PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Airlines, Airports & Routes (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes-85/)
-   -   STANSTED - 2 (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/245928-stansted-2-a.html)

STN Ramp Rat 31st Mar 2013 09:31

from small acorns ......
The first new passenger service since the takeover .... from the Air Moldova website

28 March 2013

Starting with April 29th Air Moldova airline will operate scheduled flights Chisinau-London-Chisinau to the airport London Stansted. Flights to London will be operated on comfortable aircraft Embraer-190, twice a week, every Monday and Friday, according to the following schedule:

Departure from Chisinau (local time)Arrival to London (local time)Departure from London (local time)Arrival to Chisinau (local time)17:5018:5019:3000:30+1
Therefore, the flight schedule is suitable for business trips (Monday-Friday) and for the weekend trips (Friday-Monday).
One way tickets start from 159 EUR with all taxes included.
Air Moldova operates direct flights to 20 cities across Europe, offering two classes of service - Business and Economy.

nt639 31st Mar 2013 10:00

Waiting for the "should of gone to Luton"' from LGS & the Lutonites:E

FRatSTN 31st Mar 2013 10:16

nt639 - just beat me to it, well said!

Falcon666 31st Mar 2013 10:18

Guys get real,
Should have gone to SEN

davidjohnson6 31st Mar 2013 11:44

The Luton gang still have a route to Bacau in Romania which, if it weren't for the lousy roads, would be only about 2 hrs drive from Chisinau.

Are higher airport charges the reason why the airline is switching away from Gatwick, or is there some other cause ?

FRatSTN 31st Mar 2013 11:51

The new owners of Stansted have probably offered them a better deal perhaps? It's the first time in many years that an airline has moved from Gatwick to Stansted, there's been a lot of cases being the other way round recently. Hopefully this is the start of many.

Wouldn't be too surprised even to see Blue Air back in Stansted in a few years time. I would have thought it's purely lower costs keeping them in Luton. I can't see them being keen on Wizzair in direct competition on the LTN-OTP route twice daily. If Blue Air can settle a better deal with MAG, I'd say it's more than likely to happen. We will have to wait and see.

globetrotter79 31st Mar 2013 15:28

For years Tarom used to serve MAN-OTP, it has been gone a while admittedly but you can't help feeling the market it served is probably still there? Since (if I remember correctly) there's no other Bucharest service from anywhere outside London then surely Blue Air should be a strong contender for an MAG "group" deal to coax them into serving both STN and MAN. There are probably a few others on the fringes of Europe a la Air Moldova who have monopoly routes into London who might be pursuaded similarly (perhaps Belavia?)

boeing_eng 31st Mar 2013 16:40

My hunch is that the Air Moldova move from LGW is slot related. Their current service at LGW is a late evening affair and the STN times are far more sociable!

STN Ramp Rat 31st Mar 2013 16:50

Air Moldova used to fly to Stansted when they first went to London then they transferred to Gatwick, I assume that they are coming back because of the fees at Gatwick. Adria also left Gatwick for Luton before quitting the UK altogether. the Tarom service goes back to the day when the government dictated which airport an airline would serve in London and Eastern Europe was allocated Stansted. Tarom stayed after everyone else went back to Heathrow if I recall correctly.

If its all about fees them maybe Flybe can be persuaded to move as they have taken GAL to court and lost on the Gatwick pricing policy.

j636 31st Mar 2013 17:11

My hunch is that the Air Moldova move from LGW is slot related. Their current service at LGW is a late evening affair and the STN times are far more sociable!
As the route continues onto DUB from end of the month I don't see a major changes. Expect that there is some sort of discount operating from DUB late at night. Blue Air, Air Baltic and S7 all have late flights from DUB so there has to be some sort of positive reasons for the poor timing for passengers.

davidjohnson6 31st Mar 2013 17:47

Moldova as a country has one of the lowest per capita GDPs in all Europe - usually indicates passengers originating in Chisinau will be price sensitive. While I went to Moldova as a tourist and enjoyed it, I do not expect there will be much inbound tourism.
An E190 has rather fewer seats compared to an A319 or B737 - making Gatwick's airport fees much more painful per passenger compared to Easyjet or Ryanair.

FRatSTN - don't hold your hopes up too much about airlines willingly switching from Gatwick to Stansted - I suspect this is simply a case of an airline being squeezed out of Gatwick by economic factors and needing to find a new airport in London

FRatSTN 31st Mar 2013 18:06

I don't agree. Remember there is a new owner and they are going to be making some changes, attracting more airlines is one of them! BAA never made a real effort at Stansted since the economic downturn, MAG will and are doing more so and I think a lot of the carriers that were orginally at Stansted that have gone to Gatwick and Luton (with the exception of Norwgain) could be quite realistically tempted back to Stansted if they get a price and deal that is right.

It only takes a look round Gatwick to see what new ownership has done and there's no reason really why Stansted can't do the same. Yes it may have slightly longer rail times but it has better motorway access and slightly faster links by road to Central London and Stansted has the benefit of being a modern and good quality airport which doesn't suffer from major flight delays and capacity constraints like Heathrow and Gatwick. That along with an owner who can offer competitive deals to airlines will in time attract more carriers in the future.

whitelighter 31st Mar 2013 18:16

Work already underway on the terminal - which is badly needed. Bigger airside areas with separate check in areas aimed at premium carriers.

Dannyboy39 31st Mar 2013 19:56

I'd be interested to see a list of airlines that have moved "around the London airport circuit" in recent years. I bet the list isn't that long.

Airlines don't up sticks for no reason. Financially, there are consequences to moving from airport to airport. I dare say its not something done on a whim. Obviously its far easier and cheaper to increase/reduce routes.

Off the top off my head...

El Al - Stansted to Luton - A big Jewish presence in North London. Far better transport links to Luton from that part of London.
Blue Air - Stansted to Luton
Air Berlin - Stansted to Gatwick to Stansted
Aer Lingus Regional - Luton to Southend?
Air Asia X - Stansted to Gatwick to Outside London

easyJet and Ryanair rotate routes on a regular basis.

FRatSTN 31st Mar 2013 20:29

But not all the airlines/routes that were at Stansted in the past 5 years or so have moved to another London airport. Some have simply been axed all together, some have gone bust or others have closed for other reasons outside Stansted's or any other airports control.

Aegean Airlines - moved from Stansted to Heathrow

Air Arabia Maroc - Stansted, then left London, resumed but from Gatwick

Air Berlin - Still serve one route 3x daily with Dash 8 but heavily reduced in recent years, Gatwick tried out but no longer served

Atlantic Airways (Faroe Islands) - moved from Stansted to Gatwick

Cyprus Airways - Both Stansted and Heathrow, axed Stansted, then resumed, now gone again

EasyJet - Still serve Stansted but lost aircraft post Southend base opening

Norwegian - Gradually pulled out of Stansted for Gatwick, now has base in Gatwick

Sun Country Airlines - moved from Stansted to Gatwick, now left UK

Turkish Airlines - moved from Stansted to Gatwick (also Anadolujet axed)

Transavia - axed Stansted, restarted but from Luton, moved to Gatwick, left UK altogether

WOW Air (Iceland) - moved from Stansted to Gatwick, then took over Iceland Express

Admittedly some of the above is virtually permanently lost from Stansted an virtually impossible to replace but the problem is that BAA never pushed hard enough to replace these services lost. For instance, since the BmiBaby closure (completely outside Stansted's control), Belfast-City has now become unserved, yet there is certainly a strong demand for this route. I think the uncertainty of Stansted's ownership for several years has also pushed carriers away.

Only Air Berlin, Aurigny, Germanwings and Pegasus have stayed at Stansted throughout the entire duration of Stansted's decline since 2007. You then have to ask yourself why these airlines chose not to move?

There are also a countless number of airlines out there who could potentially serve Stansted in the future. Perhaps some traffic that has never been at Stansted could be attracted, for example... Air One, FlyBe, Vueling or even some long haul eg, Emirates, PIA, United Airlines could be possible. MAG have loads of routes to go down!

boeing_eng 31st Mar 2013 20:35

FRatSTN.....Whilst your unstinting optimism about MAG and STN is laudable, as I mentioned a few months ago it has to be the market that decides the future of STN. Routes that are unsustainable or that do not currently exist cannot suddenly be made to work from STN just because of a change of ownership.

There are many factors that contribute towards the success of any given route. In today's economic climate, many airlines are not in a position to take excessive risks just to see if a route is viable. Indeed, as your favorite orange airline have proved, carriers will simply move aircraft around to achieve the best given return for that asset.

FRatSTN 31st Mar 2013 20:58

It's not simply the change of ownership, although a new management will make a difference to the appeal of the airport to some airlines depending on what changes they make. The key thing though is that Stansted is now seperately owned from Heathrow and it's ownership is no longer in doubt and is stable for the forseeable future. That itself will encourage more long term commitment from more airlines. So actually, the change of ownership does make a huge difference in a variety of ways.

Aegean Airlines
Air Arabia Maroc
Atlantic Airways
Blue Air
Cyprus Airways
El Al
Turkish Airlines

These are examples of carriers that no longer serve Stansted but still serve London. None of these carriers moved airports because they couldn't get enough bums on seats at Stansted, they left because they could see better potential financially elsewhere. Others have been and gone, some of which moved around a bit before going, but that doesn't mean they won't come back. Stansted's new owners spent 1.5 billion because they clearly believe they can bring more traffic back. It's not simply the case that the market decides the future of Stansted, that could apply to any airport. It's the people within the market that decide and MAG is a big part of the market.

In today's economic climate, many airlines are not in a position to take excessive risks just to see if a route is viable. Indeed, as your favorite orange airline have proved, carriers will simply move aircraft around to achieve the best given return for that asset.
Contradicting yourself there a bit aren't you?

EI-BUD 31st Mar 2013 21:25

FRatSTN; you provide a very comprehensive description of the various airlines that have come and gone at STN.

You mention some airlines who have not left, such as AirBerlin, GermanWings etc. I'd suggest that the airlines who can fly routes ex STN that are not head to head with FR on routes to primary airports, these will have a sporting chance of success.

STN has potential, but to what extent is FR's scale at STN a deterrent to airlines starting up services?

FRatSTN 31st Mar 2013 22:07

STN has potential, but to what extent is FR's scale at STN a deterrent to airlines starting up services?
I'd say it's more of an issue to the airport than to the airlines who use it, hence why MAG will push to diversify Stansted's mix of traffic, although the scale of Ryanair will certainly be a deterrent to some airlines.

The reason why it may not be so off putting to some airlines is as you say, they may not be going head to head with Ryanair. Since Ryanair often flies to smaller secondary airports and small towns and cities (some of which many would probably not even have heard of) which are soley served by Ryanair from the UK market, that will somewhat reduce the competition on the bigger European cities/airports that European carriers that could serve Stansted are likely to originate from.

There is also the same scenario with EasyJet and Gatwick although the difference is that they only account for about 35 or 40% of Gatwick's total, as opposed to Ryanair having 70% of Stansted's. Having said that, EasyJet serve the large European airport/cities of which many routes are flown by either another Gatwick based carrier eg. BA, Monarch and Thomson or a European carrier such as Vueling or Norwegian. In many cases if not the majority, there's direct competition from at least one other airline on EasyJet's Gatwick routes, unlike many of the Ryanair routes from Stansted. Take Barcelona as an example. BA, EasyJet, Monarch, Norwegian and Vueling all serve the route from Gatwick with close to 15 departures a day in the summer months, compared to 2 Ryanair departures from Stansted. I think the sheer volume of traffic on the LGW-BCN route would be more of a deterrent than going in direct competition with Ryanair on the 2x daily STN-BCN route.

Therefore I don't think it would be such a big drawback to any European or long-haul airline wanting to serve Stansted as a destination airport, especially if their home market is not served, or indirectly competes with Ryanair, which is most likely going to account for much of the future growth at Stansted anyway. It would be more of an issue for an airline like FlyBe, Jet2 or Monarch if they were to set up a base at the airport.

FRatSTN 31st Mar 2013 22:12

Airlines like EZY will not take huge risks in today's market
I'm sorry, but do you not consider EasyJet setting up in Southend as a risk? As successfull as it might be now, it still comes with it's risks.

I'm sure even if you asked the management of EasyJet personally, they would admit it comes with its risks. It wouldn't work if eveybody played it safe. Running a successfull company is about taking risks, that's why business is business.

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:10.

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.