Norwegian's tough winter

Back to Forum

This topic contains 37 replies, has 19 voices, and was last updated by  GivingupBA 15 Mar 2019
at 14:40

Viewing 8 posts - 31 through 38 (of 38 total)

  • transtraxman

    More negative news about Norwegian? Or is it O´Leary wanting to provoke a bankrupcy?
    “More carriers ‘to fail’ warn airline bosses”.(Travel Weekly, 8th March 2019)


    Currently have 18 planes grounded with the new restrictions I believe.

    Ireland has bannnd the 737 Max, significant as Norwegian use it on their several Irish transatlantic routes.

    It’s hard to see how Norwegian see this through.


    18 out of 163 aircraft in the group (Wikipedia), that’s over 10%! I wouldn’t book a flight with them now…


    reland has bannnd the 737 Max, significant as Norwegian use it on their several Irish transatlantic routes.

    The only service left from Ireland/NI operates from DUB.

    Norwegian to temporarily operate B787 from Dublin to US


    It will be a significant blow to Norwegian to have so many of their aircraft grounded. Especially with their already cliff edge finances, and could be the final blow?

    Similarly with Air New Zealand, and problems with their 787 Dreamliners still is going on, almost 2 years on. they had to have engines replaced on each aircraft.
    It impacted them severely and they had to lease at least one 30 yr old 777, over which there have been many complaints, as various cabin classes were either not available, or completely different.
    The impact on Boeing will be significant also.

    Perhaps a very good time to have planes to be leased, replacing these Worldwide aircraft unable to fly?


    Norwegian has now suspended bookings for its sole transatlantic route from Edinburgh. It was supposed to operate throughout March but, with the 737 MAX issues, ticket sales have ended.


    There does seem to be a long history of LCC’s failing when trying to establish long haul routes.
    Norwegian also appear to have tried to expand so quickly, with a lack of consolidating or increasing frequencies on a few high demand routes, a safer strategy.

    Traditional / National carriers, always seem to manage these, due to the infrastructure at their hubs, the size of the aircraft generally being larger, and superiority of quality for Certainly Premium, let alone basic cabins. They also can offer greater frequencies, Frequent Flyer schemes and benefits, partnerships in the 3 main Alliances or codeshare agreements. Any issues, and there is good back up of aircraft, alternate routes, and options, and less hassles than flying low cost medium or long haul.
    There really is not that much saving with basic economy tickets compared, and much revenue continues from innovations, and constant updates of Business cabins with so many Airlines, to such a high standard now.

    The growth of Premium Economy cabins, even with Airlines who said they would never have them is pretty much spread across most carriers now, compared to 5 years ago.
    The demise of First Class, improvements in Business cabin is not just the seat, but now “The Experience”, and many features & facilities in Business cabins to equal what was, or is offered in First. BA’s First is not as good as others Business Cabin, and way behind First on other major Airlines, for example, many offering Suites now.

    Flying Aircraft medium / Long haul with all the back up and stability needed with the above, is a costly business, and only large or well funded Airlines can complete these elements, with their resources.

    Whilst Uniquely, Air Asia / Air Asia X has maintained some Medium – Long haul routes, this has been at the expense of Malaysian Airlines as a National carrier, and much of their custom has been taken from them. They now operate with their own terminal, and over half of the airport at KLIA. Their flights to some Australian cities can run to 2 aircraft a day on A333’s, also flying to Auckland now. Having said this, their Biz Space seats, have only ever run to 2- 3 rows of 2-2-2.
    The size and efficiency of the A333 makes these viable, and having flown them – a Biz seat basic, is OK for about half the price of other Airlines. Clearly sad for the demise of Malaysia Airlines, once a great International carrier.

    The populations in Asia, as well as regional travel and domestic routes, provide very high demand, in each unique market of each country. Such is the case in Malaysia, with a strong profitable domestic and regional income to be gained. Generally, airlines have far less domestic demands in Europe.
    Norwegian do not have this climate, but are encroaching on other well established routes and Airlines, aimed at Leisure customers.
    I fundamentally do not believe, revenue can be raised enough certainly within Europe, for LCC’s to make long lasting success of Intercontinental services.
    With so many new aircraft now, and such high standards of cabins in Economy and Premium in the industry, Norwegian would have been better to consolidate what they had, and not to have taken such risks. Especially with such huge well resourced Airlines in the US, and within Europe, they just cannot compete, or sustain services as the traditional carriers.

    1 user thanked author for this post.


    There does seem to be a long history of LCC’s failing when trying to establish long haul routes. Norwegian also appear…..

    That is the best analysis I’ve read of the case, thank you

Viewing 8 posts - 31 through 38 (of 38 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller UK March 2019 edition
Business Traveller UK March 2019 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below