Airport.

[Guest]

Whilst I would not wish to see Easyjet leave the island, they cannot alone provide all the services the island needs.

I believe Aurigny are the best additional provider because, as an island based operator, they have similar issues to the Isle of Man.

I also accept that a regular twice daily service to LGW  would be great, but sadly, it is not what Easyjet are currently providing.  Furthermore, I would be surprised if their recent operations between LGW and IOM have been financially viable, indeed, what’s to stop them ceasing operations on the route at any time.  After all, the bottom line is what matters at the end of the day !
Slot issues at London airports can be resolved for essential destinations like IOM, I believe  INV and others are already availing themselves of this option.

 

Edited July 14, 2023 by Cypman

[IOM]

8 minutes ago, newaccount said:

step away from this forum and in the real world you will find no one wants to get rid of easyJet

Who said get rid of EasyJet? There is a role for them I have always maintained that but they are not the sole answer for ensuring frequent and regular connectivity to the island . 

[madmanxpilot]

In my honest opinion, if we want any form of guarantee that we are going to have a frequent and reliable air service to suit our specific needs, we need to to do one of two things. Both will involve ditching the Open Skies policy.

Option one. Enter into an agreement with a single reputable carrier on lifeline routes. In exchange for offering them exclusive rights to serve these routes, they will undertake to provide an agreed level of service with an agreed price structure. This would be a contractual arrangement.

Option two. Set up our own airline or go into a governmental partnership with a similar jurisdiction- and by that I obviously mean Guernsey and Aurigny.

If neither of these things happen we will be left at the whim of commercial providers to pick and choose when they want to come. They can cherry pick the profitable times leaving just scraps for those that provide frequency to feed on. That is what we have now, and I think we all agree it is far from ideal.

 

[newaccount]

If the population was the size of Jersey just look at what would be operating 

[madmanxpilot]

2 minutes ago, newaccount said:

If the population was the size of Jersey just look at what would be operating 

Exactly - but we are not - so we need to cut out cloth accordingly rather than strut around with delusions of grandeur.

[IOM]

44 minutes ago, newaccount said:

step away from this forum and in the real world you will find no one wants to get rid of easyJet

And also maybe ask the 4000-5000 people a year why they don’t fly to London with EasyJet and instead choose to go into London City and Heathrow! 

[The Phantom]

7 minutes ago, IOM said:

And also maybe ask the 4000-5000 people a year why they don’t fly to London with EasyJet and instead choose to go into London City and Heathrow! 

City is much better if you're going to central London on business (usually just as a day trip) in my experience.  

[asitis]

From the moment the administration in 2006 embraced the idea of Heathrow on Sea and 2.5 million passengers a year, commercially the airport has gone downhill.

It is about time we realised we are not some major hub with connections to Europe and beyond, we are a small island who need regular, reliable air links to many parts of the UK. Ignore cost for a minute, but this is exactly what we have lost, we have sacrificed lots of things on the altar of easyJet.

Open skies is a nonsense for us, we don't have sufficient footfall for open skies to work, why do we have an exclusive steam packet, because we know that the traffic is insufficient for two carriers. 

I never could understand why Loganair had the patient transfer contract, then struggled to fill the aircraft because easy had plundered the rest of the seats. We have not got healthy competition what we have is one carrier struggling on scraps being supported by subsidy. 

[Nellie]

24 minutes ago, IOM said:

And also maybe ask the 4000-5000 people a year why they don’t fly to London with EasyJet and instead choose to go into London City and Heathrow! 

I think you mean 4000-5000 a month!

[IOM]

2 minutes ago, Nellie said:

I think you mean 4000-5000 a month!

Sorry yes my mistake . 

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Nellie said:

I think you mean 4000-5000 a month!

It's actually more like 2000.  And falling.

Edited to add:  Sorry I thought you were just meaning City rather than LCY and LHR combined.  Combined they were about 5000, though City is still falling.  And in June LGW, despite its problems, was still up on 2022.

Edited July 14, 2023 by Roger Mexico

[IOM]

3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

It's actually more like 2000.  And falling.

Really ? 3211 to Heathrow in June and 2046 to London City . By my reckoning that’s more than 5000 in the month ! 

[IOM]

2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

It's actually more like 2000.  And falling.

Edited to add:  Sorry I thought you were just meaning City rather than LCY and LHR combined.  Combined they were about 5000, though City is still falling.  And in June LGW, despite its problems, was still up on 2022.

In your analysis you did not point out that Heathrow has increased significantly. In fact in May there was a net 500 more passengers using Loganair into London and around 200 in June . So yes London City has dropped but clearly more people want to fly to Heathrow. I think it demonstrates the point I have made before that there are different markets and customer needs and a single airport approach for London  is not what people want . 

[Roger Mexico]

7 hours ago, IOM said:

In your analysis you did not point out that Heathrow has increased significantly. In fact in May there was a net 500 more passengers using Loganair into London and around 200 in June . So yes London City has dropped but clearly more people want to fly to Heathrow. I think it demonstrates the point I have made before that there are different markets and customer needs and a single airport approach for London  is not what people want . 

I agree that LHR and LCY are separate markets.  City depends on traditional business traffic and that simply hasn't returned much after Covid - and was in decline even before.  LCY passenger figures were only 60% of 2019 last year and the decline of Canary Wharf as business consolidates in the City of London won't help.  And LCY has the problem that it need two flights a day to be most effective and there may not be the passengers for more than one.

Heathrow has long haul as well as business and I pointed earlier to it having an average loading of 42 in April - nearer to the alleged break-even of 50, but still not there.  But we also don't know if subsidy removal would mean that fares would rise and lower traffic.  And the increase for June over 2022 was indeed 522, but Gatwick was up 805, despite all the problems.  People are still voting with their feet that way.

[Amadeus]

Gatwick seems to have weather related restrictions in place today. We’re stuck here for an extra hour. May have a knock on effect for Afterthought Airfield?

At least Amsterdam has a nice airport so don’t mind waiting. Security was great. Don’t have to take anything out anymore. Even my water bottle was ok to go through x ray and staff were really friendly. Makes a big difference in experience and time needed.