Great news for Shannon

globemaster1986

MYOB wrote: »

NOC is not SNN. Just because routes were unprofitable at SNN does not mean that they will be unprofitable at NOC.

The ONLY point I made about fuel was that any putative reduction in SNN charges will only be a fraction of how much fuel has gone up since they left.




We'll see. I'm extremely confident that the standard Ryanair bull**** and bluster will be just that.

Expect to see court action if exclusive deals are done. They're only legal for PSO routes.

Yes but our country is a small one and both airports are drawing from part of same catchment area.

Ya thats what I was afraid of because Ryanair could just come in and bully another carrier off

L1011

globemaster1986 wrote: »

Yes but our country is a small one and both airports are drawing from part of same catchment area.

...except they're not. Sure, Galway's between the two of them, but SNN's main catchment area and NOC's main catchment area are *not the same places*.

globemaster1986

MYOB wrote: »

...except they're not. Sure, Galway's between the two of them, but SNN's main catchment area and NOC's main catchment area are *not the same places*.

Therefore "part of"! And by that I was referring specifically to Galway!

L1011

globemaster1986 wrote: »

Therefore "part of"! And by that I was referring specifically to Galway!

"part of the same catchment area" does not equal "small parts of their catchment areas overlap"

And the bulk of Galway's airport traffic has gone to DUB since the motorway opened, not SNN or NOC. Hence GWY closing and there being huge demand for express airport buses.

globemaster1986

MYOB wrote: »

"part of the same catchment area" does not equal "small parts of their catchment areas overlap"

And the bulk of Galway's airport traffic has gone to DUB since the motorway opened, not SNN or NOC. Hence GWY closing and there being huge demand for express airport buses.

Galway has a large population! Of course they have gone to DUB as it has more choice, choice they might have got in SNN before. Are you really anti SNN or what because you seem to have serious problems with it?

L1011

globemaster1986 wrote: »

Are you really anti SNN or what because you seem to have serious problems with it?

I've no problems with SNN.

I've problems with cheerleaders (for any airport) who seem to assume that their chosen base has some innate right to routes, ignoring economic conditions (or the physical size of the runway, in the case of the GWY cheerleading thread recently) that prevent them from happening.

If the routes were viable, they would already be operating. Any reduction in airport charges is not going to cause routes to start en-masse.

globemaster1986

MYOB wrote: »

I've no problems with SNN.

I've problems with cheerleaders (for any airport) who seem to assume that their chosen base has some innate right to routes, ignoring economic conditions (or the physical size of the runway, in the case of the GWY cheerleading thread recently) that prevent them from happening.

If the routes were viable, they would already be operating. Any reduction in airport charges is not going to cause routes to start en-masse.

Innate right? Cheerleader?

I'm from the region and I want SNN to succeed, guilty. I do not believe we have an innate right but I believe we should have choice. I see no reason why routes that people used in the past from SNN and today use from other airports are no longer available in SNN should not be viable if restored. As xflyer said he is going to Dublin for his hols, SNN not an option as no route! Economic circumstances are not some kind of kill all explanation. Foreign holidays are one of the things people have not given up, people look forward to them all year. If SNN can be made to compete with Knock I believe it is viable.

L1011

If there was demand for routes, routes would exist. Why is this so hard to countenance?

Routes existed, there was not sufficient demand at a profitable ticket price, hence they no longer exist. Its not like nobody has tried - many other airlines than FR have pulled out of SNN (and not gone anywhere) and many other airlines than FR have gone in to NOC and not SNN; despite there being extremely little difference in price, particularly when NOCs departure theft is counted.

MYOB

MYOB wrote: »

I've no problems with SNN.

I've problems with cheerleaders (for any airport) who seem to assume that their chosen base has some innate right to routes, ignoring economic conditions (or the physical size of the runway, in the case of the GWY cheerleading thread recently) that prevent them from happening.

If the routes were viable, they would already be operating. Any reduction in airport charges is not going to cause routes to start en-masse.

MYOB, do you thinks its right of the government to undermine Knock and Kerry which have strived to be as efficient and lean as possible by removing this debt from SNN.
Knock and Kerry will both have to work through there debt passing it off to passengers, while the 100 million debt write off for SNN means eventually that will be used as an incentive to travel from that airport with reduced costs.

The government have basically rewarded bad business. D Calleary will be raising this in the Dail tomorrow to now look for a debt write down for Knock to allow them compete in what appears to be a rigged market. Surely the government have opened a can of worm for themselves. Hopefully this state aid will be investigated by higher authorities than Leo Vradkar.

L1011

Deleted User wrote: »

MYOB, do you thinks its right of the government to undermine Knock and Kerry which have strived to be as efficient and lean as possible by removing this debt from SNN.
Knock and Kerry will both have to work through there debt passing it off to passengers, while the 100 million debt write off for SNN means eventually that will be used as an incentive to travel from that airport with reduced costs.

The government have basically rewarded bad business. D Calleary will be raising this in the Dail tomorrow to now look for a debt write down for Knock to allow them compete in what appears to be a rigged market.

I don't think it should have got off without at least a decent % of the debt, seeing as its mostly from capital.

Sterling Archer

Demand = routes. correct
but the daa pricing cancels out demand, so therefore with the DAA gone, and SNN dropping there prices things could pick-up

and the debt is part of the Daas debt, i do think they got a lucky break there tho, I'd love to see the airport flourish, but they are going to have to work seriously hard at it, and being under a government body probably won't help, i'm unsure if i'd like to see ryanair come in as there are like a child most of the time, so unpredictable if they don't get there own way.

Cookiemunster

xflyer wrote: »

Look we all live in the real world. Even the likes of me who has a bit of information on the subject. Last year my wife and I wanted a holiday. We fancied the Canaries. We went to a travel agent. After some discussion we decided on Tenerife. We had a choice, Knock or Dublin. Well Dublin is two hours away and Knock one hour from Galway. Tough decision? No.

SNN didn't come into it. Ryanair or anyone else didn't provide the service to Tenerife from Shannon. We all know why. If Ryanair don't fly out of Shannon then it's because Shannon won't play Ryanair's game. So I travel to the big hill in the middle of Mayo because the people there are pragmatic enough to realise that there is no reason anyone will go there unless the price is right.

That's the leap Shannon needs to make.

You can bitch about Ryanair as much as you like but their job is to make money for Ryanair not for some airport with a history.

Actually Ryanair do fly to Tenerife from Shannon year round. The also fly to Lanzarote from Shannon year round.

Tea 1000

I think anyone who thinks the DAA weren't operating in Shannon's best interests are being a little naive. I don't know how viable routes are from SNN, but I'm convinced that it can do better than it is doing if it was to be operated cleverly. How much better remains to be seen, and whether this new crowd will be any good or not is another question.
But expensive parking dissuades passengers and expensive fees dissuades airlines. I think an aggressive campaign to attract airlines and routes is needed to start bringing passengers from Galway and up to at least half way up the M7 down to Shannon. Nearly all successful business do the same thing. Establish demand first by promotion and low charges, work out costs when the demand is established.
I also think that the idea of being Ryanair's bitch is the worst possible thing that can happen is a little narrow-minded. You certainly don't want to be an airport under the demands of an airline, but in a small way being one airlines bitch is better than being alone and closed down.

mayotom

globemaster1986 wrote: »

You keep bringing up how fuel prices have changed, my point is they have changed everywhere so that is not a reason for moving routes to NOC.

Yes we have motorway to Dublin, but most of us would fly out of Shannon given the choice regardless of motorway or cart tracks.

Yes we will have to see what happens but I can say with some certainty that if they do open new routes (especially to holiday sestinations) they will get bums on seats! And they can be any carrier. Ryanair bullying them may come later but as mayotom said an exclusive deal with a carrier to prevent Ryanair doing this would be an option, if it's possible, not sure if that can be done legally.

I never said that, however I don't think that keeping Ryanair out of SNN is the way to go, it is anti competitive and simply makes no sense. As I said at the start I still think that this is great for Shannon. I don't think that the Knock on effect for Knock is bad, it may bring some competition but Knock is a far more competitive airport with a better catchment area due to lack of Roads etc. Over all I see this as been good for Aviation in Ireland

highlydebased

mayotom wrote: »

with a better catchment area due to lack of Roads etc.

I think that is an oxymoron.

mayotom

highlydebased wrote: »

I think that is an oxymoron.

or a paradox, the point been that the Shannon Catchment area has a much higher population, but it is also much more accessible to the larger airports like DUB and ORK. Therefore Knock with a smaller population would still have more potential passengers..

clintondaly

Ryanair will keep a route open no matter where as long as it makes money.

Whats going to happen if the proposed airport in Athlone goes ahead?

As for ideas as to what to do with Shannon,yes Cargo is an option as is the humanitarian hub,why not have a facility like Westpark with similiar Tax incentives and take some of the Leasing companies out of the IFSC.

Or,how about using Shannon as a hub for Transatlantic Ryanair like Airlines.Ship everyone from Europe(using secondary airports) into Shannon,use the preclearance facilities,everyone gets on to B757/767 A330/340 etc. etc and fly them all to secondary airports in the US,feasible?

A320

clintondaly wrote: »

Whats going to happen if the proposed airport in Athlone goes ahead?

Huh????

L1011

A320 wrote: »

Huh????

It won't happen.

Some private developer has suggested building a "Midlands International" airport/ cargo hub (why would anyone hub where there is zero native traffic?) for near Clara.

kub

clintondaly wrote: »

Ryanair will keep a route open no matter where as long as it makes money.

Whats going to happen if the proposed airport in Athlone goes ahead?

As for ideas as to what to do with Shannon,yes Cargo is an option as is the humanitarian hub,why not have a facility like Westpark with similiar Tax incentives and take some of the Leasing companies out of the IFSC.

Or,how about using Shannon as a hub for Transatlantic Ryanair like Airlines.Ship everyone from Europe(using secondary airports) into Shannon,use the preclearance facilities,everyone gets on to B757/767 A330/340 etc. etc and fly them all to secondary airports in the US,feasible?

Firstly, love the Clare but more importantly from Cork , great ideas hopefully someone down in Shannon reads that. But as mentioned, Airport in Athlone, Huh?

clintondaly

kub wrote: »

clintondaly wrote: »

Ryanair will keep a route open no matter where as long as it makes money.

Whats going to happen if the proposed airport in Athlone goes ahead?

As for ideas as to what to do with Shannon,yes Cargo is an option as is the humanitarian hub,why not have a facility like Westpark with similiar Tax incentives and take some of the Leasing companies out of the IFSC.

Or,how about using Shannon as a hub for Transatlantic Ryanair like Airlines.Ship everyone from Europe(using secondary airports) into Shannon,use the preclearance facilities,everyone gets on to B757/767 A330/340 etc. etc and fly them all to secondary airports in the US,feasible?

Firstly, love the Clare but more importantly from Cork , great ideas hopefully someone down in Shannon reads that. But as mentioned, Airport in Athlone, Huh?

Answered just above,part of the submission for the Chinese manufacturing showcase facility in Athlone.

L1011

clintondaly wrote: »

Answered just above,part of the submission for the Chinese manufacturing showcase facility in Athlone.

It'd make more sense if it was part of that - but it was suggested before it! I despair at some of the boomtime gibberish this country came up with...

roundymac

clintondaly wrote: »

Answered just above,part of the submission for the Chinese manufacturing showcase facility in Athlone.

An Taisce have lodged an objection to that proposal. first of many I would suspect.

Suits

clintondaly wrote: »

Or,how about using Shannon as a hub for Transatlantic Ryanair like Airlines.Ship everyone from Europe(using secondary airports) into Shannon,use the preclearance facilities,everyone gets on to B757/767 A330/340 etc. etc and fly them all to secondary airports in the US,feasible?

"Ryanair" type airlines dont like wasting money...which this would be. If you flew to a secondary airport in the US chances are it would not have a massive amount of foreign/European traffic so there wouldnt be too much of a que at immigration. The pre-clearance was set up to try and cut down on ques in the major US airports...the ones at the secondary airports are less.

In any case this would be a re-emergence of the dreaded "Shannon Stopover" which in name and appearance would not be a great PR move....

Tenger

Suits wrote: »

.....If you flew to a secondary airport in the US chances are it would not have a massive amount of foreign/European traffic so there wouldnt be too much of a que at immigration. The pre-clearance was set up to try and cut down on ques in the major US airports...the ones at the secondary airports are less.....

Actually the SNN/DUB CBP pre-clearance combined with the Open Skies agreement between USA/EU allows access to any/and all airports in the USA.

Without the CBP pre-clearance any international flight into the USA must operate into a limited number of internationally equipped airports. In theory you could fly from SNN into La Guardia (LGA) thus by-passing both Newark and JFK for flights into New York. (LGA currently does not have direct flights to/from Europe)

Avoiding the queues in EWR/JFK/BOS/ORD/PHL is just a secondary benefit!!

Suits

Tenger wrote: »

Actually the SNN/DUB CBP pre-clearance combined with the Open Skies agreement between USA/EU allows access to any/and all airports in the USA.

Without the CBP pre-clearance any international flight into the USA must operate into a limited number of internationally equipped airports. In theory you could fly from SNN into La Guardia (LGA) thus by-passing both Newark and JFK for flights into New York. (LGA currently does not have direct flights to/from Europe)

Avoiding the queues in EWR/JFK/BOS/ORD/PHL is just a secondary benefit!!

I cant see any airline stopping in Shannon though. If "Ryanatlantic" wanted to fly to the US I'd imagine they'd sort immigration issues at the departure/destination airports as they would most likely get a lot of traffic from the airline. They'd create an immigration booth in LGA, Buffalo, Midway, Oakland, Providence etc I'd imagine if multiple flights a day were coming in from across european bases and there wasnt one already.

Dacian

Actually Suits, any LCC across the Atlantic is restricted to the airports it can serve.

While Open Skies allows EU airlines to start routes to any US city, they are still limited by US CBP who do not have international facilities in every airport. And you cannot 'just sort out immigration at departure/arrival airport' for the USA. EI, who are a very well established EU-US airline, have been in discussions with the CBP for over a year about some of their difficulties with the current set-up.

Ireland is the only country (other than Canada and Bermuda) to have such facilities. This is a huge advantage, and the entire logic supporting SNN as a possible TransAtlantic LCC hub operation. In practise only flights from Ireland can take full advantage of the EU-USA Open Skies agreement.

Davidth88

Tea 1000 wrote: »

But expensive parking dissuades passengers and expensive fees dissuades airlines.

I looked at this , parking at Shannon is nearly 2 euro per day MORE EXPENSIVE than Dublin , thats mad . Interestingly it's the same sort of price as Cork and knock.

I am surprised that the provincial airports don't undercut Dublin .

I think Shannon is missing out on a trick with the US customs / Immigration . Look at the BA001 flight form London City .

They should be talking to LH/AF and others and see if similar flights could be marketed.

urajoke

Davidth88 wrote: »

.

I think Shannon is missing out on a trick with the US customs / Immigration . Look at the BA001 flight form London City .

They should be talking to LH/AF and others and see if similar flights could be marketed.

First of all they would have to find the French and German version of London City airport and then try and get AF/LH to fly from it.

I think you are missing the point with this route, it's very specific to one airport London City, right beside a major financial district on a dock with water on three sides and a very short runway. Why do you think BA haven't increased flights or started more ? WE ARE IN A GLOBAL FINANCIAL RECESSION. BA are very lucky to be still getting enough business travellers to keep this route running. It suits BA to operate this route as the flight needs to make a westbound stop anyway for fuel and it just happens that Shannon is so quiet that they have no problems with delays and it has US customs and Immigration so the passengers can fill the time productively while they refuel.

Airlines don't open routes because aviation enthusiasts thing they should.

People who live near Shannon should wake up and smell the coffee. The airports future is very limited and once again forcing/encouraging airlines to make unnecessary stopovers to keep it open and running is NOT the way to market yourself.

Dacian

Davidth88 wrote: »

.....I think Shannon is missing out on a trick with the US customs / Immigration . Look at the BA001 flight from London City .
They should be talking to LH/AF and others and see if similar flights could be marketed.

I agree that the CBP pre-clearance is something that SNN could try to market a lot more aggressively.

However the BA LCY-SNN-JFK service is extremely specific. This route set-up would probably not work for any other city pair in the World. Financial ties between London and New York are closer than anywhere else, then you have the location of LCY in relation to LHR/LGW. Time is money on this route and the A318 service offers time in return for a lot of cash.
The only comparable route would be the SIN-JFK service by Singapore airlines, they use an A340 in all Business class config for a direct service.