GATWICK
Only a theory but might it be to encourage people who want that information to proceed through security and therefore spend more time in the (shopping mall) departure lounge. That would fit with the coffee shop/bar installations as you might be tempted to become a customer while looking at the screen.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norwegian will in May 2016 start four weekly LGW-BOS. For now only a press release in Norwegian is available:
Pressemeldinger - Norwegian
Pressemeldinger - Norwegian
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems like a logical new route for Norwegian, good to see more flights to the US from LGW. I wonder if OAK will be launched 3 weekly, as the BOS route will presumably require a 3rd 787 to be based?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ballymena
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Norwegian has carried about 200k pax to the USA over the last 2 years. That's a lot of lost revenue to the boys up the road. Wonder how long it will be before they decide that it's getting too big and that maybe there is a market to the USA from Lgw after all?
TB
TB
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is probably a 'market' to the US from every point on earth.
It's a question of whether it's a worthwhile one for the business model you run.
Obviously in this case, the answer is 'No'
It's a question of whether it's a worthwhile one for the business model you run.
Obviously in this case, the answer is 'No'
Last edited by All names taken; 11th Jul 2015 at 04:13.
Wonder how long it will be before they decide that it's getting too big and that maybe there is a market to the USA from Lgw after all?
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: dublin
Age: 64
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IAG impact on LGW
200 pax DUBLGWLAS on Saturday , no wonder the bearded one is "anxious" about IAG now they have EI , expect a huge EI growth to feed IAG inLGW next summer from every airport on the Island of Ireland ,
320 x two , split 100 each roughly
320 x two , split 100 each roughly
Last edited by Hangar6; 12th Jul 2015 at 10:22.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: LV
Posts: 2,296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how do you know historically the majority werent already interlining with BA and may just continue to do so, rather than it being a sudden shift away from connecting to VS? They havent even merged yet!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
200 is more than the connecting A320 can hold, assuming it's not an A319 (!) That's also the majority of seats on a B777. Seems like a one off if true.
Btw aside from TPA and LAS, eveything else going West is in the Caribbean so not going to have an impact on US flights.
Why would I be staggered? They're offering good connections on their own metal from across Europe, DY do connections, EZY don't. Flip that one then, if they have to fill them using feed on a loco model, does DU or DY get the benefit of the revenue?
Btw aside from TPA and LAS, eveything else going West is in the Caribbean so not going to have an impact on US flights.
Why would I be staggered? They're offering good connections on their own metal from across Europe, DY do connections, EZY don't. Flip that one then, if they have to fill them using feed on a loco model, does DU or DY get the benefit of the revenue?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ballymena
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't it amazing the vested interests at work now to convince us that just about nothing at Gatwick can work or is ever likely to work. Almost 40m pax pa are using Lgw now but we are told that these are mainly low fare wanting a cheap weekend tourists. So why would any airline bother providing any service at all, no money to be made here. Meanwhile, up the road at Lhr, you don't get low fare tourists on flights there, just high yielding business travellers. We are led to believe that few connect through Lgw, yet I did that myself last month using EI from Bhd then BA to Bodrum. There were quite a few on my flight connecting with BA to Orlando. My wife and daughter followed me on the same route a few days later. When mention is made of connecting traffic at Lgw it is questioned.
What I do see is a massive effort to protect big interests up at Lhr. The airport itself, airlines, executive clubs etc have all made big investments there and are now trying to protect themselves by convincing as many as possible of the poor prospects for Lgw.
So the American carriers that used Lgw for decades lost money but decided to provide a service to us anyway? Or is it that they didn't make as much money as they would like?
Did Virgin and BA fly these routes for decades making a loss but did so out of the kindness of their hearts? If they were making a loss, was this due to the yield they could get or was the problem with them, costs too high?
Air China and Korean are quoted as examples of airlines trying to make new services work, but couldn't. How could they tell after one season yet we are told that it can take up to two years to see if a route is going to work. Was the issue that the Lgw services damaged the Lhr services more than was expected? Vietnam moved to Lhr recently, the Caa stats don't show this big increase in numbers we were led to believe would happen. Yet Icelandair and Turkish Airlines are never mentioned at Lgw. Maybe they haven't yet found out how much money they are losing at Lgw.
The world changes but there seems little recognition of that when it comes to possible success for Lgw. I get the impression there are many scared of a possible new competitor down the road. I hope Lgw is a major success, along with Norwegian.
One thing I know I don't like is where business thinks it has an entitlement and no one else should challenge. That is where the paying customer ends up being worse off.
What I do see is a massive effort to protect big interests up at Lhr. The airport itself, airlines, executive clubs etc have all made big investments there and are now trying to protect themselves by convincing as many as possible of the poor prospects for Lgw.
So the American carriers that used Lgw for decades lost money but decided to provide a service to us anyway? Or is it that they didn't make as much money as they would like?
Did Virgin and BA fly these routes for decades making a loss but did so out of the kindness of their hearts? If they were making a loss, was this due to the yield they could get or was the problem with them, costs too high?
Air China and Korean are quoted as examples of airlines trying to make new services work, but couldn't. How could they tell after one season yet we are told that it can take up to two years to see if a route is going to work. Was the issue that the Lgw services damaged the Lhr services more than was expected? Vietnam moved to Lhr recently, the Caa stats don't show this big increase in numbers we were led to believe would happen. Yet Icelandair and Turkish Airlines are never mentioned at Lgw. Maybe they haven't yet found out how much money they are losing at Lgw.
The world changes but there seems little recognition of that when it comes to possible success for Lgw. I get the impression there are many scared of a possible new competitor down the road. I hope Lgw is a major success, along with Norwegian.
One thing I know I don't like is where business thinks it has an entitlement and no one else should challenge. That is where the paying customer ends up being worse off.
True Blue
You made some valid points. Yet, the FACT remains that many of us , from the non-UK regions, who are forced to connect through Gatwick (because we have no Heathrow service), would very much like Heathrow to expand & offer us a service because, there are precious few non-stop flights to places in USA, Canada, Asia, Africa & Australasia to connect with through Gatwick. Nor are there ever likely to be!
Oh yes, & to connect with flights to these areas we have to make a time consuming trip to & from Heathrow by coach-&, often, have to make a night-stop at Heathrow.
Another FACT is that the carriers which did operate to these places from Gatwick abandoned it for Heathrow at the first available opportunity !
You made some valid points. Yet, the FACT remains that many of us , from the non-UK regions, who are forced to connect through Gatwick (because we have no Heathrow service), would very much like Heathrow to expand & offer us a service because, there are precious few non-stop flights to places in USA, Canada, Asia, Africa & Australasia to connect with through Gatwick. Nor are there ever likely to be!
Oh yes, & to connect with flights to these areas we have to make a time consuming trip to & from Heathrow by coach-&, often, have to make a night-stop at Heathrow.
Another FACT is that the carriers which did operate to these places from Gatwick abandoned it for Heathrow at the first available opportunity !
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: England
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be interesting to see if direct long haul services to new or 'unusual' destinations at LGW will see other airlines start to offer direct services from LHR. For example Thomson are re-starting direct service to Costa Rica and currently are the only airline that fly direct from the UK. Although you could argue that it's a purely tourist route, it's perhaps less so than many others. If I was trying to get to CR, I'd go direct through LGW, rather than going from Heathrow to connect through the US and add several hours to my journey.
I don't think LGW is anywhere near an arseache as people make out. I've quite easily connected through LGW on many occasion.
I don't think LGW is anywhere near an arseache as people make out. I've quite easily connected through LGW on many occasion.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ballymena
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kcockayne
do you believe that during the period that Lgw was owned by BAA that Lgw and Lhr were promoted equally? Or was Lgw promoted as the waiting room to Lhr, a term we hear often. I remember a few years back when BA used to print a timetable, getting a copy of their worldwide edition. Where a service ran from both Lhr and Lgw, the connections via Lhr were always far better promoted. So, in my opinion, neither BAA or BA were that serious about promoting Lgw as an airport for transfers. Now we have an operator there giving the idea of transfers full support and there are a lot of vested interests who do not like it. I use Lgw to transfer a lot, usually on Easyjet flights, never had a problem and I understand the risks I am taking. I am also of the opinion that if Norwegian is successful to N America we will soon see others going there to. And if Lgw gets the second runway, they will all pile in as they will not want to miss out on one of the best aviation markets in the world. I would love Lgw to get the second runway to just watch how quickly all talk of taking expansion plans to Paris, Amsterdam etc melts away. I give it a few days/weeks.
do you believe that during the period that Lgw was owned by BAA that Lgw and Lhr were promoted equally? Or was Lgw promoted as the waiting room to Lhr, a term we hear often. I remember a few years back when BA used to print a timetable, getting a copy of their worldwide edition. Where a service ran from both Lhr and Lgw, the connections via Lhr were always far better promoted. So, in my opinion, neither BAA or BA were that serious about promoting Lgw as an airport for transfers. Now we have an operator there giving the idea of transfers full support and there are a lot of vested interests who do not like it. I use Lgw to transfer a lot, usually on Easyjet flights, never had a problem and I understand the risks I am taking. I am also of the opinion that if Norwegian is successful to N America we will soon see others going there to. And if Lgw gets the second runway, they will all pile in as they will not want to miss out on one of the best aviation markets in the world. I would love Lgw to get the second runway to just watch how quickly all talk of taking expansion plans to Paris, Amsterdam etc melts away. I give it a few days/weeks.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting discussion re LGW US services.
The fact is that LHR is more attractive for a whole host of reasons means that when the airlines get the opportunity to move over they do. But compounded to this is the fact that in many cases it is a foreign carrier who moves and usually will not operate the same route to 2 London airports eg Vietnam Airlines. Hence, LHR becomes the one.
I disagree that LGW USA routes were unprofitable, but the shortage of routes , and a big reduction in airlines mean that it's much harder than before to get airlines into routes. And given the scale of LHR ops to the US any other London airport is a hard sell. Let's see how DY get on, but the fact here is that their point of difference has to be on price and nobody thus fas has sustainable cracked low cost long haul ..
The fact is that LHR is more attractive for a whole host of reasons means that when the airlines get the opportunity to move over they do. But compounded to this is the fact that in many cases it is a foreign carrier who moves and usually will not operate the same route to 2 London airports eg Vietnam Airlines. Hence, LHR becomes the one.
I disagree that LGW USA routes were unprofitable, but the shortage of routes , and a big reduction in airlines mean that it's much harder than before to get airlines into routes. And given the scale of LHR ops to the US any other London airport is a hard sell. Let's see how DY get on, but the fact here is that their point of difference has to be on price and nobody thus fas has sustainable cracked low cost long haul ..
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EI-BUD
Price is of course a motivator and Norwegian have always used keen pricing to build a customer base in markets where they operate, but as the load factor builds then so does the pricing.
For many LGW is more convenient than LHR, a lot of connecting traffic can do so from through LGW, Norwegian have well over a 100 destinations on offer from LGW, so its not just long haul consolidation outbound that is getting a boost.
The big difference with long haul compared to the likes of BA and many other carries is that they price punitively if you only book one way, see below..
LHR JFK LHR out on the 16 Oct back on the 23rd with BA £467.06
One way LHR JFK on the 16th £1174.00 with BA
LGW JFK LGW same date (low fare + includes bag and meal) £491.00 basic fare ££391.00
One way LGW JFK on the 16th (low fare +) £209 ......or £182 JFK LGW with Norwegian, so it will cost you just under £1000.00 more with BA
So BA are cheaper for a return trip, not sure if you get a meal? with them but not much in it. Why should you pay 2.5 times the price to travel one way??
This is the damage that Norwegian will do over time, they have a long haul low fares calendar the same as easyjet/Jet2/FR which prices each leg as a separate trip, so if the timing suits you better fly out with one airline fly back with another
For many LGW is more convenient than LHR, a lot of connecting traffic can do so from through LGW, Norwegian have well over a 100 destinations on offer from LGW, so its not just long haul consolidation outbound that is getting a boost.
The big difference with long haul compared to the likes of BA and many other carries is that they price punitively if you only book one way, see below..
LHR JFK LHR out on the 16 Oct back on the 23rd with BA £467.06
One way LHR JFK on the 16th £1174.00 with BA
LGW JFK LGW same date (low fare + includes bag and meal) £491.00 basic fare ££391.00
One way LGW JFK on the 16th (low fare +) £209 ......or £182 JFK LGW with Norwegian, so it will cost you just under £1000.00 more with BA
So BA are cheaper for a return trip, not sure if you get a meal? with them but not much in it. Why should you pay 2.5 times the price to travel one way??
This is the damage that Norwegian will do over time, they have a long haul low fares calendar the same as easyjet/Jet2/FR which prices each leg as a separate trip, so if the timing suits you better fly out with one airline fly back with another
LNIDA
Why should you pay 2.5 times the price to travel one way??