Manchester-3
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't think why IAG would want to create a new airline LEVEL UK for example, when Aer Lingus is getting established as a player on long haul at Manchester. Makes zero sense financially or operationally.
My thoughts on this were not prompted by any *desire* to lose Aer Lingus UK from a MAN perspective, but rather by increasing pressure from DUB interests in focusing scarce EI assets there. As we know, MAN would love to get it's hands on some of EI's new A21N's, but inevitably DUB has first dibs on new aircraft deliveries. MAN will always depend on DUB's fleet surplus - availability of which may dwindle in more buoyant economic times. Arguably, it already has. MAN lost it's third EIUK aircraft (G-EIRH) to DUB repatriation in 2023, and seemingly can't source any more EI frames for 2024. MAN can support more aircraft than EI is able to provide. Level has a management structure and A330 experience in place. The suggestion that ex-Iberia A330's could be headed to MAN just raised the LEVEL brand as a potential option, as IB could be better placed than EI to cascade down surplus A330's on behalf of the wider IAG stable.
My thoughts on this were not prompted by any *desire* to lose Aer Lingus UK from a MAN perspective, but rather by increasing pressure from DUB interests in focusing scarce EI assets there. As we know, MAN would love to get it's hands on some of EI's new A21N's, but inevitably DUB has first dibs on new aircraft deliveries. MAN will always depend on DUB's fleet surplus - availability of which may dwindle in more buoyant economic times. Arguably, it already has. MAN lost it's third EIUK aircraft (G-EIRH) to DUB repatriation in 2023, and seemingly can't source any more EI frames for 2024. MAN can support more aircraft than EI is able to provide. Level has a management structure and A330 experience in place. The suggestion that ex-Iberia A330's could be headed to MAN just raised the LEVEL brand as a potential option, as IB could be better placed than EI to cascade down surplus A330's on behalf of the wider IAG stable.
MAN can support more A330s? Says who?
I know you guys like to speculate, but really you are way off.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worth watching this video blog covering a customer experience through T2. This chap from Nottinghamshire normally flies from Heathrow but chose this time to travel to JFK with Virgin ex-MAN. He's never used MAN before and is totally blown away by the experience. Just shows how MAN is turning the corner with the new T2, the security improvements and modern facilities it offers.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See below
Is actuality not where we draw comfort in regard to speculation, ie FACTS ?
Maybe you can you enlighten us regarding your own bleak prognosis and a source to confirm we are "way off" ?
If you don't have one its not really worth engaging in serious debate ?
https://www.independent.ie/business/...%20this%20year
‐‐-------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile......
https://mediacentre.manchesterairpor...ber-on-record/
Between now and then, though, we have a whole host of new announcements and developments for people to look forward to; from exciting new routes .........
Last edited by Navpi; 13th Jan 2024 at 17:33.
If I'm "way off", maybe you can post facts and data to demonstrate why that is so. Go right ahead.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South East
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fact is airlines have assets. Aircraft. They choose where those very expensive assets will make the most money for their bottom line.
It isn’t that Aer Lingus for example want a new 321NX in DUB for pride, or anything other than to them that’s where it will deliver the greatest financial returns.
Or that BA don’t care about Manchester. The Atlantic JV with BA/EI/IB/AY means they pay a share of the costs. And take a share of the revenue of the EIUK operation. And if it becomes prudent to put a LGW config 777 in I’m sure that would happen if the business case supported it.
Similarly post COVID Virgin consolidated their London network at LHR. They have to sweat their assets. They have to operate every LHR slot, and also one presumes they make more money out of doing so, same as the IAG case.
No airline board sits and says we “need” to fly Manchester to anywhere because there is demand. If using the same asset (aircraft) to add a 15th daily LHR-JFK would make more money, or taking over a 3rd daily LHR-ATL for your owner would make more money.. that’s what you do.
The recent Edinburgh boom is primarily driven by inbound tourism.
Manchesters historically strong Trans Atlantic network was driven by outbound tourism. The days of 777s and MD-11s to ORD, ATL and EWR were not full of inbound tourists. Whatever you think the local tourist boards can do, they can’t force customer behaviour. On a whistle stop tour of the UK, the Manchester region can’t compete with Buckingham Palace, the Tower of London, or Edinburgh Castle. Putting the Visit Britain HQ on the threshold of 23R at Manchester wouldn’t change that.
In short, anything that doesn’t go Manchester’s way isn’t a slight on Manchester, but a business doing what business does to maximise return on investment.
About me; I’m Northern. Manchester was my base airport for many years. I’d love to see expansion. But I feel people need to see the wider picture. From the airlines perspective…they’re about maximising profit
It isn’t that Aer Lingus for example want a new 321NX in DUB for pride, or anything other than to them that’s where it will deliver the greatest financial returns.
Or that BA don’t care about Manchester. The Atlantic JV with BA/EI/IB/AY means they pay a share of the costs. And take a share of the revenue of the EIUK operation. And if it becomes prudent to put a LGW config 777 in I’m sure that would happen if the business case supported it.
Similarly post COVID Virgin consolidated their London network at LHR. They have to sweat their assets. They have to operate every LHR slot, and also one presumes they make more money out of doing so, same as the IAG case.
No airline board sits and says we “need” to fly Manchester to anywhere because there is demand. If using the same asset (aircraft) to add a 15th daily LHR-JFK would make more money, or taking over a 3rd daily LHR-ATL for your owner would make more money.. that’s what you do.
The recent Edinburgh boom is primarily driven by inbound tourism.
Manchesters historically strong Trans Atlantic network was driven by outbound tourism. The days of 777s and MD-11s to ORD, ATL and EWR were not full of inbound tourists. Whatever you think the local tourist boards can do, they can’t force customer behaviour. On a whistle stop tour of the UK, the Manchester region can’t compete with Buckingham Palace, the Tower of London, or Edinburgh Castle. Putting the Visit Britain HQ on the threshold of 23R at Manchester wouldn’t change that.
In short, anything that doesn’t go Manchester’s way isn’t a slight on Manchester, but a business doing what business does to maximise return on investment.
About me; I’m Northern. Manchester was my base airport for many years. I’d love to see expansion. But I feel people need to see the wider picture. From the airlines perspective…they’re about maximising profit
If you want me to take this post seriously, then you will need to engage in a more constructive and respectful manner. I will debate historic passenger flow data, market conditions, future travel trends, geopolitical and global economic factors with you if you like. 30+ years experience analysing airline data, traffic flows (and much more) really helps with that sort of thing. However, if your level is "says who?", "you are way off" and "you guys like to speculate" then I'll just leave you to it, thanks.
If I'm "way off", maybe you can post facts and data to demonstrate why that is so. Go right ahead.
If I'm "way off", maybe you can post facts and data to demonstrate why that is so. Go right ahead.
You want facts. OK, If the MAN transatlantic traffic is so lucrative, where are AA, United, Delta? What happened to BIMAN's transit service through MAN to the US? Even Emirates have given up on that idea.
I come to this thread to keep up on news at my local airport not to read a thousand word thesis speculating on what you or anyone else wants.
For what it's worth, 40+ years in the airline business.
Downwind Left - I agree with your points. This is exactly why Aer Lingus assets are preferred at DUB (and Virgin at LHR) rather than MAN. And also why the Iberia A330 fleet may represent a more promising source of additional IAG aircraft than Aer Lingus for the MAN operation in the future.
I think most on here are quite realistic about the reduced Transatlantic outbound market post-covid, with exchange rates a major factor. However, there is a strong argument that the extent of the capacity reduction now seen is overdone. Demand on MAN Transatlantic is not about to recover to Summer 2019 levels, but that doesn't mean that present capacity is adequate pitched so far below those levels.
I think most on here are quite realistic about the reduced Transatlantic outbound market post-covid, with exchange rates a major factor. However, there is a strong argument that the extent of the capacity reduction now seen is overdone. Demand on MAN Transatlantic is not about to recover to Summer 2019 levels, but that doesn't mean that present capacity is adequate pitched so far below those levels.
TURIN - Since you ask, BOSTON was the leading route touted for Aer Lingus A21N service from MAN. The aircraft seems ideally suited to that market.
American, United and Delta tailored their post-covid T/A schedules to suit the US outbound leisure market for three reasons: 1) the USD-GBP exchange rate strongly favoured US domiciled customers; 2) the Biden regime maintained strict covid restrictions on UK travellers for many months after the UK had opened up to travellers from the US; 3) Reduced demand for business travel post-covid. MAN Transatlantic is predominantly an outbound market. Delta consider themselves to be represented at MAN through their partner Virgin Atlantic.
Biman and Emirates ... UK airports are disadvantaged in competing for transit services due to UK DfT rules which require all passengers to disembark and go through a full security screening. The economics of SIN-MAN-IAH mean that SIA is prepared to run their through-service in spite of this, but it is a headwind to the appeal of the operation.
Finally, why the unpleasant and aggressive tone to your posts? Where is the need for that? If you don't like the content on here, nobody is forcing you to read it. It isn't all about you.
American, United and Delta tailored their post-covid T/A schedules to suit the US outbound leisure market for three reasons: 1) the USD-GBP exchange rate strongly favoured US domiciled customers; 2) the Biden regime maintained strict covid restrictions on UK travellers for many months after the UK had opened up to travellers from the US; 3) Reduced demand for business travel post-covid. MAN Transatlantic is predominantly an outbound market. Delta consider themselves to be represented at MAN through their partner Virgin Atlantic.
Biman and Emirates ... UK airports are disadvantaged in competing for transit services due to UK DfT rules which require all passengers to disembark and go through a full security screening. The economics of SIN-MAN-IAH mean that SIA is prepared to run their through-service in spite of this, but it is a headwind to the appeal of the operation.
Finally, why the unpleasant and aggressive tone to your posts? Where is the need for that? If you don't like the content on here, nobody is forcing you to read it. It isn't all about you.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not really bothered if you take it seriously or not. I would just like to know on what routes EIUK is going to use an (checks notes) A21N?
You want facts. OK, If the MAN transatlantic traffic is so lucrative, where are AA, United, Delta? What happened to BIMAN's transit service through MAN to the US? Even Emirates have given up on that idea.
I come to this thread to keep up on news at my local airport not to read a thousand word thesis speculating on what you or anyone else wants.
For what it's worth, 40+ years in the airline business.
You want facts. OK, If the MAN transatlantic traffic is so lucrative, where are AA, United, Delta? What happened to BIMAN's transit service through MAN to the US? Even Emirates have given up on that idea.
I come to this thread to keep up on news at my local airport not to read a thousand word thesis speculating on what you or anyone else wants.
For what it's worth, 40+ years in the airline business.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fact is airlines have assets. Aircraft. They choose where those very expensive assets will make the most money for their bottom line.
It isn’t that Aer Lingus for example want a new 321NX in DUB for pride, or anything other than to them that’s where it will deliver the greatest financial returns.
Or that BA don’t care about Manchester. The Atlantic JV with BA/EI/IB/AY means they pay a share of the costs. And take a share of the revenue of the EIUK operation. And if it becomes prudent to put a LGW config 777 in I’m sure that would happen if the business case supported it.
Similarly post COVID Virgin consolidated their London network at LHR. They have to sweat their assets. They have to operate every LHR slot, and also one presumes they make more money out of doing so, same as the IAG case.
No airline board sits and says we “need” to fly Manchester to anywhere because there is demand. If using the same asset (aircraft) to add a 15th daily LHR-JFK would make more money, or taking over a 3rd daily LHR-ATL for your owner would make more money.. that’s what you do.
The recent Edinburgh boom is primarily driven by inbound tourism.
Manchesters historically strong Trans Atlantic network was driven by outbound tourism. The days of 777s and MD-11s to ORD, ATL and EWR were not full of inbound tourists. Whatever you think the local tourist boards can do, they can’t force customer behaviour. On a whistle stop tour of the UK, the Manchester region can’t compete with Buckingham Palace, the Tower of London, or Edinburgh Castle. Putting the Visit Britain HQ on the threshold of 23R at Manchester wouldn’t change that.
In short, anything that doesn’t go Manchester’s way isn’t a slight on Manchester, but a business doing what business does to maximise return on investment.
About me; I’m Northern. Manchester was my base airport for many years. I’d love to see expansion. But I feel people need to see the wider picture. From the airlines perspective…they’re about maximising profit
It isn’t that Aer Lingus for example want a new 321NX in DUB for pride, or anything other than to them that’s where it will deliver the greatest financial returns.
Or that BA don’t care about Manchester. The Atlantic JV with BA/EI/IB/AY means they pay a share of the costs. And take a share of the revenue of the EIUK operation. And if it becomes prudent to put a LGW config 777 in I’m sure that would happen if the business case supported it.
Similarly post COVID Virgin consolidated their London network at LHR. They have to sweat their assets. They have to operate every LHR slot, and also one presumes they make more money out of doing so, same as the IAG case.
No airline board sits and says we “need” to fly Manchester to anywhere because there is demand. If using the same asset (aircraft) to add a 15th daily LHR-JFK would make more money, or taking over a 3rd daily LHR-ATL for your owner would make more money.. that’s what you do.
The recent Edinburgh boom is primarily driven by inbound tourism.
Manchesters historically strong Trans Atlantic network was driven by outbound tourism. The days of 777s and MD-11s to ORD, ATL and EWR were not full of inbound tourists. Whatever you think the local tourist boards can do, they can’t force customer behaviour. On a whistle stop tour of the UK, the Manchester region can’t compete with Buckingham Palace, the Tower of London, or Edinburgh Castle. Putting the Visit Britain HQ on the threshold of 23R at Manchester wouldn’t change that.
In short, anything that doesn’t go Manchester’s way isn’t a slight on Manchester, but a business doing what business does to maximise return on investment.
About me; I’m Northern. Manchester was my base airport for many years. I’d love to see expansion. But I feel people need to see the wider picture. From the airlines perspective…they’re about maximising profit
Yes difficult to stomach hard facts but its reasoned analysis which is accurate and difficult to argue against.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Stockport
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quoting Navpi: -
Not sure if representative but interestingly BA fare LHR JFK is over £132 cheaper from LHR than same dates 1st week July than EI Ex Manchester to JFK.
Is that to make up for lack of premium ?
It seems a nice hike .
It used to be said that because airlines flying across the pond from LHR, (I'm thinking BA in particular), were able to attract plenty of people up front at premium fares, they were happy to discount economy prices to help fill up seats at the back. Whether that was direct by the airlines or through other booking agents, and whether it still holds, I don't know. Maybe Skip can tell us.
Of course, if demand is strong on a particular day from MAN, that will be reflected in the EI price.
Not sure if representative but interestingly BA fare LHR JFK is over £132 cheaper from LHR than same dates 1st week July than EI Ex Manchester to JFK.
Is that to make up for lack of premium ?
It seems a nice hike .
It used to be said that because airlines flying across the pond from LHR, (I'm thinking BA in particular), were able to attract plenty of people up front at premium fares, they were happy to discount economy prices to help fill up seats at the back. Whether that was direct by the airlines or through other booking agents, and whether it still holds, I don't know. Maybe Skip can tell us.
Of course, if demand is strong on a particular day from MAN, that will be reflected in the EI price.
I think Aer Lingus took a sensible decision to keep their fleet flying by opening MAN, my worry is that with DUB bouncing back, will their heart be in a MAN base on an arms length AOC or will they just simplify it and make the most bang for their buck at home base in Ireland? I would bet that like any business, there's a good argument to move the MAN fleet back to DUB, now whether that's cold numbers or stratetgic focus and politics, we shall see. Hopefully the counter-argument of doing something worthwhile in MAN wins, but it will need supprt, not just something to keep 2 frames busy uintil something else comes along.
Not even sure it's an IAG thing, it's likely a decision for the op-co in Dublin rather than the group. If they have a determination to make it work, then some Iberia A330 frames may be a good use of IAG assets as IB get more A359s. Brand recongnition is often over rated as many use price comparison sites and "Norse" doesn't sound like a London operation but seems to do well out of LGW.
Apologies, I see downwind_left just made a similar post.
Pre-COVID, EI were 1 x daily A330 on DUB-IAD. Post COVID this has become 2 x daily A321 and they’re making more money. As more 321s arrive, other A330s may be displaced. There is indeed talk of yet another pair of ex QR birds joining (there’s 3 already in the fleet). MAN-BOS & MAN-ORD are consistently mentioned on Irish chat boards, albeit on A321s. I remember the original rumours were 2 x A330 and 2 x A321 at the MAN base.
Now it's full of keyboard analysis from wannabee airline CEOs who think they should be running the airport.
Still it makes a change from all the hot air about cargo.
Cargo remains a topical and relevant conversation on here. Since reports emerged last year alleging that MAG had received a knuckle-rap over it's cargo policy at MAN, the airport has still handled NO whole-plane freight flights using a widebodied type, aside from aircraft visiting STS for maintenance work. Nor are there any reports of management moving to restore handling capability for these in conjunction with handling agencies.
Perhaps your best course would be to skip over posts which don't interest you? There may even be a function to put posters you dislike on "ignore".
Perhaps your best course would be to skip over posts which don't interest you? There may even be a function to put posters you dislike on "ignore".