This article aims at exploring potential for air route development to Malta from the alpine region and the adjacent area.
Austria
Vienna has not only Austria’s biggest airport but together with Munich is a market leader as regards connections to Eastern Europe (EU and non-EU) and the Balkans. It would thus be crazy to try and purposely damage the Vienna flights (summer: Air Malta five scheduled weekly flights, Austrian Airlines Group twice weekly serial charters; in winter mostly Air Malta runs) with subsidized parallel flights from Bratislava, 50kms off Vienna.
During the early to mid 1990s Air Malta flew to Salzburg, Graz (both scheduled) and Linz (charter). These flights stopped after some years due to dwindling demand – in smaller markets this sometimes happens when everybody interested visited Malta. Now one has just sporadic Austrian charter flights from Linz and Salzburg operated by Austrian Airlines Group. Only Innsbruck sees summer serial charters (Air Malta), covering western Austria and the border areas of Germany and Italy. Klagenfurt Airport has a much stronger Ljubljana airport in the neighbourhood (ca. 35 miles), and Graz is not far either. Graz in turn competes with Vienna and also Maribor.
Maybe one could re-develop one to one-and-a-half weekly summer flights from Linz, Salzburg, Graz and Innsbruck (which already has it) each. Tour operators remain important in Austria: a job for Air Malta and/or Austrian Airlines Group. While Austrian/Lauda and Air Malta have the same sized planes, possibly a challenge to fill, Austrian Arrows has smaller yet also very economic jets available (Fokker 70/100, 70-100 seats; these would have made ideal planes for Air Malta instead of the money-burning Avro RJ70s in the 1990s), and for the slightly shorter Innsbruck or Graz routes, the Bombardier Q400 fast turboprop 80-seaters could be an option. Salzburg, Austria’s second most important airport (however with a very strong incoming component) might damage the Munich service, though Air Malta might combine with for example. Graz, and/or improve loads with Maltese tourists to Salzburg.
Slovenia
Ljubljana, linked by Air Malta or Adria Airways charters (summer, in winter only for holidays, some years more often than others), covers southern Austria (Klagenfurt, 75 kms from Ljubljana) and the Trieste area (90kms from Ljubljana) too. While Ljubljana sees major LCCs, Air Malta/Adria is run also for tour-operators. Parallel operations are impossible.
Switzerland
Zurich, Basel, and a stunt Zurich has had uninterrupted Air Malta links since the 1970s. Swissair did a great job in its last years providing five or six weekly flights, offering splendid connections and good fares from all across Europe and beyond. After the sad end of Swissair, Air Malta expanded.
Air Malta should get a code-share agreement with Swiss International Airlines k/a Swiss (meanwhile a Lufthansa company). Zurich is the most central place as it covers the whole northern half of Switzerland. Switzerland in turn is very centrally located in Europe and is ideal for transits. Swiss is a good value-for-money full-service alternative for both network giants and low-cost carriers alike. Flights could be operated by Air Malta (lower costs) while enjoying optimised marketing and connections with Swiss’s network.
Air Malta concentrates frequent flights to Zurich as the central airport for the central and complete northern half of Switzerland, tour operators adding one seasonal Air Malta Basle summer flight.
Provided demand for a further supplement (or rather regularly weak demand days) not justifying an A319, one might schedule a Swiss 100-seater Avro RJ100 (roughly equal trip costs like an RJ70, but way more seats, hence way lower unit costs).
Continues on page 18
Continued from page 17
Swiss could fly southbound in the late evening, returning into the morning hub wave, keeping the plane productive instead of parked. A daily winter run is hardly possible given the meteorological realities of destination Malta.
Both carriers can however only risk investment if they can trust that nobody suddenly declares nearby Basle a ‘new area’ to justify giving tons of money to a low-cost-carrier.
The ‘level playing field’
Around September 2005, MIA issued an “invitation” programme for Basle. Basle, a major Easyjet airport, is a mere 60 miles of autobahn (not forgetting Switzerland’s excellent public transport) away from Zurich, the major catchment area right in between. The “invitation” required planes having at least 145 seats, quote point 2.1. operator’s obligations: “The operator shall make use of an aircraft having a minimum of 145 seats.”
Now, Air Malta’s B737-300s have 144 seats, the A319s 141 seats. Easyjet is Europe’s only airline having A319s with over 145 seats, and one of very few with more than 144 seats on B737-300/700s. So, sticking to the rule, an Easyjet A319 equipped with 156 seats, loaded with 120 passengers, qualified for support/rebates, while Air Malta’s (or Swiss’s) A319, also “delivering” 120 passengers, but equipped with 141 seats, is not.
Here a look at the general state “calls”, quote Article 3 f) of the London (Luton) “new area” “call” (with five year-round linked airports in the neighbourhood), found similarly also with the others, as from 2006 onwards:
“New services which involve switching capacity from one airport in the country to another of the country’s airports will not qualify for support.”
Thus if an established competitor, like Air Malta, were to cut a flight in 700kms away Glasgow it would have consequences for London: both are in the same country (UK).
“Financing will not be granted for a route provided by the airline to replace another route that it had previously served from another airport located in the same economic attraction zone or population centre.”
But apparently not if a new carrier simply replaces a route of an established one.
“Financing cannot be granted to help a new entrant to open links that already exist and to enter into competition with an existing operator already working on that same route from and to the same airports.”
So apparently only the same airports for the same route, no problem about parallel airports.
Stansted is just 30 miles of road from Luton, Heathrow roughly 45 (motorway) – hardly a “different economic area”, with Gatwick, Birmingham and East Midlands sharing catchment area sections too.
Or Article 6:
“Applicants have to produce a complete dossier […] containing the details and documents mentioned hereunder:
[…]
10: References regarding experiences of provision of similar services, for at least three years duration, in the area of the lot/s for which the enterprise is making an offer”
Britishjet’s operating firm Hello started off in 2004, with the Britishjet brand launched in 2005.
Myths about “traffic/landing rights”, to “grant/allow a route” in the sense of permitting (while maybe meaning financial allowance/grant?) “government hindering LCCs” were circulated wither all legal facts. One spoke/speaks about a 2006/07 “advent of low-cost carriers”while leading low-cost carriers like Transavia (Euro low-cost arm of Air France-KLM, summer), Air Berlin (bigger concern fleet seat capacity than Easyjet, winter), Britannia-Thomsonfly (until all the Ryanair fuss started during winter 04/05 sending even B767 wide-body jets from Luton, fares less than GBP30) or Sterling were long around.
Maybe one should financially support just geographically genuinely new routes (like Ryanair’s Valencia or the Girona winter flight were), as mentioned several times e.g. Belfast and Tel Aviv - under genuinely level conditions.
Geneva
Geneva covers the Francophone southwest of Switzerland and the French Alps, and is not far from Lyons. It also saw an “invitation”.
Geneva has not been performing as well for Air Malta as Zurich: it is discontinued this winter, which it would not had it covered even just variable costs (fuel, fees, crew and maintenance). Sure, the catchment area is smaller. For summer schedule one has one to three weekly flights.
As Malta does not fit into the Swiss International route portfolio profile of Geneva, one should discuss with Air Malta their opinion regarding a winter operation, and otherwise evaluate a year-round basic Easyjet operation, supplemented during summer by Air Malta, open to tour operators, while individual passengers could combine both low-fare carriers for maximum flexibility. In winter no business is taken away for Air Malta.
However, summer services possibly cannot be provided with massive Easyjet capacity around, risking damaging the Lyons summer link too. Furthermore, Geneva shares the Berne catchment area with Zurich and Basel. DIY transit traffic might cannibalise other direct flights, as Geneva is a major Easyjet airport. But then Air Malta’s fares-per-distance (revenue per passenger kilometre) were anyway comparable to Easyjet’s already before Ryanair was lured in with fat subsidies and reprisal offers had to be launched.
With two (not more) weekly Easyjet Geneva flights, ensured year-round, one would have a solid base to which Air Malta could still add a seasonal operation, while not destroying the Lyons and Zurich routes through overcapacity pressure. Concurrently the commercial risk for Easyjet would be limited, meaning less subsidies required. The pressure on Bern area, which during winter is essential for Air Malta to fill Zurich is undeniable but is not comparable to the impact of subsidized parallel Basle flights.
While for Geneva the ‘invitation’ asked Easyjet directly for many weekly runs, for the Stockholm “call” Ryanair flights one required just two flights, proving simple replacements of an age-old year-round service, as one forced Air Malta out of Stockholm-Arlanda by throwing highly subsidized Stockholm-Skavsta flights (identical core catchment area, different airports) at them.
Berne
Berne-Belp, the customer-friendly capital airport, is not that far from the airports of Basel (110kms), Zurich (140kms) and even Geneva (170kms). Yet a once or who knows maybe twice weekly summer run operated by Skywork / Berne Wings, using a Bombardier Q400, could be an option. With just 72 seats this means no tough pressure on Air Malta. A combination of tour operator support scheme and incentives from both Berne and Malta could result in a route addition and concurrently not hurt Air Malta - or rather vice-versa. Should Easyjet additionally be operating in Geneva things might get complicated. As the Berne runway is not really suitable for fully-loaded A319s, one could be sure to have a new high value route which would be no serious threat to the central Zurich operation due to limited capacity while requiring far less subsidies than a big low-cost airline operation.
Concluding, subsidizing a Basle LCC operation would be a bad joke. For Zurich, Air Malta and Swiss could invest in a code-share and moderate expansion, but can they really trust that nobody declares ‘new areas’ which are anything but that, puts established competitors at a practical disadvantage, invents ‘145-seat’ tricks, or other gimmicks? If not possible with Air Malta, one could aim at a guaranteed year-round basic Geneva Easyjet operation. A Berne Wings charter from Berne could be a charming addition.
France, Lyons
Air Malta provides three flights from Lyon - in the summer. A year-round basic operation from Geneva might cover this market year-round. Should Geneva however be put on overcapacity, Lyon might be revised even for summer. A balance is necessary. Grenoble is an incoming airport otherwise covered through Lyons and Geneva.
Nice
Nice, where the Alps and the Mediterranean meet, is primarily a destination. Possibly Easyjet or maybe Air Malta could run, but one needs realistic expectations. Maltese tourists to the Cote d’Azur/Liguria area would surely welcome the route (but: subsidising outgoing tourism is good for especially Gozo?). If requested, France and Monaco should thus also provide.
Marseille (Air Malta/Air Mediterranee etc. links) is 200kms of motorway west, thus not totally insurmountable to reach for tourists to Malta from there. Nice should thus stay in proportion.
Nice could also source some tourists for Malta. Furthermore one could have a shuttle for international yachting (one-way trips) and gambling tourism (Monaco-Malta, given the government’s hard work to make Malta a gambling tourism hotspot).
Italy, Milan/Turin
Alitalia has been doing a fantastic job connecting Malta with short transit times at very affordable fares from/to Europe and beyond, providing far better connections than British/GB-Airways, although these got more Maltese media attention. Alitalia should deserve more local credit. Alitalia’s restructuring-related due pullout from the Milan route (MTmidweek 17 October 2007) should be a welcome relief for Air Malta.
The auto industry centre Turin is only 100kms of motorway/fast road away from Milan-Malpensa – no “new area”, though once included in some LCC luring programme. Adding Turin in a scenario with full Air Malta-Milan flights plus Alitalia daily would mean grave overcapacity. Adding it with the seven (Alitalia) flights (to some extent filled with point-to-point travellers) removed can make sense if capacity is limited (say twoA319s a week). Now Air Malta will apparently take Turin up as supplementary route (TMIS, 9 December 2007), thus occupying the airport before one declares it “new area” to pay subsidies to low-cost carriers.
Venice
Venice-Malta, initially a sporadic charter route, became an Air Malta scheduled run, with according investment, for summer schedule 2007. After Air Malta proved there was a market it suddenly became a “new area” to “allow” (as an EU-registered carrier needs to ask nobody for permission, maybe an “allowance” context?) Ryanair on the route. Air Malta was forced out.
Still, northeast Italy is now very well connected, year-round, three times weekly. While one can be sorry for Air Malta’s effort and can write off the package business, Ryanair’s winter run still remains a positive addition.
Verona
Verona has, except for the Adige valley up to Bolzano, a catchment area congruent with either that of Bologna, Milan or Treviso, and Bolzano itself is shared with Innsbruck: occasional charters thus suffice.
Germany
Baden-Württembergian Friedrichshafen is too near to Zurich airport (50 miles). The Friedrichshafen catchment area sections not covered by Zurich are covered by Stuttgart (Germanwings) and Munich (Air Malta/Lufthansa).
Bavaria
Memmingen, a base of low-cost giant TUIfly, is located further away (basically on the meeting point of a Munich to Zurich and a Stuttgart to Innsbruck line). A once weekly run by TUIfly or Air Malta (TUIfly’s parent company is also a long-time business partner of Air Malta) might theoretically be possible, but if, should stay in limits.
The Bavarian state administration and Bavarian airports are open to all airlines accepting a level playing field. Germany’s most prosperous state remains a no-Ryanair-area. Apart from the Lufthansa-concern and many traditional regional and international carriers, Bavaria has bases of low-cost giants Air Berlin (larger concern fleet than Easyjet, Malta-services from Nuremberg for ages) and TUIfly. Traditional scheduled carriers can continue to provide the diversified high-quality route network essential to maintain Bavaria’s role as an IT, general high-tech, manufacturing and tourism based economy, and avoid massive redundancies/job growth hindrance, which is good as these airlines are also key direct employers.
Munich is a major Air Malta airport since the 1970s, proving essential for Malta’s tourism and industrial development. Today Air Malta code-shares with Lufthansa (many onward connections together with Star Alliance partners). Even during winter schedule, Malta’s flag carrier has six weekly non-stop flights plus flights operated via Catania, plus extra flights for higher demand periods, plus Lufthansa-operated peak flights: clearly way more than the catchment area can provide for. Within a comparatively short time the two carriers made Munich one of Malta’s top gateways. Clearly nothing needs to be improved here. Well done, great job!