Ryanair
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR
Irish steve,
It sounds like your experiences with FR are flawed by DUB airport. Its honestly seems like its DUB thats giving you the stress, but because the particular section of the airport is FR dominated, u are associating it with FR.
If i had a penny (excuse the pun really for this circumstance) for every time i walked into Dunnes, Tesco, Aldi, Supervalu, even my local butchers, and was told ""ive no change"" and have had to walk away....Rest assured, i could buy FR!
in the circumstance, merely agree with the crew that you will pay for your item now, and you would be most obliged if they could bring you your change when it is available (when some other pax coughs up a load of 10c coins he has from the pub the night before!). Ive done this on FR, BA Connect, BMI, EI etc a million and one times, and theres never a problem. Change is always returned post haste too.
It sounds like your experiences with FR are flawed by DUB airport. Its honestly seems like its DUB thats giving you the stress, but because the particular section of the airport is FR dominated, u are associating it with FR.
If i had a penny (excuse the pun really for this circumstance) for every time i walked into Dunnes, Tesco, Aldi, Supervalu, even my local butchers, and was told ""ive no change"" and have had to walk away....Rest assured, i could buy FR!
in the circumstance, merely agree with the crew that you will pay for your item now, and you would be most obliged if they could bring you your change when it is available (when some other pax coughs up a load of 10c coins he has from the pub the night before!). Ive done this on FR, BA Connect, BMI, EI etc a million and one times, and theres never a problem. Change is always returned post haste too.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O' Leary and his duff decisions.
Sunday Independent: June 18th 2006
O'Leary and his duff decisions
NOTHING, it seems, can stop Ryanair. This year the budget airline is planning to carry 42 million passengers. If it does, it will overtake Lufthansa to become the world's largest scheduled airline measured by the number of passengers carried.
While it might seem churlish to spoil Ryanair's party, the fact is that motormouth O'Leary is not quite infallible - and what's more, some of his mistakes have ended up costing Ryanair's shareholders a hell of a lot of money. So we decided to glory in them.
FUEL HEDGING O'Leary's most expensive mistake was undoubtedly his refusal to hedge Ryanair's exposure to rising fuel costs by buying fuel forward and locking in lower fuel prices. This meant that Ryanair had no protection as aviation fuel costs soared skywards. Last year the airline spent 462m on fuel, an increase of 74 per cent on the previous year.
If Ryanair had been able to lock in fuel prices even $10 (7.80) below the spot price, it would have added about 70m to last year's profits.
EUROPE While Ryanair has already repaid 4m in subsidies, that was only a small part of the cost of the Charleroi debacle. Make no mistake about it, gratuitously annoying the EU Commission was not a good idea.
By turning down the offer of a cosmetic compromise and publicly abusing the Commission, which had objected to Ryanair's sweetheart deal with the Walloon regional government that owns Charleroi, O'Leary has made powerful enemies in Brussels. Enemies who have long memories and are in a position to inflict serious damage on Ryanair.
GEOGRAPHY Whatever it was the Jesuits taught the young O'Leary during his time at Clongowes, geography doesn't seem to have been on the curriculum. Ryanair's Frankfurt-Hahn hub is virtually in Luxembourg, while Paris-Beauvais is closer to the northern French city of Amiens than it is to the French capital.
However, it was Ryanair advertising flights to "Copenhagen" a few years back that really took the Mickey, if you'll pardon the pun. On closer examination it emerged that the flights were not to Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, but to Malmo in Sweden.
NO DIVIDENDS With its growth rapidly slowing, O'Leary's refusal to pay a dividend is now starting to hurt the share price. While the airline almost quadrupled passenger numbers to 35 million over the past five years, it is forecasting that passenger numbers will double to just under 70 million by 2011.
DUBLIN AIRPORT By pursuing a pointless vendetta against Aer Rianta over its plans to expand Dublin Airport and refusing to start any new routes out of Dublin for several years, O'Leary allowed Aer Lingus to open a slew of new routes.
Having a free run at these new European routes was one of the key reasons Willie Walsh was able to bring Aer Lingus back from the dead. With Aer Lingus rapidly evolving into a sort of Ryanair-lite, O'Leary had no option but to eat humble pie and start operating new routes out of Dublin.
CUSTOMER RELATIONS While O'Leary might view customer relations as an expensive irrelevance, treating the paying public in such a cavalier manner could yet come back to haunt Ryanair. O'Leary's handling of Jane O'Keeffe, Ryanair's millionth passenger, who was awarded 67,500 by the High Court in 2002 after the airline reneged on a prize of free travel for life, was merely the most notorious such incident.
With relations between Ryanair and the EU Commission now downright poisonous, what are the odds on enhanced consumer protection for passengers whose flights are delayed or cancelled?
POLISH U-TURN In 2004 O'Leary sneeringly said: "Who wants to go to Gdansk? There ain't a lot there after you've seen the shipyard wall." A year later Ryanair announced that it was after all flying to the Polish port - and now flies from Gdansk to Stansted, Frankfurt Hahn and Stockholm.
WHEELCHAIRS Whatever made O'Leary levy a charge on passengers in wheelchairs? In fairness, Ryanair had a better case than was generally recognised as it was merely passing on a charge imposed by the British Airports Authority and Aer Rianta.
It doesn't matter. When Bob Ross, who had been charged stg£18 for the use of a wheelchair at Stansted in March 2002, successfully sued Ryanair, it was the budget airline and not BAA which got it in the neck.
After the wheelchairs experience, you would have thought that Ryanair would tread carefully in its dealings with the disabled. Not a bit of it. Last September it chucked nine blind and visually impaired people along with their three fully-sighted minders off one its planes at Stansted citing "safety" considerations. Some people never learn.
THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT In September 2004 Ryanair unveiled ambitious plans for an in-flight entertainment system. Passengers would pay 7 for the use of a laptop-type device which would show films, cartoons and TV shows.
O'Leary predicted that Ryanair would make "enormous sums of money" from the system. Things didn't quite work out as planned. The system left passengers underwhelmed and it has since been quietly dropped.
Dan White
O'Leary and his duff decisions
NOTHING, it seems, can stop Ryanair. This year the budget airline is planning to carry 42 million passengers. If it does, it will overtake Lufthansa to become the world's largest scheduled airline measured by the number of passengers carried.
While it might seem churlish to spoil Ryanair's party, the fact is that motormouth O'Leary is not quite infallible - and what's more, some of his mistakes have ended up costing Ryanair's shareholders a hell of a lot of money. So we decided to glory in them.
FUEL HEDGING O'Leary's most expensive mistake was undoubtedly his refusal to hedge Ryanair's exposure to rising fuel costs by buying fuel forward and locking in lower fuel prices. This meant that Ryanair had no protection as aviation fuel costs soared skywards. Last year the airline spent 462m on fuel, an increase of 74 per cent on the previous year.
If Ryanair had been able to lock in fuel prices even $10 (7.80) below the spot price, it would have added about 70m to last year's profits.
EUROPE While Ryanair has already repaid 4m in subsidies, that was only a small part of the cost of the Charleroi debacle. Make no mistake about it, gratuitously annoying the EU Commission was not a good idea.
By turning down the offer of a cosmetic compromise and publicly abusing the Commission, which had objected to Ryanair's sweetheart deal with the Walloon regional government that owns Charleroi, O'Leary has made powerful enemies in Brussels. Enemies who have long memories and are in a position to inflict serious damage on Ryanair.
GEOGRAPHY Whatever it was the Jesuits taught the young O'Leary during his time at Clongowes, geography doesn't seem to have been on the curriculum. Ryanair's Frankfurt-Hahn hub is virtually in Luxembourg, while Paris-Beauvais is closer to the northern French city of Amiens than it is to the French capital.
However, it was Ryanair advertising flights to "Copenhagen" a few years back that really took the Mickey, if you'll pardon the pun. On closer examination it emerged that the flights were not to Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, but to Malmo in Sweden.
NO DIVIDENDS With its growth rapidly slowing, O'Leary's refusal to pay a dividend is now starting to hurt the share price. While the airline almost quadrupled passenger numbers to 35 million over the past five years, it is forecasting that passenger numbers will double to just under 70 million by 2011.
DUBLIN AIRPORT By pursuing a pointless vendetta against Aer Rianta over its plans to expand Dublin Airport and refusing to start any new routes out of Dublin for several years, O'Leary allowed Aer Lingus to open a slew of new routes.
Having a free run at these new European routes was one of the key reasons Willie Walsh was able to bring Aer Lingus back from the dead. With Aer Lingus rapidly evolving into a sort of Ryanair-lite, O'Leary had no option but to eat humble pie and start operating new routes out of Dublin.
CUSTOMER RELATIONS While O'Leary might view customer relations as an expensive irrelevance, treating the paying public in such a cavalier manner could yet come back to haunt Ryanair. O'Leary's handling of Jane O'Keeffe, Ryanair's millionth passenger, who was awarded 67,500 by the High Court in 2002 after the airline reneged on a prize of free travel for life, was merely the most notorious such incident.
With relations between Ryanair and the EU Commission now downright poisonous, what are the odds on enhanced consumer protection for passengers whose flights are delayed or cancelled?
POLISH U-TURN In 2004 O'Leary sneeringly said: "Who wants to go to Gdansk? There ain't a lot there after you've seen the shipyard wall." A year later Ryanair announced that it was after all flying to the Polish port - and now flies from Gdansk to Stansted, Frankfurt Hahn and Stockholm.
WHEELCHAIRS Whatever made O'Leary levy a charge on passengers in wheelchairs? In fairness, Ryanair had a better case than was generally recognised as it was merely passing on a charge imposed by the British Airports Authority and Aer Rianta.
It doesn't matter. When Bob Ross, who had been charged stg£18 for the use of a wheelchair at Stansted in March 2002, successfully sued Ryanair, it was the budget airline and not BAA which got it in the neck.
After the wheelchairs experience, you would have thought that Ryanair would tread carefully in its dealings with the disabled. Not a bit of it. Last September it chucked nine blind and visually impaired people along with their three fully-sighted minders off one its planes at Stansted citing "safety" considerations. Some people never learn.
THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT In September 2004 Ryanair unveiled ambitious plans for an in-flight entertainment system. Passengers would pay 7 for the use of a laptop-type device which would show films, cartoons and TV shows.
O'Leary predicted that Ryanair would make "enormous sums of money" from the system. Things didn't quite work out as planned. The system left passengers underwhelmed and it has since been quietly dropped.
Dan White
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cartoon strip
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disappointing really. I thought the Indo would try and come up with something new and at least juicy. Heard nearly all that stuff before and I have to say it wouldn't exactly set the world on fire in any airline. Silly season padding of newspaper, tsk, tsk.
So he's a chancer who gets it wrong occasionally. He also has an exceedingly annoying habit of getting it right occasionally too.
And before anyone has a go, there is not a hint of employee relations in that article and I didn't mention it either so hopefully the usual suspects can contain themselves...
So he's a chancer who gets it wrong occasionally. He also has an exceedingly annoying habit of getting it right occasionally too.
And before anyone has a go, there is not a hint of employee relations in that article and I didn't mention it either so hopefully the usual suspects can contain themselves...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: North of London
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, he may well get it right occasionally as Roger above points out. But, bearing in mind he is the single most dislikeable person in the world, let alone aviation, isn't it wonderful to be able to re-read his f-ups over and over again!!!!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone confirm that FR are actually trying to charge airports for the pleasure of letting them land there? Friend of a neighbour of mine's brother says that they are trying to do that at PIK. This "friend" also says that they are still using the original contract they had at PIK when they first started. This took into account the use of the 737-200 with approx 120 pax, however the 800's carry approx 185 pax and no provisio in the contract has taken this into account. Good luck to FR if they can carry it off.
As I have said before, the CEO appears to be following a well worn business strategy that assumes his competitors are idiots, and that he can drive them out of business by supplying product at less then the full cost of production. Once his competitors are out of business, he reasons, he can raise his prices and recoup his losses, then go on to make squillions.
A reading of the accounts suggests that the actual business of flying people from one place to another doesn't make much money. Its the "extra's" that make the dough.
Unfortunately the "punters" eventually work this out and act accordingly.
A reading of the accounts suggests that the actual business of flying people from one place to another doesn't make much money. Its the "extra's" that make the dough.
Unfortunately the "punters" eventually work this out and act accordingly.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Magic Kingdom
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately the "punters" eventually work this out and act accordingly
NOTHING, it seems, can stop Ryanair. This year the budget airline is planning to carry 42 million passengers. If it does, it will overtake Lufthansa to become the world's largest scheduled airline measured by the number of passengers carried.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by Sunfish
As I have said before, the CEO appears to be following a well worn business strategy that assumes his competitors are idiots, and that he can drive them out of business by supplying product at less then the full cost of production. Once his competitors are out of business, he reasons, he can raise his prices and recoup his losses, then go on to make squillions.
A reading of the accounts suggests that the actual business of flying people from one place to another doesn't make much money. Its the "extra's" that make the dough.
Unfortunately the "punters" eventually work this out and act accordingly.
A reading of the accounts suggests that the actual business of flying people from one place to another doesn't make much money. Its the "extra's" that make the dough.
Unfortunately the "punters" eventually work this out and act accordingly.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR
GEOGRAPHY Whatever it was the Jesuits taught the young O'Leary during his time at Clongowes, geography doesn't seem to have been on the curriculum. Ryanair's Frankfurt-Hahn hub is virtually in Luxembourg, while Paris-Beauvais is closer to the northern French city of Amiens than it is to the French capital.
However, it was Ryanair advertising flights to "Copenhagen" a few years back that really took the Mickey, if you'll pardon the pun. On closer examination it emerged that the flights were not to Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, but to Malmo in Sweden.
However, it was Ryanair advertising flights to "Copenhagen" a few years back that really took the Mickey, if you'll pardon the pun. On closer examination it emerged that the flights were not to Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, but to Malmo in Sweden.
NO DIVIDENDS With its growth rapidly slowing, O'Leary's refusal to pay a dividend is now starting to hurt the share price. While the airline almost quadrupled passenger numbers to 35 million over the past five years, it is forecasting that passenger numbers will double to just under 70 million by 2011.
DUBLIN AIRPORT By pursuing a pointless vendetta against Aer Rianta over its plans to expand Dublin Airport and refusing to start any new routes out of Dublin for several years, O'Leary allowed Aer Lingus to open a slew of new routes.
Having a free run at these new European routes was one of the key reasons Willie Walsh was able to bring Aer Lingus back from the dead. With Aer Lingus rapidly evolving into a sort of Ryanair-lite, O'Leary had no option but to eat humble pie and start operating new routes out of Dublin.
Having a free run at these new European routes was one of the key reasons Willie Walsh was able to bring Aer Lingus back from the dead. With Aer Lingus rapidly evolving into a sort of Ryanair-lite, O'Leary had no option but to eat humble pie and start operating new routes out of Dublin.
CUSTOMER RELATIONS While O'Leary might view customer relations as an expensive irrelevance, treating the paying public in such a cavalier manner could yet come back to haunt Ryanair. O'Leary's handling of Jane O'Keeffe, Ryanair's millionth passenger, who was awarded 67,500 by the High Court in 2002 after the airline reneged on a prize of free travel for life, was merely the most notorious such incident.
With relations between Ryanair and the EU Commission now downright poisonous, what are the odds on enhanced consumer protection for passengers whose flights are delayed or cancelled?
POLISH U-TURN In 2004 O'Leary sneeringly said: "Who wants to go to Gdansk? There ain't a lot there after you've seen the shipyard wall." A year later Ryanair announced that it was after all flying to the Polish port - and now flies from Gdansk to Stansted, Frankfurt Hahn and Stockholm.
After the wheelchairs experience, you would have thought that Ryanair would tread carefully in its dealings with the disabled. Not a bit of it. Last September it chucked nine blind and visually impaired people along with their three fully-sighted minders off one its planes at Stansted citing "safety" considerations. Some people never learn.
THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT In September 2004 Ryanair unveiled ambitious plans for an in-flight entertainment system. Passengers would pay 7 for the use of a laptop-type device which would show films, cartoons and TV shows.
O'Leary predicted that Ryanair would make "enormous sums of money" from the system. Things didn't quite work out as planned. The system left passengers underwhelmed and it has since been quietly dropped.
O'Leary predicted that Ryanair would make "enormous sums of money" from the system. Things didn't quite work out as planned. The system left passengers underwhelmed and it has since been quietly dropped.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree. O'Leary has convinced the public that being treated like crap is a GOOD THING! He has convinced airlines like Aer Lingus to become more and more like FR rather than persuading people that service is worth paying for. He makes all these "bad" decisions and gets 42m pax. I bet the Poles were actually thinking "neck like a jockey's bollix" when O'Leary did his "mea culpa" - and then headed for their keyboard.
What the Indo should have concentrated on is O'Leary's appalling Industrial Relations track record and the curious merrygoround that his fleet acquisition appears to be. But that would take a real newspaper, as opposed to the Duckworth School of Journalism.
What the Indo should have concentrated on is O'Leary's appalling Industrial Relations track record and the curious merrygoround that his fleet acquisition appears to be. But that would take a real newspaper, as opposed to the Duckworth School of Journalism.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by smith
Good luck to FR if they can carry it off.
Airlines reducing fares (and as part of their business model) forcing down fees paid to airports, just results in airports having to recoup more money from other income streams (parking, retail, etc).
Do you think that operating costs of airports have reduced in the last 10 years? I very much doubt it. Pax will pay for airports (and airlines) at the end of the day. What low-costs have done is drive higher volumes of pax so that the individual cost is lower than it was 5 years ago.
But 'Good luck to FR' for driving up the cost of a parking space and a crap cup of coffee in the terminal? Not from me!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
42M people says he's doing something right.
MOL is a gambler. when he hedged last year at $49/barrell he did very well. This year who can tell if is hedge will be a good deal or a costly mistake.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coasthugger - I wouldn't be to concerned for the airport authorities. Have you tried to book a cheapie low cost flight lately? I have and although you might get your fares for 10 or 20 quid, there is at least 20-30 of fees added on. One Aer Lingus flight I booked for 20 euros return had just under 50 euros of fees added on. Granted only a small amount goes to the airport authorities (say £5-10) but how much do you think they should get? After all like you say they get money from landing fees, car parking, cargo handling, lease of space for offices, shops, a cut from the concessions run within the airport...the list goes on.
If you are worried about costs at airports going up then look at who runs them and if they are being run as efficiently as they could be. There is an interesting thread running about the development costs of Stansteds runway for example. See the numbers involved for laying some concrete and you start to get a feel for how the airport authorities can get away with it.
If you are worried about costs at airports going up then look at who runs them and if they are being run as efficiently as they could be. There is an interesting thread running about the development costs of Stansteds runway for example. See the numbers involved for laying some concrete and you start to get a feel for how the airport authorities can get away with it.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: MANCHESTER
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
befree
So I see,this MOL guy counts differently to the likes
of BA/Lufthansa/AirFrance etc,etc.....
The swine !!! and heres me thinking he'd flown them
whilst counting honestly!!
Please disregard my previous I obviously didnt have
the proper info to be able to comment.
MM
So I see,this MOL guy counts differently to the likes
of BA/Lufthansa/AirFrance etc,etc.....
The swine !!! and heres me thinking he'd flown them
whilst counting honestly!!
Please disregard my previous I obviously didnt have
the proper info to be able to comment.
MM
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Fees' added on are stealth fares. They go to the airlines and bear no resemblance to what the airport gets.
As far as what airports get for pax charges - well go and look at the published rates for the regulated airports. You can bet that low cost carriers are paying less than that to regional airports. So less than £5 certainly.
As for costs of concrete - that's down to building contractors not the airport, surely? Remember that airports are heavily regulated by the CAA in terms of safety requirements for airside infrastructure.
But I wasn't trying to stick up for airports particularly. I'm just making the point that airlines reducing what they pay airports will not necessarily flow through to the passenger - they'll just have to pay more in other areas to make up for it.
As far as what airports get for pax charges - well go and look at the published rates for the regulated airports. You can bet that low cost carriers are paying less than that to regional airports. So less than £5 certainly.
As for costs of concrete - that's down to building contractors not the airport, surely? Remember that airports are heavily regulated by the CAA in terms of safety requirements for airside infrastructure.
But I wasn't trying to stick up for airports particularly. I'm just making the point that airlines reducing what they pay airports will not necessarily flow through to the passenger - they'll just have to pay more in other areas to make up for it.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FR
More stupid statistics. Every single person on return trip counts as two. Many people will be regular travelers who own 2nd homes or work away from home. The real number of individuals who travel with ryanair each year may be something like 10m which take an average of 4.2 sectors per year. Most will take 2 sectors but a few will take 50-100.
It is the industry norm to count "Earned Seats". These are seats occupied against the number of seats available. (Also the base for calculating load factor). 1 pax equals one earned seat, and therefore the WHOLE INDUSTRY counts 1 return journey as two sectors and therefore 2 earned seats. count it whatever way ya want....If Ryanair say 40m and BA say 30m, ya may not want to beleive it, but its compared on an apples with apples basis and not apples and pears as you seem to suggest