DURHAM AIRPORT - 2
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizz to the rescue?
Possible new operator is apparently Wizz...flying 3 times weekly to as yet undisclosed destination in Poland.
Would certaintly raise the spirits a bit and-shock horror-represent a sensible and possibly popular route as would no doubt appeal to stag do's and culture vultures alike-added to the fact that Wizz already have a link to Peel at LPL and DSA
Would certaintly raise the spirits a bit and-shock horror-represent a sensible and possibly popular route as would no doubt appeal to stag do's and culture vultures alike-added to the fact that Wizz already have a link to Peel at LPL and DSA
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: england
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nail on the head
Are DTVA entirely blameless here (new frontage started January and meant to be finished for the summer season, road signs still directing you to Teesside Airport, new Belfast service floated in the press in April and still no announcement). What's happening with the planning approval for the major re-development?
Can't help thinking that Peel see the site more for it's real estate value than its aeronautical.
Can't help thinking that Peel see the site more for it's real estate value than its aeronautical.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near MME, England, UK
Age: 35
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Possible new operator is apparently Wizz...flying 3 times weekly to as yet undisclosed destination in Poland.
Would certaintly raise the spirits a bit and-shock horror-represent a sensible and possibly popular route as would no doubt appeal to stag do's and culture vultures alike-added to the fact that Wizz already have a link to Peel at LPL and DSA
Would certaintly raise the spirits a bit and-shock horror-represent a sensible and possibly popular route as would no doubt appeal to stag do's and culture vultures alike-added to the fact that Wizz already have a link to Peel at LPL and DSA
Speaking of Newcastle, what's this press release on their website? I get the impression they are after a monopoly in the north:
Newcastle International reassures North East travellers following bmibaby’s decision to terminate its operation from Durham Tees Valley Airport.
Newcastle International Airport notes today’s announcement by low-cost airline bmibaby that the airline will terminate all services at Durham Tees Valley Airport by 6th November 2006.
Newcastle International has five low-cost airlines providing services to and from 30 different destinations across Europe, providing the region with an extensive choice of low-cost routes. These destinations include all of those currently operated by bmibaby from Durham Tees Valley, which are Cork, Paris, London Gatwick, Alicante, Malaga and Palma.
Newcastle International’s low cost operators continue to perform strongly at the airport and are enjoying significant growth. Details of all the destinations currently served by easyJet, Ryanair, Flybe, Hapag-Lloyd Express and Jet2.com can be found on the airport’s website together will a full timetable of all scheduled services.
Last edited by PPRuNe Pop; 17th Sep 2006 at 21:24. Reason: Advertising link!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately it does seem though that although it is a bitter pill to swallow, history is once again suggesting that the region is unable to support two airports with similar aspirations and that there can only be one winner
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BMI Baby decision has evoked many emotions, amply demonstrated by submissions to this thread: "pretty foolish"; "shock and anger"; "despicable, what the hell are they thinking"; "seething with the arrogance of WW".
Sadly, whilst I'm sure we all fully sympathise with the staff and customers affected, arrogance and foolishness don't come into it. Only two questions matter. Firstly, did the MME base make a profit? Secondly, if not, is there a reasonable prospect of it doing so in the foreseeable future? BMI Baby views the answers to these questions in the negative. That's why they are leaving. The company is a commercial concern run for profit alone, not to feed civic pride or for philanthropic provision of a desirable service to the public. No profit, no service. BMI Baby is not foolish or despicable to apply this principle; it is the only way an unsubsidised company can survive in a cut-throat business environment. If the leaks aren't plugged the whole ship goes down. Clearly, it's disappointing in the extreme for those hit by the cutbacks. However, maybe it's better to say "thanks for trying" rather than "despicable, what the hell are they thinking." There's alot of airlines out there which have never given MME a chance.
I for one hope MME does attract new operators. But be under no illusion. In an environment of high fuel prices and anti-aviation policies from politicians, only profitable services will survive in the long term. Not just at MME but across the board. If in doubt, read afew of the other airport threads on PPRUNE ... grinding of teeth and howls of protest are par for the course in this industry. Civic pride postures, but money talks.
Sadly, whilst I'm sure we all fully sympathise with the staff and customers affected, arrogance and foolishness don't come into it. Only two questions matter. Firstly, did the MME base make a profit? Secondly, if not, is there a reasonable prospect of it doing so in the foreseeable future? BMI Baby views the answers to these questions in the negative. That's why they are leaving. The company is a commercial concern run for profit alone, not to feed civic pride or for philanthropic provision of a desirable service to the public. No profit, no service. BMI Baby is not foolish or despicable to apply this principle; it is the only way an unsubsidised company can survive in a cut-throat business environment. If the leaks aren't plugged the whole ship goes down. Clearly, it's disappointing in the extreme for those hit by the cutbacks. However, maybe it's better to say "thanks for trying" rather than "despicable, what the hell are they thinking." There's alot of airlines out there which have never given MME a chance.
I for one hope MME does attract new operators. But be under no illusion. In an environment of high fuel prices and anti-aviation policies from politicians, only profitable services will survive in the long term. Not just at MME but across the board. If in doubt, read afew of the other airport threads on PPRUNE ... grinding of teeth and howls of protest are par for the course in this industry. Civic pride postures, but money talks.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Teesside, UK
Age: 33
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well to throw another spanner in the works, I have it on good authority that baby pulling out had very little to do with the profitablity of the base. My crystal ball tells me it was more to do with the landing fees.
On the other hand I'm not sure whether MME could sustain a route to Poland or Hungary with Wizz, although if it was the only route to 'the destination' in the north east then it might do well.
mmeteesside
On the other hand I'm not sure whether MME could sustain a route to Poland or Hungary with Wizz, although if it was the only route to 'the destination' in the north east then it might do well.
mmeteesside
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Isle Du Cyber
Posts: 933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Landing fees
If BMI Baby pulling out due to landing fees it seems odd that it has happened so quickly.
This may just be speculation and could be another reason.
Regional airports want the bussiness but find it diffulcate to work and help the local based operators.
With a number of regional airport having aircraft 0f the Boeing 737 size some route cannot sustain this size of aircraft for to long and numbers on some routes start to dwindle.
With some reports of operators looking to take on some of the routes droped could this be another foot in the north for JET2 or Thompson or would this have effect on the airports close to Durham they operate from??????
This may just be speculation and could be another reason.
Regional airports want the bussiness but find it diffulcate to work and help the local based operators.
With a number of regional airport having aircraft 0f the Boeing 737 size some route cannot sustain this size of aircraft for to long and numbers on some routes start to dwindle.
With some reports of operators looking to take on some of the routes droped could this be another foot in the north for JET2 or Thompson or would this have effect on the airports close to Durham they operate from??????
Ironically, I'm using a bmibaby example here, but bmibaby has hubs at BHX and EMA, so why can't Jet2.com have hubs at NCL and MME?
Its like the HUY and DSA thing, though MME is far better connected than HUY both LBA and NCL are not too far away serving the larger cities and conurbations, that is obviously then where the airlines will want to fly to.
You may be lucky at MME, Peel can work wonders. Just seems hit and miss for airports like MME and HUY (though HUY hasnt realy touched low cost flights yet) someone may come along and decide that it will compete with both LBA and NCL at once and base at MME, but, who does that leave?
My moneys on TOM!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Teesside, UK
Age: 33
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I'll let the whole reason out now, if I dare 
Apparently baby asked for cheaper landing fees (than they already had which I bet were already discounted!), then MME said no, BHX said yes so off they went and pulled the base and moved extras into BHX
My bet is still on Jet2 to base here, with TOM a close 2nd
mmeteesside
Apparently baby asked for cheaper landing fees (than they already had which I bet were already discounted!), then MME said no, BHX said yes so off they went and pulled the base and moved extras into BHX
My bet is still on Jet2 to base here, with TOM a close 2nd
mmeteesside
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well if the refusal by MME with regards to landing fees is true then i applaud DTV airport authority!!
Odd I know to applaud losing business but I really do think it is a two way relationship and since they arrived WW have taken the
!!
1. Given the 'freedom of DTV' with regards to competitors being refused to base operations...source: credible insider from MME
2. Subsidised landing fees (at least initially and probably still a lot cheaper compared to other regionals e.g. EMA and LBA)
3. Infrequent and poorly timetabled destinations with apparant little consulation with DTV airport authority (e.g. BFS and forever changing the times on the CDG run meaning businessmen were driven to NCL and LBA)
4. Dropping profitable routes (e.g. PRG) and introducing 'dubious' routes with little need (e.g. NOC)
5. Treating passengers poorly (well documented flight to JER that took several days to be rectified and various personal stories from friends and relatives of planes going tech either at MME or downroute particularly when my relatives were stuck there for 48hrs which ended up with a nightime coach trip from EMA back to MME)
6. Poor punctuality (a simple look at 'arrivals' most days on ceefax confirms how WW are usually late incoming)
so...after a few days to let the news soak in the words 'blessing in disguise' spring to mind!!
The future? Personally I would like to see operations spread out more evenly over several operators even if it would mean W patterns from Girona, Stockholm etc which alongside operators such as Wizz and perhaps Air Berlin as a possible outsider?
Odd I know to applaud losing business but I really do think it is a two way relationship and since they arrived WW have taken the
!!1. Given the 'freedom of DTV' with regards to competitors being refused to base operations...source: credible insider from MME
2. Subsidised landing fees (at least initially and probably still a lot cheaper compared to other regionals e.g. EMA and LBA)
3. Infrequent and poorly timetabled destinations with apparant little consulation with DTV airport authority (e.g. BFS and forever changing the times on the CDG run meaning businessmen were driven to NCL and LBA)
4. Dropping profitable routes (e.g. PRG) and introducing 'dubious' routes with little need (e.g. NOC)
5. Treating passengers poorly (well documented flight to JER that took several days to be rectified and various personal stories from friends and relatives of planes going tech either at MME or downroute particularly when my relatives were stuck there for 48hrs which ended up with a nightime coach trip from EMA back to MME)
6. Poor punctuality (a simple look at 'arrivals' most days on ceefax confirms how WW are usually late incoming)
so...after a few days to let the news soak in the words 'blessing in disguise' spring to mind!!
The future? Personally I would like to see operations spread out more evenly over several operators even if it would mean W patterns from Girona, Stockholm etc which alongside operators such as Wizz and perhaps Air Berlin as a possible outsider?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As can be seen it is totally irrelevant insofar as the situation that exists some 250+ miles 'up the road'.
Possibly bmibaby failed as it realised that it was extremely difficult to go 'head to head' even on the most popular volume routes that are already established a little further still 'up the road'. Maybe this is a reason why destinations like Knock? were tried
Most of the arguments & criticism of Bmibaby that I have seen on this site appertain to their manner of affecting a withdrawal, which I agree seem deplorable
. However the discussion ongoing as to whether they were profitable has at times been far too 'shallow'. For most business that I deal with, decisions are not based on historic events but much more on future projections. Bmibaby clearly have access to highly advanced forecasting models and market research and for whatever reason the parameters that they identified that they would have to operate within, whether landing fees, pax no.'s or whatever did not add up. It would thus have been a combination of any number of factors that precipitated their decision and once made they must have felt that there was no point in procastinating and a structured withdrawal would have only created more bad feeling & further losses (or less profit for those that don't see it).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near MME, England, UK
Age: 35
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More bad news - I've been informed that all Onur Air flights have been prematurely cut. Whether they will return next summer or not remains to be seen.