Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
AIR MALTA
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 6:45 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Tue Nov 08, 2011 8:59 pm

BA has been given another week in which the problem needs to be solved.

I suggest if Nigeria force BA to cut their flights, they should force Arik to reduce their flights to 3 weekly LOS-LHR.
Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Tue Nov 08, 2011 11:31 pm

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 99):
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?

They don't have to if the government gives in to the demands of the Nigerian government. Could it realistically do so with LHR as congested as it is? Or will it try and pay off some Nigerian officials as it has done in the past?

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 99):
It will all come to nothing, much like a lot of statements released by Arik/Nigerian government, like Branson, it's all talk.

Who knows?


Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 100):
BA has been given another week in which the problem needs to be solved.

I suggest if Nigeria force BA to cut their flights, they should force Arik to reduce their flights to 3 weekly LOS-LHR.

You mean we mighty Brits should retaliate tit for tat with the lessor African nation? Hardly the stuff of "Fair Play" and All that old chap? We do love to Lord it around the world as the nation of decent folk, equal opportunity, strong moral and Christian values blah blah blah. It seems the Nigerians are calling on us to be exactly that.

If, and only if, this is an attempt to win some concessions to get to the pool of honey that is UK to Nigeria slots at LHR then I say go for it. If the UK government gave in to the demands, what precedent will it create? Could it force LHR to give the slots seeing as it doesn't own the airport? Maybe we will see David Cameron in Parliament notifying MPs that he has authorised bribe payments to protect British interests abroad. I mean who bloody knows? Interesting times.
 
lewis
Posts: 3586
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 3:26 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 101):
You mean we mighty Brits should retaliate tit for tat with the lessor African nation?

It is not the British Government that has broken a bilateral agreement. In all business and national relations, it is usually the entity that breaks the agreement that is recognized to be on the wrong.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 101):
They don't have to if the government gives in to the demands of the Nigerian government.
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 101):
If the UK government gave in to the demands

The UK government cannot give into such demands, the UK government does not control slot allocation at LHR.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 101):
Could it realistically do so with LHR as congested as it is?

No, because of the above but even if they could do something with BMI so that they did not ask for such a high fee:

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 101):
what precedent will it create?

It would give the right to every other airline operating at LHR to complain for preferential treatment.
 
hoons90
Posts: 3816
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 10:15 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:44 am

After reading the articles and arguments that were posted here, I still have trouble figuring out and making sense of the rationale and logic behind Nigeria's decision. If anything, such retaliation from Nigeria is misdirected to parties that have absolutely no control over the situation.

There is nothing that British Airways (the victim, which also happens to be a private entity not controlled by the government) is obliged to do to allow Arik Air to obtain what they consider to be optimal times at the prices that they dictate. Why does British Airways have to be the victim for something that they are not responsible for?

The UK Government cannot force British Airways to give up their LHR slots or to lease them out at a lower price, nor can they dictate anything to the airport authority with regards to their allotments of slots. The bilateral agreement signed between the UK and Nigeria does not guarantee slot availability at LHR. You could also argue the other way around, but bear in mind that BA are losing slots that they already have. I certainly would like to see any evidence that indicates that Lagos Airport is congested to the degree that LHR is at the times that BA fly into Lagos.

Let's say that I am from country A, and I get a visa that allows me to emigrate to country B, and there is a particular building that I really desire to live in that country. The property manager tells me that there are no rooms available, but I find someone there that is willing to sublet me a room there for a very high price that I can't afford, and I end up not taking it. Would that make it right if my country, country A, as a retaliatory measure, restricts the entry of persons from country B to my home country A as a means to pressure country B from somehow stepping on the toes of a private entity that wishes to charge whichever amount they want (which they are entirely within their rights to)? Would it be fair if country B gives in and forces the property owner to charge a much lower amount just so that I am able to afford it? Would it be fair if country B forces the property manager to build an extra floor just for me, since it's literally impossible to create extra room out of nothing?

If what I wrote in the paragraph above makes no sense, then good, because it is an analogy to a policy and decision that makes absolutely no sense at all. I know that with regards to the issue of Arik Air and their LHR slots, the stakes are much higher. However, the logic remains the same.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 95):
No chip on shoulder. Just favour the underdog. A bit Of a David and Goliath thing going on here and I always liked David.

Doesn't really make sense considering that the British government didn't bully Arik Air out of LHR, nor did BA for that matter.



[Edited 2011-11-08 21:11:08]
Flown: 2L 7C 9E 9L AA AB AC AF AY AZ BA BR BX B6 CA CO CP CX DL EK EY JL KE KL LA LH LX MQ NW OZ PD RW SQ TG TP TR TS US WG WN WS XE XJ
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:22 am

Think of it like this.

If everybody started playing these kinds of games, what would happen? The entire system would implode.
You'd have delta blocking BA at JFK, Cathay blocking BA at HKG, etc... the entire system would be a bloody mess
and its likely the only carrier that would win would be Emirates (again).

The situation here is quite simple. Arik Air either cannot or unwilling to pay the commercial rate available.
So they're getting their mates in the government to bully the competition who have done absolutely nothing wrong.
End of story. The fact that BA has a long history in the market, and Arik Air is a relative new comer is irrelevant.

I can also confirm for fact that BA is leasing slots of Qantas. So British carriers too have to pay foreign carriers for things at times. Maybe the fact that Australia and the UK don't play such games, and that Qantas and BA have a good working relationship helped BA the opportunity first. If it wasn't BA taking them up then no doubt the next step would have been to offer them to American, then after that probably finnair, cathay and JAL. It helps in the business world to have good working relationships and not make too many enemies at times.
 
FCAFLYBOY
Posts: 687
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:03 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 6:47 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 101):
They don't have to if the government gives in to the demands of the Nigerian government. Could it realistically do so with LHR as congested as it is? Or will it try and pay off some Nigerian officials as it has done in the past?

Your source please? You cannot make such a statement without a source.
 
mikey72
Posts: 1439
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 1:31 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:22 am

I wish BA would just tell them to stuff it and pull out completely ! LOL (call their bluff)

Not good sound business practice I grant you but really !

Anyway apparently BA have a very strong loyal customer base (imagine that EDICHC !) and they're moving up the road to Abuja.

Honestly, what a way to run a country !
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
 
AIR MALTA
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 6:45 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:26 am

Quoting mikey72 (Reply 106):
I wish BA would just tell them to stuff it and pull out completely ! LOL (call their bluff)

May be not pull completely but the UK government should retaliate. The Nigerian government is in breah of the BASA agreements signed between UK and Nigeria. Anyway, this is not the first time BA is target of the Nigerian Government attacks.
Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
 
SKAirbus
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:18 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:38 am

This "protectionist" action by the Nigerian government is not limited to the developing world.

- Canada try virilantly to protect AC, which can be seen by their spat with EK and the UAE government.
- The US have legislation in place that protects failing airlines. Not very capitalist is it?

The EU is one of the few places in the world where there is pretty unforgiving climate for airlines. If an airline fails, then a government cannot prop it up. Hence, why there was a lot of controversy with the Alitalia restructuring.
Base: BRU
 
oneworld77
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:05 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:15 am

I understand that Safety Regulators have been advised of issue's with W3 and their operations into/through and/or involving LHR.

I post this apropros nothing!

Welcome to the world W3, you may look back with wistfulness to your LHR slots, allegedly!!
Flown - EI;BA;RE;FR;WW;TW;TS;US;JP;JT;AT;QF;JQ;VB;NC;TR;D7;AA;IB;AF;SN;LX;SR;LH;AY;CX;CP;9K;9W;IX;AI;IC;EK;EY;GF;QR;BE;N
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 12:22 pm

Quoting lewis (Reply 102):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 101):
what precedent will it create?

It would give the right to every other airline operating at LHR to complain for preferential treatment.

I know Armageddon. How exciting would that be as a spectator. If I worked in the industry perhaps I wouldn't be so excited. David and Goliath. Will Goliath crush David again?

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 103):
Why does British Airways have to be the victim for something that they are not responsible for?

HA HA HA and HA again. Calling BA a victim in all of this is the great joke of this thread. They've exploited a gap in the market for so long that it occurs to many of you as the norm. In the world of business, I would do the same but when the time comes to close the loophole, you cannot be called a victim or innocent party. Lye with the dog, get prepared to get rabies.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 104):
Think of it like this.

If everybody started playing these kinds of games, what would happen? The entire system would implode.

The sling shot that brought Goliath down? Could it really happen? The Brits could guarantee Arik favourable spots at the proposed London Estuary Airport ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-15611454 ) so long as the Nigerians retract the threat and make Arik Air take the LHR slots that BA wouldn't even piss on.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 104):
I can also confirm for fact that BA is leasing slots of Qantas. So British carriers too have to pay foreign carriers for things at times. Maybe the fact that Australia and the UK don't play such games, and that Qantas and BA have a good working relationship helped BA the opportunity first.

God I can imagine the exorbitant fees QF pays to its Oneworld alliance partner. [sarcasm]

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 105):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 101):
They don't have to if the government gives in to the demands of the Nigerian government. Could it realistically do so with LHR as congested as it is? Or will it try and pay off some Nigerian officials as it has done in the past?

Your source please? You cannot make such a statement without a source.

Let's start a conversation in the general chat forum about that. I will give you some reading material beforehand then we can discuss. It is a fascinating subject but, alas, off topic
http://www.assetrecovery.org/kc/node...d=5E0DD7E13C6CE75CF7BF547E15A1C5C8

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 107):
May be not pull completely but the UK government should retaliate. The Nigerian government is in breah of the BASA agreements signed between UK and Nigeria.

Yes, maybe they could cut the number of visas given to their nationals wanting to visit the UK. Or cut the amount of foreign aid it pays out? Maybe they could invade Nigeria? Sorry couldn't resist.

Quoting Reply 109):
I understand that Safety Regulators have been advised of issue's with W3 and their operations into/through and/or involving LHR.

I post this apropros nothing!

I am sure it is apropros nothing mate. It would be terrible as Arik Air's A340's from LOS are planes operated, maintained and owned by a European company. Equally, Arik Air has had fewer safety incidents than squeaky clean BA.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arik_Air
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_airways

Dirty war tactics already. Arik and the Nigerian government better have mighty big balls cause they'll be squeezed to buggery. Or paid off.
 
oneworld77
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:05 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 12:39 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
Dirty war tactics already.

...goodness, perhaps the 'Colonial Masters' have learnt to play the games of the Nigerian masters, wouldn't that be interesting!! Alledgedly!

Not all of their maintenance is done in Europe, check your facts, A, B or C?
Flown - EI;BA;RE;FR;WW;TW;TS;US;JP;JT;AT;QF;JQ;VB;NC;TR;D7;AA;IB;AF;SN;LX;SR;LH;AY;CX;CP;9K;9W;IX;AI;IC;EK;EY;GF;QR;BE;N
 
AIR MALTA
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 6:45 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 12:55 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
Yes, maybe they could cut the number of visas given to their nationals wanting to visit the UK. Or cut the amount of foreign aid it pays out? Maybe they could invade Nigeria? Sorry couldn't resist.

This explains it all... lol
Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:03 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
Yes, maybe they could cut the number of visas given to their nationals wanting to visit the UK. Or cut the amount of foreign aid it pays out? Maybe they could invade Nigeria? Sorry couldn't resist.

This is not some colonial warfare. If anybody is doing the invading it's Nigeria for unfairly attacking BA. Again WHAT has be done illegal? That's right nothing. This is no different to if South African Airways wanted to start a new service. It too would have to buy or lease new slots from whoever was willing to part with them at the market rate. The rate is like a constant auction. If the price is too high nobody will pay it, and if its too low nobody will be willing to sell it. What works for Arik air has nothing to do with it.

Arik air probably has some advantages against BA too. For a start it is using newer aircraft, so probably more passenger appeal. Next, I would imagine its Labour costs are lower. Other carriers in Africa have had huge disadvantages over BA over the years and had to survive. SAA's flights to London took 3 hrs longer than BA's because SAA was denied overflight rights by most african nations, where as BA took the shortest route down to JNB. (aside from getting into the politics of that, but the point is a 3 hr longer flight time is a huge disadvantage compared to having to pay for a slot). What about when carriers like China Eastern started LHR service? They managed to get slots. They just had to pay. Maybe Arik Air needs more feed so it can operate a larger aircraft to LHR to help with the cost of the slots?
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:03 pm

Quoting Reply 111):
Not all of their maintenance is done in Europe, check your facts, A, B or C?

I am happy to learn BA man. Hit me up with a link to enlighten me
 
hoons90
Posts: 3816
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 10:15 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:17 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
HA HA HA and HA again. Calling BA a victim in all of this is the great joke of this thread. They've exploited a gap in the market for so long that it occurs to many of you as the norm. In the world of business, I would do the same but when the time comes to close the loophole, you cannot be called a victim or innocent party. Lye with the dog, get prepared to get rabies.

Why do you think it's a joke? British Airways was minding its own business, operating their daily flight to Lagos fully within the scope of the agreement, and the Nigerian government steps in to impose punishment on them. For what? Is it BA's fault that Arik Air can't afford LHR slots? I don't think so!

Why do you think it is logical for someone to receive a punishment for something that they cannot be faulted for? Does not make any sense at all.

What is this loophole that you speak of, and what exactly did BA exploit? It's not like BA actively stepped in to block Arik from purchasing slots at LHR.

You continue to speak of David vs Goliath, but it's pure nonsense. I will tell you why, once again. It's not BA, the British government or the airport authority that kicked Arik out of LHR. Arik simply left on their own. BA never bullied Arik around. If Arik wants to get their LHR slots, they better pay up. If they can't, too bad. The private entity that is Heathrow's airport authority is in no way obligated to be extra charitable to Arik just because they are an 'underdog' as you describe them.

God forbid Arik ever attempt to start flights to NRT. I am willing to bet even more tantrums will be thrown. Will people blame colonialist attitudes for that one, given that Nigeria was never colonized by Japan?

If you think I'm wrong, I would like to see you challenge all of my points, not just one.

[Edited 2011-11-09 05:56:12]
Flown: 2L 7C 9E 9L AA AB AC AF AY AZ BA BR BX B6 CA CO CP CX DL EK EY JL KE KL LA LH LX MQ NW OZ PD RW SQ TG TP TR TS US WG WN WS XE XJ
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:23 pm

Arik's A340s are wet leased from HiFly.

hmmm This more than anything makes me suspect the carrier is undercapitalised. I see
their plans to acquire the 777-300ER have been dumped.

If this was a short term measure one could understand. Maybe they would have been better
acquiring something like 767-300 and doing what Delta are doing to them (new pivot bins etc) until they get a foot in the market. They obviously need an investor. I doubt any foreign airline is going to want to touch a Nigerian Airline after
the virgin debacle. They must have some friends in the oil industry there though?
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:32 pm

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 112):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
Yes, maybe they could cut the number of visas given to their nationals wanting to visit the UK. Or cut the amount of foreign aid it pays out? Maybe they could invade Nigeria? Sorry couldn't resist.

This explains it all... lol

I know right? So many on here are chatting like the Nigerians have threatened to bomb the UK or something. This is a spat like many others that happen in industries around the world and where the governments get involved. I am siding with one side, many others are siding with the status quo. Let's get it into perspective.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 113):
This is not some colonial warfare. If anybody is doing the invading it's Nigeria for unfairly attacking BA. Again WHAT has be done illegal?

I am in full agreement. The question is have the Nigerians done anything illegal either? I suspect that is what the governments will need to discuss. The threat of cuts to the LHR slots is not illegal nor, I would argue, is the actual cuts of the LHR flights if flights from LGW or MAN would be allowed. BA can use those four slots to exploit the new Asian markets that they always say they want to.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 113):
This is no different to if South African Airways wanted to start a new service.

HUGE difference. SAA already had the slots at favourable times. Only that in the past they took 3 longer hours.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 113):
Maybe Arik Air needs more feed so it can operate a larger aircraft to LHR to help with the cost of the slots?

Better still BA could offer Arik Air join Oneworld Alliance. No more argument. No need to run to the government complaining about being made a victim. How BA, which has more inches of metal flying than the whole of Nigerian aviation industry, can be called a victim by anyone is beyond me. A pawn in a big game of chess yes. Victim never!
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:48 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 117):
The threat of cuts to the LHR slots is not illegal nor, I would argue, is the actual cuts of the LHR flights if flights from LGW or MAN would be allowed

And what about a point of equity here? This isn't being applied to VS also. There could be some legal implications there.

I'm going to say one thing here. I bet if one of the Gulf Giants were granted 5th freedom rights to fly to the UK, they'd have absolutely no trouble getting another slot at LHR. Feed could possibly be another issue.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:48 pm

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 115):

I will try and answer the whole point as succinctly as I can.

BA operates flights in and out of Nigeria as does VS up to the 21 allowed. They knew that there wasn't a Nigerian carrier operating to 21 flight from Nigeria to UK. They have exploited this fact. Now don't get too activated by the word "exploitation". It is what any successful business will do to increase profits. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

As I have stated so many times before, it seems the Nigerians are unhappy with slot allocation at LHR. Not a lot of people are by the sounds of it. So what it appears that they are doing is holding out for some concessions and using BA as a pawn. Of course no need to cut VS, no one in government listens to Branson as much as they would BA.

An airline that enjoys some of it's highest margins all year round on this route, is not a victim. What would happen if the bilateral agreement was like-for-like slot allocations? And if not, why is that the Nigerian carriers should get the bum rush? I have said before, something stinks and it needs sorting. I know whose side I'm on, I am unshakeable on it. You don't have to like it.

If I have left anything out, let me know.
 
AIR MALTA
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 6:45 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:58 pm

I declare that the Tunisian governement should axe BA flights to Tunis untill Tunisair gets more slots at LHR. Why not? Tunisair could not add more flights to London from the existing 5 as it could not find suitable slots at London Heathrow.

Yallah let's start the "Airlines Spring" against the mighty UK government and BA... Lol
Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
 
hoons90
Posts: 3816
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 10:15 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 2:09 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 119):

- It isn't the UK, nor BA's problem that the Nigerian side isn't fully utilizing those rights.

- Using BA as a pawn won't achieve a single thing, nor will it result in the UK government providing Arik access to LHR because slots at LHR are controlled by private entities.

- Your argument that British Airways is not a victim is very difficult to understand. If I owned a profitable high end clothing store and you stole a nice pair of jeans, how much money I make is irrelevant with regards to whether or not I am a victim. I am one.

- A point that you forgot to address is that the entities that control slots at LHR are private ones. If you are suggesting that the government should meddle with private companies in that manner, I don't think that's how things work in modern capitalist and democratic societies.
Flown: 2L 7C 9E 9L AA AB AC AF AY AZ BA BR BX B6 CA CO CP CX DL EK EY JL KE KL LA LH LX MQ NW OZ PD RW SQ TG TP TR TS US WG WN WS XE XJ
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 2:18 pm

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 120):
I declare that the Tunisian governement should axe BA flights to Tunis untill Tunisair gets more slots at LHR. Why not? Tunisair could not add more flights to London from the existing 5 as it could not find suitable slots at London Heathrow.

Yallah let's start the "Airlines Spring" against the mighty UK government and BA... Lol

I know right? Whilst I am not aware of the agreement between the two countries, if it was skewed so much in favour of BA then I'd say go for it. I do love it when some little upstart dares retaliate against the legacy carriers. Many try and few succeed. What will BA do? What will the government do? Let us see.....
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 2:41 pm

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 121):
- Your argument that British Airways is not a victim is very difficult to understand. If I owned a profitable high end clothing store and you stole a nice pair of jeans, how much money I make is irrelevant with regards to whether or not I am a victim. I am one.

No one is stealing anything. It is just the opening hours are being changed due to new regulations. You can still make profits at your high end clothing store, just not with the hours of trading you enjoyed before. You are not a victim. You might be pissed off but not a victim. If you wanted to open another high end store in another city or part of town, go for it. I think that is what is occurring here, if I was to use your analogy.

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 121):
- A point that you forgot to address is that the entities that control slots at LHR are private ones. If you are suggesting that the government should meddle with private companies in that manner, I don't think that's how things work in modern capitalist and democratic societies.

I did address this in previous posts. If these entities cannot be meddled with then governments have no place signing bilateral agreements. Tariffs and protectionism happens all the time. Look at EK in Germany being denied flights to Berlin and their continuing spat with Canada to name but two? Look at Britain or LHR (whichever is in control, it always seem to be fluid to suit an argument), offering slots that BA wouldn't even piss on then saying that the airport is full. India refusing to allow planes as big as A380 a slot at any of it's airports.
All modern capitalist societies, some of them will argue that they stand for fair play and equal opportunities for all, free trade across the globe.
 
hoons90
Posts: 3816
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 10:15 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:54 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
No one is stealing anything. It is just the opening hours are being changed due to new regulations.

That's not my point. My point is this: It makes no difference if BA rakes in a big profit or incurrs a major loss on this route. That cannot be used as a justification for detriment caused to a party that does not deserve it.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
. You can still make profits at your high end clothing store, just not with the hours of trading you enjoyed before. You are not a victim. You might be pissed off but not a victim

Definition of victim: One who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance, agency, or condition

BA has been directly harmed as a result of the actions of the Nigerian government. Their capacity on the route, and thus their profit potential has been significantly diminished. That is enough to constitute harm. Ergo, BA is a victim.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
If you wanted to open another high end store in another city or part of town, go for it.

Same thing could be said for Arik Air at LHR. However, in this case, it's a genuine lack of physical space that is restricting them, and not the government.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
If these entities cannot be meddled with then governments have no place signing bilateral agreements.

Nope. The UK government is merely providing the framework for the airlines to establish air services.

That's tantamount to saying that the government has every right to dictate when my store opens and closes and what prices I charge for all of the products sold in my store, just because they built the road that leads there.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
Look at EK in Germany being denied flights to Berlin and their continuing spat with Canada to name but two?

Not the same. Those restrictions have more to do with the ratio of local versus sixth freedom traffic.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
India refusing to allow planes as big as A380 a slot at any of it's airports.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
All modern capitalist societies, some of them will argue that they stand for fair play and equal opportunities for all, free trade across the globe.

Arik Air was provided with an opportunity to fly to LHR. It was their choice to not to take it up. If there's opportunity, then there is also responsibility. If Arik cannot afford to pay for LHR slots, then that is their responsibility to resolve That issue without putting the blame on others.
Flown: 2L 7C 9E 9L AA AB AC AF AY AZ BA BR BX B6 CA CO CP CX DL EK EY JL KE KL LA LH LX MQ NW OZ PD RW SQ TG TP TR TS US WG WN WS XE XJ
 
AIR MALTA
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 6:45 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:28 pm

In the mean time, other respectable airlines that can not find slots at LHR are looking at LGW like Korean Air, Sri Lankan... They are not balck mailing BA or the UK for the lack of slots and they are not crying racism...
Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
 
lewis
Posts: 3586
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:16 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
They've exploited a gap in the market for so long that it occurs to many of you as the norm.

Other airlines that want to fly the route are free to do so if the bilateral allows them to. Being first to fly a route and establishing yourself is not illegal, unethical or wrong in any way.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
If these entities cannot be meddled with then governments have no place signing bilateral agreements.

Wrong. The governments agree on the framework, allowing flights between countries and setting the maximum capacity etc etc. Look at it this way. I get a tourist visa to travel to Sydney for Christmas. If I cannot find a flight that suits my time preference, my budget or no flight at all, the Australian government that granted me permission to visit the country has no way of finding me a flight that suits my needs. They also cannot tell the owner of the hotel that has the room I want to lower the price so that I can go. All they have done was allow me to visit the country. If I cannot arrange for that to happen due to budget constraints or lack of availability of flights and hotels, it is my problem. I cannot then go to the Greek government and tell them to stop allowing Australians in the country!

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
Look at EK in Germany being denied flights to Berlin and their continuing spat with Canada to name but two?

EK's problem with Germany and Canada is that those countries will not agree to increase the capacity already set by existing bilateral agreements. Neither Germany nor Canada have broken any of the terms that the UAE and those governments have signed under the bilateral agreements that exist.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
Look at Britain or LHR (whichever is in control, it always seem to be fluid to suit an argument),

No it is not fluid, it has been pointed out to you which entity controls what exactly multiple times.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
offering slots that BA wouldn't even piss on then saying that the airport is full.

If BA doesn't want slots on offer for times that do not suit their scheduling, they are right to not even "piss on them". BA will pay whatever is asked to lease slots from other airlines (oh yes, BA leases slots from others too!) if they really want to have them. Slots are unavailable or too expensive for specific times of the day, you can't afford to get your hands on some, too bad.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 11:13 pm

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 124):
Definition of victim: One who is harmed by or made to suffer from an act, circumstance, agency, or condition

BA has been directly harmed as a result of the actions of the Nigerian government. Their capacity on the route, and thus their profit potential has been significantly diminished. That is enough to constitute harm. Ergo, BA is a victim.

Again i am scratching my head to see where BA is a victim. It will still make money on 3 flights per week. It is a bit inconvenienced (which is the intention of the threat, I would hope and not an attempt to get a bribe). BA would still make money if it flew from LGW. Not as much maybe but it would make it work. It is a mighty airline with great personnel.

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 124):
Nope. The UK government is merely providing the framework for the airlines to establish air services.

That's tantamount to saying that the government has every right to dictate when my store opens and closes and what prices I charge for all of the products sold in my store, just because they built the road that leads there.

Then it appears that it is different in Nigeria. And the government there is pushing for a bigger slice of the LHR cake on behalf of Arik. You might not like the tactics but that is what is happening. I like this very much because it looks like an African nation is standing up. It is upsetting a lot of you on this site but hey it's happening.

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 125):
In the mean time, other respectable airlines that can not find slots at LHR are looking at LGW like Korean Air, Sri Lankan... They are not balck mailing BA or the UK for the lack of slots and they are not crying racism...

I don't now if this is true and I definitely don't know that this dispute is all about racism.

Quoting lewis (Reply 126):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
They've exploited a gap in the market for so long that it occurs to many of you as the norm.

Other airlines that want to fly the route are free to do so if the bilateral allows them to. Being first to fly a route and establishing yourself is not illegal, unethical or wrong in any way.

I agree

Quoting lewis (Reply 126):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
If these entities cannot be meddled with then governments have no place signing bilateral agreements.

Wrong. The governments agree on the framework, allowing flights between countries and setting the maximum capacity etc etc. Look at it this way.

Oh ok then. So it would be within the governments remit to allow certain flights and at certain times, and given suitable notice, change them where necessary. I mean being first to fly doesn't give you legal rights or ownership of a slot or time does it? Or does it?

Quoting lewis (Reply 126):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
Look at Britain or LHR (whichever is in control, it always seem to be fluid to suit an argument),

No it is not fluid, it has been pointed out to you which entity controls what exactly multiple times.

Well then equally whoever controls the slots and overlooks the "framework" in Nigeria can adjust slots and times, so long as they do not alter the agreement. So BA could make an application from LGW to make up the frequencies. Nigeria would be breaking the agreement if they did not consider the application favourably.

Quoting lewis (Reply 126):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 123):
offering slots that BA wouldn't even piss on then saying that the airport is full.

If BA doesn't want slots on offer for times that do not suit their scheduling, they are right to not even "piss on them". BA will pay whatever is asked to lease slots from other airlines (oh yes, BA leases slots from others too!) if they really want to have them. Slots are unavailable or too expensive for specific times of the day, you can't afford to get your hands on some, too bad.

Incredulous. Arik's worth is less than BA's weekly fuel bill per week, give or take a few pennies. Yet most on here sound like Arik is doing BA a huge disservice and victimising poor iddy biddy BA that wouldn't harm a fly. They know full well it isn't a level playing field and have playing ball downhill with Nigerian carriers have to shoot uphill.

I mean how much of a victim is it really? BD raise the lease rate 50% to Arik making it unprofitable to use, then BA announce that is it taking over BD. Actions of a victim or those of an aggressor? Or total coincidence.

I say it again. Something stinks and it needs sorting.
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Wed Nov 09, 2011 11:22 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
I am sure it is apropros nothing mate. It would be terrible as Arik Air's A340's from LOS are planes operated, maintained and owned by a European company. Equally, Arik Air has had fewer safety incidents than squeaky clean BA.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arik_Air
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_airways

You're comparing an airline that has been around a few years with one that has been around for decades and decades. Whilst factually correct, it is statistically misleading.


Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
They've exploited a gap in the market for so long that it occurs to many of you as the norm.

BA have provided a consistent service to Nigeria unlike Nigerian carriers. Perhaps we should be congratulating BA for their services to Nigerian transportation?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 117):
The question is have the Nigerians done anything illegal either? I suspect that is what the governments will need to discuss.

I'm not a legal expert, but the fact that BA alone have been singled out - rather than BA and Virgin - suggests something untoward is going on - especially as this has been reported as a bilateral issue. Why single out BA over something that affects all carriers on the route?


Quoting ebbuk (Reply 119):
What would happen if the bilateral agreement was like-for-like slot allocations?

Then there would be less flights to Nigeria. Arik Air only operate 7 weekly, so BA or VS would only operate 7 weekly. Fares would sky-rocket, and I suspect you would then be accusing BA or VS of exploiting the market when in fact it is the actions of the Nigerian government.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:05 am

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 128):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 110):
They've exploited a gap in the market for so long that it occurs to many of you as the norm.

BA have provided a consistent service to Nigeria unlike Nigerian carriers. Perhaps we should be congratulating BA for their services to Nigerian transportation?

Oh let's give all who work for her a knighthood. Such a noble company. Most other Nigerian carriers (possibly Arik too) have not had an easy time in the industry. Without the slots, the expertise, the government help, (wasn't BA sold by the British government and wasn't it given the Concorde for pennies?) I don't know if the Nigerian government can offer such concessions to Arik, or buy them some new fancy jets and give them away for free.

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 128):
I'm not a legal expert, but the fact that BA alone have been singled out - rather than BA and Virgin - suggests something untoward is going on - especially as this has been reported as a bilateral issue. Why single out BA over something that affects all carriers on the route?

If a government want Britain to listen, threaten to kick BA in the goolies. If a government wants the media, glamour world to listen, then threaten to hit Branson in the chops. Simples

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 128):
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 119):
What would happen if the bilateral agreement was like-for-like slot allocations?

Then there would be less flights to Nigeria. Arik Air only operate 7 weekly, so BA or VS would only operate 7 weekly. Fares would sky-rocket, and I suspect you would then be accusing BA or VS of exploiting the market when in fact it is the actions of the Nigerian government.

Hell yeah. 7 each for BA and VS then only 7 for Arik. Wouldn't you? Not sporting old chap. Simply not cricket.
 
lhr380
Topic Author
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:39 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:23 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 129):
Oh let's give all who work for her a knighthood. Such a noble company. Most other Nigerian carriers (possibly Arik too) have not had an easy time in the industry. Without the slots, the expertise, the government help, (wasn't BA sold by the British government and wasn't it given the Concorde for pennies?) I don't know if the Nigerian government can offer such concessions to Arik, or buy them some new fancy jets and give them away for free.

1. So what if BA was once government owned, it has not been for a long time now (24 years now) and does not get help from the government, no bailouts or Cpt 11 to fall back on.

2. What has Concorde got to do with slots to LOS?

3. Regarding the first line, well, no idea what to say to that line.

4. Regarding Nigerian carriers and the hard time bit. You just need to look at some of the colourful history's to see why they are having/had a hard time.
(The views on this site are my own and no one elses)
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:31 am

If the government really want to help Arik,
They could increase say landing taxes, and then with the money raised 'lend it' out to Arik
to purchase more slots. But this would come at the expense of higher prices for all involved,
and would probably need to be done unilaterally across all landings. Or, for instance, the government
could simply go and guarantee additional Debt for Arik Air.


Next, if the yields on this route are anywhere near as lucrative I know that at one point in history they were
(I suspect Delta and CO on one side may have significantly reduced that for US connecting traffic) Then Arik air,
shouldn't have too much trouble being able to raise the cash from its flights. My guess is they're not quite the gold
mine they used to be.

I can tell you one thing for sure. BA will NOT give up slots. If I were running BA this would set a dangerous precedent. I would rather dump the city altogether then be seen to be giving into this demand. There are plenty of other cities it can use these slots on.
 
lewis
Posts: 3586
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:09 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
I like this very much because it looks like an African nation is standing up. It is upsetting a lot of you on this site but hey it's happening.

Standing up to what? From all I have read, I cannot see how the British Government or BA are bullying Arik. I can see though how the Nigerian government is trying to bully BA. You keep talking about the African nation, about David and Goliath and then go ahead saying that you do not see it as the UK being racist. What if instead of Arik we were talking about another airline, like JAT for example. Would you consider that fair game? Why should a nation be given preferential treatment for slots of all things just because it happens to be in Africa?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
Oh ok then. So it would be within the governments remit to allow certain flights and at certain times, and given suitable notice, change them where necessary.

If that was clearly worded in the bilateral then yes. That would be very restrictive though and coming from someone that has mentioned "free market" a couple of times it is kind of ironic.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
I mean being first to fly doesn't give you legal rights or ownership of a slot or time does it? Or does it?

If an airline has ownership of the slots then yes. If an airline can keep up with the monetary demands of the owner of the slot in order to keep leasing it, again yes. I don't see how slots can be forcibly be taken away or given somewhere, unless they remain unused.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
Well then equally whoever controls the slots and overlooks the "framework" in Nigeria can adjust slots and times, so long as they do not alter the agreement. So BA could make an application from LGW to make up the frequencies. Nigeria would be breaking the agreement if they did not consider the application favourably.

I doubt that the bilateral gives the UK or Nigerian governments the power to dictate the airport where a flight originates from. Why are you pressing the matter of BA moving half their flights to LGW so much. Why should BA be made to do that? What will Arik get out of it? Once again, it is Arik's inability to secure the slots they want, nobody is not allowing them to fly to LHR!
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:12 am

Quoting lhr380 (Reply 130):
1. So what if BA was once government owned, it has not been for a long time now (24 years now) and does not get help from the government, no bailouts or Cpt 11 to fall back on.

2. What has Concorde got to do with slots to LOS?

It's had 24 yrs of making money without having to pay back anywhere near what it actually cost. The vast profits skimmed of Concorde services have helped set up BA's coffers. Yet Arik Air never enjoyed such subsidy by the Nigerian government and has to service it's full historical costs from income. I am sure if it had been subsidised then a 50% hike in landing fees wouldn't mean a thing and it would happily pay. But the situation is very different. BA wants everything incluing BD and has asked it to increase it's fees to Arik, a blatant and cynical move by "vicim" BA.

Then you wonder why so many carriers from Nigeria have not made it? I don't call that a level playing field. I am of the belief that the Nigerian government has to protect Nigerian interests. In this instance, I agree with this stance.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:44 am

Quoting lewis (Reply 132):
Standing up to what? From all I have read, I cannot see how the British Government or BA are bullying Arik. I can see though how the Nigerian government is trying to bully BA. You keep talking about the African nation, about David and Goliath and then go ahead saying that you do not see it as the UK being racist. What if instead of Arik we were talking about another airline, like JAT for example. Would you consider that fair game? Why should a nation be given preferential treatment for slots of all things just because it happens to be in Africa?

Because they are inherently disadvantaged against their more established Western counterparts.The very same argument that saw Airbus receive preferential government loans to enter the civil aviation market to compete against Boeing.

I mean why should Greece receive a bailout from anyone? They spent the money gots to pay it back. I suspect they got the bailout because without it Greece would remain uncompetitive, uneconomical for too long. Likewise if African carriers are expected to compete on an equal footing as BA, they will never survive. I am up for the status quo being changed and giving the David (Arik in this instance) a chance. I would have hoped a Greek of all people would have seen the synergies in the argument that without some kind of assistance, there is little chance of survival.

Quoting lewis (Reply 132):
That would be very restrictive though and coming from someone that has mentioned "free market" a couple of times it is kind of ironic.

Please read my responses clearly. A bilateral agreement clearly restricts free market by imposing limits. Even I know that.

Quoting lewis (Reply 132):
If an airline can keep up with the monetary demands of the owner of the slot in order to keep leasing it, again yes.

Well if for operational reasons, certain slots would have to be withdrawn, but could be reinstated if certain conditions were met.

Quoting lewis (Reply 132):
Why are you pressing the matter of BA moving half their flights to LGW so much. Why should BA be made to do that? What will Arik get out of it? Once again, it is Arik's inability to secure the slots they want, nobody is not allowing them to fly to LHR!

Sorry you are a bit late to the conversation. I suggested that BA, rather than run to the UK government and cry like a baby, it could make up for the lost slots and apply for flights from LGW for example. They could use any other UK airport as well.


I am going round and round in circles. Saying the same thing. It doesn't hurt for a small player to ask to eat from the master's table. When it is fed scraps, Arik has upped the stakes and involved the Nigerian government to get involved we shall see what happens. We can use analogies till we are blue in the face.

There are two sides to an argument or a bilateral agreement and what it will take is some sitting down and sorting. Let's hope they do this without carrying out the threat. If the Nigerians have to, I am with them.
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:47 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 133):
I am sure if it had been subsidised then a 50% hike in landing fees wouldn't mean a thing and it would happily pay. But the situation is very different. BA wants everything incluing BD and has asked it to increase it's fees to Arik, a blatant and cynical move by "vicim" BA.

Okay a few things wrong. Firstly it's a slot, it's not landing fees. They are different and everybody who lands there regardless of the time of day is going to be paying them at the same rate. slots however are determined on a supply and demand basis. This happens at busy airports right around the world. Arik would be up against this at JFK also.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 133):
Yet Arik Air never enjoyed such subsidy by the Nigerian government and has to service it's full historical costs from income

You may need to have a closer look at the current competition BA faces. American carriers have costs about 10-12% cheaper thanks to their recent spate of forced bankruptcy restructuring and mergers, and heading east, they're up against the Gulf carriers that have costs estimated to be between 25-30% cheaper. This is in an industry that typically only enjoys a 5% profit margin at best. That is a VERY hard fight for BA. Also BA actually has the least slots at it's home airport of any major carrier in terms of a percentage of takeoff's and departures. What this means its its much much easier for the likes of KLM, with 5 massive runways, to add frequency at its hub and pick people up from places like Manchester and take them to places like Manila. BA can't do that. It literally can't waste any slots flying additional smaller aircraft places to connect to additional long haul flights, hence certain destinations get served from LGW, missing out on the connectivity of the hub, and putting them at a huge commercial disadvantage compared with its european competitors. On top of that, being based in London means BA is gonna have more wage pressure on it than any other european major. It costs more to live in London these days than it does in the once notoriously expensive (and still not exactly cheap) Stockholm. Once again making it tougher on BA. Just look at the price of renting a small flat anywhere in London, and then compare that with Amsterdam, Frankfurt etc. It means everything from baggage handling to catering costs more to do in London. Yet if BA tries to fly a passenger say Manchester-LHR-Jo'berg can it charge more than KLM flying that same PAX MAN-AMS-JNB? Simple answer. Not really. But KLM can do it at a lower cost. As can Air France and Lufthansa.

As to BA enjoying subsidies from the UK government a billion years ago, it might come as a shock to you but like many government owned enterprises it wasn't exactly booming it's whole life. There were long periods, despite whatever concorde revenue came in the door that BA was struggling and inefficient. It was hardly doing "an Emirates' and enjoying making profits because the government made sure they could borrow a truckload of cash very cheap. Also BA had an obligation to serve "the Empire" and was forced to fly all kinds of crazy routings that had very little hope of ever making a profit, purely for political reasons. It hasn't been a walk in the park for BA. It's been a very long hard fight.
 
lewis
Posts: 3586
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:09 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 134):
I mean why should Greece receive a bailout from anyone? They spent the money gots to pay it back.

Quite irrelevant to the discussion we are having.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 134):

Sorry you are a bit late to the conversation. I suggested that BA, rather than run to the UK government and cry like a baby, it could make up for the lost slots and apply for flights from LGW for example. They could use any other UK airport as well.

OK lets say its done, half of BA's flights move to LGW. What's in it for Arik?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 134):
A bilateral agreement clearly restricts free market by imposing limits.

So instead of having a simple bilateral that only restricts number of flights, you'd rather have a bilateral that dictates to BA what origin airport they use, what times they can fly etc?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 134):
When it is fed scraps, Arik

For the nth time, Arik is allowed to fly to wherever they want as long as they can get the required slots. It has nothing to do with being fed scraps. Not being able to afford a slot or the fees imposed by an airport has nothing to do with the government and there is nothing the British government can do about it.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 134):
Well if for operational reasons, certain slots would have to be withdrawn, but could be reinstated if certain conditions were met.

Blackmailing is not "operational reasons".

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 134):
I suggested that BA, rather than run to the UK government and cry like a baby, it could make up for the lost slots and apply for flights from LGW for example.

You could say the same for Arik. We have explained this to you over and over. Based on the bilateral signed by both governments, the Nigerian government does not have the right to limit BA's landings so they are the ones breaking the agreement. BA is not running crying at the British government, they are just addressing whoever is in charge of the bilateral, which in this case is the government.

Bilateral = agreement between governments (Diplomatic)
LHR = private entity
Slots = controlled by private entity(ies)
 
hoons90
Posts: 3816
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 10:15 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:48 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
Again i am scratching my head to see where BA is a victim

Let's do a simple test.

As a result of the actions of the Nigerian government, has British Airways received harm? Yes.

Therefore, British Airways is a victim. Whether or not you agree that BA is a victim is an issue of semantics. However, the fact remains that British Airways has received harm, and one that receives harm is, by definition, a victim.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
It will still make money on 3 flights per week. It is a bit inconvenienced

57% loss of revenue potential is considered a bit of an 'inconvenience'?

Then I guess that Arik Air's inability to reach LHR can be considered as a minor annoyance to them. See the double standard there?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
Then it appears that it is different in Nigeria. And the government there is pushing for a bigger slice of the LHR cake on behalf of Arik. You might not like the tactics but that is what is happening.

Sorry, but the cake is sold out. There's no more cake. Arik can try buying a part of someone else's slice, but the price is up to the seller.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
I like this very much because it looks like an African nation is standing up. It is upsetting a lot of you on this site but hey it's happening.

I think it's actually practicing third-world politics by deflecting responsibility and pressuring other countries to solve Nigeria's own problems. Again, it's not the UK's, nor is it BA's fault that Arik Air cannot afford the LHR slots that they have been offered.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
Oh ok then. So it would be within the governments remit to allow certain flights and at certain times, and given suitable notice, change them where necessary.

That's not what the U.K. government did. There can be no logical or fair counteraction on the part of the Nigerian government.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 127):
Well then equally whoever controls the slots and overlooks the "framework" in Nigeria can adjust slots and times, so long as they do not alter the agreement.

Slot control at certain airports should be viewed separately from bilateral agreements, as different agents are involved in their conceptions and enforcement. Even then, restrictions have to be within reason. LHR is restrictive simply because demand far exceeds capacity and infrastructure has reached its limit. It's not a matter of the UK government pulling a few strings to get Arik Air the slots at LHR that they desire at the price that they dictate. They cannot just grab a magic wand and create extra space out of nothing. LOS airport is not in the same situation, so slot restrictions for BA cannot be justified in the same regard.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 133):
where near what it actually cost. The vast profits skimmed of Concorde services have helped set up BA's coffers. Yet Arik Air never enjoyed such subsidy by the Nigerian government and has to service it's full historical costs from income. I am sure if it had been subsidised then a 50% hike in landing fees wouldn't mean a thing and it would happily pay.

Arik Air is not deserving of any sort of special entitlement just because BA has had a less tumultuous financial history. If I was born into a wealthy family, nothing makes it right for someone to forcibly take away half of my possessions later in life and have it redistributed to less advantaged people. Whether or not I become charitable is entirely my prerogative.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 133):

Then you wonder why so many carriers from Nigeria have not made it? I don't call that a level playing field. I am of the belief that the Nigerian government has to protect Nigerian interests. In this instance, I agree with this stance.

Perhaps an airline's success has a lot more to do with taking responsibility for their own financial state instead of finding reasons to blame other parties for its misfortunes.

There are plenty of examples of successful airlines that have started off with limited resources from developing nations. One does not need to look further than Kenya Airways, TACA, Cebu Pacific, etc.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 134):
Because they are inherently disadvantaged against their more established Western counterparts.

It's not the LHR airport authority that has to take responsibility for that. If Arik Air feels inherently disadvantaged, perhaps they should find more constructive ways to improve their competitiveness.

I can't just walk up to the front desk of a hotel and expect to get a presidential suite for the price of a standard room just because I don't have the money because I come from a disadvantaged background. It's entirely their prerogative whether or not to feel sorry for me and offer me that room as a goodwill gesture. I cannot feel entitled to it.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 134):
I suggested that BA, rather than run to the UK government and cry like a baby, it could make up for the lost slots and apply for flights from LGW for example. They could use any other UK airport as well.

I thought that the plan was to restrict all BA flights to LOS regardless of origin. In that case, how would your proposition be feasible?
Flown: 2L 7C 9E 9L AA AB AC AF AY AZ BA BR BX B6 CA CO CP CX DL EK EY JL KE KL LA LH LX MQ NW OZ PD RW SQ TG TP TR TS US WG WN WS XE XJ
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:45 am

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 137):

I thought that the plan was to restrict all BA flights to LOS regardless of origin. In that case, how would your proposition be feasible?

I don't know what the intention is, as I have said many times before. Only time will tell. It's well known that change causes upset. Let us all wait and see.
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:27 am

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/11/f...-face-off-cameron-writes-jonathan/

An interesting article. The British PM has written to his Nigerian counterpart regarding the issue - so it is being handled by the highest level of government.

It is a shame that the article is littered with factual inaccuracies such as BA withdrew the slots because of a sharp increase in passengers on the Abuja - London route.

Arik Air reduced capacity to a 738 so how could there have been a sharp increase? Also, the slot was BD's not BA's.
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:40 am

You know If i were running BA and they pulled this stunt on me, I'd fly to the nearest neighboring country, charter some other airline to link it to my flights (this is how Qantas got around the ban on flying to JNB, they simply flew to Harare instead and got the PAX to connect) and then offer double miles for the inconvenience. If it works then double the frequency. Simply put people flying XYZ fare are entitled to a connecting flight on carrier ZZZ connecting to this service. Then bribe all the big wigs in Nigeria with complementary upgrades for a limited time, and then watch Arik get squeezed out of the market.

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 139):
It is a shame that the article is littered with factual inaccuracies such as BA withdrew the slots because of a sharp increase in passengers on the Abuja - London route.

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story?
 
lhr380
Topic Author
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:39 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:08 am

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 133):
It's had 24 yrs of making money without having to pay back anywhere near what it actually cost.

And, not the airlines fault it was government owned, it had a good start in life yes, why blame BA for the fact Arik did not?

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 133):
The vast profits skimmed of Concorde services

You mean the vast amounts of money BA spent on Concorde you mean to keep it flying and fuelled? Have a look at this from the nice people at ConcordeSST
I actually learned something from reading it.

Quote:
How much profit did Concorde make for British Airways?

On average Concorde made and operating profit of £30-50 Million a year for British Airways in the boom years where many passengers were travelling first class. British Airways reportedly received £1.75 Billion in revenue for Concorde services against an operating cost of around £1 Billion. Air France made a much smaller profit.

Did the British Government give Concorde to British Airways for one pound UK sterling?

Claims in the Meida that BA paid £1.00 for the Concorde fleet or that it was given in trust are wrong.
British Airways predecessors (BOAC) paid the manufacturers more than £155 million for the Concorde fleet and over the following 27 years of operation British Airways has invested more than £1 billion on the aircraft. The Concorde book value was written down to nil in 1979, by the then labour governmanet, and subsequent capital investments in the Concorde programme to 1983 were also written off to nil.

In March 1984 the government ended its involvement with Concorde when British Airways assumed full responsibility for Concorde support costs. The British Airways Board paid £16.5 million to acquire the government’s stock of spare parts and was released from the profit share scheme under which the government collected 80 percent of Concorde operating surpluses. Within this agreement BA aquired the 2 Concordes that had been placed at its disposal in 1980 for abook value of £1 withing the £16.5M sum.
Quoting ebbuk (Reply 133):
But the situation is very different. BA wants everything incluing BD and has asked it to increase it's fees to Arik, a blatant and cynical move by "vicim" BA.

Ok, having now made that statement, back it up with proof please???
(The views on this site are my own and no one elses)
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:41 pm

Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 139):
It is a shame that the article is littered with factual inaccuracies such as BA withdrew the slots because of a sharp increase in passengers on the Abuja - London route.

Arik Air reduced capacity to a 738 so how could there have been a sharp increase? Also, the slot was BD's not BA's.

BD is being bought by BA is it not? Subject to scrutiny by authorities. There is a mention of the six slots being used by BA almost immediately. I don't what new routes BA has started recently and whether or not it is factually inaccurate. Additionally does this "littering of factual inaccuracies", negate from the issue that the Nigerians have brought to a head?

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 140):
You know If i were running BA and they pulled this stunt on me, I'd fly to the nearest neighboring country, charter some other airline to link it to my flights (this is how Qantas got around the ban on flying to JNB, they simply flew to Harare instead and got the PAX to connect) and then offer double miles for the inconvenience. If it works then double the frequency. Simply put people flying XYZ fare are entitled to a connecting flight on carrier ZZZ connecting to this service. Then bribe all the big wigs in Nigeria with complementary upgrades for a limited time, and then watch Arik get squeezed out of the market.

Yes you could do that. Or alternatively you could sit down with all the authorities concerned to thrash through a deal that benefits all and not just one. It is a pity Nigeria has had to resort to this to at least get a conversation about the dynamics of the agreement and the reality of it.

Quoting lhr380 (Reply 141):
And, not the airlines fault it was government owned, it had a good start in life yes, why blame BA for the fact Arik did not?

Calm down dear! No one is blaming precious BA as far as I can tell. Nigeria is taking action to protect its national carriers. They are using the BA allocation as a bargaining tool. Stick to the topic please.


With regards to the profits on the concord, AFIK, No government has written down Arik's plan value to nil. Equally, £1.7B revenue less £1B costs equals £75 million profit on that plane alone. I am certain Arik or any other Nigerian carrier would kill for that kind of profit. Unfortunately, they couldn't get even close to it with slot mess as it its now. The Nigerians want a change and have escalated the issue upwards.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:46 pm

The article below explains Nigeria's position in the matter very clearly. I understand that the source is a Nigerian paper.

Quote fair use

"FAAN MD explains decision on BA



Uriesi, who spoke in an interview on AIT’s Kakaki programme, said the Federal Government was not comfortable with the manner Arik Air was edged out of Heathrow on its Abuja-London operations, saying the fact that the slots denied Arik were given to British Airways angered the government.

According to him, though the issue of slot allocation at Heathrow was determined by commercial considerations, the sudden increase in the cost of slots to Arik at the airport gave the impression of a deliberate plot to muscle the airline out of the route.

He said failure of government to take action might spell doom for the country’s airlines in future, as other foreign airlines would be encouraged to do a similar thing to a Nigerian carrier.

He said: “When you have a bilateral air services agreement between two countries, it is about accessing your market, it is about exchange to that market. The reality of the situation is that the government provides the framework for the access to that market.

“The United Kingdom has 21 frequencies, which gives room for British carriers to access our market 21 times a week, and Nigerian carriers can access the British market 21 times a week, it is all about exchange to access market.

“Now, on the side of the British carriers, it is exchange to your market and what I will exchange for it into your own market. The agreement sort of specifies how that access will work out. For the British carriers, they are utilising the entire 21 slots as they have two carriers, BA and VAA, but on the Nigerian side, only Arik Air is exercising that right.

Rights of indigenous carriers

“It is not really about Arik Air, it is about Nigerian designated carriers, which happens to be Arik Air, which has seven frequencies from Lagos to Heathrow, but a couple of weeks ago, with its five slots a week from Abuja into Heathrow, its slot got taken rather suddenly in the middle of October, they were left high and dry.

“To a large extent, it is one thing to have 21 frequencies, but if you do not have slot at the airport, it is generally about trying to defend a Nigerian carrier. I only want to de-emphasize the Arik part of it: it is about defending Nigerian designated carrier; it is trying to protect the rights of indigenous carriers.

“In the bilateral air services agreement, it is a convoluted arrangement that we have two British carriers at the detriment of one Nigerian carrier. It is one thing to have frequency into the airport without a slot, which makes it difficult. It is good for government to protect the rights of indigenous carriers.

“Slots into Heathrow is probably the most valuable commodity in the air transport industry, and there is a lot of acts associated with access to Heathrow. There are so many countries across the globe, many countries engage the British authorities to get slots into Heathrow.”

“Arik Air quietly went to negotiate five slots a week into Heathrow from Abuja, paying about £600,000 to have the opportunity to lease the slots, and the airline was paying about £52,000 per month for the operations, but all of a sudden, the British authorities informed Arik Air that from the end of October, it will not be able to lease slots to the airline.

“Coincidentally, it turns out that British Airways bought those slots, and even more and began to use six slots about the time Arik Air was elbowed out. There is a whole trade of slots going on in Heathrow, it is almost an essential commodity in the industry.

“One thing is to be able to access the leasing of slots. You can even buy them out right, then they become yours, the other thing is to show a competitive arrangement to elbow some one out of the market, but I think what is important for us to stress is that a lot of people are watching this.

“Other carriers and their owner nations , if a Nigerian registered carrier , could be elbowed out of that market , it means that other Nigerian carriers could be edged out of any other route by the authorities other than the British market. The access to the Nigerian market is prime for British Airways , so in elbowing out Arik Air out of Abuja – London is enough indication that British Airways will have to face some consequences."

source: http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/11/f...-face-off-cameron-writes-jonathan/

Go for it Nigeria, stand up for your rights!
 
lhr380
Topic Author
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:39 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:46 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 142):
Calm down dear! No one is blaming precious BA as far as I can tell. Nigeria is taking action to protect its national carriers. They are using the BA allocation as a bargaining tool. Stick to the topic please.

Im quiet calm thanks, I was responding to your post.
(The views on this site are my own and no one elses)
 
ba319-131
Posts: 8318
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:06 pm

“Arik Air quietly went to negotiate five slots a week into Heathrow from Abuja, paying about £600,000 to have the opportunity to lease the slots, and the airline was paying about £52,000 per month for the operations, but all of a sudden, the British authorities informed Arik Air that from the end of October, it will not be able to lease slots to the airline.

- I doubt it was the British Authorities, it will be the slop owner.

It's all PR rubbish.
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
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2639
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:42 pm

The joke about all of this is both airlines could end up at Gatwick if they're not careful now they have governments involved in this. VS could end up the big winner here.
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:10 pm

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 142):
BD is being bought by BA is it not? Subject to scrutiny by authorities.

That is irrelevant. The increase in leasing costs of those slots has taken place before confirmation that BA will purchase BD. The slot issue is therefore between BD and W3 until such a time as the takeover of BD has taken place.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 142):
Additionally does this "littering of factual inaccuracies", negate from the issue that the Nigerians have brought to a head?

It does negate from the issue because it spreads misconceptions which are not constructive to solving the issue. The issues raised must be based upon facts and not emotions or hearsay.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 142):
There is a mention of the six slots being used by BA almost immediately.

It is hard to know. BA have recently purchased 6 daily slot pairs from BD - I don't know if they are referring to that. Arik Air - I believe operated 5 weekly to Abuja which would mean 10 weekly slots in all (or 5 weekly slot pairs) so the figures don't add up.

If it so happens that BA have purchased the slots that Arik Air were using, so what? A commercial decision made between two private entities in a foreign country is the business of those two parties involved only.
 
B747-4U3
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 8:08 am

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:14 pm

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 145):

“Arik Air quietly went to negotiate five slots a week into Heathrow from Abuja, paying about £600,000 to have the opportunity to lease the slots, and the airline was paying about £52,000 per month for the operations, but all of a sudden, the British authorities informed Arik Air that from the end of October, it will not be able to lease slots to the airline.

- I doubt it was the British Authorities, it will be the slop owner.

It's all PR rubbish.

The accussed has ranged from British Airways to restricting access, to British Midland restricting access, to the British government restricting access via British Midland (completely ignoring the fact that BD is a private entity owned by Lufthansa). The reporters do not seem to understand the role of ACL.

It is this sloppy reporting that removes all credibility from the action that the government has taken. If you are going to take such action, at least get a consistent story and make it factually accurate. Otherwise it will get ripped apart.
 
lhr380
Topic Author
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:39 pm

RE: BA May Have To Cut Flights On LOS Route

Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:17 pm

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 146):
The joke about all of this is both airlines could end up at Gatwick if they're not careful now they have governments involved in this.

Both airlines?
(The views on this site are my own and no one elses)

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