|Quoting Kevin777 (Reply 46):|
But compared to CPH and OSL, ARN is definitely far away I totally agree. Old buldings, many of them in need for heavy maintenance or replacement; old hardware (e.g. baggage belts etc.), and then the whole mess of what, 5-7 terminals or so, with many - to the customer at least - oddities as to which Airline flies from which terminal to which destinations (I don't want to start up yet another SE/NO/DK forum-war here at all, but I think even most supporters of Stockholm as the "right" centre of Scandinavia would agree, that as an airport, ARN is inferior to OSL and CPH)
|Quoting sailas (Reply 47):|
Sure, but you're missing the point, FInland is no.1 in technology companies in the north, and where do we make our business?
I'm sure it will be tough for both SK and AY but my bets on the blue and white.
|Quoting Kevin777 (Reply 49):|
The data comes from GDS bookings ARN-HKG versus CPH-HKG. 20 % more of the latter. Granted, it may not account for everything, but would still give a good indication. As for Danes going a lot to Hong Kong, perhaps they do, but also be reminded that 1/5 or so of the Swedish population has CPH as their (major) home airport.
There is so much confusion and national sentiment here its not even funny.
I agree with the poster who says that ARN
is the worst airport of the three cities. By far the worst airport and that the different terminals, minor areas of use makes ARN
a truly poor European gateway.
But the rest Finland is the technological centre of the north, Denmark has more passengers to China/Hongkong and 20% of Swedens population has CPH
as its airport.
be realistic non of those statements is close to reality.
Stockholm as a business region is not just the technological centre of the north but one of the more major centres in Europe.
While a few of Swedens export MNC have their HQ
outside Stockholm 75% doesn't. Stockholm is home to a clear majority of the Nordics major corporate HQ
and is the financial centre home to all stockexchanges in the Nordics plus the Baltics (minus Oslo) and home to the investment banks, hedgefunds etc.
, Volvo has a Star Alliance deal. But Volvo tries to avoid CPH
is very happy about that.
Sweden sends more citizens to China than Norway and Denmark combined.
And no despite what CPH
marketing brochures says 20% of Swedens population does not have CPH
as its home airport. Unfortunately for CPH
20% of Swedens population doesn't live in Scania province and even those in the north and east of that province have other airports they may use. Scania has 1.2 million inhabitants, even if we say that all of those use CPH
for international flights thats not even 14%. However for domestic flights they have their own airports, with feeder flights to STO, rather frequent such. The choice of going to CPH
requires a trainride or carride between 20 minutes to 2.5 hours. Those in MMX
and the west coast probably use CPH
as their default international airport.
Opening HongKong from ARN
is not good for several reasons.
First it reduces the only hub SK
has, the CPH
serves alot less destinations from ARN
. This reduces the ability to feed the route.
Third frequency to ARN
is much less than frequency to CPH
To choose ARN
for the HongKong route further shows how weak the CPH
hub is. SK
needs one hub, spreading the airline thin, having some routes from ARN
, some from CPH
suuceed they need a strong hub and they have bet on CPH
. Yet they dont see enough potential to North Asia from CPH
. So instead they choose ARN
an airport they have little feed to compared to CPH
and where secondary cities virtually arent serced at all. Yet ARN
is a better choice to HongKong/China. Thats scary. SK
to be a strong market with substantial O/D to be a successful carrier. SK
knows this but they have no choice because the market, SK
:s market to HK
and China, is so clearly primarily Swedish originating that opening it from CPH
just isnt viable if the airline want decent O/D traffic. I still think that SK
is doing a mistake here, this route should have been launched from CPH
despite it being a much worse O/D market. CPH
need to be the only hub for SK
, they cant spread themselves thin.
Sure starting the flight out of CPH
means they loose their main Scandinavian market, Sweden. But thats already happened, Swedes and Norwegians have voted with their feet and are not flying internationally out of CPH
at the levels that CPH
need for it to be a profitable Scandinavian hub. SO stop caring about the swedes and Norwegians and cater a hub to perceived demand from Denmark and siphon traffic from the neighbouring countries. Build a hub that cater to the danes and to Scania province. Spreading the hub will weaken SK
and reduce the companies chance to compete.
Better yet, transfer the CPH
hub to the main Scandinavian market ARN
, maximise O/D, but thats politically impossible so it wont happen. But it would have created a much more financially viable SK
No One Likes Us - We Dont Care.