Plans to set up a new national carrier in Slovenia will ultimately depend on the European Union’s approval of the country’s Recovery and Resilience Plan, which will be funded by the EU through 1.6 billion euros in grants and 3.6 billion euros in repayable funds. The state has completed a draft of the plan, which envisages an investment of 1.1 billion euros into the transportation sector, of which 76 million have been earmarked towards the creation of a new flag carrier. However, according to Slovenian media, initial reactions from the European Commission towards the entire draft proposal have been negative as some of the planned investments are considered inconsistent with EU guidelines.
Slovenia’s Minister of Finance, Andrej Šircelj, expressed hope this week that Slovenia would finalise and formerly submit its plan to the EU, aimed a mitigating the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic, by the end of the year. He noted the state was working with the block in order to address any issues. For its part, the Commission noted it was looking forward to further dialogue with the Slovenian authorities with the aim of making the best possible use of the funds to support economic recovery, in line with the European Union's priorities. As a result, it is still uncertain whether a new national carrier will receive Brussel’s approval, however, the government is intent on the project.
Prior to Adria Airways’ bankruptcy in September 2019, Oxford Economics estimated that airlines, airport operators, airport on-site enterprises (restaurants and retail), aircraft manufacturers, and air navigation service providers employed 2.000 people in Slovenia. In addition, by buying goods and services from local suppliers the sector supported another 1.000 jobs. On top of this, the sector was estimated to have supported a further 1.000 jobs through the wages it paid its employees, some or all of which were subsequently spent on consumer goods and services. Foreign tourists arriving by air to Slovenia, who spent their money in the local economy, were estimated to support an additional 21.000 jobs. In total 25.000 jobs were supported by air transport and tourists arriving by air during Adria’s last year of existence, according to Oxford Economics.
 |
| The importance of air transport to Slovenia prior to Adria's bankruptcy |
Not sure a new money loosing airline fits the EU's agenda.
ReplyDeleteAgain a understand the need of a national or better said regional carrier who acts as an ambassador and promoter in other areas of Europe, I understand the importance of keeping aviation jobs and know how in the region, but little 2 mio Slovenia having an own carrier?? It will cost you a fortune especially with the given free and liberalized market. Either regulate the market (which wont happen with all the lobbyism in BRU) or set up something with your neighbours, so yr market is larger and you have more shoulders to split the costs. The question is just which neighbours ;-)
DeleteSo ironically Germans will again decide about Slovenia's national airline, like they decided about Adria.
ReplyDeleteAnd that worked out well so far.
DeleteMore ironic is that corona could save Slovenian aviation.
DeleteBy saving you mean pumping 100m+ EUR of taxpayers money into a company with unprofitable business model?
Delete@anon 11:28
Deletewhere did you find 100m + EUR? Did you even read that article? especially last paragraph? Now Slovenia is losing more than 100m per month due to no-connectivity so we agree that Slovenian aviation has to be saved
Losing 100m a month due to no connectivity? In Covid times?
DeleteI'll take a doubt on that.
It would be smarter for smaller airlines to merge into a larger one. If the Ex-Yu could create one airline to meet all their needs it would end up being one of the top 10 airlines in Europe (maybe even top 5?)
DeleteThat's really difficult because who would then decide which routes are most important for certain country?
Delete@An.17.52
DeleteWe had such airline. It was JAT Yugoslav Airlines. It had fleet of 36 planes when Emirates had 8 planes and it flew to 70 destinations on 5 continents when Emirates flew to 20 destinations in Asia and Europe only. It was the 8th biggest European and the 30th biggest airline in the World. It had regular long-haul flights from BEG, ZAG, LJU and DBV, regular international/European flights from ALL ex-yu airports except TGD, SJJ, SKP and OMO, and it had domestic flights connecting ALL ex-yu airports with which other. And all that with the state of the art fleet, acquired new, directly from the manufacturers, and exclusively US/EU made. It had for those times very decent on board product, day by day better on time performance and excellent safety record. As such, it was the reflection of the country and the system we had. Today's airlines are reflection of the current "states" and current system, which will NEVER allow project you suggest to happen. From the same reason they ruined the former one.
@pozdrav iz Rijeke +1000
DeleteWe really don't need it.
ReplyDeleteWe need it
DeleteOf course we need it, those who are talking that we don't need it then they are obvious not from Slovenia or it's Skobir/Krasnja talking...there is no third option.
DeleteWith these funds a respectable small airline could be set up with a foreign partner where the risk would be shared.
ReplyDeleteCan an airline really be set up with 76 million?
DeleteActually it can be set up even with much less money, I don't think that this 76 is only for startup...
DeleteHow do you mean? What else would it be used for?
DeleteTo maintain liquidity during next few years.
DeleteAnd who of "foreign partners" would invest in a small airline that would not be run for profit from the start?
DeleteOU
DeleteAnd they would be interested in that instead of focusing on their own (big) problems why exactly?
DeleteOU is out of the game. I believe that partner here is Solinair...
Delete@Anonymous11:50:
DeleteExactly. Most likely Solinair, the government has to decide if it wants the new carrier to operate an all CRJ fleet or an ATR fleet. Hopefully, the former.
Turboprops make much more sense for typical network from Slovenia.
DeleteI just feel this money could be better spend from the corona fund then on an airline no one needs.
ReplyDeleteWow, are you saying that you want to give that money to people sitting at home, doing nothing (as in financial assistance), instead of me, who is unemployed and have no chance of landing a job anywhere on planet Earth (as a pilot in late 40's), i.e. someone who will be more than happy to work?
DeleteThere are other jobs around as well, not just flying...
DeleteNo one needs? did you check last paragraph? How many jobs is connected to an airline as Adria was?
Delete@Anonymous11:19:
DeleteReally? There are? Especially during the covid crisis, how many are hiring 40+ year-olds with no other experience apart from flying? When Mura went bankrupt, everyone felt sorry for their employees. Not so with spoiled, overpaid pilots, right?
I know plenty of pilots who have lost their jobs.
DeleteSome are stacking shelves, driving delivery vans, etc. Most were able to find jobs even in Covid times.
Ok, so why don't people who will be receiving government aid find another job? It's not like the companies have to keep them employed. Fire them and let them take care of themselves.
DeleteFor people saying we don't need an airline, read the last pargraph.
ReplyDelete+++
DeleteThat's what some of us were talking about from the beginning..
DeleteRead it. Can be recreated with a foreign successful airline recruiting locally, and stimulating the market with competitive pricing that a national start up won't be able to offer.
DeleteSave the 76 million for efforts that will actually fix the economy post-covid.
@Anonymous13:00:
DeleteYeah, only one slight problem. There is no such foreign airline. Covid, remember?
And which foreign airline will base aircraft in LJU? We haven't seen many of those flying to LJU not to even think of it to base aircraft or two in LJU.
DeleteWell, evidently no company is going to commit to a foreign base until the pandemic at least shows signs of easing. There's no real need for subsidies and routes before then anyway
DeleteEven before covid there wasn't any interest from foreign airlines to base aircraft here. Furthermore we were waiting to have 1 morning departure from LJU for more than 6 months (LH started with summer season). So even after covid time (when it come to that) I doubt LJU will have any chances to have base here by foreign airlines.
DeleteApply the Tirana model and lower the taxes to attract more LCC. Smaller countries and airportsreally need them to grow. The 2 sole very cheap ways to reach Slovenia are currently London and Brussels excluding winter.
ReplyDeleteIf you compare Ljubljana with any EU capital, you will realise that all 27 have at least 10-15 nonstop connection. The administration of the airport must comprehend that LCC and I LCC are extremely vital especially within the EU.
From TLL to ATH and BTS to LISTEN all of them are very affordably reached.
You can't compare Tirana and Ljubljana because:
Delete1) Their location
2) Diaspora
So it is much easier to attract LCCs to Tirana than LJU.
Albania has a national airline as well.
DeleteHere we go again. LCC brigade is on the move.
DeleteFor the 1230421 time, LCC have no market in LJU. Why the hell do you think Adria operated CRJ? Because it was such a nice looking aircraft or because it's capacity was suitable for the market?
There is also a quite low diaspora in Slovakia, but BTS is a LCC base. If it's a VIE alternative then LJU can be such for VCE for instance even if there is TSF.
DeleteIf Slovenia has a very small diaspora, then connect leisure destinations to Spain and Italy or more UK ones as well as DUB.
I agree with anon@09:11. Small countries like Slovenia do not need a national airlines, they just don't have the capacity to sustain it. Instead, they need to attract LCC even if they have to subsidise them. I mean, Slovenia has like 2-3 international airport compared to say Albania (mentioned in the comments above) which has only 1 airport. So they have the opportunity to subsidise one of the three airports in order to attract LCC particularly for the difficult times that aviation sector is going through right now. And I agree with the model used in Tirana although as far as I know it was the airport itself which lowered the charges rather than the government subsidising LCC.
DeleteLCC fanboy talking again. Check those flights in TIA, do you think that they are flying TIA-BCN, TIA-PMI etc..? no, they are operating to destinations where Albanians lives in EU. So would you fly to DTM or MIL because 17 Slovenians are living in those two cities? please stop being ridiculous.
Deleteanon@09:46 you are totally trolling mate. Try to reason a little bit more than this. Countries like Albania are poor countries by EU standards and of course LCC will not fly to PMI, they will fly where there is demand. But surely if your lower airport charges, if you apply incentives, you're making your airport more attractive to different carriers. More carriers, more passengers, more money to the economy. Fine, if you don't like LCC that's ok but how are you going to make sure that Slovenia keeps its connectivity with the rest of the EU?!
DeleteSince Tirana lowered their charges, the number of passengers in/out the airport is more than 1 million this year. Look at Zagreb, where is the airport right now in terms of numbers?!
You need to find a sustainable model which will grow your airport and your economy. And again for small countries like Slovenia or even Albania, I do not see national carriers as a solution.
Do you also know that TIA is becoming a major tourist attraction? I doubt you have even been there. Regardless of LCC, it was an airport that was able to attract many new airlines during the last couple of years:
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tirana_International_Airport_N%C3%ABn%C3%AB_Tereza
Mind you, they are even connected to Orly and have BA year-round, even before they slashed their charges.
nononono, stop pulling that shizz airline everywhere with those hungarians
DeleteIf you think that LCC is flying out of TIA because of poor Albanians living in Albania then you have to think again. more than 80% of revenue is made by Albanians living and working in EU and those are not poor citizens and their salaries are much higher than Slovenians. And you have millions of them across EU (not to mention USA, Canada). Second, do you really think that LCC is improving your connectivity with ROW? Wrong, those are airlines to connect two cities and that's it. Of course I would be more than happy to have LCC in LJU, but meanwhile you need scheduled airline to maintain your connectivity through EU hubs.
Delete@anon 10:20-TIA has done superb with their combination of legacy carriers and LCC. With the introduction of LCC, you are making those people, who have had it up to now financially difficult to fly because of the expensive tickets, to fly more frequently. The airport is not only for those who live in the EU but even for those who live in the country but do not have the incomes of those living in the EU. I understand thet up to know that people are still not able to fly out of the country because of the bans but once these are lifted I believe they numbers will boom big time.
DeleteLCC may not offer the connectivity that legacy airlines offer but certainly they do offer more destinations. And I bet that the success of TIA's number this year is are not the legacy airlines but LCC.
In regards to Slovenia, I believe having something is better than having absolutely nothing. And again I'd still support the TIA model which has the perfect combination of legacy and lcc carriers.
Like I said, 90% of pax are those from EU, because that have EU documents and can travel without restrictions (talking about pre covid times). Albanians still need visa for EU and that's huge problem when is comes to flying to EU. So as explained before, those flights were established more or less because of ethnic living in EU and they are coming back several times per year to Albania.
DeleteAlbanians still need visa for EU? I got news for you...
DeleteOf course they do, unless they have biometric passport which majority does not have.
DeleteYou rather make a fool out of yourself than accepting your mistake
DeleteIf anyone is fool here than this is you. You are comparing TIA and LJU where you have mass tourism in Albania and huge amount of diaspora living across the world. Secondly road connections are really bad in Albania. You need one hour to come from TIA to Durres which is the closes coastal city to airport. If you want to visit cities on south you would need at least 3 hours by car. So yes it's completely different than in LJU where you don't have mass tourism and millions of people living around EU. So whos making fool of itself we will see in next few weeks, if you are right LCC will place aircraft in LJU or if i'm right we will have new national carrier.
DeleteWhat are you even on about, im Anon 12:04 and 13:20. I wasnt even comparing TIA and LJU. You said that Albanians need visa for EU, which is absolutely not true and then you came up with ''most of Albanians dont have passports''
DeleteTIA is already catching up with the top 5 ex-Yu airports even if it is the only airport in the country. Look at all those Polish charters, British Airways, Transavia and here I am not even mentioning your "favourite" Hungarian airline because the truth hurts as usual.
DeleteWell, TIA would be the 3rd busiest airport if it was in ex-Yu so im not sure how they re catching up with the top 5. This year they will overtake ZAG as well
DeleteAlbanians are doing it right and Slovenia should definitely learn a lesson from them. Lets just forget about the economical and HDI Index part. Estonia used to be a poorer nation and look where they are now.
DeleteThe Slovenian government said that money for the airline would be given in some form of a loan. So the money would be paid back eventually.
ReplyDeleteGood luck with that.
DeleteSo now we are going to be giving money to foreign airlines through subsidies and also give money to create a new national airline...
ReplyDeleteIts probably only for 2021, and when the national airline will be created the subsidies are gone
DeleteThe government said that this airline would launch ASAP, as in 2021.
DeleteYep, told you so. Were are the concerned citizens of Slovenia now? The government should have saved that 6 million euros and just go ahead with the new carrier.
DeleteI see why the EU may not be keen in their money being spent on such a project.
ReplyDeleteWould they care that much about an airline?
DeleteThey would certainly care where 76 million was going.
DeleteYeah really... at a time when all EU governments are giving money for their airlines.
DeleteHope it gets the necessary approval.
ReplyDelete*unpopular opinion* I think this airline could work if run by the right people. The tourism sector would definitely benefit.
ReplyDeleteCould work as in make profit and pay back the original investment? Never.
DeleteAdria 2.0
ReplyDeleteThe money for planned for the airline is a drop in the ocean compared to the money that is being given to Slovenia.
ReplyDeleteI don't see what's the problem. A new airline would create jobs, improve connectivity with Europe and the world, generate more tourists. Reason enough to set it up.
ReplyDeleteThe reason being, as airlines in EU operate on the free market, they should be run under fair economic conditions.
DeleteFor example, let's say you have a company that makes coffee makers. You make profit and you are expanding. Then the government says they are investing 76m in a new coffee maker company, that will never generate any profit.
Is this fair to you and other people who make coffee makers?
@anon09:21
DeleteI agree but what happens when there is country where there isn’t any coffee maler at all? Is it fair that their residents dont get those products? If there would be enough coffee for everyone than nobody would even think to establish new company but if there isnt any product available then we have to make our own
Last paragraph is very interesting. Shows what a huge chain one company or airline can produce and certainly many sectors suffered after Adria, with all of its faults, went bankrupt.
ReplyDeleteGood luck
ReplyDeleteIf this gets approved I'm wondering what they will call the airline.
ReplyDeleteProbably something generic like Air Slovenia or Slovenia Airways.
DeleteAir Slovenia probably
DeleteAdria Airways was a great name
Deleteagree with last anon
DeleteWhat about Alps Air or Air Alps.
DeleteI think there used to be an airline called like that
DeleteAir Alps, (stylized as Air A!ps, previously operating as KLM Alps, legally AAA-Air Alps Aviation), was an Austrian regional airline based in Innsbruck.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Alps
But Air Slovenia has strong marketing name. Just think how many passengers in EU hubs would see those airlines. When they saw Adria Airways only few % of passengers knew that this airline is from Slovenia.
DeleteAh yes, marketing is about name on plane saw by some passagers on other airlines.
Deleteit's not all of course but it helps a lot. How many times you see croatia airlines, air serbia or montenegro airlines on one of the EU hubs. You immediately connects those airlines with their originating country. Air Slovenia would do the same..
DeleteI really hope this happens.
ReplyDeleteAnd then the commy party says that this government is right wing. #facepalm If this goes through it's going to be an epic fail yet again, when the government boys start to make decisions or sit on the board.
ReplyDeleteI still hope that they will just give subsidies to privately owner company who's willing to establish new carrier. Either way, Slovenia need one and if government boys have to sit on the board so be it (i think that's not good at all but at least we would have carrier).
DeleteI agree, hopefully a privately owned company (most likely Solinair) will take over things and run the business as they are accustomed to. From what I know, Solinair will set up the company, if the government decides to cover the losses (should they incur them).
DeleteSo Solinair wants all the benefits and transfer the risk to the state?
DeleteFingers crossed.
ReplyDeleteAll of this could have been avoided had they just helped Adria at the time.
ReplyDeleteOnly if the airline was restructured and its debts paid off.
DeleteIt just wasn't worth throwing so much money into it.
DeleteCreating a new airline in these sort of circumstances is just crazy.
ReplyDeleteThey don't plan to set it up tomorrow. It will be next year.
DeleteActually the whole process will start really soon. If you want to have your first flight in summer season then company should be established at least till end of this year.
DeleteGo Air Slovenia/Slovenian Airways!!! All of the Slovenian travellers, either frequent flyers, business people, holidaymakers, Slovenian diaspora living, studying and working in the EU or further abroad, will be happy to see you flying, see those tails with the name of our country, hear Slovenian public annoucements and talk Slovenian with the crew on board. We need conectivity, new jobs that aviation directly or indirectly provides in other sectors (tourism, catering, logistics etc). Having connectivity through a national airline it is not a luxury it is a necessity. Yes, we can sit and wait if some LCC will be willing to set a base in LJU, but there is no guarantee it will happen. We need to act now. Now. I can't wait the day when I will be able to fly home again through LJU airport on our new national airline, where my family members can easily pick me up, and not riding long hours on Flix bus, Go Opti from distant airports (ZAG, VIE, VCE), and lose the whole day for that.
ReplyDelete+100
DeleteBravo!
DeleteSurprise Surprise.
ReplyDeleteWell the EU recovery plan is supposed to be used as an investment so I see no issue.
ReplyDeleteYes, but a sustainable investment. This one isn't.
DeleteThe last paragraph shows the investment is worth it because it stimulates a lot of other sectors which have gone down together with Adria.
DeleteThe EU will allow it, no dobut. Hell, there are some days where there are no passenger flights to Slovenia. Air Slovenia will happen, no doubt about it.
DeleteBenefit study was done by Oxford Economics. Same company published a report couple of years ago showing even larger benefits another national airline from the region brings to that country's economy.
ReplyDeleteWhen that study is mentioned to justify existence of that other airline, many posters (and their mother in law!) go crazy attacking the benefit report, trying to diminish actual impact on the economy and instead positioning foreign airlines as potentially having the same impact.
This time, not a single comment so far questioning accuracy of that report or saying that subsidized foreign carrier would equally benefit Slovenia's economy. Double standards, anyone?
It's impossible to have equally benefit from foreign carrier or national carrier because foreign one would not create as many jobs as national carrier would. all other jobs are just connected to how many passengers carrier would bring to country (hotels, taxi drivers, restaurants, bars, shopping centers etc...).
DeleteNo doubt national carrier has more benefits but that was not the point of the Anon 17:18 post.
DeleteOxford Economics, ....
ReplyDeleteForeign tourists arriving by air to Slovenia,....
These numbers are insane and fake: real field situation study and market request can tell you this anytime (even without covid)!
How can any conscious person with a real knowledge believe to such estimations.
Go figure!
You need to see bigger picture here. Althought the airline is loss making, it has a positive overall impact on tourism and economy. It is Croatian third larges exporter and it ensures year round air connectivity with Europe and thus the world. It generates over 1500 jobs in aviation (as some companies are highly dependant on OU as well as all costal airports outside of summer season) Also each sold ticket generates additional money in tourism services. In other words, much more damage would be made if OU was not going to be saved.
Deletefrom: https://www.exyuaviation.com/2020/04/state-to-help-croatia-airlines.html?showComment=1587671524813#c9049544453519477002
We saw same pattern here in Slovenia after demise of JP. Many companies went bust, hotels were not fully booked anymore, unemployment went up in region around airport,..
DeleteSo I believe in those figures made by Oxford Economics, actually some of us knew that even without that analysis.
Anon 21:33
Delete+100
plus - taxes paid by employees, by the airliner. The same state which left JP to die, had no problem injecting 177 milion € into local bus company Arriva alone, almost 5 billion € into railway system, 85 in REVOZ (according to erar.si) - just to stimulate Renault to maintain car assembly in Novo mesto... at the same time, it injected 64 million € into Adria Airways, and all you can hear from Adria haters is that they don't want "their" money to be injected in any new national airliner. So it is clear, that it is not their general policy, but pure hate for publicly owed airliner as at the same time they advocate for foreign carrier's stimuli. Understand that if you can!
DeletenotLufthansa, well written!
Delete21:31
DeletePlease explain:
- how many (JP+?), it comes only one more to my mind
- hotels had a record year + top tourists in SI by origin were not covered by JP routes
- unemployment went up for approx 0.4 in Cerklje na Gorenjskem, there are municipalities in he region where it went down ...
So yes, maybe some analysis would be good.
what kind of business model and planes will be? Is there a decision already? Air Baltic model?
ReplyDelete