British Airways CityExpress
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel the biggest problem for BACX is the fact that GB Airways have come into MAN and are doing very well for themselves. They are fitting A320's to new destinations where as BACX cannot even fill 49 seaters to MAD, or 110 seaters to FCO. Surley BA management must have taken note of this.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Willy Walsh thinks that BACX's performance is 'not good enough'.
Sorry Willy lad, you've missed the point. From this frequent flier's perspective, it's the BACX offering that is not good enough.
The planes are crap and the fares are high, astonishingly high in some cases.
The BA website, tells me I'm in the Club Europe 'cabin' like I'm in some luxury ocean going liner, when all I get is a seat the same as everyone else and that is just as small as one you get with most LOCOs. There is of course the little curtain behind me that offers the one fingered salute at all behind me - which is what I don't want to do.
The product is marketed as 'full service'. What exactly is that? And do I really care? Am I really paying 200 quid more for a 'hot breakfast' that would be returned promptly, had I the misfortune to have it served in a Chinese takeaway.
If BACX can't even half fill an Embraer to a major European city then there really is a fundamental problem and it's not the market.
Additionally, the Manchester Airport owners must be wondering about the return they are getting on their infrastructure investment. The precious early morning slots are being squandered by aircraft with a couple of dozen people on board whilst LOCOs with a proven record of making routes work, complain about not being able to get the right slots at MAN. Something will have to give.
I feel so sorry for the crews who, despite it all, remain so professional and good humoured. Not their fault they are being screwed by an unsustainable business model.
Anyway, all appears to be coming to a head.
Good luck to all affected.
Sorry Willy lad, you've missed the point. From this frequent flier's perspective, it's the BACX offering that is not good enough.
The planes are crap and the fares are high, astonishingly high in some cases.
The BA website, tells me I'm in the Club Europe 'cabin' like I'm in some luxury ocean going liner, when all I get is a seat the same as everyone else and that is just as small as one you get with most LOCOs. There is of course the little curtain behind me that offers the one fingered salute at all behind me - which is what I don't want to do.
The product is marketed as 'full service'. What exactly is that? And do I really care? Am I really paying 200 quid more for a 'hot breakfast' that would be returned promptly, had I the misfortune to have it served in a Chinese takeaway.
If BACX can't even half fill an Embraer to a major European city then there really is a fundamental problem and it's not the market.
Additionally, the Manchester Airport owners must be wondering about the return they are getting on their infrastructure investment. The precious early morning slots are being squandered by aircraft with a couple of dozen people on board whilst LOCOs with a proven record of making routes work, complain about not being able to get the right slots at MAN. Something will have to give.
I feel so sorry for the crews who, despite it all, remain so professional and good humoured. Not their fault they are being screwed by an unsustainable business model.
Anyway, all appears to be coming to a head.
Good luck to all affected.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VHF FLYER
Your point is very well made. The people from BACX frequently posting on here occasionally overlook the view of their customers! I agree with your assessment of the product. It is NOT up to the standard of mainline! However, in their defence, the reason the prices are sky high, is that they are prevented from competing with mainline, but can be lumbered with a similar cost base.
The flights need to be much cheaper, if they are to provide good value for money.
This is exactly why they need a distinctively different brand. That way, customers like yourself can't be confused into expecting the same product you would get at LHR, and can make your choices accordingly.
Purely as an aside, it is a shame that some on here are so keen to see the backs of the ex-BAR cabin crew. It is a shame they can't see the 'added value' that many of these individuals offer. It is also ironic that they are so keen to moan about their own 'disruptions', and yet so harsh to individuals who may well have worked at BHX or MAN for anything up to 20 years, only to see their jobs sold to the lowest bidder.
Ironic also, that so many people are said to be leaving BACX, due in part I guess, to poor T & Cs, and yet anyone with better T & Cs receives nothing but a good slagging!
How bizzare
Your point is very well made. The people from BACX frequently posting on here occasionally overlook the view of their customers! I agree with your assessment of the product. It is NOT up to the standard of mainline! However, in their defence, the reason the prices are sky high, is that they are prevented from competing with mainline, but can be lumbered with a similar cost base.
The flights need to be much cheaper, if they are to provide good value for money.
This is exactly why they need a distinctively different brand. That way, customers like yourself can't be confused into expecting the same product you would get at LHR, and can make your choices accordingly.
Purely as an aside, it is a shame that some on here are so keen to see the backs of the ex-BAR cabin crew. It is a shame they can't see the 'added value' that many of these individuals offer. It is also ironic that they are so keen to moan about their own 'disruptions', and yet so harsh to individuals who may well have worked at BHX or MAN for anything up to 20 years, only to see their jobs sold to the lowest bidder.
Ironic also, that so many people are said to be leaving BACX, due in part I guess, to poor T & Cs, and yet anyone with better T & Cs receives nothing but a good slagging!
How bizzare
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAR - British Airways Regional; as opposed to the others. BA in general is the home to many functions being performed by diferent grades on differing wages when the job function is identical. Can WW be blamed for this surely he has not been with us long enough and the results causing this overhaul was conducted during the governship of Mr Edd. Seems more like Batman may be behind this.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Down in the jungle
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VHF Flyer
'The planes are crap and the fares are high, astonishingly high in some cases'
You ain't kidding there.... MAN - ABZ £300+ same with BMI. Of course I can get cheaper if I am prepared to travel at a time that does not suit
'The planes are crap and the fares are high, astonishingly high in some cases'
You ain't kidding there.... MAN - ABZ £300+ same with BMI. Of course I can get cheaper if I am prepared to travel at a time that does not suit
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the other issue that must be borne in mind at all times is how BACX lie alongside BA and to what extent they contribute to the BA bottom line. If BACX is losing £30 millions then that does not ogre well for BACX and with nil routes into LHR/LGW might some of their business take cash away from BA and place it into EU competitors.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What BACX needs is a new leadership team with revenue management that is on the ball which is something they lack at the moment.... The current leadership does not seem to have any idea what there aim is and lurches from pillar to post with one idea then another. If they aim to go loco then there entire fleet is wrong, loco on 49 and 50 seaters is not viable. That would require a big financial input from BA for some bigger aircraft 737's or larger. Even now i would say there fleet is wrong, the pax dont like 49 seater aircraft and they have left in large numbers. I guess they must be cheap to run. Also the MAN JFK route apparently makes them £22M PA.
Always said that BAW is a prestige national airline and as such should be a one cabin service (Club is just not worth it) in Europe , with several fares depending on what the pax wants - flexible or non-flex . The E145 is too small for this type of service I never realised it was so cramped until yesterday . I normally fly DUS-MAN and vv. Yesterday I boarded a Lufthansa B733 from DUS to FRA on my way to LAS . As I walked into the cabin my immediate response was 'my this is big'! Three or so years ago the B733/4 was normal on the DUS-MAN route , or was it longer ago ?(!)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B737-300s (and occasional 400) last operated in the regions approximately 6 years ago. Followed by about 3 years of brand new A319s, straight from the factory.
Since then, it's been RJ100s, E145s, and Dash 8s.
They call it progress you know.
Since then, it's been RJ100s, E145s, and Dash 8s.
They call it progress you know.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northern England, United Kingdom
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VHF FLYER
Good point about Manchester Airports view of things and small aircraft tying up valuable peaktime slots. I think they manage to put nearly four times as many "potential shoppers" through T2 as they do through T3 and someone in MA must be looking at this.
Maybe BACX are simply being used for as long as BA can get away with it in order to keep these lucrative slots and stands free for future use.
American perhaps or GB? I haven't worked from Man for some time, but friends still hanging on in there have heard that GB are planning to base up to 6 Airbuses there by 07. 145's doing a little slot protection on the side doesn't seem too far fetched when one company is already flying fresh air around in a four engined jet just to keep some LHR slots warm.
Good point about Manchester Airports view of things and small aircraft tying up valuable peaktime slots. I think they manage to put nearly four times as many "potential shoppers" through T2 as they do through T3 and someone in MA must be looking at this.
Maybe BACX are simply being used for as long as BA can get away with it in order to keep these lucrative slots and stands free for future use.
American perhaps or GB? I haven't worked from Man for some time, but friends still hanging on in there have heard that GB are planning to base up to 6 Airbuses there by 07. 145's doing a little slot protection on the side doesn't seem too far fetched when one company is already flying fresh air around in a four engined jet just to keep some LHR slots warm.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Railgun,
Maybe the MAN - JFK route makes £22M profit per annum but it has NOTHING to do with CXP. That profit is part of BA Mainline.
The route is a BA Mainline one, (always has and always will be) and is crewed with BA Mainline Flight Crew.
The only connection with CXP is that presently, the Cabin Crew are ex BAR based at MAN.
There is a distinct possibility as from April next year this will be operated with LHR Eurofleet Cabin Crew, MAN Shuttle Base, or GB Airways according to Galley FM!
Maybe the MAN - JFK route makes £22M profit per annum but it has NOTHING to do with CXP. That profit is part of BA Mainline.
The route is a BA Mainline one, (always has and always will be) and is crewed with BA Mainline Flight Crew.
The only connection with CXP is that presently, the Cabin Crew are ex BAR based at MAN.
There is a distinct possibility as from April next year this will be operated with LHR Eurofleet Cabin Crew, MAN Shuttle Base, or GB Airways according to Galley FM!