Ryanair Axed routes?
 

What routes have ryanair axed sice they started?

Well, they began operations in 1985 (Waterford-Luton, with EMB-110) and have been through more than one business model in the 19 years since then, so your question is very broad. Would you like to narrow down your question to a particular timescale?

Some of the more recent routes to be axed involve Stansted to Stasbourg and Stansted to Brussels South. Ryanair stated they were no longer economically viable following the EU ruling on airpot subsidies. (makes you realise how many of their routes are vunerable to any more EU rulings)

STN to Erfurt and Ostend

BHX to Gerona and Murcia

Don't forget that all of routes are transfered to another airport, like Strasbourg to Karlsruhe and the BHX-Spain flights to EMA, so although a route is axed, there is a replacement

The BHX flights to Spain were moved over to EMA due to Ryanair having a falling out with the BHX management over landing fees

WNC

A few more axed FR routes are:

BOH-HHN
STN-Rimini
STN-Lamezia

Admittedly, FR seem pretty good at making the vast majority of their routes work.

Some, certainly not all, are:

STN - Kristianstad
STN - Groningen
STN - Maastricht
STN - Ostend
STN - Charleroi
STN - Strasbourg
STN - Clermont-Ferrand
STN - Reims
STN - Rimini
STN - Erfurt

HHN - Malmoe
HHN - Bournemouth
HHN - Perpignan

LPL - Charleroi

NYO - Torp
NYO - Tampere
NYO - Arhus

GRO - Turin

I also remember that Ryanair ceased the following routes :

STN - Brest
STN- Dinard (replaced with LTN-Dinard)
STN - Lamezia Terme
CIA - Klagenfurt

Gatwick-Waterford (their first route)
Luton-Knock
Luton-Waterford
Luton- Brussels (they bought out London European)
Luton-Cork
Luton-Galway
Luton- Shannon (now reintroduced)
Luton-Kerry

If you assume that at the time RYR make decisions to start routes they use the best opportunities open to them the list of cancelled routes particulalry out of STN makes grim reading. What it means is that RYR is reaching the limits of its current business model. It means that the routes canceklled simply cannot make money at any price at which tickets are sold. It does not matter whether ticket prices are high or low these marginal routes are incapable of making money even for RYR.

As London is by far the largest air transport market in the world it means that RYR is running out of profitable opportunities from London unless it gets into big airports in Europe. On this basis there is simply no way that it will find profitable opportunities for the 2 aircraft per month tht it has ordered for delivery over the next five years.

IMHO EZY is likely to prove to have the better business model as it has found it profitable to operate into major airports. Sure this is more expensive but the public seems well prepared to pay for the convenience.

Pinhammond,

I have to disagree very strongly with your observations and conclusions above. What %age out of all routes do Ryanair pull out from - less than 5%, which suggests that they get it right the other 95% of the time.

If you do a statistical analysis of any airline's route network, you will see some very profitable routes at the top (20% of routes generating 80% of profits), a fair chunk in the middle, and then some loss making routes at the bottom. This is a perfectly natural distribution, and it is a credit to Ryanair that they have a policy of getting rid of the duds.

If you've bought a holiday home in Rimini, then you may be unlucky. But Ryanair aren't in the business of running routes for charity. There are numerous other factors which come into play over whether or not a route will be profitable for the airline, which have nothing to do with the "natural" number of passengers who should be using it.

I don't doubt the logic of Easyjet's business model - I think both airlines will be around for some time yet - but right now, which one is more profitable, which one is more reliable, and which one carries more passengers?

If you want to bash Ryanair, there's plenty of things to have a go at them for - but dropping routes, and punctuality (see other thread) - are two issues you really can't touch them on. How many routes have Easy dropped by the way?

pinhammond, EZY may appear to have the better business model since flying to mainstream airports would seem to be more attractive to business passengers etc, but you need to look at the fundamentals - ie the gap between breakeven load factor and actual carried load factor. When you do that you'll see that although RYR's yields may be lower they have much lower costs and hence break even with less passengers and make more money overall. The big test for the two European LCC giants is given that their London activity seems to be reaching a plateau can they sustain high growth from their non-UK bases. The next year or two will reveal the results....

From memory, not all routes were axed for being loss making.

Some of the reasons were more diverse

STN Kristianstad - fell out with airport and opened double daily to Malmo
STN Lamezia - fell out with airport over marketing money
STN Rimini - fell out with airport over marketing money
STN Charleroi - was cut as a threat to airport during commission row
STN Ostend - was cut as a threat to Flanders region during commission row
STN Strasbourg - was cut when local court ruled airport deal to be illegal

As a big number of FR routes cannot exist without marketing money, a row over marketing money sort of equals "loss making"...

jabird, brabazon, beancounter, interesting posts, thanks. It is nice to see real meat on PPrune. Actually I am not anti-RYR. They have made some huge achievements. Their dominanation of the Irish Sea routes is perhaps the best but they have combined that with a very high level of reliability. Largely through their low fares but combined with the routes they serve on which there was no previous service they have generated comletely new traffic. My concern is that there is a limit to going on putting big aircraft like the 738 into small markets. Sooner or later they are going to have to go into more big airports. I can think of numerous routes where they could find rich picking grounds. LON-MAD is very vulnerable to competition just now as BA and IB try to grapple with their absurd pooling of services. AGP would be an easy market for RYR from STN, DUB, ORK, Hahn, Lubeck, Torp and Stockholm. ATH is crying out for more services. SKG desperately needs low fares. If they really want to be the biggest airline in Europe (in intra-European passenger carryings)they have got to go head to head with the big airlines on aorport pair routes. It will happen, the only issue is when?

http://www.mercermc.de/mapper.php3?f...lication%2Fpdf


that page might give some interesting ideas abour yields...

Beaucaire

Thanks for the link, despite my lack of German the second to last chart certainly shows the differences in costs and yields.

Altenburg-Nobitz
 

Ryanair cannot fly to altenburg at the moment. There seems to be some sort of ban on planes over 14 tonnes. Is this a planning dispute. It seems very strange for the problem to come out of the blue. ryanair seem to have lots of problems with there airports closing at short notice.

the airport has this on its site:-


Wichtige Information

Auf Grund der Entscheidung des Thüringer Wirtschaftsministeriums dürfen vorerst bis 10.01.2005 keine Maschinen über 14 Tonnen am Flughafen Altenburg-Nobitz abgefertigt werden. Wir bitten die Fluggäste um Verständnis.

Flugplatz Altenburg-Nobitz



Wichtige Information!

Reading this thread you would think that other airlines do not leave routes. Lets open this thread up, what routes have other airlines given up over the years and why did they give them up ?.

From the Ryanair website regarding Altenburg.

Ryanair regrets to advise that Altenburg Airport will be closed to all flights from the 18th-21st December, 2004 due to a landing restriction imposed by the Thuringian Government.

"My concern is that there is a limit to going on putting big aircraft like the 738 into small markets."

Conventional aviation logic would agree with you, but Ryanair logic works differently. The 737-800 is about as good as it gets in terms of crew: passenger ratios, and is similar to a 737-200 on fuel costs, but with 55% more seats. Therefore on thin routes which other carriers might not touch, Ryanair are able to make a profit using this larger aircraft.

I'm sure MOL's done the maths, and it would go along the lines of - extra rotation to Dublin at €50 per head or take people to Dinard for €30 per head, but 50% of pax take a hire car at €200 per booking, of which FR get 30% (50% x 30% x €200 = €30), so Dinard effectively brings in €60 per head.

I don't know if any such breakdowns are ever published on this, so my speculation may be a little out.


Sooner or later they are going to have to go into more big airports.

Why would they need to? Look at the places they currently serve, add in the hundres of airports they will be talking to at any one time, and consider all the combinations for dots which could be drawn up on the network. Larger airports = larger delays = higher expenses.


I can think of numerous routes where they could find rich picking grounds. LON-MAD is very vulnerable to competition just now as BA and IB try to grapple with their absurd pooling of services.

Don't discount FR from looking at Don Quixote, but Barajas would be too congested and high cost for them.


AGP would be an easy market for RYR from STN, DUB, ORK, Hahn, Lubeck, Torp and Stockholm.

Plenty of other less busy airports on the Spanish Costas, but AGP is already served from DUB.

ATH is crying out for more services.

SKG desperately needs low fares.

Too far?