SOUTHEND 5
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hemel Hempstead
Posts: 1,092
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tophat27dt - Figari could certainly be sold to the likes of Corsican Places, same with Dubrovnik with someone like Balkan - but Budapest/Prague etc could be a bit more difficult.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would say the press saying 2xe195s is speculation as this is what flybe have done elsewhere ... But as this is a Stobart franchise operation I think flybe providing the airframes is unlikely (but I don't know)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is great news! I would have like to see them pick up where easyJet left off with Berlin which handled 54,000 passengers in 2015, so demand is there. Derry is definitely viable with Ryanair off the route next year. They also need to focus on serving niche routes that are not served to/from London, like Rennes which has done really well. Also with easyJet pulling the plug on it's 4 daily Copenhagen flights to Luton and it not being served at Stansted any more, maybe they could try Copenhagen?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the choices of route from a developing the airport point of view. They complement easyJet very nicely, and give a good opportunity to demonstrate what kinds of inbound traffic Southend can attract.
If the aim is as much to demonstrate to other airlines that their passengers will be willing to fly from or end up in Stobart's airport as it is for Stobart to operate flights itself, then these should help clearly establish the situation either way.
I was expecting one or two domestic and / or Irish routes though; my entry in a bet would have included Dublin, Waterford & Edinburgh (& Londonderry, which I guess may yet come). I'd have thought there might be something Polish too, and I was also expecting to see something like Berlin. I suppose however that they know what negotiations with other airlines they have underway, and these might be a reason why something could not appear with them.
If the aim is as much to demonstrate to other airlines that their passengers will be willing to fly from or end up in Stobart's airport as it is for Stobart to operate flights itself, then these should help clearly establish the situation either way.
I was expecting one or two domestic and / or Irish routes though; my entry in a bet would have included Dublin, Waterford & Edinburgh (& Londonderry, which I guess may yet come). I'd have thought there might be something Polish too, and I was also expecting to see something like Berlin. I suppose however that they know what negotiations with other airlines they have underway, and these might be a reason why something could not appear with them.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't know you cared compton3bravo. May I call you Compton? Can I just say I believe you have forgotten more about this business than I'll ever know, and your seeming belief that this will all end in tears may prove correct. Yet, surely, you will agree the time had come for Stobart to either 'Put up or shut up' and they have done that in the context of the SEN operation. So can you not wish them well? It is Christmas!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have had my concerns since Stobart bought into SEN. The plans for Carlisle seems one of the greatest follies, however, a good investment was made into the airport, terminal and general appearance.
I fear that STN will always cast its shadow restricting SEN to collecting the crumbs. The other concern is surely the profits, if there are any, they are minimal and when will the investment pay off ?
The saga reads like a failing business in the long term. Irrespective of threaders actual involvement in this industry or not, there is little profit in running 50-70 seater aircraft to many obscure destinations. If these destinations were profitably viable the LoCo would be covering them now and would have been doing so for some time.
Taking the model that applies' mainly to aviation within the EU it is cheap fares with the max number of seats per airframe (or at least the impression of a cheap seat). Most threaders are positive about the future of SEN and let us hope this is the case but surely the airport will only ever be at best a very small player?
I fear that STN will always cast its shadow restricting SEN to collecting the crumbs. The other concern is surely the profits, if there are any, they are minimal and when will the investment pay off ?
The saga reads like a failing business in the long term. Irrespective of threaders actual involvement in this industry or not, there is little profit in running 50-70 seater aircraft to many obscure destinations. If these destinations were profitably viable the LoCo would be covering them now and would have been doing so for some time.
Taking the model that applies' mainly to aviation within the EU it is cheap fares with the max number of seats per airframe (or at least the impression of a cheap seat). Most threaders are positive about the future of SEN and let us hope this is the case but surely the airport will only ever be at best a very small player?
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fear that STN will always cast its shadow restricting SEN to collecting the crumbs. The other concern is surely the profits, if there are any, they are minimal and when will the investment pay off ?
The saga reads like a failing business in the long term. Irrespective of threaders actual involvement in this industry or not, there is little profit in running 50-70 seater aircraft to many obscure destinations. If these destinations were profitably viable the LoCo would be covering them now and would have been doing so for some time.
Taking the model that applies' mainly to aviation within the EU it is cheap fares with the max number of seats per airframe (or at least the impression of a cheap seat). Most threaders are positive about the future of SEN and let us hope this is the case but surely the airport will only ever be at best a very small player?
The saga reads like a failing business in the long term. Irrespective of threaders actual involvement in this industry or not, there is little profit in running 50-70 seater aircraft to many obscure destinations. If these destinations were profitably viable the LoCo would be covering them now and would have been doing so for some time.
Taking the model that applies' mainly to aviation within the EU it is cheap fares with the max number of seats per airframe (or at least the impression of a cheap seat). Most threaders are positive about the future of SEN and let us hope this is the case but surely the airport will only ever be at best a very small player?
There are, generally, three types of airline services:
1. Major carriers from major hubs, often fed by feeder services, to worldwide destinations, and:
2. Low cost carriers operating 'point to point' services, often, with no onward (interline) connections, and:
3. 'Puddle Jumper' operations utilising 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70 seater aircraft on lesser routes or on higher routes with a higher frequency of services.
Stobart Air do not fall, as I understand it, within category '1", perhaps minimally they fall within category '2' but, most certainly, they fall within category '3'.
If it is all about maximum number of seats per airframe then how do the likes of Eastern Airways, Loganair, indeed Flybe, KLM UK, Stobart Air etc. even exist?
Every airline, indeed every business, should find their place in the market, I have my own business and it took me some two years to find my business's place in the market, Stobart Air, it seems, are still trying to find their place and I, for one, wish them every success in doing so.
P.S. If at first you don't succeed then try and try again!
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@SEN Observer
Look, it's like this old boy, stick to the issues, park you personal emotions they've got no place in business. This is business.
I just don't see how some of those proposed routes are sustainable. It's very shortermism in my personal opinion. Some will work but ultimately pax loads will be questionable over the longrun performance. Secondly, passenger volumes routing through SEN need increasing, and when I say they need increasing, I mean fast and in significant volumes. What many of us have seen played out by the management at Stobart and the airport is lack lustre solutions. In this day and age, there is no room for below average performance, it will hurt the business, threaten employment security and destroy value. The soft launch announcement is not going to effectively resolve the business objectives or the problem. That's the harsh business view - no emotion, it's binary. It works or it doesn't in terms of ramping up sustainable services which passengers are actually interested in using very frequently and over the long term.
Look, it's like this old boy, stick to the issues, park you personal emotions they've got no place in business. This is business.
I just don't see how some of those proposed routes are sustainable. It's very shortermism in my personal opinion. Some will work but ultimately pax loads will be questionable over the longrun performance. Secondly, passenger volumes routing through SEN need increasing, and when I say they need increasing, I mean fast and in significant volumes. What many of us have seen played out by the management at Stobart and the airport is lack lustre solutions. In this day and age, there is no room for below average performance, it will hurt the business, threaten employment security and destroy value. The soft launch announcement is not going to effectively resolve the business objectives or the problem. That's the harsh business view - no emotion, it's binary. It works or it doesn't in terms of ramping up sustainable services which passengers are actually interested in using very frequently and over the long term.
mik3bravo
Perhaps you can describe to us what in your view would have been an 'inspiring effort', as your post above reads like PR waffle without any specifics. Why are some of the routes not sustainable? Why is it short-termism? Why is this a "lack lustre solution" to the current low passenger volume problem?
Personally I think it is a good selection of routes which last year carried over 10 million pax in total from the LON airports. I applaud the departure from trying to simply find additional unserved secondary airports where you have to build traffic from nothing and instead choosing, on the whole, primary destinations. SEN can now offer well recognised branding, the right aircraft capacity and performance flying to popular destinations and stand a good chance of making a success of this. It's ludicrous to even suggest that any of the major airlines or other LON airports will lose sleep over this small scale operation but for SEN it is a major development.
I'm sure we all agree that it will be very interesting to see how well it works, whether we are SEN supporters or otherwise inclined, and it certainly respresents a defining moment in SEN's history one way or the other.
Perhaps you can describe to us what in your view would have been an 'inspiring effort', as your post above reads like PR waffle without any specifics. Why are some of the routes not sustainable? Why is it short-termism? Why is this a "lack lustre solution" to the current low passenger volume problem?
Personally I think it is a good selection of routes which last year carried over 10 million pax in total from the LON airports. I applaud the departure from trying to simply find additional unserved secondary airports where you have to build traffic from nothing and instead choosing, on the whole, primary destinations. SEN can now offer well recognised branding, the right aircraft capacity and performance flying to popular destinations and stand a good chance of making a success of this. It's ludicrous to even suggest that any of the major airlines or other LON airports will lose sleep over this small scale operation but for SEN it is a major development.
I'm sure we all agree that it will be very interesting to see how well it works, whether we are SEN supporters or otherwise inclined, and it certainly respresents a defining moment in SEN's history one way or the other.
Last edited by Expressflight; 23rd Dec 2016 at 07:07. Reason: new post from mik3bravo
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mik3bravo
Perhaps you can describe to us what in your view would have been an 'inspiring effort', as your post above reads like PR waffle without any specifics. Why are some of the routes not sustainable? Why is it short-termism? Why is this a "lack lustre solution" to the current low passenger volume problem?
Personally I think it is a good selection of routes which last year carried over 10 million pax in total from the LON airports. I applaud the departure from trying to simply find additional unserved secondary airports where you have to build traffic from nothing and instead choosing, on the whole, primary destinations. SEN can now offer well recognised branding, the right aircraft capacity and performance flying to popular destinations and stand a good chance of making a success of this. It's ludicrous to even suggest that any of the major airlines or other LON airports will lose sleep over this small scale operation but for SEN it is a major development.
I'm sure we all agree that it will be very interesting to see how well it works, whether we are SEN supporters or otherwise inclined, and it certainly respresents a defining moment in SEN's history one way or the other.
Perhaps you can describe to us what in your view would have been an 'inspiring effort', as your post above reads like PR waffle without any specifics. Why are some of the routes not sustainable? Why is it short-termism? Why is this a "lack lustre solution" to the current low passenger volume problem?
Personally I think it is a good selection of routes which last year carried over 10 million pax in total from the LON airports. I applaud the departure from trying to simply find additional unserved secondary airports where you have to build traffic from nothing and instead choosing, on the whole, primary destinations. SEN can now offer well recognised branding, the right aircraft capacity and performance flying to popular destinations and stand a good chance of making a success of this. It's ludicrous to even suggest that any of the major airlines or other LON airports will lose sleep over this small scale operation but for SEN it is a major development.
I'm sure we all agree that it will be very interesting to see how well it works, whether we are SEN supporters or otherwise inclined, and it certainly respresents a defining moment in SEN's history one way or the other.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As LTNman has pointed out, to meet the objectives they have set SEN only need a modest 1.6% of the market. So some of the comments here lack context, perhaps they come from those who understand how major airport operators do things.
The one criticism I would level at the airport's owners (with the gift of hindsight), is their belief that SEN would become the business community's airport of choice. The new routes suggest that they have moved on from this and the airport's future depends on leisure users. I believe they are in a better place now to progress and they have a chance to meet their goals, albeit probably not by 2018 and with a few setbacks along the way.
Calling yourself a London airport is fine providing you don't get stuck with the belief you exist to get people to and from the capital. Clearly, the name won't change because of attracting those in other countries to fly here, but right now 'Essex Airport' would better represent SEN, and that's not a problem if the airport has a clear understanding of who butters their bread.
The one criticism I would level at the airport's owners (with the gift of hindsight), is their belief that SEN would become the business community's airport of choice. The new routes suggest that they have moved on from this and the airport's future depends on leisure users. I believe they are in a better place now to progress and they have a chance to meet their goals, albeit probably not by 2018 and with a few setbacks along the way.
Calling yourself a London airport is fine providing you don't get stuck with the belief you exist to get people to and from the capital. Clearly, the name won't change because of attracting those in other countries to fly here, but right now 'Essex Airport' would better represent SEN, and that's not a problem if the airport has a clear understanding of who butters their bread.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts