CARDIFF - 4
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Wherever my current employers wish to send me !!
Posts: 718
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't always get what you want.
If baby want to place 3 a/c in CWL ad infinitum, then who are any of you
to complain?
As was explained by more astute posters earlier, if a route is pulled or reduced, then it's not going to be a decision taken lightly by management.
If the yield ain't good, then why operate at a loss if you can make a killing on another route?
It's a profit-making business that we're interested in and why throw good money after bad?
You can slag baby off all you like, but if you don't like/understand the reasoning, don't resort to such pathetic comments such as " Why dont WW just
off up north ".
It doesn't become you, dear !
If baby want to place 3 a/c in CWL ad infinitum, then who are any of you
to complain?
As was explained by more astute posters earlier, if a route is pulled or reduced, then it's not going to be a decision taken lightly by management.
If the yield ain't good, then why operate at a loss if you can make a killing on another route?
It's a profit-making business that we're interested in and why throw good money after bad?
You can slag baby off all you like, but if you don't like/understand the reasoning, don't resort to such pathetic comments such as " Why dont WW just
off up north ".It doesn't become you, dear !
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well it isnt just me thats just a wee feed up of WW, theyre making money fair play to them, but why if there so good at what they do are they dropping PRG a well establshed route for a bucket a spade route in an already well served country from CWl?
Is the yield down on that route or something? and instead of calling what i say 'pathetic' why dont you try and give some hard evidence to argue with what im saying?
Surely we can reason without argueing.
Is the yield down on that route or something? and instead of calling what i say 'pathetic' why dont you try and give some hard evidence to argue with what im saying?
Surely we can reason without argueing.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hear hear Little Blue
there are those on this thread who understand the airline industry having actually worked in the airline industry. They understand that it is a cut throat business and survival depends on tough decisions.
Then there are others on here who think they could run an airline but in reality do not have the first clue about the real world and just bleat on about how incompetent airline/airport management is. These are the people who take it personally if airlines don't satisfy their "spotter's wishlist" (to quote a previous poster).
Let's stop this ill informed criticism
there are those on this thread who understand the airline industry having actually worked in the airline industry. They understand that it is a cut throat business and survival depends on tough decisions.
Then there are others on here who think they could run an airline but in reality do not have the first clue about the real world and just bleat on about how incompetent airline/airport management is. These are the people who take it personally if airlines don't satisfy their "spotter's wishlist" (to quote a previous poster).
Let's stop this ill informed criticism
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: By the BCN, VOR
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
Well after sitting back for a few months i've finally decided to join!!!! 
Looking at the progress of this post over the last few days and the previous one for that matter im going to post here with some trepidation.
I firstly must agree with with the like of Littleblue, teifiboy and TwinAisle with there views on the aviation business. Aviation is a demand and supply business, much like Tescos or any other profiteering organisation, they are here to make money, and certainly do not control there business to the likes of hopefulls. If WW wishes to concetrate it's business on the North then let them, theyre obviously going to make more money by basing 9 A/C in BHX than basing an extra A/C in Cardiff. I personnaly hope that they dont finish PRG or cut AMS by two much, but comments such as ( of up north) are totally ludacrus.
As for JH poor guy, I manage a business myself and other people who do or have a fair knowledge of it will realise that you have to make some hard decisions, (you dont run an airport to suit some spotters). Although he and his team could have possibly attracted more routes etc etc, they certainly havent let CWL slip, improved passenger numbers, more routes than ever before, and decent airport developement. Yeh in the grand scheme of things they could have done more to attract routes, but hey if they havent who the hell are we to tell them to off, after all they got the job for some reason or the other didnt they, maybe is i because they know how to run an airport to make money cwl747!!!!!!.
Heres some more helpfull news on the N/S air link.
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100n...name_page.html
Looking at the progress of this post over the last few days and the previous one for that matter im going to post here with some trepidation.
I firstly must agree with with the like of Littleblue, teifiboy and TwinAisle with there views on the aviation business. Aviation is a demand and supply business, much like Tescos or any other profiteering organisation, they are here to make money, and certainly do not control there business to the likes of hopefulls. If WW wishes to concetrate it's business on the North then let them, theyre obviously going to make more money by basing 9 A/C in BHX than basing an extra A/C in Cardiff. I personnaly hope that they dont finish PRG or cut AMS by two much, but comments such as (
of up north) are totally ludacrus.As for JH poor guy, I manage a business myself and other people who do or have a fair knowledge of it will realise that you have to make some hard decisions, (you dont run an airport to suit some spotters). Although he and his team could have possibly attracted more routes etc etc, they certainly havent let CWL slip, improved passenger numbers, more routes than ever before, and decent airport developement. Yeh in the grand scheme of things they could have done more to attract routes, but hey if they havent who the hell are we to tell them to
off, after all they got the job for some reason or the other didnt they, maybe is i because they know how to run an airport to make money cwl747!!!!!!.Heres some more helpfull news on the N/S air link.
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100n...name_page.html
Last edited by 4 engines 4 longhaul; 24th Feb 2007 at 14:51.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that comments such as those by cwl747 are a bit strong but the fact is that bmibaby seem to be so uncommitted with the airport and are treating it like a guinea pig, chopping and changing routes as it suits them.
As for yield, it can't have been bad on the GLA route which was running close to capacity and I for one know that I could have got a cheaper flight from BRS but stuck in at CWL which suggests that they were making money on it. Instead of expanding on this they go and cut it to 1* daily which is going to cause a lot of lost pax without a doubt. As for PRG the loads at BRS are only slightly higher but instead of cutting back EZY raise that to daily. And for those who keep banging on about poor CWL's tiny catchment area - it isn't! Sure BRS has one spanning the south-west but CWL's reaches into West Wales and over into the South-West. The potential is there but the airport cannot seem to secure an airline who is committed to base here and perhaps the landing fees cited by RYR a year back were a major reason. And it is a widely held belief that the marketing team at BRS are much better than CWL's management - just look in the archives. Now AMS a route that gets around 20,000 pax and having flown on this before its usually packed, yes yield can be different but what can you expect?! For pax to pay double to ensure the airline makes money?
Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if there are more hidden surprises from baby in store for us, and on another route front there are strong rumours Zoom are about to leave CWL. When does CWL shut down because it is sure heading in that direction.
As for yield, it can't have been bad on the GLA route which was running close to capacity and I for one know that I could have got a cheaper flight from BRS but stuck in at CWL which suggests that they were making money on it. Instead of expanding on this they go and cut it to 1* daily which is going to cause a lot of lost pax without a doubt. As for PRG the loads at BRS are only slightly higher but instead of cutting back EZY raise that to daily. And for those who keep banging on about poor CWL's tiny catchment area - it isn't! Sure BRS has one spanning the south-west but CWL's reaches into West Wales and over into the South-West. The potential is there but the airport cannot seem to secure an airline who is committed to base here and perhaps the landing fees cited by RYR a year back were a major reason. And it is a widely held belief that the marketing team at BRS are much better than CWL's management - just look in the archives. Now AMS a route that gets around 20,000 pax and having flown on this before its usually packed, yes yield can be different but what can you expect?! For pax to pay double to ensure the airline makes money?
Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if there are more hidden surprises from baby in store for us, and on another route front there are strong rumours Zoom are about to leave CWL. When does CWL shut down because it is sure heading in that direction.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Around and About
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for yield, it can't have been bad on the GLA route which was running close to capacity and I for one know that
Nov 06 8548 pax
Dec 06 7756 pax
Jan 07 6975 pax
If you are running 12 rotations a week that is barely over 50% load factor, no loco carrier is going to stand for that.
Baby have now tried this route twice as double daily and stepped back both times as they obviously see more lucrative routes elsewhere.
Ex
edited due to a finger fumble
Last edited by Exasperated; 24th Feb 2007 at 19:08.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: By the BCN, VOR
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there are strong rumours Zoom are about to leave CWL
the marketing team at BRS are much better than CWL's management
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for PRG the loads at BRS are only slightly higher but instead of cutting back EZY raise that to daily.
It carries around 90,000 pax a year, give or take (eg 93K in 2005 and 89K in 2004 - 2006 not yet available).
Incidentally, CWL is not alone in having seemingly popular routes pulled.
easyJet axed both the CPH and BUD at BRS despite very good load figures, so they must have decided there were better yields elsewhere.
There has been much made of Welsh accents of pax on BRS flights.
This should be no surprise because BRS says approximately 10% of Lulsgate's pax are from South Wales (master plan stats) which works out at around 1,500 per day on average throughout the year.
CWL says that about 10% of its pax come from the West Country so there ought to be quite a number of burrs on the speech of people using aircraft at Rhoose.
Or perhaps we on this side of the Channel are shrinking violets and don't say much so you wouldn't know.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: By the BCN, VOR
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flybe have now made BHD once daily
Going Out
Cardiff (CWL) to Belfast City (BHD) Thu 21 Jun 2007 
Depart 12:45 Arrive 13:45 Fri 22 Jun 2007
Depart 12:45 Arrive 13:45 Full or not
enough seats Sat 23 Jun 2007 This departure date is after your currently displayed return date range. Please select a different return date to travel on this day.
Coming Back
Belfast City (BHD) to Cardiff (CWL)Wed 20 Jun 2007
This return date is before your currently displayed departure date range. Please select a different departure date to travel on this day.Thu 21 Jun 2007
Depart 07:05 Arrive 08:10 Full or not
enough seats Depart 14:20
Arrive 15:25 Fri 22 Jun 2007 Depart 07:05
Arrive 08:10 Full or not
enough seats Depart 14:20
Arrive 15:25
Visited CWL today for the first time in years, and I can quite understand why there are Welsh accents flying from Bristol.
Apart from a wider selection of routes, and better timings, another problem is Rhoose's inaccessibility. I know Lulsgate is a bit off the beaten track, but the drive from the M4 must have been 15 miles, round lots of roundabouts, through at least one residential area, and much of the route speed limited either by statute or quality of the road. And then you join/leave the M4 quite some way west of Cardiff. If I lived in Newport or further east, I think my most convenient airport would be Bristol.
Sorry boyos!!
Apart from a wider selection of routes, and better timings, another problem is Rhoose's inaccessibility. I know Lulsgate is a bit off the beaten track, but the drive from the M4 must have been 15 miles, round lots of roundabouts, through at least one residential area, and much of the route speed limited either by statute or quality of the road. And then you join/leave the M4 quite some way west of Cardiff. If I lived in Newport or further east, I think my most convenient airport would be Bristol.
Sorry boyos!!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Around and About
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
THe November figure looks extremely healthy, especially when compared to EDI-CWL which handled 11022 pax that month and has quite a significant amount of extra flights per month. I must say, whenever I have tried to work out the CWL-GLA loads it has been above 70%. Even over 80% for one month I'm sure.
The best performance was June with 102 pax average (78% and 69% loads respectively).
All data from the CAA website.
Flybe have now made BHD once daily so out goes the window any plans to support business pax. Flybe to expand at CWL don't make me laugh.
Airlines are mercenary, they will not cut frequencies unless they are losing money or can make more cash utilising the aircraft elsewhere.
Ex
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Around and About
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still not desperately bad. Things will certainly get much worse when it goes to 1x daily.
Baby and CWL will be hoping to retain these pax on CWL-EDI but many will use EZY BRS-GLA instead.
Baby just can't seem to make it work double daily having now tried twice, maybe the aircraft is just too big.
Now which loco operates a smaller aircraft? Maybe Flybe could be the knight in shining armour here, and on many other routes around the country which are in danger of being dumped as the mainstream locos continue to upsize in terms of aircraft being operated to gain economies of scale.
Only time will tell and my crystal ball is bust.
Ex
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bristol
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cant believe how much moaning is going on within this thread, especially aimed toward BABY, just because they dont seem to be expanding at CWL for the moment, at the end of the day think what would CWL be like if they didn't bother starting services at all a few years ago!!!
As for Flybe,I'm suprises they're going down to 1 a day so quickly, seems an odd move to make, however i've heard rumours that they will be keeping at least 2 embraers at BRS, possibly 3.
As for Flybe,I'm suprises they're going down to 1 a day so quickly, seems an odd move to make, however i've heard rumours that they will be keeping at least 2 embraers at BRS, possibly 3.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The market for BHD isn't that big from Cardiff that is known, but why have they made that 1 daily, 3 months before it is to start? And frankly I have hardly seen any advertisements, any promotions from Flybe despite the fact this is the first time they have ever flown from CWL. Regarding GLA - baby have been messing around with pax for years already. First they suddenly changed it to PIK (with Air Wales) which really hurt the business pax because most would have preferred GLA so that sent off a load of them to BRS. Then by reinstating GLA they won over some pax back to CWL but now that it is going to be single daily I don't think any business pax would want to be messed around for much longer and I think this is probably a near permanent dent in the pax on this route.
As for Flybe on other routes they could certainly make a go of ABZ which had healthy figures when Air Wales operated it, NCL which has figures of over 20,000 at BRS and so I would bet there is quite a bit of potential here and finally GLA twice daily would work too.
As for Flybe on other routes they could certainly make a go of ABZ which had healthy figures when Air Wales operated it, NCL which has figures of over 20,000 at BRS and so I would bet there is quite a bit of potential here and finally GLA twice daily would work too.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
keeping at least 2 embraers at BRS, possibly 3.
I must to agree that i have seen Zero adverts for BE from CWL considering this is their first route from the airport. The route being cut back months before service starts doesnt look good, they probably would have done better and another route such as Exeter, with virtually no competiton. I did however see a WW advert last month, however in the Western Mail, now, I wouldnt of thought this was babys key advertising market, as all the routes listed on the page were in Spain, surley more biz PAX read the WM. Therfore EDI, AMS, Glasgow and BFS would have been the best routes to advertise there.
Zoom leaving CWL, well all this year both routes are gong via BFS. So it doesnt seem well, but it isnt really poor loads from CAA figures, but maybe yield, or more likley fleet constraints with only 4 aircraft, and more money too be made elsewhere.
Well 20,000 from BRS and
Newcastle with 1318
Smile!!!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: East Yorkshire
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smile
3 daily was from a good source NCL - CWL
Now I know everybody is complaining about Baby, and I have been saying for months that it is all about yield and not numbers. But if say Eastern did Glasgow return twice or 3 times a day, there will be the same people complaining it is too expensive, you cannot have it both ways, do you want more frequencies in which case, you pay higher fares (the busier flights offset the cost of running more services with less passengers). Or scenario 2 , more destinations less frequency like the WW or JE business plan
Over to you boyos
3 daily was from a good source NCL - CWL
Now I know everybody is complaining about Baby, and I have been saying for months that it is all about yield and not numbers. But if say Eastern did Glasgow return twice or 3 times a day, there will be the same people complaining it is too expensive, you cannot have it both ways, do you want more frequencies in which case, you pay higher fares (the busier flights offset the cost of running more services with less passengers). Or scenario 2 , more destinations less frequency like the WW or JE business plan
Over to you boyos
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Baby aren't reluctant to expand CWL. It may appear that way but the reality is that it just isn't true. Unlike TFLY, EASY and Ryanair Baby just have extremely limited resources. They only have 20 aircraft (with one on the way). That's about the same size as Easy's LGW base ! BRS are fortunate that GO chose BRS ten years ago. I believe I have already mentioned that as the point where BRS powered ahead and the reasons for that.
Baby want to place at least one more aircraft in CWL. That's also true of their bases at MAN and EMA. There just aren't any 737 classics available in the world ! A/C 21 is coming from Indonesia ! The company can't afford the extra expense of the NG or totally re-equipping with the bus or the 195. Even if these could be supplied quickly, which they can't.
When you have limited resources you have to maximise them. That means dropping PRG and starting Murcia. Neither are a business route from CWL and that means low yields. However, the demand, accross the week (not just fris, sat and sun) is for Spain not for PRG. Come the winter they may well pull Murcia and look at another city break destination for the winter season.
Just business logic. You can't run a route to make an airfield feel better about itself (unless you're Rhodri Morgan) if you only have finite resources. The routes you operate have to offer the highest return possible and in the summer that means Spainish home owners and holiday makers not stag nights and city breakers.
On the positive side flew from CWL the other day and it is definately going the right way in terms of facilities. A long, long way to go but moving in the right direction. All they need now are some people who know what they are doing to organise it all. It was total chaos and didn't need to be.
Baby want to place at least one more aircraft in CWL. That's also true of their bases at MAN and EMA. There just aren't any 737 classics available in the world ! A/C 21 is coming from Indonesia ! The company can't afford the extra expense of the NG or totally re-equipping with the bus or the 195. Even if these could be supplied quickly, which they can't.
When you have limited resources you have to maximise them. That means dropping PRG and starting Murcia. Neither are a business route from CWL and that means low yields. However, the demand, accross the week (not just fris, sat and sun) is for Spain not for PRG. Come the winter they may well pull Murcia and look at another city break destination for the winter season.
Just business logic. You can't run a route to make an airfield feel better about itself (unless you're Rhodri Morgan) if you only have finite resources. The routes you operate have to offer the highest return possible and in the summer that means Spainish home owners and holiday makers not stag nights and city breakers.
On the positive side flew from CWL the other day and it is definately going the right way in terms of facilities. A long, long way to go but moving in the right direction. All they need now are some people who know what they are doing to organise it all. It was total chaos and didn't need to be.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Have heard a few rumours recently about Flybe, apparently GLA, NCL and ABZ were going to be announced with the completion of the Bacon takeover but with that looking a bit dodgy now who knows. I'm not surprised that they have taken BHD down to a single daily considering the retimed BFS flights by WW.
Another rumour is of Wizz Air who look likely to take on the much needed Polish link. As someone mentioned the loss of Prague means something is needed for Eastern Europe links.
I doubt Zoom will be leaving their loads are pretty respectable and I think the reason its going via BFS is probably just a temporary one.
Another rumour is of Wizz Air who look likely to take on the much needed Polish link. As someone mentioned the loss of Prague means something is needed for Eastern Europe links.
I doubt Zoom will be leaving their loads are pretty respectable and I think the reason its going via BFS is probably just a temporary one.