Although this is debate has gone slightly off subject I thought I would comment on some points raised herein.
On the face of it it does seem strange that baby is apparently taking an a/c from CWL (albeit temporarily so we are told) when loads have reportedly been generally very good, The difference between yields and loads has already been talked though.
It also seems odd that BRS has pulled well away from CWL in pax number terms in the last few years given its own dreadfully disadvantaged position: poor road links, short runway; poor weather; constricted site and so on. In the 1980s and early 90s both airports were roughly the same size in passenger numbers.
Possibly a clue might lie in some figures announced last month by the BRS management. A consulting firm discovered that 54% of BRS pax are middle aged and professional (36-60 years) with 76% of this group being ABC1 socio economic grouping. Perhaps this type of person is prepared to pay more for 'low cost' flights, thus improving the yield. They are also more likely to have second homes abroad.
Furthermore, 50% of BRS's 4 million passengers live within one hour's drive of the airport with another 14% coming from South Wales and 12% from Devon and Cornwall. This is over half a million South Wales-based people using Bristol Airport.
I know some people from Bristol use Cardiff Airport and also Birmingham which is sometimes easier to reach from the northern side of the city, and it also has routes that Bristol doesn't have, but I don't know how many Bristol area people use CWL and BHX.
Given the government's projected figures I don't see either CWL or BRS stagnating in the years ahead, despite relatively poor road and rail communication links to both airports, especially BRS.