Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

LIVERPOOL-3

Old 1st Oct 2015, 13:24
  #461 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think that is a given and fairly obvious, MAG and RYR are heavily involved with each other with huge RYR ops across STN, MAN and EMA. It's an uphill battle faced with such a relationship for LPL with RYR it seems,

EZY are not far behind, adding new units, and routes, at MAN in 2016 in far greater extent than LPL, but at least they seem not to be directly transferring routes from LPL.

This makes all these new carriers and routes all the more important, of which there has been quite a few recently. It was not long back that LPL had just EZY and RYR, so to get to 9 carriers is fabulous work.

Quite a fuss being made on LPL twitter of Flybe and Aer Lingus routes, both can really help offset the seemed lack of commitment from EZY and RYR.
eggc is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2015, 13:43
  #462 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Ribble
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes we know how it works its not 94% of rock bottom fares is it, its simple as the plane fills up it gets more expensive, so 94% at LPL will yield roughly the same elsewhere.
Ribble56 is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2015, 14:06
  #463 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 894
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ribble56
Yes we know how it works its not 94% of rock bottom fares is it, its simple as the plane fills up it gets more expensive, so 94% at LPL will yield roughly the same elsewhere.
I think you've just demonstrated that you don't know how it works. The likes of RYR have complex software tracking and predicting sales on a given route, and so the 100th seat on the same route may have been sold for a different price on every flight. Add in the fact that you are talking about different airports (MAN/LPL) and the waters are muddied even further.

Bottom line is that MAN, LPL and RYR are not charities, nor do they make decisions based on whether MAN or LPL is sexier, or has more hunky spotters. In this particular case RYR have decided that over a certain period they can make more money operating the route from MAN than from LPL. There may be a 'new route' incentive (I forget if MAN-Bratislava has been served before), but that works both ways - most people believe that is why Norwegian operated LPL-CPH instead of MAN-CPH despite their other routes to NW England being to MAN.
Curious Pax is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2015, 14:37
  #464 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Ribble
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes of course fares vary, but back to basics as the plane fills up it becomes more expensive, doesn't matter what the route is, the quote was "A route could have a 100% load factor but might only be selling at very low fares. If the route is unprofitable then the high loads are immaterial" 100% LF at very low fares doesn't happen.
Ribble56 is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2015, 15:23
  #465 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: stockport
Posts: 485
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If they have flight that is only half full it can just to get some bums in seats and bring a bit of revue in

Ian
chaps1954 is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2015, 17:39
  #466 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EZY are not far behind, adding new units, and routes, at MAN in 2016 in far greater extent than LPL, but at least they seem not to be directly transferring routes from LPL.
I think if you looked over a longer period, ie 3 or 4 years, you'd see that EZY are by far the bigger offender of expanding one airport at the other's expense. This has been the case at a number of places and LPL v MAN is no different.

Go back to around 2011/12, EZY had 10 a/c at LPL and about 6 or 7 in MAN. FR had I think 8 at LPL but nothing in MAN. Jump forward to 2015/6 and what a difference! Overall, EZY are not much bigger than they were 3 or 4 years ago.

The fact FR are transferring routes directly from one airport to the other if anything shows more commitment to making their routes work.
FRatSTN is online now  
Old 2nd Oct 2015, 14:39
  #467 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London, UK & Europe
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wizz/Blue Air

Wizz increase Gdansk from 3 to 4 weekly next summer

Blue Air have Cluj on sale operating twice weekly from 3 June
j636 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2015, 17:46
  #468 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Ribble
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As Ryanair move LPL services elsewhere Bratislava being the latest, one wonders what the more established operators think of Ryanair and possible incentives they receive, because lets face Ryanair want something for nothing, Bratislava maybe a new incentive route, but Murcia,Reus, Riga, Rome, Milan, Shannon? Could be one of these operators Jet2 for instance will have a look at LPL and the holes left by Ryanair, and what LPL has to offer suits them we'll see.
Ribble56 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2015, 18:17
  #469 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
one wonders what the more established operators think of Ryanair
That's a bit of a wishy-washy statement. What do you mean by 'more established' operators?

I can't really see the commercial basis for an airline to pick up those routes from LPL just because FR have moved them half hour down the road to MAN (and in several cases with a much higher frequency). Broadly speaking, LPL and MAN serve a fairly similar catchment and any duplicate routes from LPL would still compete with those FR routes now at MAN very strongly.

Goes without saying FR clearly have some sort of very attractive deal with MAG, not just at MAN but across all their airports. That's most likely if anything where their main incentive comes from. BTS specifically may be a response to LS and EZY on VIE?
FRatSTN is online now  
Old 2nd Oct 2015, 19:01
  #470 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Ribble
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I just wonder if established airlines, airlines that maybe have developed over a longer time, Monarch, Thomson Thomas Cook Aer Lingus, think when Ryanair receive incentives that's all! As far as operators filling Ryanair Holes at LPL who knows new operators and expansion already, maybe an operator already considering LPL
Ribble56 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2015, 19:12
  #471 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ribble

How are you so sure that Aer Lingus, Thomas Cook and the likes are not also receiving incentives? Contracts are re-negotiated all the time.

Thomas Cook in particular has increased services with new routes and more based aircraft, so seem to be happy with the deal they have.

The fact is, There seems to be an almost giddy sense of hope that Ryanair and Easyjet expansion at MAN will lead to other MAN operators moving flights to LPL from some people.

The fact that there has been very little, if any, retraction of flights from MAN, quite the opposite actually, with increases from Jet2, Thomas Cook, Aer Lingus, Thomson and so on, suggests there seems to be enough room for all at this stage.
LAX_LHR is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2015, 22:27
  #472 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some here are thinking far too parochially. We see a vexatious belief that the transfer of a certain air route must be the result of underhand dealing or a conspiracy against LPL in favour of MAN etc. This is not how things work in the real world. We need to think 'big picture overview' not 'petty local rivalry'.

Examine the evolution of EasyJet and Ryanair as corporate entities. Both started off small, avoiding busier airports, and carved a niche from nothing with very low prices being their main selling point. In the early days, EasyJet flew from LTN and LPL with B737's which had a large telephone number adorning the fuselage such that bookings would avoid traditional higher-cost sales channels. Ryanair flew to places most people had never heard of and amazed traditional thinkers by filling B737's between city-pairs which were considered unthinkable just a decade earlier. Nowadays, we are routinely unsurprised when an airline announces schedules on a 180-seat airliner between Doncaster and Wroclaw (for example). Just pause and think about that for a moment.

But business models evolve as companies grow. We saw it first with EasyJet. As the company grew rapidly and gained market recognition, it developed the confidence and financial clout to take on traditional legacy carriers from some of Europe's 'fortress' big city airports. Having made strongholds out of certain secondary UK airports such as LTN, LPL, NCL, BFS, BRS, EasyJet was suddenly becoming a force in cities such as Geneva, Nice and Berlin. Now, aside from their huge operation dominating LGW, we see them as the dominant carrier at Milan (MXP). They base aircraft in Paris and Amsterdam. And of course, at Manchester. Going head-to-head with the traditional legacy short-hauls. Some of the early bases such as LPL, NCL, EMA have inevitably suffered as a consequence of this process.

Ryanair stuck with second and third-level airports much longer. Indeed, many of these formerly obscure names such as Hahn, Charleroi, Bergamo, Niederrhein, Modlin and Torp will likely remain a part of the Ryanair culture for years to come. But at Ryanair too change is happening. Ryanair's ambition is to secure 25% of the European short-haul market. To achieve this, they can no longer avoid first-level European gateways. We are already seeing this process in action.

Ryanair is happy with its hugely-successful London bases at STN and LTN. They have sufficient market penetration from these to not worry unduly about LGW or LHR. But just look at other key cities. DUB is a special case - dominated by RYR from the early days by reason of its heritage. But Ryanair is moving into Barcelona en masse, at the expense of Girona and Reus. They're about to base aircraft at Milan Malpensa ... Bergamo must be very worried. And Brussels ... Ryanair are now appearing at Zaventem, which can only be terrible news for Charleroi in the long-term. At Lisbon, Ryanair is muscling in on TAP's home turf. And they're expanding at Madrid's main airport too. Then there is one more larger airport which Ryanair has targeted for similar penetration ... Manchester ... now upto eight based units and still growing.

Ryanair's moves on first-level airports does have implications elsewhere. BRU growth will hurt CRL. MXP growth will hurt BGY. BCN growth has already devastated GRO / REU. And MAN growth is impacting LPL. But this is not due to a conspiracy against LPL in particular, or underhand dealings from Manchester Airport (MAG). It is symptomatic of a wider strategy to compete with the established legacy carriers on key city-pairs from their home-turf. Exactly as EasyJet has done before them. And network changes are not the only visible sign of this evolution. EasyJet is now perceived as a natural choice for business travellers, offering service little different from that of Air France, SAS, Lufthansa or BA. Meanwhile, at Ryanair, we are also seeing the first signs of the move upmarket. A friendlier image is being promoted, allocated seating has been introduced, the confrontational attitudes and the 'fines' for outsized baggage and incorrectly-printed boarding cards have been toned down. Further innovations such as interlining are being openly discussed.

So the move of certain routes from LPL to MAN (just as from GRO to BCN, BGY to MXP, CRL to BRU, PIK to GLA etc.) is part of a wider business strategy. It is not driven by the local considerations that we residents perceive. These are strategic company-level policy shifts, the sort we see in all large and growing businesses. This doesn't happen because of a bust-up with an exec at LPL or a tenner incentive from an exec at MAN. Besides, launch incentives from airport businesses such as LPL and MAN are open to all carriers. LPL has enjoyed considerable success in this regard over recent months with several new carriers gracing the departure board. It is normal business. LPL recently won a contract with traditional MAN customer CSA - are we to suppose that was a vindictive conspiracy as well?

Looking at Bratislava specifically, why this particular route to MAN and why now? Well, FRatSTN has got it. The relationship between Vienna and Bratislava Airports is similar to that between LPL and MAN. They are geographically close together, and the catchment areas overlap to a considerable degree. Austrian Airlines (Star Alliance) has just launched daily MAN-VIE. EasyJet has announced plans to launch MAN-VIE schedules. The fight is on. Meanwhile, Jet2, which operated MAN-VIE upto 3x weekly, appears set to withdraw and redeploy its aircraft to other routes. Jet2's limited MAN-VIE operation was not a big deal for Ryanair's LPL-BTS route. But the arrival of Austrian and EasyJet on the scene certainly is. And that is why Ryanair is making its move.

Don't think small-time. Don't think LPL v MAN petty rivalry. Think fundamental strategic planning at the HQ's of some of Europe's largest and fastest-growing airline groupings. And take note of this too ... Wizz and Blue Air are now pitching up at airports such as BHX and GLA. That too is a shift from early destinations such as Doncaster, Teesside, Prestwick and Coventry. MAG may be thinking it is time to pitch to those two again! Don't take it personally.
Shed-on-a-Pole is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2015, 08:38
  #473 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And if RYR is thinking about a strategy in terms of some level of onward connectivity the larger airports have this... Manchester included.
Bagso is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2015, 08:43
  #474 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fully understand what you guys are saying about business models and connections, EZY also looking at connectivity I think I am correct in saying, but lets hope LPL manages to keep some presence by both, as it'll be a bad day the day LPL see's the end of RYR / EZY, as I doubt there are carriers to replace what they offer.

For the time being though I really think LPL will be OK with them, apart from the odd loss, the testing time will come with MAN's terminal expansion / redevelopment, that when ready could probably swallow up LPL's EZY and RYR based units pretty easily, which it certainly can't at the minute.
eggc is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2015, 08:57
  #475 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North West UK
Age: 69
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Man expansion

Good point EGGC. Does anyone know how the £1bn MAN capex is to be paid for? What is the implication for landing/pax charges as that could be material when considering the future MAN/LPL position.
eye2eye5 is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2015, 09:31
  #476 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The expansion is being funded by money already available from profits, share sales and loans.

At the airline consultations, MAG were explicit in saying airline fees would not go up to supplement the build, before or after. There will actually be some fee reductions and rebates, as, with the building comes disruption, and some airlines are being given sweeteners as a 'pre-apology'.
LAX_LHR is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2015, 09:36
  #477 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North West UK
Age: 69
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MAN expansion

That just doesn't happen in the real world, LAX LHR. Significant Capex demands a return on expenditure ( Troce) or the capital should be invested elsewhere. The era that we live in states that the return should be in the short term. There must be a fully detailed plan somewhere which has comprehensive details of additional income to repay the expenditure.
eye2eye5 is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2015, 10:03
  #478 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The GBP1Bn terminal rebuild programme at MAN is expected to take around ten years from start to final completion. Work will also take place in modules, one section at a time, which means that progress could be paused quite easily during a major economic downturn.

These days, one billion spread over ten years is not an unmanageable sum for a business the size of MAG which is bringing in healthy profits at today's traffic levels. If you compare the MAN redevelopment price-tag with the proposed sums required for developments at LHR and LGW you will get a sense of perspective on this. By today's standards, the MAN costings are relatively benign. MAG can schedule repayments over a long period, and of course should enjoy increased business as a consequence of expanding capacity and improving the attractiveness of the facilities to operators (US pre-clearance, dualing of taxiways etc.). And of course, MAG has control over the rate of redevelopment module by module. If the economic climate turns nasty they can pause and reschedule the next module.
Shed-on-a-Pole is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2015, 10:05
  #479 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what doesn't happen in the real world?

The same happened with the buyout of STN. Shares sold to raise funds, and they certainly didn't ramp up the fees there to bulk up returns.

Fail to see why you think they can do that at STN but not MAN?
LAX_LHR is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2015, 10:18
  #480 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North West UK
Age: 69
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MAN

See Heathrow expansion and the expected impact on fees. I'm a lifelong banker and I know the questions I would be asking if I was asked for £1bn. And as for it being a small amount Shed, I remind you that Greater Manchester councils have an interest of around 33% in MAG if I remember rightly. I'm sure they wouldn't think of it as a small amount. I have asked this question before and no one seems to know the answer. Surely as an entity with such a significant local ownership/interest, the projections of income streams should be in the public domain?
eye2eye5 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.