atuk wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:59 pm
I’ve been reading these posts with interest. In a previous role the GLA-MCO/SFB flights carried many folks from Dundee, Perth, Fife, Edinburgh and Lothians. Yes there were plenty passengers from Greater Glasgow and Ayrshire too.
What is being overlooked is the critical mass of “Alliance” carriers: Oneworld, Star Alliance and Skyteam all of whom have multiple operations at EDI.
GLA has KLM the only Skyteam airline; Lufthansa the sole Star Alliance carrier and BA representing Oneworld.
Given that Emirates, Air Transat and Westjet aren’t members of any alliance it must be an uphill task to promote the airports profile.
As I and many others have said. It’s back to the 1970s. A few schedules to hubs and a large basket of holiday charters.
GeorgeNTravels wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:26 pm
Sorry to bring back the thread with just an opinion.
But does anyone else think given the fact that UA did not announce EWR flights from GLA today that this VS/DL move will maybe not be as big as they think it is.
In 2019 NYC had around 87k passengers on it, now it has 0 seats available. Orlando had around 91k, now its around 12k seats available next year.
DL/VS consolidating at GLA would allow DL to run to JFK and have the whole market to themselves, VS could run MCO and maintain the majority of the market. Barbados would have also been a welcome addition, and even if necessary the VS aircraft could do winter flights to JFK whilst DL operate elsewhere.
Just a thought.
Don't get what you mean
VS and DL are partners and consolidated operations at EDI.
GLA now has a market of 87k people to NYC that is now unserved and a market of 91k to Orlando that is now massively underserved.
If VS and DL stayed at GLA rather than EDI then they would essentially have both markets with little competition.
DL fly to JFK during the summer and VS to MCO, then during the winter VS take over the JFK route alongside Barbados.
GeorgeNTravels wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:26 pm
Sorry to bring back the thread with just an opinion.
But does anyone else think given the fact that UA did not announce EWR flights from GLA today that this VS/DL move will maybe not be as big as they think it is.
In 2019 NYC had around 87k passengers on it, now it has 0 seats available. Orlando had around 91k, now its around 12k seats available next year.
DL/VS consolidating at GLA would allow DL to run to JFK and have the whole market to themselves, VS could run MCO and maintain the majority of the market. Barbados would have also been a welcome addition, and even if necessary the VS aircraft could do winter flights to JFK whilst DL operate elsewhere.
Just a thought.
Don't get what you mean
VS and DL are partners and consolidated operations at EDI.
GLA now has a market of 87k people to NYC that is now unserved and a market of 91k to Orlando that is now massively underserved.
If VS and DL stayed at GLA rather than EDI then they would essentially have both markets with little competition.
DL fly to JFK during the summer and VS to MCO, then during the winter VS take over the JFK route alongside Barbados.
If that is any clearer
Any long-haul airline operating to the USA & Canada will look at it as the Scottish market . . . and better served by consolidating on one airport rather than splitting its resources over two airports 50 miles apart
If the fares yield is near enough the same from the competing airports then it is simply down to costs . . . and momentum especially post COVID-19
VS and DL are partners and consolidated operations at EDI.
GLA now has a market of 87k people to NYC that is now unserved and a market of 91k to Orlando that is now massively underserved.
If VS and DL stayed at GLA rather than EDI then they would essentially have both markets with little competition.
DL fly to JFK during the summer and VS to MCO, then during the winter VS take over the JFK route alongside Barbados.
If that is any clearer
Any long-haul airline operating to the USA & Canada will look at it as the Scottish market . . . and better served by consolidating on one airport rather than splitting its resources over two airports 50 miles apart
If the fares yield is near enough the same from the competing airports then it is simply down to costs . . . and momentum especially post COVID-19
Yeah I get that, but this could be a potential opportunity if costs were better at GLA to consolidate there rather than EDI, but I agree consolidation at 1 airport is the correct strategy as they will view Scotland as one market.
Ekally1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 8:31 am
With the current team gla I wouldn't bet on getting any US routes ..
If Bearsden is correct, and I suspect he is, then no airport management could alter the business case.
We can teleport his explanation to LPL and MAN. Any global airline will want to serve the NW England region from MAN, not LPL. Transferring MAN’s route development team to LPL could not alter that IMO.
Ekally1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 8:31 am
With the current team gla I wouldn't bet on getting any US routes ..
If Bearsden is correct, and I suspect he is, then no airport management could alter the business case.
We can teleport his explanation to LPL and MAN. Any global airline will want to serve the NW England region from MAN, not LPL. Transferring MAN’s route development team to LPL could not alter that IMO.
I don't recall LPL ever having an extensive US portfolio.
Ekally1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 8:31 am
With the current team gla I wouldn't bet on getting any US routes ..
If Bearsden is correct, and I suspect he is, then no airport management could alter the business case.
We can teleport his explanation to LPL and MAN. Any global airline will want to serve the NW England region from MAN, not LPL. Transferring MAN’s route development team to LPL could not alter that IMO.
I don't recall LPL ever having an extensive US portfolio.
They never but we did ... US, AA , UA AC , VS , DL etc etc ... all gone as well as other portfolios ... time for a change .. If we are setting our sights as being LPL , we have a low bar
If Bearsden is correct, and I suspect he is, then no airport management could alter the business case.
We can teleport his explanation to LPL and MAN. Any global airline will want to serve the NW England region from MAN, not LPL. Transferring MAN’s route development team to LPL could not alter that IMO.
I don't recall LPL ever having an extensive US portfolio.
They never but we did ... US, AA , UA AC , VS , DL etc etc ... all gone as well as other portfolios ... time for a change .. If we are setting our sights as being LPL , we have a low bar
TBF, PIK also had an extensive long haul network. The market changes, sadly.
