I see a good debate has been had over the last week or so. My quick thoughts on the topics discussed as follows (for what they are worth and to contribute to the debate): -
Flylooloo: - A very poorly conceived business which must be hemorrhaging money. Did they get the idea from Come fly with me's joke airline? What is astounding is that the people in senior positions seem to be experienced individuals, who should know better. Anyone know who is bankrolling this outfit? Package holidays are stuffy and the customer base are slowly dying. No offence to people of the north, who I am sure are so deprived of sun that they overcompensate by frying like a pig on some far flung beach, people in the south are more interested in city breaks where there is culture and things to do. Tour operators will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, work from SOU. The death of Palmair at BOH, which is one of the biggest retirement homes in the country, should be enough evidence.
Flymaybe: - They have been in retrenchment mode for the last couple of years, with the only growth being at odd airports almost certainly as the result of big subsidies/incentives (Doncaster to Newquay - need I say any more). It would appear that they are now just sitting on the shelf waiting to be bought by somebody (they seemed very disappointed that the Stobart deal fell through, which is a crying shame for what was once claimed to be the biggest regional airline in Europe). In my opinion, there will be no growth at SOU by flymaybe, regardless of the increased runway length etc (certainly under the leadership of the current lady who is more interested in making their aircraft look like a female sanitary product).
Easyjet: - They fit SOU like a glove. I agree we will probably only see them initially on the established sun routes, but I would argue that bucket and spade destinations are not the main focus of their business, you only have to see one of their adverts to see that they want to attract the young upwardly mobile demographic, who go on numerous shorter holidays throughout the year to interesting cities around Europe. This is exactly the catchment that SOU is very blessed with. Lets not forget that Easy is very much interested in the business market as well. At the moment, this market is all being forced to use LGW, which is an awful airport and I am yet to meet a single person that has anything positive to say about it. For all these reasons, SOU is low hanging fruit for Easy (if, SOU puts their hand in their pocket, which I still doubt).
Ryanair: - Completely wrong for SOU and the demographic. Would be as welcome as Air Zimbabwe.
Polish market: Absolutely huge, SOU was one eighth Polish last time I checked. A lot even travel as far as Luton to fly home currently. Again, low hanging fruit for Easy.
Masterplan: I guess the fact that there are consultations happening this time, raises the expectations slightly, and that there might actually be some momentum. Mr procrastination has also been dislodged from the hot seat. I still maintain that the stands and taxiways being proposed do not go far enough to provide the environment for a sizable Easy base. The four A320 sized stands are going to be very cramped, and logistical pain at push back (heaven forbid two aircraft need to depart within 10 minutes of each other - which of course they will). A full length taxiway can (and was meant to be) installed on the other side of the runway, and connect with the new apron to the north east (it looks like they now want to waste that area on more car parks - see TCAS FAN's posts for a case of deja vu). Whilst the terminal looks like it will be expanded, there is no mention in respect of security/baggage improvements. I am sure these are planned, but they require a significant rethink. They are a massive bottleneck at the moment, and that is even when two Q400s disembark at the same time! Easy need all this stuff to pick the low hanging fruit, maybe it would be easier to just give them their own terminal on the north east land? Just my thoughts as always!