Lets use this to talk about SAA specific developments

SAA have been struggling on the continement of late. This is their strategy going forward, as presented at the African Renaissance conference in Durban in August.

http://www.ebandla.co.za/uploads/AaronAfricanRenaissanceConference-DurbanAugust2011.pdf

They also have a strategy lately of announcing new routes, especially into Africa, which doesn't materialise and it just goes quiet.
A few months ago flights to Kigali via Bujumbura, as well as to Cotonou via Libreville was announced to start end-October, still nothing available to book. Similiarly Antananarivo, Abuja, Bamako and others have been named to start within the year. Only Ndola launching 1 October seems to be going ahead.
Also Beijing mentioned over and over again, but nothing's happening.

Btw, could we please make sure to keep this thread on SAA itself, and not SA Express and Airlink.

With their R782m profit they seem to be on the right track. I think overall management and service is improving with necessary cost cutting. There seems to be more commitment to expansion than there has been for a number of years.

Looking through that presentation it shows me what I have been thinking for years. SAA is trying to made JHB the hub for Africa and trying to be the best airline in Africa.

I think SAA should focus of South Africa and make JHB hub for Europe, Africa, Middle East. CPT hub for Americas, and DUR hub for Asia's and Australasia. I think their thinking is to dominate and control instead of offer good value and win. They should get Charlie Sheen to come do some training. WINNING!!!!

Agree. SAA only think of joburg. And let's be honest, as that preso shows, joburg is not ideally placed for Africa growth. The fact they lose sight of Durban and CT is probably their downfall

SAA have finally released the flights for the new Johannesburg-Kigali-Bujumbura route, to start now 17 Jan 2012.
Will operate 3x weekly with A319 aircraft, departing Tue, Fri and Sun (alternate days departing from JNB than what Rwandair departs).
Departing JNB at 13:00pm going to Kigali and then Bujumbura, overnight in BJM, returning next morning again via KGL

Now, regarding these new A320's....

My first flight ever was on a Flitestar A320, that was supposedly leased from SAA. Later that month I flew on a SAA A320. And they were superb aircraft! I was eight at the time, but this aircraft started off my love for commercial aviation. So my issues are...
1 - Why did SAA get rid of those A320s so fast?
2 - They purchase B737-800s, which are fairly efficient aircraft, then purchase A319s and create a mixed small aircraft fleet!
3 - Now they say they want an all Airbus fleet, and want to get rid of perfectly good B737s. I dont buy the excuse that Mango might receive them, because we know already that the 2 that have left, went to Firefly in Malaysia!

So, whilst I'm all for SAA getting pretty new planes, something seems amiss regarding the financial implications of these purchases (TAX PAYER'S MONEY). I dont see the justification.... remember as well that these are "old-spec" A320s, not even the sharklet variant that flies soon or the "A320neo" which is supposed to offer 20% savings on fuel.

One final issue... why are SAA so hell-bent on leasing planes, and then still paying for them to be painted and refitted for them (A340s and A330s too!!!) SAA claims to be Africa's best, but take a look Egypt Air and Ethiopian's fleets.... makes SAA look very budget!

One final issue... why are SAA so hell-bent on leasing planes, and then still paying for them to be painted and refitted for them (A340s and A330s too!!!) SAA claims to be Africa's best, but take a look Egypt Air and Ethiopian's fleets.... makes SAA look very budget!

Not making sense really, SAA owns several of their planes, as well as then leasing some, similiarly as to what many major airlines do. It does get painted and refitted so that it doesn't look so budget, but rather uniform and professional. Yes look at Ethiopian's and EgyptAir fleets, just like SAA they are receiving new planes, but also still having many older ones in the fleet while the replacement happens. Now, with the old A340-200s basically gone and these brand-new A320s arriving, SAA has a much younger fleet than any of the others. Ethiopian still having many of their older 757 and 767s in the fleet, EgyptAir alot of older A320s, 737-500, older 777-200 and their older A330-200s (which go to JNB) isn't all that great with no PTV.

I dont see the justification.... remember as well that these are "old-spec" A320s, not even the sharklet variant that flies soon or the "A320neo" which is supposed to offer 20% savings on fuel.

The shark-let A320s is still in the process of being certified, while the A320neo is still a long way down the road. No one is sitting around waiting for them, you can see even with recent large orders of other airlines, many order the A320NEO or 737MAX for delivery about 4 or 5 years down the line, untill then ordering the current variants, which will then be replaced. These are not as 'old-spec' as the older SAA ones or the Flitestar ones or even many of those flying for airlines like BA, Lufthansa, United etc.

With technology and develpmont of aircraft advancing faster all the time, the time-frames for fleets is also becoming smaller, mostly due to the fact that airlines weigh the financial implications up of keeping older birds longer, or opting for more cost-effective newer aircraft. SAA might just be doing that.
Ofcourse in South Africa there will always be complaints, why spend the money on new aircraft, and if not, why spend the money on these old aircraft using the money much faster...but hey, there was the 'good old days'...

Thanks for the insight.... and dont get me wrong, i"m not complaining... its just always better to have a broader understanding of what's actually going on, by discussing it here.
I was more interested in guaging the thought-process that went into all of those "issues" that i mentioned above - A320 to B737-800, then adding A319, now buying new A320 which will replace both B737-800 and apparently some A319s, when they could wait a year for the sharklets variant.... since NEO is too far ahead.

SAA have shot themselves in the foot before (the A340-300s sub-leased to Jet Airways for less than SAA were leasing them in the first place). We wouldn't want to see the same happen with redundant 737s or A319s in the future.

I only mention Egypt Air, for their B777-300ERs, which is just a sublime aircraft... which SAA really could use (RIP B747-400s) .... and Ethiopian for their B777-200LRs and B787s (also which would have made more sense for SAA - as assets)

2 - They purchase B737-800s, which are fairly efficient aircraft, then purchase A319s and create a mixed small aircraft fleet 3 - Now they say they want an all Airbus fleet, and want to get rid of perfectly good B737s.

SA had already started growing their Airbus short-/medium-haul fleet, and then the whole Coleman Andrews episode happened. He came in, and all of a sudden Boeing was the answer again... thus the massive order for the B738's happened. He left (with a very nice Golden Handshake!), and things switched back to Airbus. :nuts: There goes our entire B747 fleet, with a bunch of -400's in perfect shape... All now flying somewhere else.

There goes our entire B747 fleet, with a bunch of -400's in perfect shape... All now flying somewhere else.

Good point! Fair enough, some may say that most airlines with 747s are phasing them out (Singapore, Thai, Japan, Air India etc) but those airlines all have B777s to fill the role. SAA retired 744s and added 2nd hand reject A340s and the new A330s..... really downsizing their ambitions i think!

The A330s - yes, beautiful planes and certainly needed, but giving up on the Jumbos i think is going to cost SAA big market share. They've already missed the boat on the A380.

And back to those 747s - would have made sense to keep a few, convert them to freighters, and become Africa's dominant Cargo carrier too....
Easier said than done, i should stick to my flight simulator :hammer:

SA had already started growing their Airbus short-/medium-haul fleet, and then the whole Coleman Andrews episode happened. He came in, and all of a sudden Boeing was the answer again... thus the massive order for the B738's happened. He left (with a very nice Golden Handshake!), and things switched back to Airbus. :nuts: There goes our entire B747 fleet, with a bunch of -400's in perfect shape... All now flying somewhere else.

The B738s weren't entirely a Coleman Andrews 'whim purchase'. In the mid 90s when Mike Myburgh was at the helm SA ordered 4 B777-200ERs and 2 B747-400s as part of a fleet expansion/renewal (see press release from Boeing: http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1995/news.release.951103.html). The 2 B744s arrived were originally meant for Philipines Airlines (they had different engines to the rest of the SAA B744) but SAA were offered them at short notice after Philipines Airlines didn't take them (much like the new A320s that are arriving currently). The 777 ordered was cancelled but in order for SAA to not lose their deposit they changed the order to a portion of the order for 21 B738s (allegedly).

what is the main reason for SAA going"all airbus"......we could do with few 777's and get rid of those 340's....

what is the main reason for SAA going"all airbus"......we could do with few 777's and get rid of those 340's....

easier more efficient maintenance/spares/pilot or cabin crew training?

The new A320https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150500407272644&set=a.10150500406477644.353397.570887643&type=3&theater

Airbus is also much cheaper than Boeing! I think SAA should choose and aircraft in one range and stick with it. Eg: Short Haul: either B737 or A320, Long Haul small routes: B737 or A320/A330 or bigger routes: B767 or A340/A350 or major routes: A380 (I think the 747 is outdates and don't think the 747-8 is going to get much traction)

SAA retired 744s and added 2nd hand reject A340s and the new A330s..... really downsizing their ambitions i think!

Of the A340s SAA now has in the fleet all 9 A340-600 arrived brand-new, the original 6 A340-300s arrived brand new, only the last 2 A340-300s that arrived last year was second-hand.

Keep in mind that at the time (9/10years ago) SAA had to decide on something that was falling in the range for the routes operated out of hot and high JNB and the ETOPS on many routes, to Sao Paulo, Perth, New York and Washington and ofcourse now the new Beijing route. Back then the 777-200LR wasn't available yet, the 787 was still just a dream and the 777-300ERs wasn't as well developed as they're now and didn't have the ETOPS clearance (which even still now could be a challenge for the long long routes). A340s were a good option, the 747s was getting older (and as fleet planning goes, they knew at least they will still get a few years out of them, but couldn't wait untill it's too late). The 747s will be much thirstier than the A340s, and in the current economics and fuel prices SAA would just not have been able to compete with the other airlines on their main routes.

giving up on the Jumbos i think is going to cost SAA big market share

It already cost them the First Class product to Europe. The SA-London route was the last to use B744 in order to at least compete with British Airways with the First product.

i should stick to my flight simulator :hammer:

Me too! :nuts:

Of the A340s SAA now has in the fleet all 9 A340-600 arrived brand-new

Yeah, Virgin Atlantic was the lauch-customer for this, and actually I think SAA was the 2nd carrier to take delivery...

The new A320https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150500407272644&set=a.10150500406477644.353397.570887643&type=3&theater

Am I the only one that cant see the pic?:nuts:

Cant see the pic either :dunno:

The thing is though, if SAA really wanted to focus on having a young and competitive fleet, and be economical... then why not opt for the A330-200s earlier? I'm not referring the 6 new ones which are the HGW variants which are new, but even the older spec i'm sure will out-class the A340-300. They seem to have the same range.

I know SAA at one point had 2 ex-BMI A330-200s on lease for a short while... so they have experience with the type, and either way, Airbuses seem similar mechanically anyway, but they chose to purchase 2 ex-IBERIA A340-300s and i think an ex-Cathay Pacific one in the mix too. What would be the thinking here?

Cant see the pic either :dunno:

The thing is though, if SAA really wanted to focus on having a young and competitive fleet, and be economical... then why not opt for the A330-200s earlier? I'm not referring the 6 new ones which are the HGW variants which are new, but even the older spec i'm sure will out-class the A340-300. They seem to have the same range.

I know SAA at one point had 2 ex-BMI A330-200s on lease for a short while... so they have experience with the type, and either way, Airbuses seem similar mechanically anyway, but they chose to purchase 2 ex-IBERIA A340-300s and i think an ex-Cathay Pacific one in the mix too. What would be the thinking here?

A330s are more desirable and so more expensive and rare to lease. You can also get 40 more pax in an A340-300 than an A330-200. As a short-medium term solution they probably worked out to be the best deal.

i am having problems loading pics...please help!!!

You need to load them onto a site like flickr or photobucket first and then use that link to show them on here.

You need to load them onto a site like flickr or photobucket first and then use that link to show them on here.

Thanks

http:///www.flickr.com/photos/76379171@N03/6854934353/

/www.flickr.com/photos/76379171@N03/6854934353/

just post the link to the pic:)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/76379171@N03/6854927523/

SAA A320!

Beautiful plane! Would be nice to see that livery on an A321 too!

Just for interest sake, are the first two A320s owned by SAA now or are they leased from Bank of China? And if so, how long is the lease for?
But more importantly, when does it enter service?

It seems first flights is scheduled from 24 February, at first just JNB-DUR

Once AGAIN they need to be bailed out... This is one airline that will never by privatised, because they will fvcked within 3 months!

SA Airways has asked the government for a recapitalisation of about R6 billion to fund operational costs, growth strategy and fleet renewal, according to a report on Wednesday.

The requested funds would be in addition to the R1.3bn subordinated loan SAA already had from the government, Business Day reported.

It also included the company's R1.6bn "going concern" guarantee it obtained to underpin its money requirements after the Auditor General raised concern last year about its ability to generate cash to fund operations.

"This year we will have to go through the same process and the guarantee required will probably be higher," SAA chief financial officer Wolf Meyer was quoted as saying. He was addressing Parliament's public enterprises committee on Tuesday.

Meyer said SAA's weak balance sheet would also have to be fixed if it was going to finance growth and fleet renewal, the newspaper reported.

iafrica.com

^^ The DA has called for them to be privatised immediately. Is this a good or bad idea? Truth is, is SAA holding SA's airspace and connectivity to the world back, or is it positively contributing to our global connectivity? Is it good for Johannesburg and bad for everywhere else? Or is SAA a true national asset that we should help keep afloat? Will SA's domestic air-travel collapse without SAA?

Truth be told. I can't really see the argument for keeping SAA a money-sucking parastatal. Honestly, I think Kulula, SA Express, 1Time and VelvetSky, BAComair would expand exponentially if SAA were to collapse; rapidly filling the gap. I think international airlines who are subject to ACSA's protectionist SAA policies would also rapidly infiltrate the market and skies, filling a plethora of routes from all 3 of SA's international gateways.

I say... let them stand on their own. Clearly, their business model and routes are all wrong if they keep needing tax-payers money. Let them stand on their own and if they collapse, it's because they are just not good enough. If Virgin can exist in the presence of BA in the UK and QANTAS is Australia, then SAA have no excuse, they're babied like an infant by ACSA and asses wiped by taxpayers almost annually.

Just my opinion... I may be wrong, but I've had it with our national carrier.

^^ The DA has called for them to be privatised immediately. Is this a good or bad idea? Truth is, is SAA holding SA's airspace and connectivity to the world back, or is it positively contributing to our global connectivity? Is it good for Johannesburg and bad for everywhere else? Or is SAA a true national asset that we should help keep afloat? Will SA's domestic air-travel collapse without SAA?

Truth be told. I can't really see the argument for keeping SAA a money-sucking parastatal. Honestly, I think Kulula, SA Express, 1Time and VelvetSky, BAComair would expand exponentially if SAA were to collapse; rapidly filling the gap. I think international airlines who are subject to ACSA's protectionist SAA policies would also rapidly infiltrate the market and skies, filling a plethora of routes from all 3 of SA's international gateways.

I say... let them stand on their own. Clearly, their business model and routes are all wrong if they keep needing tax-payers money. Let them stand on their own and if they collapse, it's because they are just not good enough. If Virgin can exist in the presence of BA in the UK and QANTAS is Australia, then SAA have no excuse, they're babied like an infant by ACSA and asses wiped by taxpayers almost annually.

Just my opinion... I may be wrong, but I've had it with our national carrier.

+1!

SAA is nothing more than a government funded job creation scheme on a massive scale. Nothing more.

Add me as another to that stand! Its been a long time coming, and we've spoken at length about the stupid things SAA has done and continues to do. I think privatisation of them will be the best thing to happen for South African aviation. And if they really are good, there wont be any issues about their survival. People shouldn't complain about job losses if they go down,... because those jobs will be absorbed by the benefitting airlines that will grow. Well, most of them...

An "open-skies" policy is what SA needs! The government sings a fat song about how we have the greatest constituition in the world.... so lets extend that freedoms to the skies too! Take a look at Singapore..... open skies policy and yet Singapore Airlines still succeeds.

Once AGAIN they need to be bailed out... This is one airline that will never by privatised, because they will fvcked within 3 months!

SA Airways has asked the government for a recapitalisation of about R6 billion to fund operational costs, growth strategy and fleet renewal, according to a report on Wednesday.

The requested funds would be in addition to the R1.3bn subordinated loan SAA already had from the government, Business Day reported.

It also included the company's R1.6bn "going concern" guarantee it obtained to underpin its money requirements after the Auditor General raised concern last year about its ability to generate cash to fund operations.

"This year we will have to go through the same process and the guarantee required will probably be higher," SAA chief financial officer Wolf Meyer was quoted as saying. He was addressing Parliament's public enterprises committee on Tuesday.

Meyer said SAA's weak balance sheet would also have to be fixed if it was going to finance growth and fleet renewal, the newspaper reported.

iafrica.com

I dont buy a word of this. The new CEO is actually doing a very good job and there is already an obvious turnaround - my experience of service in the sky has also improved a lot recently. They have raised quite a bit of cash privately as well.

The second A320 arrived in Johannesburg on tuesday the 21st. she is in the hanger for paint job,......nice!https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#search/flickr/1356acdf20ec4766

:banana:https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#search/flickr/1356acdf20ec4766

http://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#search/flickr/1356acdf20ec4766

Privatise SAA! It is an anti-competitive behavior for tax payers to fund the company!

Cape Town - Flights on Velvet Sky have been delayed as a result of "commercial issues", the low-cost airline said on Thursday.

The black economic empowerment company is based in Durban and flies between Johannesburg, Cape Town and Durban.

Flights were delayed for several hours on Wednesday after “commercial issues" that arose between Velvet Sky Aviation and a service provider. No flights were cancelled, the airline pointed out.

“Passengers can expect delays for most of today [Thursday],” Solomon Makgale, spokesperson for Airports Company South Africa (Acsa) told News24.

“As of 10:00 this morning, none of Velvet Sky's flights have departed in accordance with the schedule.”

Circumstances beyond its control

Velvet Sky said the delays were caused by circumstances beyond its control.

Passengers stuck at Cape Town airport on Wednesday were unable to book onto other airlines because flights were full after the Budget address in Parliament. Flights were delayed with up to four hours. All passengers were flown out by late in the evening.

“We would like to apologise to those passengers who are inconvenienced due to the delayed flights. These delays were caused by circumstances beyond our control. “

- Velvet Sky urged passengers to contact the call centre at 0861 835 838 for any queries.

Not seeing the pic Manox..... or is it just me this time?

Not seeing the pic Manox..... or is it just me this time?

i have so much trouble loading pictures on this thing. will try again

I dont buy a word of this. The new CEO is actually doing a very good job and there is already an obvious turnaround - my experience of service in the sky has also improved a lot recently. They have raised quite a bit of cash privately as well.


I agree. Compared to other airlines I have been on recently they are doing alright.
Just a reminder, most world airlines are in serious difficulties at the moment, financially and otherwise, and I think a few big ones might go BANG this year, or close to it (Air Mauritius and Qantas spring to mind).

So if SAA shows some recovery, with government help or not, I say yes!

Lets all complain to the Competition Commission about SAA. Hopefully if we make enough noise they will do something.

ccsa@compcom.co.za

http://www.compcom.co.za/

South African Airways has been busy submitting applications for new routes and some extra frequencies on existing routes. 3 extra flights for Harare and 4 for Maputo.
Then the new routes are quite a strange mix:
3 weekly for Brazzaville
1 weekly Colombo
6 weekly Bangkok
1 weekly Cancun

None of these are applied for as codeshares. I'm guessing Colombo and Cancun must be special once off flights. The Bangkok application is a bit odd as they'd need to compete with partner Thai on a low yield route. And I don't think they'll take over from Thai with their shortage of aircraft. Maybe they're thinking of routing Beijing via BKK. Or perhaps the plan is to team up with Thai to create a BKK hub (they've applied for a new codeshare to Nagoya). BKK is excellent for connections and they have said they'll be focusing on east Asia. Will have to wait and see what becomes of it.

Also SA Express has applied for 12 flights a week to Lusaka.

South African Airways has been busy submitting applications for new routes and some extra frequencies on existing routes. 3 extra flights for Harare and 4 for Maputo.
Then the new routes are quite a strange mix:
3 weekly for Brazzaville
1 weekly Colombo
6 weekly Bangkok
1 weekly Cancun

None of these are applied for as codeshares. I'm guessing Colombo and Cancun must be special once off flights. The Bangkok application is a bit odd as they'd need to compete with partner Thai on a low yield route. And I don't think they'll take over from Thai with their shortage of aircraft. Maybe they're thinking of routing Beijing via BKK. Or perhaps the plan is to team up with Thai to create a BKK hub (they've applied for a new codeshare to Nagoya). BKK is excellent for connections and they have said they'll be focusing on east Asia. Will have to wait and see what becomes of it.

Also SA Express has applied for 12 flights a week to Lusaka.

The Lusaka flights are ex-DUR if I am not mistaken?

DUR or JNB

Noticed that SAA is currently increasing and upgauging many African routes. Harare already has a some days with a 3rd daily flight, so guess this would be to make it every day 3 flights...also currently operating A330/A340 on Thursday and Friday. Lusaka recently got 3rd frequency on Mondays and Saturdays, and operating A330/A340 on Sundays. Dar es Salaam will be increasing from 10 to 11 weekly (extra Friday flight). A340 also operating once a week to Nairobi and Kinshasa.
Maputo would be great to get extra frequency, as is very restricted, I get the idea they can't even operate larger than the A319, never 737-800 scheduled (would A320 be possible); what is SAA's seat allowance on the route?
Brazzaville has been mentioned before and would be a good choice, complementing the recently launched Pointe Noire service.
Bangkok I'm worried about, as said before it's low-yield (if only to BKK). Personally I wouldn't want Thai to exit SA again, rather building their frequencies (should be going better since Malaysia exited?), so hopefully this might be for a codesharing deal? If it is for en-route stopage, then might be to Beijing (although not such a great thing since they introduced with much fanfare about being nonstop), and/or adding Shanghai and/or maybe a Japanese destination again?
I hope the application by SAX is for DUR and maybe CPT as well...double daily from DUR at first might be overkill, maximum 5-7 weekly to start with. Hopefully not from JNB, as then it will have all 3 SA group airlines (SAA and Airlink I believe is enough, rather build SAA flights)

GregPz, do you know if the other African routes mentioned lately by SAA has been applied and approved: Abuja, Antananarivo, Bamako, Cotonou?

DUR or JNB

Which really means JNB.

GregPz, do you know if the other African routes mentioned lately by SAA has been applied and approved: Abuja, Antananarivo, Bamako, Cotonou?

No none of these have been applied for yet.

More flights to Lusaka

South African Airways Increasing Lusaka Service from mid-Mar 2012

by JL


Update at 0840GMT 29FEB12

South African Airways starting 15MAR12 is increasing service on Johannesburg – Lusaka route, where mainline service is increasing from 16 to 18 weekly. South African Airlink operates 12 weekly service with ERJ135.

Also, the Star Alliance member is introducing wide-body A330 service to Lusaka, once a week.

Schedule:

SA062 JNB1030 – 1230LUN EQV D
SA064 JNB1325 – 1525LUN EQV x245
SA066 JNB1855 – 2055LUN EQV D

SA067 LUN0715 – 0920JNB EQV D
SA063 LUN1320 – 1525JNB 738 x7
SA063 LUN1340 – 1545JNB 332 7
SA065 LUN1615 – 1820JNB EQV x245

Airbus A319/Boeing 737-800 operates this route
SA062/063 on Day 7 operates with A330-200

http://airlineroute.net/2012/02/29/sa-lun-mar12/

Can someone please explain why it is actually necessary to have to apply for routes? I dont see how the industry is going to grow with the state-owned airline monopolising routes that they've had preference for all the time!

where do you find the applications?

The SAX you mentioned as Joburg or Durban to Lusaka, how can it be durban or joburg, surely they chose beforehand?

Also..why fly Airlink and SAA to Lusaka from Joburg? Surely there is no point then having SAX as well?? It seems completely absurd and a waste of resource and route allocation.

where do you find the applications?

The SAX you mentioned as Joburg or Durban to Lusaka, how can it be durban or joburg, surely they chose beforehand?

Also..why fly Airlink and SAA to Lusaka from Joburg? Surely there is no point then having SAX as well?? It seems completely absurd and a waste of resource and route allocation.

They are published in government gazettes under the International Air Services Act (can search http://www.search.gov.za/info/search.jsp). Airlines apply for multiple cities as it allows them to cover all bases. Clearly the cities they apply for are under consideration.

Can someone please explain why it is actually necessary to have to apply for routes? I dont see how the industry is going to grow with the state-owned airline monopolising routes that they've had preference for all the time!

Most bilateral agreements only allow for a limited number of flights so permits are necessary. In many cases SA has tried to get more flights but the destination country imposes the limits.
Permits expire after 6 months if they're not used. In the past airlines (SAA) held onto numerous permits blocking others from flying routes they didn't fly themselves. This has been stopped so now airlines are at least seriously considering a route before applying for it.

SAA will add Montpellier (South of France) as a new code share destination. From 31 MAR, LH will launch weekly flights from Munich to Montpellier

SAA will add Cotonou (COO), Benin to network from 17 May. As extension of current 2x weekly JNB-Pointe Noire route, so not additional flight from JNB though.

A SAA South African Airways Airbus A330-200, registration ZS-SXY performing flight SA-222 from Johannesburg (South Africa) to Sao Paulo Guarulhos,SP (Brazil) with 153 passengers, touched down on Guarulhos runway 27R (length 3,700 meters/12,140 feet) in heavy rain at about 17:06L (19:06Z), veered off the runway, the crew managed to steer the aircraft back onto the runway before slowing the aircraft to taxi speed and stopping the aircraft after vacating the runway via high speed exit DD about 2300 meters/7,480 feet down the runway. No injuries occurred, a number of tyres deflated.

The runway was closed for about 6 minutes for an inspection and removal of dirt.

The airport reported the aircraft skidded shortly after touch down, some gear went over grass aside of the runway before the aircraft returned onto the runway and came to a stop with a number of tyres deflated. The runway was closed for about 6 minutes to inspect the runway and remove the dirt brought onto the runway by the aircraft. The aircraft is undergoing an inspection and wasn't able to depart for its return flight.

This happened nearly 2 weeks ago. Really nothing major.

This happened nearly 2 weeks ago. Really nothing major.

yeah, February 24

‘Government is furious with SAA’March 9 2012 at 12:38pm
By Suren Naidoo
INLSA

President Jacob Zuma challenged the KwaZulu-Natal government to “up its game” in marketing King Shaka International Airport and developing it into SA’s secondary hub airport during the official opening of Dube TradePort on Thursday.

“This airport bears the name of a great leader, innovator, military and political strategist who is respected and admired worldwide. For this reason, it has to conquer, expand and grow, like its namesake… But something is missing… you have not marketed King Shaka sufficiently. The time has come to think of this airport as SA’s secondary hub and not just as a regional feeder airport. It should aggressively market itself as a key entry point for international routes,” said Zuma.

The provincial government and Dube TradePort have been fighting a losing battle to get SAA, the national carrier, to re-establish international flights out of Durban. The government is also furious at SAA’s move to drop its Durban-Cape Town route in 2011.

KZN has also failed to lure international carriers to Durban’s new airport, with only Emirates operating a daily flight to Dubai. King Shaka International faces a further setback: Air Mauritius announced last month that it planned to withdraw flights to Durban from October.

But Zuma had some good news. He said the airport was set to become the regional hub airport for SA Express flights to the Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries. The move was aimed at using SA airports to promote “the African agenda” and economic growth in the region.

Despite failing to secure new international routes out of Durban, Zuma said King Shaka airport was growing and would surpass the 5 million passenger mark in 2012. -The Mercury

Business on the new A320's is the exact same seat as economy and not area separation, actually pathetic and not a business class product offer at all.will they be installing it? For as things currently stand I feel ripped off getting the seat I did. Least I knw my flight on SQ will be better.

SAA fined for price fixing

iafrica.com

The Competition Commission on Monday said it concluded settlement agreements with South African Airways (SAA) and Singapore Airlines in relation to price fixing conduct of flights between Johannesburg and Hong Kong.

SAA agreed to pay a penalty of R18 799 292, while Singapore Airlines will cough up R25 106 692.

The investigation was initiated on 16 January 2008 following Cathay Pacific's application for leniency.

"In the case of SAA, the settlement agreement also settles cases against the airline with regards to collusion concerning international air cargo surcharges and domestic route prices and pricing strategies during the 2010 Soccer World Cup," the commission added, noting that no findings were made against SAA in respect of these two matters.

The commission's investigation into cargo fuel surcharges was referred to the Competition Tribunal in July 2010, and SAA has offered its full cooperation to the commission in its on-going investigations and prosecution of both matters before the tribunal.

Similarly, Singapore Airlines undertook to do the same with regards to the Far East matter, the commission commented.

Business on the new A320's is the exact same seat as economy and not area separation, actually pathetic and not a business class product offer at all.will they be installing it? For as things currently stand I feel ripped off getting the seat I did. Least I knw my flight on SQ will be better.

did they block off the middle seat perhaps like they do for intra-europe flights? im flying on the A320 on wednesday so pretty excited! what seats did they use for economy?

did they block off the middle seat perhaps like they do for intra-europe flights? im flying on the A320 on wednesday so pretty excited! what seats did they use for economy?

When the B738s arrived back in 2001 they did not have business class either, just the blocked off middle seat and a movable class divider (a.k.a a curtain on rails) to separate business class from the snake pit.

no curtain on the A320 between business and economy, so when u walk on the plane it looks like a kulula one class plane. The seat was good...if i was paying for economy. But yes all they do is leave the middle of the 3 seats on each sides free as a "business space".

Bit pointless

no curtain on the A320 between business and economy, so when u walk on the plane it looks like a kulula one class plane. The seat was good...if i was paying for economy. But yes all they do is leave the middle of the 3 seats on each sides free as a "business space".

Bit pointless

disappointing....

all they do is leave the middle of the 3 seats on each sides free as a "business space"

I'm not sure if they do it anymore, but when I worked for Comair they used to do the same thing in Club Class. On the port side you have a two-seater, but on the right where you have three seats, they'd block off the middle seat.

Problem with this, is that some day you will have a technical delay or whatever which results in the flight having to be filled to the brim, and then they WILL open those seats. You end up with Business pax basically sharing the same seat product as Economy. If they are lucky, they might get the Business meals, however, in the current economic climate I doubt any carrier will over cater enough...

i flew the A320 yesterday...very nice! to be honest we were very lucky to have the business class we had on the A319/B738. that business class alothough used on domestic sectors was also used for regional flights and hence it made sense to have those larger than usual seats in business. compare this to european airlines and its no match as the euro airlines all do what the A320 have. they now have decided to use the same idea on the A320's whichi think is perfectly understandable. Howeveri dont agree witht the fact that there is no cabin divider to separate eco from bus...not professional and not respectful of the people who pay that extra bit for privacy

There's no divider so that it's easier to increase or decrease the business class space according to demand.

simple, they should not offer business class. The business class ticket cost R4000 compared to economy at R2200 (these are the full prices, not any of the discount options).

Therefore its simple, do not pay for business if on the A320. They should however let you know upfront that they actually are not offering a business class package. Its the simple reason i never fly BA in SA

I flew the airbus A330 -200 to from JHB to Cape Town.......nice piece of machine.

http:///www.flickr.com/photos

http:///www.flickr.com/photos/76379171@N03/sets/72157629952790705/

http://farm9.static.flickr.com/8006/7137378561_5fee1000b9_s.jpg

Congrats Manox! Been waiting for a chance to get on one myself.... but being from Durban, not likely to be soon! Been on the Emirates' old lady and looks like big advances have been made since.

From the discussions going on at the moment on other forums, sounds like SAA is experiencing another "multiple personality disorder" episode. Turns out they're realizing now that the A340s are shite compared to the 777s, and might be considering a split A330/777/787 long haul fleet, with more A330s on the way.
Ofcourse, this is SAA, and it all is probably just hot air rising off the escarpment, but one can dream!

^^ its more likely to be hot air by the people on the forum rather than SAA. they are moving to an airbus fleet, phasing out 737s, cant see them now turning back to boeing again.

^^ I've skimmed through the Avcom thread (http://www.avcom.co.za/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=94577), and some good points were made:

The A340 is a lot heavier on fuel than the B777, and is now starting to become rather heavy on maintenance as well. Due to the operating expenses, SAA is looking at renewing the long-haul fleet a lot sooner than anticipated.
The 777-200LR is a surprisingly good performer when faced with hot and high conditions (*cough* FAJS). It would have payload restrictions for the ultra-longhaul flights (i.e. JFK, Beijing) though.
It's unlikely that we'll see a B748 (can't compete with the twins in terms of efficiency) or A388 (none of the SAA routes have a large enough payload to justify an aircraft of that size).
A combination of A332, B772 and B773 would suit SAA well in terms of size and performance flexibility.
SAA's current investment in Airbus aircraft does however make reintroducing Boeing aircraft problematic in terms of maintenance and training.
For longer term options, don't be surprised if SAA is keeping an eye on both the B787 and A350 (with the A350 possibly suiting SAA better).

What I (and others) believe the outcome might be is an interim replacement of the A343s with B772/B773, with a long-term view of having an A350 long-haul fleet. That being said, how well the A350 will perform out of FAJS is still unknown.

That being said, how well the A350 will perform out of FAJS is still unknown.

Not to mention the fact that the A350 probably will be delayed and come with its own bag if issues just like the A380 is facing! Until those issues are ironed out, I cant see SAA opting for them, they cant afford the gamble.

The thing about saving money with a one manufacturer fleet sounds a bit too simplistic...... maybe some of the fodder the Airbus clan fed the severely degenerate SAA board of past. Find me one major airline in the world that follows that practice. Even Air France and Lufthansa have Boeings (heck, LH even opted for 748s to go with their A380s), and the US carriers have a good mix of Airbuses.

The Asian carriers are good model to follow..... A330s and 777s utilized to their financial benefit, and A340s being globally dumped.

Thanks Durbs.

Over the last month l had opportunity of flying to canada, japan, england then USA

Air Canada flies the 777-300 between Toronto and Tokyo. I always enjoy flying the 777. to my knowledge, Air Canada is the only airliner I know who have power on all seats including economy. i could use my laptop all the way.

In Japan I flew ANA.....their service was incredible. they used 777-200 from Haneda to Hiroshima. it was rather old aircraft but awesome. the highlight of the trip was going to Kansai airport....experience of lifetime.

then BA from London to Johannesburg. that was the low point of my trip. I was so disappointed with the business class on that aircraft. in my opinion worse than economy...small seat, squeezed to the last mm facing all sorts of directions. surprisingly this i was flying flight33...the third daily flight from LHR to JNB, using 777-200.

i then flew SAA from JNB to Washington via Dakar. The A340-300 they use was awful plus that 1hr stopover in Dakar is pain in the butt. if I had my way i would throw away all those 343 and 342's and get 773's and 787...especially after coming face to face with the first 787 that is flown by ANA.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/76379171@N03/7137386653/

its just that i see them getting more 330's before even looking at boeing.

interesting renderings here,
http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/8572/saaboeings.png

AWESOME.....

its just that i see them getting more 330's before even looking at boeing.

It really depends on how quickly SAA wants to replace the A343 (and maybe A346). If they want to do it as soon as possible, then a long haul fleet consisting of A330-200, B777-200LR and B777-300ER is the only sensible option (as I mentioned earlier, no SAA route has payloads that justify the A380).

Thing is: with global fuel prices the way that they are right now, operating quads is no longer economically viable compared to twins (the A380 is an exception, but it really serves a niche market, that being routes with high payloads and limited landing slots). The combination of aircraft I mentioned above would work really well: the A330-200 on the thinner routes, the B777-300 being the main workhorse, and the -200LR for the ultra long-haul routes (JFK, Hong Kong, Beijing). Operationally, the one issue that I see being a problem is ETOPS, but looking at the routings, it should only be a major problem on the Perth route.

Then again, this is SAA that we're talking about, so we can unfortunately expect politics to stand in the way of common sense...

interesting renderings here,
http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/8572/saaboeings.png

Wicked!!

Imagine 748 in SA colours!!

It really depends on how quickly SAA wants to replace the A343 (and maybe A346). If they want to do it as soon as possible, then a long haul fleet consisting of A330-200, B777-200LR and B777-300ER is the only sensible option (as I mentioned earlier, no SAA route has payloads that justify the A380).

Thing is: with global fuel prices the way that they are right now, operating quads is no longer economically viable compared to twins (the A380 is an exception, but it really serves a niche market, that being routes with high payloads and limited landing slots). The combination of aircraft I mentioned above would work really well: the A330-200 on the thinner routes, the B777-300 being the main workhorse, and the -200LR for the ultra long-haul routes (JFK, Hong Kong, Beijing). Operationally, the one issue that I see being a problem is ETOPS, but looking at the routings, it should only be a major problem on the Perth route.

Then again, this is SAA that we're talking about, so we can unfortunately expect politics to stand in the way of common sense...

How can you say that none of SAA routes have the payloads for A380? How come Emirates, Air France, Lufthansa and BA shortly all fly to JHB.
I think there is a market for SAA to have A380 but only having 3 or 4 A380 is not worth it.

I like to 777-300 but think SAA needs to actually buy some new planes and not keep buying second hand planes.

I think a collection of 787 and 350!

^^ The only route where it would be possible is JNB-LHR, and there's sufficient competition on that route to ensure that SAA wouldn't be able to fill one up. (Besides, it's kind of a waste buying a certain aircraft type for only one route.)

All other examples you mentioned are routes which SAA does not operate.

I like to 777-300 but think SAA needs to actually buy some new planes and not keep buying second hand planes.

ummm all the new A320s? the 737s were new... the A330's are new....

ummm all the new A320s? the 737s were new... the A330's are new....

I mean a new plane like 787 or 350. Not a plane that has been in production for 10 years.

With regards to the idea of having a single type of fleet (Airbus or Boeing), it is a cost saving. I did a study on low cost airlines and it it one of the Key Success Factors of the LCC industry. But they again I think that might be having a single type of aircraft! That is where is makes sense.

I think for domestic routes, should go for all A320neo. Nice range from A318 to A321

Regional routes 767-200 or A330

International: A350 or 777-330ER

I mean a new plane like 787 or 350. Not a plane that has been in production for 10 years.

[snip]

Regional routes 767-200 or A330



Now you are seriously contradicting yourself!!!!

B767-200???? :wtf:

The 767 has been in production 30 years! :bash:

I'm pretty sure SAA is NOT looking at getting B767-200's! :lol:

Now you are seriously contradicting yourself!!!!

B767-200???? :wtf:

The 767 has been in production 30 years! :bash:

I'm pretty sure SAA is NOT looking at getting B767-200's! :lol:

I know but either you use a A321 or a 737 for regional route but I think they are too small. Everything else is really big. The 767 has a decent range with a med PAX. I would prefer the A321 or 737-900 but don't think they have the range. Maybe the 787-8 would be a better option?

I know but either you use a A321 or a 737 for regional route but I think they are too small. Everything else is really big. The 767 has a decent range with a med PAX. I would prefer the A321 or 737-900 but don't think they have the range. Maybe the 787-8 would be a better option?

This is exactly where the 777-200LR would be perfect. Just as SAA used their 747-400s on the high capacity runs to Luanda, Lagos, Accra/Dakar, which has since been replaced with the A340-600s in-between their long runs.

A decent sized fleet of the 77Ls to replace these A346s, i think, would give SAA the right numbers (fuel use vs payload vs range) to do their Long Hauls (New York, Washington, Beijing, Hong Kong, Perth, London), whilst still utilizing them on the high capacity regional cities (as mentioned above), and thus freeing up the A330s for extra capacity on other "secondary" African cities and maybe some new Asian destinations. Although it would be perfect to base them out of Durban (had to add my 2cents) :wink2:

Maybe the 787-8 would be a better option?

It would; the B788 is targeted to replace the B762 and B763. Problem is a) the aircraft still has to prove itself, and b) there's a rather large backlog...

The A332 isn't considerably larger in terms of pax capacity though (typical two-class configuration is 264 for the B788 and 293 for the A332). In my opinion, SAA should rather get more of the A332; folks with insider information on Avcom are saying that SAA is really happy with them. It will take far too long for SAA to get their hands on a B788 at this juncture.

Sorry for the double post.

Anyway, in my own parallel universe, this is how I see things happening:


A319/A320 for domestic and low-capacity (or high frequency) regional. (We all know that the B738's are leaving.)
B77L for the ultra long haul routes: North America, East Asia, Australasia. (It has both the range as well as the legs to get out of FAJS without sacrificing too much payload.)
B77W for the shorter, fatter routes: the African destinations currently served by A346 and Europe.
A332 as the stopgap aircraft: regional routes requiring more capacity than the A320 where adding frequency is not an option, as well as opening up new destinations. Also perfect for routes out of Cape Town (and, dare I say it, Durban as well).


A lot of airlines over in the Middle East and East Asia use the A332/B77W combination: Emirates, Etihad, Cathay Pacific, Singapore to name a few (although those guys also have A388 and B744). The B77L is far less common, but is apparently the best performing twin for hot and high at FAJS (hence why I would put them on the ultra long-haul routes).

Agree it wouldn't make sense to get rid of the 330 now and not worth joining the queue for 787.

All this talk is making me think that there has been no long term thinking from SAA. They should decided what the fleet should look like in 10 years and work toward that. Like emirates are doing. They have over a 100 aircraft on order! Forward thinking!

I agree those 330's are awesome and the pilots enjoy them. perhaps SAA should think of getting more of those.

Agree it wouldn't make sense to get rid of the 330 now and not worth joining the queue for 787.

No one is saying get rid of the A330s! In fact they should order more! Its a beautiful and very capable plane - everyone knows that. I think the point of discussion here is what to replace the A340s with - and for that SAA should turn to the 777-200LRs. I think the 777-300ER is probably too much plane for SAA (as ridiculous as that sounds, and even more painful to type)!

And sure, the A319/320/321 combo will do excellently for African ops, but again, nobody doubted that. In fact if the dim-wits at SAA did anything right, and plan atleast to become a dominant force in Africa (forget the world, JHB aint matching DXB), shouldn't they consider the A319/320 neo to order now, instead of being number 3000 on the list 10 years from now!

judging by comments, it seems that 747-8 is not on anyone's shopping list!!!!

SAA would have to order A320neo now if they want to get them early enough. By my calculations if SAA ordered now they would receive delivery between 2018 and 2019. Still along way off.

Just had a though. What about SAA leaving the domestic market for Mango. Sell all the 737 to Mango and let Mango create two products, a premium and low cost under one name.
Let SA Express and Airlink focus on regional. They could also buy some 737.
And SAA focus on International.

Any thoughts on that?

^^ Apart from JNB-CPT and JNB-DUR, they already have done that. :)

SAA expects nod for R6bn

May 15 2012 at 05:00am
By Nompumelelo Magwaza.

SAA’s chief executive is hoping that the airline’s request for a R6 billion government injection will be granted, enabling it to renew its fleet, introduce premium economy class and expand its business class.

The request will be tackled by Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba in his budget vote speech in Parliament today, but the department would not comment yesterday on whether the state-owned carrier would get the funds.

SAA chief executive Siza Mzimela raised the issue of its shareholder’s monetary support at a Tourism Indaba breakfast in Durban yesterday.

“It must be clear that we are not asking for a bailout, but… for proper capitalisation to buy necessary aircraft,” she said.

SAA told Parliament in February that it needed R6bn from the government for its recapitalisation and expansion plans. This would be in addition to the R1.3bn subordinated loan SAA already had.

Mzimela said SAA had not been untouched by strenuous economic challenges faced by the industry at large, and hinted that the airline had been hit by additional fuel costs of R2.6bn for this financial year.

Mzimela could not elaborate on SAA’s performance, citing the company’s preparation for its annual results in August.

She said SAA’s growth strategy included the replacement of the fleet of short-haul Boeing 737-800s by 2017 and the delivery of 20 new fuel-efficient Airbus A320s in the next five years.

Two A320s were delivered in January and February. For the long-haul fleet, the airline had six A330-200 aircraft delivered last year.

These six new aircraft cost R1bn each and would not be bought outright. Instead, they would be leased from Irish-based company Aircastle.

“SAA expects to finalise a major aircraft order by the end of the year to replace current non-efficient long-haul aircraft,” Mzimela confirmed.

SAA had recently renewed the leases of some of its Boeing 737-800s for periods of between five and 10 years. SAA had Airbus A319s in its regional fleet and recently acquired two A380s on a temporary lease. The firm’s growth strategy included increasing destinations in African countries.

A route would be launched to Cotonou in Benin this week, which would fly from Johannesburg twice a week.

This year alone the airline introduced three routes to the African cities of Kigali, Bujumbura and Ponte Noire “without increasing the number of aircraft but… through increasing efficiency”, she said.

Mzimela said SAA was making great strides as its passenger revenue rose 20 percent in the last quarter of the 2011/12 financial year. And the airline had a solid yield improvement of 17 percent.


Source (http://www.iol.co.za/business/companies/saa-expects-nod-for-r6bn-1.1296584)

Looks like there's an element of truth to the B77L rumours...

(Oh, by the way, I have no idea where they thumb-sucked the "A380" bit -- possibly referring to the ex-Iberia A343s?)

^^ why 777 though? could very easily be airbus

^^ Because, as we established earlier, the 777 is the only sensible aircraft to replace the 340s with. The 787 has too long a queue, the 350 is too far away, and the 380 too large. :)

(Though, they could be ordering more 330s...)

Sensible to all of you......

Doesnt mean that it makes more sense for SAA and the deal they are more likely to get from Airbus.

I am sure it will be more A330-200s first before any other plane type

Glad to hear that SAA will be introducing a premium economy class.

^^ sometimes wonder the true benefit of it... would rather fork the extra for the business class. In some airlines the premium economy is not even a different seat to economy

I don't know... on long flights, the increase in space makes quite a difference but it really depends on the carrier. BA is completely pointless. Virgin is quite nice though.

how about 747-8i

Cape Town - A new planned capital injection by the government into South African Airways (SAA) is part of a plan to make the carrier more competitive in routes on the African continent, and does not constitute a bailout of the national carrier, says Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba.

"SAA has not come to us and said 'we are in the red, please help us out with money'," said Gigaba, briefing media ahead of his Budget Vote in Parliament on Wednesday.

He said the planned capital injection would fund a new aviation strategy, which his department, together with SAA and SA Express, had drafted and which would be submitted to Cabinet next month.

The strategy focuses on boosting services to the continent and using air transportation to boost regional integration.

Gigaba said discussions were still underway with the National Treasury and stressed that no figure had been set yet on the amount of capital to be injected into SAA.

"The R6 billion [injection into SAA] is something I am reading about in the newspapers as well," he said.

The total number of new aircraft that SAA needed was also still under discussion.

The minister said the state needed to maintain a hold over its flagship carrier, especially in the uncertain economic times.

"The damage both to business and tourism of unreliable air travel to South Africa will be immeasurable," he said.

The volatile economic times had resulted in fuel price increases, which made it vital for the government to help SAA procure a modern and fuel-efficient fleet if the carrier was to remain competitive.

African routes had also been neglected, he said, adding that SAA needed new aircraft and needed to be competitive with other carriers on the continent.

"Given our location on the southern tip of the African continent and the extremely volatile nature of the airline industry, I believe that it is critical that South Africa should sustain a national flag carrier to ensure security of air transport to our country," he said.

Africa would constitute the primary market and routes for the future SAA and Mango, he said, adding that five new routes had been added in Africa since October last year.

Thursday will see the maiden flight for a new SAA service between Johannesburg to Cotonou, Benin.



Reported by: South African Government News Service

There must be some market for premium economy as more and more airlines are starting to offer it. I agree the same economy seat with 3" more legroom is not worth it but if you look at Virgin/Air France/Virgin Australia's offering they are a distinct improvement over the regular economy seats.

^^ possibly, but in my experience of using it, i personally found it a waste of time. rather use your extra miles to upgrade to business, better value for the money u outlay. then again thats not an option for some people. in that case i personally would just get economy and put the extra money i would spend on the premium econ seat into a better hotel or massages on arrival :)

SAA would have to order A320neo now if they want to get them early enough. By my calculations if SAA ordered now they would receive delivery between 2018 and 2019. Still along way off.

Just had a though. What about SAA leaving the domestic market for Mango. Sell all the 737 to Mango and let Mango create two products, a premium and low cost under one name.
Let SA Express and Airlink focus on regional. They could also buy some 737.
And SAA focus on International.

Any thoughts on that?

Well, Airlink is privately owned and not part of SAA. So I don't know.

Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba on Wednesday said there was not a limitless amount of money available for South African Airways (SAA) when bosses need to boost their coffers.

He was speaking during his budget speech in Parliament, Cape Town.

SAA management has already put in a R6 billion funding request to boost its balance sheet.

Gigaba joked that SAA will always be able to rely on it main shareholder - the state.

“The support will be there,” he said.

The minister said the national carrier has a dual challenge.

SAA is operating in a depressed global economy and is contending with rising fuel costs.

He said the airline must change its business model.

Gigaba said SAA needs a sustainable model to prevent the airline from coming back in two years to ask for a bailout.

He stressed the airline remains a key player in government's African Aviation Strategy.

Since the 2004/05 financial year, government has spent around R16.8 billion on the airline.

Meanwhile, SAA has gone to court in an attempt to recover the R30.8 million former CEO Khaya Ngqula, who allegedly misspent the money while he was with the airline.

The national carrier parted ways with Ngqula in 2009 after KPMG found him guilty of mismanagement.

He walked away with a golden handshake of R8.9 million.

iafrica.com

Personally, I cannot wait for the day they get privatized, then get liquidized and close their fvcking doors! Nothing but job-creation at the expense of the tax-payer. Plain and simple.

^^ i think that is a naive view to take. i would love to see the implications of a privatisation... i honestly think alot of the routes would close and hence avenues to get to and do business in SA would suffer. Its a delicate tight rope. We do not want SAA to be a drain on Gov finances...BUT will a fully privatised airline at this end of Africa offer the same array of routes? i personally highly doubt it and that is the crux of the impact no SAA could have on the SA business environment

^^ i think that is a naive view to take. i would love to see the implications of a privatisation... i honestly think alot of the routes would close and hence avenues to get to and do business in SA would suffer. Its a delicate tight rope. We do not want SAA to be a drain on Gov finances...BUT will a fully privatised airline at this end of Africa offer the same array of routes? i personally highly doubt it and that is the crux of the impact no SAA could have on the SA business environment

Yes you are right. Especially regarding the regional routes which will be non-existent. The longhaul routes will be taken over though, I've no doubt about it. Just pisses me off how they waste public funds!!! :ohno:

Ethiopian Airlines starting 16JUL12 is launching service to Addis Ababa – Toronto route, becoming the first East African carrier to operate service to Canada. Toronto is the airline's second North American destination. Reservation begins today (17MAY12).

Service operates twice a week with Boeing 777-200LR aircraft with following schedule:

ET502 ADD2230 – 0340+1FCO0440+1 – 0740+1YYZ 77L 15
ET503 YYZ1015 – 0715+1ADD 77L 26

Outbound flight operates via Rome as technical stop.

[QUOTE=manox;91709206]Ethiopian Airlines starting 16JUL12 is launching service to Addis Ababa – Toronto route, becoming the first East African carrier to operate service to Canada. Toronto is the airline's second North American destination. Reservation begins today (17MAY12).

Service operates twice a week with Boeing 777-200LR aircraft with following schedule:

ET502 ADD2230 – 0340+1FCO0440+1 – 0740+1YYZ 77L 15
ET503 YYZ1015 – 0715+1ADD 77L 26

Outbound flight operates via Rome as technical stop.[/QU


Implications for SAA???

Ethiopian Airlines starting 16JUL12 is launching service to Addis Ababa – Toronto route, becoming the first East African carrier to operate service to Canada. Toronto is the airline's second North American destination. Reservation begins today (17MAY12).

Service operates twice a week with Boeing 777-200LR aircraft with following schedule:

ET502 ADD2230 – 0340+1FCO0440+1 – 0740+1YYZ 77L 15
ET503 YYZ1015 – 0715+1ADD 77L 26

Outbound flight operates via Rome as technical stop.

Thanks! Didn't realise Ethiopian Airlines is also part of SAA.

Apparently connecting good with the ET Jo'burg flight, giving a good alternative to flying to Canada, instead of via Europe.
SAA do codeshare on ET flights to Addis Ababa, maybe will codeshare on the Toronoto flight as well.

Thanks! Didn't realise Ethiopian Airlines is also part of SAA.

Maybe you should learn to read the whole posting.... at the bottom there "implications for SAA??
because this development will affect SAA big time!!!

^^ How will it affect them big time?

I cant see that many people in that part of Africa would be travelling to SA to transfer to Canada currently? So surely more of an effect on the European carriers that would transfer through Europe than SAA

SAA in line to buy the A380 Superjumbo?

By: Keith Campbell
24th May 2012
TEXT SIZE
It is understood in Toulouse, France, that Airbus is in negotiations with South African Airways (SAA) about the A380 Superjumbo jet. It is known that Airbus believes that the economic arguments in favour of the South African flag carrier acquiring their double-deck airliner are irrefutable.

The A380 is already being flown in to OR Tambo International Airport by two operators, Air France and Lufthansa, with more set to follow. It has already been established on other routes, that airlines operating the Superjumbo gain market share from those that do not. Moreover, the latest developments of the A380 design would allow SAA to fly directly from Johannesburg to New York, as well as use it on direct Johannesburg-Europe routes.

So far, the A380 has racked up 253 firm orders from 19 customers, with the order backlog currently standing at 180. Around the world, an A380 now takes off or lands every eight minutes, every day of the year. A million passengers a month now travel on the aircraft.

Since entry into service, and despite some problems (with engines and with wing rib brackets, known as rib feet) the aircraft has demonstrated an average reliability of 97.6%. Surveys have reported that 92% of passengers who have flown on the A380 have a "positive" attitude to the aircraft, as against 4% who felt "neutral" and another 4% who were "negative".

"You can't win them all," quipped Airbus chief operating officer: customers John Leahy in Toulouse on Wednesday.

"The rib feet cracking is not a big issue," he assured. "It's not a safety issue. But it is a maintenance issue. It will cost us money."

Airbus executive VP: programmes Tom Williams agreed. "The ribs are not primary load carrying structures. Is it an airworthiness safety issue? Definitely not! The aircraft is still perfectly safe to fly. But it does impose an inspection regime on airlines and it becomes a maintenance issue."

He explained that there are about 60 ribs in each wing, with some 4 000 rib feet. The cracks affect only 20 brackets in each wing. A solution has already been developed and will be tested in the coming months. Once qualified and certified, it will be incorporated as standard in future production aircraft and retrofitted to existing A380s.

* Keith Campbell attended the Airbus Innovation Days in Toulouse, France, as a guest of the company.

Edited by: Creamer Media Reporter

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/saa-in-line-to-buy-the-a380-superjumbo-2012-05-24

SAA in line to buy the A380 Superjumbo?

24th May 2012

It is understood in Toulouse, France, that Airbus is in negotiations with South African Airways (SAA) about the A380 Superjumbo jet. It is known that Airbus believes that the economic arguments in favour of the South African flag carrier acquiring their double-deck airliner are irrefutable.

The A380 is already being flown in to OR Tambo International Airport by two operators, Air France and Lufthansa, with more set to follow. It has already been established on other routes, that airlines operating the Superjumbo gain market share from those that do not. Moreover, the latest developments of the A380 design would allow SAA to fly directly from Johannesburg to New York, as well as use it on direct Johannesburg-Europe routes.

So far, the A380 has racked up 253 firm orders from 19 customers, with the order backlog currently standing at 180. Around the world, an A380 now takes off or lands every eight minutes, every day of the year. A million passengers a month now travel on the aircraft.

Since entry into service, and despite some problems (with engines and with wing rib brackets, known as rib feet) the aircraft has demonstrated an average reliability of 97.6%. Surveys have reported that 92% of passengers who have flown on the A380 have a "positive" attitude to the aircraft, as against 4% who felt "neutral" and another 4% who were "negative".

-------------------

http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa366/b7x7/Untitled.jpg
http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00011654.jpg
not yet, but it would be cool, under competent leadership that is.

^^ How will it affect them big time?

I cant see that many people in that part of Africa would be travelling to SA to transfer to Canada currently? So surely more of an effect on the European carriers that would transfer through Europe than SAA

+1

^^ How will it affect them big time?

I cant see that many people in that part of Africa would be travelling to SA to transfer to Canada currently? So surely more of an effect on the European carriers that would transfer through Europe than SAA

There is huge volume of passengers travelling between Canada and South Africa each day, either through Europe or United States. last year i flew between the two countries four times and i can tell you waiting waiting in some airport the whole day sucks....going through US immigration..pain in the ass. so people will be happy for quickest possible route with less hassles.

and by the way Air Canada are working on direct non-stop flights from YYZ to JNB. they are waiting for the 787's and that will release the 777's to fly to Joburg...........

^^ to be honest and not disrespectful to Ethiopian, i cant see many south africans transitting through Addis.

Secondly, again i dont see how this affects SAA? the people transitting through Europe to Canada would have been on BA or Air France or Lufthansa. they will be affected...if at all.

Great that Ethiopian is expanding for their sake

It affects SAA in different ways. Yes lot of people travel to Canada with BA, Air France and Lufthansa. But similarly to Lufthansa, lot of people travel via Germany to Canada with SAA to Frankfurt and Munich and then Lufthansa or Air Canada...Star Alliance codesharing, in fact I'm sure SAA codeshares on some flights between Germany and Canada, as well as with Air Canada between Heathrow and Canada.
But now, with Ethiopian also being Star Alliance it gives opportunity to SAA and Air Canada to codeshare on the route, it doesn't add that much time, will have shorter transfer time and easier at ADD than FRA or MUC.
But with only 2 weekly flights, the impact on SAA won't be that much, the little loss through Germany can be made up via ET...it will really be minimal.
For the very cost-conscious travelers that even go as far out as to fly via Dubai to get to Canada, with competitive fares the Ethiopian flights can compete for the same kind of traveler as Emirates.
Add to this that Ethiopian will be flying the most modern and newest aircraft into SA than any other airline when they start using the 787 to JNB and just as good a plane to Canada with the 777-200LR, while ADD is quite a modernised airport and easy transfer airport.
I think a huge part of Ethiopian's traffic on JNB route is actually South Africans just transitting, Ethiopian is becoming more and more a transit hub, quite favourable geographical location...they even advertise their Toronto flights to connect to Beijing, Hong Kong and Guangzhou...so they're going all out to start establishing a real hub on the African continent competing with places like Dubai, Doha and Abu Dhabi (yes of course won't easily be exactly in the same league, but just a smaller version). From JNB it's a shorter 1-stop option to many places in Europe than via Middle-East, and just as good options for transitting to China, India and the Middle-East.

^^ but they have many psychological fights to overcome to even be thought in the same book as Emirates or the other middle east carriers. i cant see many people thinking "yeah sure i will transit thru Addis", most will be freaked out

News on Avcom (can't find a reliable news source at this stage) is that SAA will be discontinuing CPT-LHR effective August 15th.

http://www.fin24.com/images/newheader/fin24_logo_transparent.gif

SAA stops Cape Town-London flights

Cape Town - South African Airways (SAA) announced Tuesday it was halting daily direct flights between Cape Town and London to avoid losses amid shrinking demand.

The national carrier will close the Cape Town route, operational for 20 years, in August when two daily flights with increased capacity from Johannesburg will become its sole leg to Heathrow.

"A thorough analysis of the route made it clear that we could use our aircraft more profitably elsewhere while continuing to ensure excellent business and tourism links... via Johannesburg," said Theunis Potgieter, SAA commercial general manager.

"It is also clear that we would lose money on the direct route in the future, whereas it is possible for us to operate more optimally between Cape Town and London via our Johannesburg hub," he said in a statement.

SAA is expanding its network of destinations said the move will see aircrafts from the axed route serve routes to India and west African capitals.

But the airline is under pressure and last month said it was looking to the government for help to renew its fleet.

"Serving the Cape Town-London route via Johannesburg will have an immediate positive effect on SAA's bottom line," said the airline.

Reasons cited included a 24 percent drop in demand between Britain and South Africa for all carriers in the past three years, as well as a dwindling passengers from Cape Town to London as a destination and for onward connections.

Competitors also offered cost effective routes from Cape Town, the airline said.

^^:lol: They never cease to amaze me!!

Its not at all surprising. It was their only long hual route (or even international route of any form?) that happened outside of Joburg. We have always known they are very Joburg as a hub centric. They will definately get operational savings from this, but whether it is a smart move not to offer direct international flights from cities other than Joburg will be debatable!

For operational reasons it makes sense and i am sure the two planes that the route takes up could definately be more profitably be used...but its a sad day when the national carrier decides it only wants to serve JHB

Lets await the moves by the foreign carriers. SAA constantly fails to realise that people in Durban and Cape Town DO NOT want to go through JHB.

A few questions for the Aviation experts and others.

1. Why do we have a national carrier? Is it in the national interest?
2. How many times have SAA been bailed out?
3. Should SAA run on "profit principles" when it suits them, and just rely on bail-outs when it does not? What is their mandate?
4. If one route is not profitable, and in future, the entire airline is not profitable, then should IT be scrapped too?
5. How full are London-Cape Town flights on SAA are compared to BA/Virgin/1-stops?
6. What will a a more "Open Skies" approach by ACSA achieve?

It irritates me that they cover up the real reason. They only want to fly from JHB and increase domestic flights. Let's face it if you an international business person and doing lots of travels you not going to use a LCC. They rather just stay on SAA.
Doesn't JHB have the highest airport taxes? And we should bring up the debate of having aircraft sitting on the ground all day!!

I think SAA should be smart and use three hubs. CPT for Americas. JHB for europe and middle east. DUR for Asia and Australasia.

I really hope Emirates whip SAA out the market completely. They not even in SA and they service SA better than the national carrier.

Preamble to the SAA Bill of 2007

- Since the Republic’s rapidly developing economy requires reliable and extensive air
transport capacity;

- And since the State desires to promote air links with the Republic’s main business,
trading and tourism markets within the African continent and internationally;

- And since the State has a developmental orientation and regards South African Airways
as a national carrier and strategic asset that would enable the State to preserve its ability to contribute to key domestic, intra-regional and international air linkages, the State intends to retain it as a national carrier

I really hope Emirates whip SAA out the market completely. They not even in SA and they service SA better than the national carrier.

It may happen. People in the Western Cape are outraged. Been taken aback by the utter disgust at the decision, from the layman, to business leaders, members of provincial parliament, tourism authorities etc. I think SAA may find Capetonian travelers may just clip their wings quite extensively; seems this province has given up on the so-called "national carrier."

It may happen. People in the Western Cape are outraged. Been taken aback by the utter disgust at the decision, from the layman, to business leaders, members of provincial parliament, tourism authorities etc. I think SAA may find Capetonian travelers may just clip their wings quite extensively; seems this province has given up on the so-called "national carrier."

I wonder what the DA is going to say about this!!!

Its not at all surprising. It was their only long hual route (or even international route of any form?) that happened outside of Joburg. We have always known they are very Joburg as a hub centric. They will definately get operational savings from this, but whether it is a smart move not to offer direct international flights from cities other than Joburg will be debatable!

For operational reasons it makes sense and i am sure the two planes that the route takes up could definately be more profitably be used...but its a sad day when the national carrier decides it only wants to serve JHB

Lets await the moves by the foreign carriers. SAA constantly fails to realise that people in Durban and Cape Town DO NOT want to go through JHB.
so people need to vote with their feet and fly the convenient routes. I try to fly point to point now and avoid SAA like the plague (except into Africa direct to Accra, Lagos, Nairobi etc), domestic I'm BA all the way. Europe BA and skip through T5. SAA is focusing on new emerging highly profitable and non congested routes like Accra, Point Noire etc and not competing head on into established and competitive route like London or Paris where they get killed by the wrong aircraft competing (340 vs 380 only 1 winner there), poor landing slot times and planes sitting around all day (london plane sits over night costing a few thousand GBP per hour)

Can understand their move to tap africa more, but then they end up being an African carrier and not a global one

Who cares what the DA says?

The fact is this works towards SAA's business plan out of OR T. We might all hate this SAA approach but it is hardly unexpected. If done truly for profitability, well done for focusing on that and hopefully contonuining to do so.

However, if their mandate is to develop tourism and the whole nation and not just joburg then this is a bad move. We moan that SAA ALWAYS want hand outs. But if this is a pure business profitability stance then maybe they are finally thinking... But I am sure if they thought harder they could make routes out of Durban and ct work... Then again they probably do not want to

SAA in line to buy the A380 Superjumbo?

By: Keith Campbell
24th May 2012
TEXT SIZE
It is understood in Toulouse, France, that Airbus is in negotiations with South African Airways (SAA) about the A380 Superjumbo jet. It is known that Airbus believes that the economic arguments in favour of the South African flag carrier acquiring their double-deck airliner are irrefutable.

The A380 is already being flown in to OR Tambo International Airport by two operators, Air France and Lufthansa, with more set to follow. It has already been established on other routes, that airlines operating the Superjumbo gain market share from those that do not. Moreover, the latest developments of the A380 design would allow SAA to fly directly from Johannesburg to New York, as well as use it on direct Johannesburg-Europe routes.

So far, the A380 has racked up 253 firm orders from 19 customers, with the order backlog currently standing at 180. Around the world, an A380 now takes off or lands every eight minutes, every day of the year. A million passengers a month now travel on the aircraft.

Since entry into service, and despite some problems (with engines and with wing rib brackets, known as rib feet) the aircraft has demonstrated an average reliability of 97.6%. Surveys have reported that 92% of passengers who have flown on the A380 have a "positive" attitude to the aircraft, as against 4% who felt "neutral" and another 4% who were "negative".

"You can't win them all," quipped Airbus chief operating officer: customers John Leahy in Toulouse on Wednesday.

"The rib feet cracking is not a big issue," he assured. "It's not a safety issue. But it is a maintenance issue. It will cost us money."

Airbus executive VP: programmes Tom Williams agreed. "The ribs are not primary load carrying structures. Is it an airworthiness safety issue? Definitely not! The aircraft is still perfectly safe to fly. But it does impose an inspection regime on airlines and it becomes a maintenance issue."

He explained that there are about 60 ribs in each wing, with some 4 000 rib feet. The cracks affect only 20 brackets in each wing. A solution has already been developed and will be tested in the coming months. Once qualified and certified, it will be incorporated as standard in future production aircraft and retrofitted to existing A380s.

* Keith Campbell attended the Airbus Innovation Days in Toulouse, France, as a guest of the company.

Edited by: Creamer Media Reporter

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/saa-in-line-to-buy-the-a380-superjumbo-2012-05-24
again poor reporting. EK also operates 380 into JHB

again poor reporting. EK also operates 380 into JHB

Incorrect. Emirates have stopped flying the A380 to JHB. They currently have three flights with 777. They will begin again with the 380 at the end of the year.

Which is an interesting point. Emirates have three flights a day and SAA doesn't fly at all!?

Who cares what the DA says?

The fact is this works towards SAA's business plan out of OR T. We might all hate this SAA approach but it is hardly unexpected. If done truly for profitability, well done for focusing on that and hopefully contonuining to do so.

However, if their mandate is to develop tourism and the whole nation and not just joburg then this is a bad move. We moan that SAA ALWAYS want hand outs. But if this is a pure business profitability stance then maybe they are finally thinking... But I am sure if they thought harder they could make routes out of Durban and ct work... Then again they probably do not want to

Frankly, we do, because the DA are the local/provincial government and their economic growth strategy relies heavily on international connectivity. Their long-sighted vision of allowing an independent growth forum, namely the Economic Development Partnership, to be formed, shows their commitment to multi-sectoral economic growth strategy and policy implementation. Min. Alan Winde said connectivity is crucial, at the EDP launch.

SAA does have a mandate, see the SAA Bill of 2007, that mandate is to facilitate the touristic and economic growth through connectivity of all regions of South Africa. If their focus is profitability, by snubbing DUR and CPT, then don't ask taxpayers for R6billion in the same breath. Extrapolate that further; should other provinces taxpayers' be paying for the "recapitalisation" of a parastatal that doesn't effectively serve them? Are you profitable, or are you a strategic economic growth partner as national carrier?

This was the ONLY long-haul flight operating from any airport other than ORTambo. If rerouting this last flight to ORTambo is suddenly going to take them back to profitability, well then damn, CPT-LHR must have been the most costly flight for any airline in history.

I think your last statement is missing the point. If u read the news articles posted elsewhere online there are clearly stated reasons are dropping it to make more money elsewhere. We can't dispute that that is probably correct. The issue is your first point of should they not be equally serving ct and dbn too. Lets not make this political and say lets hear what the DA would say as the ANC in KZN have been extremely critical of SAA. if SAA are now fully centralizing all in joburg and that is their drive going forward they need to be very clear on that. As SA tourism also have an issue with that.

This was the ONLY long-haul flight operating from any airport other than ORTambo. If rerouting this last flight to ORTambo is suddenly going to take them back to profitability, well then damn, CPT-LHR must have been the most costly flight for any airline in history.

Never mind long-haul, it was the last flight at all operating from an airport other than FAJS, after DUR-CPT was discontinued at the end of 2010.

I think your last statement is missing the point. If u read the news articles posted elsewhere online there are clearly stated reasons are dropping it to make more money elsewhere. We can't dispute that that is probably correct. The issue is your first point of should they not be equally serving ct and dbn too. Lets not make this political and say lets hear what the DA would say as the ANC in KZN have been extremely critical of SAA. if SAA are now fully centralizing all in joburg and that is their drive going forward they need to be very clear on that. As SA tourism also have an issue with that.

Of course it's political. As long as national government has any involvement with SAA, politics are at work. I very highly doubt we'd have national government continually bailing out SAA if the DA were in charge on a national level. But this isn't even about that. This is about the fact that the DA govern the Western Cape, which just got screwed over by this decision, so why wouldn't the Western Cape DA's (read: government) commentary on the matter be important?

If this is a business decision then by all means make it, but then they should be receiving bailout money from the Gauteng provincial government and not national government, because it is Gauteng that is benefiting from the taxes of the entire country, who are not getting a service from the so-called national carrier in return. It's so illogical it's actually amusing. We aren't even thrown the scraps of open skies to allow others to step up to the plate.

If this is something they need to do to make the airline more profitable, then all good and it's probably in the best interest of the taxpayer. Although there is many arguments for the flight, they do make some points that are valid. When BMI now goes to BA, SAA will not really have any remarkable connections onwards from LHR. BA (and Virgin in a way) have great feed from the rest of Europe, the USA and Canada, feeding their flights down to South Africa. While SAA have better feed through Frankfurt and Munich on these routes, as they're the bigger Star Alliance hubs. So for SAA CPT-LHR really had to depend on almost just O&D. And this market has unfortunately been suffering lately, especially since the introduction of visas for South Africans to visit the UK, and the eventual dwindling of South Africans living and working the UK. So SAA had to rely more on the South African market, while BA had their home market more on their side. Together with the economica problems in Europe...the UK tourist market to SA have been in slight declines or stagnate the last year or two.
And let's be honest, us Capetonians already have a grudge against SAA, so in a way we got what we wanted.

Financially for SAA there is many more positive spin-offs, as said before the better utilisation of the aircraft, not having to spend the whole day up in LHR and long times in CPT. They can be used on routes (within Africa and Asia) which have much better business class occupancy and quick turn-arounds.
Then also, one thing not mentioned yet, if SAA sells those valuable slots (SAA had good slots, quite favourable) at LHR, it's worth a few bucks, and the saving on it as well.

Perhaps we must look at all the reasons and what other carriers are doing as well.

1. Emirates already reduced one flight from Cape Town - they would not have done this if the demand was high enough.
2. Airlines are not queuing to start to fly to Cape Town as it remains a destination only with no passengers connecting to other destinations.
3. London is at least R1200 per flight more expensive for South Africans from Johannesburg or Cape Town and because of this people flying into Europe (including me) prefer to fly via Munich, Frankfurt or Schiphol. The cost is made up from the departing taxes that differ depending on the distance the flight is. Cape Town is part of the most expensive group out of London Heathrow. The tax to European destinations where you can connect is often up to R500 less if you fly economy and even more than a R1000 when you fly business. The VISA issue is also not helping requiring SA citizens to have UK Visas even if you transfer in the same terminal. I recently decided to pay the R9300 for my 10 year UK visa to prevent the delays in obtaining Visas every time I had to connect to London or visit London. The price of a 6 month visitor visa is now more than R1000 and you find that tourists from SA now prefer to pay the R650 for a Schengen visa and only visit mainland Europe.
4. SAA can use the slots at Heathrow to develop more flights from Johannesburg - to increase flights on Fridays and Sundays to 3 per day for example.
5. Holiday costs in South Africa - This is most probably the biggest reason why Europeans do no flock in high numbers to Cape Town. Cape Town became one of the most expensive cities in the world to visit on Holiday if you look at accommodation costs, restaurant meals, car rental etc. I can have a 3 week holiday in Europe for less than what it will cost me to go to Cape Town! Perhaps it is not only SAA that must be cheap to bring tourists to SA but it is time to reduce the prices of our Hotels, Restaurants, car rental and excursion prices.

Higerbigger u hit the nail on the head and the same view I was putting forward. Like was said to me and others in Durban before, this is not a government conspiracy against cape town.

its saa finally being business minded

Higerbigger u hit the nail on the head and the same view I was putting forward. Like was said to me and others in Durban before, this is not a government conspiracy against cape town.

its saa finally being business minded

I agree - I like the fact that SAA is business minded but also wish that people will understand business. When people understand business they will also understand the difference between a bailout and a re-capitalisation. Perhaps we must refer to the additional capital that Facebook recently raised during their listing also as a bailout!

Higerbigger u hit the nail on the head and the same view I was putting forward. Like was said to me and others in Durban before, this is not a government conspiracy against cape town.

its saa finally being business minded

Agreed but then they shouldn't get bailouts! They should only get bailouts if they are servicing routes that are unprofitable in order to help economic growth!

Be business minded, yes, but then you should also be treated like a business.

R1.3bn sub-ordinated loan
R1.6bn cash guarantee
Requesting R6bn in addition.

A few questions for the Aviation experts and others.

1. Why do we have a national carrier? Is it in the national interest?

A massive job-creation scheme funded by the taxpayer. Oh, and having aircraft on demand for JZ to fly around the globe doesn't hurt either...

Agreed but then they shouldn't get bailouts! They should only get bailouts if they are servicing routes that are unprofitable in order to help economic growth!

If we did not have SAA servicing the routes in Africa it does, then the SA economy would be directly and negatively affected. Business in SA would not be able to be so dominent on the continent. Do yuo really think that every Africa route is immensely profitable? of course not, but they are served to help us grow. Cape Town and Durban unfortunately do not service that agenda as they only want to hub out of JHB.

I personally feel that they should also then be servicing durban and cape town to the region and work even harder as an economic generator, but then i am sorry to say but the financial support from government would be many times the R6billion figure.

Most of you are looking at this from one very narrow lens

Simon Williamson

From August South African Airways will cease its direct flights between Cape Town and London, and instead ticket passengers through Johannesburg. According to Fin24 the airline’s commercial general manager, Theunis Potgieter, said it was due to profitability, adding “It is also clear that we would lose money on the direct route in the future.”

For all the justified slamming SAA gets when it loses money (in spite of an airline being a notoriously difficult way to make money, even in the good times), this occasion should be celebrated. SAA has made a positive decision towards profitability. It has responded to the markets. In short: it is behaving like a real business.

London to Cape Town is a notoriously expensive route to fly direct. I searched for the lowest fares I could find on both SAA and British Airways, and the cheapest I could find was indeed SAA, with a starting fare of £869 (R11 285). On British Airways it was £905.49 (R11 759).

I only checked the fares coming into Cape Town because I am sure the critics in Cape Town understand that this was a market decision: if Capetonians were regularly flying between Cape Town and London on SAA this decision would not have been made.

Profit margins

I would also like to think that people are not bleating in disgust because they wish SAA to continue to fly an unprofitable route. Expansion into Africa is where SAA sees its largest growth potential.

While flying direct is everyone’s ideal, the market has to buy into it for success. At a base price of over R11 000 for people coming in, which is slightly less for South Africans flying out, it is no surprise that other airlines have capitalised, making a cheaper one-stop flight seem appealing to passengers. Within just a few minutes I found fares from London to Cape Town on Emirates for £770 (R9 998), Turkish Airlines for £700 (R9 086) and Qatar Airways for £696 (R9 037). That’s a potential saving of nearly R3 000 per ticket.

It is also worth pointing out that the transfer at Johannesburg’s OR Tambo airport doesn’t involve masses of waiting – by my rudimentary count there are 46 flights between Johannesburg and Cape Town on an average weekday, 20 of which are operated by SAA (departing virtually every hour) and another four by Mango (SAA’s low-cost airline).

Some folks pointed to British Airways adding a direct flight to its Cape Town-London route, but this was only for summer: Cape Town’s peak tourist season.

A few major international airlines only run flights to Cape Town in its tourist season. British Airways can also afford to run at a lower profit margin, as it is a far larger airline (SAA has less than 60 aircraft and serves 34 destinations while British Airways has nearly 250 aircraft and serves 170).

Also bear in mind that SAA’s Potgieter said that the route looked to become unprofitable “in the future”. There is no telling what British Airways might do in time (although, as things stand, there remain two per day in December 2012). Indeed, SAA has developed vision.

SAA is a business

We have a national airline owned by the government, and it is in all of our best interests for the thing to turn a profit, lest we continue to plug taxpayer cash into it every year.

And before you bang on about selling it – don’t expect a privately-owned airline to be any kinder. SAA is a business. It (hopefully) aims to make profit, not do favours.

So before you fill up your lungs, ready to enunciate SAA-hate speech, be careful of shouting something along the lines of “SAA STOP WASTING MONEY BUT CARRY ON FLYING UNPROFITABLE ROUTES”.


Simon Williamson is a freelance writer.

^^ AGAIN! I say... if they are a business and to be treated like a business, than open up the skies and let the market and market alone decide on flights to DUR and CPT, not SAA protectionism or ACSA. If SAA are there to make a profit, so be it, but then NOT protected and bailed-out under the auspices of the "national carrier." They aren't.

We wouldn't be bleating then... not that difficult a concept to grasp.

off to Kenya next week. kenyan 3 flights at decent times ish. SAA 1 flight at the shit time of 0940 and arrive 1445. What a waste of a day in the air.

Going kenyan as it serves a business logic of getting you there so you can actually work rather than having to stay extra nights.

SAA don't get this yet. Same for Lagos flight , depart JHB at 2pm so check in at 12 and leave home at 11am. Another wasted day. At least the return is deceit at 2200 so you can kip coming home.

Thats what EK has done so well with contacting through DXB , you arrive in London etc at 8am so you have had a dos and can get a full days work.

Bladdy leisure travelers

the ACSA /SAA axis of evil is a big issue here . Scratching each others backs

It is also worth pointing out that the transfer at Johannesburg’s OR Tambo airport doesn’t involve masses of waiting

Really.... with all due respect to his "profession" of journalism, Mr Williamson has just dished out some candy-coated SAA propaganda.... (I guess most journalists fit this profile)

A simple glance at the Emirates timetable will reveal such:
1) Daily 1340 CPT 0115+ DXB ---> 0250+ DXB 0720+ LGW (time in DXB: 1hr 35min)
Daily 1340 CPT 0115+ DXB ---> 0230+ DXB 0700+ LHR (1 hr 15 min)
Daily 1810 CPT 0525+ DXB ---> 0800+ DXB 1230+ LGW (2 hr 35 min)
Daily 1810 CPT 0525+ DXB ---> 0745+ DXB 1215+ LHR (2 hr 20 min)

..... similar times for Durban-DXB-London (minus the 2nd daily flight)

Where is this "masses of waiting"? If anything, JHB adds time (bearing in mind that added flight time via DXB is around 2-3hrs, you still have to be in ORT 3hrs before the international flight), plus you have to cart your luggage around the airport (apart from waiting ages for it to arrive), then live with the anxiety of whether it's already been pilfered by the baggage handlers, or about to be when you check-in again!

Mr Freelance Journalist... living in the UK it seems... maybe out of touch with the reality in SA. Also, i like how he casually mentions that you can save R3000 by choosing other options, but fails to elaborate how they can do it and survive (wrath of the shareholders and all). Who wouldn't want to save money?

The fact is..... CPT and DUR citizens want to avoid JHB. Sometimes you have no choice... I know.... but when you do (SA vs BA vs VS vs EK vs QR vs TK vs KL vs LH.... all possible routes into London from CPT.... and SAA pulls out citing bad business..... just tells me that they're missing the point of their business. They're not an investment firm, financial institution, insurance company, frikkin HI-FI Corp for that matter! If they ignore their potential customer base, and crap marketing by this move too, how on earth will they improve their standing? Forget about the African continent and its need for growth/supply, that much is obvious, but beyond, what is the plan? if any!

Dont BS the public.... say what it is.... It will always be cheaper for them to operate out of JHB, even though it will effectively mean they're shrinking as an airline..... but for the short term their books will look good, nice figures, the current CEO will be lauded for her brave and imperious stance on bringing the nations carrier back to profitability.... after which she'll move on to bigger greater things with a nice CV to match.... while SAA will be the premier carrier to Accra and Lagos..... World.... Who needs the World? Let the others fight for it! :nuts:

ORTambo is also avoided by DUR and CPT passengers out of fear of bag pilferage in transit. The luggage theft problem is well-documented and epidemic at JNB and often, just speaking for Capetonian travelers, avoid it just because of that fact.

Another factor, is many airlines with hubs in "different cities" other than prime final destinations, offer packages for a free stop-over in their hub cities. What on earth can SAA offer as incentive for Durbanites and Capetonians to see JNB as a worthwhile free stop-over? Not much... Not to mention, SAA is seldom the least-expensive carrier to use.

With Cape Town being a far-flung airport, 1400km to the WSW, the distance and inconvenience also creates a huge aversion to flying through it. Example: CPT-LHR is about 11.5hrs, JNB-LHR is about 11hrs. You really don't get much closer to Europe flying towards JNB, you fly almost perpendicular for 2hrs in the direction you're trying to go towards. This is different for DUR however. Flying to the America's, it's outright painful flying to JNB as you're going further east to go west.

It would be like having Delta Airlines' hubs in the mid-west, like Chicago or Dallas, but expecting to attract throngs of eastern seaboard city residents to fly them indirect to Europe. Rule of thumb, airlines have their westbound hubs on the western seaboard of countries and eastbound hubs on the eastern seaboard.

Basically, SAA can do as they wish as a profit-focused airline, but this doesn't change the will of passengers, the perception of dismissal-of-cities and the issues at ORTambo that deters passengers. It also does not account for the fact that ACSA and SAA have the same majority shareholder and thus, the referee and player are in effect, the same entity. We would not be so pissed off if skies were open, landing slots where given when required and if there was no whiff of SAA protectionism.

SOUTH African Airways is adding an additional flight to Perth from August 16 to take the service to Johannesburg daily. SAA Australasian manager Tim Clyde-Smith said the decision reflected increased interest in Africa as a tourist and commercial destination. The airline was also seeing an uptake in travel to Europe, South America and the US via South Africa.

The airline was also seeing an uptake in travel to Europe, South America and the US via South Africa.

EDIT: Now looked - he means that travel is up from Australia to these destinations via JNB?

EDIT: Now looked - he means that travel is up from Australia to these destinations via JNB?

Read again, more and more Perth residents prefer to fly via Johannesburg than via Singapore, Bangkok or Dubai

^^ Thanks. Pretty much got that.

Just thinking aloud... okay... we understand SAA has indicated they are profit-driven and consolidating everything in JNB.

However, let's imagine that were following the SAA Bill of 2007 to the letter and a strategic airline for destination promotion, economic and tourism growth. Singapore and Dubai are world-famous for their stop-over packages and building tourism with in-transit travelers.

What potential could South Africa have as a stop-over incentive destination from Europe and the USA to Australia and NZ...?

Imagine this:
CPT-MEL: 10,298km (JNB-MEL: 10,312km)
CPT-SYD: 10,982km (JNB-SYD: 11,016km)
CPT-AKL: 11,739km (JNB-AKL: 12,168km)

CPT-LHR: 9,674km (JNB-LHR: 9,068km)

CPT-ATL: 13,081km (JNB-ATL: 13,573km)
CPT-JFK: 12,552km (JNB-JFK: 12,823km)

CPT-EZE: 6,881km (JNB-EZE: 8,108km)

Could one have a Aus-Americas-Europe hub in a place, people WILL stop over if given incentive? This, in light of SAA themselves saying Australians are opting for going via JNB to these destinations.

Just thinking aloud, as most people think CPT is further from eastern Australia and NZ, but it isn't, as it being further south makes up for it being further west. It's obviously a little further from Europe, but closer to N.America and much closer to S.America.

:poke:

^^ And besides, I'm certain that if anyone had to stop over in SA enroute to the US for example coming from Oz, CPT is a MUCH better place to spend your time than Joburg...

^^ Really nothing against Jo'burg, just thinking where in-transit passengers would take advantage of such incentives NOW. As I said in the Gauteng: Nelson Mandela Bridge Neglect thread, there is much that needs to be done to turn Jo'burg into the very tagline they promote, World Class African City. Once that happens, perhaps the disparity between the appeal of CPT and JNB will narrow, however for now...

^^ Really nothing against Jo'burg, just thinking where in-transit passengers would take advantage of such incentives NOW. As I said in the Gauteng: Nelson Mandela Bridge Neglect thread, there is much that needs to be done to turn Jo'burg into the very tagline they promote, World Class African City. Once that happens, perhaps the disparity between the appeal of CPT and JNB will narrow, however for now...

Agree!

Lufthansa is also cancelling CT flights.

^^ When?

Lufthansa is also cancelling CT flights.

A Tsunami had hit Cape Town airport and all the airlines are running to cut their losses. The majority of people forget that it is not only about the few cheap airline seats but the overall ability to sell the balanced load of expensive flexible tickets with a few cheap highly restrictive tickets. Johannesburg sells a lot of Business class tickets where it is not always the same for Cape Town.

The second big issue is the movement of freight on every passenger plain. Perhaps it is time to look at air freight to and from Cape Town per flight compared with Johannesburg as well.

^^ A tsunami? When PAX growth is highest for ANY major airport in the country... really, tsunami and airlines are running? Don't you think that might just be a gross hyperbole? Haven't been able to confirm Lufthansa cancelling, flights are loaded all the way deep into next high-season on their system. Still awaiting Jakes' source...

Here's quite an interesting analysis. There's several graphs accompanying the article at the link.
http://www.centreforaviation.com/analysis/south-african-airways-ends-cape-town-london-service-for-bigger-growth-in-west-africa-and-beyond-75711


South African Airways ends Cape Town-London service for bigger growth in West Africa and beyond

8th June, 2012


Cyclical downturns can disproportionately affect end of line carriers since they have few opportunities to pull traffic for long-haul flights, as has been seen with Qantas and to a lesser extent Air New Zealand. But now South African Airways (SAA) is feeling the pinch and will end from 16-Aug-2012 its London Heathrow-Cape Town service after over two decades of operation.

As with Air New Zealand and Qantas redistributing some capacity from competitive intercontinental routes to less competitive and higher-yielding regional markets, SAA intends to expand capacity to the healthy west African markets of Abidjan, Accra and Lagos as well as open longer routes to the healthier markets of Mumbai and Perth.

SAA has not previously encountered challenges the way ANZ and Qantas have, a result of South Africa taking a more restrictive approach to air service agreements, SAA being able to fly non-stop to key markets and there is limited sixth freedom competition from other African carriers.

But European competition is now taking a greater toll.

Long-haul intercontinental has greater prestige than profitability

As much as markets may be enamoured with long-haul intercontinental routes, the simple fact for end of line carriers is that these routes are often highly competitive and airlines like SAA are at a disadvantage for lacking large feed. The result is depressed yields. SAA’s Cape Town-London Heathrow service can have an economy class yield half that of Perth, where it is the sole carrier, or two-thirds of less competitive regional West Africa, where SAA will increase capacity.

A low-yielding route like Cape Town-London combined with high taxes (the UK increased its APD and carriers are now subject to the EU ETS), large competition, an economic downturn and dependence on the leisure market makes the route unprofitable, or at the very least unattractive when larger opportunities beckon.

Sample of select South African Airways economy class yield (per ASK ex-fuel surcharge): Aug-2012

Route Yield

Cape Town-London Heathrow ZAR0.42 (USD5.0 cents)
Johannesburg-Accra ZAR0.57 (USD6.8 cents)
Johannesburg-Lagos ZAR0.64 (USD7.6 cents)
Johannesburg-Mumbai ZAR0.60 (USD7.2 cents)
Johannesburg-Perth ZAR0.80 (USD9.5 cents)

Source: CAPA – Centre for Aviation

Cape Town-London cut but capacity increased on Johannesburg-London route

The suspension of the daily Cape Town-London route will leave SAA with its double daily Johannesburg-London Heathrow route as its sole direct service to the UK. SAA plans to increase seating capacity on the route by 13%, to partially compensate for the suspension of the Cape Town route. It can achieve this by upgrading services, on A330-200s and A340-300s, to A340-300s or A340-600s.

SAA can efficiently connect Cape Town to London via Johannesburg with minimal additional routing, saying in a statement it can “operate more optimally between Cape Town and London via our Johannesburg hub," adding that doing so will have “an immediate positive effect on SAA's bottom line”.

Lack of feed for SAA – or any end-of-line carrier – is a challenge

SAA also cited the unrealised ambition of using Cape Town as a transit hub for other destinations in Africa, underscoring the significant need for network feed. While the loss of the route has provoked the typical lamenting, Cape Town is a leisure market where direct traffic, especially from end of line carriers, is hard to sustain.

A larger factor, however, is the competitive landscape. British Airways and Virgin Atlantic serve Cape Town but with significant fluctuations in capacity. Virgin Atlantic has even made the service seasonal and trimmed capacity in shoulder periods. British Airways has its large network while Virgin Atlantic primarily had only local marketing power, which makes service difficult to sustain in the off-season.

Even with SAA's increased capacity to London from Johannesburg, it will have removed approximately 1100 weekly seats on average, bringing its capacity to approximately 75% of current levels. Whether an airline backfills that remains unclear.

There is also notable one-stop competition from European carriers including Air France, KLM and Lufthansa, all with powerful networks to pull traffic from. There is also significant capacity from Emirates with double daily services, but in evidence of the Cape Town market’s low-premium traffic, Emirates deploys its less premium Boeing 777-200ER and A340-300. British Airways’ 747-400 service operates with a low business class density.

SAA’s exit from Cape Town-London Heathrow has made available a very valuable Heathrow slot, with an arrival in the prized morning period of 6:20 and a departure at 21:00. Coincidentally, following SAA’s route cancellation Singapore Airlines, having remarked a few week prior it had no additional slots at Heathrow, announced a fourth daily Heathrow service arriving at 6:20.

Cape Town cut amidst declining UK-South African traffic as UK imposes visa restrictions

Airport taxes in the UK also influenced the decision. The UK Air Passenger Duty (APD) for long-haul flights of more than 4000 miles increased from GBP75 to GBP81 per passenger in Apr-2012. The distance between Cape Town and London Heathrow is 5994 miles, just keeping it out of the most expensive APD price band, covering flights of 6000 miles or more.

The carrier also stated that it was “clear that we would lose money on the direct route in the future”. British Airways and Virgin Atlantic Airways also operate on the route between Cape Town and London Heathrow. British Airways and Virgin Atlantic also compete with SAA on London Heathrow-Cape Town service.

The UK is South Africa’s largest travel market outside of the African continent with more than 400,000 tourist arrivals per year. However, travel between the UK and South Africa has been waning. SAA stated traffic between the UK and South Africa has declined by 24% over the past three years, no doubt partially due to the UK’s 2009 requirement for South Africans to pre-apply for a visa, which currently costs ZAR1092 (GBP84).

Tourism arrivals from the UK to South Africa have declined in the year-on-year comparison, with the exception of 3Q2011. Also, arrivals have picked up somewhat in early 2012, with January traffic up 2.4% year-on-year and February traffic 5.1% higher.

Capacity additions to Abidjan, Accra, Mumbai and Perth with Lagos a target

SAA has decided that it could more profitably deploy its aircraft on other sectors, and is looking at expanding its network primarily in West Africa and India. SAA is “redeploying its capacity to routes experiencing expanding demand, as part of our larger strategy for growth and increased efficiency within the airline,” SAA general manager commercial Theunis Potgieter said in a statement.

South African’s capacity addition to Mumbai is driven by a significant opportunity afforded from Jet Airways, the only other operator between South Africa and India, ending in Jun-2012 its five weekly flights to Johannesburg, its sole service in South Africa. While SAA previously made plans to boost its weekly capacity by one flight to five services, going from approximately 900 seats to 1100, this was not enough to cover Jet’s 1100 weekly seats. SAA now plans to add an additional weekly service, bringing Johannesburg-Mumbai to six weekly services with approximately 1300 weekly seats, a dip from when the route could see upwards of 2000 seats from Jet and SAA combined.

SAA will also bring to six weekly flights its Johannesburg-Accra service with the addition of one frequency. SAA is the sole operator, but West African aviation is growing and Ghana’s neighbour of Nigeria is set to expand links to South Africa with Air Nigeria due to open a Lagos-Johannesburg service, from which it can offer connecting services to/from Accra.

The expanded Accra and Mumbai services will be operated from 16-Aug-2012 by the A330-200 coming off the Cape Town-London route (suspended from 16-Aug-2012), but the aircraft still has significant utilisation hours left. SAA intends to launch additional services to Nigeria if the bilateral agreement between the two countries is expanded following a recent review.

SAA also intends to open a new route to Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire, which is seeing its own growth with new carrier Air Côte d’Ivoire.

See related article: New national Air Côte d’Ivoire plans domestic and international route launches this year

SAA also intends to resume its daily A340-300/A340-600 Johannesburg-Perth service, currently operated six times weekly. SAA made the route daily in Sep-2009 following bilateral revisions but dropped the route to six weekly services in May-2011 following what SAA claimed were weakening conditions. SAA may be experiencing a resurgence in the market owing to the growing mining and resources boom concentrated around Perth (its official statement about growing Australia-Europe traffic via South Africa seems less plausible). But another factor may be Australia’s willingness disclosed this month to reconsider the SAA-Qantas codeshare it cancelled earlier in the year due to a lack of competition. An additional daily service **could show Australia the two carriers are committed to the market and not abusing their position.

More BRICS in the wall

The end of the Cape Town-London Heathrow is another example of South African Airlines shifting its emphasis away from its traditional – and now overly-competitive – markets towards developing and uncompetitive markets with growth opportunities. This year the carrier has added new routes to Congo and Benin, following on from services to Ndola (Zambia), Kigali (Rwanda) and Bujumbura (Burundi) added over 4Q2011, as well as more frequencies to Accra, Dar Es Salaam, Entebbe, Harare, Mauritius, and Lusaka.

CEO Siza Mzimela has shown no problems realising the changed world in which a flagship route like London no longer makes economic sense. She said SAA will focus on a “stronger network of services to the many African, Asian, and Latin American destinations which are of growing importance to South African business and to the tourism industry”.

yeah where the source on Luthansa??

^^ Due to it being relevant to the preceding conversation, but more CapeTown-centric, posted an article in the CT International Airport thread: Seems CT has begun talking to other airlines already to pick up the slack left by SAA's wholesale international withdrawal from the city.

guess the lufthansa was a joke?

South African Airways to Host 69th IATA AGM - Air Transport Leaders to Converge in Cape Town in June 2013

Beijing - The International Air Transport Association (IATA) announced that South African Airways will host the 69th IATA Annual General Meeting (AGM) and World Air Transport Summit (WATS). The event will draw the top leadership of the air transport industry to Cape Town’s International Convention Centre from 2-4 June 2013.
“South Africa will be a great location for the 2013 AGM and WATS. Air connectivity is key to South Africa’s economic success, contributing 2.1% to the country’s GDP. Along with supporting South Africa’s strong tourism sector, air connectivity plays a critical role in maximizing growth opportunities arising from South Africa’s BRICS membership and the burgeoning African economy,” said Tony Tyler, Director General and CEO of IATA.
South African Airways accepted IATA members’ proposal to host its 2013 AGM. The announcement was made today at the close of this year’s meeting and WATS in Beijing, China.
“We look forward to hosting the global air transport community in South Africa. Holding the AGM and WATS on African soil will focus the global industry’s attention on the tremendous opportunities as trade and tourism links are being strengthened within the continent and to new and traditional markets beyond,” said Siza Mzimela, South African Airways CEO.
The aviation and aerospace sectors contribute about ZAR51 billion (approx USD 6,07 billion) which is equal to 2.1% South Africa’s GDP. This activity supports over 227,000 South African jobs. The bulk of this contribution is driven by commercial airline transport.
Along with shining a spotlight on Africa’s opportunities, the AGM and WATS will provide a forum for discussing its challenges. “Growth in Africa is impeded by regulatory burdens and a poor safety record compounded by the high fuel prices in many parts of the continent. IATA is working across the continent with governments, regulators and airlines to improve safety, sustainability and competitiveness. Holding the 2013 AGM and WATS in Cape Town will provide a prominent platform to address these issues and challenges,” said Tyler.
This year’s AGM and WATS in Beijing attracted some 750 airline industry leaders representing IATA’s 242 member airlines. It drew a further 350 journalists representing major media outlets from around the world.
“The IATA AGM and WATS is a unique marketing and publicity opportunity for our industry, for Cape Town and for South Africa. Significantly, it takes place at the same time as our country is rolling out a new national infrastructure development programme. This will position South Africa to play a vital role driving trade, business and tourism on the continent together with current and developing markets in Brazil, Russia, India & China. In turn this promises to create jobs and tackle poverty and inequality in South Africa,” added Ms Mzimela.
This will be third time that the IATA AGM is held in Africa. Previous IATA AGM’s held in Cairo, Egypt (1946) and in Nairobi, Kenya (1991).
Notes on the Benefits of Aviation for South Africa:

According to Oxford Economics’ recent study on the Benefits of Aviation to South Africa, 21 million passengers and over 240,000 tonnes of freight travel to, from and within South Africa on more than 52,500 scheduled international flights annually serving 77 airports in 51 countries. Domestically, more than 156,000 flights provide more than 17 million seats on routes linking 17 airports across the country.
The study, which was commissioned by IATA on behalf of the industry, reports that in 2010 there were 66 routes per week connecting major airports in South Africa to major economic centres around the world. On average, there were four outbound flights per day on those routes. Twelve of these routes connected South Africa to cities of more than 10 million inhabitants with an average of 1.5 outbound passenger flights each day. Many of these city-pair connections are only possible because of the traffic density provided by hub airports. South Africa’s integration into the global air transport network transforms the possibilities for the country’s economy by:


Opening up foreign markets to South African exports
Lowering transport costs, particularly over long distances, helping to increasing competition by enabling suppliers to service wider areas and potentially reduce average costs through increased economies of scale
Increasing the flexibility of labour supply and reduce unemployment
Encouraging South African business to invest and specialize in areas that play to the economy’s strengths
Speeding the adoption of new business practices, e.g. just-in-time inventory management that relies on quick and reliable delivery of essential supplies
Raising productivity and hence the economy’s long-run supply capacity. It is estimated hat a 10% improvement in air connectivity relative to GDP would see a ZAR1.5 billion per annum increase in long-run GDP for South Africa’s economy

SAA is to introduce service to Abidjan. From 17 Aug 2 of the 6 weekly JNB-Accra services will be extended to ABJ, with A330-200. On Tuesdays and Fridays the JNB-ACC service will depart earlier at 12:45 to continue on to ABJ.

From 13 Sept a new service is to be introduced, with 2x weekly JNB-Brazzaville with A319.


With all the talk lately of the new services to Africa and the optimizing utilization of the long-haul aircraft, something opposite seems to be happening. On some of these new services means that the short-haul fleet (mainly A319 aircraft) is actually now being used less optimal.
The JNB-Pointe Noire-Cotonou flight arrives in COO at 16:40 in the afternoon, then stand there overnight and only depart again at 06:00 the next morning...13hours on the ground in COO!
JNB-Bujumbura-Kigali similarly arrives in KGL at 17:00 and depart next morning between 6am and 7am, also around 13 hours standing in KGL.
Even the daily JNB-Dar es Salaam service overnight in DAR for 11-12 hours.

Any ideas why this would be? Same crew doing return leg? All these airports seem to be operating 24hours. Could just be timing for landing earlier in JNB. But then again, SAA can just as well then depart from JNB later, not as if anybody's going to be able to do any business after arriving around 5pm at COO, KGL or DAR.
Similarly distanced routes to Lagos, Accra and Luanda that operates with A340/A330 is turned around within 2hours.

JNB-Bujumbura-Kigali similarly arrives in KGL at 17:00 and depart next morning between 6am and 7am, also around 13 hours standing in KGL.

6 a.m:). But at the begining, the SAA crew slept at Bujumbura. There is also EBB, where the plane sleeps outside South Africa.

In the 2012 Skytrax Awards SAA is rated as the 4 most improved airline and as having the 7th best business class in the world beating airlines such as Emirates and Virgin Atlantic. They're also 9th for best economy class seats.

Well done! Great to see them up there with the best!

http://www.worldairlineawards.com/Awards_2012/improved2012.htm

great news Greg... any airport numbers :)

In the 2012 Skytrax Awards SAA is rated as the 4 most improved airline and as having the 7th best business class in the world beating airlines such as Emirates and Virgin Atlantic. They're also 9th for best economy class seats.

Well done! Great to see them up there with the best!

http://www.worldairlineawards.com/Awards_2012/improved2012.htm

I am so glad that Skytrax agree with me. I just landed yesterday after the long flight from London via Dubai on Emirates in Business Class. I cannot believe that people choose this bad service if they can fly SAA. SAA Business class is far superior to the Emirates product and if not for the Bean Counters in our company that thought it will be good to save a few thousand rand even though it meant that I had to travel in excess of 24 hours and pay in R4000 for an additional 10kg of luggage on Emirates - I now know why I prefer SAA!

Pay in for extra luggage? Emirates allow 30kg in economy and 40kg in business. What more do you want

no way the A340 SAA business class seat is better than the 777 EK business class seat. DId both long haul about 2 weeks ago (SAA to LAgos and EK to Dubai). Ek smokes SAA in on board entertainment, flat bed is much better than SAA sort of flat bed ish thing, Both have shot in flight service (asian carriers make them both look pathetic) , EK lounge is so so at DXB and SAA Boabab lounge same, its average (again take notes for CK lounge at Honkers for style and comfort or Sing at Changi).DXB lounge has slowest internet ever and normally is over crowed with no seating and even less toilets (something Business traveler mag criticized them about too).

Food is kuk on both (8 years living in Dubai and I hate arabic type food) and SAA food is no better especially when flying back to SA from Lagos etc. I always eat before flying and room service is best for this just before check out. Ever tried to get food at Lagos airport at 10pm ?

Then I was in nairobi week before on SAA and it was in a 737 with Sit up, non leather business class seats, not that I need to sleep for a 4 hr flight but it felt like i was flying to Cape Town.

Over all its not hard being best airline in Africa.

As for EK, after 125 flights with them I am more critical than most of them but the planes and seats are always good, which is what we need first and foremost when travelling

no way the A340 SAA business class seat is better than the 777 EK business class seat. DId both long haul about 2 weeks ago (SAA to LAgos and EK to Dubai). Ek smokes SAA in on board entertainment, flat bed is much better than SAA sort of flat bed ish thing, Both have shot in flight service (asian carriers make them both look pathetic) , EK lounge is so so at DXB and SAA Boabab lounge same, its average (again take notes for CK lounge at Honkers for style and comfort or Sing at Changi).DXB lounge has slowest internet ever and normally is over crowed with no seating and even less toilets (something Business traveler mag criticized them about too).

Food is kuk on both (8 years living in Dubai and I hate arabic type food) and SAA food is no better especially when flying back to SA from Lagos etc. I always eat before flying and room service is best for this just before check out. Ever tried to get food at Lagos airport at 10pm ?

Then I was in nairobi week before on SAA and it was in a 737 with Sit up, non leather business class seats, not that I need to sleep for a 4 hr flight but it felt like i was flying to Cape Town.

Over all its not hard being best airline in Africa.

As for EK, after 125 flights with them I am more critical than most of them but the planes and seats are always good, which is what we need first and foremost when travelling

Believe me, the SAA A340 business class seat is way better than the Emirates Business class seats in both the 777-300ER or the A380. What is the difference:
1. The SAA seat is wider by at least 8cm!
2. When making a bed, the SAA seat is making a full flat bed, not at an angle like on 777 and without your feet being squashed into a little cubbyhole like on the A380.
3. All SAA business class seats are of equal length in bed configuaration not with all the isle seats 20cm shorter like on the A380 planes.
4. Configuration of seats on SAA is 2+2+2 unlike the 2+3+2 on 777 (that is not that much wider than A340) or 2+4+2 on A380 (squashed)
5. Beds in SAA with better blankets and bigger pillows.
Your last statement that we need good seats and comfortable beds is exactly why I prefer SAA to Emirates when flying business class.

The entertainment on Emirates may be excellent but I am interested in being comfortable not entertained! I hardly ever watch a movie and normally listen to my own music on my iPad (I prefer Dutch music that is not even available on Emirates)

No for catering:
Food and service on Emirates is like SAA good, not excellent. If you want excellent fly Qatar or Etihad, Singapore etc. On my flight out of Johannesburg on 15 June onboard the A380 of Emirates you have the minibar at your seat. Unfortunately for me and two of my colleagues the bottles of water (Perrier and other smart bottle) were either empty or someone already drank from that. The aircraft had no replacements!

On SAA flights you can always have bottles of water to keep at your seat. Nice small Valpre bottles recently appeared on SAA. If you ask for water on Emirates you get one small glass!

Food flying out of South Africa on SAA is always better than when you fly back - unfortunately the quality of kitchens especially in Africa is not on par with Johannesburg.

Amenity bags:
On SAA every flight longer than 4 hours will earn yourself an amenity bag with socks, eye shades, tooth brush and hair brush etc.. On Emirates I still do not understand when you are supposed to get this. On a 8 hour flight from Johannesburg to Dubai that arrive after midnight you get nothing, but will get one on the 6 hour flight to Paris. On the return from London I received one for the flight from LHR to Dubai but nothing on the flight to Johannesburg!

If you study the Skytrax website you will see some of the differences in Economy class as well:
Emirates seat pitch of 32/33 inches. SAA seat pitch of 33/34 inches.

The 737 fleet of SAA is bad and a hangover of the American Coleman Andrews obsession with American Boeings. Airbus 319/320 much better. I normally fly economy class in SA and will book to get a flight on the 319/320 for more comfortable seats with more space and a quite cabin.

Pay in for extra luggage? Emirates allow 30kg in economy and 40kg in business. What more do you want

That was part of the problem. I weighed the luggage at my brothers house and it was 41kg. Emirates claimed it was 52 kg and when arriving in Johannesburg the scales at the connecting flights indicated only 40kg.

I did travel for 3 weeks for business and 1 for pleasure and had two suitcases with clothes. 4 suits, 3 jackets a few trousers and jeans, enough shirts and others to prevent me from having to do laundry.

The most I ever checked on a flight was 112 kg total and this was on SAA without paying in. It included my luggage (2 clothes each weighing 25kg), other luggage (did a lot of shopping), golf clubs, baby push chair and hand luggage. I must admit it was a few years ago on SAA and I was flying first class on the 747 with a platinum voyager status.

Perhaps I took to heart what I heard many years ago: It is only the poor that travel light!

112kg of luggage?????? My word when I moved countries I only took 45kgs. I think people need to accept that airlines have luggage allowance rules across all classes regardless of status. And if you are having to require obscene amounts of luggage rather get it couriered

186kg of luggage when I moved home last year . 2 adults and 3 kids all on EK as I, wife and eldest son were all gold plus when business.

Totally disagree that SAA business class product is better than EK business class product. Done 146 flights on EK all Business class and as of today 58 alone this year on SAA (12 long haul in Business) and not in mail lion years is SAA even on the same page. The A340 is a shit plane compared to 777 . The 380 is a poor business layout especially if you get a "window" seat as you have to squeeze thru this gap. Bar is not functional as I work or sleep but its very quite as a plane . Did a first on the A380 back form JFK last year and it was amazing .

on EK you get a bottle on both planes not a glass . you get am amenities bag on bath planes. Its standard practice so not sure why you never got.

Food is shit both airlines so I eat at hotel or airport.

EK you get mattresses , nothing like the sort on SAA. EK has better blanket than SAA one.

Its preferences and as a gold SAA, Gold BA, Gold EK, I fly a lot and have many options always and don't particularly like going thru DXB despite having lived there for 8 years so point to point is my preference but if going to London, will go BA over SAA even if its on an old 747. SAA is good into africa (despite going on 737 to Nairobi) but then again whats the alternative option?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/76379171@N03/7598417140/in/photostream

this baby is taking our olympic team to London tomorrow

World’s largest online customer satisfaction survey, Skytrax, lauds SAA at Farnborough Air Show
South African Airways (SAA) scored a notable double success at the 2012 World Airline Awards, with air travellers voting SAA as the Best Airline in Africa, and winner of the title for Best Airline Staff Service in Africa.
The Best Airline in Africa award is the tenth in a row for SAA whilst the Best Staff Service in Africa award is the third in succession for the airline.
The awards, by SKYTRAX, a global aviation research organisation were announced today at the Farnborough International Airshow currently underway in the UK and received by the chairperson of the SAA Board, Ms Cheryl Carolus and the CEO, Ms Siza Mzimela.
“SKYTRAX has again confirmed that SAA, with our excellent service and very convenient connections to 26 African destinations via our Johannesburg hub, ranks with the best in the world,” said Mzimela. “We are immensely proud of our staff, because it is their consistent, professional and dedicated approach combined with our reliable fleet, our hospitable and advanced onboard product and the convenient connectivity we offer through our global route network that led passengers to again rate SAA number one in Africa”.
The SKYTRAX awards are based on customer responses to a survey which is run over a period of 10 months. This year, over 18 million businesses and leisure air travellers from 100 countries were polled by telephone, questionnaires and online. The survey covered over 200 airlines, from the largest international airlines to the smallest domestic airlines.
The survey measured passenger satisfaction across nearly 40 key performance and service indicators including the airport and on-board environments; from check-in to boarding, onboard seat comfort, cabin cleanliness, food and beverages as well as staff behaviour and service standards and consistency.
"This represents another great success for SAA. To pick up these two major awards is a clear indication of the esteem that passengers have for the airline, and with this being the 10th consecutive year that SAA has emerged winner of the Best Airline in Africa title; it underlines their dominance of this market. Also named winner of the Best Airline Staff Service in Africa award is recognition of the hard work across all front-line staff at SAA," said Edward Plaisted Chairman of SKYTRAX.
The World Airline Awards are the global benchmarks of airline excellence. Other accolades that SAA has received this year include a four star rating in February by Skytrax; the World Travel Awards as the Leading Airline in Africa 2011 voted by the travel trade, the Public Sector Award (a Service Excellence Gold award for the transport sector), and the Generation X Coolest Domestic Airline for the fourth year in a row a

My friend Adri did the plane design! :)

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7118/7598417140_a36a82dd2d_b.jpg

this baby is taking our olympic team to London tomorrow

eew

thats so boring!

At least we can see that SAA is trying to save money.
Unfortunately not much saying this is the SA Olympic team carrier, the little detail of sports theme is not really visible, unless you stand right next to the aircraft...and an aircraft is usually viewed from distance.
Just a few splashes of the same colours of SA, which mostly is similar to Olympic colours as well.
Of course we shouldn't try and compare it to the old Ndizani 747, they obviously had to make sure it's not similar to that.
On the other hand though, at least it's more of an effort than any other carrier including the official carrier, British Airways, now they did boring !

I agree that the design is not amazing but at least SAA are making an effort after nothing in 2000,2004 and 2008.

I think the design looks great. Got that SA feel

Starts off well at the rear but the front bit with the runner and soccer player is just plain awful.

yeah its pretty average i think and kinda sucks that it cant be on a340-600 aswell, but then again this is what they mostly use to london right?

Well, in other news, herd on the news the other day that SAA sold one of its prime day time london heathrow slots, for an undisclosed amount to an undisclosed airline. Apparently slots are so hard to get that SAA probably wont get it back again? Im guessing this is cpt - london?

correct

^^ *Hand over ears* LALALALALA! I can't hear you! LALALALA! :cry:

from eTNW:
SAA ups Mumbai, Nairobi frequencies
24 Tue, Jul 2012

South African Airways has announced a number of additional flights as well as additional capacity on popular summer holidays routes.

Effective October 3, the airline will offer non-stop daily flights between Johannesburg and Mumbai, India. The additional frequency follows the news of the fifth weekly frequency the airline launched on June 16 and the sixth due to start on August 21.

“The increase in frequencies echoes our commitment to the Indian market and means that SAA customers can catch a direct flight between Johannesburg and Mumbai any day of the week. This is also SAA’s response to market demand as over the last three years there has been a consistent growth in the market between southern Africa and India. South Africa’s entry into the BRICS alliance has also played a significant role, leading to noticeable increase in investment activities between India and South Africa,” said Theunis Potgieter, SAA general manager commercial.

The route is serviced with an Airbus A330-200, one of SAA’s newest and most fuel-efficient aircraft, with 36 business and 186 economy-class seats.

In addition, effective September 13, SAA will add three flights to its daily Johannesburg-Nairobi schedule, bringing flights to 10 a week.

To meet demand, the airline will also be adding capacity to its summer holiday routes. First in line will be Brazil, with the current 10 flights a week between São Paulo and Johannesburg increasing to 11. The extra flight will operate between October 6 and March 13 2013 using a combination of the Airbus A323 and A343.

Further, during the summer holidays, a wide-body aircraft will be deployed to meet demand on the Johannesburg-Mauritius route, which has historically proved to be more popular during this period.

Between mid-December and mid-January the same will happen on the Johannesburg-Cape Town route, when a bigger aircraft will be deployed to cater for an increase in demand by holiday travellers.

“In addition to adjusting our schedules as per seasonal changes, we have also planned accordingly to ensure that we meet leisure travel demand that usually peaks during the summer holidays. Cape Town, Brazil and Mauritius have year after year showed consistent demand during these holidays. Our reservations system has been updated accordingly and we encourage travellers to make bookings early,” Potgieter concluded.

Makes one wonder what Jet Airways was doing wrong on the route to Mumbai, with SAA since increasing flights from 4 to 5 in June, to 6 from August and now going daily. Hopefully this might indicate the growth in Indian market and hopefully Jet Airways can get themselves sorted and return to SA again.

SAA is only increasing capacity on the India route because with Jet leaving there was excess demand not met. There are still less seats available on the route with daily SAA flights than there were when Jet and SAA flew it

I'd imagine fares will go up making the route more viable. Flying to India became ridiculously cheap while Jet was here.

Was just trying to book the non-stop flight from Munich to Johannesburg for late October and was surprised that Economy is already fully booked. Seems that SAA will start using A330-200 (instead of A340-600) on certain days, hence reducing capacity!

Johannesburg - Cadet pilot training course applications from white men are no longer being accepted by South African Airways (SAA), it was reported on Friday.

SAA spokesperson Kabelo Ledwaba told Beeld that the cadet programme was being advertised online as an initiative to bring pilot demographics in line with the country's broader demographics.

"Only 15% of SAA's pilots are currently black, and this includes Indians and coloureds. The rest are white, and 91% of them are men."

Ledwaba said the airline would appoint male, white pilots when there were vacant posts for which applicants of other races could not be found.

Beeld had asked why white applicants were being rejected across the board.

An irate father had called the newspaper to complain that his son, who had a commercial pilot's licence and met the educational and physical criteria, had been rejected on the grounds of race.

By filling out several dummy applications, Beeld established that the online form had been programmed to reject any white applicants.

fin24.com

love to see the white pilots union (well if you can have a black editors forum and a black Business group you can have a white pilots union and a gay, arab sushi bar owners league!!!!!) call a dispute with SAA and go on strike, see how many planes you get off the ground.

Fucking joke of a policy and everyone appreciates the past issues but to sabotage the future to balance the past is ridiculous

Johannesburg - Cadet pilot training course applications from white men are no longer being accepted by South African Airways (SAA), it was reported on Friday.

SAA spokesperson Kabelo Ledwaba told Beeld that the cadet programme was being advertised online as an initiative to bring pilot demographics in line with the country's broader demographics.

"Only 15% of SAA's pilots are currently black, and this includes Indians and coloureds. The rest are white, and 91% of them are men."

Ledwaba said the airline would appoint male, white pilots when there were vacant posts for which applicants of other races could not be found.

Beeld had asked why white applicants were being rejected across the board.

An irate father had called the newspaper to complain that his son, who had a commercial pilot's licence and met the educational and physical criteria, had been rejected on the grounds of race.

By filling out several dummy applications, Beeld established that the online form had been programmed to reject any white applicants.

fin24.com

I completely disagree with this policy. in the aviation sector, we do not play with people's lives, the most deserving should have the work and not selected on a racial basis.

http://dailymaverick.co.za/resources/images/logo.png

Buy a 1Time ticket now
IVO VEGTER

28 AUGUST 2012 00:22 (SOUTH AFRICA)
Yet another private-sector competitor in the airline market looks set to collapse in a tough market, under sustained predatory behaviour from the state-owned giant, South African Airways. If we ever want to be free of government monopolies, decent private companies need our support.

It’s the age-old story all over again, isn’t it? When domestic air travel was deregulated in 1991 a venerable name in South African aviation, Trek Airways, most famous for its inexpensive Luxavia joint venture, promptly acquired four new Airbus A320 aircraft and launched Flitestar, a service connecting Johannesburg with both Durban and Cape Town.

With competitive prices and good service, it promptly wrested a quarter of the market from the state-owned monopoly, South African Airways, which was forced to remove some of its aircraft from domestic service.

This, SAA did not like. It embarked on what veteran industry-watcher Paul Dubois calls “dirty tricks” to regain the upper hand. According to his article on Flitestar’s history these included blocking aircraft on airport aprons to cause delays, ratcheting up mechanical service fees and commissions to travel agents, arranging priority treatment by air traffic controllers and even sabotaging the national ticketing system, Safari, to show Flitestar flights as being full.

Flitestar may have jolted a lethargic state-owned monopoly into improving service somewhat, but by the time elections came around in 1994, the upstart had already closed its doors. In the wake of its liquidation, according to Dubois, SAA paid “in excess of R90-million to Trek Airways shareholders, Rentmeester Beleggings, SAFREN and the de Moelenaer family to cease operating ‘any’ airline service in competition with SAA for five years.”

The New South Africa would not begin with competition in the airline sector.

A year later, Phoenix Airways arose, but soon returned to the ashes, leaving only a wispy memory. It would go on to become a bidder in the privatisation of Sun Air in 1997 in a process that was heavily rigged in favour of SAA.

In a 1,500-page doctoral thesis on the competitiveness (or the lack thereof) in the domestic air transport market, transport economist Joachim Vermooten quoted Mac Maharaj, Transport Minister from 1994 to 1999, as saying: “I would like a South African investor or consortium to buy [Sun Air], but I would check carefully to ensure it isn't a front for a large foreign airline... That would give them a strategic foothold here and enable them to undercut South African Airways.”

How horrible! Passengers might have to pay less!

It was clear that SAA was going to get government protection and that real competition was the last thing on Maharaj’s mind.

The anti-competitive tactics that worked against Flitestar worked against Sun Air too. Among other predatory moves, like controlling landing and apron slots, SAA artificially increased capacity on routes operated by Sun Air, sparking a price war.

Vermooten explained how that worked: “[SAA] has not achieved an adequate return on assets and has received substantial financial state aid without any published conditions that would mitigate the anti-competitive effect of such state aid and promote competition in the air transport market. The risk of such state aid could enable the dominant state-owned airline, SAA, to deploy too much capacity on an uneconomical basis, operate many services at a lower income level than the cost of providing such services, dump excess capacity on competitive routes at a lower fare than needed to provide a reasonable return on assets, and conduct operations with the objective of earning a lower return on investment than would be required as a reasonable return on assets by competitors that are subject to normal financial markets and do not receive state financial aid.”

Sun Air ceased operations 1999, and SAA ticket prices quickly returned to their usual high levels.

Even the demise of its rival wasn’t good enough for SAA, however. Without even bothering with the required approval from government, it engineered a takeover of shares and debt designed to prevent the Sun Air liquidation from going to court, where the assets might be sold to potential competitors. While Maharaj worried about Singapore Airlines or British Airways running Sun Air, SAA feared a takeover of its distressed assets by Virgin Atlantic and KLM, both of which were sniffing for opportunities to challenge inefficient state-owned airlines in emerging markets like South Africa.

A day after it was purchased by SAA, Sun Air was shut down, though Coleman Andrews, the SAA chief executive at the time, denied having anything to do with it. That is a lie. At least, one can safely assume it must be a lie, because if it is true, it is evidence of gross negligence. Even notoriously predatory monopolists don’t accidentally acquire and shut down rivals in the ordinary course of business.

Once Sun Air had been driven under, SAA reprised its nasty little deal with Flitestar’s shareholders, and paid R50 million to Safair, the leasing company that owned the Sun Air aircraft, to keep the aircraft out of the hands of would-be domestic competitors.

Andrews would go on to abscond with a golden handshake worth R230-million, even though the state-owned airline was booking massive losses and fraud allegations were swirling all about.

“According to the editor of the Business Day, the result of the demise of Sun Air was higher domestic airfares, hundreds of people joining unemployment queues and an increasingly weary [sic] international investment community,” Vermooten wrote.

Rather too late, SAA was slapped with a R45 million Competition Commission fine. It had been found guilty of employing another tactic it first used against Flitestar, bribing travel agents, in its rivalry with Sun Air. “Loyalty rebates”, is what SAA delicately called these blatant kickbacks.

The fine was the largest the Competition Commission had issued to date, but it must have hit the state-owned airline like the tip on an expense claim for a Coleman Andrews dinner. SAA was quick to recover from this slap on the wrist.

While its lawyers were still mumbling niceties about never ever doing anything naughty again, it set its sights on Nationwide Airlines. This was the oldest of the three remaining private airlines, having been founded in 1995. Along with Kulula, established in 2001, and 1Time, founded 2004, it was using low-cost airline strategies to try to compete with the voracious government behemoth.

In addition to all the nice state-sponsored benefits it enjoys, however, like being bailed out whenever it failed to make a profit because it had been undercutting private competitors, SAA launched its own low-cost airline in 2006.

SAA’s little anti-competitive spawn was inexplicably called Mango. It got a fleet of nice hand-me-down aircraft from its sugar daddy, along with a lifelong service deal from its nice uncle, SAA Technical.

Meanwhile, in the real world, Nationwide and the other private airlines had to buy aircraft and pay for them by running a profitable business.

In the face of predatory pricing, over-capacity on competitive routes and having to park a half-hour bus ride from airport terminal buildings, Nationwide bravely kept flying until bits of its aircraft started to fall off. Then it shut its doors, too.

Notch another one up for SAA. (While we’re counting, add a notch for Velvet Sky, which launched a low-cost domestic service and went bankrupt while I was outside for a quick smoke.)

Flitestar, Phoenix, Sun Air, Nationwide, Velvet Sky. Now 1Time has its back against the wall. In the face of tough market conditions and high fuel prices, it filed for what it calls a “business rescue”, which is essentially bankruptcy protection.

1Time said it would continue scheduled services while it pitches a restructuring plan to its investors and creditors, designed to address heavy debt under loss-making conditions. However, I have tickets for George to Johannesburg today, returning tomorrow, and I’m nervous. Airlines that announce trouble don’t have a good record of hanging around to fly passengers to where they’re supposed to be.

SAA’s financials, meanwhile, though in better shape than a few years ago, remain worrying. Its cash flow remains negative to the tune of a billion rand a year or so, and several pages are devoted to its non-compliance with various financial laws and to its weak defences against a raft of local and global competition accusations. However, its operating profit is back in the black, which means 1Time and Kulula can expect a lot more walloping from the big government bully.

Those of us who use airlines in South Africa know what happens on routes that are not subject to competition by private airlines. If SAA or the cartel partners it acknowledges in its annual report, SA Airlink and SA Express, are your only options, expect to pay several times more for a short hop than you’d pay for a ticket on a competitive route. Try flying from Durban to Port Elizabeth, Bloemfontein to East London, or George to Cape Town if you want real “sticker shock”.

We know, from our own experience with the likes of Telkom and Eskom, how state-owned enterprises without adequate competition drive up price inflation and deliver shoddy quality. We know how ports, railways and other government infrastructure monopolies drive up prices and limit our ability to move commodities and compete in global markets.

The anti-competitive rot goes deep. That SAA has only ever been nailed for one kind of anti-competitive behaviour on two occasions, paying only token fines, suggests that competition authorities are simply not equipped to deal with the problem.

Vermooten agrees: “No specific guidance currently exists in the domestic air transport industry in South Africa relating to the particular forms of conduct that would be regarded as having an anti-competitive effect. No measures currently exist in South Africa that enable the competition authorities to respond timeously (as required in the airline industry) to prevent anti-competitive or predatory conduct, to stop such conduct (in contravention of those guidelines) by means of cease and desist orders and effective interim orders where there is a danger that competition will be eliminated.”

This leaves us, the passengers, as the last bulwark against a time when SAA will once again have the African sky—and access to our pockets—all to itself. We can stand around waiting until SAA has murdered 1Time too, or we can use what little power we have against state-owned monopolies and vote with our wallets.

Never buy a ticket from the state-owned monster, SAA, or its misbegotten whelp, Mango, if you have a choice. Prefer a private competitor, and given its precarious position right now, give your money to 1Time if you can.

It’s the least you can do for your country.

Meanwhile, I’ll be sitting at the airport, hoping the last time I saw 1Time wasn’t the last time 1Time flew. DM

some valid points but also alot of absolute rubbish in that piece. Yes SAA and its funding is an issue, but i do not see that as the failure of 1time and i would not stop flying SAA for the reasons provided. 1time refused to upgrade its fleet when it had the chances, it chose to continue in its falling apart ancient planes. i for one would never fly them because i was cautious of their fleet and recent events have reassured me on that.

The SAA concerns and 1time are two different things in my view.

Yes we want more competition in aviation in SA, but we need clever competition, forward thinking competition.

Give me 1time over Kulula any day. I still plan on flying with them.

Very interesting article just appeared in the Citizen:


SAA board speaks out

South African Airways (SAA), SA Express and Mango deserve the full support of their main shareholder, the South African government, and nominally the department of Public Enterprises. But they are not receiving it.

28 September 2012 | SASHA PLANTING


This is the view of Russell Loubser, the first of the six SAA board-members to resign this week.

Chairman Cheryl Carolus, who has also resigned, was not available and requested that Loubser speak in her stead.

‘‘If you are going to maintain three national airlines through an economic downswing and in a highly competitive market, then support them completely – and I mean financially, morally, emotionally, I mean in every way possible,’’ said Loubser.

‘‘SAA is different to Transnet and Eskom which have virtually no competition. With SAA international airlines can fly in with gay abandon’’.

SAA board members Cheryl Carolus, Russell Loubser, Bonang Mohale, Louis Rabbets, Jabulani Ndhlovu, David Lewis, Teddy Daka and Maggie Whitehouse resigned yesterday.

As a state-owned-enterprise SAA cannot operate under normal commercial principles.

‘‘Every move they make has to comply with the Public Finance Management Act; they cannot hire and fire at will; they cannot add or change routes without getting government approval. They are subject to a raft of rules and restrictions that ordinary commercial enterprises are not.

‘‘I’m not saying this is wrong, there is a place for state owned enterprises. But a company like SAA which is totally dependent on the government requires in return the total support of the shareholder. And right now it is finding it difficult to work with the shareholder.’’

One of the board’s major frustrations over the past year is that issues that have been on the table for months do not get resolved.

One in particular is SAA’s request for a further R6bn in funding. ‘‘SAA has a strategic plan which has been signed off by government. The funding is necessary to execute on that plan. I’ve been on the board for three years and in that time this airline has never been properly
capitalised.”

Minister of Public Enterprises, Malusi Gigaba’s spokesman Mayihlome Tshwete has accused the board of acting in bad faith.

He went as far as to suggest that board members were interested only in the preservation of their own jobs and resigned because their three-year term as a board was up.

As it turns out, the three-year tenure of the board is a concern for the board – but not for the self-serving reasons Tshwete suggests.

‘‘The board gets appointed for three years and then gets changed completely. That is just stupid. I have not seen that work anywhere,’’ said Loubser.

‘‘What is needed is a rotation of directors to bring new blood in – but not all at the same time – that way ensures zero continuity. You need to get one third of the directors to resign every year. It is then up to the shareholder to decide which resignations to accept and which to keep.’’

Gigaba appointed Vuyisile Kona, Andile Mabizela, Andile Khumalo, Bongisizwe Mpondo, Dr Rajesh Naithani, Carol Roskruge, Raisibe Lepule and Nonhlanhla Kubeka to the board. Kona is also appointed as the new chairman.

– sasha@moneyweb.co.za


It is just sad that the Minister and the Government will most probably not even understand what Loubser was saying. When government owns a company (State owned company) they must act like the shareholder but they think it is an extension of their government departments and the ANC.

So, with all those board members gone, and already replaced, SAA have finally approved their latest purchase..... apparently to replace those pesky, fuel-thirsty A340s. Even has the legs to do JHB-JFK non-stop :tongue3:

http://www.skyliner-aviation.de/photos/6840.jpg


Image courtesy of http://www.skyliner-aviation.de

Vuyisile Kona, Andile Mabizela, Andile Khumalo, Bongisizwe Mpondo, Dr Rajesh Naithani, Carol Roskruge, Raisibe Lepule and Nonhlanhla Kubeka.

They sound like a capable bunch.

Treasury grants SAA's R5-billion request
02 OCT 2012 16:29
VERASHNI PILLAY

National treasury has agreed to a R5-billion guarantee for South Africa Airways for two years, following a dramatic walk-out by the board, it was announced on Tuesday afternoon.

"The South African government has granted South African Airways a R5-billion guarantee for a period of two years starting from September 1 2012. The guarantee will enable SAA to borrow from the financial markets, thus ensuring that the airline continues to operate as a going concern."

"The minister of finance and I will announce [on Tuesday] a R5-billion guarantee," Minister of Public Enterprises Malusi Gigaba told the Mail & Guardian, while on a trade trip to Ghana.

The announcement comes on the back of major drama at the airline when eight of the 11-member board resigned, including chairperson Cheryl Carolus after Gigaba postponed their annual general meeting.

She cited a lack of support from the department, which Gigaba's officials contested. "On Tuesday I had dinner with Cheryl," Gigaba said. "We have been in constant contact. She didn't tell me she was going to resign on Thursday."

Former board member David Lewis told Business Day his decision was based on lack of support of late, of the turnaround strategy, the financial report and budget and Gigaba's silence in the face of public criticism of the board.

The airline, like all state-owned entities, was meant to table their annual results within six months after year-end, in this case by September 30, Fin24 reported. Gigaba wrote a letter to Max Sisulu, the speaker of the national assembly, explaining the delay in the submissions.

Gigaba said at the time SAA has not been able to finalise its annual report "due to the need to address the immediate financial position of the airline before the auditors can finalise the annual financial statements".

But Gigaba told the M&G while the board members seemed to resent the letter, he had to write it as they had a deadline to meet and were in danger of contravening the Public Finance Management Act.

"The board was being extremely melodramatic, to be honest with you. They acted in absolute disregard for the airline and in bad faith. There was absolutely nothing malicious in the decision to postpone the AGM."

The minister postponed SAA's annual general meeting to October 15 in what he said was a bid to secure the guarantee in time for the meeting. But the board criticised the postponement, concerned that it made them look bad.

"We agreed to postpone with them. SAA has submitted an application for recapitalisation, and the auditors said if they didn't get the guarantee, the audit would be qualified. But they were sitting on my case, putting pressure on me while treasury was considering their request," Gigaba explained.

"I said, let's postpone the AGM until the government certification committee meet and finalises the guaranteed. It met on Thursday last week. We didn't know what conditions they would come up with. We may need to engage about it ahead of the AGM. I said let's postpone the AGM till October 15 so we could study it. The company had run out of money completely."

But according to Business Report, the delay put SAA's directors in an extremely vulnerable situation as they are deemed to be responsible for the statements.

Carolus told journalists: "I have a stamped receipt from the department of public enterprises showing that the statements were received by them on August 31. All that was outstanding was a letter from treasury indicating that it would support SAA if the oil price continued along its forecasted path."

But Gigaba has put the incident behind him and had appointed Vuyisile Kona as the new board chairperson. Though a controversial choice, he brings experience to the role.

"I am satisfied with the deal," said Gigaba. "I think it brings us closer to the AGM and proceeding to beginning to setting the airline on track."

The airline was angling for a guarantee of between R4-billion and R6-billion over five years for operational costs, growth strategy and new fleet. While SAA posted a R782-million profit at the end of the 2010/11 financial year and R442-million profit during the 2009/10 period, its operating margin fell to 4.24% in 2011. The airline wants to buy 20 new Airbus between this year and 2017 and is looking to expand across the African continent in order to boost its flailing profits. But critics say the airline is designed to fail as a business, in a harsh operating environment.

According to the department, "the guarantee requires that the SAA board develop a turnaround strategy to be approved by the minister of public enterprises in concurrence with the minister of finance.

"This will include SAA providing the department of public enterprises and minister of finance with the financing strategy for its planned purchase of short and long haul fleet. Furthermore, a technical committee comprising representatives from the national treasury and the department of public enterprises will monitor SAA's financial position, and progress with developing and implementing the turn-around strategy."


http://mg.co.za/article/2012-10-02-treasury-announces-r5bn-bail-out-for-saa

http://www.fin24.com/images/newheader/fin24_logo_transparent.gif

Comair lambastes SAA bailout
Oct 03 2012 12:30 James-Brent Styan

Cape Town - Comair [JSE:COM] says if South African Airways (SAA) is allowed to use money provided for from a new government guarantee to fund its domestic operations, it will contravene the government's aviation transport policy.

Comair CEO Erik Venter said in 1992, on deregulation of the domestic airline industry, government developed this policy which was intended to govern the behaviour and funding of SAA in a competitive domestic environment.

“This included the provisions that SAA was not allowed to cross-subsidise domestic with international operations, and that it could not receive government funding or guarantees as long as private competitors were required to rely on commercial funding,” said Venter.

Venter said Comair wants to be assured that the new R5bn guarantee government has given SAA won’t be used for SAA’s domestic operations in any way.

He said Comair understands that SAA has to rely on its shareholder (government) to the extent that it is required to deliver a public service, mainly servicing routes that are not commercially viable for private airlines. He added that this does not, howeve,r apply in the domestic market.

“We want to see a separation of SAA’s operations between domestic and international operations. This separation
must be transparent and be accounted for separately.

"The new guarantee should be used to finance the SAA’s international operations alone. The separate domestic operation would then have to operate on sound commercial principles and without any government support or indirect cross-subsidy from SAA international.”

Comair is a JSE-listed airline group and operates low-cost carrier Kulula. It is also the domestic operator for British Airways.

Venter claims since deregulation in 1992, SAA has accumulated a total loss of R17bn.

“The failure of nine of the 11 private airlines that attempted to compete with SAA over the same period is a clear indication of the impact of SAA’s assurance of state support,” Venter said.

“The losses incurred by SAA and Mango in the domestic market could not be sustained by a private airline, and have been incurred to protect SAA’s market share at the expense of its competitors and the taxpayer.

"We do not see any controls in place that will prevent this from happening again,” said Venter.

He said government must ensure a level playing field in the domestic airline market.

“If government fails to ensure the achievement of a level playing field, then we might return to a state monopoly for domestic air travel, which is exactly what the aviation transport policy was designed to avoid.”

Venter said giving money to SAA's domestic operations will mean a change in the policy, which will require all affected stakeholders' participation.

At this stage it is uncertain what the R5bn guarantee will be used for. Indications are that SAA will use the money to finance a new fleet of more fuel-efficient aircraft.

*Follow Fin24 on Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and Pinterest.

Follow James-Brent Styan on twitter @jamesstyan.

You all live in the clouds if u believe SAA does not deserve and need this funding. Without SAA aviation in sa is more screwed than u can imagine. Are successes in Africa which out economy aflout will die. The government should be looking after SAA better. Read the good reports on the leavers of the board, its the lack of clarity from government thay has affected things. If we left everything to private aviation many of the routes served from SA would dry up, our links and ambitions in Africa would suffer and overall we would be many time ls worse off. R5bn is nothing in the big schemeand actually they should be getting more.

@dysan1. I have to agree with you to some extent. Yes it is good that SAA provide a public service to some degree. If you read the Comair response you get a better understanding. International travel should be supported by the government in order to keep routes that otherwise might fall away, however when it comes to domestic routes it get a little more complicated. With so many alternatives it is unfair to the private guys. They cannot stay in the market and compete with SAA if SAA can just bailout.
The real sad thing here is that SAA should be offering the best price to help grow air travel yet they are more expensive than most.

If it were possible privatize would be best but it would dry up but maybe that is what is needed. Supply and demand story.

It should have been $5B....and then they can get good aircrafts....777's!!

the thing is, how can you restrict them domestically when they need that feed to their global network?

the thing is, how can you restrict them domestically when they need that feed to their global network?

so true

the thing is, how can you restrict them domestically when they need that feed to their global network?

We have a choice to make: Either they're restricted to international capital expansion with local codeshare agreements; or, they're unrestricted and eventually, local carriers will go bust.

You can't have some carriers competing against another that has had R17-billion is cash-injections in the last 15-years and a bottomless pit of potential capital and think those other carriers can compete.

Same logic as saying: Pick 'n Pay must make a profit, but Shoprite-Checkers doesn't, it gets annual recapitalisation of R500million. Which one will survive long-term?

IMO: You have to choose, one or the other.

RESIGNATIONS and the rotation of the boards of directors of SA’s two state-owned airlines, South African Airways (SAA) and SA Express (SAX) have dominated the headlines since November last year, when the board of SA Express resolved to withdraw its financial statements due to two irregular items that were brought to its attention by a whistle-blower.

A forensic investigation revealed further irregularities in SAX’s accounting policies, which spiralled into a war of wills between the board of SAX and its auditors, Nkonki, (which jointly audits SAA), resulting in Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba deciding that the only way to resolve the impasse was to remove the board and Nkonki, handing over the task of determining who was correct to the auditor-general.

The events that surrounded that decision were set out in a detailed statement by the departing chairwoman of SAX, Lilian Boyle, on behalf of the rotated members of the board. The statement was circulated to the minister of finance, Gigaba, the auditor-general and the chairman of the parliamentary committee on public enterprises, among others. This statement received little attention from the media or the recipients.

Be that as it may, a lot of criticism has been levelled against the state about the public funds allocated to the state-owned carriers over the years, some of which is deserved, although most is not.

Critics have also argued that the state lacks a coherent policy on the role of the state-owned carriers.

However, a little-known fact is that in 2008, then public enterprises minister Alec Erwin dispatched the CEO of SAA (Khaya Ngqula) and SAX (Siza Mzimela, now CEO of SAA) and other directors, including me, to Frankfurt to hear from Lufthansa executives, including its CEO, how they run things.

At the heart of Lufthansa’s model is an integration of services among its subsidiaries operating in Europe with its own international service, while maintaining the identity and niche markets of the subsidiaries. What came across strongly was a need, if not to consolidate the two airlines then, at least, for a "shared services" model. Further discussions and strategy meetings were held under the auspices of the Department of Public Enterprises between the two carriers’ boards and their senior executives, which expanded on the "shared services" model.

One of the proposals mooted was for the establishment of an "Aviation Group" holding company, with the three carriers (SAA, SAX and Mango) operating as independent entities, with cargo, technical and another divisions (termed "aviation services") providing common services to those airlines and perhaps to others in future.

The mandate to the carriers would be to focus on operating in their distinct market segments without any one carrier wielding excessive power over another. Those market segments would be dictated by customer needs and volumes, which in turn would determine the gauge of aircraft and frequency, and thus route selection. In the Lufthansa structure, this is dictated by the mainline carrier. The regional carriers have little say.

A further issue was the continued use of the "SA" code by all three carriers (and by SA Airlink, with which a closer relationship could have been fostered by SAX as there are synergies that would be beneficial to all parties, and especially to the mainline carrier — SAA). The ownership of the code would, however, reside with the shareholder and not with SAA. Under this structure, route and network decisions would be debated with the holding company and not with the mainline carrier, thus removing the dominating tendencies of the latter.

The three carriers have a common shareholder and many common facilities. It would be logical to extract the positive aspects of the Lufthansa model, for example shared services such as ground handling, IT, revenue accounting and treasury, call centre services, loyalty schemes and procurement of aircraft and fuel. If these were housed in a separate division headed by a responsible CEO, with revenue and profit objectives and focused on delivering services to its clients at market-related rates and governed by service-level agreements, truly operating independently, the competitive issues and strong-arm tactics inherent in the present arrangement would be removed to the benefit of all.

These discussions and valuable time and effort and, by implication, state funds, came to naught, with a succession of ministers being appointed to steer the state-owned companies, resulting in a loss of impetus in the process.

A further pity is that the debate wasn’t opened to the private sector. Now the Department of Pubic Enterprises has issued a tender for consultants to assist with a study into the opportunities, mechanisms and challenges of regional aviation expansion in Africa. It has called again for a better strategic plan for SAA before approving further funding to stabilise SAA, in effect starting the process from scratch and ignoring the lessons learnt from Lufthansa.

Surely the time has come for the government to integrate SAA and SAX, considering that the two airlines are already locked into a commercial agreement, under SAX depends on SAA for many core services, such as fuel purchases, reservation systems, airline codes, the frequent flyer programme and emergency response services, which are all conducted by SAA on behalf of SAX — and not always at competitive prices. Instead, a foul up in invoicing for fuel, an unutilised ticket liability and other accounting mishaps have, over the years, cost the two carriers hugely in costs and legal expenses and led to the whistle-blowing incident that saw SAX withdrawing its financial statements at the expense of the board’s credibility.

In addition, the two carriers have locked horns over route rights into Botswana that cost SAX much-needed revenue.

A misalignment on the choice of routes each airline chooses to fly has led to both carriers losing ground to competitors, only later to see one or the other opt out of that route, leaving the remaining carrier the unenviable task of trying to recover lost ground from its competitors.

Poaching of senior executives and migration by the two airlines’ pilots and staff has long plagued both carriers and is an indication that a combined entity is needed.

Further, the inability of the airlines’ CEOs to work together, despite having common board members, and the implementation of a "chairman’s forum" for all state-owned companies aimed at encouraging such co-operation, is another example of the shortsightedness of the segregated airline model and policy. Interestingly enough, Gigaba has seen fit to continue with this line, appointing the chairman of SAX, Andile Mabizela, to the hastily constituted new board of SAA.

A single state-owned airline has a greater chance of success if, and only if, a visionary combined strategy is implemented by a leaner, experienced and commercially minded board to steer the combined entity. And, as a parting shot, why not buy SA Airlink and incorporate it into the common entity?

SAA money woes ‘worse than feared’, says report
BY NICKY SMITH
08 OCTOBER 2012, 05:58

SOUTH African Airways (SAA) is in a far more serious financial position than previously thought and it is clear the airline will need much more than the R5bn lifeline it recently and controversially secured from the government.

A "transition plan" the former board of directors of SAA drew up, and which Business Day has seen, shows that the airline will report a loss of R1.25bn for the past financial year. It reveals the crippling weakness of the airline’s balance sheet — its liabilities exceed its assets by 359%.

The tabling of the carrier’s annual financial statements was postponed last month when Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba was forced to play for time to secure the lifeline from the Treasury and avoid SAA’s auditors from flagging its status as a going concern.

The guarantee allows the airline to continue borrowing should it need to in an environment of high fuel prices.

The Department of Public Enterprises has conceded that more money will be needed from the Treasury to support the carrier. Therefore, Mr Gigaba had sought to strengthen the board through a skills mix that would take the airline forward. The new board members have skills in aviation, mergers and acquisitions, and financial management, according to the department.

Conditional to the R5bn guarantee is that the board oversee the drawing up of a long-term business plan in co-operation with technocrats from the department, the Treasury and SAA.

"The shift by the minister has been to entrench a more technocratic board at the helm of SAA as it going through this very tough time," department spokesman Mayihlome Tshwete said last week.

"Whatever strategies are presented must be guided by technical pragmatism because that will strengthen the minister’s hand in engaging with Treasury (for more money) and with the public, when communicating the strategy and plans for the airline."

The department was not expecting a speedy turnaround. "It won’t be overnight, there are variables which are out of SAA’s control, such as fuel prices and the economic downturn," Mr Tshwete said.

"It is difficult to say (when SAA will be profitable), it is going to be a process, but we have a shareholder that is committed to this process."

The transition plan talks about the failure of the 2009 programme of cost cuts, and restructuring to allow the airline to rebuild its balance sheet from retained earnings.

"SAA’s balance sheet was weak in 2009 and the carrier’s financial position has continued to atrophy despite a range of operational improvements," it said.

"SAA remains inadequately capitalised with a current debt-to-equity ratio of -359%. As a result, the group cannot adequately support the growth strategy at the centre of the 2012-15 corporate plan, or navigate cyclical adverse trading conditions."

This weakness undermines the airline’s ability to fund the acquisition of new, more fuel-efficient aircraft or to cater for the government’s ambition that it expand its route network.

By comparison, Singapore Airlines’ debt-to-equity is 8%, Ethiopian Airlines is at 54%, Lufthansa 75%, Kenya Airways 122%, and Air New Zealand at 226%.

Since 2006, SAA has been surrendering market share to its aggressive and better capitalised competitors, including Emirates Airlines, Ethiopian Airlines, Kenya Airways and Egypt Air.

The board has proposed that R2bn be invested on the fleet, which would allow SAA to improve its service offering.

The fleet renewal "will support a 10-year international network plan which aims to expand the east-west corridor, connect major global flows to Africa via Johannesburg, and fly nonstop on all international routes."

Over the next five years, SAA is expecting to take delivery of 20 Airbus A320s for domestic flights. To achieve its goals, SAA would need to lease six new A350 aircraft as soon as possible, and be able to take delivery of the aircraft between 2016 and 2018.

It is also envisioned that there would be some sort integration of SAA, SA Express and SA Airlink. This could take the form of a straightforward merger or placing them into a single holding company, allowing for cost savings on shared services.

SAA, according to the plan, "must be run on commercial lines borrowing on the strength of its balance sheet", the board said. "This requires an adequate capital base and from time to time capital injections that enable the carrier to realise its broader developmental objectives as defined by the shareholder, allowing the company to borrow for fleet expansion."

The rapid expansion of SAA’s international service since 1994 had not been matched "by a commensurate increase in the level of capitalisation", the board said.

Rising fuel costs have had an enormous impact on SAA’s bottom line. Fuel costs have increased from 24% of SAA’s total expenses in 2009-10 to 34% in 2011-12 and rose by R2.2bn last year to R8.3bn.

SAA declined to comment on the loss the company made in the past financial year.

"The actual position in relation to the company’s financials will only be known once the AGM (annual general meeting) has taken place (on October 15)," SAA spokesman Tlali Tlali said. "To provide any details regarding the financials before … would undermine the reason(s) why we have it in the first place."

http://www.bdlive.co.za/business/transport/2012/10/08/saa-money-woes-worse-than-feared-says-report

AWA

Head of S.Africa's troubled state airline exits
Mon Oct 8, 2012 2:37pm

JOHANNESBURG Oct 8 (Reuters) - The chief executive of South African Airways has stepped down, the government said on Monday, just days after Pretoria promised to shoulder $600 million in loan guarantees for the struggling state-owned airline.

The Department of Public Enterprises said in a statement Siza Mzimela had resigned and the airline's board would begin a search for her successor.

The government promised last week to guarantee $600 million in loans for the airline, a move that could put further pressure on an already strained national budget.

South Africa's state-owned companies, including SAA and national broadcaster SABC, have come under fire for what critics say is excessive spending of taxpayer money. (Reporting by David Dolan; Editing by Ed Cropley)

© Thomson Reuters 2012 All rights reserved

http://af.reuters.com/article/southAfricaNews/idAFL6E8L8J5I20121008

The board will look for a new CEO... What board? Didn't they all leave?

Maybe we should get Julius as CEO, he will make some noise and get some nice new planes.

SAA ‘holding it together’

October 9 2012 at 10:47am
By SAPA

INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS

Johannesburg - The public enterprises department denied on Tuesday that “things are falling apart” at South African Airways following a string of resignations.

“There is an appearance of things falling apart, but things are not falling apart at SAA,” public enterprises director general Tshediso Matona told SABC radio news.

“The events in our view could have been avoided... are completely unnecessary.”

SAA CEO Siza Mzimela and two other senior managers, corporate affairs general manager Theuns Potgieter, and general manager for legal, risk and compliance Sandra Coetzee, resigned from the airline this week.

This came barely two weeks after most of the board - including chairwoman Cheryl Carolus - also quit, saying there was a lack of support from its shareholder, the public enterprises department.

Matona said the resignations happened while the department was busy preparing for its annual general meeting.

“We had been engaged with the company through a process of preparing for the annual general meeting, so when we step outside of disciplined processes, personality complexes take over, and then in the end we all lose, because leadership fails,” he told the SABC.

Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba said in September that the state-owned airline needed to present a long-term plan to ensure a strong and viable financial future.

In early October the National Treasury announced that SAA had been given a R5 billion government guarantee for a recapitalisation exercise.

The SAA board is also busy suing former SAA CEO, Khaya Ngqula, who left the airline in 2009, to recover about R252 million from him in four separate claims following a forensic investigation by auditors KPMG. - Sapa

http://www.iol.co.za/business/companies/saa-holding-it-together-1.1399250#.UHPrz03MgXs

Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba on Monday said it is essential that South African Airways (SAA) be stabilised, immediately.

The national carrier announced a R1.3 billion loss for the past financial year.

The SAA board's annual general meeting is taking place in the wake of the resignation of its chairperson, CEO and several board members.

Gigaba slammed the carrier, highlighting wasteful expenditure over the past year.

“I am concerned about the recurrence which reflects weak internal controls. I have implored the board and management to improve the controls around procurement and not continue condoning irregular expenditure. Furthermore, the fruitless and wasteful expenditure amounted to R4 million.”

He has appointed a task team and announced there will be a zero percent increase for directors in 2013.

Meanwhile, government has guaranteed the national carrier a R5 billion over the next two years.

iafrica.com

What is causing SAA's turbulence?

05 OCT 2012 00:00
LYNLEY DONNELLY

The reasons for the sudden departure of the chairperson of SAA, Cheryl Carolus, and leading members of the board are still not clear.

But their resignations take place against a background of a troubled global aviation industry and the need for a R5-billion injection, despite a plan for a more orderly exit by board members.

Their choice to leave at short notice has done little to restore confidence in the national carrier, given the appointment of a new chairperson, Vuyisile Kona, who is not entirely free of controversy.

No wrongdoing was found on the part of Kona or his counterparts, but he headed the board of trustees at Trilinear Empowerment Trust at a time when hundreds of millions of rands in clothing workers' pension money, ultimately under Trilinear's care, vanished. The saga was covered in detail in the Mail & Guardian.

Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba's spokesperson, Mayihlome Tshwete, said the ministry was satisfied that Kona was not implicated in these matters and had the skills and technical expertise to provide strategic leadership to SAA.

Kona worked for SAA before and he sued the airline after he was reportedly fired under former chief executive Khaya Ngqula.

Settled
Kona did not respond to questions regarding this incident or his time at Trilinear, but the Times reported that the dispute had been settled.

The timing of resignations, a cloud of allegations from the board about a lack of state support and the ministry's counter accusations about the failure to deliver on a long-term strategy for the airline indicate trouble at the top. A more orderly exit had been planned because a number of board members were not standing for reappointment. Instead, Gigaba was prematurely forced to reveal his replacements, which the Cabinet had approved on September 19.

One of the new board's tasks is to finalise a major aircraft order before year-end to replace its inefficient long-haul aeroplanes.

On October 2 the treasury announced it would provide a guarantee for a loan facility for SAA of up to R5-billion. The guarantee is on condition that the new board develops a turnaround strategy, which Gigaba and Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan must approve.

According to the public enterprises department, the guarantee's conditions also include providing a financing strategy for its planned purchase of both a short- and a long-haul fleet. It will also require the establishment of a technical committee comprising officials from the treasury and the department, which will be tasked with monitoring SAA's financial position and the implementation of the turnaround strategy.

The R5-billion granted to SAA brings the total of guarantees extended to state-owned enterprises and development finance institutions to R475-billion.

Conditions for airlines everywhere have soured, particularly because of rising fuel costs. According to the International Air Transport Association, jet fuel prices rose to $127 a barrel in June, adding an anticipated $208-billion to the industry's fuel bill.

Aggressive competition
Linden Birns, managing director of aviation consultancy Plane Talking, said fuel costs, especially in African countries, aggressive competition from Gulf carriers, rising user charges and the mandate on the state-owned company to service less populous and profitable routes were among the contributors to a tough trading year for SAA.

High jet fuel prices have been seen in a number of African capitals, said Birns. Many of these are destinations for the national carrier. For example, Angola charges a 200% premium on average jet fuel prices.

User charges such as airport taxes and overflight fees – the price airlines pay to fly across a country's airspace – were also on the rise, he said.

Birns said there was added pressure on SAA to increase productivity and better use its equipment, but to achieve this more cost- and fuel-efficient aeroplanes were needed.

Significant technological advancements in fuel and technical efficiencies over recent years have rendered aircraft bought in the past decade, which SAA has done, outdated and costly.

Unlike many international airlines, SAA has been unable to reduce its staff complement to manage cost pressures because it is a state-owned enterprise. International competitors have been turning to their shareholders to recapitalise and SAA is not unique in this regard.

It is circumstances such as these that are believed to be contributors to the loss SAA is expected to report at its annual general meeting in mid-October.

Unfair advantage
The decision to grant the airline finance was immediately challenged. Democratic Alliance spokesperson on public enterprises Natasha Michael said it "perpetuates the unfair advantage afforded to the national carrier at the expense of private airlines".

Private airlines have consistently cried foul over what the industry sees as the subsidisation of SAA's loss-making domestic services, whereas competitors have been left to sink.

Comair chief executive Erik Venter told Sapa that the airline's latest request for funding for new aeroplanes was a result of SAA and its budget airline, Mango, fighting domestic competitors for market share at the expense of generating sufficient profits for sustainability.

SAA was not like other parastatals such as Transnet, said Venter, because there was a "tax-paying private industry willing to fulfil the Southern African air transport requirements".

The minister has also castigated the board for its failure to provide a long-term strategic vision for the airline, although the former board members clearly see this differently.

The airline gave a presentation on its turnaround strategy to Parliament in May. It said:

It was expanding its routes into Africa;
It had dealt with a slew of competition suits dating back to 2000 and had set about curbing costs other than fuel, aiming for R1-billion in reductions for 2012-13;
It overhauled its sponsorship programme, the questionable management of which was a contributing factor in the termination of Ngqula's term as chief executive; and
It was in the process of replacing its fleet of short-haul carriers with more fuel-efficient aeroplanes. It was here that SAA indicated it expected to finalise a major order to replace its inefficient long-haul aircraft.
This is an indication that the company had a sound management team and effective board.

There has been speculation that Gigaba was getting rid of those members former minister Barbara Hogan had appointed, seeking to fill the board with people aligned to his interventionist take on the management of state-owned enterprises.

Tshwete called this "nonsense", saying that their terms were due for review and the minister wanted people with technical capabilities in aviation at the helm.

The new board would have to prove that it could deliver, said Tshwete, and it would be assessed on its performance.


http://mg.co.za/article/2012-10-05-00-what-is-causing-saas-turbulence#comment_thread

US Airways is preparing to announce a new codeshare with South African Airways (SAA) on services between and within the US and South Africa after getting regulatory approval from US authorities.
US Airways has been granted the right to place its code on SAA flights from the US to Johannesburg Cape Town, Durban, East London and Port Elisabeth in South Africa via Frankfurt, London and Munich and SAA services between US and South African points via Dakar, Senegal.

US Airways meanwhile will be able to place the SAA code on flights within the US from the South African carrier’s six US gateways, although these would be limited to the 25 codeshare destinations agreed under the US-South African Air Transport Agreement.

SAA has also been granted the right to operate to Atlanta as one of its six US gateways in place of Philadelphia.

The approval paves the way for US Airways’ 22 codeshare partnership and SAA’s 29th. Both carriers are also members of Star Alliance.

The government has given South African Airways (SAA) until February to find a new CEO following the sudden resignation of CEO Siza Mzimela. Mzimela resigned in October, joining eight of the airline’s board members and two general managers who resigned in September.

Speaking with ATW at the African Airlines Association’s annual general assembly in Johannesburg, South African Airways chairman and acting CEO Vuyisile Kona said the government has given the airline until February to propose a replacement CEO. A sub-committee has been set up to handle the project.

He added that South African Airways is on the verge of selecting a consultancy firm to advise on its future strategy and the renewal of its 58-aircraft fleet. The proposed business plan, including its turnaround strategy, must be submitted to the government by the end of January and will be made public in February.

“We do not know what the new business plan will look like, but we need to progress to new-generation aircraft, which are cheaper to operate,” Kona said. “We will be replacing the current fleet.”

Ernst & Young managing partner for Ethiopia Zemedeneh Negatu commented: “We are very confident SAA will turnaround. It has all the elements for being a dominant carrier in southern Africa.”

I was shocked to see SAA require a R550million emergency loan, just after they approached the National Treasury for a R1billion+ recapitalisation again. I cannot actually believe this...

What are those in aviation's thoughts? I REALLY think enough is enough now. :ohno:

enough was enough ages ago in my opinion...

Our national carrier is bleeding money because they know the government won't let them fold.

enough was enough ages ago in my opinion...

Our national carrier is bleeding money because they know the government won't let them fold.

And they basically have NO board or leader for all intensive purposes. Wonderful example of how glorious nationalisation would have been for our nation had the radical left has their way at Mangaung.

And they basically have NO board or leader for all intensive purposes. Wonderful example of how glorious nationalisation would have been for our nation had the radical left has their way at Mangaung.

I was chatting to Dudu Myeni (acting CEO or something for SAA) the other day and she apparently has been given instructions from Zuma to go on a cost cutting drive in the next year. I'm sure it's been tried before but it does seem ridiculous that the other operators operate without bailout yet for SAA it's business as usual...... Until the next bailout.

I was shocked to see SAA require a R550million emergency loan, just after they approached the National Treasury for a R1billion+ recapitalisation again. I cannot actually believe this...

What are those in aviation's thoughts? I REALLY think enough is enough now. :ohno:

Emergency LOAN you say.... Like they will ever pay anything back...

What a fucking JOKE!

SAA is just one massive job-creation circus fed with tax payers' money.

http://www.fin24.com/images/newheader/fin24_logo_transparent.gif

Troubled SAA may cut flight routes
Feb 19 2013 15:29 Sapa

Cape Town - Troubled carrier SAA's turnaround plan to be presented to the government at the end of next month might involve cutting some flight routes, MPs heard on Tuesday.

SA Airways (SAA) board acting chairperson Dudu Myeni said the plan would be the ninth developed by the ailing airline in 13 years.

"When the board assessed all the existing strategies of SAA, developed since 2000, we discovered that we had... eight strategies... that were developed by various well-known companies, but they were put on the shelf, gathering dust, and not being implemented."

However, SAA's new board - a number of board members unexpectedly quit last year before the annual general meeting in October - was "hard at work" finalising a new plan, which would be presented to the government on either March 28 or April 2.

Myeni was briefing members of parliament's public enterprises portfolio committee.

She described the 20-year plan as "cutting-edge", and vowed it would be more successful than its predecessors because "it will be developed and owned by our own people".

Responding to questions about why the latest plan would be more credible than previous ones, SAA acting CEO Nico Bezuidenhout said the latest "holistic" strategy aimed to achieve "sustainable" business.

"We cannot continue to come back looking for further capitalisation. If nothing else, it's embarrassing," he said.

Last month, the national carrier reportedly received a R550m bank "facility" to cover fuel and other short-term commitments.

The airline's losses over the past decade amount to R14.7bn.

Bezuidenhout, who is the CEO of Mango, was appointed acting CEO of SAA earlier this month, after the previous incumbent, Vuyisile Kona, was suspended.

Kona replaced then CEO Siza Mzimela in October, after the airline reported a R1 25bn operating loss for the year.

Bezuidenhout said the new strategy aimed to take the best elements of the previous ones, "developed, in the past, at great expense", and implement them.

"In my subjective opinion, 70% of the issues [with the airline to date] have been directly related to failure to implement."

SAA was also set to take "a very hard look" at the routes it flew.

"If our... mandate is to connect up with the countries we do trade and tourism business with, then our route networks should be informed solely by that... mandate."

The airline was in the process of looking at its existing routes and seeing which did not "fit" and should not be operating.

"This may mean we have to cut certain routes."

Bezuidenhout also called for changes to SAA's fleet. According to its 2011/12 annual report, the carrier operates 53 aircraft.

"If we have the wrong tools for the job, we're not going to make it. Our long-haul fleet will not be profitable unless we adapt and change our fleet," he told the committee.

"At the same time, we cannot expect our shareholder to provide us with one cent of additional capital unless we show that we will safeguard that additional capital through a sustainable long-term plan."

Myeni called on members to "have faith" in the national carrier.

"We implore members... give us an opportunity to do the work. We are very passionate and patriotic about the national airline," she said.

Finally someone who sounds like he knows what he's doing. Let's hope he actually does...

SAA: baggage theft decreasing


In an effort to clamping down on baggage irregularities and pilferage South African Airways (SAA) has embarked on a system-wide, structured approach to improve baggage handling during the past year, the national carrier has said in a statement.

As part of the airline’s overall passenger service enhancement project, several initiatives were launched to systematically re-engineer the way in which baggage is handled.

The ariline says collaboration between the airline’s Baggage Services and Group Security Services departments, airport ground handlers, outstations and Airports Company South Africa (Acsa) was intensified with the view to improve the way in which SAA executes surveillance and decisively deals with challenging operational areas.

The result is that SAA has achieved its goals with respect to baggage delivery and continues to review and enhance its operational procedures. The outcomes were as follows according to measured bags pilfered per 1,000 passenger travelled

1 - Pilferage rate reduced to 0.29 in January 2013 from 0.65 in January 2012 representing a 55% reduction
2 - Damage rate reduced to 1.33 in October 2012 from 2.01 in January 2012 representing a 34% reduction


“SAA is grateful to its employees and partners for helping it to achieve this outstanding on-time performance and baggage handling success. We also appreciate the recognition that we have received from FlightStats, as well as from our passengers who regularly share their feedback with us and have provided positive reinforcement of our efforts,” said Ramasia.

“It is only through collaboration and teamwork at all levels that SAA has been able to achieve these important goals. But we will not rest on our laurels - rather, we will continue to apply a laser focus on providing our valued customers with reliable and high-quality service in every aspect of the travel experience.” said Zuks Ramasia, GM Operations for SAA.

Last year SAA also introduced its piece baggage concept, aligning with most of its larger Star Alliance member carriers by restricting the number of pieces of baggage a passenger may check in, rather than the total weight of the passenger’s checked baggage.


http://www.news24.com/Travel/Flights/SAA-baggage-theft-decreasing-20130228

SAA borrows R1.5bn to keep going
06 May 2013 07:56 - Sapa

South African Airways has postponed its bond issue in favour of borrowing R1.5-billion from two banks.

South African Airways (SAA)'s chief financial officer Wolf Meyer told Business Day on Monday that the loan is an interim measure until Cabinet adopted the airline's turnaround plans.

The R1.5-billion is working capital to keep operations running while SAA grapples with high fuel prices and its loss-making, long-haul business in a highly competitive market.

SAA used a R5-billion state guarantee extended to it last year to secure the loan.

"All the legal documents [for the loans] are being finalised and we are waiting for the minister's final approval," Meyer told the newspaper.

"The cash will be available today [Friday] or Monday."

Meyer said SAA had also received a "good rate" on the loans because of the guarantee. The loans are believed to have been extended by Rand Merchant Bank and Investec.

Meyer refused to confirm this, however, and only told Business Day that the loan was split "fifty-fifty" between two local banks.

"We require it [the loans] for working capital ... this was always our plan to use part of the guarantee to raise money," he was quoted as saying.

SAA would repay the loan once it had gone ahead with its bond issue. – Sapa


http://mg.co.za/article/2013-05-06-saa-borrows-rr15bn-to-keep-running

SAA to take delivery of 20 Airbus aircraft
by Agency Staff, May 14 2013, 13:41

SOUTH African Airways (SAA) will take delivery of 20 Airbus A320 aircraft valued at R10bn, starting in the next quarter, Public Enterprises Minister Malusi Gigaba said on Tuesday.

"(The aircraft) form part of a broader fleet replacement plan that aims to address the fuel inefficiency of SAA’s current long-haul fleet," Mr Gigaba told Parliament.

In April the government gave the troubled airline, which has cut some European routes to focus more on African destinations, a guarantee of R5bn on the condition it developed a turnaround strategy.

SAA chief financial officer Wolf Meyer said last week the airline had selected a lessor for its "sale and leaseback" acquisition strategy for the new Airbus A320s. The leasing company would buy the aircraft instead of SAA and lease them back to SAA, relieving the carrier of the large financial burden of the capital costs associated with the purchase.

The carrier has 20 new A320s on order. It has repeatedly deferred delivery over funding issues.

Mr Meyer said he would be able to confirm who had been selected for the sale and leaseback agreement once the board had approved the transaction. The agreement covers the first 10 of the A320s.

SAA could not find a taker for all 20 aircraft.

Mr Meyer said once the agreement covering the delivery of the first 10 A320s had been approved, SAA would begin work to find a second leasing company. The other benefit of the new financing arrangement for SAA was that it would trigger the repayment of the pre-delivery deposits made over the years, which total about $140m.

Mr Gigaba has resisted calls to privatise the airline, saying it has shown some signs of progress and savings following a turbulent year in which almost the entire board resigned and a new CEO was appointed.

SAA had already begun to implement its turnaround strategy and had achieved its cost compression target of R1.3bn for the year ending March 2013. In the year ahead the focus would be on ensuring SAA’s cash position was stabilised, the cost compression programme was accelerated, the international network was reviewed and the long-term fleet plan is finalised, Mr Gigaba said during his budget speech.

Mr Gigaba also announced that SA Express had cut R129m in costs in the last financial year.

SAA’s 20-year turnaround plan has three clear stages. The first involves immediate actions the airline and the state must take in the next 12 months to resolve the airline’s precarious financial position, arrest falling market share and stop further decline.

The plan will show how much money is needed to ensure SAA and the subsidiaries it is to absorb in order to integrate all state airlines under a single holding entity are financially stable and able to operate sustainably. SA Express, for example, needs more than R1bn from the Treasury as it is in breach of loan and aircraft lease covenants.

The Cabinet and the Treasury would have to agree to "support" SAA, Mr Gigaba said last month.

Prior to the R5bn guarantee, SAA had been lobbying for up to R7bn to recapitalise its business. The Treasury declined, preferring to extend a guarantee and demand a turnaround plan in exchange for support.

Reuters, with staff writers


http://www.bdlive.co.za/business/transport/2013/05/14/saa-to-take-delivery-of-20-airbus-aircraft

^^ Same shit over and over. The last time they got new long-haul aircraft, they were the 'most fuel efficient aircraft ever built'... Now all of a sudden they are not...? And it seems that every time they get given money by government on the condition that they 'turn themselves around', the period given to do this also increases exponentially!

Didn't manage to do it last time, won't manage to do it this time around either... Oh well, at least this time they have TWENTY YEARS (like WTF??!) to get it right... :ohno:

^^ Same shit over and over. The last time they got new long-haul aircraft, they were the 'most fuel efficient aircraft ever built'... Now all of a sudden they are not...? And it seems that every time they get given money by government on the condition that they 'turn themselves around', the period given to do this also increases exponentially!

Didn't manage to do it last time, won't manage to do it this time around either... Oh well, at least this time they have TWENTY YEARS (like WTF??!) to get it right... :ohno:

What is the correct strategy for SAA to turn around?

My first thoughts about the new fleet as that the current one is still fairly new and economical. They can't keep chasing that latest fuel efficient aircraft. The long haul fleet is all A330 and some A340 which I believe are on the way out? I think the problem is on the domestic fleets. Weren't they suppose to get rid of the 737? The domestic fleet should be one aircraft across the board. This would save costs on pilot training, and maintenance like a low cost airline does.

I think they should go with either the A320 or the B737NG for all domestic flight. Long haul keep the A330 and possibly consider the 787.

I also don't see the point in focusing more on african travel. If people what to travel through africa they have to connect somewhere and if SAA is not connecting to the rest of the world it makes it more difficult. Emirates have done this exceptionally well.

What are your thoughts?

That's what they're doing now on the short/medium-haul fleet, going all Airbus A320 (including A319).

They currently have 9 A340-600, 8 A340-300 and just 6 A330-200...so the A330 isn't yet a big part of the fleet but have replaced the even less fuel-efficient A340-200 (last one to leave fleet in 2 weeks time). So more twin-engined long-haul aircraft should be the way to go, possibly more A330-200 to replace A340-300.

Back when these A340s were ordered in 2001/2002 they were a better option than what was available, back then the 787 and A350 was not even developed yet and the available 777s didn't have the same specs as they have now...shortly afterwards (2005-2007) is when the 777-300ER and 777-200LR became available. And of course fuel prices wasn't what they're today.

Nowadays the more successfull airlines actually do replace their aircraft every 8 to 10 years or so...these A340s is already going 10years and more. So yes, it's time to consider the replacement, as you're anyway going to wait a few years for them.
I'd say in the long run two versions of the A350 (-900 and -1000?) should be the way to go, and in the interim perhaps get some more A330-200s to replace the A340-300s.

why did saa drop the origional a320's it had back around 1999 2000, for boeing 737's?

why did saa drop the origional a320's it had back around 1999 2000, for boeing 737's?

Because Coleman Andrews as CEO was an American and American choose American products and not normally the best!

maybe because the new generation 737 8 was a better plane the generation before 320?