Advanced rumours for new bmibaby Teesside routes
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Advanced rumours for new bmibaby Teesside routes
Advanced rumours suggest that bmibaby will launch daily services from Teesside(MME) to:
Alicante, Cork, Palma, Paris CDG and Prague
with Jersey being operated on a reduced frequency.
The Cork and Prague flights will be 'Ws' using East Midlands aircraft with the others being operated with 2 based Boeing 737-500s.
Daily services to Belfast International and Malaga will also continue throughout the summer, with Geneva being dropped.
Alicante, Cork, Palma, Paris CDG and Prague
with Jersey being operated on a reduced frequency.
The Cork and Prague flights will be 'Ws' using East Midlands aircraft with the others being operated with 2 based Boeing 737-500s.
Daily services to Belfast International and Malaga will also continue throughout the summer, with Geneva being dropped.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This sounds like a good mix of routes to start with. Did/does baby have a problem with getting enough aircraft for s '04? (Rumours regarding route/frequency cuts).
Any ideas when the routes will be on sale?
Any ideas when the routes will be on sale?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The word on the street is that Baby have had problems with not having enough Aircraft or Crews to man them, hence the strange reason to drop one aircraft out of Cardiff to accommodate Teeside.
I understand that the load figures on the majority of routes out of Cardiff are excellent, thus to remove one aircraft from there must send out completely the wrong message to people.
What's going on Baby?, don't overstretch yourself !!!
I understand that the load figures on the majority of routes out of Cardiff are excellent, thus to remove one aircraft from there must send out completely the wrong message to people.
What's going on Baby?, don't overstretch yourself !!!
Airlines don't withdraw aircraft from profitable bases to open new bases.
Cheers
WWW
Cheers
WWW
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forgive a layman's interjection but excellent load figures do not always translate into excellent yields, do they?
I know that when baby started at CWL they undercut GO/EZY at BRS on some routes to the extent that some regular BRS passengers made the road journey across the Severn to fly from Wales.
I believe that EZY have recovered these pax and I do not know the seat prices that baby now charges for its routes out of CWL vis-a-vis other low cost airlines elsewhere.
I believe that someone from EZY told me on a forum that the BRS-BFS loads were not brilliant but the yields were pretty good.
I must confess that the mysteries of airline economics is sometimes slightly baffling to those outside the industry.
I know that when baby started at CWL they undercut GO/EZY at BRS on some routes to the extent that some regular BRS passengers made the road journey across the Severn to fly from Wales.
I believe that EZY have recovered these pax and I do not know the seat prices that baby now charges for its routes out of CWL vis-a-vis other low cost airlines elsewhere.
I believe that someone from EZY told me on a forum that the BRS-BFS loads were not brilliant but the yields were pretty good.
I must confess that the mysteries of airline economics is sometimes slightly baffling to those outside the industry.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW,
on this occasion I am afraid Cardiff has lost out to Teeside and the word from all the crews says it is to do with staffing and the inability to have enough aircraft to supply all the routes.
I know Baby on many routes has almost if not an 100% load factor, OK as Merchant Venturer says that does not necessarily mean profitable but apart from a couple of routes which are being dropped they are apparently doing extremely well out of Cardiff and the hope before the entry of Teeside into the Equation was to introduce a 4th Aircraft into Cardiff .
We have been told that they hope to return the third aircraft and hopefully increase the Fleet further in the future, but this is really sending out all the wrong signals.
on this occasion I am afraid Cardiff has lost out to Teeside and the word from all the crews says it is to do with staffing and the inability to have enough aircraft to supply all the routes.
I know Baby on many routes has almost if not an 100% load factor, OK as Merchant Venturer says that does not necessarily mean profitable but apart from a couple of routes which are being dropped they are apparently doing extremely well out of Cardiff and the hope before the entry of Teeside into the Equation was to introduce a 4th Aircraft into Cardiff .
We have been told that they hope to return the third aircraft and hopefully increase the Fleet further in the future, but this is really sending out all the wrong signals.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: over here
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The loads would need to be good as CWL is a relatively low yielding market.
As WWW rightly says airlines do not take out planes from a profitable base to put them somewhere else.
baby's record at CWL suggests its operations there aren't as "fantastic" as Tony Davis says in his statments to the Welsh press.
A significant number of routes have been chopped and changed since the base was established there last year. Some routes have been tried then axed and others have had some serious pruning done to them - GLA, BFS, BGY, JER, CDG etc etc. It's not that disimilar a story at EMA.
When carriers cut capacity they do so to increase yield. Baby's actions would suggest that most of their routes are delivering pretty poor or modest returns out of both CWL and EMA.
It doesn't auger well for when the discounted deal at CWL and the Welsh Assembly money runs out.
As WWW rightly says airlines do not take out planes from a profitable base to put them somewhere else.
baby's record at CWL suggests its operations there aren't as "fantastic" as Tony Davis says in his statments to the Welsh press.
A significant number of routes have been chopped and changed since the base was established there last year. Some routes have been tried then axed and others have had some serious pruning done to them - GLA, BFS, BGY, JER, CDG etc etc. It's not that disimilar a story at EMA.
When carriers cut capacity they do so to increase yield. Baby's actions would suggest that most of their routes are delivering pretty poor or modest returns out of both CWL and EMA.
It doesn't auger well for when the discounted deal at CWL and the Welsh Assembly money runs out.
Indeed. Not wishing to crow at a competitor - nothing would suit me more than for Baby to succeed in CWL and offer a competitor employer in the local area. But. You can rustle up a 737 and a crew in a jiffy these days. If you are making good hard profit at CWL you ain't going to shout STOP - lets move you up to Teeside to open a new route.
You just aren't. Profitable routes need to be tended lovingly. Chop them and reintroduce them at your peril. But then - Sir Michael Bishop does know a wee bit more than me about running airlines so I'll wind my neck in gladly.
On the side issue of loads vs yield. Some fag packet statistics show that EZY made 52m gross off of 26m pax last year. Thats £2 yield before tax - about the profit off two cups of tea or one G&T on board...
The yield is tiny to the turnover - loads mean little.
Cheers
WWW
You just aren't. Profitable routes need to be tended lovingly. Chop them and reintroduce them at your peril. But then - Sir Michael Bishop does know a wee bit more than me about running airlines so I'll wind my neck in gladly.
On the side issue of loads vs yield. Some fag packet statistics show that EZY made 52m gross off of 26m pax last year. Thats £2 yield before tax - about the profit off two cups of tea or one G&T on board...
The yield is tiny to the turnover - loads mean little.
Cheers
WWW
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW - suspect that the £2 per pax you're referring to may be the profit margin per passenger rather than the yield. The yield is equivalent to the average ticket price and even Mr O'Leary would not be happy with a £2 average. I seem to recall EZY's average yield is somewhere in the £40 range (and Ryanair's is lower - hence their "Easyjet fares are xx% higher than ours" blather).
C.
C.
Scourge of Bad Airline Management!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Global Nomad
Age: 55
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few facts.....
1. bmibaby is limited to 13 aircraft by the bmi board.
2. Teesside is not going to become a good base with 1 737 based there.
From 1 and 2, it is obvious that you either give up on Teesside (embarrassing volte face for all concerned) - or you move things about to get critical mass at Teesside for their first summer season.
3. Cardiff loads are very good on the majority of routes.
4. In the low cost game, loads and yields are simply proportional.
So don't sweat about how they are doing. They will - like all lo-costs - tweak their routes. Bear in mind that they had no role models in Cardiff - doing a lo-cost in the South East is dead easy, you copy everyone else, and Bristol was just a Go copy of Stansted - Cardiff is virgin territory and a learning exercise for all concerned (and look at how Go played tunes with their routes our of BRS, as has easyJ?)
5. Cardiff needs a new road to the airport, and baby and the airport have been pushing the cretins in the assembly hard to get them to make a positive decision, rather than carrying on batting it back and forth between the Vale council, the DETR and themselves.
7. Baby needs more aircraft at Cardiff and their other bases, but Sir Michael, he say no....
8. Tony D was, in a former incarnation, the man in charge of government relations for bmi - so is well used to playing the politicians (and airline bosses?) at their own game to get what he wants.
Could it be that moving a 737 may be a political ploy?
Let's not talk baby down, boys and girls..... Tiny Tony knows what he is doing, trust me.
TA
1. bmibaby is limited to 13 aircraft by the bmi board.
2. Teesside is not going to become a good base with 1 737 based there.
From 1 and 2, it is obvious that you either give up on Teesside (embarrassing volte face for all concerned) - or you move things about to get critical mass at Teesside for their first summer season.
3. Cardiff loads are very good on the majority of routes.
4. In the low cost game, loads and yields are simply proportional.
So don't sweat about how they are doing. They will - like all lo-costs - tweak their routes. Bear in mind that they had no role models in Cardiff - doing a lo-cost in the South East is dead easy, you copy everyone else, and Bristol was just a Go copy of Stansted - Cardiff is virgin territory and a learning exercise for all concerned (and look at how Go played tunes with their routes our of BRS, as has easyJ?)
5. Cardiff needs a new road to the airport, and baby and the airport have been pushing the cretins in the assembly hard to get them to make a positive decision, rather than carrying on batting it back and forth between the Vale council, the DETR and themselves.
7. Baby needs more aircraft at Cardiff and their other bases, but Sir Michael, he say no....
8. Tony D was, in a former incarnation, the man in charge of government relations for bmi - so is well used to playing the politicians (and airline bosses?) at their own game to get what he wants.
Could it be that moving a 737 may be a political ploy?
Let's not talk baby down, boys and girls..... Tiny Tony knows what he is doing, trust me.
TA
Hmmmm.
1. So are they not serious about becoming a major low cost carrier then?
2. So why open new bases that you know (from point 1. above) that you can't support?
3. Loads mean diddly - what the yield? Oh, we don't know because Baby is a part of a private group and the figures just aren't there.
4. Umm, hello - £9.99 for the first 5 seats but £399.00 for the last 5...
There were no role models in Bristol either. Cardiff is just a Baby copy of EMA which in turn is a copy of Go. Go started then dropped Rome and Ibiza out of Bristol. Everything else they have kept or expanded or added:
Dropped, Ibiza and Rome. Kept, expanded or added EDI, GLA, BFS, NCL, FAO, BIL, AGP, ALC, BCN, NCE, VCE, PRG, CPH, AMS, PRG.
5. Thats because it will never be built. The airport is only a few miles from the capital - it doesn't need transport links. It needs people with the money and inclination to travel on weekend breaks and own second homes. It doesn't have that.
6. Missing.
7. If your aircraft are making money then why place artificial limits on them? Oh I know - because you are not really serious about becoming a major player.
8. Tony D can be a mafia Boss for all the use it will be in getting Joe Punter into your B737 - which at the end of day - is what is needed when it comes to creating and maintaining a viable route.
So Twin Aisle, how do you like them facts?
Cheers
WWW
1. So are they not serious about becoming a major low cost carrier then?
2. So why open new bases that you know (from point 1. above) that you can't support?
3. Loads mean diddly - what the yield? Oh, we don't know because Baby is a part of a private group and the figures just aren't there.
4. Umm, hello - £9.99 for the first 5 seats but £399.00 for the last 5...
There were no role models in Bristol either. Cardiff is just a Baby copy of EMA which in turn is a copy of Go. Go started then dropped Rome and Ibiza out of Bristol. Everything else they have kept or expanded or added:
Dropped, Ibiza and Rome. Kept, expanded or added EDI, GLA, BFS, NCL, FAO, BIL, AGP, ALC, BCN, NCE, VCE, PRG, CPH, AMS, PRG.
5. Thats because it will never be built. The airport is only a few miles from the capital - it doesn't need transport links. It needs people with the money and inclination to travel on weekend breaks and own second homes. It doesn't have that.
6. Missing.
7. If your aircraft are making money then why place artificial limits on them? Oh I know - because you are not really serious about becoming a major player.
8. Tony D can be a mafia Boss for all the use it will be in getting Joe Punter into your B737 - which at the end of day - is what is needed when it comes to creating and maintaining a viable route.
So Twin Aisle, how do you like them facts?
Cheers
WWW
Scourge of Bad Airline Management!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Global Nomad
Age: 55
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW
1. Yes. But they have finite funds and are determined not to go down the "do it all on tick" road adopted by too many of their competitors.....
2. They can. They just need to wiggle things about a bit.
3. "Loads mean diddly" - they do in normal fare models, but they don't in the low cost world. The pricing model is different.
4. You HAVE grasped the low cost model!!
So could you have predicted which routes out of Cardiff would sell best? If so, you are wasted as a PPRUNE moderator - you could earn a serious fortune doing route planning, and the airlines would kill for you.....
5. Cardiff does need better links. As does Bristol. I am amazed that this is even arguable, personally.... any other Cardiff locals want to comment?
6. Fair cop - I can't count, it was late... no excuse!
7. See bmi's financial results..... what you ain't got, you don't spend.
8. I have more faith in TD than you do, clearly.... you sort of imply that baby run half empty out of Cardiff, which I can assure you is not true. Like all airlines, some routes do better than others, but overall, I would bet baby is committed to Cardiff. I wasn't referring to his ability to fill his aircraft (which is clearly a strength...) but more to his ability to play the long hard game with the powers that be....
TA
1. Yes. But they have finite funds and are determined not to go down the "do it all on tick" road adopted by too many of their competitors.....
2. They can. They just need to wiggle things about a bit.
3. "Loads mean diddly" - they do in normal fare models, but they don't in the low cost world. The pricing model is different.
4. You HAVE grasped the low cost model!!
So could you have predicted which routes out of Cardiff would sell best? If so, you are wasted as a PPRUNE moderator - you could earn a serious fortune doing route planning, and the airlines would kill for you.....
5. Cardiff does need better links. As does Bristol. I am amazed that this is even arguable, personally.... any other Cardiff locals want to comment?
6. Fair cop - I can't count, it was late... no excuse!
7. See bmi's financial results..... what you ain't got, you don't spend.
8. I have more faith in TD than you do, clearly.... you sort of imply that baby run half empty out of Cardiff, which I can assure you is not true. Like all airlines, some routes do better than others, but overall, I would bet baby is committed to Cardiff. I wasn't referring to his ability to fill his aircraft (which is clearly a strength...) but more to his ability to play the long hard game with the powers that be....
TA
Has any airline ever flourished at Cardiff?
Cheers
WWW
Cheers
WWW
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet again a"lets knock Cardiff" post, what is it with folks that they seem to think its clever to do so.
Cardiff is a very different city today than it was 10 years ago, a vibrant exciting go getting city which requires a successful airport.
It is essential to build the M4 link from J34, it would then take minutes to arrive at the airport , unlike another airport to the west of us which takes for ever to get to.
A new terminal to cope with the increased demand will also help increase demand.
In the past maybe people could scoff at Cardiff but i think that will all change. Passenger figures have increased significantly, we are served by both Baby and Air Wales to numerous destinations.
The Welsh deserve an airport as much as any other, else wise the quickest option for us is to fly from Birmingham ( not Bristol it is quicker to get to Birmingham most of the time).
The terminal is a very different place this year than it was 15 months ago, we will succeed.
Thank you TwinAisle for explaining Baby's ridiculous decision to withdraw an Aircraft from Cardiff, lets hope Mr Davies can get things sorted with BMIs board to ensure that Baby can continue to grow at units where they are already doing well.
Cardiff is a very different city today than it was 10 years ago, a vibrant exciting go getting city which requires a successful airport.
It is essential to build the M4 link from J34, it would then take minutes to arrive at the airport , unlike another airport to the west of us which takes for ever to get to.
A new terminal to cope with the increased demand will also help increase demand.
In the past maybe people could scoff at Cardiff but i think that will all change. Passenger figures have increased significantly, we are served by both Baby and Air Wales to numerous destinations.
The Welsh deserve an airport as much as any other, else wise the quickest option for us is to fly from Birmingham ( not Bristol it is quicker to get to Birmingham most of the time).
The terminal is a very different place this year than it was 15 months ago, we will succeed.
Thank you TwinAisle for explaining Baby's ridiculous decision to withdraw an Aircraft from Cardiff, lets hope Mr Davies can get things sorted with BMIs board to ensure that Baby can continue to grow at units where they are already doing well.
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although this is debate has gone slightly off subject I thought I would comment on some points raised herein.
On the face of it it does seem strange that baby is apparently taking an a/c from CWL (albeit temporarily so we are told) when loads have reportedly been generally very good, The difference between yields and loads has already been talked though.
It also seems odd that BRS has pulled well away from CWL in pax number terms in the last few years given its own dreadfully disadvantaged position: poor road links, short runway; poor weather; constricted site and so on. In the 1980s and early 90s both airports were roughly the same size in passenger numbers.
Possibly a clue might lie in some figures announced last month by the BRS management. A consulting firm discovered that 54% of BRS pax are middle aged and professional (36-60 years) with 76% of this group being ABC1 socio economic grouping. Perhaps this type of person is prepared to pay more for 'low cost' flights, thus improving the yield. They are also more likely to have second homes abroad.
Furthermore, 50% of BRS's 4 million passengers live within one hour's drive of the airport with another 14% coming from South Wales and 12% from Devon and Cornwall. This is over half a million South Wales-based people using Bristol Airport.
I know some people from Bristol use Cardiff Airport and also Birmingham which is sometimes easier to reach from the northern side of the city, and it also has routes that Bristol doesn't have, but I don't know how many Bristol area people use CWL and BHX.
Given the government's projected figures I don't see either CWL or BRS stagnating in the years ahead, despite relatively poor road and rail communication links to both airports, especially BRS.
On the face of it it does seem strange that baby is apparently taking an a/c from CWL (albeit temporarily so we are told) when loads have reportedly been generally very good, The difference between yields and loads has already been talked though.
It also seems odd that BRS has pulled well away from CWL in pax number terms in the last few years given its own dreadfully disadvantaged position: poor road links, short runway; poor weather; constricted site and so on. In the 1980s and early 90s both airports were roughly the same size in passenger numbers.
Possibly a clue might lie in some figures announced last month by the BRS management. A consulting firm discovered that 54% of BRS pax are middle aged and professional (36-60 years) with 76% of this group being ABC1 socio economic grouping. Perhaps this type of person is prepared to pay more for 'low cost' flights, thus improving the yield. They are also more likely to have second homes abroad.
Furthermore, 50% of BRS's 4 million passengers live within one hour's drive of the airport with another 14% coming from South Wales and 12% from Devon and Cornwall. This is over half a million South Wales-based people using Bristol Airport.
I know some people from Bristol use Cardiff Airport and also Birmingham which is sometimes easier to reach from the northern side of the city, and it also has routes that Bristol doesn't have, but I don't know how many Bristol area people use CWL and BHX.
Given the government's projected figures I don't see either CWL or BRS stagnating in the years ahead, despite relatively poor road and rail communication links to both airports, especially BRS.
The reason for the relative success of BRS vis-a-vis CWL is the affluence of its catchment area.
Bristol has become a very successful finance and media-orientated city, and both those sectors are high-income.
Just to the NE is Gloucestershire and the Cotswolds - where house prices are high, there are lots of affluent retirees (with money, time and the inherited belief that flying ought to be more expensive than this), and where many Londoners have second homes.
South is Somerset/Dorset, could be described as 'Cotswolds-lite' in terms of rural affluence.
Bristol is the closest airport for all these areas notwithstanding poor road links, and few would consider Cardiff second-closest - people would opt for BHX or LHR in preference.
Contrast Cardiff/South Wales: still a lot of industrial decay, but with some grant-induced inward investment which provides low-paid manufacturing jobs. Other than small pockets, no seriously affluent areas, no aspirational areas (except Cardiff Docklands).
If the flight's not available from CWL, options are BRS and BHX. For those north of the Heads of the Valleys, BHX is probably as accessible.
I see more success for BRS in the future. The only hope CWL has is if Wales becomes independent with Cardiff it's capital. Now there's a thought....
Bristol has become a very successful finance and media-orientated city, and both those sectors are high-income.
Just to the NE is Gloucestershire and the Cotswolds - where house prices are high, there are lots of affluent retirees (with money, time and the inherited belief that flying ought to be more expensive than this), and where many Londoners have second homes.
South is Somerset/Dorset, could be described as 'Cotswolds-lite' in terms of rural affluence.
Bristol is the closest airport for all these areas notwithstanding poor road links, and few would consider Cardiff second-closest - people would opt for BHX or LHR in preference.
Contrast Cardiff/South Wales: still a lot of industrial decay, but with some grant-induced inward investment which provides low-paid manufacturing jobs. Other than small pockets, no seriously affluent areas, no aspirational areas (except Cardiff Docklands).
If the flight's not available from CWL, options are BRS and BHX. For those north of the Heads of the Valleys, BHX is probably as accessible.
I see more success for BRS in the future. The only hope CWL has is if Wales becomes independent with Cardiff it's capital. Now there's a thought....