Most profitable routes
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: England
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most profitable routes
I spotted a thread stating that the BA service to IAH was the most profitable from LGW. Anyone happen to know the 5 most profitable routes from LHR on S/H and L/H???
PS As a BA shareholder..how low can the shares go??
PS As a BA shareholder..how low can the shares go??
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Now back in London
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its quite possible that a route with 6 flights a day is more profitable than one with one flight, but the one flight makes more money than each of the 6. Cost allocations can lead to some pretty arbitrary numbers as well.
Being in that line of work, tell me the answer you want and I'll justify it.
Might be better to look at which route gives the highest average contribution to fixed costs per planeload, but a cleaner number is probably revenue per passenger kilometre. Being simple, however, has its limitations.
Having said all that I'm still no nearer to answering your question!!!
cur
PS so am I and probably somewhere between 0 and 5p, worst possible case.
Being in that line of work, tell me the answer you want and I'll justify it.
Might be better to look at which route gives the highest average contribution to fixed costs per planeload, but a cleaner number is probably revenue per passenger kilometre. Being simple, however, has its limitations.
Having said all that I'm still no nearer to answering your question!!!
cur
PS so am I and probably somewhere between 0 and 5p, worst possible case.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOS used to be one from LHR on the longhaul side for a couple of years not quite sure about now................
Considering how much I paid Air France to Paris from PHC for a five and a half hour flight
Considering how much I paid Air France to Paris from PHC for a five and a half hour flight
Paxing All Over The World
My understanding was that JNB was always a reliable 'earner'? Particularly in the days before VS got on the route. However, BA still run a 744 to JNB every day of the week. They also do CPT every day, 6 x 772 and 1 x 744, I think.
Either way South Africa is a right little gold mine.
Either way South Africa is a right little gold mine.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Silly Cone Valley
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It all depends...
A route is profitable if you spend less operating it than you earn in revenue from it. Whilst BA have 18 members of staff per pilot, and fly 625 passengers per employee as opposed to 4447 with Easy and 6000 with Ryan then few routes will be profitable.
The franchising debacle has been brought about by the frank admission of Commercial that BA cannot operate the route at a competitive price and so contractors have been brought in. A cleverer management would have reduced our MASSIVE costs to redress the balance and protect the integrity of the product.
The share price is a bit of an irrelevance, how low is low? The market is being dragged lower by American corporate earnings worries and concerns that no-one can believe the balance sheet anyway. That is a situation that nobody in the UK can control. In an environment that favours the bears and the short sellers, companies that have poor management can expect to be oversold.
That is not to say that BA could help itself immeasurably by facing up to its obesity and SACKING THE BLOODY SUITS! AARRGGHHHHHHH!
I’ll take on the opposition anyday. It’s my management I can’t beat!
The franchising debacle has been brought about by the frank admission of Commercial that BA cannot operate the route at a competitive price and so contractors have been brought in. A cleverer management would have reduced our MASSIVE costs to redress the balance and protect the integrity of the product.
The share price is a bit of an irrelevance, how low is low? The market is being dragged lower by American corporate earnings worries and concerns that no-one can believe the balance sheet anyway. That is a situation that nobody in the UK can control. In an environment that favours the bears and the short sellers, companies that have poor management can expect to be oversold.
That is not to say that BA could help itself immeasurably by facing up to its obesity and SACKING THE BLOODY SUITS! AARRGGHHHHHHH!
I’ll take on the opposition anyday. It’s my management I can’t beat!
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Curmudgeon makes a good point about rooute profitability, though I'd argue that Revenue per Passenger KM is only relevant when you compare it to the appropriate costs.
Another way is to compare acutal load factor to break-even load factor on the route, but the key issue is what level of costs does each route carry. It's obvious that costs directly associated with a particular route (airport pair)- landing and handling fees, Navigation charges, Fuel, Catering, Crew allowances etc will only be incurred if that particular route is flown. Other costs such as leasing/depreciation, insurance, maintenance, crew salaries have also to be carried by the route, but they are irrespective of whether the route is to destination A or B - if they both take the same flying time. Where things can be complicated is how to deal with Indirect, Overheard, Admin, Back-office, HQ or whatever you like to call them costs. The point being that if route Y-Z looks unprofitable through one type of analysis and you decide to chop it then all the non-route specific costs that it carried will be re-allocated and it may turn out that other routes start appearing un-profitable. The answer is that if you chop a route you have to reduce your Overhead costs in the same proportion to avoid making the situation worse for the other routes.
Ok, so that doesn't answer the original question, but gives a few warnings about cost analyses.
I guess though the for BA some of the trans-Atlantic routes must have been good earners - if only since their overall performance took such a knock after Sept 11 2001.
Another way is to compare acutal load factor to break-even load factor on the route, but the key issue is what level of costs does each route carry. It's obvious that costs directly associated with a particular route (airport pair)- landing and handling fees, Navigation charges, Fuel, Catering, Crew allowances etc will only be incurred if that particular route is flown. Other costs such as leasing/depreciation, insurance, maintenance, crew salaries have also to be carried by the route, but they are irrespective of whether the route is to destination A or B - if they both take the same flying time. Where things can be complicated is how to deal with Indirect, Overheard, Admin, Back-office, HQ or whatever you like to call them costs. The point being that if route Y-Z looks unprofitable through one type of analysis and you decide to chop it then all the non-route specific costs that it carried will be re-allocated and it may turn out that other routes start appearing un-profitable. The answer is that if you chop a route you have to reduce your Overhead costs in the same proportion to avoid making the situation worse for the other routes.
Ok, so that doesn't answer the original question, but gives a few warnings about cost analyses.
I guess though the for BA some of the trans-Atlantic routes must have been good earners - if only since their overall performance took such a knock after Sept 11 2001.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Out of the blue
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are very close to the kernel here. BA are about to pull out of Charlotte, a prosperous US city destination with a comparatively low sensitivity to price (all investment bankers and $1T invested there). BA will not reduce its losses by cutting revenue generating airline operations whilst retaining loss making administrative operations. This simply cannot go on.
At this rate they’ll be operating one extremely expensive Concorde service with 66000 managers shortly before going bust.
At this rate they’ll be operating one extremely expensive Concorde service with 66000 managers shortly before going bust.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roobarb writes..
Yes, but Ryan and Easy don't do long-haul - so is a straightforward comparison between number of pax per employee per unit of time a fair comparison???
Whilst BA have 18 members of staff per pilot, and fly 625 passengers per employee as opposed to 4447 with Easy and 6000 with Ryan then few routes will be profitable.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plus it may be cheaper for a larger airline like BA to keep some functions in house such as transport or check-in staff unlike easyJet and Ryanair who contract in such services. Staff/pax are not the same thing as total cost/pax.
Agree with Big Brutha below though!
Agree with Big Brutha below though!
Last edited by Lucifer; 20th Sep 2002 at 13:44.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most profitable routes? Anything prefixed with 'FR' or 'EZ' and NOT 'BA'!!
Skippy has a masterplan......bankrupt BA then re-emerge (like SR/SN) as a new airline, without the historical union and contractual agreements. So far he's right on course.
Skippy has a masterplan......bankrupt BA then re-emerge (like SR/SN) as a new airline, without the historical union and contractual agreements. So far he's right on course.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only a million, try 2
I think it was closer to £2million - £2.5m when salary for the year is included JetII for RAyling. However, u look at "Hot Rod" and he got £750K for the year that he took over....
