8herveg From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1118 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1784 times:
Does anyone think US Airways would be more successful at EDI instead of GLA? It just seems GLA is better suited for leisure routes and EDI is better suited for business routes.
Would there not be better links between PHL and EDI?
Gkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24627 posts, RR: 58 Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1760 times:
Quoting 8herveg (Thread starter): Does anyone think US Airways would be more successful at EDI instead of GLA? It just seems GLA is better suited for leisure routes and EDI is better suited for business routes.
Would there not be better links between PHL and EDI?
I hope this isn't another case of what GLA has, then EDI should have instead?
As for the question (if it's an honest one), then probably not. Edinburgh actually has more scheduled flights to the US than GLA now has, so US are better off at GLA.
When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
DLPMMM From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3537 posts, RR: 9 Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1696 times:
Quoting 8herveg (Thread starter): Does anyone think US Airways would be more successful at EDI instead of GLA? It just seems GLA is better suited for leisure routes and EDI is better suited for business routes.
I would think the opposite as EDI is more tourist, university, and government while GLA is more business and industry. (I've been to both several times).
Gkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24627 posts, RR: 58 Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1681 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 2): I would think the opposite as EDI is more tourist, university, and government while GLA is more business and industry. (I've been to both several times).
Edinburgh is a higher yielding destination due to it's Banking and Business industries.
When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
ScottishLaddie From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2004, 2383 posts, RR: 9 Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1574 times:
US seemed to do pretty well from GLA this summer after a pretty dire summer the previous year. Seems this is partly down to better marketing of the flight. The way they are marketing Scotland as a whole rather than specifically Glasgow, maybe in years to come we'll see them branch out into serving both airports which then gives the pax more choice/flexibility, who knows....
Nighthawk From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 4992 posts, RR: 38 Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1514 times:
Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 2): I would think the opposite as EDI is more tourist, university, and government while GLA is more business and industry. (I've been to both several times).
Edinburgh is number one for both tourism and business. Edinburgh is a major financial centre in the UK, with a number of banks based there, including RBS, who have a large presence in the US.
Glasgow is traditionally a heavy industry city, such as steel and ship building, although this is receeding now. these type of industrys dont traditionally require air travel.
If you look at the passenenger stats you will see that traffic at Glasgow is mainly outbound scottish tourists, fueled by the large local population, plus the fact it is the main base of operations for the tour operators, drawing in departing scots from further afield such as Aberdeen, Edinburgh etc.
Edinburgh on the other hand has very little charter traffic, any charters you do find are mainly from abroad bringing tourists into the country. Most links are scheduled - to europes major cities and financial centres. As a result edinburgh is thought to be higher yeilding than Glasgow.
As for the question, Would US Airways be more successfull from EDI? Probably not is the answer, back when they launched then perhaps, they were competing with CO + AA from GLA, whereas EDI just had CO to the US. (unless you also factor in other airlines such as Air Canada, Icelandair and KLM from GLA and LH, KL, AF from EDI). Perhaps then EDI had less competion, however CO had only just launched and the market was still unproven.
Last summer you had just CO from GLA and both CO and DL from EDI, so perhaps last summer it was justified. All in all, I dont think US would see any benefit from switching.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1118 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24627 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3537 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
