SOUTHEND 5

[Cyrano]

Originally Posted by AdamThePassenger

Maybe the cheaper tickets need to be re-input into the system for some reason.

How would that work, then?

I think you're clutching at straws, to be honest.

It's pretty common practice that if an airline expects to cancel a route but doesn't want to actively announce that cancellation for a while, it sets the prices to dissuasive levels in order to minimise the number of people for whom EU261 compensation is payable.

However, under EU261, compensation for cancellation is only payable if the passenger gets less than 2 weeks notice of the cancellation (the airline has to offer a refund or rerouting in any case, but only has to pay additional compensation if there is < 2 weeks notice). Therefore, the fact that flybe is doing this suggests to me that they suspect they may have to announce the cancellation with less than 2 weeks notice (e.g. announcing next week, with effect from the start of S15).

[AdamThePassenger]

You are damn right, I was clutching at straws :P

[cumbrianboy]

I looked at flybe schedules out of dublin months ago and it struck me then they never had an aircraft for summer 2015 to operate the rotation. The Southampton aircraft that currently operates Southend from the s15 schedule returns back to Southampton straight away ... Makes me wonder if it was ever on the cards.

Let's hope Stobart step back in with a rotation on the atr...

[AdamThePassenger]

If that is the case, then Flybe have known about this for a LONG time. One has to wonder why an announcement has not been made or an alternative put in place.

[Ernest Lanc's]

Its future is always going to lie with the holiday traveller, but there is enough of them within SEN's catchment area to provide a constant flow of passengers to the right destinations.

The future of any airport is in the management and agreeing correct contracts with airlines.


Blackpool had good sunshine routes with good load factors and in fact the routes on the increase.


That did not stop the airport from closing. Blackpool also had a decent catchment area, but bad management from successive owners and greed from FR and LS made closure inevitable despite being voted best airport and despite very good load factors. The airport failed.


On a point later in this thread about pricing - If an airline wants to pull a route, they will normally at the end of a season.

[mockingjay]

Southend is a differemt animal. It has a large, affluent population, much better connectivity and arguably has a good amount of inbound tourism. Blackpool had none of these things.

Airlines and airports are profit making business (unless they're governemnt subsidised ones in Scotland or Wales) and not public services. If they don't turn a profit they will go.

I Can't blame anyone for trying to benefit from reduced fees. BLK a fancied themselves as large international airport and the gamble did not pay off unfortunately.

And as always, any idiot can fill a plane. Making them turn a profit is the aim and load factors are not an indication of profitability. If it was profitable for Jet2 then I'm sure they would have kicked up a bigger fuss when the airport closed. Most likely the could make more money with the planes in different bases, free landing fees or not.

[Andy_S]

Originally Posted by Ernest Lanc's

......greed from FR and LS.....

These are businesses, and entitled to drive as hard a bargain as they like. I wish more people would understand that.

[Barling Magna]

Back to marketing of SEN. I was driving back from Keswick to sunny Essex today (how I wished that CAX-SEN service existed!!) when I chanced upon an Eddie Stobart lorry on the M6. In very big letters on the back of the lorry it said "London Southend Airport. Try flying to Ibiza." Only problem was that I passed this lorry north of Lancaster. Maybe these lorries have been advertising SEN for some while, but this is the first I've actually seen. Anyone else seen such a lorry advertising SEN to Ibiza, or indeed advertisng SEN at all...??

[tws123]

Funny you should mention this. I saw an advert for the 'The new super fast fly-through terminal' on the back of a Stobart lorry heading on the M6 at Coventry couple of months back!


Also a quick update on Air Kärnten.


- The AOC will not be completed in time for the start of scheduled services (as many predicted), subsequently they will operate as a virtual airline with no owned aircraft or own AOC
- Reservations for Klagenfurt-SEN have been low (even though a booking system is not running yet, except for package holidays on tour operator's websites)
- This has put doubt into its viability, and hence whether or not it will operate
- Aircraft may vary from the CRJ-200 type originally chosen as another airline would be operating the flights for them


Here's an idea for them, why don't they market the route! SEN might not want to market them (yet) but they can still create Facebook and Twitter accounts for FREE and reach a large target audience. A small article in the Echo will not suffice...

[davidjohnson6]

Perhaps Air Karnten could add the capacity to book flights (albeit on a wet leased aircraft) on their website, allowing customers to see the price of a ticket immediately, instead of having to wait for someone to send an email the following day ? Plenty of other virtual airlines seem to manage this...

[Ernest Lanc's]

These are businesses, and entitled to drive as hard a bargain as they like. I wish more people would understand that.

With respect I wish you would "understand" an airport needs landing fees to survive.


FR I understand wanted to land as a favour to BLK, less that a £1 per pax..


LS would not pay a fair landing fee - now they had high load factors at BLK, so driving BB out of business did them no favours. new routes LS did give BLK, a fair deal they did not,


Yes the fault lies with owners past and present, for not insisting on a better deal.

[fa2fi]

Ernest Lancs - can you provide a source for Jet2's fees paid to BLK?

[Cyrano]

Originally Posted by Ernest Lanc's

With respect I wish you would "understand" an airport needs landing fees to survive.


FR I understand wanted to land as a favour to BLK, less that a £1 per pax..


LS would not pay a fair landing fee - now they had high load factors at BLK, so driving BB out of business did them no favours. new routes LS did give BLK, a fair deal they did not,


Yes the fault lies with owners past and present, for not insisting on a better deal.

SCENE: A Routes conference somewhere in Europe.
Ryanair: "We have a queue of airports offering us free landing fees. We'll fly to your airport and pay you £1 per passenger. If you organise your ancillary revenue right you'll make another £5 or more per passenger. We'll bring you 100,000 passengers a year. Think of what you can do with that."
Airport: "No, £1 per passenger isn't enough. We insist on a better deal."
Ryanair: "Ok, fine, bugger off then. Who's next?"

Seriously, how do you propose that an airport can "insist" on a better deal? They can't force Ryanair (or any other carrier) to fly there.

[Sharklet_321]

You'd be lucky too if Ryanair agree to pay a pound!!!!

An airport like STN possibly would be earning a quid or two but an airport like CWL? Or MME? Or DSA? More like 25p after three years of free

[Ernest Lanc's]

Originally Posted by fa2fi

Ernest Lancs - can you provide a source for Jet2's fees paid to BLK?

Sure can....

PR explained it was unlikely BLK would resume international passenger flights and that they had lost money every time a jet landed. Attempts to negotiate with the main airlines failed. None were prepared to pay £10 per passenger, with Ryanair refusing even to pay £1 per passenger. Since reopening without the burden of commercial flights, the airport runs at a small profit, securing 34 jobs.

https://www.change.org/p/balfour-bea...port/u/9497106

Originally Posted by Cyrano

Ryanair: "We have a queue of airports offering us free landing fees. We'll fly to your airport and pay you £1 per passenger. If you organise your ancillary revenue right you'll make another £5 or more per passenger. We'll bring you 100,000 passengers a year. Think of what you can do with that."[....]Seriously, how do you propose that an airport can "insist" on a better deal? They can't force Ryanair (or any other carrier) to fly there.

Cyrano - Not sure your point - What use is 100,000 extra pax if that is losing you money. In 2006 BLK had near 600,000 pax a year but was losing money - I am convinced BB introduced the ADF, just to get rid of FR. BLK were not in a position to make "ancillary revenue" to make up for FRs scrooge tactics. If you are correct that airlines are the piper that calls the tune - Regional airports are doomed to fail.

[Andy_S]

Originally Posted by Ernest Lanc's

If you are correct that airlines are the piper that calls the tune.......

Of course they are. They are the customer and it's a buyers market.

[Ernest Lanc's]

Of course they are. They are the customer and it's a buyers market.

You are missing the point completely. Large airports can make money from shopping, cafe's ect. Small regional airports can't.


By your logic - We may as well shut down the regional airports and leave it to the big boys, who could survive on unrealistic landing fees.


Oh and as for your remark about "customer" - Let enough airports close down - Then watch the airlines squirm when a small number of large airports have a monopoly.

[cumbrianboy]

If an airport is a primary airport it is attractive to an airline, in the uk this is London (All airports although sen is on the periphery of this), MAN BHX GLA EDI and to a lesser extent BRS NCL LPL. Otherwise the Airport is at the mercy of the airline. You're right it's hard for a regional to make money and those that do do from for other activities such as property rental, a thriving ga and biz jet operation or maintenance

I understand people get frustrated when their local airport doesn't secure the latest round of expansion from easyjet or Thomson or Ryanair or whoever but the point is Southend ir Blackpool isn't competing with stansted or manchester they're competing with EVERY regional and MAJOR airport in Europe.

Like it or not, regional airports present a massive gamble to airlines. Do I put an aircraft in manchester where I know I can fill it and make money and the travel trade are so used to supporting it they will without any effort and the public will automatically try and book or do I put it in a small regional with few flights that is not in the public or trade consciousness and that will cost me disproportionately more to market and up my operating costs because of lack of economies of scale?

What do you think? Airlines will but they expect the airport to carry the risk

The problem is for an airport if you start carrying one airline passenger you need the same facilities and services as the airport that carries 10 million+ and that is where the regional airports can't rely on passengers services alone, and if they don't get a critical mass then ...

I've just written this on an iPhone so enjoy the typos ....

[LEEDS APPROACH]

Originally Posted by cumbrianboy

If an airport is a primary airport it is attractive to an airline, in the uk this is London (All airports although sen is on the periphery of this), MAN BHX GLA EDI and to a lesser extent BRS NCL LPL. Otherwise the Airport is at the mercy of the airline. You're right it's hard for a regional to make money and those that do do from for other activities such as property rental, a thriving ga and biz jet operation or maintenance

I understand people get frustrated when their local airport doesn't secure the latest round of expansion from easyjet or Thomson or Ryanair or whoever but the point is Southend ir Blackpool isn't competing with stansted or manchester they're competing with EVERY regional and MAJOR airport in Europe.

Like it or not, regional airports present a massive gamble to airlines. Do I put an aircraft in manchester where I know I can fill it and make money and the travel trade are so used to supporting it they will without any effort and the public will automatically try and book or do I put it in a small regional with few flights that is not in the public or trade consciousness and that will cost me disproportionately more to market and up my operating costs because of lack of economies of scale?

What do you think? Airlines will but they expect the airport to carry the risk

The problem is for an airport if you start carrying one airline passenger you need the same facilities and services as the airport that carries 10 million+ and that is where the regional airports can't rely on passengers services alone, and if they don't get a critical mass then ...

I've just written this on an iPhone so enjoy the typos ....

Interesting discussion. The airlines rule. This is exactly why Yorkshire and the Humber needs just ONE 'fit for purpose' airport (ignoring HUY oil rig operation) instead of two fighting against each other. The passenger still gets competition because it is the route that is important and not the bus stop. Looks like the clueless govt are about to wade in again to distort the UK's natural demand for number of airports and viable air routes. This is going to harm actual viable routes and the airports they serve.

[Musket90]

Barling Magna

I confess not to being a Stobart truck spotter but I also saw London Southend Airport -Ibiza on a truck recently. I suppose it's better that one I saw which had the rear trailer left door replaced with nothing written on it, so instead of stating "Eddie Stobart" the right side trailer door read read "die bart". I felt for any "Simpson" fans who also saw it.