Agree on AirasiaX but what I was trying to get across on that one was if AirasiaX had stopped the route whilst at STN everyone would have blamed STN for the loss of the route.

I think AirBerlin should have stayed at STN they were doing very well and only left because of pricing issues and wanting to join an Airline "team" they seem to have lost their way trying to be something they are not and forgot they are a low cost airline.

I live near Derby, but my last 2 flights have been from Stansted. Although it is a long way to travel, I like Stansted.
I have to say that EMA is turning into a dump, I hate the place, drop off and pickup are poor, you can be on the plane for ages waiting for the stairs, walking in the open, queuing to get through passport control.
I went from Luton a few years ago, what a dump.
I hope Stansted gets more airlines, they deserve to.

What STN needs is for one of the Low cost Airlines Ryanair, Easyjet,
Southwest, Jetblue ect... to start daily Transatlantic flights to the Airport.

The onward destinations are endless both sides of the pond.

Airlines need to understand that passengers needs have changed and a growing amount of passengers dont mind not having interlined baggage or having one ticket to the final destinaton.

Ryanair has seen a big rise in the number of passengers from the USA traveling to SUN destinations, on my last two flights to from STN-ACE and STN-LPA there were a large amount of Americans and Canadians, and on my last BUF-LAS flight there were a hell of a lot of people from the UK on our Southwest flight.

Im not saying it is going to happen, Im just saying it would work even if the flights were not much less than the normal flag carriers, there is far to many people wanting to discover Europe and the States on a budget.

Probably those Americans and Canadians going to the Canaries live and work in the South East Daz211. Transatlantic services never have or never will succeed at Stansted unfortunately. You will always get plenty of ´Europeans´ going to the US but as I have said before practically all Americans want to fly into London Heathrow or Gatwick. They haven´t a clue where Stansted or even Manchester is and you try informing them where it is and how reasonably easy it is to get to Central London.
I do not include regular Business and US travellers but mainly the once in a lifetime type who leave American shores.

You don't have interlined baggage transitting US airports as you need to collect and go through customs which is why see using Stansted flying to the US as a great opportunity.

Forecast its about 2 years max away as still recession everywhere but next year start coming out and then opportunity for growth will be there.

daz - would be great if that happens, but nobody seems to have been able to come up with a business plan that has cheap transatlantic flights from London and still makes money. Sun Country don't seem to be flying this year. After the failures of Eos, Silverjet and Maxjet, the 800 lb gorillas in the form of BA, Virgin, American, Delta and United are just too scary.

I dont agree thousands of passenger only discovered places in Europe through look at Ryanairs website and only traveled to those destination because the route was opened.

So the same would happen if say London Stansted showed on the JetBlue website or if La Guardia New York showed up on the Ryanair Website people would travel on the routes.

As for saying transatlantic routes would never work at STN i strongly disagree, AA worked very well, CO also worked very well, The only reason MAXJET and EOS failed was due to the Bully boys AA & BA teaming up and opening a AA Route to New York to push MAXJET and EOS out of business and as soon as they done that AA pulled out.

If anything it shows that Transatlantic would work from STN as people were willing to pay that bit more on MAX and EOS and also filling up the AA flights, AA/BA were so worried about MAX and EOS that was the only reason AA returned to STN and closed the route only to get the passengers back to LHR ... You dont need to be a "boffin" to figure that one out.

What makes you think that lower operating costs would bring in more airlines?? Who makes the loudest noises about charges at STN? Ryanair! Lower costs = potentially more Ryanair & I suspect they would use their already dominant position to ensure nobody else got a foothold there. I've said before MOL is the first to scream about monopoly abuse but he isn't averse to having a monolpolistic position himself! To be fair - he would say thats good business / survival of the fitest etc. & almost certainly has a point.
Airports are not charities: they have to make money too. Is it better to have an airport which is under utilised & makes money or a packed airport where the charges are too low & so the place loses money?
Scenario: Regional airport in Europe has taken the RYR route to rapid expansion . After 18 months or so the other airlines have been pushed from the picture or have a reduced ability to compete. Back comes Ryanair wanting an extension to the initial start up deal or they are off. Airport now virtually dependant on FR finds it has limited options if it wants to keep the business but also finds with less airlines paying "normals" charges they are now losing money! It can be a poison chalise!
Now STN is not a regional airport by any means but equally it is not & never will be LHR. LHR is the UK hub and a different beast altogether.
I have no doubts that STN outside the BAA would also be a different beast to what it is now & may take a different approach. I am certain MOL would come in looking for a "deal" & an offer to increase the number of based airframes to get the place busy again. He has already alluded to it if I recall. Some new owners may jump at that possibility. Others maybe not. I'm thinking MAPLC had a bit of a run in over charges to prevent exactly this situation developing at MAN.
I for one am not convinced that lower charges are necessarily the panacea that cures all ills for STN.

Daz

The Stansted-USA via SNN to me probably is the best opportunity provided Irish Govt plays ball with taxes using SNN as the hub from across Europe. Direct back to Stansted is always possible and using aircraft to feed back to SNN.

Using this avoids APD across the pond and also enable US Immigration and Customs to be cleared in SNN, potentially saving lost time at SNN versus direct.

Naysayers will claim adds hours more to journey but no worse than the hours going via LHR which is the norm and the hours queueing when arriving.

Priced a LHR - NYC for July for 4 and its £1,750, booking a SNN (UK)-US for £1,250 which includes a voucher for flight from UK to SNN including 2 bags at any time so getting family to SNN in time for flight makes it a done deal.

Daz211
You may well be correct in thinking a transatlantic route would help STN but low cost leaves us asking will it happen any time soon given Air Asias recent decision stating taxes in Europe.
Just cant help thinking the might of Ryanair at STN prevents airlines starting up routes.
For example would Atlas,Turkish and Pegasus and others hang around if Ryanair attacked their turkish routes or North Cyprus.It will be interesting if LTN gets the expansion it wants to see which airlines would increase based units there.
They obviously see this as a chance to get on a more level playing field. as STN under a different operator and half utilised could see a exodus back to the Essex side.
LTN needs to get the cutomer experience right where STN has the advantage right now.

Gentleman - the buyer of Stansted whoever it is wants a return on its investment and profits for its shareholders. I would suggest the fees that the LoCos are charged at the moment are not particularly high and personally cannot see the new owners wanting to reduce them en masse.
Also most people in the US have never heard of Ryanair or easyJet so if you put them into the booking systems of US carriers they would be scratching their heads and saying who are these guys!

That depends on what your target market is, as most people in the US don't have a passport. However those who travel do know about various airlines and if the opportunity to save $250 or more on a fare they would know very quickly.

Using same basis Laker would not have taken off in US before the Cartel destroyed him.

I think the old using route profitability from elsewhere to destroy Laker isn't going to happen as the LCCs have that profitability more so than the legacy carriers.

Does Stansted have any scheduled airlines that are full service airlines and not a low cost operator?

Anyone here heard the rumour about another airline that is moving out of Stansted but this time to Luton for the summer?

Full service carriers at STN
 

I can only assume Cyprus Airways are the only full service carrier left at STN.

If only STN still had

PK to Islamabad
AA to New York JFK
CO/UA to Newark

and possibly

EK to Dubai
TS to Toronto

Add those destinations to the those that have gone or to the airlines that have left STN it would be a good network of routes, who ever buys STN must attract new airlines and especially a major long haul airline like EK.

I think EL AL was also at Stansted for a while before they moved to Bedforshire.

One aspect of these arguments not mentioned is the fact that the decision to expand STN was made 20 years ago to serve capacity restrictions in the SE.

It simply filled up as the Locost boom came along, right airport at the right time !

..... BUT the inescapable fact remains not one mainline legacy carrier has moved from either LHR OR LGW and made a success of STN.

It also throws into Q the building of another airport in the SE, there is little point UNLESS you close LHR and force airlines to move !

TNT sort by UPS......... or will FedEx respond?
 

If this goes through, what fallout for STN?

Navpi, to be fair airlines moving out of LHR are generally on their knees whether they move to another airport or not ie Malev, Lithuanian, BWIA.

I don't think there have been any full service switching between STN & LGW recently, Atlantic aside - there were quite a few in the 90s but that's a long time ago now.

There have been examples of sustained legacy carriers at STN in addition to LHR service - CSA, Cyprus, El Al, KTHY all 15 years plus.

If you're talking sustainable, Aegean would easily fit in that category...3 daily A321, two class, great loads. But essentially it was just waiting for slots at LHR which does back up your other argument - LHR would have to shut to make any new airport work.

new airline?
 

whilst sitting in sat 1 yesterday several suits were seen walking around with delta on their hi vis.Anything to do with the rumour that they are pulling out of gatwick?

Think DL are going to LHR from LGW in April-possibly what you saw may have been to do with the Somali conference in London today-the USA visitors may have arrived in STN with DL..... a few came into LGW yesterday .