But in terms of subsidies, haven’t you just created an extension of the question and also cast doubt?
as you say, CWL handles 1.5m pax. It has a select number of scheduled routes and also some charter. Yet, here we are. We have a Qatar B787 touching down at what is, and by your own admission, a small airport (and I genuinely don’t mean it as a derogatory statement, you too have insinuated the same).
there are airports with more long haul and larger pax numbers than CWL that don’t have QR. Glasgow, Porto, Lisbon, Lyon and Düsseldorf to name a few. Now, I know ‘rights’ may be an issue in some and it’s not a clear cut case as to why those airports are not served, and I’m not saying CWL doesn’t deserve a chance at the route, but don’t you find that just a teensy bit ‘out of the ordinary?’ And let’s not forget, outside of CWL, we are talking about an airline that is blocked from serving some of its biggest markets and still sailing away just fine, so, not beyond the realms of possibility the welsh government agreed to subsidise the route.
it’s back to my original point though. How can it be considered purely good news that the airline CEO has come out and said what he has. My question had nothing to do with ‘I want the route to fail’ or ‘CWL doesn’t deserve the route’. I was genuinely intrigued how the interpretation of ‘the route hasn’t yet met expectation’ translate down into ‘good news’.