Quoting A388 (Reply 20): I do hope Caribbean Airlines gets the flight as it will mean nice aircraft photos in SXM in their hummingbird livery over Mahoo Beach

BW already serve SXM and have done so for their entire existence. SXM is served on the POS - KIN runs. Predecessor BWIA started flying to SXM in the 1980s, linking KIN in a route on which JM kept a codeshare for many years.

On the topic of BW and the LGW route, I have always had my doubts as to whether it was a wise decision on their part to restart London services. BW of course inherited the LHR route from BWIA in 2007 but the predecessors found it difficult going notwithstanding a POS monopoly. The trouble was that POS was and is a smaller market from the UK than many other islands - and BWIA ended up head-to-head with BA and VS in destinations such as BGI, UVF and ANU. BWIA were also stuck with a fleet of A340s which were largely a holdover from the Category 2 days of T&T (2001 - 2004) but which the airline could not afford to replace and could not easily be used on other routes. As a result the route lost money and BW cut it shortly after starting up in 2007.

With BW's withdrawal came BA who retained a BW codeshare on the LGW services. At that time too POS traffic increased significantly from the UK due to increasing business links. The thing is that much of the business traffic, especially that which is UK based, would preferentially use BA if there were a choice of airlines and so BW's arrival may have made little impact into that. BW's start in LGW in 2012 was clearly aimed at the VFR market and POS based travellers - but as mentioned the VFR market to the UK from most Caribbean markets (Jamaica being the main exception) is static if not declining.

Now we see that VS have pulled TAB. In comparing BA and VS services from this beautiful island with an unfortunately troubled tourist industry, we can see that BA have advantages which VS did not have. BA is strong in POS and wants to preserve their market share so have tried to avoid the public relations fallout which could arise from a TAB withdrawal. Alongside this their TAB flights effectively provide back-up capacity to POS which could be useful at peak times. With revenue guarantees being offered for TAB (not POS) services, BA are in a win-win position. VS had no interest in POS and so did not have the same considerations as BA which meant that pulling TAB was easier for them. The fact that VS have significant DL investment now and are being reviewed - a review which has seen them drop SYD too - also needs to be remembered in the context of this pullout.

Trintocan.

Trintocan I know Caribbean Airlines flies to SXM, as the discussion was about Caribbean Airlines flying from SXM to London I meant to see them fly their 767 to SXM. That will be something nice to see over Mahoo Beach 

A388

Quoting trintocan (Reply 50):

We all knew that the route was going to be a flop from the beginning. This route was nothing short of politically motivated by a man that should not have been the chairman of the company. When George Nicolas announced the return to LGW sighting, "We would not only fly the small planes but the big ones too" it too the management of CAL by surprise. In that time period the airline was looking for 777 from Egyptair and then had to take the 767 from LAN as the operations of 777 would have been a disaster in the making.
To make matters worse, the board was told but the former COO there was no way they can get pilots trained to the 767 in time for inauguration, and had to hire expats; he was demoted because the board insist on getting the route to "stick it" to the last board for political reasons. Then when his prediction came through the board had to wet lease a 767 from Omni for almost 7 months to operate the route, losing millions of dollars in the process.

CAL can fill their 767 to LGW, the problem, however cost is outstripping revenue as the sub-fleet of 767 plus crews spending days over at LGW, then running the 767 between POS-GEO empty to continue to JFK/YYZ is creating an inefficient operation. So much so that the airline has replaced one GEO-YYZ with a 738.
There was no business case for the route in the first place and IMO the route needs to be cut, the 767 return to the ILFC, pilot retrained to the 737 and use the 737 to fly the GEO-JFK/YYZ routes.

The last board knew that CAL could not have 2 widebodies operating for the sole purpose of longhaul travel. The route adds negative value to the company, sold the LHR slot to BA in return for BA taking over the route with CAL marketing and distributing seats for three years.

Howai not satisfied: CAL to redo report
"Opposition Senator Camille Rob­inson-Regis questioned Howai on whether the Trinidad-to-London route was successfully econo­mical for the airline.
Howai said it has not been pro­fitable and a consultant was hired to evaluate all CAL routes.
He said prior to this, the board had submitted an analytical report to him but he was not pleased with the recommendations.
“Following analysis of the report, I then asked that a specific route analysis be done; I wasn’t satisfied with the suggestions and recommendations which came from the first evaluation,” said Howai.
This report, he said, should be completed within the month"
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/...CAL-to-redo-report--253983901.html

Quoting caribbean484 (Reply 52): CAL can fill their 767 to LGW, the problem, however cost is outstripping revenue as the sub-fleet of 767 plus crews spending days over at LGW, then running the 767 between POS-GEO empty to continue to JFK/YYZ is creating an inefficient operation. So much so that the airline has replaced one GEO-YYZ with a 738. There was no business case for the route in the first place and IMO the route needs to be cut, the 767 return to the ILFC, pilot retrained to the 737 and use the 737 to fly the GEO-JFK/YYZ routes. The last board knew that CAL could not have 2 widebodies operating for the sole purpose of longhaul travel. The route adds negative value to the company, sold the LHR slot to BA in return for BA taking over the route with CAL marketing and distributing seats for three years.

Ditto 484. I believe anyone following this forum shouldn't be surprised at this "revelation". Despite Minister Howai's most recent utterings concerning not cutting the LGW route, I still have much confidence in his abilities. I certainly hope that he will revisit that decision.

Quoting trintocan (Reply 50): BWIA were also stuck with a fleet of A340s which were largely a holdover from the Category 2 days of T&T (2001 - 2004) but which the airline could not afford to replace and could not easily be used on other routes. As a result the route lost money and BW cut it shortly after starting up in 2007.

Just to make things a bit clearer; BW always intended on cutting the route upon restarting operations on Jan. 1st, 2007. This was part of the approved master plan when the new BW was launched in Sept. of 2006. The LHR route stayed on until May of 2007 when the leases on the A340s conveniently expired. I remember BW's A340 drivers being rumoured to receive lucrative six month contracts to operate the buses during that short period. BA began service to POS from LGW in March of 2007, thus, for 2 months or so, POS had service to both LHR and LGW.

Quoting caribbean484 (Reply 52):

If they cut the 767 then they will need more 738s. If you look at their schedule for this summer the 738s are maxed out and that is with 767s 5x to GEO from JFK.

Quoting BW424 (Reply 53):

The response about not canceling the LGW route was in response to a question on it. If they said that they planned to cancel it then loads would have tumbled. What is telling is the comment that ALL routes are under review. So who knows. Come Sept an announcement might be that the route is discontinued from Nov and all passengers will be accommodated on BA.

Do either of you know how B6 is doing on the JFK and whether it has begun to impact BW?

Quoting BW424 (Reply 53): Just to make things a bit clearer; BW always intended on cutting the route upon restarting operations on Jan. 1st, 2007. This was part of the approved master plan when the new BW was launched in Sept. of 2006. The LHR route stayed on until May of 2007 when the leases on the A340s conveniently expired.

In part BW's retention of LHR at the beginning was a result of the Cricket World Cup being held in the West Indies during early 2007. BW closed the route immediately after the tournament ended.

Quoting A388 (Reply 51): Trintocan I know Caribbean Airlines flies to SXM, as the discussion was about Caribbean Airlines flying from SXM to London I meant to see them fly their 767 to SXM. That will be something nice to see over Mahoo Beach

Actually I thought so too all along! Yes that would make a great sight, a majestic 767-300 in BW colours coming in over Maho Beach! Cameras at the ready...

Agreed with everyone else here, it's time for BW to face reality and close this LGW route. Pride by itself does not bring profit and one cannot wantonly spend precious resources on services which bring no positive returns. It is interesting that on another thread there are again gripes about BW dropping some tourist-oriented services to MBJ - again it's the same principle. Those routes drained a lot of money and caused JM to end up in such a parlous state, why do we keep flogging those matters over and over? VS bit the bullet and cut TAB and SYD as they lost money, BW just need to do the same.

Trintocan.

Quoting guyanam (Reply 54): The response about not canceling the LGW route was in response to a question on it. If they said that they planned to cancel it then loads would have tumbled. What is telling is the comment that ALL routes are under review. So who knows. Come Sept an announcement might be that the route is discontinued from Nov and all passengers will be accommodated on BA. Do either of you know how B6 is doing on the JFK and whether it has beg

Guyanam, yes, I'm fully aware of the fact that his statement concerning not cancelling the route is in response to a question. It was a 3 part question asked in the Senate by a member of the opposition.

After watching the segment on TV (Howai's response), I must say that he was very very careful, somewhat subdued, in the response he delivered. The key opening phrase concerning the cancellation of the LGW route "As of now, no decision has been made...", suggests that the decision to remove LGW is still there on receipt of the report.

Quoting guyanam (Reply 54): If they cut the 767 then they will need more 738s. If you look at their schedule for this summer the 738s are maxed out and that is with 767s 5x to GEO from JFK.

I was told by credible sources that utilization of the 738 fleet can be better. I was also told that on the current and upcoming schedule, there's always a spare 738 available. I think if the 767 goes, with the 738 utilization optimized, utilization will be just perfect. Once a management team has been selected, the proposed growth of KIN ops will require more 738s.

As for B6, I've heard that they're doing well. B6 isn't any EZjet, Redjet or FlyJamaica, so I'd expect them to be doing so. They've already started their corporate social responsibility campaign, partnering with a local primary school in North Trinidad.

[Edited 2014-04-05 14:55:54]

Quoting BW424 (Reply 56):

What expansion do they really plan out of KIN? They have arrested their decline in market share, but I haven't seen evidence of an ability to regain much of what they lost. What they need to do is offer civilized departure times to FLL. The 5:45 AM flight is a killer and many seem to complain about it. This coming from people who would rather use them than B6. If there is slack in the system why don't they offer a 7 AM departure instead?

I am skeptical that BW can add a daily 738 on its JFK GEO POS without adding more 738s, and yet guarantee reliable service during the summer. I agree that outside of peak periods there is a degree of under utilization, but not so during the peaks.

Let us hope that they don't take for granted the one market that they dominate (GEO) for dreams of significant growth in KIN.

[Edited 2014-04-05 23:17:02]

Quoting guyanam (Reply 54): Do either of you know how B6 is doing on the JFK and whether it has begun to impact BW?

Looking at the loads in the GDS they are doing well, but we have to remember we are in the busy period still and both airlines are enjoying a bit of success in getting their flights out with good loads. The real truth will be seen when September-November period comes.

For POS the period between Carnival to Easter is a busy travel period and then from June till Labor day is considered the high season. The trough will be in January, May and mostly September-November just before the Thanksgiving holidays leading to the high December period.

My concern is not really NYC but the FLL route where South Florida market is small to POS.

For example B6 forward booking on that route was terrible, so last week the airline decided to price the route from US$130 one way, airfare only which is $0.079 per seat mile to US$70 which is now at $0.044 per seat mile.
Using the same period of time for a flight between FLL-KIN B6 prices the route at base US$95 which is US$0.15 per seat mile.
Or FLL-NAS at US$70 or US0.36 per seat mile.
TO make the point looking at FLL-BOG almost the same distance to POS and a larger market, they price it at US$130 or US$0.082 per seat mile
This is the time period from May 5th 2014.

So it tells me that B6 is trying to dilute the market with unprofitable yields to fight AA and BW in a small market that we already saw some year ago NK dropped.

Quoting guyanam (Reply 57): I am skeptical that BW can add a daily 738 on its JFK GEO POS without adding more 738s, and yet guarantee reliable service during the summer. I agree that outside of peak periods there is a degree of under utilization, but not so during the peaks. Let us hope that they don't take for granted the one market that they dominate (GEO) for dreams of significant growth in KIN.

Actually they can and still have a/c for the busy periods, the problem is that CAL moved a number of senior Pilots from the 737 to the 767 and are yet to fill that gap left in that transition period.

As I mentioned in the other thread in a model of fleet utilization, the 738 are severely underutilized in the off season, with the 767 on the routes.
Even if they use the model and find the slack to be too small they can always lease a 767 from Omni in the peak periods, as they have done for many years.

All they have to do is make the 424/425 run the POS-GEO-JFK-GEO-POS and the same seat capacity would be achievable on a daily basis. Currently the 767 flies 4w and leave POS empty in the off season.

The thing CAL has to look for is optimality in their operations.

[Edited 2014-04-06 12:58:32]

Quoting caribbean484 (Reply 52): CAL can fill their 767 to LGW, the problem, however cost is outstripping revenue as the sub-fleet of 767 plus crews spending days over at LGW, then running the 767 between POS-GEO empty to continue to JFK/YYZ is creating an inefficient operation.

What would be the minimum crew rest time in LGW between POS-LGW and LGW-POS flight?
Because if BW could fly POS-LGW and LGW-POS red-eyes both ways and the crew have enough rest time between flights in LGW, the same B767 might be flown POS-GEO-JFK-GEO-POS daytime 4 times per week and POS-LGW-POS thrice weekly red-eyes both ways and any GEO connecting traffic to/from LGW would be mostly welcome.

Some news across the region

WINAIR discontinue service to Anguilla.
"WINAIR has notified the Anguilla gov't and its handler in Anguilla that WINAIR will be discontinuing air service between St. Maarten – Anguilla – St. Maarten. When planning WINAIR's first quarter schedule to include Anguilla, our partner airline AIR ANTILLES was to lease WINAIR aircraft to operate Anguilla – San Juan - Anguilla which would have assisted in filling void created when American Eagle ceased operations in the Caribbean. It is most unfortunate that regulatory issues have caused Anguilla – San Juan – Anguilla service to be deferred until such time as required regulatory issues are satisfactorily resolved."
http://www.smn-news.com/st-maarten-s...scontinue-service-to-anguilla.html

PM Gonsalves Says High Cost of Regional Air Travel Unavoidable
"High travel taxes affecting regional air travel are a necessary evil, according to CARICOM Chairman – Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves of St Vincent and the Grenadines. Dr Gonsalves is acknowledging that there is merit in the argument by some passengers that the region continues pressing Britain to reduce its controversial APD – Air Passenger Duty, while in the case of regional airline LIAT the taxes imposed by Caribbean governments often make up more than half the cost of the actual airline ticket."
http://www.winnfm.com/news/local/783...of-regional-air-travel-unavoidable

Surinam Airways to connect Cayenne and Miami
"The weekly flight will depart Cayenne on Saturdays at 7pm. SLM wants to connect French Guianese to its network of destinations since market research confirms that many from the neighbouring European Union territory travel by land to Paramaribo to take advantage of SLM’s competitive airfares to Miami and elsewhere."
http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/head...nnect-Cayenne-and-Miami-20468.html

LIAT Not Going Anywhere
"I want to assure all of you that LIAT is not leaving Antigua." Maginley stated. "Not when the Winston Baldwin Spencer that I know and the leaders of the United progressive party that I sit with have made a statement and saying we are going to ensure that LIAT does not move."
http://caribarenaantigua.com/antigua...06362-liat-not-going-anywhere.html

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 59): What would be the minimum crew rest time in LGW between POS-LGW and LGW-POS flight?

12hrs but in this case with 3w scheduled flights crew are staying over 2-3 days period, even if the flights are blocked at 19.3 hrs flying POS-LGW-POS with a 2.83 hrs stop off in LGW.

As I mentioned the flights leave and arrive with high loads, the yields however are another story in the mix. For the route to become profitable they would need to fly daily at a minimum. To do that they would have to include stop over flights in ANU, BGI of UVF and given that they are heading to LGW rather than LHR, that is an up hill task.

To be successful on the LGW route CAL needs to configure their a/c into a high density longhaul rather than the premium config of LAN.
For instance they would need to have a 788 config in about 270 pax, with a rather successful marketing campaign aimed at both VFR and tourist to make it work.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 59):

If you do POS LGW red eyes both ways then the 767 will be idle all day at LGW. The crews will still need to rest, and be fully accommodated, but now landing fees soar, due to the additional time on the ground.
If by now LGW isn't working I don't see how it will, because attempting to add SXM and/or TAB will not work as BW lacks access to the UK leisure markets.
Indeed if it wanted to do an LGW KIN might have been a better spot as there is still a large J'can VFR market out of the UK. T&T never sent large numbers of immigrants to the UK, as it did to the USA and North America.

Quoting caribbean484 (Reply 58):

Number of points.

1. I am aware that BW has adequate 738s during off peak periods, but then there is a problem at peak. Didn't the Omni arrangement not cost them big time? Is this KIN base really worth it, because I don't detect that J/cans have changed their views, and indeed B6 is now quite established.

2. Unless there has been a big upsurge of traffic, surely BW must be seeing some loss of loads and especially yields. B6 is flying heavy and has forced down fares. And some one must be flying Travelspan, both the POS and the GEO. While that isn't a market segment that BW will wish to battle over, last year those people would have flown BW. From what I see TS hasn't cut fares so low that this will spur spontaneous travel. Yes I know this year Carnival/Easter are late and so it has provided an extended "busy", so loads mightn't be too bad, now, but what happens later?

3. B6 can feed passengers from various points thru FLL, as they definitely do to KIN. That gives them an advantage over BW which is O&D.

4. Remember that BW doesn't have the fuel subsidy so will need to generate more revenues as an offset, but B6 is most likely nibbling into that.

5. There is nothing that BW can do about the empty seats on the POS GEO sector, except to maybe reduce other flights. OJ is flying JFK GEO nonstops, given that this has the largest passenger loads, there will be howls of protest, and further screams that BW has a "personal vendetta" against Guyanese. This just at the time when they seem to be more favorably viewed. Using the 738s is fine but they will have to offer 5X off season and at least daily during the peak. Remember that BW isn't only carrying its traditional loads but also those offered by DL. BW has two planes which overnight at GEO. Is that necessary?

[Edited 2014-04-06 18:23:12]

Quoting guyanam (Reply 62): If you do POS LGW red eyes both ways then the 767 will be idle all day at LGW. The crews will still need to rest, and be fully accommodated, but now landing fees soar, due to the additional time on the ground.

Quoting caribbean484 (Reply 61): 12hrs but in this case with 3w scheduled flights crew are staying over 2-3 days period,

So the cost of keeping a BW B767 12+hours in LGW (plus crew on airport hotel) is far greater than what BW is spending accommodating its crew 2-3 days in London?
Ground time may be cheaper in STN or LTN but doubt UK would allow BW fo operate POS-LON-POS there.

Quoting caribbean484 (Reply 60): WINAIR discontinue service to Anguilla.

Once again Winair tries to take a larger step than their legs can afford. It was said here before.

Quoting caribbean484 (Reply 60): PM Gonsalves Says High Cost of Regional Air Travel Unavoidable

Sorry to tell you Mr. Gonçalves, but more and more local carriers will struggle/collapse due to these unavoidable fees.

Quoting caribbean484 (Reply 60): Surinam Airways to connect Cayenne and Miami

They indeed have low fares to MIA, I paid 240 usd one way... but when are they expanding in Brazil? 

Quoting andrefranca (Reply 64):

WM wanted to do SJU AXA but apparently the US authorities haven't permitted them. At least not yet. Maybe the two US puddle jumpers blocked them, knowing that WM with larger planes will snatch some business.

A Dominican hotelier said that Mr. Gonsalves should resign as the shareholder spokes person for LI, because he doesn't have a vision for the airline. Indeed I don't think that he cares any more as SVD will no longer live or die based on LIQuoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 63):

No one is going to use any airport other than LHR (now too expensive and restricted) or LGW, so even if the UK authorities allow them its a nonstarter. Reducing the 767 to 4 rotations per week will probably be more costly. I bet that they put the crew in some "cheap" hotel near LGW.