Why are HUY, NME and let’s not forget SOU (which you now neglect to mention) poor comparisons? SEN too?
How is the number of airlines not relevant? It is directly relevant and is why all examples I’ve just provided have lost market share to other airports. Why? Because most airlines have chosen to consolidate at fewer, larger departure points. That is why, even though more passengers are travelling now than 20 years ago, they’re flying with a smaller number of airlines and those airlines have chosen not to fly from CWL but BRS and cannot justify flying from both.
You can of course choose to disagree if you wish, but I’m offering empirical evidence and you appear stuck in a mindset not fitting of today’s operating environment. I suggest to you therefore that what CWL needs in order to grow in the way you appear to be championing, is new airlines entering the U.K. market, not a better management team at the airport.
I don’t see HUY or MME as being so relevant as they have never really been of a size (pax wise) comparable to CWL. I made some points about SOU and SEN in earlier posts.
So, if I follow your train of thought through - the large airlines have chosen BRS and won’t operate at CWL and I don’t see new entrants into the UK market, then the aviation related business of CWL looks pretty bleak. I don’t see how non aviation businesses can make the airport a viable going concern.
i am going to bow out of the discussion as it would seem a lot of people feel management and leadership are entirely passive to the aviation part of this business. I take a different view as a customer of the airport and a taxpayer would like to see change and more transparent communication about a recovery business plan - whether that be aviation or non aviation growth. At the moment I see nothing and would like to see more than the maintenance of the status quo.