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

Luton-9

Old 12th Oct 2018, 18:38
  #1781 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Under the flight path
Posts: 2,141
...but with each year the propensity to fly increases (aviation is a growing industry), so previously marginal routes may become viable, all other things being equal.
LGS6753 is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 19:24
  #1782 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Luton
Posts: 14
It is true, but that is equally applicable to other routes as well - airlines will go for where they can make the most money, and especially as capacity is so restricted at LTN in the morning and evening (who would set up an aircraft base in Waterford just to operate a LTN route?). Like has been said - Dublin is now so much easier to get to, is it time to accept Waterford will not be a viable route?
baileygates is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2018, 08:21
  #1783 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Luton
Posts: 322
Waterford needs investment

144,000 pax was the peak at Waterford with its very short runway! If the runway is extended to that quoted then it will be longer than Luton. However the LTN service proved to be successful, so I personally would welcome the re-development and the route being re-instated.
Lee Baker Street is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2018, 20:31
  #1784 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Luton
Posts: 322
Pax figures for September

1,543,374 pax passed through LTN in September which represents 3.95% growth compared to September 2017. With 15 new routes and 1 route to resume before the year end, October through to end of December this year will prove substantial growth each month.

The only thing that can hold back substantial growth in the short term is the lack of a/c aprons.
Lee Baker Street is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2018, 20:48
  #1785 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 6,999
Also lack of terminal capacity comes to mind although Japan might have the answer. Luton just needs to remove some of those pesky seating areas.
LTNman is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2018, 18:37
  #1786 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 4,322
The price of a barrel of oil is slowly rising which will expose marginal routes.
Buster the Bear is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2018, 19:05
  #1787 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: IoM & Luton
Age: 55
Posts: 1,663
S19 Nighttime ban

Is it true that one will not be in place next year, just more restrictions on noisier types above QC1 ?
pabely is online now  
Old 15th Oct 2018, 20:39
  #1788 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 6,999
It was every summer until further notice but Signature does state that indeed for summer 2019 it is only QC1 that will be affected although ainonline.com have just reported that the restrictions will indeed remain next year so take your pick.

Last edited by LTNman; 15th Oct 2018 at 20:57.
LTNman is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2018, 20:35
  #1789 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Between the check-in desks
Posts: 135
So next year the airport will apply for planning permission for a terminal that could handle around 20 million passengers but what sort of terminal should it be? More of the same with no airbridges and what many would rate as basic facilities in a low rent terminal or a more upmarket affair for trying to attract a better class of passenger.

There is an argument that Luton has only done well on the back of cheap Eastern European migrants and their visiting families but growth in that market must be close to saturation and the fact that Brexit was a vote to control migration so where is a future market going to come from when Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted all have plans to cream off passengers.

Luton's market is niche based on a shortish runway so long haul will always be problematic with many types of aircraft. The Brits only have so much money to spend so growth would have to come from outside the UK from new markets.

Agree or disagree?
Spanish eyes is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2018, 23:21
  #1790 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 4,322
Neo and MAX open possibilities of reaching far off destinations. People use planes, like they do buses and trains. New markets will open, but growth in my opinion depends upon one thing, the price of aviation fuel. Should a town the size of Luton be borrowing staggering figures (debt) on a gamble?
Buster the Bear is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 06:21
  #1791 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 6,999
Buster has hit the nail on the head and is asking a question that everyone is ignoring. LLAL is already borrowing 225m for the DART. A DART extension plus basically a new airport linked to the existing runway will cost at least a 1bn. This is not a large PLC borrowing the money and taking a risk but a local council in the expectation that they will fill the new terminal. If the project fails they will leave the people of Luton with a bankrupt council.
LTNman is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 06:33
  #1792 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 3,656
Do the lenders of the money have recourse to either the council or the company which owns the airport in the event of default ? I imagine there is something on this theme to avoid an astronomical interest rate, but just how big a claim could local residents face if it all goes a bit wrong ?

Does Westminster have powers to limit the borrowings by a council ? After Northampton, presumably there will be a level of caution in the corridors of power - if bankruptcy occurs, Westminster would have to pick up (some of) the pieces rather than seeing uncollected rubbish pile up in the streets
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 08:30
  #1793 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Under the flight path
Posts: 2,141
Local government borrowing is guaranteed by central government, and is therefore at very low rates of interest.
LGS6753 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 08:52
  #1794 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 6,999
I would guess if LLAL/ Luton Council defaulted on the loans they would have to sell assets which would mean selling the airport. Also estimated costs will no doubt rise as when first announced the existing redevelopment work was costed at 100m. The latest figure I have seen is now 160m with a nearly 2 year overrun on the terminal project.

There is no doubt that the council is gambling on getting the numbers but if it all goes wrong those making the decisions today will be long gone with the new councilors saying it was nothing to do with them.
LTNman is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 08:53
  #1795 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 6,999
Originally Posted by LGS6753 View Post
Local government borrowing is guaranteed by central government, and is therefore at very low rates of interest.
Looking at some of the loans LLAL has taken out they are paying up to 12% interest.
LTNman is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 11:53
  #1796 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Luton
Posts: 322
Assets

Originally Posted by LTNman View Post
Buster has hit the nail on the head and is asking a question that everyone is ignoring. LLAL is already borrowing 225m for the DART. A DART extension plus basically a new airport linked to the existing runway will cost at least a 1bn. This is not a large PLC borrowing the money and taking a risk but a local council in the expectation that they will fill the new terminal. If the project fails they will leave the people of Luton with a bankrupt council.
I do not pretend to know how company finance works but LBC have assets last audited on 31st March 2018 and declared as being 1.341 Billion. Further more I do not see LBC taking a gamble (as implied) but simply investing in Lutons future. If LLAO built six extra remote stands overnight then those stands would be in regular use in a very short time.
Lee Baker Street is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 12:43
  #1797 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 692
Vueling

After not being bookable for months now, the 2x daily AMS is back in the booking engine for S19.
Nothing yet for Florence

Sunexpress

All five routes served this summer are now loaded on their website for S19
Falcon666 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 18:40
  #1798 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Dunstable
Posts: 57
AMS never stopped though
BlueA330 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 19:10
  #1799 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 692
Originally Posted by BlueA330 View Post
AMS never stopped though
True , but it wasn't bookable after the end of March 19 when all their other routes were (in the last six months)
That made it look like it was stopping at the end of W18/19

Only now has it become bookable past March
Falcon666 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2018, 19:36
  #1800 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 4,322
Grrr

Originally Posted by Lee Baker Street View Post
I do not pretend to know how company finance works but LBC have assets last audited on 31st March 2018 and declared as being 1.341 Billion. Further more I do not see LBC taking a gamble (as implied) but simply investing in Lutons future. If LLAO built six extra remote stands overnight then those stands would be in regular use in a very short time.
The town of Luton has a population of around 220,000. Investing 600m in an airport is going to take an awfully long time to recoup that debt. LBC was once getting 1.43 per passenger, but I understand that is no longer the case? Even so, after interest has been added, those making the decisions today, will be long dead before that debt is repaid. Even my crystal ball cannot see that far into the future! The world of aviation will certainly have moved on by then. I stand by my words, 'a huge gamble'. Should there be a downturn in aviation, history says that it is likely to happen, will those residents then lose out with local council funding being squeezed to make the debt payments?

If it was an airport operator borrowing the money for a project of this size, no one would blink, but the town the size of Luton saddling each of those 220,000 residents with an equivalent 2.75m debt, utter madness! What extra benefit are the towns folk actually going to get, it will not be money into the town hall coffers to spend on the town? No, with that size of debt the only benefits to local residents are increased traffic, noise and pollution. Oh any bye the way, I do not live anywhere close to the airport, but if I did, I'd be branching out as an independent at the local council elections!
Buster the Bear is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.