British Airways
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 44
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hec7or
Maybe BA should have held on to BHX and MAN as bases
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ex Cargo Clown
MAN, yes. As for BHX, I don't think you could make a profit there. Same goes for GLA and BFS as bases.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ex Cargo Clown
MAN, yes. As for BHX, I don't think you could make a profit there. Same goes for GLA and BFS as bases.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: LV
Posts: 2,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ATNotts
When BA had their base and hub at BHX it was said to be quite lucrative since the NEC and ICC attracted decent yielding passengers; I suspect that if the bean counters had wanted MAN and BHX to be profitable they could have produced figures that could have made both thus. They chose not to, and the rest is history.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: BIRMINGHAM
Age: 60
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was always lead to believe BHX was quite a profitable operation. Having said that BA had it all to themselves, even the European flag carriers tended to leave BHX alone until relatively recently
"Back then" was in the days before LCCs were anywhere near as large as they are now. BA sold their regional ops in the form of BA Connect to Flybe (or rather paid Flybe to them off BA's hands) in 2007 for a reason
The days of each country having a national state-owned monopoly airline are largely gone (except for Alitalia !) - so each airline has to decide the market sectors it thinks it can do well - trying to be all things to all people just leads to AirBerlin
The days of each country having a national state-owned monopoly airline are largely gone (except for Alitalia !) - so each airline has to decide the market sectors it thinks it can do well - trying to be all things to all people just leads to AirBerlin
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MARK 101
Was always lead to believe BHX was quite a profitable operation. Having said that BA had it all to themselves, even the European flag carriers tended to leave BHX alone until relatively recently
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA set up their own LCC in the form of GO, which could easily have made a Go of it from places like MAN, long before the others were significantly on the scene. Instead they flogged it off and concentrated on ploughing funds into the Manx/Regional proving the case that regional flying was dead for BA. I'd say it proved what they wanted to prove.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 57
Posts: 3,262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TU now reporting all SH at LGW to cease and be transferred to LHR. Hangar to close and only about a dozen LH routes to be retained.
Appalling! If True of course. Good luck everyone.
Appalling! If True of course. Good luck everyone.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know hindsight is a wonderful thing - at the time I believe BA said that GO as a low cost carrier wasn’t in their DNA or fit their strategy but if they had grown it (and it was growing fast) things could be different. It would now fit nicely in the IAG stable alongside VY and EI (or merged with one). I also think they made a strategic mistake not to extend the GB Airways franchise or buy it and they would have had a much stronger hold at LGW and prevented the Orange expansion (GB were 3rd biggest slot holder with 10-12 a/c). How much did they pay for the former MON slots ? As I say though hindsight is a wonderful thing. Some big strategic mistakes though ?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well they bought CityFlyer which had a nice low cost base at Gatwick but lost the low cost element when they folded it into BA - oh and they did the same with Dan Air. BA has never liked Gatwick. From time to time they give it a go - remember “the hub without hubbub “? but it never lasts.
Paxing All Over The World
BA, like many long established corporates has a 'culture' and each new generation of staff who join find themselves unable to break through that culture. I have seen this in many enterprises, not just airlines.
It is all part of the human desire to keep things the way that they were and difficulty in seeing what they might become. Which is how old companies die and new ones are born. In the (I think) late 1970s, British Rail experimented with ways to reduce cost of their multiple diesel units on small routes. They took a body from a coach and put it on bogies (obviously more complicated than that!) but it didn't work. Many years later, it came out that some of the senior BR men had thought, "It didn't look like a train" Sums it up.
It is all part of the human desire to keep things the way that they were and difficulty in seeing what they might become. Which is how old companies die and new ones are born. In the (I think) late 1970s, British Rail experimented with ways to reduce cost of their multiple diesel units on small routes. They took a body from a coach and put it on bogies (obviously more complicated than that!) but it didn't work. Many years later, it came out that some of the senior BR men had thought, "It didn't look like a train" Sums it up.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PAXboy
BA, like many long established corporates has a 'culture' and each new generation of staff who join find themselves unable to break through that culture. I have seen this in many enterprises, not just airlines.
It is all part of the human desire to keep things the way that they were and difficulty in seeing what they might become. Which is how old companies die and new ones are born. In the (I think) late 1970s, British Rail experimented with ways to reduce cost of their multiple diesel units on small routes. They took a body from a coach and put it on bogies (obviously more complicated than that!) but it didn't work. Many years later, it came out that some of the senior BR men had thought, "It didn't look like a train" Sums it up.
It is all part of the human desire to keep things the way that they were and difficulty in seeing what they might become. Which is how old companies die and new ones are born. In the (I think) late 1970s, British Rail experimented with ways to reduce cost of their multiple diesel units on small routes. They took a body from a coach and put it on bogies (obviously more complicated than that!) but it didn't work. Many years later, it came out that some of the senior BR men had thought, "It didn't look like a train" Sums it up.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dorset
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They took a body from a coach and put it on bogies (obviously more complicated than that!) but it didn't work.
Is there any more news on the BA short-haul LGW reports? Seismic change if true.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad news today about BA CC - I can’t however help but think members should not have put their blind trust in the intransigent and frankly incompetent BASSA reps. A policy of not talking and saying no to everything for months (until it was too late) was, like previously, never going to end well. Whilst BALPA may not have got a great deal, the engagement and constructive talks at least prevented a far worse outcome. Sad.
