IAG Results

Back to Forum
Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)

  • SimonS1
    Participant

    Today’s results indicate the financial disaster – passenger revenues down 97% in Q2 compared to 2019.

    Capex to be halved, LCY to JFK shut down, rights issue €2.75bn, could be end 2022 before return to pre-covid levels.

    https://www.iairgroup.com/~/media/Files/I/IAG/documents/proposed-capital-increase-and-1h-2020-presentation-31-july-1.pdf


    JDTraveller
    Participant

    LCY-JFK removal has been predicted for years. This will ow be the second BA001/BA002 service that I haven’t managed to travel on. You do have to wonder given the current state of play if those rumours in T5C development for ore-clearance will also ever come to fruition or if BA even still think this will be a benefit.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    You do have to wonder given the current state of play if those rumours in T5C development for ore-clearance will also ever come to fruition or if BA even still think this will be a benefit.

    With things like Global Entry available I’m not sure it will ever see the light of day.

    BA must be reckoning on a sustained downturn as all the other OneWorld airlines seem to be relocating to T5.

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    esselle
    Participant

    You do have to wonder given the current state of play if those rumours in T5C development for ore-clearance will also ever come to fruition or if BA even still think this will be a benefit.

    With things like Global Entry available I’m not sure it will ever see the light of day.

    BA must be reckoning on a sustained downturn as all the other OneWorld airlines seem to be relocating to T5.

    Don’t you think the move of airlines to T5 is a deal brokered between them/HAL to reduce the operating cost base of Heathrow generally until pax number justify more space being utilised?

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    SimonS1
    Participant

    You do have to wonder given the current state of play if those rumours in T5C development for ore-clearance will also ever come to fruition or if BA even still think this will be a benefit.

    With things like Global Entry available I’m not sure it will ever see the light of day.

    BA must be reckoning on a sustained downturn as all the other OneWorld airlines seem to be relocating to T5.

    Don’t you think the move of airlines to T5 is a deal brokered between them/HAL to reduce the operating cost base of Heathrow generally until pax number justify more space being utilised?

    Yes….but you can be sure BA would not have agreed if they thought traffic would rebound any time soon.

    Perversely it would be an ideal time for HAL to get on and redevelop the place as the closure of T2 and T4 gives them operating flexibility.

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    JDTraveller
    Participant

    Is Global Entry as good an alternative as pre-clearance? You have to pay to register, you have to renew and pay again. Not every airport supports the programme either. I would much rather clear US customs on home soil and walk out as a domestic passenger on arrival.

    With the relocations to T5 I can’t see this being long term. Qatar and AA would want/need their own lounge space, and while you could probably loose a few duty free stores, there isn’t much free space available. Plus if anything happened to the CX lounge in T3 I would be devastated.

    HAL still have the T1 site sitting there, this could easily be turned into the US terminal for all airlines to use. One terminal for all routes, shared lounges after clearance just like in DUB.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    With the relocations to T5 I can’t see this being long term. Qatar and AA would want/need their own lounge space, and while you could probably loose a few duty free stores, there isn’t much free space available. Plus if anything happened to the CX lounge in T3 I would be devastated.

    HAL still have the T1 site sitting there, this could easily be turned into the US terminal for all airlines to use. One terminal for all routes, shared lounges after clearance just like in DUB.

    They may want their own lounges but would they really need them? Surely the BA set up would have capacity? In any case I suspect in the post-covid world that lounges are not top priority.

    Also I can’t see moving all US flights to T1 working, BA has (had) a significant amount of connecting traffic, transferring between terminals wouldn’t be ideal and I’m sure would be resisted.


    RoyJones
    Participant

    With the relocations to T5 I can’t see this being long term. Qatar and AA would want/need their own lounge space, and while you could probably loose a few duty free stores, there isn’t much free space available. Plus if anything happened to the CX lounge in T3 I would be devastated.

    HAL still have the T1 site sitting there, this could easily be turned into the US terminal for all airlines to use. One terminal for all routes, shared lounges after clearance just like in DUB.

    I can see almost the opposite. T4 being permanently closed – it is 34 years old and the oldest terminal at Heathrow and “out of the way”. T5 getting an extra satellite and Heathrow expanding the underground people mover to connect T5 and T3/T2. That would put OneWorld in T5, Star Alliance in T2 and Sky Team incl. Virgin and unaligned in T3. Yes, this is simplistic and I can see several issues and anomalies but it boosts both OneWorld’s and Sky Team’s connectivity and T4 (or the T4 area) could be used to enlarge Heathrow’s cargo capacity.

    Undoubtedly some space could be found for QATAR and Cathay to have their own lounges, maybe in the T5 south or in one of the Satellites

    And don’t forget Heathrow is owned by a Spanish Builder.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    With the relocations to T5 I can’t see this being long term. Qatar and AA would want/need their own lounge space, and while you could probably loose a few duty free stores, there isn’t much free space available. Plus if anything happened to the CX lounge in T3 I would be devastated.

    HAL still have the T1 site sitting there, this could easily be turned into the US terminal for all airlines to use. One terminal for all routes, shared lounges after clearance just like in DUB.

    I can see almost the opposite. T4 being permanently closed – it is 34 years old and the oldest terminal at Heathrow and “out of the way”. T5 getting an extra satellite and Heathrow expanding the underground people mover to connect T5 and T3/T2. That would put OneWorld in T5, Star Alliance in T2 and Sky Team incl. Virgin and unaligned in T3. Yes, this is simplistic and I can see several issues and anomalies but it boosts both OneWorld’s and Sky Team’s connectivity and T4 (or the T4 area) could be used to enlarge Heathrow’s cargo capacity.

    Undoubtedly some space could be found for QATAR and Cathay to have their own lounges, maybe in the T5 south or in one of the Satellites

    And don’t forget Heathrow is owned by a Spanish Builder.

    I agree.

    By the way the BT Forum gremlins are alive and well, it wasn’t my post that you are quoting.


    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    Is Global Entry as good an alternative as pre-clearance? You have to pay to register, you have to renew and pay again. Not every airport supports the programme either. I would much rather clear US customs on home soil and walk out as a domestic passenger on arrival.

    Having benefited from both Global Entry and Dublin pre clearance, I agree with the above 100% as long as there are agreed clearance times for pax joining pre clearance q’s. Passengers have be known to have been left behind in Dublin due to excessive lines at pre clearance and flights not waiting.

    On some occasions, I have only made the connecting flight in Dublin, by using using the Global Entry lane.

    One of the big issues re USA pre clearance in London, will be the USA requirement for their immigration officers to be armed (on UK soil).


    JDTraveller
    Participant

    One of the big issues re USA pre clearance in London, will be the USA requirement for their immigration officers to be armed (on UK soil).

    While I dont understand the US obsession with arms and certainly don’t understand why a Customs officer inside a secure terminal needs to be armed, their cant be too much opposition to this from the government. The Met already have armed presence at LHR, and there are US Secret Service running around the streets in London who are armed.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller September / October 2020 edition
Business Traveller September / October 2020 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls