Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
EI Schedule Ex BFS  
User currently offlineBDKLEZ From Ireland, joined Jun 2005, 1735 posts, RR: 10
Posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1474 times:

I know that EI recently opened it's BFS base amid much controversy within the company, and I have been a frequent passenger on it's services to AMS since then. I am concerned however that EI holds expansion plans in a much more provident position than winning the loyalty of new customers ex BFS which should be at the forefront.

My example is as follows; when the services ex BFS were launched commencing December 2007, there were two daily services to AMS. Both allowed a full working day to be completed at each destination. That has subsequently been reduced to 1x daily which requires an overnight stay by default unless one chooses to fly with both EI & U2 on opposite legs of each journey.

I appreciate that competition is limited ex BFS to U2, but what is the difference between their late evening departure and EI's early morning departure apart from the time of day. I do not feel that EI have made the necessary commitments to seal that route as theirs, as they could have done. Their limited offer of 2x daily services seemed ideal when service commenced, but now it seems that we will only be able to fly with both carriers in order to have a full days work in AMS. Am I being cynical or could there be an underlying agreement between the two to share that traffic...???

I'd be interested to hear if others have experienced the same on other EI routes ex BFS...???

Edit for correction.

[Edited 2008-06-09 09:37:22]


Trespassers will be shot; survivors will be shot again!
13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineEIDAA From Ireland, joined Oct 2006, 828 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1457 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From what I read on A.net in the build up to the dropping of the second daily service, the loads to AMS were pretty bad and EI didn't sign up the codeshare agreement with KLM as planned.

With poor loads, (assuming that is true?), perhaps they just felt a daily service to CDG or elsewhere would be more profitable than double daily to AMS.

I know what you mean though... it is always useful to have a double daily service for business travel, but at least you can buy one-way tickets with EI and U2 easily enough.



Most Flown:- G-BUVA (20 Flights), EI-DEB (12 Flights), EI-JFK (11 Flights)
User currently offlineBrianDromey From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 3920 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1457 times:



Quoting BDKLEZ (Thread starter):
I'd be interested to hear if others have experienced the same on other EI routes ex BFS...???

When EI initially launched the route it was intended that the flight would be operated as a code-share service with KL. Hence the 2x daily service allowed a lot of connections through the AMS hub. For some reason the code-share never came to fruition and I guess EI could not make the two flights work, at least for now. CDG was launched in its place.

The early-morning service out of BFS allows for the maximum connectivity possible with one daily flight. Hence why this was kept as opposed to the later departure time.

Brian.



Next flights: MAN-ORK-LHR(EI)-MAN(BD); MAN-LHR(BD)-ORK (EI); DUB-ZRH-LAX (LX) LAX-YYZ (AC) YYZ-YHZ-LHR(AC)-DUB(BD)
User currently offlineShamrock350 From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6331 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1435 times:

What have the loads been like on your AMS flights?
Quoting EIDAA (Reply 1):

With poor loads, (assuming that is true?), perhaps they just felt a daily service to CDG or elsewhere would be more profitable than double daily to AMS.

Apparently some flights were leaving with just 20 passengers on board. If that's true there is noway that a double daily could last.

Other routes have done well against the competition though such as APG and BCN. Although BCN also saw a time change for some reason.

[Edited 2008-06-09 09:55:07]

User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26913 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1407 times:



Quoting Shamrock350 (Reply 3):
Although BCN also saw a time change for some reason.

I would have stayed loyal to EI on the BFS-BCN route but they messed up the times so that you miss any possible train connection anywhere in the region. Others have said the same thing . I dont know where they got their new times from and messed up a really good route. I have mostly switched to FR now into REU.


User currently offlineShamrock350 From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6331 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1392 times:



Quoting OA260 (Reply 4):
I would have stayed loyal to EI on the BFS-BCN route but they messed up the times so that you miss any possible train connection anywhere in the region.

Was there a reason given for the change and have you any idea of how it's performing since it?


User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26913 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1337 times:



Quoting Shamrock350 (Reply 5):
Was there a reason given for the change and have you any idea of how it's performing since it?

No I didnt get a reason. The 1040 out and back at 1510 were great times. Now they are just night flights.


User currently offlineBDKLEZ From Ireland, joined Jun 2005, 1735 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1209 times:



Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 2):

The early-morning service out of BFS allows for the maximum connectivity possible with one daily flight

This I appreciate and if all of EI's targetted traffic would be interlining through AMS then it would be sensible. But EI are setting themselves up against easyJet who offer a point-to-point service; EI should not forget that core demend. A double daily service would secure the route as theirs but they seem not to want to do that for some reason.

Quoting Shamrock350 (Reply 3):
What have the loads been like on your AMS flights?

Respectable; not full but 75% plus I would guess.



Trespassers will be shot; survivors will be shot again!
User currently offlineShamrock350 From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6331 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1202 times:



Quoting BDKLEZ (Reply 7):

Respectable; not full but 75% plus I would guess.

Sounds much better than what it was, loads were below 30% at times.


User currently offlineBDKLEZ From Ireland, joined Jun 2005, 1735 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1192 times:



Quoting Shamrock350 (Reply 8):
Sounds much better than what it was, loads were below 30% at times

I witnessed that as well at the start.

I'm just rather frustrated at what I see a perfect opportunity to seal the route. EI seem reluctant to take a bold step in order to achieve that.

The point was made earlier about utilising maximum connectivity potential, but this also applies on the return leg from AMS-BFS. KLM have 4 waves daily, and an early evening departures ex AMS would fit in rather snuggly in order to take advantage of that potential as well as allowing the inbound sector from BFS to interline with the last KLM departure wave ex AMS. This is one advantage that EI have over U2.



Trespassers will be shot; survivors will be shot again!
User currently offlineShamrock350 From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6331 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1167 times:

I think EI were probably loosing money on the double daily AMS route and they could of given it more time to settle in but with no KL code share I doubt they had much hope and cut the route to introduce CDG. In the eyes of EI management it's better to have a profitable daily flight to CDG and AMS than a double daily to AMS loosing money. It could have been better just to stick with the original schedule and watch to see if things pick up but at the risk of loosing more money I don't think they thought it was worth it.

Aer Lingus did plan and talked about a code share agreement with KLM but for some reason it didn't happen which is strange as the code share has been a success in DUB and ORK.


User currently offlineBDKLEZ From Ireland, joined Jun 2005, 1735 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1153 times:



Quoting Shamrock350 (Reply 10):
more time to settle in

In an ideal world.

Quoting Shamrock350 (Reply 10):
it's better to have a profitable daily flight to CDG and AMS than a double daily to AMS loosing money.

Understandable.

Quoting Shamrock350 (Reply 10):
Aer Lingus did plan and talked about a code share agreement with KLM but for some reason it didn't happen

I wonder why not? I would've expected that as a firm decision prior to launch, particularly as KL no longer operate their own service to BFS. As the only major UK city not to be served by KLM/KLC they also could be missing out.



Trespassers will be shot; survivors will be shot again!
User currently offlineShamrock350 From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6331 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1141 times:



Quoting BDKLEZ (Reply 11):

I wonder why not? I would've expected that as a firm decision prior to launch, particularly as KL no longer operate their own service to BFS. As the only major UK city not to be served by KLM/KLC they also could be missing out.

It does seem strange and I got the impression that Aer Lingus was all for a code share so KL must have other plans but I think they're missing out on a lot of passenger feed from BFS now.


User currently offlineCOEI2007 From Vanuatu, joined Jan 2007, 1912 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1047 times:

The KL codeshare might not have been wanted by EI as it might take pax away from connecting via LHR? Maybe they didnt want two routes feeding other airlines, when they can launch CDG?

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
This Summers Charters Ex. BFS posted Fri Jun 4 2004 04:05:46 by BFS
Current Delivery Schedule For Delta Ex-TWA 757s? posted Mon Nov 5 2007 09:29:45 by 1337Delta764
A333 C/n 54 Ex EI-SHN Is Back! posted Sat Jan 31 2004 02:52:58 by N754pr
2 Ex-SR A320's Flying For EI posted Fri Nov 21 2003 14:32:38 by Sabena 690
Boeing's 787 Dreamliner First Flight On Schedule posted Mon Jun 9 2008 06:30:39 by Aviationbuff
NW Memphis Hub Summer 2008 Schedule posted Fri Jun 6 2008 10:09:56 by JohnJ
CX888 Schedule Change posted Sun Jun 1 2008 19:01:27 by CXA330300
AA And UA Schedule Cuts At ORD posted Fri May 30 2008 17:39:17 by TWA1985
LH Schedule From LHR posted Fri May 30 2008 16:45:19 by Thestooges
United Schedule Cuts posted Fri May 30 2008 11:41:15 by Joeljack