BIRMINGHAM - 4
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS
At least there is a rumour of something happening at BHX even if it doesn't come off 
.....IF LS are looking at a new Midlands base (and its a big if) i'm sure they will also be looking at CVT so BHX are going to have to do a knock down deal, not something they are well known for (like their very lukewarm interest in loco operations full stop).
IMO BHX should have poached LS when they were sniffing round EMA, I still think this was an opportunity lost. We are now stuck with FR who seem to have BHX over a barrel, leave us alone BHX, we have no interest in developing new routes, if you don't we have enough routes in place to make a pull out a very big deal for you. Although i'm sure if there was money to be made on routes out of BHX FR would be there with their faces washed......ho hum!
.....IF LS are looking at a new Midlands base (and its a big if) i'm sure they will also be looking at CVT so BHX are going to have to do a knock down deal, not something they are well known for (like their very lukewarm interest in loco operations full stop). IMO BHX should have poached LS when they were sniffing round EMA, I still think this was an opportunity lost. We are now stuck with FR who seem to have BHX over a barrel, leave us alone BHX, we have no interest in developing new routes, if you don't we have enough routes in place to make a pull out a very big deal for you. Although i'm sure if there was money to be made on routes out of BHX FR would be there with their faces washed......ho hum!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS wouldn't be able to operate their 737-800's from CVT.....
If they come anywhere near the West Midlands it will be to BHX who will offer a deal which (Like FR) will start with a bang and fizzle out later.
I can't help thinking that BHX is hampered by the current leadership.
Nothing has happened since the changes at the top happened. Everything has gone down hill since then and not recovered in any way.
Some bad decisions were made early on based on ego's and not necessarily on what was good for BHX.
I don't suppose anything will change any time soon, so back to the rumour mill!!
If they come anywhere near the West Midlands it will be to BHX who will offer a deal which (Like FR) will start with a bang and fizzle out later.
I can't help thinking that BHX is hampered by the current leadership.
Nothing has happened since the changes at the top happened. Everything has gone down hill since then and not recovered in any way.
Some bad decisions were made early on based on ego's and not necessarily on what was good for BHX.
I don't suppose anything will change any time soon, so back to the rumour mill!!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call100 & Helicraig - loving your posts!
IMO BHX and its management got it wrong way back in the late 90's when it remained resolutely loyal to the BA/full service airline horse and showed arrogance of the highest order when it came to the then developing loco operations, which I believe were viewed by them as an irritating flash in the pan. Of course our loyal BA punters would not travel up the M42 to EMA to catch a flight that doesn't even offer an inflight meal they thought. Well, they thought wrong didn't they! Airports like EMA, LPL and BRS instead took a very proactive view to these new-fangled carriers, opened their arms and have now got very strong networks of routes in place when compared to the mid to late 90's. As a result, these airports now claw much more strongly to BHX's catchment area than ever before. BHX's network meanwhile give or take a few East European routes, IST (hanging on in there!
)and increased frequencies on long established routes, looks remarkably similar to that in the early noughties. Yes perhaps other airports have sold their souls and balance sheets to the likes of FR, EZY and so on, but I haven't seen any of these airports shut down because of their reliance on them.
As I have stated before, I am not saying that BHX should have ditched its full service carriers, far from it, they provide an excellent and useful way to tap into hundreds of worldwide destinations from BHX. And I know this is also true for European destinations too - but should pax to/from the UK's second city be condemned to ONLY being able to hub to get around some of the major European cities? No airport should put all its eggs in one basket and having a range of carriers is a strong selling point. But, there should be a choice, it is true for sure that not every route to every major European city is viable from BHX but there surely there should be a better choice available than at present?
Despite changes at the top, there has been a continued lack of interest in low cost airlines at BHX. Although it does have FR, MON and WW, BHX is still behind in terms of based units and destinations compared to others. No wonder the management are trying to squeeze as many shops into the place as possible to make up for the stagnance in aeronautical activity!!
IMO BHX and its management got it wrong way back in the late 90's when it remained resolutely loyal to the BA/full service airline horse and showed arrogance of the highest order when it came to the then developing loco operations, which I believe were viewed by them as an irritating flash in the pan. Of course our loyal BA punters would not travel up the M42 to EMA to catch a flight that doesn't even offer an inflight meal they thought. Well, they thought wrong didn't they! Airports like EMA, LPL and BRS instead took a very proactive view to these new-fangled carriers, opened their arms and have now got very strong networks of routes in place when compared to the mid to late 90's. As a result, these airports now claw much more strongly to BHX's catchment area than ever before. BHX's network meanwhile give or take a few East European routes, IST (hanging on in there!
)and increased frequencies on long established routes, looks remarkably similar to that in the early noughties. Yes perhaps other airports have sold their souls and balance sheets to the likes of FR, EZY and so on, but I haven't seen any of these airports shut down because of their reliance on them. As I have stated before, I am not saying that BHX should have ditched its full service carriers, far from it, they provide an excellent and useful way to tap into hundreds of worldwide destinations from BHX. And I know this is also true for European destinations too - but should pax to/from the UK's second city be condemned to ONLY being able to hub to get around some of the major European cities? No airport should put all its eggs in one basket and having a range of carriers is a strong selling point. But, there should be a choice, it is true for sure that not every route to every major European city is viable from BHX but there surely there should be a better choice available than at present?
Despite changes at the top, there has been a continued lack of interest in low cost airlines at BHX. Although it does have FR, MON and WW, BHX is still behind in terms of based units and destinations compared to others. No wonder the management are trying to squeeze as many shops into the place as possible to make up for the stagnance in aeronautical activity!!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMO BHX and its management got it wrong way back in the late 90's when it remained resolutely loyal to the BA/full service airline horse
In all fairness, I believe that decision was a gross under-estimate of the potential of the lo-cost market at that time rather than any arrogance towards lo-cost operations. Lo-cost was simply seen as a development of new markets which would not impact European short haul air travel to any significant degree.
All the European legacy carriers were very slow indeed to recognise the threat from the lo-cost operators until it was too late to react effectively.
GF nicely put. As I remember Maersk wanted to go loco around the late 90's, but because of the franchise agreement BA were having none of it. That's when the relationship with them started to turn sour. Maersk had very low operating costs compared with BAR and were prepared to open up new routes that would have benefited BHX all round. As I remember pax much preferred the service standard Maersk offered at the time, even though meal services were the same as BAR.
Then along came Duo....................that's another story!
Then along came Duo....................that's another story!
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Nuneaton / Fuerteventura
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR in MAN
I bet Monarch and Jet 2 are thrilled to bits that FR are about to hit there bucket and spade routes in Man. Next winter will be the acid test with Fr having bases in the canary's
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GF...Spot on...I remember being in a meeting with the then MD, Brian Summers, who stated categorically that there was no way that LoCo carriers would operate from BHX....
As for the shops....LHR has, for a long time, made more from the shops than from aeronautical revenue.
BHX would not be far away from the crossover point now......Shops up, routes down....
As for the shops....LHR has, for a long time, made more from the shops than from aeronautical revenue.
BHX would not be far away from the crossover point now......Shops up, routes down....
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call100
Jet2 have 2 738s ex a fleet of 39. Afaik, the issues @CVT restricts some more distant destinations (eg TFS) from being operated with a fully laden 738, with a particular engine type - as used by FR. Have never seen a good breakdown of exactly which routes would be affected and how much - would always appreciated a more detailed technical feedback from anyone who can.
MOL has often said that his selection of routes (and even more so bases) is driven by the handling fees at each end above all else - and I see no reason why Jet2 wouldn't have a similar logic.
So why might BHX offer a better deal than CVT? I would expect Jet2 to talk to both, and I would also expect CVT management to be more hungry for the deal - at the end of the day, they want back in the game, and those portkabins have a very low cost per pax.
LS wouldn't be able to operate their 737-800's from CVT.....
If they come anywhere near the West Midlands it will be to BHX who will offer a deal which (Like FR) will start with a bang and fizzle out later.
If they come anywhere near the West Midlands it will be to BHX who will offer a deal which (Like FR) will start with a bang and fizzle out later.
MOL has often said that his selection of routes (and even more so bases) is driven by the handling fees at each end above all else - and I see no reason why Jet2 wouldn't have a similar logic.
So why might BHX offer a better deal than CVT? I would expect Jet2 to talk to both, and I would also expect CVT management to be more hungry for the deal - at the end of the day, they want back in the game, and those portkabins have a very low cost per pax.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Warwick
Age: 42
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was my understanding, and I may be wrong, that certain 738's couldn't be operated out of CVT without having available (legally) a portion of tarmac at the end of the runway which is unlicenced. The right to licence this portion was "given up" I believe to gain planning from Warwick District Council some time ago...
... however, I dare say with all the talk of the Enterprise Zone and regeneration that perhaps WDC may not be so stuck in the mud about giving them the use of this piece of tarmac back!!
... however, I dare say with all the talk of the Enterprise Zone and regeneration that perhaps WDC may not be so stuck in the mud about giving them the use of this piece of tarmac back!!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call100
Jet2 have 2 738s ex a fleet of 39. Afaik, the issues @CVT restricts some more distant destinations (eg TFS) from being operated with a fully laden 738, with a particular engine type - as used by FR. Have never seen a good breakdown of exactly which routes would be affected and how much - would always appreciated a more detailed technical feedback from anyone who can.
MOL has often said that his selection of routes (and even more so bases) is driven by the handling fees at each end above all else - and I see no reason why Jet2 wouldn't have a similar logic.
So why might BHX offer a better deal than CVT? I would expect Jet2 to talk to both, and I would also expect CVT management to be more hungry for the deal - at the end of the day, they want back in the game, and those portkabins have a very low cost per pax.
Jet2 have 2 738s ex a fleet of 39. Afaik, the issues @CVT restricts some more distant destinations (eg TFS) from being operated with a fully laden 738, with a particular engine type - as used by FR. Have never seen a good breakdown of exactly which routes would be affected and how much - would always appreciated a more detailed technical feedback from anyone who can.
MOL has often said that his selection of routes (and even more so bases) is driven by the handling fees at each end above all else - and I see no reason why Jet2 wouldn't have a similar logic.
So why might BHX offer a better deal than CVT? I would expect Jet2 to talk to both, and I would also expect CVT management to be more hungry for the deal - at the end of the day, they want back in the game, and those portkabins have a very low cost per pax.
I don't believe CVT are as hungry for it as you may think.....Great for them if they are, but, I think their priorities are elsewhere.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the road
Posts: 918
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
crewmeal...Maersk were actually offered the chance to be BMIBaby by BMI in 1999 at the same time that the franchise agreement with BA was up for renewal but because of vanity on the part of AP Moller (they didn't want to lose the Maersk name!!) they rejected the deal...complete and utter madness.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't want to start a war but Birmingham lost its status as second City status years ago........
And the rest is in the bin. Mods
And the rest is in the bin. Mods
Last edited by Hogg; 16th Jul 2011 at 01:35. Reason: DRIBBLE!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
June 2011 down -1.1%
No surprises this month, although I had hoped it would just be up despite
by own estimate (857000).
CAA Figures June 2011 860649 -1.1% rolling year 8640255 -1.3%
ATM's 8051 -2%.
The June 2011 figure was higher than June 2002 but well below June 2003, which was 911622. I am sure this will with give Mr Kehoe some food for thought.
In respect Dubai (down 6%) the question I pose is it being squeezed by Manchester's over capacity on their Middle Eastern flights or just a general down-turn, which will right itself in July and September onwards? Qatar & Etihad barely made 50% load factors in June, which is virtually unheard off on on mid to long-haul flights.
Guess which routes showed increases - yep KLM (& Baby), LH MUC, LH FRA (although not great), LH DUS, SN BRU and LX ZRH. Even TK was up so a good month for STAR at BHX.
Pete
Well off to buy some rose-tinted glasses not from Birmingham of course, as it will be closed at this time on a Friday with everybody tucked up in bed with their hot chocolate (can we afford Hot Chocolate here in the Midlands?)
by own estimate (857000).
CAA Figures June 2011 860649 -1.1% rolling year 8640255 -1.3%
ATM's 8051 -2%.
The June 2011 figure was higher than June 2002 but well below June 2003, which was 911622. I am sure this will with give Mr Kehoe some food for thought.
In respect Dubai (down 6%) the question I pose is it being squeezed by Manchester's over capacity on their Middle Eastern flights or just a general down-turn, which will right itself in July and September onwards? Qatar & Etihad barely made 50% load factors in June, which is virtually unheard off on on mid to long-haul flights.
Guess which routes showed increases - yep KLM (& Baby), LH MUC, LH FRA (although not great), LH DUS, SN BRU and LX ZRH. Even TK was up so a good month for STAR at BHX.
Pete
Well off to buy some rose-tinted glasses not from Birmingham of course, as it will be closed at this time on a Friday with everybody tucked up in bed with their hot chocolate (can we afford Hot Chocolate here in the Midlands?)
Last edited by OltonPete; 15th Jul 2011 at 21:04. Reason: order of words
Bagso go do your trolling somewhere else and Bagsoff!!
I think you need to step outside the huge narrowminded bubble your in and smell the coffee before you go accusing others of being in a bubble! never read so much cods wallop in my life!!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the meantime, back to the airport........I see they have purchased more of the needed land and the extension is going ahead as planned with a 2014 completion date.....
I guess they could use 'The Clock' as a new social club??
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call100
I suppose the "Clock" is the Pub on the A45 - RHS as you go away from the city. - Surely its well out of the way of any developement . Unless the rerouted A45 goes that way. - Are there any SSI's there: to prevnet "progress" at even this stage.
I remember the place as having traditional broad leaf woodland and relatively underdeveloped old stye small fields - OK perhaps I'm wrong.
CAT III
I remember the place as having traditional broad leaf woodland and relatively underdeveloped old stye small fields - OK perhaps I'm wrong.
CAT III
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the area is where the diverted A45 goes through once through the tunnelling where it feeds into the Clock interchange....
Last edited by call100; 17th Jul 2011 at 09:36.