Manchester-3
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting comments from the Skipmiester, essentially I "think" suggesting that market forces should flourish not artificially be directing demand for one airport to another ?
MAG may well currently suggest EMA is the airport of choice.....
......if they were to jettison EMA to shore up the balance sheet one wonders what the view on cargo would be then?
MAG may well currently suggest EMA is the airport of choice.....
......if they were to jettison EMA to shore up the balance sheet one wonders what the view on cargo would be then?
Yes but the spending decisions were taken on a commercial basis from the mid 80s as privatisation loomed. I think the balance between op-cos in a group is a tricky one. Think Air France / KLM or even BA / Iberia or BA /Aer Lingus. At some point you start skewing the market when you co-operate, you become dominant in some ways. Like LHR-DUB/MAD. It's a balancing act as there are good pros for connections and alliances. With MAG, the ability to dictate specialisms within each op-co may bring dividends in the long run, with the occasional lost ad-hoc main deck freight charter a price worth paying, but you'd need to be closer to the financials to know.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Problem is that everytime MAG try and divert airlines and "revenue" opportunities to EMA it backfires. Yesterday saw two ETIHAD cargo freighters in Doncaster at the sametime.
With SAS moving daily flights into Birmingham, Manchester is now surrounded by airports that can seemingly all make money and provide employment opportunities from freight whilst Manchester's own employees are furloughed or worse have been made redundant.
It seems incomprehensible that the airport that has a World Freight Terminal and trumpets itself as having 22 million customers within 2 hours is now actually surrounded by airports which are grasping these opportunities with aplomb.
Manchester is not even the gateway for Wythenshawe anymore let alone the international Gateway For The North Of England !
With SAS moving daily flights into Birmingham, Manchester is now surrounded by airports that can seemingly all make money and provide employment opportunities from freight whilst Manchester's own employees are furloughed or worse have been made redundant.
It seems incomprehensible that the airport that has a World Freight Terminal and trumpets itself as having 22 million customers within 2 hours is now actually surrounded by airports which are grasping these opportunities with aplomb.
Manchester is not even the gateway for Wythenshawe anymore let alone the international Gateway For The North Of England !
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't suggest the SAS flights would come to Manchester.
The forwarder is using the most convenient airport for that particular type of shipment.
I was simply making the point that there are no issues re equipment, staffing, or resources, at Birmingham, East Midlands , Doncaster or Liverpool.
Not sure what "spotting" has to do with it ?
The forwarder is using the most convenient airport for that particular type of shipment.
I was simply making the point that there are no issues re equipment, staffing, or resources, at Birmingham, East Midlands , Doncaster or Liverpool.
Not sure what "spotting" has to do with it ?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is so much comment on these Manchester threads about how MAG are only interested in the bottom line. If their strategy regarding freight in recent years is costing them a significant volume of profit as you suggest, you'd think an organisation with such a focus on the bottom line would do something about it, wouldn't you?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Birmingham
Age: 62
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
December 2020 Pax
Manchester – 248,451 down 87.4%
Stansted – 198,291 down 90.1%
East Midlands – 15,065 down 92.7%
2020
Stansted – 7,543,779 down 73.2%
Manchester – 7,037,036 down 76.0%
East Midlands – 899,756 down 80.8%
Cargo
East Midlands – 46,320 up 43.5%
Stansted – 23,136 up 18.8%
Manchester – 4,693 down 46.6%
Manchester – 248,451 down 87.4%
Stansted – 198,291 down 90.1%
East Midlands – 15,065 down 92.7%
2020
Stansted – 7,543,779 down 73.2%
Manchester – 7,037,036 down 76.0%
East Midlands – 899,756 down 80.8%
Cargo
East Midlands – 46,320 up 43.5%
Stansted – 23,136 up 18.8%
Manchester – 4,693 down 46.6%
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know about a "strategy" to push cargo to EMA and STN, which is I think what you are driving at.
Most of the additional tonnage through EMA appears to be on the DHL network, along with the other integrators that use EMA as a hub. When it comes to ad hoc additional movements, by the look of it they are going to non-MAG facilities such as DSA, LPL, BHX and the like. Because of the MAG business model at Manchester I really can't see them ever having wanted to attract DHL, UPS or Fedex/TNT to build a major hub their, such as exists at EMA and to a lesser extent, Stansted, as it could seriously impinge on capacity for the core business at Manchester - passenger traffic which will build back over time.
Most of the additional tonnage through EMA appears to be on the DHL network, along with the other integrators that use EMA as a hub. When it comes to ad hoc additional movements, by the look of it they are going to non-MAG facilities such as DSA, LPL, BHX and the like. Because of the MAG business model at Manchester I really can't see them ever having wanted to attract DHL, UPS or Fedex/TNT to build a major hub their, such as exists at EMA and to a lesser extent, Stansted, as it could seriously impinge on capacity for the core business at Manchester - passenger traffic which will build back over time.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those cargo figures for Manchester are dire, the limited mainline carriers left who carry underbelly capacity are QATAR, ETIHAD and EMIRATES, given they are losing corridor status means any cutbacks could result in zero uplift from anywhere.
Cargo connectivity will have totally evaporated.
It doesnt exactly chime with the platitudes on the MAG world Freight Terminal Page. I appreciate these are dated but even so.
Let's hope those carriers KEEP providing uplift even with no passengers or Manchester will have no freight throughput at all. That would be nothing short of scandalous for the airport which by it's own admission describes itself as a "global gateway".
Surely manufacturing, distribution , NHS, etc need some capacity in the middle of a pandemic ?
Cargo connectivity will have totally evaporated.
It doesnt exactly chime with the platitudes on the MAG world Freight Terminal Page. I appreciate these are dated but even so.
Let's hope those carriers KEEP providing uplift even with no passengers or Manchester will have no freight throughput at all. That would be nothing short of scandalous for the airport which by it's own admission describes itself as a "global gateway".
Surely manufacturing, distribution , NHS, etc need some capacity in the middle of a pandemic ?
Last edited by Navpi; 14th Jan 2021 at 07:29.
