The Montenegrin government hopes for the country’s new national airline, known under the working title ToMontenegro, to launch before April 1, in time for the 2021 summer season, however, only if it is able to take over commercial agreements, staff and aircraft from the country’s former flag carrier. Otherwise, the process may take up to nine months. Furthermore, the state expects for the new airline to operate under a low cost carrier (LCC) model. “We are looking to transfer everything that we can from Montenegro Airlines into the new company. We are in discussions with Embraer to take over the aircraft which operated at the former airline. In terms of staff, part of them will start work at the new airline, while others will be offered renumeration packages. If we can inherit everything from Montenegro Airlines, including the workforce, interline and codeshare agreements, aircraft and slots, which depends on factors which are out of our control, such as plane manufacturers, then we expect for the new company to launch before April 1”, the State Secretary in charge of Transport at the Ministry for Capital Investment, Zoran Radunović, said.
The Ministry for Finance has issued a public call for experts to submit their CVs in order to be part of the task group which will work on the formation of the new airline. The requirements can be found here. The Ministry has so far held initial talks with two foreign consultants, one of which is believed to be Knighthood Capital headed by former Etihad Airways CEO James Hogan. This week, the government will launch a tender for an external consultant to aid in the set up of the new airline.
There is still a possibility for Montenegro Airlines to restore limited operations in the coming weeks until the new carrier is launched with a final decision on the matter to be made early next month. The carrier’s fleet currently consists of four aircraft, two of which are grounded due to technical issues and two which are operative. Commenting on ToMontenegro’s future operations, Mr Radunović said, “The new company will be based on low cost airline principles, with minimal expenses. Operational staff will be at the forefront, while administrative will unfortunately, for the most part, have to be outsourced”.
Hoping for the best possible outcome
ReplyDeleteLCC as national airline?
ReplyDeleteNo more free food or baggage
DeleteWell the name fits. To Montenegro or 2 Montenegro sounds very LCCish.
DeleteWell if they want to succeed and make a profitable airline then the LCC model is the best way to go. Besides the lines are very blurred today as to what is an LCC and what is a "traditional" airline in Europe.
Delete@09.12 FlyMontenegro would be better. Also has an LCC ring to its but sounds nicer, at least to me.
DeleteIn the end its better to use the 30 million to fund LCCs.
DeleteLCC is probably the only viable option for a market with few business travelers where the vast majority of travelers just look for the cheapest option regardless of service provided. Even then, I do not think that Montenegro market is big enough for any airline to be able to make a profit alike all other EX-YU market. If sentiment of national pride is so strong that people must have their flag carrier, the only solution is for government to keep injecting money into national airline(s) which permanently lose money.
DeleteLCC is probably the only viable option for a market with few business travelers where the vast majority of travelers just look for the cheapest option regardless of service provided. Even then, I do not think that Montenegro market is big enough for any airline to be able to make a profit alike all other EX-YU market. If sentiment of national pride is so strong that people must have their flag carrier, the only solution is for government to keep injecting money into national airline(s) which permanently lose money.
DeleteI like more something as - "Balkan express" or air podgorica or Balkan breeze :)
Delete@ano 10:01, a national carrier is not about pride but more national economic interest. Just like many other countries in the world, national carriers are not profitable but they serve a greater purpose. If the direct and indirect benefits are greater than the unprofitability then a national carrier is justified.
DeleteI hope some of the experts that comment here will apply to the government call :D
ReplyDelete+1
DeleteIs it realistic for the airline to launch in 2 months or so?
ReplyDeleteLike they said, if they can inherit everything then yes
DeleteNo. We observe a hysteria in Montenegrin society similar to Slovenians had a year ago. It is not so easy for people (especially for the ones who are not in aviation business) to understand the economics of aviation or the airlines' consolidation process, which takes more than decade. And politicians do not prefer to look like accepting the reality while the society don't (otherwise they would be blamed for doing nothing and lose votes), therefore they act as if they're seriously planning something to cool the public down.
DeleteActually when there is a will you can do that much faster. In Slovenia everything could be established very quickly (codeshares/slots/agreements etc.) if someone would push that. It's much easier when you don't need to do everything from scratch and new airline does not necessarily mean that everything has to be done from scratch.
DeleteThere are no codeshare agreements they can inherit. All of them have been terminated.
ReplyDeleteSo they want to inherit everything except the debt?
ReplyDeleteHasn't the Italian government been doing the same with Alitalia for decades?
Deleteyes but you cannot compare both economies
DeleteGood luck
ReplyDeleteI really hope they change that name.
ReplyDeleteWhy not call it Montenegro Airways?
DeleteThey said the name would change. Even in the article it is written that ToMontenegro is a "working title".
DeleteI don't see how this will work any differently than Montenegro Airlines.
ReplyDeletewell they seem to be much more mindful about costs.
DeleteHope it works out.
ReplyDeleteThey seem determined and realise the importance of having a national airline so this is a good start.
DeleteThey should have prepared everything before they grounded YM. That would have been impressive. Not adhoc like this.
DeleteWell at least Montenegro Airlines has finally stopped selling non existent flights on its website.
ReplyDeleteIs anyone going to compensate all those poor people that had tickets with YM?
DeleteAnd also many people who had vouchers because their flight got cancelled because of Covid.
DeleteNew chance for a new airline with a clean slate. All the best.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if all this would have happened were it not for Covid.
ReplyDeleteDefinitely. The airlines was chronically indebted and loss making.
DeleteEveryone was saying MGX was next after Adria went bankrupt. It was just unsustainable.
DeleteThey are just calling it LCC because it sounds better when you present that to public, but on other hand I am really curious how LCC model will work with E-195!? And why do they need codeshares if it's meant to be LCC. At the end everything will be the same
ReplyDeleteThe saga continues
ReplyDeleteI'm not too optimistic about this airline. Especially if James Hogan is involved. Let's see.
ReplyDeleteHogan just had talks with the government. He still has to win the actual consultancy tender.
DeleteLivery wise they should just change the blue with royal red, turn the eagle logo from white to gold and it's done (even though I prefer the blue).
ReplyDeleteI think the livery is the least of their concerns at the moment.
DeleteI think they are doing the right job. They seem to be engaged in this new airline and are not just talking about it to animate the masses. They seem committed to this project.
ReplyDeleteLet's just hope they keep it professional and don't employ friends and family.
DeleteHow much will all this cost?
ReplyDeleteGovernment will give 30 million.
DeleteNew airline with just 30 million euros?? Good luck with that.
DeleteWhatever airline they create it will be money loosing. There is just no point.
ReplyDeleteWhich routes can we expect from this new airline?
ReplyDeleteBelgrade, Zurich, , Paris and Ljubljana. My guesses
DeleteNot sure about LJU. Was it really profitable?
DeleteDoubt any of them was, except BEG and Tivat-Moscow
DeleteThey really shouldn't waste their time with it.
ReplyDeleteNo, better to have no flights or three airlines serving the country, like Slovenia.
DeleteAnd how many airlines do you need in the middle of pandemic, when nobody can travel anyway? 20?
DeleteBut how will YM restart flights even for a limited time until April? I mean they didn't clear their debt so I don't understand how it will start operations again.
ReplyDeleteLove it!
ReplyDeleteSo the new airline should have a fleet of three planes?
ReplyDelete2 Embraers and 1 Fokker.
DeleteFokker is very old and its resources are running out. I think it will be retired.
DeleteAn LCC that wants to codeshare with other airlines and have an Embraer-based fleet. The expertise is clearly there.
ReplyDeleteWell this is just some state secretary talking off the top of his head. Let's see who they choose for the task force and what they propose.
Deleteekspertiza sta da ti kazem
DeleteExpect one year round route (BEG) and the rest seasonal.
ReplyDeleteWith 3 planes, don't think so.
DeleteIs it possible to create an airline in the region like Air Baltic for countries where a profitable airline is difficult to reach ?
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice but I think because of politics it's impossible.
Delete@10.19 that will have to include all exyu-countries im afraid (lmao) if you stick to your "profitable" criteria and nope they will not move further from negotiating the name of the company
DeleteWe had an airline in the region for all ex-yu countries. It was called JAT Yugoslav Airlines, it flew to 70 destinations on 5 continents, it had fleet of 36 planes, was bigger and better than Austrian or Turkish at the time, and getting better and better day by day quality - wise, with big plans for future. And it was profitable company. Not the biggest contributor to national budget, but definitely not one of its major users. Self sustainable. And I will refrain from writing why it disappeared because if I write it my post will be erased, which happened before already.
DeleteJAT was profitabile? Yeah one or two years out of 45 i think.
Delete
DeleteAir Baltic is not a joint owned airline between Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. It is not even a national carrier of all 3 coutries. BT is Latvian owned airline and national carrier of Latvia. It has not any connection with goverments of Estonia or Lithuania neither is payed by them. BT has only bases in these coutries which is possible because of EU membership. Something like Air Baltic in ex yu can only be made by Croatia Airlines with establishing a base in Ljubljana.
Yes, JAT was profitable. Not talking about post-war time when it was established, or periods of development, but last 10-15 years of its operations, JAT did not receive one single cent/dinar from the budget. It was on opened market, it had competitive prices, it carried millions of foreign transit passengers, had hub and spoke system, developed national network, numerous additional services, excellent inflight service, and not one single "political" service except Tirana. JAT flew full planes on profitable routes, tourists, diaspora and business people. I know some of people, especially younger, cannot understand that Yugoslavia had in its last two decades, market economy, with some particularities, and some very successful companies who were able to make business on international market, as for example Elan, Gorenje, Hidroelektra, Energoinvest, Prva petoletka. And one of those successful companies, after 1970, was JAT
Delete@An12.30
DeleteThey were not protected by govt. They had direct competition on domestic market from Adria, Panadria/Transadria and Aviogenex. Hub and spoke system with proper waves existed, domestic services, Eastern and Southern Europe services and Middle East services were feeding Western and Northern Europe and North America network, and it functioned both ways. Also lot of European passengers used its long haul flights to the Far East and Australia. The best proof for that is DC-10 operating to LHR on days when flights were departing/arriving from Australia. Once again, the only unprofitable route was Tirana. If you don't understand the difference between overall profitability and prices structure, I will tell you that you are partially right because domestic services did have lower prices than needed to be profitable, as a general rule, but "euromediterranean" and long-haul income was such to cover all the losses made on domestic services, which were simultaneously helping "feeding" international ones, and in that way, "repaying" for its losses. So looking strictly and only on domestic services, yes, they were not profitable, but the whole system was profitable. And hub and spoke. To which extent you have no idea what you talk about is example of the service that never existed and it shows how correct are the stories you are told
Service between OHD and DBV existed so i dont know what are you talking about. But i never flew with them, never expirience them so let we say that i will b you same as i will believe you same as i would belive Alen Scuric and his expiriences about JAT and their hub&spoke model.
Delete*believe
DeleteRe: pozdrav iz Rijeke
DeleteEverything you mention seems correct (although I didn't live at that era or have a chance to glance at JAT's financial reports, I know the aviation economics and it was the golden age for hub&spoke model when LCCs did not exist in Europe), but let me correct one term. Transit passengers are the ones arriving and leaving the airport with the same flight number (i.e. passengers flying from Beijing to Belgrade on Hainan Airlines flight PEK-PRG-BEG are considered transit in Prague, as they arrive and leave PRG with the same flight number), but the passengers arriving and leaving an airport with different flight numbers are called "transfer passengers". I believe your message @12.19 refers to transfer passengers, not transit. These two terms are highly confusing as many countries' aviation glossaries do not even differentiate two terms and use both words to define "transfer passengers".
airBaltic is successful project only until Latvian taxpayers are willing to pay for it.
DeleteAirbaltic is succesulf because they got 132 million of capital from private investor for 20% of shares. And they didnt even got any aid from 2012. to 2019.
Delete@An.14.38
DeleteAlways willing to accept justified criticism. Transfer was the term I should have used. Thanks!
"Something like Air Baltic in ex yu can only be made by Croatia Airlines with establishing a base in Ljubljana"
DeleteWrong. For example, Slovenian airline Solinar could buy a passenger aircraft and base it Zagreb, but that act would make Zagrebers (correct demonym for but it sounds horrible - Purgers sound better) really terrified.
No. I gave you an example how would airline like BT look at ex-yu. Air Baltic is state owned national carrier. Solinair is neither of that.
DeleteLOL If you followed the news: Solinar asked for Slo govt financial help to start passenger ops, which would likely mean some govt equity in Solinar, i.e. partial govt ownership. Anyway, private or not, Solinar could start ops in ZAG and that's something like Air Baltic did in other countries.
DeleteGovernment equity in Solinair would require approval from their owner, which is unlikely to happen. Anyway, IF plans about Solinair becoming involved in passenger operation, it will likely be with a new company, to minimize exposure to risk in highly likely case of it becoming a failure.
DeleteSolinair in ZAG? There's not even a single aircraft in LJU, where there is almost no competition, and you want them to start competing with the bottomless pit, serviced by taxpayers that is OU?
Who says I want Solinair to start competing against OU? Fact check please. I just said "Something like Air Baltic in ex yu can only be made by Croatia Airlines with establishing a base in Ljubljana" is not true. And it isn't.
DeleteAgain, they are not national carrier so they cannot be a equivalent to BT.
DeleteAgain, Slo govt is planning a new govt airline and that one can base an aircraft in ZAG. It's 100% not true only OU could do it.
DeleteBut that "new" airline does not exist so currently only simliar concept to BT can be made by OUl.
DeleteKad preprodaju E195 koga su platili za Beograd ce im odraditi Er Srbija, za ostalo samo da placaju LCC kompanije za jedan let nedeljno u vansezoni. Pametnima dosta.
ReplyDeleteBravo Montenegro!!
ReplyDelete1:0 vs Slovenian government and other smart guys...
Learn from them!..and shame on you to let Adria perish
SMFH
Delete@9.28 and @10.12 said it best - an LCC model that also wants to run with Embraer's, interline and codeshare ... er, not gonna happen (and perhaps this "expert" is at best, talking about a hybrid model).
ReplyDeleteThat is why it is best for politicians and bureaucrats to refrain from making public statements beyond their area of expertise or knowledge. It sets unrealistic public expectations, which brings unnecessary pressure on those who are trying their best to do the right thing (behind the scenes).
They should - at most - set the high level agenda (which they have already done) in stating their desire for a new airline and then leave it to their consultants to flesh out the detail around what this might look like and what they believe will best serve their needs.
They should refrain from any further "shooting from the hip" .... it will otherwise, only serve to embarrass them.
Let's see if they consider LIS and resume flights as it was quite a potential route.
ReplyDeletema kakvi
Deletethere has not been a lcc with embraers. what are they talking about
ReplyDeleteJetblue has embraers, what are you talking about
Deletethey are gonna retire all of them
DeleteBut they still have them
DeleteBut they don't have 1 or 2 or 3 of them.
DeleteCan't be an LCC with 3 aircraft, even if they are the A320/B737 like other LCCs have.
This is all so fishy. It gives me those vibes when someone has a bakery called xxx and then they close it and open the same banker called xxx011, just to avoid creditors.
ReplyDeleteim afraif they are bigger amateurs then YM were
ReplyDeleteIm afraif too.
DeleteA low cost national airline in ex-Yu. That I've gotta see.
ReplyDeleteCould there be any truth to stories of zee Germans trying to destroy new Montenegro airline like 4K did to Adria??? Nooo way:
ReplyDeleteNemci zainteresovani za novu crnogorsku avio-kompaniju: Ambasador Nemačke Robert Veber posebno je zainteresovan za aktuelnu situaciju u vezi sa Montenegro erlajnsom kao i za dalje planove vlade koji se ticu osnivanja nove nacionalne avio kompanije
https://www.rtv.rs/sr_lat/region/nemci-zainteresovani-za-novu-crnogorsku-avio-kompaniju_1193899.html
Ko će biti konsultant za To Montenegro: Na pitanje da li je tačno da će konsultant za ovaj posao biti iz Nemačke, iz resora Vlade je odgovoreno da je moguće, ali da konačna odluka o tome još nije donesena
https://www.b92.net/biz/vesti/region.php?yyyy=2021&mm=01&dd=20&nav_id=1798127
LJU Fraport is not supportive of new government airline in Slovenia so similar attitude against ToMontenegro should come as no surprise.
DeleteOther countries like Russia and Serbia send more tourists to Montenegro than Germany but those countries didn't show same interest in new airline as Germany did.
They should collaborate with Izet Rastoder who bought Adria AOC.
ReplyDeleteApril 1 launch date, doesn*t anyone see ... April Fools !!!
ReplyDelete