What's BA's problem?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: South Shields
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's BA's problem?
Is it just me or do they seem intent on operating from London Heathrow alone?
All you hear is BA restructuring, which has so far resulted in CWL and LBA being knocked off their network, swallowing up Manx Airlines, who operated a sizeable programme from IOM, and operating minimal flights from there.
Besides this, they want to replace all propeller aircraft in their Citiexpress fleet, which would see PLY wiped off the network, along with a lingering rumour that BRS is 'too close to London for a substantial base' - meaning that too is on it's way.
BA at LGW and LHR have been exchanging routes for the past four or five years, (although most traffic has gone in LHR's direction), and the new rumour that they will plug MAN and BHX for 'under-performing', having already let all of BHX's Maersk Air routes go.
How come airlines such as Lufthansa have substantial bases at FKT, MUC, HAM, DUS and TGL when it seems BA can only handle one?
I would just like to know if the airline has any intention to live up to it's name and serve it's country
All you hear is BA restructuring, which has so far resulted in CWL and LBA being knocked off their network, swallowing up Manx Airlines, who operated a sizeable programme from IOM, and operating minimal flights from there.
Besides this, they want to replace all propeller aircraft in their Citiexpress fleet, which would see PLY wiped off the network, along with a lingering rumour that BRS is 'too close to London for a substantial base' - meaning that too is on it's way.
BA at LGW and LHR have been exchanging routes for the past four or five years, (although most traffic has gone in LHR's direction), and the new rumour that they will plug MAN and BHX for 'under-performing', having already let all of BHX's Maersk Air routes go.
How come airlines such as Lufthansa have substantial bases at FKT, MUC, HAM, DUS and TGL when it seems BA can only handle one?
I would just like to know if the airline has any intention to live up to it's name and serve it's country
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SW Scotland
Age: 40
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree totally! Edinburgh is supposedly "The second most important financial city in the UK" and "second most popular tourist destination after london", yet BA does not operate a single non-stop european flight from EDI. All they offer is a very limited selection of flights "via birmingham"
Pretty pathetic for "British" Airways! Its just a shame Air Scotland cant decide wether they are a lo-co or a flag carrier (or indeed if they are an airline or travel agency!)
Pretty pathetic for "British" Airways! Its just a shame Air Scotland cant decide wether they are a lo-co or a flag carrier (or indeed if they are an airline or travel agency!)
Scourge of Bad Airline Management!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Global Nomad
Age: 55
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How long have you got?
Funny, but as I read jmc_757's post, a shiver went down my spine....
They closed CWL when it was in the black, and now the Cardiff 145s are looking for work.
They are closing the maintenance base at GLA, and as Dai Rear said so eloquently in another forum, that is just mad.
They have managed to turn the national carrier into one that has little more than a skeleton service into Northern Ireland and Scotland, and not even that into Wales.
They are run by a team that has the tact of a house brick, the charm of Uday Hussein and would lose money running a bath.
STILL reckon they have the wit NOT to close MAN??
They closed CWL when it was in the black, and now the Cardiff 145s are looking for work.
They are closing the maintenance base at GLA, and as Dai Rear said so eloquently in another forum, that is just mad.
They have managed to turn the national carrier into one that has little more than a skeleton service into Northern Ireland and Scotland, and not even that into Wales.
They are run by a team that has the tact of a house brick, the charm of Uday Hussein and would lose money running a bath.
STILL reckon they have the wit NOT to close MAN??
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wigan
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
I'm still confident that BAW won't close down MAN ops because there Citiexpress operations spread far beyond the UK as they also fly to destinations like MAD, BRU, SNN etc...
Thanks
jmc_757-200
I'm still confident that BAW won't close down MAN ops because there Citiexpress operations spread far beyond the UK as they also fly to destinations like MAD, BRU, SNN etc...
Thanks
jmc_757-200
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Newcaslte upon Tyne
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember reading a few years ago in one of BA's flight magazine that Belfast Aldegrove was one its main hubs along with Heathrow, Edinburgh etc. As Im sure you know Belfast Ald is no longer a hub to BA or even a destination. If I am not mistaken the last flight out of there was the Birmingham route. I am not sure how long they will last down at the City airport as well. They must only have Manchester, Glasgow and Edinburgh left.
You could say the same about my local airport Newcastle as well. We used to have a major regional hub up here now we have a little skeleton service and with rumours circulating about the future of the airline at the airport uncertain who knows what will happen. I suppose as long as BA keep the rich people from London and the South East happy then BA are happy.
You could say the same about my local airport Newcastle as well. We used to have a major regional hub up here now we have a little skeleton service and with rumours circulating about the future of the airline at the airport uncertain who knows what will happen. I suppose as long as BA keep the rich people from London and the South East happy then BA are happy.
Not Manchester
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Salford
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm still confident that BAW won't close down MAN ops because there Citiexpress operations spread far beyond the UK as they also fly to destinations like MAD, BRU, SNN etc...
I wonder where they all are now???
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few points...only major lh presence is at fra and muc.. allothers such as txl.dus, cgn etc are operated by limited lh mainline and primarily franchises like cirrus/cityline/augsberg etc.
(which work)
AF..only presence is at cdg, marginal elsewhere, considerable presence of codeshare and franchise (britair, flybe etc). which work.
IB only major presence at mad, with touristic value presence in bcn. many t/a services ex bcn are ops via mad with aircarft change involved...a la edi.
OS.. no presence in the regions.. all done by franchise and codeshare with alliance franchise to boot. which work
SK allegedly major presence in osl/arn and cph... but in effect major resources focused at cph.. hence why thay have/are gobbling the majority of small competitor airlines.
Interesting to note that all of the above still have to see real competition from locos in their own territory, although this is changing with fr in stockholm and ezy/virgin xpress in ory.
Why should ba operate routes that are not profitable from these regional airports? Just so that you can wipe a nationalistic tear at the sight of that wavy British flagfrom your eye as you clamber onboard cheap 'n' greasy air service to nowhereville (airport 70kms from city centre), which is owned by alexis or paddy your local marketcaller?
If you all loved BA that much why didn't you fly with them before now?
it appears BA does not have a problem..just business sense.. and you??
(which work)
AF..only presence is at cdg, marginal elsewhere, considerable presence of codeshare and franchise (britair, flybe etc). which work.
IB only major presence at mad, with touristic value presence in bcn. many t/a services ex bcn are ops via mad with aircarft change involved...a la edi.
OS.. no presence in the regions.. all done by franchise and codeshare with alliance franchise to boot. which work
SK allegedly major presence in osl/arn and cph... but in effect major resources focused at cph.. hence why thay have/are gobbling the majority of small competitor airlines.
Interesting to note that all of the above still have to see real competition from locos in their own territory, although this is changing with fr in stockholm and ezy/virgin xpress in ory.
Why should ba operate routes that are not profitable from these regional airports? Just so that you can wipe a nationalistic tear at the sight of that wavy British flagfrom your eye as you clamber onboard cheap 'n' greasy air service to nowhereville (airport 70kms from city centre), which is owned by alexis or paddy your local marketcaller?
If you all loved BA that much why didn't you fly with them before now?
it appears BA does not have a problem..just business sense.. and you??
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Valley Where the Thames Runs Softly
Age: 77
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some confusion here, I feel.
BA is a Public Limited Company. It is responsible to its shareholders. It is not a social service, an arm of Government or a regional development agency. It operates in one of the toughest market sectors in the world, where politically-led disaster is always just around the corner.
BA is pulling in its horns in Europe because a combination of low-cost competition and hidden subsidies to major rivals (compris?) means that there is little realistic chance of making any money there in the forseeable future.
Plenty of people can criticise BA for its performance, but it is just plain silly to criticise it for not trying to be all things to all men. If BA sees a market in which it can operate profitably, I am sure that it will be in there. There is absolutely no room for soggy sentimentality and nostalgia.
BA is a Public Limited Company. It is responsible to its shareholders. It is not a social service, an arm of Government or a regional development agency. It operates in one of the toughest market sectors in the world, where politically-led disaster is always just around the corner.
BA is pulling in its horns in Europe because a combination of low-cost competition and hidden subsidies to major rivals (compris?) means that there is little realistic chance of making any money there in the forseeable future.
Plenty of people can criticise BA for its performance, but it is just plain silly to criticise it for not trying to be all things to all men. If BA sees a market in which it can operate profitably, I am sure that it will be in there. There is absolutely no room for soggy sentimentality and nostalgia.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Unwell- It would be lovely if BA could be 'funded' by the govornment to provide a 'public' service to the Departments Outre-Mer, for example, or if it bought and operated all BAe aircraft (ahh the days....) and thus be able to assure itself of friendly slot allocation in airports.
Do you really think that if BA bought BMI and or Virgin and EZY and Ryanscare that the competition authorities would turn a blinder??? Of course not, this is a competative market.. but the above scenario has happened in austria, scandinavia and germany, It is possible to fly Fra-Cph on 2 airlines, both of which share the same alliance. Where is the customer choice in that?
UK-CDG, why we have ba, ezy, fr, af, be, bmi to name the biggies.
BA have faced up (perhaps succesfully) to the massive competition that exists here and which other countries still have to experience.
As regards to NCL, yes it is very sad, but it was the franchise operators choice, mainline have maintained their presence.
Do you really think that if BA bought BMI and or Virgin and EZY and Ryanscare that the competition authorities would turn a blinder??? Of course not, this is a competative market.. but the above scenario has happened in austria, scandinavia and germany, It is possible to fly Fra-Cph on 2 airlines, both of which share the same alliance. Where is the customer choice in that?
UK-CDG, why we have ba, ezy, fr, af, be, bmi to name the biggies.
BA have faced up (perhaps succesfully) to the massive competition that exists here and which other countries still have to experience.
As regards to NCL, yes it is very sad, but it was the franchise operators choice, mainline have maintained their presence.
Paxing All Over The World
With regards to Manx and IOM base. I continue to say (and sit to be corrected) that this was purchased as they wanted the six slots at LHR.
They promptly moved the primary and 'flagship' route to LGW, as they did with Brymon years ago. When main line are reducing their interest in regional fields, I cannot see what in heck they saw in a tiny dedicated location carrier. Except six slots for long haul.
They promptly moved the primary and 'flagship' route to LGW, as they did with Brymon years ago. When main line are reducing their interest in regional fields, I cannot see what in heck they saw in a tiny dedicated location carrier. Except six slots for long haul.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Livingston and Edinburgh
Age: 86
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>I agree totally! Edinburgh is supposedly "The second most important financial city in the UK" and "second most popular tourist destination after london", yet BA does not operate a single non-stop european flight from EDI. <
They operate EDI-CDG..The one-stop flights via BHX etc are
encouraging predators at EDI..CSA. Germanwings..Air France..
Lufthansa etc are laughing all the way to the bank..
BA should instigate a direct EDI-USA flight before they get 'pipped at the post.
Assuming of course BAA allow them....
They operate EDI-CDG..The one-stop flights via BHX etc are
encouraging predators at EDI..CSA. Germanwings..Air France..
Lufthansa etc are laughing all the way to the bank..
BA should instigate a direct EDI-USA flight before they get 'pipped at the post.
Assuming of course BAA allow them....
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JKP505
I note that you mention the ‘lingering rumour’ that BA will pull their BRS base because it is too close to London.
Another forum member hinted strongly recently in another thread that the writing was on the wall for the BRS BA Citiexpress base. I asked whether he had any more information to add other than rumour, but he did not reply. Have BA suddenly become aware that BRS is ‘close’ to London? Have they only gained knowledge of this little known fact since they pulled their CWL, LBA and ABZ flights? If not, why did they not pull the BRS base at the same time?
Rumours can become self-fulfilling. Say something loudly and often enough and people will believe it and, in the case of airlines, will become reluctant to travel with the airline in question in case the rumours are true. BA’s 'trunk' routes out of BRS (to EDI, GLA, DUB and CDG) have direct competitors in the form of easyJet, Ryanair and Air France Regional. Only on the routes to Munich, Frankfurt, Jersey, Plymouth and Newcastle do they have a monopoly, and the NCL route is due to be duplicated by easyJet from August.
Other than someone in another thread telling me that the NCL route is holding up well, I have no idea of BA loadings and profitability out of BRS. If they are poor, with no forecast of realistic improvement, then no commercial undertaking can be expected to sustain losses indefinitely.
However, if the routes are doing well, and the only grounds for the closure rumours are that after CWL etc BRS must be next, then I think that, to put it mildly they are unhelpful, and they fall into the same category of those than foretell the imminent demise of some airlines.
In three years BRS has grown from 2 million annual pax to 3.5 million with a forecast of 4 million during the next year. So there must be some potential passengers there. If so, why cannot BA have their share?
Perhaps someone with ‘chapter and verse’ might like to enlighten me as to BA’s current situation at BRS.
I note that you mention the ‘lingering rumour’ that BA will pull their BRS base because it is too close to London.
Another forum member hinted strongly recently in another thread that the writing was on the wall for the BRS BA Citiexpress base. I asked whether he had any more information to add other than rumour, but he did not reply. Have BA suddenly become aware that BRS is ‘close’ to London? Have they only gained knowledge of this little known fact since they pulled their CWL, LBA and ABZ flights? If not, why did they not pull the BRS base at the same time?
Rumours can become self-fulfilling. Say something loudly and often enough and people will believe it and, in the case of airlines, will become reluctant to travel with the airline in question in case the rumours are true. BA’s 'trunk' routes out of BRS (to EDI, GLA, DUB and CDG) have direct competitors in the form of easyJet, Ryanair and Air France Regional. Only on the routes to Munich, Frankfurt, Jersey, Plymouth and Newcastle do they have a monopoly, and the NCL route is due to be duplicated by easyJet from August.
Other than someone in another thread telling me that the NCL route is holding up well, I have no idea of BA loadings and profitability out of BRS. If they are poor, with no forecast of realistic improvement, then no commercial undertaking can be expected to sustain losses indefinitely.
However, if the routes are doing well, and the only grounds for the closure rumours are that after CWL etc BRS must be next, then I think that, to put it mildly they are unhelpful, and they fall into the same category of those than foretell the imminent demise of some airlines.
In three years BRS has grown from 2 million annual pax to 3.5 million with a forecast of 4 million during the next year. So there must be some potential passengers there. If so, why cannot BA have their share?
Perhaps someone with ‘chapter and verse’ might like to enlighten me as to BA’s current situation at BRS.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If anyone mentions EDI, the JoeCurryBot comes out with pearls like this:
now, I'm all for direct flights to the US from EDI, although I can't see BA starting one; but why oh why, would the BAA block such a route?
A reasonable argument this time Joe, not more ravings.
BA should instigate a direct EDI-USA flight before they get 'pipped at the post
Assuming of course BAA allow them....
Assuming of course BAA allow them....
A reasonable argument this time Joe, not more ravings.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North of CDG
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to put things right: there may be subsidies in France to operate flights to Overseas Departments, Overseas Territories and to Corsica, but these subsidies are in exchange for a minimum number of rotations per day/week - basically Public Service Obligations.
If I'm not mistaken, the same happens with Loganair to the Orkney and Shetlands...
Also, these French subsidies ARE official, not hidden (not something one might understand from some of the previous posts) and they are paid to a number of airlines - NOT only Air France and its franchises/subsidiaries. Their aim is to ensure that some far-flung parts of French territory are not left without air links just because the route is (slightly) unprofitable.
At least the French do have something akin to a public transport policy - which is more than Britain can say...
As for BA, give them the Sahara, and within two years, they'll have to import sand...
If I'm not mistaken, the same happens with Loganair to the Orkney and Shetlands...
Also, these French subsidies ARE official, not hidden (not something one might understand from some of the previous posts) and they are paid to a number of airlines - NOT only Air France and its franchises/subsidiaries. Their aim is to ensure that some far-flung parts of French territory are not left without air links just because the route is (slightly) unprofitable.
At least the French do have something akin to a public transport policy - which is more than Britain can say...
As for BA, give them the Sahara, and within two years, they'll have to import sand...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: South Shields
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MerchantVenturer, as far as I know the BRS-NCL route is doing very well. But even that is no indication on whether British Airways will stop flying the route.
British Airways within the last three or four years (at different times) has served Newcastle to Aberdeen; Belfast; Birmingham; Cardiff; Copenhagen; Cork; Dublin; Edinburgh; Isle of Man; Oslo; Paris CDG and Southampton. Of these, only CWL and EDI were plugged due to bad loads, the other 10 routes apparently had good loads, so much so frequency was increased on ABZ, BHX, DUB and SOU.
So why have BA ditched ALL of these routes, considering Braathens managed to fill a 737-500, as opposed to BA's Emb145; Air France operate three or four Bae146-2/300 flights daily, soon to be joined by easyJet; Cimber Air managed three flights daily to CPH in contrast to BA's one; and Ryanair had to increase to double-daily to keep up with demand after one month.
In response to starone, if it was down to the subsidary carriers, who owned all shares in Brymon Airways and Cityflyer Express? British Airways.
So you see, BA are earning a well-deserved reputation for kicking the regions of the UK, so I wouldn't regard any well-performing routes as safe where the 'World's favourite airline' are concerned.
I think BA as the national flag-carrier has a responsibility to make sure that it's own country is well connected, and connect the regions to Europe were suitable. It is rediculous to travel down from somewhere like Newcastle to London to fly to Oslo, when there is quite sufficient demand for a service direct...
British Airways within the last three or four years (at different times) has served Newcastle to Aberdeen; Belfast; Birmingham; Cardiff; Copenhagen; Cork; Dublin; Edinburgh; Isle of Man; Oslo; Paris CDG and Southampton. Of these, only CWL and EDI were plugged due to bad loads, the other 10 routes apparently had good loads, so much so frequency was increased on ABZ, BHX, DUB and SOU.
So why have BA ditched ALL of these routes, considering Braathens managed to fill a 737-500, as opposed to BA's Emb145; Air France operate three or four Bae146-2/300 flights daily, soon to be joined by easyJet; Cimber Air managed three flights daily to CPH in contrast to BA's one; and Ryanair had to increase to double-daily to keep up with demand after one month.
In response to starone, if it was down to the subsidary carriers, who owned all shares in Brymon Airways and Cityflyer Express? British Airways.
So you see, BA are earning a well-deserved reputation for kicking the regions of the UK, so I wouldn't regard any well-performing routes as safe where the 'World's favourite airline' are concerned.
I think BA as the national flag-carrier has a responsibility to make sure that it's own country is well connected, and connect the regions to Europe were suitable. It is rediculous to travel down from somewhere like Newcastle to London to fly to Oslo, when there is quite sufficient demand for a service direct...
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FougaMagister- sorry to point out but do you remember AOM? Air OUTRE MER? These routes were not slightly unprofitable, but very much. I have often picked up a bargain to Reunion, with up front being empty..that is where the money is after all. I don't know whether Noumea (new caledonia) is still considered a DOM, but again i was quite surprised when i did fly with UTA at the price i paid, considering where I was going. You havn't answered my question about the aircraft orders/slots?
JKP505- BA is not THE national flag carrier, look at BMI and Virgin, both proudly have the british flag on their aircraft and BA have long accepted this. They did after all dig their own grave for the prices they DID charge for example EDINCLCDG, they learnt their lesson, have a business model that makes more sense, although there still remains a lot of work to do. That business model focus is on the SE, although with a presence inthe regions. The SE have a higher, although not all, A grade earners it is also the business and political capital of the UK. They owe no duty to anybody just like nobody owed them a duty when they were not privatised and had the lions share without competition. well done to them for adapting to severe competition(that hurt!!), it took them long enough mind
If Cimber et al were so good, where are they now, they may have filled their aircraft....
BTW the best way of getting from ncl to osl is via ams or bru and quite competative too.
JKP505- BA is not THE national flag carrier, look at BMI and Virgin, both proudly have the british flag on their aircraft and BA have long accepted this. They did after all dig their own grave for the prices they DID charge for example EDINCLCDG, they learnt their lesson, have a business model that makes more sense, although there still remains a lot of work to do. That business model focus is on the SE, although with a presence inthe regions. The SE have a higher, although not all, A grade earners it is also the business and political capital of the UK. They owe no duty to anybody just like nobody owed them a duty when they were not privatised and had the lions share without competition. well done to them for adapting to severe competition(that hurt!!), it took them long enough mind
If Cimber et al were so good, where are they now, they may have filled their aircraft....
BTW the best way of getting from ncl to osl is via ams or bru and quite competative too.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They owe a duty to their frequent flyers like me to provide a service which is value for money.
They are failing in that duty, and many of their business customers from around the regions will be forced to find alternative travel arrangements.
Doesn't sound like a good business case to me.
They are failing in that duty, and many of their business customers from around the regions will be forced to find alternative travel arrangements.
Doesn't sound like a good business case to me.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Charlie 32- Are you an actual Gold/prem card holder with Ba or are you using that moniker. If you're the former they really will listen to you.
However, I must go back again to the point that they owe NO duty to anybody, irrespective.
Did Sabena owe a duty to anybody that stopped it from collapsing? Did BMI owe a duty when all its ops at EMA became loco.
If you're not happy then you're the king, take your business elsewhere, brits have never had it so good with regard to choice in the wider passenger aviation market, one of those choices happens to be BA, where often the price is right, or often they seem mad to be charging what they do!
Where all this duty is coming from, i don't know, but it doesn't belong in the aviation business, they only owe you a duty once you have decided that they are worth spending your cash on, a duty to get you from a to b (or in the regions a to b via c!)
However, I must go back again to the point that they owe NO duty to anybody, irrespective.
Did Sabena owe a duty to anybody that stopped it from collapsing? Did BMI owe a duty when all its ops at EMA became loco.
If you're not happy then you're the king, take your business elsewhere, brits have never had it so good with regard to choice in the wider passenger aviation market, one of those choices happens to be BA, where often the price is right, or often they seem mad to be charging what they do!
Where all this duty is coming from, i don't know, but it doesn't belong in the aviation business, they only owe you a duty once you have decided that they are worth spending your cash on, a duty to get you from a to b (or in the regions a to b via c!)