MANCHESTER 1

[roverman]

Originally Posted by j636

D Dobbo

Forgive me for not understanding but surly the CAA stats for both legs include those routing SIN-IAH and MAN-IAH and vice versa.

Can you tell from IAH figures published that the 3000 marked as IAH-SIN dosnt include MAN traffic?

The route makes no sense for SQ if they are bad as this unless there is some business contract at play.

Not looked at the websites where the figures are located but way I read is, its more less 50/50 IAH to SIN and MAN if you look at the 3,000 figure and the 6,000 for MAN-IAH figure.

Although I know that the MAN traffic on this whole route is pretty healthy the figures Dobbo quoted from the IAH source look a bit odd. Transit and double-tagged routes are always potentially misleading in terms of load factor because you can't assume the airline allocates the seats 50/50 or any other ratio necessarily. CAA stats always deal with terminating or transferring pax at UK airports, those in transit i.e. SIN-IAH through MAN on the same aircraft are not assigned to MAN's figures.

[MANFOD]

The way I read Dobbo's figures for June was that the total pax on board between MAN & SIN was made up of 158 getting on or disembarking at MAN and 72 through pax SIN-IAH & IAH-SIN.
Likewise, MAN-IAH total is 220 comprising the same 72 through pax and 148 for the MAN-IAH sectors.

So if the a/c seat capacity is 253, then the LF's for the total pax on each sector is correct.

It has been said that SQ have been offering some cheap fares on MAN-IAH. Whether that was to stimulate demand after the low figures in the early months or whether those low fares are still available I'm not sure. But low fares can mean poor yields. However freight may be another important ingredient.

Just an afterthought on this: The CAA stats as roverman points out will only include pax getting on or off at MAN for the SIN & IAH sectors and those numbers broadly reflect the 158 &148 loads above. However, it did cross my mind whether there could be an element of double counting of the 72 transit pax if you simply added together the 2 segments of the route each way to arrive at the overall carryings on the route. I doubt this happens though.

[roverman]

Originally Posted by MANFOD

The way I read Dobbo's figures for June was that the total pax on board between MAN & SIN was made up of 158 getting on or disembarking at MAN and 72 through pax SIN-IAH & IAH-SIN.
Likewise, MAN-IAH total is 220 comprising the same 72 through pax and 148 for the MAN-IAH sectors.

So if the a/c seat capacity is 253, then the LF's for the total pax on each sector is correct.

It has been said that SQ have been offering some cheap fares on MAN-IAH. Whether that was to stimulate demand after the low figures in the early months or whether those low fares are still available I'm not sure. But low fares can mean poor yields. However freight may be another important ingredient.

Just an afterthought on this: The CAA stats as roverman points out will only include pax getting on or off at MAN for the SIN & IAH sectors and those numbers broadly reflect the 158 &148 loads above. However, it did cross my mind whether there could be an element of double counting of the 72 transit pax if you simply added together the 2 segments of the route each way to arrive at the overall carryings on the route. I doubt this happens though.

There's a risk that this topic could get boring but I think we're all interested in SQ's view of MAN as a commercially successful destination, and having made various changes to the way they have served MAN over 31 years, what might be their strategy going forward. So what we are trying to tease out is the LFs applying to MAN specifically rather than to the whole SIN-MAN-IAH route. And that's what is tricky unless you take a nominal 50/50 seats assigned to each city, which is probably not how it is sold. Revenues and yields are another factor of course. My view is that MAN is strong here and is pulling in transfer traffic to both SIN and IAH through its multitude of UK domestic and EU connections.

[Dobbo_Dobbo]

Originally Posted by MANFOD

The way I read Dobbo's figures for June was that the total pax on board between MAN & SIN was made up of 158 getting on or disembarking at MAN and 72 through pax SIN-IAH & IAH-SIN.

Likewise, MAN-IAH total is 220 comprising the same 72 through pax and 148 for the MAN-IAH sectors.

This is correct.

There are also figures for cargo. Both cargo (measured by weight) and passenger numbers have doubled since the route has gone via MAN.

[Ex Cargo Clown]

SQ do extremely well off the freight side

[pholling]

Originally Posted by Rob Courtney

We passed through T3 last week, I was quite suprised how fast we got through security at 5ami it took about 5 mins. The worst part for me is the check in area. The atoumated bag drop Ryanair are using now is an absoulte nightmare and leads to long queues. coming back immigration and bag collection was better than T1

Did T3 last month. We were through security fairly quickly. Though travelling with a small child we are often at the mercy of the others with small children, who seem to be a little less prepared. It didn't look like the rest of the line was that bad. However, the departure lounge is a disaster. Given that T3 was really designed around primarily business travellers who don't spend huge amounts of time at the airport prior to the flight, the shift to the Ryanair crowd seems to overload the space quite quickly. They were 8-12 deep at the bar and blocking the corridors. The return, which was via T3 domestic arrivals, was as typical, pretty painless. I am on the fence as to what is the better combination for domestic flights. T1 Departures and the pain of the arrivals process or T3 arrivals and the pain of the departure lounge.

[Dobbo_Dobbo]

Originally Posted by Skipness One Echo

Good point, but the ME3 are a particular kind of flag carrying pseudo-political state entities. With more money than God they've captured market share going East in a massive way from the old legacies with their multi stop nightmare slogs across Asia. The flip side of that is that there's a host of places that might otherwise have non stop service to MAN who are now better served with a one stop option via DXB/AUH/DOH.

So in terms of variety, not ideal but better in terms of volume I think.

Good point Skipness, my view on the MEB3/4 is a bit chicken and egg. They are very good at providing tangible proof that a certain market exists, but they also act to stifle direct services.

As noted above, BKK is the classic example. One of the highest unserved city pairs on earth, but yield remains the issue due to the one stop fares of EK, EY and QR.

It's not all bad news, as CX at HKG has shown. I expect the coming years will see some more CX type success stories on routes like PVG, TYO, ICN - and possibly BOM, BKK, KUL - each of which have major one stop flows from MAN and/or significant surface leakage.

The harder nuts to crack willl be Africa and South America.

[inOban]

I'm thinking that city pairs where there is a lot of potential freight may be more likely to succeed, since, unlike PAX, freight doesn't transfer itself at Dubai or wherever. May also be less seasonal.

In the case of SIN, RR have a major facility there. I wonder if they are using the SQ flight to send components between SIN and their various facilities in the North of England?

[116d]

Originally Posted by Dobbo_Dobbo

Good point Skipness, my view on the MEB3/4 is a bit chicken and egg. They are very good at providing tangible proof that a certain market exists, but they also act to stifle direct services.

As noted above, BKK is the classic example. One of the highest unserved city pairs on earth, but yield remains the issue due to the one stop fares of EK, EY and QR.

It's not all bad news, as CX at HKG has shown. I expect the coming years will see some more CX type success stories on routes like PVG, TYO, ICN - and possibly BOM, BKK, KUL - each of which have major one stop flows from MAN and/or significant surface leakage.

Indeed. It just needs one airline to take the plunge, the question is who?

[Dobbo_Dobbo]

Originally Posted by 116d

Indeed. It just needs one airline to take the plunge, the question is who?

The advantage should always be with the hub based airlines because they have access to onward connections.

I.e. It is much better for SQ to operate MAN-SIN than TCX/VS because SQ can carry a huge volume of passengers onto Australasia.

That being said, there are opportunities for the likes of VS and TCX to look at the eastern marketplace. BOM is a massive gap in the network, and BKK would fit in well to TCX's strategy.

Places like Korea and Japan are tough because onward connections require a dog leg, but they cannot be a million miles away.

[Dobbo_Dobbo]

Originally Posted by Navpi

Maybe MAG s/b going after SIN FRA JFK ?

As well as IAH?!!!

One things for sure, MAN is proving itself as a good transit stop. Long may it continue.

[doublesix]

Any idea why the Saudi 787 involved in the incident a couple of weeks ago is still on the ground at Manchester? Just curious as it seems along time to be AOG if it's awaiting spare parts.

[TURIN]

It was fixed a couple of days ago, they were waiting for a crew to drive it back.

[european130]

Re AOG Saudia 787

it departed at 2:02am Saturday morning on its ferry flight back home.

[SWBKCB]

More about security queues from the Evening News...

'Filthy and shambolic' - These negative reviews of Manchester Airport really don't pull any punches - Manchester Evening News

[spannersatcx]

That was a long AOG!

[Navpi]

MAG CEOs are trading places at Manchester and Stansted.
Andrew Cowan is returning to the larger airport Manchester to oversee the build programme.

Ken 'o Toole is going to Stansted to keep that ticking over with the locost and a smattering of IT.

[SWBKCB]

That was a long AOG!

Took that long to get the crew out of the shops?

MAG CEOs are trading places at Manchester and Stansted. Andrew Cowan is returning to the larger airport Manchester to oversee the build programme.
Ken 'o Toole is going to Stansted to keep that ticking over with the locost and a smattering of IT.

Miaow!

[southside bobby]

Navpi.......Re the CEO exchange,not going to trade with you but for the record your descriptive powers are wholly lacking & sadly skewed...Just stating....))

[Navpi]

I live near Stansted. It's a factual narrative!