Ryanair - 6

[davidjohnson6]

dubline - while Manchester airport is owned by the various pieces of local Govt that cover the Manchester area, it gets very messy when you try to cross-subsidise one thing with another.

I doubt Manchester gets a large amount of inbound tourism from Ryanair passengers. They might get on the train to the Lake District, but the number of people who live in Girona who come to see Manchester is probably quite small. It's more likely that Ryanair are carrying residents of Manchester to spend their money elsewhere in Europe.

If airport charges are insufficient to cover all the costs, then it is possible for the airport to make the money up through car park charges and spend in shops. However, passengers generally won't accept being charged a different amount to park their car depending on the airline they are using ! Further, to cover that £1 of airport charge, a passenger needs to spend on average quite a bit more on other items - that hamburger costs money to produce and Burger King want some profit margin as well. Further, Ryanair don't want to rent check in desks, so another potential revenue stream is lost.

One could make the argument that because Manchester airport is owned by local Govt, then local Govt should subsidise it to save jobs. In rare cases this might be true, but Govt is usually not good at running business. Politics is about democracy and being fair to all citizens - business is the undemocratic means of making money. Using taxpayer funds to make it cheaper for the middle class to jaunt around Europe is unlikely to be the best use of the money.

[Merchant Banker]

Great news, bye bye Ryanair!

[Rob1975]

It's said on another thread (Manchester 7) that FR more or less wanted to fly free from MAN - if they had agreed, you can bet Jet2 etc. would have wanted that same deal..? Expect over-exaggerated claims from FR via the media!

[Based]

Good riddance to bad rubbish I say and well done to MAG to standing up to MOL's bullying and owt for nowt way of "running" his business - proper airlines that care about their customers will be the winners here as will an airport that understands low cost doesnt have to equal cheap n nasty practices.

The funniest thing is that MAG also owns East Midlands Airport which is one of the 'lower cost competitor airports' mentioned by Ryanair. It's all a game of cat and mouse guys, comments like 'Well done Manchester' and 'Great news! Ryanair should pay the same amount of money as everybody else! Bye bye Ryanair' only emphasise your hatred of Ryanair rather than any understanding of the commercial dealings of the aviation world and of what actually might be bad or good for Manchester overall.

[OliWW]

The only competition FR has at EMA is WW, EZY and a few charter airlines, compared to MAN. The catchment area however does also involve BHX as well, but FR is less of a threat at EMA over MAN and has been able to have continual growth at EMA since 2003.

[dublin_eire]

I doubt Manchester gets a large amount of inbound tourism from Ryanair passengers.

Funny you should say that. I was thinking of taking advantage of the cheap fares to visit Manchester as I've never been. Wanted to check out the Irish centre there. And, don't forget the continentals that want to travel there, especially during the summer, to learn English.

FR more or less wanted to fly free from MAN - if they had agreed, you can bet Jet2 etc. would have wanted that same deal..?

The only difference there would be Ryanair would promise x amount of pax and be able to deliver on that whereas I doubt Jet2 would be able to substantially stimulate untouched markets the way Ryanair can.

I hope you all remember the inconvenience this will have on the workers at the airport and their families. Some might say it's Ryanair's fault but if something is counter to your business model what choice have you? Profitiblity is key at the end of the day and Ryanair caters to it's shareholders like any other business. I'm sure Tesco and the likes do exactly the same!

[benish]

How will this cause 600 job losses?!
28 flights a week can be operated by 2 aircraft, I imagine. Since when did 2 aircraft require 600 jobs?!

[dublin_eire]

Agreed, it deffo ain't 600. And for sure directly employed staff is nowhere near 600. But remember you do have huge spin off from every aircraft.... ATC controllers, caterers, re-fuelers, baggage handlers etc. etc.

600 jobs or however many will most likely manifest in hours being cut for workers in shops, bars and on the apron.

[EI-BUD]

Ryanair Manchester Reduction;

This should be the golden opportunity for Jet2 and Bmibaby to get in and take over from Ryanair and offer any affected Ryanair passengers Free or cheap tickets in a bill board that would say 'Ryanair stranded passengers tickets honoured'.

Would make the whole landscape very interesting and for Jet2 the timing would be perfect!!!!??

Any thoughts?

EI-BUD

[toledoashley]

LS and EZY should be able to take over from FR. EZY have already applied for MAN-DUS, and I think other routes are also planned.

[Based]

How will this cause 600 job losses?!
28 flights a week can be operated by 2 aircraft, I imagine. Since when did 2 aircraft require 600 jobs?!

Ryanair base this figure on the assumption of 1000 direct and indirect jobs per 1 million passengers. It not the definite loss of 600 jobs but the potential loss of up to 600 jobs.

Specifically, Ryanair currently have approximately 36 workers per aircraft to give you an idea of direct jobs (as in employed directly by Ryanair only).

Ryanair Manchester Reduction;

This should be the golden opportunity for Jet2 and Bmibaby to get in and take over from Ryanair and offer any affected Ryanair passengers Free or cheap tickets in a bill board that would say 'Ryanair stranded passengers tickets honoured'.

Would make the whole landscape very interesting and for Jet2 the timing would be perfect!!!!??

Any thoughts?

EI-BUD

Jet2 have responded in a way - announcing Kos, Venice and Gran Canaria this afternoon for Summer 2010. Overall it would only be a smart move if they believe they can make a profit from largely marginal Ryanair routes while paying full airport fees, there's a reason why Dublin has been retained. Granted, flying to the main airport instead may target a different customer pool but then again most of these airports are already served.

Barcelona - BMIbaby, Monach
Brussels - Flybe, Brussels Airlines
Dusseldorf - Flybe, Lufthansa
Frankfurt - Flybe, Lufthansa
Milan MXP - Flybe
Olbia - Jet2 (vs Ryanair's Cagliari)

That leaves Marseille, Bremen and Shannon without direct routes from Manchester as a result of this announcement.

[donnlass]

Ryanair Closes Routes From MAN

BBC NEWS | Business | Ryanair closing Manchester routes


At least their still flying to Dublin!!!!

[RED WINGS]

Well done Manchester!!!

I like to see people stand up to a bully!

[eu01]

Good morning! They've been discussing it here for hours.

[howard h]

As a mere passenger, I would never consider flying Ryanair. The mere thought of the hastle of x-in with/without bags + bag drops etc, countless charges onto the £1.99 or whatever base fare, being left stranded by them etc etc is a total turn-off.

Good riddence, and I hope a proper airline (even if a tad more expensive) takes their routes.

[dwlpl]

How will this cause 600 job losses?!
28 flights a week can be operated by 2 aircraft, I imagine. Since when did 2 aircraft require 600 jobs?!

What you will find is that the lost routes will equate to approx 600k in passenger figures.

They constantly use 1000 jobs, per 1million passengers when quoting benefits of them starting routes/bases.

EDIT - just noticed a similar post from 'based'.

[dwlpl]

I note that there is no sign of FR placing the moved routes up on its site for sale yet.

The news today is a publicity stunt designed to get its low fees from airport owners.

They will be back at MAN and they will get the fees it wants in a year or two.

[conradmueller]

What about charging Ryanair extra for being allowed to use a big airport?
At least it is the second airport to FUE, who doesn´t let FR do what it likes.

[Based]

Good riddence, and I hope a proper airline (even if a tad more expensive) takes their routes.

I'm guessing you're also the type that would never consider flying to Charleroi, Hahn, Girona, Weeze, etc. in the first place so it might be better if a 'proper airline' doesn't take their routes. Please see my previous post for airlines already operating to 'proper' airports.

On the charges front, it's not all that complicated to work out really. It's the quoted fare when you search for a flight + €10/£10 if you want to check in a bag + €5/£5 if you're paying with anything other than a Visa Electron card. Just think of most of the other charges as penalties for people who can't do things properly and therefore require more Ryanair resources to get them airborne!

I note that there is no sign of FR placing the moved routes up on its site for sale yet.

I'm not sure it's their intention to add extra routes from East Midlands, Leeds, etc. as a direct result of these route closures. By saying 'switch' I believe they're referring to the fact that they will be offering passengers the opportunity to choose to fly from these airports instead, if the affected routes happen to be offered from these airports already.

What about charging Ryanair extra for being allowed to use a big airport? At least it is the second airport to FUE, who doesn´t let FR do what it likes.

I don't think they would sign that deal. It's well beyond the 2nd airport who 'doesn't let FR do what it likes'. Despite what it may seem like from many comments on these boards, it's not an airport's function to try and defend itself from what Ryanair does and does not want to do but to operate as a viable business. Stop demeaning airport bosses!

[howard h]

I'm guessing you're also the type that would never consider flying to Charleroi, Hahn, Girona

Correct. I'd go by train (Eurostar mainly) to the first two, and fly to Barcelona and train it to wherever concerning Girona.