Jump to content

Airport.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, IOM said:

This illustrates the point I was making in my earlier posts. The larger aircraft find it harder to get into Ronaldsway whilst all the Loganair flights managed to get in yesterday afternoon virtually to schedule. To rely on Easyjet to only serve the island which is what could end up happening without proper thought would be a huge mistake. I fly regularly to London and the BA London City service invariably coped with bad weather whereas the Easyjet Gatwick was frequently cancelled or diverted. 

To be fair to EasyJet, they are the longest serving operator at Ronaldsway since Manx/BA connect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bonatti said:

To be fair to EasyJet, they are the longest serving operator at Ronaldsway since Manx/BA connect. 

Yes agreed but to only have them as the option for the island would be a big mistake. An island requires a frequent service and this is highly un likely with the EasyJet model . The right answer is a mix of EasyJet and an island based local operator . 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, IOM said:

....................The right answer is a mix of EasyJet and an island based local operator . 

There is ''an island based local operator'' . It is called Loganair.

And they could not make a London Heathrow or City service viable even with an ATR-70.

I assume you want the government to pay huge subsidies but the IOMG just borrowed £400,000,000 (=£400million) for 30 years. The interest alone is £6,600,000 which has to be paid each and every year for 30 years and the £400,000,000 has to be paid back by the maturity date. It covers past borrowings and huge Covid19 incurred expenditure debts.

Obviously, there is no magic money tree. Obviously there is no spare money. None at all. They cannot even afford to pay for many basic services.

I would try and get used to the Gatwick route.  I see many double daily easyJet services on the route next year with consistent times. I just booked some.

Welcome to the new world.

Edited by Cassie2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Cassie2 said:

There is ''an island based local operator'' . It is called Loganair.

And they could not make a London Heathrow or City service viable even with an ATR-70.

I assume you want the government to pay huge subsidies but the IOMG just borrowed £400,000,000 (=£400million) for 30 years. The interest alone is £6,600,000 which has to be paid each and every year for 30 years and the £400,000,000 has to be paid back by the maturity date. It covers past borrowings and huge Covid19 incurred expenditure debts.

Obviously, there is no magic money tree. Obviously there is no spare money. None at all. They cannot even afford to pay for many basic services.

I would try and get used to the Gatwick route.  I see many double daily easyJet services on the route next year with consistent times. I just booked some.

Welcome to the new world.

Where did I say I want the government to pay huge subsidies ? That’s an assumption on your part that is totally incorrect! It is a complex issue but with some clever thinking a solution could be found to meet everyone’s needs . The London City service was operating fine prior to the pandemic because a solution was found using the private sector to underwrite it at no cost to the taxpayer . I would recommend you do a little more research and understand the facts before making sweeping statements of this nature . 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EasyJet won't fly if they think their plane will get stuck here overnight. Of course they won't, and I don't really blame them.

It's why it's important for us to have airlines based on the island. Loganair have an ATR72 here and so they're less likely to cancel flights, because getting stuck here overnight isn't an issue for them.

As for subsidising flights to London, I'm not sure why this would be such a bad thing? We indirectly subsidise flights to Liverpool with the patient transfers money. We're a small market, the facts are some flights will need to be supported. Compared to the money being spunked away on the Liverpool landing stage, partial support for a Heathrow or City flight would be pocket money.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

EasyJet won't fly if they think their plane will get stuck here overnight. 

 

They decided to fly the BRS plane to the island having made the decision it was going to night stop 

Edited by snowman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IOM said:

Where did I say I want the government to pay huge subsidies ? That’s an assumption on your part that is totally incorrect! It is a complex issue but with some clever thinking a solution could be found to meet everyone’s needs . The London City service was operating fine prior to the pandemic because a solution was found using the private sector to underwrite it at no cost to the taxpayer . I would recommend you do a little more research and understand the facts before making sweeping statements of this nature . 

And I recommend that you do likewise! It is ridiculous for you to assume someone has not done so

The 'private sector'  as such did not underwrite the BA franchise LCY route. A single online gambling company with at that time a very large need for the route did so and it then withdrew its support. During the first 18 months or so of Covid19 here, the IOMG heavily subsidised the route and ditto the LHR route when LCY closed to scheduled pax flights.

You will also presumably be aware of the unstable history of the LCY route and the number of former operators. In busier demand times for business travel then than there is now or is likely to be going forward. 

Your assertion that 'with some clever thinking a solution could be found to meet everyone’s needs'  is pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking and avoids actually putting forward any such solution. It also very foolishly assumes that you know better than all the airline operators, senior aviation professionals and the IOMG. Unlike you they know the economics. I do too. You sadly do not.

Perhaps you will take your own unsolicited advice now and 'do a little more research and understand the facts before making sweeping statements....'. to quote your goodself above! 

 

Edited by Cassie2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, snowman said:

They decided to fly the BRS plane to the island having made the decision it was going to night stop 

True enough, once it was late enough that it wasn't needed anywhere else.

I don't blame them for their normal operational decisions, I really don't. But it's a downside of the airline not having a plane and crew based here.

14 minutes ago, Cassie2 said:

Unlike you they know the economics. I do too. You sadly do not.

What are the economics then?

As an outsider I'd say it's obvious that small planes flying from a small market into a big airport requires subsidy, if for nothing else because of the landing fees charged by LHR. But it wouldn't be the subsidy Loganair required during Covid, when that LHR flight typically had 2-5 people on it. 

I think it is a mistake not to pay the required subsidy to keep the links. But similar short-sighted decisions are why we also no longer have reliable business links with the island of Ireland. OpenSkies and "the market" is great for leisure and discretionary travel, not so much for requirements outside of that.

One also notes the frequency and consistency of EasyJet flights to the island from Londom drop in the summer, when EZY use the planes and slots for more profitable flights to European sunspots. Of course they do, they're a business, it makes sense. What doesn't make sense is leaving the island beholden to them.

Edited by Ringy Rose
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Cassie2 said:

And I recommend that you do likewise! It is ridiculous for you to assume someone has not done so

The 'private sector'  as such did not underwrite the BA franchise LCY route. A single online gambling company with at that time a very large need for the route did so and it then withdrew its support. During the first 18 months or so of Covid19 here, the IOMG heavily subsidised the route and ditto the LHR route when LCY closed to scheduled pax flights.

You will also presumably be aware of the unstable history of the LCY route and the number of former operators. In busier demand times for business travel then than there is now or is likely to be going forward. 

Your assertion that 'with some clever thinking a solution could be found to meet everyone’s needs'  is pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking and avoids actually putting forward any such solution. It also very foolishly assumes that you know better than all the airline operators, senior aviation professionals and the IOMG. Unlike you they know the economics. I do too. You sadly do not.

Perhaps you will take your own unsolicited advice now and 'do a little more research and understand the facts before making sweeping statements....'. to quote your goodself above! 

 

Well it is ridiculous for you to assume that I want the IOMG to provide a huge subsidy then go on to give me a whole load of information about the financial position on the island. Total nonsense and a blatant misrepresentation of my comments!

And lets look at your comments in a little more detail . Of course the private sector underwrote the route prior to covid or is a single online gambling company now in the public sector? Secondly how do you know the potential and future demand for a business like route be it LHR, LCY or LGW I take it you have carried out in depth research and therefore know? if so please do share it for all on the forum. Thirdly clearly clever thinking has never resolved seeming impossible things in the past? If you don't try then how do you know? And no I don't know all of those sectors but I think if you had senior people from government, senior people from airlines, senior people from business and some passengers in a room together the seed of an idea might just might be found. If not what is lost? The other answer is to tell people they have pie in the sky ideas which will for sure get us all exactly.........nowhere! 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am an aviator not an accountant, so I don't pretend to understand the economics. However the phrase "small market" which is entirely true, is completely the opposite of what an open skies policy would ideally be suited to, common sense seems to say ! Suitable aircraft flying protected routes ( with service level guarantees and price controls) would seem to require less subsidy than trying to run a non economic service based solely on subsidy alone !

What is needed is some business acumen and strategy at the airport, not the joke management we have been subject to for the past few years !

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, asitis said:

I am an aviator not an accountant, so I don't pretend to understand the economics. However the phrase "small market" which is entirely true, is completely the opposite of what an open skies policy would ideally be suited to, common sense seems to say ! Suitable aircraft flying protected routes ( with service level guarantees and price controls) would seem to require less subsidy than trying to run a non economic service based solely on subsidy alone !

What is needed is some business acumen and strategy at the airport, not the joke management we have been subject to for the past few years !

 

9 hours ago, Cassie2 said:

And I recommend that you do likewise! It is ridiculous for you to assume someone has not done so

The 'private sector'  as such did not underwrite the BA franchise LCY route. A single online gambling company with at that time a very large need for the route did so and it then withdrew its support. During the first 18 months or so of Covid19 here, the IOMG heavily subsidised the route and ditto the LHR route when LCY closed to scheduled pax flights.

You will also presumably be aware of the unstable history of the LCY route and the number of former operators. In busier demand times for business travel then than there is now or is likely to be going forward. 

Your assertion that 'with some clever thinking a solution could be found to meet everyone’s needs'  is pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking and avoids actually putting forward any such solution. It also very foolishly assumes that you know better than all the airline operators, senior aviation professionals and the IOMG. Unlike you they know the economics. I do too. You sadly do not.

Perhaps you will take your own unsolicited advice now and 'do a little more research and understand the facts before making sweeping statements....'. to quote your goodself above! 

 

 

8 hours ago, IOM said:

Well it is ridiculous for you to assume that I want the IOMG to provide a huge subsidy then go on to give me a whole load of information about the financial position on the island. Total nonsense and a blatant misrepresentation of my comments!

And lets look at your comments in a little more detail . Of course the private sector underwrote the route prior to covid or is a single online gambling company now in the public sector? Secondly how do you know the potential and future demand for a business like route be it LHR, LCY or LGW I take it you have carried out in depth research and therefore know? if so please do share it for all on the forum. Thirdly clearly clever thinking has never resolved seeming impossible things in the past? If you don't try then how do you know? And no I don't know all of those sectors but I think if you had senior people from government, senior people from airlines, senior people from business and some passengers in a room together the seed of an idea might just might be found. If not what is lost? The other answer is to tell people they have pie in the sky ideas which will for sure get us all exactly.........nowhere! 

The truth is that the IoM routes have never been stable, we’ve had operators, from big to fly by night, come and go, with monotonous regularity and striking frequency, under both open skies, and the previous regulated market, over the last 70 years. The only ones who stuck it out long term, 20+ years, have been Manx & Easy.

Most did a year or two, more likely a season or two, a few got to five and the odd one or two got to 10+.

Whats for sure is that we don’t want a monopoly or an Aurigny. The balance between stable services and the demand for low prices is a hard one.

As for @Cassie2 suggestion that LoganAir is locally based, that’s laughable. They aren’t. They station aircraft here overnight. They’d be gone like a shot if their routes weren’t profitable, or being subsidised. Having aircraft based here has upsides and downsides, for us and them. But to be really effective needs a critical mass like Manx had.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, IOM said:

Well it is ridiculous for you to assume that I want the IOMG to provide a huge subsidy then go on to give me a whole load of information about the financial position on the island. Total nonsense and a blatant misrepresentation of my comments!

And lets look at your comments in a little more detail . Of course the private sector underwrote the route prior to covid or is a single online gambling company now in the public sector? Secondly how do you know the potential and future demand for a business like route be it LHR, LCY or LGW I take it you have carried out in depth research and therefore know? if so please do share it for all on the forum. Thirdly clearly clever thinking has never resolved seeming impossible things in the past? If you don't try then how do you know? And no I don't know all of those sectors but I think if you had senior people from government, senior people from airlines, senior people from business and some passengers in a room together the seed of an idea might just might be found. If not what is lost? The other answer is to tell people they have pie in the sky ideas which will for sure get us all exactly.........nowhere! 

We shall see soon enough who is correct. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...