Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The End Of LHR Envy?  
User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 14102 times:

For reasons we are all familiar with it is little wonder Lufthansa described the BD saga as “significantly negative”.

Add to that the fact that SQ has now had over a decade to rue its equity ''investment'' in VS.

The increasingly endangered British carrier VS is already 49% owned by Singapore Airlines, an arrangement almost as unwelcome today to that airline as BD was to Lufthansa.

SQ has made clear that it will happily sell its interest in an airline that has delivered little joy since a misjudged £600M outlay bought it what it thought would be de facto control almost exactly 12 years ago. The “unique global partnership” which was to be created never materialised, at least not in the way SQ intended.

AF's attempt to operate a TATL service at LHR fell flat almost immediately.

Will the present uncertain economic environment and the above spell the end for Star and Skyteam's interest in the airport beyond their current presence?

Or..is there one more hand left to be played at the airport regards VS and alliance membership ?


Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3572 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13808 times:

This "Heathrow envy" has as you say been going on for years, all and sundry shout from the rooftops that they are being denied the opportunity to enjoy the benefits that BA do at "Fortress Heatrow" Meanwhile BA have only acheived their desired operating profit once in the last decade, so its not exactly a gold mine for them either.
It would be interesting to know if the US airlines who transferred from LGW to LHR, buying very expensive slots in order to do so, have seen a decent return on their money.
It is also noticeable that a few slots become available at each scheduling change, so there must be airlines who decide that LHR isn't working for them.


User currently offlineaaexecplat From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 635 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13811 times:

Well, despite the assertion that LHR is the highest yielding airport in Europe, many of the operators at LHR seem not to be doing so well. Competition and costs must surely be the driving forces behind this.

I, for my part, have never understood the fixation on LHR. When I traveled regularly to London for work (from the US) in 2005 and 2006, I always chose LGW over LHR because the transit into London is so much more convenient that the Heathrow Express.

Lastly, the end of the credit bubble will put pressure on yields for years to come, and that can't be a good thing for airlines at LHR where competition is so fierce.


User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 13566 times:

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1):
at "Fortress Heatrow"

That phrase has always mystified me given the much greater competition at LHR than say FRA and CDG and the much less dominant position of the two British carriers there compared to their French and German counterparts.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1):
Meanwhile BA have only acheived their desired operating profit once in the last decade,

Well yes - because it isn't a ''fortress''.

Anyway that wasnt't my point.

From a Star Alliance point of view the cost of their botched attempts at gaining market share at LHR must be running into the billlions of dollars now surely ? (SQ/VS and LH/BD)

I mean take VS. I can't think of anything more pathetic in the business world today than VS (which has spent the last 25 years vilifying BA for being too big and dominant) practically falling over itself to do business with LH. An airline far bigger and more dominant than BA. It's really rather nauseating.

[Edited 2012-01-10 06:17:00]


Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8003 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 13423 times:

I think the days of needing LHR just to get to London could come to an end soon. Remember, CDG has a TGV station, and they could eventually route Eurostar trains from CDG to London St. Pancras International station, which would turn CDG into a "de facto" third London airport.

User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 13281 times:

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 4):
I think the days of needing LHR just to get to London could come to an end soon. Remember, CDG has a TGV station, and they could eventually route Eurostar trains from CDG to London St. Pancras International station, which would turn CDG into a "de facto" third London airport.

Eurostar isn't cheap at all. That's a very expensive third airport to deal with - I might as well take a taxi from the City to Heathrow for the same costs.

The only way this would work is if AF subsidize the Eurostar costs for London-originating pax (a variation of TGV-CDG-AF connection), but that would just destroy yields for AF without doing much help.

By Gatwick Express, the airport is only 15 mins further away from central London than Heathrow. Don't know why there's so much anti-LGW sentiment among carriers.


User currently offlineBD338 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 13109 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 5):
Quoting RayChuang (Reply 4):
I think the days of needing LHR just to get to London could come to an end soon. Remember, CDG has a TGV station, and they could eventually route Eurostar trains from CDG to London St. Pancras International station, which would turn CDG into a "de facto" third London airport.

Eurostar isn't cheap at all. That's a very expensive third airport to deal with - I might as well take a taxi from the City to Heathrow for the same costs.

I suppose options to run Eurostar to CDG and AMS may exist in the future and I've found tickets can be fairly cheap to Paris. With UK APD an ever increasing cost it might still be cheaper to fly into CDG and buy a ticket on Eurostar and avoid APD.

As for LHR, I'm not sure why any US airline at least might be surprised if LHR hasn't worked out as they thought. They all clamoured for access to the 'fortress' and then all flooded the market at the same time which if I recall Economics 101 may have tipped the supply and demand in favor of the demand side.


User currently offlinehotelmode From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2007, 460 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 13081 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 5):
By Gatwick Express, the airport is only 15 mins further away from central London than Heathrow. Don't know why there's so much anti-LGW sentiment among carriers.

Heathrow's wider catchment area (within 2 hrs normal drive) covers all of the South East to the east of Kent, the High Tech corridor down the M3/4 as far as Bristol, the M40 as far as Birmingham and the M1 to Leicester. Gatwick is 45 mins further to all of these places and adds nowhere extra that LHR doesn't already cover. Unless you live in Kent, Sussex, S/SE London or the E bit of Surrey LHR is always closest.

Heathrow express does start from the wrong part of London but in 5 years time LHR will have direct trains from the City, Docklands and N Kent and Essex too.

[Edited 2012-01-10 07:31:53]

User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3238 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 12857 times:

Guys Heathrow's yields have little to do with getting into Central London, as has been pointed out above, the Gatwick Express is barely longer and is quicker than the Piccadilly Line from LHR. Yields are high because LHR is a hub airport and supports a critical mass of flights to key destinations from legacy long haul. Feeding this is what makes money, not keeping Malev at LHR or CSA who are not really bringing much to the party beyond loss making point to point.

User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5193 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 12680 times:

What will kill LHR is the ever increasing APD taxes that the UK government are imposing.

User currently offlinembmbos From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2597 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12402 times:

It occurs to me that LHR may have once been a "high yield" venue because of limited slots and lack of fluidity. Once rules were changed enabling airlines previously not allowed to serve LHR and allowing airlines serving LHR to sell slots, the general "supply" side of the equation changed. And the supply side doesn't need to change much to make a significant difference in the overall value of serving LHR.

User currently offlineLondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1487 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12369 times:

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 4):
Remember, CDG has a TGV station, and they could eventually route Eurostar trains from CDG to London St. Pancras

The Eurostar trains can already connect London St Pancras with CDG should the authorities wish it to happen because the track is already there. Note that there is already a special Disneyland Eurostar special service from London which runs through the CDG station without stopping en route for Disneyland.

Quoting BD338 (Reply 6):
With UK APD an ever increasing cost it might still be cheaper to fly into CDG and buy a ticket on Eurostar and avoid APD.

Growing numbers of overseas visitors to Europe are already avoiding APD by making the UK their first point of arrival. They then travel to mainland Europe by surface transport (to avoid APD) and fly home from there.

http://www.stenaline.co.uk/ferry/med.../news/increase-in-indian-tourists/


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11645 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 11933 times:

Quoting BD338 (Reply 6):
I suppose options to run Eurostar to CDG and AMS may exist in the future and I've found tickets can be fairly cheap to Paris. With UK APD an ever increasing cost it might still be cheaper to fly into CDG and buy a ticket on Eurostar and avoid APD.

I have done that several times now, especially with U2/FR selling fares from a tenner.

Quoting hotelmode (Reply 7):
Heathrow express does start from the wrong part of London but in 5 years time LHR will have direct trains from the City, Docklands and N Kent and Essex too.

The cynic in me says CrossRail isn't so much to link Heathrow with East London as to link a new Thames Airport with West London and Heathrow.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3238 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 11470 times:

Why exactly would you link the Thames fantasy project to Heathrow???

User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11645 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 11086 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 13):
Why exactly would you link the Thames fantasy project to Heathrow???

Because a not insignificant objection to a new airport in the Thames is that companies have located around the Heathrow/Reading areas for a reason, therefore with CrossRail inevitably linking with any new East of London airport they would still be connected. I've spent too much time talking to politicians and their transport strategists recently - hence my cynical view of how their minds work.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineSR4ever From Luxembourg, joined Mar 2010, 800 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 10698 times:

LG was eyeing flying back to LHR last year, 3 yrs after concentrating on LUX-LCY.

But none talks any longer about it now, probably because BA switched its LUX flights from LGW to LHR.

For non OW-members, LHR makes sense only if they can sustain enough high yields and can offer good connections with partner airlines.

Otherwise, LGW remains very relevant. LCY, too, yet in a different way.

LH flying back to LGW is also a development to be closely monitored. Some other major airlines may also take this path.


User currently offlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4369 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 9999 times:

LHR Envy has not shrunk, if anything it's grown in recent years as the airport commands solid O&D flows and yields on many longhaul routes that no other airport in Europe comes close to matching -- and this is all the more important in a troubled economic environment.


Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineLGWflyer From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2011, 2348 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 9920 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 8):
the Gatwick Express is barely longer and is quicker than the Piccadilly Line from LHR.

No I don't agree! It takes 30mins to Victoria on the Gatwick Express, on the tube it is about an hour to get to Central London with all the stops along the way on a busy cramped carriage.



3 words... I Love Aviation!!!
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3238 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 9793 times:

Quoting LGWflyer (Reply 17):
No I don't agree! It takes 30mins to Victoria on the Gatwick Express, on the tube it is about an hour to get to Central London with all the stops along the way on a busy cramped carriage.

Go back and read the post again....You DO agree with me, the Gatwick Express is quicker.


User currently offlineLGWflyer From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2011, 2348 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 9616 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 18):

Go back and read the post again....You DO agree with me, the Gatwick Express is quicker.

Oops im really sorry, misread of post.
     



3 words... I Love Aviation!!!
User currently offlineZaphodB From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5965 times:

From LGW to the city or Canary Wharf is also much quicker than from LHR ... at least until Crossrail.
The US carriers who spent all those years bleating about LHR access ended up with little more than some very expensive magic beans that they have to pretend to love by sending 757s there. LHR has better access to the M40 ... so what? The London O&D market is ... London ... not Birmingham or Oxford or the Cotswolds. I guess it does makes life a bit easier for Clarkson.


User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1709 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4498 times:

The thing I don't get is why HS2 is not being routed via Heathrow, but instead a spur is going to be built. That is the biggest stupid mistake the government could have made... Having direct connections to Birmingham and then on to Manchester and Scotland will eventually help move passengers off planes and onto trains, especially if any HST can be operated in partnership with BA.


Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-IAH (744-BA), MSY-LGA (319-DL), JFK-LHR (744-BA)
User currently offlineplanesmith From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2009, 139 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4458 times:

Quoting BD338 (Reply 6):
By Gatwick Express, the airport is only 15 mins further away from central London than Heathrow. Don't know why there's so much anti-LGW sentiment among carriers.

One runway - I lost count of the times I was on-time at LGW but sadly several thousand feet above it! That and the chaotic layout of the terminal buildings that demands that passengers really should take a fitness test before attempting a departure!

London is served by two appalling airports - LHR and LGW - one airport that isn't at all sure it's an airport but thinks it's a railway marshalling yard and a few small ones that use London in their names to make them feel better.

I don't suppose I'll see a useful workable airport near London in my lifetime....


User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1709 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4357 times:

Quoting planesmith (Reply 22):
London is served by two appalling airports - LHR and LGW - one airport that isn't at all sure it's an airport but thinks it's a railway marshalling yard and a few small ones that use London in their names to make them feel better.

LHR is getting there.... Terminal 5 is a great building and very easy to navigate. The major issue here is the queuing at passport control.

The new Terminal 2 will be just as good when it is completed, leaving only Terminal 3 and 4. I think after T2 is finished BAA will announce plans to completely knock down and rebuild T3.



Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-IAH (744-BA), MSY-LGA (319-DL), JFK-LHR (744-BA)
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3238 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4261 times:

Terminal 4 has just been semi-renovated bringing the departures landside concourse up to T5 levels. Now they just need to do Arrivals and sort out airside.

25 planesmith : Quite correct - London is the only place that counts - the many and several million other people living within 2-hours or so of the pit that is LHR w
26 mikey72 : World's busiest airports by international passenger traffic...2010. 1. London Heathrow Airport............................................. 40,239,19
27 fcogafa : As DLH are downsizing LGW to a CRJ900 in the morning already, it seems like this is service is just a spoiler for EZY Heathrow has been regularly bre
28 skipness1E : Indeed and Korean Air would be double daily at LHR if they could get a good deal for appropriate slots instead of splitting operations between LHR and
29 Post contains images ual777uk : Can I just add that there are a massive amount of Blue Chip companies along the M4 corridor and the location of LHR to them is vital. I am sure a hell
30 CYatUK : Well, I hope they do it because otherwise T3 and T4 will seem odd next to T5 and new T2. The other fact that needs to be taken into account is the pu
31 Bongodog1964 : T3 is a horrible experience for many, exit security seemingly straight into a department store, pass through department store and find that it has so
32 mikey72 : What would you prefer ? A cap on traffic ? Nothing is going to make any difference with LHR because like the saying goes.."build it and they will com
33 CYatUK : I could be wrong but I think the point he was trying to make is that T3 is not up to standard with T5 and the future T2 and that a building built a f
34 Post contains links mikey72 : How did you deduce that ? There was no mention of T5 or T2. I'm sure the man does not need you to express his views ? The airport needs another termi
35 Post contains links mikey72 : http://www.breakingtravelnews.com/ne...s-are-restricting-economic-growth/ This is interesting... Results in the international ASQ benchmarking survey
36 skipness1E : And people think I am negative? You're half right, we do need the capacity however the overall passenger experience in the years up to the opening of
37 mikey72 : Not negative..just realistic. Great turn of phrase ! He he I know and I'm sure we will as the latest figures suggest. It's just going to take time bu
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...
Could We See The End Of NZ's LHR-LAX-AKL Service? posted Sun Apr 16 2006 13:12:38 by Gilesdavies
The End Of The Production Of The CRJ In Sight? posted Tue Sep 20 2011 08:32:41 by SASMD82
The End Of The 717 In The Continental US? posted Mon Sep 27 2010 19:16:19 by TrijetsRMissed
JQ To Europe Ex SIN 332s "at The End Of The Year" posted Wed May 12 2010 00:31:39 by tayser
Windmills At The End Of Runways? posted Wed Apr 14 2010 02:23:15 by Airport
LH To Leave Caracas At The End Of 10/2010 posted Tue Apr 13 2010 17:59:21 by Avianca
The End Of Aviation? posted Fri Feb 5 2010 16:07:56 by TCrew
The End Of IFE As We Have Grown To Love It? posted Thu Feb 4 2010 08:16:46 by Normie999
The End Of Loyalty Pgms? (UA1K A Joke Now) posted Fri Jan 22 2010 15:56:14 by Rcair1
Is The 767 Nearing The End Of Production? posted Mon Jan 11 2010 15:14:05 by C5LOAD
Could We See The End Of NZ's LHR-LAX-AKL Service? posted Sun Apr 16 2006 13:12:38 by Gilesdavies
The End Of The Production Of The CRJ In Sight? posted Tue Sep 20 2011 08:32:41 by SASMD82
The End Of The 717 In The Continental US? posted Mon Sep 27 2010 19:16:19 by TrijetsRMissed
JQ To Europe Ex SIN 332s "at The End Of The Year" posted Wed May 12 2010 00:31:39 by tayser
Windmills At The End Of Runways? posted Wed Apr 14 2010 02:23:15 by Airport
LH To Leave Caracas At The End Of 10/2010 posted Tue Apr 13 2010 17:59:21 by Avianca
The End Of Aviation? posted Fri Feb 5 2010 16:07:56 by TCrew
The End Of IFE As We Have Grown To Love It? posted Thu Feb 4 2010 08:16:46 by Normie999
The End Of Loyalty Pgms? (UA1K A Joke Now) posted Fri Jan 22 2010 15:56:14 by Rcair1