MIDAS AVIATION

Market Dominance v's No One Big Carrier - which is better for an airport?

Market Dominance v's No One Big Carrier - which is better for an airport? 

iStock-641974954-2000x1200.jpg

OCTOBER 27, 2017

The Blue Swan Daily, in partnership with MIDAS Aviation, have carried out an in-depth analysis of the world’s ‘Top 100’ airports by capacity, highlighting differences in airport approaches to route development, passenger profile trends between different destinations, those airports that have the most reliance upon a single airline partner and those that have the biggest diversity of airline partners. 

Over the next week, we'll be bringing you some of the key insights from the analysis, by  region. 

In the first piece, we explored the share of capacity across the Top 100 airports, using OAG schedule data for Summer 2017 looking at the dominance of carriers.  At one end of the scale, the biggest carrier at Osaka (KIX), Peach Aviation, has just 12.1% of capacity whilst Tokyo (NRT) has a similar position with its biggest carrier Japan Airlines accounting for 12.9% of capacity.  Los Angeles (LAX) is another airport where there is no one dominant airline - the biggest individual operator is American Airlines with 15.1% of capacity.

At the other end, some airports are dominated by just one carrier. At Moscow (SVO) Aeroflot operates 89.4% of capacity at the airport. There are some other notable airports where one carrier dominates, such as London Stansted, where Ryanair now account for 75.3% of capacity, and Baltimore (BWI) where Southwest operate 69.4% of seats.  At these locations, these dominant airlines have such a position of scale and share that other carriers almost consciously avoid these markets.  For these airports, investing heavily in route development activity is unlikely to yield a big return.  

You can read the full story in depth here on the Blue Swan Daily website.