JKP505
I note that you mention the ‘lingering rumour’ that BA will pull their BRS base because it is too close to London.
Another forum member hinted strongly recently in another thread that the writing was on the wall for the BRS BA Citiexpress base. I asked whether he had any more information to add other than rumour, but he did not reply. Have BA suddenly become aware that BRS is ‘close’ to London? Have they only gained knowledge of this little known fact since they pulled their CWL, LBA and ABZ flights? If not, why did they not pull the BRS base at the same time?
Rumours can become self-fulfilling. Say something loudly and often enough and people will believe it and, in the case of airlines, will become reluctant to travel with the airline in question in case the rumours are true. BA’s 'trunk' routes out of BRS (to EDI, GLA, DUB and CDG) have direct competitors in the form of easyJet, Ryanair and Air France Regional. Only on the routes to Munich, Frankfurt, Jersey, Plymouth and Newcastle do they have a monopoly, and the NCL route is due to be duplicated by easyJet from August.
Other than someone in another thread telling me that the NCL route is holding up well, I have no idea of BA loadings and profitability out of BRS. If they are poor, with no forecast of realistic improvement, then no commercial undertaking can be expected to sustain losses indefinitely.
However, if the routes are doing well, and the only grounds for the closure rumours are that after CWL etc BRS must be next, then I think that, to put it mildly they are unhelpful, and they fall into the same category of those than foretell the imminent demise of some airlines.
In three years BRS has grown from 2 million annual pax to 3.5 million with a forecast of 4 million during the next year. So there must be some potential passengers there. If so, why cannot BA have their share?
Perhaps someone with ‘chapter and verse’ might like to enlighten me as to BA’s current situation at BRS.