Lufthansa Group Reveals Plans For Their Four Hubs

I’ve written before about how the ‘Big 3’ airlines are forming in Europe – IAG, Air France/KLM, and Deutsche Lufthansa (Lufthansa Group).

Each of the Big 3 has slightly different growth strategies, and there were some very interesting insights into Lufthansa’s growth strategy that Tiffany sent me me last week, as part of the announcement of their new service to Austin.

I had previously considered the group’s strategies as a series of brands (Swiss, Brussels Airlines, etc.) given they all fly to so many of the same destinations and are located so close to each other geographically. However, the details from the group last week made me realise their strategy is more around multiple hubs rather than multiple brands.

I had originally considered Brussels to be a hub for Lufthansa Group, as it is the home of Brussels Airlines and connects passengers, especially between Europe and West Africa. But the announcement from Lufthansa Group does not mention Brussels once, so I now understand the group’s hubs to be as follows:

  • Munich
  • Frankfurt
  • Zurich
  • Vienna

Munich

Lufthansa Group is rapidly growing their Munich hub much faster than any other hub and will focus on increases in both first class passengers and Asian flights.

They have already moved five Lufthansa A380s from Frankfurt to Munich, and this has been so successful they are considering moving more in the coming years (remembering Lufthansa has a fairly small A380 fleet of 14 aircraft, with no more on order).

Additional narrow body aircraft will be moved from Frankfurt to Munich to support increased connecting passenger flows onto these larger aircraft at Munich.

Munich could be the future of Lufthansa first class, with most of the A340s that feature first class to be moved from Frankfurt to Munich as well. Munich will focus on both premium passengers (in line with the increase in first class aircraft), as well as services to Asia, with increased frequencies to Seoul and Singapore, as well as new routes from Munich, to both Bangkok and Osaka, the latter being transferred from Frankfurt.

The group expects double digit growth in terms of passengers numbers at Munich which is impressive for such an established airline.

Frankfurt

When most people think of Lufthansa, they think of Frankfurt.

In terms of passenger numbers, Frankfurt is still by far the busiest airport in Germany (and one of the busiest in Europe), with almost 50% more passengers each year than Munich, which is the second busiest in Germany.

Now Lufthansa Group is not looking to downsize Frankfurt per se, but they are planning to limit their growth at Frankfurt in the short term to improve their on time performance. They will add some new destinations from Frankfurt but these are not the long haul, premium destinations you might guess (other than, perhaps Austin although Tiffany has predicted the new route will not feature first class). And note some of their biggest aircraft will be (or have already been) moved to Munich as discussed above.

Lufthansa Group is focusing on having a good quality destination mix from Frankfurt, to attract connecting customers.

Zurich

While Swiss has an excellent first class product both in the air and on the ground, and an extensive long haul route network, the focus for this hub over the next 12 months will be European destinations, with only moderate growth.

I would expect to see new European destinations (they’ve just announced services to Bremen), as well an increased flights to existing European destinations.

This means it is likely there will be no new long haul destinations announced by Swiss over the next 12 months.

Vienna

Similarly to Zurich, Lufthansa Group will be focusing on new European destinations from Vienna, rather than new long haul destinations, although it will increase the frequencies of some existing Austrian services to North America.

Lufthansa Group is so focused on the efficiencies and profitability of each hub in its own right that they have not yet decided where they will base the new Boeing 777-9s, which will be delivered from 2020 onwards.

They will continue to shift aircraft and routes between hubs quite rapidly to both save and make money.

What about Berlin?

Berlin is a fascinating city for aviation. Despite being the capital of Germany, and its biggest city population-wise, it has only the fourth busiest airport in Germany (Dusseldorf is third). This is due to a number of factors, not the least because of the unfortunate tale that is Berlin Brandenburg airport, which I have written about in detail here.

You may recall that when airberlin ceased services altogether, Lufthansa stepped in to operate flights between Berlin Tegel and New York. So, there was a chance Lufthansa would build up services to and from Berlin Tegel and potentially even turn the airport into a mini-hub, noting the space and capacity constraints of Tegels unusual design.

But unfortunately Berlin to New York was not successful for Lufthansa, and they ceased flying this route earlier this year. This means the group only operates flights from Tegel to their four hubs.

I was quite saddened to learn that the biggest operator from Germany’s capital airport is now… easyJet.

Bottom line

I always find it interesting to hear about how the Big 3 US legacy carriers (American, Delta and United) make their multi-hubs work, especially how they target certain hubs for certain passenger mixes, and these aren’t necessarily the passengers from the geographic locations closest to that particular hub.

But I had always thought of Lufthansa Group as a series of brands/airlines rather than a series of hubs, and it shows just how well the group’s centralised management systems are working that they can switch in and out aircraft and routes so easily to both reduce costs and maximize revenue.

I found it especially interesting that Lufthansa is so focused on making Munich a premium hub, at the expense of Frankfurt. It will be very interesting to see when and if Munich overtakes Frankfurt in terms of number of flights with first class.

Which Lufthansa Group hub do you prefer to connect at?

Conversations (31)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

Bagoly Guest

I agree that Berlin will not be attractive for airlines doing long-haul until they sort out an airport. SXF and TXL recently made it into a bottom ten list of airports in Europe, and that is not surprising. Berlin catchment area is much of western Poland too - the only long-haul connections from POZ are via FRA, MUC or WAW (so all effectively LH) Poor but adventurous does indeed describe much of the Berlin area population - once there is an airport that can cope effectively with large 'planeloads, I could see it making sense for Norwegian to fly from Berlin to many of the Condor destinations, for which we currently have to connect in FRA.

0
‼ 0
j Guest

The problem with Berlin is not about the city at this point. It's the problem with the airports. If they were to build a functioning, modern airport it would become an important hub.

0
‼ 0
phillies88 Guest

Some comments regarding the LH Group fleet (I am working as a consultant in the aerospace sector). There are some undergoing major efforts by the group to further standardize the airplane configuration. Starting 2019, all newly delivered airplanes from the A320 family will have the same cabin equipment (overhead bins, seats, cabin dividers, galleys), freight loading system, uniform safety and cockpit equipment and functionality. To some extend this will also be rolled out to the 777X deliveries. Especially since the new business class will be rolled out to Swiss and Austrian as well. Groupwide re-painting of engines and wings (white) especially at the Eurowings fleet will further harmonize the fleet. All of this is clearly geared towards flexibility in terms of fleet planning and utilization. Lastly consolidated flight training schools (European Flight Academy) are an additional effort to increase synergies.

0
‼ 0
Batman Guest

Brussels is considerred a hub by LH! It is clearly (also stated) the Africa Hub and is going to be expanded for that business. Brussels will be integrated into Eurowings and they are taking over the longhaul handling and provide planes for a better experience for customers and bring in stability into operations in long-term. Austrian is facing massive competition by LaudaAir/RyanAir and other LCCs and has had problems with their numbers for a while. Now that staffers have new contracts, their homework is to show the numbers to be receiving more and new planes by LH. It is openly - and clearly communicated that way. SWISS has a very good reputation for premium cabin and with Edelweiss for the leisure traveller. However, there is potential to expand within European network. So why not. Swiss also has the advantage of travellers with bigger pockets, also one reason not to consider PE for now. The issue with FRA has already been stated above. Why would LH want to pay more, when LCCs pay less and FRAs performance seems to disappoint them too. I prefer to connect in ZRH, MUC when flying LH group anytime over the huge and clogged FRA airport. The Berlin issue is nothing new and it has been said. Low yield. Eurowings will now fly both NYC airports on the same day, taking over LH traffic. They are getting the BIZClass to lure the low yield customers to pay for better inflight experience. Leave aside the major hiccup with too rapid expansion and resulting performance issues. Many travellers departing from BER are actually from Poland. There is an intercity train to Warsaw that only needs a couple of hours and the flight network and prices offered for leisure travellers is better. Even with BER opening, the idea was always just to have a "capital" airport. If AB or LH would not create a hub there, it would suffer heavily. In fact, now the LCC terminal is going to be expanded, as the biggest demand is calculated there. Just the same with HAM. Many of the travellers there are actually from Denmark, as they prefer to fly from there than from CPH or BLL and use long term parking for their car there. Germans on the other hand fly to CPH/OSL/ARN/WAW etc to make use of the better prices. Just a couple of points that can be researched quite easily...

0
‼ 0
Alex Mas Guest

I understand that Berlin is relatively poor city by German standards , but that it is by standards of the biggest and one of the most developed nations in Europe. Current intercontinental network from Berlin is a plain joke. Warsaw (1/3 of Berlin GDP ppp ?) has bigger American network. Kiev (1/10 of Berlin GDP ppp ??) has about the same American network as Berlin and slightly bigger Asian network (yes, that’s Kiev , Ukraine) This is a good case of what happens if you don’t have a hub. You just become a mindless collection of low cost / short haul flights that by no means make a truly global city. I think Germany can and should do better.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member