East Midlands
 

August pax figures.

560,992 pax used the airport in August, a very significant 10.1% decrease compared to August 2014.

Is this mainly due to Monarch's exit from EMA?

The rolling year to date total is 4,482,092. Just a 0.8% increase on the previous year.

The increase for all UK airports is 5.3% year in year.

For YTD figures EMA is now ranked 11th, all airports in the top 10 have very positive growth figures.

Where is the usual EMA thread?

A drop like that is a deliberate strategy. Who are your owners again?

Perhaps they want an airport in the vicinity to be given a helping hand / not fail?

Failure of that airport would swing doors wide open to another airport's development that in time would hugely affect the mothership.

A drop like that is a deliberate strategy. BTW what happened to your Aer Lingus service?

Absolutely utter nonsense.

You don't accept that owners of multiple nearby airports will adjust their airline deal strategy in response to competition airports? Then you are not living in the real world. A 10% swing is a huge, huge movement - you would accept? - Other airports growing rapidly. It's not like mag don't have some clout is it?

But I respect your opinion.

An alternative theory for the decline in August passenger numbers
 

Compared to last year there's the loss of Monarch, as previously mentioned.

Another factor that affected only August is that Ryanair operated 7.9% fewer movements than in August 2014.

The number of RYR movements in August 2015 was roughly equal to the number operated in July 2015, but in August 2014 and in August 2013 there was a peak in flights (about 4 legs per day). In August 2015 this extra peak didn't happen.

That's not an alternative theory. That is the theory proven. Strategy of the owner. Airlines or routes don't just operate - they are paid to operate or not (dissuaded). Do you think mag could have paid Monarch to stay at EMA if they had wanted? Ryanair additional flights? Just let EI backtrack on their schedule? Sometimes there are bigger battles to be won (or lost). If mag wants increase mag gets increase.

I think somebody has been reading too many James Bond novels lately. Why would MAG conspire to somehow stop passengers from using EMA ? Those passengers would be far more likely to use nearby BHX airport, than trek all the way to MAN.

Oh and another thing...airports don't pay airlines to use their facilities, its the other way around. Sure discounts/incentives may be offered here and there, but airport costs are only a tiny proportion of what it costs to fly an aircraft from A to B.

LEEDS APPROACH

Not sure what your agenda is here. Whatever it is, as others have already suggested, the logic is flawed.

Passengers "lost" by EMA will be picked up, generally, by one of three airports. In order, these will be BHX (because of it's proximity and range of destinations), LBA, and finally, if the destination is available, Doncaster. None of these are MAG airports, so IF a strategy such as you are suggesting were in play, MAG would be cutting off their corporate nose to spite their face.

There has been over capacity on some bucket and spade routes at EMA for a while. The loss of Monarch, combined with the growth of capacity on some routes at BHX / LBA will have redressed the balance. Whilst airlines like the discounts that some airports offer to attract them, if they can't put adequate bums on seats at the right yield something will give, and in the summer just gone, this appears to have happened. I see it as short term blip, not a long term decline.

Anyway, please look at EMA in the round. There is more to EMA than self loading freight. Pure freight is a real success story here, and whilst I have no idea what the split is, I would guess that the cargo sector provides something close to half the revenue for EMA, and is probably one of the chief drivers for MAG investing in EMA.

By the way - as has already been mentioned, why is this thread being opened, when there is / was a perfectly adequate existing thread, which to the best of my knowledge hasn't been shut down?

Quite how a company's decision making and strategy adjustment in response to competition is "out of a James Bond novel" I'm not sure! MAN changed their strategy from dissuading the low cost model to encouraging it. That decision affected the competition. Completely normal industrial posturing the world over. Is coca cola v pepsi out of a novel? Are the squabblings LHR v LGW out of a novel? - No. Dog eat Dog out there.

In the 1970/80s airlines used to pay airports to be there. These days the airports (of which there are too many in England) fight tooth and nail to get an airline on board. In real terms the airport pays the airline to be there - the over all deal. Look around the country - Cardiff, Bournemouth, LBA even Teesside had a go.

As for the rest - it's nothing to do with Birmingham. It's to prevent another 'Birmingham' from spawning. Nothing to do with pushing EMA passengers to MAN. Perhaps read my post again. If you cannot get it - no problem. Lose a battle to help win a bigger battle - normal industrial affair the world over.

No one has answered my question;

What happened to the EI service that was announced from EMA? Half the flights shifted up the road to help to an airport that seemingly cannot sustain a Belfast or Isle of Man Service? Why? Is this a blip or a decision. (btw It's a decision). Could the owner of EMA kept those EI flights in tact if they had wanted to?

Oh well - I'll get back to my novel.

OK, I'll have a stab.

The EI Dublin service at EMA is up against it's own multi daily service from BHX, just down the road, and Ryanair. The EMA catchment is comparatively small, compared with BHX. Doncaster is further away from BHX, and the road / rail access to LBA is dreadful, giving Doncaster less competition on the Dublin route.

As for MAG "keeping these flights", it is not in the gift of MAG to "keep" EI. They (Aer Lingus) have to make a profit, and if the yields aren't there they will move the capacity to where it is. In case of doubt. Aer Lingus are continuing to operate through EMA this winter.

I'm not sure just how big a role you think that airports have in retaining traffic / carriers. They can always attract them, but keeping them, when any incentives have expired, is down to the economics of the airline, not the airport.

That a good stab! Naive but good.

Absolutely spot on ATNotts.

In light of BHX and MAN seemingly getting new routes IE MAN Vueling,IBX and BHX Vueling, IBX and Wizz announced recently amongst others.

The lack of news from EMA is puzzling.

Is there a strategy here for the MAG group.. funnel new passenger flts to MAN and just use EMA for freight, or are FR and Jet 2 going to announce big expansion for next year out of EMA?

Most of the new freight flts seem to being sent by MAG to STN as well ?

Sat 26th Sept EMA 50th anniversary. 1515-1600LT
Flypast by DC3, A109, Spitfire,Eastern J41, Atlantic 737F and DHL B757F :\

Reason for new thread
 

I searched for the existing thread, but couldn't find it on any of the 3 pages.

I suspect as nothing had been posted for a while it had slipped down the rankings and dropped off the bottom?

Happy for mods to merge this thread with the previous one if it still is open.

I don't understand that while the likes of Liverpool, Leeds Bradford, Doncaster and Bristol have been able to expand by attracting the likes of KLM, Vueling and Wizzair in recent years, EMA has if anything lost variety on routes and continued to lack any real growth or major investment.

Sorry but I have explained it in my opening reply. It is not about holding EMA back it is about giving another airport a helping hand.

Have the EI flights been cancelled? Bookable for me?

So MAG are disadvantaging EMA to help DSA to stop Leeds East developing?

Deep, LA, deep!

And what did happen to the EI service?

Errmm you mean the Number One airport outside London? I didn't realise that Monarch moved all the aircraft they based at EMA and shunted them off to MAN instead. Oh. My mistake, Monarch PULLED 3 aircraft from MAN. Wouldn't you say that has had a dramatic effect there? The idea that passenger numbers are increasing at 3 times the increase in seat capacity reflects well on MAN.

The full aircraft on SV and CX equate to something like 1200 passengers being carried on 4 flights. You'd be hard pressed to get 3 return flights each operating 100% loads on each and every flight for low-cost carriers and even then it's still less than the SV/CX combine.

Besides, you seem to have forgotten that Manchester Airport Group is not the sole preserve of the Greater Manchester councils. They are also answerable to the Australians. I hardly think they would be appreciative of getting an airport to running at a loss to "bolster" the already very profitable performance of the main airport in the group.

Which freight flights were slated to come into MAN or EMA but ended up at STN instead? I'm struggling to think of them.

Apologies if I've misunderstood you Ringwayman, but I feel you've missed LA's point. SWBKCB has it spot on.


PS and by the same logic shouldn't MAN disadvantage itself so as to give LBA a helping hand, as that will further stop Leeds East developing?

Oh, and I think Elvis is still alive...

so MAG would hinder their performance to help a rival airport group which would ultimately help MAG because the airport being run down would then be able to be expanded with less competition? Sorry, someone appears to have had 1 sherbert dip too many tonight.

Think I may have been thrown by this line Everybody bar 1 person seems to understand that Church Fenton is irrelevant. No airline will operate there for a long while. The cost of redeveloping Church Fenton would preclude the likes of Ryanair from even spending more a second thinking of operating there as the redevelopment costs would need to be bourne by either (a) the passengers through some kind of levy or (b) airlines though sky high charges.

I can't see another EMA thread anywhere so sorry if this has been referred to before.

I saw that the a new link from East Midlands Parkway has been established, basically a cab company co-operating with EMA and East Midlands Trains. Traveling from Sheffield, this in theory looks a lot easier than taking the train to Derby then a slow stopping bus to EMA and I'm tempted to try it next time I travel to EMA.

The picture on the website appears to show a large car - I presume it's a minibus we're talking about - HOME - EMARailink

I get the distinct impression from people inside that MAG is content to let EMA tick along rather than proactively try to grow the airport. The main focus at group level, perhaps understandably, seems very much on building up STN, and on the forthcoming development of MAN. Added to which, some of the local management resources have been transferred to group level as cost cutting measures over the last few years. The "loss" of the second EI service has made no contribution to the -10%, because it wasn't there last year. Monarch disappearing and Ryanair not offering so many extras this August have undoubtedly impacted the figures.

Added to which, with all of the passenger eggs very much in the low-cost carrier basket where operators are known to be fickle when it comes to long term loyalty to an airport, there seems to be an aversion to risking upsetting the incumbents by bringing in new carriers. It would not be the first time that offering incentives to a newcomer cause a long standing operator to throw its toys out of the pram!

The increased capacity of the DHL facility, currently under construction, is undoubtedly good news on the express logistics side. Do remember though that EMA has very little regular pure cargo other than express and mail, and nothing but occasional ad-hoc during the daytime. The introduction of new freight operators seems to be a little problematic because [at least some of] the handling agents don't want to bring in staff during the daytime to turn a single cargo flight, and don't need the extra business at night when they are already busy and the aprons congested. DHL of course have a special handling unit, but it is geared to ad-hoc rather than regular scheduled cargo flights.

EastMids

Why not do some research before you post.

CARGO - EMA does very well out of its cargo operation.

Fact - there are actually two cargo aprons.

Fact - As well as DHL, TNT, Royal Mail, FedEx plus others all use EMA

Fact - Most of night time Cargo Flights are scheduled flights. The operators run a very tight schedule and the on time dispatch rate would put any pax operator to shame.

It would not surprise me if the actual cargo aircraft movement we on par with the pax aircraft movements.

The ratio of large aircraft being operated by the Cargo Airlines is greater than the Pax operators. ie A300, B747, B757, B767, B777 and AN24. So the airport will generate a nice little earner from the landing fees for these aircraft.

Another benefit is cargo is labour intensive so more people are employed at the airport due to the cargo operation than the pax side of things. Thus the expansion at DHL is most welcome as it will create jobs.

On the pax side of things compare the UK to many other counties and it is obvious we have too many airports competing for a finite amount of punters. If one airport gains some routes it will be at the expense of another airport.

As for the airport management. They are professional people and as such would like the business to be successful. I am sure they try dam hard to attract operators to their airports. I do not think they get out of bed thinking how can a screw EMA, BOH and other airports within the group in favour on MAN.

Turboprop - suggest you read EastMids post again.

I think that's a bit harsh!

In fact turboprop has made some concise valid and accurate points with regard to EMA and cargo. Many posters in these forums forget completely about cargo, and it's importance as both a revenue stream, and employer of many hundred of people - all that seems to matter is bums on seats.

I would say that, contrary to what Eastmids wrote, EMA has a thriving adhoc business, whether it be AN124 carrying RR engines, the F1 business, with 747 freighters, during the season, or relief flights.

I don't know what the tonnage of adhoc cargo us per annum, but I wouldn't mind taking a stab that it is a deal more than BHX, which benefits from many more adhoc flights, but most of them are operated using much smaller equipment (AN26, Saab 340, AN12). As BHX seem incapable of giving the CAA accurate figures we may never know for certain!

I would however agree with Eastmids - there is far too great a dependence upon lo-co and "bucket and spade" passenger services, and this will hold back growth on this sector of the business.

Well that was a bit bizarre! :ugh: None the less, I agree with all of your points while at the same time you have managed to refute nothing that I said! :rolleyes:

Ah well, a bit more clarification maybe, first passenger...


Some years ago, EMA threw its hat into the low-cost ring. Undoubtedly an exciting sector at the time, and one which has grown steadily since, it may well have been the right decision at the time. However, the embracing of firstly Go, then later Ryanair etc cast the full service offer at the airport to the wolves. What full service network EMA had went down the drain as the incumbent carrier was forced to respond. Many of the business passengers - particularly those flew to Europe to connect to further afield - transferred their travel to Birmingham, got used to the drive down the M42, and have never come back. The net result is that EMA now has a network of low-cost routes that would have been undreamed of before the LCCs came along, but it has virtually no full service network. And it is the passengers using the full service carriers, connecting in places like AMS, CDG and FRA that come back through good times and bad - such business passengers are not as fickle as those on low-cost and charter carriers who might one year go to Prague, the next to Malaga, and the year after no where at all.

The airport is therefore now very dependent on the low-cost carriers it already has. Imagine what the airport would look like without the two big LCCs that shore up the numbers day in day out. The problem is that these carriers will terminate routes at the drop of a hat, unlike the full service carriers who tend to stick with things through thick and thin (at least as far as they can). It is therefore vital that EMA does not upset its LCCs.

BHX has recently added Norwegian, Vueling, Wizz Air and Iberia Express to its portfolio. A year or two ago, these carriers might have been seen to be a shoe-in for EMA rather than BHX, but it became very obvious a while ago that BHX had decided to chase the low-cost market. BHX previously shunned the sector as it didn't want to clog up or dilute their offer, which was providing a good experience for the scheduled business passenger. But the airport's management realised that if they could get the LCCs into the shoulders or low periods of the day (rather than the peaks like slot one) they could accommodate them without adversely impacting their full service market.

The end result is that BHX can be fairly aggressive when courting LCCs, whilst EMA has to tread a little more carefully so as to not upset those airlines it already has. Add to that the catchment area advantage BHX has in comparison to EMA (especially for Wizz which is already embedded at Doncaster and Luton, both of which can fairly easily be reached from the East Midlands), and EMA is a little bit stuck in the middle. It lacks the facilities and network to attract full service carriers, it does not have the global connectivity network to woo the business traveler, and the low-cost carriers have mopped up the leisure travel that used to contribute a little something to the back of the bus on the full service airlines.


Secondly cargo...

As far as DHL / UPS / TNT / Royal Mail are concerned, EMA has undoubtedly done extremely well. However, Royal Mail is slowly declining, and the growth in express logistics is hampered by the airport's location. EMA lost one of its original transatlantic UPS flights, which was transferred to STN because the cut-off times for collections down south were too early given that the cargo had to be trucked 120 miles up the M1.

In terms of DHL, its a great ongoing success story and a credit to the airport, but EMA has undoubtedly been helped by the problems DHL encountered with its hub in Brussels. Had that hub been able to grow or even continue at past volumes, I suggest DHL EMA would not be as big as it is now and the network would be more restricted. Unfortunately, the UK is too far west to be a true European hub for express, so as far as DHL is concerned EMA has to share the role with Leipzig. Leipzig, Cologne and Liege are all bigger than EMA for express logistics, primarily because of the geographical advantage being situated in mainland Europe provides.

Still, its a good story and despite the geographical constraints that no one can solve I'm sure it will continue to thrive.

Lucrative maybe, but hardly something the airport can depend on. Bread and butter is scheduled cargo, and as I said before, with the exception of express logistics and mail (the definition turborprop dismally failed to appreciate), EMA has practically none. As far as I am aware, the only regular operation that falls outside of express and mail is the fish from Iceland, and even that aircraft is turned into the express market each night after it arrives at EMA. The only other regular scheduled bulk cargo operation EMA has had in recent years was the twice-weekly Kalitta 747 which stopped when the airline found it could get better rates from flying for Uncle Sam than it could from operating an independent cargo service. And unsurprisingly EMA's figures for cargo carried on passenger services is hardly stellar - 8 tonnes in 2014 according to the CAA!

And there is another important point I made earlier - attracting a regular scheduled bulk cargo service in the middle of the day is a little problematic because few of the handling agents want the work. DHL and Aviation Solutions do handle the adhoc cargo demand very well, but they do not seem want to bring staff in for a single regular two hour turnround outside of their normal shifts, and they are not keen on the business at night because they already have a lot to handle.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely appreciate EMA has done very well over the years to build the express and mail business to the point where it is the biggest pure-freighter airport in the UK, and the DHL extension being constructed right now underpins further expansion of the business.


Finally, I reiterate my point that the impression I get (and I'm not just trying to pluck ideas out of the air) is that MAG is at the moment prepared to let EMA just tick over, doing what it does fairly well but not driving for major growth in any sector. A number of management resources were transferred to group level, and most of the thinking and investment is going into STN and MAN - STN to rebuild the market at MAN with its huge development programme. I'm not suggesting staff at EMA are idle or trying to run down the business, just that the main focus of the MAG group at the moment isn't EMA. I am really not trying to be negative either in what I originally wrote or this response, just trying to explain a few things and maybe put a bit of realism into the equation.

EastMids

So far as the lo-co market is concerned, there is a limit to the number of new destinations that will provide the volume and yield that the likes of Ryanair and Jet2 require for their business models, and sooner or later, and I think it's sooner rather than later, EMA will reach saturation point on the old faithfuls like Malaga and Palma. BHX has in recent years under served these markets, but the pendulum would appear to be swinging back westwards, to the detriment of EMA.

This is very true; you can't be a major logistics hub on the extreme edges of the market geographically - but DHL is giving it a darn good go despite the UK's geographical limitations.

Given that the overwhelming majority of passenger services are operated by carriers that don't want freight, it's quite amazing that 8 tonnes were carried on scheduled PAX flights - I might have expected nearer 800 kg!

I doubt it's quite as simple as that; more likely the management has been given financial targets to maximise profit, rather than chase passenger numbers, so growing that side of the business organically whilst putting the investment into the core business, which is cargo (and the integrators in particular).

Undoubtedly ATNotts, vibes suggests there's a "we've spent money [at EMA], now we need the returns" thrown in there as well - money on things like an extension to the terminal for an enlarged security screening area, before anyone asks. DHL say that they themselves are putting £90m into the EMA hub, so MAG can't be spending so much there. But EMA has chased business such as the LCCs that isn't hugely profitable, and has deployed tactics such as drop off fees, express security lanes, etc to help swell the coffers. Even so, aside from DHL there's not much sign of investment on the horizon, other than more car parks!!!

Not so much saturation point at EMA, more that BHX is opening up to LCCs and travelers from their catchment area will increasingly fly local rather than drive up the M42 to get a cheap flight.

East Midlands about to get a 2 weekly Islamabad link from Shaheen Air using A330 from 1st March.

ShaheenAir Booking And Flights Information - Shaheen Agents

WOW...did not see that one coming. Would have put my house on BHX. MAG done a good job of a group deal here it looks.

Interesting! I wonder if they will also serve STN in the near future assuming it doest cannibalise EMA too much?

I'd be a little more confident when the airline itself announces these routes. There's diddly squat on their website relating to any international routes apart from to destinations around The Gulf and to China, and looking at their "about us" tab, no ambition to serve Europe.

Of course, things change - but let's not count those chickens just yet.

According to Shaheen air, tickets will be on sale 1st Nov for MAN/EMA

East Midlands airport
 

Why is there no information on the above topic(East Midlands Airport) used to be on it, but no longer

If you google the subject your find they have been and gone but the airline never touched EMA.

Regarding Ema, and competition Bhx are expanding A380 to Dxb twice daily starting later this year, Qatar to Doh, in the eastmidlands we have a great catchment area and the population in East midlands are are multicultural, meaning the population can have a big say in where we fly to ( Indian,Pakistani,Chinese) to name a couple we have the people to fly to Asia etc but no flights they only fly from Bhx, when will we expand?.When Mag took over Ema the Chairman stated that Ema would have scheduled flights to Usa, that was approx 10 years ago!!!!

That's the sort of nonsense that businesses come up with when they want to make some news. Perhaps that's a bit harsh, it's the PR consultants that organisations like MAG employ to "make news" for them.

EMA suffer the same problem that BHX has - BHX being equidistant from LHR and MAN and as a result it's long haul prospects are stifled. EMA's therefore are even further squeezed. On short haul, EMA has always struggled in more recent years to hold on to full service carriers as the offer from BHX is so strong, and is left with bucket and spade traffic, and as the airport has catered for this market segment for so long it's offering to business travelers isn't really that great.

All I can see with HS2 coming along is further seeping of business and commerce westward towards Birmingham, in the same was as sadly, contrary to the Government's stated aims, HS2 will such business and commerce from Birmingham towards London.

Cargo is where EMA thrives, and will continue to unless / until idiots in local government try to limit night time ops.

Hand luggage liquids
 

Anyone know why border control at EMA have a problem with 'Zipped' clear 20cm x 20cm liquid container bags? My understanding is the containers should be 'resealable' is a zip not a sealing mechanism? Wife and sister in law both stopped with zipped clear plastic holders - no problem with size, just that they were zipped , told to transfer to another bag. There was more fuss about the bag than the liquids. Not had this at any other uk airport.