I'm no doom-monger and have not written this route off. I couldn't care less what type of aircraft operates the flight, as long as TK prosper and thrive at BHX. Agreed: two months does not give enough time to analyse a routes performance (i'm sure the summer will see much higher pax figures) and that yes, TK are no bargain basement airline. However I still don't understand how carrying 40 or so pax a time (even if paying high yield fares) on an aircraft that can seat another 100 or so more can make money on the day given the cost of fuel, landing fees, crew, catering, baggage handling and all the other things I am sure I have forgotten to mention. If the yield is consistently high, can an airline really make profits on flying such low numbers of pax about on a long term basis?
I assume when looking very simplistically at the economics of a route that, along with fixed and variable costs per flight as well as yield per pax, any profit made during periods of high demand is 'counter balanced' against the costs of operating when demand is lower in order to decide if a route is tenable in the long term? How long will it take before TK have to make that decision at BHX? Then again, I don't work in aviation so what would I know? I would be grateful if one of you knowledgeable chaps out there could enlighten me further.
PS out of interest, how long did it take before EK a) started filling their flights and b) started making any money?