Swiss Air?
Feb 18th, 2004, 01:18 PM
#2
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
purplefreak,
I flew them last March to Venice via Zurich from the midwest - so not too recently, but not that long ago. My experience was good (I am flying them again in May). The plane I was on had, I think, a 2-4-2 configuration. And it had the tv screens in each seat. The plane itself was very clean and the food was well airplane food.
Take care,
SRS
Feb 18th, 2004, 01:24 PM
#3
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They were previously one of the big major national airlines, flag carrier for the country. Then four things happened.
They started a subsidiary called CrossAir, and for reasons that I don't fully understand some of the best management gravitiated to this subsidiary. I am not really sure if this was before or afer the crash of SwissAir 111 off of Newfoundland in 1996 - - for which 1.5 Billion USD (yes, billion) was paid out in compensation to survivors and families (have you watched Nova this week? Scary).
They invested heavily in Sabena, the Belgian national carrier, (bought 48% of the company?) and through a number of factors, Sabena went bankrupt.
Due to weakened management, and the burden of the bankrupt Sabena, SwissAir collapsed financially. But they still had this successful and profitable subsidiary called CrossAir with good and talented people.
The Swiss government wasn't prepared to let the country be represented by a subsidiary, or no airline at all, so the management of CrossAir and some consortium of financial backers (including the Swiss government? I'm not sure) resurrected the company under a new name, simply Swiss.
I think they are still struggling, and like many airlines run some incredibly deep discounted fares (So is USair and Lufthannsa, and AirFrance, and AerLingus). Other than the ten days or so of their financial collapse and re-organization about two years ago, I have heard no stories of their providing their passengers an unsatisfactory flight.
If any of this is factually inaccurate, I am sorry - - it is simply how I recall it. I didn't do any research to confirm if I have sequences of events right before posting this.
Best wishes,
Rex
They started a subsidiary called CrossAir, and for reasons that I don't fully understand some of the best management gravitiated to this subsidiary. I am not really sure if this was before or afer the crash of SwissAir 111 off of Newfoundland in 1996 - - for which 1.5 Billion USD (yes, billion) was paid out in compensation to survivors and families (have you watched Nova this week? Scary).
They invested heavily in Sabena, the Belgian national carrier, (bought 48% of the company?) and through a number of factors, Sabena went bankrupt.
Due to weakened management, and the burden of the bankrupt Sabena, SwissAir collapsed financially. But they still had this successful and profitable subsidiary called CrossAir with good and talented people.
The Swiss government wasn't prepared to let the country be represented by a subsidiary, or no airline at all, so the management of CrossAir and some consortium of financial backers (including the Swiss government? I'm not sure) resurrected the company under a new name, simply Swiss.
I think they are still struggling, and like many airlines run some incredibly deep discounted fares (So is USair and Lufthannsa, and AirFrance, and AerLingus). Other than the ten days or so of their financial collapse and re-organization about two years ago, I have heard no stories of their providing their passengers an unsatisfactory flight.
If any of this is factually inaccurate, I am sorry - - it is simply how I recall it. I didn't do any research to confirm if I have sequences of events right before posting this.
Best wishes,
Rex
Feb 18th, 2004, 01:27 PM
#4
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good afternoon, Have flow Swiss Intl.
(old Swissair) about 16 out of 22 RTcrossings.. The last one ws last November taking advantage of a two for
one deal. Have always been satisified with Swiss, however do regret that if
you e mailk their sales department in NYC with a problem, mine was ignored and
NO reply was received. Also as of last
November all Swiss flites in and out
of Venice ceased.. They fly into both
Geneva and Zurich, hweever have always used Zurich, always stay over night there on our last night in EUR. Have been very satisified with Swiss and
their EUR connections..
Richard of LaGrange Park, Il..
(old Swissair) about 16 out of 22 RTcrossings.. The last one ws last November taking advantage of a two for
one deal. Have always been satisified with Swiss, however do regret that if
you e mailk their sales department in NYC with a problem, mine was ignored and
NO reply was received. Also as of last
November all Swiss flites in and out
of Venice ceased.. They fly into both
Geneva and Zurich, hweever have always used Zurich, always stay over night there on our last night in EUR. Have been very satisified with Swiss and
their EUR connections..
Richard of LaGrange Park, Il..
Feb 18th, 2004, 06:01 PM
#6
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flew old Swiss air through Zurich on way to Rome (2001). The flight was fine, but some of our bags arrived a full day after us. In Italy they told us that Zurich had one of the least organized baggage systems. When we were stop for our layover in Zurich there was a lot of construction going so that may have been part of the problem. But this was in 2001 - so hopefully things ahave improved.
Feb 18th, 2004, 06:21 PM
#7
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Swiss is but a pale shadow of the (alas!) now defunct Swissair. Swissair was a class act. My experiences on the new Swiss have been reasonably good. They come across as an efficient airline and in this they rub shoulders with other European carriers like Lufthansa. Their seat pitch in Economy barely clears the minimum required for comfort. And despite their claim they are not representative of "Swiss values" (which one associates with elegant, premium products and service).
For more comments, see the passenger opinions under Swiss at http://www.airlinequality.com
For more comments, see the passenger opinions under Swiss at http://www.airlinequality.com
Feb 18th, 2004, 08:53 PM
#8
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have flown Swiss from Rome to Los Angeles and I really liked it. MUCH better than Alitalia (for personnel kindness, punctuality and reliability -they don't strike like ALitalia does). My father also flew Swiss (when it was still Swiss Air actually) getting an excellent senior fare from Rome to Bucharest (it was half the price of the Alitalia/Tarom super pex fare), therefore I recommend it.
The problems that Swiss has had in the past are not uncommon to other airlines nowadays.
The problems that Swiss has had in the past are not uncommon to other airlines nowadays.
Feb 18th, 2004, 11:05 PM
#9
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rex,
Sorry to say so, but your version of the facts isn't exactly right...
- Crossair was started by a Mr. S, an ex Swissair manager, because he saw the upcoming niche market for european flights. His base airport was Mulhouse-Basel. Swissair wasn't interested in this market, she was still dreaming to become a world leader.
She probably had some parts of Crossair but the relations were mainly tainted with distrust and arrogance from Swissair. Crossair indeed had an excellent management and developped very well.
- Swissair invested heavily in Sabena, emptied the company of its substance and let it go bankrupt. Sabena was in this sense certainly no burden for Swissair. Court actions are ongoing.
- Swissair collapsed financially, certainly for a different number of reasons. Some of them are bad management, arrogance and megalomanic behaviour of an ex CEO, who, if I recall well, fled to South Africa afterwards.
So Swissair went bankrupt. Thousands of people in Switzerland lost their savings, because Swissair was an icon to the public, the pride of the country, and everyone invested his savings in SA.
As the Swiss government, indeed, wasn't prepared to live without airline company, Crossair changed names and became Swiss. All flights are now LX and not SA anymore. It costed 2.000.000.000 Sfr of public money. (Population of 7 million)to start the new company.
Wage agreements between pilots from SA and LX have only recently been settled, SA pilots earning 2,5 times more than the Crossair pilots...
- Since then, it isn't going any better, allthough the company's financial analysts and communication people tell you the contrary. They really have a bunch of people that can announce red figures as a benefit. The public trust is strongly diminished. They already had 2 or 3 downscalings of their aircrafts and flight schedules.
Some people think they are now gently preparing to ask for more public funding.
With that come the enormous problems of Zurich airport, 'Unique' as it is named... It is indeed unique; a great part of it is empty and the main company may not survive in the next years.
Zurich airport is already the first european airport for delays: 29 % of the flights arrive with a delay of more than 15 or 30 minutes. The bulk of the incoming traffic approaches the airport from the north and has exasperated the inhabitants of a zone of 50 km in Germany. An agreement has recently been signed limiting the number of these incoming flights. This leaves the possibility for the southern approach, which means that the Swiss from the Lake Zurich 'Gold coast' suffer from passing aircrafts now....
Over the last ten years, Swissair has also gradually emptied Geneva airport from an important part of the Swissair/Swiss flights.
Recently, they went on the cheap flight market. I took one recently to London. It is OK. You have to pay for your drinks and food. Normally, if reserved well in advance, Easyjet is cheaper and stands easily to comparison.
Rex, this is just another sound of the bell. The imbroglio is so enormous that nobody can tell you the 'truth'.
Sorry to say so, but your version of the facts isn't exactly right...
- Crossair was started by a Mr. S, an ex Swissair manager, because he saw the upcoming niche market for european flights. His base airport was Mulhouse-Basel. Swissair wasn't interested in this market, she was still dreaming to become a world leader.
She probably had some parts of Crossair but the relations were mainly tainted with distrust and arrogance from Swissair. Crossair indeed had an excellent management and developped very well.
- Swissair invested heavily in Sabena, emptied the company of its substance and let it go bankrupt. Sabena was in this sense certainly no burden for Swissair. Court actions are ongoing.
- Swissair collapsed financially, certainly for a different number of reasons. Some of them are bad management, arrogance and megalomanic behaviour of an ex CEO, who, if I recall well, fled to South Africa afterwards.
So Swissair went bankrupt. Thousands of people in Switzerland lost their savings, because Swissair was an icon to the public, the pride of the country, and everyone invested his savings in SA.
As the Swiss government, indeed, wasn't prepared to live without airline company, Crossair changed names and became Swiss. All flights are now LX and not SA anymore. It costed 2.000.000.000 Sfr of public money. (Population of 7 million)to start the new company.
Wage agreements between pilots from SA and LX have only recently been settled, SA pilots earning 2,5 times more than the Crossair pilots...
- Since then, it isn't going any better, allthough the company's financial analysts and communication people tell you the contrary. They really have a bunch of people that can announce red figures as a benefit. The public trust is strongly diminished. They already had 2 or 3 downscalings of their aircrafts and flight schedules.
Some people think they are now gently preparing to ask for more public funding.
With that come the enormous problems of Zurich airport, 'Unique' as it is named... It is indeed unique; a great part of it is empty and the main company may not survive in the next years.
Zurich airport is already the first european airport for delays: 29 % of the flights arrive with a delay of more than 15 or 30 minutes. The bulk of the incoming traffic approaches the airport from the north and has exasperated the inhabitants of a zone of 50 km in Germany. An agreement has recently been signed limiting the number of these incoming flights. This leaves the possibility for the southern approach, which means that the Swiss from the Lake Zurich 'Gold coast' suffer from passing aircrafts now....
Over the last ten years, Swissair has also gradually emptied Geneva airport from an important part of the Swissair/Swiss flights.
Recently, they went on the cheap flight market. I took one recently to London. It is OK. You have to pay for your drinks and food. Normally, if reserved well in advance, Easyjet is cheaper and stands easily to comparison.
Rex, this is just another sound of the bell. The imbroglio is so enormous that nobody can tell you the 'truth'.
Feb 19th, 2004, 03:53 AM
#10
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, Baldrick - - just as Esimos have 100 different words for snow, you see this story different than I heard it - - and it seems that you must be closer to the facts and the impact on the people of Switzerland.
From where I sit, my version and yours were just mildly different.
But this "cross-examination" that routinely occurs here is vitazl to the forum.
In fact, it is a reason I often cite why private e-mail questions and answers are a bad idea.
From where I sit, my version and yours were just mildly different.
But this "cross-examination" that routinely occurs here is vitazl to the forum.
In fact, it is a reason I often cite why private e-mail questions and answers are a bad idea.
Feb 19th, 2004, 08:32 AM
#11
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Swissair debacle is a puzzle for the 'outsider.' That the Swiss people, who have built and superbly managed such a beautiful country for themselves, are having so hard a time managing an airline is somewhat of a mystery.
Feb 20th, 2004, 07:41 AM
#13
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,906
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
agtoau,
one reason might be that airlines do not operate in a free (or somehow fair regulated) market. Every country tries to protect his own market and own airlines with sometimes bizarre rules. And Switzerland itself is a small country ...
In addition to that they obviously had a bad management. Some decicisions (like purchasing a significant number of Sabena shares) were hazardous.
It doesn't look like they would go bankrupt this year, though.
one reason might be that airlines do not operate in a free (or somehow fair regulated) market. Every country tries to protect his own market and own airlines with sometimes bizarre rules. And Switzerland itself is a small country ...
In addition to that they obviously had a bad management. Some decicisions (like purchasing a significant number of Sabena shares) were hazardous.
It doesn't look like they would go bankrupt this year, though.
Feb 20th, 2004, 12:04 PM
#14
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking in very broad generalities, the passengers of grounded airlines do eventually get accommodated on other airlines.
I would be tempted to gamble on these low fares, if they appear to fit your needs and provide real savings to you.
I would be tempted to gamble on these low fares, if they appear to fit your needs and provide real savings to you.
