Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Etihad Buys Jet Airways LHR Slots  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24834 posts, RR: 46
Posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11586 times:

LHR gold ransom prices continue -

Now Etihad has purchased 3 slot pairs for $70mil from Jet Airways.

The slots are being leased back to Jet Airways for 3-years.

Etihad Buys Jet Air's Three Heathrow Slots
http://goo.gl/2JuvG

=


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8282 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11548 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Why would Jet Airways sell 3 slots at its most important international destination. IF things are so bad they have to sell their LHR slots they should dump all their 77W and A330 and be a regional airline.

User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 11482 times:

Well things are not too bright for Jet at the moment.

They are for sale - and Etihad continues to be a rumored partner.

Also they have for many years now been leasing out much of their 777 fleet - to Turkish then Thai.

Here is a story from this week - After Vijay Mallya‘s Kingfisher fall, they now say Naresh Goyal and his Jet are facing a bleak future.

http://www.firstpost.com/business/af...or-naresh-goyal-of-jet-640436.html

=



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7390 posts, RR: 17
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 11113 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
Now Etihad has purchased 3 slot pairs for $70mil from Jet Airways.

There is probably more in this than meets the eye. This may have something to do with the proposed EY investment in 9W. It may be a way of injecting temporary or a mix of temporary and permanent capital into 9W that will be recovered or partly recovered over the next three years as 9W leases the tree daily slot pairs slots back from EY.

Why do I say this?

The IAG Annual Report for 2012 discussed here:

IAG Posts €997m Loss For 2012 (by thowman Feb 28 2013 in Civil Aviation)

suggests that the final price paid by IAG to Lufthansa Group for BD (after rebates on the offer price of £172.5 million to allow for the disposal of bmi Regional at only £8 million - against its valuation of £20 million - and the costs of closing down bmiBaby) was €101 million. Assuming that the value of BD was no more and no less than the value of its 54 LHR slot pairs, this prices them at less than €2 million per slot pair or significantly less than $25 reportedly paid by EY for each 9W slot pair. Also note that the unsuccessful VS bid for BD at £50 million is less than £1 million for each slot pair, although that was probably not a serious but a spoiling bid.


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4497 posts, RR: 72
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 10835 times:

No matter what is behind it, this deal is not without lots of risk for 9W. Although it is leasing the slots back from EY for 3 years, if in the mean time the 9W-EY relationship turns sour, it could find itself without access to its prime international gate way in 3 years.

9W is currently holding a prevcious 7 am arrival slots combined with a 10 am departure slots as well as 2 later afternoon arrivals slots linked to two 9 pm departure slots. A lots of airlines can be expected to be willing to pay top dosh for some of these slots pairs. I feel that the morning arrival slots is particularly invaluable.

On the issue of the 9W widebody fleet, I wonder what is the airline's plan. It is currently taking delivery of a number of A333 frames, and in a while some of the leased out B77Ws at TG will come off lease as TG takes delivery of its own 77Ws. Meanwhile, 9W keeps shrinking its longhaul operation with MXP now closed and BRU JFK abandoned. That will inevitably leave the airline with excess widebody capacity. Is there anyway something about earlier rumors of a new temporary lease of B77W frames to TK?


User currently offlineAzure From France, joined Dec 2012, 610 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10124 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 4):
No matter what is behind it, this deal is not without lots of risk for 9W. Although it is leasing the slots back from EY for 3 years, if in the mean time the 9W-EY relationship turns sour, it could find itself without access to its prime international gate way in 3 years.

According to AF (which has signed a partnership with EY), should the deal between EY and 9W be concluded, 9W may well join Skyteam and move its continental European operations from BRU to either CDG or AMS. In such case LHR would not remain as crucial as it is right now for 9W.



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things - A. de Saint Exupery
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3198 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10010 times:

Quoting Azure (Reply 5):
In such case LHR would not remain as crucial as it is right now for 9W.

Well you either serve the biggest international gateway in Europe or you don't. Saying it's fine cause you need to focus on a.n.other is mere spin. London is too big a market to simply wander off from.


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4497 posts, RR: 72
Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 9966 times:

Quoting Azure (Reply 5):
In such case LHR would not remain as crucial as it is right now for 9W.

Really? As far as I can see, moving the Brussels scissor hub to Amsterdam or Paris doesn't make the slightest difference at all. Heathrow is Europe's number one market from India and 9W giving up on serving that market nonstop and instead routing is passengers through Amsterdam or Paris will render it uncompetitive for that part of the market where the money is to be made.


User currently offlineAzure From France, joined Dec 2012, 610 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9913 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 6):
Well you either serve the biggest international gateway in Europe or you don't. Saying it's fine cause you need to focus on a.n.other is mere spin. London is too big a market to simply wander off from.

I can bluntly reply you either serve the 2nd and 3rd gateways in Europe (CDG and AMS) or you don't ! LHR is certainly not the best hub in terms of connectivity for any airline.
Of course "London is too big a market to simply wander off from" for an Indian carrier, but serving CDG or AMS and simultaneously join ST would open a wide range of opportunities that would lessen the role of LHR for 9W . Just my two cents. You have the right to disagree.



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things - A. de Saint Exupery
User currently offlineAzure From France, joined Dec 2012, 610 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9862 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 7):
Really? As far as I can see, moving the Brussels scissor hub to Amsterdam or Paris doesn't make the slightest difference at all.

Are you serious ? Are you really comparing BRU with CDG or AMS ?!

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 7):
that part of the market where the money is to be made.

Are you sure ? The LHR - India Route is probably one of the most competitive out of the UK...

Anyway, please refer to my previous post #8 and do not try to make me say LHR is unimportant.



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things - A. de Saint Exupery
User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4497 posts, RR: 72
Reply 10, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9806 times:

Quoting Azure (Reply 9):
Are you serious ? Are you really comparing BRU with CDG or AMS ?!

Yes I am serious. Whether 9W hands over a number of Europe bound passengers to SN through the extensive interline deal it currently has in place, or to AF or KL through what will likely be a codeshare arrangement, will ultimately make not much of a difference, as the main purpose of the scissor hub is to feed 9W's own India to North America flights.

With regard to Heathrow, while the market may well be very competitive, 9W will entirely lose out on any higher yielding traffic it can now cater to, as these people will surely move to nonstop alternatives. To say that 9W will be able to serve Heathrow through an AF or KL codeshare arrangement involving a transfer in Amsterdam or - God forbid - Paris without losing out on its current market position is not very realistic.


User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9630 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 3):
Assuming that the value of BD was no more and no less than the value of its 54 LHR slot pairs, this prices them at less than €2 million

You have to remember that IAG bought the company and not just the landing slots - so you can't just divide the price paid by the number of slots.

An acquiring company looks at a whole host of factors - fair value of assets, liabilities, future trading prospects and so on. The 'value' of the slots would be integral to the price decision but not by any means the only factor.

If you look at note 13 to the IAG condensed accounts published yesterday you will see that the fair value attributed to the landing rights acquired from business combinations was £499m. I can't recall any other business combination within IAG this year besides the BMI acquisition. Assuming that to be the case and assuming that's based on BA retaining approx 42 slots after the EU required divestment has taken place that gives an average of £11.9m or approx $19m per slot. So allowing for the fact that the value of slots will vary with their time of day, and for 'bulk discount' that compares reasonably well with the $23.3m per slot apparently paid by Etihad.

I read elsewhere on a.net that AZ are thinking of selling some LHR slots to help them keep afloat - it will be interesting to see what they get for theirs. They did this in 2007 when in financial trouble before and the FT reported then that they sold one pair of slots for £30m - so on that basis Etihad's $23.3m is a bargain!


User currently offlineAzure From France, joined Dec 2012, 610 posts, RR: 16
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9532 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 10):
Whether 9W hands over a number of Europe bound passengers to SN through the extensive interline deal it currently has in place, or to AF or KL through what will likely be a codeshare arrangement, will ultimately make not much of a difference

I really have to disagree. AF and KL serve far more destinations with far more frequencies than SN, not only in Europe but worldwide, notwithstanding possible codeshare agreements with other ST members at either AMS or CDG !
Concerning this latter as a hub, all ST airlines are now using the new 2E and 2F terminals, that offers a much better experience to the connecting pax than BRU or LHR !
Once again I have never said that 9W should leave LHR, but you seem to keep saying the contrary, for God knows what reason !
In any case, whatever it may imply, the 9W / EY rumored partnership is already praised by the markets rather than the status quo you seem to plead for.



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things - A. de Saint Exupery
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3198 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9446 times:

Quoting Azure (Reply 8):
I can bluntly reply you either serve the 2nd and 3rd gateways in Europe (CDG and AMS) or you don't ! LHR is certainly not the best hub in terms of connectivity for any airline.

It has the largest O&D by far and given former colonial ties with India, if Jet Airways cannot succeed in THAT market they will fail. I am not even mentioning hub connectivity, they can't even get the basic A to B part right, much like Air India and Kingfisher. Endemic and institutional corruption and incompetence = India.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7390 posts, RR: 17
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9430 times:

Quoting Azure (Reply 8):
LHR is certainly not the best hub in terms of connectivity for any airline.

Incorrect. There can be absolutely no doubt at all that LHR is by far and away the best hub in terms of connectivity for at least two airlines, BA and VS. We could discuss how this applies to other airlines. Here the indisputable background would be that it is Europe's largest hub. In 2012 passenger numbers were:

LHR: 70.0M
CDG: 61.5M
FRA: 57.3M
AMS: 51.0M

So one question that would need to be addressed is "Why is it Europe's largest hub?" if it really is so bad for connectivity,

As determined by numbers of international passengers it is also probably number one in the world. Here it is worth noting that of the ten largest routes across the North Atlantic determined by the numbers of seats offered by all airlines, no less than seven involve LHR. And the three that do not, CDG-JFK, ORY-FDF and ORY-PTP, include two routes that likely have relatively low levels on international connectivities as they operate out of what is not one of the larger international hubs, ORY. So again this beggars the question "Why is LHR so pre-eminent?" when possibly more international passengers connect trough it than any other airport.

Of course other hubs do offer connections to more destinations than LHR does. But that apparently does not deter passengers from choosing to use it to access many destinations.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 2961 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9393 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 13):
It has the largest O&D by far and given former colonial ties with India, if Jet Airways cannot succeed in THAT market they will fail. I am not even mentioning hub connectivity, they can't even get the basic A to B part right, much like Air India and Kingfisher. Endemic and institutional corruption and incompetence = India.

Agreed one wonders why the UK has chosen to sponsor India in the BRIC race at all !


User currently offlineAzure From France, joined Dec 2012, 610 posts, RR: 16
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9186 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 13):
It has the largest O&D by far and given former colonial ties with India, if Jet Airways cannot succeed in THAT market they will fail

I agree for the first part of your statement, while the second is purely hypothetic. In my initial post (#5), I mentioned the possibility for 9W to join ST and move their continental hub from BRU to either CDG or AMS which in my view would be a positive decision for 9W as the growth generated by this operation would compensate the loss of traffic at LHR if EY was to use all or some 9W slots there.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 14):
Incorrect. There can be absolutely no doubt at all that LHR is by far and away the best hub in terms of connectivity for at least two airlines, BA and VS. We could discuss how this applies to other airlines. Here the indisputable background would be that it is Europe's largest hub. In 2012 passenger numbers were:

LHR: 70.0M
CDG: 61.5M
FRA: 57.3M
AMS: 51.0M

I agree with your figures but they do not prove LHR is a better hub than CDG, FRA or AMS : they just show that LHR has more passengers - and not necessarily connecting passengers - than the other airports. As skipness1E stated, LHR has certainly the largest O & D, but I am questioning it has the largest number of connecting passengers.
From a passenger point of view, a hub is interesting not by the number of total passengers it can handle in a year but by the number of connections this passenger can get in a limited time frame (generally 3/4 hours max).

For that matter, please check these figures I have found in an interesting report :




Furthermore, should LHR remain slot constrained, at current rate of growth, CDG will overpass LHR within 10 or 15 years I believe (but please tell me if I wrong). Some other figures from the same report :



Source : http://mediacentre.heathrowairport.c....ashx?MediaDetailsID=886&SizeId=-1



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things - A. de Saint Exupery
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12888 posts, RR: 100
Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 9140 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting VV701 (Reply 14):
LHR: 70.0M
CDG: 61.5M
FRA: 57.3M
AMS: 51.0M

So one question that would need to be addressed is "Why is it Europe's largest hub?"

IIRC, LHR is at 30% connecting and FRA at 50%. So technically FRA connects more passengers. LHR is Europe's largest airport as it is the main airport for Europe's largest O&D market.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 14):
Incorrect. There can be absolutely no doubt at all that LHR is by far and away the best hub in terms of connectivity for at least two airlines, BA and VS.

Best hubs in terms of connectivity are, in Europe:
FRA, AMS and CDG. Even MUC and FCO have more connectivity than LHR. (See post # 29 for the updated list).

Airports With Greatest Number Of Connected Cities (by lightsaber May 14 2012 in Aviation Polls)

But it makes the point. With LHR being such high O&D, if 9W cannot make it there, they're done internationally.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
Well things are not too bright for Jet at the moment.

Sadly true. 9W will have to meet EY's terms.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 4):
No matter what is behind it, this deal is not without lots of risk for 9W.

I think EY is proving they know where 9W stands economically.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3198 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 9095 times:

Key point is, you cannot make anything of a decent hub if you can't succeed in O&D in your own key markets. Downsizing London is an admission of failure in a key high volume market. Building a hub relying on connectivity if you can't succeed on O&D is a new ball game. The two go together.

You can do well on O&D, until recently that's Virgin Atlantic.
You can then mix O&D in with connections like BA.
However you can't just add connections if your O&D is a poor effort, that will not make a profitable hub.


User currently offlineAzure From France, joined Dec 2012, 610 posts, RR: 16
Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 9040 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 18):
Downsizing London is an admission of failure in a key high volume market.

Yes, but it is not happening yet (as far as 9W is concerned). Wait and see.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 18):
Building a hub relying on connectivity if you can't succeed on O&D is a new ball game. The two go together.

May be, but they are some noticeable exceptions, such as EK and Dubai for instance



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things - A. de Saint Exupery
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 8965 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 4):
No matter what is behind it, this deal is not without lots of risk for 9W. Although it is leasing the slots back from EY for 3 years, if in the mean time the 9W-EY relationship turns sour, it could find itself without access to its prime international gate way in 3 years.

  

I think the way things sit today, the allure of $70mil in the bank, and ongoing talks with EY made this move the pragmatic one for Jet.

But you are certainly right - 3 years from now if things don't work out with EY, 9W might indeed find itself without slots at such a key global airport if EY decides to not renew the leases.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3198 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8879 times:

Quoting Azure (Reply 19):
May be, but they are some noticeable exceptions, such as EK and Dubai for instance

Emirates DOMINATE O&D to Dubai, they are the market leader.


User currently offlineJOYA380B747 From India, joined Mar 2005, 490 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8848 times:

LHR is a good hub to connect to the British isles, but not at all a better hub to connect to other Euro nations when compared to MUC, AMS or CDG. A passenger has immense flexibility in terms of travel dates and transport and Visa restrictions when passing through the latter hubs.


If it wasn't for AI and those money mongers sitting in the parliament, 9W would have been as big as SQ...:(
User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4497 posts, RR: 72
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8735 times:

Quoting Azure (Reply 12):
Once again I have never said that 9W should leave LHR, but you seem to keep saying the contrary, for God knows what reason !

Here is what you said:

Quoting Azure (Reply 5):
In such case LHR would not remain as crucial as it is right now for 9W.

while the fact of the matter is that LHR will remain exactly as crucial as it is right now. LHR is the important end point of a spoke in the 9W operational model and it will remain so no matter where 9W's scissor hub may be located in the future.


User currently offlinevfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 3964 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5625 times:

I guess one strategy is to make sure that the slots do not fall into the hands of another airline if Jet Airways' goes bust.

User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7390 posts, RR: 17
Reply 25, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5475 times:

Quoting Azure (Reply 16):
For that matter, please check these figures I have found in an interesting report

Thanks.

I also checked the charts and figures on pages 23 and 24 of the link. They are also interesting. They show that:

1. LHR serves 82 long haul destinations with "high frequency" services compared with 64 at AMS, 75 at FRA, 77 at CDG and 32 at MAD.

2. The "density" - that is a measure of flights per route per day - on short-haul high-frequency routes is significantly higher at LHR than at other European hubs. It is reported as being 12.1 at LHR, 7.8 at AMS, 8.2 at FRA,, 8.8 at CDG and 10.2 at MAD.

3. Similarly .the "density" per route per day on long-haul high-frequency routes is proportionally even higher at LHR (4.3) than at AMS (2.0), FRA (2.6), CDG (2.6) or MAD (2.7).

In other words while the other major European hubs offer good connectivity to and from a significantly larger number of short-haul destinations, LHR offers good connectivity to and from a larger number of long haul destinations than any other European hub. Further the connectivity offered at LHR is on average significantly more time efficient than at the other European hubs. This is because a greater number of daily flights are offered to both the short- and long-haul high-frequency destinations that are served.

With LHR offering frequent flights to more long-haul destinations and more daily flights on both short- and long-haul routes than those offered at other European hubs I do not think it is yet time to write it off as simply an O&D airport.


User currently offlinevin2basketball From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 5414 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 7):
Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 7):

Correct; LHR is the most profitable out station in Jets international network and the only route where they can actually fill the First Class cabin consistently.

In terms of the excess widebody capacity; remember that a lot of the 332s are leaving the fleet 1:1 as the 333s enter. The 77W can be deployed onto existing LHR turns, BOM-HKG, and BOM-BRU-EWR -- especially post reconfiguration with the lower CASM 10 abreast Y class. But there is no way they can reintegrate the entire fleet, they only need 5 frames plus 1 spare for the routes I've described. So my guess is that they'll lease out the fleet again. If they're really serious about debt reduction as they claim, I don't know why they don't keep 5 frames and sell off the rest at 100-150 million a frame. That would allow 9W to retire its entire stock of high interest debt..


User currently offlinePW100 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2002, 2366 posts, RR: 11
Reply 27, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5175 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 25):
With LHR offering frequent flights to more long-haul destinations and more daily flights on both short- and long-haul routes than those offered at other European hubs I do not think it is yet time to write it off as simply an O&D airport.

While I do agree fully with this statement, I do think your analysis behind it is skewed.

I would expect that the majority of connections will be made inter-alliance. With LHR being such a O&D orientated airport, it's bound to have a relatively high route density.
Also, the route density at the other airports is kept lower because they do have room to accommodate many smaller markets that are just not economical at LHR. How many turboprops and small RJ's do you see at LHR vs AMS, FRA, CDG? LHR is better of having another BA 777 / 747 doing a JFK / LAX roundtrip, than having a EMB170 doing two daily runs to EIN for instance. You bet that the slot investment of another widebody JFK / LAX run will easily beat a double daily EMB170 rotation.

PW100



Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7390 posts, RR: 17
Reply 28, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4819 times:

Quoting PW100 (Reply 27):
Also, the route density at the other airports is kept lower because they do have room to accommodate many smaller markets that are just not economical at LHR. How many turboprops and small RJ's do you see at LHR vs AMS, FRA, CDG?

You are right. Virtually none. But why?

The last significant operator of regional jets into LHR was BD. On the day that they were bought by IAG, 20 April 2012, there were five bmi Regional EMB 145s based out of ABZ operating for BD that had over-nighted at LHR. They included the aircraft that was then operating the only (three-times-daily) service flown between LHR and HAJ.

The three-times-daily flights to and from HAJ are still all operating. Today instead of using 50 seat EMB145 RJs, BA use 132 seat A319s for these flights. Can this increase of 164 per cent in capacity from 150 to 396 seats a day be attributed to an increase in O&D traffic following te BA/BD merger? Or is it more likely that the capacity growth is to meet the increased passenger demand because this route is now flown by a oneworld airline into the major oneworld European hub?

So the absence of turboprops and small RJs at LHR could be because it is a major hub and not indicative that it is only an O&D airport. The key question here is could LHR operate as the European hub with the largest number of high frequency long-haul-flight destinations and have the highest flight density on such routes if the feed to these flights was primarily from small turboprops and RJs on short-haul flights even if these flights serve fewer destinations?

The nature of the LHR hub operation is different to that at other major European hubs and probably very different to that at most North American hubs. But these differences, bought about because of both capacity constraints and a very large O&D market, do not mean that it is not a very major hub in terms of the absolute number of tranfer passengers it handles. And this argument is actually supported by the absence of short-haul operations utilising smaller aircraft.


User currently offlinesankaps From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2255 posts, RR: 2
Reply 29, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4267 times:

This whole LHR slot-selling thing... at least in the case of rights that are negotiated on a country-to-country basis, aren't the slots, right, and assignments governed by bilaterals / regulatory body decisions? Shouldn't the relevant regulatory bodies "own" the slots?

User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 30, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4096 times:

Route authorities and landing/takeoff slots are two different things.

For example the right to fly between XYZ-London is negotiated by nations as part of their bilateral. Once in hand, then the airline needs to go find what London airport it will use, and then secure the appropriate landing and takeoff slots for the times it desires.

Secondary slot trading is a totally legitimate thing. There had been some previous legal opposition to the practice by some parties (Spain for example), however the EU eventually passed legislation that clarified that such activities were permitted.

In the case of Europe, there is even a website now setup to help facilitate airline slot trades including at LHR.
http://www.slottrade.aero/our-services.asp

=

[Edited 2013-03-04 08:34:47]


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7390 posts, RR: 17
Reply 31, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3954 times:

Quoting sankaps (Reply 29):
This whole LHR slot-selling thing...

Slots at LHR and all other slot controlled airports in the EU are distributed , sold and / or leased under strict rules laid down by the EU. In the UK Airport Coordination Ltd has exclusive responsibility for the allocation of slots, coordination of
schedules, and the collection of airline schedule data at all the major airports as well as DUB and WAW.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 32, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3827 times:

While the agreement is to lease back the 3 slots to 9W for 3-year period, I suspect EY itself would love to further grow its own LHR flying.

With 9W doing 2x daily to BOM and 1x to DEL anyone think EY would push them to release one of the BOM slots sooner rather then later?



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4497 posts, RR: 72
Reply 33, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3627 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 32):
With 9W doing 2x daily to BOM and 1x to DEL anyone think EY would push them to release one of the BOM slots sooner rather then later?

I suspect there is a strong possibility for that. However, both current BOM slots pretty much overlap with an existing EY AUH slot, so EY may need to engage in some slot swapping first. That morning slot in particular should not be too hard to exchange for something that suits EY's needs better.


User currently offlineb777erj145 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3550 times:

I think 9W should leave LHR as it is due to the fact that 49% of Virgin Atlantic belongs to Delta and 9W can also code share with VS. What 9W can do is (in my opinion) they can change their BRU hub to MXP or FCO and connect with Alitalia (if it survives bankruptcy) and with the additional frame they are getting they can try getting slot for CDG and/or AMS and feed KLM and /or AF.

This is just my 2 cents

AJ


User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1296 posts, RR: 2
Reply 35, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2858 times:

In long run I wonder what Jet Airways will look like and if they will even need LHR slots.

It seems they along with Kingfisher they maybe took wrong approach to business model - a high end, global wanta be operation. Jet for years has not known what to do with widebody fleet.

Maybe with Etihad they will be reshaped more into a value domestic carrier with some regional flying. No longer ambitions of carrying Indian flag globally.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 36, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2319 times:

Yes who knows what ideas Etihad might have for Jet (if they indeed are acquired).

Its not outside the realm of probability that a future Jet might not be focused on longhaul anymore. Seems longhaul has been a achilles heal for the carrier with continued changes, and inability to fully utilize the fleet. Maybe Jet indeed becomes more of a regional/domestic only operator.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4497 posts, RR: 72
Reply 37, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2189 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 36):
Yes who knows what ideas Etihad might have for Jet (if they indeed are acquired).

An extensive AUH feeder with a limited regional network and a core domestic operation, I would see. In the best case scenario, I could see 9W operate a couple of North America flights via AUH as a joint operation with EY, but it is more likely that EY would just absorb the B77W fleet and operate those flights themselved, while leaving 9W with a handful of A333s to operate key India - AUH markets.


User currently offlinetommytoyz From Tonga, joined Jan 2007, 1353 posts, RR: 6
Reply 38, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2065 times:

One question I have is:

What is the legality around selling or leasing a slot at an airport from another airline? Is that slot the property of the airline? Or is it the property of the entity that awarded the slot in the 1st place? I remember Richard Branson battling BA in the early days saying slots were not the property of BA, etc...

I guess every country has different rules and laws to this.


User currently offlineairdfw From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1995 times:

Jet should not sell off to EY. It then becomes a feeder for EY. They should sell instead to U.S Carriers like DL or UA or may even be AA. Then 9W can sustain its longhaul and do the handshake at European/Asian ports like AMS, CDG or NRT, ICN etc so that transfer the passengers to US and other parts.

9W is big for EY and not like Virgin Australia which has very few longhaul operations. We need India based longhaul carrier too.


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...
Jet Airways Heathrow Slots posted Sun Nov 20 2005 10:07:19 by Srilankan
JET Airways @ LHR Today (5/23) posted Tue May 24 2005 03:20:44 by HNL
Etihad - Jet Airways Deal Finalized? posted Fri Jan 25 2013 18:15:14 by dtwlax
Jet Airways In Talks With Etihad - Stake Sale posted Sun Nov 25 2012 22:34:14 by AF185
Jet Airways Aborted Landing At LHR? posted Fri Nov 4 2011 10:53:14 by varsity
Jet Airways And Etihad Reach Codeshare Agreement posted Tue Jun 10 2008 16:14:54 by BALHRWWCC
CO Buys LHR Slots For $209m! posted Wed Mar 5 2008 06:34:57 by Scbriml
BA Buys 51 LHR Slots From BMI! posted Fri Mar 30 2007 16:44:07 by PanAm330
Who Will Handle Jet Airways' New Flight To LHR? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 23:58:50 by Concorde001
Jet Airways New Service Between ATQ And LHR posted Tue Jun 13 2006 00:20:56 by 9W77W