"tim......" wrote:
wrote in message ...
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 19:39:01 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:21:52 on Tue, 17
Dec 2013, tim...... remarked:
Intra UK transit pax are not the problem. It's the perceived need to
steal pax from other European carries at major European "hubs", that is

I was researching flights to SA the other day and it is 20% cheaper to
fly LHR-FRA-CPT with LH than it is to fly FRA-CPT

OTOH it is 20% cheaper to fly FRA-LHR-CPT with BA than it is to fly LHR-CPT.

So the reason that LHR needs to be a hub is because BA (apparently)
can't fill a plane from LHR to CPT without "bribing" pax from Germany
to fly via London.

You really don't understand yield management, do you?

It's about selling the highest priced fares to people who insist in
direct flights, then filling the remaining seats with people on feeders
from nearby. The result maximises revenue, even if some people get
cheaper flights as a result of agreeing to be those indirect passengers.


Regardless , the whole motive behind blighting somewhere in the southeast
with another runway seems to be so that airlines and BAA can make more profit.
It has zilch to do with the UK economy other than the small amount of extra
corporation tax it would deliver which would be more than ofset by the billions
it would cost to build the thing in the first place even with partial private
finance. Its a cynical campaign by private corporations for the government to
spend huge amounts of public money on some infrastructure that will benefit
almost no one economically except themselves and their shareholders.

And their customers, employees and suppliers. And those customers will
include businesses that gain from direct flights to secondary cities in
places like China and South America.


Actually it won't be the government spending the money (but otherwise I agree)

but instead it will be the government (or rather the governing party) who
takes the political flack from all the annoyed residents.

And that's the political puzzle that they have to solve. Which is why
Boris' island will never fly as there isn't the commercial support
available to fund it. Fortunately, both the LHR and LGW options would
(more or less) be self financing so they have a "free" choice there.

Boris Island would also need a huge publicly funded transport
infrastructure to replace those the one already exists at Heathrow. Closing
Heathrow would also deeply **** off the huge business community in the
Thames Valley and west London who are there because of a Heathrow.