Community
Wiki Posts
Search

IAG snaps up Monarch LGW landing slots

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 28, 2017, 5:55 am
  #61  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Originally Posted by Worcester
But we don't want to get like the US where the fares are high the airlines are making very significant profits.
I don't think you can judge that just by looking at the actual numbers. AA makes big profits because it is a big company. However I believe the return on capital is some way short of IAG's.

Also the good years help to cover for the bad years when shareholders take the pain.
simons1 is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2017, 6:02 am
  #62  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 38,644
Originally Posted by Worcester
But we don't want to get like the US where the fares are high the airlines are making very significant profits.
Why not? We're frequently bemoaning the lack of investment by BA in its equipment and product. But viable investment requires profitable trading.
rockflyertalk likes this.
Globaliser is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2017, 6:28 am
  #63  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London, Babylon-on-Thames
Programs: BAEC Blue (back to Earth)
Posts: 1,511
Originally Posted by cornishsimon
DHL and most other cargo operators tend to operate at night. LGW doesn’t have a slot issue overnight. I would guess BA could probably get slots and operate an extra 20 flights a night tomorrow if they wanted.

cs
The Heathrow DHL operation is flown during the day as of course Heathrow doesn't allow BAU flying between 11pm and 6am with only a strictly limited number of arrivals before 6am, all passenger. It is also mainly flown for BA albeit under the "Eurotrans" callsign.
skipness1E is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2017, 7:29 am
  #64  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Programs: Mucci, BA, AF
Posts: 10,131
Originally Posted by LupineChemist
How recently? I definitely saw one that looked like it was going for passenger duty on the ramp at T4S a couple weeks ago.
Last week I believe, but I don't think they have flown passenger flights (or at all) since being retired over a year ago. Are you sure you didn't see an old livery 346 such as JLE?
BA6501 is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2017, 7:42 am
  #65  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: BRU
Programs: BA GGL, TK E (*G), ITA exec
Posts: 4,123
Originally Posted by T8191
Anything that saves us having to do the LGW-LHR shuffle is good! Yes, a few more l/h destinations ex-LGW would be nice ... swap a few airframes between the 2 airports could offer some interesting options. Let's face it, the LGW-CPT seems to have been a great success.
I would indeed like a BRU-LGW option...
Lefly is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2017, 7:58 am
  #66  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 582
Originally Posted by Lefly
I would indeed like a BRU-LGW option...
Would love that as well! Bit of a pain to have to go to Heathrow from Sussex at present.
AmaaiZeg is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2017, 8:30 am
  #67  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: South Coast, UK
Programs: Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 2,069
Originally Posted by UKtravelbear
IMHO if an IAG company can't use the slots within a short space of time then IAG shouldn't be allocated them in the first place and they should go to an operator who can use them.

IAG certainly shouldn't be able to use them as a source of revenue by leasing them out.
Why not ?
mike turnbull is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2017, 8:45 am
  #68  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brexile in ADB
Programs: BA, TK, HHonours, Le Club, Best Western Rewards
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by simons1
I don't think you can judge that just by looking at the actual numbers. AA makes big profits because it is a big company. However I believe the return on capital is some way short of IAG's.

Also the good years help to cover for the bad years when shareholders take the pain.
I was basing it on this analysis. https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21721201-americans-are-treated-abysmally-their-airlines-they-should-look-europe-lessons-lack

It could be argued that a lack of investment is symptomatic of lack of competition allowing BA to operate older less fuel efficient aircraft.
Worcester is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2017, 8:57 am
  #69  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Originally Posted by Worcester
I was basing it on this analysis. https://www.economist.com/news/leade...e-lessons-lack

It could be argued that a lack of investment is symptomatic of lack of competition allowing BA to operate older less fuel efficient aircraft.
Not sure that the stats used there really count for much. Quotes profit per passenger without stating how long the average trip is. Quotes Skytrax, hardly a bastion of truth after their brushes with ASA. Biggest 4 carriers in US control 80% of the market, biggest 4 carriers in UK can't be much less (comparison between US and Europe is a bit meaningless, one is country the other a continent). Most american cities have only 1 airport...apart from NY, Washington, Orlando, Houston, Dallas and so on, doubt that is much different to Europe.

Personally I would see healthy (not excessive) profits as enabling re-investment in new fleet and routes which is what BA has been doing.
simons1 is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2017, 1:52 am
  #70  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: MAD
Programs: IB+, BAEC
Posts: 3,106
Originally Posted by BA6501
Last week I believe, but I don't think they have flown passenger flights (or at all) since being retired over a year ago. Are you sure you didn't see an old livery 346 such as JLE?
It was 100% a 342. I don't remember the reg, but I was quite shocked to see it there. My personal thoughts was it was there for a charter flight rather than scheduled service since IB basically has flex capacity. Either that or they were giving it a proper sendoff or something since it sounds like the timelines match up.

I know they had been keeping them maintained to be able to provide hot swaps for equipment in case of MX issues.
LupineChemist is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2017, 2:26 am
  #71  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by Globaliser
Why not? We're frequently bemoaning the lack of investment by BA in its equipment and product. But viable investment requires profitable trading.
Judging from their latest report, IAG seems fairly profitable. Perhaps because they don't bother investing much.
scillyisles and Worcester like this.
simonrp84 is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2017, 2:27 am
  #72  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: BA GGL, A3*G, Mucci de l'expertise des Apps
Posts: 3,367
Originally Posted by LupineChemist
It was 100% a 342.
.
Given that IB never had any, it 100% wasn't a 342.
Airprox is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2017, 4:24 am
  #73  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Programs: Mucci, BA, AF
Posts: 10,131
Originally Posted by Airprox
Given that IB never had any, it 100% wasn't a 342.
IB used the code 342 to distinguish between various A343 configurations.
BA6501 is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2017, 4:31 am
  #74  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: MAD
Programs: IB+, BAEC
Posts: 3,106
Originally Posted by BA6501
IB used the code 342 to distinguish between various A343 configurations.
Yeah, sorry, I get messed up between the various codes. Just like they also code for 345s but at least that model just doesn't exist in general.
LupineChemist is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2017, 4:53 am
  #75  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: BA GGL, A3*G, Mucci de l'expertise des Apps
Posts: 3,367
Originally Posted by BA6501
IB used the code 342 to distinguish between various A343 configurations.
Indeed they did, doesn't mean they had any though

Originally Posted by LupineChemist
Just like they also code for 345s but at least that model just doesn't exist in general.
It does exist, 35 were made.
Airprox is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.