Heathrow-3
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SOF
The latest tax at LHR is referred to as a "UK Exceptional Regulatory Charge" which is misleading is it not?
Yes it reflects "the cost of doing business" but is underhand in its description & of course will certainly help alleviate to a small extent any problems with LHR shareholder value & income.
Oh and LHR do it because they can even if they choose so to "hide" it.
The latest tax at LHR is referred to as a "UK Exceptional Regulatory Charge" which is misleading is it not?
Yes it reflects "the cost of doing business" but is underhand in its description & of course will certainly help alleviate to a small extent any problems with LHR shareholder value & income.
Oh and LHR do it because they can even if they choose so to "hide" it.
Originally Posted by Asturias56
Long haul pre coivd it was always remarkable how much you could save by avoiding LHR - you pay a BIG premium for using it
Caveat being you can get some really good fares on routes with strong competition, LHR-JFK has price dumping in Y as the frequency is high to support the pointy end. Well, pre COVID anyway, God only knows what that'll look like soon, hopefully bounce back.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by southside bobby
The latest tax at LHR is referred to as a "UK Exceptional Regulatory Charge" which is misleading is it not?
LHR charges are set by the regulator, otherwise they would be in a monopoly position. In Covid, they have lobbied the regulator that they need to have increased charges to recover their loss in this period, which the regulator has accepted. I would not have. LHR will be in the best position to recover quicker than any other airport, as the slots will rapidly fill back up before anywhere else, including transfers from other airports, Gatwick in particular of course. Now if the Exceptional Charge had been levied at Heathrow, collected by the regulator and used to disburse to the other worse-off airports in compensation, I could see some merit in that. But no, it's going straight out of the door again to Ferrovial and their fellow-traveller investors who just saw Heathrow as a Cash Cow opportunity.
Has the Exceptional Charge been given a time limit, say one or two years?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taxi waiting fee tripled
Next move in the Ferrovial money grab is to triple the fee charged to each taxi picking up at the airport
Heathrow to treble taxi pick-up fee from July | Financial Times (ft.com)
Given that the taxi trade has been decimated by Covid and the lack of passengers at the airport, plus the competition from Ubers who don't pay anything, it just seems mad. I would have thought they would want to support one of their business components and partners, not the opposite.
Heathrow to treble taxi pick-up fee from July | Financial Times (ft.com)
Given that the taxi trade has been decimated by Covid and the lack of passengers at the airport, plus the competition from Ubers who don't pay anything, it just seems mad. I would have thought they would want to support one of their business components and partners, not the opposite.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An accurate report, not behind a paywall. They are recovering the cost of taxi waiting sites. Hope they end up with a taxi boycott.
It also started a few years ago, banning local private hire vehicles collecting passengers, by insisting they go into a car park, min £3.50 +
https://londonnewstime.com/taxi-pick...ly/185163/amp/
It also started a few years ago, banning local private hire vehicles collecting passengers, by insisting they go into a car park, min £3.50 +
https://londonnewstime.com/taxi-pick...ly/185163/amp/
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uber continue to pick up at the set-down areas for nothing. They just drive round and round, making a nuisance of themselves.
Regarding the black taxis, this is just exploiting a loophole in the regulations which a clever HAL beancounter has found. There is of course little operating cost in the taxi waiting area, but they can load the supposed asset value of the asphalt etc into the calculations, where the regulator requires them to charge only a fee to cover their costs. With next to no business this last year, they can claim a "loss" from the few taxis around, and thus "recover the loss" by tripling the charge.
If the regulator had any balls they would reject all this outright.
Regarding the black taxis, this is just exploiting a loophole in the regulations which a clever HAL beancounter has found. There is of course little operating cost in the taxi waiting area, but they can load the supposed asset value of the asphalt etc into the calculations, where the regulator requires them to charge only a fee to cover their costs. With next to no business this last year, they can claim a "loss" from the few taxis around, and thus "recover the loss" by tripling the charge.
If the regulator had any balls they would reject all this outright.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There has been a taxi waiting park as far back as 1975, pre HAL, Ferrovial have monetised it calling it a service. The current park is on waste land, no need for shops or office building. Re Uber, HAL told them to ring fence their communications to keep drivers away, to prevent this current action, and make them pay for parking.
You can park your car nearby in the west, in the green belt, much cheaper than any service commissioned by HAL.
You can park your car nearby in the west, in the green belt, much cheaper than any service commissioned by HAL.
Paxing All Over The World
May have been asked before: During the reduction to one operational runway, did HAL bring forward any runway maintenance to save time and money later? My guess is No.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes - during the first lockdown 09R/27L was closed permanently for a few weeks to carry out significant maintenance. Now that work is complete it is routine maintenance on whichever runway is closed for the week, which makes planning these routine works a lot simpler..
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure Virgin will be pleased to be able to offer their own ground experience, upper class wing, etc to their passengers at T3.
I think the plan was for AA to move to T5 even before COVID, so I doubt that they will move back, there was some talk of an AA, new BA or dual-branded lounge at T5C and a refurbishment of the lounge complexes at T5, but that has all gone quiet. The other one world lounges at T3 were Qantas and Cathay. Qatar and Malaysia were at T4, no sign of that terminal opening, so quite a lot of displacement still, even with T3 reopening.
I think the plan was for AA to move to T5 even before COVID, so I doubt that they will move back, there was some talk of an AA, new BA or dual-branded lounge at T5C and a refurbishment of the lounge complexes at T5, but that has all gone quiet. The other one world lounges at T3 were Qantas and Cathay. Qatar and Malaysia were at T4, no sign of that terminal opening, so quite a lot of displacement still, even with T3 reopening.
I think American really want to be in T5 but in normal times, as per summer 2019 they have 21 heavies per day and even BA were split between T3 and T5. Now I know it's all metal neutral and Iberia have been co-located at T5 for years but with BA Gatwick drastically downsized until next summer at the earliest, will BA not want to run one single terminal operation rather than split ops in T3? BA also ran long haul flights out of T3 with MIA, DEN, PHX and LAS alongside ACC, NBO,CPT and YVR.
Options :
AA split ops T3/T5 with JFK plus key others in T5, remainder in T3
AA move everything into T5 leaving BA to move some of their own flights to T3 or LGW
Neither is tidy but I suspect HAL will move all of AA into T5 as BA are moving to T8 at JFK and there's give and take on both sides.
Options :
AA split ops T3/T5 with JFK plus key others in T5, remainder in T3
AA move everything into T5 leaving BA to move some of their own flights to T3 or LGW
Neither is tidy but I suspect HAL will move all of AA into T5 as BA are moving to T8 at JFK and there's give and take on both sides.
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would think the focus on what routes operate from T5 will centre around connections. If BA/AA feel having AA in T5 suits feed for both airlines I’d expect them to stay.
much of the ex LGW services had minimal feed so. I would think it makes sense to focus on the LGW at T3 along with, space depending, ex T3 routes for the same reason
can’t see AA or HAL favouring splitting AA’s operation across two terminals then possibly see how things go and then assess whether LGW is required for summer 22
as a side note, I wonder if the slot waivers are extended thru winter 21/22 or not, or at least partly reintroduced to say 50/50 rather than 80/20
much of the ex LGW services had minimal feed so. I would think it makes sense to focus on the LGW at T3 along with, space depending, ex T3 routes for the same reason
can’t see AA or HAL favouring splitting AA’s operation across two terminals then possibly see how things go and then assess whether LGW is required for summer 22
as a side note, I wonder if the slot waivers are extended thru winter 21/22 or not, or at least partly reintroduced to say 50/50 rather than 80/20
Last edited by 772; 4th May 2021 at 13:56. Reason: K
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't there some planning permission regulation on the annual passenger throughput of T5, x million per year, which was behind BA's split operation (and when one was brought in from T3, sending another one the other way to balance), rather than pushing for the third satellite to be built.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: London
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reopening of T3 has been pushed back:
https://www.executivetraveller.com/n...eopening-delay
London's Heathrow Airport has delayed the planned reopening of Terminal 3 due to "ongoing uncertainty" over rolling travel restrictions imposed by the UK government.T3, which was shuttered in April 2020 as the coronavirus pandemic made its first sweep around the world, was previously slated to welcome back selected airlines and passengers from May 17, with Virgin Atlantic and Delta Air Lines among the first to return.
That timeline has now been pushed back to at least the end of May, with early June also considered a realistic restart.
That timeline has now been pushed back to at least the end of May, with early June also considered a realistic restart.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only when planned movement levels dictate. I seem to remember from the first lockdown a figure of 450 - 500 daily movements was the trigger. Even then dual ops may only be for part of the day.
