Have also heard that same rumour. What I had heard was the LGW landing fees were uncompetitive for smaller aircraft, and that BE with the E195, it just isn't feasible. Now add to that, EI starting LGW with A319's....

Had also heard that FlyBE were currently taking LGW to court, presumably about the above.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if BHD were encouraging EI/EIR to start regional routes even if they will be in competition with Flybe - Flybe's OTP of late has been woeful mostly down to reliability issues with the Q400s (2 inbounds today alone were over 4 hours late).

If EI/EIR do expand then Bristol could also be considered after it was unceremoniously dropped by Flybe.

Flybe dropping BHD -LGW is bravado in what seems to be a spat with Gatwick airport. Easyjet are involved in the same spat as the airport are trying to impose an RPI+5% fees increase over 5 years to pay for improvements that will only benefit long haul operators. As Aer Lingus already operate at LGW they can't be getting that great a deal to operate BHD.
There are routes at BHD that Aer Lingus could make money on. I fail to see why they insist on piggy-backing on established routes. They tried it at BFS (at first) and lost a fortune before smelling the coffee. A bunch of clapped out ATR's isn't exactly going to impress either if that's the ace up their sleeve.

Clapped out the ATRs may be but they couldn't be any worse than Flybe' s Q400s most of which are considerably younger!

I would imagine this will coincide with the delivery of new ATR's.

A bit late to the discussion, I have been pondering this EI / BA / BE scenario for ages. It feels like BA have played a blinder with bmi.

BA owns 14.5% of FlyBE. (through IAG).
BA has a codeshare agreement with EI.
BA has given luke-warm committment to Belfast, at best; re-iterating that the route must be profitable - which is fair enough. But, allowing your codeshare partner to launch flights on your doorstep and go into direct competition with an airline you own 14.5% of seems a good way to make something unprofitable. BA can pull the route and say "We tried."

That's very true, but why was Willie Walsh so vocal about wanting BA metal back to Northern Ireland, even before the bmi acquisition was on the cards??

Whilst we all know BA want and need more slots for long haul markets, BA have shown commitment to NCL. Now as ignorant as I am regarding NCL, I would hazard a guess that BHD would have greater profit potential. Yes Northern Ireland has EI as a codeshare partner, but whilst BA shows commitment to the regions, such as NCL and now LBA (seems a lil bizarre to me) I would reckon BHD will see BA metal for a while. Maybe coordinate schedules with EI, but a complete pull out again, I just don't see it.

Again just from what I have heard in the past, BHD was one of the more profit making routes for bmi. Combine this with, as I said WW's previous statement about having BA back in Belfast, BA continuing to serve the UK regions with BA metal at LHR, upping the BHD schedule for winter, and I just don't see a pull out. Though I could well be very much mistaken.

Looks like HMS Sour Grapes is about to visit again!

BFS101; you pose a valid arguement here. Whether BA stay at BHD or axe the route, and I certainly hope they stay, the issue is at this point, BA as an organisation is integrating bmi into the airline and I believe nothing will be reviewed in this period of transition,( some exceptions apply Mid Haul etc.), the priority will be creating a steady state and a smooth integration.

In terms of the domestic flying program at this time WW will be very careful with sentiment and PR, meaning they wont cut any capacity in this area and the they will use as many opportunities to shout domestic progress as possible.

you refer to LBA, this is simply the bmi MAN capacity being moved to LBA and MAN schedule will be smaller than current combined BA/BD schudule. If LBA doesnt work it will be axed as unviable, the commentary would say 'in the intererst of improving domestic connectivity we tried LBA'etc. Man would hardly get an increase in frequency then.

Belfast, now I am not convinced that BA and EI relationship in terms of interlining at LHR is going to be sarcrificed, and the net gain in terms of BA operating LHR BFS in my view is not great considering that they have other Long Haul aspiration AND a partner who can feed pax ex Belfast to LHR. EI move to BHD may well be a substitute in the medium term for BA and would mitigate any bad press locally from a BA withdrawl.

In any case, I think this remains to be seen and not something that will materialise this year or even next summer season. Lets see what happens post new operator on EDI and ABZ. I still believe there is a connection.

EI-BUD

Quote: "Have also heard that same rumour. What I had heard was the LGW landing fees were uncompetitive for smaller aircraft, and that BE with the E195, it just isn't feasible. Now add to that, EI starting LGW with A319's....

Had also heard that FlyBE were currently taking LGW to court, presumably about the above."

LGW following LHR's example perhaps? Need to get NHT up and running as soon as, it could take some of BE if it is squeezed out of LGW, as could SEN.


Quote: "BA owns 14.5% of FlyBE. (through IAG).
BA has a codeshare agreement with EI.
BA has given luke-warm committment to Belfast, at best; re-iterating that the route must be profitable - which is fair enough. But, allowing your codeshare partner to launch flights on your doorstep and go into direct competition with an airline you own 14.5% of seems a good way to make something unprofitable. BA can pull the route and say "We tried." "

BA and BE are not in competition: BE does not on BHD-LHR!

With EI now at BHD, what is to stop BA and EI doing a code share on BHD-LHR?

If one of them comes off the route would expect it to be EI first.


Quote: "That's very true, but why was Willie Walsh so vocal about wanting BA metal back to Northern Ireland, even before the bmi acquisition was on the cards??"

AFAIK, BA are commmited to BHD. There must be a healthy feed to/from BA longhaul at LHR.

Whilst we all know BA want and need more slots for long haul markets, BA have shown commitment to NCL. Now as ignorant as I am regarding NCL, I would hazard a guess that BHD would have greater profit potential. Yes Northern Ireland has EI as a codeshare partner, but whilst BA shows commitment to the regions, such as NCL and now LBA (seems a lil bizarre to me) I would reckon BHD will see BA metal for a while. Maybe coordinate schedules with EI, but a complete pull out again, I just don't see it."

The BD domestic routes also fed BA longhaul (as well as fellow Star Alliance carriers, VS, etc.) so it makes sense to keep them (BHD) or reinstate them (LBA), plus there is some point to point traffic.

Maybe the ending of BD shorthaul routes had more to do with "reallocation" of slots to LH than anything else?

BA have made it clear that the slots acquired from BD will be split approximately one third longhaul and two thirds shorthaul.

Again just from what I have heard in the past, BHD was one of the more profit making routes for bmi. Combine this with, as I said WW's previous statement about having BA back in Belfast, BA continuing to serve the UK regions with BA metal at LHR, upping the BHD schedule for winter, and I just don't see a pull out. Though I could well be very much mistaken."

Agreed

im told Flybes plan is to drop LGW completely - on all LGW routes, sell off the slots for a nice profit and transfer the best London routes to LCY where smallish planes are still welcome and yields are better.:ok: So maybe BHD gets a new LCY, BA gets LHR and Shamrock to LGW. Everyone happy:ok:

Which it true, would allow EI to then pick up the codeshare and transfer passengers currently using BE. VS and BA would be keen I'm sure to ensure reliable connections to LGW from the regions inc BHD.

Sounds like galley FM given BA and WX have peak slots at LCY sewn up. There's just not the capacity for BE to get into LCY in a meaningful way. Doubt they are THAT hacked off with GIP at LGW, given they own LCY which has charges in place making smaller aircraft tricky to make money on.

Can't see Flybe giving up Gatwick

It's an established base, they have the code share with BA, their passengers are well used to the routes offered. Just because there is competition!!!!!

Giving all this up, just because EI have arrived at BHD is nonsense

I would bet the euro millions that flybe is not for competing against aer lingus

Also I have heard that since BFS is in talks with airlines since EI have gone, they are in talks to grab BE

But would BE go up to the land of EZY ? also be have replaced ulster bank branding at city. thats a lot of money to spemd

Now dog - do u really think BE have spemt big bucks on the ads, or been given them as a sop against what has happened [gatwick] (or what's to come?) by the ever bounteous hand of airport management???

or before it went green

BE BHD LGW
 

BHD LGW must be Flybe's busiest route in terms of passenger number and up there in terms of high frequency. The route carries in excess of 20K Pax per month. The connectivity with other carriers at LGW is significant. Interesting to note that when FR arrived and were carrying up to and over 30K pax some months on STN BHD, BE contined to grow the route in single digit % points. Not a bad achievement.

So if BE are giving up LGW (CANT SEE IT), due to EI arrival, the message is to EI, we cannot compete, so come into BHD and take over any route you want. BE will fight the fight on this route, to safeguard the rest of the BHD operation.

BE will give frequency and are very well established. EI will do ok numbers wise as it will be price driven. I would suggest that anything EI gain will be transfers from LHR and EZY from BFS, though EZY wont be shy about keeping the pressure on.

I had meant to also say, given that there are rumours about LCY and BE in the same statement, do we need to be wondering about Cityjet? Would this be an airline that BE would wish to purchase, assuming AF in the mood for selling and strategic options being assessed including 'sell'?