IAG’s Walsh: ‘I will fight’ current Heathrow third runway plan

[malpensante]

IAG’s Walsh: ‘I will fight’ current Heathrow third runway plan

The current proposal to build a third runway at London Heathrow Airport is “indefensible” from a cost point of view and the head of British Airways’ parent company will fight it.

International Airlines Group (IAG) CEO Willie Walsh (above), speaking as a panelist May 11 at the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Aviation Symposium, said he was worried about the current Heathrow proposal because there was now “desperation by the airport to get a third runway and they are willing to do anything to get it.”

Walsh said that has led to a proposal that would cost £18 billion ($26 billion), but just 1% of that would go to building the runway. The rest of the money, he said, would go to all other things at the airport.

“So the airport is incentivized to spend money while I am incentivized to save money,” Walsh said. “I will not support what would be the world’s most expensive runway. I will fight against it and I refuse to pay for it because the cost will be passed on to me and my customers.”

Walsh added, “The proposal that’s on the table now is completely indefensible from a cost point of view.”

Building a third runway at Heathrow was declared the best option for extra runway capacity in the crowded southeast of England after a two-year investigation by a government-backed commission.

Walsh explained that when he first joined British Airways in 2005, the company campaigned for an additional runway at Heathrow, but the new UK government that came into power in 2010 had made denying permission for the third runway a platform of its election campaign.

As a result, IAG acquired UK airline BMI so that it could secure that airline’s Heathrow’s slots and ensure its ability to compete from its hub base.

“Since then, there has been a realization by politicians that there was no magic solution [as an alternative to a third runway] and when they asked me what we were going to do, I said the alternative was to grow somewhere else,” Walsh said.

IAG, which owns Spanish carriers Iberia and Vueling and Irish airline Aer Lingus, operates a three-hub strategy—Heathrow, Dublin and Madrid.


http://atwonline.com/airports-routes/ia ... cf54ebf7e6

[KittyHawk]

Una delle proposte per ottenere la terza pista è incrementare per legge il coprifuoco notturno dalle 23:00 alle 05:30 (attualmente è dalle 23:30 alle 4:30).
Il CEO di LHR, Holland-Kaye, vede la terza pista sotto una luce diversa da Walsh, come riporta Flightglobal (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/heathrow-promises-11pm-curfew-to-secure-third-runway-425206/):

Holland-Kaye [CEO LHR] suggested that, were existing night flights moved to 06:00-07:00, "you use up most of the new capacity you have just created [with the building of a new runway]". He adds: "That makes it harder for new airlines to come in and compete with existing airlines, so EasyJet would find it harder to come in and compete with British Airways."

The current night-time flight ban at Heathrow runs from 23:30 to 04:30. Sixteen night flights operate from Heathrow every day between 04:30 and 06:00. Holland-Kaye says affected flights were being moved to a later time. He adds: "The shift is not very significant. The big prize for airlines is the new capacity... I have 30 airlines that want to come into Heathrow."

Interessanti le due affermazioni fatte: una che dice, sostanzialmente, che BA ci guadagnerebbe nei confronti di U2 e l'altra che i potenziali clienti non mancano. E i nuovi clienti, quasi sicuramente, non esistono solo sulla carta.

[FlyCX]

IAG’s Walsh: ‘I will fight’ current Heathrow third runway plan

The current proposal to build a third runway at London Heathrow Airport is “indefensible” from a cost point of view and the head of British Airways’ parent company will fight it.
...
Walsh added, “The proposal that’s on the table now is completely indefensible from a cost point of view.”
...

E' un'ottima strategia per non avere una terza pista ed pure un commento da decerebrato: non puoi costruire una pista in praticamente città, al costo di una nel deserto!

Certe cose puo' dirle O'Leary che è capo di una low cost, non il CEO di una delle piu' prestigiose compagnie aeree del mondo!

[malpensante]

BA non ha interesse a costruire una nuova pista che le porterebbe maggior concorrenza.

[FlyCX]

Una delle proposte per ottenere la terza pista è incrementare per legge il coprifuoco notturno dalle 23:00 alle 05:30 (attualmente è dalle 23:30 alle 4:30).
Il CEO di LHR, Holland-Kaye, vede la terza pista sotto una luce diversa da Walsh, come riporta Flightglobal (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/heathrow-promises-11pm-curfew-to-secure-third-runway-425206/):
...
Interessanti le due affermazioni fatte: una che dice, sostanzialmente, che BA ci guadagnerebbe nei confronti di U2 e l'altra che i potenziali clienti non mancano. E i nuovi clienti, quasi sicuramente, non esistono solo sulla carta.

E' circa lo stesso trucco usato a FRA per non rendere troppi slot disponibili a svantaggio di chi è basato li' e non puo' aprire di colpo troppe rotte.

[FlyCX]

BA non ha interesse a costruire una nuova pista che le porterebbe maggior concorrenza.

Non è del tutto vero.
LHR è un hub limitato e che non puo' crescere; anche questo per BA è un problema.
Non possono pero' avere una pista gratis.

[malpensante]

Inizio a pensare che due piste a Gatwick e due a Stansted sarebbero utili e arriverebbero prima.
LHR diventerebbe un aeroporto intercontinentale point to point...

...come Malpensa :green:

[FlyCX]

Inizio a pensare che due piste a Gatwick e due a Stansted sarebbero utili e arriverebbero prima.
...

Io autorizzerei la seconda pista a LGW indipendentemente da quella di LHR.

[spanna]

con una metafora matematica:

LHR sta a BA come LIN sta ad AZ

alla magliana stanno cercando di capire come mai, se vale quanto sopra, i risultati economici sono cosi' diversi :green: