|
...but with each year the propensity to fly increases (aviation is a growing industry), so previously marginal routes may become viable, all other things being equal.
|
It is true, but that is equally applicable to other routes as well - airlines will go for where they can make the most money, and especially as capacity is so restricted at LTN in the morning and evening (who would set up an aircraft base in Waterford just to operate a LTN route?). Like has been said - Dublin is now so much easier to get to, is it time to accept Waterford will not be a viable route? |
Waterford needs investment
144,000 pax was the peak at Waterford with its very short runway! If the runway is extended to that quoted then it will be longer than Luton. However the LTN service proved to be successful, so I personally would welcome the re-development and the route being re-instated. |
Pax figures for September
1,543,374 pax passed through LTN in September which represents 3.95% growth compared to September 2017. With 15 new routes and 1 route to resume before the year end, October through to end of December this year will prove substantial growth each month. The only thing that can hold back substantial growth in the short term is the lack of a/c aprons. |
Also lack of terminal capacity comes to mind although Japan might have the answer. Luton just needs to remove some of those pesky seating areas.
https://i.imgur.com/PYH2G7B.jpg |
The price of a barrel of oil is slowly rising which will expose marginal routes.
|
S19 Nighttime ban
Is it true that one will not be in place next year, just more restrictions on noisier types above QC1 ?
|
It was every summer until further notice but Signature does state that indeed for summer 2019 it is only QC1 that will be affected although ainonline.com have just reported that the restrictions will indeed remain next year so take your pick. |
So next year the airport will apply for planning permission for a terminal that could handle around 20 million passengers but what sort of terminal should it be? More of the same with no airbridges and what many would rate as basic facilities in a low rent terminal or a more upmarket affair for trying to attract a better class of passenger.
There is an argument that Luton has only done well on the back of cheap Eastern European migrants and their visiting families but growth in that market must be close to saturation and the fact that Brexit was a vote to control migration so where is a future market going to come from when Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted all have plans to cream off passengers. Luton's market is niche based on a shortish runway so long haul will always be problematic with many types of aircraft. The Brits only have so much money to spend so growth would have to come from outside the UK from new markets. Agree or disagree? |
Neo and MAX open possibilities of reaching far off destinations. People use planes, like they do buses and trains. New markets will open, but growth in my opinion depends upon one thing, the price of aviation fuel. Should a town the size of Luton be borrowing staggering figures (debt) on a gamble? |
Buster has hit the nail on the head and is asking a question that everyone is ignoring. LLAL is already borrowing £225m for the DART. A DART extension plus basically a new airport linked to the existing runway will cost at least a £1bn. This is not a large PLC borrowing the money and taking a risk but a local council in the expectation that they will fill the new terminal. If the project fails they will leave the people of Luton with a bankrupt council. |
Do the lenders of the money have recourse to either the council or the company which owns the airport in the event of default ? I imagine there is something on this theme to avoid an astronomical interest rate, but just how big a claim could local residents face if it all goes a bit wrong ?
Does Westminster have powers to limit the borrowings by a council ? After Northampton, presumably there will be a level of caution in the corridors of power - if bankruptcy occurs, Westminster would have to pick up (some of) the pieces rather than seeing uncollected rubbish pile up in the streets |
Local government borrowing is guaranteed by central government, and is therefore at very low rates of interest.
|
I would guess if LLAL/ Luton Council defaulted on the loans they would have to sell assets which would mean selling the airport. Also estimated costs will no doubt rise as when first announced the existing redevelopment work was costed at £100m. The latest figure I have seen is now £160m with a nearly 2 year overrun on the terminal project.
There is no doubt that the council is gambling on getting the numbers but if it all goes wrong those making the decisions today will be long gone with the new councilors saying it was nothing to do with them. |
Originally Posted by LGS6753
(Post 10286048)
Local government borrowing is guaranteed by central government, and is therefore at very low rates of interest.
|
Assets
Originally Posted by LTNman
(Post 10285987)
Buster has hit the nail on the head and is asking a question that everyone is ignoring. LLAL is already borrowing £225m for the DART. A DART extension plus basically a new airport linked to the existing runway will cost at least a £1bn. This is not a large PLC borrowing the money and taking a risk but a local council in the expectation that they will fill the new terminal. If the project fails they will leave the people of Luton with a bankrupt council. |
Vueling After not being bookable for months now, the 2x daily AMS is back in the booking engine for S19. Nothing yet for Florence Sunexpress All five routes served this summer are now loaded on their website for S19 |
AMS never stopped though |
Originally Posted by BlueA330
(Post 10286497)
AMS never stopped though That made it look like it was stopping at the end of W18/19 Only now has it become bookable past March |
Originally Posted by Lee Baker Street
(Post 10286182)
I do not pretend to know how company finance works but LBC have assets last audited on 31st March 2018 and declared as being £1.341 Billion. Further more I do not see LBC taking a gamble (as implied) but simply investing in Lutons future. If LLAO built six extra remote stands overnight then those stands would be in regular use in a very short time.
If it was an airport operator borrowing the money for a project of this size, no one would blink, but the town the size of Luton saddling each of those 220,000 residents with an equivalent £2.75m debt, utter madness! What extra benefit are the towns folk actually going to get, it will not be money into the town hall coffers to spend on the town? No, with that size of debt the only benefits to local residents are increased traffic, noise and pollution. Oh any bye the way, I do not live anywhere close to the airport, but if I did, I'd be branching out as an independent at the local council elections! |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:28. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.