Originally Posted by
OzzyOzBorn
This really comes down to whether you want to live in a free-market economy or a command economy. In a free-market economy, businesses are free to compete with each other for customers. In a command economy, state officials dictate outcomes. I'm a free-market advocate myself, though I note the arguments in favour of both systems. Our airports are generally free to compete with each other for business, and this process has generally produced good outcomes for the travelling public. Liverpool has done well in competing for the attentions of Ryanair, EasyJet, Wizz and Blue Air. They also won a promise of business from Adria Airways over the Manchester option ... though that carrier failed before anything came of it. No complaints from MAN about "unfair competition" in any of these instances, though when it is MAN which looks to have the upper hand, cries of 'foul' come flying out of Merseyside. No, the free market works both ways. None of the parties should have their hands tied in bidding for business.
And indeed, this process is not just about the winners. Ryanair has done well out of playing off MAN / LPL / LBA against each other. EasyJet has played off MAN and LPL. And, as cited upthread, Wizz has form for flirting with an unserved airport to secure better terms at their preferred base of choice. Could this be happening again? We don't know, but it remains a possibility. If they end up choosing to expand at LPL / DSA, MAN will have to accept that: it is a competitive free market outcome. But the reverse is also true.
Whatever your ambitions for your preferred local airport may be, it is a fact that this process of competing for business results in lower fares for consumers. And that is what the competition authorities like to see. MAN is doing nothing wrong in competing for business with neighbouring airports. And, conversely, neither are they in bidding against MAN.
And as for the airlines: they've never needed improved terms from suppliers more than they do now.
Liverpool Airport were bases for Easyjet and Ryanair prior to them arriving at Manchester so those airlines were not attracted away from Manchester indeed neither have expanded greatly at Liverpool since that happened. I very much doubt Liverpool Airports management ever expected Adria to begin their proposed operations considering their financial situation, of course we are not privy to negotiations but I cant really imagine why Liverpool Airport would go after an airline in such dire shape. Wizz and Blue have only ever operated from Liverpool and of course they will have to offer them attractive rates but there will be a limit to what an airport the size of Liverpool can offer compared to its much large neighbour same for LBA which as far as I know also hasn't attracted any business from Manchester airline wise, with Jet2 growing very slowly if at all there.
If Manchesters financial dominance allows them to offer much lower rates than Liverpool and indeed any other northern airport, I'm not sure how this can be considered a benefit to the region as a whole or passenger.
We are basically left with less choice and a growing monopoly at one airport not to mention job losses. I don't accept the lower fares argument , weather you fly from Liverpool or Manchester or Leeds they are all competing and would have to therefore offer attractive fares otherwise many passengers would just use Manchester if the fare from there was so much less.
If Liverpool looses its main carriers to Manchester due to anti-competitive pricing, I fear for Liverpool Airports future, which I believe to be highly detrimental for the travelling public and the loss of a northwest asset.