Use this prefix for new threads for Leeds Bradford Airport
Personally I have reservations about actively promoting the free parking offering. While undoubtedly a valuable amenity for many users, the revenue derived from parking charges remains fundamentally critical to the airport's operational viability and service levels.

Airports such as LBA operate complex financial models predicated on achieving a requisite level of income per passenger (IPP). This encompasses both airline fees (e.g., landing fees) and non-aeronautical revenue streams. Parking fees constitute a significant component of the latter and are essential for the airport to meet its break-even point and maintain existing infrastructure, facilities, and passenger services to the expected standard.

Should LBA contemplate a strategic shift away from parking charges, it would necessitate a substantial compensatory increase in revenue from other non-aeronautical sources predominantly retail, food & beverage, and service concessions within the terminal. The viability of this approach hinges entirely on concessionaires generating significantly higher yields per passenger when they are already regarded as operating a "service station price" structure.

Crucially, if concession revenues prove insufficient to offset the loss of parking income, the resulting financial shortfall would inevitably necessitate increased aeronautical charges levied upon the airlines utilising the airport. Such a rise in operating costs for carriers could render certain routes, particularly thinner regional services or price-sensitive leisure routes, economically unviable. This carries the tangible risk of diminished flight frequency or even the withdrawal of services altogether from Yorkshire's principal air gateway.

Consequently, the situation presents a profound commercial dilemma: maintaining parking revenue is essential for LBA's current operational equilibrium and service offering, yet heavy reliance on it involves inherent trade-offs. It is a classic balancing act where efforts to reduce passenger costs in one area may inadvertently precipitate negative consequences elsewhere in the airport's commercial ecosystem.
 
Even a one minute walk is too much for some. I suffer from arthritis in one knee and chronic back pain, use a walking stick and I would find it difficult to walk for that long.

Yet many European airports seem to offer free drop off point parking. It seems in the U.K. every opportunity to charge us is taken, especially the motorist who is an easy target.
 
Even a one minute walk is too much for some. I suffer from arthritis in one knee and chronic back pain, use a walking stick and I would find it difficult to walk for that long.
It is but there are no disabled concessions unless they're driving an electric car!

Frankly, I find the matter rather perplexing. The expense associated with reaching the airport ought logically to be factored into the overall cost consideration when booking a flight or holiday. As a previous contributor said, passengers readily commit many hundreds of pounds for their air travel or package holiday, yet subsequently become querulous over what is, in the grand scheme, a nominal sum for utilising essential infrastructure immediately outside the terminal building.

This perspective may sound somewhat harsh to some, but it reflects a commercial reality: the extensive roadway networks leading to the terminal forecourt and the car parks themselves incur significant, ongoing expenditure for maintenance, security cameras, and operation. To illustrate, a recent visit to Bolton Abbey involved a £15 parking charge. Purchasing merely a coffee and a sandwich there could easily set one back a further £15. Given this context, the notion that an airport should provide complimentary parking seems rather curious.

After all, if you were to book a train journey departing from Leeds station, one certainly wouldn't anticipate gratis parking at the station forecourt. Why should the expectations for airport facilities be fundamentally different? The principle remains: dedicated infrastructure serving a specific travel hub necessitates funding, and user charges represent a standard, equitable method to ensure its upkeep and availability.
 
Personally I have reservations about actively promoting the free parking offering. While undoubtedly a valuable amenity for many users, the revenue derived from parking charges remains fundamentally critical to the airport's operational viability and service levels.

Airports such as LBA operate complex financial models predicated on achieving a requisite level of income per passenger (IPP). This encompasses both airline fees (e.g., landing fees) and non-aeronautical revenue streams. Parking fees constitute a significant component of the latter and are essential for the airport to meet its break-even point and maintain existing infrastructure, facilities, and passenger services to the expected standard.

Should LBA contemplate a strategic shift away from parking charges, it would necessitate a substantial compensatory increase in revenue from other non-aeronautical sources predominantly retail, food & beverage, and service concessions within the terminal. The viability of this approach hinges entirely on concessionaires generating significantly higher yields per passenger when they are already regarded as operating a "service station price" structure.

Crucially, if concession revenues prove insufficient to offset the loss of parking income, the resulting financial shortfall would inevitably necessitate increased aeronautical charges levied upon the airlines utilising the airport. Such a rise in operating costs for carriers could render certain routes, particularly thinner regional services or price-sensitive leisure routes, economically unviable. This carries the tangible risk of diminished flight frequency or even the withdrawal of services altogether from Yorkshire's principal air gateway.

Consequently, the situation presents a profound commercial dilemma: maintaining parking revenue is essential for LBA's current operational equilibrium and service offering, yet heavy reliance on it involves inherent trade-offs. It is a classic balancing act where efforts to reduce passenger costs in one area may inadvertently precipitate negative consequences elsewhere in the airport's commercial ecosystem.
If they abolish free parking then the increased numbers paying for drop-off could justify a reduction in charges. I suppose we also have to consider if the drop off area in front of the terminal could even cope with larger numbers, it looks pretty chaotic at peak times.
 
If they abolish free parking then the increased numbers paying for drop-off could justify a reduction in charges. I suppose we also have to consider if the drop off area in front of the terminal could even cope with larger numbers, it looks pretty chaotic at peak times.
It is a very good point. I have thought exactly the same and I am sure I mentioned something similar with the CEO at the Rawdon meeting. Most of the retail offering has moved airside and meet and greeters are discouraged from going to the terminal. I genuinely believe this is a mist opportunity for the airport to generate additional revenues from the public who aren't travelling. Some airports are now capitalising on this opportunity. I think Bristol airports new transport hub is going to house a Marks & Spencer shop.

"The new M&S Food will be located on the top floor of the new Public Transport Interchange (PTI), which is due to open this summer, with the brand-new Burger King located landside, before security, in the terminal entrance.
Kate Gwyther, Head of Retail, Bristol Airport said: “We’re pleased to announce that soon Bristol Airport will be home to an even better, brand-new M&S Food store. Its prime position is ideal for easy access for all departing and arriving passengers, as they will naturally use the pedestrian bridge connected to the Public Transport Interchange to enter and leave the terminal building. The new store is due to open this Summer."

In some respects airports should be encouraged to keep meet and greeters for as long as possible when seeing loved ones off, or waiting for them to land. Charge them £3 an hour in the car park, but then sell them a £4 coffee and a sandwich for a £5. Most will end up staying longer than an hour then anyway and be changed another couple of quid for staying a bit longer.
 
It is a very good point. I have thought exactly the same and I am sure I mentioned something similar with the CEO at the Rawdon meeting. Most of the retail offering has moved airside and meet and greeters are discouraged from going to the terminal. I genuinely believe this is a mist opportunity for the airport to generate additional revenues from the public who aren't travelling. Some airports are now capitalising on this opportunity. I think Bristol airports new transport hub is going to house a Marks & Spencer shop.

"The new M&S Food will be located on the top floor of the new Public Transport Interchange (PTI), which is due to open this summer, with the brand-new Burger King located landside, before security, in the terminal entrance.
Kate Gwyther, Head of Retail, Bristol Airport said: “We’re pleased to announce that soon Bristol Airport will be home to an even better, brand-new M&S Food store. Its prime position is ideal for easy access for all departing and arriving passengers, as they will naturally use the pedestrian bridge connected to the Public Transport Interchange to enter and leave the terminal building. The new store is due to open this Summer."

In some respects airports should be encouraged to keep meet and greeters for as long as possible when seeing loved ones off, or waiting for them to land. Charge them £3 an hour in the car park, but then sell them a £4 coffee and a sandwich for a £5. Most will end up staying longer than an hour then anyway and be changed another couple of quid for staying a bit longer.
I think Teesside give a discount on drop off parking if you buy a coffee in the terminal
 
Heathrow manages 100% discounts for blue badge holders and just about manages to stay afloat, so I guess it is possible to manage it, somehow.
Heathrow operates mostly high yeild full service airlines so very different from most other UK airports. Airlines are charged substantially for the privilege of using Heathrow. This is reflected in the price of airline tickets and even there the airport has introduced kiss and go charges in recent years.
 
But it’s possible, yes? These things are simply commercial decisions, that’s all.
I posted a fact, not an opinion.
I like to remain objective on these issues.
I’m a supporter of LBA (and a worker at LBA many moons ago) but everyone needs a truth telling critical friend every now and again.
It’s called love 😁
 
But it’s possible, yes? These things are simply commercial decisions, that’s all.
I posted a fact, not an opinion.
I like to remain objective on these issues.
I’m a supporter of LBA (and a worker at LBA many moons ago) but everyone needs a truth telling critical friend every now and again.
It’s called love 😁
The commercial decision is the airport needs to make money. It's a business and it needs to spend the best part of £100m on resurfacing the runway in the next few years. The airport won't gain any sympathy if it can't afford to do essential work that is needed to stay in business.
 
My understanding is that it is a planning condition that the airport provides a free drop off area.

As for parking, and drop off fees, LBA makes most of its money through these charges. Its absolutely essential to charge these fees which is why virtually all UK airports charge them. LBA is investing £200m on the terminal and more to come, but they have to repay this money with interest. The simple fact is that if we want an airport, then we have to expect these charges. Bear in mind too that the Council are demanding a reduction in the number of passengers getting to LBA by car, which in turn reduces LBA income. We've seen down the A1 what happens to airports that are deserted by airlines and make yearly losses. They cannot increase landing fees as the likes of Ryanair and Wizz will simply cut routes or leave. They've done so many times.

At Heathrow, airlines expect to and do pay significantly higher fees, but these are not low cost carriers. They have a totally different business model. Heathrow can in no way be compared to the likes of LBA. Across the hills, MAN charge these fees despite the fact they have a significant presence from national carriers such as Emirates, Turkish, Lufthansa etc.who will all pay much higher landing fees. It really is pointless people complaining about drop off charges. They're here to stay.
 

Upload Media

Postimages.org logo
Postimages.org is an external site offering FREE image hosting and optional paid subscription hosting. The site provides ready‑to‑use coding you can paste directly into your forum posts. Recommended size: 1024 × 768. You can continue to use your Forums4Airports allowance as per your membership level. Attachments can be managed through your profile settings by clicking on your Avatar. Forums4Airports is not affiliated with postimages.org

Remove Advertisements

Subscribe to help support your favourite forum and in return we'll remove all our advertisements. Your contribution will help to pay for things like site maintenance, domain name renewals and annual server charges.



Forums4aiports
Subscribe

NEW - Profile Posts

I've added a link to Postimages.org as an alternative option for posting images here on Forums4airports. You can continue to post images with us but for prolific posters who love to share lots of images, this might be a better option for you.
All checked in for my flight to Sydney from Manchester via Heathrow. Been waiting for this trip for nearly a year and now tomorrow I'll finally head to Australia and New Zealand!
If anyone would like to share their local airport news right here in our news area let me know so I can give you the correct permissions to do so. It only takes a couple of minutes to upload a news story with an accompanying image. The news items can then be shared on the site homepage by you. #TakePart #Forums4airports Bring the news to one place!
survived a redundancy scenario where I work for the 3rd time. Now it looks likely I will get to cover work for 2 other teams.. Pretty please for a payrise? That would be a no and so stay on the min wage.
Live in Market Bosworth and take each day as it comes......
Well it looks like I'm off to Australia and New Zealand next year! Booked with BA from Manchester via Heathrow with a stop in Singapore and returning with Air New Zealand and BA via LAX to Heathrow. Will circumnavigate the globe and be my first trans-Pacific flight. First long haul flight with BA as well and of course Air NZ.

Trending Hashtags

Advertisement

Back
Top Bottom
  AdBlock Detected
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks some useful and important features of our website. For the best possible site experience please take a moment to disable your AdBlocker.