Is there any intent for the BCN / ORY flights to be long-term or are these (as I suspect) purely slot-sitters until BA can enough get airframes and crew to operate routes that they actually want to fly ?

I am not sure it is all to do with frames and crews. Demand for some multi daily short haul business services is still soft particularly in the summer months so cuts to some frequencies has meant some spare slots.

BA dropped Orly not that long ago 🤦‍♂️
Emirates were operating only 6 daily pre COVID, all A380,
EK7/1/29/31/3/5.

Will VUE operate from T5 like IBE do?

Press report today.
”Australian investment house Macquarie is assembling the firepower to buy out several of Heathrow’s existing backers who are scrambling for an exit. The potential change of ownership has been triggered by the decision of Spanish construction outfit Ferrovial to offload its shares in Heathrow after 17 years as its largest investor”

Though denied by Macquarie:

Macquarie denies it is eyeing a stake in Heathrow Airport

What’s going on?
 

Can anyone explain what’s going on at LHR? For as long as I can remember this was London’s premier airport and every operator wanted to operate there and would only use LGW if they couldn’t get access to LHR. Operators were paying huge sums for slots and queuing up at the door to get access.

However, it seems this is now changing. Various operators have left with ITA being a real surprise lately being the national airline of a big European country. If you look at the new routes opening lots of existing operators are also opening duplicate routes up out of LGW. Did not expect to see Singapore Airlines, Air India etc start operating routes at LGW. What has caused LHR to lose its shine?

Personally, I feel the airport allowing the Middle Eastern airlines to get as many slots as they now have is one of the big reasons. Essentially, this has turned LHR into a stopover hub for their operations and passengers rather than it being a world hub all airlines want to serve. The third runway should be an absolute priority to not only LHR but also the country if they don’t want things to become further marginalised.

ITA don't own any slots.
Singapore & Air India are expanded shedules, if you don't own more slots you have to look somewhere else.
Quite simple really.

Gatwick is also less expensive to operate from. It has attracted quite a few new entrants lately. I can also envisage Gatwick having its Northern runway in routine use alongside the southern runway before Heathrow gets its third runway.
This is also leading to more interest from airlines.

LGW will get to use it's 'extra' runway.
LHR will NEVER get a third runway.

Supply and demand. There is huge demand for LHR slots but no new availability. This means the price of those existing slots rise exponentially. Those with the deepest pockets can afford them and buy the others out (especially the ailing legacy carriers like SAS, ITA, Croatia…).

Virgin and BA had a coming together I see today ,though Virgin being towed so not on their cheque.

Cheers
Mr Mac

It's absolutely supply and demand and Gatwick is getting interest for expansion and those that can no longer retain the LHR slots they need, in the case of ITA for example who were leasing slots.

Personally I think the CAA pricing caps at LHR are counterproductive to the overall LON airport system. I get why they're there principally to protect the public from price hikes due to LHR's dominance in the market. However, it shows that airlines/routes that don't need to be at LHR from an onward connectivity/shared alliance point of view are still willing to pay for it's prestigiousness or still achieve the yields that set LHR apart from the other airports. The reality is many of these foreign airlines are at least partly government owned and those countries will want their national flag carrier to fly into LHR.

Take the Air India routes besides Delhi and Mumbai for example, or someone like Biman Bangladesh, who are very point-to-point, VFR market focussed. They can easily serve that demand from LGW or STN. LHR offers those routes/passengers nothing other than the fact that it's Heathrow.

If more of those routes, including the uplift of African services for instance are now being drawn to LGW rather than LHR then that's a positive development in my view. It would better allow LHR slots to be used more effectively by those airlines and routes where LHR is strategically important, namely hub connectivity, rather than simply the fact that it's Heathrow and looks good from a prestigiouness/perception point of view.

Heathrow has obvious advantages over LGW/STN for the extensive Asian community in West London.

there's quite a lot of evidence showing that the longer established immigrant communities are moving out from their traditional bases in W London - by the time you get to the second generation people are moving for more space, parking, gardens etc and by the 3rd generation their choices are almost indistinguishable from long term white British

Indeed true but the point also is that in reality that market would still travel to LGW/STN to fly direct to their home country if that's where the flights were available from. It might not be as convenient but people would do it. Leisure often do so already too, often willing to travel to an alternative airport for the right fare, timings etc.

The connecting hub traffic and higher yielding premium demand on the other hand depends on LHR. That's what I think the pricing structure fails to recognise. Obviously you can't dictate which airlines must fly from which airport, the market decides, but you could incentivise it with the right pricing regulations.

Anyone know the story behind cargo flights being booted out this month ? Only a couple of legacy operators with old slots allowed to continue ............

Heathrow urges government to scrap £10 fee for transit passengers

Does a tenner really make that much difference, especially to travellers from the Gulf? Heathrow is bursting at the seams anyway.

The people who own airports would sue you for 10p if they could

Indeed Asturias56 It has become a SOP for corporates to fling accusations and 'blame' at anyone. This is done under the guise of PR/Marketing/diverting attention.