Isle of Man-3
A common misunderstanding arising again in discussion here.
The term 'LOW COST AIRLINE' is not and never has been a reference to the fares which customers pay. The term quite literally means that the inherent cost of operating the business is kept below those of traditional legacy carriers. This is achieved via the way the business is structured. What the customer actually experiences is a 'NO-FRILLS CARRIER' ... an airline which compartmentalises every aspect of the flying experience and charges by component of the itinerary ... add-on fees for all 'frills'. Note that whilst fares offered by these carriers often are attractively priced, they don't have to be. There is no implied promise that all customers will pay a low fare. These carriers are businesses which exist to maximise profits, and they do this by deploying yield-management software to maximise revenues like every other airline.
Of course, the public have come to believe that a 'low cost airline' means low fares for them is part of the deal. It really isn't. The airline will charge what the market will bear. But, of course, the LCC's are quite happy that this widespread misunderstanding is commonly held by the public at large. If customers have convinced themselves that 'Airline X' will always sell them a cheap ticket, the company is not going to disabuse them of that impression. The myth serves them well. So customers find out the reality the hard way when they look to make a late booking on a popular route.
If you're an investor in an airline, you want to see 'low costs'. If you're a passenger, you want to secure a 'cheap fare'. Two very different things. The one does not guarantee the other.
The term 'LOW COST AIRLINE' is not and never has been a reference to the fares which customers pay. The term quite literally means that the inherent cost of operating the business is kept below those of traditional legacy carriers. This is achieved via the way the business is structured. What the customer actually experiences is a 'NO-FRILLS CARRIER' ... an airline which compartmentalises every aspect of the flying experience and charges by component of the itinerary ... add-on fees for all 'frills'. Note that whilst fares offered by these carriers often are attractively priced, they don't have to be. There is no implied promise that all customers will pay a low fare. These carriers are businesses which exist to maximise profits, and they do this by deploying yield-management software to maximise revenues like every other airline.
Of course, the public have come to believe that a 'low cost airline' means low fares for them is part of the deal. It really isn't. The airline will charge what the market will bear. But, of course, the LCC's are quite happy that this widespread misunderstanding is commonly held by the public at large. If customers have convinced themselves that 'Airline X' will always sell them a cheap ticket, the company is not going to disabuse them of that impression. The myth serves them well. So customers find out the reality the hard way when they look to make a late booking on a popular route.
If you're an investor in an airline, you want to see 'low costs'. If you're a passenger, you want to secure a 'cheap fare'. Two very different things. The one does not guarantee the other.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
businessair75
I don't think its right that a carrier that claims to be low cost is charging £483.00 before seats and bags for a flight to London with a badly timed one a day service. We saw the same thing last year with single fares from Liverpool to Isle of Man commanding £600.00. I would suggest someone somewhere in Easyjet knows what is going on and looking the other way that pricing behaviour is not right.
I don't think its right that a carrier that claims to be low cost is charging £483.00 before seats and bags for a flight to London with a badly timed one a day service. We saw the same thing last year with single fares from Liverpool to Isle of Man commanding £600.00. I would suggest someone somewhere in Easyjet knows what is going on and looking the other way that pricing behaviour is not right.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: North
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IOMX
You get very defensive and a little ar*y in your replies. I understood your long standing argument about having a more frequent service but then you went on a tangent about easyJet’s pricing which by and large is dictated by the demand. For every ‘high priced fare, there will be many more on that 156 seater that are sold much cheaper, probably at a loss at certain times.
You get very defensive and a little ar*y in your replies. I understood your long standing argument about having a more frequent service but then you went on a tangent about easyJet’s pricing which by and large is dictated by the demand. For every ‘high priced fare, there will be many more on that 156 seater that are sold much cheaper, probably at a loss at certain times.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OzzyOzBorn
Yes I understand all of your points. It is indeed a misconception that Easyjet are always offering cheap fares something certain posters on here should take note of. The point I am trying to make is some people believe Easyjet are 'wonderful' and always offering great fares and a great service. I don't think they do at all in the case of the Isle of Man for any number of reasons I have laid out in previous posts and they have a habit of driving out competition to force up their yield. As you say they are a business I get that but its just not what is needed on an island where there are few alternative choices to travel.
Yes I understand all of your points. It is indeed a misconception that Easyjet are always offering cheap fares something certain posters on here should take note of. The point I am trying to make is some people believe Easyjet are 'wonderful' and always offering great fares and a great service. I don't think they do at all in the case of the Isle of Man for any number of reasons I have laid out in previous posts and they have a habit of driving out competition to force up their yield. As you say they are a business I get that but its just not what is needed on an island where there are few alternative choices to travel.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely if there is this demand you speak of for the business focused routes then the LCY route would survive and Easyjet wouldn’t have made enough and they would have pulled off. Instead it seems the business pax went for the cheap Easyjet flight and didn’t care about the time of the flight or flying to LGW. Or the LCY route at £150 return wasn’t charging enough to turn a decent profit.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
businessair75
I am sorry that you do not like my replies all I am seeking to do is air a view and a set of opinions as that is what this forum is for. It does seem a few posters on here want to defend Easyjet and bash smaller operators I seek to address the balance! And if you looked at my posts you will see I am not against Easyjet at all in fact I support one service a day but that needs to be supplemented with a twice daily service at early morning and evening. I think that is a very fair and balanced non defensive position compared to some on here but then maybe I am living in a parallel world!
I don't think it is a tangent the point is Easyjet are flooding the market offering non sustainable pricing and then when they are the only ones left they push up their prices. That means we don't get to see a frequent service and so in my view the two points are intrinsically linked.
I am sorry that you do not like my replies all I am seeking to do is air a view and a set of opinions as that is what this forum is for. It does seem a few posters on here want to defend Easyjet and bash smaller operators I seek to address the balance! And if you looked at my posts you will see I am not against Easyjet at all in fact I support one service a day but that needs to be supplemented with a twice daily service at early morning and evening. I think that is a very fair and balanced non defensive position compared to some on here but then maybe I am living in a parallel world!
I don't think it is a tangent the point is Easyjet are flooding the market offering non sustainable pricing and then when they are the only ones left they push up their prices. That means we don't get to see a frequent service and so in my view the two points are intrinsically linked.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA318
I already laid out the position that the LCY route was complicated because it was in most cases operated by either Eastern or Loganair on behalf of BACF. Several airlines trying to make money out of it. And actually I think it was all going fine before the pandemic there was no indication of a problem then. If the IOMG had supported LHR or LCY for a little longer to help bridge the pandemic gap I suspect all would have carried on being fine.
I already laid out the position that the LCY route was complicated because it was in most cases operated by either Eastern or Loganair on behalf of BACF. Several airlines trying to make money out of it. And actually I think it was all going fine before the pandemic there was no indication of a problem then. If the IOMG had supported LHR or LCY for a little longer to help bridge the pandemic gap I suspect all would have carried on being fine.
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately though, it's probably only not sustainable for the smaller airlines in competition. It's probably very sustainable for easyJet if / when they drive off the competition and sell seats at £400+ Free market economics at play.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that’s going to be the case. BA doesn’t have anything smaller than an E190. And on anything smaller you are dividing the same fees between fewer people so fares start to rise fast. In the past several carriers tried it too and the only survivor is Easyjet so evidently they make money otherwise I doubt they would stick at it.
You also gave excuses why all the other attempts failed but surely it proves the point. This dream scenario of a carrier basing their plane on the IOM, operating just twice a day, at peak time for max fare of £150 return just isn’t feasible. It’s never going to happen.
BA also had Eastern operate the Saab2000 to DUS and after they returned the Saab the E170 took over DUS so they were happy to continue that route despite much more competition.
You also gave excuses why all the other attempts failed but surely it proves the point. This dream scenario of a carrier basing their plane on the IOM, operating just twice a day, at peak time for max fare of £150 return just isn’t feasible. It’s never going to happen.
BA also had Eastern operate the Saab2000 to DUS and after they returned the Saab the E170 took over DUS so they were happy to continue that route despite much more competition.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Antrim
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking forward to next summer, although particularly in the current times that can be precarious, it's perhaps worth noting there's double daily rotations on the LGW on 4 out of 7 days per week, perhaps not totally business friendly timings but they are there and let's be honest U2 will be more than happy to fill in the gaps if the demand is there. No sign of LTN.
In the end U2 are a business, if it suits them and their needs they will roll out more/less flights and tweak timings, but the demand for business travel simply isn't there like it used to be. Flying BHD-LHR early in the morning recently not one suit to be seen, this would have been packed with them pre-covid.
I understand the want of flexible schedules etc but the other way to look at it is without them nobody would be flying between London and IOM currently, if the demand was there another carrier would be in making hay selling day returns to business pax and possibly making it unviable for U2 to operate as they do or change timings.
In the end U2 are a business, if it suits them and their needs they will roll out more/less flights and tweak timings, but the demand for business travel simply isn't there like it used to be. Flying BHD-LHR early in the morning recently not one suit to be seen, this would have been packed with them pre-covid.
I understand the want of flexible schedules etc but the other way to look at it is without them nobody would be flying between London and IOM currently, if the demand was there another carrier would be in making hay selling day returns to business pax and possibly making it unviable for U2 to operate as they do or change timings.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Far from it. But the last time I looked this forum was for airing and sharing opinions and views and as long as that is the case that is exactly what I will do. And I for one am happy to own a view that does not fit with everybody else although I know there are a lot of people who do hold views like mine on this matter they just find it challenging to be drowned out by some who don't want to listen at all! Look at it it this way its far better to debate and discuss these issues than say nothing surely? Maybe by taking note of an opposing view that can help understand a situation better. If through doing that the outcome and I recognise its a huge if we get the right people ( policymakers etc) to see what is happening we might just might end up with something that it is good for the island. Wouldn't that just be fantastic?
Finally I think most people who post on here have some very reasonable and valid points and I certainly 'listen' to those its the reason why if you read my posts I agree at least one Easyjet service a day makes sense.
Finally I think most people who post on here have some very reasonable and valid points and I certainly 'listen' to those its the reason why if you read my posts I agree at least one Easyjet service a day makes sense.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cavokblues
Yes I agree and that is why I think in the case of an island policy around this is very important. You can debate open and closed skies all I would say is an island is different to a market where it is easier to make choices and go to different airports etc. And if Easyjet are operating in a manner that drives off competition and pushes up prices afterwards someone should be looking at that behaviour and seeking to prevent it happening it's not right.
Yes I agree and that is why I think in the case of an island policy around this is very important. You can debate open and closed skies all I would say is an island is different to a market where it is easier to make choices and go to different airports etc. And if Easyjet are operating in a manner that drives off competition and pushes up prices afterwards someone should be looking at that behaviour and seeking to prevent it happening it's not right.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
businessair75
I a not necessarily saying that you are bashing small operators but some posters on here are happy to do so and act as though they are working for Easyjet! I am seeking to address the balance and share my thoughts I see nothing wrong with that.
I a not necessarily saying that you are bashing small operators but some posters on here are happy to do so and act as though they are working for Easyjet! I am seeking to address the balance and share my thoughts I see nothing wrong with that.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
easyJet have coexisted on the Liverpool route for around 11 years. I don't sense that they actively force others off the routes where there's direct competition.
The questions should be around what government can do to increase competition and encourage the numbers of routes and destinations. See Jersey as an example - rather than handing out bungs or route licenses or doing closed skies.
Whilst the IOM relies on the TT, farming, fishing and retail there are always going to be issues 😁
Only joking with the last bit
The questions should be around what government can do to increase competition and encourage the numbers of routes and destinations. See Jersey as an example - rather than handing out bungs or route licenses or doing closed skies.
Whilst the IOM relies on the TT, farming, fishing and retail there are always going to be issues 😁
Only joking with the last bit
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a lot of your points here I agree. Government should absolutely be doing more to encourage more tourism and more people to the island. The island has a lot to offer a tourist and if it were marketed more effectively maybe we would see more demand for air services. Also more broader onward investment should be encouraged I am all for that to help the island prosper. The problem is not enough has been done around this to date and so it needs time to build to that position. Indeed to get the required inward investment you need to get key businessman and investors here in the first place. I would argue that is why the Mayor of Teesside is doing everything he can to keep a LHR route going into his region.
Your comment re Liverpool is an interesting one but I suspect may be clouded by the Patient Services contract which the government tender out. Maybe that is why the two coexist? But an outcome like Liverpool would be ideal for the London market so lets hope we can see something like that happening.
Your comment re Liverpool is an interesting one but I suspect may be clouded by the Patient Services contract which the government tender out. Maybe that is why the two coexist? But an outcome like Liverpool would be ideal for the London market so lets hope we can see something like that happening.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: North
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely, as I noted last week. The cultural ties between the Northwest and the IOM support the routes well, the market to London from the Island isn’t as big and that’s why a more frequent schedule to London isn’t offered. Despite expensive last minute fares, easyJet will generate some demand with cheaper fares making it viable to operate with a 319.
Post #257 refers to the cost of Jersey to London flights being around £120. This sort of figure is not realistic for the IOM with it's much smaller tourist industry. A quick Google shows that in 2017 there were around 8500 tourist beds in Jersey compared to 2000 in the IOM.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: London
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
businessair75
Except that if you look at CAA passenger data by airport in 2019 there were 277406 people flying between IOM and London and 254250 from IOM to Liverpool. So the London market is bigger than Liverpool where there are normally three rotations from Loganair and an Easyjet rotation.
Except that if you look at CAA passenger data by airport in 2019 there were 277406 people flying between IOM and London and 254250 from IOM to Liverpool. So the London market is bigger than Liverpool where there are normally three rotations from Loganair and an Easyjet rotation.