Skeddan Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 Also the larger airlines contribute little to the economy they are aggressive and infrastructure demanding and will not pay.... All in all might be safe and look good but on paper at least is another financial black hole. In quite a few cases destinations / local authorities are being expected to underwrite any losses that the airline might incur as a condition of servicing the destination. I believe this is becoming quite common as a practice. If IoMG is thinking the extension will attract other carriers, then it might make it possible, but there would need to be a very great deal more money put at stake. The losses that it might have to mop up for all these regional services could be astronomical - and probably would be. I'm still really struggling to understand what all these destinations are that will somehow become point to point services from IoM if the extension is built. I can't believe Ronaldsway will become an easyjet hub like Luton and Bristol, flying to multiple destinations (where exactly?). I could see it being more like Inverness or Aberdeen - basically flights to Bristol and Luton - where passengers can connect to other flights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanxfella Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 I can't believe Ronaldsway will become an easyjet hub like Luton and Bristol, flying to multiple destinations (where exactly?). Moving on even further it would be interesting to analyse the profitibility the existing carriers are getting on the manx routes. I'm guessing it ain't that much, so what capacity is the airport expanding in to? You have to have a basic demand and profitable routes before you spend tens of millions increasing capacity. That's why the whole reason for this is 'safety' and EU run off regs because I'm guessing that there can be no actual business case at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 Who is claiming this is about new routes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 I would like to see the airport Business Plan and how they calculate out the bennies the new setup will bring them - with the usual forward thinking SWOT caveats of course. If it's anything like the first Skyward effort it should be a really good laugh! I mean, after all that taxpayers money and all those £120k pa "retainers" to the great and the good anyone heard from them recently? Anyone who feels it's unjustified expenditure can always write to their MHK for an explanation as to why what's left of their tax dollars (always assuming there is any left after the MEA, IRIS etc etc gross overspends) are being squandered. I mean, those folks always keep one eye on their electorate and never forget they are there to serve the people for the people, now do they... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 Just listened to the nauseating Ann Reynolds on Manx radio clip, seems she has conveniently forgotten her business case citing "niche markets" " decline of turboprops" "larger aircraft" "airports international gateway role" LOL She now congratulates the whole of Tynwald on their commitment to safety what about the rest of the business plan oh yes I forgot, so full of holes you could drive a horsedrawn tram through it Come on MHK'S you've been had again !!! Wonder when London city, Southampton, Jersey etc etc are going to announce their plans ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanna Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 totally unneccesary?So your happy for the island to go back to having 1 small airline with very small prop a/c charging whatever they like? Because without the runoff extension the big regional airlines will stop coming in here. So there goes the competition. The point in running an airport is to try and encourage as many airlines as possible to operate from your airport. more airlines serving more destinations = more passengers = more money. Having an airport doesn't mean airlines will operate from it. The airline and airport business is fiercely competitive. Airlines don't just come because an airport is there with a runway which their planes can land on. The economics of a short-haul DHC-8 are very competitive against a regional jet - unless there is very consistent demand on the route with high load factors. You could build a spanking new runway with all the bells and whistles and still no airlines come (apart from maybe a basic short haul turboprop service - as is, to meet demand - as is). In other words it would achieve nothing and be a white elephant project. If you want to bring passengers in, encourage competition and control pricing, then there are ways of doing it without building an extension. It does sound very much like a 'field of dreams' - but one which will be built with no one coming - much like Sienna airport. Sorry , the point i was trying to make is that the point in running an airport is to get as many airlines using you as possible. (shouldnt have used the word encourage) Basically without the runoff extension ronaldsway would be limited in the airlines that could operate here. (Most proper regional airlines have at least 50% regional jets in their fleet.) Why would you want to purposely stop airlines using your airport. The public complained about lack of competition, without the runoff extension we would be back to that again. ( or even worse a pile of cr4ppy cowboy airlines flying eastern bloc cr4p out of here. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 without the runoff extension we would be back to ... a pile of cr4ppy cowboy airlines... Back to???!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah 01 Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 spanna Your observations on the Island's aviation scene are usually pretty astute and well informed but you are way wide of the mark on this one. There is no concievable situation , given the Island's 'flying market', of any requirement for any larger aircraft using the airport than do at present nor is there a requirement for jets. If you hadn't noticed, the regional jet in short haul operations is dead. Why do you think flybe have invested in turboprops, as are many other airlines, and the turbo production lines at ATR and Bombardier are running at record levels? Although Ms Directress drones on about 'growth' and 'new markets' she must be regressing into a former life at BAA or wherever she came from. There is massive overcapacity (in terms of seats) as it is here, the local airlines are scraping there arses to make any profit and one may be giving up the ghost soon in any case. If you want something to do with the £40M, write off some MEA debt and get power prices down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 least there keeping a few ppl in work on the island, i say build it, its only 40 mill, drop in the ocean for some of the projects here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skig Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 spanna Your observations on the Island's aviation scene are usually pretty astute and well informed but you are way wide of the mark on this one. There is no concievable situation , given the Island's 'flying market', of any requirement for any larger aircraft using the airport than do at present nor is there a requirement for jets. If you hadn't noticed, the regional jet in short haul operations is dead. Why do you think flybe have invested in turboprops, as are many other airlines, and the turbo production lines at ATR and Bombardier are running at record levels? Although Ms Directress drones on about 'growth' and 'new markets' she must be regressing into a former life at BAA or wherever she came from. There is massive overcapacity (in terms of seats) as it is here, the local airlines are scraping there arses to make any profit and one may be giving up the ghost soon in any case. If you want something to do with the £40M, write off some MEA debt and get power prices down. Wasn't she in charge of catering at Southamton airport before her rapid rise to fame over here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 If there is a proper commercial case for extending the runway I assume that there should also be a proper commercial basis for funding the project. Does anyone know if consideration was given to financing the extension in whole or part via commercial loans? Generally doing things on a commercial basis focuses the mind and keeps cost management in focus in ways that don't seem to apply when taxpayesr funds a project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 quote name='spanna' date='Apr 17 2008, 12:42 PM' post='318217']Sorry , the point i was trying to make is that the point in running an airport is to get as many airlines using you as possible. Basically that's bullshit as far as the IOM is concerned as you're limited by the number of people that want to come here (not many) - we have about 4,000 hotel beds available so what use is increased airline capacity? There is nowhere to put these people up IF they came. Its total rubbish to say increased capacity will have any effect and its rubbish to say that the hotel bed situation would improve if flights got more frequent because there is NO reason for more people to come here. Basically without the runoff extension ronaldsway would be limited in the airlines that could operate here. (Most proper regional airlines have at least 50% regional jets in their fleet.) We are limited any way why can't people see and accept that. London City is a perfect counterpoint in that restricted land is not going to affect demand because people will always want to fly into the heart of the financial district. All we are ever going to get is a bit of business trade and on and off Island shuttles for IOM residents with family in the UK. There is no business case for increased capacity because there are no new reasons to come here emerging. ( or even worse a pile of cr4ppy cowboy airlines flying eastern bloc cr4p out of here. ) Thats all we ever have. There are rumours already circulating about the viability of the airlines we already have so what would change if capacity increased? More fly by night businesses attracted by incentives to make a dead tourist industry feel better about itself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeky boy Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 If the runway extension means that bitter divorced middle aged men will be able to fly direct to Pattaya it will be a winner And if their ex-wives can fly direct to Turkey then we can all say money well spent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.