185 replies to this topic

[Eddard]

Mislim da će biti Malpensa.

[golosina]

Bice gotovo sigurno Malpensa, jer Izidzet nema avione u Bergamu, Linate koriste samo za Pariz, a sa Malpense imaju mnogo destinacija.

sto se mene tice, Milano mi je interesantan iskljucivo kao tacka presedanja, a za svaki od ovih aerodroma moze ponesto da se iskombinuje.

 

 

Opet je veliko pitanje na koji ce aerodrom leteti, da li na Malpensu, Linate ili Bergamo i u koje doba dana.

Naime, JAT/Alitalia (zajednicka linija, ali lete JAT-ovi avioni) leti na Malpensu, i nije skup, ali je Malpensa bestraga daleko od grada - kao i Bergamo, uostalom. Takodje, za razuman novac se mogu dobiti karte na SWISS i Lufthansa letovima sa Linatea, sa jednim presedanjem, do Beograda. Alitalia preko Rima je jos i najskuplja.

Moze biti i zgodno, ali opet olovku u ruke i sracunati sve.

Edited by golosina, 02 February 2013 - 01:16.

[vladan]

U tome i jeste razlika: meni je po pravilu Milano konacna odrednica.

[alberto.ascari]

 

...sto se mene tice, Milano mi je interesantan iskljucivo kao tacka presedanja...

 

Sa tobom bih se ja lako posvadjao...

[GlennGould]

Sto se A/R (RT) karata tice i zelje da se prvo "iskoristi" povratna, to nema veze sa vrstom niti sa usluznim kvalitetom avio kompanije, vec sa dobro znanim principom kuponskog sleda karata. Naime, tu vasu A/R (RT) kartu, ste kupili u paketu i time dobili promotivnu cenu, koja je i do 4 puta jeftinija od one koju bi vam prodali da ste trazili istu u jednom pravcu (OW). Isto bi vam se desilo kada biste recimo kupili kartu sa presedanjem tipa FRA-CDG-BEG, pa dosli da iz Pariza "iskoristite" ovaj drugi deo...

 

Sto se samog modela Low Cost (LC) tice, on se moze primeniti na sve segmente ekonomije, i cini mi se da nam drustvo (svesno ili ne) upravo klizi ka tom idealu. Problem, osim sto je koncept LC kao filizofija privredjivanja diskutabilan, lezi u ipak skrivenim troskovima koje mi, kao drustvo, placamo (bili mi njih svesni ili ne). Sta je to LC? Pa, to je samo logicki nastavak externalizacije cene datog proizvoda. Ona nije niza, vec je odvojena od stvarne cene koju neko ipak negde "placa": sam konsumer, provajder usluge, teritorijalna celina gde se ta usluga vrsi i konacno drzavno uredjenje koje tu uslugu omogucava. Da ne bude zabune, oligopoli industrijskih giganata nisu bolje resenje, i nize cene su bile dobrodosle, narocito u avio transportu. Problem je, da ponovim, model koji se ovim niskim cenama promovise i njegove vise nego ocigledne posledice...

 

[golosina]

Sto se samog modela Low Cost (LC) tice, on se moze primeniti na sve segmente ekonomije, i cini mi se da nam drustvo (svesno ili ne) upravo klizi ka tom idealu. Problem, osim sto je koncept LC kao filizofija privredjivanja diskutabilan, lezi u ipak skrivenim troskovima koje mi, kao drustvo, placamo (bili mi njih svesni ili ne). Sta je to LC? Pa, to je samo logicki nastavak externalizacije cene datog proizvoda. Ona nije niza, vec je odvojena od stvarne cene koju neko ipak negde "placa": sam konsumer, provajder usluge, teritorijalna celina gde se ta usluga vrsi i konacno drzavno uredjenje koje tu uslugu omogucava. Da ne bude zabune, oligopoli industrijskih giganata nisu bolje resenje, i nize cene su bile dobrodosle, narocito u avio transportu. Problem je, da ponovim, model koji se ovim niskim cenama promovise i njegove vise nego ocigledne posledice...

Tacno je da su niskobudzetne avio kompanije nekada subvencionisane od strane lokalnih samouprava i/ili drzave. No, zar stvarno mislis da to ide na stetu te iste lokalne samouprave?? Pa ne subvencionisu oni jer su dobrocinitelji, vec zato sto im to donosi nova radna mesta, drasticni skok broja turista (u nekim slucajevima i do 50% vise turista na godisnjem nivou i to zahvaljujuci iskljucivo Rajaneru, npr), itd itd. Jel su to te ocigledne posledice o kojima pricas - turisticki bum, razvoj, konkurencija i rast?

Edited by golosina, 04 February 2013 - 11:49.

[golosina]

Sa tobom bih se ja lako posvadjao...

ehehe, bolje da ne pocinjem

[GlennGould]

Tacno je da su niskobudzetne avio kompanije nekada subvencionisane od strane lokalnih samouprava i/ili drzave.

Jel su to te ocigledne posledice o kojima pricas - turisticki bum, razvoj, konkurencija i rast?

 

Da, to je otprilike to... ali ako bismo gledali malo dalje od vlastitog nosa, moze i ovako:


 

With a number of 72.1 million passengers carried in 2010-2011, a conservative estimate of state-aids funds received by the low-cost carrier is 72.1 million passengers x €10 = €721 million

With revenues of €3.630 billion for year 2010-2011, subsidies represent 20% of Ryanair’s total revenue, which, like ancillary revenues (22%), cannot be considered as marginal.
For 2010-2011, Ryanair declared a profit of €401 million. The subsidies represent 180% of Ryanair’s profit. The day subsidies cease, Ryanair profitability will be in jeopardy.

What these numbers reveal is that the so-called profitability of the low-cost model is fragile: the company’s business model relies on two pillars which are marginal for most other airlines. Secondly, the current market capitalisation of the company is based on an inaccurate estimate of its profitability and hence of its capacity to maintain sustainable growth.

 

A personal interpretation of laws
Ryanair seems to systematically get around the law and interprets it according to the benefits it can achieve. For tickets, personals, airports, the pattern is the same and the company gets all the profits it can from the European and local legislations. When the carrier is proven wrong, it blames the law for being stupid or threatens to stop servicing an airport.

 

Personnel

Ryanair’s staff is employed directly or via third-parties with Irish contracts even if the flight attendant is based in another country.
This situation is not without issues as most members of crew are living, having their day-to-day activities, are sick, in another country than Ireland but they do not benefit from the social coverage of the very same country they live in (needless to say that Irish work contracts are less protective than Belgium or French ones). For instance, Ryanair cabin crew may have to change bases without compensation and on short notice. If they decide to leave the company, they are bound to pay administrative costs.

 

Airports

Subsidies are legal in Europe but their use is strictly framed:
° subsidies must be given for a maximum of three years
° they must decrease over time
° they must be declared
As the company does not meet these requirements and wants to spend as little as possible at airports, subsidies are dissimulated under « marketing aids » or reduced fees. A subsidiary of Ryanair, Airport Marketing Services, is dedicated to this activity.

 

In order to avoid airports being pinned down for direct abuse of public money in an unfair situation – because of the constant aids handed to Ryanair over the years – a scheme has been repeated between airports. A scheme whereby the airport will create an association dedicated to the promotion of regional touristic assets, and while being heavily subsidised by the airport will pay marketing fees for promotional actions to an offshore subsidiary belonging to Ryanair. The subsidiary is generally, if not always, in the Channel Islands, and allows Ryanair to both escape taxes on marketing fees it receives and blur the amount of monetary transfers between the airline and airports.

 

Financial relationships around the Ryanair Group

The complexity of Ryanair’s financial structure is actually hidden beneath Ryanair Holding’s subsidiary, Ryanair Ltd. The company serves as a nexus point for the various investments and subsidiaries Ryanair possesses. Most of the subsidiaries appear to have been created with a particular purpose in mind, some of them obviously dedicated to reinvesting Ryanair’s cash, or managing marketing subsidies or aircraft leases. Even in its financial structure, the company shows an impressive determination in minimising all possible expenses. Subsidiaries dedicated to aircraft leasing and financing have all been created on the Isle of Man, probably to make the most of advantageous fiscal conditions.

An in-depth analysis of possession structure for the aircraft in use by Ryanair reveals that the company actually owns very few of its aircraft. Instead, those are placed under finance leases under the property of other companies. While this does not mean that Ryanair is not liable for payment of its aircraft, it might allow the company to not declare these aircraft as taxable assets. The internal financial structure of companies actually owning the plane can be rather obscure. They are generally positioned outside Europe, often in fiscally advantageous places such as the state of Delaware in the U.S.A – such is the case for King Leasing or RIL Aviation.

 

Putting it all into perspective
Ryanair has deeply modified the traditional model of airlines. Passenger transportation is no more the main source of income. Value comes from derived income sources such as airport subsidies or website traffic monetisation.
With a highly different business model from traditional airlines, it is difficult to compare the Irish carrier with its competitors. If we sump up, what makes it different:
°  heavy use of airports subsidies
°  outsourcing of employment, maintenance, catering…
°  low ticket fare coupled with various taxes and extra charges
°  monetisation of website traffic to partners (from car hire to insurance and house rental)
°  purchase of aircrafts at attractive conditions with sale and leaseback agreements
°  low spending on advertising and communication
All these impact either the company’s revenues or expenses and make difficult an item by item comparison with other airlines working on a traditional model.
Yet, investors may wonder what the real value of the company is. On one hand, Ryanair’s business model heavily relies on airports’ subsidies (around 20% of the company’s turnover) and employees subcontracted and hired on Irish conditions. On the other hand, the financial structure is complex with a holding, Ryanair Holdings plc publishing the annual report and the subsidiaries (Ryanair Ltd and its own subsidiaries) in charge of operations. Any change in the airport subsidies scheme or in the employee contract localisation could severely impact Ryanair’s numbers and destabilise the company. Its profitability could not be as high and it would both impact the firm’s future development and the firm’s value to shareholders.

 

Sve u svemu vrlo "uspesno" extrenalizovanje troskova, disimulacija profita i dodatnih neophodnih troskova, poreska evazija i naravno tournover zaposlenih bez ikakve mogucnosti sindikalnog organizovanja sa sve socialnim dumpingom... Jel' to taj model za XXI vek?!

[golosina]

...

Sta reci, celu Evropu Rajan vrti oko malog prsta

[GlennGould]

Ma samo da "ja" udjem u avion za 9€ - 49€ i laktanjem se izborim za sediste...a koliko to stvrano kosta i ko tu moju pravu cenu karte i kako placa, te koje su, po drustvo,  posledice ovog privrednog modela, mislim... zivot je kratak!

Edited by GlennGould, 06 February 2013 - 12:09.

[golosina]

Ma samo da "ja" udjem u avion za 9€ - 49€ i laktanjem se izborim za sediste...a koliko to stvrano kosta i ko tu moju pravu cenu karte i kako placa, te koje su, po drustvo,  posledice ovog privrednog modela, mislim... zivot je kratak!

 

Ne, bolje da putujem JAT-om

 

edit: ne laktam se. sedim i citam knjigu i cekam da svi udju u avion, i posle sednem na neko slobodno mesto. uvek se nadje barem jedno.

Edited by golosina, 06 February 2013 - 12:32.

[GlennGould]

Nije JAT (propala drzavna, politicki dirigovana, trzistno nesposobna, firma) alternativa modelu LC -i ti to vrlo dobro znas. 

Problem nije u tome sto se ti licno "ne laktas", vec u sistemu koji navodi na "laktanje" kao nacin izbora mesta u aionu -i to ti je, siguran sam vrlo jasno.

 

Osim  , neki tvoj stav po pitanju LC modela ne vidim...

 

Moj je gore obrazlozen i dokumentovan. To sto (koliko sam razumeo) vise ne zivis u Srbiji, pruza ti priliku da imas izbor i razmisljas kao drustveno odgovorni pojedinac. Cak i da koristis LC usluge, koje dominiraju kao krizni BusinessModel, bilo bi pozeljno da promislis o vrednostima i posledicama istog. Lepo sto citas knjige, ali budi svesna da ih i ti "pises" sopstvenim zivotnim izborom...

Edited by GlennGould, 06 February 2013 - 12:56.

[vladan]

Sta reci, celu Evropu Rajan vrti oko malog prsta

Rayan je samo dno low cost kompanija; lazljiva i eksploatatorska kompanija u stilu vrlo ranog kapitalizma. 

Te se kompanije kloni "pristojniji svet", koji ne voli da ga lazu, sto Ryan redovno radi.

Za Ryanair EasyJet je gospodska kompanija.

[golosina]

 

 

Osim  , neki tvoj stav po pitanju LC modela ne vidim...

 

Moj je gore obrazlozen i dokumentovan. To sto (koliko sam razumeo) vise ne zivis u Srbiji, pruza ti priliku da imas izbor i razmisljas kao drustveno odgovorni pojedinac. Cak i da koristis LC usluge, koje dominiraju kao krizni BusinessModel, bilo bi pozeljno da promislis o vrednostima i posledicama istog. Lepo sto citas knjige, ali budi svesna da ih i ti "pises" sopstvenim zivotnim izborom...

 

Na svoj nacin se borim da svet u kom zivim bude bolji, ali ovo nije ni vreme ni mesto/tema da o tome pisem.

 

Pre nego sto nekog optuzis da je bezosecajan i/ili nesvestan realnosti jer leti za 9 evra, pogledaj da nisi mozda u Nike patikama koje siju petogodisnja indijska deca, da li imas mozda ajfon koji se sklapa u kineskim fabrikama gde radnici ucestalo vrse samoubistva, i da li jedes meso sa farmi na kojima zivotinje imaju surov tretman... itd itd itd itd

 

Nemam nazalost sada vremena ni strpljenja da nasiroko pisem na forumu svoje stavove, mozda neki drugi put...

[GlennGould]

...

Pre nego sto nekog optuzis da je bezosecajan i/ili nesvestan realnosti...

Ovakve optuzbe od mene dobila nisi, mozda vise kao indukovana reakcja, prigovor savesti... sto je, BTW dobar znak.

 

Tvoja nespremnost da obrazlozis tvoj stav po pitanju LC BM, je tvoje pravo, nema potrebe da se razbacujemo afektima.

Biti svestan da je promovisanje individualnog izbora na javnom forumu podlozno kritikama drugih individua, cini mi se predstavlja neki minimum na koji bismo morali biti spremni i umesto da padamo u ili/ili stranputice, i isticemo licne ljudske kvalitete koji bi nas izbor opravdali, bolje bi bilo da odgovorom udostojimo sagovornika... O poturanju pod nos imaginarnih kontra-primera radi medjusobnog nivelisanja ne bih trosio reci...

Edited by GlennGould, 06 February 2013 - 18:02.