|
Maybe he went public with this as a stunt to try get a bigger subsidy from the welsh government?
|
He does state that freight and cargo is doing well which as we all know can be quite lucrative and help make or break a route. Funny how LAX didn’t pick up on that when he’s the first one to highlight the importance of cargo revenue when someone dare critisices a MAN route! |
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
(Post 10198990)
erm, is it not the same thing? not performing to expectations = under performing from the expectations set. Your arguing a technicality. yes, it is yield that counts, and do you honestly think said yield wouldn’t be stellar if fares are up to 50% cheaper than other U.K. regionals? come on, it’s being subsidised. It’s a government entity (Wales) and a government entity (Qatar) in partnership. It’s being subsidised. No routes to a lot of EU capitals, no flights to long haul hotspots like Orlando and the Caribbean’s, but there is a route to Doha. What do you thinks happening? where have I, or anyone, said this. I’m merely questioning how an article with a quote from an airline CEO saying the route isn’t meeting expectations is seen a source nothing but a good thing? Yes that’s exactly the crux of what people are talking about, they all want to know when they can go and buy their party hats. Let’s not argue the points, let’s just put words in people’s mouths instead. As for the fares. Again we don't know the cost structure so just because a fare is low compared to another airport doesn't mean the yeild is low. Airports like Heahtrow and Manchester will have higher charges than an airport like Cardiff. As for subsidy again you are assuming there is a subsidy. And as for European capitals Cardiff has routes to 7 if you count Edinburgh and Belfast as European capitals 5 if you don't and hopefully will gain more in the years to come. And as for lack of Orlando and Caribbean (there are flights in the winter) so what? Just because Cardiff doesn't have these then what it shouldn't have Doha? Look back at the posts on this thread and you'll find a lot of negativity towards this airport especially considering the Doha route but people are entiltled to their opinions as it's a free country and we all have the right to free speech. |
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
(Post 10198990)
come on, it’s being subsidised. It’s a government entity (Wales) and a government entity (Qatar) in partnership. It’s being subsidised. No routes to a lot of EU capitals, no flights to long haul hotspots like Orlando and the Caribbean’s, but there is a route to Doha. What do you thinks happening? Orlando or the Caribbean would presumably be on a charter basis, in peak summer and would very much be aimed at the outbound Welsh market. Such a route would have almost no inward appeal and would not carry cargo or offer connections at either end. DOH provides all of that, in both directions and opens CWL up to the world. |
I notice my number one cheerleader posted. Ignore function is bliss as no doubt he is slagging me off again. I must get him off ignore and invite him for dinner some time, someone that fixated must want more and who am I to deny! as for the other post. Connected to just 5 European capitals, and pretty much the rest of the post, I rest my case. |
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
(Post 10199024)
I notice my number one cheerleader posted. Ignore function is bliss as no doubt he is slagging me off again. I must get him off ignore and invite him for dinner some time, someone that fixated must want more and who am I to deny! as for the other post. Connected to just 5 European capitals, and pretty much the rest of the post, I rest my case. |
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
(Post 10199024)
I notice my number one cheerleader posted. Ignore function is bliss as no doubt he is slagging me off again. I must get him off ignore and invite him for dinner some time, someone that fixated must want more and who am I to deny! as for the other post. Connected to just 5 European capitals, and pretty much the rest of the post, I rest my case. The vast majority of QRs route network is not connected to any European capitals. Is that a pre-requisite now? I have no idea what you're trying to suggest. |
But in terms of subsidies, haven’t you just created an extension of the question and also cast doubt? as you say, CWL handles 1.5m pax. It has a select number of scheduled routes and also some charter. Yet, here we are. We have a Qatar B787 touching down at what is, and by your own admission, a small airport (and I genuinely don’t mean it as a derogatory statement, you too have insinuated the same). there are airports with more long haul and larger pax numbers than CWL that don’t have QR. Glasgow, Porto, Lisbon, Lyon and Düsseldorf to name a few. Now, I know ‘rights’ may be an issue in some and it’s not a clear cut case as to why those airports are not served, and I’m not saying CWL doesn’t deserve a chance at the route, but don’t you find that just a teensy bit ‘out of the ordinary?’ And let’s not forget, outside of CWL, we are talking about an airline that is blocked from serving some of its biggest markets and still sailing away just fine, so, not beyond the realms of possibility the welsh government agreed to subsidise the route. it’s back to my original point though. How can it be considered purely good news that the airline CEO has come out and said what he has. My question had nothing to do with ‘I want the route to fail’ or ‘CWL doesn’t deserve the route’. I was genuinely intrigued how the interpretation of ‘the route hasn’t yet met expectation’ translate down into ‘good news’. |
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
(Post 10199049)
But in terms of subsidies, haven’t you just created an extension of the question and also cast doubt? as you say, CWL handles 1.5m pax. It has a select number of scheduled routes and also some charter. Yet, here we are. We have a Qatar B787 touching down at what is, and by your own admission, a small airport (and I genuinely don’t mean it as a derogatory statement, you too have insinuated the same). there are airports with more long haul and larger pax numbers than CWL that don’t have QR. Glasgow, Porto, Lisbon, Lyon and Düsseldorf to name a few. Now, I know ‘rights’ may be an issue in some and it’s not a clear cut case as to why those airports are not served, and I’m not saying CWL doesn’t deserve a chance at the route, but don’t you find that just a teensy bit ‘out of the ordinary?’ And let’s not forget, outside of CWL, we are talking about an airline that is blocked from serving some of its biggest markets and still sailing away just fine, so, not beyond the realms of possibility the welsh government agreed to subsidise the route. it’s back to my original point though. How can it be considered purely good news that the airline CEO has come out and said what he has. My question had nothing to do with ‘I want the route to fail’ or ‘CWL doesn’t deserve the route’. I was genuinely intrigued how the interpretation of ‘the route hasn’t yet met expectation’ translate down into ‘good news’. |
Originally Posted by LAX_LHR
(Post 10199049)
But in terms of subsidies, haven’t you just created an extension of the question and also cast doubt? as you say, CWL handles 1.5m pax. It has a select number of scheduled routes and also some charter. Yet, here we are. We have a Qatar B787 touching down at what is, and by your own admission, a small airport (and I genuinely don’t mean it as a derogatory statement, you too have insinuated the same). there are airports with more long haul and larger pax numbers than CWL that don’t have QR. Glasgow, Porto, Lisbon, Lyon and Düsseldorf to name a few. Now, I know ‘rights’ may be an issue in some and it’s not a clear cut case as to why those airports are not served, and I’m not saying CWL doesn’t deserve a chance at the route, but don’t you find that just a teensy bit ‘out of the ordinary?’ And let’s not forget, outside of CWL, we are talking about an airline that is blocked from serving some of its biggest markets and still sailing away just fine, so, not beyond the realms of possibility the welsh government agreed to subsidise the route. it’s back to my original point though. How can it be considered purely good news that the airline CEO has come out and said what he has. My question had nothing to do with ‘I want the route to fail’ or ‘CWL doesn’t deserve the route’. I was genuinely intrigued how the interpretation of ‘the route hasn’t yet met expectation’ translate down into ‘good news’. If the route was subsidised what difference would it make? The Welsh governments job is too promote Wales, it's too help strenghten the Welsh economy and encourage inward investment into Wales and attracting Qatar Airways helps with that. Providing better access for business and tourism and cargo into Wales directly and promoting Wales in large parts of the world. As for CWL being a small airport what difference does it make? Should these routes only go to large airports. In the end time will tell if the route will survive or not and another thing would Qatar increase to 6 weekly in April and May if the route was doing so badly? And where has anyone said the article was good news? I said it was more advertisement for the route whether it's good or bad it's still advertisement in a national newspaper. |
I feel like you haven’t read my post properly as you are now essentially questioning your own posts. with that in mind, we could just keep going round in loop here and risk a ban, so, I’ll leave it there. But, I’ll reiterate again, I’m not saying the route should/will fail, and I’m not saying CWL doesn’t deserve the route, I honestly wish the route well as it’s a great asset for the region (don’t want to be thrown into the anti-CWL/QR pile). |
Theres no doubting the route is heavily subsidised. Another example would be emirates from NCL |
If the route was subsidised what difference would it make? The Welsh governments job is to promote Wales, it's to help strengthen the Welsh economy and encourage inward investment into Wales and attracting Qatar Airways helps with that |
Emirates are not subsidised out of Newcastle. I believe Qatar are "heavily" subsidised by the Welsh government.
The comments in the aforementioned article backup exactly what I heard from QR UK sales staff around a month ago. They are very pleased with all their UK routes, apart from CWL. This route is very much under the microscope and as the old saying goes... use it or lose it! |
if they can survive elsewhere with apparent low pax loads and upgauge to bigger aircraft despite, surely CWL can grow even if just on the back of good cargo loads |
Cardiff Airports Masterplan to 2040 is being released for consultation today.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/busine...-next-14921105 |
emirates has run at over 80% load factors out of NCL for several years without a subsidy. But they've been unable to keep a new York service....
As people say use it or lose it |
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-44864963 cardiff reporting that they’ve sold 1,500 of the 1,750 seats to Doha representing 84% load. Wonder when this is for? June maybe? |
Originally Posted by bycrewlgw
(Post 10199526)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-44864963 cardiff reporting that they’ve sold 1,500 of the 1,750 seats to Doha representing 84% load. Wonder when this is for? June maybe? |
Originally Posted by bycrewlgw
(Post 10199526)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-44864963 cardiff reporting that they’ve sold 1,500 of the 1,750 seats to Doha representing 84% load. Wonder when this is for? June maybe? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.