MANCHESTER - 9
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DELTA New York Service Ex LHR Starts March.
The DELTA New York Ex MAN starts July, that's nearer Christmas 2015!
Can somebody pls tell airlines we do actually trade 365 days a year in the North!
The DELTA New York Ex MAN starts July, that's nearer Christmas 2015!
Can somebody pls tell airlines we do actually trade 365 days a year in the North!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's look at some start dates for other transatlantic routes ex-MAN:
PHL: May 2000
ATL: July 1991
ORD: May 1986
JFK (by AA 1st time round): June 1991
Anyone noticing the pattern? None started in March. So perhaps we can have less of the chip on the shoulder about a start date being "wrong" when we ought to be pleased with getting the service. It's then down to the airline (not the airport!) to start advertising the route so passenger book the route and can then allow the route to be upgraded in due course.
PHL: May 2000
ATL: July 1991
ORD: May 1986
JFK (by AA 1st time round): June 1991
Anyone noticing the pattern? None started in March. So perhaps we can have less of the chip on the shoulder about a start date being "wrong" when we ought to be pleased with getting the service. It's then down to the airline (not the airport!) to start advertising the route so passenger book the route and can then allow the route to be upgraded in due course.
Last edited by Ringwayman; 21st Sep 2014 at 09:10.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
makes sense to start a new route in summer - you pick up some of the school holiday trade to get the numbers off to a nice start - plus less chance of weather related issues on the ground
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point bagso, what do the fools at Delta with decades of customer analytics out of their MAN operation know? Probably very little, they should really take your advice and fly all year round. Decisions on where to place valuable assets are clearly made on the back of a yellow post it note, silly billies.
Oh btw your rant at LHR (again) is misplaced as LHR-JFK is year round with seasonal tweaks. Actually, here's a thought, maybe the businesses / airlines in question think MAN is seasonal too. That would explain why there's more flights during summer when people are more likely to go on holiday..... Peak leisure season is when the schools break up btw.
This is a re-introduction of a route recently dropped, I would imagine the removal of non peak offerings reflects learnings from past experience.
Oh btw your rant at LHR (again) is misplaced as LHR-JFK is year round with seasonal tweaks. Actually, here's a thought, maybe the businesses / airlines in question think MAN is seasonal too. That would explain why there's more flights during summer when people are more likely to go on holiday..... Peak leisure season is when the schools break up btw.
This is a re-introduction of a route recently dropped, I would imagine the removal of non peak offerings reflects learnings from past experience.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 21st Sep 2014 at 14:05.
WOW, more chips here than in Blackpool.
Although Bagso wasn't clear - i think he was alluding to the start of the Delta new service LHR - EWR, which does indeed start in March.
The post was at odds with the Delta press release of a June start. bear in mind Thomas Cook start JFK in May . You might consider that you would possibly not want to give TCX a head start on point to point traffic.
Either way, no need for sarcasm on these boards.
Although Bagso wasn't clear - i think he was alluding to the start of the Delta new service LHR - EWR, which does indeed start in March.
The post was at odds with the Delta press release of a June start. bear in mind Thomas Cook start JFK in May . You might consider that you would possibly not want to give TCX a head start on point to point traffic.
Either way, no need for sarcasm on these boards.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Stafford
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does seem to me that Delta can't make up their minds when it comes to MAN; JFK was constantly being downgraded before eventually being cut altogether. Now it's coming back but already the start date has been pushed back and equipment downgraded and given how we are always being told that New York is underserved from MAN I find it disappointing that US carriers can't seem to put on anything larger than a 757.
Then ATL, a route which has always been fairly constant. A few months ago DL planned to upgrade to the 764, then changed to the A332, then back to the 763 before handing it over to Virgin! The Virgin/Delta plans must have been in the works ages ago so why were we hearing about all these planned equipment changes?
Then ATL, a route which has always been fairly constant. A few months ago DL planned to upgrade to the 764, then changed to the A332, then back to the 763 before handing it over to Virgin! The Virgin/Delta plans must have been in the works ages ago so why were we hearing about all these planned equipment changes?
Good points Chinapattern.
I last flew Delta MAN-JFK in 2000,In J class, - full in both cabins- .B763. The 767 also has a nifty cargo capacity- whereas the 757 is seriously lacking.
They allowed a well supported product to fall apart for the reasons Chinapattern says. 14 years later, & it looks very much like some PR & tinkering & then the inevitable.....
I last flew Delta MAN-JFK in 2000,In J class, - full in both cabins- .B763. The 767 also has a nifty cargo capacity- whereas the 757 is seriously lacking.
They allowed a well supported product to fall apart for the reasons Chinapattern says. 14 years later, & it looks very much like some PR & tinkering & then the inevitable.....
Last edited by Mr A Tis; 21st Sep 2014 at 17:48.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: teesside
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I live in the North East, my wife and I travel to florida every summer. We travel business class but want it for a decent price. Until around 4 years ago we always traveled via Manchester. We now get the ferry to Dublin instead, about an extra hour and a half drive then on the ferry as foot passengers where the holiday begins. We have to travel the night before anyway as its too far from up here to manchester to travel on the morning anyway. Last year traveling from Dublin saved us £1200 once the cost of the extra petrol, ferry and 20 euro 15 minute taxi from dublin port is taken into account.
I booked for next summer again from dublin the other day for summer 2015, this year it will be a saving again of about £1200. It will be excellent news for me if Scotland also becomes an alternative route for us and a way of avoiding APD like the dublin route.
Around 20% of all passengers going through Dublin airport originate in the UK.
I booked for next summer again from dublin the other day for summer 2015, this year it will be a saving again of about £1200. It will be excellent news for me if Scotland also becomes an alternative route for us and a way of avoiding APD like the dublin route.
Around 20% of all passengers going through Dublin airport originate in the UK.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tut tut CabinCrewe pots and kettles et al 
The MAN long haul west market is strong but is being chipped away at by Aer Lingus via DUB and capacity dumping over LHR. Bagso moaning that Delta's LHR-EWR is starting before MAN-JFK is, again, comparing apples and pears as LHR-NYC is a very high yielding, high frequency world leading city pair.
By contrast, American's 28 year old MAN-ORD is being dropped for a quarter of next year, so a strong but not unlimited market being sandwiched between two differing competitors.
The MAN long haul west market is strong but is being chipped away at by Aer Lingus via DUB and capacity dumping over LHR. Bagso moaning that Delta's LHR-EWR is starting before MAN-JFK is, again, comparing apples and pears as LHR-NYC is a very high yielding, high frequency world leading city pair.
By contrast, American's 28 year old MAN-ORD is being dropped for a quarter of next year, so a strong but not unlimited market being sandwiched between two differing competitors.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really don't think DUB is the issue at all. Scotland for example has saw new US routes this year yet APD is still in place. LHR is the major problem and it effects DUB massively as BA heavily under cut flights to get passengers to fly them instead of direct. The AA changes at DUB and MAN are solely down to protect LhR services this winter.
The above poster flies DUB-MCO yet thousands of Irish people save hundreds with VS and BA via the UK.....
As for changes in APD don't be fooled into thinking once its scrapped/cut airlines will come flocking to MAN or indeed Scotland because they wont and it will not stop people connecting at euro hubs in favour of MAN as prices will always be cheaper to fly indirectly.
Has MAN even lost any L/H capacity since APD started?
Its actually the big hubs at LHR and AMS which bring the most connecting passengers to DUB.
As competition continues to decline between the US and Europe prices will continue to go one way.
BFS us a prefect example of what a cut in air tax does, nothing and a 12 week suspension of a service.
The above poster flies DUB-MCO yet thousands of Irish people save hundreds with VS and BA via the UK.....
As for changes in APD don't be fooled into thinking once its scrapped/cut airlines will come flocking to MAN or indeed Scotland because they wont and it will not stop people connecting at euro hubs in favour of MAN as prices will always be cheaper to fly indirectly.
Has MAN even lost any L/H capacity since APD started?
Its actually the big hubs at LHR and AMS which bring the most connecting passengers to DUB.
As competition continues to decline between the US and Europe prices will continue to go one way.
BFS us a prefect example of what a cut in air tax does, nothing and a 12 week suspension of a service.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EI A330 300
Good post. I tend to agree that APD doesn't make a huge amount of difference because airlines will just hoover up the difference in profits.
I'm a very regular J Class passenger across the pond and my nearest / most logical airport to where I live is MAN.
I'm starting to get tired of the constant attrition that I get from corporate travel agents who are obliged by their 'clients'...who are ultimately my clients, telling me how expensive it is to fly from Manchester and I should consider changing at LHR or AMS or CDG. It is a permanent background noise these days.
Fortunately I'm senior enough or confident/daft enough to tell them to '**** off'...I just don't need that kind of crap at my time of life with nothing left to prove in my career. They end up paying the kind of stupid OTT prices that airlines like DL (in particular) like to charge. I know I'm not the norm and there are plenty of J Class pax who would prefer to use non-stop MAN-USA flights but a combination of narrow minded short sighted tax penalties on the part of the UK govt and aggressive pricing by US carriers out of MAN (and other UK non LHR airports) has hobbled the potential.
This is the dichotomy of the UK's airport policy....despite grumbling about over capacity in the SE it has no qualms about aggressive airline pricing nor an unwillingness to countenance demand based (progressive)tax policies that, in absence encourages further demand at the very airport that they claim is over capacity and leaves other airports with under utilised infrastructure sweeping up the scraps.
I'm more or less a fully fledged free market laissez-faire economist but I'm increasingly getting to the view that in the case of UK aviation policy, we have a market failure that needs to be addressed by the government.
The current London-centric market failure system that has been tolerated for the last few decades has not made the strides that should be the fruits of a normally functioning market.
In the light of recent 'the Scottish people have spoken' events...... - the North of England is significantly bigger, more populous and richer - if the Westminster establishment is serious about freeing up the rest of the UK economy from its constraints then ............something has to be done.
Greetings from Texas by the way
Good post. I tend to agree that APD doesn't make a huge amount of difference because airlines will just hoover up the difference in profits.
I'm a very regular J Class passenger across the pond and my nearest / most logical airport to where I live is MAN.
I'm starting to get tired of the constant attrition that I get from corporate travel agents who are obliged by their 'clients'...who are ultimately my clients, telling me how expensive it is to fly from Manchester and I should consider changing at LHR or AMS or CDG. It is a permanent background noise these days.
Fortunately I'm senior enough or confident/daft enough to tell them to '**** off'...I just don't need that kind of crap at my time of life with nothing left to prove in my career. They end up paying the kind of stupid OTT prices that airlines like DL (in particular) like to charge. I know I'm not the norm and there are plenty of J Class pax who would prefer to use non-stop MAN-USA flights but a combination of narrow minded short sighted tax penalties on the part of the UK govt and aggressive pricing by US carriers out of MAN (and other UK non LHR airports) has hobbled the potential.
This is the dichotomy of the UK's airport policy....despite grumbling about over capacity in the SE it has no qualms about aggressive airline pricing nor an unwillingness to countenance demand based (progressive)tax policies that, in absence encourages further demand at the very airport that they claim is over capacity and leaves other airports with under utilised infrastructure sweeping up the scraps.
I'm more or less a fully fledged free market laissez-faire economist but I'm increasingly getting to the view that in the case of UK aviation policy, we have a market failure that needs to be addressed by the government.
The current London-centric market failure system that has been tolerated for the last few decades has not made the strides that should be the fruits of a normally functioning market.
In the light of recent 'the Scottish people have spoken' events...... - the North of England is significantly bigger, more populous and richer - if the Westminster establishment is serious about freeing up the rest of the UK economy from its constraints then ............something has to be done.
Greetings from Texas by the way
Last edited by All names taken; 22nd Sep 2014 at 04:10. Reason: I actually wrote '****' but got ****ed out
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MAN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One possibility would be to completely restructure APD by converting it into an airport congestion charge. It might only be applied at Heathrow (and maybe eventually at Gatwick), but at a much higher rate than now so as to maintain the same level of revenue for HMG. Such a structure would also tie in with the need to address the high environmental costs of expanding Heathrow.
It's not clear whether this would increase air fares ex-LHR in the long term. The main impact would be on the value of LHR slots, which would be expected to reduce to compensate for lower route profitability. Again this could be a good thing (and a nifty way of Treasury getting its mitts on the massive value of LHR slots).
A big impact on BA either way. But I really don't think that tweaking APD (for example by new route 'holidays') is the answer - a big bold shake-up is required.
It's not clear whether this would increase air fares ex-LHR in the long term. The main impact would be on the value of LHR slots, which would be expected to reduce to compensate for lower route profitability. Again this could be a good thing (and a nifty way of Treasury getting its mitts on the massive value of LHR slots).
A big impact on BA either way. But I really don't think that tweaking APD (for example by new route 'holidays') is the answer - a big bold shake-up is required.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
APD Solutions
We're all missing the point here. The elephant in the room. Commercial aviation must strive to prosper DESPITE politicians, it will never prosper BECAUSE of them. We're mainly aviation types on here. We look for logical solutions to address market distortions in the industry. Politicians have very different priorities.
Top of the list for politicians is the requirement to get re-elected at regular intervals. In order to achieve this they must project the "right image". And that means regularly acknowledging in public that 'climate change' is killing the planet and that aeroplanes are the leading culprit for this. OK, genuine science can demonstrate that there has been NO global warming for 18 years now (hence the rebrand from 'global warming' to 'climate change') but that isn't the point. It is all about image and perception. They must regularly bow before the altar of the global warming cult or risk the wrath of the media and the implications of that on their job security. And politicians do understand the need to spin. Keep mentioning Arctic ice-melt and never mention record ice-accumulation levels in the Antarctic. That sort of thing. Thriving polar bear populations … shhhh! … that doesn't fit the narrative!
We are now in a climate (pardon the pun) where politicians MUST be seen to use the train rather than aircraft. Lots of examples of rail photo-opportunities from the London to Scotland milk-runs in recent weeks. That is no coincidence. I think it was Boris who had to put out a statement afew months ago confirming that he had used the train when publicly accused of flying to an event. Note also the tendency of premiership football teams and celebs to avoid being seen flying as well … the Manchester clubs always used to fly to London fixtures and vice-versa. It rarely happens now.
This is the backdrop. Climate change. Demonisation of carbon (essential to all plant-life). It is career suicide for politicians to to be seen to challenge the eco-extremist lobby. And afew of them are actually daft enough to buy into the religion wholesale. It is understandable … most MP's have never held a real job and have only mixed with the Westminster chatterati. They are unfamiliar with the real world.
So now lets get back to the point of all this. The measures we on PPRuNe are discussing require politicians to support commercial aviation as a net positive to society. We look to them to make informed decisions based on economic logic. We call out APD for the abomination that it is. We point out that it suppresses tourism to the UK, very likely to an extent higher than the tax it raises. We tell them it is costing jobs. But the politicians won't act. And its not party-political either. The Laboristas gave birth to the abomination, the Contras turned up its damage settings. The Beardy Democrats want us all back in caves. Which of these will lead the charge to restore sanity to tax policy in aviation?
The ones with the common sense to actually understand the issues dare not upset the eco-loons and their rabid supporters in the press pack. The rest are committed global warming extremists themselves. Until a large enough lobby starts seriously pointing out climate realities to these groups the status quo will remain. It will be unthinkable for politicians to be seen to encourage airline growth. Half of them look on every air service axed and every airline failure as progress in the right direction.
So we can discuss logical solutions all we like. We can discuss beneficial changes to APD. We can discuss solutions for SE capacity. I actually get the impression that a small number of pols are secretly quite pro-aviation, but it is still too risky for them to dare to utter such heresy in public. It is up to us in the industry to spread the message that aviation is not an evil planet-killer industry. A good start would be for airlines and airports to publicly promote the good they do, the benefits they bring, and to put forward the truth about climate. Instead, they tow the line of the eco-extremist agenda telling the world about their glorious carbon-offset schemes, how 'green' they are and similar nonsense. Airports (yes, you Manchester) switch off essential escalators in the name of saving the planet. Step one is to lose aviation's own timid 'Mea Culpa' attitude. Then to gradually create a climate in which afew politicians will be empowered to cautiously utter the truth in public without threat of immediate media condemnation and the risk of deselection.
But as things are now, we must not look to pols for salvation. They're concerned with maintaining the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed. That means paying regular homage to eco-extremism. If we want positive solutions for aviation, we must seek them from within the industry itself. Long term there is hope … Dutch and Irish politicians eventually scrapped their APD equivalents. Because ultimately, when the feet are held to the fire, money talks!
Top of the list for politicians is the requirement to get re-elected at regular intervals. In order to achieve this they must project the "right image". And that means regularly acknowledging in public that 'climate change' is killing the planet and that aeroplanes are the leading culprit for this. OK, genuine science can demonstrate that there has been NO global warming for 18 years now (hence the rebrand from 'global warming' to 'climate change') but that isn't the point. It is all about image and perception. They must regularly bow before the altar of the global warming cult or risk the wrath of the media and the implications of that on their job security. And politicians do understand the need to spin. Keep mentioning Arctic ice-melt and never mention record ice-accumulation levels in the Antarctic. That sort of thing. Thriving polar bear populations … shhhh! … that doesn't fit the narrative!
We are now in a climate (pardon the pun) where politicians MUST be seen to use the train rather than aircraft. Lots of examples of rail photo-opportunities from the London to Scotland milk-runs in recent weeks. That is no coincidence. I think it was Boris who had to put out a statement afew months ago confirming that he had used the train when publicly accused of flying to an event. Note also the tendency of premiership football teams and celebs to avoid being seen flying as well … the Manchester clubs always used to fly to London fixtures and vice-versa. It rarely happens now.
This is the backdrop. Climate change. Demonisation of carbon (essential to all plant-life). It is career suicide for politicians to to be seen to challenge the eco-extremist lobby. And afew of them are actually daft enough to buy into the religion wholesale. It is understandable … most MP's have never held a real job and have only mixed with the Westminster chatterati. They are unfamiliar with the real world.
So now lets get back to the point of all this. The measures we on PPRuNe are discussing require politicians to support commercial aviation as a net positive to society. We look to them to make informed decisions based on economic logic. We call out APD for the abomination that it is. We point out that it suppresses tourism to the UK, very likely to an extent higher than the tax it raises. We tell them it is costing jobs. But the politicians won't act. And its not party-political either. The Laboristas gave birth to the abomination, the Contras turned up its damage settings. The Beardy Democrats want us all back in caves. Which of these will lead the charge to restore sanity to tax policy in aviation?
The ones with the common sense to actually understand the issues dare not upset the eco-loons and their rabid supporters in the press pack. The rest are committed global warming extremists themselves. Until a large enough lobby starts seriously pointing out climate realities to these groups the status quo will remain. It will be unthinkable for politicians to be seen to encourage airline growth. Half of them look on every air service axed and every airline failure as progress in the right direction.
So we can discuss logical solutions all we like. We can discuss beneficial changes to APD. We can discuss solutions for SE capacity. I actually get the impression that a small number of pols are secretly quite pro-aviation, but it is still too risky for them to dare to utter such heresy in public. It is up to us in the industry to spread the message that aviation is not an evil planet-killer industry. A good start would be for airlines and airports to publicly promote the good they do, the benefits they bring, and to put forward the truth about climate. Instead, they tow the line of the eco-extremist agenda telling the world about their glorious carbon-offset schemes, how 'green' they are and similar nonsense. Airports (yes, you Manchester) switch off essential escalators in the name of saving the planet. Step one is to lose aviation's own timid 'Mea Culpa' attitude. Then to gradually create a climate in which afew politicians will be empowered to cautiously utter the truth in public without threat of immediate media condemnation and the risk of deselection.
But as things are now, we must not look to pols for salvation. They're concerned with maintaining the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed. That means paying regular homage to eco-extremism. If we want positive solutions for aviation, we must seek them from within the industry itself. Long term there is hope … Dutch and Irish politicians eventually scrapped their APD equivalents. Because ultimately, when the feet are held to the fire, money talks!
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One possibility would be to completely restructure APD by converting it into an airport congestion charge. It might only be applied at Heathrow (and maybe eventually at Gatwick), but at a much higher rate than now so as to maintain the same level of revenue for HMG. Such a structure would also tie in with the need to address the high environmental costs of expanding Heathrow.
It's not clear whether this would increase air fares ex-LHR in the long term. The main impact would be on the value of LHR slots, which would be expected to reduce to compensate for lower route profitability. Again this could be a good thing (and a nifty way of Treasury getting its mitts on the massive value of LHR slots).
A big impact on BA either way. But I really don't think that tweaking APD (for example by new route 'holidays') is the answer - a big bold shake-up is required.
It's not clear whether this would increase air fares ex-LHR in the long term. The main impact would be on the value of LHR slots, which would be expected to reduce to compensate for lower route profitability. Again this could be a good thing (and a nifty way of Treasury getting its mitts on the massive value of LHR slots).
A big impact on BA either way. But I really don't think that tweaking APD (for example by new route 'holidays') is the answer - a big bold shake-up is required.
Do you really want to load even more financial penalties on those carriers that use Heathrow?
There is already a financial penalty for operating at LHR, the high costs in the secondary slot market. This already keeps out many operators who would otherwise be at Heathrow, consequently many destinations are missing from the Heathrow departures boards. It's the smaller or the newer operators that are squeezed out, often from areas where we need new and extra connectivity.
This adversely affects LHR as a world hub airport and is a serious detriment to "UK PLC". We all know the arguments.
You state that the values of LHR slots will decrease. This is not so, because demand would still exceed supply. Only more rwy capacity can change this and eliminate the secondary slot market.
If you think that scrapping APD everywhere except LHR and converting it into a congestion tax at LHR (whilst being revenue neutral in HM Treasury terms) will force traffic to other UK airports, you are sadly deluded.
As is the case now, LHR's loss is AMS/CDG/FRA's gain, not BHX/MAN/GLA's. Your idea would intensify this.
Of course there is a strong case for scrapping APD altogether or seriously reducing it, say to pre-2006 levels.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Manchester
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virgin Atlantic new Atlanta flight and times:
eff 29MAR15 Manchester – Atlanta NEW 1 daily service (replacing DELTA service)
VS109 MAN1100 – 1500ATL 333 D
VS110 ATL1905 – 0830+1MAN 333 D
Virgin Atlantic S15 US Operation Changes as of 22SEP14 | Airline Route
----------------
A few more destinations added to Thomas Cook wesbite and drop down menu. Fingers crossed for some of them!
Boston
Nice
Thessaloniki
Plus the existing:
Los Angeles
Seville
Verona
eff 29MAR15 Manchester – Atlanta NEW 1 daily service (replacing DELTA service)
VS109 MAN1100 – 1500ATL 333 D
VS110 ATL1905 – 0830+1MAN 333 D
Virgin Atlantic S15 US Operation Changes as of 22SEP14 | Airline Route
----------------
A few more destinations added to Thomas Cook wesbite and drop down menu. Fingers crossed for some of them!
Boston
Nice
Thessaloniki
Plus the existing:
Los Angeles
Seville
Verona
Last edited by kieb92; 23rd Sep 2014 at 08:59.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MAN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frank
I don't put this idea forward as a way of redistributing traffic from LHR to regional airports. I agree with you that it wouldn't have that effect. However it might make some regional services viable when they otherwise wouldn't be.
However I do disagree with you on the slot value point. I think it would reduce slot values, thereby making it easier for there to be churn between carriers. Fare levels are basically set by the market, so the only factor that would change is route profitability and hence the slot value (based on the premise that slot values equate to the net present value of the economic rent).
As for Shed's excellent post, while I agree with him in pretty much every respect I think we should accept that there is zero chance of APD being abandoned, and that the industry's focus needs to be on a 'fairer' structure of APD which maintains revenue to the Treasury. And in any event the linkage of APD to the environmental costs of aviation is a fig leaf that was abandoned many years ago. It's really just another form of taxation.
I don't put this idea forward as a way of redistributing traffic from LHR to regional airports. I agree with you that it wouldn't have that effect. However it might make some regional services viable when they otherwise wouldn't be.
However I do disagree with you on the slot value point. I think it would reduce slot values, thereby making it easier for there to be churn between carriers. Fare levels are basically set by the market, so the only factor that would change is route profitability and hence the slot value (based on the premise that slot values equate to the net present value of the economic rent).
As for Shed's excellent post, while I agree with him in pretty much every respect I think we should accept that there is zero chance of APD being abandoned, and that the industry's focus needs to be on a 'fairer' structure of APD which maintains revenue to the Treasury. And in any event the linkage of APD to the environmental costs of aviation is a fig leaf that was abandoned many years ago. It's really just another form of taxation.