Originally Posted by
Peter47
UK - LAX was nearly 1.4m pax p.a. in 2014 & UK - SFO approaching 1.0m (including transfers) so 10% of passengers could justify a daily flight to each. Surely MAN could manage this?
It is interesting that the ME3 are doing very well with eastbound traffic - over 3m pax travelled from regional airports to AUH, DOH or DXB in 2014 most of them doubtless transferring on to the Indian sub-continent or Australasia.
You have rather answered your first question with your second. There's a lot of traffic to Abu Dhabi, not because of the intrinsic attractions of the city but because of transfers onward to 101 final destinations. And likewise a lot of the traffic on LAX/SFO to London is transferring on, whether local or long distance (the absence of any West Coast to Africa flights has long made Heathrow a significant connection point for such intercontinental passengers).
Look at your high revenue and regular traffic. LAX has much entertainment and media traffic, SFO has much IT industry travel. Both have significant UK contacts in London and the South-East, with very little in comparison in the North-West. For US-based travellers in particular, sticking on their favourite alliance is important to them. Californian points offer very few connecting opportunities, unlike say Chicago, because there's nothing beyond there. Heathrow offers a lot on BA, but Manchester doesn't have this.