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)

nigel osborne 27th Sep 2013 13:19

Ok,

With lower fares, lower fees and mostly increase in LCCs etc how exactly is STN going to raise the funds for any 2nd runway ?

Not sure MAG will have enough profits, they are still paying off MAN 2nd runway .

Nigel

Skipness One Echo 27th Sep 2013 14:07


The deal seems to make commercial sense for Stansted, although we cannot reach a definitive view on this without access to details of the agreement
Translation : We don't have the data we need for analysis but we're going to speculate regardless.

LGS6753 27th Sep 2013 18:03


lower fees will dilute Stanstedís aeronautical yield per passenger,
Translation: Ryanair's charges will reduce, so if they don't increase passenger numbers, we're in deep sh1t.

Further translation: We're even more in Ryanair's clutches than we were before.

FRatSTN 27th Sep 2013 20:35

LGS and Skipness.

So is that all you have to say? That's highly unusual. Please keep going, I want to hear more...

But on one condition...

Please add something much more concrete which you'll find I often do.

Please do us all a favour and try not to give us a compilation of your clever little remarks or this stupid routine LGS especially you have of picking bits from reports that give you the slightest opportunity to twist them. It simply demonstrates nothing but stupidity.

If that is all you have to contribute, it says a lot about the credibility of what you are saying!!

How about adding your own links to credible analytical sources and reports to back up what you're saying?? Oh no, sorry you can't, because they frankly don't exist.

M-JCS 28th Sep 2013 07:31

On the face of it, the paragraph you refer to seems fairly positive for Stansted. The trouble is it's full of assumptions. What seems to be implied is that increasing numbers of passengers do not increase the wear and tear on the terminal and infrastructure (a "largely fixed cost business"). It's the old mass tourism problem revisited. Will the profit level from increased traffic meet the expenses of infrastructure maintenance and refurbishment?. There's also the assumption ("benefit of retail sales") that Ryanair passengers have the same financial power as those flying with other carriers and so will have the shopkeepers' delighted. Has that been proven elsewhere? My own suspicion is that retail margins will be lower because those products proving popular will in fact be lower margin products while higher margin products will eventually disappear from the shops. To me it seems like an exercise in chasing passenger numbers at every cost.

mikkie4 28th Sep 2013 22:52

CONTROL OF AIRSPACE
 
SEN are trying to get control of their airspace (2.5 miles radius ) How much higher will planes have to fly (if any) from STN/LCY

Expressflight 29th Sep 2013 06:55

mikkie4

If you go the SEN website you will find a page entitled Controlled Airspace where there is a link to the consultation document. That will answer all your questions.

racedo 29th Sep 2013 11:45


On the face of it, the paragraph you refer to seems fairly positive for Stansted. The trouble is it's full of assumptions. What seems to be implied is that increasing numbers of passengers do not increase the wear and tear on the terminal and infrastructure (a "largely fixed cost business"). It's the old mass tourism problem revisited. Will the profit level from increased traffic meet the expenses of infrastructure maintenance and refurbishment?. There's also the assumption ("benefit of retail sales") that Ryanair passengers have the same financial power as those flying with other carriers and so will have the shopkeepers' delighted. Has that been proven elsewhere? My own suspicion is that retail margins will be lower because those products proving popular will in fact be lower margin products while higher margin products will eventually disappear from the shops. To me it seems like an exercise in chasing passenger numbers at every cost.
Another attempt to try and claim that people flying Ryanair do not have any money.

Stansted KNOW what Ryanair passengers spend because they have 13 Million of them a year.

If as you claim that more passengers would be reducing high margin items then wouldn't they have already done so years ago :ugh:

Claims that it will cost the airport more in terms of wear and tear are pretty bogus because wear and tear happens anyway and instead of having 20 million in 18 months you have 20 million in 15 months..............little or no difference.

Infrastructure already in place with car parks, acccess, trains etc so instead of a Stansted express going with 150 passengers it has 250, no additional cost in the slightest.

davidjohnson6 6th Oct 2013 14:49

I've been having a read of MAG's press releases and other PR as to how they will transform the facilities at Stansted. Sounds awfully nice and helpful, but given the money involved I have to assume it's simply a reorganisation of what is inside the main terminal building and not an expansion. On that basis, this means some areas will be shrunk down while others are enlarged.

Does anyone have good information as to what MAG's capital investment and terminal redesign plans *really* involve ? The relocation of security is of particular interest.
I'm interested in more than just "we're adding some extra toilets in a corridor".

FRatSTN 6th Oct 2013 16:00

To be honest, Stansted doesn't need a lot of expansion, reorganisation of the terminal building is exactly what it needs.

If you ever fly from Stansted, you'll notice that the check-in concourse is really quite spacious now. Even at 5-6am at its busiest, its more than adequate. Ryanair has a lot of passengers who don't even use the check-in/bag-drop desks now so there's less of a need for check-in/bag drop desks than there used to be.

The Departure Lounge on the other hand is often quite busy and at 5-6am, seating can be tight. Security is probably the worst thing about Stansted, again at 5-6am, quite busy.

It is only common sense to make better use of the existing infrastructure to suit the needs of passengers. It's more than just adding a few more toilets and simply "moving" security.

Security will relocate but also increase from 18 to 22 lanes to improve passenger flow. Some other nice additions like a "calm zone" between Security and the Departure Lounge which is quite a unique idea. It allows passengers to re-gather belongings after security in a more relaxed and spacious manner.

More flight info screens and a countdown to gate number announcements is also part of it. That will have a great impact on all those Ryanair passengers crowding the screens waiting 10 minutes so they can be first to run to the gate!

The more major stuff is the doubled amount of seating in Departures, more shops and restaurants, a food court by 2016. All this offers better comfort, better choice and encouraging more spend from passengers. Just as well they have 1.3 million more passengers next year to help make that investment worth while!

It's a completely different investment from an expansion entirely. While Heathrow and Gatwick want to raise charges to airlines and passengers and just make their airports bigger through big infrastructural investments and claim that will increase the quality of their airport, MAG at Stansted have got right to the bottom of what really makes passengers more satisfied and investing in improvements, not expansion while keeping the place more affordable. That brings massive added value to the airport and potentially opens up huge opportunities.

Remember only £40m really is their own investment, another £40m funding is from commercial partners. That's a big investment, but it isn't massive! It has the potential to help Stansted stand out from Heathrow and Gatwick as a better and more customer friendly airport. It really does demonstrate how competition works and how each airport competes in their own way now the BAA monopoly has been broken up.

FRatSTN 15th Oct 2013 00:01

Long-haul returns to Stansted
 
It has been revealed that Pakistani carrier Airblue will start flights from Stansted to Lahore from next year.

MAG are reportedly holding detailed talks with several other airlines and has said one is close to announcing another route for next year as well.

MAG chief puts focus on two-runway future for Stansted - FT.com

Keyvon 15th Oct 2013 11:10

I wouldn't put my money on it since Airblue is rumoured to be on the brink of collapse.

TSR2 15th Oct 2013 12:12


I wouldn't put my money on it since Airblue is rumoured to be on the brink of collapse.
What is your source of information on this potentially damaging rumour ?

GroundControl1 17th Oct 2013 20:47

Pegasus Airlines
 
Is it true Pegasus Airlines are pulling out of Stansted?? I have flights booked for early next year :uhoh:

Boeing737-8 17th Oct 2013 21:04

Pegasus airlines
 
I heard that they could be moving to luton around April time

nt639 17th Oct 2013 21:30

Sounds like a "Spotters Rumour" B737 , flights are bookable from STN right through next summer:ok:

True Blue 17th Oct 2013 21:42

proves nothing. can be changed in an instant.

tb

Buster the Bear 17th Oct 2013 21:50

Did MAG also purchase all the land and housing that the BAA has been buying up over the last 20 years or so to facilitate runway 2? I am sure I read the BAA flogged it of in a separate deal?

An ex colleague held out selling his cottage somewhere close (near where the KAL jumbo dived into a lake) until he retired. Got a handsome cheque to go into his retirement kitty, BAA then rented it out pending demolision.

sxflyer 18th Oct 2013 07:56

If Pegasus do move to Luton at least it would end the Luton fans argument that El Al would never move back to STN because the Jewish population is nearer Luton, as STN is the best airport for the Turkish contingent.

I'm not convinced personally, but you never know

LGS6753 18th Oct 2013 13:02

Pegasus could benefit from a transfer to Luton. Aside from a bigger catchment area and better surface access, their current flight schedule would not conflict with Luton's busy periods, where capacity is limited.
No doubt LTN would offer an introductory deal to a new airline too.
It seems that the EZY flight to SAW is not bookable after March 2014, so there could be a ready-made market for them too, if EZY are in fact dropping the route.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:16.


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