BA considering going LOCO at Gatwick.

[Runway 31]

Article taken from Todays Guardian. BA is considering going LOCO at Gatwick in the face of competition especially from EasyJet. Can you see at time when they will pull out of Gatwick altogether and concentrate on fortress Heathrow?.



British Airways has begun a wholesale review of its offering on short-haul flights after failing to meet its target of making a profit from its domestic and European network.
Industry sources believe changes are likely to focus on the airline's services from its second-biggest base, Gatwick, where business-class cabins could be removed and in-flight services cut to provide flights more akin to "no-frills" rivals.

BA's chief executive, Rod Eddington, said yesterday the present break-even performance of short-haul flights was "not acceptable".

He was speaking as BA revealed a plunge in its third-quarter profits from £125m to £75m, depressed by a £106m increase in fuel costs.

Mr Eddington said short-haul changes would focus on the fleet and on in-flight services, rather than on the range of destinations served.

"We're looking hard at our short-haul product offering at the moment," he said. "This is a very competitive world and, with respect, we won't be saying anything more until we're clear about what it is we're going to do."

Since Mr Eddington became chief executive, BA has stemmed its £300m annual losses from short flights and brought them near to breaking even, despite the relentless rise of budget carriers offering cut-price tickets for as little as 99p.

However, Mr Eddington has made it clear he wants more progress: "They're broadly at break-even, but in the BA of today that's not an acceptable performance. There have to be more changes."

Experts believe Gatwick is likely to face particular scrutiny. Mr Eddington has already "de-hubbed" BA's services at the airport by shifting many intercontinental connections to Heathrow.

The airline still serves more than 30 short-haul destinations from Gatwick, including Amsterdam, Geneva, Prague and Rome, but it faces direct competition from easyJet.

Average income per passenger fell by 1.9% for the three months to December, partly due to the weakness of the dollar, which reduced the value of sales to American travellers.

However, the shares perked up 4p to 274.5p following encouraging signs on future income.

The airline told the City that it expected revenue to be up by between 3% and 3.5% in the year to March, compared with its previous guidance of a 2% to 3% increase.

Chris Avery, a transport analyst at JP Morgan, said business-class travel was beginning to show signs of improvement: "BA is showing that premium volume business travel is recovering reasonably strongly on the back of a strong year for British GDP last year."

BA said it had suffered little from December's tsunami in Asia, other than a reduction in loads to Bangkok.

However, Mr Eddington said conditions across the global aviation industry remained tough, with many of America's struggling carriers fending off bankruptcy by offering short-term discounts on fares.

He cited figures showing that the industry made an overall loss of $5bn last year: "If you were an investor, would you invest in the global aviation business? In an industry losing $5bn, you'd have to think long and hard."

[madmax100]

Interesting.............BACX is also looking at going down to LOCO route in the regions! Big announcement due in a few weeks....

Max

[eggc]

BACX just chopped various routes ex MAN including AMS, with reductions on others !!

[ATIS]

I thought that BA LGW (short haul) was lo-cost. The prices certainly were. I flew them last year and their prices beat easyjet by quite some £££££.

Why not dispense with short haul, cos the market is already SATURATED. Pass on the good routes to GB, cos they know how to make a route work. Scrap all loss making routes, CDG will be first of many. Use the lucrative slots to expand long haul.

May be a brave move though to take on the ever increasing middle east carriers at LGW. If these carriers are making money from LGW pax, then BA should put on some non-stop flights to several points around the world. I remember in good old days LGW-Hong Kong couldn't get a seat for love or money. Mind you that was a few years ago now.

[hostiegirl]

ba should NEVER have got rid of go-fly it was a good quality lo-cost carrier!!and was making money!!!

[Stampe]

I,m a frequent pax with Ba from LGW they are already usually the cheapest scheduled airline out of there with the added benefit of a full service .The airline of preference for me.If you book ahed Ba fares are amazingly low and your getting a quality product.

[Mark Lewis]

From some research I undertook back last summer the BA LGW flights were performing very well in the loads for economy due to the low prices offerred. I never once saw more than 5 passengers in a LGW-AMS business cabin, yet from LHR the highest I ever saw was 75!

However dropping the business class from LGW would make little sense, as the size of the business cabin can be as large or small as they want it to be, without restricting the lower yield economy passenger cabin. Dropping it would only cause revenue to fall.

In terms of dropping the service levels, that is currently the only point BA has to compete on with the (current) LoCos. By getting rid of that they become wholly indistinguishable from the others, and as a result the whole brand cheapens, not necessarily just in the areas there is actual change.

Not decisions to be taken lightly by any means.

[Jet2LBA]

As hinted by hostiegirl, could this possibly lead to a Go-Fly MKII?

A quality LCC from LGW, just as Go was from STN? With staff who were committed to their role and had management who valued them? Anyone got Barbara Cassani's telephone number?

[MerchantVenturer]

BACX just chopped various routes ex MAN including AMS, with reductions on others !!
But is it increasing routes and basing an extra aircraft at BRS.

I suspect BACx's main competitor, certainly in this part of the world, is Flybe and I wonder how long it can continue in the face of such price competition before it is forced to do something about it, presumably either try to compete on fares or bow out.

It's lead-in fares on the new routes from BRS to Milan and Zurich are very competitive at £79 return, incl taxes and charges. A sign of things to come?

[Max Tow]

Re above comments on BA's already competitive pricing ex LGW.
You're all correct, but I suspect the problem is that BA LGW has indeed become low fare here without yet managing to become truly low cost. Getting stuck in the transition between the old high cost full service model and a new loco one is not a comfortable place to be, especially when fare dumping goes ahead of cost shedding.

Just look at the infrastructure/overhead at LGW there compared with the EZY operation, even given the third party handling of the latter. There's less than 5 years ago but it's still over the top for European loco yields. No doubt the old issue of overhead allocation from Waterside/LHR also still exists.

Finally, in an era when the locos alleged "fees and taxes" surcharge often exceed the advertised fare, it does seem to me that BA's advertising of all inclusive fares has never made enough of the real competitive situation for the less bright members of the travelling community.

[go_edw]

14th June 2000

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1388980.stm

A new strategy

Last year BA decided to sell Go as part of a strategy to restore profits at its loss-making European operations.

"Go is an excellent airline with a fine management and workforce," said Rod Eddington, the chief executive of BA.

"As a no-frills operator, however, it simply does not fit in our full-service strategy."

The budget airline market - dominated by Go, Ryanair and Easyjet - does not suit BA's plans to reduce lower-priced seats on many of its routes and instead focus on business class passengers.

[MarkD]

Shades of EI... down with this kind of thing! :yuk:

If they are demerging the 737s to go all airbus-shorthaul that's one thing but don't put a BA logo on it!

[VIKING9]

BA could always call their new loco "BEA" - maybe dust off the old Trident and 1-11 at Duxford for the inaugural flights....... ahhhh memories http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/otn/angry/director.gif

[BOAC]

How about 'DanAir'.........................?:D :D

http://www.yahodeville.com/torebki/logos/danair.gif

[WHBM]

British Airways has begun a wholesale review of its offering on short-haul flights after failing to meet its target of making a profit from its domestic and European network. Maybe part of the excessive costs is the inordinate number of financial reviews, strategy studies, business redirection exercises, or whatever else they are called this week, that BA constantly seems to do on their short-haul network. It all has to be paid for !

[madmax100]

Makes sense to go loco.
BA simply cannot continue to sustain the current losses @ lgw.

[PropellerPaul]

As an ex-employee of B.A. at both gatwick & heathrow, a move like this doesn't surprise me.. I don't see any harm in trying to make all shorthaul more like a lost cost brand, I think they should 'woo' back Barbara Cassani & give her the whole of the gatwick fleet to play with, I'm sure with her business experience & hands-on approach at 'Go-Fly' she would turn loss-making gatwick around.. Unfortunately, the only people I'm sure would dissaprove would probably be, in my experience, the cabin crew. The travelling public has changed so much since I started flying back in 1990 and I think we owe it to ourselves as crew to change with it & be open to what may help us to keep our jobs & win more customers, the way it's going though, the only airlines that will probably 'clean-up' as a result of B.A. slot losses at gatwick etc are 'EasyJet' who seem to be doing very well out of there.. The futures bright, the futures orange! :ok:

[colegate]

If this really is a serious BA idea it will have to go the whole way if it is to succeed. The best option for them would be to take the best offerings from their competitors and package them up into a "no one can beat us offering".

That means high density seating on large aircraft. 734 or A320 at least at LGW. 757 or A321 would be even better.

Install free IFE. Choice of meals like Monarch. All, on-baord service sapaid for at rates which generate profits. A reward card for regular flyers that has got nothing to do with BA miles. The popularity of Monarch Vantage is something which cannot be ignioored by competitors. No non-internet bookings. Better schedules than the competition. Above all John Lewis type of never knowingly undersold price guarantee.

[Psr777]

If this is the case, what of the plans to open BA at LGW as the new "Mid-Fleet", with mixed flying on the 737 and 777 by the crews? (not flight crew)

Is this a different operation, I am confused !!:confused:

BA longhaul ex LGW is currently operated by mainline crew.

BA shorthaul ex LGW is currently operated by BACX, yes?

So will it only become LOCO when the mainline operation is shut down and BACX take over the long haul routes, on their current contract (which is less pay and not mainline), with the mainline crew relocating to LHR?

I hear BA are also trying to use Pursers only and no CSD's on certain leisure routes LH ex LGW. 1 x Purser in charge of each cabin, with 1 x Puser designated as "Lead Purser" !!

Sounds familiar :suspect: :suspect: :suspect:

[madmax100]

Psr777

you are right about BA only trying to use Pursers.

bacx is currently prevented from operating at lgw due scope.

that will change soon when a new a/c type is introduced.

[BOAC]

If this is the case, what of the plans to open BA at LGW as the new "Mid-Fleet", with mixed flying on the 737 and 777 by the crews? - only rumour, but I heard it was off due to the LHR c/crew union's refusal to accept. Perhaps they will 'die by the sword'?:eek:

[lowfaresbuster]

I heard that Willie Walsh, formerly Aer Lingus was taking up a job at BA, to manage the 'lo-co' short haul division.
2 + 2 = 5 .....

[In trim]

In theory I totally agree that the current BA product ex-LGW is not sustainable given the BA cost-base, and they've had loads of chances along the way to tackle this.....Go, CityFlyer, and still have the GB option. However, they've never had the balls to take on the unions.

Yes, on-board service and product are a significant factor......but one of the biggest issues are the working practices utilised at LGW......staffing levels, turnround times, union-agreed caps on number of flights worked by Despatchers per shift, check-in desk utilisation, etc.

You only have to look at the relative efficiency (in staffing and turnround time) of an eJ operation on the South Pier, or elsewhere such as LTN/STN. How will BA ever achieve anything remotely approaching this at LGW? Even if there was a will and an acceptance (which in itself is a major hurdle), you cannot simply change mindsets overnight.

[tilly666]

As cabin crew at Shorthaul LGW I would like to say that we have already cut costs to the lowest possible level at LGW and have accepted changes in order to stay in work.

BA have cut all unprofitable routes from LGW e.g FRA,GOA,CDG etc.
Crews have lost alot of nightstops which will save the airline money and we only carry 4 crew on our 737 aircraft, including services with club europe.
Crews are on less money than those at the golden runways, even though we do the same job and have less stringent union agreements.
We are now carrying out 'fixed' turnarounds, of 35 minutes to get the most out of the aircraft and the schedule now includes very early mornings, late nights and over night flights.
Regarding midfleet, which is estimated will save the company 70 million, yes the unions may well argue but in the end BA will win and have their way. The gods at LHR will not have a choice.

For once will people stop picking at EF LGW. Our flights are busy, sometimes with high club loads, we have a schedule equal to that of a low cost operator, even though we are NOT one, we have the lowest overheads of anywhere in BA and most of all passengers get off praising the fact that they get a free drink and snack, they get off happy. LGW has a dedicated team of pilots and cabin crew who deliver excellent service!

If BA wants to cut further costs look 35 miles up the road at the golden runways with their archaic agreements and ludicrous wages.

(Sorry to my colleagues at LHR, but we are sick of always being targeted by cuts, we have been through enough and can't do much more.)

[Buster the Bear]

So if as quoted, easyjet are harming BA at Gatwick, how many routes have direct competition as a percentage of short haul routes flown by BA?

Gatwick, stand by for another shafting from BA towers!

http://whipsnade.co.uk/picturelibrary/jpeg150/br/brown_bear_120_wide.jpg

[jettesen]

Since when were GO ever a "quality " airline? My a**e. Old, shi**y planes, tech problems daily, you make me laugh

[In trim]

Tilly,

For the record, I agree with you. My post was not aimed at the crew (many of whom I know) but more at the ground operation.

I know BA have significantly improved their utilisation, but how does their current LGW SH fleet utilisation compare with easyJet's? I'm sure someone has the answer.

What is the cost per ASK of BA SH LGW compared with eJ? (Particularly given the comparative seating densities).

My post was primarily aimed at the still relatively high-cost handling and infrastructure organisation at LGW. Yes it is undoubtedly a damn sight lower than LHR, but I can guarantee it is nowhere near the per-turnround cost of eJ at LGW.

If you were to apportion just the "groundstaff cost per turnround" with BA in the North compared with eJ in the south there would be quite a sizeable difference!!

Like it or not, many people in the LGW area are price-driven, and whilst the eJ product may not be everyone's cup of tea, the product is in my experience usually very good and friendly, on a shiny new aircraft.........it does what it says on the tin!!

[bmibaby.com]

From a customer service point of view Go was a quality airline, especially considered to its other competitors in the no-frills field when they were around; EasyJet, Ryanair & AB Airlines. The service was always of a good standard on the ground & in the air, and certainly on all the flights I flew with them, the BA "classy" touch was certainly felt, compared to the service offered by the other LCCs at that time.

I don't know whether BA are any good at the LCC game. They did, depending on who you talk to, fairly well with turning Deutsche BA into flydba. Any idea whether LGW would get its own brand or just be all-Y class BA? Seems a bit too sketchy details to be taken seriously right now ...

[Tom the Tenor]

The airport with the Golden Runways! Ha, that is good! The heads will be swelled out big tonight!

[Dash-7 lover]

Can understand that changes are needed at LGW. BA got lumbered with LGW when they bought their rivals British Caledonian. Since then they've tried to shore it up by grabbing Dan-Air and abosorbing Cityflyer, and it's still not working..... . The unions haven't really helped. Pre-historic rostering agreements have probably led to inflexible and unprofitable use of resources.

I can see a lot of stuff at LGW being handed over to GB airways, being a new-ish company I can imagine they may be a bit more flexible...........maybe the future could be.....

GB airways operating all LGW deps and Western European routes?

BMED operating 'speciality' routes out of LHR. (also in the right place to be BA's get out clause at LHR, for some European routes?)

BACX operate other European routes from MAN/BHX etc and all domestic stuff incl the shuttles, perhaps.

BA MAINLINE then concentrate on the long-haul options?

Loganair have got all the Highlands and Islands stuff.

Just a thought.

[In trim]

Dash 7 lover

they've tried to shore it up by grabbing Dan-Air and abosorbing Cityflyer, and it's still not working..... .

Dan-Air had a lot of strengths but was a loss-maker with a crazy mixed fleet, and was saddled with debt. A great airline, with great people, but nonetheless not a viable concern.

CityFlyer, however, was a different matter. To say BA "....absorbed CityFlyer....and it's still not working" really does NOT reflect the truth. It was a successful airline, with an excellent management team. If they had been allowed to manage those niche short-haul routes, then I believe BA LGW would be in a much stronger position today. It was, however, 'integrated' and the management team dissolved, largely for political reasons and the perceived threat.

There was absolutely no business logic to the way that happened, and the second the CFE operation was saddled with the North Terminal BA costings, those routes were doomed.

[tilly666]

Dash 7 lover

You say pre-historic rostering agreements haven't helped and have led to inflexible and unprofitable use of resources.

LGW do not have the old archaic set of agreements, infact our's are much like those ones cityflyer had. We do maximum sectors per day and more than often when we are down route it is minimum rest, so we work equally as hard as crew's from low cost airlines.

And during this discussion let us not forget

BA ARE NOT A LOW FARES AIRLINE!!

BA are a full service airline, therefore trying to compete with the likes of easyjet is one thing, but trying to be them we will never be. Leave lgw alone, we are making our fair share of proit and as I have already mentioned LHR needs huge cost cutting. Has anyone thought "Too many chiefs"?????

[hostiegirl]

jetteson how dare you knock go ****ty a/c yes there were a few but the go op's ops team kept them in stn where they were looked after when we became easy i'd never known so many apu/airstairs inop on the 300 fleet easy just sent any a/c to any base regardless of parts not being availible when things went tech at the outstations.go were a great company with a great bunch of people working for them barbara was a fantastic boss same cannot be said of r.w.the only good thing to come out of the merger was the big pay out i got!!i stuck around in orange but went to see if the grass was greener and i was in luck as for me it was!!!.so enough of the slating of an airline you know nothing about and back to the thread .....b.a loco at lgw............

[atco-matic]

As I understand it from a good friend who is a BA CSD and has close links with the unions, Gatwick long haul WILL operate with one purser on board the aircraft. Thats one purser total. No CSD or purser in each cabin.

This has been agreed to on the proviso that any crew working at Gatwick for BA can have a posting to anywhere else at the same grade if they want it. This leads to the situation where a different friend who was made a purser on long haul 6 months ago at LGW can be transferred to LHR. This in turn is ruffling feathers at LHR as the newest pursers are 3+ years his senior and he gets to jump the waiting list and go straight in.

As for BA going LOCO on Euro routes, well if they do then I wont be flying them anymore from LGW for the pityful amount of miles they give you for travelling in Euro Traveller!

[4468]

atco

You possibly don't realise it, but it's only around 3 years ago that a number of BA B777s, were operating regularly out of LGW with not a single CSD in sight!

And what good crews they were too!

[HZ123]

Whats in a name anyway. All BA CC are trained to the acceptable level of pax safety and whatever the titles CC comply with the CAA directives. If it is OK loads will continue to be fine.

[aeulad]

tilly666

On more than one occasion I have found BA to be THE lowest fares airline.

I have flown Gatwick-Murcia cheaper than on Ryanair. Gatwick-Gibraltar cheaper than Ryanair to Jerez. I am flying Gatwick-Las Palmas for £100rtn!! Whilst these flights are operated by GB, they are BA branded and are booked via the BA website.

I will also be choosing BA for my trip to Saudi flying Heathrow-Bahrain for £300, cheaper than the likes of KLM, Emirates, Qatar and Gulf Air by a long shot.

To say that BA is not an airline with low fares is simply not true.

Regards

Mike

[In trim]

aeulad,

The points you make actually work against your argument in some respects......as all the routes you highlight are operated by GB.

As was the case with CFE, GB might operate in BA colours, and BA at Waterside might physically manage the yield control on a flight-by-flight basis, but the management team are NOT BA, and have got the focus and expertise on individual routes and markets that BA have never had.

I suspect that the yield control model (and other overhead costs) would be quite different if it was a 'proper' BA LGW flight rather than a franchise airline.

And to re-emphasise a point.....any comments I make are primarily aimed at management focus / cost and the costs / efficiencies of the airport operation and ground handling units.....they are NOT aimed at the crew where I fully recognise that efficiencies have taken place.

In trim.

[aeulad]

I have also found BA to be the cheapest London-Atlanta and London Gatwick-Barcelona.

The first website I visit it always BA, and it would seem that a lot of people I know, travel and no-travel related are doing the same thing.

Regards

Mike

[Jet A1]

GB make BA a tidy sum from the franchise. But BA seem to be shooting themselves in the foot by being held to ransom by the unions when it comes to allowing GB to expand out of LGW. At least BA management could see the light and allowed the MAN base to kick off, which unsuprisingly is already a sucess with more-than-expected booking figures.

[Dash-7 lover]

tilly666

Apologies then LGW must be unique..but picture an early ???-??? flight booked to 80 pax. Cabin crew compliment drops from 4 to 3 cabin crew due late sickness and 80 hot breakfast get chucked away as the CSD refuses to do any cabin service at all.....not even tea or coffee as they only have 3 cabin crew and the pax services manager at ??? is furious due to high number of club pax.!!!

Just picture it....'ladies and gentleman, we apologies for the lack of cabin service this morning, due to the fact WE CAN'T BE ARSED!'

No......'oh we'll try and do the best we can'....... nothing at all!!

Absolutely bloody ludicrous.........What happened to working in the aviation industry because you want to. There are too many people working for the 'flag carrier' that make an art out of doing nothing for something...and get away with it.

SN Brussels operate their similar a/c type with 2 and I bet there are no complaints...


IN TRIM


I was referring to the Rod Eddington's bit about short haul overheads still being too high. It's obviously not working if that's the case. BA have never been able to run regional services. One reason is that they keep absorbing regional airlines with management that have great visions of being part of big BA but don't have the experience, also BA used to employ graduates into high profile positions that stiffled the promotion prospects for everyone else that 'knew' how to run an airline and filled the top positions with people that didn't have a clue and with over inflated salaries???

You can't run regional and european services on long-haul ideals. They must be completely seperated for it to work.

My understanding of the cabin services director or CSD is that they get paid alot of money for doing very little, which is great for longhaul but no use to anyone for a 50 minute sector......what's the point...?

[In trim]

Tilly,

One reason is that they keep absorbing regional airlines with management that have great visions of being part of big BA but don't have the experience

On the contrary.....BA absorb these companies with good focussed management for the particular markets.........but it's not that the managers don't have the experience, it is simply that they are not given the opportunity. This is often due to politics and a refusal amongst the incumbent BA staff to accept that these managers do actually know their stuff!!

BA have allowed a lot of incredibly good managers to go, or even paid them off (....to go and work the competition!!) rather than face the internal unrest which would result by allowing those people an effective role within the organisation.

[tech...again]

In Trim - couldn't agree with you more! BA have had a number of opportunities - some utterly 'golden' to sort out LGW SH. There's been a complete inability to grab said bull by the horns demonstrated several times and now, frankly, it may just be too late.

Look at EZY at LGW - soon to be 16 x 156 seat very new & shiny A319s based operating 56 flights per day with load factors of around 80% + on 29 different routes. And you can be sure they're not stopping there! All that in around 3.5 years...! That's pretty much the presence/frequency that CityFlyer used to be when they were at their highly successful peak back in 2001. Sure 9/11 would have hit CFE badly too, but they had the cost base, flexibility and frankly the 'gumption' to cope far better than BA/EoG.

With the opening of T5 at LHR looming and, therein, the opportunity for BA to centralise its operations there, is the writing really on the wall for BA at LGW (certainly in terms of SH) or will BA do with GB what they were going to do with CFE a number of years ago - i.e. transfer LGW SH ops to them. Surely GB is their last real chance of making this work at LGW - another astute franchise making the best of the BA brand that's available to them?

Methinks a bit of 'rock & hard place' going on here for BA in terms of the future at LGW vs pull out of LGW given the intense and unrelenting competition right on its doorstep in the LON region - market share - however unprofitable - that they can ill afford to lose?

In the meanwhile, the customer has never had it so good at LGW fares-wise - but is it sustainable.....?

It will be very interesting to watch how this develops - always, for my part (and having been there more than once) being mindful that real people and their lives & futures, depend on those big decisions.

TA

[Simon Lumley]

Lets be honest, BA should never have sold off Go Airline. It was a very bad decision by Rod Eddington to do so a the time.

Just think if Go had been around today, BA LOCO (Go Airline) would have probably been the largest operator at Stansted, if not second after Ryanair.

They would have also dominated Bristol's operations since they could have done what bmi did and transferred all of its BA CitiExpress services to BA LOCO (Go Airline). Then they could have kept their mainstream business services such as Munich and Frankfurt as BA CitiExpress... Then hopefully no other airline would want to have started ops at Brsitol due to the competition.

BA could have also been a big operator at Nottingham East Midlands under LOCO (Go Airline) and competed head-to-head with bmibaby. Go could have actually had about 6 or 7 aircraft based there now if hadn't been Easyjet prioritising London, Bristol, Newcastle and European operations.

Basically, BA LOCO (Go Airline) could have dominated the low-cost British market with its hands on major UK airports. If BA LOCO (Go Airline) had gone into Gatwick, Easyjet may have never started ops from their.

The other fantastic thing about Go was that it was the best low-cost airline I had ever flown on because of their crew professionalism, smart uniforms andexcellent in-flight service. BA could have kept Barbara Cassani who in my mind was a fantastic Chief Executive.

Since BA sold off Go Airline, they have just allowed Easyjet to literally triple in size and compete directly with BA at Gatwick. Glasgow, Edinburgh and Bristol and still have a knock-on effect on its short-haul routes at Heathrow, Cardiff and Newcastle. Just think if Go Airline had been around today then Easyjet would still be a tiny airline only operating out of Luton, Liverpool and Europe!

So from that stupid decison to sell of BA LOCO (Go Airline) I have never rated Rod Edddington as a good Chief Executive of BA. Though he has brought profitability back to the airline, BA is seriously struggling on its short-haul routes.

[steamchicken]

I just can't believe these people!

First of all, when the cheaplines began to bite, they decided to have their own (no doubt craftily subsidised). It worked! Yawoozoosh!

So - they sold it - to the biggest low-cost competitor!

To deal with the still-increasing low-cost competition, they then slashed fares on short-haul routes.

It worked (up to a point).

Now they want to "go low-cost" again! Never mind, it's not as if it was real money...for mine, I'd have folded the whole European network into Go and kept it. Three boxes - BA mainline with all the routes outside western Europe, Go with all the western Europe routes, BACX with the domestic routes. Oh, and bulldoze Waterside.

It wouldn't have been such a bad idea to put Barbara C. in charge of the whole company - if she could have been spared from the Go/Euro business.

[flyer55]

BA wont give up LGW, if they did then Easyjet probably would go head to head with BA at LHR on every route. They are considering a few things and an announcement due soon.