somebody with a multilevel experience. and not o

Or rather can he survive without giving up his 11 million bonus. Or should the question be, will he, since it could take him 2 years to make it back. Question is how much does he want to be CEO or is it just the money that drives him. There is surely another company he could rescue from the brink through financial wizardry. Schram, the former CEO of Norwegian lasted 18 months. More because ofthe support of a weak board with litle shareholder backing but at the same time without any shareholder unity or even a strong such. And a chairman without much airline background that maybe of that reason picked a CEO without any at all. As soon as kind of new strong shareholders came in and the chairman that picked him for the CEO role was out, so was he. But is Karlsen what Norwegian needs now. When he came in as CFO he either had any airline background but was a part of the Fredriksen sphere. Fredriksen is again a large shareholder in Norwegian but the time for finanzial wizardry might be vanin

If one as the Norwegian party Senterpartiet (Centrist) suggested had given the airline Norwegian 20 billion nkr, the future for the company would have been less rosy than one would think. As opposite to the future of the many who would have filled their pockets. Management would have rewarded themselves well with some exuberant, for Norway to be, bonuses for saving the company. As Gustafson of SAS did after persuading staff to so deep cuts in their terms and renumerations some years ago. The lease- and bondholders would see to that all past and future rents and payments would be paid well in advance, as the big shareholders they are. All the unions would then come in and fight hard to see to that their members got their share of the cake and more, plus lay paid to any demands for performance improvements. Nobody would fight for neither future profits or any streamlining of the company into something that would be anything else than a future drain and per passeenger loss busines. None o

More of the fictive crew rental straw companies that Norwegian created are being declared bankrupt. Reasons given; client (= Norwegian) won't pay their bills. And this time it is really closing in on them being in their neighbouring countries Denmark and Sweden. This is going to end in tears. The management of Norwegian haven't solved neither the company finances nor its problems. They have just pushed them into the future. No other airline have tried to solve their CoVid19 problems by abandoning their legal responsibilities towards their employees. Whether they where hired directly or through fictive agencies. Fictive = the agency only supply staff to 1 company which is also the owner (or part owner) of said employment agency. Others have tried to abandoned their crew at other times. But those companies always had the financial strength to pay themselves out of trouble when it went legally tits up. Norwegian do not have the money to pay out if different countries start tak

Last years plan of decorating the edges of the accounts with removing a few new non profitable routes seems like the equivalent of putting lipstick on a pig. Much more needs doing and I doubt the current management are the ones to do it, except for some financial tinkering. They certainly do not  seem to have the airline experience needed, or from the right airlines, to know what makes a Low Fares carrier a Low Cost. Neither do the new ones added to the management team recently, who have absolutely no airline experience whatsoever. Are they trying to make Norwegian into a shopping mall or think the website rather than actually flying passengers and stuff is what will make the company profitable. There are certainly many steps the airline can do to make it more like the model of the industry Southwest. Where the principle of Low Fares Low Cost was first modelled and who have been profitable in nearly all of the years since, with very little industrial strife to boot. Take the best

Or is it hibernation for the year. They refused to hold a press conference when the first quarter results came out and issued just a written statement. There where no new plans for this year at a time when other airlines left, right and center come up with their back to business plans from June/July. Instead just what had happened from January to March, so pretty much pre CoVid19. A company like Norwegian should squander no time or opportunity getting a momentum going by presenting a basic timeline for coming back from the nearly dead. It can always be adjusted as more countries opens up, or closes down again, but get something up there you can sell and get those prepayments in. Something that will make the lease holder share owners happy that there is lights not only at the end of the tunnel but also in it. And a chance for some early payback also for the power by the hour deal. Not to mention that any positive news on more planes in the air can only lead to a real upswing in the s

Hibernation is not the right path for any airline. Neither planes nor crew nor admin or financials benefits from it. They should: Start to rotate planes so all of them get an airing on a regular basis. Utilize freight opportunities so also 787's can get flight time. Start to rotate pilots so they are all ajour with license requirements and up to date on their flying skills. Negotiate with government for flexible utilization of percentage return to work schemes for all employees. Flexibly add additional later departures for those departures that fill up quickly. It is not like they don't have neither slots, planes or crew available an mass. Look for near future opportunities in other scandinavian countries where governments may not keep their travel advice for foreign travel as restrictive aw Norway. Prepare their spanish bases for Scandinavia to the sun as soon as that and other med countries opens up for summer seasonal travel. This would also placate possible lawsuits l

Did Schram forget that the world has changed when he today presented his new'ish senior managment for Norwegian. The plan from last winter should have been put out to pasture and a new one created more suited to corona and a return. Getting in old sales colleagues to sell more inflight stiff to passengers no longer existing is a bit to late. Will these new brooms first start in April next year when the company plans to have more than 7 planes in the air. The won't sell much aboard a plane where everyone wears a mask. And the experience is more about not getting infected rather than anything else. The position, in addition to Karlsen's, that is most of importance is Chief of Operations. And they haven't filled that. No wonder they have problemes handling even 7 planes. The CEO must have been in a hurry to present his plan before the new owners get control of their shares, get organized and come up with their own plan. Or person/team that will form that plan. Will th

Is Easyjet well served by getting on the wrong side of a 30% shareholder in difficult times. Is the continued concentration on growth for the benefit of the shareholders that take all the risk, or for increasing managements incentive packages. There are enough samples of corporate greed where top management walks away with millions even though the results tanks and staff ends up getting laid off. Easyjet management says an outside independent have looked at its dealings with Airbus and found nothing untoward. An independent company is only as independent as the one that pays their bill want them to be. Self-hiring an "independent" is a well known way of getting in ahead of an investigation instigated by somebody else.I am not saying anything will be hung on the current management of Easyjet, but smaybe something will stick on Airbus that could be used for negating the contract without penalties. Even more likely since they have already settled something similar. Easyjet ma