PDA

View Full Version : BACX chop BRS-DUB increases BRS-CDG


MerchantVenturer
6th May 2004, 13:34
This piece appears in today's Bristol Evening Post.

British Airways has announced four extra daily flights between Bristol International Airport and Paris - at the expense of its Dublin service. From the start of next month, the airline will have the capacity to carry an extra 1,176 passengers a week to the French capital.

The extra flights, two in each direction, will be operated by BA's subsidiary, British Airways CitiExpress, leaving Bristol at 8.40 am and 4pm and departing Paris at 11.30 am and 6.50pm.

The airline has also announced that its twice-daily services between Bristol and Dublin will cease from May 31, although partner airline Aer Lingus will still serve the route.

Steve Cassidy, British Airways CitiExpress commercial general manager, said: "Paris is a key market for us, both for our business and leisure customers, and our new schedule provides a superb level of flexibility."

Fares from Bristol to Paris start at £99 return.

I thought the arrival of a daily Aer Lingus B 735, together with the 3 daily Ryanair rotations (two at weekends), was a bit of an overkill on BRS-DUB and am not surprised to see BACX pull out their two daily ERJ 145 rotations to the Irish capital.

This news means that BRS will have eight weekday rotations to CDG: five BACX ERJ 145s and three Air France ERJ 135s.

Perhaps slightly surprising that Air France appears to have downsized from 145s to 135s whilst BACX is increasing frequency.

Scottie Dog
6th May 2004, 14:57
MerchantVenturer

Copy of email received from AF back in April!

AIR FRANCE FLASH NEWS

Please note that as of 1st June 2004, Air France will cease its direct services between Bristol and Paris CDG operated by Air France subsidiary, Régional. The decision has been taken following the growing un-profitability of this route.

The flights from 1st June will be closed to sale as of tomorrow morning, 14th April 2004, but will be cancelled in the GDS at the end of the week.

Travellers booked after 1st June 2004 will be rebooked or offered a refund.

Cheers

Scottie Dog
:(

MerchantVenturer
6th May 2004, 19:42
Thanks for that Scottie. The Bristol Airport website has never mentioned Air France pulling out of the route. I have noticed this before with official websites. They always make great play when new routes are to commence but keep quiet when the opposite happens. That’s why I never rely on them for definitive information.

Air France’s decision surprises me a bit when one considers the most recent provisional CAA figures for the route in March. 12,249 pax were carried, up from 9,931 the previous March when there were the same number of flights. I know raw figures are only part of the picture but it does appear the route was increasing nicely. Perhaps BACX had the lion’s share and that’s why they are increasing frequency whilst Air France are pulling out.

As a matter of interest I have calculated that each ERJ 145 carried an average load of 34-35 in March on BRS-CDG-BRS. Of course the CAA figures don’t break down the figures between individual airlines.

Would the Air France decision be anything to do with the new joint AF-KLM airline? I guess a significant number of AF pax from BRS used CDG as a hub for onward travel. As KLM do the same at AMS from BRS would the combined airline need two hubs to be serviced from an airport such as BRS?

terrier21
15th Jun 2004, 01:45
Not really a surprise that AF pulled out of BRS. More and more passengers were travelling in to cdg from all over the world on AF but when transferring to BRS they were travelling with BA. Aparently AF were using the aircraft for local routes instead.

As for BA. As soon as EI started up again BA were always going to scrap their DUB service its a shame they didnt think logically for a change and try and tap in to the yet unnoticed market to MXP direct from BRS. It will only be a matter of time before EZY work this out and start it daly.

T21

Wee Weasley Welshman
15th Jun 2004, 08:04
BRS Milan you reckon?


WWW

MerchantVenturer
15th Jun 2004, 09:34
WWW

There is an easyJet pilot who contributes regularly to the Motley Fool financial message board on matters easyJet.

He says that BRS is to get a seventh 737 in September with Paris and a ski destination the rumoured routes. He asserts that if this happens BACx will withdraw from the CDG route altogether. Hmm!

Flightmapping
9th Sep 2004, 01:56
Merchant,

BA have held off against EZ on the GLA & EDI routes, so why would they flee CDG? Is it because GLA & EDI feed onwards to FRA, IIRC?

Presumably, EZ doing BRS to CDG would substantially weaken the case for Flybe doing EXT to CDG?

TwinAisle
9th Sep 2004, 11:21
Wonder how long it will be before the crass incompetents at BACX management do a "Cardiff" at BRS, and leave the whole lot to easyjet?

Their track record of not holding out long against a good competent loco is remarkable in its consistency.

Frankly, if you got easy at BRS and baby at Cardiff, plus Air Wales, Air Southwest etc etc.... who needs BACX?

You heard it here first....

TA

Flightmapping
9th Sep 2004, 12:11
Twin,

BA have given Easy a run for their money at LGW, especially with all the £69 fare offers plastered all over the tube. I suppose the London market is big enough to sustain both types of carrier, especially with the added bonus of connecting flights.

TwinAisle
9th Sep 2004, 17:08
They have indeed, FM... but as you say, it's a way bigger market up there. Round these parts, I would imagine that BA are getting tanned at BRS as they did at CWL... but its the regional crowd, and they have about 10% of the management skills as mainline BA....

TA

MerchantVenturer
9th Sep 2004, 19:47
Flightmapping,

I was quoting the easyJet pilot who regularly contributes to the Motley Fool financial site. He suggested that BACx would withdraw from BRS-CDG if easyJet took on the route. That was three months ago and my 'hmm' at that time suggested I wasn't necessarily convinced. As it turned out he was right about the ski destination (the bigger surprise is that easy or Go did not do GVA before given BRS's massive ski programme - 14 weekly flights in each of the last 3 winters with more to come this winter) but wrong about Paris - so far at least.

To my mind there would be a worry if easy did start Paris and wiped off BACx entirely from the route because easy have already stated they are to abandon BRS-CPH and reduce BRS-AMS because of high charges at CPH and AMS (albeit from the Danish government at CPH at least). Both these routes were carrying high loads, especially AMS and CPH had steadily improved to over 80% in July. Paris and Amsterdam are core routes for any regional airport of any size at all.

BACx have hung in at BRS to the surprise of many. They have slugged it out with easy on BRS to GLA and to EDI for three years now and have more daily weekday rotations to these Scottish cities than easy (5 against 3 but admittedly with much smaller aircraft - the ERJ 145). It's difficult to estimate their share of this market because the CAA route stats are not broken down into individual airlines of course. Anecdotal evidence suggests the flights are not particularly well filled but some people must use them.

As for the BACx daily flights (except Sats) to FRA and to MUC the CAA July stats show a 70% rise in pax nos over the previous July for MUC (average load 70%) and a 27% rise for FRA (average load 60%). The fares are usually high I know because an acquaintance who lives in Frankfurt regularly commutes to Bristol and finds it cheaper to use LHR and land transport to Bristol - he used to fly Ryanair Hahn-Bournemouth then by road to Bristol before FR abandoned it. So BACx might be making money on their BRS German routes at least.

As for Flybe on EXT-CDG there was a note on a very good Exeter Airport unofficial site a couple of months ago that the airline want to start a twice daily service to CDG but are after regional development agency money to make it viable. If this is true I wonder what the reaction of BRS and BACx would be given that BRS and EXT share a common catchment area in certain areas of the west country.

TwinAisle
9th Sep 2004, 23:44
It is rare that I find anything to argue with MV about... him/her and I share common ground a remarkably high percentage of the time... we must meet for a beer one day!

But.

I still think that BACx look at BRS as a bit of a problem. Volumes from BRS, and, by extension yields, must have been hammered by easy (and to a lesser extent baby ex CWL), and I, unlike MV, am surprised that they still persist in CDG. If easy hit this route, BA will be massacred. The CWL example - when BA did it with the 145 (49 seats, two returns a day) it was rarely full. Baby are getting manageable (not great) loads on a 737 - but these are WAY higher loads than BA got. This route from the regions - like many others (BRS, CWL etc etc) is way more price sensitive than the equivalent route from LHR etc....

Once again tho, it boils down to the fact that the CAA figs are almost (note that word) irrelevant. All you can suss from them is load; airlines that chase load tend to be short-lived!! What counts is YIELD - and the CAA won't tell you that. It is VERY difficult to suss out the absolute yields on these routes - and even harder to suss the gross margin - from the evidence of a few fares.... the other issue re the German routes is their contribution.... they make make a lot as part of a balanced handful of BRS routes, but on their own, do they justify a base? And I can't believe that EDI/GLA haven't been screwed by easy, much to the benefit of the consumer....

My gut feeling on EXT-CDG is that flybe should go for it. Whilst EXT is probably likely to have a number of people who will drag to BRS for the FF miles, there are LOADS of people - particularly west of EXT - who wouldn't. Fancy sharing a beer to discuss that one, MV? :D

BRegards

TA

Jetstar81
10th Sep 2004, 09:44
BACX do compete effectively against EZY on the BRS - EDI/GLA routes. The load factors tend to be pretty good these days compared to 2 years ago. Therefore I'm sure they would be able to compete well on CDG if that ever happens. The BRS and CWL markets are completely different even though there's not much distance between them. The only route that ever did well from CWL was CDG. BACX would have withdrawn that route as it probably wouldn't work to base a single a/c at CWL after stopping BRU.

MerchantVenturer
10th Sep 2004, 20:48
Twin

I believe you are an airline professional and part of your work involves routes. I confess to being merely an interested amateur and I certainly take on board your point about load factors only being part of the equation vis-a-vis route/base profitability, and probably a less important one at that.

I believe that good load factors do at least suggest there is a potential market on a route and it is up to an airline to exploit it as best it can. I realise there can be occasions when the price needed to make a route sustainable will be so high that the majority of the potential customers will be driven away. Prior to Go/easyJet arriving at BRS the BA franchised route to Scotland (Brymon/BACx) often charged over £200 for a return ticket, sometimes over £300. Most people simply went by train or to LHR.

Go/easyJet certainly concentrated BA's mind at Lulsgate and their fares are now much lower than they were in pre loco days. Whether they are unsustainably low relative to pax numbers I don't know.

Apart from the already mentioned CDG, EDI, GLA, FRA and MUC routes, the only other BACx route from BRS is the daily JER rotation. This year they have had competition from three other airlines operating daily flights to the largest Channel Island, viz Aurigny, Flybe and Air South West.

If your contention that BACx is played out at BRS is correct one would think this summer would be make or break time.

Incidentally, I am not really arguing against you because my knowledge of airline economics and especially the situation re BACx/BRS is insufficient to make a solid guestimate. I always hate to see airlines or even routes discontinued - from anywhere. However, I recognise the reality of economics.

Today's Bristol Evening Post reports that BRS is to spend £50 million on further airport improvements over the next five years. I would love to think that BACx is around to see some of them.

As to Flybe and EXT/CDG I assume it would have an impact, albeit possibly a minor one, on pax numbers to the French capital from BRS because the most recent statistics issued by Bristol Airport suggest that 12% of its overall pax emanate from Devon and Cornwall - that would be around half a million people this year. However, that is what competition is about and good luck to them if they decide to give it a go. My brother-in-law lives on Dartmoor and is always pleased to see new routes from EXT.

BTW, a drink sounds like an excellent idea although I am a bit committed in the immediate future – my wife broke her leg and I am suddenly having to do all those chores again I thought one only did as a newly-wed. :eek: Maybe we can put it on the back burner for the time being.

TwinAisle
10th Sep 2004, 21:41
MV

You do yourself a disservice... your postings in this forum (which I always read with interest) suggest that you have a VERY good handle on the economics of this nutty business!

I too hate to see routes discontinued. Professionally, I spend an inordinate amount of my time trying to make routes (and by extension airlines) pay (what's that line about flogging dead horses?) My prime contention was that given BACx's cost structures, which I would bet are still (despite some vicious, and, IMHO, misplaced, cutting) vastly higher than easyjet's, it is difficult to see how they can carry on indefinately at BRS.

From the consumer's point of view, Go and then easy at BRS have been a blessing; fares have dropped on competed routes very sharply, as they have at CWL (BA cheapest to EDI was £99, baby will do the same trip for a lowest of £20, and the capacity has gone throught the ceiling). So looking at BACx's BRS routes -

GLA, EDI now competed on by easy
JER now competed on by a few players
CDG - already vulnerable from silly prices ex CWL with WW, and poss flybe and easy at home
MUC, FRA - I would guess that easy will be eyeing up Germany as their new aircraft come on stream, and they have to start looking for routes to fly them on.

The golden days for BA at BRS (and most other regional airports) of "no choice leading to sumptuous yields" is very passé. I can honestly see a time when BA just give up on the regions altogether - and perhaps even the European routes - and let the low costs / niche regionals do it. BA's best bet may well be to start a low cost operator, basing a few 737s at BRS.... oh, hang on, we've been there before ;)

I would guess that if easyjet force the issue, you'll see the back of BA at BRS as we did at CWL, and frankly, I am not terribly sure that they would be missed....

Really hope your wife mends quickly! In the meantime, don't let her fly with Ryanair, or you'll have to fork out for crutches....

Jetstar - BACx had a number of VERY profitable routes out of CWL, of which BRU was one of the best. I used to get stuffed for £500 plus return on that route, and that was on the waitlist! And please don't confuse load with yield - the loads may be good, but how much are the punters paying? I could fill any route to the max anytime.... I'll pay people to fly on it! 100% loads, and out of business in a fortnight.

The reasons that BA pulled CWL was not altogether to do with low profit routes... more to do with high cost operation and incompetent management, coupled with political posturing. Regrettably, I see little evidence that much has changed :uhoh:

TA

terrier21
15th Sep 2004, 08:04
I remember about a year ago (ish!) at Brs when BA pulled there NCL service due to the fact (they said) 'To make Brs an all E145 operation' (more likely reason Ezy were introducing the route). Rumours had it that BACx had 6 months to pull them selves around or they would be pulled out of Brs all together. The big change they made was to stop looking at themselves as an airline but to take a step back and look at themselves as a handling agent!

As we know BACx are a wholly owned subsidery of BA, the passengers (on the whole) didnt realise this and thought they were BA mainline and were expecting to and were often paying the prices.

Since BACx have become more of a handling agent, handling: EI,SN,EA,WO and of course BA they have bedded their routes(mind the pun!) more firmly into the ever expanding Brs.

Long may they continue.

ps:MV im sorry to here about your wife's injury and hope you makes a full and speedy recovery.

Terrier

Jetstar81
15th Sep 2004, 12:30
BACX have become a handling agent for other airlines at BRS as well as looking after their own flights and seem to be doing quite well out of it. BRS as a base for BACX is actually doing well at the moment. It's a shame NCL had to be withdrawn. If there had been a spare ERJ available BACX would have continued to operate the route.

Twin Aisle - CWL/BRU was loss making for some time and the only route profitable was CDG. As the base was so small it's probably more of a cost issue than a revenue problem.
BRS routes are doing well for BACX and I guess expansion wouldn't be ruled out. I think that there is a market for both EZY and BA to operate against each other with the different markets they attract.

It's good to see the start of CO on EWR, although I would have preferred to see AA to JFK.

MerchantVenturer
15th Sep 2004, 20:06
terrier

Many thanks for your good wishes - much appreciated.

Jetstar

Since contributing to this thread I received a PM from someone saying that in July BACx had 27% of the pax on the BRS-EDI and BRS-GLA routes. The information was couched in such a way that it appears genuine.

If this is so it would give average loads of betwen 50 and 60%. Yes, I know the really important things are yield and margins but I have to say that a 27% share of these routes does surprise me. I assumed it was less.

Dash-7 lover
16th Sep 2004, 18:04
Twin Aisle...


More BACX bashing - suggest you leave then if you don't like it. BRS makes money.......and thats what counts.....

TwinAisle
16th Sep 2004, 18:29
D7L

You suggest I leave? I was one of BACX's most loyal customers, with up to 100 Club class sectors a year out of Cardiff. THEY left.

Do I miss them? No. We now get better services (albeit all economy) at FAR better prices. I knew many of the BACX crews at Cardiff as friends, and they were absolutely top notch people. But their management - yeesh. Would you like me to quote you some of the pearls of wisdom of their top management when they closed the base here?

I still maintain that easy must be a pain for BACX at BRS.

TA

terrier21
17th Sep 2004, 10:14
I think BACx have been standing still at BRS for a while now in the new route sense and unfortunatly they wont be having a winter charter flight this year (probably due to EZY op' GVA).

jetstar 81

'It's good to see the start of CO on EWR, although I would have preferred to see AA to JFK'

who knows what the future holds we are of course 'Bristol Continental' ha

marlowe
18th Sep 2004, 14:28
BACX at BRS is a money making operation its BACXs other bases that are a fly in the ointment.

MerchantVenturer
17th Oct 2004, 11:33
The following item appears on today's ITV West Teletext news pages.

British Airways is to expand its operations at Bristol International by basing an additional aircraft at the South West airport.

The fifth aircraft, an Embraer 145, will be based at Bristol International from March 2005.

British Airways says it is likely to use the plane to increase frequencies on its core international services.

BACX operate to CDG, FRA and MUC on international routes from BRS - plus EDI, GLA and JER domestically.

marlowe
17th Oct 2004, 12:24
So A 5th BACX aircraft to be based at BRS then, FRA rotation to be increased to twice a day and talk of a Milan service, CDG routes doing well EDI & GLA doing well so all you BRS BACX bashers out there you seem very quite!!!!

the futures bright it just might not be orange!!!!

terrier21
17th Oct 2004, 20:44
excellant news. Have a lot of friends in BA and im sure they will be pleased to hear this.

terrier21
18th Oct 2004, 13:32
regarding the new aircraft to be based at bristol does anybody on the inside have any information as to where it will be flying. I have asked BA today at BRS and they dont know anything about it apart from what they have seen on teletext!!!

MerchantVenturer
22nd Oct 2004, 18:36
terrier

Today’s Bristol Evening Post carried a story confirming that the extra (fifth) ERJ 145 will be based at BRS from next March. It quoted Tony Hallwood, the airport's aviation development director.

The routes to be serviced by the extra aircraft, whether an increase in frequency of some of the current ones or brand new ones, will be announced in December.

The paper speculated on Milan, Hamburg, Dusseldorf and Cologne, but that’s all it was – speculation. There were no real clues hidden between the lines. If Mr Hallwood has an inkling he clearly wasn’t saying.

terrier21
22nd Oct 2004, 22:38
Time for a bit of sleuthing me thinks!

When I first heard about the possible new German routes I immediatly thought they would be operated by Ezy or a new airline; I then heard that as well as the 7th based Ezy aircraft here for the winter they would be introducing two more next year. Bringing their Brs fleet to 9! This then confirmed my theories about Ezy operating the new German routes.

Surely for BA a Milan service would be far more lucrative than operating a 3rd German route. hummmm now im confused much to taxing to try and work out at this time of night!

Any theories anyone?

MerchantVenturer
23rd Oct 2004, 12:29
terrier

I presume the additional aircraft will fly three rotations during a day. Does this not point to perhaps one new route and extra frequencies on some existing ones?

As to the existing routes, it is difficult to see which ones could accommodate extra rotations. Not the Scottish routes surely, nor probably FRA and MUC. Although these last two have steadily improved their load factors over the last twelve months (yes, loads are only one part of the equation, I know, but the fares always seem pretty tasty so one would think the yields aren’t bad either) I wonder whether additional capacity is necessary. Aurigny and Air Southwest are running their JER rotations through the winter (slightly curtailed frequencies in Southwest's case) in competition with BACx so there doesn’t seem much scope for adding extra JER rotations.

That leaves CDG. A return to six rotations each weekday from the present five would return to the level seen when AF competed on the route. So that might be the one.

Milan has been talked about forever and might be tried at last.

I have two other suggestions. The first is Copenhagen. easyJet had built up the route to an average load of 110-120 and would doubtless have kept it going but for the Danish government’s cash grab on every passenger. I flew it in March and there seemed to be a number of regular business travellers – I spoke to one who confirmed it. It must be highly likely that the route would work, even with BACX’s higher fares and the Danish government’s insistence on a piece of the action.

The second is Cork. Aer Arann reduced their daily (except Sats) rotations to Tue Thur and Sun at the beginning of summer 2004. They have not reinstated the lost rotations in their winter schedule. I spoke to one of BRS’s senior route gurus at the time and he told me Arann blamed poor yields which he didn’t believe because the loads were good and the fares not cheap. He said BRS would be looking for another carrier if Arann did not restore the earlier schedule. They reduced their ORK-SOU rotations at the same time.

The real reason seems to be that the Irish government pays PSOs on routes out of the likes ofGalway and Waterford, and Arann obviously found this guaranteed income more to their liking. They were therefore in need of aircraft to service the PSO routes and BRS and SOU suffered.

CAA stats show the BRS-ORK route averaged 45 pax per load last month (it was a bit higher in the main summer months). 45 is 93% of the ATR 42 capacity which seems to be used more than the 72 on the route now, or at least each time I have been at the airport it was a 42. Brymon/BACX used to fly the ORK route from BRS. Perhaps they should look at it again.

BTW, how strong are the rumours about additional easyJet aircraft from next summer? Off the top of my head, I can't think where they might fly to.

Tom the Tenor
23rd Oct 2004, 12:48
Sure would welcome a return by BACX to Cork from Bristol. Was always a good runner in the Dan Air days of yore. Yes, beats me why RE were so focused on trying to do the ORK-BRS route down but as Merchant Venturer says the attraction of easy PSO money may have been a factor. As I said in the RE thread another ATR42/72 would create loads of extra opportunities for Aer Arann ex ORK and elsewhere.

terrier21
23rd Oct 2004, 22:44
I think that the routes operated will be Brs/Fra first thing maybe 0600-0700 then Brs/Mxp 1300-1400 then Brs/Fra 1800-1900. Then again looking at the times it doesnt seem that viable.

Guess we will just have to watch this space!

The Ezy aircraft for next summer was just a rumour and I cant remember where from. Although rumours here at Brs do have tendencies to turn into reality!!!

aeulad
24th Oct 2004, 11:54
What about a BRS-CPH??

U2 were getting 100+ loads, surely a 50 seater would work better?

Regards

Mike

MerchantVenturer
24th Oct 2004, 18:11
I have two other suggestions. The first is Copenhagen. easyJet had built up the route to an average load of 110-120 and would doubtless have kept it going but for the Danish government’s cash grab on every passenger. I flew it in March and there seemed to be a number of regular business travellers – I spoke to one who confirmed it. It must be highly likely that the route would work, even with BACX’s higher fares and the Danish government’s insistence on a piece of the action.
Mike,

I agree wholeheartedly. See above extract from my previous post in this thread.

terrier21
24th Oct 2004, 21:25
Dont get me wrong i would love to see Brs/Cph restarted and I believe It would be financially viable, the only problem I see is it is not operated from Bhx. I know that sounds like a small, insignificant reason but It seems that in the past Brs's Ba routes have only been started once they have been successful from Bhx.