Airline Pilot Central Forums - [Breeze] Airways

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Breeze (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/breeze/)

- - [Breeze] Airways (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/breeze/114461-breeze-airways.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Puddy (Post 2976655)

Your seating assumptions are off. You are looking at the smaller A220-100. The bigger A220-300 can seat up to 150 in an all economy layout (Breeze may offer a flexible/changeable seating arrangement including all economy on some routes) and the geared turbofan engine yields at least a 20% improvement in efficiency than the legacy 737NG and A320. The CASM for the A220-300 is far lower than the typical 737-800.

With all of the legacy 737-800s coming off lease and becoming available (and now going to cargo operators like Southern Air and even Mesa Airlines), why didn’t Dave Neeleman just order cheap, used 737-800s for Breeze? Used 737-800s might be cheaper than a volume order for the A220-300. Because they aren’t designed/optimized and flexible enough for “ultra-low” cost operations. Have you not read his article about why he chose the A220-300? It’s a long article but he has a good section on why he chose the A220-300:

https://crankyflier.com/2020/02/07/d...oss-the-aisle/

If/when Airbus offers the proposed bigger A220-500 with even more seats (Air France and other airlines have expressed interest in it), watch the CASM become even more competitive with more seats to spread costs over.

If DN wants to fly longer routes with an A220-300, I highly doubt they would configure them with 150 seats. That would dig into their range instantly, specially out of secondary Airports which would have shorter runways. How about cargo capacity?Still doesn't answer the question. How is an A220-300 more cost effective than an B738? How about the E-195's? How is this gas guzzler going to compete with an 800? Have you made the cost to operate difference between the ERJ's and 800's? Not to mention that ERJ's would pretty much make Breeze less attractive for pilots. The "Regional Airline" stigma. Why leave a Regional with a flow to a Major Airline for a start-up? Something needs to be offered upfront to the pilot group otherwise it will prove to be a difficult to recruit qualified Airmen. If I had 2.000 hours and were looking for a job, after applying to all the Majors (of course), I would look at these 2 start-ups and would rather have a B737 type than a ERJ, assuming they oth offered me a position. I've read those articles and DN has a plan. AL has his own plan. Similar but still very different. Great. And I wish Levy and Neeleman the best. The Industry does need a Breeze of Xtra fresh air.
BTW, Mesa will not be flying 800's but CL's (300's and/or 400's) instead and 737NG cargo conversions have proven to be cost prohibitive.
Interesting discussion though,
Chop

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChopperHopper (Post 2976688)

I don’t disagree about the E195s. Not as efficient as the A220-300. I think DN probably wanted to get started sooner and his Azul connection allowed him to access “cheap” E195s sooner than the A220-300s could come off the assembly line in Mobile (especially with some production delays). It’s a trade off - the E195s must be cheap which means the low financing cost maybe partially makes up for the higher operating costs per seat. Plus, there are plenty of E175/190 pilots out there to facilitate a quicker start up.

Personally I would focus on A220-300s and bigger 500s to keep the average CASM low but DN seems to want to take advantage of the market opportunity now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Puddy (Post 2976698)

With the extremely low capital cost of the 195s, he has no need to fly it with high utilization, unlike a brand new plane which will need high utilization to make money. It’s no different than Allegiant (or cargo companies) buying old planes...lower acquisition costs work for low utilization operations, even if they aren’t as fuel efficient. This mix will allow Breeze to have some low utilization bases/routes and mix that with higher utilization A220s.

Also, for the 195s, DN has said he won’t fly them more than 2 hours. For a 1-2 hour flight, the economics of the 195 aren’t that bad...20% more seats over the 190 and only slightly higher fuel costs.

Also, getting an initial cadre group of regional E175 check airmen wasn’t very hard for him to do. I think having a bunch of seasoned 175 pilots will help the initial operation get off the ground before the 220s get there.

Tell that to operators In Europe like Ryan air and Jet2 who are extremely profitable with the 737

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Puddy (Post 2976368)

Sounds like Sun Country. The 737 is not optimized for super low cost travel - the A220-300 is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesholzhauer (Post 2976726)

how many have they hired so far?

You guys crack me up with this my airplane is better than your airplane stuff.

there are many line items that drive CASM. Getting an airframe for a steal can make up for lots of shortcomings in fuel efficiency etc.

the other thing is not to get too myopic on cost. Yes - lower cost is better than higher cost. But you also have to drive revenue and customer experience.

thats where DL drives differentiation. It seems that this is also Breeze’s angle. Offer a good/innovative product in markets with relative little to no competition while not let cost run out of control.

It is all about market segmentation and the overall mix.

I think they have a really good **** at it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Puddy (Post 2976665)

Really? You think Ryanair would be just as profitable if it paid current SWA wage levels (assuming normal flying with the MAX back in operation and more open flying time for pilots)? I know SWA Captains earning $300K+ and I doubt any Ryanair pilots come close.

I sure hope any SWA CA's you meet are making $300k. Unless they drop everything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TFAYD (Post 2976793)

I agree with a lot of what you are saying. The A220 is very ergonomic compared to the 737NG. And the range capability provides great route flexibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 2976804)

I sure hope any SWA CA's you meet are making $300k. Unless they drop everything.

exactly what I was thinking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluedriver (Post 2976007)

Caution, there's another airline he started in the US that constantly tells it's staff they are well taken care of, but it simply isn't true. It's a mind trick that largely works on a significant proportion of the population.

Just keep telling them they are well paid, and keep sending happy emails, and people will work for less for decades.

Also, people keep saying "what were F9, Spirit, JB, Allegiant pay rates x years ago?"... Those companies STILL pay WELL below market leading rates, some of them dramatically well below, after decades. And UAL and DL (and I think AA) are currently in negotiations and will likely pull even further ahead in the next couple of years.

And some dude has suggested an airline should have 30 year pay steps? That's a terrible idea. Pilots should negotiate for the best top rate possible, and then hope to achieve that rate in the shortest time possible. Postponing top rate for 20-30 years is a terrible idea, and the hope that a 30 year rate would be higher than a 12 year rate, that money has to come from somewhere, and it will come out of the 12 year rate... Simply a terrible idea.

What your not seeing is that most people get seniority reset when they move from their regional if your hiring people at 1500 hours its reasonable for your year 5 rate to be equal to most majors year 1 rates. It would be better for pilots career progression for their to one seniority list from the start to the end of someones carrier even if that means lower year one pay and more years on pay levels