MANCHESTER - 9
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No worries,
PVG-MAN-DUB is certainly feasible if a carrier was looking for a tag route, however MAN's best chance at a China route would be by far and away Hong Kong. Not only because its the biggest unserved market from MAN by a long country mile, but Cathay Pacific already send freighters to MAN and keep saying they will open MAN-HKG when the A350's arrive.
The next biggest route is Beijing and Air China have now publicly said they are looking into opening MAN flights.
PVG-MAN-DUB is certainly feasible if a carrier was looking for a tag route, however MAN's best chance at a China route would be by far and away Hong Kong. Not only because its the biggest unserved market from MAN by a long country mile, but Cathay Pacific already send freighters to MAN and keep saying they will open MAN-HKG when the A350's arrive.
The next biggest route is Beijing and Air China have now publicly said they are looking into opening MAN flights.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ringwayman
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.
This is so true, the fixation with LHR is beyond belief matched only by a total absence of creativity in the Davies Commission review.
It's a view shared in the media as again these so called analysts keep spouting on about LHR though various sympathetic outlets, The Telegraph and The Spectator leading the charge.
At least previous Aviation Policy Reviews included Manchester albeit maybe scraping in on the last page, but at least we managed a mention. This time it was almost as if they were afraid to mention us in case it provided the oxygen of publicity.
I agree that a 3rw is required, somehow it will now have to be shoehorned into LHR, lords knows how they will do it re infrastructure , but that is another argument.
My angle is more about safety and the need to alleviate the substantial holding over London, BUT if another runway is built it throws up many issues that Davies simply failed or chose not to address.
It increases slots by over 50%, there seems an automatic presumption that they will be filled ?
With a such a deluge the value will drop like a stone, a major issue for LHR based airlines where these slots appear on the balance sheet.
Whilst some observers suggest a phased distribution over a number of years to address this can you really see HAL spending billions and having a runway running half empty , not a chance ?
It immediately negates the need for the existence of LGW, I suspect HAL will almost certainly go after this business aggressively, but that is simply moving pieces on a chess board.
The Davies commission remit was to look at UK Airport Policy but seemingly this simply meant the ability of regional airports to connect at LHR isolating a review of other options as if they were of little consequence or simply didn't exist.
Why were our MPs so subservient in not challenging this at the beginning ?
Again Manchester was lumped in with the also rans !
As LAX indicated these analysts do not seem to have a clue what goes on North of Watford.
Will the slots be filled ? The main remit of the commission seemed to be enhancing domestic connectivity and servicing new routes/destinations to use the favourite term "keep us competitive"!
I would contest a few more long hauls ex Manchester unburdened by bilateral constraints would do the same would it not OR does that not count ?
With the combination of Emirates, ETIHAD and Qatar dominating airports in the UK (and now Dublin) it could be argued that in terms of domestic connectivity the Commission are reviewing something long since passed !
Of course there will be some tinkering but will there actually be the massive expansion that everyone assumes will happen ?
Many routes seem to have peaked already in terms of frequency so is building a 3rw using a sledge hammer to crack a nut ?
Look at domestic points not served, the commission implied these will suddenly reappear, er I doubt it !
Anyone looking at the Newquay thread will be aware that there is simply no desire from the main operator BA to reconnect with all domestic points that have been slashed previously and yet according to the Commission and so called analysts this remained one of the main arguments for expansion ! If anything domestic connectivity is falling.
In terms of destinations Manchester actually has better connectivity (18) than LHR (12) or LGW (12) so if that was a plank of the argument why was it ignored ?
The list of unnerved routes that could be met by a 3rw is on the HAL website, I won't list them here but they hardly jump out, again I hardly think there is the appetite from BA to address these.
None of these issues were raised by Davies nor challenged by MAG who sadly seemed bedazzled by events in Essex.
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.
This is so true, the fixation with LHR is beyond belief matched only by a total absence of creativity in the Davies Commission review.
It's a view shared in the media as again these so called analysts keep spouting on about LHR though various sympathetic outlets, The Telegraph and The Spectator leading the charge.
At least previous Aviation Policy Reviews included Manchester albeit maybe scraping in on the last page, but at least we managed a mention. This time it was almost as if they were afraid to mention us in case it provided the oxygen of publicity.
I agree that a 3rw is required, somehow it will now have to be shoehorned into LHR, lords knows how they will do it re infrastructure , but that is another argument.
My angle is more about safety and the need to alleviate the substantial holding over London, BUT if another runway is built it throws up many issues that Davies simply failed or chose not to address.
It increases slots by over 50%, there seems an automatic presumption that they will be filled ?
With a such a deluge the value will drop like a stone, a major issue for LHR based airlines where these slots appear on the balance sheet.
Whilst some observers suggest a phased distribution over a number of years to address this can you really see HAL spending billions and having a runway running half empty , not a chance ?
It immediately negates the need for the existence of LGW, I suspect HAL will almost certainly go after this business aggressively, but that is simply moving pieces on a chess board.
The Davies commission remit was to look at UK Airport Policy but seemingly this simply meant the ability of regional airports to connect at LHR isolating a review of other options as if they were of little consequence or simply didn't exist.
Why were our MPs so subservient in not challenging this at the beginning ?
Again Manchester was lumped in with the also rans !
As LAX indicated these analysts do not seem to have a clue what goes on North of Watford.
Will the slots be filled ? The main remit of the commission seemed to be enhancing domestic connectivity and servicing new routes/destinations to use the favourite term "keep us competitive"!
I would contest a few more long hauls ex Manchester unburdened by bilateral constraints would do the same would it not OR does that not count ?
With the combination of Emirates, ETIHAD and Qatar dominating airports in the UK (and now Dublin) it could be argued that in terms of domestic connectivity the Commission are reviewing something long since passed !
Of course there will be some tinkering but will there actually be the massive expansion that everyone assumes will happen ?
Many routes seem to have peaked already in terms of frequency so is building a 3rw using a sledge hammer to crack a nut ?
Look at domestic points not served, the commission implied these will suddenly reappear, er I doubt it !
Anyone looking at the Newquay thread will be aware that there is simply no desire from the main operator BA to reconnect with all domestic points that have been slashed previously and yet according to the Commission and so called analysts this remained one of the main arguments for expansion ! If anything domestic connectivity is falling.
In terms of destinations Manchester actually has better connectivity (18) than LHR (12) or LGW (12) so if that was a plank of the argument why was it ignored ?
The list of unnerved routes that could be met by a 3rw is on the HAL website, I won't list them here but they hardly jump out, again I hardly think there is the appetite from BA to address these.
None of these issues were raised by Davies nor challenged by MAG who sadly seemed bedazzled by events in Essex.
LHR does need RWY #3, the gap is widening between it and AMS, FRA and CDG, those are it's current competitors. MAN is operating below capacity runway wise (what's capacity like terminal wise?). Traffic is the same as Dublin despite having far better capacity with 2 parallel runways as opposed to 2 intersecting runways that are only both used for a couple of hours in the mornings when winds allow in DUB.
A huge amount of Gatwick's traffic is only there because they can't get into LHR, so runway #3 at LHR would do huge damage to them.
Do you think MAN should be set up as the U.K. #2 airport and become LHR's main domestic competitor BAGSO? i'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you btw, just genuinely curious.
If LHR doesn't get runway #3, the UK as a whole will lose out financially, there is already a huge bleed of PAX to AMS from the UK regions heading east.
A huge amount of Gatwick's traffic is only there because they can't get into LHR, so runway #3 at LHR would do huge damage to them.
Do you think MAN should be set up as the U.K. #2 airport and become LHR's main domestic competitor BAGSO? i'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you btw, just genuinely curious.
If LHR doesn't get runway #3, the UK as a whole will lose out financially, there is already a huge bleed of PAX to AMS from the UK regions heading east.
Bagso
The main remit of the Davies Commission was a review of UK Airport Capacity, and not UK Aviation Policy as such. It would be extremely difficult for them to conclude there is a shortage of airport capacity outside the SE corner - if anything in most of the UK there are probably too many airports competing for the same business, and losing large piles of money as a result. Just look at the sad state of airports like Teesside and Doncaster Sheffield, to name but two.
Even at MAN it would have been difficult for Davies to conclude there is a shortage of capacity, with Runway 2 still not required for large swathes of the day. Yes the terminals are a bit squeezy at certain times of the day, and the shortage of parking stands and taxiways has been well discussed on here, but these are things MAG could do something about themselves if they opened their eyes and got their collective finger out. It doesn't need some Government appointed quango to recommend they do it.
MAN should be very grateful for the foresight and determination shown in the eighties to get the second runway built, effectively setting themselves up with sufficient capacity for whatever the next 30-40 years throws at them.
I don't agree with some of what the Davies Commission has stated, but it has at least correctly identified that the area which has a shortage of Airport capacity is the SE corner, and recommended a few options to deal with it. Perhaps during their deliberations they have noticed how well MAN and some of the other regional airports have done in attracting new full service and low cost airlines over the last twenty years, looked at how much airport capacity is still available for the future, and concluded there is no pressing airport capacity problem here that needs fixing.
Personally I don't think MAN needs to be too concerned whether LHR gets 3 runways and 6 terminals, or 6 runways and 10 terminals. I have no issue with LHR gaining the additional capacity it needs. The days when everyone like me from "up north" had to traipse up and down the M1/M6, or take a risk that the infamous shuttle would actually connect, are now long gone. There are plenty of better options available now, and by the time the first bit of new concrete is available at LHR there will be a whole lot more options from the UK regions too. If I'm travelling the 9000 miles home to MAN, I really can't be arsed changing planes again just 180 miles short of where I actually want to go - no matter how good the LHR T5 experience is now supposed to be. The success of the MEB3 and others at MAN proves a lot of other people feel the same way.
I agree with you that the additional slots created by a third runway at LHR are unlikely to be consumed by multiple daily flights to Newquay and the like. The airlines themselves will find more profitable opportunities than that.
I do share your frustration at times with the apparent apathy of the UK Government towards encouraging the development of aviation across the UK as a whole. I also think airports like DUB and AMS are a far bigger threat to MAN's catchment area over the next twenty years than the threat of an expanded LHR.
I have my doubts about the ability or even appetite MAG themselves have to actively pursue and encourage airlines to try new routes at MAN. By anyones standard MAG run a very profitable operation, but you wouldn't think it when you look at some of the infrastructure at MAN. Having the second runway gives them a great asset for the future, but if they want to fill the runways with aircraft they need to start improving the terminals, taxiways and parking availability (and I mean for aircraft not just cars).
Yes the list of new routes for 2014 is quite impressive by any standard, but I just wonder how many of those were the result of MAG's marketing efforts, and how many have just fallen into MAN's lap as a result of the efforts of airlines and others ??
The main remit of the Davies Commission was a review of UK Airport Capacity, and not UK Aviation Policy as such. It would be extremely difficult for them to conclude there is a shortage of airport capacity outside the SE corner - if anything in most of the UK there are probably too many airports competing for the same business, and losing large piles of money as a result. Just look at the sad state of airports like Teesside and Doncaster Sheffield, to name but two.
Even at MAN it would have been difficult for Davies to conclude there is a shortage of capacity, with Runway 2 still not required for large swathes of the day. Yes the terminals are a bit squeezy at certain times of the day, and the shortage of parking stands and taxiways has been well discussed on here, but these are things MAG could do something about themselves if they opened their eyes and got their collective finger out. It doesn't need some Government appointed quango to recommend they do it.
MAN should be very grateful for the foresight and determination shown in the eighties to get the second runway built, effectively setting themselves up with sufficient capacity for whatever the next 30-40 years throws at them.
I don't agree with some of what the Davies Commission has stated, but it has at least correctly identified that the area which has a shortage of Airport capacity is the SE corner, and recommended a few options to deal with it. Perhaps during their deliberations they have noticed how well MAN and some of the other regional airports have done in attracting new full service and low cost airlines over the last twenty years, looked at how much airport capacity is still available for the future, and concluded there is no pressing airport capacity problem here that needs fixing.
Personally I don't think MAN needs to be too concerned whether LHR gets 3 runways and 6 terminals, or 6 runways and 10 terminals. I have no issue with LHR gaining the additional capacity it needs. The days when everyone like me from "up north" had to traipse up and down the M1/M6, or take a risk that the infamous shuttle would actually connect, are now long gone. There are plenty of better options available now, and by the time the first bit of new concrete is available at LHR there will be a whole lot more options from the UK regions too. If I'm travelling the 9000 miles home to MAN, I really can't be arsed changing planes again just 180 miles short of where I actually want to go - no matter how good the LHR T5 experience is now supposed to be. The success of the MEB3 and others at MAN proves a lot of other people feel the same way.
I agree with you that the additional slots created by a third runway at LHR are unlikely to be consumed by multiple daily flights to Newquay and the like. The airlines themselves will find more profitable opportunities than that.
I do share your frustration at times with the apparent apathy of the UK Government towards encouraging the development of aviation across the UK as a whole. I also think airports like DUB and AMS are a far bigger threat to MAN's catchment area over the next twenty years than the threat of an expanded LHR.
I have my doubts about the ability or even appetite MAG themselves have to actively pursue and encourage airlines to try new routes at MAN. By anyones standard MAG run a very profitable operation, but you wouldn't think it when you look at some of the infrastructure at MAN. Having the second runway gives them a great asset for the future, but if they want to fill the runways with aircraft they need to start improving the terminals, taxiways and parking availability (and I mean for aircraft not just cars).
Yes the list of new routes for 2014 is quite impressive by any standard, but I just wonder how many of those were the result of MAG's marketing efforts, and how many have just fallen into MAN's lap as a result of the efforts of airlines and others ??
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some very interesting points
Do you think MAN should be set up as the U.K. #2 airport and become LHR's main domestic competitor BAGSO? i'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you btw, just genuinely curious.
No I think that ship has long since sailed.... I doubt it was ever an option anyway, and without a national airline it is non existent.
BUT I am interested in maximising opportunities and debating how best that can be achieved.
If LHR doesn't get runway #3, the UK as a whole will lose out financially, there is already a huge bleed of PAX to AMS from the UK regions heading east.
Is this not a contradiction and precisely part of the argument that Davies should have fully examined ?
If there is already a feed to Eg AMS would it necessarily revive based on another runway ?
And as has been pointed out who will put the planes on ?
LBA down from 4 to 3, MAN losing last Shuttle, Virgin Red reducing as well.
QR are heading to EDI in Summer will that effect EDI - LHR.
TK expanding as well !
EK etc are ramping up DUB that has severely reduced DUB-LHR services already !
OK its a mute point are they cutting in order to use the slots more productively OR is there simply not the demand anymore ?
If its the latter that surely undermines a highly substantial part of the argument about UK domestic connectivity.
Are they basing decisions on the wrong evidence, it would seem so if they keep talking about UK connectivity!
AND is UK Plc actually suffering because of lack of flights from the regions to LHR, I don't buy it !
BTW If Davies was not going to include MAN in the debate was it not somewhat pompous to conclude that "long haul flights from the regions were environmentally damaging because the chances of filling these flights was lower than from LHR". Is that a comment on capacity OR is it straying into aviation policy ?
I just think the report was flaky to say the least leaving many questions unanswered, "industry experts" seem to be focusing on the bit they like without addressing the bits they don't !
And yes Logohu I agree 100%, I think some of the backslapping in respect of these routes is more down to our natural location and the airlines than an epiphany in MAG marketing !
Do you think MAN should be set up as the U.K. #2 airport and become LHR's main domestic competitor BAGSO? i'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you btw, just genuinely curious.
No I think that ship has long since sailed.... I doubt it was ever an option anyway, and without a national airline it is non existent.
BUT I am interested in maximising opportunities and debating how best that can be achieved.
If LHR doesn't get runway #3, the UK as a whole will lose out financially, there is already a huge bleed of PAX to AMS from the UK regions heading east.
Is this not a contradiction and precisely part of the argument that Davies should have fully examined ?
If there is already a feed to Eg AMS would it necessarily revive based on another runway ?
And as has been pointed out who will put the planes on ?
LBA down from 4 to 3, MAN losing last Shuttle, Virgin Red reducing as well.
QR are heading to EDI in Summer will that effect EDI - LHR.
TK expanding as well !
EK etc are ramping up DUB that has severely reduced DUB-LHR services already !
OK its a mute point are they cutting in order to use the slots more productively OR is there simply not the demand anymore ?
If its the latter that surely undermines a highly substantial part of the argument about UK domestic connectivity.
Are they basing decisions on the wrong evidence, it would seem so if they keep talking about UK connectivity!
AND is UK Plc actually suffering because of lack of flights from the regions to LHR, I don't buy it !
BTW If Davies was not going to include MAN in the debate was it not somewhat pompous to conclude that "long haul flights from the regions were environmentally damaging because the chances of filling these flights was lower than from LHR". Is that a comment on capacity OR is it straying into aviation policy ?
I just think the report was flaky to say the least leaving many questions unanswered, "industry experts" seem to be focusing on the bit they like without addressing the bits they don't !
And yes Logohu I agree 100%, I think some of the backslapping in respect of these routes is more down to our natural location and the airlines than an epiphany in MAG marketing !
Last edited by Bagso; 22nd Feb 2014 at 16:12.
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: dublin
Age: 64
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ME3 plus TK
QR not in DUB yet but EY and EK plus TK expanding ex DUB
LH doing fine but DUB LHR is growing not decreasing
DUB growing as TATL hub 19 daily flights this summer to North America
MAN should aim for pre clearance ? For USA bound pax both UK and others ?
MAN might need to up their game a tad ?
LH doing fine but DUB LHR is growing not decreasing
DUB growing as TATL hub 19 daily flights this summer to North America
MAN should aim for pre clearance ? For USA bound pax both UK and others ?
MAN might need to up their game a tad ?
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DUB growing as TATL hub 19 daily flights this summer to North America
MAN should aim for pre clearance ? For USA bound pax both UK and others ?
MAN might need to up their game a tad ?
MAN should aim for pre clearance ? For USA bound pax both UK and others ?
MAN might need to up their game a tad ?
Pre-Clearance is a government thing. MAN can lobby but has no authority to implement on its own.
DUB also has the advantage of being the capital with a home based airline.
For a UK regional with no home based flag carrier, I think MAN gives DUB more than a run for its money.
MAN has more passengers overall, and has up to 14 daily flights to North America (not including charter and Im assuming by North America you mean USA/Canada) so only 5 behind DUB despite its advantages.
In terms of MEB3, Emirates interested in putting on 2nd A380, I have on good authority Etihad will go 3 daily next winter, Turkish is 2 daily and has applied for slots on a 3rd daily IST as well as a press release stating that they will serve MAN-DLM, Qatar still at 10 weekly but I suspect EDI may have got the 4 weekly flights we could have had to get back to 2 daily. MAN also has Singapore airlines daily, Egyptair 5 weekly, NAS air 2 weekly and Saudia 3 weekly going east.....
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MCT
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bagso
Your chance to find out what is going on at a TAS meeting coming up shortly.
TAS Socials
Monday 17th March 2014 – Tim Haskins, Corporate Affairs Director – MAG
Subject: The UK Aviation Capacity Debate – Part 2
Following on from the interim recommendations of the Airports Commission headed by Sir Howard Davies which are to be published in December 2013, Tim will discuss the options presented and their possible impact on the Manchester Airport Group.
Your chance to find out what is going on at a TAS meeting coming up shortly.
TAS Socials
Monday 17th March 2014 – Tim Haskins, Corporate Affairs Director – MAG
Subject: The UK Aviation Capacity Debate – Part 2
Following on from the interim recommendations of the Airports Commission headed by Sir Howard Davies which are to be published in December 2013, Tim will discuss the options presented and their possible impact on the Manchester Airport Group.
Dub will never compete with MAN to the middle and far east because of the huge number of people from that region living in the UK. The number of Pakistanis and Indians living in Ireland is miniscule in comparison. A result of colonialism.
BUT make no mistake DUB is targeting MAN,BHX,GLA,EDI etc for trans Atlantic pax. The pre-clearance is a dream. I've used it several times in the last few years aswell as flying to other parts of Europe then the US, the time saving at immigration in the states is astounding. 25% of EI's t/a pax originate from other parts of Europe that morning westbound. Early morning EI/EIR flights to the UK are set up to deliberately target these people
BUT make no mistake DUB is targeting MAN,BHX,GLA,EDI etc for trans Atlantic pax. The pre-clearance is a dream. I've used it several times in the last few years aswell as flying to other parts of Europe then the US, the time saving at immigration in the states is astounding. 25% of EI's t/a pax originate from other parts of Europe that morning westbound. Early morning EI/EIR flights to the UK are set up to deliberately target these people
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is so true, the fixation with LHR is beyond belief matched only by a total absence of creativity in the Davies Commission review.
It's a view shared in the media as again these so called analysts keep spouting on about LHR though various sympathetic outlets, The Telegraph and The Spectator leading the charge.
It's a view shared in the media as again these so called analysts keep spouting on about LHR though various sympathetic outlets, The Telegraph and The Spectator leading the charge.
MAN already doubled its potential rwy capacity some years ago. LHR needs to follow suit and quickly.
I agree that a 3rw is required, somehow it will now have to be shoehorned into LHR, lords knows how they will do it re infrastructure , but that is another argument.
Having gone through the time and expense of the infrastructure changes, a fourth parallel rwy will also be needed in that location, sooner or later, rather than to the south west.
It increases slots by over 50%, there seems an automatic presumption that they will be filled ?
With a such a deluge the value will drop like a stone, a major issue for LHR based airlines where these slots appear on the balance sheet.
It immediately negates the need for the existence of LGW, I suspect HAL will almost certainly go after this business aggressively, but that is simply moving pieces on a chess board.
Of course there will be some tinkering but will there actually be the massive expansion that everyone assumes will happen ?
Many routes seem to have peaked already in terms of frequency so is building a 3rw using a sledge hammer to crack a nut ?
Look at domestic points not served, the commission implied these will suddenly reappear, er I doubt it !
Many routes seem to have peaked already in terms of frequency so is building a 3rw using a sledge hammer to crack a nut ?
Look at domestic points not served, the commission implied these will suddenly reappear, er I doubt it !
Despite the ME3 and others, domestic connectivity is vitally important and is needed to feed the new thinner longhaul routes that the UK lacks and needs; to help regeneration in some regions; to assist the export drive; to encourage inward investment to areas other than in the southeast; and to ressurect struggling local airports.
That doesn’t mean that we do not need more longhaul routes out of MAN, we need both, and the more the better! But it is not an issue for Davies.
Anyone looking at the Newquay thread will be aware that there is simply no desire from the main operator BA to reconnect with all domestic points that have been slashed previously and yet according to the Commission and so called analysts this remained one of the main arguments for expansion ! If anything domestic connectivity is falling.
A huge amount of Gatwick's traffic is only there because they can't get into LHR, so runway #3 at LHR would do huge damage to them.
It is also likely that carriers would shift to LGW from LTN and STN, and the holiday companies would stay at LGW. Think there would be more damage to LTN and STN than LGW, which would also be saved the immediate expense of building a second rwy.
If LHR doesn't get runway #3, the UK as a whole will lose out financially, there is already a huge bleed of PAX to AMS from the UK regions heading east.
The main remit of the Davies Commission was a review of UK Airport Capacity, and not UK Aviation Policy as such. It would be extremely difficult for them to conclude there is a shortage of airport capacity outside the SE corner - if anything in most of the UK there are probably too many airports competing for the same business, and losing large piles of money as a result. Just look at the sad state of airports like Teesside and Doncaster Sheffield, to name but two.
BTW If Davies was not going to include MAN in the debate was it not somewhat pompous to conclude that "long haul flights from the regions were environmentally damaging because the chances of filling these flights was lower than from LHR". Is that a comment on capacity OR is it straying into aviation policy ?
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BUT make no mistake DUB is targeting MAN,BHX,GLA,EDI etc for trans Atlantic pax
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some great imagery of the locality on the SAUDIA web site, looks like Manhattan !
...although nothing shouts Manchester more than the number 52 from Media City to Piccadilly in the foreground !
...although nothing shouts Manchester more than the number 52 from Media City to Piccadilly in the foreground !
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LBA down from 4 to 3, MAN losing last Shuttle, Virgin Red reducing as well. QR are heading to EDI in Summer will that effect EDI - LHR.
If Etihad (wow, I can actually say the name again, whatever happened?) do go three daily, then I wonder exactly how anyone is making money? I know EK do well but what about Qatar and Etihad? Does it even matter or are they just arms of the oil rich state capacity dumping and empire building? It's impressive what black gold can do, wish we had some in the UK. Waiiiiit a minute!
There's no sense in getting into a DUB/MAN willy waving contest as Ireland has stronger links with the US and MAN lacks political backing at a high level. In terms of US legacies though, MAN does well but DUB has the edge. With the ME3, there's a political drive to serve MAN as well, especially with Etihad sponsoring Manchester Rovers Boy's Club. It's a marketing strategy to increase brand recognition globally as well as bring a degree of respectability.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 22nd Feb 2014 at 22:48.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness
If shale gas drilling does take hold in the UK, I do wonder if the fact the majority of focus thus far being in the North West could help boost MAN traffic, given airports near energy centres around the world seem to do quite well (Houston, Lagos, the middle east just off the top of my head)
I'm not expecting a hub or anything like that, but, possibly more flights between shale areas and the head offices? Quadrilla is French for the HQ and the American mid-west is a shale area for starters.....
If shale gas drilling does take hold in the UK, I do wonder if the fact the majority of focus thus far being in the North West could help boost MAN traffic, given airports near energy centres around the world seem to do quite well (Houston, Lagos, the middle east just off the top of my head)
I'm not expecting a hub or anything like that, but, possibly more flights between shale areas and the head offices? Quadrilla is French for the HQ and the American mid-west is a shale area for starters.....
The only reason Etihad sponsor Manchester Boys Club is because the "owner" of Etihad happens to be the brother of the owner of Manchester City and wanted to find a way around the financial fair play rules in football. The only profitable carier from that region is Emirates
As Skipness points out, the reason BA maintained MAN-LGW for so long after they acquired Dan Air back in the 80s was to feed their longhaul routes out of LGW.
Over time many of those longhaul routes were moved from LGW to LHR (West Africa, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston and others). The remaining BA longhaul routes at LGW are now beach destinations, and many of them are now accessible direct from MAN on Virgin, Thomson, Thomas Cook and Monarch.
So the reason for MAN-LGW no longer exists. The recession, cost increases and APD were the final nail in its coffin.
Over time many of those longhaul routes were moved from LGW to LHR (West Africa, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston and others). The remaining BA longhaul routes at LGW are now beach destinations, and many of them are now accessible direct from MAN on Virgin, Thomson, Thomas Cook and Monarch.
So the reason for MAN-LGW no longer exists. The recession, cost increases and APD were the final nail in its coffin.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the ME3, there's a political drive to serve MAN as well, especially with Etihad sponsoring Manchester Rovers Boy's Club. It's a marketing strategy to increase brand recognition globally as well as bring a degree of respectability
Also, if serving Manchester is mainly political, then I suppose politics is also forcing those now millions of passengers to fly those 3 airlines between MAN and various points, instead of transporting fresh air back and two? Nothing at all to do with the large ethnic populations in the North West and UK from the sub-continent and far east?
The only profitable carier from that region is Emirates
Last edited by LAX_LHR; 23rd Feb 2014 at 11:10.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why on earth knock one of thee best investors in Manchester in years ?
Have you actually seen the build work in East Manchester around the Etihad?
Oh for similar enthusiasm at Manchester which is possibly what we could have had if MAG had jumped in with ADI.
Let's keep it sensible!
See below re Etihad profits
BBC News - Etihad Airways sees profits triple
Have you actually seen the build work in East Manchester around the Etihad?
Oh for similar enthusiasm at Manchester which is possibly what we could have had if MAG had jumped in with ADI.
Let's keep it sensible!
See below re Etihad profits
BBC News - Etihad Airways sees profits triple
Last edited by Bagso; 23rd Feb 2014 at 11:21.