Originally Posted by
orbitmic
On the first point, I agree with you, but I assume that the word "stranglehold" was meant as voluntarily hyperbolic.
I don't know, words like that and 'monopoly' are used way too frequently on this board.
Originally Posted by
orbitmic
At any rate, I agree with you it is excessive, but we are very much talking about arch-dominance here (over 50% is really very significant). One should also remember that the 55% excludes JV figures which are numerous for BA (AA, QR, JL, etc) so in practice, the dominance is even more than the figure suggests as JVs effectively remove competition by typically aligning prices and often sharing revenue (as is the case with the main ones here).
If it wasn't for the fact that there are similar JVs for others, like DL+VS, with which their weight increases a lot more.
Originally Posted by
orbitmic
On the second point, BA is also by far the first operator at LCY and the second at LGW. This is noteworthy because even within a city, not all airports were created equal. and LHR and LCY are by far the two dominant business airport and they effectively exclude low cost flying (both long and short haul). This contrasts with, say, Paris where Easyjet for instance competes right in AF's garden in CDG 2 as well as ORY. This also incidentally underlines another interesting aspect of the BA situation. It is one of the very few cases I can think of in multi-airport cities where the main hub airline (BA) is actually based in the city's airport that is the one most passengers prefer to use.
Sure, but if we look at AMS, FRA, MUC, ZRH, ATL, VIE and so on the airlines owning 60/70% of the departures are on the only airport one can choose from. So, again, monopoly? not so much.
Originally Posted by
orbitmic
From that point of view, I also disagree with your point on BA being "unique" in having a second local airline competing with BA. What do you call Easyjet or Norwegian or Level for AF?
Note that I've written 'longhaul'. And, also, LEVEL is gone from Orly and I think Norwegian isn't going to build too much over at CDG.
Originally Posted by
orbitmic
And I also disagree with the idea that BA is unique in having a second airline on most routes being unusual. Again, The same is very largely true of Paris or Rome, though indeed less of Frankfurt or Amsterdam which are less attractive destinations to serve for many foreign airlines.
I don't want to sound too pedantic, but the point I was making was in the breadth and extension of other airlines' coverage of BA's routes. Sure, other airlines fly CDG-JFK, or FRA-JFK; but not many airlines fly, say, LOS-CDG. At LHR you have at least two; it's the presence of Virgin that helps in this sense (and a good reason, in my mind, to keep it afloat or to give it to somebody who actually knows how to run an airline).
thanks for the OT chat!