Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Are New LHR Domestic Flights Waste Of Slots?  
User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 7 months 6 hours ago) and read 9498 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Given the very limited slot availability at LHR and the presence of domestic LCC's at other London airports is the introduction of another carrier on LHR domestic routes really a good use of those limited slots ?

Keeping names of airlines out of it might help the thread to not degenerate !!

90 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinedavid_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 6 hours ago) and read 9496 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Thread starter):
is the introduction of another carrier on LHR domestic routes really a good use of those limited slots ?

Perhaps you should have asked the EU that seeing that the conditions of BA buying BD included the provision of competition on certain domestic routes.


User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 819 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 5 hours ago) and read 9369 times:

All long-haul flights need feed from other flights, long- or short-haul. So I don't think domestic flights are a waste of slots. It does not matter if the feed comes from MAN, GLA, EDI, DUB, TXL, CDG, MAD, FRA, AMS, DEL, HKG, NRT or JFK. It does not matter if the feed is domestic, continental (EU/Europe), or from another arriving intercontinental flight.

In our dream-world all domestic flying in Europe perhaps would be eliminated by high-speed-rail service, trains running at 350 km/h from each city-center to the airports, no runs longer than 3h. But it won't happen. France is close, but still enough domestic flying going on there, too.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 5 hours ago) and read 9369 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting david_itl (Reply 1):
Perhaps you should have asked the EU that seeing that the conditions of BA buying BD included the provision of competition on certain domestic routes.

How does that work though ?

The provision of slots don't you mean ?


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 5 hours ago) and read 9307 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CARST (Reply 2):
All long-haul flights need feed from other flights, long- or short-haul. So I don't think domestic flights are a waste of slots.

Domestic flights certainly are not a waste of slots I agree.

Do we need two carriers providing them though at a highly congested airport like LHR ?

For example there do not seem to be many domestic flights arriving at FRA this morning that are not operated by LH ?

Maybe there is a reason for that. It is probably the same reason that resulted in BD's failure ?

[Edited 2013-01-24 00:01:28]

User currently offlinen729pa From UK - England, joined Jan 2011, 401 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 5 hours ago) and read 9269 times:

I guess it's only a waste if the flights are empty, as otherwise they are revenue earners and as CARST mentions it's for international interlining too which is important. Given that there is no alternative from LHR-GLA say by train, then a flight it has to be. I don't think it doesn't really matters whether there are 10 domestic airlines operating from LHR or 2 or 3 the slots are essentially the same. It's just over time non-profit routes are cut, or mergers occur and the slots are realigned depending on the outcome.

I remember years ago (late 80s) we had a variety of domestic airlines at LHR including Dan Air, Air UK, Manx, Brymon as well as the BMA (BMI) and BA. In some ways it would be nice to have a bit more of a choice again.


User currently offlinedamian From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 5 hours ago) and read 9262 times:

In 2011, domestic routes at LHR were worth the following passenger numbers:

EDINBURGH 1,271,459 - (9th busiest route at LHR)
GLASGOW 82,0949 - (29th busiest route at LHR)
MANCHESTER 766,906 - (31st busiest route at LHR)
ABERDEEN 652,520 - (39th busiest route at LHR)
NEWCASTLE 473,614 -(57th busiest route at LHR)
BELFAST CITY (GEORGE BEST) 428,611 - (62nd busiest route at LHR)
BELFAST INTERNATIONAL 289,359 (76th busiest route at LHR)

Worth noting that the EDI route was worth more passengers individually than Chicago, Madrid, Singapore, Delhi and Toronto routes (among others), while the GLA route added more passengers individually than Vienna, Athens, Barcelona, Sydney and Tokyo.


User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5188 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 4 hours ago) and read 9195 times:

There really isn't an increase in slots being made for domestic flights.
They have just been reallocated from BD to both Virgin and BA.


User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 819 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 4 hours ago) and read 9139 times:

I added numbers to your quote, so I can answer these (rhetorical) questions:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 4):
1) Do we need two carriers providing them though at a highly congested airport like LHR ?

2) For example there do not seem to be many domestic flights arriving at FRA this morning that are not operated by LH ?

3) Maybe there is a reason for that. It is probably the same reason that resulted in BD's failure ?

To 1) Yes! 110% yes. Why allow a monopolistic situation anyway?

To 2) Total different situation. If you compare Great Britain versus Germany, taking BA/VS and LH/AB, you will see that AB has no hub at FRA, their hubs are DUS, NUE and TXL, they don't need a huge number of domestic feed into the LH hubs FRA or MUC. But at LHR both BA and VS have their largest hub operation and are both in need of domestic, continental and intercontinental feed.

To 3) I don't think that you could blame the demise of BD on their short-haul-operation. It is true that most large hub-and-spoke airlines in Europe are loosing money on their domestic/continental network these days, that is why you see a lot of restructuring going on (LH with 4U and the Score program, AirFrance with their new LCC subsidiary, etc.), but you have to sell these short-haul flights so cheap to fill your long-haul aircraft.

No feed > empty huge aircraft flying around the world > loosing money > (e.g.) VS getting out of business > BA close to monopoly at Great Britain/LHR > higher prices for the average traveller > EU and its citizens not interested in this situation


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 4 hours ago) and read 9028 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting anstar (Reply 7):
To 1) Yes! 110% yes. Why allow a monopolistic situation anyway?

Monopolistic ?

For people travelling solely between London and Manchester, Edinburgh, Glasgow etc there are countless daily options on several carriers.

Non UK based carriers offer comprehensive international and intercontinental service from airports north of LHR going both east and west. People in the north are certainly not reliant on getting to LHR for long-haul travel like they once were. They can also connect onto BA's massive operation (via countless daily domestic departures) at LHR through the best terminal at LHR if they so choose.

Considering this is it really a good use of available slots at LHR ?

(Germany is far, far more monopolistic and protectionist in its civil aviation policy than the UK)

Quoting CARST (Reply 8):
Yes! 110% yes. Why allow a monopolistic situation anyway?

You allow a monopolistic situation at FRA do you not ?

What's the difference ?

The market dictated the future of BD at LHR not BA.

Forcing the successful carrier to relinquish invaluable and highly needed slots just so another carrier can maintain an unrequired status quo is my mind very, very warped. At an airport like LHR it is also very unhelpful.


User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3229 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 3 hours ago) and read 8949 times:

When BA had a monopoly on GLA-LHR, fares rose accordingly. Flying to LGW isn't great if your business is in West London or the M4 corridor.

User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17063 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 3 hours ago) and read 8902 times:

Quoting damian (Reply 6):
In 2011, domestic routes at LHR were worth the following passenger numbers:

What is your source for those numbers?



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 819 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 2 hours ago) and read 8749 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 9):

Considering this is it really a good use of available slots at LHR ?

Again: Both airlines (VS and BA) need the feeder flights from wherever possible.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 9):
You allow a monopolistic situation at FRA do you not ?

What's the difference ?

There is no difference regarding the slots and monopolistic situation. Years ago already LH had to give a significant number of slots to AB at FRA. AB started flights to TXL, HAM and other cities. Because of stiff competition from LH they later reduced frequencies and stopped flying to HAM. But to end the domestic monopolistic situation for FRA AB got the required slots and not just a few, e.g. they had alone 6 frequencies to HAM daily in 2009.

If you want to find a difference, there is one, FRA is a hub for LH, not for AB. LHR is a hub for BA and VS, which both need the feeder flights. But I am repeating what I said above, just read it again please.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 10):
When BA had a monopoly on GLA-LHR, fares rose accordingly. Flying to LGW isn't great if your business is in West London or the M4 corridor.

  

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 9):
The market dictated the future of BD at LHR not BA.

Forcing the successful carrier to relinquish invaluable and highly needed slots just so another carrier can maintain an unrequired status quo is my mind very, very warped. At an airport like LHR it is also very unhelpful.

The market dictated the future for BD, yes. It was between stopping operations or getting taken over by another airline. It was not BA or bust. So when BA thought about taking over BD they knew from the beginning that this would result in some slot re-allocations, otherwise the EU would not have allowed them to take over BD, it would have created a monopolistic situation at LHR. Not directly for the traveller, but for VS who would have the disadvantage compared to BA. That could have resulted in a chain of events, which I have written about in my last post, indirectly creating a monopolistic situation for the traveller, too (at least in the long-run).


User currently onlinegilesdavies From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 3013 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 2 hours ago) and read 8675 times:

That's a very tricky one to answer...

Many airlines would probably argue they don't need domestic feeder flights at LHR to fill their international flights, especially if they serve other UK airports like QR, EK and UA, but other airlines would probably claim they do...

UK airports and airlines like BA and VS would probably also claim they are discriminated against, if they cannot have domestic links to LHR, to provide feeder services. Especially when cities like CDG, AMS and FRA are similar flying distance to LHR as BHD, EDI and ABZ are.

Also you could then argue, why should airlines like LH, AF and KL be aloud to feed flights to their respected hubs from LHR and UK regional airports while BA and VS are not aloud to feed their flights through their LHR hub.

If and when the UK gets this high speed rail link, to the north of England and Scotland, and if it had a stop at Heathrow. It could then be argued flights from Scotland and England could be banned from operating into LHR, especially if airlines had an interlining agreement with the rail operator. I think AF do something similar to this in France with the TGV services.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 4):
Domestic flights certainly are not a waste of slots I agree.

Do we need two carriers providing them though at a highly congested airport like LHR ?

This is however a very good point...

Maybe an independent airline (or state owned) could operate ALL domestic routes, and is not linked to any other carrier operating to/from LHR (by alliance or financially) and is obliged to interline with all carriers that want to offer domestic connections within the UK.

Does anyone know the percentage of passengers on domestic flights connecting through LHR? Just another idea, how about restricting only passengers flying into LHR, who are connecting onto another flight. All other passengers flying to or from London only are obliged to use the likes LCY, LTN, LGW or STN.

[Edited 2013-01-24 03:16:40]

User currently offlineLN-KGL From Norway, joined Sep 1999, 1026 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 2 hours ago) and read 8654 times:

B747forever, damian has found the numbers in the CAA 2011 Survey - http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?ca...81&pagetype=90&pageid=7640.

If you combine these CAA survey numbers with CAA reported passenger numbers for 2011, you end up with these number for the domestic traffic:

Total number of domestic passengers at LHR: 4.7 million (6.8% of LHR total)
Terminating domestic passengers at LHR: 2.2 million (3.2% of LHR total)
Domestic passengers using LHR as a transfer airport (hub): 2.5 million (3.6% of LHR total)

Since 33.6% of the terminal passengers at LHR in 2011 were either transferring or in transit, then it's easy to say 20% of the LHR passengers are foreigners using LHR as an international destination to international destination hub - i.e. 20.8 million passengers.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 2 hours ago) and read 8613 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CARST (Reply 12):
Again: Both airlines (VS and BA) need the feeder flights from wherever possible.

Hang on a minute CARST.

Nobody forced VS to commence international operations at LHR without domestic feed 25 years ago ? They obviously decided they didn't need it ? Otherwise they would have introduced domestic routes at the same time they were selecting LHR's most profitable long-haul routes.

What's changed has got nothing to do with BA. Outside competition has increased greatly over the years resulting in VS's 'stand alone long-haul niche carrier business plan' crumbling into dust.

VS can operate as many domestic routes as they want but it shouldn't be as a result of BA having to relinquish slots. Using BD's failure as a stick to beat BA with is typical and as Willie Walsh said rather pathetic.

There was a caveat that BA provide seats for VS feed anyway. How humiliating is that !

Quoting CARST (Reply 12):
LHR is a hub for BA and VS, which both need the feeder flights. But I am repeating what I said above, just read it again please.

Why should BA have to keep wet nursing VS due to VS's bad management. BA bought BD fair and square after (I might add) it had already shambolicly been through another carriers hands !!

Quoting CARST (Reply 12):
Not directly for the traveller, but for VS who would have the disadvantage compared to BA.

Why should BA be castigated because of failure within VS management ?? Like I said....they chose not to commence domestic operations when they commenced long-haul operations at LHR. That in itself is another example of and rather indicative of VS's naive approach to the nature of the airline industry at LHR.

Quoting CARST (Reply 12):
That could have resulted in a chain of events, which I have written about in my last post, indirectly creating a monopolistic situation for the traveller, too (at least in the long-run).
VS has never operated domestic flights. All of VS's flights from LHR are operated by at least TWO other carriers. Therefore the demise of VS would not lead to a BA monopoly on ANY route.

[Edited 2013-01-24 03:26:25]

User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7461 posts, RR: 17
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months ago) and read 8290 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 11):
What is your source for those numbers?

His number for EDI (1,271,459) is exactly that published on the CAA web site. I have not checked the others but look here:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airport...om_Air_Pax_Route_Analysis_2011.pdf


User currently offlinebongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3549 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8197 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 15):
VS has never operated domestic flights. All of VS's flights from LHR are operated by at least TWO other carriers. Therefore the demise of VS would not lead to a BA monopoly on ANY route.

To put a different perspective on the matter which has been touched upon with the above quote,

Without VS entering into the domestic market BA have a monopoly on a number of routes from LHR, obviously they can't charge whatever they want, but this does give them considerable leeway to increase fares. Meanwhile however we have BA and VS competing directly on a number of International routes, most if not all of which there is at least one non UK airline also on the route. In order to provide more slots for new routes it would be better to only have one UK airline on each route, as there would still be competition to help keep prices reasonable.

However, no ones suggestions are going to happen, are they ?


User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8166 times:

I don't like to be negative but I would give Virgin 24 odd months before they wind up domestic.
I really can't see the point other than a dig at BA.If BMI could not make it work how will Virgin.
The market is pretty well sown up by the locos and BA have their feed also.

Then again you never know?


User currently onlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 805 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8108 times:

Quoting bongodog1964 (Reply 17):
Without VS entering into the domestic market BA have a monopoly on a number of routes from LHR, obviously they can't charge whatever they want,

I booked flights LHR-EDI in late April the other day. The VS flights were £3 cheaper than BA, and from my perspective not at such good times. I wonder if their in flight service will be better as based on this one example they don't seem to be differentiating themselves too much on fares.


User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5188 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8106 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 15):
What's changed has got nothing to do with BA.

Actually it does have something to do with BA.... they bought the carrier that was providing domestic feed to VS.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 15):
Like I said....they chose not to commence domestic operations when they commenced long-haul operations at LHR.

Because 25 years ago BD were uch more a domestic/short haul carrier and it made no sense to compete with them AND BA on domestic routes.

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 18):
I don't like to be negative but I would give Virgin 24 odd months before they wind up domestic.
I really can't see the point other than a dig at BA.If BMI could not make it work how will Virgin.

Well the contract with Aer Lingus is for 3 years.... and BMI couldnt make it work because they were filling alot of seats carrying other airlines passengers. At least will be connnecting them to their own long haul network - much like what BA does. Virgin know short haul will not make money, but they will also have a very good picture of what the wetlease will cost and what amount of passengers currently connect on BA (or used ot on BD).


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 8326 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7993 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

One of the conditions of BA buying BMI was some domestic slots for competition. Since Virgin got lots of feed from BMI they needed their own feed domestically.

User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7922 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting anstar (Reply 20):
Actually it does have something to do with BA.... they bought the carrier that was providing domestic feed to VS.

So what ?

I guess VS should have bought BD via a decent offer then.

If a carrier decided to commence operations at FRA would the Bundestag and Brussels force LH to surrender rights and slots ?


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7900 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bongodog1964 (Reply 17):
In order to provide more slots for new routes it would be better to only have one UK airline on each route, as there would still be competition to help keep prices reasonable.

Oh that it were so simple.
A significant % of BA long haul routes operate to points where the foreign carrier is an alliance partner or even worse from a competition perspective Joint Venture Partner.

In the market place VS remain an effective competitor on those selected routes (All high yield and heavy O & D demand) out of LHR.

The incorporation of bmi domestic feed into BA operations has also had a negative effect on VS regional feed.

Whilst it is true BA are required to offer interline domestic feed (At commercial rates i might add), the remedy slots were part of the take over agreement.
Therefore it would blatantly obvious VS should consider replacing the bmi feed with their own brand.

For the Virgin Group (As opposed to the airline) there would also be the opportunity to replace some of the about to be lost rail franchise capacity.

Of course because of the bent franchising rail process they have since retained the WCML rail franchise with an extension for a further two years.
They now have the prospect of securing an opportunity to re-tender with differing rules.

As to the opening question as part of an effective Hub and Spoke operation be that single airline/alliance or traditional interline operations domestic feed is an essential element of the structural arrangement.

Caveat the point where domestic air travel and feed becomes effective is where ground travel times are 3 hours and beyond.

Manchester is at that tipping point (For road travel, however not rail ), added to which that city and region creates size-able corporate traffic and there remains market for some O & D as well.

Leeds may yet be slot sitting however we shall see. Clearly the Banking sectors (Halifax) may have some potential.

As for Newcastle for BA that's clearly feed in the main these days.

The current Nationalised ECML rail serve is fast and very cheap compared to the WCML and Newcastle -London just just over that tipping time of 3 hours (By 10 minutes or so ) via rail. Its a long drive by road and certainly needs an overnight each end !

All journeys between London and Scotland by ground are way over the tipping point and air is the ONLY way to achieve a return within the same day.
There remains real O & D and transfer opportunities to these parts that only air can ever offer.
Thats why BA fly to these parts from LHR/LGW and LCY multiple times a day. And the existence of EZY and Cityjet in the market place.

Scotland- London very much meets the criteria of an essential aIr route and will remain so for a VERY LONG TIME.

Ironically in the context of domestic services operating expressly as feeder -Too much connecting traffic may make for an un-economic operation !

It was said bmi had bums on seats between GLA-LHR and at times more than they could handle however could never make money since they all went onto other *A without sufficient payment for the domestic sector.

If VS are smart with there accounting they may actually loose less money on the domestic routes by NOT offering to feed alliances other than at commercial rates themselves.
Yes that means fares from the regions with a VS connection will need to increase.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7874 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 22):
If a carrier decided to commence operations at FRA would the Bundestag and Brussels force LH to surrender rights and slots ?

Depending on the terms possibly !

In fact Lufthansa HAVE offered slots recently in anti trust claims

Read here:

http://www.ch-aviation.ch/portal/new...rankfurt-nyc-slots-for-competitors

and here

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...nental-antitrust-approval-bid.html


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7928 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 24):
Depending on the terms possibly !

Those reports you link referencing anti-trust are not quite the same thing as LH is making the first move.

So are you saying LH would be required to surrender slots/rights if a new carrier decided to commence ops at FRA ?

Seeing as VS had the same opportunity to purchase BD as BA I cannot understand why BA as the successful bidder has to surrender slots ?

Would VS have surrendered slots to BA if they had purchased BD ?


User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 819 posts, RR: 1
Reply 26, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7933 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 22):
If a carrier decided to commence operations at FRA would the Bundestag and Brussels force LH to surrender rights and slots ?

Basically that is what happened with AB and LH, AB went to the court to get slots at FRA and route authority between TXL/HAM/NUE and FRA. To break the LH monopoly they got what they wanted.

That is how the business works, at least in our Western countries with fair anti-trust-laws. If one company can show at court that a competitor has a monopolistic advantage the suing company will win in most cases.

Quoting anstar (Reply 20):
Actually it does have something to do with BA.... they bought the carrier that was providing domestic feed to VS.

  

That is the most important point. You can't just buy a competitor and expect the authorities to look the other way. BA would have taken over all non-LCC domestic flying. By re-allocating some slots to VS the authorities avoided BA gaining a monopoly on the domestic routes.

The focus and decision of the EU anti-trust-agency when agreeing on the BA-BD-deal under certain terms was not on BA and VS, but on BA and BD. It did not say: BA, you have to give up slots to VS, your competitor. It said, you have to give up slots at LHR for domestic flying to avoid creating the mentioned monopoly. VS applied for the slots and got them.

Not directly linked to the ruling this has the advantage of VS now getting feed for their long-haul flying. The market has changed in 25 years and VS is doing more these days than flying tourists to the sunny places of the world. But don't focus on this point. Don't read something into the ruling like this: BA can buy BD only for VS to profit from the deal by gaining slots at LHR. It is like this: BA is allowed to take over a direct competitor (BD) if they give away some of BDs slots at LHR to avoid a domestic monopoly, otherwise the take-off would not have been gone through.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 27, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7974 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 25):
Seeing as VS had the same opportunity to purchase BD as BA I cannot understand why BA as the successful bidder has to surrender slots ?

Would VS have surrendered slots to BA if they had purchased BD ?

That was the deal to ensure the take over met the requirement of the competition regulators in the UK/US AND EU.

So yes they are of the same magnitude.

By the way its NOT a FREE market , but a regulated competitive marketplace.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 28, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7871 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 27):
Would VS have surrendered slots to BA if they had purchased BD ?

Likely NOT as the competitive market conditions would have remained unaltered.


As others have pointed out you cannot compare the UK and German markets with any ease.

They operate in a completely differing environment.

German States have FAR greater power and identity than the UK regions have over local economies (Manufacturing still alive, Commerce and Tourism all across the nation) meaning multiple aviation Hubs have developed (Closer to the US model !)

What you said about re Frankfurt is as a nonsense as a new UK operator demanding access and slots at Heathrow.
Neither has happened !

That said Air Berlin has a real opportunity to selectively compete against LH albeit from differing hubs (their own choice)
Historically remember this is a Leisure Carrier and much of the change is driven to take advantage of the upgraded facilities in Berlin and strengthened business routes from Dusseldorf.
They can do this based on the strong German State economies.

This is what the UK should be emulating not a stupid in/out EU debate. (Sorry political and ignore if you want)

[Edited 2013-01-24 09:02:48]

User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7827 times:

Reminds me off Pan Am buying National a bit...Never had a domestic airline to feed its long haul .

User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 30, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7802 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 29):

Reminds me off Pan Am buying National a bit...Never had a domestic airline to feed its long haul .

They did all right in a differing market place. US domestic deregulation did for them as they lost those cozy interline arrangements with Delta/North West and Eastern.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7749 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CARST (Reply 26):
That is the most important point. You can't just buy a competitor and expect the authorities to look the other way. BA would have taken over all non-LCC domestic flying. By re-allocating some slots to VS the authorities avoided BA gaining a monopoly on the domestic routes.

They 'just' bought it after it went BUST ! It's not like it was a hostile take-over in order to gain an advantage.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 28):
What you said about re Frankfurt is as a nonsense as a new UK operator demanding access and slots at Heathrow

The fact that it is nonsense is the point I was making. Where do you think VS got its traffic rights to NRT from ?

Quoting CARST (Reply 26):
BA, you have to give up slots to VS, your competitor. It said, you have to give up slots at LHR for domestic flying to avoid creating the mentioned monopoly. VS applied for the slots and got them.

Who else was going to apply for the slots? (given the routes they have to be used for)

Quoting CARST (Reply 26):
BA is allowed to take over a direct competitor (BD) if they give away some of BDs slots at LHR to avoid a domestic monopoly

But BD had gone BUST. If BA hadn't bought BD they would have been the sole domestic operator anyway !?! The slots would have been sold to the highest bidders. (which wouldn't have been VS for sure)

What happens when VS pulls out of domestic in a year or two ?

Maybe BA should subsidize VS's domestic operation in order to avoid a monopoly ?

[Edited 2013-01-24 08:56:23]

User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7731 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 30):

National knew how to run its operation, when Pan Am took over it didn't have a clue about running it.

Virgin really needs to join an alliance, as has been said a million times on here.
This whole domestic thing is really just going to cost them a fortune, and is going to end up messy.
Could they not have done some sort of agreement with EZY or FLYBE rather than starting up their own short haul?
As I said before I think this market is already saturated and really does not need another carrier!

I think Virgins biggest problem right now is finding itself an alliance partner, ie sky team ASAP,
I wonder if DL has any input on funding this short haul venture?


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 33, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7657 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 31):
Where do you think VS got its traffic rights to NRT from

The negotiated governmental bi-lateral agreement (theres that regulated competitive environment again) allows for 2 carriers to operate between designated cities from each country.

So we have ANA, JAL, BA, and VS

Under the Bi-Laterals the frequencies are also controlled.

At this time none of the parties use their quota.

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 32):
National knew how to run its operation, when Pan Am took over it didn't have a clue about running it.

Agreed

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 32):
Virgin really needs to join an alliance

Maybe ! Delta must have plans - My concerns are more the future of Virgin Holidays/Leisure ops rather than the franchised domestic operations.

I can see Virgin Holidays sold off leaving those aged 744s at LGW and MAN little to do !


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7634 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 33):
The negotiated governmental bi-lateral agreement (theres that regulated competitive environment again) allows for 2 carriers to operate between designated cities from each country.

So we have ANA, JAL, BA, and VS

Under the Bi-Laterals the frequencies are also controlled.

At this time none of the parties use their quota.

....Lord King was further angered by the subsequent decision of the CAA to transfer two pairs of unused landing slots that British Airways held at Tokyo's Narita Airport to Virgin to let it increase its frequency between Heathrow and Tokyo from four to six weekly round trips, making it easier for Virgin to compete against British Airways. King called the CAA's decision, which the Government had endorsed, "a confiscation of his company's property"..........


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7461 posts, RR: 17
Reply 35, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7635 times:

I wonder if VS will be able to sustain its flights from both ABZ and EDI to LHR.

From ABZ it has the distinct disadvantage of only offering three return flights a day against BA's eight. With its own long-haul departures and arrivals at LHR spread across the day it will not be able to offer thesame level of conectivity that BA can.

The situation with EDI is better. But VS will still only have sixdaily flights to and from EDI against BA's twelve.

Fares do not seem to be super-competitive. I selected at random EDI-LHR on 15 April returning LHR-EDI on 22 April. The fares were £158.30 on VS and £152 on BA or, for a fully flexible ticket, £572.30 on VS and £578 on BA. However for some reason the VS web site said no seats were available on any of the flights to and from EDI on these dates although all ABZ flights were bookable.


User currently offlinegoosebayguy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2009, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7616 times:

If you're looking for Heathrow to be better utilised then how about a minimum limit on aircraft size? Say minimum 150 seats or even 200 seats. Even a minimum load factor? Say 80% full before being allowed to land or take off. I remember LHR having some great business jets around the Hunting hangar but they were all pushed out for larger aircraft so perhaps now we need to increase the size of aircraft using LHR?

User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7626 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 27):
That was the deal to ensure the take over met the requirement of the competition regulators in the UK/US AND EU.

The only requirement the EU 'should' insist upon is that the BA domestic operation at LHR is no more uncompetitive than other European carriers domestic operations at the likes of AMS, FRA, CDG, MAD etc

Which of course it would not have been.

Otherwise what are they basing their judgment on ?

Unless of course Brussels make decsions based on ideals rather than what is actually reality across the continent.

(would explain alot actually)



[Edited 2013-01-24 09:34:14]

[Edited 2013-01-24 10:26:22]

User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7584 times:

[quote=rutankrd,reply=33][
Good points..


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 39, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7116 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 34):
Lord King was further angered by the subsequent decision of the CAA to transfer two pairs of unused landing slots that British Airways held at Tokyo's Narita Airport to Virgin to let it increase its frequency between Heathrow and Tokyo from four to six weekly round trips, making it easier for Virgin to compete against British Airways. King called the CAA's decision, which the Government had endorsed, "a confiscation of his company's property

Thats why the market IS regulated to prevent market dominance in the interests of the consumer and smaller competitors !

BA just dumped their loss making Japanese regional services to compensate !


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 40, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7027 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 37):
The only requirement the EU 'should' insist upon is that the BA domestic operation at LHR is no more uncompetitive than other European carriers domestic operations at the likes of AMS, FRA, CDG, MAD etc

Which of course it would not have been.

Otherwise what are they basing their judgment on ?

Unless of course Brussels make decsions based on ideals rather than what is actually reality across the continent.

You make a wrongful assumption that it was Brussels. Both domestic and US ! competition authorities were involved in the BA/bmi exchange and setting the conditions for completion.

Many mergers involve similar conditions to ensure the markets remains competitive.

Bank mergers see branches (And accounts !) sold off the competitors, large scale retail take over see stores sold on to competitors need to go on.

Fact is no remedy slots no completion sorry but thats how it is.


User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17063 posts, RR: 10
Reply 41, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6957 times:

Quoting LN-KGL (Reply 14):
B747forever, damian has found the numbers in the CAA 2011 Survey - http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?ca...7640.

Thanks for the link.

Always good to back up statistics with a source.



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6838 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 39):
Thats why the market IS regulated to prevent market dominance in the interests of the consumer and smaller competitors !

That's all very well and good but the market dominance of BA domestic at LHR due to the failure of its competitor is not the concern of BA.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 40):
Fact is no remedy slots no completion sorry but thats how it is.

And if BA had not been in a position to purchase BD ?

BA would have been the sole operator of domestic ops at LHR.

What do you do then to prevent a monopoly ? Prevent BA from operating domestic service at LHR and therefore scrap all domestic service at LHR ?

Of course not and we'd all be very happy for BA to provide domestic service then even if they did have (god forbid) a monopoly !

Just aswell BA 'were' able to come to the rescue (again) and save the day.........

VS managed to squeeze a few more freebies out of the system into the bargain !

 


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 43, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6835 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 31):
BD had gone BUST

Repeated twice and both times not true .

The Group had registered huge losses for sure and DLH had had enough but they NEVER went bust !

Had they gone into administration BA may have got an even better deal !


User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6774 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 43):

If BA hadn't got BMI, seemingly they were 1 week away from bankruptcy..I think Walsh quoted that somewhere,


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6763 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 43):
Repeated twice and both times not true .

The Group had registered huge losses for sure and DLH had had enough but they NEVER went bust !

Had they gone into administration BA may have got an even better deal !

If BA hadn't stepped in and purchased BD LH would have liquidated BD and that's a fact. They were hemorrhaging too much cash. BD (unfortunately) was dead in the water.

A better deal ? Slots or no slots BA took on an airline that was losing £200M a year.

LH probably would have paid BA in the end just to take it off their hands and stem the flow of cash !!!

Better deal indeed.


User currently offlinevectismanpaul From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 46, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6750 times:

How many times does one have to repeat that long and mid haul services from LHR need feed from Short haul Europe and Domestic!!! If a service is profitable or allows long haul to be so how can the use of such a slot be a waste? An airline has a given number of slots which are they decide how to use. Whats the big deal!!

V.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 47, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6719 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 42):
That's all very well and good but the market dominance of BA domestic at LHR due to the failure of its competitor is not the concern of BA Who said it was !

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 40):
Fact is no remedy slots no completion sorry but thats how it is.

And if BA had not been in a position to purchase BD ?

DLH would have looked at other alternatives and probably had various options- Closure of bmiBaby and sale of bmiR were almost certainly pre-planned.
DLH has gained and retained a significant number of bmi slots. Further slot sales may well have taken place - Yes even to BA

BA would have been the sole operator of domestic ops at LHR.

They are right now !

What do you do then to prevent a monopoly ? Prevent BA from operating domestic service at LHR and therefore scrap all domestic service at LHR ?

Of course not and we'd all be very happy for BA to provide domestic service then even if they did have (god forbid) a monopoly !

Stupid - You create a framework that allows competition - Part of that was to insist BA offer domestic interline terms to VS AND provide those few remedy slots (That worry you so much)

Just as well BA 'were' able to come to the rescue (again) and save the day.........

Your knight in shining Euro white blue and red - They sure did it for altruistic reasons NOT !

VS managed to squeeze a few more freebies out of the system into the bargain !

The remedy slots are not free !


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6618 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting vectismanpaul (Reply 46):
How many times does one have to repeat that long and mid haul services from LHR need feed from Short haul Europe and Domestic!!! If a service is profitable or allows long haul to be so how can the use of such a slot be a waste? An airline has a given number of slots which are they decide how to use. Whats the big deal!!

No one is arguing your point ?

I'm saying the extra flights VS will provide on London domestic are not needed in addition to BA at LHR and the LCC's at other London airports.

Therefore they are a total waste of slots at congested Heathrow. They may provide feed for VS but they will run at a loss and they will not be enough to make VS run at a profit. There are other more practical things VS could do to achieve that rather than embark upon another vanity project such as this.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6592 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 47):
The remedy slots are not free !

Oh come on. They're a damn site cheaper than if BA had not purchased BD and the slots had gone into a 'highest bidder' scenario.

Everyone knows VS likes to get everything on the cheap !


User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 50, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6553 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 48):

Very true.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25117 posts, RR: 22
Reply 51, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6401 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 15):
Nobody forced VS to commence international operations at LHR without domestic feed 25 years ago ? They obviously decided they didn't need it ?

VS did (and does) have feed. They interline with virtually all major carriers. People seem to think that you have to feed your flights only with your own flights, or with alliance partners. That's never been the case. Even the largest alliance members sell thousands of interline connections every day with carriers from competing alliances or with no alliance affiliation.

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 29):
Reminds me off Pan Am buying National a bit...Never had a domestic airline to feed its long haul .

One of Pan Am's biggest mistakes.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 52, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6261 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 49):
Oh come on. They're a damn site cheaper than if BA had not purchased BD and the slots had gone into a 'highest bidder' scenario.

Everyone knows VS likes to get everything on the cheap !

You pick up on the last random throw away statement - All businesses use similar commercial levers when the can -okay I give up !

Aside the fact BA now have MORE slots than they know what to do with which is fine AND we continue to have a potentially stable domestic and intercontinental competitor in the market place.
A situation shared by only the US and Japan !

(Don't suggest India - they have only JET operating competitively - AI are tool of the state and China where the carriers are simply regional divisions of the CAAC and other government agents !)


As for the BUST issue some semantics at play - Again they weren't declared bankrupt (Bust)

Had they been in admin -BA absolutely could have made a better deal - None the less, they would have been able the Hire new staff under MIx fleet terms without facing TUPE costs for one thing.

I am not doubting the claims made be WW but thats just verbal diarrhoea at its best.

The post is past 50 threads and I will add that from a competitive and commercial stand the bmi take over could/should result in a strengthened BA AND a competitive VS.

And I think you are plain wrong and miss the point if you think that domestic services into/out of LHR are a waste and that only BA should have limited opportunity where its deemed essential.

THAT IS NOT A FAIR COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT.

The UK regions absolutely have a right to access the main British Long Haul hub and as repeated said the 3 hour travel time makes those remaining northern routes pretty much essential - especially for BA and VS serving their respective corporate clients.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 53, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6110 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 51):
VS did (and does) have feed. They interline with virtually all major carriers

Agreed many on these forums seem to miss the importance of traditional interlining in the world of Alliances.

VS codeshared with CO for many years and SQ among others as well.

VS are not green to short haul operations - they have operated to Maastricht Dublin and Athens in the past.
Virgin Group remains a shareholder in Brussels Airlines as well


User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 54, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5670 times:

[quote=rutankrd,reply=52][/quot
I didn't say that, Walsh did...not me..


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 55, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5628 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 54):
I didn't say that, Walsh did...not me..

I know and referred to WW - Willie Walsh - I certain Irish gentleman !


User currently offlineshuttle9juliet From UK - Scotland, joined Jul 2010, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 56, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5615 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 55):

Ha ha


User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4418 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5336 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 37):

The only requirement the EU 'should' insist upon is that the BA domestic operation at LHR is no more uncompetitive than other European carriers domestic operations at the likes of AMS, FRA, CDG, MAD etc

I don't actually understand your point when you include AMS, CDG and MAD.

At AMS KL is required to give slots ("a competitive number") if an airline decides to compete with KL on Amsterdam - France flights. U2 was close in starting AMS-CDG, but later on decided not to do so.

At CDG you have the TGV which takes a lot of traffic away from AF (hence why AF discontinues domestic flights). Moreover, there are ample of slots available and AF is bound by certain rules so it cannot crush a new entrant.

At MAD you have competitors like UX and FR which eat in IBs domestic share. In addition the high speed train takes away traffic as well. Thus no need for the EU to step in.

Thus in essence, the EU treats the LHR - domestic market equally than it treats abroad. The only difference is that at LHR there is someone who wants the slots it can get


User currently offlinecosyr From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 386 posts, RR: 0
Reply 58, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4046 times:

Personally, I think LHR has done the best job of any major airport in the world of getting the most out of their slots. Do any props even fly into LHR? It is so widebody heavy that NYC airports could learn a great deal about maximizing resources. Obviously the only downside is the increased spacing for runways.

User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3655 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 51):
VS did (and does) have feed. They interline with virtually all major carriers. People seem to think that you have to feed your flights only with your own flights, or with alliance partners. That's never been the case. Even the largest alliance members sell thousands of interline connections every day with carriers from competing alliances or with no alliance affiliation.

Exactly. Totally needless. An airline with only 20 daily departures most of which involve some of the most easily sold routes in the world does not need its own domestic feed at an airport that has the catchment area that LHR does !

It's a vanity project.


User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5188 posts, RR: 6
Reply 60, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3353 times:

Well if LHR were going to gob

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 31):
What happens when VS pulls out of domestic in a year or two ?

Gibent hey have a 3 year contract with Aer Lingus is there something that you know that VS don't?

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 42):
And if BA had not been in a position to purchase BD ?

Hyperthetical quesiton but perhaps LH would have gone to the second highest bidder and sold BD to them... that being VS.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 48):

Therefore they are a total waste of slots at congested Heathrow.

Actually I would say there are far bigger wastes of LHR slots... look at KL's slot sitting on flights with F70/E190 between say 4-6.30 at night we have departures 5 mins apart on some days! And also the empty LHR-RTM and LBA flights with BA.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 49):

Everyone knows VS likes to get everything on the cheap !

I think most people would like to get a bargain... I certainly do! Why overpay for something??

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 59):

Exactly. Totally needless. An airline with only 20 daily departures most of which involve some of the most easily sold routes in the world does not need its own domestic feed at an airport that has the catchment area that LHR does !

But if said airline wants to grow then they have to look at their other options. VS will know hoe much feed they send BA's way and will have done the number and now they will be bringing that traffic onto their own network.

Anyway - have you anything more than VS bashing to contribute to the discussion? Surely we could be a happy that there is more competition for BA.. it keeps everyone on their toes and we as consumers can only benefit from that.

[Edited 2013-01-25 02:25:49]

User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 61, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3246 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting anstar (Reply 60):
Gibent hey have a 3 year contract with Aer Lingus is there something that you know that VS don't?

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 42):
And if BA had not been in a position to purchase BD ?

Hyperthetical quesiton but perhaps LH would have gone to the second highest bidder and sold BD to them... that being VS.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 48):

Therefore they are a total waste of slots at congested Heathrow.

Actually I would say there are far bigger wastes of LHR slots... look at KL's slot sitting on flights with F70/E190 between say 4-6.30 at night we have departures 5 mins apart on some days! And also the empty LHR-RTM and LBA flights with BA.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 49):

Everyone knows VS likes to get everything on the cheap !

I think most people would like to get a bargain... I certainly do! Why overpay for something??

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 59):

Exactly. Totally needless. An airline with only 20 daily departures most of which involve some of the most easily sold routes in the world does not need its own domestic feed at an airport that has the catchment area that LHR does !

But if said airline wants to grow then they have to look at their other options. VS will know hoe much feed they send BA's way and will have done the number and now they will be bringing that traffic onto their own network.

Anyway - have you anything more than VS bashing to contribute to the discussion? Surely we could be a happy that there is more competition for BA.. it keeps everyone on their toes and we as consumers can only benefit from that.

All points agreed

There is a subscriber on the dried fruit site that bears some similarity with 1400mph . Neither gets the COMMERCIAL imperative of a regulated competitive environment.

That said the observation of the three year contract is of no coincidence. VS would be able to transfer some/many/most of the remedy slots to their own long haul operation after this.
VS has ensured this is a low risk venture - ACML leases from EI and handling subcontracted and Termination penalties may not be to onerous on either party

Clarification for 1400mph you do know the VS Manchester operation is NOT part of the slot remedy scheme and VS are using existing slot holdings for these flights.(These were leased out by VS)
It is said that they had to use up these to qualify for the remedy slot award - Hence the not free statement.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3193 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting anstar (Reply 60):
Hyperthetical quesiton but perhaps LH would have gone to the second highest bidder and sold BD to them... that being VS.

Except that there is no possible way VS could have absorbed BD and lasted longer than about a week ?

Just more hot air on their part.

Quoting anstar (Reply 60):

Anyway - have you anything more than VS bashing to contribute to the discussion? Surely we could be a happy that there is more competition for BA.. it keeps everyone on their toes and we as consumers can only benefit from that.

It always amazes me that people still think that VS keeps BA on its toes. Really...it amazes me considering how much the market has changed since VS started ops and given the competition now present at LHR and the UK in general.

If VS were the only airline keeping BA 'on its toes' BA would be laughing. If only !!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 61):
VS has ensured this is a low risk venture - ACML leases from EI and handling subcontracted and Termination penalties may not be to onerous on either party

Oh I'm sure...there's always a backout clause with VS.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 61):
Clarification for 1400mph you do know the VS Manchester operation is NOT part of the slot remedy scheme and VS are using existing slot holdings for these flights

Yes that's very interesting. After all the years of moaning about not being able to expand or get LHR slots......all of a sudden it turns out they have slots they don't even use.......????????????


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7461 posts, RR: 17
Reply 63, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3098 times:

Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 36):
If you're looking for Heathrow to be better utilised then how about a minimum limit on aircraft size? Say minimum 150 seats or even 200 seats.

Not practical.

For example BA have 44 aircraft with less than 150 seats and 108 aircraft with less than 200 seats currently operating out of LHR. These aircraft would need to be replaced by either 150+ or 200+ seat aircraft. The cost would put BA out of business but their competitors would just need to shuffle the allocation of their fleet and perhaps buy a couple of new aircraft. No other British airline has a suitable fleet of larger aircraft. Net result: No British airline operating a comprehensive service out of LHR.

Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 36):
Even a minimum load factor? Say 80% full before being allowed to land or take off.

Not practical.

One possibility would be one passenger not turning up for a flight reducing the load factor to just below 80 per cent resulting in the cancellation of the flight close to scheduled departure time. This would annoy the, say, 122 passengers already checked in and waiting to board that flight. With the 80% full rule there clearly would not be enough room for these passengers on the next flight so the airline would probably have to put many of them into a hotel overnight and would, as a result, have to significantly increase fares to cover additional costs.

There would also be travellers who had, in good faith, booked a flight six, nine or even twelve months prior to scheduled departure. Then they could receive an e-mail the day before their flight saying it was cancelled as there were insufficient passengers to operate it. Indeed none of us could be certain that the flight we had booked would achieve the 80 per cent load factor and therefore depart as scheduled.

There would also be the cases of the outward bound flights that had, say, a 90 per cent load factor - perhaps an early morning flight on a heavy business route - where the aircraft could not return because the load factor on the scheduled mid-morning return flight was just under 80 per cent. So it would sit on the ground unproductively and out of position requiring the cancellation of its next flight out of LHR while pushing up costs and therefore fares.

Finally there would be the unscrupulous airline that would employ "passengers" to make up the required 80 per cent load factor.

Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 36):
I remember LHR having some great business jets around the Hunting hangar but they were all pushed out for larger aircraft so perhaps now we need to increase the size of aircraft using LHR?


They may no longer be parked where they used to park, but Biz Jets are still a regular features of the LHR scene. For example here is a listing of the seven Biz Jet arrivals at LHR on 2 January 2013:

http://www.lhr-lgw.co.uk/lhr-movemen...1-lhr/janlhrbiz13/lhrbiz020113.mht

So a more sensible approach would be to ban all Biz Jets. Increasing the size of passenger aircraft sounds great. But in addition to the reasons as to why this is not practical given above, the size of the aircraft is irrelevant. Large, nearly empty aircraft do very little for the environment or for air fares. It is better to have small full aircraft on both counts.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 64, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3033 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting VV701 (Reply 63):
So a more sensible approach would be to ban all Biz Jets. Increasing the size of passenger aircraft sounds great. But in addition to the reasons as to why this is not practical given above,

Clearly the 80% minimum load factor is a nonsense, however the airport operator already uses pricing differential tools to encourage use of larger aircraft types or use of out of peak slots don't they ?

As for BA wasn't it a commercial decision the Size and Shape Project to move to smaller aircraft types and increased frequencies some years back.
A decision based on reducing Y% to raise yield in the "good times"


In the coming years and with continued limited slot growth opportunities and further pricing differentials one would expect the likes of BA to make those modest increases in capacity through replacement orders up-guaged A319 - to A320NG and possibly A321NG types as a matter of commercial imperative wouldn't you ?

In fact its been happening for some time (10 years - since the last own order 319 delivery !)


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7461 posts, RR: 17
Reply 65, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2933 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 64):
In fact its been happening for some time (10 years - since the last own order 319 delivery !)
Quoting rutankrd (Reply 64):
As for BA wasn't it a commercial decision the Size and Shape Project to move to smaller aircraft types and increased frequencies some years back

Looking at the orders would take you back even further. BA ordered 39 319s and 20 320s and took out 129 319/320/321 options in August 1998. It confirmed this order a couple of months later on 28 October. These aircraft were intended to meet the future needs not only of BA itself but also its then subsidiaries, Air Liberte and Deutsche BA.

The above order was later ammended. So only 33 of the 39 319s were ever delivered. These deliveries started on 6 October 1999 and were completed on 13 November 2001.

All this was before the BA "Future Size and Shape" programme was announced. Designed to save £650 million, the programme was revealed in February 2002. It is almost certain that its main stimulus was the 9/11 outrage. This had severely hit air traffic immediately it occurred just five months earlier. BA's response was equally immediate. Between 11 September and 8 October 2001 it retired all of its remaining fleet of 10 742s. The impact of LCC's on BA's short-haul business was probably also a factor in "Future Size and Shape". However the only "small" short haul aircraft either ordered or delivered siince October 1998 are the LCY based fleets of 318s and EJets.


User currently offlineRichard28 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 1616 posts, RR: 6
Reply 66, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2817 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 62):
It always amazes me that people still think that VS keeps BA on its toes. Really...it amazes me considering how much the market has changed since VS started ops and given the competition now present at LHR and the UK in general.

If VS were the only airline keeping BA 'on its toes' BA would be laughing. If only !!

I disagree.

VS and BA competing at LHR has been fantastic news for passengers on both carriers.

From this competition came flat beds in J class, Premium Economy, seat back TV's as standard, chauffeur service to the airports, big leaps in the quality of airport lounges and services.

Many of these things would not have happened when they did without competition being in place. Indeed in many other markets outside of LHR the lack of hub competition has meant some of these things took a long time to happen or still have not happened.

VS having more short haul routes will help keep them a player at LHR and will keep competition alive, improving the prospects for services and prices to passengers of both BA and VS.

I applaud this competition - the more, the better.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 67, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2649 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Richard28 (Reply 66):
I applaud this competition - the more, the better.

I applaud competition I don't applaud 'this' (VS) competition. VS would have liked to have kept LHR in a time warp ref UK based airlines membership of alliances, mergers and joint ventures. Indeed they attempted to block BA in these endeavours every step of the way.

This most certainly would have hindered the UK's civil aviation competitiveness with the rest of the world.

My point is that BA has moved on in the the form of Oneworld, mergers and joint ventures etc whilst VS is becoming more and more obsolete and certainly no more of a competitive threat than alot of other carriers with 'now' strong presence at LHR.

What you say is true about VS's impact on BA.......once upon a time.

Star Alliance, Skyteam, EK etc etc....they are the competition now....VS doesn't even figure in the equation anymore.

[Edited 2013-01-25 23:22:04]

User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5188 posts, RR: 6
Reply 68, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2559 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 67):
What you say is true about VS's impact on BA.......once upon a time.

I'd say with DL as a 49% stake holder, a new domestic network and a JV with DL across the atlantic it certainly will be keeping BA on their toes.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2548 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting anstar (Reply 68):
I'd say with DL as a 49% stake holder, a new domestic network and a JV with DL across the atlantic it certainly will be keeping BA on their toes.

There are no additional slots/increase in capacity as a result of DL's acquisition.

Besides we had all this with SQ and they did nothing but regret the 49% purchase.

VS has 3% of slots at LHR and DL has even less. Hardly a worthy adversary for BA and AA ?


User currently offlinefinnishway From Finland, joined Jul 2012, 308 posts, RR: 0
Reply 70, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2515 times:

This is easier said than done, but why don't they move cargo flights to LGW or STN?

User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 71, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2424 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting finnishway (Reply 70):

This is easier said than done, but why don't they move cargo flights to LGW or STN?

There are very FEW pure cargo rotations through LHR these days.

Just CX /SQ/KE and a few late evening/weekend EAT/BA joint services a week.
None are anything close to daily and use random off peak slots.

Effectively pure cargo has already been priced out of the market place. Much/most of the bulk UK freight goes via STN/EMA or truck to the low countries if it can't be put on/off the belly of the wide bodies.



Quoting 1400mph (Reply 67):

Quoting Richard28 (Reply 66):
I applaud this competition - the more, the better.

I applaud competition I don't applaud 'this' (VS) competition. VS would have liked to have kept LHR in a time warp ref UK based airlines membership of alliances, mergers and joint ventures. Indeed they attempted to block BA in these endeavours every step of the way.

Its the role of any good CEO to object to unfair competition the BA/AA joint venture absolutely needed conditions placed on it for acceptance by the regulators.

The dominant position of BA continues to influence the UK Long Haul Market where bilateral treaties exist.

That said the UK has had a long long transport policy of promoting a multi carrier approach (Seen as maintaining a regulated competitive environment) in many of the bi-laterals.

It was the UK and US stand off re Bermuda 2 and the designated 4 carrier operations out of LHR-US that delayed satisfactory terms for BA/AA joint ventures -NOT VS and a few crap No Way BA/AA stickers.

Given the intrangience of the UK authorities - that could still be the case.
It took a EU/US Regulation Authority OpenSkys agreement to sort that.

That allowed DL/NW/US/CO to spend hundreds of millions to gain entry to LHR and also allowed BA to transfer much of the LGW Long Haul US operation across the Thames and Downs.

It also gave a framework into which the BA/AA joint venture could be considered by the regulators.


There is a pattern here Mr/Ms 1400mph think about all your points against VS- they involve the REGULATION AUTHORITIES , and all cases both BA and VS customers have made gains with expanded competition and choice.

Sir Richard B has had little control of the day to day operations of VS for a very long time you do know that don't you ?

One thing to agreed VS have a presence in the collective mind of the consumer and UK media that is far greater than reality - that's very much down to SRB (And adds value to VIrgin Group Shares) . However in reality we know they a pretty small player.

Finally business is ruthless get used to it


User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5188 posts, RR: 6
Reply 72, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2408 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 69):

There are no additional slots/increase in capacity as a result of DL's acquisition.

I didn't say it would increase their slots. Just saying that by having a partnership with DL - it makes then a stronger carrier across the atlantic and will likely lead them into Skyteam.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 69):
Besides we had all this with SQ and they did nothing but regret the 49% purchase.

Singapore regretted it because a) they paid too much and b) the emergence of the ME carriers moved their focus away from LHR and to their own backyard.

As such SQ were a very inactive shareholder.

DL on the other hand is already proving to be far more active in pushing for the JV and co location at T3.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 69):
VS has 3% of slots at LHR and DL has even less. Hardly a worthy adversary for BA and AA ?

I believe VS had 3.3% of the slots for the last summer 12 season but after receiving the remedy slots I'd expect that to increase. Don't forget that the 3% is currently used for Widebody only service which offer more capacity than a smaller aircraft.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 73, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2380 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 71):
It was the UK and US stand off re Bermuda 2 and the designated 4 carrier operations out of LHR-US that delayed satisfactory terms for BA/AA joint ventures -NOT VS and a few crap No Way BA/AA stickers.

Yes am aware of that. I just personally find it rather amusing and highly typical of VS to vehemently oppose something and then in woefully delayed realisation of facts and reality desperately try to do the same thing.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 71):
Its the role of any good CEO to object to unfair competition the BA/AA joint venture absolutely needed conditions placed on it for acceptance by the regulators.

Is it also the role of any good CEO to grass or snitch to the authorities about a competitor when you yourself are doing exactly the same thing ? Business maybe ruthless but if I were the CEO of an airline I wouldn't touch VS with a barge pole after that ! Again typical.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 71):
There is a pattern here Mr/Ms 1400mph think about all your points against VS- they involve the REGULATION AUTHORITIES , and all cases both BA and VS customers have made gains with expanded competition and choice.

The regulation authorities follow a standard method of doing things regardless of whether the result is ultimately beneficial to the consumer. They just have to be seen as fair. IAG being forced to hand over LHR slots that it could use to much better use for the consumer and the UK economy as opposed to some thrown together half baked domestic operation is a prime example.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 71):
One thing to agreed VS have a presence in the collective mind of the consumer and UK media that is far greater than reality - that's very much down to SRB

There is a saying for that - "all fur coat and no knickers"

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 71):
Finally business is ruthless get used to it

Oh indeed business is ruthless. Judging by the shameless naked ambition DL is demonstrating at the moment I think VS will soon find out just how ruthless business can be ! DL will not just sit back and lose money like SQ did.

[Edited 2013-01-26 04:21:22]

User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 74, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2356 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 73):
Oh indeed business is ruthless. Judging by the shameless naked ambition DL is demonstrating at the moment I think VS will soon find out just how ruthless business can be ! DL will not just sit back and lose money like SQ did.

Couldn't agree more DL will ensure their board members and investments meet with their expectations.

They will demand detailed and costed explanations when they don't !

Delta will want a pay back with those domestics in event of the VS/DL joint venture and i really wouldn't be surprised if Virgin holidays were traded off.

If I were at VS LGW/MAN I would be more concerned than the EI staff on the up coming short subcontract domestics !

[Edited 2013-01-26 04:49:55]

[Edited 2013-01-26 04:51:16]

User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 75, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2341 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 73):
Is it also the role of any good CEO to grass or snitch to the authorities

If breaches of laws/regulations are taking place and there is clear evidence - YES its a duty to inform the appropriate authorities and the financial regulators.

BA and others have been found guilty several times of such breaches.

Cargo price fixing and unauthorised use of IT data are two off the top of my head.


User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4418 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2336 times:

Quoting anstar (Reply 72):
Quoting 1400mph (Reply 69):

There are no additional slots/increase in capacity as a result of DL's acquisition.

I didn't say it would increase their slots. Just saying that by having a partnership with DL - it makes then a stronger carrier across the atlantic and will likely lead them into Skyteam.

Moreover, I expect that once VS is in Skyteam, some slots will reshuffle so that the slots used by AF/KL for their slot sitting flights will be used for other flights.

Quoting anstar (Reply 60):
And also the empty LHR-RTM and LBA flights with BA.

I only hear positive news about LHR-RTM (full planes). Which is true?


User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 77, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2332 times:

With a new CEO from outside the company and three directors placed on the board by Delta it is going to be very interesting to see what happens at Virgin.

Back to the original question. Don't forget that a lot of the slots at LHR are not suited to long-haul operations. For long-haul ops you primarily need arrival slots in the early morning and departure slots later in the day.

One of the reasons why Lufthansa struggled to make a go of bmi and why there was no prospect of turning bmi alone into a long-haul player was that most of its slots were suited to short-haul operations rather than long-haul.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 78, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2301 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 77):
For long-haul ops you primarily need arrival slots in the early morning and departure slots later in the day.

One of the reasons why Lufthansa struggled to make a go of bmi and why there was no prospect of turning bmi alone into a long-haul player was that most of its slots were suited to short-haul operations rather than long-haul.

Not quite LHR and indeed Europe has two long haul arrival banks - The early AM is primarily from the West with a later afternoon bank from Eastern Asia and the sub continent. Flights from the south are less effected by time zones and can operate into either bank (Day light flight or red eye)

Due to time zone advantages it is however possible to spread Europe- US/Canadian departures throughout much of the day !

That said it is true that many of the slots through day are more suited to short haul/smaller aircraft.
VV has more a handle on this -

In simple terms it goes that use of more slots by wide-bodies with increased turbulence clearances results in fewer slots in the land sequence (Multiplied through the day result in a FALL in available capacity !)


User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5188 posts, RR: 6
Reply 79, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2266 times:

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 73):
DL will not just sit back and lose money like SQ did.

AS I posted above - DL will be far more active than SQ as a shareholder. No disrespect but I think you can only blame SQ for not making more of it.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 74):
Delta will want a pay back with those domestics in event of the VS/DL joint venture and i really wouldn't be surprised if Virgin holidays were traded off.

If I were at VS LGW/MAN I

I doubt that they would sell Virgin Holidays. It is fully owned by VS and is profitable. I don't really see the benefit.

Quoting LJ (Reply 76):

Moreover, I expect that once VS is in Skyteam, some slots will reshuffle so that the slots used by AF/KL for their slot sitting flights will be used for other flights.

Agreed.

Quoting LJ (Reply 76):
I only hear positive news about LHR-RTM (full planes). Which is true?

Well I've flown the route 3 times this month and each flight has been about half full. I know its only a handful and its a new route.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 80, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2200 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 75):
If breaches of laws/regulations are taking place and there is clear evidence - YES its a duty to inform the appropriate authorities and the financial regulators.

Rather a shame that VS were involved in the same activity then. No wonder nobody wants them in their alliance !

Quoting LJ (Reply 76):
Moreover, I expect that once VS is in Skyteam, some slots will reshuffle so that the slots used by AF/KL for their slot sitting flights will be used for other flights.

They could have accomplished this with the slots they were leasing out. (whilst moaning they couldn't get any)

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 77):
With a new CEO from outside the company and three directors placed on the board by Delta it is going to be very interesting to see what happens at Virgin.

Oh yes !


User currently offlinedavid_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7370 posts, RR: 14
Reply 81, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2148 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting anstar (Reply 79):
Quoting LJ (Reply 76):
I only hear positive news about LHR-RTM (full planes). Which is true?

Well I've flown the route 3 times this month and each flight has been about half full. I know its only a handful and its a new route.

CAA provisional statistics say 5962 passengers in December. In the unlikely scenario of 3 daily services a day from 9th December including the holiday period, it's an average of 43 passengers per flight.

For comparison the LBA flights had 5580 passengers and were 4 daily.

[Edited 2013-01-26 07:45:18]

User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5188 posts, RR: 6
Reply 82, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2143 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 77):
With a new CEO from outside the company and three directors placed on the board by Delta it is going to be very interesting to see what happens at Virgin.

I agree. I believe they will gain alot from the new CEO and having DL on the board.

If it is anything like the changes at Virgin Australia in the last 2 years having DL as a partner and a new CEO from the competitor (QF) it can only be a good thing.

Wridgeway has been deadwood at VS for a while and new blood and expertise from DL can only be positive.


User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 83, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2130 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Do you think they will concentrate more on what VS is doing rather than BA ?

You guys know I'm just winding you up right ?

I do enjoy a good VS / BA bitch-fest from time to time.


  


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26426 posts, RR: 76
Reply 84, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2036 times:

Unless and until a high (at least 125-150 mph) speed rail line is put into LHR from these places, there need to be domestic flights for feed.

Quoting 1400mph (Reply 15):
BA bought BD fair and square after (I might add) it had already shambolicly been through another carriers hands !!

Most monopolies are bad - that's why.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offline1400mph From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2013, 837 posts, RR: 0
Reply 85, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1948 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 84):
Most monopolies are bad - that's why.

How can you possibly say BA has a monopoly on anything ? They operate many of the most competitive routes in the world.

BA were buying a broken airline and in by doing so were actually do the sellers and the people trying to keep their jobs a favour.

  


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 86, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1915 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

BA and oneworld partners could be said to be Complex monopoly out of LHR
(Equally *A at FRA/MUC/ZRH or Skyteam at AMS/CDG/FCO)

A complex monopoly is said to exist whenever firms tacitly collude, and act as if they are a single firm.

The Fair Trading Act1973, first defined a complex monopoly as a number of firms with a collective market share of over 25% that operate very similar or identical price and non-price policies.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 87, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1876 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 84):
Unless and until a high (at least 125-150 mph) speed rail line is put into LHR from these places, there need to be domestic flights for feed.

Existing ECML runs at 125mph both diesel and electrics. Current electric vehicles can run at 140mph however requires in cab signalling technology across the route.

The WCML also runs at 125mph with pendolinos capable of 140mph. This route however does need track alignment before the speeds are raised (Extensively north of Preston)

Even with the completion of HS2 as far as Manchester and Leeds (More than a decade away at the earliest !) and using this combined with those existing routes the lowland Scottish cities will remain well in excess of the illusive 3 hour time advantage achievable via air.

Aberdeen and Inverness are still hours further on !

So yes i agree .

[Edited 2013-01-26 15:00:32]

User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7461 posts, RR: 17
Reply 88, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1615 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 71):
Much/most of the bulk UK freight goes via STN/EMA or truck to the low countries if it can't be put on/off the belly of the wide bodies.

While not disputing the point being made, the bulk of UK air freight does NOT go via STN/EMA. Almost two thirds of all UK air freight does go through LHR, primarilly in the cargo holds of passenger flights.

Specifically:

Total freight handled by UK airports 2011: 2,297,602 tonnes (100 per cent)
Total freifght handled by the five LON airports 2011: 1,802,939 tonnes (78.5 per cent)
Total freight handled by LHR 2011: 1,484,351 tonnes (64.6 per cent)

However EMA and STN were the second and third largest UK freight handling airports in 2011:

Total freight handled by EMA 2011: 264,595 tonnes (11.5 per cent)
Total freight handled by STN 2011: 202,593 tonnes (8.8 per cent)

In terms of growth LHR showed a small growth in 2011 while many other UK airports (including EMA and STN) showeed a small decline. So its 2011 share of 64.6 per cent was higher than its 2010 share of 63.4 per cent.

Data source of the above is the CAA web site here:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airport...l/Table_13_2_Freight_2001_2011.pdf


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2981 posts, RR: 7
Reply 89, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1586 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting VV701 (Reply 88):
bulk of UK air freight

bulk UK freight

One small word makes a difference !

And refer to

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 71):
the belly of the wide bodies

It remains remarkable that LHR handles almost 1.5 million tonnes with so few dedicated flights !

By the way does that LHR number include roaded cargo transfers into and out of LHR ?
There are plenty of those each day to/from the low countries, Paris, Frankfurt even Stansted and East Midlands.

Cathay even road freight to and from Manchester to connect with their 744F services several times a week !

Just saying boxes really don't care so much as there are no mileage rewards or fancy lounges to bribe corporates in that market place !


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7461 posts, RR: 17
Reply 90, posted (1 year 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1528 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 89):
By the way does that LHR number include roaded cargo transfers into and out of LHR ?
There are plenty of those each day to/from the low countries, Paris, Frankfurt even Stansted and East Midlands.

The CAA figures exclude all freight carried to or from the airports by road. They only include freight carried in the cargo holds of passenger aircraft and freight carried in freighter aircraft into or out of the identified airports.

This is confirmed here:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airport...by_Aircraft_Configuration_2011.pdf

where the total freight figures are broken down into freight carried in passenger and freight carried in all-freight aircraft. As you can see the total figures in this table precisely match those in the table I linked in my previous post. So trucked freight, even when trucked in an airline's road freighters, is excluded.


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...
New NW China Flights: Beginning Of End Of NRT Hub? posted Fri May 9 2008 06:41:15 by Incitatus
AF CDG To LHR S08 7 Flights Instead Of 12 posted Fri Dec 7 2007 03:44:30 by CDG
New TED Mexico Flights Out Of ORD? posted Tue Mar 7 2006 01:45:37 by N8334w
How Many Domestic Flights Outside Of Home Country? posted Sun Jul 21 2002 18:07:51 by AirOne
Are There Any Domestic U.S. Flights Using 747s? posted Sat Jul 13 2002 00:45:33 by Bobcat
Are The LHR-BRU Flights Operated By VEX Or Dat? posted Fri Nov 16 2001 16:31:42 by LGW
ULR Flights Are An Irresponsible Waste Of Fuel? posted Sun Aug 12 2007 03:52:11 by Art
How Are New Flights Out Of MRY Doing? posted Mon Mar 13 2006 20:06:01 by RentonView
Status Of Qatar Plan To Fly Iran Domestic Flights? posted Tue May 1 2012 23:58:17 by haveasafeflight
End Of Domestic Flights In NL: KL Stops AMS-MST posted Fri Aug 15 2008 05:09:43 by Joost