Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Strumms

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

They've got plenty of other airports crying out for passengers and happy to let them land for next to nothing and still keep their load factors up.
A manager in Ryanair will be faced with this problem some time soon; do they let the numbers of passengers in Dublin pass a threshold and their passenger charges go up for every single passenger or do they divert a plane to another route.
Don't shoot the messenger.

You are not a messenger you are just making up rubbish. Ryanair will pass the charges on or absorb as they see fit. They won't pull routes they may threaten all sorts but at the end of the day they have competition out of DUB and beyond who would be in a prime position to take advantage of any pull out partial or otherwise. Its more likley that a second runway would even act as a catalyst for more expansion by FR at DUB not the other way around.

18MonthsaSlave

Agreed. forestall rather than prevent.
unintended consequence of the decision and once the threshold passes they'll bundle back in.

Ryanair can't suck it up or pass it on. Their business model doesn't allow it. People fly with them because they are cheap. If they aren't cheap then a significant proportion of their passengers don't fly at all.

Their profit for 2013 according to this was 569m with 79.3m passengers.

https://www.ryanair.com/doc/investor/present/quarter4_2013.pdf

569/79.3 is an average profit of €7.17 per passenger fare. They simply don't have the built in profitability to pay another 2 to 4 euro per passenger in passenger charges and their average customer is very price sensitive so putting a headline fare up from their average of 48 euro to 52 euro is enough to leave them stuggling to fill a plane.

They have an interesting business model in that no competitor has a cost base that can challenge so they don't loose many passengers to competitors. They do loose passengers if they can't set the ticket prices low enough. This is a big business weakness for them as their business model is vulnerable to costs they can't control e.g. fuel. A fuel price spike could wipe out their profits quarter after quarter. They are paying more in airport charges than they are making profit on passengers. They are a low margin business.

Any useful feedback/critique of the point I make above beyond "you simply haven't got a clue" is welcome.

L1011

The risk involved in your scenario of a competitor taking hold and building loyalty is so high it'd never be risked, and any exec that tried it would be out on their ear.

We are critiquing, you're just selectively responding.

notharrypotter

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Their profit for 2013 according to this was 569m with 79.3m passengers.

How many were ex-Dublin would have a greater impact on their Dublin fares rather than what was carried across their network.

lord lucan

If hypothetically FR did engage in such a campaign against the daa I could see a scenario where the daa go the regulator/government and ask them to give them the go ahead and most likely would get it to under the guise of DUBs strategic importance and the future growth of the economy.

Anyways,FR might be unconventional but they're not mad. There's been enough bad blood between FR and the daa over the years,it needs to end for everyone's benefit.

18MonthsaSlave

MYOB wrote: »

The risk involved in your scenario of a competitor taking hold and building loyalty is so high it'd never be risked, and any exec that tried it would be out on their ear.

We are critiquing, you're just selectively responding.

You overstate risk. Dublin is a periphery airport with limited growth potential and is just as unattractive to any other airline if landing charges are high.

They can be a dog in a manger and engage in predatory business practices while still reducing total passenger numbers until they are ready to recommit to growth of passenger numbers in Dublin. They have driven off other new entrants to airports around europe and they'll continue to do so.

Strumms

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Agreed. forestall rather than prevent.
unintended consequence of the decision and once the threshold passes they'll bundle back in.

Ryanair can't suck it up or pass it on. Their business model doesn't allow it. People fly with them because they are cheap. If they aren't cheap then a significant proportion of their passengers don't fly at all.

Their profit for 2013 according to this was 569m with 79.3m passengers.

https://www.ryanair.com/doc/investor/present/quarter4_2013.pdf

569/79.3 is an average profit of €7.17 per passenger fare. They simply don't have the built in profitability to pay another 2 to 4 euro per passenger in passenger charges and their average customer is very price sensitive so putting a headline fare up from their average of 48 euro to 52 euro is enough to leave them stuggling to fill a plane.

They have an interesting business model in that no competitor has a cost base that can challenge so they don't loose many passengers to competitors. They do loose passengers if they can't set the ticket prices low enough. This is a big business weakness for them as their business model is vulnerable to costs they can't control e.g. fuel. A fuel price spike could wipe out their profits quarter after quarter. They are paying more in airport charges than they are making profit on passengers. They are a low margin business.

Any useful feedback/critique of the point I make above beyond "you simply haven't got a clue" is welcome.

people will pay the extra if the fares are still competitive. 52 vs 48 Euros for example ? I don't think that is a deal breaker to most peoples pocket. They can still be competitively cheaper then say the likes of EI who will also don't forget have to deal with those charges. FR are not going to cut their nose off to spite their face and your selective argument and hypothetical scenarios don't lend any weight to your argument. Ryanair will adapt as will avery one else.

L1011

You're overestimating FRs importance at DUB hugely.

You've been given multiple solid reasons why your scenario will not happen - and you're ignoring them or attempting to write them off illogically. FR are a business, not a spoilt child's play toy and they're not going to hand traffic away for short term gain (if even, as this would lead to lower revenue)

18MonthsaSlave

Unlike others here who proudly declare they don't fly Ryanair, I do.
I understand the mentality of their Customers. I'm one of them. As I have flexibility as to when I fly I pick up the cheapest flights. I fly when it is cheap.
My next return flight is 67.30 return in to Dublin.
If airport charges go up due to the cost of a new runway I'll still fly home but less often. I'll just hop in to my car and take a break in Europe(this is something Irish people don't get, an alternative to Ryanair isn't another airline, an alternative to Ryanair is going somewhere else by car or train for your holiday or weekend break). so the balance between trips home and roadtrips swing towards roadtrips.
I've flown with Ryanair in to Knock and Kerry(so cheap!!) because there isn't much difference to me in travel time from those airports to home.
fortunately for the DAA most of the flying population are captive in the greater Dublin area but if Ryanair move their planes from Dublin to Knock or Kerry or Shannon or Cork(all are equally convenient or inconvenient) I'll still be booking flights on those routes too.

DAA want passengers on aircraft who fit quite well on the existing runway to finance the new one.
Even if Ryanair do not object and pull planes from Dublin the increase in passenger charges will have to be passed on and load factor will drop because Customers are so price sensitive.

Look at the routes available from Hahn or Charleoi. A prospective holiday maker will think to themselves; Greece? Spain? Dublin? Italy?
Right now there are flights to Barcelona, Pisa and Kerry for 19.99 and of course the significant other comes along so any difference in price is double between the more expensive dublin and the alternate attractive tourist destinations.

18MonthsaSlave

MYOB wrote: »

You're overestimating FRs importance at DUB hugely.

hugely? Ryanair and Aerlingus are 80% of passenger traffic at Dublin if I remember correctly.

L1011

You are still ignoring that there's growth in DUB independent of FRs. Even if every single one of their passengers from the petulent withdrawals didn't change airline it'd still hit 25m, with FR a smaller player

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

hugely? Ryanair and Aerlingus are 80% of passenger traffic at Dublin if I remember correctly.

They're not the dominant carrier like they are at most other bases and really all others of this scale. The airport grows outwith their traffic and is not at their beck and call

And they know this which is why they won't take massive risks to maybe (as theres no proof they'd actually make even the same on other routes) save a few quid for a year or two max

Growth for Dublin excluding FR and EI.

Ethiopian airlines
Finnair
WOW air
FLYBE
British airways
Emirates
Air Canada Rouge
WestJet
Lufthansa

All in the last 6 months or in the next 8 months.

That's only some off the top of my head there will be others.

LXFlyer

Luxair also.

denis halpenny

look dublin needs a new runway and more gates end of story.just build them have it done it will all fall into place.

18MonthsaSlave

MYOB wrote: »

You are still ignoring that there's growth in DUB independent of FR.s Even ifif every single one of their passengers from the petulent withdrawals didn't change airline it'd still hit 25m, with FR a smaller player

Ever the optimist. Ireland's economy is being primed with money Ireland doesn't have.
Here they are blaming the drop in GDP for not reaching expected passenger numbers in 2013.
http://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/2013%20Regulated%20Entity%20Accounts%20ABRIDGED.pdf

"Passengers in Dublin Airport for 2013 were 20.2 million (2012: 19.1 million), which is 1.1 million or 5% below the CAR passenger forecast of 21.3 million (2012: 20.5 million) reflecting the substantial fall in Irish Gross Domestic Product post 2008."

Ending of Double Irish tax agreements and stateless companies is going to make a big change to GDP. Whoever gets in to government will go in to austerity mode for the first 2 to 3 years before trying to prime the economy for an election in 2019/2020 so don't expect current growth pattens to continue in a linear fashion.

What's more you'll see from the financial accounts that Dublin Airport isn't especially profitable but Ryanair is cheap easy money; their passengers flow through costing DAA practically nothing as most of them carry their luggage on their backs and interact with no-one. If they send less to Dublin Airport then Dublin Airport being the public sector organisation that it is in its blood won't be able to cut its costs.

denis halpenny

passenger numbers are going up all the time and will continue to do so.now is the time to build the second runway and extension off piers more gates needed.its like everything else in this country,taking to long to get things done enough talk just do it.

Razor44

on the FR point, they would actually benefit from a new runway, (i dont know the figs but im sure someone does) FR have a huge amount of aircraft heading out of Dublin between 6-8am, at the min 28 and 34 are used to help reduce the backlog of aircraft waiting to go. a new runway would increase the amount of movements per hour that DUB can mange,this would be a massive help in the morning rush. For instance look at the other morning, two aircraft clipped wings at a key taxi way intersection, effective closing the airport in the middle of this rush. having the new runway would have keep flights landing and taking off.

also aside from all that, as has been said before, 10/28 isnt in great nick at the min and will need work to stay operational.

L1011

Passengers with no bags not using the shops are the ones who are far less profitable for airports - and if you're so convinced growth could falter you need to remember it'll hit FR just as hard and make your entire scenario irrelevant. You can't use the same point both for and against

denis halpenny

remember this is ireland i think they make up the prices as they go along the runway is badly needed and the main runway is even too short as it is time to get things done.

18MonthsaSlave

MYOB wrote: »

Passengers with no bags not using the shops are the ones who are far less profitable for airports - and if you're so convinced growth could falter you need to remember it'll hit FR just as hard and make your entire scenario irrelevant. You can't use the same point both for and against

10.30 euro or something similar they get out of ryanair passengers if the DAA passenger charge page is to be believed. I'd like to be getting 10.30 out of about 7 million passengers wired directly to my account every year without any effort involved before you even start counting parking at the short or long term car parks.
I saw the stats somewhere online but can't find them now. Aer Lingus and Ryanair are 80% of the business and Aer Lingus are larger than Ryanair at Dublin.

Ryanair are hugely mobile:
exhibit A:
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/ryanair-will-not-add-summer-routes-to-cork-over-high-charges-290328.html

What's more they are not limited by borders. If they can make more flying to north africa or eastern europe then that is what they'll do.

The clamour to build a second runway could backfire very badly on DAA and Dublin itself if the costs are pushed so high through building a new runway that Airlines can't make the numbers work and decide to fly elsewhere.

Peregrine

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

The clamour to build a second airport could backfire very badly on DAA and Dublin itself if the costs are pushed so high through building a new runway that Airlines can't make the numbers work and decide to fly elsewhere.

Who's building a second airport now?

18MonthsaSlave

Razor44 wrote: »

on the FR point, they would actually benefit from a new runway, (i dont know the figs but im sure someone does) FR have a huge amount of aircraft heading out of Dublin between 6-8am,

they might benefit from a new runway but they don't need a long one and as I understand it the expense involved is much greater because of the length.
An airline with a fleet of 737 airplanes would resent having their passengers paying for additional infrastructure they'll never use.

L1011

Processing 7m passengers != "without any effort"

You were trying to convince us that visiting emigrants were a huge amount of the growth and now you're trying to convince us that the traffic is mobile tourist traffic that can be switched off like a tap. Which one is it?

You haven't got a consistent point on anything here, you're twisting and turning as points get refuted and trying to cover old ground in a contradictory manner

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

they might benefit from a new runway but they don't need a long one and as I understand it the expense involved is much greater because of the length.
An airline with a fleet of 737 airplanes would resent having their passengers paying for additional infrastructure they'll never use.

This is getting to the surreal now - FR fly to airports with much longer runways every day.

Idbatterim

the new a350 will be able to take off from DUB at MTOW even with the current runway length..

just another observation, 18monthslave mentioned FR are highly price sensitive and will simply move planes away from DUB, I often fly out of Leeds Bradford to sun destinations etc and the fares from here are far cheaper, despite the fact its a stones throw... You would imagine Dublin would be an airport where they can earn better yields as Irish arent very price sensitive, dont have the option of saying "we will just stay at home in the sunny weather or take the train or drive somewhere else (like they do on the continent)... Long story short, Ryanair here seem to be onto a cash cow (on sun destinations at least), the way the English companies that operate in retail and food etc in Ireland are...

Ryanair would huff and puff if the airport tax was E5!

18MonthsaSlave

MYOB wrote: »

Processing 7m passengers != "without any effort"

I fly out of a Ryanair Base which is very very humble but still carries many millions of Ryanair passengers.

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

I fly out of a Ryanair Base which is very very humble but still carries many millions of Ryanair passengers.

And? I don't see any context to this statement.

Razor44

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

they might benefit from a new runway but they don't need a long one and as I understand it the expense involved is much greater because of the length.
An airline with a fleet of 737 airplanes would resent having their passengers paying for additional infrastructure they'll never use.

ROFL you can still only have 1 plane on 1 runway at a time, so if there are 2 runways that equals 2 planes able to go at them same time...

anyways im no longer going to feed the trolls,

18MonthsaSlave

MYOB wrote: »

This is getting to the surreal now - FR fly to airports with much longer runways every day.

They don't need to fly from longer runways.