MANCHESTER 1
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks to all who posted feedback on my earlier remarks. Some follow-ups:
Turtlecontroller: Welcome back! I see that single-digit percentage growth equates to "imminent doom" over there in Troll-land. I'll keep that in mind :-)
LAX_LHR: Thought provoking posts, as always a good read. I suspect that our different interpretations of the outlook is a function of the respective ways in which we assess the data. You seem to base your conclusions on the breadth of operators and new route announcements; I tend to calculate and contrast the raw seat numbers from one season to the next.
Just a couple of points concerning Ryanair to explain why they are so crucial to this calculation. A single based RYR B738 operating an active summer programme of around 24 departures weekly (48 movements) represents around 9000 seats per week. Contrast this with the proposed Hainan Airlines service which we're all keeping our fingers tightly crossed for. An A332 configured with 222 seats offers 1776 seats per week based on 8 movements (4x Dep, 4x Arr). A bit more maths informs us that we require five new services on the scale of Hainan A/L to equal the raw weekly passenger throughput of a single based RYR B738. Now recall that we were hoping for three additional RYR units just weeks ago. Can you see where the damage to potential growth is coming from? New operators such as Hainan bring great prestige to MAN, but a based RYR B738 brings consistent high passenger volumes through the door.
By the way, sticking with Ryanair, they actually dropped two routes for S15 (Bremen 3x W, Trapani 2x W). Not a vast amount, but they all count. I believe we have a net gain of two routes from them.
I note your other point about alternative based units, and yes, I do take account of these (and celebrate their presence!). However, an aircraft such as the Enter Air B734(?) won't be used anything like as intensively as a RYR B738. Do you know how many MAN departures per week it will offer ... I understand its doing some 'W' patterns through BHX as well? Moving on to Jet2, and their additional based unit also offers much lower utilisation. And it appears that the proposed A333 programme will now revert to a B752 operation (botheration, I booked on that one as well!!!). Hopefully the additional based EasyJet will at least offer high utilisation. Thomas Cook and FlyBe utilisation ... discuss. Then slot handbacks have to be factored in, as well as late equipment changes (gains from incoming UAE A388, ADR A319 etc.; losses from dropped EXS A333, ETD B77W etc.).
I agree completely with your assertion that offering a broad range of carriers across all market segments is a very healthy thing for MAN. But that doesn't alter the maths discussed above. In summary, I'm not trying to make a "negative case". However, I do stand by my suggestion that we should not anticipate a "swashbuckling summer". My outlook calls for modest growth.
MANFOD: Hallelujah! Finally, one other regular poster 'gets it'! The critical role Ryanair represents in MAN's future growth prospects, that is. I'd rather hoped that more regulars here would be grasping the significance of the 'Ryanair factor'. And the importance of upgrading the short-term infrastructure needed to keep them growing at MAN. If Ryanair at MAN goes ex-growth we've got a huge problem.
North West: Posting seat comparisons would answer some questions as you say. But aren't we talking about privileged data?
Regards to all from 'The Usual Suspect'. (Nice ring to that name, don't you think?).
Turtlecontroller: Welcome back! I see that single-digit percentage growth equates to "imminent doom" over there in Troll-land. I'll keep that in mind :-)
LAX_LHR: Thought provoking posts, as always a good read. I suspect that our different interpretations of the outlook is a function of the respective ways in which we assess the data. You seem to base your conclusions on the breadth of operators and new route announcements; I tend to calculate and contrast the raw seat numbers from one season to the next.
Just a couple of points concerning Ryanair to explain why they are so crucial to this calculation. A single based RYR B738 operating an active summer programme of around 24 departures weekly (48 movements) represents around 9000 seats per week. Contrast this with the proposed Hainan Airlines service which we're all keeping our fingers tightly crossed for. An A332 configured with 222 seats offers 1776 seats per week based on 8 movements (4x Dep, 4x Arr). A bit more maths informs us that we require five new services on the scale of Hainan A/L to equal the raw weekly passenger throughput of a single based RYR B738. Now recall that we were hoping for three additional RYR units just weeks ago. Can you see where the damage to potential growth is coming from? New operators such as Hainan bring great prestige to MAN, but a based RYR B738 brings consistent high passenger volumes through the door.
By the way, sticking with Ryanair, they actually dropped two routes for S15 (Bremen 3x W, Trapani 2x W). Not a vast amount, but they all count. I believe we have a net gain of two routes from them.
I note your other point about alternative based units, and yes, I do take account of these (and celebrate their presence!). However, an aircraft such as the Enter Air B734(?) won't be used anything like as intensively as a RYR B738. Do you know how many MAN departures per week it will offer ... I understand its doing some 'W' patterns through BHX as well? Moving on to Jet2, and their additional based unit also offers much lower utilisation. And it appears that the proposed A333 programme will now revert to a B752 operation (botheration, I booked on that one as well!!!). Hopefully the additional based EasyJet will at least offer high utilisation. Thomas Cook and FlyBe utilisation ... discuss. Then slot handbacks have to be factored in, as well as late equipment changes (gains from incoming UAE A388, ADR A319 etc.; losses from dropped EXS A333, ETD B77W etc.).
I agree completely with your assertion that offering a broad range of carriers across all market segments is a very healthy thing for MAN. But that doesn't alter the maths discussed above. In summary, I'm not trying to make a "negative case". However, I do stand by my suggestion that we should not anticipate a "swashbuckling summer". My outlook calls for modest growth.
MANFOD: Hallelujah! Finally, one other regular poster 'gets it'! The critical role Ryanair represents in MAN's future growth prospects, that is. I'd rather hoped that more regulars here would be grasping the significance of the 'Ryanair factor'. And the importance of upgrading the short-term infrastructure needed to keep them growing at MAN. If Ryanair at MAN goes ex-growth we've got a huge problem.
North West: Posting seat comparisons would answer some questions as you say. But aren't we talking about privileged data?
Regards to all from 'The Usual Suspect'. (Nice ring to that name, don't you think?).
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South of MAN, North of BHX, and well clear of Stoke ;-)
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the rumblings that United is to upguage EWR to a B76W after summer, it wouldn't surprise me if we bade farewell to Delta.
Once Virgin take over ATL, I can't see Delta maintaining an operation for the New York, which always seems to have struggled for them and has always been seasonal.
Once Virgin take over ATL, I can't see Delta maintaining an operation for the New York, which always seems to have struggled for them and has always been seasonal.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Stockport
Age: 69
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the airlines handling agents etc etc have to contacted first with information on how they will be affected during and after work and replies with any queries before it is finalised THEN as long as all the plans are signed off with all the authorities something can be said.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Near Stockport UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair, they actually dropped two routes for S15 (Bremen 3x W, Trapani 2x
W).
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Near Stockport UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a lot of talk about the reduction in Monarch movements / equipment. I read somewhere a couple of months ago that there were rumours that there may be some financial problems at Monarch.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monarch are expecting to make a good profit this year....
Monarch Airline Expects to Post Profit This Year - WSJ
Monarch Airline Expects to Post Profit This Year - WSJ
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ian, love your enthusiasm, but look at all the better airports in the world, this process should have started at least 3, maybe even 5 years ago. From what you are saying we are probably years away from this starting. Decision by Committee, LHR Runway 3 come to mind?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Stockport
Age: 69
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BDLBOS
MAG have said there would be an announcement early this year
and we are only in February, there are plans but I believe they have been completely revamped so it`s not enthusiasm it`s reality.
Whatver happens a lot of disruption is going to happen for quite a while so it has to be right with everyone.
MAG have said there would be an announcement early this year
and we are only in February, there are plans but I believe they have been completely revamped so it`s not enthusiasm it`s reality.
Whatver happens a lot of disruption is going to happen for quite a while so it has to be right with everyone.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the road
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really Bagso, as it depends on what the spokesperson is referring to. There can often be a wide variation between what the runway capacity is and what the current terminal capacity can currently cope with. MAN is already maxed out at certain times of day due to terminal constraints. Plenty of room on the runways for take offs and landings though...
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ian
I really hope you are right, but I must confess it may have passed me by but I havn't seen ANY reference other than here about terminal changes/expansion, certainly nothing from MAG.
Is this commitment to a mid Feb announcement referenced anywhere in the media ?
I hasten to add I am not being picky, it is a genuine question, I "thought" we were relying on well informed insider knowledge , which the rest of us outside the perimeter are really hoping proves correct.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
On a wider note is it not an odd juxtaposition that one week a MAG spokesperson suggests capacity is a "spectacular" 55m whilst then presumably suggesting to shareholders the need to raise significant funds to reconfigure the terminals .....
....essentially to accommodate the dozen or so RYRs first thing in the morning ?
Lord knows we need the expansion and reconfiguration and most of us on here would see the benefit but how will this be sold to said shareholders ?
Skippy
To reiterate I was merely making the observation !
"that the main plank of BackHeathrow and indeed the Airport Commission review was the NECCESSITY to connect to Heathrow".
Little Red have almost gone and BA retracting are frequency.
It is silly to suggest that I was intimating that we would want to lose all BA flights to Heathrow replacing these with directs Ex MAN, but the fact remains that when I did maths before leaving school, the calculated loss in terms of Little Red and 1 BA flight a day represents a circa 30% decrease in capacity to the main hub, or am I missing something ?
Either demand is not there OR passengers are using other hubs to connect.
I noticed the term "masses going on behind the scenes " has on some forums morphed into IAG rather than just Vueling.
Are they somehow going to use Vueling in a much wider sense than we ever imagined to address leakage to other airlines ex MAN ?
I really hope you are right, but I must confess it may have passed me by but I havn't seen ANY reference other than here about terminal changes/expansion, certainly nothing from MAG.
Is this commitment to a mid Feb announcement referenced anywhere in the media ?
I hasten to add I am not being picky, it is a genuine question, I "thought" we were relying on well informed insider knowledge , which the rest of us outside the perimeter are really hoping proves correct.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
On a wider note is it not an odd juxtaposition that one week a MAG spokesperson suggests capacity is a "spectacular" 55m whilst then presumably suggesting to shareholders the need to raise significant funds to reconfigure the terminals .....
....essentially to accommodate the dozen or so RYRs first thing in the morning ?
Lord knows we need the expansion and reconfiguration and most of us on here would see the benefit but how will this be sold to said shareholders ?
Skippy
To reiterate I was merely making the observation !
"that the main plank of BackHeathrow and indeed the Airport Commission review was the NECCESSITY to connect to Heathrow".
Little Red have almost gone and BA retracting are frequency.
It is silly to suggest that I was intimating that we would want to lose all BA flights to Heathrow replacing these with directs Ex MAN, but the fact remains that when I did maths before leaving school, the calculated loss in terms of Little Red and 1 BA flight a day represents a circa 30% decrease in capacity to the main hub, or am I missing something ?
Either demand is not there OR passengers are using other hubs to connect.
I noticed the term "masses going on behind the scenes " has on some forums morphed into IAG rather than just Vueling.
Are they somehow going to use Vueling in a much wider sense than we ever imagined to address leakage to other airlines ex MAN ?
Last edited by Bagso; 22nd Feb 2015 at 13:02.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bramhall
Age: 50
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shed. For once you haven't said enough!!! What is modest growth and what is "swashbuckling" growth? I would say less than 5% is modest and greater than 10% swashbuckling. MAN would seem to be set for 7-10% or do you consider this modest? If so we agree. If you wish to reply a short to the point response would be fantastic.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts