PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Aer Lingus - 6
Thread: Aer Lingus - 6
View Single Post
Old 5th Jan 2013, 11:36
  #1033 (permalink)  
BALHR
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BA you are beginning to make yourself look foolish here. Granted it is obvious you have a great desire for BA to flourish and that is your choice, but justifying this by suggestion they buy, do deals or sell out to Virgin, Ryanair or anyone else is not going to happen.

Lets be honest does BA need to operate as many flights as it does to JFK every day, no, so if it really thought it could make more money using those slots elsewhere it would, there are resources available within if it needs to.
The reason I want BA to do well is that they (for better or worse) are the main medium-long haul carrier for the UK (despite what SRB thinks), now the UK is in a pretty poor economic state and what hampers it even more is that compared to our nations in Mainland Europe and the Middle East, the UK is lagging behind in terms of flights/connections to Asia, South America, Africa and other areas in the emerging world, in fact we even fall behind in terms of Domestic connections as well, KLM, LH, AF and even United serve more UK destinations that BA

This is important since we need those connections when it comes to trade, the problem is that there is a lack of space at LHR (which all the airlines want to use) to launch those flights, so we would have to rely on flying to those overseas hubs (thus sucking money out of the country)

This is why I want BA to expand at LHR, LGW and LCY (until R3 opens at LHR, after that they should leave as soon as possible), because since there is little chance of expansion for the time being, because we need to make the most of what we have got and to do that BA needs to increase the number slots it holds at those airports (towards the 70% limit or maybe push it even higher)

Remember Lufthansa owns 70% of the slots at FRA (which can deal with more flights than LHR), a similar number at MUC (which can deal with more flights than LGW) and and ZRH (which can deal with more flights than at MAN or MAD or LCY), and remember, they also have fairly large bases at DUS, VIE, BRU and TXL as well, not only that but they also have close partnerships with TK, which brings a large (and growing hub) at Istanbul and large bases at Ankara, Antalya and Izmir and LOT, which has a hub at Warsaw and a fairly large base out of Krakow

AF-KL also hold’s around 60% of the slots at both Paris airports (Orly and CDG) and Amsterdam as well, not only that but they have focus cities in Lyon, Marseille, Nice, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Rotterdam and London City (for now…), they are also close partners with AZ, who have a fairly large hub at Rome...

BA on the other hand has 52% of the slots at LHR (which can handle fewer flights than at AMS, CDG, MUC and FRA) and 20% of the slots at LGW (BA also holds around 40% of the slots at LCY, which is a small Premium O&D airport), sure they have Iberia/Vueling which has a large hubs at Madrid and Barcelona, but the problem is that the financial performance of those operations is awful and Spain is going though substantial and numerous political/economic problems

Unlike LH and AF-KL, BA don’t have much in the way of partners in Europe, only Air Berlin and they are on the way out (either BK or moving to ST)
You can see what BA has to face and what it needs to do to meet those challenges…

You, then state “does BA need to operate as many flights as it does to JFK every day”, well they do, firstly the premium/business customers need it and want it and BA can provide it (hence TATL is very profitable for them), that is why they pushed for a ATI with AA as soon as Open Skies came into force

However you are missing the point, why you should be asking is why should BA choose between serving TATL (which is highly profitable) or the emerging markets (which are profitable, but less so that TATL, but there is potential for growth)? Why not both markets, I mean LH/LX/TK/OS/SN/LO and AF/KL/AZ do not have to choose, they can (and do) serve both markets rather well

What BA really needs in the long run is 2 additional runways at LHR, only then will LHR (and BA) will be able of fix the problem of capacity, enough to match FRA and MUC combined (once it gets a 3rd runway)

And frankly, I haven’t even got to Qatar Airways, Eithad and Emirates in all of this
BALHR is offline