MANCHESTER - 9

[Bagso]

One for you Lax

Read a press release re cargo showing Riyadh but then Jeddah as part of new SAUDIA route which I thought was odd.

Also strange that it was not mentioned in the MAN press release which I also referenced.

Assumed Jeddah was an extension, however I thought I would check prices and looked on Skyscanner (random portal) no flight to Riyadh on April 1st

....was about to castigate them so checked on Saudia booking engine.

SV124 is now definitely non stop Jeddah...NOT Riyadh !

I have tried to provide the link but could not too long. see Saudia Booking

Is this good news or bad which is the better option ?

Explains why no mention of them on MAN PR !

Possibly reaction to FlyNas ?

[LAX_LHR]

Hi Bagso,

As far as I know, the Saudia route was always down to operate to Jeddah, apart from a few erroneous quotes in press releases, I have not seen anything to suggest the route was ever going to go direct to Riyadh.

[viscount702]

Always Jeddah' Riyadh was never mentioned for the route starting in April.

[Bagso]

No probs, yes I was looking at some old press releases.

On a theme which has the better onward connections ?

I know Flynas are talking Riyadh, but given "possible" limitations in the market with SAUDIA what could Flynas bring to the table ?

[Ringwayman]

Clicking on the new routes section on MAN's website you can see these side-menus:

"Fly Manchester - Go West"

and

"Fly Manchester -Head East"

Jeddah is listed there, even if it's not mentioned as a new route. Surprisingly (or worryingly!) Singapore isn't listed.

Good to see that Egyptair is bookable for summer flights again on their website.

[Ringwayman]

Hopefully I'm not the only one who has noticed these slightly contradictory statesments regarding a China link.

From Skipness's linked article

"Mike Carrivick, chief executive of the Board of Airline Representatives, a trade association for airlines that do business in Britain. Carrivick says cities such as Birmingham and Manchester probably do not have enough passengers to fill the type of aircraft that can fly to China nonstop. There are few long-haul aircraft that would fly from Britain to China nonstop carrying only 100 people, he says. "

and LAX-LHR's internal e-mail

"China to Manchester has a market of roughly 245,000 passengers per annum. "

If the market is as large as that (and why would the Air China manager get this wrong!), then it means an average of (drum roll please!).... 671 passengers per day. 335 there, 336 back. Not quite "100 people" is it?

If those pearls of wisdom are being told to various airlines regarding the regional UK market by analysts, is it any wonder why so many are reluctant to venture a service.

[Bagso]

One might be forgiven for thinking it was a lobby group with only London in mind.

Did I just say that, perish the thought !

"Make sure your views are heard",

is one of the gems on the web site, I must send them a Christmas card next time they bat for Manchester.

How odd that if you check the web site you cannot actually get a list of members !

There are some sponsored links listed, (cough) I wonder why they are there !

He is on twitter, if you want some sport !

I commend you to challenge him with some facts, the responses are breathtaking, but you may get more enlightenment by staring for 10 minutes at a tub of lard !

Sadly "up North" we are rudderless, bereft, there are not enough
personalities or groups powerful enough to grab the media by the balls and shout our corner !

Our MPs are bordering on useless, the local media are more interested in Coronation St as a news item and as for major business in the NW...... deafening !

The China Forum (er, remember them ) should have responded but can you hear them, "shush be quiet they are out there ....somewhere !"

To be fair I still reckon our best bet is HK, but we certainly don't need pompous ill educuated comments by faceless self confessed analysts of a highly dubious background preaching to us !

Butt out brother !

[LAX_LHR]

If the market is as large as that (and why would the Air China manager get
this wrong!), then it means an average of (drum roll please!).... 671 passengers per day. 335 there, 336 back. Not quite "100 people" is it?

There is an few issue with this however:

-335 each way is based on splitting the market over all of the China destinations this 245,000 per year covers. Therefore, you have to fight up against carriers already offering 1 stop to the various other Chinese cities and then brings your average load down.

MAN-PEK-PVG would be competing with MAN-DXB/DOH/LHR/CDG/MUC/ETC-PVG so to gain a decent cabin load on the initial MAN-PEK sector could need a fairly hefty price decrease and then the yield on such a long route comes into question.

Yield wise, MAN is the ideal candidate for a tag-on, and then if this is the case, unless MAN is the intermediate stop (such as LIS-MAN-PEK), you are effectively the poor cousin of intra-China connections as you already have the disadvantage of being 2 stop over those carriers offering 1 stop to the larger Chinese cities.

Anyway, all of these arguments could be irrelevant as I have been told that my initial post about the email is actually not based on the August 2013 quote, but a more recent one from January 21st 2014 and thus the different wording (I went back and asked why the quote was so old). Again I cannot seem to locate this new source.

As for the people who say China links cannot be sustained in the regions, well, while the economics may not be known and in this case they may well be right (why else would there be no MAN-HKG/PEK route despite the obvious pax pool), there has been a practice in the industry for years that airports north of London cannot support long haul apparently.
The funniest moment was when I had the chance to meet one of these analysts who share this mentality last year, and he was completely taken aback that Emirates and Singapore Airlines flew a first class cabin out of Manchester. Knew nothing about it and told 'Well, that will never work'. 'Has been working for 3 years now' was my response. Silence followed. Way to show your knowledge!

[TURIN]

I know Flynas are talking Riyadh, but given "possible" limitations in the market with SAUDIA what could Flynas bring to the table ?

A couple of wetleased Portuguese A330s from what I hear.

[Skipness One Echo]

Isn't the First Class on Singapore a result of being twinned with Munich? It would be interesting to see the MAN/MUC split by class. It is a little surprising that EK offer First, more so in the sense that who in the name of God in this day and age pays for long haul F out of their own pocket? It's a dying, though far from dead commodity. It's interesting that none of the North Atlantic carriers nor Qatar or Etihad have offered a F cabin, which is, I think, the future. However Emirates are clearly onto something with the disposable income high value brigade....

Can MAN sustain a service to China? I would say yes, however that might best be Hong Kong for connectivity rather than the mainland. It remains a mystery why Cathay is alway "soon". If Air China can afford to run a thrice weekly Gatwick service, perhaps couple the other four days to MAN, the A330-200 is the right size for an entry level service.

[Suzeman]

"Mike Carrivick, chief executive of the Board of Airline Representatives, a trade association for airlines that do business in Britain. Carrivick says cities such as Birmingham and Manchester probably do not have enough passengers to fill the type of aircraft that can fly to China nonstop. There are few long-haul aircraft that would fly from Britain to China nonstop carrying only 100 people, he says. "

Very old quote as this Mike Carrivick character from Bagso's accurately described London lobby group BARUK, retired in October 2012

Carrivick retires from BAR UK | News | Travel Trade Gazette

Time to move forwards

[LAX_LHR]

I know Flynas are talking Riyadh, but given "possible" limitations in the
market with SAUDIA what could Flynas bring to the table?

Well, one thing flynas may not be able to bring is passengers, given their website appears to have been down for the last 3 days as 'domain expired'. Could just be my computer though.....

[Fairdealfrank]

MAN-PEK-PVG would be competing with MAN-DXB/DOH/LHR/CDG/MUC/ETC-PVG so to gain a decent cabin load on the initial MAN-PEK sector could need a fairly hefty price decrease and then the yield on such a long route comes into question.

Via DXB (or DOH) is one hell of a long way round, almost 1,500 mi. longer than via LHR. Via HEL is almost 200 mi. shorter than LHR. Maybe AMS and FRA and HEL should be on the list. Needs to be a lot cheaper for the extra 1,500 mi., else it's a triumph of marketing.

Great Circle Mapper=

Yield wise, MAN is the ideal candidate for a tag-on, and then if this is the case, unless MAN is the intermediate stop (such as LIS-MAN-PEK), you are effectively the poor cousin of intra-China connections as you already have the disadvantage of being 2 stop over those carriers offering 1 stop to the larger Chinese cities.

Do you mean a MAN as a "tag-on" such as SIN-MUC-MAN?

Again it's a question of fares, LIS-MAN-PEK on a Chinese carrier as opposed to LIS-(change at) LHR, AMS, CDG or FRA-PEK on BA, KL, AF or LH respectively.

Can MAN sustain a service to China? I would say yes, however that might best be Hong Kong for connectivity rather than the mainland. It remains a mystery why Cathay is alway "soon". If Air China can afford to run a thrice weekly Gatwick service, perhaps couple the other four days to MAN, the A330-200 is the right size for an entry level service.

It all depends on how succesful the initiatives to improve trade and business links between the two countries turns out to be. We need to grow links with up and coming countries, and diversify.

We cannot rely on the majority of trade links being with the eurozone, it is unsustainable in the long term and has major problems which will not be resolved any time soon. The UK has to diversify its trade links and China is a reasonable place to start.

Certainly agree that HKG is probably the best place to start with, but it has to be Chinese carrier, as BA (apart from HKG with CX) or VS do not have the network of transfer opportunities at the China end, both within in China and beyond. At the UK end, BA and VS funnel transfers pax through LHR.

For example, a Chinese carrier could also offer flights "down under" with one change of aircraft, and/or the possibilities of a stopover somewhere different. China is introducing visa on arrival for short stays so this will become increasingly easier. For HKG, visas are not needed.

The carrier that takes on the route would determine whether the destination in China is HKG, PVG, PEK or CAN.

[Bagso]

Just going back to lobby groups there is one voice which has achieved a modicum of success re Manchester and that is IPPR (North) and guy called
Ed Cox.

Ed Cox > Director, IPPR North :: IPPR

For anybody interested this is his bio.

Quite why on earth MAG have not co-opted him on to speak on behalf of Manchester is a complete mystery.

He lives in Manchester and is a polished media performer with an excellent grasp of issues "In the North" and more importantly Manchester Airport, most importantly he is well connected within the BBC, Newspaper industry etc

It would seem an ideal fit !

----------------------------

And yes good to see the airport marketing machine seems to have swung into action Much improved website and hopefully some partnered adverting with airlines using MAN.

Having lost out with Stansted "maybe" account management are refocusing on MAN ?

Another "esteemed" forum is indicating good loads on Egyptair, must confess trawling the ticket portals Egyptair are appear at a high frequency offering cheap connections via Cairo !

[LAX_LHR]

Maybe AMS and FRA and HEL should be on the list

I just put /ETC at the end of my list as lets face it, no matter how long the journey, the lust of 1 stop options is quite extensive, and even more so if some brave soul tries to make their own routing, such as MAN-VIE on Jet2 and then VIE-PEK on Air China.

Via HEL is almost 200 mi. shorter than LHR

The connections to China and Japan is the only reason Finnair serve Manchester at all.

Do you mean a MAN as a "tag-on" such as SIN-MUC-MAN?

Again it's a question of fares

Yes I do mean like that and the whole point I was eluding to was indeed about fares and Yield.....

[Una Due Tfc]

There was speculation of China Southern launching a service to DUB a month or 2 back with an A332. Our Tanaiste (deputy prime minister) was visiting and it was all over the media that the service was an aim of theirs. DUB-MAN-PVG maybe?

[LAX_LHR]

Would China Southern not launch Guangzhou and not Shanghai?

[Una Due Tfc]

Maybe it wasn't Southern ( I thought it was though!)

[LAX_LHR]

Wasvit China Eastern? They operate from Shaghai.I think? Southern hubs at Guangzhou and Air China at Beijing.

[Una Due Tfc]

I think you are right, we don't see any Chinese carriers in Irish airspace so I get mixed up, my sincerest apologies for my inaccuracies. A Dublin-Manchester-Shanghai route though, feasible?