Originally Posted by Skipness One Echo
We get it. You hate Heathrow and you have no grasp of the airline business.
Firstly, you have no idea as to daynehold's level of understanding.
Secondly, do
I have no grasp of the airline business because I believe it was a bad idea for BA to terminate Manchester-JFK. I as an experienced accountant who has worked in yield, commercial and accounts payable departments with four airlines alongside the Syrian tourism authority?
Whenever a Manchester enthusiast or employee complains about BA you become unpleasant with them but that aside, allow me to point out a few things you might be missing in your black and white view of a complex industry:
1.) Manchester-JFK had
PR impact, to the casual (i.e not airline related) observer it would appear that BA had a very small base at Manchester with a few destinations including New York, thereby creating the illusion that BA had a presence in the regions and creating goodwill in those regions.
2.) Said goodwill could have convinced those who had taken satisfactory direct flights from Manchester to use BA via Heathrow.
3.) Swapping Manchester for Gatwick puts the idea of a sort of "anti-Northism" into the minds of residents of the North of England causing bad feeling towards British Airways.
4.) The public do not understand that BA is privatised, they consider it the national carrier and they have even less understanding of the "hub and spoke" model.
Perhaps before you insult others you might consider arguments outside of your black and white mentality (such as
PR, goodwill, etc).
In any case, you seem to consider anyone who criticises the hub and spoke model to be lacking in understanding. Remember what they said about Ryanair's decision to set up at Charleroi? Something along the lines of "no feeding traffic, not enough point to point travellers" which seems to be the argument on your lips the majority of the time.