|
Post by LPL on Nov 9, 2011 23:19:14 GMT 1
This follows ten days over Christmas with the similar 2-flight schedule. This includes Christmas Day. Up to and including the 8th Jan the only scheduled two flight days are 20th to 26th Dec, 28th and 31st Dec. The rest are listed as three per day.
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Feb 28, 2012 16:12:54 GMT 1
Using the approx carryings for the KLM AMS route as published in 09/27 we can make rough guesses as to the load factors for them and EZY on the route. col1=month col2=KLM load factor col3=EZY load factor Jan-11 53% 57% Feb-11 63% 69% Mar-11 53% 61% Apr-11 68% 74% May-11 72% 72% Jun-11 68% 68% Jul-11 77% 77% Aug-11 70% 74% Sep-11 71% 68% Oct-11 71% 73% Nov-11 66% 73% Dec-11 70% 70% total 66% 69%
|
|
|
Post by johnoakes on Feb 28, 2012 16:31:27 GMT 1
Just watch Easy run 80% + from when KLM pull the plug. Sad but Easy will love it.
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Feb 28, 2012 16:45:21 GMT 1
Just watch Easy run 80% + from when KLM pull the plug. Sad but Easy will love it. If they do then that would mean approx 70k pax pa not flying the LPL/AMS route because they are not looking likely to increase their frequencies.
|
|
|
Post by andyh on Feb 28, 2012 21:51:51 GMT 1
Interesting that the load factors on the KLM service have held up despite its being due to end. I'd normally expect loads to drop off as people make alternative arrangements in case the axe falls early. It's a pity the airline couldn't be convinced to give the route more time.
|
|
|
Post by liverpoolman1 on Feb 29, 2012 7:56:11 GMT 1
Figures can be deceptive and I would love to see KLM stay with the LPL/AMS route. However there is more to the airline industry than bums on seats and we could do no better than read the article in 09/27 which gives an honest appraisal of the situation. You can bet your life that the Management team at LJLA have made every argument they can think of to retain the route. Who knows, as the financial situation improves (when?) KLM may come back.
|
|
|
Post by johnoakes on Feb 29, 2012 9:18:32 GMT 1
Can't see them coming back and the worst thing is other carriers will look at this and think that its not worth the risk.All very sad. If Easy get higher loads may they not think it worthwhile to increase frequency--they are not likely to turn away custom or profits.
|
|
|
Post by davel on Feb 29, 2012 10:54:02 GMT 1
The queues for the late afternoon service yesterday were nearly out the door. So much for the demand dropping off due to its demise!!
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Feb 29, 2012 11:01:56 GMT 1
The queues for the late afternoon service yesterday were nearly out the door. So much for the demand dropping off due to its demise!! Excellent. By looking at the local media today, KLM are predicting 100,000 passengers per year to use the LPL/AMS route. This breaks down to an average of 45 per sector (8100 per 30 day month). That quote above equates to KLM looking at a lf of 56%, so the route is doing better than predicted even in a recession AND them flying 2 rotations a day for around 3 months per year.
|
|
|
Post by richard on Mar 1, 2012 12:22:19 GMT 1
Maybe as you say yields is the deciding factor, more business class may have helped, we shall see Airline economics 101: Loads are normally fairly irrelevant, especially if like KLM you have few or no onboard sales to factor in. Any fool can fill a 100 seat aircraft at £5 a time, but bankruptcy will quickly follow. Yield is king - if you can't pull in enough cash from the punters to cover the cost of operating, plus whatever is deemed an acceptable profit margin, then the route is history. We will never know the yield detail, but it is well known that business class fares normally contribute much more profit than economy, especially when KLM will not have been able to charge very high fares for cattle class as they had the EZY LPL flights, plus their own and EZY's MAN flights to contend with. My take is that they didn't get enough business class passengers on board to cover the lower economy fares, plus the extra squeeze of EZY's MAN service starting finished them off. The latter meant that KLM's MAN economy fares had to come down to compete, which meant that prospective passengers for whom both LPL and MAN were viable options went to MAN. In the past KLM's LPL economy fares tended to be a bit cheaper, so that group were more likely to go to LPL. In the old days, when Air UK were operating as a separate airline from KLM (although owned by them), using northwest based crew would have helped, as nightstopping is expensive, but that option wasn't open to them. What may help LPL with mainline services is Flybe's stated desire to operate services for full service airlines (similar to the model a lot of US carriers use). Rumour has it they are shaping up to operate flights for Brussels Airlines on this basis, as using them is cheaper for Brussels than operating their own flights. For the UK it would also address the nightstopper cost issue. Flybe already have a relationship with Air France (codesharing) so that would be the direction I would look for a new full service airline coming in.
|
|
|
Post by danairamb on Mar 1, 2012 18:06:47 GMT 1
Excellent point Richard. Lets hope you are right. This does sound like a truly viable and realistic alternative. Yields are everything, but obviously an airline like Fly-Be can provide codesharing at much lower costs than major international carriers. LPL's excellent low cost service and availability is unfortunately not helpful for those wishing to fly into LPL from outside Europe. Codesharing would certainly be a solution.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2012 9:31:33 GMT 1
I have removed a number of posts from this "thread".
I, and a lot of other people are fed up of the bickering and sometimes personal attacks that these types of thread descend into at times. I *will* be deleting accounts if this sort of thing flares up again.
The airlines make their own business decisions, it is fine to report and discuss, but I will not tolerate bad language (even x'd out) or the type of "discussion" it then leads to. For the record, once again, I am not biased towards any NW airport, I just want some civility in the manner of the discussions that appear here.
If you don't like my decision, fine - find another forum that will take you.
End of story, no correspondence entered into, so you will waste your time bombarding me with pm,s
D Graham Administrator
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2012 23:02:59 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by northbynorthwest on May 14, 2012 22:47:54 GMT 1
Having not been on the forum for quite a while, I thought it was about time I weighed in on the demise of this route, especially as I had initiated the discussion. I do have some insights into what transpired, and my take on things is that there were a number of things happening concurrently that caused the cancellation of this route. Firstly, it was a gamble to operate to LPL when KLM's established operation at MAN was just down the road. They saw it as a way to increase market share in the northwest rather than dilute their own market share at MAN; to gain passengers at the expense of B-A, Lufthansa, etc who would transfer through their respective hubs. They also saw the succesful Easyjet LPL-AMS operation (up to 5 flights daily at one point if I remember correctly) as something they could muscle into and perhaps force Easyjet off the route.
What actually happened was that the world recession and the huge increases in the price of jet fuel had a devastating effect on the finances of the newly merged KLM and Air France , as it did on every other carrier. This led to them undertaking a very needed look at cutting costs - which also led to them looking at the performance of every route. No longer was there an acceptable time for routes to grow - if they were underperforming, they were scrutinized even more closely, and some cuts were made. LPL was underperforming for a number of reasons, and with the ability to protect the passengers through MAN, it was a relatively easy decision to make.
At the same time as fuel prices were rocketing, KLM also saw that several markets that they were strong in were being adversely affected by competition from Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airways. The UK to Middle East / Far East / India / Australia markets in particular were being affected, with passengers who would have flown LPL-AMS-SYD, for example, now flying MAN-DXB-SYD. This was happening right when KLM started LPL-AMS flights. Also, Easyjet proved to be resilient on the LPL-AMS route - again passengers in the LPL-AMS local market that KLM could not capture. Even though the local business community was fully supportive of this route and connectivity to the rest of the world, the amount of higher yielding business passengers out of LPL was lower than forecast. Again, the recession as well as Easyjet maintaining loyalty of local businessmen had an effect here.
Passenger loads were improving - but the bottom line was that yields were lagging behind projections, with no immediate sign of improving. The LPL-AMS market when Easyjet and KLM were combined was only surpassed by LHR / LGW / BHX / MAN / EDI-AMS markets, so this needs to be remembered. The last four legs I flew AMS-LPL-AMS on KLM all had around 60- 65 passengers on them - all were first flights out from AMS or LPL and all during the work week. I also flew Easyjet once during that time - again the first flight out of LPL, with a load of around 125. I only ever saw a few suits traveling on KLM, and the highest loads I ever saw in business class was 5 - of which two of us were airline employees. On Easyjet, I must have seen 20 or more suits travelling. I find that telling, even though it was an unscientific survey. What makes LBA/BRS/CWL, etc -AMS successful even though loads may have been similar to LPL-AMS is that the yields are higher, plain and simple.
Will KLM ever return? I really hope that the door is not shut on this. It was a bold experiment that probably would have worked at a different time. I doubt that any other carrier can operate to a European hub and make it work. AMS is the best hub in Europe for connectivity bar none, and it has a large local market with LPL, so the ingredients are there. LPL desperately needs that connectivity with the rest of the world, but in the current climate I don't think it will be any time soon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2012 13:20:51 GMT 1
Very interesting response by northbynorthwest, I too hope they return, cant see it happening very soon, and agree KLM are the only carrier where a link with a hub will work offering transfers (same carrier throughout).
|
|