As I have said many times and I will say it again. Baby being at CWL is not preventing other operators coming in. Throwing Baby out will not result in a Jet 2 base the same afternoon. Jet 2 are not there because they don't want to be. If they wanted to be the fact baby has one aircraft based there will not stop them or anyone else. No one is scared of bmi baby, MOL and Stelios do not quake at thought of competing with them. The problem is that airline managers and accountants say "there's no money there" and baby winding down is only, in their minds, proving them right ! Strangely if Baby was doing very well with a five aircraft base you would be more likely to see other airlines there trying to nick that business !
Can I suggest that as many people on here as possible print the above, read it, understand it, and then use it as part of their thinking when they post? Cheeky Visual hit so many nails squarely on the head here that I really cannot pick out the most important comment - but perhaps this line is the most vital:
The problem is that airline managers and accountants say "there's no money there" and baby winding down is only, in their minds, proving them right !
Amen to that. Forget the length of the runway, the problems with the road, the charges for the trolleys, the indifference of the WAG, the strengths and weaknesses of the management. The only way CWL will get more traffic is if airlines can see that there is a market there that makes economic sense to operate to and from. That's it. That's all there is to it. Continuous speculation about this carrier 'should' run this route, or that carrier 'needs to serve' this city are pointless. An airline will only do that sort of thing if they can make a profit on it. No evidence of market (and remember, we are talking revenue here, not just load) means no route.
I see the old EK chestnut is being pushed again.... just a few facts on EK for you....
1. They have the same number of destinations in Scotland as they do IN THE WHOLE OF SOUTH AMERICA.
2. They serve Gatwick about six times as much as they do CANADA
3. They serve Birmingham twice as much as they serve San Francisco
WHY would they want to push more metal into CWL, with all the load and yield dilution, when they have soooo much of the world still to cover? It makes no sense. Down in this part of the world, we joke that EK is now the Indian flag carrier - that's where their interests lie, not further saturation of the UK.
Why would EK risk a new route - with all the costs that incurs, with all the revenue cannibalisation, with all the effort and time that requires - when they could better use that time, effort and metal to serve an airport that has not been shrinking year on year?
Does CWL have a bright future? I think so yes. But it needs to prove its market. Right now, it just isn't doing that. I hope that the reason is NOT that it can't.
TA