Stansted-3
Thread Starter
In 2009 STN saw a reduction in traffic compared to 2007 which continued until 2012 - but it was not a catastrophe. The peak-to-trough was around 24 % decline in passenger numbers - bad but the lights stayed on even in the worst of the credit crunch
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last trough at STN was exacerbated & prolonged by the politics of then owner BAA.
The downward traffic trend suited the BAA empire very well at the time.
I would expect MAG to have a completely different pro active agenda in the event.
The downward traffic trend suited the BAA empire very well at the time.
I would expect MAG to have a completely different pro active agenda in the event.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Daws Heath Essex
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thankyou for your assertion that SEN is not a London airport when it is officially classified as such. May we have your facts and reasoning please? Ah but then I have just read your username....silly me!
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the grand order of things & in the context of the discussion re the news item pasted on the STN thread earlier then whatever the nomenclature used SEN IS NOT included...
STN Ramp Rat
Road distance from STN to London Bridge 39 miles; SEN to London Bridge 40 miles. Travel time 63 minutes and 70 minutes respectively. So one is a LON airport and the other isn't? I could understand it if you claimed that neither is.
In any event if it's good enough for IATA then it's good enough for me.
Road distance from STN to London Bridge 39 miles; SEN to London Bridge 40 miles. Travel time 63 minutes and 70 minutes respectively. So one is a LON airport and the other isn't? I could understand it if you claimed that neither is.
In any event if it's good enough for IATA then it's good enough for me.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further to the post above concerning another airport...
Beginning to see media articles & comment (again) concerning "labelling" of airports anywhere in the South......all as London!...
We know the methodology of airport owners & operators desperate for the LON tag in the booking search systems but it appears for some observers now that enough is enough,with a possible calling for a rethink to be put on the agenda as the current system is less than rigid.
Tipping point seems to be London Oxford in the criticism...
Beginning to see media articles & comment (again) concerning "labelling" of airports anywhere in the South......all as London!...
We know the methodology of airport owners & operators desperate for the LON tag in the booking search systems but it appears for some observers now that enough is enough,with a possible calling for a rethink to be put on the agenda as the current system is less than rigid.
Tipping point seems to be London Oxford in the criticism...
As far as I'm concerned if IATA designate an airport as being a LON terminus then it is. If an airport just chooses to prefix itself with 'London', as in the case of Oxford, it isn't. Thus SEN is and Oxford isn't.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More to do with the mood swings of Ryanair who like to show who has the upper hand.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By all means praise MAG for what they’re doing but BAA built up STN even though there was enormous opposition to it. It was BAA who built a beautifuly simple and passenger friendly world class facility of which London could be justifiably proud. It was supposed to be the new Heathrow and they tried VERY hard for years. The harsh reality is that due to distance, a catchment area of too many sheep and fields and market dominance of LHR, it never worked. BAA realised it would never work and to be fair had to do something, and with AirUK’s hub concept struggling and KLM buying them out, they gave it to FR for next to nothing, they HAD to.
Hence none of the above concepts remain and STN is a loco shopping mall where the original concept is long neglected. But there would be no STN without BAA, that much is abundantly clear, although the days of the monopoly operator (now though to be very bad) or, coherent airport planning policy to put it another way (er, somehow less bad) are long gone. Both views have merit IMHO, a proper planning structure would have raised costs marginally but allowed less cut-price facilities. There is no way STN v2 will look as good as v1 as FR, LS et al couldn’t justify the price.
Good point about LCY, I have been wondering about Crossrail bringing LHR to the Wharf as well, LCY-JFK is barely hanging on as it is. SEN is not a London Airport to anyone but the marketing team at SEN. And that’s not meant as a slur on a good little airport, just a reality check on marketers, with whom I work with managing daily!!!
Hence none of the above concepts remain and STN is a loco shopping mall where the original concept is long neglected. But there would be no STN without BAA, that much is abundantly clear, although the days of the monopoly operator (now though to be very bad) or, coherent airport planning policy to put it another way (er, somehow less bad) are long gone. Both views have merit IMHO, a proper planning structure would have raised costs marginally but allowed less cut-price facilities. There is no way STN v2 will look as good as v1 as FR, LS et al couldn’t justify the price.
Good point about LCY, I have been wondering about Crossrail bringing LHR to the Wharf as well, LCY-JFK is barely hanging on as it is. SEN is not a London Airport to anyone but the marketing team at SEN. And that’s not meant as a slur on a good little airport, just a reality check on marketers, with whom I work with managing daily!!!
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BAA internals I refer to were timeline specific occurring with the traffic downturn mentioned originally above as a trough of approx. -25%...
The BAA exacerbated & prolonged the correction which originally started with misfortunes including BER pulling their domestics & demise of EOS & MAX et al...
It could not really be attributed to the history per se of STN as related above though, as there were two major factors ongoing for the BAA in that same timescale which came to suit the BAA Empire very well in seeing traffic "run down" at STN in the short/medium term for a sight & view of the long term overall future of the "London Empire"...
Reference to statements by MAG even in the last few weeks concerning STN growth under their leadership & very diplomatically alluded too also highlights the case.
The STN history as related above is obviously very generalised & I would defer in some instances but it reflects too the overall malaise in the real political world with every successive government to this very day fudging the London airports issue...
LHR is & has been since WW2 a cobble up & still suffers from it`s planning past today & really only strengthened by becoming a major beneficiary of the emergence unforeseen a few years ago of the Alliances & ME3...
Surely the organisation that is STN deserves merit in commercial & marketing eyes as although as pointed out it does not exist with it`s original function it has been transformed by commercial reality & innovation not envisaged at the outset...
Referring back to the actual STN news story from yesterday it does portray an exciting & evolving story.
I agree with sentiments concerning LCY & SEN btw.
From the records Stansted Airport officially became London (Stansted) on 1 May 1964.
The BAA exacerbated & prolonged the correction which originally started with misfortunes including BER pulling their domestics & demise of EOS & MAX et al...
It could not really be attributed to the history per se of STN as related above though, as there were two major factors ongoing for the BAA in that same timescale which came to suit the BAA Empire very well in seeing traffic "run down" at STN in the short/medium term for a sight & view of the long term overall future of the "London Empire"...
Reference to statements by MAG even in the last few weeks concerning STN growth under their leadership & very diplomatically alluded too also highlights the case.
The STN history as related above is obviously very generalised & I would defer in some instances but it reflects too the overall malaise in the real political world with every successive government to this very day fudging the London airports issue...
LHR is & has been since WW2 a cobble up & still suffers from it`s planning past today & really only strengthened by becoming a major beneficiary of the emergence unforeseen a few years ago of the Alliances & ME3...
Surely the organisation that is STN deserves merit in commercial & marketing eyes as although as pointed out it does not exist with it`s original function it has been transformed by commercial reality & innovation not envisaged at the outset...
Referring back to the actual STN news story from yesterday it does portray an exciting & evolving story.
I agree with sentiments concerning LCY & SEN btw.
From the records Stansted Airport officially became London (Stansted) on 1 May 1964.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never realised how sensitive and insecure some of you are about your London airport status. This despite huge numbers and capacity for even more.
Do you really want to deprive little ol' SEN of its status as a London airport? You all know deep down there's no justification for that - not from your location.
So stop being big boy bullies. You success or otherwise doesn't depend in any way on what happens elsewhere in Essex.
Do you really want to deprive little ol' SEN of its status as a London airport? You all know deep down there's no justification for that - not from your location.
So stop being big boy bullies. You success or otherwise doesn't depend in any way on what happens elsewhere in Essex.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sense the inevitable form of censorship arising from "little ol`SEN" YET again...
Free speech & view & opinion & knowledge is the name of the game dear boy...
"Sensitive & insecure" surely is the kettle & pot `an all that...
Read back to yesterday & it was a good news feature from the BBC concerning STN & the subject of Southend was not actually mentioned I believe until a SEN poster inserted a Southend view.
I posted the Stansted officially becoming date as an interesting historical aside...
Free speech & view & opinion & knowledge is the name of the game dear boy...
"Sensitive & insecure" surely is the kettle & pot `an all that...
Read back to yesterday & it was a good news feature from the BBC concerning STN & the subject of Southend was not actually mentioned I believe until a SEN poster inserted a Southend view.
I posted the Stansted officially becoming date as an interesting historical aside...
You need to look at post #702 to see who started this off so please don't complain when a "free speech" response or two is forthcoming following a gratuitous dig at SEN by a STN stalwart.
I never realised how sensitive and insecure some of you are about your London airport status. This despite huge numbers and capacity for even more.
Do you really want to deprive little ol' SEN of its status as a London airport? You all know deep down there's no justification for that - not from your location.
So stop being big boy bullies. You success or otherwise doesn't depend in any way on what happens elsewhere in Essex.
Do you really want to deprive little ol' SEN of its status as a London airport? You all know deep down there's no justification for that - not from your location.
So stop being big boy bullies. You success or otherwise doesn't depend in any way on what happens elsewhere in Essex.
Perhaps East Midlands should be Called "Birmingham-East Midlands" or Liverpool "Manchester-Speke". It might be great marketing (and at the same time cause a parochial rumpus in both regions) but it little more than deception of the airlines and industry and it's the passengers that suffer - and many of those would be foreigners who have little perception of distance, and the inadequacies of our surface infrastructure.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I state again the discussion was started by a paste of a BBC good news story concerning STN....Southend was not mentioned until a SEN poster on #701 inserted a reference to Southend!...
I believe post #702 replies to the Southend addition & is HIS view...I condone that belief as has a poster concerned with marketing last night...
I understand your obvious challenge concerning IATA designation.....BUT...
I believe post #702 replies to the Southend addition & is HIS view...I condone that belief as has a poster concerned with marketing last night...
I understand your obvious challenge concerning IATA designation.....BUT...
ATNotts
I would be interested to read your reasons why airports other than LHR, LGW, STN and LTN "simple(sic) don't cut it". With SEN and STN being the same distance from London Bridge, with very similar surface travel times and with both being designated by IATA as LON airports, what characteristics lead you to your conclusion and why LCY is also excluded?
I would be interested to read your reasons why airports other than LHR, LGW, STN and LTN "simple(sic) don't cut it". With SEN and STN being the same distance from London Bridge, with very similar surface travel times and with both being designated by IATA as LON airports, what characteristics lead you to your conclusion and why LCY is also excluded?
ATNotts
I would be interested to read your reasons why airports other than LHR, LGW, STN and LTN "simple(sic) don't cut it". With SEN and STN being the same distance from London Bridge, with very similar surface travel times and with both being designated by IATA as LON airports, what characteristics lead you to your conclusion and why LCY is also excluded?
I would be interested to read your reasons why airports other than LHR, LGW, STN and LTN "simple(sic) don't cut it". With SEN and STN being the same distance from London Bridge, with very similar surface travel times and with both being designated by IATA as LON airports, what characteristics lead you to your conclusion and why LCY is also excluded?
Adding more and more airports under the LON banner causes nothing but confusion to the poor punter - especially as it is largely unnecessary and serves as little more than a marketing exercise.