1. Introduction
The aviation industry faces fierce competition, thin profits, and risks from external factors like fuel price swings, economic cycles, and global crises. Amid this, low-cost carriers (LCCs) disrupt the market by using operational efficiency to win customers with lower prices. Ryanair, a leading LCC, thrives by rigorously applying a low-cost strategy, setting new industry cost-optimization standards. Since its 1984 founding, Ryanair has grown from a small Irish airline to one of Europe's largest and most profitable, with a vast route network. Its growth relies on strict cost-cutting across operations, allowing it to offer lower fares than full-service airlines while staying profitable, making it a key study for understanding LCC success.
Crucially, Ryanair's low-cost strategy's sustainability depends on financing that aligns with its cost goals. Capital allocation for fleet growth, scaling operations, and managing liquidity is optimized for cost efficiency, integrating operational and financial decisions.
The continuous success of Ryanair stems from the high degree of synergy between its operational efficiency and financial strategy. This article will conduct an in-depth analysis from three aspects: operational strategy, financing model, and the interaction effect between the two.
This research will explore how low-cost strategies interact with financing in aviation. By studying its operational costs, such as route planning, fleet standardization, and service streamlining, along with financing frameworks, it identifies the keys to LCC success.
2. A deep deconstruction of Ryanair's low-cost operation strategy
2.1. Cornerstone of cost leadership
Improved Operational Efficiency: Adopt a single aircraft model (such as Boeing 737) to lower maintenance, training, and other costs; increase daily aircraft utilization and shorten turnaround time to maximize flight operational efficiency [1].
Outsources many businesses; apart from cabin crew, pilots, reservation agents, head office functions, and some maintenance work, most other operations are outsourced to flexibly adjust the cost structure, though it requires time to manage relationships with subcontractors. Manages subcontractors through strict penalty and reward systems to ensure service efficiency and cost control [2].
Airport Selection Strategy: Give priority to using secondary airports, which usually have lower landing fees and ground service charges, effectively reducing operational costs. At the same time, attract passengers to use these airports by offering discounted fares, forming a virtuous cycle.
Expands aggressively to gain first-mover advantages, signs long-term contracts with airports to lock in favorable terms and avoids head-to-head competition with other low-cost carriers to reduce market competition costs.
In 2003, each employee carried 10,050 passengers, far higher than traditional airlines (e.g., British Airways had 758 passengers per employee), improving efficiency through streamlined positions and efficient division of labor. Outsource aircraft maintenance, airport ground handling, catering, and other services to reduce fixed labor costs, and flexibly adjust suppliers through contracts to optimize cost structures. Implement an employee stock ownership plan to bind employee interests with company profits, enhancing cost control awareness; internal promotion mechanisms boost employee motivation and reduce management costs [3].
2.2. Revolution of income models
Simplified Services and Additional Charges: Abolish traditional services like free in-flight catering, convert non-essential services into paid options, and reduce service costs.
Improved Operational Efficiency: Adopt a single aircraft model (such as Boeing 737) to lower maintenance, training, and other costs; increase daily aircraft utilization and shorten turnaround time to maximize flight operational efficiency.
By 2019, ancillary revenue had grown to represent 31.7% of its total operating revenue (up from 15% in 2010), turning it into a profit pillar that subsidizes ultra-low base fares. This shift transformed Ryanair's income structure from "volatile ticket reliance" to "stable, diversified income streams", enabling it to offer fares as low as €4.99 while maintaining industry-leading profit margins (Profit per ASK of €0.01 in 2018, double that of Norwegian Air Shuttle) [4].
Ryanair's ancillary revenue success stems from hyper-targeted service design-turning every customer touchpoint into a revenue opportunity, while aligning add-ons with its low-cost, no-frills brand positioning. Below are the most impactful innovations:
Ryanair redefined baggage policies to penalize checked luggage and reward minimalism-aligning with its goal of reducing aircraft weight (and thus fuel costs) while driving revenue: Free allowance: Only 1 small cabin bag (40x20x25cm) is free, forcing passengers to pay for larger items. Tiered fees: Checked baggage fees are dynamic, increasing with booking time (e.g., €25 if booked online in advance, €40 at the airport) and weight (€10 extra for bags over 15kg). In 2019, baggage fees alone contributed ~12% of ancillary revenue, with over 40% of passengers opting to pay for additional luggage. Strategic upsells: During booking, Ryanair’s website uses pop-ups to "warn" passengers about cabin bag size limits, encouraging them to upgrade to a "Priority Boarding + 10kg cabin bag" bundle (€8–€15) - a high-margin add-on that also speeds up boarding (reducing aircraft turnaround time, a key cost driver).
Seat Selection: Monetizing "Preference" Without Adding Costs Ryanair turned seat assignments-once a free perk-into a scalable revenue stream by segmenting passenger preferences: Basic selection: Standard seats (e.g., middle seats) cost €1–€5, while "better" seats (window/aisle) cost €5–€10. Premium options: "Extra Legroom" seats (with 10–15cm more space) and "Front Row" seats (for early disembarkation) cost €15–€30, targeting business travelers or families. Dynamic pricing: Prices surge during peak times (e.g., holidays, weekends) or for popular routes (e.g., London-Amsterdam), with seat selection revenue growing by 18% year-over-year in 2019. Critically, this innovation requires no additional operational costs-seats are a fixed asset, and monetization relies solely on software adjustments to the booking platform.
2.3. Wisdom of pricing and market expansion
Dynamic Pricing Mechanism: Fares show a hyperbola-like upward trend as the flight departure date approaches. That is, buying tickets in advance usually results in lower fares, and fares rise sharply near the departure time, to maximize the revenue of each flight. Differentiated Discount Strategies: On routes with fierce competition attract passengers by increasing the discount for advance bookings; on long routes and high-frequency routes, there are fewer discounts for advance bookings to balance costs and revenues. Demand-Based Pricing Adjustments: The average fare is positively correlated with route length, flight frequency, and the proportion of fully booked flights. When Ryanair's share of seats at the departure and destination airports increases, fares tend to decrease to stimulate demand and improve load factors.
Cost Advantages: Significantly Reducing Takeoff/Landing and Ground Service Fees: Secondary airports (e.g., London Stansted Airport, Paris Beauvais Airport, Milan Bergamo Airport) usually offer extremely low takeoff/landing fees (only 1/3-1/5 of hub airports) and ground service fees (e.g., baggage handling, gate rental) to attract airlines. Additionally, these airports have smaller passenger flows, leading to higher ground handling efficiency (aircraft turnaround time is shortened to 25-30 minutes, 15-20 minutes faster than hub airports), further reducing the time and labor costs per flight [5].
Ryanair’s cooperation with secondary airports is not a "one-time contract" but deepened through "traffic commitments and long-term exclusive cooperation". For example: Ryanair promises, "if the airport provides a 5-year discount on takeoff/landing fees, we will launch at least 10 routes and increase annual passenger flow to over 500,000". Some airports even build exclusive terminals for Ryanair (e.g., the Ryanair-exclusive area in Terminal 2 of Dublin Airport), further reducing its ground operating costs. This win-win model, where airlines bring traffic and airports offer cost concessions-makes it difficult for competitors to replicate Ryanair’s cost advantages at secondary airports.
3. Innovation in financing models
3.1. Flexible fleet financing strategy
Dynamic Balance: Adjust the proportion of "operating leases + finance leases + direct purchases" based on market cycles and financial status to avoid risk exposure from over-reliance on a single model (e.g., excessive direct purchases straining cash flow, or excessive operating leases leading to high long-term costs).
Strategic Alignment: Use large-scale orders as a dual negotiation tool for "financing + cost", leveraging volume advantages to secure pricing, payment, and technical benefits, reducing full-lifecycle operating costs.
Goal Synergy: Ensure financing strategies align with network expansion (short-term supplementation, long-term lock-in) and cost control (converting fixed costs, optimizing capital costs), avoiding "financing for financing's sake" and ensuring every financing decision serves core strategic objectives [6].
3.2. Strong cash flow management
Ryanair achieves strong cash flow management through three core pillars: robust cash generation, prioritized cash use, and financial stability. For cash generation, high load factors (over 85% for LCCs) drive steady ticket revenue, advance payment models lock in cash inflows ahead of service delivery, and ancillary income (20%-40% of LCCs’ revenue) adds high-margin cash streams [7]. In cash allocation, they prioritize capital expenditures (fleet, routes, facilities) to sustain operations and expansion, then debt repayment (focusing on high-interest short-term debt) to cut risks, and finally fuel hedging to stabilize 20%-30% of cost. To stay financially sound, they maintain low leverage (asset-liability ratio 60%-70%, interest coverage ratio ≥3x, long-term debt over 60%) and secure investment-grade ratings (BBB-+) via steady profitability, 6-12 months of operating cash reserves, and transparent disclosures-lowering financing costs and forming a virtuous cycle of stability.
4. Challenges and future prospects
The EU ETS is the world’s largest carbon market, requiring airlines operating within the EU to purchase permits for their greenhouse gas emissions. For Ryanair, this translates to direct financial pressure:
Cost scale: In 2023, the EU ETS carbon price averaged €80 per ton of CO₂ (up from €25 in 2020). Ryanair emitted ~13 million tons of CO₂ in 2022 (per its annual report), meaning it faced roughly €1.04 billion in potential ETS costs-equivalent to ~12% of its 2022 operating profit (€8.6 billion). While the EU grants partial free allowances to airlines, the share of free permits is shrinking by 2030, airlines will need to buy 100% of permits for emissions exceeding their allocation, doubling Ryanair’s ETS burden [8].
Ryanair’s reliance on cost-cutting strategies-such as "self-employment" contracts, unpaid labor, and exploiting legal loopholes across EU member states-has triggered backlash from unions and regulatory bodies. Court rulings (e.g., EU Court of Justice decisions) and new labor laws (e.g., Ireland’s 2015 Industrial Relations Amendment Act) have eroded its ability to avoid collective bargaining and undercut labor costs. Strikes and pilot shortages in 2017–2018 highlighted the vulnerability of its labor model, leading to increased staff costs and operational disruptions [9].
In the aviation industry, the unionization trend among pilots and cabin crew significantly impacts labor costs in three key ways: it drives up remuneration by boosting the workforce’s bargaining power-for example, Air Canada’s cabin crew secured a 32.5% salary hike over four years (plus pay for ground hours) and its pilots a 42% increase, while airlines like American and Alaska now pay cabin crew from passenger boarding; it increases negotiation complexity, as unions (such as those representing Air Canada’s cabin crew or 20,000 Lufthansa ground staff) push for multi-faceted demands (e.g., boarding hours pay, minimum wages, inflation-beating raises), forcing airlines to spend more resources on talks; and it alters cost structures, like Air Canada shifting from paying cabin crew only during flight operations to covering ground hours, requiring airlines to rethink labor cost management and potentially triggering other cost changes [10].
5. Conclusion
Ryanair's journey from a small Irish airline to a European aviation powerhouse is a testament to the effectiveness of its integrated low - cost strategy. By meticulously optimizing operational efficiency, revolutionizing its income model, and implementing innovative financing strategies, Ryanair has not only survived but thrived in a highly competitive and volatile industry.
Its cost-leadership approach, from fleet standardization and outsourcing to secondary airport utilization, has enabled it to offer low fares that attract price-sensitive passengers in large numbers. The growth of ancillary revenue streams, such as baggage fees and seat selection, has diversified its income and provided a financial cushion. Meanwhile, its flexible fleet financing and strong cash flow management have ensured financial stability and supported continuous expansion.
However, Ryanair is not without challenges. The EU ETS and unionization trends pose significant threats to its cost structure and profitability. Yet, with a history of adaptability and innovation, Ryanair is well-positioned to face these challenges. By embracing sustainable development, expanding into new markets, and further growing its ancillary revenue, Ryanair can continue to be a dominant force in the global low-cost aviation sector, setting new industry standards and reshaping the future of air travel.
References
[1]. Malighetti, P., Paleari, S., & Redondi, R. (2009). Pricing strategies of low-cost airlines: The Ryanair case study. Journal of Air Transport Management. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2008.09.017
[2]. Gillen, D., & Lall, A. (2004). Competitive advantage of low-cost carriers: some implications for airports. Journal Air Transport Management, 10(1), 41–50. https: //doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2003.10.009
[3]. Barrett, S. D. (2005). The sustainability of the Ryanair model. International Journal of Transport Management, 2(1), 89–98. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtm.2004.12.001
[4]. Prichinet, G.-C. (2020) Strategic analysis of Ryanair. Master’s thesis, Copenhagen Business School.
[5]. Müller, Lukas Nicholas. Communicating Brand Identity Through Instagram Reels: A Comparative Study of Ryanair and EasyJet. Master's thesis, Utrecht University, 2025.
[6]. Evangelinos, C., Tscharaktschiew, S., & Obermeyer, A. (2025). Quantifying an airline's brand image: The Ryanair disutility effect. Research in Transportation Economics, 18(2), 45–62.
[7]. Smith, J. (2020). The impact of climate change. Environmental Science Journal, 15(3), 45-60.
[8]. Barrett, S. D. (2004). The sustainability of the Ryanair model. International Journal of Transport Management, 2(2), 89–98. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtm.2004.12.001
[9]. Rodríguez-García, M., Orero-Blat, M., & Palacios-Marqués, D. (2020). Challenges in the Business Model of Low-Cost Airlines: Ryanair Case Study. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, 16(3), 64-73.
[10]. Harvey, G., & Turnbull, P. (2020). Ricardo flies Ryanair: Strategic human resource management and competitive advantage in a Single European Aviation Market. Human Resource Management Journal.
Cite this article
Fu,X. (2025). Low-Cost Strategy and Financing Models in the Aviation Industry: Evidence from Ryan Air. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,223,138-142.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of ICFTBA 2025 Symposium: Financial Framework's Role in Economics and Management of Human-Centered Development
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).
References
[1]. Malighetti, P., Paleari, S., & Redondi, R. (2009). Pricing strategies of low-cost airlines: The Ryanair case study. Journal of Air Transport Management. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2008.09.017
[2]. Gillen, D., & Lall, A. (2004). Competitive advantage of low-cost carriers: some implications for airports. Journal Air Transport Management, 10(1), 41–50. https: //doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2003.10.009
[3]. Barrett, S. D. (2005). The sustainability of the Ryanair model. International Journal of Transport Management, 2(1), 89–98. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtm.2004.12.001
[4]. Prichinet, G.-C. (2020) Strategic analysis of Ryanair. Master’s thesis, Copenhagen Business School.
[5]. Müller, Lukas Nicholas. Communicating Brand Identity Through Instagram Reels: A Comparative Study of Ryanair and EasyJet. Master's thesis, Utrecht University, 2025.
[6]. Evangelinos, C., Tscharaktschiew, S., & Obermeyer, A. (2025). Quantifying an airline's brand image: The Ryanair disutility effect. Research in Transportation Economics, 18(2), 45–62.
[7]. Smith, J. (2020). The impact of climate change. Environmental Science Journal, 15(3), 45-60.
[8]. Barrett, S. D. (2004). The sustainability of the Ryanair model. International Journal of Transport Management, 2(2), 89–98. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtm.2004.12.001
[9]. Rodríguez-García, M., Orero-Blat, M., & Palacios-Marqués, D. (2020). Challenges in the Business Model of Low-Cost Airlines: Ryanair Case Study. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, 16(3), 64-73.
[10]. Harvey, G., & Turnbull, P. (2020). Ricardo flies Ryanair: Strategic human resource management and competitive advantage in a Single European Aviation Market. Human Resource Management Journal.