Virgin Atlantic demands 150 slots at expanded Heathrow airport

Zoedyn · Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:45 pm

https://www.ttgmedia.com/news/news/virg ... port-18478

Shai Weiss, CEO of Virgin Atlantic, says the carrier should be given 43% of the 350 new take-off and landing slots at an expanded Heathrow, whose planned 3rd rwy will reportedly help LHR enlarge flight capacity nearly 60% from 476,000 to 756,000 over the next 30 years (through to 2050).

Virgin wants to position itself as a “second flag carrier” of UK.

VS has long complained of IAG’s stranglehold at LHR where IAG currently holds over 55% of capacity, but Virgin only accounts for less than 10% of LHR slots, even when combined with its partners DL and AF-KL.

That sounds like a bold but reasonable demand. But will VS manage to earn the desired LHR slot share?
We'll see

ikolkyo · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:02 am

I've always been shocked at how tiny their operation is and it seems they have finally had enough. Can't blame them.

jfk777 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:08 am

Virgin has a better chance of winning the Powerball lottery. Virgin's long haul portfolio is already full except for maybe Tokyo and Peking.

x1234 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:13 am

With the launch of Sao Paulo soon in Brazil the only place left in Latin America is Mexico City. They should launch it. Latin America yields from Europe are MUCH higher than Middle East/Africa/Asia due to limited competition. In Africa they should launch Accra & Cape Town. In Asia they should launch Tokyo & Seoul. Japan/South Korea have higher yields than China. In SE Asia there's Singapore/Bangkok but again less of a priority.
Cities they should launch in priority in terms of yield growth after GRU: MEX, CPT, ACC, HND, ICN, PEK, SIN and BKK.

jasoncrh · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:17 am

They recently withdrew from Cape Town and Tokyo. Why should they go back when years of experience (I think 20 years in Tokyo) taught them otherwise?

x1234 wrote:
With the launch of Sao Paulo soon in Brazil the only place left in Latin America is Mexico City. They should launch it. Latin America yields from Europe are MUCH higher than Middle East/Africa/Asia due to limited competition. In Africa they should launch Accra & Cape Town. In Asia they should launch Tokyo & Seoul. Japan/South Korea have higher yields than China. In SE Asia there's Singapore/Bangkok but again less of a priority.
Cities they should launch in priority in terms of yield growth after GRU: MEX, CPT, ACC, HND, ICN, PEK, SIN and BKK.

chepos · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:27 am

MEX? Between BA and AM they seem to have LHR-MEX well covered.
Not all markets from Europe to Latin America are created equal:

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WeatherPilot · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:28 am

JakubH · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:33 am

A whole new connectivity with the rest of Europe will be required to make this a successful strategy, IMHO.

lightsaber · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:37 am

WeatherPilot wrote:

It does sound like a Dr. Evil random demand.

You don't get what you deserve but what you negotiate.

Lightsaber

Midwestindy · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:46 am

What leverage does Virgin have in this situation? If any?

strfyr51 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:46 am

will Virgin Atlantic Utilize all of the slots they demand or will they "Slot Sit" until they DO?? They should be ready to make the Moves when they come available..

smi0006 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:50 am

Do they currently use all their slots as is?

Key challenge with slots is they also have to line up at the airport down route, and then be a commercially viable time. I can imagine VS pain!

sagechan · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:54 am

Auction! Airlines should just put up the money for limited slots.

chonetsao · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:00 am

Where are the aircrafts and pilots? And partially owned by Delta and some unknown Caribbean entities, how could VS be a British flag carrier?

SEU · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:15 am

Remember the new Flybe takeover, could be apart of it, a bigger feed to a bigger Long haul operation?

I hope Virgin get more slots, 43% is a little much, but at least enough to have 25% of LHR slots at least.

Bricktop · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:18 am

The worst they can do is say no.

tphuang · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:19 am

auction the slots, VS shouldn't be given slots just because they demand them. And some should be kept around for new entrants.

blueflyer · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:23 am

Curious... could they lease the slots they're asking for to another carrier?

grbauc · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:59 am

ikolkyo wrote:
I've always been shocked at how tiny their operation is and it seems they have finally had enough. Can't blame them.

LOL They should of kept Little red then??? And aggressively buying and bidding for new slots. Do they have the planes to fill the 150 slots, or is this just positioning and PR talk to get a some public support. I'm sure others from the UK will fill us in but don't see how they had enough can't blame them fits...

grbauc · Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:02 am

Oh yea Didn't VA cut a bunch of routes to focus on US routes to be DL Uk division has many put it. I remember reading about a lot of routes Virgin cutting on this board several times.

sibibom · Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:21 am

SEU wrote:
Remember the new Flybe takeover, could be apart of it, a bigger feed to a bigger Long haul operation?

I hope Virgin get more slots, 43% is a little much, but at least enough to have 25% of LHR slots at least.

They are asking for 43% of new slots not 43% overall

steveinbc · Tue Jun 25, 2019 4:29 am

Interesting stats. That BA have 53% of slots is indeed dominant. But is this any more dominant than LH at FRA or AF at CDG or DL at ATL. Don't even know what the main Chinese carrier is at Beijing but I'm sure it's up there.

speedbird52 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 5:13 am

Did VS bid for BMI? I feel like if they had gotten BMIs operations they would have had more success with domestic and European flights than Little Red.

questions · Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:09 am

What’s a ballpark figure as to how many aircraft VS would have to order to utilize 150 slots?

Gemuser · Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:10 am

grbauc wrote:
Oh yea Didn't VA cut a bunch of routes to focus on US routes to be DL Uk division has many put it. I remember reading about a lot of routes Virgin cutting on this board several times.

No, VA do not serve LHR.

Gemuser

FabDiva · Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:30 am

speedbird52 wrote:
Did VS bid for BMI? I feel like if they had gotten BMIs operations they would have had more success with domestic and European flights than Little Red.

They did, but IIRC their bid basically amounted to wanting Lufthansa Group to pay Virgin to take BMI off their hands. BA at least offered Lufthansa some money for BMI

ITSTours · Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:30 am

Will the 3rd runway be built though?

bennett123 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:31 am

This is all assuming that R3 opens in 2026.

FabDiva · Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:38 am

Good question, given there is a fairly high chance that B Johnson will be the next PM, will we see the stupid idea for an island in the North Sea get resurrected?

slinky09 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:49 am

VS cut routes to focus on yield with DL, Tokyo was a popular and busy route, HKG could go twice daily again for example. BA will fight but why should BA get 60% of the additional capacity and all other airlines suffer?

Geoff1947 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:38 am

ikolkyo wrote:
I've always been shocked at how tiny their operation is and it seems they have finally had enough. Can't blame them.

That’s Branson for you, they are mainly PR.

Geoff

skipness1E · Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:44 am

Utter BS. That level of growth in a legacy company in a cut throat market would end them. It’s all fluff and PR.
What it likely means is an opportunity to consolidate London operations at one airport and close Gatwick, but we’re a long way away from that. All those Connect Airways DHDs now make sense but there’s a LOT of turnaround still to go, but a single London airport with a new B789/A35K/A339 fleet partnering with Delta, who would likely be in the above request as it’s a JV would be compelling.

chunhimlai · Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:46 am

Do they have enough aircraft for 150 daily flights?

Boeing74741R · Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:01 am

jasoncrh wrote:
They recently withdrew from Cape Town and Tokyo. Why should they go back when years of experience (I think 20 years in Tokyo) taught them otherwise?

x1234 wrote:
With the launch of Sao Paulo soon in Brazil the only place left in Latin America is Mexico City. They should launch it. Latin America yields from Europe are MUCH higher than Middle East/Africa/Asia due to limited competition. In Africa they should launch Accra & Cape Town. In Asia they should launch Tokyo & Seoul. Japan/South Korea have higher yields than China. In SE Asia there's Singapore/Bangkok but again less of a priority.
Cities they should launch in priority in terms of yield growth after GRU: MEX, CPT, ACC, HND, ICN, PEK, SIN and BKK.

Accra is another route that was withdrawn a few years ago, though admittedly before the round of changes that saw CPT and NRT dropped. Can't see SIN personally as that appears to be a bloodbath given the capacity on offer already with BA and SQ plus one-stop options. BKK may be worth a go, particularly from MAN given this is one of the biggest unserved city pairs in the world, however that would mean starting a route that isn't already served from London and up against a plethora of one-stop competition.

chunhimlai wrote:
Do they have enough aircraft for 150 daily flights?

Not at this time, no. But that's a moot point for now as Shai Weiss is on about when LHR is expanded which is several years away yet and is nowhere near the stage where spades can go in the ground. We also need to assume that the 150 figure also includes some short-haul flights via Flybe depending on their plans for them.

lhrsfosyd91 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:12 am

Tokyo was served by a 4 engine aircraft. The economics would change drastically with a 789 on the route and a codeshare with ANA.

uta999 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:22 am

Boris Johnson has back-peddled big time over Heathrow recently. He knows there is a huge majority (415 / 119) for R3 in parliament. He is likely to remain silent, hoping people will forget the bulldozer statement a few years ago.

seansasLCY · Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:32 am

steveinbc wrote:
Interesting stats. That BA have 53% of slots is indeed dominant. But is this any more dominant than LH at FRA or AF at CDG or DL at ATL. Don't even know what the main Chinese carrier is at Beijing but I'm sure it's up there.

According to the Lufthansa presentation yesterday, the Lufthansa Group holds 67% of slots at FRA, 68% at MUC, 63% at ZRH and 59% at VIE. Michael O'Leary from Ryanair always said he'd like to run Lufthansa to see what it's like to control Germany and Austria.

UAL777UK · Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:36 am

Whilst I commend VS for putting their oar in early doors, by the time this runway is built we will probably be seeing VTOL aircraft at LHR!!

JannEejit · Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:36 am

Zoedyn wrote:
https://www.ttgmedia.com/news/news/virgin-atlantic-demands-150-slots-at-expanded-heathrow-airport-18478

Shai Weiss, CEO of Virgin Atlantic, says the carrier should be given 43% of the 350 new take-off and landing slots at an expanded Heathrow, whose planned 3rd rwy will reportedly help LHR enlarge flight capacity nearly 60% from 476,000 to 756,000 over the next 30 years (through to 2050).

Virgin wants to position itself as a “second flag carrier” of UK.

VS has long complained of IAG’s stranglehold at LHR where IAG currently holds over 55% of capacity, but Virgin only accounts for less than 10% of LHR slots, even when combined with its partners DL and AF-KL.

That sounds like a bold but reasonable demand. But will VS manage to earn the desired LHR slot share?
We'll see

Sounds more like a reincarnation of what some already call "London Airways" ? Would it kill them (or BA for that matter) to further reinvestigate the possibility of some UK regional trans-atlantic services, maybe further afield than say Manchester?

DobboDobbo · Tue Jun 25, 2019 11:41 am

JannEejit wrote:
Zoedyn wrote:
https://www.ttgmedia.com/news/news/virgin-atlantic-demands-150-slots-at-expanded-heathrow-airport-18478

Shai Weiss, CEO of Virgin Atlantic, says the carrier should be given 43% of the 350 new take-off and landing slots at an expanded Heathrow, whose planned 3rd rwy will reportedly help LHR enlarge flight capacity nearly 60% from 476,000 to 756,000 over the next 30 years (through to 2050).

Virgin wants to position itself as a “second flag carrier” of UK.

VS has long complained of IAG’s stranglehold at LHR where IAG currently holds over 55% of capacity, but Virgin only accounts for less than 10% of LHR slots, even when combined with its partners DL and AF-KL.

That sounds like a bold but reasonable demand. But will VS manage to earn the desired LHR slot share?
We'll see

Sounds more like a reincarnation of what some already call "London Airways" ? Would it kill them (or BA for that matter) to further reinvestigate the possibility of some UK regional trans-atlantic services, maybe further afield than say Manchester?

There was a wide-ranging interview a week or so ago which highlighted that VS was back in growth mode, and taking advantage of an expanded LHR, if it comes to pass, was only one of a number of spaces in which they intend to grow (understandably given how it could change their business).

The other points raised were the opportunities raised by the FlyBe purchase at LHR and MAN, also the opportunity raised by the potential acquisition of Thomas Cook’s UK longhaul division (also MAN).

There was little noise about LGW, which raises the question of consolidation of London flying at LHR in the future.

There was also discussion about the benefits of the relationships with DL, AF and KL, and the possibility of joining Skyteam in the future.

GCT64 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 11:59 am

tphuang wrote:
auction the slots, VS shouldn't be given slots just because they demand them. And some should be kept around for new entrants.

That's the logical approach if demand exceeds supply - auction the slots to the highest bidder and use the money to help pay for the runway and infrastructure improvements.

EastLondoner · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:13 pm

FabDiva wrote:
Good question, given there is a fairly high chance that B Johnson will be the next PM, will we see the stupid idea for an island in the North Sea get resurrected?

Boris has stated, if I am right that he will not go back over Heathrow plans due to it having the majority in the commons. I think it was more of a stunt he pulled to get re-elected as London mayor rather than actually being against it.

skipness1E · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:22 pm

No, Boris is REALLY against Heathrow expansion, it caused him no end of grief as a cabinet member in May’s govt, but it’s finally moving ahead thankfully.

par13del · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:26 pm

steveinbc wrote:
Interesting stats. That BA have 53% of slots is indeed dominant. But is this any more dominant than LH at FRA or AF at CDG or DL at ATL. Don't even know what the main Chinese carrier is at Beijing but I'm sure it's up there.

More interested in just looking at their situation, not equivalence, the article states that no other carrier has more than 5%, that's a wow and is the end of the story in my opinion.

5NFGS · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:32 pm

x1234 wrote:
With the launch of Sao Paulo soon in Brazil the only place left in Latin America is Mexico City. They should launch it. Latin America yields from Europe are MUCH higher than Middle East/Africa/Asia due to limited competition. In Africa they should launch Accra & Cape Town. In Asia they should launch Tokyo & Seoul. Japan/South Korea have higher yields than China. In SE Asia there's Singapore/Bangkok but again less of a priority.
Cities they should launch in priority in terms of yield growth after GRU: MEX, CPT, ACC, HND, ICN, PEK, SIN and BKK.

Accra was once operated. Was started around 2010-11 and dropped late 2013

vhtje · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:52 pm

JannEejit wrote:
Sounds more like a reincarnation of what some already call "London Airways" ? Would it kill them (or BA for that matter) to further reinvestigate the possibility of some UK regional trans-atlantic services, maybe further afield than say Manchester?

Indeed.

A321XLR anyone?

rjmf22 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 12:58 pm

ITSTours wrote:
Will the 3rd runway be built though?

Most likely. Here's a cool video i found detailing the plan, with a very in depth view of new terminals, garages, hotels, wtc:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_At_8ZfqSLo

skipness1E · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:23 pm

JannEejit wrote:
Zoedyn wrote:
https://www.ttgmedia.com/news/news/virgin-atlantic-demands-150-slots-at-expanded-heathrow-airport-18478

Shai Weiss, CEO of Virgin Atlantic, says the carrier should be given 43% of the 350 new take-off and landing slots at an expanded Heathrow, whose planned 3rd rwy will reportedly help LHR enlarge flight capacity nearly 60% from 476,000 to 756,000 over the next 30 years (through to 2050).

Virgin wants to position itself as a “second flag carrier” of UK.

VS has long complained of IAG’s stranglehold at LHR where IAG currently holds over 55% of capacity, but Virgin only accounts for less than 10% of LHR slots, even when combined with its partners DL and AF-KL.

That sounds like a bold but reasonable demand. But will VS manage to earn the desired LHR slot share?
We'll see

Sounds more like a reincarnation of what some already call "London Airways" ? Would it kill them (or BA for that matter) to further reinvestigate the possibility of some UK regional trans-atlantic services, maybe further afield than say Manchester?

Er.....Virgin are having their busiest summer ever at MAN with 5-6 rotations per day. They've never had as many seats out of MAN, and LGW has lost an aircraft in favour of MAN which is now a markedly bigger base. This is way more than BA or even BD ever managed. Some credit perhaps?

musman9853 · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:35 pm

skipness1E wrote:
No, Boris is REALLY against Heathrow expansion, it caused him no end of grief as a cabinet member in May’s govt, but it’s finally moving ahead thankfully.

with him being the most likely next british PM, i wonder if there's anything he can to do to stymie it?

3AWM · Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:35 pm

The thing is the growth potential for VS of eating into BA's share at LHR is much, much, bigger that the growth potential as MAN. If more slots become available they are going to want to hub as much traffic through there as possible, the same as BA do. Advent of the A321XLR will help as they would be able to open a lot more routes that are currently too thin.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net