Gate Gourmet/BA crisis - Gatwick to be Shafted!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: South
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what do the people behind this decision up at waterslide (which co-incidentally needs halfing in size with all the 'managers' trimmed) propose to do with,
a, the 50+ shorthaul and 12 worldwide destinations served from LGW, which due to SLOT CONSTRAINTS AND LACK OF RUNWAY SPACE at the golden runways are not served from LHR and which contrary to popular belief run quite profitably rom LGW. Will BA abandon these places altogether???
b, the 5000+ BA staff based at LGW, Cabin Crew, Flight Crew and all the groundstaff? I know waterslide think they are running Heathrow Airways but even they should realise that there aint enough space for all these at the 'mothership'.
c, the aircraft that are actually owned (yes watersliders, BA actually own 737's)?
Why can BA and certain members of staff at LHR realise that LGW is not a dumping ground for LHR's losses, we are part of mainline BA and that it is now time or LHR to take some cuts (CAT Payments etc anyone???).
And does the fact that GPM results for LGW are some o the best in the airline, with praise for the terminal and staff???
There is little else that can happen to LGW to make the shorthaul side more efficient - believe me I know with late finishes, minimum turnarounds and maximum aircraft useage with some of the oldest a/c in the fleet, crew walking to a/c and the decrease in crew nightstoppping, not to mention a more low-cost style to rosters, six on - one day off - six on - 2 off, is not uncommon or SH LGW!!!
WW Please turn your devils fork to LHR, maybe then we can fly a profitable airline with freedom of choice in where pax leave from.
a, the 50+ shorthaul and 12 worldwide destinations served from LGW, which due to SLOT CONSTRAINTS AND LACK OF RUNWAY SPACE at the golden runways are not served from LHR and which contrary to popular belief run quite profitably rom LGW. Will BA abandon these places altogether???
b, the 5000+ BA staff based at LGW, Cabin Crew, Flight Crew and all the groundstaff? I know waterslide think they are running Heathrow Airways but even they should realise that there aint enough space for all these at the 'mothership'.
c, the aircraft that are actually owned (yes watersliders, BA actually own 737's)?
Why can BA and certain members of staff at LHR realise that LGW is not a dumping ground for LHR's losses, we are part of mainline BA and that it is now time or LHR to take some cuts (CAT Payments etc anyone???).
And does the fact that GPM results for LGW are some o the best in the airline, with praise for the terminal and staff???
There is little else that can happen to LGW to make the shorthaul side more efficient - believe me I know with late finishes, minimum turnarounds and maximum aircraft useage with some of the oldest a/c in the fleet, crew walking to a/c and the decrease in crew nightstoppping, not to mention a more low-cost style to rosters, six on - one day off - six on - 2 off, is not uncommon or SH LGW!!!
WW Please turn your devils fork to LHR, maybe then we can fly a profitable airline with freedom of choice in where pax leave from.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the use of all those resources if simple aircaft profit/loss analyses can't be obtained!
Firstly, and most obviously the profit generated by an individual aircraft is directly related to the sectors & loads it flies in any given period. What is this information going to provide?, basically the obvious that certain sectors are more profitable than others.
Secondly & of much more relevance would be the operating costs on a seat/mile basis for specific types of aircraft in the fleet. If you are interested in identifying aircraft of same type for cost savings then you need to give full consideration to individual finance costs whether purchase or lease, issues of age, amortisation / depreciation and the maintenance record of the aircraft. This information will yield far more than any P/L Account.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: LGW
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there are to be cuts surely then LGW BA operation must be run as an outstation. In doing so a lot of the cost of the admin and ops must be transfered to LHR.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bealine, I really can not understand your obsession with the profit / loss of an individual aircraft !
I bet Michael O'Leary could give me an answer within a few hours regarding one of RYR's individual aircraft!!!
.....But, sadly, with BA, finance is all tied in with different "budgets" so that costs can be hidden or reallocated elsewhere! This is the real reason why an individual aircraft's balance sheet will not be shown - because the true picture would emerge!!!
(The reason I am obsessed with this is because, over a three or six month period, that aircraft would have covered its complete "tour of duty" several times over and would produce an accurate picture as to whether we're just being "busy fools" or actually selling tickets that make money! I have always advocated that it's far better to sell 25 seats at £100 each than 100 seats at £25 each - but then, who am I? I'm only a poor Gatwick turd compared to the mighty LHR lot!)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bealine - you can get all that information in the best way to be able to decide whether a profit is made or not. It may not be in the form that you envisage it, but it will be performed, analysed, and decisions made upon it.
O'Leary will operate in a similar fashion as well.
You can get one for a division - just divide that by the number of aircraft. You will not receive one as it is highly confidential proprietary information with which rival could massacre BA on profitable or unprofitable routes as they desired if it were in their possession.
Realise that the profit of say G-DOCY is irrelevant - you should care about the route's profit, ASK, Yield etc as mentioned above, about which more meaningful data can be obtained.
This is completely unrealistic - a mixture is sold to ensure proper yield management and profit maximisation.
Combine these with aircraft untilisation rates - which is done - you do see exactly what is required.
Face it - LGW appears - or at least management desire it to appear as - a loss leader in order that Ts & Cs can be bargained down to a competitive level in the company as a whole.
O'Leary will operate in a similar fashion as well.
You can get one for a division - just divide that by the number of aircraft. You will not receive one as it is highly confidential proprietary information with which rival could massacre BA on profitable or unprofitable routes as they desired if it were in their possession.
Realise that the profit of say G-DOCY is irrelevant - you should care about the route's profit, ASK, Yield etc as mentioned above, about which more meaningful data can be obtained.
I have always advocated that it's far better to sell 25 seats at £100 each than 100 seats at £25 each
Combine these with aircraft untilisation rates - which is done - you do see exactly what is required.
Face it - LGW appears - or at least management desire it to appear as - a loss leader in order that Ts & Cs can be bargained down to a competitive level in the company as a whole.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have empathy with the LGW situ. However and irrespective of Waterworld being top heavy cuts will have to be made there and at LGW. Surely a lot of the ops which are mimicked at LHR could be covered from LHR all the time with LGW treated as a route station. As for the 737's they are worth very little and are a heap of rubbish and can do little for BA's reputation as they are falling apart inside. Apart from LGW BA will have to take the TGWU on at LHR otherwise T5 will be a disaster and could find increased costs rather than that required.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Autoglide:
I don't see any problem with the direct flight being dearer than the indirect - as a passenger I would be prepared to pay a bit more for the convenience of a direct flight, and I'd expect an airline to set their fare levels appropriately (i.e. more attractive service = higher fare). The issue for the short-haul carrier is that they stand to make much less for the short sector from a transferring passenger than they would from a point-to-point passenger. So the transfer passenger is not "worth nothing" but - depending on how the cost accounting is done - the short-haul connecting sector can be made to look more or less profitable.
I can therefore understand Bealine's suspicion of creative accounting. Lies, damn lies and cost accounting assumptions...
I don't see any problem with the direct flight being dearer than the indirect - as a passenger I would be prepared to pay a bit more for the convenience of a direct flight, and I'd expect an airline to set their fare levels appropriately (i.e. more attractive service = higher fare). The issue for the short-haul carrier is that they stand to make much less for the short sector from a transferring passenger than they would from a point-to-point passenger. So the transfer passenger is not "worth nothing" but - depending on how the cost accounting is done - the short-haul connecting sector can be made to look more or less profitable.
I can therefore understand Bealine's suspicion of creative accounting. Lies, damn lies and cost accounting assumptions...
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: brighton
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a LGW crew member and yes their is more than One airport in London.
LGW is a fantastic Airport to fly in to and out of
And yes it has Easyjet , Ryanair and Flybe on its doorstep and is competing very well with all 3 or even more!
Dread North Terminal being painted Orange
Eurofleet LGW is Mainline (in a way) is always treated as an outsider in BA , and yes crew do work very hard espically in the summer very long days and minimum rest compared to the days of EOG , CFE and Danair. LGW changes every day compared to LHR.
Hear hear LGW keep up the fantastic work
LGW is a fantastic Airport to fly in to and out of
And yes it has Easyjet , Ryanair and Flybe on its doorstep and is competing very well with all 3 or even more!
Dread North Terminal being painted Orange
Eurofleet LGW is Mainline (in a way) is always treated as an outsider in BA , and yes crew do work very hard espically in the summer very long days and minimum rest compared to the days of EOG , CFE and Danair. LGW changes every day compared to LHR.
Hear hear LGW keep up the fantastic work
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: LGW
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing that is doing LGW no favours at all is our beloved franchise partner GB Airways.
Pax have a BA ticket and ride on a BA liveried aircraft with a BA flight prefix. They believe the experience is BA.
The serviceability of their fleet is shaky at best and the poor machines are worked to death trying to maintain near impossible scheduling.
Who gets the blame? Pax are not interested in the franchise, they want to (and do) shout at BA for the 5 or 6 hour delay to a 2 hour flight. They're not interested that there is no other craft available "an airline the size of BA should have a standby aircraft" simplistic view of course, but to the layman, valid.
The GB employees do a fantastic job and I sympathise, but they aren't here getting their faces chewed off by some of the foulest pax ever to board an aircraft.
It's been a very long summer and the BA girls and boys are beginning to get a little fed up with another carrier's failings being the reason for pax "never flying on f****** BA again" and having idiots swinging punches (really) at the poor guy that has to tell them their flight is delayed.
The future? Even more routes operated by GB Airways?
This situation ties up BA staff that should be dealing with BA flights, and woe betide BA if they don't board a GB flight within the SLA.... don't worry about the BA scheduled service, you must board that delayed GB flight .... BA has become a handling agent for BA flight numbers to the detriment of the BA product.
Steps down from soap box and apologises to any sensitive GB Airways members.
Pax have a BA ticket and ride on a BA liveried aircraft with a BA flight prefix. They believe the experience is BA.
The serviceability of their fleet is shaky at best and the poor machines are worked to death trying to maintain near impossible scheduling.
Who gets the blame? Pax are not interested in the franchise, they want to (and do) shout at BA for the 5 or 6 hour delay to a 2 hour flight. They're not interested that there is no other craft available "an airline the size of BA should have a standby aircraft" simplistic view of course, but to the layman, valid.
The GB employees do a fantastic job and I sympathise, but they aren't here getting their faces chewed off by some of the foulest pax ever to board an aircraft.
It's been a very long summer and the BA girls and boys are beginning to get a little fed up with another carrier's failings being the reason for pax "never flying on f****** BA again" and having idiots swinging punches (really) at the poor guy that has to tell them their flight is delayed.
The future? Even more routes operated by GB Airways?
This situation ties up BA staff that should be dealing with BA flights, and woe betide BA if they don't board a GB flight within the SLA.... don't worry about the BA scheduled service, you must board that delayed GB flight .... BA has become a handling agent for BA flight numbers to the detriment of the BA product.
Steps down from soap box and apologises to any sensitive GB Airways members.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: london
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wanted to say as an ex GB now BA LHR employee.
I have to say BA does have to take on a lot of the problems GB bring on themselfs i.e- lack of spare aircraft/crew etc.
Also as a now LHR employee, i have to say, i would much rather fly out of LGW than LHR. The north terminal,BA staff,security etc are always efficent,friendly. I always enjoy the stress free journey of going through LGW. LHR... BA staff were i work are great, but the overall journey through LHR is not great.
I have to say BA does have to take on a lot of the problems GB bring on themselfs i.e- lack of spare aircraft/crew etc.
Also as a now LHR employee, i have to say, i would much rather fly out of LGW than LHR. The north terminal,BA staff,security etc are always efficent,friendly. I always enjoy the stress free journey of going through LGW. LHR... BA staff were i work are great, but the overall journey through LHR is not great.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is completely unrealistic - a mixture is sold to ensure proper yield management and profit maximisation.
........Except LGW-BRE (Bremen) and LGW-DUS (Dusseldorf) where every ticket sold was at £572.30 - so, what happened? BA axed the routes!
LGW-LUX still carries these high-yield fares - but averages only 25-30 pax per flight! I wonder how long this route will last???
(FYI a 25 pax LGW-LUX service probably yields more profit than a full LGW-BCN or MAD service because of the dilution of Groups, Air Miles, BA Miles, Evening Standard Two for One's etc (which, ironically, are only offered on Gatwick services)! Trouble is, this cr4p rated traffic still has to be checked-in, fed, paid EU compensation and have its baggage looked after!)
IF BA is making losses at Gatwick (and I doubt this very much - I don't trust BA's figures as they are not transparent - indeed, nothing BA does is ever transparent!), its down to cr4p management - nothing else! You certainly can't keep on using the "wrong type of passenger" argument - it is BA itself that has created the "wrong type of passenger" - no one else!!!
So, my question is this, if BA management caused the problems, why are the poor bloody Gatwick infantry getting punished???
bealine..... it's the new management style and not only at BA . You should try ATC with "cost saving...blah blah blah" and a rising number of "managers" and thus new a building. I new this would happen the moment they put up a big board in the entry hall with among other gems "our most important asset is our staff" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Three years and three months to go .
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speedpig
Whilst I do agree with you about their scheduling - I have to point out that the GB Fleet is far newer and more reliable than anything that BA mainline has at LGW - except for one aircraft.
And that is on loan from BA!
One thing that is doing LGW no favours at all is our beloved franchise partner GB Airways. Pax have a BA ticket and ride on a BA liveried aircraft with a BA flight prefix. They believe the experience is BA. The serviceability of their fleet is shaky at best and the poor machines are worked to death trying to maintain near impossible scheduling.
And that is on loan from BA!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet 11 I have to take issue, our 737's are rubbish inside irrespective of how hard the CC try to provide a service. Additionally all this nonsence about being a full service airline is an exageration. The club meal / snack service is grim and I cannot comment on down the back. This is getting away from the subject of this post which may have exhausted itself. Please to report that the GG protesters have diminished in numbers after it p......d down. They can move fast when they want to.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No - G-BUSJ is doing fine at mo!!!
IMHO GB Airways have had quite a run of bad luck with the Airbus fleet - I hope Airbus Industries are sharing some of the responsibility and reimbursing GB for some of the losses!!!
It's easy to blame GB, but in their size of business, any one with a business brain and the leasing costs of new aircraft would seek to maximise aircraft usage!!!
IMHO GB Airways have had quite a run of bad luck with the Airbus fleet - I hope Airbus Industries are sharing some of the responsibility and reimbursing GB for some of the losses!!!
It's easy to blame GB, but in their size of business, any one with a business brain and the leasing costs of new aircraft would seek to maximise aircraft usage!!!
