London Heathrow (LHR) airport is overrated

...if your journey starts or ends in Central London.

Sure, airlines have good reasons to want to fly into Heathrow, most certainly British Airways and the rest of Oneworld airlines, as it is an important hub for them (in 2007 47% of BA's traffic at London Heathrow was connecting).

Connecting traffic at Heathrow is also important for non-Oneworld airlines. CAA data for 2007 shows how of all airlines carrying over half a million passengers at Heathrow, connecting traffic was over 15% of their passage in all cases except in three (Swiss, Air France, and KLM, with Alitalia just above this mark). As expected, since they did not have a local partner, connecting traffic at Heathrow was relatively less important for Skyteam carriers).

I am not sure these numbers would still be valid for Star Alliance's carriers though, I guess that after BMI's demise and absorption by British Airways its share of connecting passengers will fall to Skyteam's levels.

Connecting traffic involving non-aligned carriers was 3.5M, however, 1.4M involved a Oneworld transfer, another million involved Star (most likely BMI, that is now gone) and transfer traffic between non-aligned carriers at LHR was less than one million passengers in total. These might still sound like big figures, but they are the aggregate of several tens of non-aligned airlines flying to LHR on that year and I suspect the Gulf carriers Emirates, Etihad, Gulf Air and Qatar Airways are responsible for a significant part of this traffic.

So, even if you are not in Oneworld, you can still benefit quite a lot from flying to an airport with lots of connections (I must say the connecting traffic figures for non-Oneworld carriers are higher than I was expecting...)

But is this extra traffic enough to justify the London Heathrow premium? I don't have enough information to be able to answer this question...but if you rely mainly in origin and destination traffic, and that means basically, people that start their journey in central London, I wonder why London Gatwick does not emerge as a more serious competitor to London Heathrow.

Will Gatwick airport finally get the credit its deserves?

I have been using London Gatwick a lot this year, traveling in and out of several locations in central London and I struggle to find the reasons why LHR would be a better option for a passenger that has London as the start or end point of his journey and that is not flying with a Oneworld carrier.

LGW might be slightly further away from London than LHR, but the difference is not huge (although maybe just far enough to discourage those that get to the airport by taxi?). LHR has the tube and the (in my opinion) overpriced Heathrow Express, but LGW has several fast mainline train options, with frequencies of no more than 15 minutes, that can take you to several points in central London (Victoria, Charing Cross, St.Pancras International, London Bridge) in about half an hour. It might be slightly more expensive than the tube and 10 minutes longer than the Heathrow Express but I think it beats both  hands down in terms of value.

My guess is that more and more people will warm up to the charms of Gatwick airport as pricing becomes more of a tool for rationing airport capacity in the South-East of England, at least until it solves its chronic shortage of airport capacity and a final decision is taken about the future of Heathrow (to check the different options, check this piece that was recently published on Flightglobal).

Bringing the Olympic spirit to the airline industry

The Olympic Games are a global event and therefore, the link with the airline industry is unavoidable. So I thought it could be a good idea to compile a list of the airline and aviation-related news, stories and images that the 2012 London Olympics are generating.

For a start, the queues at Heathrow and other London airports, a major concern for both the authorities and air travelers that were expecting (even more) chaos...the big news, however, is that...there are no news! All seems to be working, even better than normal!

Whereas one million extra visitors are expected in London during the Olympic period (let me doubt about these figures!), some UK-based airlines seem less than enthusiastic about the extra business they might bring them: Easyjet does not expect the Games to have a positive impact on its bottom line, whereas British Airways expects a drop in business (high-yield) passengers.

Not sure why they complain, since it was BA itself that was encouraging Britons to stay at home and support Team GB. Its "Home Advantage" campaign included a cool game that allows you to direct a one of BA's Boeing 777s to your home address by making it taxi through the London streets.



In any case, British Airways is fully embracing its role as one of the Olympic sponsors and has unveiled a number of original Olympics-themed liveries to be displayed on some of its A319 aircraft in the run up to the Games, starting with the Dove, and continuing with the Firefly, painted on the plane that brough the Olympic flame from Greece to the UK.

But BA is not the only airline that is repainting its aircraft for the occasion, Qantas, JAL, ANA, LOT and South African Airways have also painted their planes in Olympic liveries.

Qantas Olympic livery for London 2012
Image: Gabriel Tam (under Creative Commons License)

More controversial were the news that, on the flight to London, Japan's delegations reserved business class seats for their male footballers, while their female colleagues had to travel in economy.

This won't be a problem for the Jordanian team, since the entire delegation will fly low cost carrier Easyjet to the London Olympics, taking advantage of the orange airline route linking Amman to London.

And, in case, you need to fly during the Olympics and risk missing any of your favourite sports, Gulf Air is going to provide live streaming coverage of the Games.

What seems to be  totally off the programme, despite some speculation, is a comeback of the Concorde during the Games...although you can always try to get this replica of the Concorde in London 2012 Olympic livery!

Bye, bye BMI...

I have not flown BMI very often, but I must say every time I did, on its routes from LHR to Moscow and Norway, I had a really great on-board experience. I also liked the look of its aircraft, in their colourful liveries, and was nice to have one more alternative to fly from London...but, unfortunately, a good product is not always synonymous with profitability.

BMI and its employees, however, will avoid the fate of the likes of Spanair and Malev as the airline has been acquired by British Airways, not the worst possible outcome...in any case, it is time to say:

Bye, bye BMI, you will be missed!

More on airport advertising: when does it makes sense to advertise an airport and when it doesn't?

In this blog, I have repeatedly brought up the topic of whether it made sense or not for a major airport with already serious congestion problems, like London Heathrow, to advertise itself in the public transport system (see my entries here and here)...and while BAA continues to spend its marketing budget in what, to me, look like pretty useless ads (maybe I am missing something, airport marketing experts, please, let me know if this is the case!) such as the one below (spotted at Angel station, Islington, this week), I came across an example of when it makes sense for an airport to advertise itself to the public

Pointless: if there is something LHR does not lack is travelers!

What if you are a new entrant into a market that has long been dominated by an oligopoly of firms that are well known to the general public? What if you have a fairly competitive product and ample scope for growth but most people have never heard about you?

So here is an ad of London Southend airport, also spotted in Islington. 

 

 Remember to check me out next time you go on holiday!

I think this is the case where it makes perfect sense to advertise an airport to the general public. People are starting to plan spring breaks and the summer season, there is a new airport in town and it has some interesting new routes that might be of your interest, so next time you are browsing for your low cost flight to the Mediterranean you remember to check this one out too. 

The ad is also straight to the point, rather than pitching some sort of abstract "passenger experience" it tells you they are new, it tells you, very visually, where you can fly to, and on what airlines

I am not sure what is the goal of the Heathrow ad, but it is clear what the Stobart Group aims  for with this ad: position London Southend as one of London's airports and make their market entry known to potential low cost airline passengers. Whether they succeed or not is a different matter.

Who is London Heathrow advertising to?

I already expressed, a while ago, my surprise (and a point of skepticism) about finding advertisements for London Heathrow airport in the London underground...and here is another example. Just that this time, a lot bigger! (I know, the ad is a bit dated since it was from before last Christmas)

But what purpose do these ads really serve? has anyone measured what is the ROI on these ads? as a frequent traveler it is usually the airline that I check first when I need to travel somewhere, only when the choice is between two very similar airlines or fares that I factor in the airport...and I doubt an ad in the underground would have much influence in this latter decision...besides that: wasn't LHR's problem that it was, actually, too crowded?

Do airports need to advertise to the general public?

I was taking a ride on the London underground (aka "the Tube") the other day and an advertisement on the top of the wagon, just above my head, caught my eye...It was a London Heathrow airport ad (see picture) highlighting the airport's role in the UK economy by connecting the country to the World's fastest growing economies...all fine, no doubt about it, but...does the average commuter really care? will you choose to fly from LHR next time because of this? ok, I know, it's a public relations stunt...but, again:

if you are an airport, is an ad on the tube the best way to deliver the message?