T8191

Full in CW, empty in W/Y? Interesting thought!

rossmacd

This is a terrifically interesting subject - possibly even on that requires its own thread. I would be interested in hearing other's strategies to mitigate this. I have booked 3 rather presumptive tickets at fantastic prices that I will just keep kicking down the road until I can actually use them. But this is not the right thread, unfortunately.

Bear96

Only if there is demand, which does not seem to be the case in the near term.

xenole

There's demand from myself, and probably many others. It's just there aren't any flights, and even if there were, a lot of countries have closed their borders.
I'm itching to get back in the air and would at a moments notice if it were possible.

RoyalSwazi

I used to work in a different part of the logistics industry and have done my fair bit of yield management and profitability analysis. In general we had four general types of cargo, which was then subdivided into contract and spot cargoes.

Contract cargo forms the base - without it you will struggle to fill up. Spot is the cream on top. You need a mix of both in order to reach the highest possible load factor, but if you only have contract cargo the result is not very good. If applied to BA I strongly doubt they could only live with contract cargo (ie those on corporate deals) and opportunistic spot (ie those on fares bought during sales and EC redemptions). They need a mix, but even then there will be variables. Likely more high yielding Y during school holidays and lower in F/J, while the situation is be the opposite at other times of the year.

We used to calculate our yield based primarily on a cubic metre basis, and it was interesting to see the huge differences based on various cargo mixes. Some of our contracts were sweetened by offering the same rates to cars and vans (compare that with Y and Y+ for an airline comparison). If there were a lot of vans our revenue, profit and yield all took a trashing even though the load factor was high.

kanderson1965

Deleted

milkyway88

I think it will vary route by route. For example, there will be pent up demand from wealthier people who have money to spend to get where they want to go and are desperate to have a holiday. So routes like the Caribbean, Florida, Maldives, Mauritius and the Seychelles may see higher prices due to this demand. Equally there will be routes that BA need to keep flying to maintain their commercial contracts in the longer term (NYC, SFO, LAX, HKG, PEK etc), but these companies will only be booking last minute when essential, so you maybe able to get cheaper prices if booking in advance to ensure flying with a decent load factor.

Another factor will be how IAGs liquidity looks. If they need to get some extra liquidity they may decide take a small long term hit to get money in the door now.

layz

It was a very long time ago but I remember EZY backing LHR as the airport they'd prefer getting the extra runway when the government were deciding which airport had the strongest case for expansion.
If we had a bad case where VS cease operations and enough other airlines cease operations to open up slots can we see a scenario where EZY would start a significant operation from LHR (assuming HAL reduce their fees due to current market conditions)?
As for LGW south definitely seems the obvious one to keep open as that's where the station is. I can see EZY wanting to keep north if they've invested a lot in it, VS was another airline that invested in this terminal (converting the old BA lounge) so I guess one option is to make the north terminal EZY only (unless VS decide to come back) and make the south terminal everyone else. This would allow EZY to have more control over passenger experience a bit like BA at T5. If things pick up that the south terminal can't cope with it then some more could relocate to north.

McG

I wonder if EZY will look at their London ops and the possibility of being able to consolidate all at LGW.

CT-UK

They would then be handing over a huge amount of customers north and west of London

jonas123

It would take a lot of airlines to cease operations at LHR to give easyjet enough scale and the appropriately timed slots. VS for example is only around 3% of slots at LHR. LHR is also not really a great airport for easyjet - the airport charges are very high, which would prevent them offering low enough fares to fill their planes, and the night curfew means it is hard to get high aircraft utilisation at the airport. I always suspected that the real reason easyjet wanted a third runway at LHR was to a) push the airport charges up at LHR to make the gap even bigger with LGW and LTN and b) tempt BA and other carriers to move their LGW operations to LHR, hence freeing up capacity at LGW.

Hannibal Lecter

Alitalia is very much alive and kicking

ROME, May 7 (Reuters) - The Italian government will inject at least 3 billion euros ($3.2 billion) fresh capital into Alitalia, the industry minister said on Thursday,
...Alitalia would “focus strongly on long-haul routes, also with new transatlantic alliances.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/ital...-idUSL8N2CP4B6

Swissroll

do Alitalia hold the record for the number of bailouts?

Worcester

Bailout? It's negative taxation...

1010101

Alitalia will outlive us all.

At this point it's clear operating a sustainable airline in Italy is impossible and the government will have to ensure at least one remains.