Birmingham: (BHX) - General Thread

[Ray Finkle]

Would not OTPP be a good bet to take over the airport entirely? They have been very good for Bristol Airport and certainly don't shirk on investment there.

I presume though that the consortium of local authorities won't sell its part of the business.

In all fairness to the owners we've seen a significant amount of investment over the last 15 or so years. The new ATC Tower, runway extension and taxiway works, rebuilt pier, new stands, MAEL/STS hangar, new ground radar system and all of the internal terminal improvements will not have come cheap. Work had also commenced on a departure lounge extension along with a £500 million master plan in the pipeline so they have definitely spent a few quid.

I think what we really need now is investment in route development but that is the one area where BHX consistently appears to struggle. Airlines seem to hold all the cards these days and it's definitely a sellers market where they can simply go to the highest bidder, if BHX can't or won't be competitive in it's pricing then we might as well just give up now. I appreciate that 10 years of austerity has wreaked havoc on local authority budgets (and Birmingham City Council have had their own well documented issues) but direct air routes, especially those to other major cities, can bring in investment which is something you would have thought those councils would have been crying out for!

I guess investing in infrastructure is a relatively safe practice as it increases the value of your 'asset'. Spending to get in a certain airline when they may disappear a year or two later means your money has pretty much gone down the drain and BHX must surely know more than most about that.

 

[nwoody2001]

Many good points raised there Ray. And its also worth remember that this investment was very much needed. When the airport did reach 13m, the airport was at bursting point, and rumours suggest the airport was actively turning airlines away because at that time because the infrastructure wasnt able to cope with increased passenger levels, especially over summer.

i would also like to challenge this concept that a local authority is not appropriate for ownership of an airport and purely use airports as a cash cow. Manchester airport group, which of course own MAN, EMA and STN is 100% owned by the local authorities of Greater Manchester and i think we can all that MAN is doing pretty well (even if the same cant be said about EMA).

Yes Local Authorities are far from cash rich and have money issues, but councils and where they invest their money are accountable to the public. Private companies are not. Councils are required by law to act in the interest of their citizens, and this includes the best interest f the economy and jobs, the private sector is not. Yes, the airport could be sold, but whos to say a new owner in the private sector would be any better or worse? The words Greybull and Monarch airlines ring a bell?

Yes the airport needs to be profitable and yes BHX due to its scale probably has less flexibility of how much money it can risk without effecting margins. However, if falling passanger levels have an impact on profitability, you can bet a good chance that the airport management would take note!

 

[TheLocalYokel]

i would also like to challenge this concept that a local authority is not appropriate for ownership of an airport and purely use airports as a cash cow. Manchester airport group, which of course own MAN, EMA and STN is 100% owned by the local authorities of Greater Manchester and i think we can all that MAN is doing pretty well (even if the same cant be said about EMA).

Doesn't the Australian company IFM Investors still own about a third of MAG any more?

 

[IanFarquharson]

MAG's ownership structure is unique and comprises an effective blend of public and private shareholders, including Manchester City Council (35.5%), IFM Investors (35.5%) and the nine other Greater Manchester local authorities (29%).

 

[jfy1999]

Andrew, I think the Management at the airport are aware of this, but as far as I have been told and I am aware, there is not much they can do to entice new airlines with the sort of contracts the airlines are now demanding. The shareholders will not approve any of these "cheap" airline deals, because the major shareholder (the 7 West Midlands Councils than own 49%) relay on the airports income to keep the 7 councils afloat. They only care about the money/profit, they have no interest in what airlines or routes are served from the airport. This has been going on for decades, and is one of the reasons the airport hasn't grown as we would all have liked.

I think what we really need now is investment in route development but that is the one area where BHX consistently appears to struggle. Airlines seem to hold all the cards these days and it's definitely a sellers market where they can simply go to the highest bidder, if BHX can't or won't be competitive in it's pricing then we might as well just give up now. I appreciate that 10 years of austerity has wreaked havoc on local authority budgets (and Birmingham City Council have had their own well documented issues) but direct air routes, especially those to other major cities, can bring in investment which is something you would have thought those councils would have been crying out for!

Many good points raised there Ray. And its also worth remember that this investment was very much needed. When the airport did reach 13m, the airport was at bursting point, and rumours suggest the airport was actively turning airlines away because at that time because the infrastructure wasnt able to cope with increased passenger levels, especially over summer.

I have no insider knowledge on this, but surely something must have changed in the period around 2014-18 to prompt such a massive influx of airlines? Blue Air, Norwegian, Wizz, Iberia Express, Vueling, Primera - all low-cost airlines, admittedly some basket cases in there, but you would think those are the type of carriers drawn by financial incentives.

When you add in the huge growth from Monarch and Flybe following the loss of BMIbaby, the fact that we were on course to be the second or third largest Jet2 base before COVID, and even Ryanair increasing capacity albeit mostly in response to the competition, it seems to me that after the last round of infrastructure spending, the management were indeed willing to invest more in route development. The timing suggests so as the new airline announcements started shortly after the most recent big ticket item, the runway extension.

It has been mentioned though on other forums that Will Pearson - the RD team manager who oversaw this growth - had taken an approach of flinging financial incentives and seeing what stuck, resulting in a lot of one season wonders in his previous stint at Manchester. It was a very high risk approach as the RD team were willing to risk a brief bloodbath on the sun routes for long-term strategic growth that was reportedly going on behind the scenes at the likes of Monarch.

I can see the management being very unhappy with the results of that boom-and-bust period and taking a more conservative approach to investing in route development as the “boom” ended with some of their largest customers leaving or going out of business with a corresponding loss in passenger revenue. It’s hard not to make a logical connection between the two.

 

[Wrightfly73]

A number of routes resume tomorrow:
-easyJet restarts it's EDI & GLA routes.

-SAS restarts CPH.

And over the weekend easyJet restart it's GVA service which will provide a much welcome boost to pax figures at the airport over the next few months.

Blue Air also returns on Monday with a very odd departure time of 1:25am

 

[Ash]

Having been through BHX a couple of times this year during lockdown, it's been a pretty surreal experience each time. Although from what few flights I have been on (KL/LH) the loads were not great but they were surprisingly not as abysmal as I had expected (about 50-60%).

It does feel now though that we are coming past the worst of it, I can see a massive pent-up demand coming in 2021.

 

[HPsauce]

So good to see a few extra flights and destinations today. It has been such a desperate year for Airports and Airlines.

 

[Matty_85]

Hi Everyone!

I’ve recently joined after following this forum for a few months. I love flying from Birmingham Airport but I do feel that I’m finding it increasing difficult to not be attracted by other airports simply because you can often fly directly and weirdly it’s often a lot cheaper.
I’m not a professional in this field but I was hoping someone could answer a couple of questions.. Do you think Birmingham will ever regain transatlantic flights or has it been too long without?
I recently read that Birmingham has a ‘low yield catchment’ which surprised me as BHX is usually more expensive than any other airport to fly from. Does anyone know if this is actually the case and how BHX could change it?

I love Birmingham but it’s becoming increasingly difficult to fly from my local airport to direct cities & I really think it’s playing our negatively on the reputation of Birmingham

 

[Ray Finkle]

Hi Matty and welcome to the forum. Hopefully this will be the first post of many

Do you think Birmingham will ever regain transatlantic flights or has it been too long without?

Personally I have no idea. United and American have made significant cuts and I don't think Birmingham will ever get Virgin so that kind of leaves JetBlue. They've already said that the likes of LHR will be first and I'd imagine that there will be a lot of competition for their business when they look to expand elsewhere which may see BHX way down the list? It's been said that aircraft such as the new A321's can make airports like Birmingham more viable but I think it may be a good few years yet.

Canada may well come before the USA.

I recently read that Birmingham has a ‘low yield catchment’ which surprised me as BHX is usually more expensive than any other airport to fly from. Does anyone know if this is actually the case and how BHX could change it?

The last figures I saw, which were admittedly several years ago, showed that Birmingham had the highest percentage of business passengers after LHR and LCY and the full service airlines keep flying here for a reason. When Czech Airlines started it was said in an interview that 30% of pax to Prague were business passengers which is a decent amount.

I wonder if the 'low yield' tag comes down to the low cost airlines and the fees that Birmingham is reported to charge eating into what are very tight margins? There has been quite a bit of talk recently from senior people at low cost airlines about how they are looking at incentives to aid their recovery, it's probably clear to see by the announcements which airports are playing ball and which airports aren't.

I love flying from Birmingham Airport but I do feel that I’m finding it increasing difficult to not be attracted by other airports simply because you can often fly directly and weirdly it’s often a lot cheaper.

I think many of us feel the same, you only have to read the post by Karl saying that he's flying BA business class back to LHR as it was cheaper than Turkish economy back to Birmingham. I could post numerous stories from people I speak to who haven't used BHX when a direct flight was available as the savings from flying elsewhere were significant.

It was pointed out on another thread that Birmingham has an impressive list of airlines in it's portfolio, which it does, but it also has an impressive list of unserved destinations, all of which are served by airports close by which can only add to the leakage. Some of those destinations were lost due to circumstances out of BHX's control but where other airports looked to have been in a position to move quickly to replace them at Birmingham it seems to take years and years. Stockholm, Valencia and Gibraltar have still not been replaced after the loss of Monarch with capacity to Rome and Venice still way down.

I really hoped that the appointment of Nick Barton with all his experience at LTN may have turned the tide but I've seen nothing to suggest that yet. I still have hope though.

 

[kfs]

I love flying from Birmingham Airport but I do feel that I’m finding it increasing difficult to not be attracted by other airports simply because you can often fly directly and weirdly it’s often a lot cheaper.

Like everyone, I'm not looking at fares at the moment, but my experience in the past has often been the opposite of what you write. Turkish, Emirates, and Lufthansa indirect fares from B'ham have often been cheaper than from London airports. I am lucky in being able to travel during school terms and midweek. It might be that school holiday weeks from BHX are higher due to the lower capacity available.

 

[Matty_85]

Hi Matty and welcome to the forum. Hopefully this will be the first post of many



Personally I have no idea. United and American have made significant cuts and I don't think Birmingham will ever get Virgin so that kind of leaves JetBlue. They've already said that the likes of LHR will be first and I'd imagine that there will be a lot of competition for their business when they look to expand elsewhere which may see BHX way down the list? It's been said that aircraft such as the new A321's can make airports like Birmingham more viable but I think it may be a good few years yet.

Canada may well come before the USA.



The last figures I saw, which were admittedly several years ago, showed that Birmingham had the highest percentage of business passengers after LHR and LCY and the full service airlines keep flying here for a reason. When Czech Airlines started it was said in an interview that 30% of pax to Prague were business passengers which is a decent amount.

I wonder if the 'low yield' tag comes down to the low cost airlines and the fees that Birmingham is reported to charge eating into what are very tight margins? There has been quite a bit of talk recently from senior people at low cost airlines about how they are looking at incentives to aid their recovery, it's probably clear to see by the announcements which airports are playing ball and which airports aren't.



I think many of us feel the same, you only have to read the post by Karl saying that he's flying BA business class back to LHR as it was cheaper than Turkish economy back to Birmingham. I could post numerous stories from people I speak to who haven't used BHX when a direct flight was available as the savings from flying elsewhere were significant.

It was pointed out on another thread that Birmingham has an impressive list of airlines in it's portfolio, which it does, but it also has an impressive list of unserved destinations, all of which are served by airports close by which can only add to the leakage. Some of those destinations were lost due to circumstances out of BHX's control but where other airports looked to have been in a position to move quickly to replace them at Birmingham it seems to take years and years. Stockholm, Valencia and Gibraltar have still not been replaced after the loss of Monarch with capacity to Rome and Venice still way down.

I really hoped that the appointment of Nick Barton with all his experience at LTN may have turned the tide but I've seen nothing to suggest that yet. I still have hope though.

Hi Ray,

thanks for the summary, I really appreciate it. Really sad situation as I used to work for a US company in Birmingham and we very regularly used United for business travel. I don’t know loads but it always seemed full when used the service. The leakage from the West Midlands to other airports must be horrific. I do struggle with how these airport catchment areas work... how can MAN claim a catchment area of 22 million when that covers Birmingham as well? Surely that’s just a marketing claim rather than an actually defined catchment area?

Like everyone, I'm not looking at fares at the moment, but my experience in the past has often been the opposite of what you write. Turkish, Emirates, and Lufthansa indirect fares from B'ham have often been cheaper than from London airports. I am lucky in being able to travel during school terms and midweek. It might be that school holiday weeks from BHX are higher due to the lower capacity available.

I can only talk from my experience but I was referring more to direct short haul flights which have almost always been more expensive from Birmingham. Saying that I’ve usually still opted for Birmingham if the times were convenient but that’s maybe because I personally wasn’t paying for it

 

[Coathanger16]

thanks for the summary, I really appreciate it. Really sad situation as I used to work for a US company in Birmingham and we very regularly used United for business travel. I don’t know loads but it always seemed full when used the service. The leakage from the West Midlands to other airports must be horrific. I do struggle with how these airport catchment areas work... how can MAN claim a catchment area of 22 million when that covers Birmingham as well? Surely that’s just a marketing claim rather than an actually defined catchment area?

Hi Matty and welcome to the forum!

A catchment area is basically the area that people travel to a particular airport. As people from Birmingham fly from Manchester Airport, Birmingham is in it's catchment.

A lot of these areas will overlap each other as well, especially for airports that lack long haul connections.

They don't really mean a lot to passengers, but airports will use them to entice airlines in by saying there's x million people living within an hours drive, etc

I can only talk from my experience but I was referring more to direct short haul flights which have almost always been more expensive from Birmingham. Saying that I’ve usually still opted for Birmingham if the times were convenient but that’s maybe because I personally wasn’t paying for it

Certainly a lot of the continental European routes that Flybe used serve (Berlin, Milan, etc) would be more expensive from BHX. Routes that Ryanair or Wizz serve tend to be as cheap as other airports though.

 

[Matty_85]

Hi Matty and welcome to the forum!

A catchment area is basically the area that people travel to a particular airport. As people from Birmingham fly from Manchester Airport, Birmingham is in it's catchment.

A lot of these areas will overlap each other as well, especially for airports that lack long haul connections.

They don't really mean a lot to passengers, but airports will use them to entice airlines in by saying there's x million people living within an hours drive, etc



Certainly a lot of the continental European routes that Flybe used serve (Berlin, Milan, etc) would be more expensive from BHX. Routes that Ryanair or Wizz serve tend to be as cheap as other airports though.

Thanks Coathanger for the welcome and the info regarding catchments. I’m just hoping that 2021 is BHXs fight back. It’s important to the city in terms of reputation

 

[Brum X]

Hi Matty, Love your passion for Birmingham. If you are interested in the city generally then check out the "Greater Birmingham" forum, sorry we don't use West Midlands around here, lol. I try and update this with new substanstial new developments proposed for the city and region.

Greater Birmingham - Thread

New thread for the Greater Birmingham area to discuss new building projects, plans and proposals.

forums4airports.com

 

[Ray Finkle]

The Netherlands has banned flights from the UK until Jan 1st.

Such a shame as KLM loads had really been picking up

Netherlands bans flights from UK over new Covid-19 strain

One case of mutant variant already detected inside Dutch borders

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Nethercote2019]

After announcements yesterday I do think tier 4 restrictions - incl travel ban will be imposed here soon im afraid

 

[Nethercote2019]

Sorry - I meant to say I think a
Eu travel ban soon from U.K.

 

[HPsauce]

Flights to Netherlands banned from today 20th Dec until 1st Jan initially. A blow to KLM who have continued throughout the Covid crisis so far ☹

 

[IanFarquharson]

Loads have been excellent on KLM from BHX too