CORK - 5

[brian_dromey]

Jack, I honestly don't believe that FR were in receipt of any special fees regimen at ORK in respect of DUB and LGW. Those were routes they chose to compete in and the routes would not have been eligible for subsidy. EasyJet to LGW would also have been ineligable as the route needed to be unserved for 6 months and (or possibly an IATA season but I'm not 100% on that), as I recall. That said easyJet may have been able to secure some support as part of a larger deal with Aer Rianta to serve SNN and ORK.
However, your continued assertion that the CAA or Aer Rianta Cork gave preferential treatment to FR on LGW and DUB defies logic. What would they have gained? More volume of passengers, but not paying passengers and also making ORK subservient to the whims of FR. Handing already served routes to FR on a plate seems like a bizzare business move, at best, more likely suicidal and possibly illegal.

Jack, punctiation would greatly help your argument. Keep in mind that you're and your, there and their, whole and hole may sound similar but are not interchangeable in written language.

[dublinaviator]

Originally Posted by Jack1985

Oh my god! This is what I said now read carefully;

Ryanair cutting fares from Cork to London Stansted had minimal affect on the easyJet Cork to London Gatwick route.

Ryanair cutting fares from Cork to London Gatwick (When it launched the route in November 05') had the affect to drive them off the route.

No where in that is there any contradiction BECAUSE there two different airports.

Please point to the post where I differentiated between the Stansted and Gatwick routes. All I said was Ryanair slashing their fares is what caused easyJet to pull out of Cork, and you disagreed and went off on a tangent, contradicting yourself in doing so.

Originally Posted by Jack1985

How many cases are on-going in Belgium, France and Germany (probably more) into Ryanair receiving such subsidies? somehow airports think prostituting (basically) themselves to Ryanair will result in sustainable traffic.

Seen as you're quoting those cases, why don't you give us the details of them? If you knew anything about those cases, you'd know they have nothing to do with incentive schemes.

I'm sure you're also aware that Ryanair have been taking legal action against Air France for the tax breaks its received from the French government, which it claims are a form of state subsidy?

Originally Posted by Jack1985

I've just told you Copenhagen, If I could it would be on PPRuNe - As I have said if you think anyone can find Ryanair's preferential deals with Airports/Routes on the Internet your mistaken.

So your whole arguement is based entirely on hear'say?

[Jack1985]

why don't you give us the details of them? If you knew anything about those cases, you'd know they have nothing to do with incentive schemes.

Hmm, BBC seem's to think they did - BBC NEWS | Business | Ryanair faces new payment probe

Air France for the tax breaks its received from the French government, which it claims are a form of state subsidy?

First I've heard of that to be honest, If true I'd fully support Ryanair's case there.

Jack, punctiation would greatly help your argument. Keep in mind that you're and your, there and their, whole and hole may sound similar but are not interchangeable in written language.

Please.

dublinaviator - What I'm saying is and let me be clear because I'm apparently not, Ryanair slashing there fares from Cork to London Stansted would eat into their own pockets and thats their own business because they're still paying airport charges. But When they are able to slash fares to London Gatwick (competing directly with easyJet) and are not paying airport charges their actually making money while killing competition - Does that make sense? Because I think it does.

hear'say?

Look's that way when I cant back up my knowledge of what I'm talking about - But its fact and its the only reason easyJet left because they simply could not compete. The new structure is somewhat fairer and I remember it was used like it should have been when the CAA refused bmibaby the support scheme for its new East Midlands route (it had just scrapped BHX at the time).

I welcome competition I think its good for everyone - But only when both parties are on a level playing field.

[dublinaviator]

Originally Posted by Jack1985

Hmm, BBC seem's to think they did

That article is 8 years old, and the case was later thrown out in an EU court over irregularities in the investigation. Heres a more recent case relating to alleged 'subsidies' Ryanair received at Carcassonne Airport: Ryanair hit by new EU inquiry | Business | The Guardian

The case revolves around public funds being given to Carcassonne Airport to improve its infrastructure, something that would've been a condition to Ryanair operating at the airport. Airlines such as Air France argue that because Ryanair does not compete with anyone at the airport, it is being given an unfair advantage and is essentially benefitting from state subsidies.

This has nothing to do with this thread, but I'm just making the point that these are the cases you're quoting to back up your arguement, and yet they have nothing to do with Ryanair undercutting other airlines while benefitting from discounts to airport charges, which isn't illegal anyway.

Originally Posted by Jack1985

dublinaviator - What I'm saying is and let me be clear because I'm apparently not, Ryanair slashing there fares from Cork to London Stansted would eat into their own pockets and thats their own business because they're still paying airport charges. But When they are able to slash fares to London Gatwick (competing directly with easyJet) and are not paying airport charges their actually making money while killing competition - Does that make sense? Because I think it does.

And you blame the CAA for this because you think an incentive scheme that was setup for all airlines allowed Ryanair to step in and drive competition out of Cork? You don't think Ryanair would've undercut easyJet anyway as a way of defending its home market?

[Copenhagen]

If what you are saying was true - Aer Arann and EasyJet would have taken Cork Airport to court and won.

The reason AerArann lost that case was because after the 24th November 2006 both were paying full house price and AerArann had no grounds to complain it was then fair competition.

If RE could prove this happened on any date, there was grounds for a complaint. Random dates make no difference.

The only think Ryanair is after is no fee's they got that with both Dublin/Gatwick in there first full year of operation and had the upper hand at Cork to drive them out

Jack - You are claiming that Cork Airport gave Ryanair a subsidy in free landing charges for Dublin and Gatwick, and did'nt offer the same subsidy to Aer Arann and EasyJet. You are accusing a company of an illegal act. You are a brave man. I hope that the CAA legal affairs department don't read these threads and arrive to work on Monday Morning in a bad mood.

Specifically - and for the third time I quote Cork airport

Cork Airport cannot offer preferential rates on existing routes.

Air Transport News


In the very link you posted - Cork airport states

all airlines are eligible to apply for route support through the Route Support Scheme when introducing new destinations.

As I have said if you think anyone can find Ryanair's preferential deals with Airports/Routes on the Internet your mistaken.

The Cork airport subsidy scheme is a pubished document. Again, are you stating that Cork Airport had a secret subsidy only for Ryanair?

Hmm, BBC seem's to think they did

Unlike you, the BBC is not claiming anything - they are reporting that the EU is investigating - nothing else.

Anyway - What has PAU airport have to do with Cork airport subsidies?

[Jack1985]

And you blame the CAA for this because you think an incentive scheme that was setup for all airlines allowed Ryanair to step in and drive competition out of Cork? You don't think Ryanair would've undercut easyJet anyway as a way of defending its home market?

Precisely, Ryanair declared War basically on easyJet in 2005 launching near enough the same schedules and guaranteed to beat them on price. But yet I do blame the CAA if they had refused to offer the waved fee's and told FR if they wanted a new base they could but would pay full house price and if say they did and still drove easyJet out then that was fair competition albeit overkill at the same time.

Anyway - What has PAU airport have to do with Cork airport subsidies?

If you had a brain you'd realise I was refering to Brussels Charleroi.

The Cork airport subsidy scheme is a pubished document. Again, are you stating that Cork Airport had a secret subsidy only for Ryanair?

You really are fooled if you believe Ryanair gets the same subsidies as every other airline, they get zero fee's for x years and give agreements on x amount of traffic.

[Jack1985]

According to Air France, Ryanair received 660 million euros in 2008 in the form of reduced landing fees and airport taxes.
“This is in direct violation of European rules,” said Air France-KLM, which added: “In practice Ryanair is flying with the money of European taxpayers.”
Air-France KLM said it had filed a lawsuit with the European Commission in November, arguing that Ryanair would have lost €829 million last year without the aid.
The row comes with the European Commission already investigating claims that Ryanair received illegal state aid in connection with the use of seven airports in Europe.



If Air France-KLM's accusations are correct it just shows you how reliant Ryanair are on incentives and subsidies.
Le Figaro - Socits : Air France veut porter plainte contre Ryanair

[dublinaviator]

Originally Posted by Jack1985

Precisely, Ryanair declared War basically on easyJet in 2005 launching near enough the same schedules and guaranteed to beat them on price. But yet I do blame the CAA if they had refused to offer the waved fee's and told FR if they wanted a new base they could but would pay full house price and if say they did and still drove easyJet out then that was fair competition albeit overkill at the same time.

Whether Ryanair actually received a discount for the route or not, what makes you think they wouldn't have competed with easyJet directly anyway?

And btw what you're suggesting the CAA should've done is illegal. An airport operator can't pick and choose what airlines it offers discounts to or what routes it allows airlines to fly.

Originally Posted by Jack1985

You really are fooled if you believe Ryanair gets the same subsidies as every other airline, they get zero fee's for x years and give agreements on x amount of traffic.

Ryanair may offer to bring in x million passengers a year if the airport offers a discount to airport charges, and they airport may well agree to that, but it has to offer those discounts to other airlines as well. The only reason other airlines don't start the same routes is because they can't compete with Ryanair.

[Jack1985]

what makes you think they wouldn't have competed with easyJet directly anyway?

I know they had began discussions with Cork Airport in I think February of 2005 they wanted to compete right from the get go with easyJet and had done that with NOC/SNN-LGW. They were going to compete with them theres no if or but about that.

Ryanair may offer to bring in x million passengers a year if the airport offers a discount to airport charges, and they airport may well agree to that, but it has to offer those discounts to other airlines as well. The only reason other airlines don't start the same routes is because they can't compete with Ryanair.

Fair enough I'd agree with that.

I rest my case obviously I cant prove any of this and If I try anymore i'll probably be out of a job.

[Tom the Tenor]

If Joe Gantly was still alive he could tell us the whole story?

May he Rest in Peace, by the way.

[ryan2000]

Ryanair also presented a package of routes to Cork that included Beauvais around late 2004 but it fell through and they opted for Shannon instead. They did introduce Liverpool at this time. As I previously said the Easyjet package was all but agreed but for some reason it didn't happen. This was shortly before the regime change at Cork in early 2005 so it's hard to get a handle on the facts. Traffic then grew by 50% until the 2008 peak but most of the growth was generated by Aerlingus and very little by the low cost airlines.

[EI-BUD]

It was such a sad day when Easyjet axed routes to the Republic, I dont think that flying to ROI was a strategic plan but partly driven by the fact that bmibaby had routes to Prague and Cork from London Gatwick, and given that Easyjet were protecting their LGW patch against any other LOCO, at that time baby could have been seen to be a threat given their backers, i.e. bmi, who at that time were seen in a much different light. In the same way Ryanair were wanted to protect their patch at home. We are all agreed on that one. However, the highly unlikely we will see the orange machines in ROI anytime soon except for maintenance at DUB...!

Ryanair were totally dogmatic on DUB ORK, where they had no interest at all, only an interest in wiping Aer Arann off that map. A small commuter airline with turboprops on thin routes (such as many routes between Ireland and UK) could render many of Ryanair's profitable routes marginal at best. Note FR avoid Flybe for this reason....

Aer Arann now in the guise of Aer Lingus well able to hold their own, and are not as reliant as FR on the point to point traffic, Aberdeen is the first casualty for FR, who can call it charges at Aberdeen if they like. The dominant behaviour of FR in persuit of strategic interest unfortunately is one of the down sides of the deregulated EU air market.

One has to question if FR had never entered ORK DUB and RE continued would the route has been sustainable with both recession and the improved roads?

EI-BUD

[Angry Rebel]

Lads some great comedy posts there in the last 24 hours.

@EI BUD - I do believe the ORK DUB route could have been sustained, but on a more targeted offering. I think 3 flights a day with an ATR42 would easily have been filled with business people, connecting traffic and the odd leisure passenger. Early and late rotations, with a lunchtime one too - and it would need to have been a refurbished 42 to offer proper comfort.

[ryan2000]

Cork should try and re establish a link with one central european city in the near future. Prague, Budapest or Vienna would be great. Aerlingus are the obvious airline to talk to.

[Copenhagen]

Do you really think that Aer Arann would sit and watch Ryanair getting an illegal subsidy without going to court?

If you had a brain you'd realise I was refering to Brussels Charleroi.

Well, why the hell did you link to a BBC article about PAU then?

From the first paragraph of the very bbc article:

The European Commission is to probe an annual payment of 400,000 euros (£274,000) by France's publicly-owned Pau airport to budget airline Ryanair.

moving on...

You really are fooled if you believe Ryanair gets the same subsidies as every other airline.

And, yet again, you accuse Cork airport of granting an airline an illegal subsidy? You, my friend are a very brave man.

and Finally...

I cant prove any of this

Of course you can't. Its impossible to prove as it does not exist.

[Jack1985]

Well, why the hell did you link to a BBC article about PAU then?

''The Commission ruled on Tuesday that Ryanair received illegal incentives to use Belgium's Charleroi airport.'' - That's further down the article the human brain is usually capable of reading one. Dublinaviator has since pointed out this was later thrown out in Court so its of no significant relevance anymore unfortunately.

Of course you can't. Its impossible to prove as it does not exist.

It just makes me laugh Copenhagen that you still think you can can find all of this on the Internet? sure if I search Cork support schemes I'll find all the tables and information of route incentives.. If I search what deal each airline gets do I find information? nope you have to realize Copenhagen not everything is on the Internet and certenaly not preferential business arrangements, sorry to break it to you.

Its impossible to prove as it does not exist.

Yep sure looks that way and I can say no more because as far as you're concerned it will remain that way until it appears on the Internet, As I have said I am saying no more on the matter and thats my final say on the hole Ryanair/easyJet Cork saga.

[aer lingus]

f course you can't. Its impossible to prove as it does not exist.
@ Copenhagen, how do you know it does not exist?

[Copenhagen]

1. Because Cork airport have stated that there were no subsidies for already flown routes.

2. Because EasyJet and Aer Arann would have sued the pants off Cork airport if they thought it existed. They didn't.

3. There isnt even a mumering, execpt on this thread that an illegal subsidy existed.

4. The only 'proof' that was shown here is an article about Pau airport thats really about a court case in Charleroi which was overturned. Guilt by association which turned into innocent by association...

5. By Law, the DAA must publish the details of their incentive schemes. They must be open to all, on a fair and equal basis.

6. Cork airport are innocent until proven guilty of an illegal act.

thats my final say on the hole Ryanair/easyJet Cork saga.

The only hole here is the one that you dug yourself.

[Charlie Roy]

And now I think the discussion around the Ryanair/Easyjet Gatwick/Dublin fees and related issues saga has been exhausted. We need a new route announcement or the release of some winter schedules to save this thread

[ryan2000]

I agree Charlie, it shows how boring things have got at Cork Airport that we're still debating the events of 2005/6. Looking to the future it'll be interesting to see if an Independent Shannon adopts a different strategy to the DAA airports and gives incentives to airlines to switch from Dublin and Cork. At present none of the 3 state airports undermine each other in that way. If that happens Cork will have to be let loose from the DAA on the same terms as Shannon!