Flygibraltar
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Coventry, UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If its any use flygibralter's website says 148 seat 737s, which rules out 737-200s. Then again not sure their website and reality are close didn't their website previously state they were partnering with Astraeus yet nothing had actually been agreed with AEU 
Quite a bit on FlyGib in the Gibraltar forum. Nothing being reported as new info down here - except recently advert placed in local paper for cabin staff - which it is assumed could be for flygib. The ad however never mentioned carrier and applications were to be sent to a PO Box number (not unusual in Gib tho)
Nivsy
Nivsy
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: USA, UK and the world
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EAAC and their mad schemes....
Perhaps the guys at EAAC will offer to fly the remains of the Gibraltar apes to Africa for free too!
Did you know they wanted to fly to Pakistan and fly human remains "for free", what an airline! A JOKE.
T
Did you know they wanted to fly to Pakistan and fly human remains "for free", what an airline! A JOKE.
T
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fly Gibraltar, a new airline that proposed low-cost flights between the UK and Gibraltar has recently announced it no longer proposes to commence new services.
The airline has run into financial difficulties and will no longer be executing any operations.
Reports indicate that the multi-million pound investment needed to get the project off the ground did not materialise.
Fly Gibraltar had intended to fly to the Rock from Stansted, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol, Dublin and Cork, beginning this summer.
The airline has run into financial difficulties and will no longer be executing any operations.
Reports indicate that the multi-million pound investment needed to get the project off the ground did not materialise.
Fly Gibraltar had intended to fly to the Rock from Stansted, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol, Dublin and Cork, beginning this summer.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When EZY and FR enter an airport they don't usually operate 1 route, they will expand from the airport, especially in places such as Spain where tourism is extremely high. GIB is just too small for that sort of operation, but do not rule out a LC carrier into the airport.
There are many out there such as LS, AB, Wizzair and SkyEurope to name afew. If we were to name a UK route I would have to say TOM from MAN. Two UK airports are already served by BA (GB) and ZB along with BA and IB on the MAD route, so there is a possibility of the resurection of MAN at the airport after ZB cancelled the route.
There are many out there such as LS, AB, Wizzair and SkyEurope to name afew. If we were to name a UK route I would have to say TOM from MAN. Two UK airports are already served by BA (GB) and ZB along with BA and IB on the MAD route, so there is a possibility of the resurection of MAN at the airport after ZB cancelled the route.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the road
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May even see ZB back on MANGIB. With the MAD flights in the mix and therefore the costs associated with GIB coming down (in theory) combined with Jerez not exactly setting the world alight......who knows?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Madrid FIR
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forget EZY and FR coming to Gib. Apparently they did poke their noses in at one stage, but quickly sussed out that with only one tug and one bowser available there was no way they would be able to achieve the 30 minute turn-rounds they rely on to keep the planes in the air earning money. And the fact there's only room for three A320/B737s on the apron. And the weather problems that cause major problems with divs to LEMG. Just one of those would completely throw their operation to the winds.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think we'll see ZB resurrecting the MAN-GIB route in a hurry. They're not an airline that mess around too much with their schedules if they can help it and having decided to pull GIB for various reasons and offer XRY in its place, I cannot see them going back on that. Plus the XRY route is doing pretty well. Loads of 130+ on most flights on a 174 seater A320 isn't bad going and it seems to have opened up a whole new market from MAN.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS is the only hope for a MAD service out of those airlines you mentioned. I think there's a strong possibility of that happening now that they've dropped BCN, so let's keep our fingers crossed.
ZB won't attempt MAD again I don't think. They've found their market in the solely leisure orientated destinations and do very well in getting high load factors on a daily basis to those places. The only exception being BCN which they've made their own and do very well on it. But MAD is very different to BCN. Tourist traffic to MAD isn't as high and it is far more business orientated. If ZB had smaller a/c then it might have worked better for them but they struggled to even half fill an A320.
And as for WW, well you can call me negative, but I don't think they'll launch another route out of MAN in the near future. They have absolutely no ambition and what small growth they do have seems to all be focused on BHX.
Anyway, back on topic. If ZB were to re-launch GIB they'd have to drop XRY as I really can't see both of them working together. Unless they can market the destination in its own right (as opposed to simply an alternative to GIB) and attract enough pax for both a GIB and XRY service to become viable. This would take several years to achieve, if possible at all. I think there will be a MAN-GIB service in the next couple of years but I don't think it'll be ZB. GB perhaps?
ZB won't attempt MAD again I don't think. They've found their market in the solely leisure orientated destinations and do very well in getting high load factors on a daily basis to those places. The only exception being BCN which they've made their own and do very well on it. But MAD is very different to BCN. Tourist traffic to MAD isn't as high and it is far more business orientated. If ZB had smaller a/c then it might have worked better for them but they struggled to even half fill an A320.
And as for WW, well you can call me negative, but I don't think they'll launch another route out of MAN in the near future. They have absolutely no ambition and what small growth they do have seems to all be focused on BHX.
Anyway, back on topic. If ZB were to re-launch GIB they'd have to drop XRY as I really can't see both of them working together. Unless they can market the destination in its own right (as opposed to simply an alternative to GIB) and attract enough pax for both a GIB and XRY service to become viable. This would take several years to achieve, if possible at all. I think there will be a MAN-GIB service in the next couple of years but I don't think it'll be ZB. GB perhaps?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Madrid FIR
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GB did fly MAN - GIB using 737's once upon a time, but gave it up. Took it up again using 146's, but that didn't last long. Then ZB decided to have a go, but dropped it after a couple of years. Is there a hidden message?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the ZB flights generally did very well. In fact, one of the flights even operated on a 757 on a W pattern with LTN (possibly on a Sunday?) and they managed to fill that up. The reason for leaving GIB was cited as airport fees. Perhaps a cover up, but why then offer XRY (a lesser known destination) as an alternative if the flights direct into GIB didn't work in the first place. Although admittedly it is a little strange that they've kept the GIB-LTN route if they had gripes with the airport over fees.
Anyway, we won't see ZB on the MAN-GIB route in a hurry I'm sure of that. XRY is doing nicely for them (157 pax inbound tonight). But I would like to see another carrier on this route. Shame FlyGib couldn't get off the ground, I think they could have made it work. Does anyone believe that another airline will take on their intended routes?
Anyway, we won't see ZB on the MAN-GIB route in a hurry I'm sure of that. XRY is doing nicely for them (157 pax inbound tonight). But I would like to see another carrier on this route. Shame FlyGib couldn't get off the ground, I think they could have made it work. Does anyone believe that another airline will take on their intended routes?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: GIB
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to resurrect this tread after a month, but someone just emailed me a link to it asking about Manchester-GIB flights.
To confirm what FlyZB posted above, when they droped MAN-GIB Monarch did make a song and dance about landing fees.
The situation was that they were recieving a fixed term discount on landing fees for opening up a new route to give it time to establish itself.
And that discount period was about to finish.
Desptie themselves claiming the route had sucessfully established itself, they decided they'd try and push for a permanent drop in fees and not a return to what they had agreed they would return to. This didn't go down too well locally, since ZB refused to believe the Gib. govt. when they said they didn't set the landing fees, the MOD did.
Also they picked their fight a couple of years too early, as the MOD were just beggining to be really pushed for cost savings themselves and their discussions with GOG about options for efficiency savings were only just begining.
Anyway, it was a game of chicken, ZB really believed GOG+MOD would blink - and they didn't so ZB moved the route to XRY to save face.
When thinking about ZB loads and destinations you need to also remember they do very well from the expat market on a lot of their routes, infact their loyalty scheme is one of the best if you are a 'regular route traveller' - and they get lots of against the flow business becuase of this.
A lot of people in the GIB and near by Spain area would love to see the MAN-XRY service switched to MAN-GIB again - XRY is a real b****ard to get to and a complete no-no on public transport.
----
The one very recent agreement worth of note is that MOD and GOG have agreed to adjust roles with regard to comercial contracts.
GOG will now set and collect and keep for itself the landing fees at GIB. With the cost of operting the airport during normal business hours now being split 50:50 between GOG and MOD. With any party requiring periods of excessive usage (i.e. a larger end of the scale MOD excersise period) paying for it. GOG will totally meet the costs of evening civilian operation (MOD in such periods would be client).
---
Roll on the new terminal by end 2008.
GOG insist GIB will not become a free-for-all, and I believe them. Therefore don't look for Ryanair etc, being allowed in. Smaller operators perhaps, even LCC - providing they allow sales through the global sales systems and END-ON-ENDS etc would be the ideal operators.
It would be nice to have ZB on another route, since they are here for LTN and I'd be amazed if they dropped that one unless actually forced out.
To confirm what FlyZB posted above, when they droped MAN-GIB Monarch did make a song and dance about landing fees.
The situation was that they were recieving a fixed term discount on landing fees for opening up a new route to give it time to establish itself.
And that discount period was about to finish.
Desptie themselves claiming the route had sucessfully established itself, they decided they'd try and push for a permanent drop in fees and not a return to what they had agreed they would return to. This didn't go down too well locally, since ZB refused to believe the Gib. govt. when they said they didn't set the landing fees, the MOD did.
Also they picked their fight a couple of years too early, as the MOD were just beggining to be really pushed for cost savings themselves and their discussions with GOG about options for efficiency savings were only just begining.
Anyway, it was a game of chicken, ZB really believed GOG+MOD would blink - and they didn't so ZB moved the route to XRY to save face.
When thinking about ZB loads and destinations you need to also remember they do very well from the expat market on a lot of their routes, infact their loyalty scheme is one of the best if you are a 'regular route traveller' - and they get lots of against the flow business becuase of this.
A lot of people in the GIB and near by Spain area would love to see the MAN-XRY service switched to MAN-GIB again - XRY is a real b****ard to get to and a complete no-no on public transport.
----
The one very recent agreement worth of note is that MOD and GOG have agreed to adjust roles with regard to comercial contracts.
GOG will now set and collect and keep for itself the landing fees at GIB. With the cost of operting the airport during normal business hours now being split 50:50 between GOG and MOD. With any party requiring periods of excessive usage (i.e. a larger end of the scale MOD excersise period) paying for it. GOG will totally meet the costs of evening civilian operation (MOD in such periods would be client).
---
Roll on the new terminal by end 2008.
GOG insist GIB will not become a free-for-all, and I believe them. Therefore don't look for Ryanair etc, being allowed in. Smaller operators perhaps, even LCC - providing they allow sales through the global sales systems and END-ON-ENDS etc would be the ideal operators.
It would be nice to have ZB on another route, since they are here for LTN and I'd be amazed if they dropped that one unless actually forced out.
Last edited by TheQuietLife; 30th Jul 2007 at 22:12.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Gibraltar
Age: 47
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What seems strange is that no other airline has decided to pick up the MAN-GIB route since there is a big hole in the market locally for this. Even a twice weekly flight would be successful as the occupancy levels for Monarch were always good even at 4 flights per week.
It is a real shame ZB decided to pull out like they did just to save face.
Let's hope someone sees sense and restores this.
It is a real shame ZB decided to pull out like they did just to save face.
Let's hope someone sees sense and restores this.
While I agree with most of the dialogue of Quiet Life - what is the problem of allowing RYR into Gib? I am sure that should an appropriate deal be struck with Ryanair they would open Gib up to a few destinations. The GOG can be a little shall we say "its our way or no way" and ofcourse Ryanair know how to negotiate .
Monarch had a good deal with Mod on the Manchester route (they paid less landing fees on that route than LTN as it was subsidised for a period of time. Once that subsidy expired ZB cared little for the pax who supported the route and stopped th service. Ofcourse the cited landing fees as being the issue (and it was) however what they never outlined was that they were being asked to pay the going rate for Gibraltar and were no longer being subsidised
Nivsy
Monarch had a good deal with Mod on the Manchester route (they paid less landing fees on that route than LTN as it was subsidised for a period of time. Once that subsidy expired ZB cared little for the pax who supported the route and stopped th service. Ofcourse the cited landing fees as being the issue (and it was) however what they never outlined was that they were being asked to pay the going rate for Gibraltar and were no longer being subsidised
Nivsy
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: GIB
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nivsy, I'll come onto the problem of Ryanair in a minute,
However yes as you say, a pity ZB had to pull out to save face (they could have bumped the ticket prices for a short period, then quietly dropped them) however they did totally read this situation wrongly....
Anyway GOG now effectivly in control of landing fees. Lets hope ZB come back on the MAN route. - I note they havn't launched their new timetable with regard to MAN routes yet!
---
OK, the problem with Ryanair is that they are strictly a point-to-point airline. No connections. This is NOT what Gibraltar needs.
If you become a destination on the point-to-point network of an airline then you are competing with all other destinations on that network - but ONLY for the passengers who are within the catchment area for that airport.
Also it means that only 1 new destination option becomes avaiable for passengers departing from Gibraltar. It does not open up alternative routing and options for passengers to other destinations.
Now point-to-point networks come in different guises.
RyanAir are the worst type becuase they only sell tickets directly and don't load them onto the global booking systems.
Monarch are also a point to point network - however they load fares onto the global booking systems (GDSs), meaning anyone using any flight finding tool can find them and book them.
- And they can also book them through a travel agent / or travel agent type website. This is important because people can then structure an ittinary that has multiple flights (not strcitly speaking connecting) but on one 'booking' and therefore still be in a postion of easily having an insurance option against something going wrong in their multiple leg journey.
[Strictly speaking ZB will actually officially sell you a full flex connections permited ticket, however they want FULL fare!]
Now there are plenty of airlines who offer connections (look at Air Berlin etc) also Brussels Airlines etc.
This is one of the reaons I would much sooner be persuading GT to operate GIB-BCN-GIB (at midday) than get either vueling or click on the route.
While click do load their fares into the GDS (using the IB codes that their flights also operate under), - they do not permit connections, end on ends etc. Which makes them a limited benefit.
---
Having said all that, why do I want ZB (a point-to-point) back on the MAN route? - Because they already have an established presence in Gib, many people are 'invested' in their FF scheme, and it does make Gib have a choice of ZB destinations rather being out on the end of the limb. [ZBs FF scheme and other destinations is also well suited to the trafic on a GIB route, which is therefore in the consumer/travellers interest.]
very tired, off to bed.
However yes as you say, a pity ZB had to pull out to save face (they could have bumped the ticket prices for a short period, then quietly dropped them) however they did totally read this situation wrongly....
Anyway GOG now effectivly in control of landing fees. Lets hope ZB come back on the MAN route. - I note they havn't launched their new timetable with regard to MAN routes yet!
---
OK, the problem with Ryanair is that they are strictly a point-to-point airline. No connections. This is NOT what Gibraltar needs.
If you become a destination on the point-to-point network of an airline then you are competing with all other destinations on that network - but ONLY for the passengers who are within the catchment area for that airport.
Also it means that only 1 new destination option becomes avaiable for passengers departing from Gibraltar. It does not open up alternative routing and options for passengers to other destinations.
Now point-to-point networks come in different guises.
RyanAir are the worst type becuase they only sell tickets directly and don't load them onto the global booking systems.
Monarch are also a point to point network - however they load fares onto the global booking systems (GDSs), meaning anyone using any flight finding tool can find them and book them.
- And they can also book them through a travel agent / or travel agent type website. This is important because people can then structure an ittinary that has multiple flights (not strcitly speaking connecting) but on one 'booking' and therefore still be in a postion of easily having an insurance option against something going wrong in their multiple leg journey.
[Strictly speaking ZB will actually officially sell you a full flex connections permited ticket, however they want FULL fare!]
Now there are plenty of airlines who offer connections (look at Air Berlin etc) also Brussels Airlines etc.
This is one of the reaons I would much sooner be persuading GT to operate GIB-BCN-GIB (at midday) than get either vueling or click on the route.
While click do load their fares into the GDS (using the IB codes that their flights also operate under), - they do not permit connections, end on ends etc. Which makes them a limited benefit.
---
Having said all that, why do I want ZB (a point-to-point) back on the MAN route? - Because they already have an established presence in Gib, many people are 'invested' in their FF scheme, and it does make Gib have a choice of ZB destinations rather being out on the end of the limb. [ZBs FF scheme and other destinations is also well suited to the trafic on a GIB route, which is therefore in the consumer/travellers interest.]
very tired, off to bed.
Yes, I do agree with just about everything you say in your very detailed post. I r ecall the heady days (less than 12 months ago) however when British Airways offered jst what you mention on a daily basis from good old London Heathrow. The national carrier (and not for the first time) dumped the route leaving many Gib residents somewhat aggrieved at the loss of international onward connnections. Ofcourse as you mention Iberia and to a lesser extent BA via LGW offer this currently
I for one would welcome Ryan Air even if it is a service to Stansted. I know most certainly that the Chief Minister would most possibly welcome anyone!! (especially as the landing fees are now completely handled by GOG)
Nivsy
I for one would welcome Ryan Air even if it is a service to Stansted. I know most certainly that the Chief Minister would most possibly welcome anyone!! (especially as the landing fees are now completely handled by GOG)
Nivsy
Last edited by nivsy; 6th Sep 2007 at 20:05. Reason: sp
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Gibraltar
Age: 47
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes but even Stanstead again is London. Unfortunately what is needed for many is the connection reestablished to Manchester. There is no reason now for Monarch to reintroduce this at least.