You make some very fair points.

The real issue I see is that we have regulators who let airlines get away with this kind of crap. Large corporations are allowed to manage the business risk associated to COVID-19 (for example by re-scheduling or cancelling flights with far fewer consequences than normal), while consumers have no such leeway when they are individually impacted by the situation.

In today's environment and uncertainty, there is absolutely no reason to advance money to airlines for flights operating a few months down the line.

Yes, I fully appreciate the need for travel providers to protect themselves from straightforward "disinclination to travel". The penalty for that reasonably falls to the customer. But we need to differentiate between that group and those who are forced to stay away by order of the government in the jurisdiction they're booked to visit.

Right now, if you arrive at an airport in Eire with the intention of staying overnight, you will be ordered to shut yourself away in a hotel room for 14 days of self-isolation whilst arranging to have food and supplies delivered to yourself all at your own expense. Now that isn't my idea of a holiday, and I don't believe that even Mr and Mrs O' Leary would be tempted to travel on those terms. It is quite different from someone who decides they just don't fancy a trip away right now when their booked destination is fully-open for business.

Note that I'm not even talking about cancellation and refund. I'm calling for a waiver of the rip-off change-fee which prevents the customer from saving their trip by switching to replacement dates after the quarantine rule is lifted. The airline still keeps both the original fare paid and the difference between that and the new fare under these circumstances. So the pain is shared around, and customer goodwill is preserved. That seems a reasonable compromise to me. How can a £90 change fee on top of this be justified?

In the absence of that compromise, I for one cannot trust Ryanair with any new advanced bookings. And that will be my advice to family and friends too. This also has implications for the company's bottom line.

Out of necessity I travel DUB-FRA and paid only €9.99 each way. Fill out a 'COVID-19 Passenger Locator Form' accurately on arrival and hand it in to passport control. I've never been followed up on and no one shuts you up in a hotel room. Why would I need to pay a change fee when I can purchase a new ticket cheaper?

I needed to change my flight to Tenerife on 26th August to late September, at £19.99 for new flight there was no way I would entertain their change fee.....

The situation is very different for visitors such as myself. You list your location as 'Dublin', so presumably you are based at your own accommodation which you call "home". A tourist flouting lockdown in a rural town such as Killarney would surely risk attracting the attention of the local Gardai. Apart from which, just what is actually open in Killarney? Are the 'Ring of Kerry' excursions actually running? Maybe they are - for Irish residents - but I'm sure a "self-isolating" tourist would be noticed.

No, for visiting tourists, Eire is not a viable option at present. If you want to enjoy a holiday, you must break the law. This is why it is so disappointing that Ryanair will not waive change fees for customers blindsided by this - not refunds, just a waiver of the arbitrary £90 change-fee. For a change which you organise yourself online and print on your own paper with your own ink using your own equipment. No interaction by Ryanair staff. Why a £90 charge for this?

Well, I remind Mr O' Leary and co of the decals he once applied to EI-EXF. "U Nevr Beat D Irish!" Now it just so happens that there's quite a bit of Irish blood in me ... like 100% of it actually. And I don't intend to be beaten by Ryanair on this one. Don't get angry, get even! I have devised a strategy to to do exactly that.

The fare on which I feel "done" by Ryanair was £51.95. Not a large sum financially, but I hate being ripped off. It's the principle of it. So I've decided to divert 20x this sum away from Ryanair in retaliation. In coming months, this means diverting £1039.00 which would have been spent with Ryanair to bookings with alternative carriers. Sending them to the proverbial 'sin-bin' for a while.

Now, of course, I recognise that this is only a gesture to a company the size of Ryanair. But I remind them that many other customers who booked flights on 'self-isolation' routes pre June 10th will also feel aggrieved by Ryanair's no-compromise indifference. If a good proportion of these also adopt an "anyone but Ryanair" attitude for a while, those £90 change fees will prove to have been an expensive misjudgment.

In Ireland, is it a law or a recommendation?

There has got to be questions asked about Ryanair and other airlines continuing to operate services to travel ban destinations just to avoid giving passengers their money back. I know of a couple where money is tight who have lost £700 as they could not travel without insurance. The bonus for Ryanair is that they get to keep government passenger taxes, don’t pay out any passenger handling charges or passenger airport fees for no show passengers.

Wizz have been doing this since 1st May - it’s cheaper to fly the aircraft empty than return 180 passengers their money back. I’m surprised other airlines hadn’t thought of this.

It's business... nothing personal, just business

Maybe so. But every business transaction requires a counterparty. A well-run business will keep the customer wanting to come back for more.

Well truthfully that`s just about best answer I have seen in many a long day...

I don’t see any problem in them still flying, these places aren’t ‘banned’, there’s just a new quarantine requirement. A flight to Alicante from Manchester with FR post-quarantine imposed still had 160pax on board.

People want to and will still travel now as this has gone on for too long, people are fed up of being stuck in their respective countries.

Except that is not true.
Here is the FCO latest travel advice...


So yes, not banned but against the UK FCO advice & will impact most travel insurances. A holiday is NOT essential travel.

Can`t help but wonder how many people jumping on a plane and off to the sun have twigged that their travel insurance (often annual policies) will be null and void if they travel against FCO advice...A bet a lot haven`t.

I bet a lot have twigged that their insurance is not valid, but have decided to chance it anyway, with the corollary they will say 'nobody told me' if they need to claim and the insuree declines to pay

It seems the majority are going to forgo insurance as they can’t find insurers willing to cover Covid 19.


https://www.travelmole.com/news_feat...ews_id=2042905

To be fair, in places like Spain there is a reciprocal health agreement in place as part of being in the EU - the insurers don’t cover it because there is no charge. So what is the value of insurance?

Oh.....

Our EHIC cards are valid until the end of the year. But they don't cover everything, including I assume repatriation.

Interesting observations on insurance, but not strictly true. I had an email from my bank about my insurance only the other day, they will cover ALL travel including to FCO exempt countries for COVID related medical but will only cover trip cancellation IF
The landscape is changing with insurers. The perceived financial risk of contracting COVID during travel is actually less now than financial risk of you wanting to claim for cost of travel. I understand why they do this and it’s the same reason that Governments globally wont bail out the airlines a second time ( or first in some cases ) in that this first hit was unexpected, nobody saw it coming. But if you book travel now, you do so knowing it’s a risk so they aren’t going to cover you if you decide actually you want to cancel the trip off your own steam.

I have pointed this out on another thread that while sitting around a swimming pool in Spain I was taken ill. The hotel receptionist called out a private doctor no doubt for a backhander. He called out a private ambulance for I guess another backhander which took me to a plush 5 star hospital.

I was lying there thinking how marvellous their equivalent of the NHS was. If never occurred to me that I was raking up a 4 figure bill and was being treated privately. It was only later on my return to the UK that I found out when the bill arrived. As for my EU medical card, it was worthless. As for my insurance, it was priceless.

Insurers will start covering Covid 19, for simple reason that they themselves will need the cash. If people don’t travel, they have no business

It’s generally well known that this goes on. Your EHIC card is useful if you know how to use it.

It is the ultimate "Project Fear", Govt say something and everybody rushes to conform.

Local Teresco (other crappy stores also available) had a lady berating security day of compulsory mask being introduced, crying that said person is infecting everybody by not wearing a mask. Security being more mature and experienced just asked, "At midnight did said gent become more infectious that yesterday because no masks were compulsory ?". Lady responded " Well government made it compulsory so you as security must do it and throw people out of the store". The security response of "Well I have not received the memo yet but we are apparently getting guns to shoot people as well" got a "oh good" and the lady walked away seemingly happy, with security wondering is this Walmart.

An inept Govt who has no clue has done more damage than coronavirus.

More like wanting to get guest best and quickest treatment possible.

If it was NHS would you rather wait hours for an ambulance and hours on a trolley ?

I was more than happy with the service I received. The point to the tale was that insurance saved the day as I was in no position to question what was happening to me. Relying on the EU medical card carries its own risks and it is something people need to consider. If folk are happy at the cost of repatriation flights and medical bills why indeed should they bother with insurance if they think nothing will happen to them.

JCSL, which bank is that?

Also the Canaries have recently taken out a block insurance for all visitors to their islands to cover if taken ill with Covid19 whilst there. You have to be staying in a hotel or equivalent (not sure whether AirBnB counts?) and obviously it doesn't cover if you've travelled there after a positive test. This covers any visitors whether Spanish or not and they have initially taken this out for a year.

Its a managed account with an offshore bank. Not a UK one, but it also a recognised name in UK highstreet banking, even if they're technically different businesses.

There are now some insurance providers, providing cover to those destinations in Europe eg France & Spain that are on the quarantine list - I just got quote for Spain £25 - including medical and repatriation. Companies are adapting to the new ‘normal’.

The issue of course is that unless you have taken out a specific new insurance policy, standard insurance policies will not cover you for any othe medical issues you may have whilst on holiday, as you have travelled against FCO advice.

From BBC

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53787437

From Travel Mole:

Ryanair is to add more flights to Portugal after the UK government removed the destination from the list of countries from where travellers must quarantine for 14 days on returning to the UK.
It will operate an additional 14 flights a week to Faro in the Algarve from 12 UK airports between 11 September and 24 October, capitalising on demand for late summer breaks.

Increased flights to Faro
Bournemouth 4 (+1)
Bristol 6 (+1)
Cardiff 3 (+1)
Edinburgh 4 (+1)
East Midlands Airport 8 (+1)
Glasgow Prestwick 4 (+1)
Liverpool 6 (+1)
London Southend 3 (+1)
Luton 5 (+1)
Manchester 13 (+2)
Newcastle 4 (+2)
Stansted 15 (+1)

Portugal was added to the list of 'safe' destinations for UK travellers last Thursday as Croatia, Austria and Trinidad and Tobago were removed.

Ryanair’s most profitable airports

https://www.anna.aero/2020/09/03/rya...in-its-top-10/

Never having been proven slow in growing out of the industry`s problems & setbacks & having considered how Ryanair would begin to take any advantage of the Pandemic catastrophe the first signs appear to have emerged today.
Ryanair is to undertake a share placing to raise Euro400m in a book building exercise to be better placed to take advantage of future opportunities including to grow the network expand it`s fleet take advantage of lower airport & a/c cost opportunities that are likely to arise.
Watching the WZZ expansion/announcement frenzy too in recent times must have been particularly galling though RYR have obviously been held back by non deliveries of the "Max" even before Covid19.

Liverpool
 

New route starting 25 Oct Liverpool to Kosice in Slovakia, twice weekly.

Doubtful because in all likelihood the Wizzair expansion plans out of LGW and others places will not occur.

It is also doubtful aside from a few big airports that slot availability will be an issue for 3 years so why go nuts when not needed.

Ryanair will be able to use existing fleet for next 2 yrs without likely needing new aircraft, there are also a lot of 738s that can be leased in very cheaply if required. The aviation market will be at 2019 levels if lucky in 2024.

Pointing out that RYR have a proven & successful track record for expanding into a downturn & that the current "catastrophe" for the industry will present many opportunities with the statement issued yesterday kinda giving those first indications.

As for new a/c & the existing fleet the MAX will be added at some stage.

Pre COVID RYR had already stated that non MAX deliveries had held back expansion plans with STN saying much the same thing for their own traffic levels.

Yes lots of availability too in the lease/purchase market which RYR indicate as well.

Perhaps not just the B738 having now A320`s & building experience with a subsidiary fleet.

Unfortunately market levels may present as pointed out but if so RYR appear to be saying they will go after a bigger share of that or any sized market then.

Yeah some of this I can concur with. In truth the Max issue has helped Ryanair massively, the expansion planned has not occurred BUT had this expansion occurred the contaction this year would have been even bigger and more costly.

As it stands for FY2020 to March it required FR to cut back on marginal routes and maximise profitability (cash) v expansion which would have eaten cash in the shoprt term.

It is doubtful that there will be any great uptake in flights until April 2021, likely by then the Max will be flying plus Ryanair will have sucked up seasonsal leases for expansion though it is doubtful passenger numbers will be the same until 2022 but fares will be higher.

At this point in time, the longer the Max is not flying the more beneficial it is for Ryanair. The likely benefit will be in region of couple of hundred $M. It will be restructred in such a way no doubt that doesn't devalue purchase price of the Max and potentially Boeing doing something with older aircraft or writing off debt on some of the newer 738's delivered.

The "compensation" factor with the MAX clearly a priority for RYR & without doubt as the industry`s 2nd largest customer for the 737 model Boeing no matter how it is structured will be of course "looking after" RYR.

The re-registration of the OE- A320s of Laudamotion to 9H- of Lauda Europe has commenced with a 9H- example visiting STN this morning on the PMI service.