Blimey! The same 787s that were cancelled many years ago!

I think you ought to take more water with it next time ratcheting!

Even if they were getting A330 which they aren`t it wouldn`t be from Tanker as all their aircraft available for lease are accounted for by TCX and LS

A330's from air tanker? just some pub talk I think

the MON/OM 787's were canx years ago

but the rumour mill is now grinding a tale at Monarch Towers that long haul is maybe back on the cards

:} Along with sub orbital flights also!

Thought these posts were years old when first reading . Why would they go back into long haul when they were so bad at it

Because they need a niche. When everyone else was falling FR and U2 down the "unbundling" route they did that. When they see LS make hay in their former backyard they suddenly wanted to do the "holiday" thing. Now TOM and especially TCX are doing well on long haul, they fancy a bit of that.

Shame they cancelled those 787s. They would have had a good head start. The short-haul model isn't looking so clever now with Sterling and Euro being close to parity (or worse) for the foreseeable future. TOM FR, U2 and TCX can move aircraft around Europe - MON cannot.

Some of this rumour may originate from the fact that a customer survey went out canvassing opinions on favourite short and long haul destinations.

apart from the Caribbean where Monarch picked up the old BCAL Golden Lion routes the long haul destinations Monarch operated to previously are either off the bucket list such as Mombasa or too expensive now as a charter holiday such as the Maldives (saturated now with scheduled legacy operators)

MCO/SFB $ to £ is awful - Does Disney and Florida still sell like it did?

Mexico Cancun - everyone is doing well here - too late for MON?

Hawaii - a long way to go

Goa Trivandrum (Kerala) and Agra - maybe - Kuoni and Voyages Jules Verne have a large specialised holiday programme to India and were previous big clients of Monarch for many years with a big series of flights to India plus Egypt and Jordan

CMB - Sri Lanka recovering from post civil war but is a big market

Canada - West Jet Air Transat Condor and TCX all do rather well - very seasonal traditionally

Cape Town - Condor/TCX on that one as with MRU (also Thomson go to MRU) again CPT is seasonal

SEZ Seychelles Condor and scheduled legacy carriers - very expensive like the Maldives

Thailand BKK Phuket - Hmm I would doubt it

Banjul - Hmm whats left there?


all of Egypt has for now gone west (although here and Aqaba for Petra in Jordan were flown mostly as there and backs)

In Germany LTU and Balair sold to Air Berlin - now they are bust so Condor has the field to themselves for long haul leisure for now - old fleet 767-300ER needs replacing in the future despite a face lift for the interiors

Does ratchetring want to make any comments!

Would love to see that happen, where's have you heard that from and I doubt it's any more concrete than rumours

Sounds to me like Monarch are too reactive and need to find a niche for themselves. They'll struggle to find one that isn't already covered now though... even Iceland has been taken.

I wouldn't say that at all. They have seen opportunities to develop non bucket-and-spade destinations from BHX such as Lisbon, Oporto, Stockholm, Valencia and Zagreb and if what we hear is true they are proving pretty successful. Certainly the traditional Spanish destinations are saturated, even the Spanish are railing against the quantity (and probably quality) of tourists they are being flooded with.

If I were Monarch I'd be looking at developing destinations like Burgas and Varna in the B+S field, and look towards routes like Ljubljana, Ohrid, Belgrade, Helsinki, on initially low frequency, aimed at the short break market. Destinations away from Euroland are likely to do particularly well, but also because of the low value of sterling, major UK cities like Birmingham and Leeds, with good shopping opportunities, plus culture and history on their doorsteps ought to thrive from some of the bigger population centres in Europe.

There's a lot more to Europe than the traditional "Costas" and serving the British tourist.

Yes I think in the past Monarch have been sheep, waited for others to do it and followed. But now they are trying to move away from that, the new short breaks they have introduced seem to be going well. They still need to continue the norm bucket and spade routes, they are popular and would be stupid to give their market share of those up. But with a fleet expansion up to 45 SH aircraft, hopefully we will see new routes being announced (they do have a company coming in to look into new potential routes ect)

A return to LH would be a good move but they need to find routes they can make work. And to those who say they were never good at LH in the last don't know what they are on about. Considering they only had two proper LH aircraft (A330) they made the operation work very well

Or bin off LBA and move down the road to DSA.
TOM are creaming the top off these routes and MON could take the B&S market for South Yorkshire, North Notts & Humberside areas.

What you are all saying is that Monarch needs a Unique Selling Point, and it's not clear what that is. Inbound tourists are certainly a growth market, but Monarch surely don't have a brand in these countries; they're more likely to use an airline they've heard of. The only possibility to me, not already mentioned, is to target the specialist tour operators who currently book space on Easyjet or Ryanair. Their customers might appreciate being away from the hoards.

What other regional airports could they move into?

It seems that the Nile Cruise market is picking up once again after the horrors of the revolution. It would be good to see Monarch fly to Luxor and tap into this market and combine it with a Red Sea break in Hughada.

yes but they made sterling good work of the 757's A300's the venerable DC-10 (and MD11 leases) plus the 767-300

back in the day the BAH and BGR (for MCO) hubs saw a few crews there with onward flights tech stopping in BAH for charters to Goa Agra CMB Male Trivandrum

the 757 went everywhere at first then the A300's took over
the 757 continued with Agra and Kerala

Mombasa tech stopped at Cairo or was it HER?

the A330's came into their own for non-stops to Goa USA/Canada, a big Caribbean programme and Male Maldives

the DC-10 was used for mainly Florida or as a short haul people mover

yes Monarch had many flights to the Nile region Luxor and Aswan - A massive programme indeed
(and likewise of course to the Red Sea too - SSH Marsa Alarm and Hurghada plus Aqaba and Eilat too via Ovda)

any return to the Nile destinations (my Fav's and I sorely miss going there) is driven by the FCO & local security and is then up to the Tour operators such as Red Sea holidays Kuoni VJV etc to take the risk to go back
the market is there but depends when it is safe to go back en-masse - but frankly in the current climes I cannot see that happening for yonks

operators putting their toes back in the Nile region use Egyptair who still have their LHR Monday LXR non-stop - not sure if Thomon's LXR charter still operates for next season?

kind of...

back in the days of the A330's both aircraft were chartered out to longhaul tour operators, a significant amount of flying in Summer was done for Airtours/Cooks etc and winter for specialists in India and MLE. None of it had to be marketed and sold by Monarch, once it was sold to the tour operators it was money in the bank and the risk is with the tour ops to make yields work for them. Often the flight is a loss leader for the accommodation you can sell on Longhaul.

That market has gone.

Either in house to the big tour ops, off to Emirates etc for routes such as India and MLE and up in smoke in the case of Egypt and Banjul.

If Monarch were to re-enter longhaul and do it off their own back they need to start from scratch.

Pipedreams are nice I guess. But people need to face facts. Starting a longhaul operation from nothing again would bleed more cash than anyone can get their hands on, and anyone expecting Boeing to sugar-daddy Monarch back into a sustainable existence reminiscent of past glories is deluding themselves.

The blame lies in the inaction of the previous management to do anything other than fill their own pockets. Too many ships have sailed. They need to find the right size and carry on doing what they do well and hope it works.

The only way to fly to Luxor now is using Egyptair's daily service via Cairo. The direct service is a winter only flight. Whilst Hurghada is in full swing with Thomas Cook, Thomson and others, the Nile cruise industry needs heavy investment. There are around 300 boats lolling around the Nile with only around 30 in service. A sad situation but no operators seem to move to get it going again.

thanks - well the winter is the High Season on the Nile of course -

i did the SS Karim twice and the SS Sudan paddle steamers about 10-12 years ago - am awesome way to plod down the Nile and see the wonders unfold

I guess these vessels are laid up

A source in Boeing claims they have signed of on some b787

Any link to your claim which I find VERY unlikely.

MOL spouting that Monarch are "burning money" and will struggle to get through the winter.

Well I find that a lot easier to believe than the ridiculous rumour two posts before...

The only ones that would be likely to be available quickly would be the last of the "terrible teens", the first 20, or so, 787s off the production line, which very few airlines were mad enough to take. They are essentially individually hand built, with a lot of "re-work" done to them.

The initial A380s have similar, overweight, overly complex maintenance requirement, which has led to them being retired by Singapore Airlines after just 10 years. the initial 787s are so bad not even business jet operators will have them.

If MON do take some of these, the lunatics really will be running the asylum.

EDIT: It seems they have been sold. Where would MON get 787s quickly?

O'Leary is "spouting" that pretty well all airlines in Europe except for his (surprise, surprise) IAG, AF-KLM, Lufthansa and possibly EasyJet are going belly up.

More like wishful thinking on his behalf than reality - but then when did he last consider allowing the truth getting in the way of a good press release!?

Just because O'Leary says it doesn't mean it's not true!

MOL could say that about a lot of airlines especially ones that rely summer sun routes but if you look at Monarch they are introducing more city routes which may be more viable in winter.

As ever I wish them luck and hope they don't need it, but that's a market that other people are involved in with a range of slightly different USPs and competitive advantages. What can Monarch bring to the party?

Ideally Monarch need to be pushing their Monarch Holidays brand further and better using their knowledge and expertise they have gained over the years of offering such product as an advantage.

They should also make better use of their Vantage card product as a USP. Perhaps join forces with Avios to collect and spend points on it. Tier points should be earned depending on flight spend / distance flown as per the current card, although with easier to obtain perks closer matching the likes of BAs Executive Club... This is something not really seen in the low cost market but absolutely does attract repeat business.

Finally, with their new Max 8's on the way they will finally have a standardised fleet. The new aircraft should better match demand across a larger mix of destinations throughout the year. I feel while the A321 has been perfect for their summer sun routes and previous charter days, it's also been too big to venture into new scheduled markets outside of this, especially during quieter parts of the year. Yes they have the A320 but again this adds a degree of complexity for scheduling to fit in whuch aircraft can fly to where.

Monarch already have a lot going for them - i feel it's just been a case of them not using these positives to their own advantage. As soon as the new aircraft arrive hopefully we'll soon see new markets and destination pop up on the route map. Alongside their bread and butter routes, perhaps they should have a focus on offering more niche routes from their current bases. As for long haul it's really not the be all and end all. Personally they should stay clear of this for the near future at the very least and completely focus on growing shorthaul and pushing their product.

As a frequent traveller with Monarch mainly from AGP-BHX I'm concerned about the capacity issues with the new 737Max versus the A321. I always go for extra legroom seats although they sell very quickly in the summer, and I often have to be flexible on dates to get them. and that's with 2 A321's daily on said route. Will they still have as many extra legroom seats on the 737? Will the capacity issue increase the fare? Do they want to decrease their market share? I'd like to hear from those with more info on this.

Yeah it will have 6 rows of extra legroom at the front and 2/3 rows at the overwing. The inflight product as such won't be changing.

It's not about wanting to decrease their market share? Once the whole fleet has been delivered, there should actually be a significant increase in available seats on offer compared to currently.

There has been no confirmation on cabin configuration for the Max's as yet. Capacity wise you should be looking closer to the A320 for comparison. As for extra space seats, there's every possibilty that they will offer the same amount as the A321's or more. The A320's already offer an additional row (6 more seats) of extra space than the A321's do. It all depends on if the economics will still add up to remove a row of seats, although personally i'd say they're definitely a good ancillary earner for them. If Monarch decide to go for a smaller forward galley (by removing the galley 2 area), they will be able to offer the same amount of extra space seats as on their A320s (54) whilst being able to achieve 186 seats in total. An additional 12 seats vs the A320.

Last year my wife and 2 friends flew Monarch to Larnaca. They paid extra and booked their seats, many months before, and chose row 5. Shortly after she received an email saying that they had been moved to row 9 because of a change of aircraft. This year she had booked MON flights to Funchal, choosing her seats and guess what, there is a change of aircraft and she has been moved some rows back.

Why are Monarch doing this as it doesn't matter whether the aircraft is a A320 or A321. She is not that bothered but wonders why pay more to chose your seat and then get moved.

One of Monarch's problems at the moment is the lack of commonality within the fleet.
You pay a premium in advance without the airline knowing which aircraft will be used. The introduction of a common fleet is long overdue and will eradicate all of these glitches.

Cazza fly Thanks for your reply and explanation regarding seats etc. Interesting to see that there will be more seats available but in reference to the BHX-AGP service I was referring to 2x A321 versus 2x 737Max must be a significant seat availability reduction, and this summer the A321's appear to be full most of the time. I think they'll put the fares up because there'll be more people chasing fewer seats.

Or with more aircraft in the fleet they could add extra rotations.