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

Prestwick-2

Old 10th May 2020, 02:10
  #401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 845
Originally Posted by highwideandugly View Post
Are they enough to sustain the airport you ask?

Probably..with prudent management and yes..cost cutting.

Whatever..they are in a better position than.....Inverness,Dundee,Carlisle,Newcastle,Leeds,Humbersid e ,Southend,Exeter,Bournemouth,Southampton et al... the ones with no diversification and no real population?

The aviation world has changed forever..so sad...
I find it hard to believe that Prestwick is more sustainable than Inverness, Newcastle, Leeds/Bradford or Exeter, if only because none of those four have an airport the size of Abbotsinch just up the road to absorb their traffic. Not sure you could describe Tyne & Wear or West Yorkshire as having 'no real population' either!

Last edited by jensdad; 10th May 2020 at 02:11. Reason: Inability to count
jensdad is offline  
Old 10th May 2020, 06:58
  #402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,874
Its not as if Durham Tees Valley has a lot going for it. Remove the FRA business and there's nowt. I doubt T3 will be running back there to operate flights
GrahamK is offline  
Old 10th May 2020, 07:05
  #403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,288
I doubt T3 will be running back there to operate flights
They will be there until next May at least!

While HWU's list is some what "random" (BOH, HUY not diversified?), there's long been an arguement that the UK has too many airports. Depends what shape the UK aviation industry end up in, and at the moment who knows?
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 10th May 2020, 07:41
  #404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 4DME
Posts: 1,962
Originally Posted by GrahamK View Post
Its not as if Durham Tees Valley has a lot going for it. Remove the FRA business and there's nowt. I doubt T3 will be running back there to operate flights
It hasn't but Teesside has, there's more than Cobham.

This whole thread just seems to be a bit of ignorant trolling by bored spotters.
N707ZS is offline  
Old 10th May 2020, 08:45
  #405 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 202
Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot View Post
All the great things listed above are dragged down by white elephant terminal and passenger operation that just doesnít pay itís way. Close the terminal. It adds nothing to the balance sheet. Keep the apron but close the 1965 terminal building operating at a fraction of design capacity. Let it go.
Nail on the head. As long as they keep this going it'll remain a money pit.
mwm991 is offline  
Old 14th May 2020, 08:18
  #406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The banks of the Pow burn
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by Tiger8 View Post
I really hope so, however you can`t allow what traffic you have to be poached by your competitor.
To keep the fanboys happy, the last 2 years have been excellent with fantastic amounts of US Mil
swelling the coffers. However, my worry always was there appeared to be little appetite to go after anything else
and as such all the eggs were in 1 basket.
I hope after the dust settles, this does not come back to bite them!

I hope to god that the deal for the airport goes through at some point and there is some stability about the place, because a you
rightly say, it is a fantastic aerodrome.
seems odd that everyone is convinced the CAF business was poached when it appeared to happen as a pandemic gripped the mainland UK. Letís not forget the initial missions were booked into PIK and allegedly switched last minute due to an issue out with the airports control. Hotels I believe? Only a handful remain open locally still to this day.

As some others have suggested there is welcome business come the other way in the form of the C40ís and Qatar Emiri C17 albeit we need more of it. Proof there is life in the old dog yet.

Whilst the Canadian stuff is a sore loss during this mess there is an argument to suggest it may only be temporary and sporadic. Letís hope it returns.

Hopeful also that when passenger traffic does return the airport may be in a position to offer a better cost saving deal to potential airlines who have been hit hard during the shut down.

interesting months ahead for the industry as a whole.
TRN1K is offline  
Old 14th May 2020, 09:09
  #407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,288
Originally Posted by TRN1K View Post

As some others have suggested there is welcome business come the other way in the form of the C40ís and Qatar Emiri C17 albeit we need more of it. Proof there is life in the old dog yet.
Can the costs of an international airport be sustained by this type of traffic?
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 14th May 2020, 13:17
  #408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Prestwick
Posts: 59
Originally Posted by TRN1K View Post
seems odd that everyone is convinced the CAF business was poached when it appeared to happen as a pandemic gripped the mainland UK. Letís not forget the initial missions were booked into PIK and allegedly switched last minute due to an issue out with the airports control. Hotels I believe? Only a handful remain open locally still to this day.

As some others have suggested there is welcome business come the other way in the form of the C40ís and Qatar Emiri C17 albeit we need more of it. Proof there is life in the old dog yet.

Whilst the Canadian stuff is a sore loss during this mess there is an argument to suggest it may only be temporary and sporadic. Letís hope it returns.

Hopeful also that when passenger traffic does return the airport may be in a position to offer a better cost saving deal to potential airlines who have been hit hard during the shut down.

interesting months ahead for the industry as a whole.
My point is though, there has been accommodation for Kuwait, Qatari and I believe 1 CAF came back to do back to back overnights. Accommodation was also available for the Volga crew, so I don`t think we can use lack of hotel rooms as a
viable reason for them being in Belfast. After all, they should be in exactly the same position as Prestwick re accommodation. Anyway, hopefully a good outcome is still possible with the buyer, although i`m sure they will be looking to get it at a
far lower price now.
Tiger8 is offline  
Old 14th May 2020, 14:12
  #409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The banks of the Pow burn
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by SWBKCB View Post
Can the costs of an international airport be sustained by this type of traffic?
certainly in my opinion, if managed correctly, yes. If the USAF return on the volumes seen pre COVID19 then no reason why it canít.
TRN1K is offline  
Old 14th May 2020, 14:15
  #410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The banks of the Pow burn
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by Tiger8 View Post
My point is though, there has been accommodation for Kuwait, Qatari and I believe 1 CAF came back to do back to back overnights. Accommodation was also available for the Volga crew, so I don`t think we can use lack of hotel rooms as a
viable reason for them being in Belfast. After all, they should be in exactly the same position as Prestwick re accommodation. Anyway, hopefully a good outcome is still possible with the buyer, although i`m sure they will be looking to get it at a
far lower price now.
itís a fair point. However with these circumstances never been seen before there may be more to it than Prestwick simply being robbed of the business. I am keeping an open mind and considering each possible reason.

TRN1K is offline  
Old 14th May 2020, 17:12
  #411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 435
TRN1K - the problem with your suggestion that once things start to recover, PIK could attract new passenger airlines by pricing is that GLA and EDI will both also be desperate for new traffic which they will also try to attract by pricing, and they have the upper hand in terms of location. It really confuses me as to why PIK hangs on to its 1960s terminal for a handful of FR flights which will not be paying more than a pittance and if anyone would like to explain the economics of this I would be interested.
willy wombat is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 08:14
  #412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SW Scotland
Age: 37
Posts: 302
Originally Posted by willy wombat View Post
TRN1K - the problem with your suggestion that once things start to recover, PIK could attract new passenger airlines by pricing is that GLA and EDI will both also be desperate for new traffic which they will also try to attract by pricing, and they have the upper hand in terms of location. It really confuses me as to why PIK hangs on to its 1960s terminal for a handful of FR flights which will not be paying more than a pittance and if anyone would like to explain the economics of this I would be interested.
Theres one reason why they might choose to do this... the economics are maybe better than everyone around here thinks. PIK is a business like any other, and if the way to profitability was as simple as closing the terminal, then they'd have done so years ago. The fact it is still open suggests its not that simple.
nighthawk117 is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 09:35
  #413 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,288
Originally Posted by nighthawk117 View Post
Theres one reason why they might choose to do this... the economics are maybe better than everyone around here thinks. PIK is a business like any other, and if the way to profitability was as simple as closing the terminal, then they'd have done so years ago. The fact it is still open suggests its not that simple.
So what is the cause of the losses year on year?
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 15th May 2020, 10:06
  #414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Scotland
Posts: 119
Is it because they don't want to pee off Ryanair, who happen to have a busy maintenance facility there? Much easier/cheaper to have a hangar at a station with regular ops so they can swap aircraft in and out at no cost of positioning etc.
Yeehaw22 is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 10:10
  #415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,288
So the British taxpayer is subsidising Ryabairs maintenance costs???
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 15th May 2020, 10:15
  #416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Scotland
Posts: 119
Originally Posted by SWBKCB View Post
So the British taxpayer is subsidising Ryabairs maintenance costs???
Well they subsidised the hangar build.......
Yeehaw22 is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 16:42
  #417 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 435
But even if it is the case that PIK is desperate to keep FR pax flights so they keep the maintenance business, it would surely be cheaper to handle the FR flights using a portacabin rather than keeping the existing terminal open.
willy wombat is offline  
Old 15th May 2020, 18:36
  #418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The banks of the Pow burn
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by willy wombat View Post
But even if it is the case that PIK is desperate to keep FR pax flights so they keep the maintenance business, it would surely be cheaper to handle the FR flights using a portacabin rather than keeping the existing terminal open.
Really? That would be a very costly exercise in itself. Having to move all of the security equipment, check in, carousels, immigration, making it big enough for a lounge whilst all being DfT compliant at the same time...
TRN1K is offline  
Old 16th May 2020, 01:40
  #419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Age: 39
Posts: 577
Originally Posted by nighthawk117 View Post
Theres one reason why they might choose to do this... the economics are maybe better than everyone around here thinks. PIK is a business like any other, and if the way to profitability was as simple as closing the terminal, then they'd have done so years ago. The fact it is still open suggests its not that simple.
They’re owned by politicians who want to keep jobs, facilities and return PIK to the “glory days”. Now, imagine the headlines of closing the terminal building. No UK passenger operator is going to open an operation at PIK. It was damned hard to get Buzz, flyglobespan and bmi baby/Air Wales before the bubble days of Ryanair, and those businesses all failed. The definition of insanity is continuing to the same thing expecting a different result. Even before COVID19 PIK were irrelevant in the UK passenger market, they have been since FR opened up EDI and GLA. Even if FR pulled out of GLA, there’s little benefit to PIK in the current market.

But PIK’s big old white elephant terminal survives because of politics, just like when George Younger was the local MP, it’s wrapped in politics.

Originally Posted by TRN1K View Post
Really? That would be a very costly exercise in itself. Having to move all of the security equipment, check in, carousels, immigration, making it big enough for a lounge whilst all being DfT compliant at the same time...
Or to put the business perspective, it would be a necessary investment to reduce losses and right size the business to a firmer footing. The passenger facilities required by FR don’t include a lounge.
Skipness One Foxtrot is online now  
Old 16th May 2020, 13:16
  #420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 121
Originally Posted by Yeehaw22 View Post
Well they subsidised the hangar build.......
The last time that I saw government figures it was the passenger side that was losing money. If I remember correctly it was over £20 per passenger.
How many jobs does the Ryanair maintenance hanger provide? Is it enough to keep sustaining the losses on their passenger movements? If not they need to send them packing.
Rob Royston is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

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