Isn't Billund still running?

Its only a franchise not real London Airways

Ian

Flybe is now the national carrier :E

No thank you very much!! BA (in toto) didn't want us as BA Connect employees and we are certainly better off as a business without the overhangs of BA Cabin Crew and their wretched agreements.

Best thing BA ever did for BA Connect employees was to cut them loose. Now we are free to thrive and make a profit.

Quote
CONGRATULATIONS to British Airways management team on it's now complete destruction of a once small hub operation.

Reply
I like that one.:D:D

Well done BA for finally seeing the benefit of concentrating
the business from a capital city.
The people bemoaning the loss of this service are not qualified
to pass judgement on any aspect of operating an airline - as is
evidensed by the posts previous.......the wailing wall of
Manchester on pprune!!

Manchester has a good selection of International carriers and
should concentrate on keeping these for the time being.

The fact that the airport saw itself as something other than
a regional base for too many years - re lack of speed in
welcoming lo-cost operators - will effect/has affected its
performance.It is now trying to play catch-up with these
operators who can now take their time in choosing what
routes to open up - if any.
Stagnation in growth terms has come to be the story of the
last few years with services coming and going on a regular
basis.

The real world has bitten back at last and the challenge is
on for the next few years to keep service levels as now.
ie:stagnation.

MM

Agree. The BA regional operations were a catastrophic money loser for years. The business model was unworkable and no one had the balls to stem the flow of red ink until Willy said "ENOUGH".

Note that neither BMI or Virgin rushed in to fill the gaping hole left because outside of London, the easyJet / flybe business model is the way forward.

London is the only place BA can ever make money, not a criticism, just a fact.Look forward not back.

Err...ther'e no spare VS equipment so would hardly expect them to step in at a moments notice, and what they do have is just too large. As for BD, any displacment of the A330s will be for a medium term thing only; but the biggest thing that counts against them is the complete mix and match of service that they operate and not one standard product.

As for lo-cost operations, then I daresay some nearby airports may be a little bit worried now that this appears to be chosen method of expanding pax numbers quite quickly.

As for BA, one only has to look at how LH somehow operates long-haul out of 3 cities. For crying out loud, even DUS has got a handful of them. This only reinforces how disinterested BA was - i'm sure when just franchise operations were at the regions, the airlines that operated them made profits...but as soon as BA makes an offer too good to refuse to the owners and so buys them, the same routes become unprofitable. If they were clever, they could have anticipated Ryanair and easyJet branching away from London and plonked Go at MAN to get a big foothold in the market.

The only relevant comparison between LH and BA is that they both strive to make a return on shareholder's capital and deploy their aircraft where they feel this is best achieved. That LH have identified DUS as one such location is utterly irelevant to what BA have identified with regard to profitable opportunities ex-MAN. It's a complete red herring.

The problem with a lot of wannabes and plane spotters is that they have no business acumen and can't navigate a balance sheet.....
Germany has a different demographic from the UK. The country is a Hell of a lot bigger and has a more spread out demographic. I am sure you selectively leave out KLM and Air France, Singapore, Swiss, Cathay Pacific etc who mainly operate from one core focus city. The UK is very heavily biased towards the South East of England and that gives London a massive advantage. BA has a massive investment in premium traffic and Executive Club beholden to a legacy cost base from it's nationalised days.

BA Manchester never made money with the BAC111. BA Manchester never made money with the B737-200s. BA Manchester never made money with the B737-500. Oddly enough, British Regional did quite well operating as BA, however when that firm was bought out for valuable Heathrow slots, the cost base went through the roof, the J41s were uneconomical from day one in the BA fold. It's a horrible fact of life in a large company. Add legacy BA Handling costs to the new nimble locos nibbling away your margins piece by piece and there is no way of stemming the flow of red ink.

The clue is the lack of stampeding Virgin and BMI flights desperate to fly long haul from the regions. As has been stated ad nauseum, the best long haul from the regions is run by those with a big old hub at the other end like Emirates and Continental.

Neither are some of those applauding the decision! :=

London is the only place BA can ever make money, London is the only place BA can ever make money, not a criticism, just a fact.Look forward not back.

Skipness one echo,

Of coarse your right, but what BA has to remember is that people in the rest of the UK do have a choice. Not a criticism, just a fact.

Shyted

Quote
The fact that the airport saw itself as something other than
a regional base for too many years - re lack of speed in
welcoming lo-cost operators - will effect/has affected its
performance.It is now trying to play catch-up with these
operators who can now take their time in choosing what
routes to open up - if any.
Stagnation in growth terms has come to be the story of the
last few years with services coming and going on a regular
basis.

Reply
I totally agree - Mickyman.:D

MAN is getting to be a 'Merry Go Round' at the moment, With different carriers taking it in turns to - start a service then finish.:confused:

There doesn't seem to be much 'StabilityPlan' anymore in any of MAN's Scheduled services - mainly Loco.:=

MAN can beat LGW pax numbers wise on a good day, And has done many times.:cool:

But people seem to like the sound of LHR better than anywhere else
And always have done.

Can't Sir Michael - see that there is only so much capacity in a day at the Row??:ugh:

Does he want his fleet of 35+ machines queing up all day every day for T/off Burning more fuel on taxi??

I think He's obsessed with LHR & has lost his direction....:*

Youv'e got to remember LHR & LGW is not everyone's immediate priority Dep point, And the population of the NW & NE do not think it to be practical to traipse 150 + miles to the Row to go to NY??

They want to go from an Airport 20/30/50 miles away = MAN.

The Joe public has no interest in how many slots BA or BD need to keep at the Row, That's irrelevant to them.

Their immediate priority is a = Quick, Safe, Easy, Dep Airport point.

When MAN Airport signs up the Airlines, There needs to be a clear understanding with both parties.

But what is happening, As I Mickyman & others have said is, The Airlines are not providing the Airport with any 'Long Term' Stability Plans.:=

Know reading what Skip One Echo has said about BA, It seems that BA did not put their 100% into the agreement with MAN.

They ran a NY service just for the principal, Wether it was making money or not.

Maybe a 'Sweetner' for the MAN Directors.:*

A way of keeping in with the crowd??

I take my hat off to FR, MOL usually 95% sticks to what he promises, And Delivers, FR will give MAN the boost it needs.

Also TCX, MON, and TOM - have always being loyal and faithfully commited to basing a number of aircraft 365 days a year for many years and will continue to.:D

I feel Jet 2 could offer more stability, But with LBA 60 miles away they don't have to it's just a stepping stone base.

I don't think Jet2 will offer any commitment to MAN??

Think if BA want to finish completely, Then they should say so - And go running back to the Row and let MAN clear up their mess.:hmm:

EZY won't last, I think they will be overwhelmed by FR, And will return to 'native' LPL.:confused:

The number of 'Thoroughbred' Operators that have dep MAN is - Abismal to say the least.:mad:

I could stand on the car park roof in 1994/5 and count X amount of Airline liveries - But not many now.:sad:

Okay, We have EK, EY, SQ etc but we need 10 more like these:D

Like I said in an earlier post, If MAN Mgt don't get a grip on this 'stability' issue, Then MAN we'lll all be travelling by 'Loco':hmm:

Sorry, Skipness One Echo me old mucker, but BA's MAN-JFK was not losing money when it was pulled. Far from it, it was profitable at the time. It was pulled because BA believed they could make more money by canning it, moving a few birds around and starting LGW-JFK, It's as simple as that mate.

As for BD, I am very surprised the Caribbean routes are still going to be honest. I've flown there 4 times up front in the last few years and each time around half the cabin was staff.

ORD is a little different, particularly yield wise. Although I was on the 705 a couple of months ago and it was half empty up front, which was handy as some of the new flat seats were goosed. I'm on it again next week and there is still plenty availability.

BA's JFK/MAN in the last year was losing money. The main problem with the route was the 767 didn't not suit the service year round. At times and for most of the year a 757 would have been perfect but this aircraft for BA is not a longhaul aircraft and configuring one 757 for MAN/JFK would have in itself been a waste of money (Something that was looked into). BA changed the aircraft from the one off special configuration with J and M seats to the newer dusk aircraft with AVOD to try a lure pax but they didn't want to pay the fares.

In the Marketing, Commercial and Revenue Management departments at BA the MAN/JFK was well known for a higher number of request by exec card holders to use their redemption tickets on it. Even though revenue management would only put a few seats aside on the flight for these tickets, some pax would waitlist and wait to the day before to see if they could get confirmed at the last minute. If there was seats available 36-48 hours before they would confirm the bookings to boost the load factor.

Yes it was busy going to JFK on a Wed/Thu/ Fri and the odd Saturday and coming back Sat/Sun and Mon. However the other sectors were quiet and the yields on those sector were dire. BA could not get the yields required to run the service profitably.

At the end the flights were going full. When BA announced the route was being axed the people of MAN and the surrounding area started using the route more. However It was too late.

It has been said for a long time " If you are not going to use a route prepare to lose it"

When it comes to MAN future I think the likes of EY and EK are there to stay. VS may scale back there winter ops but MCO will always do well. CO and DL not sure there is a market for them both to survive, but I hope I am wrong.

With SQ adding A380's at LHR and their star alliance partner BMI operating frequent flights from MAN to LHR I think and I hope I am wrong that if any more routes are to go it will be SQ to SIN.

Aaaaaarggghhhh!!!

It's LOSE not loose!!!:\:\:\:\:\

Their, not there! :\:\:\



I'm sorry, I couldn't help myself. I'll crawl back under my rock.

Virgin Atlantic are pulling the Manchester to St. Lucia route from 26 March. Not just for the summer either

The BA MAN-JFK route also carried between 5 - 8 tons of cargo per day !!, not something a 757 would of been well suited to.

...it'll all fit on Connie or Delta, as will the pax. The route is still there and i am sure that the american carriers will benefit and grow as a result of BA's withdrawl. Roll on AA/DL triples to ORD & JFK :)

....Errrr, no, Delta and Continental both use 757's the JFK and EWR, so very little cargo uplift there.

btw Continental are reverting back to a singal 767-400 within the coming months


G-STAW

BA in the Regions
 

Hi guys
I don't think that you will ever persuade some of the London-centric posters on this site. Birmingham had the second highest proportion of business travellers on its BA flights after Heathrow ( I worked in revenue management for BAR and Connect). Still we were told that services didn't make money. That says more about the airline and its inability to manage costs than the travel preferences of regional business and leisure travelers.
So Manchester, Birmingham and the Scottish Airports have lost BA international services, who cares? BA service is mediocre at best, they have an terrible record for timekeeping, lost luggage and customer service. Lets welcome new airlines to the UK regions and let BA consolidate and consolidate at its three (for now) London bases.
Daza

Plane spotters fantasy. In the real world, American are being "encouraged" to retrench to Heathrow and not rock the OneWorld boat by having an oddball long haul from Manchester. For the first time, it's not even daily this winter, so no longer reliable for business travellers. This is the sly and dishonest way of withdrawing a route over the mid term.
As for Delta B777s, I'll file this next to the NWA B757-200s to Detroit.

Sterling job peeps, really amazing work there.

Think we both know this is untrue, the front was full of upgrades. Revenue management were tearing their hair out over the unwillingness of their regulars to use the direct service and fly from Birmingham and Glasgow. Certain other parts of BA ( think Exec Club cardholders )kept booking them on bigger aircraft over LHR to keep the Shuttle loads and the JFK load factors up. Left hand right hand etc etc

Will Ba Come Back?
 

I've been around long enough to recall that BA withdrew MAN-JFK in 1981, apparently for good. They were flying it with B707s and VC10s at the time. But in 1985 they were back on the route in response to a growing long-haul presence at MAN, including the likes of Qantas and the imminent arrival of American Airlines and Singapore Airlines. BA stayed on the route and grew it from 3 x weekly to daily. There were changes of equipment from L1011 TriStar, to B747 and DC10 following the BCAL take-over. In the mid 1990s it went to a daily B767 where it stayed until this weekend.

Could they come back again? Less likely this time, as they now have no domestic or European base at MAN any longer to support it, just the London links. OpenSkies? well never say never, but probably not. With onerous rumours surrounding bmi Atlantic services the future for MAN as a long-haul airport looks challenging for the foreseeable. I say that with great sadness as one who witnessed the heady years of the 1980s and 90s when MANs network spanned 5 continents. More than ever the city and its airport must work closely to ensure that it grows its profile as an international business centre, for it is those passengers at the 'pointy end' paying the bigger bucks who convince airlines to open long-haul routes. More Spinningfields / Media Citys / Knowledge Capitals required!

I remember British Airways Holidays would always try and funnel any US tourists, visiting the UK on a fly-drive holiday, from New York into Manchester rather than Heathrow

There's some ill-informed, London-centric garbage been written in the last few pages.

The only poster I CAN 100% Commend is comet.

BA senior management are absolute scum. They can easily make a profit out of the regions, but decide not to. The MAN-JFK flight had high load factors, and crucially high yield factors, so what did BA do, they tried to discredit it by "loaning" the aircraft out to BAR and then fiddling the figures to make it look worse than it was, even then it performed well. They also never marketed the route in the states, and often the fares via LHR were cheaper than the direct.

They forced IB, QF and AA off their MAN routes, just to keep everything via the OneWorld hub in LHR.

Crooked, imbecilic, incomprehensibly stupid. These words sum up BA management.I smile regularly when I read of the Cargo three being banged up for the price fixing, and I wouldn't shed a tear if WW had a horrible life-threatening illness either.

London Airways, please go out of business soon, and do the rest of the UK a favour.

[I][There's some ill-informed, London-centric garbage been written in the last few pages./I]

Spoken like a true un-biased gent !!!!

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck............

Well glad we've got that sorted out. All you need to do is tell all those people who tried to move Heaven and Earth to make it work and we're done. How many times do you guys have to be told? There is no pot of gold in Manchester!
Are Virgin moving in to fill the gap? Are BMI? No? OK let's drop a level. Flyglobespan? Jet2? No. Why is no full service British airline rushing into MAN to fill the void?

Excargoclown says This is also true of CDG-LAX via LHR on Air France......tis quite common in the industry, you pay a premium to fly direct.

QANTAS don't need to fly a 747 LHR-MAN as BA carry that sector for them at less cost, a sound business decision. QANTAS return the favour in OZ to MEL and so forth, this is standard commercial practice in an alliance, in this case ONEWORLD. Iberia are free to return now BA are no longer on the route. Do we see Iberia returning? I suspect you may be right about American though.

There is no pot of gold in Manchester!

Maybe not?

But I should think there should be at the least 1 UK full service carrier doing a NY.

I would have thought VS would have had a go at say 3 X a week, And running the MCO on the other 4 days?

Or whatever.

I still find it hard to believe there is a 7 day demand in winter for MCO?

The other main problem at MAN is the Airport is too busy pushing the 'Loco' services forward, FR & EZY And not paying as much attention to the full service marketing?

Will MAN be 'Flooded' out with 'Loco's by 2010?

There should be some 'Gold Pots' in MAN - It is one of our biggest cities.

There is a pot of Gold in Manchester and one which BA were taking, and then re-diverting to the LHR coffers.

I can't speak for BHX, NCL, BFS etc, but I do know that BAR were making a profit out of MAN if you took into account the hideous amount of money that mainline took out through "internal accounting". It's a little like the famous LGW shorthaul paying for Concord's fuel on their budget, if BA want to discredit a station or route they do so through manipulating figures, a little like nu-Labour do.

And if you think MAN was a loss making station, have a wander through Waterworld one day, see the Coffee-quaffing morons sat out staring at the lake on their mega-MG grades with such amazing titles as "Bread Rolls Europe" etc..... Do they go on mainline's budget ?? Compare that to MAN I don't believe there were many surplus to requirement staff there...

As for the 1502/3 the oft quoted "poor premium yields" is absolute rubbish, I can categorically state that. In actual fact, it had better yields per seat than quite a few LHR routes, and most LGW ones.....

I agree totally Ex Cargo Clown.

To be honest, I think the whole BA issue comes down to - Jealousy:=

The BA LHR Bods see MAN as a 'Threat' and as you say were transferring MAN's profits and turning them into LHR ones?

And Waterworld yes, I agree it's like another world.:hmm:

And to be honest, I can see BA in about 10 years time stating - Pulling LH out of MAN was on of the biggest mistakes......:zzz:

And the 'fuel' beancounters will be 'Kicking' themselves when they realise that they have an extra 767 queing up at 27L /R 7 days a week burning off 'precious' juice.:ugh:

Wheras, At MAN it was alot easier in hindsight.:*

And what about all the 'Olympic' traffic coming in, How saturated will the Row become?

BA out of Manchester
 

Who really cares if BA decide to take there operation to London does it really make any difference whatsoever? everybody across the UK has seen exactly the way BA has pitched themselves its just a case of dealing with it!
BA have never hidden the fact that all they want on there aircraft is First and business passengers you and I know that all to well, so them pulling out of Manchester was not that much of a suprise, BA are right there not getting enough business class pax out of Manchester so be it, they with drew the JFK flight, good ridance I say BA have not been the worlds favourite airline for over 10 years, everybody should sit back and appreciate the slow demise of what was once the pride of the world, if you need to fly, then book on airlines that really want your business.

"stop harping on about poor little Manchester losing BA its getting tedious":ugh:

BA at MAN
 

Seems to be a heated issue. I am a not a regular on this thread but have been reading comments with interest about BA and the regions.

I have no idea if BAR/Connect made money at MAN or indeed any other station. But I do remember whilst working at BHX in Operations between 1999-2002 that Eurohub (T2 as it is now) was never particularly busy (except Mon morning and Fri evening) and the BA operation there had an over-bloated, unionised 'BA will never pull out, as if' feel about it among the staff - yes, great facilities and good service but lots of staff and not many pax. Since BA departed BHX forever, the departures board in T2 thanks to FR now looks a whole lot more interesting, there sure is more pax and to the average Joe on the street you can now fly to far more places in Europe than ever before you could with BA. Does the average Joe really care what airline it is as long as it flies to where they want at a price that suits?

OK so MAN is a busier and bigger airport and cannot be directly compared to BHX. And you have just lost a high profile service - but you still have Continental and Delta to NYC and other long haul flights with quality international carriers that BHX can only dream of. Move on cos BA sure have :ok:

Will Ba Comeback To Manchester ?
 

Here are my thoughts.

Domestic -non London virtually no chance,very remote possibility that it will purchase either flybe or bmi regional.

London- possible increase in frequency to LHR in effort to try and top up some flights. LGW i see little change here.

Continental Europe-little chance here, no spare aircraft, AF/KL, LH/LX/SN, SK all well entrenched. Possible increase in code share with flybe.

Long haul- Opportunities here at present. Will see nothing from BA for at least a few years. Boeing 787-8 game changer. Believe are to be fitted out with no first class. Possible routes LAX or SFO not both, HKG if no service by CX. JFK if market not over saturated by then. Pakistan market if political scene quietens down.

If LHR third runway is denied or cancelled by a change of government BA will have to change tact again.

Options.
1. Increase size of aircraft- more A380's

2. Expand in continental Europe- Openskies

3. Expand in UK- Manchester prime candidate, 2 runways, slots available
large catchment area.

A question for Skipnes One Echo was it cheaper to fly LHR-MAN-JFK

No chance, imho the shuttles are on borrowed time. They will be gone within a few years.

Railgun,Skipness

If the shuttles are on borrowed time how are BA going to feed pax into there precious hub.
I am lead to believe that KLM and Lufty are doing exeptionally well from MAN to there hubs in AMS and FRA......WHY, because they are more loyal to there passengers and they have far better airports to transit through than that hell hole off the M25.

Manchester people are sick of there national carrier letting them down so are going for the far better option .

Now go and take a two mile walk off a one mile pier......

I never said the Shuttles were on borrowed time. They are essential to the business model of feeding T5 long haul from the UK and Europe. This thread is degenrating into personal attacks which is a shame. I strongly disagree with a lot of what has been said but I always try to back it up with some information.

What are you basing this on? Do you understand the current hub feeding BA business model? This is also the reason Gatwick is being scaled back. Legacy unionised cost base cannot really compete against easyJet head to head.
You cannot run a multi million pound business like that. OR WHATEVER ?!?!? Putting 3 747s on that route would only attract leisure passengers on a three weekly basis and that is commercial suicide.

It's not "there" it's "their", and even correcting your grammar your facts are in error. BA has been a PLC since 1987, has been listed for 20 years. They are not anybodys national carrier except the shareholders.

Please don't think I'm having a go at MAN, I like the airport and fly through it often enough. I still think it has a fine network of routes, but the future has to be commercially sustainable. BA at Manchester was always going to be massively overshadowed by London. Glasgow and Edinburgh got flyglobespan to breath new life, Leeds got Jet2. I think that UK registered hopes for long haul at MAN lie in that arena in the medium term.

Are there any other happenings at Manchester at the moment? It all seems to be BA BA BA at the moment :ugh:

Skipness, unfortunately you've hit a raw nerve (North vs South) and your sound business sense is falling on deaf ears - and that's from someone who would happily become independent from the South East :}. You're dead right but the truth hurts!

Anyway its the slot conference soon so expect a tsunami of rumours :uhoh: