Following my shared experience on Why Video-Conference Will Not Impact Air Travel, I attended the first virtual conference. Without networking, another barrel burst! We need interaction, but this was all push-content. But conferencing is about networking. And networking = interaction.
If the developers of the software and the organizers of virtual conferences believe what I experienced these days to replace conferences in the real world, they will have a harsh wake-up quickly. And I am not afraid those to replace travel and conferences in the real world anytime soon.
Sessions being Webinars
While we can “learn” making use of contemporary webinars, it is even worse than on a real-world conference if the speaker does not provide know-how, but self-indulgence and company marketing. But conferences are about meeting people. Ones you know, but more important even the ones you do not know.
The conference contained some “sessions”. But while they might be interesting to some delegates, it’s never all delegates in the session room. Some topics are more, some less relevant. That is a lesson from the Real World (RW). Now, what is the difference between a virtual conference session and a webinar? So those sessions were a bucket full of webinars. Which I can replay later. So why would I need to be there “on time”? Except if I am one of those who use the comments to interact?
And what else could we have learned before this first “online conference” from webinars? Worst than in a real-world (RW) conference, if the speakers are not focused to provide valuable insight but self-indulgence and product marketing, such webinars are a loss of time. For a virtual conference, it is the more important to have truly interesting topics, inspiring speakers and value for the audience.
I am reminded of the Passenger Terminal Expo (PTE), the event I always have overlaps on the multiplicity of sessions, which are all interesting. And times without any session of interest. And sessions with speakers I found to be self-focused, promoting own products instead of delivering valuable insights to use my time for. Time I spend “on the floor”, meeting and speaking with people. It is why PTE became one of the “must go”-events in our industry.
Scheduled Appointments vs. “Networking”
There are four ways I do scheduled appointments at good RW conferences. First two options are exhibitors, where it is possible to either have a scheduled meeting, or try to “drop in”. The third option is “networking events”, usually dinner, where delegates meet. While many stick together with there “known friends”, I found those the most valuable to stroll around and look for new faces. The final option then is to meet people on the exhibition floor or infront of the session rooms.
Online, the website offered to “connect” and set up meetings with delegates, exhibitors and speakers. What they totally failed to replicate in the virtual world is the “casual networking”, which is the most important: On RW conferences, I don’t approach the speaker asking for an appointment, but I approach the speaker after his speech. I also make use of the coffee or lunch breaks to meet people in a casual scenario. Or talk during a conference session I don’t attend “outside” over a cup of coffee.
The conference makers of that conference failed on that casual networking that is integral part of any conference. I even tried to add my e-Mail to my description, which was removed by the software – excuse me? But it got worse.
Networking vs. Zombie Delegates
Now at the virtual conference, most “delegate profiles” were merely the registration data (company, name, title). I wasn’t allowed to put my mail-contact into the public description. Why can’t I see, entering the floor, how many are there? Who is there? Who looks for networking?
The typical paranoid misunderstanding of event organizers, “mothering” me and avoid networking opportunities. Excuse me? Ain’t “networking” what this is about? No, it was about some webinars, sponsors and show-off. Which was reflected also in the missing ability to “chat” on the conference website. Nothing resembling “the floor”. If you want to contact a delegate, set up a meeting (min. 15 minutes). Of which zero were confirmed on my agenda. For which the conference site issues e-Mail notifications – no pop-up on the conference site anywhere. Then sitting five minutes in the Zoom-room they provided (all available/unused at all times I’ve set up meetings) waiting if they’d show up anyway. Which they didn’t. My impression: Most those delegates were zombies. Registered and never at the event. Some having registered for one of the “sessions” aka. webinars. Coming for that and likely left immediately after. Did they attend the webinar? Or watch it “later at leisure”. It’s “push” anyway, no “real interaction”.
So what value has such a virtual conference if it doesn’t motivate live interaction? None. It’s nothing better than some webinar series.
Learning Curve
A virtual conference without networking? A webinar. Or several webinars.
Anyone planning a virtual conference must have learned from the real world conference and improve on it. It is kind of frustrating to see again how IT crippled the good idea! And supposed subject matter experts (conference companies) selling such a crap to an audience. The only reason I can see to do such stunt would be to promote the real-world event and intentionally make the user feel the incompetence of online compared to real-world. Though that incompetence for me backfires on the event company and such an impertinent execution.
Virtual Conference missing interactive networking becomes a barrel burst! So I look forward to my first real-world conference scheduled now for December:
Food for Thought
Comments welcome!
Call Quality, Disruptions
What it does keep reminding me is that for 2002, in the wake of 9/11, we had the very same discussion. And I brought in a video-conferencing-specialist to speak at ITB Travel Technology Congress. And while the big players added video conference rooms to their portfolio, they turned to dust-bins quickly. I know, c’mon, that was 20 years ago. And we simply don’t tend to learn from history. There’s all the young smart-asses leaving university. They have no experience with extensive travel, their live has been virtual, they are still to learn the lessons.
The last issue is emotional, psychological. Which we found out post-9/11 already. There is the factor of “importance” when you are send to travel to meet your client. And I do not speak about the true importance to show your flag at your client. But the perceived importance for the traveler.
Naaaw. No it won’t. I have video calls with my family when traveling, my mom living 600 km away, friends around the world. And especially during the lock-down I keep with my network attending webinars, video and voice-only conference and one-on-one calls. And can’t wait to see all my counterparts in person either on conferences, on business trips and visits. Video-calls replace phone calls. But they don’t have what it takes to replace the real face-to-face.
A few days ago someone on the media compared Corona to the “new measles. Ever since I use the analogy and sure gave it some thoughts how that will impact our industry.
To date, the PTBs communicate in the sense to stop the virus. That is crap and they should know it. The time of containment has been missed, see above. So it is not about stopping it, but to 
To which he replied: “I couldn’t agree more. I have seen the same firsthand when it came to [product] engineering. Initially we were going to work with an established manufacturer and have them make modifications for us. That was quite the trip down the rabbit hole, and more trouble than it’s worth. Now we’ll get [products] that were custom engineered for us, from the ground up.”
In direct conversation, one of the later board members of Air Berlin told me, the airline would not kick the bucket because the new CEOs wouldn’t have good ideas, but because they failed on the heritage. The existing “networks”, afraid of the change, afraid to loose their job, torpedizing the management.
As addressed in 
Dinosaurs …
Doing a staged setup and focusing to stake our own claims, select strategic bases aggressively outselves, we can establish the company for a mere €30 million. € 15 million per additional base with seven aircraft and hundreds of (secure) jobs. A fraction of the food the dinosaurs demand to survive. Condor now half a billion? What evolutionary wonders we could achieve with that money.
Bill Cumberlidge addressed P2F shortly in the ISHKA webinar. As the need for quick transport increases, the belly-freight in passenger aircraft has gone missing. That increases the demand for classic freighter aircraft. But keep in mind that this is a temporary peak only.
The main issue there seems not to be the demand for conversions exceeding the available resources, companies with the experience in such conversions.
While there is a current peak, promising a use of lots of large freight aircraft (A380, B747, B777, B767, A330, A300, etc., etc.) that demand bubble will last maximum one year.
But how many containers does a single container giant today transport? And how many of those can you put onboard an A380 or B747? There were a lot of hurray and self-praise of airlines that one aircraft transported 500,000 masks to somewhere. Whereas the population there is a multiple of that number. Airfreight is expensive and a drop on a hot stone.
Another, very standard “fallback idea” is the “End-of-Life”-strategy to cannibalize the surplus aircraft for spare parts. Given the immense surplus of 150-240-seat aircraft, this bubble is instantly doomed. In several expert discussions I heard 50%, even up to 70% of the fleets to be grounded. Recovery of likely 80% within two years. Let’s say we decommission 20%. Which ones? Where? Who starts?
Cognitive Dissonance: Who Pays the Bill
Freight Use + Repatriation Flights
Very visible is the mass grounding of large aircraft. The Airbus A380 is already no longer built, now airlines retire, decommission that aircraft in large numbers. Flightradar showed quite some of those aircraft being flown to the scrap-yards, also called aircraft graveyards. The same applies to many 747s, not being “parked”, but decommissioned. The same fate even seems to hit the Boeing 777. Coronavirus also seems to seal the fate of many Boeing 767. For all those aircraft, more than 80% are grounded – many of which are being decommissioned for good.
What stroke me odd was the Embraer E195, showing 75% grounded, as well as 65% of the E190s. Both very good aircraft. But very few, large operators grounding their Embraer fleet in favor or their Boeing/Airbus operations seem to have resulted in their large groundings.
Optimists outlook is a two-year return to “normal” (AF/KL). Flightglobal headlines 
As outlines in my Corona Papers, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva warns of the 
Now Flightglobal headlines that 
In a recent conference call, two attending tour operators flight purchasing managers emphasized a recovery on the basis of previously high density high volume routes. They emphasized that while VFR (visiting friends and relatives) will recover a bit faster, the “normal” traveler will be busy recovering their jobs and lives and income – they expect only very little demand for the typical vacation for 2020. And they, as tour operator flight experts raised a question: “Who will want to spend some hours in an airplane having the reputation of being a sardine can?” This will even impact the vacation travel in 2021 and beyond. There will be a revival of ground-based and localized travel at the expense of air travel. It will take time to recover from that blow.
Business Travel
An exception the BTMs mentioned: Travelers who went through the infection and are such immune and noncontagious may be the first to start traveling again. But it was also consensus that a comparison to flu vaccination would be not comparable, after all the hysterics we went through.
All this lead to the expectation that even on former high density routes, the use of B757, A321LR and such smaller airplanes may be the first routes to recover on long haul. Some very high density routes may recover using larger aircraft such as the remaining B747s or B777s. Where I see Emirates likely to stake their claims quickly, possibly even basing some of their aircraft out of country to serve remote routes.
As for the anticipated return in passenger numbers, except for the very high density routes like New York-London, airlines will start with shorter hub-to-hub-routes, like back in the 80s the availability of two-leg-connections between any two cities will be limited, three-leg connections again becoming quite normal. Expectation was also voiced that most operators will shelve most, if not all twin-aisle aircraft.
Given the expectation of questionable safety regarding load factors and demand for 150-240-seat aircraft, this will be a turning point for the low-cost industry. For a long time, I considered “low-cost” carriers (LCC) as a cost-sensitive regional aviation player. Connecting point-to-point without a focus on connecting traffic. As the fleets grew, the routes got longer, the LCCs started experimenting with classic concepts like GDS-sales, hub-services and connecting flights, etc., etc. As the classic airlines learned to adapt to the new competition. It was long questioned on conferences and other discussions, if you can still group LCCs, that dates back even to fierce discussions about the status of Air Berlin as a LCC.
In most of the webinars, calls and discussions of the past weeks, the expectation was expressed that as regional flights were the last to be cancelled, they will be the first ones to recover. 150-240 seats are the domain of the former LCCs. There problem will be the very slow growth of passenger numbers post-crisis. Suddenly their “more seats” turn from benefit at full load into a severe challenge. Similar to tour operators, they will focus their recovery on the former high density routes. In a perfect scenario, they would slowly pick up speed. Realistically, they will rush it, risking a lot, flying below cost. How long they can sustain that must be seen. If aviation truly cuts back to traffic of the 1990s, the demand for flights served by 150-240 seat aircraft will be rather limited. A lot of Airbus-320- and Boeing-737-families’ aircraft will be grounded for time to come. With a devastating impact to aircraft leasing companies focusing on those aircraft.
Pending question was if there will be enough consolidation to leave enough niches for the survivors. Or if the stabbing and fighting for routes will continue – with the pre-crisis effect on revenues and commercial sustainability of the air carriers. While we all expressed hope for the first, we all fear that airline managers will fall back into their old modus-operandi to focus on marked share and loads instead of revenue and profit.
The recovery will be slowed down as “low-cost” models at the beginning will such pose high risk – low return, airlines will need to focus initially on low load factors but the need to create profit after the drought.
With 
Now, surprise surprise, the current crisis proves that this is the very same with aircraft investors. If you just look at aircraft but have no idea how to use it, you’re doomed. It will work a while, it did work a while. But even before Corona, this model was doomed and I addressed it. If an investor invests into the aircraft but outsources (the risk of) the operation. Then those small failing airlines return the aircraft after not paying the bills for several months.
Since starting to turn the idea that turned out to become 
Reading the 
If you focus on shareholder value, human resources and only your own, personal profit, you end up in a deep, dark pit. Sometimes, like Boeing’s Muilenburg and others who have been on the Olymp, just for that much deeper a fall. Examples aplenty.
Corporate Social Responsibility starts with your immediate environment: Your own organisation!
Aside the example i used on the different approaches between 
It might be surprising to the bean counters (accountant-mindset “managers”) that all of our related “cost centers” turned out to be no just driving loyalty, but to be true profit centers and vital in our attempt to melt the cost factors to competitive levels. As a start-up, investing into all the company’s assets, you must be competitive against all those large, established companies like easyJet owning around 70% of their fleet, cost down to maintenance, with roughly 25% being paid off and around 5% being leased to cover ad hoc opportunities (like taking over Air Berlin routes). And while now being a “burden” in Corona times, airlines cannot drop out of leasing either, so the cost still is there. But those airlines can secure credits based on their (aircraft) assets. To develop profit centers that allow to cut down the cost to competitive levels such ain’t a mere strategy, but a vital need.
![To most people, the Sky is the limit. To those who love aviation, the Sky is HOME. [Jerry Crawford]](https://foodforthought.barthel.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Crawford-Jerry-The-Sky-is-Home.jpg)
![To most people, the Sky is the limit. To those who love aviation, the Sky is HOME. [Jerry Crawford]](http://foodforthought.barthel.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Crawford-Jerry-The-Sky-is-Home.jpg)
