MANCHESTER - 6
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I am not mistaken Manchester has now becomes one of the busiest airports in Europe without any international routes flown by a former national airline of that country.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Oxford
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
without any international routes flown by a former national airline of that country.
it could have retained some of it's cabin crew and used the small team for the JFK service and come to aggrements with the unions
Best thing BA ever did for BA Connect employees was to cut them loose. Now we are free to thrive and make a profit.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Age: 59
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done BA for finally seeing the benefit of concentrating
the business from a capital city.
The people bemoaning the loss of this service are not qualified
to pass judgement on any aspect of operating an airline - as is
evidensed by the posts previous.......the wailing wall of
Manchester on pprune!!
Manchester has a good selection of International carriers and
should concentrate on keeping these for the time being.
The fact that the airport saw itself as something other than
a regional base for too many years - re lack of speed in
welcoming lo-cost operators - will effect/has affected its
performance.It is now trying to play catch-up with these
operators who can now take their time in choosing what
routes to open up - if any.
Stagnation in growth terms has come to be the story of the
last few years with services coming and going on a regular
basis.
The real world has bitten back at last and the challenge is
on for the next few years to keep service levels as now.
ie:stagnation.
MM
the business from a capital city.
The people bemoaning the loss of this service are not qualified
to pass judgement on any aspect of operating an airline - as is
evidensed by the posts previous.......the wailing wall of
Manchester on pprune!!
Manchester has a good selection of International carriers and
should concentrate on keeping these for the time being.
The fact that the airport saw itself as something other than
a regional base for too many years - re lack of speed in
welcoming lo-cost operators - will effect/has affected its
performance.It is now trying to play catch-up with these
operators who can now take their time in choosing what
routes to open up - if any.
Stagnation in growth terms has come to be the story of the
last few years with services coming and going on a regular
basis.
The real world has bitten back at last and the challenge is
on for the next few years to keep service levels as now.
ie:stagnation.
MM
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree. The BA regional operations were a catastrophic money loser for years. The business model was unworkable and no one had the balls to stem the flow of red ink until Willy said "ENOUGH".
Note that neither BMI or Virgin rushed in to fill the gaping hole left because outside of London, the easyJet / flybe business model is the way forward.
London is the only place BA can ever make money, not a criticism, just a fact.Look forward not back.
Note that neither BMI or Virgin rushed in to fill the gaping hole left because outside of London, the easyJet / flybe business model is the way forward.
London is the only place BA can ever make money, not a criticism, just a fact.Look forward not back.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Err...ther'e no spare VS equipment so would hardly expect them to step in at a moments notice, and what they do have is just too large. As for BD, any displacment of the A330s will be for a medium term thing only; but the biggest thing that counts against them is the complete mix and match of service that they operate and not one standard product.
As for lo-cost operations, then I daresay some nearby airports may be a little bit worried now that this appears to be chosen method of expanding pax numbers quite quickly.
As for BA, one only has to look at how LH somehow operates long-haul out of 3 cities. For crying out loud, even DUS has got a handful of them. This only reinforces how disinterested BA was - i'm sure when just franchise operations were at the regions, the airlines that operated them made profits...but as soon as BA makes an offer too good to refuse to the owners and so buys them, the same routes become unprofitable. If they were clever, they could have anticipated Ryanair and easyJet branching away from London and plonked Go at MAN to get a big foothold in the market.
As for lo-cost operations, then I daresay some nearby airports may be a little bit worried now that this appears to be chosen method of expanding pax numbers quite quickly.
As for BA, one only has to look at how LH somehow operates long-haul out of 3 cities. For crying out loud, even DUS has got a handful of them. This only reinforces how disinterested BA was - i'm sure when just franchise operations were at the regions, the airlines that operated them made profits...but as soon as BA makes an offer too good to refuse to the owners and so buys them, the same routes become unprofitable. If they were clever, they could have anticipated Ryanair and easyJet branching away from London and plonked Go at MAN to get a big foothold in the market.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: BOH - UK
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only relevant comparison between LH and BA is that they both strive to make a return on shareholder's capital and deploy their aircraft where they feel this is best achieved. That LH have identified DUS as one such location is utterly irelevant to what BA have identified with regard to profitable opportunities ex-MAN. It's a complete red herring.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for BA, one only has to look at how LH somehow operates long-haul out of 3 cities
Germany has a different demographic from the UK. The country is a Hell of a lot bigger and has a more spread out demographic. I am sure you selectively leave out KLM and Air France, Singapore, Swiss, Cathay Pacific etc who mainly operate from one core focus city. The UK is very heavily biased towards the South East of England and that gives London a massive advantage. BA has a massive investment in premium traffic and Executive Club beholden to a legacy cost base from it's nationalised days.
BA Manchester never made money with the BAC111. BA Manchester never made money with the B737-200s. BA Manchester never made money with the B737-500. Oddly enough, British Regional did quite well operating as BA, however when that firm was bought out for valuable Heathrow slots, the cost base went through the roof, the J41s were uneconomical from day one in the BA fold. It's a horrible fact of life in a large company. Add legacy BA Handling costs to the new nimble locos nibbling away your margins piece by piece and there is no way of stemming the flow of red ink.
The clue is the lack of stampeding Virgin and BMI flights desperate to fly long haul from the regions. As has been stated ad nauseum, the best long haul from the regions is run by those with a big old hub at the other end like Emirates and Continental.
The people bemoaning the loss of this service are not qualified
to pass judgement on any aspect of operating an airline
to pass judgement on any aspect of operating an airline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Abu Dhabi
Age: 64
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
London is the only place BA can ever make money, London is the only place BA can ever make money, not a criticism, just a fact.Look forward not back.
Skipness one echo,
Of coarse your right, but what BA has to remember is that people in the rest of the UK do have a choice. Not a criticism, just a fact.
Shyted
Skipness one echo,
Of coarse your right, but what BA has to remember is that people in the rest of the UK do have a choice. Not a criticism, just a fact.
Shyted
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West Yorkshire Zone
Posts: 976
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote
The fact that the airport saw itself as something other than
a regional base for too many years - re lack of speed in
welcoming lo-cost operators - will effect/has affected its
performance.It is now trying to play catch-up with these
operators who can now take their time in choosing what
routes to open up - if any.
Stagnation in growth terms has come to be the story of the
last few years with services coming and going on a regular
basis.
Reply
I totally agree - Mickyman.
MAN is getting to be a 'Merry Go Round' at the moment, With different carriers taking it in turns to - start a service then finish.
There doesn't seem to be much 'StabilityPlan' anymore in any of MAN's Scheduled services - mainly Loco.
MAN can beat LGW pax numbers wise on a good day, And has done many times.
But people seem to like the sound of LHR better than anywhere else
And always have done.
Can't Sir Michael - see that there is only so much capacity in a day at the Row??
Does he want his fleet of 35+ machines queing up all day every day for T/off Burning more fuel on taxi??
I think He's obsessed with LHR & has lost his direction....
Youv'e got to remember LHR & LGW is not everyone's immediate priority Dep point, And the population of the NW & NE do not think it to be practical to traipse 150 + miles to the Row to go to NY??
They want to go from an Airport 20/30/50 miles away = MAN.
The Joe public has no interest in how many slots BA or BD need to keep at the Row, That's irrelevant to them.
Their immediate priority is a = Quick, Safe, Easy, Dep Airport point.
When MAN Airport signs up the Airlines, There needs to be a clear understanding with both parties.
But what is happening, As I Mickyman & others have said is, The Airlines are not providing the Airport with any 'Long Term' Stability Plans.
Know reading what Skip One Echo has said about BA, It seems that BA did not put their 100% into the agreement with MAN.
They ran a NY service just for the principal, Wether it was making money or not.
Maybe a 'Sweetner' for the MAN Directors.
A way of keeping in with the crowd??
I take my hat off to FR, MOL usually 95% sticks to what he promises, And Delivers, FR will give MAN the boost it needs.
Also TCX, MON, and TOM - have always being loyal and faithfully commited to basing a number of aircraft 365 days a year for many years and will continue to.
I feel Jet 2 could offer more stability, But with LBA 60 miles away they don't have to it's just a stepping stone base.
I don't think Jet2 will offer any commitment to MAN??
Think if BA want to finish completely, Then they should say so - And go running back to the Row and let MAN clear up their mess.
EZY won't last, I think they will be overwhelmed by FR, And will return to 'native' LPL.
The number of 'Thoroughbred' Operators that have dep MAN is - Abismal to say the least.
I could stand on the car park roof in 1994/5 and count X amount of Airline liveries - But not many now.
Okay, We have EK, EY, SQ etc but we need 10 more like these
Like I said in an earlier post, If MAN Mgt don't get a grip on this 'stability' issue, Then MAN we'lll all be travelling by 'Loco'
The fact that the airport saw itself as something other than
a regional base for too many years - re lack of speed in
welcoming lo-cost operators - will effect/has affected its
performance.It is now trying to play catch-up with these
operators who can now take their time in choosing what
routes to open up - if any.
Stagnation in growth terms has come to be the story of the
last few years with services coming and going on a regular
basis.
Reply
I totally agree - Mickyman.
MAN is getting to be a 'Merry Go Round' at the moment, With different carriers taking it in turns to - start a service then finish.
There doesn't seem to be much 'StabilityPlan' anymore in any of MAN's Scheduled services - mainly Loco.
MAN can beat LGW pax numbers wise on a good day, And has done many times.
But people seem to like the sound of LHR better than anywhere else
And always have done.
Can't Sir Michael - see that there is only so much capacity in a day at the Row??
Does he want his fleet of 35+ machines queing up all day every day for T/off Burning more fuel on taxi??
I think He's obsessed with LHR & has lost his direction....
Youv'e got to remember LHR & LGW is not everyone's immediate priority Dep point, And the population of the NW & NE do not think it to be practical to traipse 150 + miles to the Row to go to NY??
They want to go from an Airport 20/30/50 miles away = MAN.
The Joe public has no interest in how many slots BA or BD need to keep at the Row, That's irrelevant to them.
Their immediate priority is a = Quick, Safe, Easy, Dep Airport point.
When MAN Airport signs up the Airlines, There needs to be a clear understanding with both parties.
But what is happening, As I Mickyman & others have said is, The Airlines are not providing the Airport with any 'Long Term' Stability Plans.
Know reading what Skip One Echo has said about BA, It seems that BA did not put their 100% into the agreement with MAN.
They ran a NY service just for the principal, Wether it was making money or not.
Maybe a 'Sweetner' for the MAN Directors.
A way of keeping in with the crowd??
I take my hat off to FR, MOL usually 95% sticks to what he promises, And Delivers, FR will give MAN the boost it needs.
Also TCX, MON, and TOM - have always being loyal and faithfully commited to basing a number of aircraft 365 days a year for many years and will continue to.
I feel Jet 2 could offer more stability, But with LBA 60 miles away they don't have to it's just a stepping stone base.
I don't think Jet2 will offer any commitment to MAN??
Think if BA want to finish completely, Then they should say so - And go running back to the Row and let MAN clear up their mess.
EZY won't last, I think they will be overwhelmed by FR, And will return to 'native' LPL.
The number of 'Thoroughbred' Operators that have dep MAN is - Abismal to say the least.
I could stand on the car park roof in 1994/5 and count X amount of Airline liveries - But not many now.
Okay, We have EK, EY, SQ etc but we need 10 more like these
Like I said in an earlier post, If MAN Mgt don't get a grip on this 'stability' issue, Then MAN we'lll all be travelling by 'Loco'
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: England
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, Skipness One Echo me old mucker, but BA's MAN-JFK was not losing money when it was pulled. Far from it, it was profitable at the time. It was pulled because BA believed they could make more money by canning it, moving a few birds around and starting LGW-JFK, It's as simple as that mate.
As for BD, I am very surprised the Caribbean routes are still going to be honest. I've flown there 4 times up front in the last few years and each time around half the cabin was staff.
ORD is a little different, particularly yield wise. Although I was on the 705 a couple of months ago and it was half empty up front, which was handy as some of the new flat seats were goosed. I'm on it again next week and there is still plenty availability.
As for BD, I am very surprised the Caribbean routes are still going to be honest. I've flown there 4 times up front in the last few years and each time around half the cabin was staff.
ORD is a little different, particularly yield wise. Although I was on the 705 a couple of months ago and it was half empty up front, which was handy as some of the new flat seats were goosed. I'm on it again next week and there is still plenty availability.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA's JFK/MAN in the last year was losing money. The main problem with the route was the 767 didn't not suit the service year round. At times and for most of the year a 757 would have been perfect but this aircraft for BA is not a longhaul aircraft and configuring one 757 for MAN/JFK would have in itself been a waste of money (Something that was looked into). BA changed the aircraft from the one off special configuration with J and M seats to the newer dusk aircraft with AVOD to try a lure pax but they didn't want to pay the fares.
In the Marketing, Commercial and Revenue Management departments at BA the MAN/JFK was well known for a higher number of request by exec card holders to use their redemption tickets on it. Even though revenue management would only put a few seats aside on the flight for these tickets, some pax would waitlist and wait to the day before to see if they could get confirmed at the last minute. If there was seats available 36-48 hours before they would confirm the bookings to boost the load factor.
Yes it was busy going to JFK on a Wed/Thu/ Fri and the odd Saturday and coming back Sat/Sun and Mon. However the other sectors were quiet and the yields on those sector were dire. BA could not get the yields required to run the service profitably.
At the end the flights were going full. When BA announced the route was being axed the people of MAN and the surrounding area started using the route more. However It was too late.
It has been said for a long time " If you are not going to use a route prepare to lose it"
When it comes to MAN future I think the likes of EY and EK are there to stay. VS may scale back there winter ops but MCO will always do well. CO and DL not sure there is a market for them both to survive, but I hope I am wrong.
With SQ adding A380's at LHR and their star alliance partner BMI operating frequent flights from MAN to LHR I think and I hope I am wrong that if any more routes are to go it will be SQ to SIN.
In the Marketing, Commercial and Revenue Management departments at BA the MAN/JFK was well known for a higher number of request by exec card holders to use their redemption tickets on it. Even though revenue management would only put a few seats aside on the flight for these tickets, some pax would waitlist and wait to the day before to see if they could get confirmed at the last minute. If there was seats available 36-48 hours before they would confirm the bookings to boost the load factor.
Yes it was busy going to JFK on a Wed/Thu/ Fri and the odd Saturday and coming back Sat/Sun and Mon. However the other sectors were quiet and the yields on those sector were dire. BA could not get the yields required to run the service profitably.
At the end the flights were going full. When BA announced the route was being axed the people of MAN and the surrounding area started using the route more. However It was too late.
It has been said for a long time " If you are not going to use a route prepare to lose it"
When it comes to MAN future I think the likes of EY and EK are there to stay. VS may scale back there winter ops but MCO will always do well. CO and DL not sure there is a market for them both to survive, but I hope I am wrong.
With SQ adding A380's at LHR and their star alliance partner BMI operating frequent flights from MAN to LHR I think and I hope I am wrong that if any more routes are to go it will be SQ to SIN.
Last edited by BAladdy; 27th Oct 2008 at 15:41. Reason: To keep TURIN the forum spelling monitor happy!!!!
Aaaaaarggghhhh!!!
It's LOSE not loose!!!
Their, not there!
I'm sorry, I couldn't help myself. I'll crawl back under my rock.
It's LOSE not loose!!!
Their, not there!
I'm sorry, I couldn't help myself. I'll crawl back under my rock.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was identified that a B757 sized aircraft was more suitable for the BA MAN-JFK service then why didn’t they explore this opportunity and run it? BA are willing to invest / waste yet again millions in trying to make Openskies work, which clearly isn’t and I bet will be withdrawn before it reaches its first anniversary.
Last edited by parky747; 28th Oct 2008 at 07:57.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...it'll all fit on Connie or Delta, as will the pax. The route is still there and i am sure that the american carriers will benefit and grow as a result of BA's withdrawl. Roll on AA/DL triples to ORD & JFK 