MANCHESTER 1

[FFMAN]

Obviously - a loss is a loss but in this case, it's relatively minor. As someone has said above - with 4 carriers on the route - the market has spoken. AA were just not good enough in terms of quality and reliability and most regular flyers would understand that. AA would be my 4th choice out of 4 to fly MAN-JFK.
Another observation from the comments above: everybody is talking in terms of TCX's presence on the market. What about Virgin's new daily?
As any J Class regular will tell you, the VS J cabin knocks spots off the AA one, especially the (frankly unacceptable) 757 one.
The only people who will bemoan this news are OneWorld status members.
There are still 3 other carriers on the route

[DP.]

Originally Posted by pholling

if you get stuck in the LHR T5-T3 transfer it falls even farther down the list.

A very good point. I did that earlier this year. I won't be in any hurry to do it again.

[MANFOD]

Originally Posted by pholling

It's a loss but not a loss, depending on the time window you look and from whose vantage point. If you are high status BA/AA it is a loss. For most others, the situation is still better than before TCX jumped in. Outside of J class, TCX's product is comparable with the legacy network carriers. Also, they do provide a onward feed at JFK via JetBlue.

Actually, I agree with these points from a UK originating passenger perspective in terms of premium pax on the one hand and economy on the other. My reference to LHR was in the context of premium pax but I can't comment on the Terminal transfer aspects if you were connecting to AA rather than BA.

However, as well as passengers, how should it be considered from MAN's perspective? It is the loss of a prestigious destination by a US legacy even though New York is currently served by 3 other carriers, one at least of which has decent premium products.

Perhaps MAN takes the view 'you win some, lose some' and as it has been winning significantly more routes than losing them in recent years, I acknowledge this, by itself, will probably not be regarded as a major set back. Given the additional capacity to NY, especially by TCX, I doubt it would come as a great surprise either.

[DP.]

Originally Posted by MANFOD

Perhaps MAN takes the view 'you win some, lose some' and as it has been winning significantly more routes than losing them in recent years, I acknowledge this, by itself, will probably not be regarded as a major set back. Given the additional capacity to NY, especially by TCX, I doubt it would come as a great surprise.

I'd expect that that's the case. In this instance, there's really little MAN could do; AA's offering is poor, and plagued by delays and cancellations.

[Dobbo_Dobbo]

MAN's strength has been its diverse portfolio of airlines. I love all that TCX have been doing and to be clear I am not "blaming" them at all.

AA clearly have certain issues at JFK and TCX have ruthlessly exploited them on the MAN route.

I hope the reaction to this from VS and UA is positive, and they seek to increase their market share. From AAs perspective, I hope this strengthens ORD and PHL. However, I am concerned that this might be the start of a long term trend of TCX taking over - which would not be good for the consumer in the long run.

[MANFOD]

Originally Posted by Dobbo_Dobbo

However, I am concerned that this might be the start of a long term trend of TCX taking over - which would not be good for the consumer in the long run.

And that would be my concern too. UA to Washington has already gone and now AA to JFK. It still leaves a decent mix of airlines offering a spread of products. I wouldn't like to see that diversity shrink further.

[nguba]

Would AA and BA really want to exit MAN-JFK? Next, summer BA's "densified" LGW 777s will come into operation and note the following comment in BA press release on the Loganair codeshare:

British Airways - BRITISH AIRWAYS SIGNS NEW CODESHARE AGREEMENT WITH LOGANAIR

The new Loganair services to and from Manchester will also be included in the codeshare parthership, enabling customers to take advantage of new connections from points including Glasgow, Inverness and Norwich onto the growing family of British Airways services at the north-west hub.

[j636]

I'm sure DY will arrive on the scene next summer.

[Skipness One Echo]

J636 nails it. Thomas Cook have done the legwork in taking on the US legacies with well priced and direct point to point leaving an opportunity for Norwegian to join the party. They're not going to be content serving LGW, EDI, BFS, SNN and NOT have a decent crack at MAN. Perfect B787 base IMHO, they could do what BMI should have done.
People always mention BA vs. DY / D8 in terms of battles at LGW but they're squarely against VS to MCO as well.

[j636]

It will more likely be MAX to NY/BOS. Can't see them putting a B787 in yet, to busy growing some European capitals.

[Dobbo_Dobbo]

I think it will be difficult for Norwegian to displace TCX from their position at MAN. It is obviously not impossible, but there is no obvious "extra" or material price discount that Norwegian can offer above TCX.

Additionally, Norwegian continue to post large losses. This can be put down to any number of factors, and can of course be covered by investors. However, it does not suggest that Norwegians current model is a runaway success or that it is repeatable in any number of markets.

The only thing Norwegians presence would do at MAN would be to encourage IAG to respond and create a race for the bottom. This may prejudice VS and UA in the short run, and undermine the market in the mid to long term.

AA/BA will undoubtedly be back (assuming they leave at all) but in the meantime, opportunity for TCX, VS and UA to grab market share.

[Turtle controller]

Dobbo why do you assert AA/BA will undoubtedly be back? If AA have left the JFK route and I believe they have then this seems to be the end of any credibility to the rumour of BA operating long haul here. This development also ends the possibility of US legacy airlines expanding as their interest is feeding hubs rather than p2p. Routes which were viable a few years back no longer are e.g. Washington, Charlotte plus the rumoured Detroit(DL), Chicago (UA( and Dallas (AA). Future growth will come from lower frequency direct routes (perhaps into these hubs but as a destination rather than a distribution point) provided MT and to a much lesser extent VS maintain their current strategy and focus. History shows these sort of carriers get absorbed into BA eventually.

[gazza007]

I regularly use MAN-PHL since US Airways days, rather pleased that they are introducing Premium Economy on the route. https://thepointsguy.com/2017/07/aa-...conomy-timing/

[Dobbo_Dobbo]

Turtle Controller

In the short term, I agree with you.

In the long term, I think you've answered your own question.

As you say, anything can happen including entities like TCX being brought into BA/IAG. You never know. AA/BA is a major TATL Joint Venture and it would be a surprise if they gave up on connecting the largest US market with the second largest U.K. Market.

I'm not saying there will be some seamless transition, or that there won't be a gap in service. There almost certainly will if AA pull out for S18.

What I am saying is that the MAN market continues to grow, BA continue to loose gross passenger numbers ex MAN (let alone retain market share) and it would be strange if they effectively left that market to others.

[116d]

Just my opinion of course, but it wouldn't surprise me if the route was losing money due to the inferior Y product and the aforementioned delays/cancellations. I refuse to believe it's entirely down to MAN not being as lucrative as, say, the London market as others are demonstrating with their growth in recent years. That said, it's still a loss nonetheless.

As others say, it's an opportunity for VS/DL, United and Thomas Cook to increase their market share and hopefully this will make the future of their offerings more secure if sufficient AA customers don't want to travel via LHR/DUB/ORD/PHL. In the case of VS/DL, it's probably too late for this winter but maybe it could lead to a more frequent schedule being run next winter?

[LAX_LHR]

Air Malta didn't stay away for too long....

https://www.timesofmalta.com/article...xt-year.655868

Currently showing in GDS as 1 weekly KM146/147 scheduled, but heard it should be 3 weekly.

[j636]

I think it will be difficult for Norwegian to displace TCX from their position at MAN. It is obviously not impossible, but there is no obvious "extra" or material price discount that Norwegian can offer above TCX.

Additionally, Norwegian continue to post large losses. This can be put down to any number of factors, and can of course be covered by investors. However, it does not suggest that Norwegians current model is a runaway success or that it is repeatable in any number of markets.

The only thing Norwegians presence would do at MAN would be to encourage IAG to respond and create a race for the bottom. This may prejudice VS and UA in the short run, and undermine the market in the mid to long term.

AA/BA will undoubtedly be back (assuming they leave at all) but in the meantime, opportunity for TCX, VS and UA to grab market share.

They won't displace but IMO it's really a case of when not if they come to MAN once they have more MAX aircraft. We know they were interested back in December/January. They have big losses but it hasn't stopped them so far!

Don't know a lot about TCX and costs but suspect DY will be lower so they will squeeze TC a little and grow the market mostly the latter.

I don't think IAG would respond because it's not really their home base where you would see much stronger action in BCN, DUB, MAD, LGW etc to defend themselves because they have to. They cannot afford to fail at home.

What sort of passenger base do TCX attract, is there still a lot of IT bookings on the US routes or just evolving more and more to Flight Only O&D?

A TCX J product and a good one is something that could really help them and increase profits but I guess its for them to determine if they should move away from holiday market.

Just my opinion of course, but it wouldn't surprise me if the route was losing money due to the inferior Y product and the aforementioned delays/cancellations. I refuse to believe it's entirely down to MAN not being as lucrative as, say, the London market as others are demonstrating with their growth in recent years. That said, it's still a loss nonetheless.

As others say, it's an opportunity for VS/DL, United and Thomas Cook to increase their market share and hopefully this will make the future of their offerings more secure if sufficient AA customers don't want to travel via LHR/DUB/ORD/PHL. In the case of VS/DL, it's probably too late for this winter but maybe it could lead to a more frequent schedule being run next winter?

I would question if it's loss making, could well be a case of them able to make more flying the 752 in the US rather than to MAN or downsizing 757/767 fleet. If the route was making big losses its really hard to see why they wouldn't cut their losses over winter as well.

They have a bad rep among the public but it hasn't really impacted them significantly. Passengers are fickle especially the Y end of the cabin.

Sometimes those interested in aviation have a better view ops wise but vast majority of the public won't and that's why they have gotten away with a poor standard of service.

[Dobbo_Dobbo]

Originally Posted by j636

I don't think IAG would respond because it's not really their home base where you would see much stronger action in BCN, DUB, MAD, LGW etc to defend themselves because they have to. They cannot afford to fail at home.

Good point, and that may come to pass.

My view is that, in the long run the size of the respective markets will lead BA/IAG to persevere with MAN-JFK. I don't think they can do that effectively if they are too much on the back foot and competing on multiple fronts.

Originally Posted by j636

I would question if it's loss making, could well be a case of them able to make more flying the 752 in the US rather than to MAN or downsizing 757/767 fleet. If the route was making big losses its really hard to see why they wouldn't cut their losses over winter as well.

I think that's right. AA probably make money on MAN-JFK. However, if they can make more money elsewhere and still capture a reasonable slice of the MAN market via ORD and PHL, it is a risk worth taking in the short run.

As the B752s start to come to the end of their lives it will be interesting to see what happens to the TATL routes that have traditionally relied on them.

Will they move towards larger aircraft like the B763/B788/A330, modern equivalents like the A321LR, or get cut?

[Logohu]

If the route was making big losses its really hard to see why they wouldn't cut their losses over winter as well.

They have - the winter suspension of JFK was announced by AA a while ago. Last flight is 29 October.

[roverman]

That whole AA thing

It's still not been officially announced, however, and I understand that slots are still held. If true, AA JFK is a loss in a number of senses, there's no doubting it. Losing a network carrier to a major destination is a some kind of a wake up, but MAN is fortunate in being able to take this and still have the route pretty well-served. And we will still have a significant AA presence, which is under some pressure from competition but surely won't withdraw entirely. AA is a major player between the US and Europe, and I don't think it's fantastical to say that MAN is a no longer just a nice-to-have European destination for airlines. AA do need to get their act together though, and hopefully the PHL and ORD routes will strengthen - ORD needs to be year-round with decent metal.

If AA were to withdraw entirely, then for BA with their stake, having no direct US services by a partner from MAN would surely be too weak a position in the UK market and would have to be countered somehow. A partnership with TCX? - unlikely but not unthinkable!