Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

EasyJet - 4

Old 3rd Feb 2012, 16:27
  #2381 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dunstable
Age: 40
Posts: 408
BMIBaby??

Just for interest found this on google news from the leicestershire news group.


Low-cost airlines easyJet and Flybe have declined to rule themselves out as the mystery buyer of rival bmibaby.
It comes after another rival, Jet2, yesterday told the Leicester Mercury it had not bought the carrier from Castle Donington airline group BMI.
Many analysts had suggested the Leeds-based operator was the likely buyer after BMI announced on Wednesday it had completed a preliminary deal to sell its budget subsidiary to a UK business.
Luton-based Monarch has also denied being the buyer.
BMI will not name the buyer or provide any more details about the deal.
When asked yesterday if they had bought bmibaby, spokeswomen for both Luton-based easyJet and Exeter-based Flybe would neither confirm or deny the suggestion
Just noticed this has also been posted on the BMIBaby thread.
Airbourne-Adamski is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2012, 16:32
  #2382 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dunstable
Age: 40
Posts: 408
Fleet

Something else in the news.............

EasyJet will make a decision on its fleet strategy by the end of the year, according to its head of fleet and central procurement Chris Essex. Explaining the low-cost carrier's plans at its investor day on 31 January, Essex said EasyJet is "actively evaluating the re-engined Airbus Neo and Boeing 737 Max as well as the Bombardier CSeries".

The airline launched a fleet evaluation in September 2011, and is studying the "relative economics of the competing types" across their life cycles. Essex said that an increased choice of suppliers and "game-changing fuel savings promised by the new fuel technologies from CFM and Pratt & Whitney", coupled with "the attractiveness of winning an EasyJet order" would lead to "a very competitive tender".

Essex said the London Luton-based carrier's business case rested on its ability to "generate long-term benefits" and if this could not be demonstrated at the end of the evaluation, then EasyJet would continue with its "current arrangements". He said the airline intended to complete the process and make a decision during the fourth quarter of 2012.

Aircraft order backlogs would not affect any potential order, said Essex. "Our reading of the situation is that manufacturers are not selling out their delivery slots consecutively," he said, so as not to "be in a position of telling a strategic customer...actually no you can't come to us".

As a result Essex said that EasyJet felt there was still plenty of time and opportunity to negotiate and place a fleet order
Airbourne-Adamski is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2012, 20:39
  #2383 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Darkest Lincs
Posts: 467
Over-Head Lockers

Interesting to note that the Bombardier C Series has rotating over-head lockers. Does any other aircraft offer this locker system?
wowzz is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2012, 23:14
  #2384 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: u.k.
Posts: 161
easyJet-allocated seating

If they are looking at allocated seating now and find it doesnt impact OTP, it begs the question why was it done that way in the first place? Was it simply one persons belief that it would be better?
easyJet management can be very arrogant & blinkered IMHO, they beleive that their way is the best way so why change? Also a company they once bought, Go-Fly used (very successfuly) allocated seating, so they could'nt be seen to adopt a proceedure of the company that they had just bought! Even if it clearly worked, was popular witht pax and was superior!

They'll get there eventually probably
Silvertop is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2012, 23:39
  #2385 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 44
Posts: 1,946
Silvertop,

Even if it clearly worked, was popular witht pax and was superior!
Was it not also a legacy of Sir Stelios' visit to Smokin Herb? One of the big mantras of low cost airlines was - shove 'em on quick, let 'em off quick - and accepted wisdom was that random seating was the best way to do this?

Of course, I still remember reading the blurb about using cheaper airports back when I took my first easy flight in 1996 - that one has long gone, so if now is the time to allocate seats - and gain extra yield for anyone who wants to pre-select any time before they get to the airport -then why not?
jabird is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2012, 11:28
  #2386 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: brighton
Posts: 445
Easyjets operation at lgw are they still planning to occupy both terminals ??
flyer55 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 23:04
  #2387 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Major London Airport
Posts: 84
EZY ADMIN FEE

As far as I am concerned EZY have shot themselves in the foot big time with their introduction of a 9 'admin fee' per booking.
I have flown with EZY about 150 times, but they will now be losing my business big time. I often travel on my own, so 9 per time is in my opinion hitting the solo traveller. Notice that fare adverts now add 'based on two people travelling' - so they don't want to discourage the solo traveller. When you add the baggage fee EZY are now often more expensive than the competition.
I have just booked an LGW-GLA return flight for 6 weeks time. B.A. were 30 (THIRTY) cheaper would you believe. And of course on B.A. I will get a drink and sandwich thrown in - AND, do not have to suffer the boarding scrum !

On the subject of Frequent Flyer Programme, EZY do not and never have shown any loyalty to their regular customers. In contrast they should look at how Norwegian Air Shuttle treat their regular customers.

When travelling on my own EZY have now lost my business. B.A. at LGW must be very happy indeed.
Whalerider is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2012, 23:34
  #2388 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Doncaster
Age: 59
Posts: 451
Just checked a Wizz flight for 16.99. Then found there is a 7 'Booking Fee' then 7 for paying by Visa.

With any airline, you really need to go to the end of the booking process to find out exactly what you're paying! But as you say, it is a pain for the single traveller - I would assume these add-on fees wouldn't change if I were with my family, and from what you say it's the same with Easy.
johnnychips is online now  
Old 8th Feb 2012, 08:35
  #2389 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 623
Still cant understand why they are all not being forced to put all the `costs` into the upfront headline price....Then the travelling public can make their decisions based on a rather easy to see level playing field..........
paully is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2012, 08:42
  #2390 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: IOM
Posts: 838
paully,

Maybe because the fee isn't always the same at some airlines so it's hard to put it in the upfront cost? EZY add the one-off fee for each booking, so until you get to the cart to 'Checkout', they can't really add it in. No point in adding it to the listed price because if you add a few other flights - that price becomes inaccurate.

FR charge differently based on how you pay, so that's (again) not easy to put in to a list price because they can't assume how you're going to pay. I disagree with these stupid charges, but I tend to avoid Loco's all the time.
JSCL is online now  
Old 8th Feb 2012, 13:03
  #2391 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
The Evils of Singlist Discrimination!

It should be possible to display the inclusive price from the outset, because as part of doing a fare search the customer inserts the number of travellers. Therefore, the system should be programmed to display a price befitting the number of passengers selected. I can well understand why an airline which is intent on ripping off single travellers (such an easy target) may not wish to display this clearly, but they should be obliged to do so. I have no sympathy with opaque pricing and sleight-of-hand trickery in financial transactions. And yes, a GBP9 hidden single traveller fine does mitigate against me choosing EasyJet for travel where an honest alternative exists.

I have always routinely avoided companies which discriminate against single customers with the likes of "two-for-one" offers anyway. I refer to those deals as SPAD's (Singles PAy Double). If a company won't spread the benefits around, they can sell to somebody else. Single supplements and the like should directly reflect an additional cost to the supplier (such as a semi-occupied hotel room). Discrimination against singles where no additional costs are incurred by the supplier is risible. The very hallmark of a clueless and bereft management strategy. The action of a company which demands to be held in low regard in comparison to its peers.

SL.EASYJET ... Shame on you!
Shed-on-a-Pole is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2012, 15:28
  #2392 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,950
Very well said Shed. I couldn't agree more.
TSR2 is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2012, 15:37
  #2393 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,221
I don't understand why airlines, including EZY have succumbed to the Ryanisation of airline travel.
Instead of assuming we all want RYR style travel & assuming that LoCo must = Ryan style, why don't they emphasise a different style of operation? including pricing policy amongst other services.

LoCo does not always = Low fare airline.

Norwegian, Air Berlin & SWA are all LoCos but offer a different level of service.

Airlines, should be playing to their strengths & promoting that you could in fact get more for less, instead they seem to be promoting getting less for more.

I have made recent bookings with KLM, Lufthansa & Brussels airlines & found the fares to be less than EZY or ZB thus getting more for less, it's a shame they don't promote themselves more in this way.

The good thing is that we the pax have a choice & it's time the big boys stopped assuming the only way to operate is by taking everything to the lowest basic denominator.
Mr A Tis is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 03:09
  #2394 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,562
...... and then the airlines lose out hand over fist as they won't be marketing to the vast majority of the market. I'm like you, I think things could be made better by emphasising a little bit more quality here and there but your average Joe doesn't want it. Price price price price to the extent that a 199 fare to TFS is deemed expensive!

I've always made my feelings known about the card charges and admin fee.....I don't really agree with it either but it's unlikely to change until legislation is in place that forces ALL carriers to play on a level field. Until then it's not likely to happen.

That said, despite the impending doom propheted by some here, I don't think Easyjet will suffer. Yields are increasing, passenger numbers are generally increasing and profit is increasing at Easyjet which means they are doing something very right. Whatever mine or your views are on the matter Easyjet is a profitable business in a back drop of severe economic hardship and they are still extrememly strong. Whatever they're doing must be right in so many ways. Whether or not those ways are ethical, one can debate away.

It's obvious i'm an employee but I can be Easyjet's biggest critic but I don't always subscribe to the fact that the vast majority of the flying public are being misrepresented and infact want more staff, full service style onboard product etc etc. Of course the vast majority want it ....it's just the majority of that vast majority just aren't bloody prepared to pay it. So whilst I accept and agree that the fee maybe underhanded it's no different IMO to fuel surcharges and a large dollop of the blame falls squarely on you and I who forever demand low fares.
easyflyer83 is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 07:58
  #2395 (permalink)  
FR-
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MIA-IBZ
Posts: 563
Do easyJet crews do any night stops from LTN base?

fr-
FR- is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 08:57
  #2396 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle NI
Posts: 824
Passengers tend to get the level of service they deserve based on the price they are willing to pay and FR are the masters of this! Not that there is much wrong with what they do, it's more how they do it.

Having watched the unpacking and re packing of luggage of people boarding FR flight and then queuing topay the excess charges many would have been better of paying more with another carrier in the first place!

But in the bar in IBZ the talk will be of a return flight for 19.99 although the amount paid will much more, there is something wrong when a product is advertised at 9.99 but ends up costing 79.99 at the till, Jet2 are no better.

To get an idea of what a flight will cost look at the bmibaby web site, they show 3 types of fare for each flight, the fly business or whatever it's called is a lot closer to the mark of what you'll end up paying if you select economy then go through build your own procces, how many people do that I do not know.

Back to EasyJet, flown with them a lot of late and it's difficult to fault, clean aircraft lots of leg room excellent cabin crew and flight deck, who a version of English that I could understand, not level four Eastern European version, given he choice they tend to be mine unless BA are close on price
Facelookbovvered is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 09:27
  #2397 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Discrimination Against Minorities As A Matter Of Company Policy

easyflyer83 -

I accept your point that the general public is generally unwilling to pay for a fully-inclusive service these days. It is for this reason that certain optional extras such as additional baggage, on-board meals and so on are sold and itemised separately. This is an inconvenience with respect to the speed of the booking process, but I recognise the justification for it. But we must be clear here: those who purchase an optional extra pay exactly the same for it as do their counterparts, and they receive a tangible product in return for their money.

The fine levied against single travellers is entirely different. There is NO enhancement to the product for those targeted by this, and it is not applied equally across customers purchasing an identical product at the same time. Fuel surcharges, whilst objectionable as an 'extra', are at least shared between all customers equally. As a customer, I actually believe that items such as fuel should constitute part of the headline price at all times. I am very happy for airlines to sell travel at a price which covers all costs and allows for a reasonable profit margin, but unavoidable elements of the fare should be included in the first price displayed. They are not an optional extra.

As a regular customer, there are certain things I require from my travel provider. I want a simple booking process which shows the true price at the outset. No tricks, chicanery or spivvery. I want a final price which is fair to provider and customer alike. I want to receive what I have paid for. And, I want to know that the company values my business and will treat me with respect. EasyJet has now spectacularly violated that last requirement. Many singles are very frequent travellers offering a high level of repeat business, as I do myself. But the message I perceive from EasyJet now is this: we see you as easy prey, a soft target. We will discriminate against you and rip you off with a fine which offers you *nothing* in return for the extra money we extract from you.

It is one thing to not offer a frequent flyer programme. But it is quite another to discourage a valuable segment of the market with a discriminatory fine for the crime of traveling alone. This will cost EasyJet goodwill and repeat business from customers of long-standing. Fool me once, shame on you ... fool me twice ...

I do wonder if EasyJet management wish to consider random additional charges levied against travellers on the grounds of race, religion or sexual orientation. Well, apparently outrageous discrimination against one minority group (singles) is fine, so why not others as well? The moral principle is the same; the shameful act of ripping off a specific minority group is identical. Why should widows, nuns, and those who simply choose to travel alone be selected for financial repression in this manner? Where is the justification?

Sadly, I find myself in agreement with Stelios for once. If this despicable attack on the single traveller is indicative of EasyJet management's corporate culture, then indeed they DO NOT deserve a bonus.

SHED.
Shed-on-a-Pole is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 10:14
  #2398 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: .
Posts: 560
Shed, just take a mate with you or maybe a mail order bride. That solves the problem!

One way of looking at the fee is that everyone pays a fuel surcharge/booking fee with other airlines. However, If you bulk book with EZY you get a "discount" in that only one person pays the admin fee. This benefits families so many will like it (Liking it being relative!!).

Rather than viewing it as discriminating against singles you could consider that it is being used to win business from families and groups?

I get your points and kind of agree but I think its taking it a little bit far to suggest its similar to charging people dependant on race, religion or sexual orientation!!!! I mean really. You do seem to be getting a tad worked up over this one!

If things were changed to benefit singles like yourself, families would suffer! This charge benefits bulk orders. This is generally the case all over the world in any industry.

The world has changed. People demand low "headline" fares. Generally unsustainable fares. The price you see is the price you never pay. We all know this. It can take quite a while therefore to compare prices but if you sit down its not difficult.

I just don't think its worth getting all worked up over! Yeah it does penalise the people who travel on their own regularly.....but it benefits families and groups. Maybe someone somewhere has worked out its families that are feeling the pinch more???

Given the number of companies and supermarkets offering meal deals and BOGOF's you must have run out of places to buy food!!!

I just consider some things in life worthy of getting worked up about and others just not worth it. Think of your blood pressure.

I totally agree about the board bonuses and I totally understand why you are irritated by this.
one post only! is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 11:20
  #2399 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
one post only -

Neither families nor singles benefit in any way from the imposition of a random additional charge ("admin fee") which should be included in the basic fare as part of the integral cost of doing business. Giving a "discount" on what is effectively a fine for booking is unlikely to garner praise from anyone, let alone those picked on to pay more than "their share" of the burden. At least the other unfair hidden charges are levied across all customers equally.

Like it or not, single travellers ARE a minority group. Targeting them for financial repression is no different in moral terms than penalising Jews, gays or females. It has just been overlooked in terms of legislation. If singles receive something extra for their additional fee (eg. use of a double hotel room), fair enough. Otherwise, no way. There is no additional cost to the business in this case. A single customer uses half the number of seats as a couple, and therefore it is fitting that the price paid should be exactly half as much.

Even if this immoral business practice did in some way encourage families to book (though I'm not sure how random additional fees, even at a reduced rate, achieve this), many families fly just one round trip per year. A large number of single tavellers fly very frequently. Penalising them is not good for business. You say that if charges were changed to benefit singles like me, families would suffer. Well, I'm not looking to get a *better* deal than families. I just expect to pay an identical price for an identical product. Parity. To be treated equally and not ripped off. This is hardly an unreasonable expectation, is it?

This unequally applied charge is a major blunder by EasyJet however they dress it up or try to justify it.

PS. The big difference with BOGOF promotions in a supermarket is that a single customer can buy and use two bags of sugar. They cannot travel twice on the same flight. And if a restaurant charges two main courses at the same price as one ... they can darned well bring me two meals!!! I can always ask for a doggy-bag at the end!

Last edited by Shed-on-a-Pole; 9th Feb 2012 at 11:31.
Shed-on-a-Pole is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2012, 11:31
  #2400 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 39
Posts: 6,168
We used to sell 800g loaves and 400g loaves, the 400g loaves were almost the full price of the 800g ones yet pensioners on a single measly income were uncomfortable to waste. Life is made for couples alas, the market economy often does have it's head up it's backside.
Skipness One Echo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.