Prague Airport faces significant challenges in keeping up with the rapid recovery and growth seen at other European airports. While many EU airports have not only recovered from the pandemic but also exceeded pre-2019 performance levels, Prague Airport continues to struggle, lagging considerably behind competitors such as Warsaw and Budapest.

Passenger Traffic Performance

Recovery Trends in the EU

International air traffic across EU countries has experienced a robust recovery that began as early as early 2024. By February of that year, many European airports had already surpassed their 2019 international traffic numbers. In contrast, Prague Airport is projected to only reach its pre-pandemic levels later in 2024, underscoring a persistent underperformance. Data from the Association of European Airports (ACI Europe) indicate that last year, EU airports collectively handled 4.5 percent more international passengers than in 2019.

Prague Compared to Regional Competitors

• Passenger Volume:
  In 2024, Prague Airport handled 16.3 million passengers, which is 8.2 percent fewer than its 2019 figures. This performance puts Prague about 13 percent below the EU average. In comparison, Warsaw Chopin handled 21.3 million passengers—a 12.8 percent increase over its pre-pandemic numbers—while Budapest Airport managed 17.6 million passengers, growing by 8.6 percent relative to 2019 levels.

• Growth Trends:
  Historically, Prague had once managed to surpass both Warsaw and Budapest in passenger numbers. However, the current data reveal that the gap is not marginal; it is a matter of classes, with Warsaw and Budapest exhibiting robust recovery and expansion that Prague has not been able to match.

Operational and Strategic Issues

Subpar Performance Among Similar-Sized Airports

Within the size category of 10 to 25 million passengers per year, Prague Airport ranks poorly compared to its EU peers. Only Berlin, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Helsinki, and Brussels have registered worse performances, though in some of these cases (notably the German airports), the downturn is partly due to a deliberate modal shift from air to rail on domestic routes.

Underperforming Summer Season

Even during the critical summer months, which are typically a strong season for air traffic, Prague Airport’s performance remains disappointing. In the third quarter of 2024—a period that includes the peak summer travel season—Prague was 10.7 percent below its summer 2019 figures, whereas Warsaw and Budapest not only recovered but exceeded their previous numbers by 11.9 percent and 9.1 percent respectively.

Baggage Handling and Image Problems

At the start of the 2024 summer holidays, the airport’s subsidiary, Czech Airlines Handling (CSAH), encountered serious baggage handling issues. This operational crisis triggered significant internal turmoil and damaged the overall image of Prague Airport in an increasingly competitive market.

Strategic Missteps

Overemphasis on Long-Haul Routes

Prague Airport’s management has repeatedly stressed the importance of establishing the city as a long-haul destination for “sophisticated and creditworthy tourists.” However, this focus comes at a time when long-haul travel is recovering more slowly compared to other segments. Moreover, long-haul routes are primarily served by high-capacity aircraft that tend to favor established international hubs. As a result, the expectation that Prague will suddenly emerge as a major long-haul hub is increasingly unrealistic. Recent route developments have mostly involved the restoration of services to destinations such as Beijing (via Hainan Airlines) and Astana (via SCAT), with the only new long-haul service being a seasonal flight to Tashkent (operated by Qanot Sharq).

Neglect of Low-Cost and Regional Growth Opportunities

The fastest growing segment of air travel worldwide is low-cost transport—a market that Prague Airport has largely overlooked. Carriers like Ryanair and Wizz Air have expressed serious concerns over the airport’s commercial policies and fare structures. Ryanair’s Chief Commercial Officer has criticized the airport for its lack of future planning and costly fee structures, while Wizz Air continues to favor established bases elsewhere in Europe. Similarly, easyJet, Europe’s second-largest low-cost carrier, prefers airports with more favorable operating conditions.

A recent increase in airport charges of around five percent has only exacerbated these issues. In contrast, Budapest Airport offers incentives and trade discounts to attract new airline bases, enabling it to offer a much more competitive fee structure in practice.

Connectivity Issues

One persistent criticism is the lack of efficient ground transportation links between Prague Airport and the city center. The absence of a direct train connection—or even an extension of the metro from the existing terminus at Zličín—complicates travel for tourists. Improved connectivity would not only enhance convenience but also boost Prague’s overall appeal as a tourist destination.

Domestic Aviation Growth as a Counterpoint

While Prague Airport struggles with an outdated growth strategy, other Czech airports such as Brno, Pardubice, and Ostrava have been thriving. For instance:

• Brno Airport handled a record 749,000 passengers in 2024, marking a 37.8 percent growth over 2019 figures, and now serves 33 destinations.

• Pardubice Airport surpassed the 200,000-passenger threshold for the first time, exceeding its 2019 performance by 97 percent.

• Ostrava Airport handled 494,000 passengers, growing by 52 percent, and also recorded significant gains in air cargo with a 125 percent year-on-year increase.

Collectively, these airports handled over 1.4 million passengers last year, illustrating that strategic, focused development can yield robust growth even in smaller markets.

A Call for Strategic Reassessment

Prague Airport’s current trajectory is unsustainable if it wishes to maintain its status as a major international hub. The insistence on prioritizing long-haul connections, when the market is shifting towards low-cost and regional connectivity, reflects a strategy that is out of sync with the realities of modern air travel. To remain competitive, the airport must:

• Revise Its Route Strategy: Prioritize both short-haul and low-cost services that align with evolving market trends.

• Reevaluate Fee Structures: Implement more competitive pricing and incentives similar to successful models at Budapest and other progressive European airports.

• Invest in Infrastructure: Enhance ground connectivity to Prague’s city center and modernize operational facilities, including addressing the baggage-handling inefficiencies that have marred its reputation.

• Consider a Holistic Growth Plan: Develop a long-term strategy that incorporates both domestic and international growth, leveraging the successes of other Czech airports to create a more integrated and resilient regional network.

Conclusion

As air travel in Europe continues to recover beyond pre-2019 levels, Prague Airport’s lagging performance becomes an increasingly critical concern. With the state retaining control over the airport—and given its strategic importance to the Czech economy—it is imperative for national authorities to intervene. A comprehensive review of the airport’s growth strategy, paired with bold corrective actions, is needed to prevent Prague from slipping into obsolescence as a provincial facility. Rebalancing the focus towards market-driven segments, offering competitive fee structures, and improving overall connectivity will be essential steps towards revitalizing one of the country’s key transport hubs.