MANCHESTER - 8
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: BOH - UK
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is because LHR connections are not attractive to us up here whether the OneLondon Alliance carriers like it or not. Their convenience is not our concern.
MAN-LHR was comfortably the largest of the MAN-'hub' routes; MAN-DXB as the next biggest was getting on for 400,000 passengers fewer.
The data and the rhetoric don't appear to be telling the same tale here.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi MUFC_fan,
I will address only the points you raised relating to my own posting. Obviously, I will leave it to Skipness to address the concerns you raised regarding his postings.
Firstly, on the point that the railways have played a significant role in the reduction of MAN-LHR passenger numbers, I agree with you. My 10:47 posting in reply to GrahamK acknowledges this. I did not refer to the railway angle in my response to Skipness because the issue under discussion was QANTAS/Jetstar - a rather different topic. In fact, the reductions in BA capacity bit during the Rod Eddington era, and largely BEFORE the completion of the WCML upgrade, although I acknowledge the impact of the improved rail services since then.
On the original QF/Jetstar issue, my point is that the opportunity to avoid LHR transfers ex-MAN is compelling for travelers from this catchment area. The market share taken by the likes of EK/QR/EY/SQ demonstrate this fact clearly. You may enjoy LHR transfers (fair enough, each to their own!) but in the case of MAN-LHR-Australia services with QANTAS (the subject under discussion between Skipness and myself) a T5/T3 transfer is required. That is not attractive to me. (DXB, DOH or AUH will do me just fine). But more importantly, in order to transfer at LHR (even entirely using T5) you must first reach there. From my past experiences, I no longer have trust in BA to actually operate my connecting MAN-LHR Shuttle on the day - they frequently cancel.
Based on the above, it is my contention that if QANTAS is serious about attracting MAN-originating customers in volume, a Jetstar service direct from MAN competing head-to-head with EK/QR/EY/SQ represents their best chance of success. If they opt to rely on connecting flights via LHR, they will remain a bit-part player in the MAN-Australia market (but that is their choice to make). I still recall the period when QANTAS used to operate a QF-liveried BAe146 on MAN-LHR to connect with the B744 service; it frequently left with embarrassingly poor loads. I seriously doubt that the number of passengers on the BA A319's transiting through LHR to Australia has risen significantly since then. The intervening period has seen substantial expansion in capacity available from MAN with the aforementioned Gulf carriers and we KNOW that they have enjoyed thriving demand (in a finite market) between MAN and Australia.
On the third section you have extracted from my posting I find myself slightly puzzled. I'm unclear what your objection is in this case. In asking "could it not happen again?", do you mean in terms of QF becoming a force on services ex-MAN? If so, my response is they can if Jetstar competes head-on with the alternatives ex-MAN, but they will continue to underperform their brand potential if they [QF] rely on LHR transfers alone.
Speaking purely for myself, my records show that I have flown with QANTAS on 22 occasions. But my QF frequent flyer card has been gathering dust in a drawer for a very long time - ever since they pulled MAN services. Quite simply, they are no longer useful to me. Etihad and Emirates are. I am not alone. And that is the issue which QF must choose to address or ignore. I guess it will all come down to yield calculations at the final reckoning (fair enough). If they stick with LHR transfers they won't be seeing me. OneLondon Alliance codeshare deals don't impress me! If Jetstar offers Manchester-Australia direct ... now that will prompt me to reconsider!
Cheers, SHED.
I will address only the points you raised relating to my own posting. Obviously, I will leave it to Skipness to address the concerns you raised regarding his postings.
Firstly, on the point that the railways have played a significant role in the reduction of MAN-LHR passenger numbers, I agree with you. My 10:47 posting in reply to GrahamK acknowledges this. I did not refer to the railway angle in my response to Skipness because the issue under discussion was QANTAS/Jetstar - a rather different topic. In fact, the reductions in BA capacity bit during the Rod Eddington era, and largely BEFORE the completion of the WCML upgrade, although I acknowledge the impact of the improved rail services since then.
On the original QF/Jetstar issue, my point is that the opportunity to avoid LHR transfers ex-MAN is compelling for travelers from this catchment area. The market share taken by the likes of EK/QR/EY/SQ demonstrate this fact clearly. You may enjoy LHR transfers (fair enough, each to their own!) but in the case of MAN-LHR-Australia services with QANTAS (the subject under discussion between Skipness and myself) a T5/T3 transfer is required. That is not attractive to me. (DXB, DOH or AUH will do me just fine). But more importantly, in order to transfer at LHR (even entirely using T5) you must first reach there. From my past experiences, I no longer have trust in BA to actually operate my connecting MAN-LHR Shuttle on the day - they frequently cancel.
Based on the above, it is my contention that if QANTAS is serious about attracting MAN-originating customers in volume, a Jetstar service direct from MAN competing head-to-head with EK/QR/EY/SQ represents their best chance of success. If they opt to rely on connecting flights via LHR, they will remain a bit-part player in the MAN-Australia market (but that is their choice to make). I still recall the period when QANTAS used to operate a QF-liveried BAe146 on MAN-LHR to connect with the B744 service; it frequently left with embarrassingly poor loads. I seriously doubt that the number of passengers on the BA A319's transiting through LHR to Australia has risen significantly since then. The intervening period has seen substantial expansion in capacity available from MAN with the aforementioned Gulf carriers and we KNOW that they have enjoyed thriving demand (in a finite market) between MAN and Australia.
On the third section you have extracted from my posting I find myself slightly puzzled. I'm unclear what your objection is in this case. In asking "could it not happen again?", do you mean in terms of QF becoming a force on services ex-MAN? If so, my response is they can if Jetstar competes head-on with the alternatives ex-MAN, but they will continue to underperform their brand potential if they [QF] rely on LHR transfers alone.
Speaking purely for myself, my records show that I have flown with QANTAS on 22 occasions. But my QF frequent flyer card has been gathering dust in a drawer for a very long time - ever since they pulled MAN services. Quite simply, they are no longer useful to me. Etihad and Emirates are. I am not alone. And that is the issue which QF must choose to address or ignore. I guess it will all come down to yield calculations at the final reckoning (fair enough). If they stick with LHR transfers they won't be seeing me. OneLondon Alliance codeshare deals don't impress me! If Jetstar offers Manchester-Australia direct ... now that will prompt me to reconsider!
Cheers, SHED.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going Loco -
The topic under discussion between Skipness and myself was the Manchester - Australia market with specific reference to QANTAS/Jetstar. It was not a debate about demand for the Shuttle. Total patronage of the MAN-LHR Shuttle operation is irrelevant. Only the number of passengers using the MAN-LHR Shuttle to connect with QANTAS flights is relevant to the issue under discussion in my response to Skipness. I am discussing the 'Kangaroo Route' and my "rhetoric" refers only to that subject. Total demand for the air travel market between MAN and LHR is another issue entirely. Sorry if you misunderstood.
SHED.
The topic under discussion between Skipness and myself was the Manchester - Australia market with specific reference to QANTAS/Jetstar. It was not a debate about demand for the Shuttle. Total patronage of the MAN-LHR Shuttle operation is irrelevant. Only the number of passengers using the MAN-LHR Shuttle to connect with QANTAS flights is relevant to the issue under discussion in my response to Skipness. I am discussing the 'Kangaroo Route' and my "rhetoric" refers only to that subject. Total demand for the air travel market between MAN and LHR is another issue entirely. Sorry if you misunderstood.
SHED.
Having flown Qantas, I certainly would not put myself out to route via LHR. Having flown MAN-SYD quiet a few times, I always used to use Cathay MAN-HKG-SYD. Ah, those were the days.
These days, my journeys stop at HKG, I certainly won't go via LHR (the shuttles get cancelled by BA as soon as there is any wiff of trouble anywhere, so not reliable enough for me, that's my choice).
So these days, I'm with Swiss or Luftie, thus avoiding the stupid O'Clock plane change in the Gulf. Fair play to both these carriers, often over looked in the clamour for big shiny new big jets, but with multiple frequencies via ZRH, FRA, MUC, DUS HAM they've done a great job for MAN.
These days, my journeys stop at HKG, I certainly won't go via LHR (the shuttles get cancelled by BA as soon as there is any wiff of trouble anywhere, so not reliable enough for me, that's my choice).
So these days, I'm with Swiss or Luftie, thus avoiding the stupid O'Clock plane change in the Gulf. Fair play to both these carriers, often over looked in the clamour for big shiny new big jets, but with multiple frequencies via ZRH, FRA, MUC, DUS HAM they've done a great job for MAN.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 767 is not as efficient as the 787 for obvious reasons. It is not fair to compare the aircraft by airline preferance over aircraft performance. Look at it this way: TOM are looking to fly to destinations such as Honolulu, Vietnam etc. - these would not have been possible with the 767.
As people have mentioned, flying Jetstar doesn't exactly mean moving over from Qantas. What a naive statement. What about EK, SQ, QR, EK, TK, AY or SK?
As people have mentioned, flying Jetstar doesn't exactly mean moving over from Qantas. What a naive statement. What about EK, SQ, QR, EK, TK, AY or SK?
I think the great hope of the B787 is that you can fly from Origin to Destination without the annoying stop at Transits Stop(s). Now in the case of MAN and Jetstar, it's true that the better option for me as a passenger is clearly a one stop B787 service, competing with the one stop Middle East options. Re-read my point though. Jetstar, specifically is supposed to allow QANTAS to serve markets that mainline can't make money on. Ahh sounds like MAN, I agree. HOWEVER, bear in mind the business model of QANTAS feeding Oneworld at London with the A380. There are strong arguments within companies like this that to justify the immense capital investment in the BigBus and the cost of Oneworld, passengers be funnelled over London. Conversely at the other end, BA passengers on from Sydney have to travel on QANTAS metal. There is a friction between this model and the more direct loco Jetstar option. Hence what marketing at Jetstar see as an opportunity, certain departments within QANTAS will see as a threat.
Addressing your example of Swiss and Lufthansa, they don't really compete, they compliment. Both are full service legacy style (Can't say Swiss is legacy can we?) carriers operating similar fleets in similar markets. Indeed bmi is increasingly seen as the UK arm of Lufthansa as the European members of STAR join closer and closer together.
Personally I wouldn't choose to fly MAN-LHR-pitstop-OZ-final destination in a million years, but you need to be aware that certain people are insisting that the shiny new A380s are filled and Jetstar won't be helping that to happen.
The analogy of the B767 was that it would bypass hubs, exactly in the way the B787 is hyped to do. American launched ORD-MAN bypassing Pan Am's JFK hub and BA's LHR hub along the way. This was the future, a massive European expansion by AA helped to kill Pan Am off. Shoot forward a few decades and the AA European network is a fraction of it's former size and they now fly from their hubs in the US to their hub at LHR and some key European destinations. Even the MAN-ORD is no longer a B767....
The Alliances (not cartels surely) work that way alas. As to what's best for me as a passenger, that's secondary apparently. Forget QANTAS, Emirates is by far a more user friendly option. MAN-DXB-final destination trumps any theoretical MAN-middle east-AU hub-final destination any day. Unless you're Sydney or Melbourne bound, QANTAS is a pain.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 12th Aug 2010 at 09:47.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN-BRU
While looking to book some seats between MAN and BRU last night, I was surprised to see SN are down to just two flights a day, from what was 4 a few months ago. What's this all about? Why the massive reduction on this route?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brussels Airlines
Vuelo
Showing 4 a day in September.
I assume that you were looking in August?
MAN & BHX I know for a fact get reduced services due to the business
closedown in August but normal service is resumed in September.
Pete
Showing 4 a day in September.
I assume that you were looking in August?
MAN & BHX I know for a fact get reduced services due to the business
closedown in August but normal service is resumed in September.
Pete
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN-SYD
Just to add my comments on this. 12 years ago I emigrated to Sydney, and I fly "home" several times each year. I used to enjoy using the Cathay service MAN-HKG-SYD, and when that discontinued I hubbed on QF or BA through LHR. However, multiple missed connections made me review that and now I use the excellent Etihad service from MAN. Interestingly, business-class fares on this service are more expensive than those from LHR. The Etihad business cabin into MAN always seems to be full, whilst economy is sparsely populated.
I have to say that almost nothing could now tempt me back to going via LHR. Last time I did it, I had a nightmare transfer from T3 to T5, waiting in a queue for 90 minutes and coming within a whisker of missing my connection (again.)
Whenever the Australian press talks about Jetstar's expansion into Europe, Manchester is never mentioned. Their favoured destinations seem to be Athens, Rome and Paris.
I have to say that almost nothing could now tempt me back to going via LHR. Last time I did it, I had a nightmare transfer from T3 to T5, waiting in a queue for 90 minutes and coming within a whisker of missing my connection (again.)
Whenever the Australian press talks about Jetstar's expansion into Europe, Manchester is never mentioned. Their favoured destinations seem to be Athens, Rome and Paris.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Manchester is never mentioned. Their favoured destinations seem to be Athens, Rome and Paris.
Markets with no QANTAS presence or Oneworld feed.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Manchester to ease airports strike chaos - Manchester Evening News
This was reported on another thread which has now dissappeared ?
I assume the strike will be called off but if it does take place it is interesting to see Manchester looking after its core longhaul customers "possibly" at the expense of handling BA long haul ops !
Must confess I have long since held the view that if BA have no desire to operate long haul at Manchester that is there issue, BUT equally there is no obligation to put them at the head of the queue when they have an operational problem at LHR.
..what goes round comes round
(...excepting any BA aircaft in the Manchester HOLDS that is !)
Anyway bags of room at Madrid !
This was reported on another thread which has now dissappeared ?
I assume the strike will be called off but if it does take place it is interesting to see Manchester looking after its core longhaul customers "possibly" at the expense of handling BA long haul ops !
Must confess I have long since held the view that if BA have no desire to operate long haul at Manchester that is there issue, BUT equally there is no obligation to put them at the head of the queue when they have an operational problem at LHR.
..what goes round comes round
(...excepting any BA aircaft in the Manchester HOLDS that is !)
Anyway bags of room at Madrid !
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Barton Upon Humber
Posts: 1,984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theres no way Gatwick could accomodate everything BA will want to try and still operate, especially at peak times when it is full or almost full. Add in the fact the strikes maybe on a Bank Holiday and Gatwick will be limited in what diverted traffic it can accomodate, likewise for Luton
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well BA do have the EDI, GLA and ABZ domestic runs that won't be operating, so that's room for about 15 services at a minimum but I envisage they'll want them to be putting some long-haul routs on those slots. If they did choose to run some long-haul out of MAN, I wonder if they would "abuse" a 777 or 747 by operating them on our routes so passengers would only have to be informed of making their way to LGW and flown on a "connecting" service instead of making their own way to MAN with the inbound long-haul pax going to approximately where they want to be after connecting at MAN. I can't see the point of them running all the LHR long-haul out of LGW as there would be, I imagine, no room to park them all.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Qantas are apparently planning to route there A380s here.
...what could possibly go wrong ...!
......pray for arbitration before next week or the pax might still be onboard on bonfire night ...!
...what could possibly go wrong ...!
......pray for arbitration before next week or the pax might still be onboard on bonfire night ...!