STANSTED - 2

[FRatSTN]

The thing that is "such a shocking way to do business" is EZY continued inability to be able to expand at one location, whether it be LGW, LTN or SEN without it be at the expense of another.


Please remember that SEN has bought NO GROWTH to the London or even the Essex areas at all. Literally every single passenger that travels through SEN with EZY, and then some, used to travel through STN in statistical terms. If you look at the S11 schedule I posted earlier, you can see at least 12 aircraft (though if I remember correctly it was actually 13) and 51 departures from STN. Compare that to 8 aircraft and 33 departures this summer (a reduction of 4/5 aircraft and 18 departures). That reduction is significantly larger than the level of traffic EZY have at SEN.


Were they completely incapable of opening a small base at SEN without it having too much of an impact on STN? Probably not, but the management of the company decided to move substantial capacity away at the time. SEN is no more than a case of EZY relocating its assets and hasn't created any extra growth, jobs and passengers like they seem to make out, not in the "big picture" anyway!


Let's take FR up in the north-west for example where a similar thing appears to be happening between LPL and MAN. FR has taken aircraft, flights and passengers out of LPL this year in favour of MAN, most likely because they (like EZY) haven't been getting many aircraft deliveries. Last year they grew ops at both airports although MAN took most of the growth. This winter FR will be growing very slightly at both airports and has expressed interest to grow again at LPL from next summer once more aircraft start coming in. There is a commitment there to grow at both airports and I'm confident they will do just that. And when you look at the "big picture" the north-west is a lot bigger in terms of FR traffic now than it was 3 years ago, that's more than can be said in EZY's case down in Essex.


EZY have done and I'm sure will continue to do very well at LGW. It is amazing what they have achieved there along with the prospects of them having the North Terminal to themselves but it is slot constrained and limited as to how much more growth it can take, especially in the peak times where based aircraft need to fly out. Any major growth at LGW in future unless it has a 2nd runway will have to be by night stopping aircraft and crews at non-base airports so they can fly into LGW first thing in the morning when there's more slots and that can be very expensive, particularly for a low-cost airline.


But take a look at a few of the routes EZY have dropped from STN in recent years:
ALC - now up to 3x daily by FR
BCN - now 4x daily by FR
FAO - now up to 3x daily by FR


Go back about five or six years and it was purely EZY on these routes with no FR. EZY have been undoubtedly weak to have in that time given FR a monopoly on these routes from STN when they were not too long ago some of their primary routes from one of their primary base airports.


And what happens if we ever see the day where EZY do want to grow again at STN, the airport which it was quick to reach a growth framework with and is the only one in London that already has significant space to grow? Most of the routes they successfully built up at STN are now flown multiple times daily by it's largest rival airline. That means they have probably lost their chances with these routes now and would have to explore new opportunities in new markets that may present further commercial risks that could easily have been avoided under a different strategy.


I don't think it's ever sustainable to remove a lot of your existing capacity because other options arise elsewhere which allow very rapid growth such as that at LGW. Any company should strive to grow in a way where all of its activities can grow alongside each other, not at the expense of each other.