Editorial

The New Compensation Battle

A battle currently taking place within the framework of the European Union may have gone un-noticed but it’s a battle that could impact any traveller and invariably is a battle that many travellers have fought over the years. In simple terms – if there is such a thing – the airlines of Europe want to water down the rules and regulations they are obliged to work to when it comes to compensating passengers for cancelled or delayed flights. A move which also pits two sides of the European bureaucracy against each other in what amusingly can be referenced as the democratic versus the un democratic employees of the European Union.

The European Parliament has just voted to maintain the current three-hour delay threshold for the payment of compensation for delayed flights reaffirming the position by the EU’s  transport MEP’s. On the other side of the ring is the European Council who, acting on behalf of the airlines are trying to force through a rule change that would mean compensation is only paid (begrudgingly) after a ‘’four hours plus’” delay on short and medium haul flights and after six hours plus on long haul flights. Additionally, the airlines are trying to limit the amounts the pay out up to 300 Euro for Short/medium haul flights and 500-600 Euro for long haul flights.

It is important to note the difference between the European Parliament and the European Council. The Parliament represents citizens (directly elected) whilst the Council brings together national heads of state to set political direction. In other words, it is perhaps a situation of “’the people v the rest’” scenario.

The Parliament also backed changes to allow passengers to carry both a personal bag and a piece of hand luggage onboard free of charge, though the definitions in terms of sizes were not mentioned. Additionally, free seating should be available for adults accompanying a child under 14 and individuals with reduced mobility. The final approval was the requirement for airlines to provide pre-filled forms to simplify compensation and reimbursement claims.

The airlines would, in an ideal world, prefer the American style of protection for passengers which amounts to almost zero. Knowing that this is not likely to happen the best they can achieve would be to water down their existing obligations and even to make them so opaque they make as few pay outs as possible. The noise from the airlines is of course the bog standard ”the rules may lead to increased travel costs and reduced competition”’ (quote). Just how it reduces competition is hard to see but this is the usual tack from airlines.

If we take a small step back and think what the current EU rules are and how they were originally intended; an airline chooses how to operate its fleet and where to base its fleet. If, for example, it operates a route which is Milan – Sofia – Milan, the airline can choose whether to base planes in both Milan and Sofia or in just one of these locations. If a plane departs Milan several hours late because of a technical issue or crew issue the airline could have and maybe should have either a) a replacement plane available in Milan and ready to be operated with the crew or b) a plane based in Sofia that can ensure Sofia departing passengers are not inconvenienced or delayed. The fact that the airline is unlikely to either have a spare plane in Milan or one sat around in Sofia is unlikely; but this is their operational decision to reduce their cost of operation.

The current rules also give a wide berth to airlines when it comes to ‘’Get out excuses’” and we all hear about Air Traffic Control issues or weather conditions which are outside their control. In many cases such excuses are little more than a lie, but the airlines will assume that a large percentage of passengers will either believe the excuse or they wont bother with the compensation claims, even if they do, they will lose the paperwork files and engage any sort of gamesmanship to slow or halt payments.

If anyone has any sympathy for airlines despite the competitive environment they prevail in, they shouldn’t have. If you buy a ticket in February for travel in say September, the airline wants your money now so they can use if for immediate operational expenses, this is far cheaper than borrowing money from a bank. Perhaps the airline should pay interest on the money it’s taken from you prior to the service being provided? If you suddenly find you can’t travel don’t expect your money to be returned and indeed, that same seat can be sold several times over between now and September. It’s difficult to think of another industry which operates by borrowing other people’s money that is not institutional money and where the owner of that money (the traveller) has so little financial protection.

Parking Second Time Around

Sofia Airport has re-opened the multi-story car park at Terminal 2 which has been closed for renovation for a year, the budget for which was 16.6 million Euro. The total investment in the airport so far by operator SOF Connect is 93 million Euro with more to follow.

The multi-story car park, which was the only real alternative when the airport’s Terminal 2 first opened in late 2006, has four levels below ground and one above. Interesting to note that the PR blurb says that during the re-construction “modern civil engineering activities were used to strengthen the vertical elements with additional re-enforced concrete walls and earthquake washers as well as to reinforce the slabs with innovative carbon fibre and steel beams”.

The bottom line is, perhaps this should have been done properly in the first place, but that would require outside knowledge and intervention which would have disturbed the apple cart.

Better Late Than Never – Again

The bureaucrats at the EU have delayed the full implementation of the EES (Entry-Exit System) from April to September of this year, the introduction of which, began in October 2025. The EES in simplistic terms is the replacing of passport stamping for visitors from ‘’third countries’”, including the UK and USA, by the collection of biometric data from them at their point of entry into the EU. Countries were free to decide when they would start their own process, in Bulgaria that was in January of this year. Anyone arriving from a non-Schengen country would have noticed this biometric data collection behind administered at the passport control for any non-EU traveller who has not had the data taken from them already. Whilst the process was or is not onerous, it does add about 2 minutes onto each passport that has to be processed. The reason for the delay is that the paper crunchers didn’t consider that the vast majority of such travellers will be having their data collected in the peak season for travel, summer.  Thus, the potential for incurring huge and disruptive queues was high and the extension is thus designed to allow more time for the process to be completed.

It should also be noted that a country can ‘’switch off’ this process temporarily if their borders become clogged up with first time EU visitors (first time since the EES scheme began).

The EES is the precursor to the main story which is the introduction of the ETIAS or visa system whereby the cost outlay of the introduction of the new technology is transferred into a profit centre as the visas required for entry have a cost attached to them.

Making the Greens Red

The Amsterdam Schiphol Airport saga, which boils down to greens v commerce, rumbles on and on. For those unaware of what this refers to, the more green than green activists in the Netherlands want to restrict activities at the country’s main airport gateway at a time when it needs to expand to both keep up with rival airports as well as continue to act as a conduit for business. The argument that aircraft activity disturbs local inhabitants perhaps fails to take into account that the airport was likely there before people moved to live there. However, a classic compromise may be at hand: build another airport!

The Netherlands Lelystad Airport could open as early as 2027. It is already largely built with a 12,000sqM terminal already under construction and is located 55 kms from Amsterdam.it is already approved to handle A320 and Boeing 737 aircraft. Both Amsterdam Schiphol and the Lelystad Airport are operated by the same people.

Thus, what we may well see in the Netherlands is that the new facility becomes a Milan Bergamo or London Stanstead equivalent whereby in the first phase, Low Cost Airlines and Charter operations move to the new facility to reduce the pressure on the country’s main hub airport and then gradually new airline entrants will also use the new airport.
A move that somehow both the pragmatists and activists can swallow. Until that is, the activists realise they are missing a trick by not making a noise.

No Driver Required

In what may be seen by many as a sign of the times, yet by others as a “frightening development”, ride hailing company Uber expects to be able to offer rides in autonomous vehicles in 15 global cities by the end of this year. The cities include London, Zurich, Madrid and Munich in Europe, Los Angeles, Houston and San Francisco in the USA plus Hong Kong. This will join the US cities of Atlanta, Austin, Dallas and Phoenix plus Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Riyadh that are already operational.

Uber is working with multiple AI companies, some of which will already be a familiar name, such as Waabi, Nvidia, Waymo and Wayve to scale its operations globally. Uber intends to be the biggest facilitator of autonomous vehicle trips in the world by 2029.

The End is Nigh for Liquid Mayhem

There is nothing worse than the mayhem created by the what seems to be an “’individualistic’’ approach to what can and what cannot be carried in travellers hand luggage as they pass through screening at airports. Anyone who travels frequently will likely not be able to recall a time when they have not seen security staff opening people’s hand luggage whilst the owner waits nervously like a schoolchild about to be scolded. The whole process slowing down the movement of people and causing distress along the way. False dawns have prevailed many times about the relaxation of such rules but it seems that the momentum is now gathering for such excess security to be by passed.

London Heathrow is the latest major hub airport to relax the rules on liquids in hand luggage, some 20 years after they first came into effect. This means that passengers travelling through Europe’s busiest hub can now take liquids up to two litres in size through screening. There is also no longer the requirement to place containers in clear plastic bags or to remove them from hand luggage during the screening process.

The original rule came about in August 2006 when plans to blow up transatlantic flights was discovered and as a result, most airports worldwide implemented draconian measures on what can and what could not be carried in hand luggage. These restrictions have largely prevailed for 20 years despite the EU setting a deadline of April 2013 for airports to roll out new screening equipment. A statement that accurately reflects the creditworthiness of the European Union.

In recent years, several airports have also relaxed their own rules on liquids in hand luggage, usually without fuss or without the help (interference) from the EU, namely Milan, Munich and Barcelona amongst several. What is of course still frustrating for travellers is when on a journey, different airports have totally different requirements which only tends to create even more delays at the scanner point.

Theory and Reality

AI will change the world as we know it, or so we are “instructed” to believe. The world of travel, it is also said, is ripe for the use of such technology as it will expedite booking process’s and make life easier, or make that “allow businesses to make more money”. Just what those currently employed in travel will do in the future is erased from the conversation.

The recent lightening strike by Lufthansa Groups Pilots and Cabin Crew provides the perfect opportunity to showcase AI at its best; where it can be adopted to re-book travellers whose original flights have been impacted. Simple then.  Except there is a problem, AI isn’t a human and despite what we are told, can’t think or make decisions like a human.

Of our own travellers who were affected by the strike, AI took it upon itself to re-booked all of the disrupted flights, however not one of the re-booked options was fit for purpose. Travellers do not want to spend multiple hours or overnights at a random airport and they do not want to fly in a day or two or even three as an alternative. There is a reason why they are travelling and that’s where AI falls down: it hasn’t asked them why they are travelling and what is their purpose; if it did, then perhaps it might, just might, have a better chance of making sound decisions, but until that point is reached, travellers will need to have the patience of a saint to survive the turmoil yet another Lufthansa Group strike or indeed any strike causes.

On a technical point, when we at Jamadvice /BCD Travel issue a ticket, we own and control that ticket.  When the airline AI robot “’re-books” the ticket, the ownership or control of that ticket is taken away from us. The only way we can take back control is to call the airline call centre and try re-book the traveller manually (if they haven’t given up with their travel already). The problem, a lack of staff at such call centres means you will spend hours on the phone and even then, you will find it difficult to get the chance to speak to someone to resolve the problem. Maybe the bigger picture answer is, wait for it, more AI (SIC).  It is after all (we are told to believe) Silicon Valley’s solution for mankind. Stocks and shares are available.

Paris Charles De Gaulle Revamp

The ability to navigate around or through Paris Charles De Gaulle Airport would make an interesting, if lengthy, dinner conversation. The main transport hub of France and indeed one of Europe’s main connecting points comprises of 11 terminals with the navigation experience best described as ‘’torturous”. The good news is that in March 2027, common sense will, for the first time be applied by the airport authorities and all 11 terminals will be renamed.

Currently, the airport has an illogical layout that includes Terminals 1 and 3, plus Terminals 2A-D, 2EK.2EL and 2EM, plus of course 2 F and 2G. Confused: you have every right to be. The idea is for the 11 buildings to be named 1-7 (meaning some must merge). Terminal 3 will become Terminal 2 whilst 2A and 2C will become Terminal 3.

Simple then!

The task of replacing signage will be an interesting one with 3000 panels in Terminals that require changing, 600 in car parks and 250 road signs. Additionally, 10,000 surveillance cameras at the airport will need to be re-configured.

At the same time, a new express rail service operating from Paris Gare de l’Est will begin operating that will take just 20 mins to reach the airport and operate every 15 mins. The current connection with central Paris is with the standard RER service that takes 30 mins to Gare du Nord.

Czech Out

“Back in the day” (which in loose local terms is often considered to be the immediate post-communist era), Eastern Europe including Bulgaria, was a battle ground for airlines seeking to ramp up their offerings and get their brand known. Invariably the tactic was to sell as many seats as possible for as low a fare as possible so that the ‘” bums on seats’” figures made good reading for prospective investors prior to the inevitable privatisation. Malev Hungarian Airlines and Czech Airlines joined the likes of Lufthansa, Austrian (before they were bought by Lufthansa), Alitalia and Air France who were all active in the game. Malev went bankrupt, Alitalia should have gone bankrupt if the Eu rules were allowed to prevail and somehow Czech Airlines survived: just. For Czech either the end is nigh or a new beginning is about to start, depending on how you view it.

Turkish Airline Pegasus has agreed s 154 million Euro deal to buy Czech and its subsidiary Smartwings. Combined, Czech and Smartwings operates to 80 destinations in 20 countries via its combined fleet of 47 aircraft which will now be added to the 127 plane fleet of Pegasus.

Fuelling the Funds

In our October edition, our editorial article was a somewhat cynical take (though not an inaccurate one) of the farce that surrounds SAF (sustainable Airline Fuel). Not that anyone is allowed to use the word farce as careers and pensions are connected with the enforced move to using SAF in aviation. This is not to say that “’trying to be better”” is not creditworthy, but the funds deployed in such feel-good projects and the disappearance of said funds would be headline news if the world wasn’t already in a dire position.

In a nutshell, in 2025, the producers (who are still around) produced lower than required levels of SAF and sold them at a higher price. Whilst the economic laws of supply and demand could be used to support such a scenario, the fact that the EU and the UK mandate (force) airlines to use at least 2% SAF fuels in their mix with this figure due to rise in the coming years, tends to twist the laws of economics slightly! Thus, smart producers would not rush to produce more fuel in the full knowledge that the EU and UK airlines ’have to buy’ these at whatever cost. The airlines from the EU and UK are now claiming that they are paying up to four times more than the market rate! What also needs to be thrown into the conversation is the fact that for 2025, passenger traffic increased by 5.3% globally and will continue to rise in the short term.

Whilst the EU in particular will claim the move towards the aviation sector using SAF is going to plan,  as politicians by nature have to claim that black is in fact white, the real world knows differently and put quite simply, for the near future, SAF cannot be produced in enough quantities to satisfy the EU “’mandated” demand for it. Expect sometime in the future significant back tracking on the ill-thought-out green agenda.

Ups and Downs

Not for the first time, travel and hospitality industry reports are highlighting the negativity surrounding visits to the USA. The latest one (of many), this time from HotelHub, reports that visits to US hotels were down 7.56% by overseas visitors and down 9,73% form domestic visitors. The report commenting that the decline was most noticeable from April onwards after the USA made changes to its foreign policy. 7% or 9% may not sound like a huge number but this is 7.56% and 9.73% of around 250 Billion of US dollars that’s been lost. No doubt that the human impact in labour terms does not affect the typical voter of the decision-making party.

Interestingly Canadian numbers told a different story with numbers up 6.14% despite a fall of 18,76% in visitors from the USA.

On a wider level, the annual average room rate globally reached 189 USD per night, in Europe this was 178 USD per night. Some notable average room rates were recorded in Madrid and Munich which reached 223 and 213 USD per night respectively.

The days of cheap hotels are fast disappearing if they haven’t disappeared already. At least in the major cities.

If you’d like to subscribe your friends or colleagues and for all your travel requirements, reservations or for more information about any of the items mentioned in the newsletter, please contact us:

Tel:+ 359 (2) 943 3011;
Fax:+ 359 (2) 946 1261;
e-mail:mark @jamadvice.eu