MANCHESTER - 9
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Monte Carlo
Age: 65
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are two schools of thought re: MAN.
An industry perspective, which is that it over performs relative to the immediate catchment. Something like 75% of the passenger throughput comes from outside Greater Manchester. The competitive battle lines are with the airports that also serve markets that the 75% originates from; mainly LPL, LBA, DSA and BHX. There are roughly 8m of the passengers a year using these airports that could use MAN and at least another 10m using MAN that would happily consider using one of others. The numbers at stake are huge and it requires an ongoing rear-guard action to protect what MAN has and to claw back passengers.
The second perspective, which I hear more from folks inside Gtr Manch but who are outside of the industry, is that it under-performs. Most comments in this regard focus on a (perceived) under performance in long haul services and as such, they believe the competitive battle lines are with London, and Heathrow in particular. Often they seem to conflate this issue with broader North vs. South issues and believe MAN should be managed in a way that showcases the fact there is life outside of London.
The management of the airport and the airport group and their external investors are firmly in the first camp. Passionate supporters of the 2nd view mis-interpret this as everything from incompetence to ambivalence, yet the reality is that the management are following the most logical commercial strategy for the challenges and risks they face. In pursuit of that, they are well regarded and well know in the industry - which is the core audience for business development, trade support and the other B2B marketing activity. B2C marketing, as with all airports, is not core simply because the general public don't react or engage with it that well. I know many airports that are trying to make social media work for them, with mixed success.
An industry perspective, which is that it over performs relative to the immediate catchment. Something like 75% of the passenger throughput comes from outside Greater Manchester. The competitive battle lines are with the airports that also serve markets that the 75% originates from; mainly LPL, LBA, DSA and BHX. There are roughly 8m of the passengers a year using these airports that could use MAN and at least another 10m using MAN that would happily consider using one of others. The numbers at stake are huge and it requires an ongoing rear-guard action to protect what MAN has and to claw back passengers.
The second perspective, which I hear more from folks inside Gtr Manch but who are outside of the industry, is that it under-performs. Most comments in this regard focus on a (perceived) under performance in long haul services and as such, they believe the competitive battle lines are with London, and Heathrow in particular. Often they seem to conflate this issue with broader North vs. South issues and believe MAN should be managed in a way that showcases the fact there is life outside of London.
The management of the airport and the airport group and their external investors are firmly in the first camp. Passionate supporters of the 2nd view mis-interpret this as everything from incompetence to ambivalence, yet the reality is that the management are following the most logical commercial strategy for the challenges and risks they face. In pursuit of that, they are well regarded and well know in the industry - which is the core audience for business development, trade support and the other B2B marketing activity. B2C marketing, as with all airports, is not core simply because the general public don't react or engage with it that well. I know many airports that are trying to make social media work for them, with mixed success.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perspectives … Public and Corporate.
North West … Thankyou for your observations. Interesting food for thought there. Unfortunately, I cannot agree that we all slot neatly into one of the two categories you describe. Business schools like to apply neat labels to people like us but reality is far more complex.
Few contributors here are criticising the entirety of MAG's performance … quite the contrary. Opinion is broadly positive. MAN is back around the 21 million pax per annum mark and could finally overhaul the 2006/7 peak afew months from now. Prestigious new scheduled services have been secured. A balance appears to have been struck between encouraging growth in both the no-frills and legacy sectors. Infrastructure development continues apace, particularly that concerning ground access. Airport City is evolving. Rumours abound of major terminal redevelopment ahead. Of course, not everything is rosy (cargo throughput, engagement with the public) but there is much to applaud and I think most here give credit where it is due. Few on PPRuNe expect MAN to mirror LHR. The airport is performing creditably in many respects and is of huge benefit to the region.
What you do see on here is a desire for MAN to be the best that it can be. In certain areas MAG appears distracted (by STN?) and sometimes complacent. Marketing is a case in point … engagement with the public is a good thing but we see very little of it. Hard-won scheduled services (kudos for attracting them, BTW) have faded away because the public were largely unaware of their existence. Of course, scheduled services do not fail on PR alone (see FlyNas) but a bit of promotional assistance from MAG wouldn't go amiss. It is a cop-out to claim that the carriers alone are responsible for marketing. It is entirely in MAG's interests to ensure that the general public is well-informed concerning the airport's portfolio of operators and destinations. Strong public awareness is mutually beneficial to both MAG and its airline partners.
Let us briefly cite the example of Norwegian Air Shuttle. Here is a carrier which *could* potentially establish a MAN base at some stage. But our well-informed Norwegian friend LN-KGL advises us that the company is despondent over the lack of interest in its offerings from the Manchester end of the operation. Few Brits are booking with them. They even question whether nationalistic prejudices are to blame. Frequencies have been pared right back. Of course, I reckon we on PPRuNe can identify the true problem. I think it can be summarised as: "Fly with who? Never heard of them!" Now if MAG wishes to engage with NAX and help them get the message out to the general public there could be a rich reward at the end of the rainbow. Like a couple of based B738's and possibly a long-haul B787 as well! Is it OK to sit back in a comfy swivel-chair and pronounce that communicating with the customers is "not core" … it is the sole responsibility of the airline. We don't need MBA's to see where that attitude will lead.
The criticisms you do read on this thread are rarely of the blanket 'MAG is rubbish' variety. Quite the opposite … plaudits are generously forthcoming when deserved. But there can be no room for complacency. The airport is doing quite well … but is that enough? Are we all satisfied with 'OK' or would we rather see 'white-hot' [see what I did there?!!!] and 'absolutely on the ball' instead? The criticisms we make highlight very specific areas of the business and they are valid points which MAG would do well to take on board. Can anyone in MAG hold their head up over the botched Cathay Pacific press-launch? David Cameron's misinformed speech is an enduring high-profile embarrassment.
On the North v South issues I believe most here are quite realistic. MAN is not LHR, nor can we expect it to be. But LHR isn't entirely irrelevant to MAN's aspirations. It is still favoured by some bilaterals. The runway capacity situation there means that carriers will cling on to LHR slots for grim death, sometimes resulting in regional services being axed or not developed to their full potential in order to keep LHR flights force-fed. It is unhelpful to obsess over LHR, but it is also unwise to disregard its influence completely. Similarly unhelpful is the perception we see from some commentators that flying BA via LHR is laudable and patriotic, whilst using a direct EK/QR/EY MAN service which supports the NW economy is somehow disloyal. LHR does enjoy considerable political support based on BA's halo and the ingrained belief at Westminster that BA's interests and the national interest are synonymous. Our LHR concerns are legitimate but should not be overplayed. Perspective applies.
I believe that it would be unfair to label regular contributors here as "passionate supporters of the second view [in your post]". Nobody here is suggesting "incompetence and ambivalence" across the board. However, elements of those traits have been evident in very specific areas of MAG's business (which we have identified). MAG has done very well in many respects but it does have room to improve in others. I sincerely hope that MAG's attitude going forward will be one of striving for constant improvement and learning from incidents where the company has fallen short in the past. Because the alternative is to hide behind the excuse that the public are a bunch of clueless numpties who just don't understand what an awesome job we do … so we'll carry on regardless exactly as before. And keep repeating the same mistakes? We can just say we're 'following the most logical commercial strategy for the challenges and risks we face'. That sounds great! David Brent would be proud.
Manchester Airport is not a hotbed of incompetence and ambivalence … far from it. But MAG could do certain specific things much better. Eradicating smugness and complacency is healthy in any company. Strive to be the best. Mistakes have been made in very specific areas of MAG's business (notably engaging with the public). Is it wrong to aspire to see such shortcomings acknowledged and proactively addressed?
Every business makes mistakes. The great ones don't repeat them.
Few contributors here are criticising the entirety of MAG's performance … quite the contrary. Opinion is broadly positive. MAN is back around the 21 million pax per annum mark and could finally overhaul the 2006/7 peak afew months from now. Prestigious new scheduled services have been secured. A balance appears to have been struck between encouraging growth in both the no-frills and legacy sectors. Infrastructure development continues apace, particularly that concerning ground access. Airport City is evolving. Rumours abound of major terminal redevelopment ahead. Of course, not everything is rosy (cargo throughput, engagement with the public) but there is much to applaud and I think most here give credit where it is due. Few on PPRuNe expect MAN to mirror LHR. The airport is performing creditably in many respects and is of huge benefit to the region.
What you do see on here is a desire for MAN to be the best that it can be. In certain areas MAG appears distracted (by STN?) and sometimes complacent. Marketing is a case in point … engagement with the public is a good thing but we see very little of it. Hard-won scheduled services (kudos for attracting them, BTW) have faded away because the public were largely unaware of their existence. Of course, scheduled services do not fail on PR alone (see FlyNas) but a bit of promotional assistance from MAG wouldn't go amiss. It is a cop-out to claim that the carriers alone are responsible for marketing. It is entirely in MAG's interests to ensure that the general public is well-informed concerning the airport's portfolio of operators and destinations. Strong public awareness is mutually beneficial to both MAG and its airline partners.
Let us briefly cite the example of Norwegian Air Shuttle. Here is a carrier which *could* potentially establish a MAN base at some stage. But our well-informed Norwegian friend LN-KGL advises us that the company is despondent over the lack of interest in its offerings from the Manchester end of the operation. Few Brits are booking with them. They even question whether nationalistic prejudices are to blame. Frequencies have been pared right back. Of course, I reckon we on PPRuNe can identify the true problem. I think it can be summarised as: "Fly with who? Never heard of them!" Now if MAG wishes to engage with NAX and help them get the message out to the general public there could be a rich reward at the end of the rainbow. Like a couple of based B738's and possibly a long-haul B787 as well! Is it OK to sit back in a comfy swivel-chair and pronounce that communicating with the customers is "not core" … it is the sole responsibility of the airline. We don't need MBA's to see where that attitude will lead.
The criticisms you do read on this thread are rarely of the blanket 'MAG is rubbish' variety. Quite the opposite … plaudits are generously forthcoming when deserved. But there can be no room for complacency. The airport is doing quite well … but is that enough? Are we all satisfied with 'OK' or would we rather see 'white-hot' [see what I did there?!!!] and 'absolutely on the ball' instead? The criticisms we make highlight very specific areas of the business and they are valid points which MAG would do well to take on board. Can anyone in MAG hold their head up over the botched Cathay Pacific press-launch? David Cameron's misinformed speech is an enduring high-profile embarrassment.
On the North v South issues I believe most here are quite realistic. MAN is not LHR, nor can we expect it to be. But LHR isn't entirely irrelevant to MAN's aspirations. It is still favoured by some bilaterals. The runway capacity situation there means that carriers will cling on to LHR slots for grim death, sometimes resulting in regional services being axed or not developed to their full potential in order to keep LHR flights force-fed. It is unhelpful to obsess over LHR, but it is also unwise to disregard its influence completely. Similarly unhelpful is the perception we see from some commentators that flying BA via LHR is laudable and patriotic, whilst using a direct EK/QR/EY MAN service which supports the NW economy is somehow disloyal. LHR does enjoy considerable political support based on BA's halo and the ingrained belief at Westminster that BA's interests and the national interest are synonymous. Our LHR concerns are legitimate but should not be overplayed. Perspective applies.
I believe that it would be unfair to label regular contributors here as "passionate supporters of the second view [in your post]". Nobody here is suggesting "incompetence and ambivalence" across the board. However, elements of those traits have been evident in very specific areas of MAG's business (which we have identified). MAG has done very well in many respects but it does have room to improve in others. I sincerely hope that MAG's attitude going forward will be one of striving for constant improvement and learning from incidents where the company has fallen short in the past. Because the alternative is to hide behind the excuse that the public are a bunch of clueless numpties who just don't understand what an awesome job we do … so we'll carry on regardless exactly as before. And keep repeating the same mistakes? We can just say we're 'following the most logical commercial strategy for the challenges and risks we face'. That sounds great! David Brent would be proud.
Manchester Airport is not a hotbed of incompetence and ambivalence … far from it. But MAG could do certain specific things much better. Eradicating smugness and complacency is healthy in any company. Strive to be the best. Mistakes have been made in very specific areas of MAG's business (notably engaging with the public). Is it wrong to aspire to see such shortcomings acknowledged and proactively addressed?
Every business makes mistakes. The great ones don't repeat them.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norwegian are big enough to have made a major impact at LGW, there is nothing to say they could not do as well if not better at MAN. I thought they would be the next Aer Lingus, the truth is they're that rarest of things. Something properly new in the market.
However they are over extending themselves and I think they understand that. People will book anyone offering the right frequency and value via any of the usual websites nowadays.
I appear to have a smiley attached to my post. I don't know why!
However they are over extending themselves and I think they understand that. People will book anyone offering the right frequency and value via any of the usual websites nowadays.
I appear to have a smiley attached to my post. I don't know why!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's face it; Norwegian hates to compete against Ryanair and their vocal MOL. Competing against EasyJet is a completely different situation. Therefore the LGW expansion, and not at MAN. Both Norwegian and EasyJet have more than one single dimension, money, and they are the top two on the Skytrax best European LCC 2014 list - Norwegian is even given the title 3rd best LCC in the world after AirAsia and AirAsia X. A Norwegian MAN base you won't see the next years, and I'm sorry to say there are a number of stonger candidates than MAN on their list.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness - You highlight a great point in mentioning that most travellers will happily book the best deal they find online regardless of air carrier. But this is an area where airport PR can really help. Returning to the example of Ryanair's axed flights linking MAN with Tours, I'm sure many of us know people who would greatly enjoy touring the chateaux of the Loire. Unfortunately, relatively few of those people would be inherently aware that Tours was the ideal base for visiting that district. Before people will search for flights to Tours the desire to travel there must first be established. Good airport PR is vital in this education process. Give people a good reason to visit Tours and they will actively consider doing so. Leave them clueless and that flight search will never happen. Clearly, the overseas property-owners' market was insufficient to sustain the route alone. Now that particular opportunity has been lost.
Extending this concept to the NAX situation … how many Mancs are sitting out there thinking: "I must check out leisure fares to Stavanger!" Very few, I suspect. However, if MAG were to put out afew teasers actually educating the public as to why a visit would be a great idea … well, that might just help. Generate travel features in the regional media, arrange occasional competitions etc. Be proactive. Use social media links. If efforts such as this can generate an additional ten passengers per flight (for example), that margin can be the difference between the success and failure of a new route. Proactive engagement with the public. It is worth going for. Naturally, the same principle applies to many other routes. The public generally knows why they wish to fly to Dublin or Malaga; for lesser-known destinations they sometimes require a little help to make up their minds! The airport operator can play a key role in this process.
Of course, regular contributors to PPRuNe are totally familiar with using the internet and wouldn't think twice about booking flights online. But we must remind ourselves that there is still a swathe of people who lack the expertise (or just the confidence) to arrange their own travel online. Many of these will (still) use travel agents. And airports should (still) prioritise keeping them well-informed about their route portfolios also. Generate trip recommendations and the bookings will follow.
I am not a travel agent, but I do help out a good number of friends and neighbours in booking flights online. Knowing these people well, I sometimes suggest destinations they might enjoy visiting, aside from their regular flights to visit family. One lady was quite surprised when I suggested an Icelandair offer to Reykjavik … she and her friend decided to book and absolutely loved the place. They'd never have considered Iceland without that initial prompt. Similarly, I suggested a trip to Keukenhof (tulip gardens) via Amsterdam to some gardening friends. Great success again. BUT … the desire to visit a place MUST be implanted first. The flight search can only follow as 'stage two'. So, in an age where the public are largely left to make their own travel decisions (without professional guidance), airports have a major opportunity to engage with their public and generate interest in their new destinations.
It's actually the classic 'chicken and egg' situation … no desire to visit (awareness deficit) = no search for corresponding flight deals. It has never been more important for airports and airlines to communicate with potential customers and implant that desire to visit those lesser-known leisure destinations, because most of those people no longer consult a travel professional. Yes, they can adeptly fill in the online booking form and select "pay now / confirm". But do they have the expertise to select the destination which would really 'wow' them? Many don't have that knowledge. That is both a challenge and an opportunity for those promoting leisure travel. Let's hope that MAG choose to proactively 'engage' their public rather than abdicating this "non-core" activity to the silent void.
Extending this concept to the NAX situation … how many Mancs are sitting out there thinking: "I must check out leisure fares to Stavanger!" Very few, I suspect. However, if MAG were to put out afew teasers actually educating the public as to why a visit would be a great idea … well, that might just help. Generate travel features in the regional media, arrange occasional competitions etc. Be proactive. Use social media links. If efforts such as this can generate an additional ten passengers per flight (for example), that margin can be the difference between the success and failure of a new route. Proactive engagement with the public. It is worth going for. Naturally, the same principle applies to many other routes. The public generally knows why they wish to fly to Dublin or Malaga; for lesser-known destinations they sometimes require a little help to make up their minds! The airport operator can play a key role in this process.
Of course, regular contributors to PPRuNe are totally familiar with using the internet and wouldn't think twice about booking flights online. But we must remind ourselves that there is still a swathe of people who lack the expertise (or just the confidence) to arrange their own travel online. Many of these will (still) use travel agents. And airports should (still) prioritise keeping them well-informed about their route portfolios also. Generate trip recommendations and the bookings will follow.
I am not a travel agent, but I do help out a good number of friends and neighbours in booking flights online. Knowing these people well, I sometimes suggest destinations they might enjoy visiting, aside from their regular flights to visit family. One lady was quite surprised when I suggested an Icelandair offer to Reykjavik … she and her friend decided to book and absolutely loved the place. They'd never have considered Iceland without that initial prompt. Similarly, I suggested a trip to Keukenhof (tulip gardens) via Amsterdam to some gardening friends. Great success again. BUT … the desire to visit a place MUST be implanted first. The flight search can only follow as 'stage two'. So, in an age where the public are largely left to make their own travel decisions (without professional guidance), airports have a major opportunity to engage with their public and generate interest in their new destinations.
It's actually the classic 'chicken and egg' situation … no desire to visit (awareness deficit) = no search for corresponding flight deals. It has never been more important for airports and airlines to communicate with potential customers and implant that desire to visit those lesser-known leisure destinations, because most of those people no longer consult a travel professional. Yes, they can adeptly fill in the online booking form and select "pay now / confirm". But do they have the expertise to select the destination which would really 'wow' them? Many don't have that knowledge. That is both a challenge and an opportunity for those promoting leisure travel. Let's hope that MAG choose to proactively 'engage' their public rather than abdicating this "non-core" activity to the silent void.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN could start doing something to the booking engine they have on their website. For a specific Friday in August I know both Norwegian and SAS fly to MAN, MAN-SVG does not give any result all. On the airlines websites, DY has one direct flight, SAS has 8 one stop options, BA has 7 one stop options, KLM/Air France has one stop 12 options and Luthansa has 6 one stop options.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But this is an area where airport PR can really help.
Joe Bloggs goes on line, has a favourtite site to look at best prices. A decision is made on "top box consideration" and a booking follows.
Premier customers will have a company travel policy or agent and are more savvy in terms of frequent flier programs. PR is incredibly difficult to quantify. Essentially a lot of the stats you see are not actual lies but as close to being useless as it gets. The moment someone starts talking about "likes" on Facebook then the immediate challenge is great, now monetise it please? You can't put a value on the fluffier stuff as it's not often possible to assign a cause / effect relationship to it. However there are many of my colleagues in the business who believe otherwise and great budgets are given over to Customer Service Indicators and how much people know or feel about a brand.
To which the obvious response is look at Ryanair who got incredibly far without caring. There are some good points made, but airport PR won't much of an impact, that's the reason it usually sits with the customer airline. It's their baby to run with for good reason.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, Skipness … but remember that by the time Joe Bloggs goes online he is typically visiting his favourite site to check best prices to a specific destination which he has ALREADY decided upon. The trick is to reach the customer's consciousness BEFORE the booking stage such that the urge to visit destination XYZ is a consideration. As I mentioned earlier, 'educational' PR will not fill an aircraft. But in a business where the margins delineating success and failure are thin, an extra ten seats sold on a 180-seat aircraft can make the difference between failure and viability.
I take your point about premier customers having access to professional advice or a company travel policy. However, such people are in the minority in the leisure travel sector.
I take your point about premier customers having access to professional advice or a company travel policy. However, such people are in the minority in the leisure travel sector.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MCT
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a contrast between the wide ranging big picture painted by Shed and the blinkered spread-sheet approach of others....I know which I prefer.
Blending these two approaches is what makes a great company where lots of the touchy-feely things that it is difficult or impossible to put a monetary value on are integrated into the business ethos because they are perceived as bringing added value.
And who is travelling on a lot of these flights and routes we've been talking about? Answer in the main -Joe Public. So for example an article about a new destination in the MEN (sorry Bagso!) or other local press or on-line media may trigger people to go and look at that destination in more detail and this may result in a booking. The article may be as a result of taking the journo there, or a paid for advertorial - and this could be jointly funded between the airport and airline. Some of the route development pitches to airlines must surely cover this joint approach. As Shed has said, another 10 bums on seats as a result could mean the difference between a route's success or failure, but these things are difficult to quantify.
But for sure Airport "PR" is an important piece of the package of things which should be done to get the message out to the people making the booking decisions.
Blending these two approaches is what makes a great company where lots of the touchy-feely things that it is difficult or impossible to put a monetary value on are integrated into the business ethos because they are perceived as bringing added value.
And who is travelling on a lot of these flights and routes we've been talking about? Answer in the main -Joe Public. So for example an article about a new destination in the MEN (sorry Bagso!) or other local press or on-line media may trigger people to go and look at that destination in more detail and this may result in a booking. The article may be as a result of taking the journo there, or a paid for advertorial - and this could be jointly funded between the airport and airline. Some of the route development pitches to airlines must surely cover this joint approach. As Shed has said, another 10 bums on seats as a result could mean the difference between a route's success or failure, but these things are difficult to quantify.
But for sure Airport "PR" is an important piece of the package of things which should be done to get the message out to the people making the booking decisions.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Council closes airport access road.... to CUT THE GRASS
Holidaymakers face nightmare delays at Manchester Airport as queues snake into car park ... and council closes road to TRIM THE GRASS 
.... where do they get these people from?
.... where do they get these people from?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North West UK
Age: 69
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Queues
Once is a blip, twice is a co incidence but three times is a trend. There are too many reports of queues at Manchester when the airport is compared with its peers. The function of management is to manage and that includes anticipation of events such as peak volumes. Focus purely on the bottom line and not on quality?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Queues and waiting times.
I don't know about queues for security at LGW but there have been serious complaints about waiting times for bags for flights arriving at night. One report mentioned 2.5 hours with the usual comment about lack of handling agent staff.
Even MAN in the past has managed only 90 minutes in reports I've seen.
That said, MAN's goal shouldn't be to avoid being the worst when it comes to security, or for that matter the airport experience generally, but to seek to be the best. And, as has been said many times, the longer the wait in security, the shorter time for passengers to spend money in the shops and restaurants. What I'm not sure about is to what extent the present building lay-out in the 3 terminals would easily allow for security areas to be extended, even if the airport were prepared to invest in additional equipment and staff.
I don't know about queues for security at LGW but there have been serious complaints about waiting times for bags for flights arriving at night. One report mentioned 2.5 hours with the usual comment about lack of handling agent staff.
Even MAN in the past has managed only 90 minutes in reports I've seen.
That said, MAN's goal shouldn't be to avoid being the worst when it comes to security, or for that matter the airport experience generally, but to seek to be the best. And, as has been said many times, the longer the wait in security, the shorter time for passengers to spend money in the shops and restaurants. What I'm not sure about is to what extent the present building lay-out in the 3 terminals would easily allow for security areas to be extended, even if the airport were prepared to invest in additional equipment and staff.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a contrast between the wide ranging big picture painted by Shed and the blinkered spread-sheet approach of others....I know which I prefer.
e.g. Great creative agency, no data analysis team to provide measurable insight
I disagree btw, I think most people have an idea where they want to go, top box consideration comes from decent prices and deals to one of several destinations they might want to go to. It's basic SEO coupled with a good offering.
Cathay will fill MAN-HKG easily if they sell it in such a way that is is attractive on site against their own LHR offering and the ME3. Again this sits with the airline, a load of twitterings from the social meeja intern at MAG won't do much to change that.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness 1E
I'm glad you recall that you thought Norwegian would be the next Are Lingus at LGW but Manchester is another matter all together, Norwegian started its base at LGW with a strong base of flights to Scandinavia and has built frequency and routes on that, put simply there is nothing like the same demand for flights to Scandinavia from MAN, having said that the loads on the flights they do operate are good.
So to develop a base from there it would mean Med routes up against Monarch, Jet2, easyJet & Ryanair, i have no doubt they could do it but the pricing would be crap, so why bother? 2015 will likely be a year of consolidation for Norwegian, the net delivery position is small next year, so not much recruitment or expansion.
I'd love to be proved wrong but i don't see MAN as a priority, LGW is
So to develop a base from there it would mean Med routes up against Monarch, Jet2, easyJet & Ryanair, i have no doubt they could do it but the pricing would be crap, so why bother? 2015 will likely be a year of consolidation for Norwegian, the net delivery position is small next year, so not much recruitment or expansion.
I'd love to be proved wrong but i don't see MAN as a priority, LGW is
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been surprised at how well DY are doing. I think market presence was zero on non Scandinavian routes but local visibility counts for less and price and reliability count for a lot more. I am genuinely astonished about how they deliver such a good product at a decent price. (My concern was their downward pressure on ts &cs but that's for another thread). Nowadays outwith the loyalty card market people shop around more for a good deal. Hence the USP of DY being quality at a decent price, a la Monarch.
Interesting point ref MAN, the gap might be p2p on the B787 as MAN does have some pretty underserved destinations unsuited to a year round legacy network carrier.
*now I have a fish. What am I doing and how do I make it go away?
Interesting point ref MAN, the gap might be p2p on the B787 as MAN does have some pretty underserved destinations unsuited to a year round legacy network carrier.
*now I have a fish. What am I doing and how do I make it go away?
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 28th Jul 2014 at 20:43.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With respect, Skipness, HKG is one of those high profile destinations where the customer base already knows what to expect. HKG enjoys high public awareness already. Plus that route is not dependent on the impulsive leisure traveler. MAN-HKG will attract business traffic, ethnic / VFR, and customers connecting onwards to points beyond in Asia and Australasia. As with my earlier examples of DUB and AGP, these are destinations with a critical mass of customers who know exactly why they wish to travel there regardless of promotional activity. All that is required is for the public to be informed that the destination is served. There is little need to explain what HKG has to offer and why it is worth a visit.
The scenarios I referred to relate to lesser-understood destinations. This is where the airport has a useful role to play. I cited the examples of Tours and Stavanger, but many other names could fill those slots. You say that people have an idea of where they want to go. Well, that is what they end up with AFTER having learned about the attractions of their preferred choice, either by educating themselves directly (brochures, magazine articles, internet research etc.), or through personal recommendation. Most do not book to visit some random city they know nothing about … some do, but they are very much a minority. The strategy I am putting forward relates to educating the public about these more peripheral destinations. The Blue Lagoon … lots of people will love it there … but only once they know what the heck it is! First must come the awareness of the destination, only then does the desire to visit it arise. Checking prices / deals is a later step in this process. This is where carefully targeted 'educational PR' can generate new demand and give a niche route the opportunity to succeed.
On your general theme, you appear to be arguing that because marketing results are difficult to quantify objectively the best strategy is therefore to do nothing whatsoever. I profoundly disagree with that. I'm certainly not advocating unrestrained runaway budgets … I do actually want to see MAG make money (!!!) … but targeted spend does have a positive role to play. It may be challenging to quantify the results of marketing spend, but it must be borne in mind that inaction bears costs of its own. Part of this takes the form of routes which may have worked out with a bit of effort expended in informing the public (eg. Tours). And then there is also a cost (difficult to measure again) in the form of relationships with airlines which may come to believe that the airport doesn't care whether their programme succeeds or fails. From what LN-KGL tells us, it sounds like NAX is in no hurry to extend its relationship with MAN. Do you think that receiving zero visible support in getting their message out to the marketplace might have influenced their thinking slightly? There are plenty of hungry airports out there which are prepared to go the extra mile if MAN can't be bothered. I hope that MAG will see the sense of pursuing the more constructive course rather than adopting the strategy you advocate which simply uses pure Brentspeak to justify permanent inaction.
EDIT: This posting was made in response to message #3619. The two additional NAX postings were yet to appear when this was composed. Regards.
The scenarios I referred to relate to lesser-understood destinations. This is where the airport has a useful role to play. I cited the examples of Tours and Stavanger, but many other names could fill those slots. You say that people have an idea of where they want to go. Well, that is what they end up with AFTER having learned about the attractions of their preferred choice, either by educating themselves directly (brochures, magazine articles, internet research etc.), or through personal recommendation. Most do not book to visit some random city they know nothing about … some do, but they are very much a minority. The strategy I am putting forward relates to educating the public about these more peripheral destinations. The Blue Lagoon … lots of people will love it there … but only once they know what the heck it is! First must come the awareness of the destination, only then does the desire to visit it arise. Checking prices / deals is a later step in this process. This is where carefully targeted 'educational PR' can generate new demand and give a niche route the opportunity to succeed.
On your general theme, you appear to be arguing that because marketing results are difficult to quantify objectively the best strategy is therefore to do nothing whatsoever. I profoundly disagree with that. I'm certainly not advocating unrestrained runaway budgets … I do actually want to see MAG make money (!!!) … but targeted spend does have a positive role to play. It may be challenging to quantify the results of marketing spend, but it must be borne in mind that inaction bears costs of its own. Part of this takes the form of routes which may have worked out with a bit of effort expended in informing the public (eg. Tours). And then there is also a cost (difficult to measure again) in the form of relationships with airlines which may come to believe that the airport doesn't care whether their programme succeeds or fails. From what LN-KGL tells us, it sounds like NAX is in no hurry to extend its relationship with MAN. Do you think that receiving zero visible support in getting their message out to the marketplace might have influenced their thinking slightly? There are plenty of hungry airports out there which are prepared to go the extra mile if MAN can't be bothered. I hope that MAG will see the sense of pursuing the more constructive course rather than adopting the strategy you advocate which simply uses pure Brentspeak to justify permanent inaction.
EDIT: This posting was made in response to message #3619. The two additional NAX postings were yet to appear when this was composed. Regards.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MCT
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you mean me, and I hope you don't, that's unfair. Try running any business without a spreadsheet and see what happens. Typically empire building in a business takes hold and people put in bids for large marketing projects with lots of staff, talk about visibility and CSI, awareness, social media etc. None of which comes cheap, so at some point you have to show a causal link between your activity and an acceptable goal, incremental sales, uplift or other KPI. What happens a lot is no one really measures the activity properly and a lot of faffing about ensues with lots of people being terribly busy having little effect. This means you have lost control of your costs and you can't attribute a measurable benefit against each specific activity.
And you're right - measurement is very difficult but can be done but the measurement costs and is often one of the first things to be chopped. A good management team is able to navigate a way forward, understand these unquantifiable features and benefits to the business and proceed with certain appropriate measures accordingly.
And of course empire building is frequently found which does no good at all and this often produces "silo management" where co-ordination and the big picture is lost.
Anyway on to more practical things - grass cutting. Here's an extract from the Evening News...
Manchester council insisted that grass-cutting was only one of the tasks that took place and that other agencies had been consulted.
A spokesman said: “These are essential works, which have taken place over a few weekends, to ensure the area is safe.
“They includes inspecting and replacing necessary signage and lighting and are not limited to clearing overgrown vegetation.
“These works have been planned with the airport management group and working closely with the Highways Agency. My emphasis.
Seems to me that there was no understanding of the impact here. End result - the airport gets more bad publicity. Oh dear.
Full story here
Manchester Airport: Council closed part of M56 to Manchester Airport on busiest weekend of year so far... to cut the grass - Manchester Evening News
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you appear to be arguing that because marketing results are difficult to quantify objectively the best strategy is therefore to do nothing whatsoever.
There's been a lot of words on this subject, but few relevant numbers I think.
95%+ of the time, it's all about the spreadsheets. It really, really is, as one bad year can kill almost any commercial airline.
But there important features of any business which is hard to quantify and some companies are ruled by people who purely look at the hard figures and sometimes big opportunities are missed.
And you're right - measurement is very difficult but can be done but the measurement costs and is often one of the first things to be chopped. A good management team is able to navigate a way forward, understand these unquantifiable features and benefits to the business and proceed with certain appropriate measures accordingly.
And you're right - measurement is very difficult but can be done but the measurement costs and is often one of the first things to be chopped. A good management team is able to navigate a way forward, understand these unquantifiable features and benefits to the business and proceed with certain appropriate measures accordingly.
that ship sailed in the 90s....