Can the European low-cost airline boom continue? Implications for regional airports

At a time when the traditional major airlines have struggled to remain viable, the low-cost carriers have become the major success story of the European airline industry. This paper looks behind the headlines to show that although low-cost airlines have achieved much, they too have potential weaknesses and face a number of challenges in the years ahead. The secondary and regional airports that have benefited from low-cost carrier expansion are shown to be vulnerable to future changes in airline economics, government policy and patterns of air service. An analysis of routes from London demonstrates that the low-cost airlines have been more successful in some markets than others. To attractive and historically under-served leisure destinations in Southern Europe they have stimulated dramatic growth and achieved a dominant position. To major hub cities however they typically remain marginal players and to secondary points in Northern Europe their traffic has been largely diverted from existing operators. There is also evidence that the UK market is becoming saturated and new low-cost services are poaching traffic from other low-cost routes. Passenger compensation legislation and possible environmental taxes will hit the low-cost airline industry disproportionately hard. The high elasticities of demand to price in certain markets that these airlines have exploited will operate in reverse. One of the major elements of the low-cost business model involves the use of smaller uncongested airports. These offer faster turn-arounds and lower airport charges. In many cases, local and regional government has been willing to subsidise expansion of air services to assist with economic development or tourism objectives. However, recent court cases against Ryanair now threaten these financial arrangements. The paper also examines the catchment areas for airports with low-cost service. It is shown that as well as stimulating local demand, much traffic is captured from larger markets nearby through the differential in fare levels. This has implications for surface transport, as access to these regional airports often involves long journeys by private car. Consideration is then given to the feasibility of low-cost airlines expanding into the long-haul market or to regional operations with small aircraft. Many of the cost advantages are more muted on intercontinental services.

Low cost carriers and the changing fortunes of airports in the UK

This paper investigates how low cost carrier (LCC) developments have affected the traffic and financial performance of UK airports from 2002 to 2014. Considerable growth in traffic was experienced from 2002 to 2007, especially at regional airports as a result of LCC expansion. This was replaced with a more volatile period from 2008 to 2014 where many of the regional airports that experienced the greatest increases in traffic during the early years, then experienced the largest reductions. This has clearly had an impact on their financial well-being, resulting in reduced profits for many airports. It has also meant that many regional airports that seemed like attractive investments as a result of LCC expansion are now less financially appealing, especially given that the LCC sector in the UK appears to be shifting capacity to larger regional airports, and in some cases, London airports.

Performance and prospects of smaller UK regional airports

This paper investigates the traffic and financial performance of smaller UK regional airports between 2001 and 2014. Fourteen airports that typically serve less than 5 million passengers per annum were selected for the analysis. A period of strong growth in passenger demand was experienced from 2001 to 2007, driven largely by low cost carriers. The period from 2007 to 2014 was characterised by declining demand, resulting in significant losses for many of the airports. Airline strategies, such as the use of an increased unit fleet size and average sector length, may further limit future prospects for smaller UK regional airports in favour of larger ones with greater local demand. The relationship between traffic throughput and the generation of aeronautical revenues seems to vary at airports. There is generally a strong and significant relationship between traffic throughput and the generation of commercial revenues and total operating costs at airports serving 3–5 million passengers, but the situation for airports serving fewer than 3 million is less certain.

Old conflicts, new rivals? Airline competition in the European market

Christoph Franz of Lufthansa recently identified Ryanair, easyJet, Air Berlin and Emirates as the company’s main competitors – gone are the days when it could benchmark itself against BA or Air France-KLM! This paper probes behind the headlines to assess the extent to which different airlines are in competition, using evidence from the UK and mainland European markets. The issue of route versus network competition is addressed. Many regulators have put an emphasis on the former whereas the latter, although less obvious, can be more relevant. For example, BA and American will cease to compete between London and Dallas Fort Worth if their alliance obtains anti-trust immunity but 80% of the passengers on this route are connecting at one or both ends and hence arguably belong to different markets (e.g. London-San Francisco, Zurich-Dallas, Edinburgh-New Orleans) which may be highly contested. The remaining 20% of local traffic is actually insufficient to support a single point to point service in its own right. Estimates are made of the seat capacity major airlines are offering to the local market as distinct from feeding other routes. On a sector such as Manchester–Amsterdam, 60% of KLM’s passengers are transferring at Schiphol as against only 1% of bmibaby’s. Thus although KLM operates 5 flights and 630 seats per day against bmibaby’s 2 flights and 298 seats, in the point to point market bmibaby offers more seats than KLM. The growth of the Low Cost Carriers (LCCs) means that competition increasingly needs to be viewed on city pair markets (e.g. London-Rome) rather than airport pair markets (e.g. Heathrow-Fiumicino). As the stronger LCCs drive out weaker rivals and mainline carriers retrench to their major hubs, some markets now have fewer direct options than existed prior to the low cost boom. Timings and frequencies are considered, in particular the extent to which services are a true alternative especially for business travellers. LCCs typically offer lower frequencies and more unsociable timings (e.g. late evening arrivals at remote airports) as they are more focused on providing the cheapest service rather than the most convenient schedule. Interesting findings on ‘monopoly’ services are presented (including alliances) - certain airlines have many more of these than others. Lufthansa has a significant number of sectors to itself whereas at the other extreme British Airways has direct competition on almost every route in its network. Ryanair and flybe have a higher proportion of monopoly routes than easyJet or Air Berlin. In the domestic US market it has become apparent since deregulation that better financial returns can come from dominating a large number of smaller markets rather than being heavily exposed in the major markets - which are hotly fought over. Regional niches that appear too thin for Ryanair to serve (with its all 189 seat 737-800 fleet) are identified. Fare comparisons in contrasting markets provide some insights to marketing and pricing strategies. Data sources used include OAG (schedules and capacity), AEA (traditional European airlines traffic by region), the UK CAA (airport, airline and route traffic plus survey information of passenger types) and ICAO (international route traffic and capacity by carrier). It is concluded that airlines often have different competitors depending on the context but in surprisingly many cases there are actually few or no direct substitutes. The competitive process set in train by deregulation of European air services in the 1990s is leading back to one of natural monopolies and oblique alternatives. It is the names of the main participants that have changed however!

Factors affecting airport route development activity and performance

Airports have become increasingly active in route development as a means of attracting, growing and retaining air services. However, little is known about the different levels of route development activity at airports, or the extent to which route development activity affects performance. Based on the findings of a survey of 124 airports worldwide, this study finds that larger airports are significantly more active than smaller airports. It also finds that private airports are more active than public airports, and that airports in Europe are more active than airports in other world regions, although differences according to ownership and location are not significant. Route development activity has a significant positive effect on performance. Factors associated with the airport business environment (market turbulence, competitive intensity, market growth and airport constraints) were not found to have a significant moderating effect on the relationship between route development activity and performance. However, two factors were found to have a significant direct effect on performance; market growth has a significant positive effect while airport constraints have a significant negative effect.

Clipped wings: corporate social and environmental responsibility in the airline industry

Within the developed world, airlines have responded to the advice of advocates for corporate social and environmental responsibility (CSER) to use the intertwined CSER dimensions of economics, society and environment to guide their business activities. However, disingenuously, the advocates and regulators frequently pay insufficient attention to the economics which are critical to airlines’ sustainability and profits. This omission pushes airlines into the unprofitable domain of CSERplus. The author identifies alleged market inefficiencies and failures, examines CSERplus impacts on international competition and assesses the unintended consequences of the regulations. She also provides innovative ideas for future-proofing airlines.　 Clipped Wings is a treatise for business professionals featuring academic research as well as industry anecdotes. It is written for airlines (including their owners, employees, passengers and suppliers), airports, trade associations, policy makers, educators, students, consultants, CSERplus specialists and anyone who is concerned about the future of competitive airlines.

Operating cost based cruise speed reduction for ground delay programs: Effect of scope length

Ground delay programs typically involve the delaying of aircraft that are departing from origin airports within some set distance of a capacity constrained destination airport. Long haul flights are not delayed in this way. A trade-off exists when fixing the distance parameter: increasing the ‘scope’ distributes delay among more aircraft and may reduce airborne holding delay but could also result in unnecessary delay in the (frequently observed) case of early program cancellation. In order to overcome part of this drawback, a fuel based cruise speed reduction strategy aimed at realizing airborne delay, was suggested by the authors in previous publications. By flying slower, at a specific speed, aircraft that are airborne can recover part of their initially assigned delay without incurring extra fuel consumption if the ground delay program is canceled before planned. In this paper, the effect of the scope of the program is assessed when applying this strategy. A case study is presented by analyzing all the ground delay programs that took place at San Francisco, Newark Liberty and Chicago O’Hare International airports during one year. Results show that by the introduction of this technique it is possible to define larger scopes, partially reducing the amount of unrecovered delay.

On the multi-dimensionality and sampling of air transport networks

Complex network theory is a framework increasingly used in the study of air transport networks, thanks to its ability to describe the structures created by networks of flights, and their influence in dynamical processes such as delay propagation. While many works consider only a fraction of the network, created by major airports or airlines, for example, it is not clear if and how such sampling process bias the observed structures and processes. In this contribution, we tackle this problem by studying how some observed topological metrics depend on the way the network is reconstructed, i.e. on the rules used to sample nodes and connections. Both structural and simple dynamical properties are considered, for eight major air networks and different source datasets. Results indicate that using a subset of airports strongly distorts our perception of the network, even when just small ones are discarded; at the same time, considering a subset of airlines yields a better and more stable representation. This allows us to provide some general guidelines on the way airports and connections should be sampled.