Skipness One Echo

The point exactly. EasyJet will continue to inject growth into the London market though, especially with a big aircraft order. And if it's not Gatwick and with difficulties in capacity in Luton, then that leaves only one place for most of the growth!

Sorry I wasn't being clear enough, they're approaching a point where they're saturating London. SEN and STN are in each other's way on the network, more so that LTN and STN are.

How many based aircraft do EZY have night stopping on a LGW / STN / SEN / LTN split. Anyone know offhand? It might help at this point.

Also how many B737s overnight with FR at STN?

EZY have around 50 at LGW, 15 at LTN, 4 at SEN and whatever at STN.

FR have around 40 at STN per night.

I believe STN is 8 now following the latest move to SEN at the weekend.

I really can't see EasyJet saturating the London market. With a new aircraft order on the cards, I'm sure London will still have a lot of EasyJet growth to come!

58 aircraft in LGW this summer according to local LGW management.

LGW 58
LTN 15
STN 8
SEN 4

That's 85 based aircraft in London, I think in all honesty there's much not else to do before they start cannibalising each airport's own market share on key routes.

Yes, adding new routes and passengers to the London market.

Blimey FR, you really must let us know where you buy your rose tinted specs (or should that be orange tinted!):}:}!

boeing_eng

Someone has posted a link on the EasyJet thread to EasyJet's PLC page outlining the details of their planned aircraft order which has today been announced. Perhaps you should check it out...

Important to their strategy is that they continue to grow in their current markets in which CEO Ms McCall says is a fairly "no risk strategy". London will undoubtedly be part of that expansion.

She also says that there's 86 million seats available in EasyJet's top 20 airports available for them to use. Can't see Gatwick having too many of those, but the other London airports (predominantly Stansted due to its available capacity and new deal with MAG along with opportunities at Luton and Southend) will undoubtedly see some growth in the coming years in light of this announcement today.

Also, the first phase of new aircraft (existing generation of A320's) is expected to be delivered between 2015 and 2017. Mmm... interesting timing in relation to the Stansted deal last week!

We'll see, if you expect to find EasyJet's London market at the same size in 2018 as it is today, I think you'll be in for a bit of a surprise!

As I've said before FR, your talents are wasted banging away on this forum.....You should get a job with MAG!:D:D

/reality check/

From easyJet's press release: So it's actually 50 additional aircraft over a 7 year period (2015 to 2022). As the economies of Europe recover, they will be allocated to profitable new routes - and increasing frequencies - in any of the countries in which easyJet operate.

/reality check ends/

They have options to acquire further aircraft and manage the fleet accordingly to economic conditions. It could well be more than 50 more aircraft by 2022. They've said 276 aircraft by 2022 on the EasyJet PLC page, 86 more than in the fleet today.

I don't want to turn this into a detailed discussion on EasyJet's aircraft order since this is the Stansted thread. However, I very much doubt it's a co-incidence that a deal allowing further capacity increases at a major airport serving London (EasyJet's largest market) was agreed days before a new aircraft order is revealed. The two announcements already combine to open many more opportunities that EasyJet is actively seeking for.

And in further response to why EasyJet never put anything about the Stansted deal on their website... They denied any speculation on details of an aircraft order on June 14th, the day after the Stansted deal announcement:

EasyJet Still Evaluating Deal Options Despite Reports-Spokesman - WSJ.com

Perhaps yet again, it comes down to the fact that such an announcement regarding any specific future expansions at Stansted were also premature.

The London market has far from saturated, and EasyJet will keep the growth coming to further increase their share in such a vast market. That will outweigh many benefits in distributing a few aircraft here and there over much smaller European markets based on the economic conditions.

Concluding that 50 more aircraft will be placed in Europe where the economy improves therefore is far too simplistic for the industry as a whole and not specific to EasyJet's strategy. Maybe you should actually link together the recent events and facts we already know specifically related to EasyJet. You may conclude with an even greater sense of reality that way!

£80m terminal redevelopment
 

Minister helps MAG put stamp of success on Stansted's future with £80m terminal transformation | Uttlesford village headlines

Which commercial partners?

Do you even read what you write? Are there any markets easyJet are in that are mature and saturated? Easy one, anything year round UK domestic. You seem to be missing how the business works, they're going Hell for leather for market share, they are dominating Gatwick for one. Now I am not suggesting it's not profitable, and hard as it is to agree with Stelios, I think your opinions on super growth are based on wishful thinking rather than underpinned by commercial realities. Easyjet have now arrived at the stage where their biggest competitor in the London market is often er....easyJet. This is an actual first.

They have so many London based aircraft they're not sure where to put them all, not a problem shared by Ryanair or BA.

Skipness One Echo

Just to clear this up, I don't expect any really major or super growth. And I don't think Stansted will reach 6 million EasyJet passengers by 2018, but there is likely to be some growth to be had. Why...

Take a look at this (more so towards the end of the video):

BBC News - Easyjet boss Carolyn McCall optimistic about growth

So the UK it would seem will continue to grow profitably for EasyJet, but in certain parts of the UK. What Stansted is offering them suits with their growth plans. An £80m redevelopment which EasyJet supports and this tied with a better financial deal offered by MAG adds huge financial value to their Stansted operation. Reduced costs for a better product?! It certainly looks at the moment to be one of the most likely and committed UK airports to see future EasyJet growth.

Even with a deal being signed with MAG in the first place shows that there is an intention for London to be a likely player in that concentration of UK growth.

Also take a look at this:

easyJet's London operations dominated by Gatwick; new Stansted agreement will "enable" growth | anna.aero

Apart from 2009, EasyJet's traffic in the London market has increased every year since 2001. And when you see the steady significant growth at Gatwick and London as a whole since 2001, they are not likely to stop growing the London market when Gatwick can take no more. Stansted and only Stansted gives the opportunity for the continuation of that overall growth in London.

Nowhere can I possibly find that EasyJet is a competitor to itself or find any evidence that they are going to stop growing in London because they don't know where to base planes. They serve a variety of London airports to benefit from serving a greater area of the London market, not because they don't know where to put planes and may stop growing in London as a result.

Overall growth may slow down in the future of course, and that will depend on economic conditions as well. But one thing I do know is that they will not stop growing in London and let the real competition (BA and Ryanair) grow in market share and potentially in volume simply because Gatwick is full, so I will reiterate:

Here endeth the latest statement from our resident (its all good news) Stansted representative.

Lose Gatwick for a day or two and watch the damage that is done.

Potentially too many eggs in one basket.

Racedo -

... and they are putting a few more eggs in that basket with the acquisition of the FlyBe slots.

The fact of the matter is that EZY is expanding at LGW and SEN, static at LTN and declining at STN. This "enabling" agreement with MAG, publicised only by MAG, is an attempt by MAG to show their stakeholders that they are setting about polishing their newly-acquired turd. (to coin a phrase)

And its also an attempt by EasyJet, yet to be confirmed in detail, to "enable" them to reverse that decline at Stansted and more particularly, continue growing in London when they can't grow anymore at Gatwick.

You don't need to me to say again that BAA's appalling, high cost and ultimately uncompetitive management of Stansted is the core reason to EasyJet's declining traffic at Stansted, as goes for just about every other airline. But times are changing, things are improving and growth opportunities are returning. EasyJet are just embracing that shameful fact I'm afraid to say!

You need to have a word with yourself if you truly believe that this is just a publicity thing by MAG to impress stakeholders. The fact is, EasyJet signed the deal. They clearly see the opportunity of growth at Stansted or else they wouldn't have wasted their time even discussing it and you know what they say, it takes two to Tango.

It's really easy to have a go at BAA but they built Stansted to be a new London hub airport for the 21st century then had to make money out of it via Ryanair and easyJet. That's a divergence straight off the bat, STN is a really nice airport with a very loco demographic and feel to it. "Uncompetitive" as you say is the necessary requirement BAA had to cover their costs once cross subsidy from LHR was stopped. By all means lets see how MAG do with STN on it's own two feet dropping prices to lure back EZY. It won't be easy to make money though, Ryanair's biggest base is at STN and BAA weren't rolling in gold as a result. High load factors and millions of passengers can still mean the airport operator loses money. Stansted is faced with being a base for the cheap and cheerful with the overheads of a major international gateway.

Does anybody who has commented on the recent Easyjet-Stansted agreement actually have knowledge of what the written agreement does or doesn't say ?
I'm aware that it indicates the airline and airport want to be friends again and won't be nasty to each other, but I haven't really seen much in the way of specific details of the contract.
Things like airport charges structures, commitments by airline to deliver passengers, etc... the hard stuff that the commercial people in an airline or airport think about.

davidjohnson6

No not specifically and that's precisely the point I'm trying to get across to LGS. What we do know though is that MAG and EasyJet have shook hands on an agreement and that will be ultimately based on a variety of aspects such as costs, operations, services etc. The deal is done in a sense, it's a case of how and when EasyJet materialise with it.

Skipness One Echo

Uncompetitive was sort of the hub of the issues, with high costs, less investment, lack of growth etc. as the spokes in a sense. And I think it's reasonable to say that if BAA were still running Stansted, there would not be an £80 terminal revamp under way, they would still be using all the money that could be spent there on investing at Heathrow instead!

BAA, or Heathrow Airport Holdings Ltd. are a high cost operator (always have been, and always will be) and therefore much more suited to running airports with a presence of more flag carriers or long haul airlines like Heathrow and Glasgow. Interestingly, Ryanair now serves none of their airports and EasyJet fairly minimally, with GIP owned Edinburgh being their main Scottish airport. Says it all really!

MAG are much more suited to Stansted's market. They already have built strong relationships with Low-cost carriers at Manchester, East Midlands and Bournemouth and are a much more cost efficient operator.

It's also nice to see that somebody actually also has optimism about Stansted's future (rather than denying any growth because to MAG it is, a newly-acquired turd that was overpaid for). I see no reason why under separate ownership and fairer competition, Stansted cannot continue to enjoy growth once again.

Worth remembering LHR went to the dogs to pay for the Norman Foster palace at Stansted, it was paid for from LHR profits! T2 closed 15 years later than it should have because BAA thought STN was the future focus. It wasn't. Anyway that's how groups work, STN profits may well be funneled to pay for MAN investment going forward.
EZY at EDI are the same size as under BAA and not much bigger than GLA. You mixing up behavioral attributes with ownership. EDI is much more business focussed and legacy carrier focussed than GLA which remains with more bucket and spade.
What does this mean? Of you mean have lower operating costs that's true but then they make less money amd handle less traffic.
The market doesn't like STN, it's that simple. Any major carrier who tried left and moved out or went bust. Really. I won't list them, oh wait I will.
American, Eos, Maxjet, Air Asia X.
SAS, Lufthansa, Air UK, Air Berlin, BMI Baby etc
Who's left with a major presence? Ryanair and easyJet. That's the free market showing a preference.

And when T2 closed, that's when Stansted really started to go down the pan. I don't really want to get into this debate again about cross subsidising, but the fact is, BAA tried to hold on to an airport that was basically falling apart under their management!

They sold Gatwick first based on the fact that they were still in fairy land at that time trying to make Stansted a 2 runway, 2 terminal airport that would be operational today.

MAG aim to and are investing on improvements and adding value to the airport. They aim to diversify the mix of traffic (which we're starting to see evidence of). And they aim to make maximum efficiency of existing infrastructure, not fantasising about second runways when they are only half full as it is!

That's what I mean by a "much more cost efficient operator." For MAG, it's about offering the best possible airport for customers and airlines in terms of cost and service, not the biggest!

As for Scotland, EasyJet and Ryanair have both increased their Edinburgh traffic since GIP took over last year. EasyJet quite drastically in fact. Ryanair sited the new owners as the reason for their expansion and they particularly have made it quite clear how much they had despised BAA through cutting back in Edinburgh, axing Aberdeen and only considering Glasgow if it was sold off by BAA. Quite disastrous for Stansted since they cater for 70% of its traffic.

New Owner To Reopen Stansted’s Diamond Hangar FBO
 

New Owner To Reopen Stansted’s Diamond Hangar FBO

AINALERTS » JUNE 27, 2013
by CHARLES ALCOCK

June 27, 2013, 2:20 PM
The Diamond Hangar FBO at London Stansted Airport is set to reopen under new ownership after the previous operator ceased trading at the facility some time around late April or early May. Diamond Hangar, a subsidiary of UK real estate group Greatex, confirmed that it has taken over the lease on the building but has yet to elaborate on what services it will provide at what is now Stansted’s fifth FBO.


The Diamond Hangar facility, which was formerly an airliner maintenance facility operated by SR Technics, opened as an a FBO last July under a lease held by Eighteen Aviation, which traded under the name of Aero Toy Store. Its main shareholder was Ben Shirazi, son of Morris Shirazi, founder of the U.S. aircraft sales and completions group Aero Toy Store.

In May, Uttlesford District Council, the local government body in the Stansted area, took legal action against Eighteen Aviation to recover £1.12 million ($1.71 million) in unpaid taxes. The current status of Eighteen Aviation remains unclear, although UK company records indicate that former managing director Mike Foley “terminated” his position as a director on April 23.

Aero Toy Store did not respond to AIN’s requests for comment. Also, AIN was unable to reach anyone from Eighteen Aviation.

New Owner To Reopen Stansted?s Diamond Hangar FBO | Aviation International News

Something on the Isle Of Man thread about BMI Regional starting a Stansted to Isle Of Man service in summer 2014, 12x a week? Would be great but I'll believe it when I see it!

Talks with Ryanair are on-going...
Ryanair in Talks With London Stansted Buyer MAG to Swell Traffic - Bloomberg

Aegean Airlines return to Stansted, July-September 2013
 

Another new carrier for Stansted, but only for a couple of months it seems.

Aegean will fly 3x weekly to Athens on Monday's, Thursday's and Saturday's using an A320 from 11th July until 16th September 2013.

The flight schedule is as follows:

Monday:
Dep. ATH 10:00 Arr. STN 12:00
Dep. STN 12:45 Arr. ATH 18:20

Thursday:
Dep. ATH 14:30 Arr. STN 16:30
Dep. STN 17:15 Arr. ATH 23:00

Saturday:
Dep. ATH 19:20 Arr. STN 21:20
Dep. STN 22:05 Arr. ATH 04:00

Didn't they leave for LHR a while back? Looks like adding summer capacity due lack of LHR slots.

Announced August 2009 - moved from STN to LHR at the end of October 2009
http://www.pprune.org/airlines-airpo...ml#post5110042

Aegean Airlines have recently discontinued Heathrow to Larnaca and are supposed to be starting Gatwick to Athens in October although I cant see that route starting myself as it is a bit late in the season and is there really the demand on that route in the winter for the extra flights to be added especially as Easyjet also fly to Athens from Gatwick.

If Aegean Airlines are supposed to be operating Gatwick to Athens from October why did they choose a return back to Stansted and not operate this new route from Gatwick, it is only three flights a week and surely they could have found slots at Gatwick for this or will it be the case that the restart of Gatwick to Athens in October will be transferred to Stansted especially as there is no competition on this route, it would be good for Stansted to retain Aegean Airlines and have them operate year round to Athens.

Well I only found it because I saw that somebody had put Aegean to Athens as a seasonal service on the Stansted Wikipedia page. I thought it was probably nothing at first, but when I looked it was indeed there from 11th July. I wonder how long they've actually had it on sale for?

I also think using Stansted is better as it gives customers a better choice of departure points to Athens in the UK market. It would provide a smaller and less congested option for departures and arrivals and to many, a more convenient or cheaper alternative to Heathrow and Gatwick. Not everybody wants to fly from the big major airports in London, especially for point-to-point travel. Being at Gatwick will no doubt have something to do with their Star Alliance membership I would imagine, so probably will be there from October as planned.

Skipness

Your forgetting continental from that list. But Air Berlin are still there though German wings too. Need to get some operators in there fast

A bit more background about what MAG and Stansted could achieve...

Routes News - Stansted eyes 34 million trips at London rivals

Sounds much more positive than anything BAA ever did, but can they eventually get those long-haul carriers in? And can they materialise that EasyJet deal and please Ryanair to get them growing "rapidly" again?

Let's hope so. Best of luck to them! :ok:

Routes News - Stansted eyes 34 million trips at London rivals

So cutting through the waffle he's eyeing KLM, Air France, Turkish and (not) Emirates. How in the name of God he's confident of a point to point Dubai against 5 Emirates A388s at LHR and 3 B77Ws at LGW is....interesting. WHen he says it might not connect, who does he mean?

Flydubai brand is likely.

He thinks there is enough demand for areas closer to Stansted than Gatwick and Heathrow to support a direct service from Stansted to Dubai, even if it doesn't offer onward or connecting flights from Dubai. In other words, Dubai is a strong enough market to support a point-to-point service from Stansted.

Personally, I think it's too soon to make a judgement to be honest and it's fair to say those places/airlines are some possible examples. They're not necessarily "eyeing" KLM, Air France etc.

As for London-Dubai, there is huge demand and if there was an extra daily flight added from Heathrow or Gatwick, nobody probably would bat an eyelid. Why couldn't Stansted support even a few flights a week?

What's to say Emirates can't move 1 of the 3 Gatwick flights to Stansted or Turkish Airlines were to move back for example? The whole reason why MAG now owns Stansted is to heat up the competition. Someone's gain is potentially someone else's loss. You win some you lose some. Stansted's done quite a lot of losing, perhaps MAG's new management strategy is just the ticket to start winning some again? And maybe Gatwick's turn to lose some? Who knows? It's too soon to say!

But I would say that Gatwick in particular needs to watch out. Over the last few years under GIP management, it's been pretty much a piece of cake to snatch traffic from Stansted but it's in a more vulnerable position now (or perhaps Stansted in a more powerful one?)

If the quality improves at Stansted (through this terminal revamp and other possible future investments) and/or operating costs become more enticing (and/or Gatwick gets its way to increase charges), some airlines may not think twice about leaving and looking at Essex instead.

Likewise, some airlines, Norwegian for example, may have got comfy at Gatwick now and nothing really Stansted can do will bring them back, where these aims could be just another complete waste of time all over again.

Andrew Harrison - welcome to "London" - although your airport is in rural Essex.

He claims Cambridge-originating passengers are driving past STN on their way to Heathrow. Yes, they are. Even more are driving past Gatwick on their way to Heathrow, and even more than that are driving past Luton on their way to Heathrow. The same applies to Bristol, Southampton, Birmingham and East Midlands. The only one of those that has much long-haul traffic is Gatwick, which will always be seen as Heathrow's waiting room.

I'm afraid Mr Harrison will be sorely disappointed if he expects Stansted to attract long-haul full-service airlines. Why would they choose his airfield? It's only merit is that he can offer capacity. But he can't offer catchment, convenience or connections.

Never mind - if he stems the decline, and picks up a bit more Ryanair traffic, he could apply for a better job somewhere else!

He's seeing potential and making Stansted as attractive as it can be for a range of airlines and destinations, clearly something that you can never see, or accept!

You may be right, Stansted may well always be nothing but LCC's and short-haul and three quarters blue and yellow, but with £80m being spent on terminal improvements (a major incentive to airlines to choose his "airfield") along with already attracting 2 new carriers (neither of which are LCC's) since taking over 3 months ago, plus have a deal signed with EasyJet, they don't seem to be doing too badly so far!

Please explain. I think you'll find he can. He already has catchment and connections, it's the convenience he is now embracing and that which you are ruling out!

Forgive if I am wrong but aren´t easyJet going back to the capacity they had before they switched a number of services to Southend plus I don´t think the agreement is set in stone yet. Also a two flights a week by Air Moldova wow - we are going to make a lot of money there aren´t we! Come on lets get real absolutely no chance of full service long haul, has had been said already the Gatwick carriers are just waiting for slots at Heathrow.