MANCHESTER - 8
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 67
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3 LPL diverts to MAN rather than the usual LBA/EMA.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main reason for the MAN diverts with FR today were because most FR diverts from Liverpool are normally in the evening or night when the aircrafts are returning to Liverpool but as FR are operateing a number of flights from MAN today it is quicker to bus passengers to MAN rather than Leeds etc.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is lifted from the Birmingham thread.
Perish the thought that somebody comes up with some joined up thinking where there is a formula that puts the planes where the demand exists.............. ie Manchester
19 January 2011
Bosses at Birmingham Airport have backed calls from London Mayor, Boris Johnson, to realise the potential of existing airports to ease the burden of constrained capacity at Heathrow.
Mr Johnson, speaking on Tuesday (18th January), cited the growing problem of limited capacity in and around the capital and called for boldness in addressing the issue. One of the proposed solutions is tapping into the vast potential of Birmingham as an alternative to airports in the south-east, which would be even more logical when Birmingham Airport is linked to High Speed Rail.
Birmingham Airport (amongst other major regional Airports) is a Strategic National Asset which, with emerging Government thinking, can easily form part of the solution to the over-heated south-east. There is spare capacity at Birmingham - enough capacity to take another nine million passengers immediately – and more than another 21 million passengers in future years, as it improves its capability with a modest runway extension, for which Planning Consent has already been given.
This spare capacity, allied with High-Speed 2, which will bring Birmingham within 38 minutes of the capital – or position Birmingham in ‘Zone 4’ of the Underground map - negate the need for further expansion elsewhere. Even now Euston is only 70 minutes from Birmingham Airport and many in the south-east can probably get to Birmingham as quickly as they could reach Heathrow's check-in desks. Significantly, the Mayor singled out the future connectivity of the Midlands as a key factor in meeting the growing demand for aviation.
Paul Kehoe, Birmingham Airport’s Chief Executive, said, “The government has already decided against airport expansion elsewhere and has indicated that existing spare capacity should be utilised. A more efficient use of regional airports, linked to High-Speed Rail, will ensure that opportunities and created across the UK, rather than draw jobs out of the regions and deliver them to the south-east.
“In these difficult times it makes sense to use and sensibly improve the assets that you have, rather than building whole new runways and demolishing whole villages. Those days are over.
“Aviation has its part to play in an integrated transport system, and rail must play a part in distributing the demand for International Gateways, to airports that have capacity. Birmingham is a prime example as it is just over an hour from London.
“Birmingham Airport is a vital yet underused piece of National strategic infrastructure. It is already the Midlands' premier international gateway.”
Perish the thought that somebody comes up with some joined up thinking where there is a formula that puts the planes where the demand exists.............. ie Manchester
19 January 2011
Bosses at Birmingham Airport have backed calls from London Mayor, Boris Johnson, to realise the potential of existing airports to ease the burden of constrained capacity at Heathrow.
Mr Johnson, speaking on Tuesday (18th January), cited the growing problem of limited capacity in and around the capital and called for boldness in addressing the issue. One of the proposed solutions is tapping into the vast potential of Birmingham as an alternative to airports in the south-east, which would be even more logical when Birmingham Airport is linked to High Speed Rail.
Birmingham Airport (amongst other major regional Airports) is a Strategic National Asset which, with emerging Government thinking, can easily form part of the solution to the over-heated south-east. There is spare capacity at Birmingham - enough capacity to take another nine million passengers immediately – and more than another 21 million passengers in future years, as it improves its capability with a modest runway extension, for which Planning Consent has already been given.
This spare capacity, allied with High-Speed 2, which will bring Birmingham within 38 minutes of the capital – or position Birmingham in ‘Zone 4’ of the Underground map - negate the need for further expansion elsewhere. Even now Euston is only 70 minutes from Birmingham Airport and many in the south-east can probably get to Birmingham as quickly as they could reach Heathrow's check-in desks. Significantly, the Mayor singled out the future connectivity of the Midlands as a key factor in meeting the growing demand for aviation.
Paul Kehoe, Birmingham Airport’s Chief Executive, said, “The government has already decided against airport expansion elsewhere and has indicated that existing spare capacity should be utilised. A more efficient use of regional airports, linked to High-Speed Rail, will ensure that opportunities and created across the UK, rather than draw jobs out of the regions and deliver them to the south-east.
“In these difficult times it makes sense to use and sensibly improve the assets that you have, rather than building whole new runways and demolishing whole villages. Those days are over.
“Aviation has its part to play in an integrated transport system, and rail must play a part in distributing the demand for International Gateways, to airports that have capacity. Birmingham is a prime example as it is just over an hour from London.
“Birmingham Airport is a vital yet underused piece of National strategic infrastructure. It is already the Midlands' premier international gateway.”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the main point of the article is to point out the reasons why London doesn't need another airport or more expansion from other LON based fields. Obviously the main alternative they're offering is BHX which with a highspeed rail link would be quicker to London that current LHR/LGW transfers.
Personally I'm all for the high speed rail. It will offer a competitive alternative to the plane however it will never compete on speed from airport to airport.
The main problem that I see is that it is all well and good saying we're going to create an ultra modern transport network but let's be realistic - that isn't going to happen for a number of years because we in this sovereign state have invented something quite 'ingenious' - Public Consultations.
London needs expansion now - not in 10 years time, otherwise we might as well hand passengers over to Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam.
I thought this country was supposed to be 'open for business?'
Personally I'm all for the high speed rail. It will offer a competitive alternative to the plane however it will never compete on speed from airport to airport.
The main problem that I see is that it is all well and good saying we're going to create an ultra modern transport network but let's be realistic - that isn't going to happen for a number of years because we in this sovereign state have invented something quite 'ingenious' - Public Consultations.
London needs expansion now - not in 10 years time, otherwise we might as well hand passengers over to Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam.
I thought this country was supposed to be 'open for business?'
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm also for the HSL, however we have a significant number of passengers located in the North Of England routinely routing or travelling via London to catch a long haul flight.... the flights that carry these passengers are restricting choice for those already based in the SE, and artificially sucking in demand !
Put capacity where idemand exists - Manchester!
The chance of Birmingham realistically taking overspill from London is a barmy idea !
Put capacity where idemand exists - Manchester!
The chance of Birmingham realistically taking overspill from London is a barmy idea !
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People turn their nose up at Glasgow-Prestwick. London-Luton is still pushing it even though it's got a * really good service rail into London. (*excl weekends!)
Even Gatwick struggles up against Heathrow, so outside the pork barrel self interest world of local politics, renowned for their business acumen no doubt, "normal" people wil smirk at Birmingham being a London airport.
Another one of these things that might look OK on paper but is comical in the light of day. I agree with Bagso, Manchester is far enough away from the London effect to grow well, Birmingham is *not* the answer to any of London's constraints.
Even Gatwick struggles up against Heathrow, so outside the pork barrel self interest world of local politics, renowned for their business acumen no doubt, "normal" people wil smirk at Birmingham being a London airport.
Another one of these things that might look OK on paper but is comical in the light of day. I agree with Bagso, Manchester is far enough away from the London effect to grow well, Birmingham is *not* the answer to any of London's constraints.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: manchester
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I said it in the white paper, Airlines will go where oppertunities of growth will exsist.
MAN has more chance of seeing star carriers, With TP starting, increases in BSL and the wealth of star carriers already at MAN, it just makes sense to add the capacity here.
Also, the infrastructure is already in place to handle the increases, it also has a rail station on site with a junction WCML at Wilmslow, so *could* be linked to Euston too. As far as im aware, the rail capacity constraints are on the MAN-Piccadilly line only, so the southern link to crewe could be the answer.
MAN has more chance of seeing star carriers, With TP starting, increases in BSL and the wealth of star carriers already at MAN, it just makes sense to add the capacity here.
Also, the infrastructure is already in place to handle the increases, it also has a rail station on site with a junction WCML at Wilmslow, so *could* be linked to Euston too. As far as im aware, the rail capacity constraints are on the MAN-Piccadilly line only, so the southern link to crewe could be the answer.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Age: 59
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand all the passengers over to Paris,Frankfurt and Amsterdam - no benefit to the country as a whole having London as a mega-port.
'we in this sovereign state have invented something quite 'ingenious' - Public Consultations.' - I now wish to build an airport on your house.
The fact that Emirates are showing just how many people do not want
to fly from Londinium should be a lesson to more airlines.
The third runway will be build - its ConDem U turn season soon.......
MM
'we in this sovereign state have invented something quite 'ingenious' - Public Consultations.' - I now wish to build an airport on your house.
The fact that Emirates are showing just how many people do not want
to fly from Londinium should be a lesson to more airlines.
The third runway will be build - its ConDem U turn season soon.......
MM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand all the passengers over to Paris,Frankfurt and Amsterdam - no benefit to the country as a whole having London as a mega-port.
London is the world's city. It sits between Asia and the Americas. It is where business is conducted and where it is hosted. If the world's largest companies aren't able to get their employees into the city effectively they'll simply move their offices elsewhere. So imagine HSBC and Barclays moved their offices along with a number of other MNCs to say, for example, France. Expect your taxes to go up, whether you live in the Shetland Islands or Canary Wharf.
The fact that Emirates are showing just how many people do not want to fly from Londinium should be a lesson to more airlines.
The third runway will be build - its ConDem U turn season soon.......
Why on earth are people bitter of people travelling to London to take connections to destinations across the globe? Manchester serves a small number of international long haul destinations. I can understand people's grievances if for example, someone travels MAN-LHR-ATL as there is a non-stop flight but people seem to think that someone flying MAN-DXB-HKG is much better than MAN-LHR-HKG (that comment regarding EK being a prime example). At the end of the day they're just buying a foreign product and in fact the UK would benefit more as a whole if they flew via LHR.
Whatever happens LHR is a vital transport hub not just to London - it is to the UK and to the world.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That Patriotic Obligation to use BA & LHR (again...)
MUFC_fan / All,
I am sure you have read previous exchanges on this forum in which it is argued that BA is now a private company, and that as such it should not be expected to provide services to the regions beyond anything which directly profits its business model. And, as a consequence of this, BA (justifiably) provides only feeder flights between MAN and its London hubs. Well, fair enough, I happen to agree with this argument. BA is now just another private company, and it should be free to run its business based on the profit motive alone. It does not owe Manchester a network of locally-originating services. BA has chosen to concentrate on LHR and treat UK regional airports as just another feeder spoke on the network. Absolutely fine. That's business reality. As a private business pursuing profit, the choice is theirs to make. They owe no apologies to anybody for this.
But hold on. Then, many of the same people who passionately argue the above present us with an additional message. Apparently, because BA has the "right" flag painted on its tailfins, we should all succumb to some strange nostalgic sentiment and flock to support their (nightmare) LHR network via their unreliable shuttles. Because they are British, that is reason enough. Oh, and (apparently) their contribution to the exchequer is the salvation of the nation! Well, to this argument I say "Poppycock!" (because I'm really polite like that).
BA, justified by its status as a PLC, has elected to offer those of us resident in the regions an extremely unreliable and very limited service with all network points served via London only. And that's when they don't cancel the connecting shuttles. Now if that best suits their business model as a profit-driven PLC then so be it. But please DON'T then use your next breath to lecture we the customers concerning our preference for instead selecting carriers which demonstrably value our business. Carriers which generally do not leave us stranded, and offer us a pleasant travel experience at a fair price avoiding the dreadful airport experience that is LHR.
BA is a private company, not a state carrier which deserves some kind of patriotic loyalty. LHR is an airport which is ideally located for Cockneys. BA chooses not to offer me a pleasant and reliable travel experience on MAN-HKG (using MUFC_fan's example). Emirates (and certain other carriers) do offer exactly that. How do some of these commentators have the nerve to admonish us for selecting alternative carriers which ensure that our journeys are as comfortable, convenient and reliable as possible? If I book a flight as a customer, I will book the journey which best suits me and me alone. Is that self-serving? Absolutely. And so is the way BA chooses to run its business. Fair play to them for that, but the quid pro quo is ... WE REGIONAL CUSTOMERS NO LONGER OWE THEM LOYALTY! They ignore our travel needs, we ignore their product. That's business. No apology required from BA. And no apology required from the MAN public either.
And what is all this nonsense which gets thrown our way about Heathrow's amazing contribution to the UK exchequer? Do some suppose that we northerners do not pay tax too? Does Manchester Airport not pay tax? Do its workers not pay tax? Do the airlines serving MAN - both British and foreign - not pay tax? Do businesses in Northern England (including banks) not pay tax? I assure you that they all do, and every pound paid ends up in exactly the same pot as those earned at LHR. So don't stick us with a guilt trip for choosing a convenient journey ex-MAN on tax grounds. It just won't wash.
Oh, and by the way. These fabulous banks - to which we apparently owe such gratitude for deigning to grace the streets of London - would they be the same ones that we taxpayers (including Northerners) paid MULTIPLE BILLIONS to bail out in 2008 (and ever since)? I think they just might be. And by the way, do you know why they are wildly profitable (good for Britain?) again now? Could it be because some of their garbage investments have been purchased at face value by the taxpayer? Could it be that they have not been forced to recognize the current market value of certain toxic derivatives on their balance sheets and can account for them at face value instead? Could it be that the artificially-low interest rates which have crucified hardworking British savers and retirees have been manipulated to save these very bankers? Are these the same banks which have forced money-printing ("QE") by the Bank of England to keep them solvent? Every pound created under QE dilutes every other pound in existence, to OUR detriment, because there is no additional underlying value backing the new currency units.
We are told to worship at the feet of London bankers who have placed Britain on the slope to sovereign debt default or ruinous inflation in the future. Whilst honest Northern businesses - the traditional backbone of the British economy - have been thrown to the wolves! No subsidies, no bailouts, no acknowledgment to the benefits they bring to Britain via all its airports ... not just Heathrow.
So don't lecture us up here. BA is no more "ours" than is Lufthansa or Air France / KLM. We will put business BA's way when they offer us a reliable and superior product to that offered by the competition. And if they don't offer that, we won't book them thanks. They are entitled to focus on Heathrow only; as a profit-motivated PLC they owe us nothing. They owe us no patronage, no loyalty (and they certainly don't offer them to us). So we owe them nothing in return. That's the other half of the deal. No guilt-trips, no flag-waving, no emotional blackmail regarding London's amazing tax revenues. We are free to book the flights which best suit our travel needs. With the airline which best meets them. Via the hub of our choosing (if not direct). That is the deal which BA made with the British public when it became a PLC run for profit over public service. BA surrendered the quaint notion of 'loyalty to the flag' a long time ago.
Best to all. SHED.
I am sure you have read previous exchanges on this forum in which it is argued that BA is now a private company, and that as such it should not be expected to provide services to the regions beyond anything which directly profits its business model. And, as a consequence of this, BA (justifiably) provides only feeder flights between MAN and its London hubs. Well, fair enough, I happen to agree with this argument. BA is now just another private company, and it should be free to run its business based on the profit motive alone. It does not owe Manchester a network of locally-originating services. BA has chosen to concentrate on LHR and treat UK regional airports as just another feeder spoke on the network. Absolutely fine. That's business reality. As a private business pursuing profit, the choice is theirs to make. They owe no apologies to anybody for this.
But hold on. Then, many of the same people who passionately argue the above present us with an additional message. Apparently, because BA has the "right" flag painted on its tailfins, we should all succumb to some strange nostalgic sentiment and flock to support their (nightmare) LHR network via their unreliable shuttles. Because they are British, that is reason enough. Oh, and (apparently) their contribution to the exchequer is the salvation of the nation! Well, to this argument I say "Poppycock!" (because I'm really polite like that).
BA, justified by its status as a PLC, has elected to offer those of us resident in the regions an extremely unreliable and very limited service with all network points served via London only. And that's when they don't cancel the connecting shuttles. Now if that best suits their business model as a profit-driven PLC then so be it. But please DON'T then use your next breath to lecture we the customers concerning our preference for instead selecting carriers which demonstrably value our business. Carriers which generally do not leave us stranded, and offer us a pleasant travel experience at a fair price avoiding the dreadful airport experience that is LHR.
BA is a private company, not a state carrier which deserves some kind of patriotic loyalty. LHR is an airport which is ideally located for Cockneys. BA chooses not to offer me a pleasant and reliable travel experience on MAN-HKG (using MUFC_fan's example). Emirates (and certain other carriers) do offer exactly that. How do some of these commentators have the nerve to admonish us for selecting alternative carriers which ensure that our journeys are as comfortable, convenient and reliable as possible? If I book a flight as a customer, I will book the journey which best suits me and me alone. Is that self-serving? Absolutely. And so is the way BA chooses to run its business. Fair play to them for that, but the quid pro quo is ... WE REGIONAL CUSTOMERS NO LONGER OWE THEM LOYALTY! They ignore our travel needs, we ignore their product. That's business. No apology required from BA. And no apology required from the MAN public either.
And what is all this nonsense which gets thrown our way about Heathrow's amazing contribution to the UK exchequer? Do some suppose that we northerners do not pay tax too? Does Manchester Airport not pay tax? Do its workers not pay tax? Do the airlines serving MAN - both British and foreign - not pay tax? Do businesses in Northern England (including banks) not pay tax? I assure you that they all do, and every pound paid ends up in exactly the same pot as those earned at LHR. So don't stick us with a guilt trip for choosing a convenient journey ex-MAN on tax grounds. It just won't wash.
Oh, and by the way. These fabulous banks - to which we apparently owe such gratitude for deigning to grace the streets of London - would they be the same ones that we taxpayers (including Northerners) paid MULTIPLE BILLIONS to bail out in 2008 (and ever since)? I think they just might be. And by the way, do you know why they are wildly profitable (good for Britain?) again now? Could it be because some of their garbage investments have been purchased at face value by the taxpayer? Could it be that they have not been forced to recognize the current market value of certain toxic derivatives on their balance sheets and can account for them at face value instead? Could it be that the artificially-low interest rates which have crucified hardworking British savers and retirees have been manipulated to save these very bankers? Are these the same banks which have forced money-printing ("QE") by the Bank of England to keep them solvent? Every pound created under QE dilutes every other pound in existence, to OUR detriment, because there is no additional underlying value backing the new currency units.
We are told to worship at the feet of London bankers who have placed Britain on the slope to sovereign debt default or ruinous inflation in the future. Whilst honest Northern businesses - the traditional backbone of the British economy - have been thrown to the wolves! No subsidies, no bailouts, no acknowledgment to the benefits they bring to Britain via all its airports ... not just Heathrow.
So don't lecture us up here. BA is no more "ours" than is Lufthansa or Air France / KLM. We will put business BA's way when they offer us a reliable and superior product to that offered by the competition. And if they don't offer that, we won't book them thanks. They are entitled to focus on Heathrow only; as a profit-motivated PLC they owe us nothing. They owe us no patronage, no loyalty (and they certainly don't offer them to us). So we owe them nothing in return. That's the other half of the deal. No guilt-trips, no flag-waving, no emotional blackmail regarding London's amazing tax revenues. We are free to book the flights which best suit our travel needs. With the airline which best meets them. Via the hub of our choosing (if not direct). That is the deal which BA made with the British public when it became a PLC run for profit over public service. BA surrendered the quaint notion of 'loyalty to the flag' a long time ago.
Best to all. SHED.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there anybody working at MAG who shares Shed's/Roverman's passion ?
Since the Con Lib Government was formed we have had announcements on the cancellation of Heathrow's 3rd runway, the possibility of budget changes to APD favouring direct regional long haul travel, and now Boris wading in on using regional airport capacity (...er centered on BHX) to mop up demand in the South East........
The silence from MAG board members has been deafening, its as though they are afraid to voice an opinon.
At Least when GT was running the show we had press releases spewing forth almost weekly, they EVEN got past the M.E.N. and made the national press and Radio4 etc !
These were matched to a constant onslaught on MPs across the region to back expansion at Manchester.......it almost became boring BUT there is little doubt in my mind that it did influence policy changes albeit on the margins !
Surely in 2011 there must be a corporate view on how these changes effect Manchester and it passengers but I for one would love to know what these are ?
The CEO at Birmingham has made various comments in recents weeks and yes it might be hot air BUT at least its a view ......
Ok, the market may well dictate events, but it would be nice to hear what the Board at MAG are actually thinking !
Since the Con Lib Government was formed we have had announcements on the cancellation of Heathrow's 3rd runway, the possibility of budget changes to APD favouring direct regional long haul travel, and now Boris wading in on using regional airport capacity (...er centered on BHX) to mop up demand in the South East........
The silence from MAG board members has been deafening, its as though they are afraid to voice an opinon.
At Least when GT was running the show we had press releases spewing forth almost weekly, they EVEN got past the M.E.N. and made the national press and Radio4 etc !
These were matched to a constant onslaught on MPs across the region to back expansion at Manchester.......it almost became boring BUT there is little doubt in my mind that it did influence policy changes albeit on the margins !
Surely in 2011 there must be a corporate view on how these changes effect Manchester and it passengers but I for one would love to know what these are ?
The CEO at Birmingham has made various comments in recents weeks and yes it might be hot air BUT at least its a view ......
Ok, the market may well dictate events, but it would be nice to hear what the Board at MAG are actually thinking !
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: manchester
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bagso,
Maybe they are working behind the scenes to make said changes actually happen, rather than out at the front blowing hot air.
If the MP's and so on are working the press calling for MAN expansion, then that frees up the MAN team to actually get things in motion, by talking to airlines and so on.
After all, MAG still havent give an official press release regarding TP/EY/BD expansion. However if forward bookings are so good, maybe they simply dont need to?
Maybe they are working behind the scenes to make said changes actually happen, rather than out at the front blowing hot air.
If the MP's and so on are working the press calling for MAN expansion, then that frees up the MAN team to actually get things in motion, by talking to airlines and so on.
After all, MAG still havent give an official press release regarding TP/EY/BD expansion. However if forward bookings are so good, maybe they simply dont need to?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Leeds
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are told to worship at the feet of London bankers who have placed Britain on the slope to sovereign debt default or ruinous inflation in the future. Whilst honest Northern businesses - the traditional backbone of the British economy - have been thrown to the wolves! No subsidies, no bailouts, no acknowledgment to the benefits they bring to Britain via all its airports ... not just Heathrow.
As for the other points, the most commonly requested route from the business community here around Leeds to the management at LBA, is BA to LHR.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
682ft AMSL,
If my posting is open to interpretation as a defence of one bank's incompetent buffoons over those of others, I assure you that was not my intention. Apologies if I leave any doubt on that matter.
As for BA serving LBA-LHR. It may indeed be the most requested route by businesses in your area. But do you expect it to happen? Do you think BA will give a moments thought to the needs of business travelers from your area? Thought not. And that is why many from your area will instead avail themselves of KLM's network via AMS, as indeed they should. If BA doesn't satisfy the needs of Yorkshire businesses, book with a carrier which does. Don't accept any criticism for a perceived lack of patriotic fervour. My original point exactly ...
SHED.
If my posting is open to interpretation as a defence of one bank's incompetent buffoons over those of others, I assure you that was not my intention. Apologies if I leave any doubt on that matter.
As for BA serving LBA-LHR. It may indeed be the most requested route by businesses in your area. But do you expect it to happen? Do you think BA will give a moments thought to the needs of business travelers from your area? Thought not. And that is why many from your area will instead avail themselves of KLM's network via AMS, as indeed they should. If BA doesn't satisfy the needs of Yorkshire businesses, book with a carrier which does. Don't accept any criticism for a perceived lack of patriotic fervour. My original point exactly ...
SHED.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LHR is an airport which is ideally located for Cockneys. BA chooses not to offer me a pleasant and reliable travel experience on MAN-HKG
BA stuffed MAN from day one. Even BOAC screamed at any competition on routes they didn't even fly from at MAN. Cheerio SABENA long haul then!
Old equipment was retained for years on the One Eleven, replaced by B737-200 as the competition bought the quiter 300 / 400 / 500. MAN long haul operated on the back of LGW add ons. Then managing to destroy everything good about Brymon and British Regional by merging them into a wholly mismanged subsidiary. A PART of BA, wanted MAN T3 as a hub. The more rational part of BA, the money making parts, saw that as throwing good money after bad. Yes they got market share but it wasn't worth the candle with the sheer mis mash of equipment, Ts and Cs and routes. Car crash.
Reaidng between the lines of Shed's post it reads as a North v South when the big battle is seen to be LHR vs AMS/FRA/CDG. You can either believe MAN can compete against offshore hubs as mentioned, or you can support LHR / AMS / FRA / CDG / ZRH / DXB etc. However only one of these options supports two airports in the UK, two sets of jobs, two sets of ground handlers, bus drivers, check in assistants and all.
No one ever said to you shed, that you should worship at the feet of London bankers. The pragmatic reality recognised by Labour was that you tax those billions and spend it on the NHS and schools and try and change the rest of our lives. Over tax them, and they will be working like some of my colleagues, enjoying splended views of Lake Geneva.
That is the deal which BA made with the British public when it became a PLC run for profit over public service.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meanwhile, Etihad is going double daily this year - so bit of ramping up with the August increase to 10 weekly.
No doubt all A330 and looks like it's still going to be 2 class as they're converting 8 A330s from 3 class to 2 class.
No doubt all A330 and looks like it's still going to be 2 class as they're converting 8 A330s from 3 class to 2 class.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Age: 59
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MUFC_fan
'So imagine HSBC and Barclays moved their offices along with a number of other MNCs to say, for example, France. Expect your taxes to go up, whether you live in the Shetland Islands or Canary Wharf.'
My taxes are going up now.......and are these the same bankers who
manufactured the world ecomomy crisis with their American mortgage
fiasco ???
You have a convenient memory
Or is it that you are a southern United fan? or both
MM
'So imagine HSBC and Barclays moved their offices along with a number of other MNCs to say, for example, France. Expect your taxes to go up, whether you live in the Shetland Islands or Canary Wharf.'
My taxes are going up now.......and are these the same bankers who
manufactured the world ecomomy crisis with their American mortgage
fiasco ???
You have a convenient memory
Or is it that you are a southern United fan? or both
MM