Manchester-3
I get that, so far as regular or scheduled cargo ops are concerned, where the carrier is approaching the airport for preferential deals, but that doesn't account for adhoc widebody charters.
I doubt very much, given BHX past ambivalence towards cargo, that the likes of Magma/Air Atlanta or National (or their brokers) got preferential rates from the airport for their 747 cargo flights of which there have been many over the past year or so.
The airport can hardly block cargo flights especially if there's a handling agent that wants to handle them. Slots are issued by ACL and I didn't think airports had much say as regards individual allocations.
I am with you, it does seem pretty ludicrous.
I doubt very much, given BHX past ambivalence towards cargo, that the likes of Magma/Air Atlanta or National (or their brokers) got preferential rates from the airport for their 747 cargo flights of which there have been many over the past year or so.
The airport can hardly block cargo flights especially if there's a handling agent that wants to handle them. Slots are issued by ACL and I didn't think airports had much say as regards individual allocations.
I am with you, it does seem pretty ludicrous.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,257
Received 168 Likes
on
103 Posts
I think one of the issues is that the UK is really not that big and shipping freight by road from EMA to the NW is not a big stretch by any means. There is a lot of freight infrastructure at EMA which helps. I would have thought MAN may get some hold freight but not dedicated freighter other what they already have.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Cheers
Mr Mac
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cornish has gone now. The new hierarchy need to be on this and sorting it out.
Is there no obligation on MAG to demonstrate that they're serious about rectifying this? If they wilfully leave the airport unequipped to handle the aircraft concerned, then they get their way by default. If the regulator needs to revisit this issue, someone might be inviting more than a 'knuckle rap' next time?
Cornish has gone now. The new hierarchy need to be on this and sorting it out.
Cornish has gone now. The new hierarchy need to be on this and sorting it out.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the region that MAN serves I would say that is highly unlikely.
My gut tells me that the handling agents feel they make their money from passengers and a speculative investment in equipment for wide body freighters may not fit their business plan.
An independent specialist cargo handler may be the solution, whether someone would be prepared to risk their money when apparently MAG aren't on side must be debateable.
The landscape changed when airports began being run by bean counters who's first loyalty are to shareholders and investors, with the regional economic benefit very much a secondary consideration.
My gut tells me that the handling agents feel they make their money from passengers and a speculative investment in equipment for wide body freighters may not fit their business plan.
An independent specialist cargo handler may be the solution, whether someone would be prepared to risk their money when apparently MAG aren't on side must be debateable.
The landscape changed when airports began being run by bean counters who's first loyalty are to shareholders and investors, with the regional economic benefit very much a secondary consideration.
Strategic decison by MAG, ATN. Shifted all freight enquiries to EMA.
Yes, you sent that exact response earlier.
Looking at EMA cargo traffic I can't see they have turned many of these deflected enquiries into new business. Traffic remains overwhelmingly the big three integrators plus Bezos' mob.
If I were running MAG I wouldn't be impressed, unless there just weren't any leads worth pursuing.
Looking at EMA cargo traffic I can't see they have turned many of these deflected enquiries into new business. Traffic remains overwhelmingly the big three integrators plus Bezos' mob.
If I were running MAG I wouldn't be impressed, unless there just weren't any leads worth pursuing.
Why would any serious new business turning their nose up at EMA want to got to MAN badly enough that they'd need to go through hoops getting main deck loading equipment and apply for slots? Boxes don't have a preference and so long as the charging regime isn't wildly misaligned, then what's the business driver?
What serious operator is asking for access to MAN? Or if it's ad-hoc cargo, why bother? LGW doesn't have any, not one. MAN has real issues supporting the existing passenger operation within the existing infrastructure, adding ad-hoc cargo charters into the mix vs. the costs involved isn't worth pursuing. I think what this really comes down to, and I understand this, is a wish to go back to the glory days. Regain MAN's "rightful place" and see Cathay and various Chinese heavy tails all lined up unloading.
Heart over head surely?
What serious operator is asking for access to MAN? Or if it's ad-hoc cargo, why bother? LGW doesn't have any, not one. MAN has real issues supporting the existing passenger operation within the existing infrastructure, adding ad-hoc cargo charters into the mix vs. the costs involved isn't worth pursuing. I think what this really comes down to, and I understand this, is a wish to go back to the glory days. Regain MAN's "rightful place" and see Cathay and various Chinese heavy tails all lined up unloading.
Heart over head surely?
It was on February 14th last year that Rutan16 highlighted the Reuters report into this issue. In the eleven months since then MAN has not, to my knowledge, either loaded or unloaded a widebodied cargo aircraft. I'm reliably informed that there have been a number of serious enquiries from operators in the meantime. One year on, we really should be seeing positive progress.
Why would any serious new business turning their nose up at EMA want to got to MAN badly enough that they'd need to go through hoops getting main deck loading equipment and apply for slots? Boxes don't have a preference and so long as the charging regime isn't wildly misaligned, then what's the business driver?
What serious operator is asking for access to MAN? Or if it's ad-hoc cargo, why bother? LGW doesn't have any, not one. MAN has real issues supporting the existing passenger operation within the existing infrastructure, adding ad-hoc cargo charters into the mix vs. the costs involved isn't worth pursuing. I think what this really comes down to, and I understand this, is a wish to go back to the glory days. Regain MAN's "rightful place" and see Cathay and various Chinese heavy tails all lined up unloading.
Heart over head surely?
What serious operator is asking for access to MAN? Or if it's ad-hoc cargo, why bother? LGW doesn't have any, not one. MAN has real issues supporting the existing passenger operation within the existing infrastructure, adding ad-hoc cargo charters into the mix vs. the costs involved isn't worth pursuing. I think what this really comes down to, and I understand this, is a wish to go back to the glory days. Regain MAN's "rightful place" and see Cathay and various Chinese heavy tails all lined up unloading.
Heart over head surely?
The difference between former CEO Mr Cornish's outlook and mine is that he viewed MAN purely as a profit centre for the MAG balance sheet. But I would argue that the airport is much more than that ... MAG is the custodian of a vital utility asset which plays an essential role in the economic health of the region. We're talking about employment opportunities and competitive edge for businesses across Greater Manchester and beyond. You can trivialise that to a desire to view "heavy tails" if you want to (and I've no aversion to seeing them if they're on offer!), but we need to address this topic in a grown-up manner. The economic prosperity of this region actually matters to me. By extension, I want MAN to be the best it can be. That aspiration was sometimes at odds with the former CEO's playbook (see T3 extension veto, MAG Property missteps, hangar letting debacles, and more). A utility asset cannot be run for the balance sheet in isolation; there has to be a reasonable element of service obligation to the region in the equation too.
Looking at EMA cargo traffic I can't see they have turned many of these deflected enquiries into new business. Traffic remains overwhelmingly the big three integrators plus Bezos' mob.
(Just checked FR24, so far today STN has received 4 wide body non integrator freighters, with a couple more potentials to come).
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Oban, Scotland
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In recent years the logistic hubs which take imported goods, store and then distribute them round the UK have become concentrated in the area between the M1 and the M6. EMA is well located for these hubs, MAN isn't.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,257
Received 168 Likes
on
103 Posts
In Oban
Totally agree. If you fly over the area it’s like someone has dropped large Lego bricks over the East Midlands when viewed from the air.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Totally agree. If you fly over the area it’s like someone has dropped large Lego bricks over the East Midlands when viewed from the air.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Just to be clear, there is zero expectation that MAN would become a HUB for carriers such as DHL, UPS or FedEx. They are firmly entrenched elsewhere with trained staff and vast infrastructure in place. However, MAN could feature as a spoke to a continental hub for operators such as these - FedEx have applied for slots again in recent times, though they haven't yet been taken up. There have been enquiries concerning use of MAN by a number of other cargo operators, none of which have seen the light of day. They have their reasons for requesting MAN. Also, some suggest that Lufthansa Cargo never actually wanted to leave and would be interested in resuming MAN services. Should they wish to do so, that should be enabled.
Note that nobody in this conversation is under the illusion that MAN will compete to be a cargo superhub; that is completely fanciful. But there are operators out there for whom MAN is the right solution, and it is my view that their business should be welcomed.
Note that nobody in this conversation is under the illusion that MAN will compete to be a cargo superhub; that is completely fanciful. But there are operators out there for whom MAN is the right solution, and it is my view that their business should be welcomed.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do find the cargo discussion, which has been going on for years, a bit like a broken record. I'm a massive MAN-fan, it gave me a career for 40 years and I remember the glory days of main deck cargo. It was fun while it lasted. But we should accept that it is not likely to return and understand why.
The MAG business strategy since the turn of the century has been to maximise shareholder value. You'll still read the right words about 'being an economic engine' etc in the annual reports and press releases but it is money that talks. If main deck cargo made decent money for MAG at Manchester then it would be happening. It doesn't. Building the required apron space on a site with very little real estate would be an opportunity cost as compared with selling it off or leasing it to the likes of Amazon for non-aviation use. That's why all those warehouse have sprung up over on the west side on land once identified for core operational use. MAG has sold off that land for good. The 'economic benefit to the region' argument for flown main-deck cargo is sketchy, as consolidating and transporting cargo to East Midlands, London, or indeed the Continent is not going to deter companies investing or locating in the northwest of England if there are other reasons to be here, such as skills, labour, and a customer base. The transport logistics, even for just-in-time supply chains, work fine with an element of trucking. You could argue that the non-aviation warehouses and distribution give a greater economic benefit to the region than flown cargo.
Someone posed the question here that if MAG didn't have EMA and STN would it change the strategy on main deck cargo? No. Boxes on pallets don't park their cars in the car parks or buy anything in the shops. They are a low yield for MAG. The reason that the integrators are at EMA is because MAG inherited the legacy there from the previous owner. The integrators pay big lease fees and have invested all the money in the infrastructure, they are unlikely to leave and go elsewhere. It makes sense for MAG at EMA because there will never be the passenger throughput which could otherwise use that apron space. STN just has the luxury of space - a massive amount of real estate either on or adjacent to the airfield as compared to MAN. I don't like this state of affairs any more than other commentators here, but I know MAG! We're getting a decent new/refurbished T2 because it will in time pay for itself. As for cargo - the M56 is right alongside.
The MAG business strategy since the turn of the century has been to maximise shareholder value. You'll still read the right words about 'being an economic engine' etc in the annual reports and press releases but it is money that talks. If main deck cargo made decent money for MAG at Manchester then it would be happening. It doesn't. Building the required apron space on a site with very little real estate would be an opportunity cost as compared with selling it off or leasing it to the likes of Amazon for non-aviation use. That's why all those warehouse have sprung up over on the west side on land once identified for core operational use. MAG has sold off that land for good. The 'economic benefit to the region' argument for flown main-deck cargo is sketchy, as consolidating and transporting cargo to East Midlands, London, or indeed the Continent is not going to deter companies investing or locating in the northwest of England if there are other reasons to be here, such as skills, labour, and a customer base. The transport logistics, even for just-in-time supply chains, work fine with an element of trucking. You could argue that the non-aviation warehouses and distribution give a greater economic benefit to the region than flown cargo.
Someone posed the question here that if MAG didn't have EMA and STN would it change the strategy on main deck cargo? No. Boxes on pallets don't park their cars in the car parks or buy anything in the shops. They are a low yield for MAG. The reason that the integrators are at EMA is because MAG inherited the legacy there from the previous owner. The integrators pay big lease fees and have invested all the money in the infrastructure, they are unlikely to leave and go elsewhere. It makes sense for MAG at EMA because there will never be the passenger throughput which could otherwise use that apron space. STN just has the luxury of space - a massive amount of real estate either on or adjacent to the airfield as compared to MAN. I don't like this state of affairs any more than other commentators here, but I know MAG! We're getting a decent new/refurbished T2 because it will in time pay for itself. As for cargo - the M56 is right alongside.
Last edited by roverman; 18th Jan 2024 at 23:56. Reason: clarification / emphasis
Thanks, Roverman. You express the MAG case very well ...
Quite so. Mr Cornish put group profit ahead of the best interests of Manchester Airport far too often in my view. There is a balance to be struck at a utility asset between operator profits and providing the level of service which the customer deserves. I contend that the tenure of Mr C saw that balance skewed way too generously in MAG's favour. Cargo policy is a glaring example of this, but not the only one.
Meanwhile, even if MAN never welcomes a freighter again, if the airport team have backed themselves into a position where there is nowhere to go for apron expansion to ensure future resilience, then that is a lamentable legacy for any executive to have on the CV. However, I'm not suggesting that MAN needs to construct some new dedicated cargo apron; volumes won't justify that. But business which is there for the taking should not be rebuffed. Accommodating Lufthansa Cargo and a nightly FedEx didn't bring the airport grinding to a halt pre-covid when the throughput was higher than it is now by around 24,000 movements per annum.
The MAG business strategy since the turn of the century has been to maximise shareholder value.
Meanwhile, even if MAN never welcomes a freighter again, if the airport team have backed themselves into a position where there is nowhere to go for apron expansion to ensure future resilience, then that is a lamentable legacy for any executive to have on the CV. However, I'm not suggesting that MAN needs to construct some new dedicated cargo apron; volumes won't justify that. But business which is there for the taking should not be rebuffed. Accommodating Lufthansa Cargo and a nightly FedEx didn't bring the airport grinding to a halt pre-covid when the throughput was higher than it is now by around 24,000 movements per annum.
Oh lord, forgive me!