Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 1:15 am

Interesting that since Arik is restricted and can't get prime time slots at LHR, they want to make BA suffer and not be able to offer prime time slots to Lagos. It makes sense that BA has flexibility and a competitive advantage with timing since they have slot flexibility. With that said, restricting BA's operation since Arik can't get slots (the few available slots quickly get swallowed up by the bigger budget Middle Eastern and US airlines that have been entering LHR in the last few years) is not how most bilaterals work.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:58 am

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 40):

The Nigerians will suffer? The fact that the UK is not playing fair isn't hurting the Nigerians?
You want to use the same argument Thatcher used when she opposed sanctions against apartheid SAfrica back in the day? We all know what happened there.

Quoting Reply 44):

"Yes, the 767 is such old equipment. When I fly to the outer islands of Scotland I feel like a 2nd class citizen on the Twotter and Saab's. How do those dears in Paris cope with their 767's operating to JFK, LAX etc etc. Purrrleeeease!! Are you for real?"

Well clearly the Scots are a tougher breed and have wholly different needs to the Nigerians, the last time I checked. I don't know if you ever venture further afield to Africa but it is a common complaint about the equipment sent to Africa, discounting S Africa and other prime tourist destinations. And yes the 767 is old equipment.

You may shoot the messenger all you want, but the fact remains Nigerian carriers are getting the bum rush from the Brits. 21 flights a week for you and 21 flights for me too. Yes? Well not exactly. In fact, BA seem to be asking that Nigerians must fulfill their side of the agreement but the Brits don't have to because, well, we can't. We don't have the space.

Don't sign a deal that you can't fulfil on. And BA can't claim ignorance of this fact as it reaps profits off the Nigerians knowing full well there are no favourable slots for Arik at LHR of the type it enjoys at LOS.

I will always favour the underdog and, in this situation, there is a wrong that needs righting BY ANY MEANS necessary. I hope the Nigerians have the balls to bring this situation at least to the letter of the agreement.
 
ba319-131
Posts: 8318
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:12 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 51):
And yes the 767 is old equipment

- This is a pathetic non argument. The 767 is a work horse that travels major trunk routes through the world, if Nigerians think they are getting old clapped out equipment they are foolishly mistaken.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 51):
in this situation, there is a wrong that needs righting BY ANY MEANS necessary.

- What a load of rubbish, even if the slots could be had when they wanted, the Nigerian carriers don't have enough suitable equipment to operate the schedules, all Arik would muster is a bunch of 737 flights, their fleet policy is almost non existent.

The only people suffering here are the decent hard working Nigerian people who wish to fly BA to connect to destinations around the world via LHR, destinations their home country airlines do nor or cannot provide.
111 732 733 734 735 736 73G 738 739,7M8 BBJ 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 764 772 77L 773 77W L15 D10 D30 D40 AB3 AB6 312 313 318 319 320 20N 321 21N 332 333 342 343 345 346 359 351 388 CS1 CS3 I86 154 SSJ CRJ CR7 CR9 CRK 145 170 175 220
 
Humberside
Posts: 3239
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:49 am

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 46):
By the same token, Nigeria is within its rights to put the squeeze on the UK for a better dispo of the slot issues at LHR. It's called politics and they are using the only leverage they have in the dispute, frequencies by British carriers to Nigerian airports which is a huge profit source.

But it is no leverage. The UK government has no control over the LHR slot co-ordinator. I'm not quite sure what can it can do. Government interference in slot allocation here would probably result in legal action against it from other airlines
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:56 am

I'm sorry ebbuk, I think you have issues with the UK that bear no relevance to the BA/Arik flights dispute, and I don't see what relevance your comments bring to this discussion.

The fact is, Arik have 21 perfectly suitable slots that are no more or less convenient than BA's or VS's. I don't hear Branson crying himself to sleep over it, do you?

Does anyone seriously believe that if Arik were to obtain (and pay for) exactly identical slot times as BA that they would EVER be fully utilised!? They already have perfectly good and unused slots.

They can't compete with BA yet, plain and simple, likely the reason VS has less flight too, for the same reason. Once Arik can compete, they will probably use more slots, maybe even try to buy more. But while they are flying 737's this will never ever happen.

Also, why do they choose to fly 737's if Nigerians only like large aircraft? That doesn't make sense.

I have flown on Arik's A340-500 and it has an excellent hard product and the service was mostly very good, though very few Nigerian crew which I thought odd.

If they can sustain that, then they can compete with BA, if
Not then they will always be the underdog, and rightly so.
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 3:33 pm

If it DID happen how soon could the Nigerian authorities bring in these changes?
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 6:01 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 51):

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 40):

The Nigerians will suffer? The fact that the UK is not playing fair isn't hurting the Nigerians?
You want to use the same argument Thatcher used when she opposed sanctions against apartheid SAfrica back in the day? We all know what happened there.

Why will BA loosing 4 slots per week to Lagos benefit Nigerians? BA loose 4 slots, Arik gain NONE. Therefore there will be 4 weekly flights less. I would hazard a guess that most of the people who use those flights are Nigerians - with a large amount of Nigerians travelling home to visit friends and relatives. They will have to pay more for their flights due to less capacity. 

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 51):
Don't sign a deal that you can't fulfil on. And BA can't claim ignorance of this fact as it reaps profits off the Nigerians knowing full well there are no favourable slots for Arik at LHR of the type it enjoys at LOS.

The British government is fulfilling the deal - there is no question about that. Arik Air can have up to 21 weekly flights to the UK. The last time I checked there is more to the UK than LHR. Arik Air is free to use any airport in the UK. If it is unable to find suitable slots at LHR it can always use LGW (as Vietnam Airlines do). Just to be clear, there are slots at LHR that could be used by Arik Air - the problem it seems is that the time would vary slightly everyday. 

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 51):
I don't know if you ever venture further afield to Africa but it is a common complaint about the equipment sent to Africa,

BA use their 767s, 777s and 747s - all of which have flat bed seats in club and AVOD in all seats. I don't see what the problem is. Also, regardless of whether or not the 767 is old equipment, I think a great many here would choose BA's 767s over their 777s or 747s due to the favourable configuration of the 767.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 51):
I hope the Nigerians have the balls to bring this situation at least to the letter of the agreement.

So do I....because the letter is 21 weekly flights to the UK, not 21 weekly flights specifically to Heathrow. There is a difference. The UK is honouring the agreement. The issue is that the privately owned Heathrow does not slots that Arik Air considers suitable. There is not much the UK government can do about this as it is not a bilateral issue, it is an issue with the availability of a privately owned resource.  

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 51):
I will always favour the underdog and, in this situation, there is a wrong that needs righting BY ANY MEANS necessary.

Innocent Nigerians will end up paying more to visit their homeland. Do you think that they want to pay more for their flights or for Arik Air to gain slots at a different time at Heathrow?

Quoting Humberside (Reply 53):
Government interference in slot allocation here would probably result in legal action against it from other airlines

Exactly, other airlines have had to pay, so to be fair Arik Air should have to pay as well. 

Quoting I380North (Reply 43):
This is ARIK side of the story as told by a newman. For whatever is worth.
http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/...1569/

Thanks for posting that. It was an interesting read. It seems that the issue is that BMI have raised the price of the slot that they were leasing to Arik Air to a price which Arik Air is not willing to pay. The only other slots they can get around a similar time will be uncompetitive in the sense that the flight would have to be at a different time every day of week. 

There seems to be confusion in the reporting. 

BMI - a private entity - have raised the leasing cost of the slot to a price which Arik Air is not willing to pay. According to the article, the UK government has therefore restricted Arik Air's flights to the UK which is clearly nonsense. The UK government has no control of BMI's slot use - as BMI is privately owned. Therefore the UK government has had nothing to do with the situation. 

Dishonest reporting like that really winds me up. Why not say that BMI has restricted Arik Air's flights to the UK? Why blame it on the government when they have nothing to do with it?

 
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:07 pm

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 54):

"The fact is, Arik have 21 perfectly suitable slots that are no more or less convenient than BA's or VS's. I don't hear Branson crying himself to sleep over it, do you?"

If this were true I wouldn't be banging on about it and the Nigerians wouldn't be crying foul. Not sure which herbal tea you're drinking.
Actually wait a minute you are right. Of course they have 21 slots available. They could fly to LGW, STN, MAN or LPL to name but a few in the UK but they want LHR. They can't and the retaliation is that Nigeria has cut BA's flights from LHR. Incensed, in a most British way, BA have referred the matter to the government. Why? Can they not use LGW for the other 4 flights a week, maybe one from MAN or STN?

It shouldn't be an issue right? Yes if I have issues, you are right.

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 56):

See my above response. Good for Goose also good for gander.

Quote "Why will BA loosing 4 slots per week to Lagos benefit Nigerians? BA loose 4 slots, Arik gain NONE. Therefore there will be 4 weekly flights less. I would hazard a guess that most of the people who use those flights are Nigerians - with a large amount of Nigerians travelling home to visit friends and relatives. They will have to pay more for their flights due to less capacity. "

There's short term pain for a long term gain. Such is the nature of playing the sanctions game. Ask the South Aficans who were playing the game for democracy for all.

Quote "BA use their 767s, 777s and 747s - all of which have flat bed seats in club and AVOD in all seats. I don't see what the problem is. Also, regardless of whether or not the 767 is old equipment, I think a great many here would choose BA's 767s over their 777s or 747s due to the favourable configuration of the 767."

It is a fact that on routes with little competition you don't fly the jewels of the fleet. You put those on the flash routes LHR, SIN for example. Probably why BA is bleeting to the government. God forbid that they'd have to upgrade the fleet to Africa. Golly gosh gosh.

[Edited 2011-11-05 13:21:08]

[Edited 2011-11-05 13:22:38]
 
AIR MALTA
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 6:45 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:31 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 57):
It is a fact that on routes with little competition you don't fly the jewels of the fleet. You put those on the flash routes LHR, SIN for example. Probably why BA is bleeting to the government. God forbid that they'd have to upgrade the fleet to Africa. Golly gosh gosh.

Ebbuk you are making fool of yourself... The 744 flies on almost all the LHR-JFK runs which way more important than the LOS route. I think you are a pissed off Nigerian mad at the UK and BA.

[Edited 2011-11-05 13:45:45]
Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:31 pm

Well golly gosh gosh, BA regularly fly 4-class 777/747's to LOS and still do, they don't have the A380 (yet) or the 748 (again, yet)- so really, LOS does see BA's best aircraft.

Take a look at some home-grown Nigerian airlines
If you believe Nigerians are all so particular about what
Aicraft to fly. With the aside of Arik's Airbus, not a crowning jewel among them.


Fact remains, BA having been continually flying UK-Nigeria far longer than anyone else.
Restricting the service and the connections that BA bring to Nigeria, like it or not, only affects
the common folk like us.
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:43 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 57):
Quote "BA use their 767s, 777s and 747s - all of which have flat bed seats in club and AVOD in all seats. I don't see what the problem is. Also, regardless of whether or not the 767 is old equipment, I think a great many here would choose BA's 767s over their 777s or 747s due to the favourable configuration of the 767."

What are you arguing with me for? It is a fact that on routes with little competition you don't fly the jewels of the fleet. You pu those on the flash routes LHR, SIN for example. Probably why BA is bleeting to the government. God for I'd that they'd have to upgrade the fleet to Africa. Golly gosh gosh.

All of British Airways' long-haul fleet have a consistent product (ok, some aircraft have a newer First and the 767s have the older - albeit still flat - business class seat). Therefore your argument that Africa somehow suffers from inferior aircraft is - in the case of British Airways - incorrect. The aircraft they use to SIN have the same onboard product as those flying to Africa. Indeed, I am sure that the aircraft that are used to Singapore are also used to Africa.

So we have established that it is a fact that BA's product to Africa is consistent with that used to the rest of the world.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 57):
Can they not use LGW for the other 4 flights a week, maybe one from MAN or STN?

They can't because the Nigerian government wants to refuse BA's landing rights at Lagos 4 times per week - i.e. BA will be unable to fly to Lagos from anywhere on those days. The Nigerian government could of course stipulate that BA can fly to Lagos on those days, but only from an airport other than Heathrow.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 57):
They can't and the retaliation is that Nigeria has cut BA's flights from LHR.

They can - just not at the time they want and in retaliation Nigeria has cut BA's flights from the UK to Lagos - not just LHR.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 57):
Incensed, in a most British way, BA have referred the matter to the government.

They have referred it to the government because it is a government issue not a BA issue. The issue of Nigeria withdrawing landing rights is a bilateral issue agreed between governments. The last time I checked BA was not the democratically elected government of the UK and therefore has no business negotiating the bilateral.

You keep mentioning BA, but you are neglecting to acknowledge the root of this problem. Arik Air leased slots from BMI and seemed perfectly happy with this situation. Then BMI put the price of the lease up. Arik Air did not want to pay the extra and was unable to obtain alternative slots that it found satisfactory. Suddenly BA is being barred from operating to Nigeria on certain days and the UK government is being accused of revoking Arik Air's landing rights. Why? This has nothing to do with BA or the UK government.

A bilateral was agreed (in full knowledge of the Nigerian government being aware of the slot issues at LHR) that allowed Nigerian carriers to fly to the UK 21 times per week. Nothing has changed.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 57):
There's short term pain for a long term gain. Such is the nature of playing the sanctions game. Ask the South Aficans who were playing the game for democracy for all.

What exactly is the long term gain?

LHR is slot restricted so unless Arik Air is willing to buy or lease slots it won't be getting any other than those already available. BA on the other hand will have to reduce it's Nigeria operation - costing Nigerian jobs and raising ticket prices due to constrained demand.

You seem to assume that the UK government will cave in to pressure and Arik Air will be allowed to get more slots. The UK government cannot do this as it has no control over slots. ACL is the private organisation that controls slots. They cannot simply give slots away without facing legal action from airline who have had to buy slots. BA could of course donate slots - but giving away 14 "prime-time" weekly slots (to allow Arik Air a daily operation) for the sake of 4 weekly flights to Lagos might not have a viable business case.

As I have said before, innocent Nigerians who have no say in the matter will have to pay more for their flights, with no long term benefit of the action established. Doesn't bother me as I have no cause to go to Nigeria, but if I did have to go I would be quite annoyed that "political games" are costing me as an individual money.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:01 pm

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 58):

Hey calm down, I was responding to a quote that was an aside to the point of the thread. My bad that you couldn't follow the previous conversation

I won't comment about the other rascist stuff from small island person.

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 59):

I refer you to the above. Not the 2nd sentence
 
ba319-131
Posts: 8318
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:03 pm

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 58):
Ebbuk you are making fool of yourself

- Totally agree.

Ebbuk, you are talking total rubbish, you have nothing backing up the text you place here, get a grip with reality and common sense, then come back.
111 732 733 734 735 736 73G 738 739,7M8 BBJ 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 764 772 77L 773 77W L15 D10 D30 D40 AB3 AB6 312 313 318 319 320 20N 321 21N 332 333 342 343 345 346 359 351 388 CS1 CS3 I86 154 SSJ CRJ CR7 CR9 CRK 145 170 175 220
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:12 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 61):
I won't comment about the other rascist stuff from small island person.

Small island....would that be Canvey Island, Isle of Dogs, Isle of Wight or Isle of Sheppey?

[Edited 2011-11-05 14:15:25]
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:22 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 61):
I won't comment about the other rascist stuff from small island person.

The irony is I was born in Abuja lol . Albeit I grew up in Brighton, on a very small island.
  
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:26 pm

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 60):
Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 62):

Ok it's getting personal. I am getting in the way of what is a serious issue that needs sorting. I am out.
 
bogota
Posts: 673
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 4:10 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:35 pm

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 35):
Indeed, I'm sure you are correct.

This is just another shining example of how Nigeria operates, I don't think I need go further........

For corruption to exist you need at least 2 individuals, a corrupt one that pays the bribe and a corrupt one that receives it.
 
theginge
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:53 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 9:37 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 57):
Actually wait a minute you are right. Of course they have 21 slots available. They could fly to LGW, STN, MAN or LPL to name but a few in the UK but they want LHR. They can't and the retaliation is that Nigeria has cut BA's flights from LHR. Incensed, in a most British way, BA have referred the matter to the government. Why? Can they not use LGW for the other 4 flights a week, maybe one from MAN or STN?

Arik is not the only airline that wants LHR, lots of airlines that fly to Gatwick would probably like to come to LHR.

So if Arik is given slots for nothing then any other airline should get them too? They just need to get on with it like any other airline and get their own slots, not try and restrict another carrier just because they can't get exactly what they want.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 10:07 pm

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 63):

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 61):
I won't comment about the other rascist stuff from small island person.

Small island....would that be Canvey Island, Isle of Dogs, Isle of Wight or Isle of Sheppey?

[Edited 2011-11-05 14:15:25]


I could sense your Abuja origins   I said not the second sentence to you. It was directed to the Malteser.
 
ba319-131
Posts: 8318
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sat Nov 05, 2011 11:23 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 65):
Ok it's getting personal. I am getting in the way of what is a serious issue that needs sorting. I am out.

- It's not getting personal, reality has set in and you have nothing that is worth talking about.
111 732 733 734 735 736 73G 738 739,7M8 BBJ 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 764 772 77L 773 77W L15 D10 D30 D40 AB3 AB6 312 313 318 319 320 20N 321 21N 332 333 342 343 345 346 359 351 388 CS1 CS3 I86 154 SSJ CRJ CR7 CR9 CRK 145 170 175 220
 
1stfl94
Posts: 1082
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:33 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 12:13 am

The last I heard on here was that Arik seemed to be in quite of financial trouble. Could this be a move to help their situation by making their chief competitor to LHR struggle?
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 12:48 am

Quoting 1stfl94 (Reply 70):

"The last I heard on here was that Arik seemed to be in quite of financial trouble. Could this be a move to help their situation by making their chief competitor to LHR struggle?"

Consider it is the opposite. By gaining valuable slots at LHR, it will have more assets on which to borrow cash against to fund fleet expansion. Those slots at LHR are like gold. You ask BA.

I am not saying its the truth, what do I or any of us know on a.net about how much the UK has stuffed Nigeria on this Bilateral agreement? None of us have seen the paper it's written on, we can only debate, discuss, consider.

We could also go off topic and start talking about how BA cares for the Nigerian people and how they all want to fly to LOS and back on ageing 747s but, alas, that will get us nowhere.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4910
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 1:20 am

Arik cannot treat the slot as an asset to borrow against as it does not appear on the balance sheet as an owned asset. Dude you contradict yourself again given they have just surrendered half their LHR slots.
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:26 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 71):
We could also go off topic and start talking about how BA cares for the Nigerian people and how they all want to fly to LOS and back on ageing 747s but, alas, that will get us nowhere.

Just the same as BA flies ageing 747s To New York, LAX, South Africa, Sydney and Hong Kong. Or how Cathay flies aging 747s to LHR (it just announced all 4 HKG-LHR flights to be 'downgraded' to 744 due to strong demand) Or how Qantas sends the 744 to LHR, and for that matter Los Angeles. If it is refurbished, the 744 is still a very comfortable aircraft to fly, and it's economics if you can fill it are still pretty good.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 5:49 am

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 72):

"Arik cannot treat the slot as an asset to borrow against as it does not appear on the balance sheet as an owned asset. Dude you contradict yourself again given they have just surrendered half their LHR slots."

Please read the articles pertaining to the conversation before responding. They gave up the slot when bmi put up the fee for the slot by 50%. You telling me that payment doesn't appear on a balance sheet? Dude can you follow the trail? BTW, you don't have to agree with it to follow it .

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 73):

As tempted as i am to respond i won't. With respect to you, please stay on topic.

[Edited 2011-11-05 23:08:22]
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:18 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 74):
Stop hijacking the thread. Stay on topic

There really isn't much to discuss. Somebody in the Nigerian government has decided the way to help
there mates at Arik Air is to Bully a private British company in an attempt to somehow get the UK government
to give them something everybody else has to pay for. Everything else has merely highlighted some of the Nigerian
government's less than favorable behavior in the past with regards to other airlines and the implications it may be
causing with dealing with them. One of them was to describe perfectly capable aircraft as inappropriate. You yourself
made that suggestion and when it was put forward that other carriers on their premium routes, such as Cathay Pacific
do the same thing, it hardly looks like Nigeria is being dealt the scraps. In fact as soon as DL refurbishes its 763 fleet
they're gonna be nicer inside than a lot of A330s flying out there. As for the high fares, one of the reasons BA carried
a lot of traffic there was for a long time the lack of direct service to the United States. That was partly a result of
the change of airline structures in the US, a conservative attitude to serving Africa from what used to be primarily US
domestic airlines after the fall of Pan Am and friends, as well an at times not so easy to deal with Nigerian Government.

But of course there is huge demand for UK-Nigeria service in its own right. Particularly business travel. I stand by my argument that BA has done nothing wrong, and is being unfairly bullied by others attempting to simply get something for free. You know maybe Arik Air can think out side the world of LHR for a minute. What other parts of the UK would have a significant amount of UK-Nigeria demand? Would there be enough demand to start serving say Manchester or Glasgow? I would imagine a lot of that traffic would be currently going via AMS or CDG etc.

Not to mention cashed strapped nearly dying US carriers could somehow manage to get slots. Is Arik air in financial difficultly and can't afford to pay the market rates? If that is the case, the airline is undercapitalised. It's quite normal for undercapitalised businesses to struggle at times regardless of industry. The entry cost to doing business at LHR is high. Very High. Both Cathay and Virgin were forced to use LGW for years. Arik has access, and if it can get the cash, can probably get the times it wants. Also, I question their fleet planning. the A345 was designed for ultra long range flights and even there proves at times slightly uneconomic due to its heavy weight. A much shorter length flight really doesn't need to be operated by this kind of aircraft. An a330 or a 767 or a 772 would have been more appropriate. If they can fill it, the A346 or the 747-400 would have offered much better CASM. Seems like an odd choice of aircraft.

[Edited 2011-11-05 23:21:38]
 
flyibaby
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:23 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:52 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 71):
By gaining valuable slots at LHR, it will have more assets on which to borrow cash against to fund fleet expansion. Those slots at LHR are like gold. You ask BA.

You just answered all of your own complaints throughout this thread in this one sentence.

If Nigera is expecting somesort of welfare from the UK Govt or British Airways in the form of prime slots at LHR, and for free, then I believe the Nigerian people will have to wait until hell freezes over. Contrary to popular belief, there are many other countries that the UK has bilaterial agreements with and you don't see this sort of childish schoolyard behavior going on. Free enterprise can be a bitch sometimes, but frankly to work, everyone has to play by the rules. Did Nigeria negotiate with the UK government for 21 flights to and from each other's countries or 21 flights to and from LHR? Check the agreement - if you don't like it - retract it.

You say that you always support the underdog. I support the one playing by the rules - and it isn't Arik or Nigeria. Nigeria can take their sense of entitlement elsewhere.

As far as your "African Spring" is concerned, tell me then is Robert Mugabe and his Zanu PF thugs still running Zimbabwe and conducting land grabs from others? Is a known crook not running South Africa in Jacob Zuma? Frankly until Africans stop causing their own poverty by allowing corruption, having waay more kids than even most western familes can support, ect. - nothing will truly ever improve. Frankly, some other African will "take charge" and begin lining their pockets again. I think we have all seen this show more times than we can remember. But I digress....
 
flyibaby
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:23 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:03 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 74):
Please read the articles pertaining to the conversation before responding. They gave up the slot when bmi put up the fee for the slot by 50%. You telling me that payment doesn't appear on a balance sheet? Dude can you follow the trail? BTW, you don't have to agree with it to follow it .

I thought I was done with an ealier response, but your economic wisdom leaves alot to be desired here. First, you cannot borrow against something that you LEASE!!! You cannot borrow against payments made for something else!!!

Why you ask??? Because if you are just making payments every month, it is a liability!!!

Now, if Arik were in the position of BMI and had slots they owned available for others to lease, then yes, it would be an asset, and Arik could borrow against it - but as many, many others have stated here, Arik will have to purchase slots from others when they become available since as you say - "those slots at LHR are like gold."

Of final note - since I am giving an economic lesson here - airlines operate based on supply side economics...supply and demand. More demand there is for that particular item, the more it will cost. Please keep that in mind for all your future posts.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:12 am

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 75):

On the point that pertains to the subject in your long response I reply thus.

As far as i can read between the lines Arik Air isn't asking for a "free" slot, Don't think such a thing exists in the world of aviation.
The area of contention is that it has to lease a slot. BD the slot holder then hiked up the fee. I have no knowledge of slot allocation though I would hazard a guess that not all the airlines at LHR "have to" lease any of their slots to make up their bilateral agreements. Any extra slots, sure.
Having read and re-read the articles, that's my understanding of the spat hence my support for Nigeria's intended cause of action.

Every other thing you talk about would make delicious chat but alas in a different topic or seven  
 
trintocan
Posts: 2790
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 6:02 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 9:34 am

Oh dear. So much emotion on this thread. All the same, let us try to look dispassionately at what is happening here.

The starting situation is the bilateral agreement between Nigeria and the United Kingdom, which allows airlines from each country to operate up to 21 weekly flights between them. This means a grand total of 42 flights a week is possible. The flights can be from any UK airport to any Nigerian airport - not specifically LHR. So

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 78):
I would hazard a guess that not all the airlines at LHR "have to" lease any of their slots to make up their bilateral agreements

does not follow. By and large bilateral agreements do not specify the airport served and slot allocation is completely unrelated to the bilateral agreement. The now-deceased Bermuda 2 was a famous exception as it limited LHR ops between the UK and US to 2 airlines from each side.

As far as the Nigeria - UK agreement goes, at present the UK carriers are using all 21 frequencies with BA and VS offering daily flights to LOS and BA also doing ABV daily. On Nigeria's side, Arik Air or W3 is the latest airline to serve the UK following the likes of Nigeria Airways, Virgin Nigeria and Bellview. Until recently it flew daily to LOS and 5 weekly to ABV from LHR.

Now, as is well known, LHR is slot-controlled and the demand for slots is very high, thus ensuring that obtaining slots is very expensive. Some airlines have "grandfather" slots through years of incumbency at LHR. Other airlines wishing to enter LHR generally have to apply to the slot coordinator company for an allocation. Contrary to popular belief slots are available at LHR but the problem is that those available tend to be late in the evening approaching the curfew which are seen as less desireable. Daytime slots are very scarce and this has been the case for many years. Of course, slots once allocated have to be used or else they can be withdrawn by the coordinator and re-allocated. The UK Government as such does not have any role in allocation of slots.

The alternative is if an airline with a holding of slots is unable to use all of them at a given point, it may lease the slots to other airlines. A good example of this is DL, many of whose LHR flights have come to be by using leased AF slots. Also, BD have let some slots out to OS and SN. While innards of these financial dealings are confidential (and rightly so) the transactions can run into the millions of pounds. While the slots themselves are not actual property of any airline a level of "horse-trading" is allowed within limits.

W3 thus leased slots from BD to fly some LHR services. The Nigerian article suggests that BD raised the lease fees for them. Let's remember that BD is in a poor financial position and bleeding cash and its owner LH want to sell it off. With its LHR slot holding being one of its greatest benefits, it can then be seen to be good business sense to try to maximise BD's returns on the slots it cannot use. Furthermore such would enhance the appeal to potential bidders for it (of course I.A.G. BA and IB's parent company, have put forward a bid). So in a free market BD is entitled to do that to raise as much money as possible. BD knows that if W3 cannot raise the money to lease the slot, other airlines surely will!

So BD, in an attempt to look after its commercial interests, raises the lease fees and W3, being unable or unwilling to pay, drops some of its services. It is then left with a reduced frequency into LHR. What W3 needs to do here is to evaluate the whole situation and decide whether to try to raise additional cash to pay the higher fees and thus keep the LHR services, apply to the slot coordinator for additional slots and start with those, even if they're not ideal (I think they tried asking), apply for fly some services from LGW and do so as an interim measure until they can acquire more suitable LHR slots or move to LGW altogether. Instead what happens - the Nigerian Government decides to block BA and reduce them to 3 flights weekly. All this time, BA has not been involved in any way with this situation and now they are facing sanction.

Now all of a sudden we have a diplomatic matter because this flies in the face of the bilateral agreement which is, of course, between Governments and one Government is taking unilateral action. BA's only recourse in this matter is to turn to the UK Government, which it has done. Whatever may come out of the negotiations we will see but the UK cannot force LHR to hand W3 slots - it does not have that authority and, as mentioned, other airlines may take legal action against the UK if such a precedent were set. Put mildly, doing such a thing is opening a can of worms.

At then end of the day we have to ask one question - what is wrong with Arik Air? Not so long ago it was touted as a bright and rising star among airlines which would lift Nigerian aviation from the doldrums. Suddenly things seem to be amiss. Emotions need to be left aside - on these boards we have discussed many airlines' ups and downs including BA (very popular indeed!), VS, BD, LH, JL, BW, JM, AA, UA, SR and so on. Perhaps now's the time for W3.

Trintocan.
Hop to it, fly for life!
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 9:40 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 78):
Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 75):

On the point that pertains to the subject in your long response I reply thus.

As far as i can read between the lines Arik Air isn't asking for a "free" slot, Don't think such a thing exists in the world of aviation.
The area of contention is that it has to lease a slot. BD the slot holder then hiked up the fee. I have no knowledge of slot allocation though I would hazard a guess that not all the airlines at LHR "have to" lease any of their slots to make up their bilateral agreements. Any extra slots, sure.
Having read and re-read the articles, that's my understanding of the spat hence my support for Nigeria's intended cause of action.

Every other thing you talk about would make delicious chat but alas in a different topic or seven  


Which, as explained to you over and over and over again, has absolutely nothing to do with BA.

Heathrow is a private enterprise, neither BA or the government control it's slot allocation in terms of times or fees. BMI is also privately owned, and their decision to increase a lease cost of certain slots is their own. If Arik don't like that, tough luck - pay up like everyone else or shut up.

Your argument that bi-laterals with other nations flying their metal to LHR don't 'have to' resort to leasing slots from other airlines carries no weight. I'm sure you will find, if you do some digging, that some slots are actually leased by British carrier from non-British airlines.

You must also consider that LHR is one of the most slot restricted airports in the world. LOS is
not, and since Arik were well aware of this on applying for route authority I have zero sympathy for them. Other countries with bi-laterals have been flying to LHR consistently for many more years than Arik, hence they will naturally take more premium slots when available (which means paying top dollar for them too).

The reality is. Arik are in financial meltdown and will likely be defunct if they continue this way anyhow, but BA, considered by many Nigerians as the airline
Of choice to the UK (despite your argument regarding their inferior aircraft in the route haha) have nothing to do with this.

Mark my words, Nigerians will be the only losers if their government takes any steps to restrict BA service.

From a crew welfare perspective, BA will not risk anything less than daily service, it carries too much risk. Don't kid yourself, the UK will kick Arik out of steps are taken to block BA. This is not CO negotiating, the service is not new, it's very established and BA dont get into brawls over rights to slots, it's not the BA way, they would sooner drop the route.

They won't want to of course, because BA makes money on it. But let me point out to you that LOS is far from being BA's most profitable route. NYC/MIA/HKG//JNB etc do far better.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:07 am

Quoting flyibaby (Reply 76):

"If Nigera is expecting somesort of welfare from the UK Govt or British Airways in the form of prime slots at LHR, and for free, then I believe the Nigerian people will have to wait until hell freezes over. Contrary to popular belief, there are many other countries that the UK has bilaterial agreements with and you don't see this sort of childish schoolyard behavior going on. Free enterprise can be a bitch sometimes, but frankly to work, everyone has to play by the rules. Did Nigeria negotiate with the UK government for 21 flights to and from each other's countries or 21 flights to and from LHR? Check the agreement - if you don't like it - retract it."

I don't know what the agreement says whether it is 21 UK or LHR, I wasn't invited to the signing ceremony. Something stinks and it isn't only the slums around Lagos. It needs sorting and we are seeing the first hints at retraction with the actions that Nigerians are threatening.
If free enterprise can be a bitch sometimes, then it looks like there's another bitch who wants to bite back. Bitch fight. YES. Coining your phrases only and no disrespect intended to the honourable Transport Minister

If heathrow and BA are private companies independent of government influence then by connection of your argument therefore, bilateral agreements signed by governments are un-enforceable? So why when BA gets a Nigerian slap in the face does it run to the British government to intervene on its behalf in this matter? (it is reported in the article attached by the OP). I dare BA to drop LOS altogether. I triple dare them.

Quoting flyibaby (Reply 77):

The economic lesson is a surplus to me. If I could return the favour and give you a reading lesson. If you track back (you don't have to my good friend), I said the payment would appear on "a" balance sheet. On BMI's it is an asset. The post then makes the case for Arik. You may not like it less agree with it, but that is it.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4910
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:46 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 74):
Please read the articles pertaining to the conversation before responding. They gave up the slot when bmi put up the fee for the slot by 50%. You telling me that payment doesn't appear on a balance sheet? Dude can you follow the trail? BTW, you don't have to agree with it to follow it .

Play the ball not the man, you honestly have no understanding of the business!
 
theginge
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:53 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:48 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 71):
Consider it is the opposite. By gaining valuable slots at LHR, it will have more assets on which to borrow cash against to fund fleet expansion. Those slots at LHR are like gold. You ask BA.

If Arik is willing to pay for these slots like any other airline then yes they will be able to do that. But are they willing to pay?!
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4910
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:48 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 78):
The area of contention is that it has to lease a slot. BD the slot holder then hiked up the fee. I have no knowledge of slot allocation though I would hazard a guess that not all the airlines at LHR "have to" lease any of their slots to make up their bilateral agreements. Any extra slots, sure.

Given you have no knowledge of slot allocation, why are you confidently expounding on the subject matter? Arik has shown itself to be just like Nigerian cowboy outfit beforehand. As VS found with VK, business rules are far from fair and impartial in Nigeria and the "everyone else is to blame but us is typical".

[Edited 2011-11-06 02:53:35]
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:01 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 81):
If heathrow and BA are private companies independent of government influence then by connection of your argument therefore, bilateral agreements signed by governments are un-enforceable? So why when BA gets a Nigerian slap in the face does it run to the British government to intervene on its behalf in this matter? (it is reported in the article attached by the OP). I dare BA to drop LOS altogether. I triple dare them.

a) The bilateral agreement is enforceable. If Arik Air wanted to fly 21 times per week to the UK - as per the agreement - they are free to do so.

b) As has been explained time and time again in this thread the reason BA have gone to the UK government is because BA's right to fly to Lagos has been revoked on 4 days per week by the Nigerian Federal Government citing the BASA hence it is a bilateral issue. As I have explained before, BA is not a government and is therefore not in a position to directly negotiate the BASA with the Federal Government of Nigeria.

c) I don't like the disregard you seem to show towards ordinary Nigerian people. You are daring BA to drop Lagos so there will be a substantial frequency reduction to Nigeria which means that innocent Nigerians will have to pay more to travel. You don't seem to care about that - which is a shame really.
 
LJ
Posts: 5463
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 81):
So why when BA gets a Nigerian slap in the face does it run to the British government to intervene on its behalf in this matter? (it is reported in the article attached by the OP). I dare BA to drop LOS altogether. I triple dare them.

Because the Nigerian government prevents BA to use 3 of the 21 weekly flights permitted between Nigeria and the UK. This means that the Nigerian government doesn't abide by the agreement between the UK and Nigeria, which is a case for the UK government.

BTW maybe Arik should looking for joining a global alliance. At least oneworld and Skyteam have some slots left (unfortunately I don't know if Star after the selling of BMI have some left).
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:41 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 81):
So why when BA gets a Nigerian slap in the face does it run to the British government to intervene on its behalf in this matter?

Because IF (and it won't happen IMO) the Nigerian government allow this
change to BA's landing rights then they are breaking the agreement, not Arik, not BA.

As has already been pointed out, BA are not government property and would have to ask the
UK government to negotiate with the Nigerian government for them. It's not running to anyone, it will have no other choice.

Arik, however , are running to the Nigerian government, because they are unwilling or unable to stump up
the cash for the slots they want.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:43 pm

Deleted. Posted the draft in error. The final one is posted below.

Blasted iPhone. Grrrrr

[Edited 2011-11-06 07:23:05]
 
David_itl
Posts: 6448
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:56 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 88):
For the three of you, certainly 4 LHR slots have been revoked. If BA applied for 4 slots from LGW, they would be approved, as per the now enforceable bilateral agreement?

You've still not got this in your mind: the bilateral is UK-Nigeria. Not LHR-Nigeria. The Nigerians cannot deny BA operating 4 more flights out of LHR because some airline is unwilling to pay the going rate to utilise slots at LHR. Or unilaterally interpret the agreement in a different way.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 3:19 pm

Quoting trintocan (Reply 80):

My apologies to you. I am responding on the iPhone which takes a longer time than usual. I missed your post the first time round.
Thank you for attempting to take the heat of the topic. You write so well about the workings of the agreement, just give me the link to the "actual" contract as opposed to the general workings. It is our standard practice to back up our statements with facts. Where we don't have such evidence then we prefix our assertions with, I think or I guess or I wonder or If....
Where I havent done that in any of my posts in this thread, I wholly and truly apologise.

Please I don't know jack about slots at Bangalore, LHR or otherwise. But if you confidently know that the agreement is from any UK aurport to Nigeria. Then surely the Nigerian government can allow some flights from LHR and others from LGW so that BA uses up its precious allocation?

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 85):
Quoting LJ (Reply 86):
Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 87):

For the three of you, certainly 4 LHR slots have been revoked. If BA applied for 4 slots from LGW, they would be approved, as per the now enforceable bilateral agreement? If the Nigerians refused these then I would not support such a move.


Yes business practices in Nigeria differ from those on our pristine white shores. But if you are going to lie with a dog, be prepared to get rabies. BA know they've enjoyed grandfather rights but they are in the bed with the dog, they will have to accept that they'll be used as collateral.

It's like Trade Unions using the work to rule strike. Working to the strict letter of the law in order to win some concessions. If this is the case, I agree with the Nigerians stance to get some concessions or level the playing field.
I am hopeful that it is so because of an African Spring emerging slowly in the continent, where the citizens are no longer going to allow officials syphoning money for their own ends helped by WikiLeaks and the spread of social websites and blogs. It is backed up by a tightening up of laws in the UK making it difficult for corrupt African leaders to deposit their ill gotten gains here. I believe Switzerland is tightening her laws too?

If it is just another attempt to munch some bribe money from the British Mandarins (civil servants) (apparently always happy to pay off the natives to get what is in our Soverign Queen's best interests), then I don't agree with the practice. Only time will tell.
That's my position based on the facts I know at this time.
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 3:47 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 90):
For the three of you, certainly 4 LHR slots have been revoked. If BA applied for 4 slots from LGW, they would be approved, as per the now enforceable bilateral agreement?

BA's right to land at Lagos has been reduced. On 4 days per week they cannot fly from anywhere in the UK to Lagos (including from LGW). Furthermore, why was Lagos chosen (rather than Abuja) and why was BA alone picked on?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 90):
Yes business practices in Nigeria differ from those on our pristine white shores. But if you are going to lie with a dog, be prepared to get rabies. BA know they've enjoyed grandfather rights but they are in the bed with the dog, they will have to accept that they'll be used as collateral.

That's fine, but ultimately BA does not need Nigeria. If the operating environment is not viable BA will leave. Arik Air aren't going to get any extra slots at LHR - unless they pay for them. So the only people who will get rabies are the Nigerians - who are forced to sleep with the dog.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that we are coming up to holiday season - many Nigerians will want to go home to visit friends and relatives, and they will now be unable to do so due to the cut in capacity. Whatever you "chip-on-the-shoulder" is with BA or the UK, you simply cannot ignore the fact that this action by the Nigerian government is going to hurt Nigerians more than the British. Perhaps you would like to tell a family and their kids that they cannot go home this year because the Nigerian government has suddenly decided to revoke landing rights - you might feel differently when you see the tears run down the kids faces?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 90):
It's like Trade Unions using the work to rule strike. Working to the strict letter of the law in order to win some concessions. If this is the case, I agree with the Nigerians stance to get some concessions or level the playing field.

If the Nigerian government decided to work to the letter they would soon find out that they do not have a case. It has probably been said at least 10 times in the post already - but I'll repeat in the hope that it might just click. The BASA covers the right to fly between the whole of the UK and Nigeria. The BASA allows Nigerian airlines up to 21 weekly flights from the UK (it does not specifically mention 21 weekly flights from LHR). The issue here is that Arik Air does not want to pay to lease slots at LHR and alternative slots are not deemed suitable by Arik Air. That does not change the fact that their right to operate 21 weekly flights from the UK still exists, and their ability to operate 21 weekly flights from the UK still exists (there are some available slots at LHR, as well as LGW, MAN, STN...etc). Therefore, as per the agreement which the Nigerian government made in full knowledge of the slots issue at LHR, it is still entirely possible and practicable to operate to the letter of the agreement.
 
ssublyme
Posts: 180
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:35 pm

So much mis-information in this thread.

From my understanding BA's frequency to LOS was cut, not their frequency to Nigeria. Just as Arik is reportedly unable to use their frequencies to LHR, not UK.

I'm actually sitting on the side awaiting how this will turn out.
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:48 pm

Well I don't think BA's frequency to LOS has been cut, YET.

Arik are not unable to use their slots and that is my argument. Arik has perfectly acceptable slots in place, however they are leased from BMI who have increased the lease cost and Arik
Don't want/can't pay for them, hence they have chosen to reduce their number of
flights.

Why should BA be forced to reduce flights, when it
Is neither the owner of those leased slots, nor responsible for slot allocation at LHR.
That's the argument.

Arik is wanting/expecting to be handed slots at a time THEY want on terms that suit THEM at a
price THEY want to pay. They are not (quite rightly) getting their own way, so they
Are throwing their toys out of the pram.
 
cslusarc
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:29 am

I just don't get understand why Nigeria can treat both VS and BA equally if they cannot retaliate against LH (the owner of BD) or the UK Slot Coordinator. Why can't Arik Air buy the slots it needs on the open market like the Middle Eastern Airlines and CO?
--cslusarc from YWG
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:27 am

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 91):

"Whatever you "chip-on-the-shoulder" is with BA or the UK, you simply cannot ignore the fact that this action by the Nigerian government is going to hurt Nigerians more than the British. Perhaps you would like to tell a family and their kids that they cannot go home this year because the Nigerian government has suddenly decided to revoke landing rights - you might feel differently when you see the tears run down the kids faces?"

No chip on shoulder. Just favour the underdog. A bit Of a David and Goliath thing going on here and I always liked David.
To respond to the latter emotive part, yes I do imagine a future with the tears of joy as more kids meet their loved ones in Nigeria and the UK as a result of lower fares brought about by more competition on routes to Nigeria?
This is one way to get it. It'll get ugly before it gets better. And if the governments don't resolve it then my future is not realised, BA continues to enjoy high margins with little competition. No room for Nigerian carrier to make money.

It's clear that you are horrified at Nigeria's tactics to try and protect its interests.
In other industries around the world this kind of sharp practice happens all the time. Tarrifs on imports and exports are all over the globe primarily to protect home markets and/or goods. Companies suffer, prices remain artificially high blah blah.
If, as I have said before, this is their intention I stand with them. If it just another official wanting a bribe then I don't support it. Simples. Only time will tell. Will BA quit LOS? Will David Cameron authorise a payment to an official to have the threat disappear? Could Arik ever be allowed to survive by the bigger Brit carriers BA and VS (we all recall the bully tactics Lord King used to try and snuff out the little upstart VS back in the day)? Excited yet at the possibilities? I know I am!

Quoting ssublyme (Reply 92):

I too eagerly await more news with regard to this spat.

Quoting cslusarc (Reply 94):

I'm not sure the Naira has quite the same bang as the dollar or any of the Middle Eastern currencies. Pretty sure they would if the could.
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Mon Nov 07, 2011 7:51 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 95):
To respond to the latter emotive part, yes I do imagine a future with the tears of joy as more kids meet their loved ones in Nigeria and the UK as a result of lower fares brought about by more competition on routes to Nigeria?

The problem is you are assuming that Arik Air will magically get extra slots at Heathrow when this is highly unlikely to be the case.

Can you please explain to me how cutting BA's frequency to Lagos but not increasing that of Arik Air will be of benefit to the Nigerian people? You keep speaking about short-term pain for long-term gain, but given the unlikelihood of Arik Air securing other slots at Heathrow, what exactly will this long-term gain be?

The action by the Nigerian government will reduce, rather than increase competition which will lead to higher fares.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 95):
BA continues to enjoy high margins with little competition.

BA competes with Virgin and Arik Air - both with daily flights from LOS to LHR - I'd hardly call that "little competition".

If competition was the issue here perhaps the Nigerian government would have taken action against BA's flights to Abuja. After all, the issue is that Arik Air are unwilling to pay to lease the slot that they used for the Abuja flights from BMI. The only route where BA is the monopoly carrier is London to Abuja, so if the Nigerian government is acting in a benevolent way - as a champion of the consumer - one would rightly assume that their target would be BA's flights to Abuja rather than Lagos?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 95):
No room for Nigerian carrier to make money.

I would speculate that their is room for a Nigerian carrier to make money. In the past, if I am not mistaken, BA have flown to Lagos 14 weekly and Virgin another 7 weekly (until the Nigerian government curtailed this), so on that basis I would definitely assume that the market is there and profits can be made. Whether Nigerian carriers actually do or not depends on corruption and the competence of their management team.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 95):
It's clear that you are horrified at Nigeria's tactics to try and protect its interests.

I'm horrified by the short-sightedness of Nigeria's tactics. It is far more likely to have an adverse impact on Nigeria than the UK, so in attempting to protect their interests they are making things worse for themselves. As an aside - other companies that were looking to trade with / set up business in Nigeria may now see the Nigerian's actions in this case an decide to invest elsewhere. The government is not acting in accordance with the BASA which they themselves agreed to.

I personally do not care which carriers fly the route - Arik Air could fly it 28 times weekly and BA 0 weekly for all I care. What I care about is improving the transport links between cities to facilitate and reduce the cost of travelling. What the Nigerian government is doing is the opposite of this, hence I disapprove of their actions.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:39 am

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 96):

Firstly, don't make assumptions for me. Secondly, you have made your position very clear, in this post. Only time will tell who is right. May there be little blood spilt. I think we could agree on that?
 
lewis
Posts: 3586
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Tue Nov 08, 2011 1:05 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 78):
BD the slot holder then hiked up the fee.

Which has nothing to do with BA.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 78):
I would hazard a guess that not all the airlines at LHR "have to" lease any of their slots to make up their bilateral agreements

Yes, some airlines have bought slots a while back when they were still available. They can either use them or lease them to other airlines if they do not need all the capacity anymore. Arik doesn't "have to" lease slots because they are an airline from Africa but because someone else owns the slots for the times they may want to fly. As far as I know, there are European, American, even British airlines that lease some or all of their slots at LHR.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 81):
If heathrow and BA are private companies independent of government influence then by connection of your argument therefore, bilateral agreements signed by governments are un-enforceable? So why when BA gets a Nigerian slap in the face does it run to the British government to intervene on its behalf in this matter?

No, they are enforceable. Airlines work with the agreements set by their governments and other governments. If a foreign government is restricting operations of an airline against bilateral agreements then this matter has to be taken care by the airline's government, which is the one that signed the agreement in the first place.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 90):
Then surely the Nigerian government can allow some flights from LHR and others from LGW so that BA uses up its precious allocation?

Unless the agreement gives the Nigerian government the right to dictate where the UK flights originate from, I don't see why they could intervene. The UK is not restricting Arik's access to LHR. It is a well known fact that LHR is slot restricted and that slots are expensive due to high demand. Arik is free to fly to LHR anytime they want if they can get hold of the slots - by paying the price the slot owners are asking for.
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Tue Nov 08, 2011 7:33 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 90):
Please I don't know jack about slots at Bangalore, LHR or otherwise. But if you confidently know that the agreement is from any UK aurport to Nigeria. Then surely the Nigerian government can allow some flights from LHR and others from LGW so that BA uses up its precious allocation?

But why should BA have to move some flights to LGW when it is operating perfectly well from LHR, has the slots it want and has a good rep on the route? Because Arik aren't prepared to fulfil their current slots properly or obtain slots
they do want by paying for them - like everyone else.

I see little point in this thread continuing now. It will all come to nothing, much like a lot of statements released by Arik/Nigerian government, like Branson, it's all talk.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos