Yes I heard Carolyn McCall' message today, makes total sense. Opening LGW up to another runway would mean an invasion of competition on its biggest patch. Whereas supporting LHR would mean securing their monopoly of slots at LGW plus potentially going into LHR where the competitive set is higher cost carriers, in essence a honey pot for a low cost carrier.
She also cited the fact that the construction of a runway at LGW would mean disruption and challenges to their sizeable operation at LGW.....
Have a look at U2's submission to the Commission, it's a good read and makes a lot of sense. Page 15 outlines what a U2 operation at LHR might be like.
http://corporate.easyjet.com/~/media...on-jan2015.pdf