Liverpool and Merseyside is a decent sized market of it's own.
Agreed. Note that my postings support this view.
People seem to think its merely a pawn for Manchester and no more.
Who exactly? Is this a chip-on-the-shoulder problem?
There probably is a market at MAN for WIZZ but not at LPL's expense
Again, nobody here has called for a switch from LPL, only for the addition of MAN flights as well.
based on their geographical diaspora in regions with multiple airports they seem to favour either one or the other. In the NW its LPL at the moment, in the same way with LTN over STN in London, DSA over LBA in Yorkshire and GLA over EDI in Scotland.
Its not a Brussels/Charleroi Glasgow/Prestwick big area small area comparison.
You can't really argue these points in parallel. Are LPL/MAN fighting for broadly the same market as per BRU/CRL, GLA/PIK or not? My view is that there is sufficient disparity between the MAN and LPL catchments for Eastern Europe to justify provision of services from both airports.
They are prepared to go for the cheaper option if it means they are still centrally located to a population base.
People presume far too much weighting on the cost of airport charges at one end of a route as a proportion of the overall expense of providing a service. Strip out fuel, salaries, aircraft financing, insurance, nav charges, costs at the reciprocal airport and you will appreciate how small a deal this really is. Some special-case airports such as LHR and LCY levy much higher fees than their peers due to unique circumstances, but this is not the case at LPL or MAN. Both airports offer terms which have proven conducive to a substantial ULCC presence. So we cannot glibly claim that MAN is "expensive" and LPL is "cheap". Ryanair appear quite at ease with the deals offered by both airports ... can there be such a chasm between comparative charges levied at the two?
Note also that LPL is
centrally located to a different area of population than the one to which Manchester is
centrally located.