Ryanair's grounding of aircraft and sharp cut in capacity this winter can be looked at in two ways.
Take the airline's view - and that of most commentators - and it is a hard negotiating ploy. Airports everywhere take note - fail to bow to Michael O'Leary's demands and his aircraft will sit on the ground rather than fly tourists into and duty-free shoppers out of your terminals.
The contrary view is that Ryanair has been caught out. O'Leary banked on the oil price going down and did not hedge. Now he is paying the market rate - $128 a barrel last week for crude, $147 the week before - while British Airways pays $84 a barrel. When fuel makes up half your costs that hurts.
What do you do, especially when you have enough aircraft ordered to double the size of your fleet by 2012 and you know you won't fill the seats even at £1 a time? You ground some aircraft - and make someone else responsible.
When Ryanair announced it was cutting services at Stansted by 14% this winter it blamed airport operator BAA for increasing charges, declaring Stansted was the most expensive airport it uses. Well it would be. Stansted is a major London airport. If BAA wanted to take the same line it might suggest, "Fly off somewhere else then."
Ryanair also raged against the Civil Aviation Authority and "the total failure of the CAA regulatory regime to control unjustified cost increases". At a press conference, O'Leary reportedly referred to the CAA as "twats" and Stansted as "rapists" (The Guardian, July 18). Leave aside the trivialisation of sexual violence, O'Leary's press conferences are generally entertaining in a Richard Littlejohn kind of way. But might he be rattled?
The carrier's announcements of cutbacks at Dublin and elsewhere were similarly bullish. A 12% reduction in weekly services at Dublin, where Ryanair will base four fewer aircraft than last winter, is the consequence of Dublin being "the second-most expensive of Ryanair's base airports" and Ireland's equivalent of the CAA being a "hopeless aviation regulator".
In both cases, the carrier had sought reductions in charges and been rebuffed. O'Leary told reporters BAA had dismissed Ryanair's "reasonable" request to cancel its fees. "We asked BAA for a 100% reduction in landing fees and we a received a two-word response, the second being 'off'," he said.
One analyst suggested the cuts represent "a new level of assertiveness in airport charges negotiations" - true at one level, but not the whole truth.
In announcing the temporary closure of seven bases in continental Europe, including Palma, Valencia, Salzburg and Budapest, Ryanair hinted at the real reason for the capacity reductions and fiery justifications. It argued: "Costs at these airports are among the most expensive in Europe and far outweigh the potential revenue passengers are prepared to pay."
In other words, Ryanair is struggling to maintain its business model with oil at the current price. O'Leary came close to being explicit on this point when he told reporters: "We are clearly not going to be selling millions of £1 fares on flights from Stansted if we are over-paying Stansted by £10 per passenger."
BAA took exception to the figures. A spokesman said: "Numbers and statistics have been banded around, many of which we simply don't recognise."
The figures are troublesome. The Ryanair release on Stansted refers both to a 25% reduction in aircraft and a 22% reduction. It says the number of aircraft will be reduced from 36 last winter to 28 this. However, the Financial Times, quoting O'Leary, reported 15 aircraft would be withdrawn. The Guardian decided 12 would be grounded.
Perhaps in exasperation, BAA suggested: "Surely this is a time for our industry to pull together, not spat by press release." Clearly, the airport operator has not been reading Ryanair's previous communications or paying attention to the way the airline is run.
Of course, Ryanair will seek to batter down airport charges. It will no doubt have some success. At Stansted, BAA hinted a compromise might be possible, revealing: "We have met with Ryanair to discuss how best to help each other and look forward to continuing to do so." That may or may not please rival carriers.
However, Ryanair may struggle to get its way at Stansted and Dublin - which are core to its operations, remember - since both are subject to regulatory bodies that are required by law not to listen solely to a chief executive in a rugby shirt.
If Ryanair were to extend its logic and withdraw from these airports, how would it pick up the traffic it requires to ferry millions around Europe to airfields most have seldom heard of and which therefore charge it nothing?
Why should airports served by other carriers slash charges to Ryanair to subsidise the give-away offers that may put rivals out of business?
Ah, the give-aways. There is no let up in the bargain basement. Last Wednesday Ryanair announced a three-day fire sale of one million seats at £1, including tax and charges, for travel between September 1 and the end of October.
Referring to the European Commission's recent announcement that all fares in Europe will have to include non-optional charges from next year, Ryanair said: "The European Union fat cats claim their decision on airline advertising marks the demise of £1 airfares. This is Rubbish."
Yes. It is.