MANCHESTER - 5
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there were flight greeters turning up way too early then that is a problem with a specific group, and they should have been targeted, not everyone.
The issue with the parking charges is not just the principle or the £1.80. It is the hassle of having to drive into a car park, then queue up to pay, then queue up to leave. Last time I did it, neither the local payment machine or the exit barrier were even working.
The public transport from MAN actually isn't that good, unless you happen to live along the south Manchester rail corridor. I live in North Manchester and last time I used it it took over 2.5 hours to get home, instead of 25 minutes by car - that's why people use them...
As for the pick up being a privilege, sorry just laughed my head off there. It is a basic function of an airport, imaging going to Sainsbury's and they charged you to park, 'because it's busy', would you go again? On the one hand I go to meetings at MAPLC where they moan about no revenue, low expansion of passengers, and then some of the same people act like the airport is doing the flying public a favour.
Trust me, MAN needs the people of the region more than they need it.
The issue with the parking charges is not just the principle or the £1.80. It is the hassle of having to drive into a car park, then queue up to pay, then queue up to leave. Last time I did it, neither the local payment machine or the exit barrier were even working.
The public transport from MAN actually isn't that good, unless you happen to live along the south Manchester rail corridor. I live in North Manchester and last time I used it it took over 2.5 hours to get home, instead of 25 minutes by car - that's why people use them...
As for the pick up being a privilege, sorry just laughed my head off there. It is a basic function of an airport, imaging going to Sainsbury's and they charged you to park, 'because it's busy', would you go again? On the one hand I go to meetings at MAPLC where they moan about no revenue, low expansion of passengers, and then some of the same people act like the airport is doing the flying public a favour.
Trust me, MAN needs the people of the region more than they need it.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some good and rather disappointing, but forseeable news
AirAsia, a long haul Malaysian budget airline to be launched by local carrier Fly Asian Xpress, has placed a 15 plane order worth up to US$2.63 billion with European plane manufacturer Airbus. The new airline plans to launch flights to the UK - to either Manchester or Stansted Airport - next year.
Tony Fernandes, the owner of one of Asia's largest and most profitable budget airline, AirAsia, announced the plans yesterday. Mr. Fernandes also owns 10 percent of Fly Asian Xpress.
Fly Asian Xpress, a new airline set up to operate Malaysian Airlines' domestic routes after AirAsia took them over last year, has ordered 10 A330-300s and took options for another 5, Fernandes said. He predicted that the airline will need 25 planes within five years and said that it may pick the same model. Fly Asian Xpress will pay for the planes with bank loans.
The new low-cost long haul airline had planned to use the AirAsiaX brand for its long-haul flights, though will now drop the 'X,' Fernandes said. He predicted that it will carry 10 million passengers a year by 2012, and announced plans to launch flights this September using up to three leased A330s whilst the airline waits for the delivery of its first aircraft next September. It plans to sell flights for as little as 10 ringgit, or £1.50.
The airline may fly to as many as five cities with its leased aircraft, Fernandes said, declining to be specific as 'we're in the process of finalising the destinations.' They are likely to include China, India, Australia, the Middle East, Europe and Japan, and in the UK, AirAsia will serve either Manchester or Stansted Airport, he added.
Tony Fernandes, the owner of one of Asia's largest and most profitable budget airline, AirAsia, announced the plans yesterday. Mr. Fernandes also owns 10 percent of Fly Asian Xpress.
Fly Asian Xpress, a new airline set up to operate Malaysian Airlines' domestic routes after AirAsia took them over last year, has ordered 10 A330-300s and took options for another 5, Fernandes said. He predicted that the airline will need 25 planes within five years and said that it may pick the same model. Fly Asian Xpress will pay for the planes with bank loans.
The new low-cost long haul airline had planned to use the AirAsiaX brand for its long-haul flights, though will now drop the 'X,' Fernandes said. He predicted that it will carry 10 million passengers a year by 2012, and announced plans to launch flights this September using up to three leased A330s whilst the airline waits for the delivery of its first aircraft next September. It plans to sell flights for as little as 10 ringgit, or £1.50.
The airline may fly to as many as five cities with its leased aircraft, Fernandes said, declining to be specific as 'we're in the process of finalising the destinations.' They are likely to include China, India, Australia, the Middle East, Europe and Japan, and in the UK, AirAsia will serve either Manchester or Stansted Airport, he added.
I would be surprised if both routes weren't been flown within the year.
But...
British Airways chief executive Willie Walsh has ruled out an expansion of the airline's international operations at Manchester Airport in the foreseeable future.
Following the disposal of its loss-making subsidiary, BA Connect, to regional low-cost airline Flybe last month, BA now only flies to New York, Gatwick and Heathrow from Manchester Airport.
Mr Walsh said he did not envisage any routes to Europe unless BA is 'radically restructured'. He told an audience at Manchester Business School: 'We just cannot do it profitably in the face of the competition [from budget airlines].'
Following the disposal of its loss-making subsidiary, BA Connect, to regional low-cost airline Flybe last month, BA now only flies to New York, Gatwick and Heathrow from Manchester Airport.
Mr Walsh said he did not envisage any routes to Europe unless BA is 'radically restructured'. He told an audience at Manchester Business School: 'We just cannot do it profitably in the face of the competition [from budget airlines].'
Shame..but not really a surprise. They will be too busy concentrating on their LHR and LGW bases as the Open Skies comes into force with increased competition.
Pilot of the Airwaves
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Close to the Med
Age: 74
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IB4138
Where exactly do all the 'little englanders' live....
MM
Where exactly do all the 'little englanders' live....
MM
I also think the airport authorities or powers to be are to be commended at AGP for providing free long term parking at P3 during the construction period......something the UK airports would never consider I feel.
I let others do the talking.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Autoglide said: imaging going to Sainsbury's and they charged you to park
J Sainsbury's in Wilmslow does just that, and won't even refund you at the till with a receipt. It's more common than you think.
While we're imagining stuff, can you imagine how any airport would look if parking was cheap or even free? Picker uppers would never get within a mile of the place, because the other picker uppers would get there early to "make a day of it" and do a bit of plane spotting before they collect and go home, although the passengers will probably have driven in the first place, and parked free for a fortnight.
Sad though it is, there has to be a charge to regulate the supply of a limited commodity in the face of excess demand. Simple economics. Not that different from the locos putting their prices up on high-demand flights. In fact it's exactly the same, but no-one complains about that, do they?
J Sainsbury's in Wilmslow does just that, and won't even refund you at the till with a receipt. It's more common than you think.
While we're imagining stuff, can you imagine how any airport would look if parking was cheap or even free? Picker uppers would never get within a mile of the place, because the other picker uppers would get there early to "make a day of it" and do a bit of plane spotting before they collect and go home, although the passengers will probably have driven in the first place, and parked free for a fortnight.
Sad though it is, there has to be a charge to regulate the supply of a limited commodity in the face of excess demand. Simple economics. Not that different from the locos putting their prices up on high-demand flights. In fact it's exactly the same, but no-one complains about that, do they?
Just another seat number
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NW UK
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The airport also has a rather excellent text message service that tells you the status of departing and arriving flights. That was designed to allow picker uppers to arrive to collect "just in time".
The whole area outside arrivals (esp. T1) was always a mess. Lazy and mean picker uppers would clog it up circling rather than using any of the adjacent car parks (surface or multi). It was dangerous for pedestrians, and prevented emergency vehicles ever getting in or out quickly.
Something needed to be done, and it has been. Fact is, there isn't enough space for all the cars that people would like to bring in. There is an excellent public transport hub right in the middle of the airport, plus a selection of taxi products (ok so the black cabs are a rip off), which arriving pax should make more use of. There is little need for many picker uppers to even drive in, in the first place. MA is using price and capacity management to allocate a scarce resource, just like the locos do, so what's the big deal?
Free and easy drop off/pick up is a privilege, not a right.
The whole area outside arrivals (esp. T1) was always a mess. Lazy and mean picker uppers would clog it up circling rather than using any of the adjacent car parks (surface or multi). It was dangerous for pedestrians, and prevented emergency vehicles ever getting in or out quickly.
Something needed to be done, and it has been. Fact is, there isn't enough space for all the cars that people would like to bring in. There is an excellent public transport hub right in the middle of the airport, plus a selection of taxi products (ok so the black cabs are a rip off), which arriving pax should make more use of. There is little need for many picker uppers to even drive in, in the first place. MA is using price and capacity management to allocate a scarce resource, just like the locos do, so what's the big deal?
Free and easy drop off/pick up is a privilege, not a right.
There are ways and means to avoid this petty charging, but I'm not going to post them here, lest they be closed.
Rip-off Britain at its best!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would repeat the concerns about emergency vehicles getting access to the front of the building when it's choked with private cars, not to mention the aviation security issues of unknown vehicles "abandoned" right outside the door.
Barriers are the best way to reduce the risk of these issues becoming something more serious.
For heaven's sake people, the place is short of land. What else is it to do to regulate access? There are enough other ways of getting there. Do you expect to drive into Manchester to go to Kendals or Selfridges, and park outside, on Deansgate or whatever road they're on, for free?
Barriers are the best way to reduce the risk of these issues becoming something more serious.
For heaven's sake people, the place is short of land. What else is it to do to regulate access? There are enough other ways of getting there. Do you expect to drive into Manchester to go to Kendals or Selfridges, and park outside, on Deansgate or whatever road they're on, for free?
Just another seat number
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NW UK
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For heaven's sake people, the place is short of land. What else is it to do to regulate access? There are enough other ways of getting there. Do you expect to drive into Manchester to go to Kendals or Selfridges, and park outside, on Deansgate or whatever road they're on, for free?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At Piccadilly station you cannot drive your car up the approach road, you have to pick up from the side entrance where the taxi rank is and if you want to use the car park, you pay. The situation at the airport isn't much different. If you want to pick up/drop off, you can do so at the departures levels and at the station free of charge. If you want to use the car park, then you pay. End of story. As I said in my previous post, there are ways around this pick up charge and although not as convenient as they could be, it's not like the airport has closed off all avenues and you have no other choice.
For anyone that witnessed the 10 minutes free area in terminal 1 will know that on any given day it was a sham. Cars parked anywhere, people driving the wrong way down one way lanes just to get out quickly to avoid paying, vehicles were left unattended and there was absolutely no access for emergency vehicles to get near the terminal. As with many things in this country, a minority abused the system and as a result the airport have taken the privilege away. A shame for the genuine users but it's not the first organisation to make such a decision and it certainly won't be the last.
For anyone that witnessed the 10 minutes free area in terminal 1 will know that on any given day it was a sham. Cars parked anywhere, people driving the wrong way down one way lanes just to get out quickly to avoid paying, vehicles were left unattended and there was absolutely no access for emergency vehicles to get near the terminal. As with many things in this country, a minority abused the system and as a result the airport have taken the privilege away. A shame for the genuine users but it's not the first organisation to make such a decision and it certainly won't be the last.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAA announced today that it is to invest approximately £9.3 billion over the next 11 years upgrading its three London airports - Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. The company also released a forecast of average growth at the three airports, saying that it expected passenger traffic to rise by 2.8 percent a year in the period to 2018.
Major airport facilities planned in the investment programme include a second runway and terminal at Stansted, the replacement of Heathrow's Terminal 2 with Heathrow East and the renovation of Heathrow's Terminals 3 and 4, and new baggage systems at Heathrow to provide a world-class level of performance across the whole of the airport by the time of the London Olympics in 2012, BAA said. The programme does not include the cost of a third runway at Heathrow or a second runway at Gatwick.
Passenger numbers at Heathrow will increase from 67.3m last year to 84.4m by 2018, according to BAA's predictions. Stansted will overtake Gatwick as London's second busiest airport, with passenger figures of 45.0m against 23.8m last year, while passengers at Gatwick will increase by 18 percent to 40.5m.
The forecasts assume that a new runway and terminal open at Stansted in time for the start of 2015/16, Heathrow's Terminal 5 is in full operation before 2008/09 and other upgrades at Heathrow, including Heathrow East, go ahead. The introduction of either mixed mode operation or a third runway at Heathrow, both of which are undergoing environmental impact studies, is not included in the forecasts.
Major airport facilities planned in the investment programme include a second runway and terminal at Stansted, the replacement of Heathrow's Terminal 2 with Heathrow East and the renovation of Heathrow's Terminals 3 and 4, and new baggage systems at Heathrow to provide a world-class level of performance across the whole of the airport by the time of the London Olympics in 2012, BAA said. The programme does not include the cost of a third runway at Heathrow or a second runway at Gatwick.
Passenger numbers at Heathrow will increase from 67.3m last year to 84.4m by 2018, according to BAA's predictions. Stansted will overtake Gatwick as London's second busiest airport, with passenger figures of 45.0m against 23.8m last year, while passengers at Gatwick will increase by 18 percent to 40.5m.
The forecasts assume that a new runway and terminal open at Stansted in time for the start of 2015/16, Heathrow's Terminal 5 is in full operation before 2008/09 and other upgrades at Heathrow, including Heathrow East, go ahead. The introduction of either mixed mode operation or a third runway at Heathrow, both of which are undergoing environmental impact studies, is not included in the forecasts.
Does anybody know whether MAN wants to take 2nd or 3rd spot by this time?
Cheers.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Macclesfield
Age: 53
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Catchup !!
It was suggested that B peir was comming down shortly also the T2 extention was to be started, world cargo was to become a domestic terminal, C peir was to be demolished as to make way for 2 way aircraft taxi-ing. also T2 to join up with T1 .......
This was a few years ago now but all that seems to have happened is numerous taxiway repairs.
I guess once they are completed(5-7 years) then maybe other works could begin, but MAN will need more Pax to justify all this..
I am sure somebody will put me right with all this and I hope so but I don't see MAN progressing as fast as BAA sites
This was a few years ago now but all that seems to have happened is numerous taxiway repairs.
I guess once they are completed(5-7 years) then maybe other works could begin, but MAN will need more Pax to justify all this..
I am sure somebody will put me right with all this and I hope so but I don't see MAN progressing as fast as BAA sites
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sure somebody will put me right with all this and I hope so but I don't see MAN progressing as fast as BAA sites
MAN need EZY or FR. If either of those carriers were to pump money through MAN (which they won't because of LPL), then MAN would certainly give STN a run for it's money! MAN has the long-haul connections that STN crave, and maybe a major LC airline at MAN would kick start the MAN revolution! (There are currently only three MAJOR LCCs in EU - EZY, FR and AB that fit the crieria that MAN needs).
I'm sure people will have different views, but MAN can't just rely on the summer traffic, they need year round LCCs which bring millions of passengers through MAN's doors each year.
MAN don't have this yet - STN does.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Stockport
Age: 69
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airports don`t make money from Lo cost operators as they want everything for free
Manchester doesn`t need anymore LC they need some more long haul full fare airlines in the same class as Emirates or American who carry lots of pax who are willing to pay for the service
Air Berlin are not lo-cost they are a full service airline that just happen to be cheap
If you add up how much low cost there is out of Manchester you will be very suprised as I think Manchester has more than Liverpool and certainly a better selection of operators
Ian
Manchester doesn`t need anymore LC they need some more long haul full fare airlines in the same class as Emirates or American who carry lots of pax who are willing to pay for the service
Air Berlin are not lo-cost they are a full service airline that just happen to be cheap
If you add up how much low cost there is out of Manchester you will be very suprised as I think Manchester has more than Liverpool and certainly a better selection of operators
Ian
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with the LCC's at MAN is that they're not expanding services at the same rate as FR and EZY at their bases. I think if easyjet or Ryanair were to open a base at Manchester, then we would see more rapid route expansion than the current Loco's have to offer.
Bmibaby are a waste of time. They've made it clear that they are not willing to commit to expansion at MAN and are happy to focus on Birmingham instead. Monarch Scheduled seem content on sticking with 'bucket and spade' destinations. Jet2 have shown a decent level of commitment but their winter timetable leaves a lot to be desired, with many routes either dropped or significantly reduced. Thomsonfly are the only airline at the moment that seem to be showing any sort of desire to expand operations on a year round basis.
I do agree that Loco's probably aren't the answer. More long haul carriers need to be attracted in order for the airport to increase revenue and improve its services but this is proving to be extremely difficult at the minute. Although having said this, the demise of charter flights means that attracting a big Loco operation wouldn't do any harm. Either one of the existing LCC's at MAN needs to pull their finger out (possibility of FlyBE coming up with the goods?) or the airport needs to try and attract FR or EZY to open and expand a base. The latter I really can't see happening any time soon.
Bmibaby are a waste of time. They've made it clear that they are not willing to commit to expansion at MAN and are happy to focus on Birmingham instead. Monarch Scheduled seem content on sticking with 'bucket and spade' destinations. Jet2 have shown a decent level of commitment but their winter timetable leaves a lot to be desired, with many routes either dropped or significantly reduced. Thomsonfly are the only airline at the moment that seem to be showing any sort of desire to expand operations on a year round basis.
I do agree that Loco's probably aren't the answer. More long haul carriers need to be attracted in order for the airport to increase revenue and improve its services but this is proving to be extremely difficult at the minute. Although having said this, the demise of charter flights means that attracting a big Loco operation wouldn't do any harm. Either one of the existing LCC's at MAN needs to pull their finger out (possibility of FlyBE coming up with the goods?) or the airport needs to try and attract FR or EZY to open and expand a base. The latter I really can't see happening any time soon.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Brighton, England
Age: 43
Posts: 708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, I think MAN has an excellent LCC network.
Aer Lingus to Cork, Dublin
Air Berlin to Hamburg, London STN, Paderborn
Air Southwest to Bristol, Plymouth
bmibaby to Alicante, Belfast BFS, Bordeaux, Cork, Geneva, Jersey, Knock, Malaga, Newquay, Palma, Perpignan, Prague
flybe to Belfast BHD, Bergerac, Brest, Brussels, Dusseldorf, Edinburgh, Exeter, Frankfurt, Glasgow, Guernsey, Hanover, Isle of Man, Jersey, La Rochelle, Limoges, Milan MXP, Norwich, Paris CDG, Rennes, Southampton
Flyglobespan to Calgary, Cape Town, Johannesburg, Toronto YYZ, Toronto YHM, Vancouver
Tuifly to Cologne, Hanover, Stuttgart
Jet2 to Alicante, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Berlin SXF, Budapest, Chambery, Faro, Geneva, Ibiza, Malaga, Milan BGY, Murcia, Nice, Palma, Paris CDG, Pisa, Prague, Rome FCO, Tenerife TFS, Toulouse, Valencia, Venice
Monarch Scheduled to Alicante, Almeria, Arrecife, Barcelona, Faro, Ibiza, Jerez, Mahon, Malaga, Murcia, Orlando SFB, Palma, Tenerife TFS
Ryanair to Dublin, Shannon
Skyeurope to Bratislava, Krakow
Zoom Airlines to Calgary, Toronto YYZ, Vancouver
Countless Thomsonfly destinations
A MUCH more comprehensive programme than LPL.
Manchester does not NEED easyjet or more from Ryanair.
Regards
Mike
Aer Lingus to Cork, Dublin
Air Berlin to Hamburg, London STN, Paderborn
Air Southwest to Bristol, Plymouth
bmibaby to Alicante, Belfast BFS, Bordeaux, Cork, Geneva, Jersey, Knock, Malaga, Newquay, Palma, Perpignan, Prague
flybe to Belfast BHD, Bergerac, Brest, Brussels, Dusseldorf, Edinburgh, Exeter, Frankfurt, Glasgow, Guernsey, Hanover, Isle of Man, Jersey, La Rochelle, Limoges, Milan MXP, Norwich, Paris CDG, Rennes, Southampton
Flyglobespan to Calgary, Cape Town, Johannesburg, Toronto YYZ, Toronto YHM, Vancouver
Tuifly to Cologne, Hanover, Stuttgart
Jet2 to Alicante, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Berlin SXF, Budapest, Chambery, Faro, Geneva, Ibiza, Malaga, Milan BGY, Murcia, Nice, Palma, Paris CDG, Pisa, Prague, Rome FCO, Tenerife TFS, Toulouse, Valencia, Venice
Monarch Scheduled to Alicante, Almeria, Arrecife, Barcelona, Faro, Ibiza, Jerez, Mahon, Malaga, Murcia, Orlando SFB, Palma, Tenerife TFS
Ryanair to Dublin, Shannon
Skyeurope to Bratislava, Krakow
Zoom Airlines to Calgary, Toronto YYZ, Vancouver
Countless Thomsonfly destinations
A MUCH more comprehensive programme than LPL.
Manchester does not NEED easyjet or more from Ryanair.
Regards
Mike
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aer Lingus, Air Southwest, & Monarch, low cost since when, Thomsonfly is basically Thomson Holiday flights, and don't kid your self mate you would love Easyjet & Ryanair up at Manchester.
Last edited by Mouser; 28th Apr 2007 at 14:23.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both Monarch and Thomsonfly have had low cost scheduled arms for a number of years now. Where have you been??? Monarch Scheduled in particular have some excellent fares that rival EZY at LPL on the sunshine routes. And I would say that both airlines have a far superior service to both FR and EZY. Just unfortunate that they don't have the capacity to expand as rapidly.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just unfortunate that they don't have the capacity to expand as rapidly.
They rely on both sectors to fill their flights. TOM and ZB/MON both fly to destinations in Europe, but from MAN they only seem to be holiday destinations. This is because they are unable to compete with LS and WW on routes to cities etc, but can fill there planes through package holidays AND flight onlys.
TOM have routes from Bournemouth and Coventry which are city destinations, but is there any competiton there?
An LCC can attract passengers for flights to all kinds of destinations - City, beach, skiing etc. ZB, the 'LCC' cannot.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why does MAN need to expand anyway? It's inefficient for UK PLC - better to have a better spread of destinations from a better spread of UK airports. That will reduce long journeys from the regions to MAN, as people can instead go to their own airports. The market seems to be driving to that conclusion - now MAN is no longer really a monopoly as its neighbours are growing well e.g. LPL.
Hmm - monopolies: BT, British Gas - what happened to them? Contraction and losses. Even the NHS has competition, and people pay twice there (NI plus private insurance premiums).
All this debate is based on the presumption that growth is good. Is it? Discuss.
My view is that MAN should focus on
- streamlining its process chain from home to plane and plane to home
- improving its service levels and attitudes to customers
- reducing queues
- improving maintenance to reduce unplanned downtime
- reducing its costs to allow service partners to pay their front line staff more money so that they can retain more of them and avoid queues due to inadequate manning levels
- controlling the number of airfield service partners through licensing, to improve ramp efficiency and safety by reducing congestion, and also to reduce price-led competition, which drives down wages (see above)
Then its reputation will increase, market forces will prevail, passengers will increase and profit will follow.
Hmm - monopolies: BT, British Gas - what happened to them? Contraction and losses. Even the NHS has competition, and people pay twice there (NI plus private insurance premiums).
All this debate is based on the presumption that growth is good. Is it? Discuss.
My view is that MAN should focus on
- streamlining its process chain from home to plane and plane to home
- improving its service levels and attitudes to customers
- reducing queues
- improving maintenance to reduce unplanned downtime
- reducing its costs to allow service partners to pay their front line staff more money so that they can retain more of them and avoid queues due to inadequate manning levels
- controlling the number of airfield service partners through licensing, to improve ramp efficiency and safety by reducing congestion, and also to reduce price-led competition, which drives down wages (see above)
Then its reputation will increase, market forces will prevail, passengers will increase and profit will follow.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are only two low cost airlines, Easyjet and Ryanair, the others like to think they are but there not really, sorry Jet2 do fall into the low cost bracket ( mind you 737's that are second hand and been round the clock, don't come close to the new A319 & 738), Monarch and Thomsonfly do the bucket and spade/sunshine routes because thats wot's in the holiday shops and brochures, I,ll tell you what MUFC FAN, go and ask Monarch cabin crew are they a Low Cost airline, and you'll get f----ed off.
Last edited by Mouser; 28th Apr 2007 at 21:12.