Leeds Bradford Airport Parking

[tleeds]

Thanks for that LS16 and sorry for the late reply on this matter.

It seems the Yorkshire Evening Post has another negative opinion about the airport. This article is 4 days old but it seems they are committed to publishing 'negative-news' about the airport.

"Safety-Fears" is now what they like to call it....

[textarea]Safety fears as drivers dodge Leeds Bradford Airport drop off fees

Fears over safety have been raised as motorists try to dodge a £2 charge introduced by Leeds-Bradford Airport for using its forecourt drop-off facility.

The charge was introduced earlier this year and, although free parking for up to one hour is available in the airport’s long-stay car parks, an increasing number of motorists are opting to drop people off on Whitehouse Lane.

A report to be discussed by senior councillors on Wednesday says this has led to more u-turns being made along the lane by drivers not wanting to pay the £2 charge.

It adds: “This change has had a negative impact on the public highway, particularly at peak times, with an increase in the number of instances of parking on double yellow lines to drop off as a means of avoiding the £2 charge.”

Source: http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/n ... _1_3842165[/textarea]

I can commend them that it isn't as negative as some of the other articles we have seen from them, but why not advertise the increasing number of Winter Charters that are now available from the airport... surely they can commend the airport on that.....

 

[whoshotjimmi]

I genuinely believe that the articles that have appeared recently are indicative of the mood of the general public. It is essentially a stealth tax. Although other options are available, they are not popular or convenient. It is a relatively small charge in reality but it is at a huge cost to the public image of the airport, as indicated by the articles.

With regards to presenting positive articles about the airport, it really is the job of LBA press department to ensure that these stories are being highlighted. The paper will print whatever, by whoever, if it has a reason to do so (sensationalism/money etc).

 

[TheLocalYokel]

The daft thing is that if the airport could persuade their customer airlines to increase each fare by £2 and pay the airport this additional revenue in the charges they pay no-one would even raise an eyebrow, yet the cost to the public would be the same. In fact, it would be more because cars usually carry more than one occupant and not everyone travels to the airport by car.

I know the idea is not feasible but I'm suggesting a principle.

It's the same with the extra charges such as credit card fees that airlines charge.

If an airline charged, say, £40 for a hop to Europe most people would think it wasn't a bad deal. Yet if they charge £30 plus a £10 credit card fee (or whatever euphemism they use nowadays) people are up in arms.

More and more regional airports are levying these drop-off parking fees as the money airlines pay them in charges is diminishing all the time. If people want a decent service at a reasonable price from their local airport they will have to accept that airports are businesses and have to survive like any other.

I can guarantee that if the owners of Leeds-Bradford Airport announced they were to close the facility for good but that a passenger fee of, say, £5 per head would keep it open people would be jamming the local radio station switchboards and local newspaper columns demanding this be done.

Look at Plymouth Airport. Only 100,000 people a year used it yet since its closure was announced the topic (and Plymouth Argyle's parlous position) has been the major source of discussion in the city for many, many weeks with all sorts of unlikely people demanding the airport be kept open, if necessary by using significant amounts of council money.

People love to whinge and newspapers love to stoke up the moaning - they think it sells more papers and, ergo, more advertising revenue for them.

 

[Aviador]

The new undercover airport parking facility at the industrial estate has recently opened. The car park was recently granted planning permission by Leeds City Council a few months ago. The new car park has already caused a bit of a stir by calling itself "Leeds Bradford Airport Parking". This hasn't gone down well with passengers who have being getting confused and parking in the airports onsite car park incurring additional charges. It's naughty of the new company to name itself after the airport and I imagine the airport authority will be far from happy with the situation.

 

[White Heather]

You can be certain of that Aviador, particularly as they are not at all happy that this car park even got planning approval on appeal, so such a blatant use of the airport's name is certain to cause further conflict. It almost seems provocative to me.

 

[Aviador]

The short stay 2 exit adjoining White House Lane (formerly the long stay car park exit) has been marked up for the up and coming work to provide a new free parking area.

 

[Aviador]

The airport has introduced a new parking tariff for the pick-up and drop off car parks. A height restrictions now apply and vehicles over a certain size will now be charges new rates.

Stays up to:        Car   Minibuses & Coaches

30 Minutes        	£2.00	 £6.00
60 Minutes        	£5.00	£15.00
2 Hours 	          £10.0   £30.00

Each subsequent hour or part thereof	

                     £5.00 	£15.00

It remains to be seen if this has been implemented correctly but I can understand why they have done it. It will stop companies from operating off-site car parks without paying their fair share to the airport, baring in mind the airport relies on parking charges as a major source of their income.

 

[White Heather]

It will probably force the off site companies who shuttle their customers into the terminal to put their prices up to cover the increased parking charges, thereby making them less competitive with the airport parking. That seems like a good commercial decision by the airport as clearly they want all their passengers in their own car parks, not up the road and round the corner in the competitions car parks. Purely from an airport supporter point of view I welcome that since the more money that the airport pulls in, the more there will be for re-investment into the airport in the future.

Have they also allowed longer for £2 now or was it 30 minutes before?

 

[SNOWMAN]

high w/heather

the car park charge was £2 before this ajustment,i am not sure makeing sentinel etc pay more is a good thing we are flying out to malaga tomorrow and i looked at parking in a lba car park,too dear yet again,£53 pound for 2weeks in sentinal, if they were more competitive we would use them, all this will do for me and my family is make it more expensive to fly out of lba.thompson have a deal with doncaster £42 for 2weeks its a pity jet2 could not do the same out of lba that would fill the carparks for them.

regards
sm1

 

[michael]

on the subject of parking, I'm flying out of LBA with FlyBe at the end of the month for 3 nights to Belfast. £64 for return flights plus 3 nights parking which I reckoned as being pretty good value. I've booked my parking through FlyBe but nowhere does it say which car park I should go to. I'm assuming the long stay down to the left but has anyone any ideas??

Thanks in advance

 

[whoshotjimmi]

It will probably force the off site companies who shuttle their customers into the terminal to put their prices up to cover the increased parking charges, thereby making them less competitive with the airport parking. That seems like a good commercial decision by the airport as clearly they want all their passengers in their own car parks, not up the road and round the corner in the competitions car parks. Purely from an airport supporter point of view I welcome that since the more money that the airport pulls in, the more there will be for re-investment into the airport in the future.

Have they also allowed longer for £2 now or was it 30 minutes before?

White Heather, I'm sure you are well aware of my antipathy towards parking charges at LBA. I am therefore very much in agreement with Snowman1 regarding the cost to the ordinary family of flying from LBA and rather dismayed at your opinion on the drop off rise in price, especially considering your position on the Consultative Committee.

Having read his post regarding the cost of long stay, I did a little experiment. I selected a random week during the summer and researched the cost for a family of 4 to drive from my house to the airport and back, park for a week using the on site facilities and return flights with Jet2 to Palma. I based the cost of driving to and from the airport on my own car (roughly 15p per mile), the cheapest available parking tariff and the cheapest available flight. For comparison, I also used the same conditions for the same journey via Manchester Airport.

The results worked out as follows:

LBA
Travel - £3.90
Parking - £40
Flights - £752
Total - £825.90

MAN
Travel - £15
Parking - £29.99
Flights - £728
Total - £772.99

As you can see, although the cost of driving to and from Manchester is more than LBA, the parking is less and the flights (as is often the case) are cheaper than at LBA. It is, therefore, illogical to say that forcing the competitors to raise their prices is good from LBA's point of view. If anything, it is the reverse as it will, undoubtedly, increase the cost of using LBA to Joe Public and make the competition (which is Manchester Airport, not Sentinel) more attractive. Instead of concentrating on forcing the off site parks to be more expensive, LBA ought to concentrate on making their own product more competitive against the real competition. Whilst that may still not impact on the flight cost, it would improve the public image of LBA and actively encourage people like Snowman1 to use official parking rather than seeking a cheaper alternative.

Taking the cost of the flights out of the equation, the difference in overall costs is £1.09. It immediately makes Manchester a viable alternative. To then put the flight cost back in, all of a sudden, LBA looks a bit dear.

I don't say what I say for the sake of argument. I say it because I genuinely believe in LBA and want it to succeed. I would choose LBA over MAN every day of the week. But, if there is a substantial saving to be made by going elsewhere, I would have to seriously consider it. As would any other reasonable person. I appreciate that these are a very specific set of circumstances and that there are probably many deals and offers that would change everything but LBA needs to do everything it can to stop the flow of passengers from Yorkshire to other airports and, indeed, attract more from elsewhere.

 

[Seasider]

You obviously live on the Manchester side of LBA so that will make it more viable for you rather than someone who lives to the east of LBA. How do you get 15p per mile for your travel costs? is this just petrol? Don't forget the real cost includes insurance, tax etc and a more realistic figure must include these. For my standard Fiesta, 9000 miles per year, it works out at 28p per mile. If you travel less than 9000/year it will be slightly more, greater than 9000/year, slightly less.

 

[White Heather]

Whoshotjimmi, I am not intending to question your figures and you are, of course, entitled to your own opinions, as am I - and my involvement in the consultative committee has nothing to do with that.

What my involvement does give me is a lot more detail as to the airport's running costs, outgoings, and what they need to do to make the airport profitable. With running costs of £29m per year, plus the £11m terminal investment, plus an unknown cost for carrying out airfield drainage works, Bridgepoint have to secure an income from somewhere! They can't get it from low cost airlines, so their options are limited. Manchester is different - it attracts many mainstream airlines who can and do pay more to land there, and they attract many more passengers per year than LBA - so they don't quite have the same need to secure income from other sources. They make more than enough already - enough in fact to buy Stansted Airport for several billion pounds! Despite that, pick up a passenger from MAN terminal 1 and stay there more than 20 minutes and you will find yourself with a £4.50 charge to get out of the car park.

You seem to forget that because the airport are losing large numbers of potential car parking customers to the likes of Sentinel, their income is much reduced from what it could be. They now also have the company inside the old Avro factory to compete with - a company whose planning application had been refused. The decision to overturn that on appeal has hit LBA in the pocket and reduced their income below what was expected when they budgeted for the terminal development. It has to be recovered from somewhere.

My own opinion is that it is reasonable for a mini bus that carries more than 7 people to pay more to get into the drop off area than a normal family car. That will affect the likes of Sentinel who will have a decision to make - stand the increase or pass it on. If they do the latter then it narrows the gap between their own prices and those of the airport - who incidentally frequently have discounted car parking offers available via their website. It stands to reason that the less income LBA have, the less there is to invest - pure and simple. The more LBA invests, the more flights they attract and the more customers that use the airport - and the more jobs the airport generates and the more income generated for the Leeds City Region. Personally it would take a considerable price difference to entice me to fly from MAN rather than LBA and I am happy to pay the difference. That is just me - I believe in supporting what we have locally and I find it funny that so many people complain about drop off charges at LBA, but seem to ignore them at other airports. I am sure we will see in the summer that despite the drop off charges and increased costs for mini buses, the airport will hit 3m passengers for the first time. Overall, Bridgepoint have worked wonders at LBA with the airlines they have secured despite the recession and if that means me paying £2 to be dropped off/picked up outside, or walking a few hundred yards as an alternative, then that is fine by me.

 

[Tarn Spotter]

Surely it is not just the cost of getting to manchester. Until my recent retirement I ran a local transport company. It was impossible to schedule trips to manchester on a timed basis due to frequent motorway disruption issues.
Virtually on a daily basis we would see delays of 2/3 hours on the journey time, visiting the transport planning office just before christmas,advised the delays on the M62 in the last quarter were now far worse then the position a year ago.
If you are planning a trip over the pennines you for safety must add a least two hours into your journey time.
For business reasons I flew out of manchester 2 or 3 times a month, for am flights I arrived at the airport before 7am and worked in the departure lounge. From yeadon to manchester took me 1hr at 6am, from 7am onwards, 3 to 4 hours.
Why put up with the stress of this situation, use your local airport.

 

[User0001]

The issue I see time and time again is people begrudging the charges for car parking or the dominance of retail without proposing a viable alternative - or often without any insight into the running costs of the airport. Controversially, I would also say that the biggest critics of the airport's charging structure are often the ones demanding more investment in terminal space, parking aprons, low visibility improvements etc. Spending more and charging less isn't a long term route to success.

For the avoidance of doubt, in the final year of council ownership (2006/07) the airport received £10.5m from the airlines. At 2.8m passengers, that worked out at £3.73 per passenger arrival or departure. In the most recent financial year (2011/12) the airport received £6.8m from the airlines. At 2.9m passengers, that worked out at £2.32.

The costs of running the airport, in terms of staff, utilities, maintenance etc and the interest payable on the loans which have funded the recent capital projects, has increased from £17m to £22m - an increase 34%

So, in five years, airline charges have reduced by nearly £4m and costs have increased by £5m.

The airport would argue that the reduced charges have brought in new airlines and destinations which give people a viable alternative to MAN on some core routes and that the investments have at least made some inroads to improving the passenger experience (and preventing legal action related to drainage issues). They would suggest it is only fair that the people who have been demanding a better range of services and better facilties, should pay the bill. The only route to achieve this either;

(a) a flat fee per passenger - ie some kind of "development fee"
(b) growing revenue from car parking (currently the biggest earner) and growing the share of the till receipts they receive from retailers and catering outlet (the biggest earner here is duty free, by some considerable margin).

They make a bit from renting out some of the land and property they own, but car parking and retail is where it's at.

So, the numbers in summary are

£7m income from airlines - at £2.32 per passenger
£18m cost of paying the staff and the bills
£4m interest bill to fund the loans

So, a £15m annual shortfall to make up through car parking, retail and anything else.

In 2011/12, they recieved £15.6m, so a small surplus.

The choices available to increase this surplus are

1) charge more to the airlines
2) reduce number of staff or staff wages
3) reduce spend on marketing & PR activity
4) repay debt and reduce future spending on investment projects
5) increase revenue from passengers through things like increasing car parking charges, increasing use of lounges, increasing spend in shops and catering, winning business back from off-site car park providers
6) introduce a flat fee per passenger

They are firmly in option (5) mode at the moment

As a final thought, if you book a return ticket through LBA, then on average £4.64 of your fare is going to the airport (£2.32 x 2). For that, you can pass through the terminal entirely free of further charges, Free drop off, free security, no obligation to spend in the terminal. The cost to the airport of running their business is £15 per return passenger - so if you transit for free, you're paying a third of the cost price.

That's not a bad deal.

 

[airforced]

I have commented on this issue previously stating that I have used Sentinal for some years now and am very happy with the service they provide and the prices they charge. In that previous post I cautioned against the airport authority being able to gain a monopoly position when it comes to car parking as they would then have a free hand to charge us what they like for the service. Those of us who live a considerable distance from the airport and have no viable alternative than to get there by car would be up the creek without even so much as a paddle if we didn't have some choice in this respect.

Car parking at all the northern airports cost about the same (except Manchester which is quite a bit cheaper due to the amount of competition there) so the airport can't be doing too badly with its car parking income when you consider the huge uplift in parking spaces (at a cost I know - but that is what investment/income thereafter is all about) in recent years. Obviously they would like to earn more from car parking and get rid of the competition but beware what you wish for if you want the airport authority to have a car parking monopoly as this would be one wish too many.

I wouldn't 'go over the hill' just for cheaper car parking as the journey to Manchester over the 62 isn't to be recommended and as all the northern airports charge about the same for parking it is the destinations on offer from the various airports (at reasonable money of course) that will influence my decisions. In this regard well done LBA for bringing in Monarch and BA which has given us more choice which at the same time will bring you more car parking punters.

Win, win all round then!

 

[White Heather]

I don't think LBA are trying to kill off the competition - they are realistic enough to know that they are unlikely to do that. Increasing the charge for their minibuses to enter the drop off area wiill probably reduce the amount that they can undercut the airport, or their profits. Which of those it is, is a choice for the company, but in a competion situation, you cannot blame the airport for trying to claw back their customers - after all, the airport are investing millions to attract airlines and customers. I don't see the car parking competition investing anything at all in the airport. Effectively they have latched on to the airport and are making a fast buck without really putting anything much back into the airport itself. In the end, if they want to keep all their customers they may choose to retain their prices and stand a reduction in profit, so the LBA passengers will still have the choice and will still make a saving.

 

[Aviador]

Lets face it, the offsite car park companies have exploited the situation for too long. The reality of the matter is the airport needs the revenue car parking provides to maintain the runway and improve facilities. What do the off-site companies like Sentinel have to maintain? A couple of minibuses and drivers on near minimum wages and some kind of liability insurance perhaps? It certainly looks like somebody has been lining their pockets over the years with nearly no outgoing expenses all at the expense of the airport authority whether that be publicly or privately run.

 

[Tarn Spotter]

How much money are Amber taxi's giving to the airport. They have a vast amount of space and a very favourable position re collection and drop off. There fares are vastly higher then the local firms such as SJK.
Local hire firms have to drop at the far side of the short stay, a great inconvenience for travellers in bad weather.
I have not seen a local authority metered rank taxi at the airport, do they still exit. When abroad I always use rank metered taxi as a reassurance on price, I would not like to jump in an Amber taxi.

 

[Aviador]

I think you are referring to Arrow Taxis not AmberTaxis. Arrow went through a bidding process with the airport along with companies like SJK and the black & white Hackney Carriage cabs. Arrow was the successful bidder presumably because they offered the most money to the airport with guarantees to offer a 24 hours a day service 365 days a year. This was something the former Hackney Carriage struggled to do because of their commitment to manning taxi ranks in Leeds city centre on a Friday and Saturday night for late night revelers. This regularly left hundreds of passengers waiting in the cold outside the airport because of Hackney's inability to serve the airport properly. I saw this happen on a weekly basis with my own eyes. Arrow might be on the expensive side but they are reliable and you pay up front so no dodgy meter readings to put up with at the end of your journey. In any case, if Arrow still isn't for you, most local taxi companies including SJK pay for a privilege card enabling them to use the short stay car park private hire pick-up and drop-off facility. So there's nothing stopping you from booking with your preferred company.