Thomsonfly.com
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
From: sunshine coast
jabird.
It's on their website in the news section. The article is re one million bookings taken by TOM since it launched.
Its official. BOH is the best selling of the bases at the moment.
Don't know why lakeside84 thought otherwise. But then again as is mentioned on here a lot, why let facts get in the way!
It's on their website in the news section. The article is re one million bookings taken by TOM since it launched.
Its official. BOH is the best selling of the bases at the moment.
Don't know why lakeside84 thought otherwise. But then again as is mentioned on here a lot, why let facts get in the way!
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 173
Likes: 15
From: Hants
Jabird
As FLYboh says the booking figures are taken from the Thomsonfly website.
From CAA website total pax figure for CVT Mar04-Jan05 is 504,258. This will be mainly TOM with some HLX.
So by my reckoning this gives something like the following:
BOH Bookings 100,000
DSA Bookings 130,000
CVT Pax Mar-Jan 500,000
Est. CVT Pax Feb05 50,000
Total 780,000
Est. CVT bookings 220,000
This gives bookings of 15,700 per route for 14 routes and includes most of an extra month (March) compared with BOH.
As FLYboh says the booking figures are taken from the Thomsonfly website.
From CAA website total pax figure for CVT Mar04-Jan05 is 504,258. This will be mainly TOM with some HLX.
So by my reckoning this gives something like the following:
BOH Bookings 100,000
DSA Bookings 130,000
CVT Pax Mar-Jan 500,000
Est. CVT Pax Feb05 50,000
Total 780,000
Est. CVT bookings 220,000
This gives bookings of 15,700 per route for 14 routes and includes most of an extra month (March) compared with BOH.
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Coventry
Flyboh and Le Tirer,
My apologies for laziness! When this was first brought up, it was not on the Thomsonfly website, so it was only available indirectly through the BOH site.
It is also not mentioned on the CVT website. They seem to have a media policy locally of not saying anything which is deemed as being "controversial", as whatever they say, the antis will try and rubbish it.
This is a complete nonsense. There is massive support for Coventry Airport from within the city of Coventry, as these figures clearly show. Meanwhile, the halfwits at Warwick District vote again to refuse any talk of mitigation with the airport. If its ok, I'll continue this on a separate thread, as one is about TOM, and the other is about CVT.
My apologies for laziness! When this was first brought up, it was not on the Thomsonfly website, so it was only available indirectly through the BOH site.
It is also not mentioned on the CVT website. They seem to have a media policy locally of not saying anything which is deemed as being "controversial", as whatever they say, the antis will try and rubbish it.
This is a complete nonsense. There is massive support for Coventry Airport from within the city of Coventry, as these figures clearly show. Meanwhile, the halfwits at Warwick District vote again to refuse any talk of mitigation with the airport. If its ok, I'll continue this on a separate thread, as one is about TOM, and the other is about CVT.
