MANCHESTER 1
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the M.E.N article on December figures
Manchester Airport edges nearer to 22m passengers goal after busiest December ever - Manchester Evening News
Manchester Airport edges nearer to 22m passengers goal after busiest December ever - Manchester Evening News
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still 40% down on the figures of 37-39 million they forecast in their "revised" business plan. How heads haven't rolled for missing targets or even allowing such forecasts go be in a report I find amazing. There is no way they could have carried 37m fact!
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heard rumours that both American flights to JFK and ORD will be operated on the 767 this summer.
Not rumours, confirmed and bookable on all platforms. Has been for about 2 months.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lexoncd - The individuals involved in presenting the ancient forecasts you refer to have moved on long ago. Do you believe that current managers should be vilified for inaccurate estimates provided by predecessors long departed?
Besides, an accurate forecast is extraordinarily difficult to achieve. May I ask in which year YOU forecast that the 2008 banking crisis would happen? How long in advance did YOU forecast the Arab Spring, crises in Iraq/Syria/Ukraine etc and the fallout from these? Can you show us YOUR forecast in which you foretold in advance the spectacular growth trajectory of upstart airlines such as Ryanair and EasyJet? And where did YOU point out ahead of time that such carriers would breathe new life into forgotten third-level regional airports at the expense of the majors?
If you expect 'heads to roll' amongst those who failed to foresee all these developments you will find nobody left alive to fill the posts left behind. Except for you. Clearly, you knew how things would pan out all along. You just 'forgot' to share it with the rest of us, perhaps?
Besides, an accurate forecast is extraordinarily difficult to achieve. May I ask in which year YOU forecast that the 2008 banking crisis would happen? How long in advance did YOU forecast the Arab Spring, crises in Iraq/Syria/Ukraine etc and the fallout from these? Can you show us YOUR forecast in which you foretold in advance the spectacular growth trajectory of upstart airlines such as Ryanair and EasyJet? And where did YOU point out ahead of time that such carriers would breathe new life into forgotten third-level regional airports at the expense of the majors?
If you expect 'heads to roll' amongst those who failed to foresee all these developments you will find nobody left alive to fill the posts left behind. Except for you. Clearly, you knew how things would pan out all along. You just 'forgot' to share it with the rest of us, perhaps?
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saw this on the Ryanair thread from yesterday, a tweet:
Anything come of this?
@Kenny_Jacobs: We announce something special in Dublin tomorrow. Bring the candles but no presents required. Then onto Manchester and Amsterdam
Anything come of this?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear dear shed on a pole you really do need to go and have a lie down old chap. I'm worried your blood pressure mAy have gone through the roof.
Specifically I refer to the revised forecasts after the second runway was opened.. This was when they realised they had used such optimistic figures that quite honestly bore no possibility of being attained.
If we look at the terminal expansion plans, rail expansion plans, road network then again the airport wouldn't have been able to handle the stated throughput that they themselves forecasted.
Imagine how the figures would be without Ryanair? So you think the "crash" of 2008 excuses highly paid people from being held accountable now? Do you not think it should be a cause of future concern when looking at maplc statements as to their future growth.. As a former director of a transport group including a low cost airline I think I have some validity in exposing the myth that manchester airport is doing exceptionally well especially as we consider that Gatwick handled 37m on one runway..
Cheerio shed...
Specifically I refer to the revised forecasts after the second runway was opened.. This was when they realised they had used such optimistic figures that quite honestly bore no possibility of being attained.
If we look at the terminal expansion plans, rail expansion plans, road network then again the airport wouldn't have been able to handle the stated throughput that they themselves forecasted.
Imagine how the figures would be without Ryanair? So you think the "crash" of 2008 excuses highly paid people from being held accountable now? Do you not think it should be a cause of future concern when looking at maplc statements as to their future growth.. As a former director of a transport group including a low cost airline I think I have some validity in exposing the myth that manchester airport is doing exceptionally well especially as we consider that Gatwick handled 37m on one runway..
Cheerio shed...
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lexoncd -
My blood pressure is just fine thanks, young dude. However, I do worry for those individuals who post rants calling for all and sundry to be dismissed from their jobs. For having an inability to foretell the long-term future, of all things!
Addressing the content you have now added to your argument, MAN does not have the capacity to handle the numbers you put forward because the need to provide it never arose. It seems eminently sensible to me not to throw funds at 'white elephant' terminal capacity and supporting infrastructure in the absence of any requirement for it.
Why would we wish to imagine the figures without Ryanair? They are there. Should we consider the figures without Thomson, FlyBe and Etihad too? Or maybe we should select afew other random names to ignore?
Do I believe that executives working for Manchester Airport should be excused for failing to take account of a global banking derivatives meltdown ahead of it's occurrence? In a word, YES. Absolutely. Well you did ask.
As for long-term forecasts (about anything) being unreliable, I think we're all quite well aware of that. Soothsaying is only ever possible on a 'best endeavour' basis, and in your former role as a director one presumes you would understand that concept?
As for Gatwick's performance, well done them. What has that got to do with anything?
By the way, feel free to post next week's winning lottery numbers later this evening. We'd all appreciate it. But some may call for your head to roll if you get them wrong!
Cheerio lexoncd ...
My blood pressure is just fine thanks, young dude. However, I do worry for those individuals who post rants calling for all and sundry to be dismissed from their jobs. For having an inability to foretell the long-term future, of all things!
Addressing the content you have now added to your argument, MAN does not have the capacity to handle the numbers you put forward because the need to provide it never arose. It seems eminently sensible to me not to throw funds at 'white elephant' terminal capacity and supporting infrastructure in the absence of any requirement for it.
Why would we wish to imagine the figures without Ryanair? They are there. Should we consider the figures without Thomson, FlyBe and Etihad too? Or maybe we should select afew other random names to ignore?
Do I believe that executives working for Manchester Airport should be excused for failing to take account of a global banking derivatives meltdown ahead of it's occurrence? In a word, YES. Absolutely. Well you did ask.
As for long-term forecasts (about anything) being unreliable, I think we're all quite well aware of that. Soothsaying is only ever possible on a 'best endeavour' basis, and in your former role as a director one presumes you would understand that concept?
As for Gatwick's performance, well done them. What has that got to do with anything?
By the way, feel free to post next week's winning lottery numbers later this evening. We'd all appreciate it. But some may call for your head to roll if you get them wrong!
Cheerio lexoncd ...
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Addressing the content you have now added to your argument, MAN does not have the capacity to handle the numbers you put forward because the need to provide it never arose. It seems eminently sensible to me not to throw funds at 'white elephant' terminal capacity and supporting infrastructure in the absence of any requirement for it.
The comparison with LGW is relevant as MAN was also forecast to actually overtake Gatwick as early as 2012!
Second runway lets Manchester rival Gatwick | UK news | The Guardian
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear shed on a pole we can see why you're not running an organisation. The basic premis of any organisation is to plan the growth of the business taking account of known factors and making assumptions allowing for a "degree" of error.. From the first master plan proposing the second runway maplc have been out on their forecasts by a magnitude not acceptable in other normal commercial organisations.. Just look at the fall in share prices of some of the leading retailers who miss growth figures by 3%byet we are looking at a continual failure to hit any targets EVEN those figures prior to 2008 that you constantly bleat on about.
if we follow your logic to its usual conclusion the nobody should plan anything after all by planning for growth or decline resources and finances are planned accordingly. Even communist regimes had five year plans.
My observation on Gatwick is to show what they have achieved over a similar period.. Do keep up..
Do look up the actual documents for verification of the facts stated.
In summary manchester may think it's performing well yet there is evidence of other airports with higher growth figures even in turbulent times. Thee are of course worse performers but 22 million is far from 39 million and if only now the fourth railway platform is to open and you look at what infrastructure was proposed in the same documents thT soecifically state 39 million then I stste again it wasn't possible with the investment plans.. As directors ultimate responsibility is to shareholders if further shows the lack of accountability at maplc compared to other normally structured plc's.
As again board director I worked on 10-15 year investment proposals on passenger figures so yes I do have some knowledge on planning.
In respect of the lottery numbers sorry old chap I prefer equities for my funds.. Did rather well on Iag in 2011 at £1.34 too.
if we follow your logic to its usual conclusion the nobody should plan anything after all by planning for growth or decline resources and finances are planned accordingly. Even communist regimes had five year plans.
My observation on Gatwick is to show what they have achieved over a similar period.. Do keep up..
Do look up the actual documents for verification of the facts stated.
In summary manchester may think it's performing well yet there is evidence of other airports with higher growth figures even in turbulent times. Thee are of course worse performers but 22 million is far from 39 million and if only now the fourth railway platform is to open and you look at what infrastructure was proposed in the same documents thT soecifically state 39 million then I stste again it wasn't possible with the investment plans.. As directors ultimate responsibility is to shareholders if further shows the lack of accountability at maplc compared to other normally structured plc's.
As again board director I worked on 10-15 year investment proposals on passenger figures so yes I do have some knowledge on planning.
In respect of the lottery numbers sorry old chap I prefer equities for my funds.. Did rather well on Iag in 2011 at £1.34 too.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Stockport
Age: 69
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
God help us Lexoncd if you ran the airport as there would be no staff
staying to work for it, it is you who need the chill pill and get off your high horse.
Gatwick is a very different beast than MAN as is LHR and too an extent
recession proof, but even their market has changed with Easyjet now taking the lions share whereas MAN has actually got fingers in a lot of pies and not reliant on just one. The recession actually cost Manchester
4.5 million passengers most of which were holiday makers which has taken 8 years to claw back but the burden of apd which also happens
to effect holidays more than business so it has been a double edged sword. How many airports have actually gone out of business or are struggling to survive, I can think of 3 shut and at least 5 that may not be open in a couple of years.
staying to work for it, it is you who need the chill pill and get off your high horse.
Gatwick is a very different beast than MAN as is LHR and too an extent
recession proof, but even their market has changed with Easyjet now taking the lions share whereas MAN has actually got fingers in a lot of pies and not reliant on just one. The recession actually cost Manchester
4.5 million passengers most of which were holiday makers which has taken 8 years to claw back but the burden of apd which also happens
to effect holidays more than business so it has been a double edged sword. How many airports have actually gone out of business or are struggling to survive, I can think of 3 shut and at least 5 that may not be open in a couple of years.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Usually in a bar!
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lexoncd
You appear to have fairly big anger issues with Manchester Airport.
The airport is successful in terms of growth and profits, bearing in mind it's had to claw back a lot of passengers that were lost post world financial meltdown.
Had that not happened I have no doubt it would have a throughput higher than it currently does but certainly not in the Gatwick territory.
The projections for future growth are always going to be difficult and in some cases are clearly way off the mark.
All airports are guilty to some degree of massaging the potential passenger figures and in the case of Manchester they were bold to say the least. However the airport has proved and is proving to be a success and can offer a great deal of connectivity for many millions in the North.
The fact it hasn't got 37-39 Million passing through the terminals is now irrelevant.
Airlines see it as very viable and the numbers of passengers using it will continue to climb. Whether it's Ryanair or Cathay Pacific it all equals more passengers/profit and more access for businesses and individuals alike whether inbound or outbound.
You appear to have fairly big anger issues with Manchester Airport.
The airport is successful in terms of growth and profits, bearing in mind it's had to claw back a lot of passengers that were lost post world financial meltdown.
Had that not happened I have no doubt it would have a throughput higher than it currently does but certainly not in the Gatwick territory.
The projections for future growth are always going to be difficult and in some cases are clearly way off the mark.
All airports are guilty to some degree of massaging the potential passenger figures and in the case of Manchester they were bold to say the least. However the airport has proved and is proving to be a success and can offer a great deal of connectivity for many millions in the North.
The fact it hasn't got 37-39 Million passing through the terminals is now irrelevant.
Airlines see it as very viable and the numbers of passengers using it will continue to climb. Whether it's Ryanair or Cathay Pacific it all equals more passengers/profit and more access for businesses and individuals alike whether inbound or outbound.
Last edited by Homo Simpson; 13th Jan 2015 at 22:49.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear lexoncd, we can see why you feel the need to convince everybody that you're Mr Big. I note your new list of claims purporting to put me straight on issues which I have never raised. In the context of this discussion I have ventured no opinion on whether MAN is doing "well" or "badly". I have not discussed retailers (though I could). I have not discussed Gatwick (though I could). Do keep up! You are trying to shift the arguments to new territory so you can recover some lost dignity following your initial childish rant. Sorry, I'm not buying in to your little game.
You have made a complete fool of yourself calling for "heads to roll" amongst Manchester Airport managers who inherited forecasts which failed to accurately predict the impact of future geopolitical events. I rightly pointed out the absurdity of your stance. Suddenly, you pull out of the air the notion that I am arguing with you about the track record of Gatwick. Keep up? You make it up as you go along. Who do you think you are impressing with your boasts about directorships and doing "rather well" on shares? Maybe others here could make claims of their own but have the good sense not to brag in a distasteful manner.
I'm not taking your bait to argue all manner of newly introduced 'red herring' points which divert the agenda. Nowhere do I 'bleat on' about MAN's 'continual failure to hit targets' before 2008 or at any other time. During our exchange I have not ventured any opinion on this. The topic is the reliability of long-term forecasting in a business context. You now acknowledge the need to take account of known factors and assumptions and to allow for a degree of error. You present this as if I have opposed such notions. Not so. It is you who has ranted that heads should roll because MAG managers of long ago failed to accurately forecast the impact of future geopolitical events. I have championed from the outset the need to view long-term business forecasts with extreme caution. Plan for the future, yes, but with total comprehension that forecasts concerning the health of the global economy years hence can only be wildly speculative. That's fundamental common sense where I come from. Do keep up!
So ... when you were a board director ... did you sack all YOUR senior managers for not forecasting the effects of 9/11 before 9/11 occurred? How about the CDO derivatives crisis? LTCM? Asian currency crisis? SARS? Or is it just Manchester Airport management who should all be sacked for not taking full account of these events before they happened?
You have made a complete fool of yourself calling for "heads to roll" amongst Manchester Airport managers who inherited forecasts which failed to accurately predict the impact of future geopolitical events. I rightly pointed out the absurdity of your stance. Suddenly, you pull out of the air the notion that I am arguing with you about the track record of Gatwick. Keep up? You make it up as you go along. Who do you think you are impressing with your boasts about directorships and doing "rather well" on shares? Maybe others here could make claims of their own but have the good sense not to brag in a distasteful manner.
I'm not taking your bait to argue all manner of newly introduced 'red herring' points which divert the agenda. Nowhere do I 'bleat on' about MAN's 'continual failure to hit targets' before 2008 or at any other time. During our exchange I have not ventured any opinion on this. The topic is the reliability of long-term forecasting in a business context. You now acknowledge the need to take account of known factors and assumptions and to allow for a degree of error. You present this as if I have opposed such notions. Not so. It is you who has ranted that heads should roll because MAG managers of long ago failed to accurately forecast the impact of future geopolitical events. I have championed from the outset the need to view long-term business forecasts with extreme caution. Plan for the future, yes, but with total comprehension that forecasts concerning the health of the global economy years hence can only be wildly speculative. That's fundamental common sense where I come from. Do keep up!
So ... when you were a board director ... did you sack all YOUR senior managers for not forecasting the effects of 9/11 before 9/11 occurred? How about the CDO derivatives crisis? LTCM? Asian currency crisis? SARS? Or is it just Manchester Airport management who should all be sacked for not taking full account of these events before they happened?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cost of the second runway was £172m. I would suggest it's paid for itself already !
You may wish to pop over to the Heathrow and Gatwick threads where the cost down there are estimated not in millions but "billions".
3billion at Gatwick and 6billion at Heathrow. Those are eye watering figures.
By comparison the Manchester expansion was peanuts and might by many observers accounts be a shrewd and very cost effective piece of investment.
You may wish to pop over to the Heathrow and Gatwick threads where the cost down there are estimated not in millions but "billions".
3billion at Gatwick and 6billion at Heathrow. Those are eye watering figures.
By comparison the Manchester expansion was peanuts and might by many observers accounts be a shrewd and very cost effective piece of investment.