Emirates - EDI next?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Around and About
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPrune Pop
I hope this passes the sense test
The GLA route has been very successful and proves there is a considerable market out there for O & D and hub traffic from Scotland. This will not have gone unnoticed by their competitors.
I am certain that Emirates would prefer not to operate from two airports so close together as this would incur higher costs, but the last thing Emirates would want is a competitor who may not want to go head to head at GLA and choose to operate from EDI against the Emirates GLA route.
Operating from both airports may be a spoiler to prevent this and ensure that fares are controlled by one operator.
Think about how Continental have developed in Scotland, who could easily have continued to grow their GLA-EWR route. By operating into EDI it has prevented competition from another US major as the route definitely would not support two carriers at this moment in time.
Having the monopoly to New York has helped enable CO to maintain higher fares than flights from other UK airports where competition exists.
This is an opinion but at least has some logic behind it.
More than can be said for many comments on this thread.
Any constructive comments on the above gratefully received
Ex
I hope this passes the sense test
The GLA route has been very successful and proves there is a considerable market out there for O & D and hub traffic from Scotland. This will not have gone unnoticed by their competitors.
I am certain that Emirates would prefer not to operate from two airports so close together as this would incur higher costs, but the last thing Emirates would want is a competitor who may not want to go head to head at GLA and choose to operate from EDI against the Emirates GLA route.
Operating from both airports may be a spoiler to prevent this and ensure that fares are controlled by one operator.
Think about how Continental have developed in Scotland, who could easily have continued to grow their GLA-EWR route. By operating into EDI it has prevented competition from another US major as the route definitely would not support two carriers at this moment in time.
Having the monopoly to New York has helped enable CO to maintain higher fares than flights from other UK airports where competition exists.
This is an opinion but at least has some logic behind it.
More than can be said for many comments on this thread.
Any constructive comments on the above gratefully received
Ex
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IF EK were goping to fly out of EDI, they would have started their Scottish routes from there, but due to lack of Airbridge facilities at EDI, they decided on GLA and will develop that route (probably twice daily with 773) before they would even look at EDI again.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Blairgowrie,Scotland
Age: 75
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So EKs own European Ops Vice President is talking garbage then? You have the quote,I would say EDI has the nod.
But it matters to me not. I won't be using it, AND I have nothing against GLA getting it,even if the route was of interest to me. All this bickering is just very boring reading.
But it matters to me not. I won't be using it, AND I have nothing against GLA getting it,even if the route was of interest to me. All this bickering is just very boring reading.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exasperated
You're contradicting yourself.
First you say EK won't want to operate from both EDI and GLA due to costs (what ever thats supposed to mean!) But then you acknowledge CO doing this exact thing as a good tactical move.
Surely if EK were to operate from EDI too, they could eliminate or at least make it difficult for a competitor to start up the same route.
Now, I'm not saying EDI will get the route. I'm not even saying EDI should, but your argument doesn't realy hold water.
You're contradicting yourself.
First you say EK won't want to operate from both EDI and GLA due to costs (what ever thats supposed to mean!) But then you acknowledge CO doing this exact thing as a good tactical move.
Surely if EK were to operate from EDI too, they could eliminate or at least make it difficult for a competitor to start up the same route.
Now, I'm not saying EDI will get the route. I'm not even saying EDI should, but your argument doesn't realy hold water.
Last edited by Bmused55; 19th Apr 2005 at 22:54.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Around and About
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bmused55
Please reread the post, I never said they did not want to, I said they would prefer not to because it will cost more. Two set of overheads for base costs, loss of economies of scale that can be achieved by running a larger operation on one site, additional marketing costs, logistics, the list of extra costs is long (some small some bigger).
The success of the DXB-GLA roue will not be unnoticed by the competition who always want to muscle in on any profitable business opportunity.
I think you would agree that if EK can retain a monopoly operating from Scotland it could be very lucrative, bearing in mind that true competition always drives down yield.
So how can EK maintain this monopoly? They can up the frequency at GLA and risk a competitor such as Qatar or Etihad trying EDI or they could operate from both airports and risk someone going head to head at GLA using better timings for long haul connections ( a problem with the current timings for EK). One thing is for certain EK are not the sort of operation to sit back and wait for the competition to make the move.
The jury may be out on which way they will jump, either way it will be a hard headed business decision.
There is always the RDF as well, two bites are better than one.
My view is that they may go the EDI route, Continental have proved that operating from both can provide significant traffic growth and EK will have been watching how this has panned out. Of course they could surprise us all and do both, only time will tell.
Now where is that crystal ball?
Ex
Please reread the post, I never said they did not want to, I said they would prefer not to because it will cost more. Two set of overheads for base costs, loss of economies of scale that can be achieved by running a larger operation on one site, additional marketing costs, logistics, the list of extra costs is long (some small some bigger).
The success of the DXB-GLA roue will not be unnoticed by the competition who always want to muscle in on any profitable business opportunity.
I think you would agree that if EK can retain a monopoly operating from Scotland it could be very lucrative, bearing in mind that true competition always drives down yield.
So how can EK maintain this monopoly? They can up the frequency at GLA and risk a competitor such as Qatar or Etihad trying EDI or they could operate from both airports and risk someone going head to head at GLA using better timings for long haul connections ( a problem with the current timings for EK). One thing is for certain EK are not the sort of operation to sit back and wait for the competition to make the move.
The jury may be out on which way they will jump, either way it will be a hard headed business decision.
There is always the RDF as well, two bites are better than one.
My view is that they may go the EDI route, Continental have proved that operating from both can provide significant traffic growth and EK will have been watching how this has panned out. Of course they could surprise us all and do both, only time will tell.
Now where is that crystal ball?
Ex
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Perpetual Traveler
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emirates has never done the logical thing regarding keeping the competition away from its good routes. We lost Toronto to our competitor down the road in Abu Dhabi and we lost Capetown aswell to Qatar Airways. If Emirates decides to go to EDI, and there are strong rumours internaly about this on our crew intranet, it will be because it merits a route from there. If I were to take a bet I would probably bet on EDI since GLA is already getting increased capacity with its 777 and the A330 is a great route starter. They can always... add a second daily flight to either place later on to connect with Asia/ Australia...
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All bickering aside, surely the crucial point here is that we can now see in Scotland a growing pattern of direct flights to international destinations?
We have Continental providing GLA and EDI direct flights to New York, Emirates direct from GLA (and maybe some day EDI) to Dubai, various flights to Canada, as well as the summer season flights from GLA to Chicago and Philadelphia.
If this trend continues, we can reasonably hope to see the seasonal services become year round, though perhaps on smaller aircraft, and maybe see a few other destinations enter the mix, such as Boston or Atlanta in the USA, and maybe an Asian destination such as India or Pakistan.
This has a triple benefit.
It reduces reliance on Heathrow for connections to other destinations.
It improves the likelihood of inbound visitors to the UK choosing to pay a visit to Scotland.
It opens up new trade opportunites - those Emirates 773s won't just be carrying more passengers but also greatly increased cargo loads.
All of this is good stuff - whether the wheels actually hit the tarmac in Glasgow or Edinburgh.
We have Continental providing GLA and EDI direct flights to New York, Emirates direct from GLA (and maybe some day EDI) to Dubai, various flights to Canada, as well as the summer season flights from GLA to Chicago and Philadelphia.
If this trend continues, we can reasonably hope to see the seasonal services become year round, though perhaps on smaller aircraft, and maybe see a few other destinations enter the mix, such as Boston or Atlanta in the USA, and maybe an Asian destination such as India or Pakistan.
This has a triple benefit.
It reduces reliance on Heathrow for connections to other destinations.
It improves the likelihood of inbound visitors to the UK choosing to pay a visit to Scotland.
It opens up new trade opportunites - those Emirates 773s won't just be carrying more passengers but also greatly increased cargo loads.
All of this is good stuff - whether the wheels actually hit the tarmac in Glasgow or Edinburgh.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can understand BAs method of operation.
But at the same time, I can't help wandering what might be if their heads weren't so firmly stuck in the Heathrow sand.
They could easily configure say 4 of their 757s to international config and take on CO.
They've missed a golden opportunity. transpond flights are where the money's at these days.
But at the same time, I can't help wandering what might be if their heads weren't so firmly stuck in the Heathrow sand.
They could easily configure say 4 of their 757s to international config and take on CO.
They've missed a golden opportunity. transpond flights are where the money's at these days.
Last edited by Bmused55; 20th Apr 2005 at 13:34.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me all this discussion about EDI vs GLA for EK may just be missing the point.
EK are obviously expanding to ensure that they are able to capitalise on the projected tourist boom in Dubai.
They are looking to expand incoming tourist trade not outgoing. Based upon this the more centres that they are able to capitalise on with separate UK catchment area's the better.
Thus on this basis EDI & GLA may present a completely different perspective to CO as opposed to EK. It would seem to present a much more sensible business case to expand the EK GLA operation as opposed to setting up another at EDI with an overlap in catchment areas.
A much more sensible operation would be to assume that BRS or NCL are more likely to attract an EK presence on or before EDI. EK has currently a strong regional prescence at MAN & BHX and clearly there are more untapped markets.
EK are obviously expanding to ensure that they are able to capitalise on the projected tourist boom in Dubai.
They are looking to expand incoming tourist trade not outgoing. Based upon this the more centres that they are able to capitalise on with separate UK catchment area's the better.
Thus on this basis EDI & GLA may present a completely different perspective to CO as opposed to EK. It would seem to present a much more sensible business case to expand the EK GLA operation as opposed to setting up another at EDI with an overlap in catchment areas.
A much more sensible operation would be to assume that BRS or NCL are more likely to attract an EK presence on or before EDI. EK has currently a strong regional prescence at MAN & BHX and clearly there are more untapped markets.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bemused55
What on earth is the point of converting a number of 757's ?
Either BA wants to operate all longhaul through a limited number of hubs or it doesn't.
From a historic perspective & in absence of any obvious change in attitude, BA seems to have a well worn strategy & the regions don't figure too highly other than to feed its major hub.
Getting back to your point of converting what would be old 757's nearing the end of their "shelf life" , all you would be achieving is creating a "second level" airline not significantly different to one of many current IT airlines, with less suitable aircraft & with more expensive revenue costs.
Incidentally I have flown extensively with both BA & Continental on longhaul & in my opinion there is not much to choose between them- though BA may just "shade" it.
Are you suggesting that these 757's should be in "packem tight / sell them cheap" mode because you percieve that that is what is appropraite for a transatlantic service for the regions ?
What on earth is the point of converting a number of 757's ?
Either BA wants to operate all longhaul through a limited number of hubs or it doesn't.
From a historic perspective & in absence of any obvious change in attitude, BA seems to have a well worn strategy & the regions don't figure too highly other than to feed its major hub.
Getting back to your point of converting what would be old 757's nearing the end of their "shelf life" , all you would be achieving is creating a "second level" airline not significantly different to one of many current IT airlines, with less suitable aircraft & with more expensive revenue costs.
Incidentally I have flown extensively with both BA & Continental on longhaul & in my opinion there is not much to choose between them- though BA may just "shade" it.
Are you suggesting that these 757's should be in "packem tight / sell them cheap" mode because you percieve that that is what is appropraite for a transatlantic service for the regions ?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Around and About
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bmused55
Airlines want to use flights to feed into their hubs for onward travel. We're back to economies of scale again.This is why airlines like Continental fly from regional airports in the UK to the hub in Newark, similarly (but to a much smaller degree) is AA to Chicago.
The reverse is true for BA on flights from US airports as they concentrate the flights into their main hub at Heathrow. This also explains the move of long haul from Gatwick to Heathrow as BA ceased to use Gatwick as a hub, the flights remaining tend to be for point to point traffic.
As BA do not have a hub in the US it becomes more difficult to attract the passengers for onward travel.So you appear to get the perverse situation where a British aiirline operates from more US airports into the UK and US airlines dominate UK regional airports. Strange but true.
So while the idea of using a 757 from regional airports to the US may be laudable, BA would not have a hub at either end of the flight reducing potential traffic to mainly point to point. Now CO to EWR, AA to ORD, US to PHL etc can take advantage of their US hubs making regional flights from the UK more feasible in their eyes.
Now, my question to you all is:
Why has this not changed with the implementation of code share arrangements which create "notional" hubs outside your country?
Skyman
Your point on other regional airports is valid, but, sadly if you have long haul scheduled services (even just one in the case of EDI) you are far more likely to attract more. In a way airlines are like lemmings, sticking together where the traffic has been proved.
And that, my friends at EDI/GLA goes a long way to explaining why the charter airlines and long haul have concentrated at GLA and the European route developments are mainly at EDI. There are many examples of such throughout the world and some much nearer to home.Wherever EK expand next in the UK, be thankful, as it is not that long ago you couldn't fly from any regional airport to any eastern country (Manchester excepted).
Ex
Airlines want to use flights to feed into their hubs for onward travel. We're back to economies of scale again.This is why airlines like Continental fly from regional airports in the UK to the hub in Newark, similarly (but to a much smaller degree) is AA to Chicago.
The reverse is true for BA on flights from US airports as they concentrate the flights into their main hub at Heathrow. This also explains the move of long haul from Gatwick to Heathrow as BA ceased to use Gatwick as a hub, the flights remaining tend to be for point to point traffic.
As BA do not have a hub in the US it becomes more difficult to attract the passengers for onward travel.So you appear to get the perverse situation where a British aiirline operates from more US airports into the UK and US airlines dominate UK regional airports. Strange but true.
So while the idea of using a 757 from regional airports to the US may be laudable, BA would not have a hub at either end of the flight reducing potential traffic to mainly point to point. Now CO to EWR, AA to ORD, US to PHL etc can take advantage of their US hubs making regional flights from the UK more feasible in their eyes.
Now, my question to you all is:
Why has this not changed with the implementation of code share arrangements which create "notional" hubs outside your country?
Skyman
Your point on other regional airports is valid, but, sadly if you have long haul scheduled services (even just one in the case of EDI) you are far more likely to attract more. In a way airlines are like lemmings, sticking together where the traffic has been proved.
And that, my friends at EDI/GLA goes a long way to explaining why the charter airlines and long haul have concentrated at GLA and the European route developments are mainly at EDI. There are many examples of such throughout the world and some much nearer to home.Wherever EK expand next in the UK, be thankful, as it is not that long ago you couldn't fly from any regional airport to any eastern country (Manchester excepted).
Ex
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Here
Posts: 711
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Picked this up of another site, spanner in the works?
Emirates won't open Geneva route Apr 21
Emirates Airlines will not be starting service from Dubai to Geneva on December 1st as the airline had announced. The airline has a lack of aircraft or has to reassign the aircraft to other routes. It is possible that other new destinations will not be started either.
Emirates won't open Geneva route Apr 21
Emirates Airlines will not be starting service from Dubai to Geneva on December 1st as the airline had announced. The airline has a lack of aircraft or has to reassign the aircraft to other routes. It is possible that other new destinations will not be started either.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of EU
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skyman771. Thought provoking post, however you don't appreciate the central Scotland market.
East coasters will not travel through to the West and West coasters won't travel through to the East! Sound tripe but it's true!
My other half is a chartered surveyor in a worldwide company which needs to maintain an office both in Edinburgh and Glasgow to win any business, whereas there office in Manchester serves the whole of North England from Lancaster to Newcastle etc. If you're based in the East you won't win GLA work and vice versa because each side seem to like doing business with their own people!
That coupled with the phenominal growth in Edinburgh and the Lothians means that the money has shifted to the East Coast (not good in my humble opinion as EDI is getting crowded....).
All this gives Emirates a reason to move into EDI. Remember EDI was their preferred airport but couldn't, and still can't handle a 777.....
East coasters will not travel through to the West and West coasters won't travel through to the East! Sound tripe but it's true!
My other half is a chartered surveyor in a worldwide company which needs to maintain an office both in Edinburgh and Glasgow to win any business, whereas there office in Manchester serves the whole of North England from Lancaster to Newcastle etc. If you're based in the East you won't win GLA work and vice versa because each side seem to like doing business with their own people!
That coupled with the phenominal growth in Edinburgh and the Lothians means that the money has shifted to the East Coast (not good in my humble opinion as EDI is getting crowded....).
All this gives Emirates a reason to move into EDI. Remember EDI was their preferred airport but couldn't, and still can't handle a 777.....
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not good in my humble opinion as EDI is getting crowded....).
All this gives Emirates a reason to move into EDI. Remember EDI was their preferred airport but couldn't, and still can't handle a 777.....