MANCHESTER - 7
 

Manchester to Ban Shuttles ?

Apparently Maplc are so upset at losing their UK based long haul network they have been having discussions about massive retaliation !

Rumours suggest that a high level meeting took place last week whereby they have looked at the legality and therefore the possibility of withdrawing landing rights to both BA and BMI shuttles thereby causing a hammer blow to both airlines profitability given the large volumes of traffic carried on both routes into Heathrow. The belief is that they could cause a groundswell of opinion that might make BA and BMI reverse their decision. No-one however it seems, is quite sure at this stage whether this could be enforced !

The more general view is that it is simply posturing in order to bring the centralisation of ALL British based airlines into Heathrow to the knowledge of the travelling public, business MPs, and the media ,at a time when a decision about another runway at LHR is due to be made.

Clearly something is in the wind as they have looked at the serious possibility that the airlines would retaliate themselves and tfr service to Liverpool and also the impact and adverse publicity of the travelling public whose travel plans would be thrown into chaos.

The airport disputes BA and BMIs own figures suggesting that yields are poor and are incensed.

They believe that Lufthansa might change their mind if there was a sufficient groundswell of opinion against them.

It would certainly be a bold step given MANplcs previous p***poor performance in marketing, spin etc.

BUT If it were true would it not be counter productive given MANplc own profitability ?

Does anybody know whether this is actually enforceable ?

Also do we know the total number of figures for pax carried on both routes and the impact this might have on both airlines Balance Sheet and indeed
Manchester !

I would have thought that the move to ban shuttles would be illegal under EU law which allows for the free movement of persons within the union. If Manchester Airport singled out BA and BMI then surely they should take similar actions against KLM, Air France and Lufthansa "shuttles" which provide the same service at Manchester as the London services linking in the the airline's main hubs.

It would nice to see BA back at Liverpool though :)

These so called "shuttles" are, in reality, domestic scheduled air services. No different to (say) BMIBaby flights to Belfast or Eastern Airlines to Stansted. I think MA Plc would have a hard time justifying such action in court.......

Manchester to ban Shuttles
 

Some of the more legislation proficient members will advise, but the law regarding free movement of EU citizens concerns the unhindered access to EU states for nationals of another EU member state - rather than modes of transport.

MAplc are not obliged to take the traffic as this is a commercial concern, only the law of contracts applies here?

It could be criticised as a bit childish though in pulling up the drawbridge in this way, as it will force the poor travelling public to find another way to get to London as the big UK airlines won't be coming back regardless of MAplcs brinkmanship (assuming it is serious).

As was pointed out, the loss of the shuttles can only benefit other Euro hubs. Hmmm, but then again, BA/BD justified their tactical withdrawal by saying the MAN originating traffic wasn't profitable - so it couldn't be a real loss to them then if the travellers are routed via CDG/FRA/AMS could it?

BA has long siphoned off the business traveller via LHR (both those which could have originated via MAN and overseas customers going to MAN) rather than aim for a developing a robust regional service. Perhaps someone in the know can supply figures of London business transit pax with a point of origin that made MAN more convenient?

So in conclusion - ban the shuttles? Yes MAN will lose pax nd revenue - but it might deflect to other EU mainland airports, strengthen US operators yields or attract other operators.

Ryanair operate a tit-for-tat strategy and it hasn't hurt them. So give it a go MAN. Kick BA/BD in the bal-ance sheet.:E

Hahahahahaha!!! That's one of the funniest posts I've read in ages!!!

They cannot stop anyone flying intra EU under the EU treaty.

It would be funny to see them try!

Wonder if this idea might have come from Sir Richard, as it would have a wonderful effect on Virgin Trains passenger numbers?

As for Ametyst dreams of seeing BA back at Liverpool, he has two hopes........

Bob and No.

What network would that be exactly?

Could MAN make it awkward for said airlines to operate,e.g. ground handling delays, ****e stands, move slot times, although am I right in assuming that slots are set in stone.

bmi have never operated shuttle services, they may operate high frequency services on some routes but never shuttles.
The shuttle was a brand name used by BA when they operated their walkon/off domestic trunk services, but that stopped many years ago.

Now here this.
 

Gonzo.He speekith with a potential professional interest.. If they can legally retaliate against Airlines that pack up and Go , let them. - This would mean a new era of stability of service levels and less profits for Airline shareholders.

Is it legal - I doubt It - but great if MAN try.

CAT III

They must be very p*ssed off to even discuss such things.

MAN are obvioulsy now trying to offer BA & BMI the commitment they have both shown to have for MAN.

Although, it must be around 3 miliion pax p.a. fly between MAN - London, which would be a huge loss of revenue for MAN. I can't help thinking that sometimes sour grapes cuts noses off and that can be counter productive !

Of that 3 million lost pax how many would just route through Europe with KLM and AIR FRANCE for example.

I know this is a rumour site but Im wondering
why no-one has questioned Bagso as to his
sources/references.He could be a spotty
teenager who gets a thrill out of people
actually taking him on!
Some people it seems dont have the capacity
to question anything on here and immediately
take up the baton and run.

I have read over the last few weeks, numorous
posts exposing peoples annoyance with airlines
decisions over routes etc - which is all very
understandable - but is it possible to have
some uninvented info - ie facts!

There are so many ways in which this thread is
wrong and I think that Bagso should appologise
for his starting it.

MM

Maybe MAN expects a little more from BA & BMI, seeing as they are our national carriers. Inlight of the recent vote of confidence shown in MAN by BA & BMI, MAN probably would prefer to connect peeps thru FRA/CDG & AMS rather than line coffers of the 2 UK carriers, that MAN feels wee'd in its bed !

Petty, but understandable.

Maybe if Manchester Airport Group spent more time, effort and money on providing passengers with an airport and not a shopping mall, maybe more passengers and airlines would be inclined to use Manchester?

I know shops are needed to make money to reinvest, but surely start with the basics?

1. Leaking roofs - walking down Pier B, not one rainy day goes by without seeing at least one bucket catching leaks from the roof. The record is 7 buckets in a stretch of no more than 50m

2. Moving walkways - Has anyone ever seen any of these all working? MAG claim that they are 2 years ols and they can't get the replacement parts for them. So why not rip them out and put new ones in?!

3. Continual building work of new shops - the other week, they had so intelligently blocked off an area of the departure lounge for 'commercial redevelopment' that there was only a 2m wide gap through which ALL passengers trying to get to the gate had to pass.

4. Total lack of sufficient seating - yes, I know they don't like passengers sitting down as it means they are not shopping, but there is only so much aimless wansdering that can be done.

5. P**s poor aircraft facilities. Go to most places in Europe, there is laser guided equipemt to position the aircraft on stand. Manchester provide a mirror. Which fogs up.

MAG wouldn't dare ban the BA shuttles as they are a major link to the Long Haul services out of Heathrow at Gatwick. Lose the shuttles and lose a massive number of passengers from the NW who want to get on these services.

CATIII-NDB

Leaving insults aside, it's a genuine question. How many UK based long haul flights a day out of EGCC were there?

As far as MAG are concerned more than there will be come April 09 !

I wonder could MAG play the eco card as part of their "rumoured" case to scrap flights to LHR.

Reply
 

Thank you Gonzo - It was not an insult, ( I remembered the context of your prev postings on PPRUNE) - What about Virgin ? and the Hols flights (all year round). I wish I could give an exact figure. It does matter in economic terms. - In the light of the current economic situation, a pull out by any airline is going to cost jobs. - Every thing is becoming "London Centric" and there is a cost. The thread my be a deliberate leg pull - Lets see if the gaps in MAN's Long Haul are filled by US /European / Asian Carriers.
I know this is just hearsay, but look at the response to the BA and now BMI cessation - The Idea that a "Shuttle blocker" is even being talked about, shows the depth of the reaction.

CAT III

If MAPLC are really keen to exact revenge on BA/BMI then surely the best way for them to do this would be to offer well-timed slots at a discounted price to the likes of Cathay, United, Delta et al to that pax are no longer relying upon BA and BMI for longhauls through Heathrow. Ensure that facitities are up to standard and keep the prices for airlines to operate out of MAN competative in the long-term.

Steve

Sharpclassic

How many people from the Manchester area have NO choice, but to fly via LHR or LGW.
Try to book a package deal to the far east and all you get is flights via London, even if the flights are available from Manchester.:ugh:
I refuse to be told to fly via London and now book my flights direct with the airline from Manchester.

E.F.