GATWICK
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA just dumped JFK-LGW again and both DL and CO opted to move their New York ops to Heathrow, as did Virgin many moons ago. LGW is bucket and spade territory these days.
LGW-JFK was a slot warmer for LCY-JFK.
The logic was that a four-class LGW-JFK service would get the traffic back to BA by providing a service from people's doorsteps. Silverjet and Eos had both vanished by the time LGW-JFK started, but the BA service didn't outlast them by all that long!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LGW-JFK was introduced to steal premium traffic? hardly. - Anyway, even if that was true it was very misjudged because the W/J/F loads were AWFUL for BA on the LGW-JFK route, as they were when the airline operated the route on a 767 back before 9/11.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: London, Los Angeles and Las Vegas
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA just dumped JFK-LGW again and both DL and CO opted to move their New York ops to Heathrow, as did Virgin many moons ago. LGW is bucket and spade territory these days.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sussex
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Randon Flyer
I think you'll find the BRS/EDI etc (the regions) to NYC have better yields that LGW-NYC. LGW-NYC has problems because for the business traveller there is a very high frequency alternative 40 miles up the road at LHR, so the to/from London business market goes there. The high frequency at LHR, driven by the business market, means there are far more economy seats there than the market really needs, as well as Air India etc with 5th freedom rights, this combination means that the leisure market fares from London are artificially low to try and fill this glut of capacity. That means that LGW services have minimal high yield business traffic, and very low yield leisure traffic, an unsustainable combination.
When you look at the regions, they don't have the proportionately high volumes of business traffic, but their leisure markets are stronger yielding because the alternatives for the leisure markets are the cost of getting to London plus the cheap fares available from there. So a good chunk of the leisure market in the regions would be prepared topay a premium (compared to LON leisure yields) to avoid making that journey to/from London. This logic applies to both passengers travelling to NYC as their final destination, and I'm sure in many cases beyond NYC in the States.
I think you'll find the BRS/EDI etc (the regions) to NYC have better yields that LGW-NYC. LGW-NYC has problems because for the business traveller there is a very high frequency alternative 40 miles up the road at LHR, so the to/from London business market goes there. The high frequency at LHR, driven by the business market, means there are far more economy seats there than the market really needs, as well as Air India etc with 5th freedom rights, this combination means that the leisure market fares from London are artificially low to try and fill this glut of capacity. That means that LGW services have minimal high yield business traffic, and very low yield leisure traffic, an unsustainable combination.
When you look at the regions, they don't have the proportionately high volumes of business traffic, but their leisure markets are stronger yielding because the alternatives for the leisure markets are the cost of getting to London plus the cheap fares available from there. So a good chunk of the leisure market in the regions would be prepared topay a premium (compared to LON leisure yields) to avoid making that journey to/from London. This logic applies to both passengers travelling to NYC as their final destination, and I'm sure in many cases beyond NYC in the States.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
XO Airways?
Does anyone know anything about the rumoured planned start up of this French operator based at Angouleme? I believe they are a 'paper airline' planning to charter in capacity to serve ANG-LGW route from this summer, to replace the Ryanair ANG-STN route, and I am given to understand they may already have some arrangements in place (slots etc) at LGW to cover this?
That said, the Angouleme/Cognac Airport authority seem to have a problem with the plan as, from their website homepage [http://www.aeroport-angouleme-cognac.com/index.html], they appear to be doing their very best to distance themselves from the plan. Very bizarre?!
Does anyone know anything about the rumoured planned start up of this French operator based at Angouleme? I believe they are a 'paper airline' planning to charter in capacity to serve ANG-LGW route from this summer, to replace the Ryanair ANG-STN route, and I am given to understand they may already have some arrangements in place (slots etc) at LGW to cover this?
That said, the Angouleme/Cognac Airport authority seem to have a problem with the plan as, from their website homepage [http://www.aeroport-angouleme-cognac.com/index.html], they appear to be doing their very best to distance themselves from the plan. Very bizarre?!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: France
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
XO Airways +++
Seems to be off, website closed ...
... an other project piloted by the local Chamber of Commerce using an aircraft from Cityline Hungary exists, to replace ryanair, with flights planned to LGW
in french only ... Une compagnie hongroise à la place de Ryanair à Angoulème | Air Journal
Does project will become "real flights" ???
Seems to be off, website closed ...
... an other project piloted by the local Chamber of Commerce using an aircraft from Cityline Hungary exists, to replace ryanair, with flights planned to LGW
in french only ... Une compagnie hongroise à la place de Ryanair à Angoulème | Air Journal
Does project will become "real flights" ???
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In the Chalfonts
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New airline / service to Angouleme
Looks like Cityline SWISS are planning to start the Angouleme route from starting 2nd June with 3 flights per week using MD83's.
Link to their website: CityLine Swiss - Flight from Angoulene to London Gatwick
Anyone know anymore about them as the details on the site are limited? Link with Citylink Hungary who are predominatly a cargo operator with just one passenger 737-200?
Link to their website: CityLine Swiss - Flight from Angoulene to London Gatwick
Anyone know anymore about them as the details on the site are limited? Link with Citylink Hungary who are predominatly a cargo operator with just one passenger 737-200?
The problem is that you can be full of low yield traffic and still make a loss. The break even load factor of economy in low season can be well over 100%.
A number of UK - USA routes outside London have been started, achieved high load factors but discontinued as unprofitable.
I suspect that the problem with LGW - NYC is critical mass. I remember British Airtours operating LGW - EWR twice weekly with a 707 to keep a competitor off a route such was the lack of demand for EWR. Now demand is high. If a major operator wee to open a hub at LGW demand would soon appear.
Not likely to happen though.
A number of UK - USA routes outside London have been started, achieved high load factors but discontinued as unprofitable.
I suspect that the problem with LGW - NYC is critical mass. I remember British Airtours operating LGW - EWR twice weekly with a 707 to keep a competitor off a route such was the lack of demand for EWR. Now demand is high. If a major operator wee to open a hub at LGW demand would soon appear.
Not likely to happen though.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has been mentioned a hundred times on here, you can fly 100% full year round and still lose money if they're all in economy. Particularly as London-New York has so many seats to sell, they need the high fares up the front to make a profit. MAN-JFK didn't achieve enough of these high yielding fares to counterbalance the economy fares down the back, couple that to BA not feeding at either end of the route and a high cost base and they lost money.
LGW-JFK always lost money as there was too much choice on LHR-JFK close by. As soon as the IS carriers could, they moved to Heathrow. Added to the fact that Continental is axing BRS-EWR in favour of another LHR-EWR rotation it's a no brainer. You go where the business and ther profits are, not where Mr Anorak would like to see more planes.
LGW-JFK always lost money as there was too much choice on LHR-JFK close by. As soon as the IS carriers could, they moved to Heathrow. Added to the fact that Continental is axing BRS-EWR in favour of another LHR-EWR rotation it's a no brainer. You go where the business and ther profits are, not where Mr Anorak would like to see more planes.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ballymena
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Iraqi Airways @ Lgw
On the airline's UK site there is now an announcement of the first flight to Baghdad departing Lgw 17th April. On Lgw arrivals this evening is IA 237 due 2310 from Baghdad/Malmo. I know these were cancelled due current situation. My question is, is this service now started, if so, what are the details, like frequency etc?
True Blue
True Blue
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Sussex
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes it was due to start but the current situation has prevented this from happening. It will be a twice weekly service using a 737-400 operated by TorAir a Swedish wet lease operator.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: southeast england
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
