Without subsidies, Ryanair would be in the red
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: CPH, BKK
Programs: OZ*G, AZ Gold, Etihad Gold, SK*G, BA Silver
Posts: 1,014
Without subsidies, Ryanair would be in the red
Ryanair wouldn't survive without subsidies. Taxpayers pay:
http://airobserver.wordpress.com/201...os-in-the-red/
The numbers, revealed by Belgian daily Lecho.be, come from the airlines forming the Association of European Airlines. The report has yet to become public, but Lecho.be claims the association estimates the total amount of subsidies now reaches 793,1 million euros.
#3
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: KL Platinum; A3 Gold
Posts: 28,742
Aer Lingus used to be an AEA member, but it's no longer listed.
The AEA lobbied hard after the introduction of the the Dutch flight tax in 2008, which was abolished after a year.
The AEA lobbied hard after the introduction of the the Dutch flight tax in 2008, which was abolished after a year.
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,364
Ryanair wouldn't survive without subsidies. Taxpayers pay:
http://airobserver.wordpress.com/201...os-in-the-red/
http://airobserver.wordpress.com/201...os-in-the-red/
The subsidies are allowed for a reason: they are there to enable an airline to start a route that would otherwise be unlikely to be profitable.
#6
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ireland
Programs: M&M, FB, Exec Club, SPG
Posts: 81
While I hate FR with a vengeance, I have to say, however, that the argument is fallacious. If the subsidies weren't there, FR would not have started those services in the first place and would have gone for other routes.
The subsidies are allowed for a reason: they are there to enable an airline to start a route that would otherwise be unlikely to be profitable.
The subsidies are allowed for a reason: they are there to enable an airline to start a route that would otherwise be unlikely to be profitable.
And you comment that "the subsidies are allowed...". Actually, subsidies for new air routes are allowed in the EU only under fairly strict conditions. The situation you mention where a route is not going to be profitable without a subsidy is a specific case, a Public Service Obligation, which goes through a specified public bidding process, and I don't think that Ryanair still operates any PSOs (they had one route in Ireland for a while). The vast majority of airport subsidies to airlines such as Ryanair are not PSOs, just "ordinary" start-up aid for new routes, and there are specific conditions under which this aid is allowed (e.g. the funding is open to any carrier, it diminishes over time, it's for a maximum of 3 or 5 years depending on the region, the route has a realistic prospect of sustainability after the aid runs out, etc.) The European Commission currently has, IIRC, 16 open investigations into airport subsidies, mostly to Ryanair, and seems to be opening another one every month or two. Recent progress reports from the Commission in respect of Altenburg and Angouleme airports seem to suggest pretty clearly that the subsidies to Ryanair were in flagrant contravention of the rules and - if this is confirmed in the final judgements - they'll have to be paid back. Much fun awaits!
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,364
And you comment that "the subsidies are allowed...". Actually, subsidies for new air routes are allowed in the EU only under fairly strict conditions. The situation you mention where a route is not going to be profitable without a subsidy is a specific case, a Public Service Obligation
But I would certainly agree with you that there are quite a few which are dubious. Some were in fact found by the Commission to be incompatible with EU law when it first developed its policy on this. Ryanair huffed and puffed in its usual manner but had no choice but to comply. I also agree that we can expect more fun on that front and more howling by FR how all of this is so unfair and crocodile tears at to the pain inflicted on consumers or some such.
#11
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: DUB-BOS
Programs: various
Posts: 3,690
FR's biggest challenge is what to do now that their great aircraft deal with Boeing is about to end.
They have made serious money as an aircraft trading company over the past decade and this is aobut to end. Soon it will just be down to what profits they can make as a regular airline
They have made serious money as an aircraft trading company over the past decade and this is aobut to end. Soon it will just be down to what profits they can make as a regular airline
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: KL Platinum; A3 Gold
Posts: 28,742
You make it sound like Ryanair and Boeing can't or won't continue working in the future.
True, Ryanair have been talking with Comac and Irkut, but they are nowhere near getting any planes from either. And as one of Boeing's better customers, Ryanair can expect even sweeter deals as a result.
True, Ryanair have been talking with Comac and Irkut, but they are nowhere near getting any planes from either. And as one of Boeing's better customers, Ryanair can expect even sweeter deals as a result.
#13
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Luxembourg
Programs: KLM/AF Platinum for life, IHG Platinum, Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,026
While I hate Ryanair with a passion and refuse to set foot on a plane operated by them. I cannot but consider such articles as nothing less than a waste of time and even a waste of the electricity used to keep them saved on a disk somehwere.
I negotiate special rates with a hotel because I am planning on spending the next year in a city. Now I could do this two ways. I could say that at the end of each quarter, they will pay back to me 40% of my spend with them OR I could just negotiate a 40% reduction. Now which one of these is a subsidy? Neither in my opinion. They are both volume discounts.
Now, most of what Ryanair does is the same. They take a small airport that will charge them various fees of X, Y and Z. They then negotiate that the owner of the airport (local or regional government) will pay them back an amount of A based on traffic. Now, they derive A by looking at the extra money and jobs that their traffic will bring, so it isn't just a % reduction of the airport fees.
This is the whole premise that caused them to win the Charelroi lawsuit. ANY airline or other airport related business has the right to negotiate fees and tarrifs being charged by another company (or government).
To say that Ryanair would be bankrupt without subsidies is just simply sensationalism. I find most of Ryanair's practices absolutely reprehensible, but on this particular point I cannot see anything wrong.
I negotiate special rates with a hotel because I am planning on spending the next year in a city. Now I could do this two ways. I could say that at the end of each quarter, they will pay back to me 40% of my spend with them OR I could just negotiate a 40% reduction. Now which one of these is a subsidy? Neither in my opinion. They are both volume discounts.
Now, most of what Ryanair does is the same. They take a small airport that will charge them various fees of X, Y and Z. They then negotiate that the owner of the airport (local or regional government) will pay them back an amount of A based on traffic. Now, they derive A by looking at the extra money and jobs that their traffic will bring, so it isn't just a % reduction of the airport fees.
This is the whole premise that caused them to win the Charelroi lawsuit. ANY airline or other airport related business has the right to negotiate fees and tarrifs being charged by another company (or government).
To say that Ryanair would be bankrupt without subsidies is just simply sensationalism. I find most of Ryanair's practices absolutely reprehensible, but on this particular point I cannot see anything wrong.
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,364
Yes, a business has a right to negotiate fees but the issue is whether the transactions are the kind that could reasonably be expected to have been entered into by a private investor. If they are, then fine. If not, then there could be illegal state aid. The question is still open in these three cases and the Commission has not yet taken a decision. Ultimately, I guess it will hover around the size of the discounts. If they are within the range that looks commercially sensible, that will be OK. If they are excessive, we will be in state aid territory.
#15
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Western North Carolina
Programs: HH Diamond,Ambassador Club,Delta FF,USAIR FF
Posts: 237
Had planned to fly Ryan Air between Dublin and Edinburgh in August. I am concerned after reading this? Is there a better alternative? Aer Lingus seems to fly but is a lot more $$$ and the schedule is not as good.
Any advise appreciated.
Any advise appreciated.