LIVERPOOL-3

[SWBKCB]

But how much of LPL do Peel still own? And you've only got to look at Teesside to see how much they will pump in if they don't see a return (i.e. not much!)

[Mouser]

Peel hold a 35% share.

[Ian Brooks]

Peel won`t pump money unless the others do as well and I think they may well
want out if it`s going to cost lots of money

Ian

[Bagso]

This was always on the cards when Manchester finally woke up to locost.

The giant down the road has the muscle to dictate favourable terms to Liverpool's only two major tenants, where does Liverpool go ?

The network is contracting so you cannot grow revenue organically , at least not to a meaningful level. You cannot increase fees as your customers will simply walk away.

If you have large costs the only thing you can do is try to lower these by extension

or

maximising car parking fees, retail etc, difficult in a market which has shrank so dramatically.

[paully]

Bit alarming so see Liverpool in this state. What happened to their once thriving cargo which was the mainstay before the Loco`s turned up?..Its not helpful to be the hostage to fortune by the `Big Two`who will think nothing about pulling out if it suits them. Maybe this is why the banks are starting to be so cagey with them. Their spread is what you might call `a bit thin`..Nevertheless I wish them all the best, its a great airport to use, with lovely helpful staff. Nothing but good memories of the place. Long may it continue :ok:

[Mouser]

I'am sure we'll all find out what it will all mean, when BBC North West Tonight make the first item on Monday nights broadcast, oooh they love a negative from Liverpool.

[AndyH52]

BasilBrush. The auditor's qualification is more likely the auditors doing what they do best and covering their own backs in the highly unlikely event that a group part owned by the multi-billion pound Peel Holdings, and one of the world's leading experts in accessing development finance (Citi Group, which owns 50% of Vantage Airports Group) can't find a bank willing to offer them favourable terms on financing.

You will note that as well as the note of caution from the auditor there is also a reassurance that the shareholders have indicated they are ready and willing to meet the costs of any payments which may be required to secure a refinancing (normally a fee is payable equating to a small percentage of the total money to be borrowed). So, no drama and very little in the way of a story.

[BasilBush]

Andy

You are right that the impact on the airport itself is not likely to be serious - it remains profitable at the operating level. But if new finance is required from the shareholders it will not come from CitiGroup, who announced last August that they were withdrawing from this activity and seeking to sell their interests in Vantage etc.

Yes, Peel have deep pockets, and maybe the outcome will be that they buy back the shareholding they originally sold to Vantage, at a discount of course! Stranger things have happened.

And it should certainly not be assumed that banks will be falling over themselves to refinance the debt. Times are tougher than they were a few years ago, and a lot of airports are finding it difficult to secure as much debt finance as they used to. The recent decline in LPL's traffic, and the fact that both its major customers have been growing down the road at MAN, will be weighing heavily on the banks' minds. It will be a hard sell.

[SWBKCB]

Yes, Peel have deep pockets, and maybe the outcome will be that they buy back the shareholding they originally sold to Vantage, at a discount of course! Stranger things have happened.

Isn't that what happened at DSA and MME?

[BasilBush]

Yes, and maybe the same will happen at LPL. Interesting times. Either way, Vantage are in a difficult position, with no obvious source of finance. They may have no option but to sell out, possibly at a distressed price.

But the airport will carry on - any drama will just be for its shareholders (and lenders).

[eggc]

So stressed shareholders want out...sell to MAG, and LPL and MAN live happily ever after :}

[Anansis]

Liverpool's case isn't helped by its lack of a coherent public transport strategy.


Around 2008 and '09, the N86 linked the airport with the city centre late at night and early in the morning. I used LPL frequently during this time and the N86 was a lifeline. The morning bus was full of passengers and airport workers (cabin crew, retailers, ramp workers etc). It ran through the main student district, giving price sensitive students an affordable means to reach the airport for that first wave of pre 8am departures. National Express, Terrorvision, and the 500 Express also linked the airport to the city centre. The public transport links made the airport very accessible.


Fast forward to today. The N86 has gone, as has the National Express link. The Terrorvision links the airport with Manchester city centre but no longer commences/ends its journey in Liverpool. The 500 still runs, but only during the day when cheaper alternatives are available that are just as fast. If your flight departs before 8am, or arrives after 10pm, it is impossible to reach the airport using public transport. The only alternative is taxi (£15 to the city centre) or car.


The decline in public transport has been matched with an assault on motorists. This is not unique to LPL, but it does exacerbate their access problems. Post Glasgow terrorist attacks, motorists can no longer drop off in front of the terminal building. They are now directed to the short term car park. Anything more than a 5 minute stay attracts a £2 charge, increasing by £2 every 10 minutes. Long term parking costs £55 for three days. Black cabs are charged £1.50 to access the airport grounds. This is passed on to the customer. Private hire taxi's are reluctant to pick up because of the potential to rack up short term parking charges.


Motorists picking up/dropping off passengers attempted to avoid these charges by dropping off on the access road. The airport painted double red lines, installed hidden cameras and stared issuing £100 fines to motorists who stopped outside of the designated areas, even if just for a few seconds. The local press had a field day! Regardless of whether it was a right or wrong thing to do, this practice alienated a massive chunk of LPL's potential market (a 'la Ryanair).


I live in Liverpool city centre. I am relatively price sensitive when booking short haul flights. I often find that it is cheaper and more convenient to catch the train from Liverpool Lime Street to Manchester Airport than it is to access LPL early morning or late at night. The train to MAN costs £6 each way and only takes 25 minutes more than a taxi to LPL. personally, I find it ridiculous that MAN is easier to get to than LPL from Liverpool city centre! If public transport can link Liverpool city centre with Manchester airport at antisocial hours, why can't it link Liverpool with it's own airport!?


While its true that the failing economy has adversely impacted on LPL, I feel that they have done themselves no favours. LPL is a great little airport once you are there - the revamped security area has massively improved the experience in recent years. However, now that the sleeping giant up the road has woken up to the loco revolution, LPL needs to make things easier for it's potential customers.


A collective effort to make the airport more accessible early morning and late at night would be a good start. I find it hard to believe that the N86 lost money, but if it did, surely it is worth subsidising? Surely cheap, convenient access to the airport will generate far more in airfares than the initial cost?


A combined rail/bus ticket would also help - passengers catching the train should be able to buy a single ticket that takes them directly from their point of origin to the airport via Liverpool South Parkway. This could open up the North Cheshire/ Midlands catchment area more effectively (an area that is relatively poorly served by rail from MAN). Long term, the council should make a rail connection to the airport a priority - I'm always struck by similar sized airports in Germany that have dedicated rail links (e.g. Berlin SXF, Nuremburg, Dortmund). If it works there, why not here?

[Ametyst1]

I agree with a lot of what anansis says with regards to public transport particularly with regards to a combined rail/bus ticket. and indeed a combined bus ticket. although I live between the city centre and the airport I have to get 2 buses to get there.

I disagree that Manchester is just as convenient as getting to Liverpool. I do not know the last time you took the train but it is not £6 each way it is £14.50. The cheapest off-peak return is £16.80 and peak (the time you would take the train is £19.50).

A taxi from Liverpool City Centre to the airport takes between 25 and 30 minutes at that time of the morning, the train to Manchester Airport takes between 70 and 85 minutes, so at lease a 40 minute difference more than double the time it takes to get to Liverpool at that time of the morning.

A private hire taxi from Liverpool city centre to Liverpool Airport would easily be cheaper than the single train fare to Manchester Airport. I have found no reluctance of private hire companies to pick up from Liverpool airport.

Long term parking deals at Liverpool Airport are way cheaper than £55 for 3 days providing you book in advance. I have found 4 days parking departing on 20th January for £26.99 using the airport's main long stay car park. There are cheaper off airport deals too. In peak summer (July) it increases to £31.99 for 4 days.

The National Express coach from Liverpool to Manchester Airport is about £6 each way and takes about 50 minutes but none of these services connect with the first wave of departures from Manchester either.

[Anansis]

Hi Ametyst1,


I suppose the thrust of my post was my frustration at the relatively good public links between Liverpool city centre and MAN in the context of limited links between the city centre and LPL.


The fares I quoted for the train to MAN were based on 50% of the cost of a return ticket in order to compare like for like with a taxi. You are quite right about the price - I use a railcard which works out at £12 return. I didn't factor this in so I stand corrected. Without a railcard, the 3.38 departure costs £9.75 (£19.50 return) and takes 70 minutes to get from Lime Street to Manchester Airport.


As for whether it is more convenient or not, I think it comes down to personal preference. I am walking distance from Lime St. A private hire costs me £15 to LPL and if I have a choice about an early morning departure, I prefer to catch the train to MAN. I am prepared to take the time penalty when other factors are considered (price, waiting for a taxi, knowing my exact arrival time). I'm sure not everyone would agree and that's fine. Overall though, I feel that many more people would use Liverpool airport if it was easier to get there and back!

[IB4138]

The National Express coach from Liverpool to Manchester Airport is about £6 each way and takes about 50 minutes but none of these services connect with the first wave of departures from Manchester either.

Not totally correct.

Taken from National Express web site:

13/01/14 LIVERPOOL (Coach Station) 02:30 Manchester Airport 03:20
0h 50m £6.60

That is in time for the first wave of departures

[All names taken]

A good post Anansis,
This is what happens when airport's decide to 'attack' the people who make the airport work or fail.
Double red lines, cameras, fines......making the passenger feel like a crook, making the passenger feel like this arrogant company has its greedy hand permanently in its pocket AND insisting that it's all in their own interest.

Well; the passengers have had enough and realised that they have a choice.

There's a powerful lesson to all airports in this current unfortunate situation. The smart ones will pay heed, passengers are much more savvy now.

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Reality check needed. Still over 4,000,000 pax. Pax numbers up in December & so far in January too.

LJLA actually made an operating profit of over £5,000,000 last year.

General aviation is still as healthy as ever. Biz jets busier than ever, EZY & RYR are offering a similar number of bums on seats this year, so pax numbers are likely to be very similar to 2013.

LJLA survived on around 1/20th of the pax numbers we have now for many many years.

Peel still own a stake in the airport. Do you really think Peel, who are investing £6 BILLION into the Liverpool Waters development, would leave the city without its own airport? If it isn't in Peels best interest, it won't happen.

There are many airports in the UK that would do anything to have LJLAs 4 million pax problems...

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

And I think that near-duplication of the points I made in post #243 brings the discussion full circle! :-)

[LAX_LHR]

Ive noticed that twice now since Vantage started sponsoring airlineroute, there have been 2 posts containing one-off charters, which also appear to have been written by someone different to the usual publisher of the blog, as they contain words like 'Liverpool airport welcomes......', which the normal publisher does not do.

So, the question is, who do these posts benefit? Im not for one second suggesting Liverpool Airport does not deserve to have a post, on the contrary new routes need as much advertising as possible, but, with them being specifically chartered 1 off flights for a group/event, the public cannot book onto them, and other airlines are unlikely to read the data for market trends as they are not new routes but chartered for s specific event, so why does the general public need to know of this flight? There are hundreds of one off charters per year that do not get published, so why are these flights to LPL treated differently?

It just seems odd that 9 times out of 10, airlineroute is for new routes or flights the public can normally book on?

[eggc]

Terms like these on subject related websites are viewed as high quality links by Google, so enhancing the web ranking on search engines. It will help Liverpool airport appear higher on the free ads when people search "Liverpool Airport" or even "Airport". Its usually done or requested by search engine optimisation companies that are employed to improve web rankings. May be a reason for it.

[Ametyst1]

I do not see the problem with Double Red lines on the approach roads to Liverpool Airport. The road also provides access to an Emergency Rendevouz Point. And like other roads with such parking restrictions there are cameras and sometimes associated fines.

How many airports, with a throughput of over 4 Million passengers, allow unrestricted parking on the approavh roads to the airport terminal? And, moreover, how many airports provide free dropping off time, allbeit for 5 minutes.

I do not see that Liverpool Airport and its owners are wrong here!

[All names taken]

<<how many airports provide free dropping off time, allbeit for 5 minutes.
I do not see that Liverpool Airport and its owners are wrong here!>>

erm, Manchester allows free drop off.
Go figure.

Being charged to drop off at an airport is just one of those petty inconveniences that totally pi$$es people off.
Do stuff like that to the punters often enough and they just get fed up with the whole experience.
Let's examine the evidence:
MAN pax up
LPL pax down

Even RYR have worked out that you cannot be seen to be nasty to the punter and get away with it for ever.

[BasilBush]

What is the latest view on seats offered this summer c/w 2013? Someone previously made the point that Ryanair will be similar to last year, but wasn't there a previous suggestion of one fewer aircraft? And what of easyJet? Presumably FlyBe will be down?

[LAX_LHR]

Easyjet about the same, Ryanair 1 aircraft down and 4 fewer flights from away based aircraft, wizzair about the same, Norwegian gone and flybe remains to be seen just what frequency they will operate IOM with.

I expect there will be another reduction in passenger numbers, unless there are champions league flights to give a little boost.

[BasilBush]

Thanks LAX - very helpful. Sounds like a potential reduction of around 300k passengers or so in a full year? Guesstimate anyway. So maybe around 4 million for the year?

[TimmyW]

And look at the state of DSA and MME now - will they both be around in another 5 years?

[Skipness One Echo]

And, moreover, how many airports provide free dropping off time, allbeit for 5 minutes.
Most surely, and most also allow you to drop off outside the terminal.
Unless you mean in comedy gold 21st century Britain, where that's just much too dangerous coupled with an opportunity to make some money.

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Flybe to continue the 3x daily IOM-LPL route. Hospital contract remains. That puts that one to bed then.

[AndyH52]

Skippy, an increasing number of airports charge for the privilege of dropping your passengers off...Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Newcastle, Bournemouth, East Midlands, to name a few. Also, DFT regulations following the Glasgow Airport attack mean most airports have had to move their drop off zones further away from the terminal.

From some of the comments here you would think Liverpool Airport had moved the drop off zone to the old airport site! It's about 45 metres from the front door.

[Skipness One Echo]

privilege
I know, think about what you wrote. Most countries, don't.

[FRatSTN]

All the good news is being spread today about Flybe continuing from Liverpool.

However currently they operate 24 departures a week to the Isle of Man operating 3x on Tues, Weds, Sat & Sun and 4x on Mon, Thu and Fri.

Whilst still no change in the booking system, from what I can make out from the various news articles, the service will be cut to 3x Mon-Fri with 3 flights over the weekend (I would assume 1 Sat and 2 Sun flights) making a total of just 18 departures a week, a reduction of 6 weekly departures. In other words a 25% cut.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[TSR2]

It's about 45 metres from the front door

Far enough to get wet through when its raining.

[Mouser]

About the same distance as T1 pick up car park, Far enough to get wet through when its raining.

[FRatSTN]

Flybe booking system has been updated and my instinct was spot on.

Now 3 return flights serving IOM Monday-Friday with 1 on Saturday and 2 on Sunday. So indeed a reduction from 24 to 18 weekly flights.

Now unfortunately it does have to be asked... Passenger numbers at Liverpool for 2014?

Now being January I think we can rule out any significant growth this summer and most likely for the rest of the whole year, so let me summarise:

Compared to last summer, Wizz Air have cut back from about 8 to 5 weekly departures and Flybe from 24 to 18 weekly departures. Norwegian are also pulling out completely.

So far I make it a total of up to 35 weekly departures cut down to 23. If you like, almost a 35% reduction in the non FR and EZY traffic.

EasyJet look vey similar this year compared to last year.

Ryanair on the other hand have the biggest cuts. To my knowledge, Ryanair operated 154 departures a week in May 2013. For May 2014 that drops right down to 127 a week. I make that near as dammit a 17.5% cut.

Assuming EasyJet has 170 departures per week both last summer and this summer (which is being quite generous), that's a cut from 359 to 320 weekly departures, or just over 10%.

Now I know that's based on aircraft movements, but my guess would be somewhere within a 6 to 9% reduction in passenger numbers, for the summer months at least.

I would guess pretty much 4 million passengers on the dot or very slightly over for 2014. Lets hope that 2015 will not see further cuts or else it might not even make 4 million :eek:

[AndyH52]

FRatSTN, I hate to burst your bubble, but the LPL - IOM route will not, by my instincts see any loss of passengers through the reductions by FlyBe. Despite previous reductions (chopping the fourth flight on a Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, for example, the additional capacity provided by Easyjet has contributed to a sustained period of passenger growth on the route.

As for the impact of other changes, yes there will be a further dip in numbers, but the encouraging start to January 2014 suggests that there may be better performance in the off-season to help mitigate summer reductions.

I am amazed that the fortunes of Liverpool Airport seem to be constantly at the top of your agenda, highlighting any route reductions quicker than Sky break a political scandal, and with equal zeal.

[LAX_LHR]

FRatSTN, I hate to burst your bubble, but the LPL - IOM route will not, by my
instincts see any loss of passengers through the reductions by FlyBe. Despite
previous reductions (chopping the fourth flight on a Tuesday, Wednesday and
Thursday, for example, the additional capacity provided by Easyjet has
contributed to a sustained period of passenger growth on the route


But there will be a reduction of capacity versus 2013 will there not? I am not aware of easyjet adding any capacity to the route in 2014 compared to 2013 and there is a net reduction of flybe seats.



I am amazed that the fortunes of Liverpool Airport seem to be constantly at
the top of your agenda, highlighting any route reductions quicker than Sky break a political scandal, and with equal zeal


To be fair to FRatSTN, he seems to report on several airports with the roughly the same balance so your judgment that he criticises purely LPL is injust in my opinion, but then again I suppose neither you or this thread are unique in terms of defending criticisms form those who are 'not local'.

[FRatSTN]

To be completely honest, I do personally have a significant preference for Manchester Airport over Liverpool and the migration of further Ryanair traffic from Liverpool to Manchester is overall welcome news to me.

That said, it plays no part in any judgment and it certainly is not my agenda or any other interest to see Liverpool in decline, or any other airport for that matter.

Liverpool was once one of Europe's fastest growing airports and continued to perform particularly well in the early recession years compared to rival airports. Even up until 2011 was a very good year at Liverpool.

But we are getting to a stage now where the vast majority of airports in the UK are seeing quite healthy levels of growth once again but Liverpool has now got 3 consecutive years of decline.

If Liverpool continues to decline at a time of recovery from recession and when other airports are growing, that is as much of a concern to me as the airport's biggest ever fan.

My intention was to in fact highlight the significance of Liverpool's bleak outlook especially when compared to competing airports' and the threats attached. Certainly not to take pleasure in any decline!

[Cleared For A Coffee]

FRatSTN...

Have a day off mate. Get a girlfriend or something. You are one bad, bad, bore.

[TSR2]

Unfortunately I must agree. A thorough and honest appraisal of the current situation. It is difficult to see a reversal of fortunes in the near future.

[Cleared For A Coffee]

TSR.

How's Blackpool doing?

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Excuse me, I should try and comment more balanced on the Manchester and Blackpool threads. Oh wait there, no I shouldn't, because I don't actually care about them airports. After all, why should I?

[StoneyBridge Radar]

Cleared For A Bogeyana Coffee

Give it a break.

Those chips on your shoulders show through in all your various identities across the web.

It's tiresome and childish and incredibly boring.

We get it. You want Liverpool to exist in this happy Utopian bubble and you don't want anyone beyond the city limits daring to comment or make judgement.

We get it, ok. :ugh:

[Mouser]

At the end of the day, Manchester will succeed in its aim to strangle Liverpool.

[airadio]

What an a load of crape from my fellow LJLA Supporters, When are you all going to agree that It has had its day,Manchester is not I repeat not trying to strangle Liverpool in fact they have a very good relation ship.
I have to laugh at the posts on Liverpool metro area and I am ashamed of the so called Scousers on there, I was banned for telling the truth about LJLA on there I am still a member but I no longer post as 99% Of the so called LJLA supporters act like Children

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Lufthansa in talks (not much to see here)...

Liverpool John Lennon Airport and Lufthansa in routes talks - Liverpool Echo (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/business/liverpool-john-lennon-airport-lufthansa-6560439)

And in other news, the worst kept secret ever...

Norwegian Airlines cancels Liverpool John Lennon Airport Copenhagen flights - Liverpool Echo (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/norwegian-airlines-cancels-liverpool-john-6596825)

At least the management seem to be having a go.

[AP1995]

Looks like JetXtra.com may be looking into flights from Liverpool
Champ CyberNews :: Your story (http://www.champnews.com/newsstory.aspx?story=3048004)

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Ryanair to return to growth at Liverpool when new aircraft are delivered?

Ryanair sees further growth at Liverpool John Lennon Airport - Liverpool Echo (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/business/ryanair-sees-further-growth-liverpool-6671733)

Interesting to read RYRs commercial director speak of an easyjet 'abandonment' of the airport, could say the same thing about them...

[DADDY-OH!]

Personally, I think RYR's going to suffer with the rise of Norwegian. There may come a day when MOL's Mafia have to choose between MAN & LPL.

The crews are already defecting in droves. It'll be the pax. next.

[airadio]

May I point out that Norge ceases To fly from Liverpool from March.
God knows where you get the idea that air crew are leaving :{

[highwideandugly]

Hi guys..anyone able to give me a passenger total for the last two years of klm ops. Please?

Across from the dtv thread wher we average about 90k per year and have fears it might be in danger.

[AndyH52]

Highwideandugly. According to stats in the Friends of Liverpool Airport magazine (09/27) KLM carried 129,000 pax in 2010 and 124,000 in 2011 between LPL and Amsterdam. Of course passenger numbers are only part of the picture - yields will be an important factor and at DTV you have the 'benefit' of no competition on the route so yields may not be too bad.

[EI-BUD]

In terms of KLM at Liverpool, yes yield will be an important indicator , but other factors like proportion of transfer pax feeding into long haul at AMS will be relevant and also factors such as impact to neighbouring MAN AMS route which is of significant scale .

[Ringwayman]

this is where it's a pity the CAA stats don't break down per airline per route:

Liverpool-Amsterdam (and vice-versa)

2009 288875
2010 344921
2011 339777
2012 246467

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Passenger numbers up 5% in January. This following December 2013's 2% rise.

New Year traffic growth continues for LJLA - Liverpool John Lennon Airport (http://www.liverpoolairport.com/year-traffic-growth-continues-ljla/)

[airadio]

not forgetting the number of diverts last month that would make up a big slice of that 5% if not more

[TSR2]

Passenger numbers up 5% in January

Lets hope the upward trend continues.

[AndyH52]

airadio, having just checked the January review for Liverpool, there was a grand total of two diversions in January (three if you want to be picky and include a Kingair 350). Those two diverts were EZY A.319s, so 312 pax at most, as opposed to a 5% increase on the 2013 figure of 240k which should come to around 12,000. Still, why let a bit of good news change your general attitude towards LPL...

[Ringwayman]

Diversions aren't normally counted for an airport's monthly total - the CAA "allocates" those passengers to the airport they should have landed.

[Charlie Roy]

Diversions aren't normally counted for an airport's monthly total - the CAA "allocates" those passengers to the airport they should have landed.

Whatever made you think that?

[Mouser]

diverts last month that would make up a big slice of that 5% if not more, airadio THINK!

[Mouser]

12,000 that's roughly 76 A319's, this January. Jesus Christ roughly 39% of Easyjets fleet or 2.5 A319's every day through the whole of January.

[Ringwayman]

Whatever made you think that?


Quite possibly because that is what the CAA says at the bottom of the PDF (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airport_data/201311/Table_12_1_Intl_Air_Pax_Traffic_Route_Analysis.pdf)

"(6) In order to preserve market analysis all identifiable diversions are reallocated to the point of intended operation."

[Suzeman]

Quite possibly because that is what the CAA says at the bottom of the PDF

"(6) In order to preserve market analysis all identifiable diversions are reallocated to the point of intended operation."

That applies to their route analysis in Table 12.1.

But does it also apply to their overall totals as shown in Table 9? Don't see a qualifying note there.

https://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airport_data/201311/Table_09_Terminal_and_Transit_Pax.pdf

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

A very bizarre first post from you there, GaelForce. What offence has been committed by these two contributors to justify a ban? The news items they have posted / discussed may not make happy reading but they are factually correct. Is this a problem for you? And what is your evidence as a new poster on the site to suggest that these two well-established contributors are one and the same person?

Please tell us which sites they have been banned from. I'll be sure to avoid them if they permit only happy-clappy (as opposed to balanced) contributions.

[PPRuNe Pop]

Get back on topic please. No witch hunts.

PPP

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Thomas Cook Scandinavia to operate charter flights from LJLA - Liverpool John Lennon Airport (http://www.liverpoolairport.com/thomas-cook-scandinavia-operate-charter-flights-ljla/)

Flights appear to be on the weekend of Liverpool vs Chelsea.

[GrahamK]

Iberia are to operate 4 charter flights from Valladolid to LPL using A321s on 29th April, 13th May, 27th May and 10th June. Any idea who is chartering these flights? Is there a lot of Beatles fans in that neck of the woods? Or possibly cruise charters?

[lplsprog]

Spanish students charters we understand.

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Just announced in the budget - Grants for new routes from Regional Airports. Specifically mentioned Liverpool but didn't go into any detail.

[IB4138]

To clarify the exact quote is:

And because we want all parts of our country to see better links with the markets of the future we’re going to provide start-up support for new routes from regional airports, like Liverpool, Leeds or indeed Inverness.

[Mouser]

Liverpool Echo today reports that the Peel Group have taken back full control of LJLA with immediate effect from Vantage Airports.

[BasilBush]

I would imagine that Vantage have taken a bath on this. Mind you, their negotiating position against Peel was very weak. With the banks threatening to call in the Liverpool debt (as a result of a covenant breach), Vantage would have been faced with having to put in a large amount of cash. Following the change in strategy of Vantage's investors they no longer have access to such cash. An offer by Peel to take their shares for (presumably) a nominal payment must have seemed the better of two unpalatable alternatives.

[SWBKCB]

what was the covenant breach?

[BasilBush]

I don't know the precise details of the covenant breach (other than that there was one) but it must have been a serious breach to trigger a requirement to repay the debt.

Less serious covenant breaches tend to result in less onerous penalties, such as a block on dividends until a year or so after the breach is remedied. Only serious breaches result in the lender being able to demand immediate repayment, which is the case here.

Of course most lenders are reluctant to implement a demand for immediate repayment, as this could result in them owning the asset, when they are in no practical position to manage it. Hence the 'standstill agreement' at LPL, where the lender gave the airport company time to sort itself out before calling in the loan. In this case, with Vantage being in no position to put in more money, this appears to have led to Peel taking the shares back from Vantage, who were in no position to put up much of a fight. Now that Peel are sole owners again I would expect them to settle with the banks, given Peel's deep pockets. Probably this will involve Peel repaying at least part of the outstanding loan.

Meanwhile the airport carries on operating quite happily.

[eye2eye5]

Movement of the Canadian dollar against sterling over the last 4 years may also suggest that its an opportune time for Vantage to move on. 4 years ago, the rate for the Canadian dollar was circa 1.60 whereas its now 1.85. If for sake of argument they invested £30m in Liverpool (hard to ascertain the value from the consolidated accounts but liabilities did increase significantly in 2010) then to purchase £30m would have cost 48m Can Dollars. If Peel offered say £25m for the shares now then at present exchange rates they would receive 46.25m Can Dollars. In the meantime, they will have been taking dividends. Net loss overall would be allowable against tax. Peel have invested £30m for 4 years and also buy the shares back at a discount. No obvious loser? I think I'm correct in saying that Liverpool made an operating profit of over £5m last year. Going forward, the question is whether that is sufficient ROI for Peel with Liverpool's debt eliminated.

[SWBKCB]

Thanks - so that means we're back to the original position of Peel being the owners of Liverpool, DSA and DTVA?

[BasilBush]

Yes indeed. Meanwhile Vantage will have lost a ton of money (and the lawyers will have made a lot of fees!).

[Bagso]

Interesting analysis from CAPA

Liverpool Airport's struggles to compete with a powerful Manchester neighbour; new airlines needed | CAPA - Centre for Aviation (http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/liverpool-airports-struggles-to-compete-with-a-powerful-manchester-neighbour-new-airlines-needed-166204)

You do the boats (Liverpool)...and we'll do the Trams, Trains and Planes (Manchester) :ok:

[airadio]

More bad news for Liverpool Ryan drop 25weekly departures but add 28 to Manchester.
on another point and another forum the same old school boys are still after all I said, and what is now coming to fruition they still think Liverpool will survive dream on my friends I do hope it willsurvive but it's getting increasingly doubtful.no mater how you look at it

[eye2eye5]

Airadio

What period of time are you referring to? If Winter 2014 then Ryanair departures from Liverpool are 6 per week down on Winter 2013. If Summer 2014 then the transfer of one airframe from Liverpool to Manchester was widely reported a good 6 months ago. Please keep your posts factual, there is no need to resort to calling posters "schoolboys".

[barry lloyd]

the same old school boys

...which is a bit rich from someone who clearly has no concept of punctuation.

Bagso:

Boats will go on a ship, but ships will not go on a boat What is the difference between a boat and a ship? | Notes and Queries | guardian.co.uk (http://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-197783,00.html) -which is how the Manchester Ship Canal got it's name.

The ability for cruise ships to call at Liverpool was only granted after a hard-won battle against Southampton(!).
BBC News - Southampton objects to Liverpool cruise industry's 'unfair' advantage (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-18159596)


As I'm sure you're aware, Liverpool has an underground railway system,
Merseyrail Network Map (http://www.merseyrail.org/_common/map/networkmap.htm)
which, amongst other things, runs under the River Mersey, so trams are not a lot of use in this case.


eye2eye5:

This is the correct definition of an airframe:

The airframe of an aircraft is its mechanical structure. It is typically considered to include fuselage, wings and undercarriage and and exclude the propulsion system

As for the airports, well really I've never understood the problem. I've worked at both and they have their own pros and cons, and frankly anyone who makes comparisons between the two is comparing apples with oranges.

A little more accuracy all round would perhaps make this thread a better read.

[airadio]

I rest my case the the information regarding Ryan is freely available and relates to Summer 2014

[chris789]

Each and every airport's page on this forum are for people who are passionate about the airport and wish to discuss its issues in a balanced way.

When comments come off as nothing other than gloating in an airport's problems, then it smells of trolling and does nothing to increase the debate. I have confidence that Liverpool airport will not cease to exist in the near future.

Now, if you wish to go and congratulate Manchester airport in the success of additional Ryanair flights, then go for it on the Manchester pages: I'm sure it will go down well. However, if you do concentrate on Liverpool, at least try to add some considered thought to your posts; and dare I say, use grammar correctly.

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Blue Air to commence 3x weekly service to Bucharest from 15th December.

Blue Air to commence North West?s only scheduled service to Bucharest with direct flights from LJLA - Liverpool John Lennon Airport (http://www.liverpoolairport.com/blue-air-commence-north-wests-scheduled-service-bucharest-direct-flights-ljla/)

[Ian Brooks]

Just wait for one of the other operators to step on them now as they are not the most prosperous airline but I still wish them good luck

Ian

[adfly]

In all fairness to Blue Air they do seem to have held their own from Luton, despite the competition from Wizz.

[eggc]

LPL needs new carriers. Good news and hope it works out.

[chris789]

Let's hope nobody tells Daily Mail readers that there is a new route from Romania to the UK!

I wouldn't be surprised if Wizzair starts in competition to drive them off the route, or even Ryanair at an outside chance. I hope not, as I think diversity is what LPL needs now.

What are the other carriers/routes you think LPL should be targeting at the moment?
- Vueling? I think there is higher chance that they pick MAN, as they do prefer larger airports, but they serve Cardiff and Liverpool has to be a bigger markets than that.
- Aer Lingus/Regional? I know they have tried before and are up against Ryanair, but surely there must be demand for a connecting airline with flights to the US (with immigration pre clearance at Dublin)
- Norwegian? Perhaps an Oslo route would make more sense than their short lived CPH route. If Ryanair can make Rygge work, then surely a better placed airport would be attractive
- Air Transat? AC Rouge? I think a summer service to Toronto would be a decent seller. If BFS can sustain Canada flights, then I believe there may be a market for both LPL and MAN flights.
- WOW Air? Given the large EZY announcement for new regional routes to KEF left LPL out, perhaps WOW could offer the route as a way of getting in on the North West action without going head to head with Icelandair and EZY at MAN

I would love to see a network carrier link LPL to the world, but to be honest, if KLM couldn't make LPL work, I just can't see Air France or Lufthansa starting flights.

Thoughts?

[lfc84]

terminal deserted on bbc news discussing security. live a few minutes ago, very quiet terminal

[EZYPZY]

Didn't Wizzair give Bucharest a try from Liverpool a few years ago? Didn't last too long if my memory serves me correctly. Let's hope Blue Air have better luck! :ok:

[DomyDom]

Great news for LPL. I was hoping that MAN would get this route however the more choice from the North-West the better. Its also nice to see Liverpool getting some new routes for a change. Good luck with it and congratulations!

[eye2eye5]

Thank you, Domy Dom. It's good indeed to see additional routes to the North West and whilst I'm delighted to see Saudia, Rouge etc at Manchester it is sensible to see new routes at Liverpool as well. If we can gain co operation rather than anhiallation between the two airports then maybe we can leverage the best outcomes.

[LN-KGL]

chris789:
- Norwegian? Perhaps an Oslo route would make more sense than their short lived CPH route. If Ryanair can make Rygge work, then surely a better placed airport would be attractive

Let's start with your last sentence first. Ryanair flies to Sandefjord Torp (TRF) on the west side of the Oslo Fjord from LPL, not Moss Rygge (RYG).

Now to your first sentence: Norwegian has for a few years flown to the most sensible airport in the North West, MAN, with flights from ARN, OSL and SVG. But I guess you won't see DY fly to MAN from CPH since they try to avoid being the third airline on a route.

[DomyDom]

Eye2eye5,
Well said and I think that is the future for our region to get the best outcome for all of us. Strength in numbers and diversity as well!
All the best,
DomyDom

[FRatSTN]

One extra flight per week to Warsaw next summer. Also Katowice, Riga and Vilnius are now in the drop down menu but don't seem to be any flights bookable. Possible new routes as well??


Edit: Riga is on sale, 2x weekly from APR24.

[Cleared For A Coffee]

LJLA have today announced a change in leadership. The new CEO is Andrew Cornish who is the former MD of Manchester Airport and was recently chief customer and brand officer at Aer Lingus.

Change in leadership at Liverpool John Lennon Airport - Liverpool John Lennon Airport (http://www.liverpoolairport.com/change-leadership-liverpool-john-lennon-airport/)

[FRatSTN]

And looks as if the new CEO is going to have quite a challenge looking at the Ryanair Schedule for Summer 2015:


In June 2015 there is currently:


4 based aircraft
27 destinations
103 weekly return flights


With the exception of a few gaps in the day, the schedule does firmly reflect a 4 aircraft base, which is one less than this year.


However I've had a glance at August 2015 and it looks a bit bulkier so maybe a 5th aircraft by then but haven't looked properly yet.


Shannon as expected will not continue next summer. Also... quite a few other destinations including Ibiza, Kos, Nimes, Rhodes and Reus look as if they will only operate in August for 2015!!


FR still look to have 7 a/c in MAN next summer but as it stands is an increase in the number weekly flights.


Either way, really not looking too good for LPL.

[Bagso]

Do you have the breakdown for the RYR Manchester Summer scheds ?

If you can post on MAN thread:D we would be interested

[eye2eye5]

FR at STN

Given your subsequent qualification of Manchester's potential requirement for 2015 (assisted by A N Other) is it possible that the Liverpool requirement is also higher than you estimate? As an example, Reus appears to be an August only outlier at both airports. Having an August only peak doesn't appear to be a Ryanair pattern I am familiar with.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Reus (and Girona) are something of a special case as RYR are rapidly expanding operations at the main Barcelona El Prat Airport. These are worrying times for nearby Reus and Girona.

[eye2eye5]

Ryanair spokesman is stating 5 based aircraft for 2015. Same number of routes as 2014, a couple of increases in rotations but loss of Shannon results in 50k less passengers.

Ryanair could add extra flights for Liverpool FC Champions League games - Liverpool Echo (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/business/ryanair-could-add-extra-flights-7742107)

[eye2eye5]

And whilst rather lacking in substance, the latest article in the Echo appears to suggest that Ryanair are committed to growth at Liverpool, the main stumbling block being aircraft availability. This should be rectified as new deliveries are made. Note that again, Liverpool and Manchester are seen as separate markets.

Ryanair committed to John Lennon Airport and vows to return to growth - Liverpool Echo (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/business/ryanair-committed-john-lennon-airport-7770722)

[FRatSTN]

FR will allocate their new deliveries to where they think they can make the best returns and as they have said, LPL is not that place for them at the moment. There's nothing to say they won't put more aircraft into LPL in the future.


MAN and LPL are separate markets but due to the geography, the catchment area overlaps quite substantially. MAN is where they are putting growth into at the moment so understandably LPL is not going to be their next priority for growth.


At least they are able to pretty much maintain the size of their operation in LPL whilst putting growth into MAN unlike certain airlines who only seem to cannibalise one airport at the expense of growth at another.


When you look at the north or north-west region overall (including say LPL, MAN, LBA) FR has brought a fantastic amount of growth over the last few years.

[eye2eye5]

Absolutely. The positive slant in the piece is the acknowledgement that demand exists and confirmation that the airline has a good relationship (ie pricing) with the airport. Whilst MAN may get the lion's share of additional short term growth, further routes from Liverpool have not been ruled out.

[AndyH52]

FRatSTN, I freely admit I am being a bit pedantic here, but where exactly has Ryanair said that Liverpool is not the place for them at the moment? Can you post a link...?

[FRatSTN]

AndyH52


No problem. About half way through the article:


Ryanair set for major growth at Manchester Airport | Insider Media Ltd (http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/north-west/123045-ryanair-set-major-growth-manchester-airport/)

[d4ky]

I don't think Ryanair or Easyjet is the real issue


The issue is the lack of airline choice at Liverpool.


How popular was Shannon at Liverpool? If it was, perhaps 1 of the 4x Manchester Air Lingus services that are leaving to be replaced by the 1x larger Ryanair flight can potentially move to Liverpool


Theres various routes such as Gatwick which Manchester lost, Cardiff. Bournemouth etc that Liverpool could gain domestically


As for European perhaps Blue Air will add more destinations in the future

[deecie]

Does anybody know why Dublin is no longer bookable for next summer?


Thanks.

[Cleared For A Coffee]

All the Summer 2015 schedule has been taken down. Probably just having a reshuffle of the summer schedule. I'd imagine they will be back up soon.

[eye2eye5]

Ryanair schedules appear to be back online. Unsure as to whether there are any changes.

[AndyH52]

Expansion from Blue Air already. Before their Bucharest route has even started the airline's website is showing an additional twice weekly flight to Bacau starting 29 March 2015, operating from Bacau Tue / Sat, returning Wed / Sun.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Security queues at LPL offer a comparable experience to those at MAN. All passengers there are processed through one terminal and RYR/EZY flight programmes have periods of bunching resulting in peaky throughput, similar to what you see at MAN. The number of channels and staff deployed are tailored to the size of the airport and anticipated demand. LPL passenger traffic is drawn almost entirely from the no-frills sector so the service levels provided are geared to the demands of the low cost model. Last time I checked, LPL had a scheme whereby passengers who wanted a quick transit of security could pay an additional fee to use an express channel. Otherwise, waiting times are comparable to those in similar airport terminals elsewhere.

[TSR2]

officially a 25 minute queue

Have only used Liverpool once and it took 50 mins to clear security despite the airport being very quiet.

[AndyH52]

TSR2 I have flown through LPL many times and it has never taken me anywhere near that long to get through security. Was your experience before or after the 'new' security area opened? My last time through LPL security in September took about 6 minutes and to be fair my last experience of MAN T1 security wasn't too bad either. Having said that a colleague and her 3 traveling companions too almost 90 minutes to get through T1 for a morning departure this August.

[Mouser]

Some fella TSR2 I think, saying his one time through Liverpool took 50 mins, Well with great delight I'd to share my experience on arrival late last night from Marrkech at this Wonderful Manchester Airport it took me over ONE HOUR yep! over ONE HOUR to get me baggage, but it was 01.30am and busy NOT!

[Mouser]

Easyjet need to have a serious talk to Menzies.

[LAX_LHR]

Mouser,


While your dislike of MAN has been made clear on more than one occasion,
I fail to see why the fact someone (not even a regular supporter of MAN at that) with a dissatisfaction of LPL requires such a blasting of MAN.


How about I re-balance this again by saying that I arrived last Monday on a 100% full long haul flight, along with 6 other arrivals within 10 minutes of my flight into the same terminal as you (T1), took just 50 minutes from landing to pulling away in the car?


Funny how most of these 'long queues and awful experiences' experiences I see here, and other forums, come from the LPL contingent, couldn't possibly have an agenda, could you/they?!? #justsaying

[LAX_LHR]

Mouser,


I can assure you I am not lying, its a case of you throwing your toys out of the prams because an inconvenient truth got in the way of your little rant.


As for 'hate the greedy cotton town, MAN vs LPL', dear me, grow up and let it go, its an airport, not life or death!

[The96er]

Easyjet need to have a serious talk to Menzies.

Easyjet are well aware of how little they're actually paying for ground handling !

[TSR2]

This fella TSR2, experienced a 50 minute delay in clearing security on departure, not arrival.

[Mouser]

I think I said THROUGH!!! Liverpool took 50 mins, no mention of departure or arrive.

[Richard Taylor]

Jesus this is worse than EDI v GLA...

[AndyH52]

...and very fortunate LAX_LHR that the poor experiences never happen to you... #justsaying...

[LAX_LHR]

Andy H52

Given the amount of miles flown, must be very very lucky.

Then again, things tend not to hack you off as much when you dont have an agenda.

On a serious note, when you go into something with the mindset such as mouser has, then maybe you notice more bad than good, i mean, when you are already pissed off that you have been forced to use an airport you hate, then it wouldnt take much more to really hack you off.

Negativity breeds negativity.

[Ian Brooks]

LAX How very true, start with a smile and your half way there:ok:

Ian

[Rawtenstall]

I must say, its hard to smile when arriving back to a cold and wet Liverpool just before midnight, and having to queue up in a cattle shed that is exposed to the elements before joining the passport queue inside.

Couldn't they at least put some patio heaters in that outside queueing area?

[Mouser]

I was stating that over one hour for baggage at a quite time at an Airport is unacceptable, btw my daughter in employed/based at Man, and I will be flying Manchester-Oslo in Jan.Hatred does not come in to it.

[LAX_LHR]

Mouser,


If you are disgruntled at a wait for baggage, then fine, everyone is entitled to their gripes. MAN is not perfect, but then again, neither is LPL.


However, my main points against you were bringing MAN into a thread that quite frankly didn't warrant it (I mean, a non Manc resident complaining about LPL must mean in some minds that a MAN slagging is due?!?).


My second gripe was you calling me a liar for stating my arrival journey was around 50 minutes. How you could possibly make that judgement from your armchair is beyond me, but hey ho, maybe you are right, maybe my journey through MAN was well over 1 hour, but just so happened to have invented time travel in the process? Who knows?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Richard Taylor / All,

It was never my intention to be part of a LPL v MAN debate on this thread. My 2nd Nov posting which appears to launch all the debate on here was actually a response to Ernest Lancs post 138 on the Blackpool thread. Whilst my posting has been moved here (presumably by the mods?) Ernest's original posting is still over on the Blackpool thread. With all context and narrative now removed, the assumption on the Liverpool thread is that a 'red flag' has been waved at contributors here.

Some of the other Blackpool responses have popped up on here, some on the Manchester thread, but also with the original context left behind. Thus we now have confusion and antagonism raging across three different threads with out-of-context postings appearing provocative.

The subject is probably best closed at this point. I'm sure Ernest has found all his responses across the three threads by now!

No doubt the mods never intended to spark a war of words based upon misunderstanding. Unintended consequences and all that.

[Ernest Lanc's]

Shed-on-a-Pole



It was never my intention to be part of a LPL v MAN debate on this thread. My
2nd Nov posting which appears to launch all the debate on here was actually a
response to Ernest Lancs post 138 on the Blackpool thread. Whilst my posting has
been moved here (presumably by the mods?) Ernest's original posting is still
over on the Blackpool thread. With all context and narrative now removed, the
assumption on the Liverpool thread is that a 'red flag' has been waved at
contributors here.


Yes post #138 is still up on the Blackpool thread.

I was simply making a point that Blackpool was an easy airport to use in comparison to MAN.

I presume my post is still on the BLK thread, as my post were critical of arrival at MAN and not Liverpool.

My only mention of Liverpool was to say I would try it. as I have used it before and found it an easy airport.

IMO replies to my post(s) should have stayed on the BLK thread, as they were not aimed at or relevant to the Liverpool thread.



Some of the other Blackpool responses have popped up on here, some on the
Manchester thread, but also with the original context left behind. Thus we now
have confusion and antagonism raging across three different threads with
out-of-context postings appearing provocative.


I agree with Shed-on-a-Pole -There was no intention by anyone to have a pop at Liverpool and best ended. I raised a point, MAN supporters responded and posts end up on Liverpool thread. Not intended.

[FFHKG]

FlyBe have announced that they are going to operate 3X daily weekdays from Belfast City to LPL, with 1X daily at w/e starting February 2nd.

[eggc]

Blue Airs first service today :ok:

[ib26uk]

Liverpool Airport closed due to snow...

Liverpool Airport closed due to snow - ITV News (http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-12-26/liverpool-airport-closed-due-to-snow/)

[eggc]

LPL tweeted sometime ago it's open again :ok:

[lurkio]

That probably means that they have cleared the approach roads and the red no stopping markings are visible so they can "legitimately" fine you for stopping. The matter of letting aircraft fly - well that's probably a whole 'nother matter.

1st SNOCLO of the year in the country?

[Suzeman]

1st SNOCLO of the year in the country?

EMA was SNOCLO at about the same time but re-opened for a couple of hours and then SNOCLO again and still is

[paully]

Lurkio

LOL :D:D.....

[AndyH52]

Flybe increasing Belfast City - Liverpool frequency from 17 to 23 per week from the end of March.

[Beafer]

Wonder why Peel owner J. Whittaker has left the Peel Liverpool Airport board last month after joining it in the summer? Shares anyone...
Director appointments listed at the bottom of the page.
PEEL AIRPORTS (LIVERPOOL) LIMITED. Free business summary taken from official Companies House information. Free Alerts. Registered as 02385999 (http://companycheck.co.uk/company/02385999)

[lplsprog]

Peel Airports are nothing to do with Liverpool Airport. LPL was part of Peel Airports until Vancouver Airport Services took over, since they have left LPL is now on its own and has not gone back into the Peel Airports Group but is owned by Peel Holdings..

[j636]

Ryanair are resuming Oslo (3 weekly) again! Increasing flights to Krakow and Dublin while they report record bookings.

http://corporate.ryanair.com/news/news/150204-record-bookings-on-ryanair-s-liverpool-summer-2015-schedule/?market=en

[kieb92]

CSA Airlines starting 2 weekly Prague to Liverpool on an A319. Will be their only service to the UK:

CSA Czech Airlines Continues Europe Expansion in S15 | Airline Route (http://airlineroute.net/2015/02/05/ok-s15update2/)

[CabinCrewe]

not convinced by economics of this.... will be interesting to see how that goes....

[eggc]

Good news another carrier at LPL, but its a bit of a random one from CSA and not what you'd expect from them, but lets see and hope it works.

[Ribble56]

Blue Air's Bacau inaugural service tonite its Bucharest service apparently figures above expectation, CSA Prague service to come, and now Flybe x3 daily to Amsterdam, is Liverpool starting to that corner and the start of pax figures trending back up ?

[AndyH52]

Airport is reporting an 8% increase for March compared to the previous March - almost 323,000 for the month. They are expecting positive growth for the rest of the year.

[paully]

Just a little snap shot I know, but stayed overnight recently in the Airport Hotel and got a birds eye view of the car parks.They were pretty full, to say the least, albeit space available at the furthest end from the terminal..Even IPark was very busy.This was in March, out of season.It certainly bears out the increase in passengers..

Well done, great airport to pass through, even if some do complain about the state of the carpets :bored:

[kcockayne]

Ribble56

I certainly hope that EGGP is starting to "turn the corner"; although I have serious doubts about the longevity of the BEE EHAM service !

[gavinhicks]

How is the flybe Belfast city route performing

[eye2eye5]

4887 carried in February according to CAA provisional statistics, which is pretty much bang on the Flybe expectation of 60k per annum.

[Rawtenstall]

It would be great if FLYBE and Easyjet passengers transferring from Belfast and IOM could connect airside, instead of having to walk half a mile around the airport and face another queue at LPL security, and a second pat-down in the space of under an hour.

Now that really would improve the customer experience. But I'm not holding my breath.

[OneBellEnd]

Less than 5k passengers in a month on BE BHD is about one third full according to the route schedule. Hope there are some deluxe fares on there!

[salute]

It was only its first month with 134 flights planned, Which gives it 36.5 per flight or 47% ,They must be reasonably pleased with the start as they have upped the schedule for the summer.

It will be fine.

[lfc84]

Connecting at LPL
It would be great if FLYBE and Easyjet passengers transferring from Belfast and IOM could connect airside, instead of having to walk half a mile around the airport and face another queue at LPL security, and a second pat-down in the space of under an hour.

Now that really would improve the customer experience. But I'm not holding my breath.

EDIT:

I have just entered IOM-AMS 10 Oct and the flybe.com website reported this option via LPL: Dep 09:20 Arr 14:20 BE603, BE1293

Airside transfer would be a wonderful improvement

[gavinhicks]

Good news about aer lingus starting Dublin route, management at lpl are doing good work in terms of new routes and extensions from all operating airlines lpl has great potential with aer lingus and the onward connections to the USA

[Ian Brooks]

It`s going to be a bloodbath EI 2 daily and FR 4 daily in LPL
plus both EI and FR upto 6 daily ex MAN and BHX, that is a lot of capacity
to fill
April this year was LPL 27285, MAN 67656, BHX 64552 and LBA 25394
so 185000 approx in 1 month from 4 airports and another 62000 approx seats added amonth this winter WOW

Ian

[eye2eye5]

I tend to agree with you, Ian.

Interesting to look at the 5 year trend though:

Liverpool. 2009 283k. 2014 276k.

Manchester 2009 655k. 2014 756k.

Liverpool (no competition) net loss of 7k.
Manchester (both Aer Lingus and Ryanair in competition) net gain 101k.

Note that Ryanair is due to operate less LPL- DUB flights in either June or July than in February. In part that may be due to less football traffic.....but it does look odd.

[eggc]

DUB - MAN/LPL is such a short hop I'd struggle to see how money could be lost to any great extent.

Good news for LPL to regain EIN and access to their network.

[EI-BUD]

Liverpool. 2009 283k. 2014 276k.

The irony of DUB LPL is that the number have always been so much smaller than Belfast to Liverpool. BFS LPL carries up to 30K pax a month and is one of easyJet's busiest sectors, and now there is also a Flybe BHD LPL service at x4 daily.

While I get that there are direct ferries Dublin Liverpool, the frequency of flights on the route have always surprised me. Aer Lingus will be challenged for every passenger on this route as they were in their last attempt on the route. While the point to point traffic will be challenging, they must surely have crunched the numbers on the transatlantic piece ex LPL and in comparison to other routes for EIR like LBA BRS CWL etc. so my guess is that they will on balance make this work.... if not then surely EIR will be called in on what can be a more sustainable footing from a cost perspective.

When do the 319's leave the fleet?? Is the date confirmed?

[eye2eye5]

FR are rather exposed in today's Echo. They have announced increases in frequency as noted above, citing overwhelming demand. However, the Echo notes that frequency has been reduced to 2 per day for June and July when demand in summer months should be greater. Note that these flights aren't at the most convenient times either (return to LPL due in at 23.00). Note that MAN retains 4/5 per day frequency throughout June and July........competition does tend to concentrate the mind!

[All names taken]

I wouldn't get too excited at the prospect of the mythical pre-clearance facility at Dublin. I have tried it once, having believed all the hype. and I didn't really see much benefit TBH.

Once you have an ESTA and are not using it for the first time, immigration at the US's main airports is now becoming a doddle. Or if you're Global Entry registered it's an even bigger doddle.

The people who will benefit most are the one-off point to point tourists who are looking for the absolute bargain bucket fares - and for that try the non-stops from Thomas Cook from your local airport.
If you're a returning ESTA or Global Entry ie a regular (read higher yield) pax, you'd be mad to go through Dublin.

[GaelForce]

I use the US GOES ('Global Entry' facility NEXUS) and find the DUB USBPA pre-clearance at Dublin to be a very convenient service. Instead of waiting in a long, time consuming line-up at a US gateway airport, then having to get to the domestic terminal, praying your bags have made it also and worrying about them the rest of the journey, I am in the area I need to be to make that connection. Remember, your bags will not be boarded until you are confirmed admitted to the USA. And your description of the acceptance and admittance by emigration procedure, at the gateway airport, as being a "doddle" does seem a little fanciful, in my experience. It isn't even a "doddle" using NEXUS facility on land crossing where there is a separate vehicle lane and entry booth.

PS: The one-offs travelling on ABC's won't likely care about pre-clearance, not having, for the most part, to concern themselves with on-ward connections.

[eye2eye5]

Passenger growth continues with 7.5% increase in May - Liverpool John Lennon Airport (http://www.liverpoolairport.com/passenger-growth-continues-7-5-increase/)

[GaelForce]

RE: Dublin US pre-clearance facility:
I was just enjoying a conversation over coffee and a donut with a management employee of the USCBPA. I was asking about the pre-clearance of airline passengers at foreign departure points. She told me that it is the airline(s) who pay for this service and, it is, for the most part, regular scheduled carriers with extensive interline or code sharing agreements and many onward travelling passengers who benefit the most from the procedure. They (airlines) schedule closer arrival and departure times, due to the pre-clearance of connecting of both passengers and their baggage. Charter type passengers wouldn't benefit much from the system and, the airlines they use wouldn't want to pay the extra fee for giving their customers this extra service.

The cost doesn't just entail the USCBPA having an area at an airport but also their accommodation in the foreign country and, believe it or not, the salary of the agents + out of pocket expenses for same and all re-location costs. The US government will accommodate most requests for "off-shore" clearance but, won't pay for it.

[LAX_LHR]

Flybe increase both BHD and IOM by 1 daily flight each this winter.

Good to see the 2 north west airports bounce back to such great levels. I suspect the level of growth LPL is starting to see again should help it bounce back to the 5m mark reasonably quickly.

Its particularly encouraging that LPL now has a good range of airlines now, rather tan solely reliant on wizz/Ryanair and Easyjet.While the latter 2 are still the dominant carriers, I suspect that LPL is no longer held to ransom by them like in the past.

[easyflyer83]

Whilst the portfolio of airlines has increased, the percentage of total weekly departures is still overwhelmingly skewed towards EZY and FR. I think your comment is a little premature.

[LAX_LHR]

Hence why I said EZY/FR are still the dominant carriers in my post......

[easyflyer83]

I was referring to your comment about LPL no longer being held to ransom simply because of a few more weekly flights by a few more carriers.

[AndyH52]

Whilst the portfolio of airlines has increased, the percentage of total weekly departures is still overwhelmingly skewed towards EZY and FR. I think your comment is a little premature.

For Winter 15/16 roughly 70% of weekly flights will be by U2 or FR so quite sizeable. However this is down from around 85% for W14/15. The two major carrier's programmes are of similar size to last winter so the drop in overall share is testament to the good work being done by the New management team.

[j636]

has easyjet always beien 3 daily (M-F) on AMS for winter or is it a response to Flybe?

[AndyH52]

has easyjet always beien 3 daily (M-F) on AMS for winter or is it a response to Flybe?

Does look as though they have upped frequency as LPL - AMS was previously showing as 15 flights pwk. Now looking like 18 (only 1 fly on Sa, 2 on Su)

[j636]

PRG service delayed until 17 July

[stab3.5up]

Czech pulled the ork programme as well

[AerRyan]

I thought PRG was pulled completely from LPL and not delayed?

[eye2eye5]

Rumours of its demise were greatly exaggerated...........

[Ringwayman]

"greatly exaggerated" by which you means CSA's social media department made a tremendous error by stating the flights were pulled. Hardly surprising that it gets picked up and broadcast as "fact" as it's not Tom, Dick or Harry that's saying it. That the launch date keeps being pushed back is slightly disconcerting if the LPL bosses insist there are substantial numbers of local passengers using other services; the likes of U2 and LS will be happy that the route didn't start on time!

[paully]

You can argue these trivial issues till the cows come home...Its still a very nice airport to transit through, you are at least made to feel human and welcome. Going there on Wednesday and looking forward to it. Which is not something that comes to mind for other, maybe larger, airports in the region :(

[FFHKG]

Totally agree. Went through 12 days ago.... friendly, cheerful security at 6.00am, and even friendly smiling UKBA staff on my return. OK, there was a bit of a queue and not all desks manned but certainly much better attitude than UKBA at LHR and even LBA

[eye2eye5]

Strong growth again in June - up 9.3% on same period last year.

Passenger growth continues at Liverpool Airport - Liverpool John Lennon Airport (http://www.liverpoolairport.com/passenger-growth-continues-liverpool-airport/)

[eye2eye5]

July is being reported as being up by 6.93% to 431k passengers, YTD being the highest since 2012.

[conradmueller]

Only Friday sees 3 Easyjet flights to Amsterdam, Tuesdays to Thursdays have been cut to 1 evening flight. Probably a response to the Flybe flights.

[AndyH52]

Easyjet has reduced AMS during August for a few years now in order to add capacity on sun routes. BE Don't start the route until next month so can't see a link, to be honest.

[conradmueller]

I'm talking about the winter timetable, f.e. November.

[eye2eye5]

I suggest you check again Conrad. Most days see 3 easyJet flights LPL AMS (except weekends).

[lfc84]

the airport has a smoking area within departures. it's struck me that i would be really, really unhappy to be sat on a plane next to somone who stinks of ciggies because they have had a smoke 10 minutes before boarding the plane.

thankfully this hasn't happened but it's an unfortunate downside for the non smokers.

nothing to stop someone having a ciggarettte landside but at least the time between smoking and embarking would be a bit longer.

[eggc]

I don't like sitting near people who stink of beer, but I'd never suggest closing bars airside.

Actual passive smoking and not wanting it is fair enough, but this anti-smoking thing is going far too far when I see people say they don't like to smell it on people, I might not like your aftershave !!

Airports should have smoking areas for those that wish to smoke.

I am a non smoker by the way.

[dancava]

Not only stinking of beer but being drunk and impeding my exit in the event of an emergency is a much bigger concern than someone who has had a fag. How many passenger fly drunk and get away with it?!

Its about time Liverpool got a smoking area to deter those who break the rules of smoking in a public toilet airside.

I am sorry but I am in support of this also.

[lplsprog]

LPL has a smoking area near gate 42.

[gavinhicks]

Anyone know how the Prague route is performing how long is left in the programme for this year will it return next year

[lplsprog]

Figures suggest around 54% load factor on the route with little or no publicity I'm not surprised.

[LAX_LHR]

It probably didn't help the route when the start date kept getting pushed back, and the customer services team accidentally telling people the route had been cancelled!

[AndyH52]

Airport confirming that a new "long term" financing package has been put in place by Peel. Will support further investment in passenger facilities.

[eye2eye5]

Another new route from Flybe, with a daily rotation to Edinburgh with effect from late October.

[lplsprog]

Plus additional flights on Isle of Man and Belfast.(George Best):)

[eggc]

Must be doing well, pleasing to see :)

[eye2eye5]

Czech will resume the Liverpool to Prague route in March, currently bookable to the end of October 2016.

[LAX_LHR]

What's happened to Ryanair at Liverpool?

Next summer, the schedule looks to be decimated!?

Lots of routes stating 'no flights' versus the 'sold out' to signify they will be loaded at some point. Notably Kos, Rohodes and all the French routes showing no flights, Tenerife down to a meagre 2 weekly and Gran Canaria just 1 weekly.

So far, the schedules fit well within a 3 aircraft base, no sign of a need for 4 based at the moment.

Has the relationship soured? S16 looks to be Ryanairs smallest schedule at Liverpool for a long time?

[eye2eye5]

I concur that 3 based aircraft looks most likely. However, note that the 4 per day Dublin now appears to be via Dublin based aircraft (in itself a risk). French routes appear to have been sacrificed which I assume fits in with the business model moving away from smaller destinations - but in the process losing subsidy? Tenerife and Gran Canaria rotations are laughable but more in line with position when the fifth August aircraft was not operational. As I have posted elsewhere, interesting times for FR as they seem more inclined to go head to head with rival carriers (eg versus easyJet on Copenhagen to Luton, EI from Amsterdam to Dublin). They have deep reserves, but if individual carriers chose to stick up to them as easyJet are doing at Luton, there could be bottom line implications. They will not be getting any concessions at AMS - time to start shorting their stock could be on the horizon!

[Jamie2k9]

However, note that the 4 per day Dublin now appears to be via Dublin based aircraft (in itself a risk).

Why's that?

I'm sure lots will change between now and January for summer 2016, some good and bad.

[eye2eye5]

The risk in using a Dublin based aircraft, Jamie, is that it's very easy to drop a rotation and to use it for other destinations.

[Jamie2k9]

The risk in using a Dublin based aircraft, Jamie, is that it's very easy to drop a rotation and to use it for other destinations.

Any reduction would happen whichever base is operating, I expect the increase capacity to LPL/MAN/BHX to be cut peak seasons both sides of the water.

Anyway its Aer Lingus forcing their hand in regard to schedules.

In fact you may even see a lot of the UK capacity start to fall away early 2016 like happened earlier this year.

[Ribble56]

Looks like you can progress a booking Liverpool - Barcelona with Vueling s16 x3 Sun, Weds, Fri.?

[j636]

With possible cuts by FR how are EZY looking next year?

The addition of Vueling can only be a positive thing and will bring to 9 airlines serving the airport in 2016.

[eye2eye5]

Blue Air have announced Liverpool to Cluj, taking the number of Romanian destinations up to three. Vueling are bringing forward their Barcelona service by operating a series of five flights over Christmas and New Year.

[Ribble56]

Maybe with Ryanair slowly reducing its services, other operators may consider looking at Liverpool, Czech Airlines, Vueling, Blue Air, Aer Lingus, have dipped to toes into the water, and with Flybe adding new services, maybe more to come who Know's!

[paully]

Hope you are right, great airport to travel through :ok:...The more choices the merrier ;)

[eggc]

Seems it is needed as RYR continue to switch services to MAN, with Bratislava being announced as switching this morning with rumour of 2 Greek routes to follow.

Wizz is proving to be a bit of a disappointment, I'm sure they could do more at LPL, hope they have expansion there in the pipeline.

[j636]

Kos and Rhodes are operating for summer 2016.

[Ribble56]

Liverpool- Bratislava route 94% load factor, it makes you wonder, lookes like that's not good enough for Ryanair, maybe inducements are behind Ryanair's decision to move.

[Sholto Douglas]

Please remember though that load factors do not give a real answer as to how a route is performing.

A route could have a 100% load factor but might only be selling at very low fares. If the route is unprofitable then the high loads are immaterial.

[eggc]

I think that is a given and fairly obvious, MAG and RYR are heavily involved with each other with huge RYR ops across STN, MAN and EMA. It's an uphill battle faced with such a relationship for LPL with RYR it seems,

EZY are not far behind, adding new units, and routes, at MAN in 2016 in far greater extent than LPL, but at least they seem not to be directly transferring routes from LPL.

This makes all these new carriers and routes all the more important, of which there has been quite a few recently. It was not long back that LPL had just EZY and RYR, so to get to 9 carriers is fabulous work.

Quite a fuss being made on LPL twitter of Flybe and Aer Lingus routes, both can really help offset the seemed lack of commitment from EZY and RYR.

[Ribble56]

Yes we know how it works its not 94% of rock bottom fares is it, its simple as the plane fills up it gets more expensive, so 94% at LPL will yield roughly the same elsewhere.

[Curious Pax]

Yes we know how it works its not 94% of rock bottom fares is it, its simple as the plane fills up it gets more expensive, so 94% at LPL will yield roughly the same elsewhere.

I think you've just demonstrated that you don't know how it works. The likes of RYR have complex software tracking and predicting sales on a given route, and so the 100th seat on the same route may have been sold for a different price on every flight. Add in the fact that you are talking about different airports (MAN/LPL) and the waters are muddied even further.

Bottom line is that MAN, LPL and RYR are not charities, nor do they make decisions based on whether MAN or LPL is sexier, or has more hunky spotters. In this particular case RYR have decided that over a certain period they can make more money operating the route from MAN than from LPL. There may be a 'new route' incentive (I forget if MAN-Bratislava has been served before), but that works both ways - most people believe that is why Norwegian operated LPL-CPH instead of MAN-CPH despite their other routes to NW England being to MAN.

[Ribble56]

Yes of course fares vary, but back to basics as the plane fills up it becomes more expensive, doesn't matter what the route is, the quote was "A route could have a 100% load factor but might only be selling at very low fares. If the route is unprofitable then the high loads are immaterial" 100% LF at very low fares doesn't happen.

[chaps1954]

If they have flight that is only half full it can just to get some bums in seats and bring a bit of revue in

Ian

[FRatSTN]

EZY are not far behind, adding new units, and routes, at MAN in 2016 in far greater extent than LPL, but at least they seem not to be directly transferring routes from LPL.

I think if you looked over a longer period, ie 3 or 4 years, you'd see that EZY are by far the bigger offender of expanding one airport at the other's expense. This has been the case at a number of places and LPL v MAN is no different.

Go back to around 2011/12, EZY had 10 a/c at LPL and about 6 or 7 in MAN. FR had I think 8 at LPL but nothing in MAN. Jump forward to 2015/6 and what a difference! Overall, EZY are not much bigger than they were 3 or 4 years ago.

The fact FR are transferring routes directly from one airport to the other if anything shows more commitment to making their routes work.

[j636]

Wizz increase Gdansk from 3 to 4 weekly next summer

Blue Air have Cluj on sale operating twice weekly from 3 June

[Ribble56]

As Ryanair move LPL services elsewhere Bratislava being the latest, one wonders what the more established operators think of Ryanair and possible incentives they receive, because lets face Ryanair want something for nothing, Bratislava maybe a new incentive route, but Murcia,Reus, Riga, Rome, Milan, Shannon? Could be one of these operators Jet2 for instance will have a look at LPL and the holes left by Ryanair, and what LPL has to offer suits them we'll see.

[FRatSTN]

one wonders what the more established operators think of Ryanair

That's a bit of a wishy-washy statement. What do you mean by 'more established' operators? :confused:

I can't really see the commercial basis for an airline to pick up those routes from LPL just because FR have moved them half hour down the road to MAN (and in several cases with a much higher frequency). Broadly speaking, LPL and MAN serve a fairly similar catchment and any duplicate routes from LPL would still compete with those FR routes now at MAN very strongly.

Goes without saying FR clearly have some sort of very attractive deal with MAG, not just at MAN but across all their airports. That's most likely if anything where their main incentive comes from. BTS specifically may be a response to LS and EZY on VIE?

[Ribble56]

I just wonder if established airlines, airlines that maybe have developed over a longer time, Monarch, Thomson Thomas Cook Aer Lingus, think when Ryanair receive incentives that's all! As far as operators filling Ryanair Holes at LPL who knows new operators and expansion already, maybe an operator already considering LPL

[LAX_LHR]

Ribble

How are you so sure that Aer Lingus, Thomas Cook and the likes are not also receiving incentives? Contracts are re-negotiated all the time.

Thomas Cook in particular has increased services with new routes and more based aircraft, so seem to be happy with the deal they have.

The fact is, There seems to be an almost giddy sense of hope that Ryanair and Easyjet expansion at MAN will lead to other MAN operators moving flights to LPL from some people.

The fact that there has been very little, if any, retraction of flights from MAN, quite the opposite actually, with increases from Jet2, Thomas Cook, Aer Lingus, Thomson and so on, suggests there seems to be enough room for all at this stage.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Some here are thinking far too parochially. We see a vexatious belief that the transfer of a certain air route must be the result of underhand dealing or a conspiracy against LPL in favour of MAN etc. This is not how things work in the real world. We need to think 'big picture overview' not 'petty local rivalry'.

Examine the evolution of EasyJet and Ryanair as corporate entities. Both started off small, avoiding busier airports, and carved a niche from nothing with very low prices being their main selling point. In the early days, EasyJet flew from LTN and LPL with B737's which had a large telephone number adorning the fuselage such that bookings would avoid traditional higher-cost sales channels. Ryanair flew to places most people had never heard of and amazed traditional thinkers by filling B737's between city-pairs which were considered unthinkable just a decade earlier. Nowadays, we are routinely unsurprised when an airline announces schedules on a 180-seat airliner between Doncaster and Wroclaw (for example). Just pause and think about that for a moment.

But business models evolve as companies grow. We saw it first with EasyJet. As the company grew rapidly and gained market recognition, it developed the confidence and financial clout to take on traditional legacy carriers from some of Europe's 'fortress' big city airports. Having made strongholds out of certain secondary UK airports such as LTN, LPL, NCL, BFS, BRS, EasyJet was suddenly becoming a force in cities such as Geneva, Nice and Berlin. Now, aside from their huge operation dominating LGW, we see them as the dominant carrier at Milan (MXP). They base aircraft in Paris and Amsterdam. And of course, at Manchester. Going head-to-head with the traditional legacy short-hauls. Some of the early bases such as LPL, NCL, EMA have inevitably suffered as a consequence of this process.

Ryanair stuck with second and third-level airports much longer. Indeed, many of these formerly obscure names such as Hahn, Charleroi, Bergamo, Niederrhein, Modlin and Torp will likely remain a part of the Ryanair culture for years to come. But at Ryanair too change is happening. Ryanair's ambition is to secure 25% of the European short-haul market. To achieve this, they can no longer avoid first-level European gateways. We are already seeing this process in action.

Ryanair is happy with its hugely-successful London bases at STN and LTN. They have sufficient market penetration from these to not worry unduly about LGW or LHR. But just look at other key cities. DUB is a special case - dominated by RYR from the early days by reason of its heritage. But Ryanair is moving into Barcelona en masse, at the expense of Girona and Reus. They're about to base aircraft at Milan Malpensa ... Bergamo must be very worried. And Brussels ... Ryanair are now appearing at Zaventem, which can only be terrible news for Charleroi in the long-term. At Lisbon, Ryanair is muscling in on TAP's home turf. And they're expanding at Madrid's main airport too. Then there is one more larger airport which Ryanair has targeted for similar penetration ... Manchester ... now upto eight based units and still growing.

Ryanair's moves on first-level airports does have implications elsewhere. BRU growth will hurt CRL. MXP growth will hurt BGY. BCN growth has already devastated GRO / REU. And MAN growth is impacting LPL. But this is not due to a conspiracy against LPL in particular, or underhand dealings from Manchester Airport (MAG). It is symptomatic of a wider strategy to compete with the established legacy carriers on key city-pairs from their home-turf. Exactly as EasyJet has done before them. And network changes are not the only visible sign of this evolution. EasyJet is now perceived as a natural choice for business travellers, offering service little different from that of Air France, SAS, Lufthansa or BA. Meanwhile, at Ryanair, we are also seeing the first signs of the move upmarket. A friendlier image is being promoted, allocated seating has been introduced, the confrontational attitudes and the 'fines' for outsized baggage and incorrectly-printed boarding cards have been toned down. Further innovations such as interlining are being openly discussed.

So the move of certain routes from LPL to MAN (just as from GRO to BCN, BGY to MXP, CRL to BRU, PIK to GLA etc.) is part of a wider business strategy. It is not driven by the local considerations that we residents perceive. These are strategic company-level policy shifts, the sort we see in all large and growing businesses. This doesn't happen because of a bust-up with an exec at LPL or a tenner incentive from an exec at MAN. Besides, launch incentives from airport businesses such as LPL and MAN are open to all carriers. LPL has enjoyed considerable success in this regard over recent months with several new carriers gracing the departure board. It is normal business. LPL recently won a contract with traditional MAN customer CSA - are we to suppose that was a vindictive conspiracy as well?

Looking at Bratislava specifically, why this particular route to MAN and why now? Well, FRatSTN has got it. The relationship between Vienna and Bratislava Airports is similar to that between LPL and MAN. They are geographically close together, and the catchment areas overlap to a considerable degree. Austrian Airlines (Star Alliance) has just launched daily MAN-VIE. EasyJet has announced plans to launch MAN-VIE schedules. The fight is on. Meanwhile, Jet2, which operated MAN-VIE upto 3x weekly, appears set to withdraw and redeploy its aircraft to other routes. Jet2's limited MAN-VIE operation was not a big deal for Ryanair's LPL-BTS route. But the arrival of Austrian and EasyJet on the scene certainly is. And that is why Ryanair is making its move.

Don't think small-time. Don't think LPL v MAN petty rivalry. Think fundamental strategic planning at the HQ's of some of Europe's largest and fastest-growing airline groupings. And take note of this too ... Wizz and Blue Air are now pitching up at airports such as BHX and GLA. That too is a shift from early destinations such as Doncaster, Teesside, Prestwick and Coventry. MAG may be thinking it is time to pitch to those two again! Don't take it personally.

[Bagso]

And if RYR is thinking about a strategy in terms of some level of onward connectivity the larger airports have this... Manchester included.

[eggc]

Fully understand what you guys are saying about business models and connections, EZY also looking at connectivity I think I am correct in saying, but lets hope LPL manages to keep some presence by both, as it'll be a bad day the day LPL see's the end of RYR / EZY, as I doubt there are carriers to replace what they offer.

For the time being though I really think LPL will be OK with them, apart from the odd loss, the testing time will come with MAN's terminal expansion / redevelopment, that when ready could probably swallow up LPL's EZY and RYR based units pretty easily, which it certainly can't at the minute.

[eye2eye5]

Good point EGGC. Does anyone know how the £1bn MAN capex is to be paid for? What is the implication for landing/pax charges as that could be material when considering the future MAN/LPL position.

[LAX_LHR]

The expansion is being funded by money already available from profits, share sales and loans.

At the airline consultations, MAG were explicit in saying airline fees would not go up to supplement the build, before or after. There will actually be some fee reductions and rebates, as, with the building comes disruption, and some airlines are being given sweeteners as a 'pre-apology'.

[eye2eye5]

That just doesn't happen in the real world, LAX LHR. Significant Capex demands a return on expenditure ( Troce) or the capital should be invested elsewhere. The era that we live in states that the return should be in the short term. There must be a fully detailed plan somewhere which has comprehensive details of additional income to repay the expenditure.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

The GBP1Bn terminal rebuild programme at MAN is expected to take around ten years from start to final completion. Work will also take place in modules, one section at a time, which means that progress could be paused quite easily during a major economic downturn.

These days, one billion spread over ten years is not an unmanageable sum for a business the size of MAG which is bringing in healthy profits at today's traffic levels. If you compare the MAN redevelopment price-tag with the proposed sums required for developments at LHR and LGW you will get a sense of perspective on this. By today's standards, the MAN costings are relatively benign. MAG can schedule repayments over a long period, and of course should enjoy increased business as a consequence of expanding capacity and improving the attractiveness of the facilities to operators (US pre-clearance, dualing of taxiways etc.). And of course, MAG has control over the rate of redevelopment module by module. If the economic climate turns nasty they can pause and reschedule the next module.

[LAX_LHR]

what doesn't happen in the real world?

The same happened with the buyout of STN. Shares sold to raise funds, and they certainly didn't ramp up the fees there to bulk up returns.

Fail to see why you think they can do that at STN but not MAN?

[eye2eye5]

See Heathrow expansion and the expected impact on fees. I'm a lifelong banker and I know the questions I would be asking if I was asked for £1bn. And as for it being a small amount Shed, I remind you that Greater Manchester councils have an interest of around 33% in MAG if I remember rightly. I'm sure they wouldn't think of it as a small amount. I have asked this question before and no one seems to know the answer. Surely as an entity with such a significant local ownership/interest, the projections of income streams should be in the public domain?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

And as for it being a small amount Shed

I have never stated that GBP1Bn is a small amount. It is a large sum. But I did say that it is not an unmanageable sum for a business the size of MAG structured over a 10-year build programme.

I know the questions I would be asking if I was asked for £1bn

Me too. But do you - as a self-professed lifelong banker - believe that MAG executives are off to the bank to request a one-off big-hit loan for a ten year modular construction programme? We both know that is not how high-level corporate finance works. Besides, MAG covers many of its costs from income.

Shed, I remind you that Greater Manchester councils have an interest of around 33% in MAG if I remember rightly. I'm sure they wouldn't think of it as a small amount

I'm sure they don't and as I stated earlier, neither do I. But they do regard the terminals redevelopment programme as a very worthwhile and fully-justified capital investment. Perhaps you would prefer them to argue for stagnation and decline? By the way, the ownership split is Manchester City Council 35.5%; Other nine GM Councils 29%; IFM Investors 35.5%.

Surely as an entity with such a significant local ownership/interest, the projections of income streams should be in the public domain?

The Councils are amply represented on the MAG Board. They are very well-informed concerning MAG finances. Given that they receive substantial annual dividends from MAG they're very happy with those finances too. And MAG does declare its finances / profits publicly by way of an annual report.

It appears to me that you have an agenda to discredit Manchester Airport and look for ways for it to fail. But MAG is in safe hands, and their expansion programme is carefully evaluated and costed. Everything is under control.

[chaps1954]

another point MAG pays quite a nice amount into the councils coffers

Ian

[LAX_LHR]

Eyes,

You mention Heathrow as an example of fees, but, seem to almost deliberately ignore my STN example, which, is surely more relevant given its now a MAG airport and therefore a better example of how they may wish to operate?

Since MAG has taken on STN, Ryanair have increased flights and passenger numbers by a large degree, even to the point STN may once again overtake MAN as 3rd busiest airport.

They have also gained at least 2 new cargo operators, new airlines and more flights. Does that give the image of increased fees which may put off carriers?

I'm not entirely au fait with exactly how MAN will pay for the terminal re-development, but, given you seem to be focusing on fees in particular, these are the best answers that can be given.

[eye2eye5]

Shed I share the LN KGL philosophy, which is one of caution. I remember him looking at the North West airports as a whole to understand the underlying growth.

If you compare 2014 to 2004, then across the three airports (now two), total passengers have increased from 24.86m to 26.20m. That's growth of 5.39% over 10 years (source CAA).

I'm sure we can point to various impacts such as the Recession etc - but the saying is that the past predicts the future. If that growth is replicated in the future, then will it be sufficient to repay the additional liability? If not, what is the fallback position?Local councils are increasingly cash strapped and they will be relying on the MAG dividend continuing.

These are sensible questions to ask and I re iterate, I'm surprised that the answers are not in the public domain given that the Heathrow equivalents are.

In case you accuse me of bias, you will find that I have also supported the recent drop off charge al Liverpool which may not be popular, but recognises the reality of the situation. Oh and my brother has worked at MAN for many years and I wish that to continue!

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

will it be sufficient to repay the additional liability? If not, what is the fallback position?

The modular mode of construction means that MAN can adjust the rate of redevelopment if necessary. They have a ten year construction window in which to monitor evolving traffic trends in real time. Meanwhile, we already know that the initial phases are desperately required based on current demand alone. Don't forget - the alternative of keeping the existing ageing terminals complex fully operational would come with its own high price-tag.

I'm surprised that the answers are not in the public domain

MAG's financing proposals are known to the Board (ie. the owners). There is no reason for such information to be shared publicly on a blow-by-blow basis with unrelated parties in the interim. MAG has a website dedicated to the rebuild programme and information already made public will be updated there as the project progresses.

[eye2eye5]

A modular approach is sensible, given a few rather worrying straws in the wind e.g. Redcar Steel closure, JCB looking to close 4 plants. I still hold that it's a rather more public issue than say Peel given the ownership, but we can agree to differ on that one.

Incidentally, I found your posting re Ryanair above to be on the mark with regards to the change in business model.

[rkenyon]

isn't this the Liverpool thread? :)

[AndyH52]

Well said, rkenyon...

Whilst it is frustrating that Liverpool seems to be a 'sandpit' for new Ryanair routes from the north west, they are at least maintaining volume through Liverpool and increasing load factor all the time. The more they focus on core bucket and spade routes, the greater the scope for the airport's management team to make a case to other carriers that there are market opportunities to be exploited out of Liverpool. And let's face it, over the last 12 months they have been pretty good at that.

Shed; whilst I agree to a degree on your post in terms of taking the bigger picture, remember that it cuts both ways and clearly not every carrier thinks that Manchester is the only place to be successful in the north west. Anything else quite frankly comes across as patronising, even if not intended in that way. Also, whilst airlines might not directly pay the cost of Manchester's new facilities, you can be sure their passengers will...

[eye2eye5]

Rebuke accepted, fellas! An interesting discussion, nevertheless and one which has impacts on both airports.

[eye2eye5]

To get back on track, Ryanair have released twice weekly flights to Reus, beginning in June. That takes their weekly flights back to the same level of 2015, with the exception of August.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

AndyH52 -

clearly not every carrier thinks that Manchester is the only place to be successful in the north west

And where did I suggest this? I specifically mentioned LPL's success in attracting new names to the departure boards over recent months. It is counter-intuitive to draw your conclusion from that.

Anything else quite frankly comes across as patronising, even if not intended in that way.

The posting addressed the topic of airline strategies in general; it was not specific to LPL. If the process by which RYR is transferring aircraft to larger airports comes across as patronising, I presume that applies to Bergamo, Girona, Reus, Charleroi and Prestwick as well? The only way posting this information could be less patronising would be to not report on the situation at all. I deliberately conveyed the information in a matter-of-fact and non-confrontational way, and I stand by the principle that it is better to be well-informed even if one dislikes the underlying facts.

Also, whilst airlines might not directly pay the cost of Manchester's new facilities, you can be sure their passengers will...

If you have received a personal briefing on MAN's future regime of passenger charges please do enlighten us ...

eye2eye5: Thankyou for your earlier comments. Interesting discussion.

[AndyH52]

SHED. Sorry for the delay in responding...I've been away on business.

And where did I suggest this?

I don't know, where did I suggest that you did? My point (probably badly made) is that just perhaps, Blue Air, Wizz Air and Czech are at Liverpool because they have decided it is the best option for them to serve the North West market, not because MAG decided 'not to pitch for them' - and before you respond, I acknowledge that these are my words not yours!

The posting addressed the topic of airline strategies in general; it was not specific to LPL

The posting is in the Liverpool thread and mentions Liverpool a dozen times. It's a fair assumption to make.

If the process by which RYR is transferring aircraft to larger airports comes across as patronising, I presume that applies to Bergamo, Girona, Reus, Charleroi and Prestwick as well?

Yes, as your premise is flawed. The airports you list and the process being followed in general by Ryanair in these locations is one of shifting from secondary to primary airports which serve the same urban centre. Unless you are suggesting that Liverpool is in effect 'Manchester West' then the situation is quite different.

If you have received a personal briefing on MAN's future regime of passenger charges please do enlighten us ...

I believe it is reasonable to infer that if airline charges aren't going to rise to pay for the investment then the increased revenue needed will come from the other main cash cow, the passenger.

Finally I would ask you to bear in mind that a number of the contributors on this thread rely on the airport for their livelihoods, so telling them 'not to take things personally' could also be perceived as patronising.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Wizz / Blue Air / Czech are ...

at Liverpool because they have decided it is the best option for them to serve the North West market

Yes, as your premise is flawed. The airports you list and the process being followed in general by Ryanair in these locations is one of shifting from secondary to primary airports which serve the same urban centre.

Now, just re-read your two statements quoted above. When you refer to Blue Air, Wizz and Czech the catchment area is deemed to be "the North West Market". But if the name in the frame is Ryanair that same premise is flawed ... according to you.

From an airline perspective, the name on the airport door is irrelevant. Issues of civic pride are immaterial to them ... let local councillors worry about all that. The airlines just see markets and catchment areas. No two airports have identical catchment areas (indeed, catchment area varies by individual route), but some have very significant degrees of overlap. Whether you, I or anybody else dislikes the fact, LPL and MAN are two such airports whose catchments do overlap significantly. That is what the airlines see, and they couldn't care less if it hurts the feelings of individuals consumed by passionate civic pride.

Ryanair do recognise that LPL and MAN do not serve identical catchment areas - it is likely that they will maintain certain routes such as DUB and certain mainstream Mediterranean resorts from both - because each airport can sustain a standalone service. But there are also routes which Ryanair will perceive as serving a larger catchment area, and they will operate that route from the airport which offers them the highest potential for profit. We can all see the way the wind has blown in that respect.

Now, you claim that moving flights from Girona to Barcelona, Bergamo to Milan or Modlin to Warsaw is "quite different" from moving flights from LPL to MAN because "they are airports which serve the same urban centre". Well, the City of Girona is actually the capital of its own province (also called Girona). Its airport primarily serves that city, but its catchment overlaps that of Barcelona and Ryanair has used it on that basis. The city of Bergamo has a metropolitan area population of almost 500K and its own top-flight Serie A football club, Atalanta. Its catchment area significantly overlaps Milan, but it is not Milan - it is Bergamo. Modlin Airport is located alongside the county town of Nowy Dwor Mazowiecki; there are many miles of green fields between this town and Warsaw, but the catchment area overlaps significantly and Ryanair uses it accordingly.

Meanwhile, the distance between the airports of Liverpool and Manchester is 30.7 miles by road. Completely consistent with the examples listed above. Distinct cities, yes, but with airports serving a catchment with significant overlap whether we like the idea or not. Just like BGY/MXP; GRO/BCN; WMI/WAW and others. Ryanair treat these two airports accordingly in their planning, just as they do with the pairs outlined above. So my premise is not flawed. You just don't like it! If in doubt, read your own quote about how Blue Air, Wizz and Czech see things.

I believe it is reasonable to infer that if airline charges aren't going to rise to pay for the investment then the increased revenue needed will come from the other main cash cow, the passenger.

But if an airport business succeeds in in growing its customer base it will have the ability to spread its costs amongst more passengers meaning that the need to increase charges can be avoided.

Finally I would ask you to bear in mind that a number of the contributors on this thread rely on the airport for their livelihoods, so telling them 'not to take things personally' could also be perceived as patronising.

The concept of relying on an airport for one's livelihood is not alien to me! But most folks who work at airports are well aware that they are working for a business which competes with neighbouring businesses for some of the same customers. I don't see why staff should need to be sheltered from that reality. Airports compete with each other for business all the time. That is not about to change regardless of whether it upsets people or not.

[j636]

MAG tried to steel Wizz before and were not successful. As long as they are at DSA I think we will not see them move. LPL and DSA allow them to maximise passengers, MAN would hurt DSA.

[LAX_LHR]

MAG tried to steel Wizz before and were not successful. As long as they are at DSA I think we will not see them move. LPL and DSA allow them to maximise passengers, MAN would hurt DSA.

How are we not 100% sure wizz approached MAN but MAN said no to their demands?

Unless you were at the meetings no-one can definitavely answer.

[BHX5DME]

Liverpool Airport recorded an eight successive month of growth in September of 6.14%. The growth was based on additional capacity in the market and improved network load factor performance.
September saw the launch of new service to Amsterdam, with Flybe operating a three times daily into Amsterdam. Looking ahead, October will see two new services inaugurated with a double daily service with Aer Lingus commencing on October 23rd, whilst Flybe will commence a single daily service to Edinburgh on October 26th.
In what has been a busy month at Liverpool Airport, new scheduled service to Barcelona operated by IAG member Vueling has been confirmed with a Christmas programme commencing December 20th with full scheduled service to commence at the end of March. Yesterday, Blue Air confirmed a twice weekly service to Cluj to commence in Summer 2016.
Traffic for the Calendar year remains 6% ahead of prior year and also ahead of levels seen during 2013.

[j636]

LAX

Come on now, MAG turn down a airline willing to fill a gap on the map. At the time MAN hadn't a single Eastern Europe route.

[LAX_LHR]

MAG originally turned down the low cost brigade, so yes, why not.

If wizz wanted lots of perks for too little in the way of fees, then yes, why not say no thanks.

pictures aren't always shades of brilliant white and jet black......

[Ametyst1]

MAG pursued Wizz Air vigorously prior to the airline agreeing a new contract with Liverpool a couple of years ago.

[LAX_LHR]

Again do you know that to be 100% fact amethyst?

You said yourself, their LPL contract was up for renewal, how do you know it wasn't wizz approaching MAN, even if it was just to keep LPL on their toes and garner a sweeter deal?