Manchester-3
How much impact do airports have on where airlines chose to fly to? Clearly they need to be able to offer the physical capacity, but have LGW done an outstanding job or are they just the next cab on a rack for those how can't get into/afford LHR? Have EDI done a better job than MAN or have currency fluctuations done more?
Clearly good communications are essential in any business but surely market fundamentals have a bigger impact than any oiling of the wheels by a route development team.
Clearly good communications are essential in any business but surely market fundamentals have a bigger impact than any oiling of the wheels by a route development team.
I agree completely. These issues are complex and multi-dimensional. Both airports and airlines are at the mercy of geopolitical events and global economics. But airports do have their role to play within that matrix. And MAN must resource and empower their representatives to produce optimal results.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the road
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How much impact do airports have on where airlines chose to fly to? Clearly they need to be able to offer the physical capacity, but have LGW done an outstanding job or are they just the next cab on a rack for those how can't get into/afford LHR? Have EDI done a better job than MAN or have currency fluctuations done more?
Clearly good communications are essential in any business but surely market fundamentals have a bigger impact than any oiling of the wheels by a route development team.
Clearly good communications are essential in any business but surely market fundamentals have a bigger impact than any oiling of the wheels by a route development team.
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: GB
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How much impact do airports have on where airlines chose to fly to? Clearly they need to be able to offer the physical capacity, but have LGW done an outstanding job or are they just the next cab on a rack for those how can't get into/afford LHR? Have EDI done a better job than MAN or have currency fluctuations done more?
Clearly good communications are essential in any business but surely market fundamentals have a bigger impact than any oiling of the wheels by a route development team.
Clearly good communications are essential in any business but surely market fundamentals have a bigger impact than any oiling of the wheels by a route development team.
One key word can be used to describe EDI’s recent success in getting routes - incentives. I remember hearing one story in which MAN was going to get a fairly significant (& sought after) carrier for 2024, but we were pipped to it by EDI at the eleventh hour who have the big Visit Scotland fund.
Of course, this may just be rumour, but it is fact that they have seen lots of ’’new route success” through incentives - just look at Hainan. I am subscribed to a Patreon page that aggregates a lot of US data, safe to say that MAN is usually up near the top of ‘potential international routes’ from some of these airports - unfortunately the data can’t be shared - but it does prove that demand is not the issue. The US carriers will be back once the GBP/USD further corrects and the A321s start rolling in.
Not necessarily an issue of EDI beating MAN or vice versa. EDI vs MAN is the wrong comparison imho. EDI is much more reliant on inbound US traffic. A better comparison would be made with somewhere like Düsseldorf - non hub, fairly large city, mostly outbound traffic. If we compare MAN to these sort of cities, suddenly we look great. I do suppose that DUS does not have a based long haul carrier - from this point the best comparison in terms of ‘status’ - ignoring inbound/outbound traffic, would probably be Barcelona - not a proper hub for the national carrier but still served in some form, US carriers (pre 2020, MAN did have all three like BCN currently)
The issue as I say at the moment is exchange rates for US carriers, aircraft shortages / hub ‘pecking order’ for Aer Lingus and Virgin (DUB & LHR respectively). On a positive note, it seems the ‘relationships’ issue with a couple of certain carriers has been sorted, or wasn’t really an issue in the first place.
Last edited by laviation; 25th Dec 2023 at 23:05.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a city there are 8m potential passengers within our footprint , for comparison Ireland as a whole has a population of just 5m , but look at the number of American flights today, 18, is the disparity really so wide that they are ALL Irish disapora ?
Manchester once chimed it was the largest gateway outside London, it now seems to be squeezed all ends up.
Even discounting passengers within the MAN footprint who might conceivably use Liverpool or LBA to connect LH using EI, LH or KL , Manchester is still a massive economic bloc reflected in some part going East but now transparent going west. That said even these figures are skewed as most ME carriers are possibly filling the PIA gap.
Yes i appreciate some say the worth of Route Development teams is negligible, clearly as LA AVIATION suggests when you are up against government incentives it's a hard road but surely they have some worth, the lady at LGW seems to think so.
My gripe is the fact that w24 offers just 3% growth at Manchester, this at a time when STN is the fastest growing airport in London, Heathrows figures are absolutely rocketing, Gatwick has 7 new long haul for 24 already , Dublins US connections are growing year on year with capacity, frequency and new routes. Edinburgh is already up to seven daily US routes next summer. LH is driving much of this.
Our contribution is ALIA and "relatively" minor tweaks elsewhere.
Even if route development did not exist surely our figures should move in tandem with similar size airports ?
We have been slower coming out of Covid and now seem to be falling behind in the general upturn which all other similar size airports are benefitting.
Some may point to T2 and capacity /apron /slot constraints, is that not an excuse, these should have been factored in by previous management to ensure flexibility was built in , those who made these decsions have seemingly now been spirited away.
You can't say no to customers 2 years on the bounce then expect them to come crawling back when it suits your agenda especially if they have been welcomed with open arms elsewhere.
What is the point in a shiny new terminal if you have lost 2/3 years growth ?
Manchester once chimed it was the largest gateway outside London, it now seems to be squeezed all ends up.
Even discounting passengers within the MAN footprint who might conceivably use Liverpool or LBA to connect LH using EI, LH or KL , Manchester is still a massive economic bloc reflected in some part going East but now transparent going west. That said even these figures are skewed as most ME carriers are possibly filling the PIA gap.
Yes i appreciate some say the worth of Route Development teams is negligible, clearly as LA AVIATION suggests when you are up against government incentives it's a hard road but surely they have some worth, the lady at LGW seems to think so.
My gripe is the fact that w24 offers just 3% growth at Manchester, this at a time when STN is the fastest growing airport in London, Heathrows figures are absolutely rocketing, Gatwick has 7 new long haul for 24 already , Dublins US connections are growing year on year with capacity, frequency and new routes. Edinburgh is already up to seven daily US routes next summer. LH is driving much of this.
Our contribution is ALIA and "relatively" minor tweaks elsewhere.
Even if route development did not exist surely our figures should move in tandem with similar size airports ?
We have been slower coming out of Covid and now seem to be falling behind in the general upturn which all other similar size airports are benefitting.
Some may point to T2 and capacity /apron /slot constraints, is that not an excuse, these should have been factored in by previous management to ensure flexibility was built in , those who made these decsions have seemingly now been spirited away.
You can't say no to customers 2 years on the bounce then expect them to come crawling back when it suits your agenda especially if they have been welcomed with open arms elsewhere.
What is the point in a shiny new terminal if you have lost 2/3 years growth ?
Last edited by Navpi; 26th Dec 2023 at 11:16.
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Bristol
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a city there are 8m potential passengers within our footprint , for comparison Ireland as a whole has a population of just 5m , but look at the number of American flights today, 18, is the disparity really so wide that they are ALL Irish disapora ?
Manchester once chimed it was the largest gateway outside London, it now seems to be squeezed all ends up.
Even discounting passengers within the MAN footprint who might conceivably use Liverpool or LBA to connect LH using EI, LH or KL , Manchester is still a massive economic bloc reflected in some part going East but now transparent going west. That said even these figures are skewed as most ME carriers are possibly filling the PIA gap.
Yes i appreciate some say the worth of Route Development teams is negligible, clearly as LA AVIATION suggests when you are up against government incentives it's a hard road but surely they have some worth, the lady at LGW seems to think so.
My gripe is the fact that w24 offers just 3% growth at Manchester, this at a time when STN is the fastest growing airport in London, Heathrows figures are absolutely rocketing, Gatwick has 7 new long haul for 24 already , Dublins US connections are growing year on year with capacity, frequency and new routes. Edinburgh is already up to seven daily US routes next summer. LH is driving much of this.
Our contribution is ALIA and "relatively" minor tweaks elsewhere.
Even if route development did not exist surely our figures should move in tandem with similar size airports ?
We have been slower coming out of Covid and now seem to be falling behind in the general upturn which all other similar size airports are benefitting.
Some may point to T2 and capacity /apron /slot constraints, is that not an excuse, these should have been factored in by previous management to ensure flexibility was built in , those who made these decsions have seemingly now been spirited away.
You can't say no to customers 2 years on the bounce then expect them to come crawling back when it suits your agenda especially if they have been welcomed with open arms elsewhere.
What is the point in a shiny new terminal if you have lost 2/3 years growth ?
Manchester once chimed it was the largest gateway outside London, it now seems to be squeezed all ends up.
Even discounting passengers within the MAN footprint who might conceivably use Liverpool or LBA to connect LH using EI, LH or KL , Manchester is still a massive economic bloc reflected in some part going East but now transparent going west. That said even these figures are skewed as most ME carriers are possibly filling the PIA gap.
Yes i appreciate some say the worth of Route Development teams is negligible, clearly as LA AVIATION suggests when you are up against government incentives it's a hard road but surely they have some worth, the lady at LGW seems to think so.
My gripe is the fact that w24 offers just 3% growth at Manchester, this at a time when STN is the fastest growing airport in London, Heathrows figures are absolutely rocketing, Gatwick has 7 new long haul for 24 already , Dublins US connections are growing year on year with capacity, frequency and new routes. Edinburgh is already up to seven daily US routes next summer. LH is driving much of this.
Our contribution is ALIA and "relatively" minor tweaks elsewhere.
Even if route development did not exist surely our figures should move in tandem with similar size airports ?
We have been slower coming out of Covid and now seem to be falling behind in the general upturn which all other similar size airports are benefitting.
Some may point to T2 and capacity /apron /slot constraints, is that not an excuse, these should have been factored in by previous management to ensure flexibility was built in , those who made these decsions have seemingly now been spirited away.
You can't say no to customers 2 years on the bounce then expect them to come crawling back when it suits your agenda especially if they have been welcomed with open arms elsewhere.
What is the point in a shiny new terminal if you have lost 2/3 years growth ?
thanks
BristolexFlyer
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Bristol
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bangkok just continues on that wish list of the last two decades imho
India we need to see the colour of the eyes for a legitimate operator - SpiceJet aren’t it and Air India priorities seem to remain focused on flying Microsoft Azure kiddies round the world to look after your business servers and call centres
Navi Dublin does have a head start with a legacy hub carrier come national carrier and alliance partner supporting the more price conscious over Heathrow.
A healthy I am Irish honest ( ninety twelve generational or no ) and Irish Tourist marketing the destination, Edinburgh likewise ( Visit Scotland) Barcelona sun and a massive cruise embarkation point the Americans do like a Butlins on sea type vacation. Oh and again a presence of a IAG carrier or two to boot.
Rightly the nearest and comparable airport to Manchester is indeed Dusseldorf . Both having seen their North Atlantic flights depleted by collapse of large tertiary carriers namely Air Berlin and Thomas Cook UK .
Both these markets share a prevalence of external with much softer inbound traffic flows.
Going back to Edinburgh there is some underlying evidence that particular market is close to saturated and indeed softening so it’s not all rosy. Delta and Air Canada reducing frequencies or even season shortening cutting out the shoulder season completely.
All that said Manchester sales remain high(er) to key markets including New York, Orlando and Atlanta throughout the year with significantly lower seasonal seesawing .
I do expect some growth in this market from 2025 but not before.
Last edited by Rutan16; 26th Dec 2023 at 16:19.
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: GB
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air India are slowly elevating up towards the standard of the likes of Singapore, Emirates etc under the new management. To say a service is inevitable would be an understatement. They’ve been close to launching a couple of times in the last 18 months.
It is believed that Virgin may launch one or both of BOM/DEL, perhaps the first one in W24 and the second in S25.
It is believed that Virgin may launch one or both of BOM/DEL, perhaps the first one in W24 and the second in S25.
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some still call Manchester Ringway, Liverpool,Speke , Leeds Yeadon or even Bristol Lulgate in a warm and cuddly way.
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was being a little conservative sorry wasn’t really rethinking 20th century 
That said there were occasions in that prior life time when there were actual connections on a Tristar and later one way on a 747 !
That said there were occasions in that prior life time when there were actual connections on a Tristar and later one way on a 747 !
The last 3 months have been the busiest ever and looks as December will be as well, when you go into Manchester the city is full of Middle and Far east yet US has never been a strong market except for UK going west which is no where near as strong as it was due it being so costly once you are out there and I certainly have no interest in going now
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some interesting posts and good points on a complex subject. Just picking up on a couple of points other than the efficiency or otherwise of MAN's Route Development team.
From Ozzy:
"Terminal capacity needs to be his focus now. The roadmap to full reopening of legacy T2 is known. But T3 requires urgent intensive care - it is set to lose two further aircraft stands to the new security hall extension. Plans need to be put in place to make best use of the T1 stands post-closure of the terminal core".
And from Navpi: -
"Some may point to T2 and capacity /apron /slot constraints, is that not an excuse, these should have been factored in by previous management to ensure flexibility was built in , those who made these decisions have seemingly now been spirited away."
I agree that terminal capacity is a crucial issue as regards T3, but isn’t it also linked to runway capacity for the first departure wave and especially to available aircraft parking space? If, say, Ryanair indicated to the airport it wanted to base an additional 4 a/c at MAN in S25, it could perhaps obtain some slots before 06.00 (night quota permitting) or after 07.30. That might be acceptable but could the airfield accommodate an extra 4 a/c overnight? The principle of a/c being parked remote and moved onto stand as the first of the early departures leave is fine provided there are enough remote stands. Whether that is the case is far from clear. Conflicting views have been expressed on here previously and we don't appear to have a definitive answer of what the situation will be when the TP is complete from the airport itself.
MAN’s footprint, as discussed a while back, is heavily restricted by its boundaries, with very little, if any, room for expansion, even if environmental issues were ignored. Within those boundaries, there are only a few possibilities it seems to me of creating more apron & parking space, and none of them very likely, at least in the short to medium term: -
- The RVP area, which is a significant visitor attraction and presumably produces a useful revenue stream.
- The maintenance hangars which provide jobs and house important engineering facilities.
- If the T1 building were knocked down along with the MSCP and the road lay-out modified. Apart from cost, this would likely mean significant disruption while the work was done.
It doesn’t help if, as I understand it, MAG has sold off bits of its limited land resources commercially.
Some will recall that a decade ago – or was it longer – there was a plan (was there a model in Olympic House?) to expand T3 by closing Ringway Road and extending the pier round the corner plus some remote stands. Others may remember more specific details. This was found to be too expensive because of the costs involved in moving utilities for example.
We’re not privy to the specific reasons why Jet 2 elected to open a 4 a/c base at LPL rather than further develop MAN. While it may have been purely a financial equation in terms of market expansion and penetration despite the costs involved in setting up a new base, it’s an obvious question whether availability of better slots at LPL and capacity issues at MAN were also factors.
As for 2024, depending on the exact final passenger stats for 2023, it looks to me as if MAN would need growth of approx. 6.5% to 7% to achieve a record year of 30m, which is probably a stretch too far, but 29m and a bit certainly should be, subject to the usual caveats of outside events.
I don't see larger narrow-bodied aircraft by itself being sufficient to provide decent longer term growth. I gather easyjet will be operating more flights next summer with away based aircraft as well as an extra based machine, which again is a contributor. Nevertheless, the questions raised about capacity - terminal, apron, parking stands and runway at peak periods need addressing by management.. Hopefully, that is being done, and who knows, perhaps tentative plans are already in place but under wraps!.
From Ozzy:
"Terminal capacity needs to be his focus now. The roadmap to full reopening of legacy T2 is known. But T3 requires urgent intensive care - it is set to lose two further aircraft stands to the new security hall extension. Plans need to be put in place to make best use of the T1 stands post-closure of the terminal core".
And from Navpi: -
"Some may point to T2 and capacity /apron /slot constraints, is that not an excuse, these should have been factored in by previous management to ensure flexibility was built in , those who made these decisions have seemingly now been spirited away."
I agree that terminal capacity is a crucial issue as regards T3, but isn’t it also linked to runway capacity for the first departure wave and especially to available aircraft parking space? If, say, Ryanair indicated to the airport it wanted to base an additional 4 a/c at MAN in S25, it could perhaps obtain some slots before 06.00 (night quota permitting) or after 07.30. That might be acceptable but could the airfield accommodate an extra 4 a/c overnight? The principle of a/c being parked remote and moved onto stand as the first of the early departures leave is fine provided there are enough remote stands. Whether that is the case is far from clear. Conflicting views have been expressed on here previously and we don't appear to have a definitive answer of what the situation will be when the TP is complete from the airport itself.
MAN’s footprint, as discussed a while back, is heavily restricted by its boundaries, with very little, if any, room for expansion, even if environmental issues were ignored. Within those boundaries, there are only a few possibilities it seems to me of creating more apron & parking space, and none of them very likely, at least in the short to medium term: -
- The RVP area, which is a significant visitor attraction and presumably produces a useful revenue stream.
- The maintenance hangars which provide jobs and house important engineering facilities.
- If the T1 building were knocked down along with the MSCP and the road lay-out modified. Apart from cost, this would likely mean significant disruption while the work was done.
It doesn’t help if, as I understand it, MAG has sold off bits of its limited land resources commercially.
Some will recall that a decade ago – or was it longer – there was a plan (was there a model in Olympic House?) to expand T3 by closing Ringway Road and extending the pier round the corner plus some remote stands. Others may remember more specific details. This was found to be too expensive because of the costs involved in moving utilities for example.
We’re not privy to the specific reasons why Jet 2 elected to open a 4 a/c base at LPL rather than further develop MAN. While it may have been purely a financial equation in terms of market expansion and penetration despite the costs involved in setting up a new base, it’s an obvious question whether availability of better slots at LPL and capacity issues at MAN were also factors.
As for 2024, depending on the exact final passenger stats for 2023, it looks to me as if MAN would need growth of approx. 6.5% to 7% to achieve a record year of 30m, which is probably a stretch too far, but 29m and a bit certainly should be, subject to the usual caveats of outside events.
I don't see larger narrow-bodied aircraft by itself being sufficient to provide decent longer term growth. I gather easyjet will be operating more flights next summer with away based aircraft as well as an extra based machine, which again is a contributor. Nevertheless, the questions raised about capacity - terminal, apron, parking stands and runway at peak periods need addressing by management.. Hopefully, that is being done, and who knows, perhaps tentative plans are already in place but under wraps!.
Thoughts on stand availability and resilience:
- There are sufficient stands on the airfield to accommodate the current based fleet, but more will be needed for future resilience if growth is the objective. Given lead times for planning and construction, action on this is needed now.
- A number of stands are unavailable for use at any given time due to construction work on the airfield. We can expect this to continue for a considerable period to come.
- MAN's remote stands are fine for T2 ops, but very poorly located for T3 ops. A Ryanair aircraft parked up on the West Apron faces a long and challenging tow to any T3 stand. This is labour intensive, wasteful and risks incurring delays.
- The alternative to towing T3 aircraft over from the West Apron is bussing. Ryanair hate that, and the distances implied are long in MAN's case.
- T3-based aircraft parked on the West Apron will generate a disproportionate number of conflicts with regular taxying traffic when towed, particularly during easterly ops. And those aircraft will generally need to be towed across for use during peak periods.
- Even revisiting the decade-old plan to expand T3 which was vetoed by Cornish would be very challenging now; investment into new multi-storey car parks on that footprint has been made since then. And car parks are a big earner for MAG.
- There are sufficient stands on the airfield to accommodate the current based fleet, but more will be needed for future resilience if growth is the objective. Given lead times for planning and construction, action on this is needed now.
- A number of stands are unavailable for use at any given time due to construction work on the airfield. We can expect this to continue for a considerable period to come.
- MAN's remote stands are fine for T2 ops, but very poorly located for T3 ops. A Ryanair aircraft parked up on the West Apron faces a long and challenging tow to any T3 stand. This is labour intensive, wasteful and risks incurring delays.
- The alternative to towing T3 aircraft over from the West Apron is bussing. Ryanair hate that, and the distances implied are long in MAN's case.
- T3-based aircraft parked on the West Apron will generate a disproportionate number of conflicts with regular taxying traffic when towed, particularly during easterly ops. And those aircraft will generally need to be towed across for use during peak periods.
- Even revisiting the decade-old plan to expand T3 which was vetoed by Cornish would be very challenging now; investment into new multi-storey car parks on that footprint has been made since then. And car parks are a big earner for MAG.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.
Jetblue to start 7 weekly to JFK
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: GB
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading in to this and despite saying that MAN V EDI is the wrong comparison to make, I have aggregated a rough estimate of the peak season summer schedule to the NAFTA countries. If there are any mistakes please do inform me
MAN vs EDI - transatlantic @ peak
Canada:
YYZ - MAN 14x 787/A330 | EDI 7x 787, 7x B38M
YYC - EDI 4x 787
YHZ - EDI 3x B38M
total - MAN 14 WB, EDI 11 WB, 10 NB
USA:
ATL - MAN 7x A333, EDI 7x 763
JFK - MAN 14x A333/A35K, EDI 7x 763, 7x A321
BOS - EDI 5x 763
IAD - EDI 7x 752
ORD - EDI 7x 752
EWR - EDI 14x 752
LAS - MAN 3x A35K
IAH - MAN 5x A359
MCO - MAN 19x A35K/A333, EDI 2x A35K
MLB - MAN 4x 787
Total - MAN 49 WB, EDI 21 WB / 35 NB (56)
Mexico:
CUN - MAN 6x 787
MAN will see a rough average of 63 weekly departures at summer peak. All widebodies
EDI will see a rough average of 32 WB, 45 NB weekly departures for a total of 77
All in all MAN still beats EDI transatlantic wise despite being at a low point. This is just the peak week too - with the exception of some capacity to Toronto & the 3 weekly LAS, it’s all year round while EDI is heavily seasonal.
MAN will regain its big lead once the US carriers return.
MAN vs EDI - transatlantic @ peak
Canada:
YYZ - MAN 14x 787/A330 | EDI 7x 787, 7x B38M
YYC - EDI 4x 787
YHZ - EDI 3x B38M
total - MAN 14 WB, EDI 11 WB, 10 NB
USA:
ATL - MAN 7x A333, EDI 7x 763
JFK - MAN 14x A333/A35K, EDI 7x 763, 7x A321
BOS - EDI 5x 763
IAD - EDI 7x 752
ORD - EDI 7x 752
EWR - EDI 14x 752
LAS - MAN 3x A35K
IAH - MAN 5x A359
MCO - MAN 19x A35K/A333, EDI 2x A35K
MLB - MAN 4x 787
Total - MAN 49 WB, EDI 21 WB / 35 NB (56)
Mexico:
CUN - MAN 6x 787
MAN will see a rough average of 63 weekly departures at summer peak. All widebodies
EDI will see a rough average of 32 WB, 45 NB weekly departures for a total of 77
All in all MAN still beats EDI transatlantic wise despite being at a low point. This is just the peak week too - with the exception of some capacity to Toronto & the 3 weekly LAS, it’s all year round while EDI is heavily seasonal.
MAN will regain its big lead once the US carriers return.
That's what GLA said too. And PIK before them. BHX is still waiting, as are BRS and NCL. There's no God given right, someone's gotta close the deal.
You'll all drive yourselves barmy going through life coveting your neighbours goods/wives/US legacy services. This idea that MAN will regain "it's rightful place over time" isn't the best.....
You guys need Norse IMHO. Point to point access at a decent price point, just like Thomas Cook used to do daily from a UK point of sale. American are happy to (and are strongly encouraged to) feed BA over LHR. Delta cut their costs by helping Virgin build out MAN, so I'd bet jetBlue or United on the NEO. I think the peak glory days of multiple US legacies per day may be gone though.
You'll all drive yourselves barmy going through life coveting your neighbours goods/wives/US legacy services. This idea that MAN will regain "it's rightful place over time" isn't the best.....
You guys need Norse IMHO. Point to point access at a decent price point, just like Thomas Cook used to do daily from a UK point of sale. American are happy to (and are strongly encouraged to) feed BA over LHR. Delta cut their costs by helping Virgin build out MAN, so I'd bet jetBlue or United on the NEO. I think the peak glory days of multiple US legacies per day may be gone though.