BA Unable to Meet Branson's Challenge on Slots at LHR

[The Guvnor]

Well done that man ... No Way BA/AA! :D

Richard Branson today claimed victory in the long-running debate with British Airways over the availability of slots at Heathrow Airport.

Following repeated claims by BA that slots are available to competitors who wish to operate services to and from the US Richard Branson challenged BA to make good on that claim.

BA was invited to provide ten pairs of slots at Heathrow. Virgin Atlantic offered to pay GBP£2 million (USD$2.9m) to charity for each pair. In the event that BA failed to do so Virgin suggested that BA should pay GBP£2 million per pair, GBP£20 million (USD$29m) in all, to charity.

The deadline passed on Friday 14 December with BA failing to supply even one pair of slots. Branson then wrote to Lord Marshall, Chairman of BA, and said:

"I am saddened but certainly not surprised that, having reached the end of the challenge period, British Airways has not been able to supply Virgin Atlantic with even one pair of slots at Heathrow.

"It does, however, settle our argument once and for all. Both BA and American Airlines have disingenuously claimed that competitors can easily find slots at Heathrow for services to and from the US.

"The truth is that slots are not available at Heathrow for transatlantic services. Having failed to rise to this challenge I do not expect to hear BA or AA repeating this claim ever again.

"By my reckoning having failed the challenge BA should now pay GBP£20m to charity in time for Christmas. I look forward to hearing that you have."

"The outcome of this challenge has serious implications for BA's proposal to form an anti-competitive alliance with American Airlines.

"Both BA and AA have argued that their proposals should be approved unconditionally by the US Department of Transportation, the UK Office of Fair Trading and the European Commission (all of whom are reviewing the application).

"The outcome of this challenge illustrates the difficulty competitors would face in attempting to compete with the combined strength of BA and AA."

Branson repeated his pledge to fight the proposal:

"We will fight it tooth and nail. This is no normal code-share application - BA and AA are applying for anti-trust immunity quite simply because they want to act anti-competitively. Between them they control over 60 percent of the Heathrow-US market, 100 percent on several key routes and around 70 percent of peak-time slots used for North Atlantic services. If they're given anti-trust immunity to operate on some of the busiest sets of routes on the planet they will collude to: use their overwhelming dominance to destroy competition, raise prices, and reduce service."

Source:Airwise

[overstress]

How typical, Guv, that a shameless self-publicist as yourself should seek to assist in the posturings of another,

[raitfaiter]

Bet Branson wouldn't have any trouble bidding against YOUR slots eh Guv....? :p

[PowerRanger]

So Beardy is bleating again huh!

Odd that a man who claims to thrive on enterprise and competition wants the authorities to force one airline to give his airline extra slots.

Sounds a little like crass hypocrisy to me.

But why has he chosen this time to return to this tedious topic? Perhaps his airline is about to go the same way as the rest of his crumbling empire and he is making a pre-emptive excuse.

Hey Guvnor did you tell him about your money-spinning, can't fail, cunning plan. Get him to park his B747-400s, his A340s and cancel his A380 order and instead pack all his fellow woolly pully wearers into - yes, you've guessed it - TRISTARS!

:D

Guvnor this could be your big chance to finally get within a gnat's wotsit of a real airplane.

'Fly Virgin - In our new Guvnor class. Equipped with beautifully restored Tristars you'll be the laughing stock (sorry, envy) of the travelling world.'

:D :D :D

[ 17 December 2001: Message edited by: PowerRanger ]

[Brenoch]

Anyone who knows anything about aviation never grins at a tristar..

I´m sure all of you, fast as flaming lightning, smacking the Guv around are all in a quite secure spot employmentwise..

However, the day if/when your outfit folds I´m sure it won´t take you long to lift the horn and call, not necessarily the Guv, but someone much like him, asking if there might be room in their outfit for someone like you..

It´s so sad that people all the time have to be reminded that if it weren´t for the pioneers, we´d still be riding bicycles..

Think about it..

:mad: :mad: :mad:

[ 18 December 2001: Message edited by: Brenoch ]

[PowerRanger]

Brenoch - er, thought about it.

Decided it was b----x.

Moved on. :D :D :D

[Gunner B12]

It’s amazing to see how the postings of one person so get under the skin of some people. I am relatively new to this forum but it is immediately obvious that all the majority of posters to the threads started by the governor want to do is gang up on him. I recently had to visit my son’s school to speak with his principal about the problems he was experiencing with bullies. It’s a shame we don’t have the same means of redress here.

Back to the thread. It seems to me BA have been caught out telling porkies or if they were able to produce the slots they claim are so readily available they would have at least risen to the challenge in some way, if only pointing out where they were to be had. I think BA’s spin doctors need to be working harder.

Gov

Being an ex-pat I don’t get to hear much about what goes on and find your posts informative. Keep up the good work.
:mad: :mad: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :mad: :mad:

[Knold]

I definitely concur with Brenoch, it really pisses me of thinking about the way you guys always bash everything the Guvnor presents.

A part from just finding this article very interesting to read, I think it’s great fun that the outcome of the challenge was in Virgin colours, especially when remembering all the foul play from BA during Virgins upstart. A great opportunity for BA to back up their empty talk, but did they?

It’s very easy sitting at home or up front biding the time, thinking about what other people dare to do and just discard their efforts with scepticism. “Oh what a fool, that ain’t never gonna work!”
Even if the pioneers don’t always make it all the way every time they sure path the way for all the others to come. How do you think that your airline got started? :eek:

I have nothing but admiration for those who have the energy to keep on trying and on top of that put up with you lot.

Lay of the Guvnor will you! Sure, if he starts a debate then you should all butt in and say you say, but don’t whack him in the head just for posting an interesting story. I think that the personal attacks of the last few days on the Guv are a bit thick.


OK, let’s hear it!

[yaffel1]

First of all, BA did not imply or say that slots were easy to come by, they said that it is possiblefor new entrants to obtain slots at the airport, and Virgin Atlantic are a good example of it happening.

Secondly, it is not up to BA to provide slots to other carriers, and it never was. New slots are obtained from the pool, either due to greater efficiency or when a carrier vacates them.

This just reminds of me of those occasions when a six year old makes a silly bet that no-one takes him up on, and then goes around shouting that he's won.

[ducksoup]

Great idea, O bearded one!
I challenge you to produce Father Christmas in time for Christmas and I shall donate one squillion pounds to a charity.
If you fail, "by my reckoning, YOU will owe a similar amount to charity"
Bottoms to you, O great bearded windbag.

[The Claw]

I'm surprised that 4HolerPoler has nothing to say about this "sniping exercise"!? :D :D

[Knold]

Ducksoup so what your saying is that BAs slots don't exist either?

[OzDude]

Knold and Brennoch, as you say you have not been on here for very long so let me try and explain a few truths although I am fairly sure that Brennoch is the Guvnor drumming up his own support! It is one thing trying to set up an airline but if you are going to spend all day on here and then add stupid comments about the jobs of pilots whilst lying about your qualifications and credentials then you have to expect some sniping, especially as it is true.

There is no problem with the Guvnor posting news articles and in this case the first person to have a go at him was probably out of order but when he does add his comments he only serves to show how ignorant he is when it comes to the job of a pilot. The Guvnor is a Walter Mitty who has no credentials. He claims to have degrees and an ATPL but has never provided any evidence to ANYONE of those credentials. He is an unmitigated liar and is also in trouble with various authoritites for his deceptive methods of raising money.

By all means defend him but if you really want to find out about him then contact him, as he says, his email address is published for all to see, just don't give him your address or lend him any money. Should you find yourself out of pocket and have the authorities knocking on your door enquiring why several accounts have been set up with your home address and they would like their money back then you will understand why so many of us have no respect for this over-inflated windbag who lives in a fantasy world.

The Guvnor never has and never will have any aircraft to populate his imaginary airline. He is one of those people you usually see being exposed on those investigative tv programs where they reveal his deceptions. Trouble is he is very elusive.

Because of the type of person he is, his coments only serve to inflame opinion. He pretends to speak from a position of knowledge but in reality it is all fantasy and therefore has no credibility whatsoever. He will of course deny all this and state that he will only reveal his credentials to those who need to know, at the same time attacking me for my anonimity. Fair enough. I need to remain anonymous in order to be able to continue my investigations but there are many of you out there who are not and I challenge you all to ask the Guvnor to provide details (if not actual evidence) of his qualifications and claims to be an experienced Boeing 707 pilot.

Until conmen like the Guvnor are fully exposed as the crooks that they are then I will continue to dig into their backgrounds and reveal what I can so that the rest of you are not hoodwinked by their inordinate ability to make you believe that they are something else. Just because he can post lots of culled news articles, nothing else to do except lurk on here all day, does not mean that those that do not know him have to be kept ignorant of his seedy past.

Gunner b 1 2 would be better off worrying about the likes of the Guvnor who claims to have a degree with a specialist subject covering paedophilia but provides no proof of this qualification and then ask why the South African police are interested in hearing from him reagrding certain allegations covering that subject! This is not bullying, this is exposing the real person from behing the Wlter Mitty smokescreen of someone who has a lot to say but no credibility to back it up. I only mention that because you mention your kids!

[Knold]

May so be that he is just a fake, what do I know. You could be right. I have never met him and I don’t operate in that part of the world.
But I must say that your vigilant attitude sounds a bit scary, are you one of those who mount a camera in your car and drive around looking for traffic wrong-doers, just to record their demeanours driving with just as insane speed and manor? Or are you part of the neighbourhood watch perhaps? All this
Until conmen like the Guvnor are fully exposed as the crooks that they are then I will continue to dig into their backgrounds and reveal what I can...

seems a bit out there to me. But hey I could be wrong again!

All I am saying is that in the last few days he has taken beatings for almost anything and in my opinion this was the last drop to fill the bucket.

To straighten out two things in your post, it was not I who wrote I was new to the forum but Gunner. Second, I can assure you that Brenoch isn’t an alias for Guv. You can always ask the administrators for the IP number.

[ 18 December 2001: Message edited by: Knold ]

[Brenoch]

Oz, I can assure you i´m not the Guvnor.. :eek: :eek:

[Brenoch]

And I wasn´t going to lend him any money anyway.. :D :D

OzDude, are you the Matlock of aviation with all your investigations going on worldwide it sounds?? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[renegator]

Again Sir Richard is trying to hid his dependency on a lack of competition on the North Atlantic behind allegations of a monopoly of BA. That story is as old as incorrect, first of all the price level ex UK is far higher than these out of continental Europe. Virgin is depending on these (backed by the duopoloy with BA) to cover not only Virgin Atlantic as a whole but the complete Virgin group.

I am not a supporter of BA, but it has to be noted that theier overall share of North Atlantic traffic is somewhere in the 30% which can hardly be desribed as a lack of competition. What Virgin is doing bysically is trying to focus the public attentition on the benefits for the passengers and at the same time trying to avoid a change in this situation because it is their lifeline.

A change of this in the current environement could have crucial consequences as they are depending with 70% of their RPK´s on the USA routes. Percentage of contribution might normally even be higher. So it´s understandable, does not make it better though.

brgds, silversurfer

[Knold]

How many percent is it if you count from the UK?

And BTW, what would it be if you added AAs percentage to that?

[ 18 December 2001: Message edited by: Knold ]

[The Guvnor]

Hmmm, OzDude, or rather Bruce Hobbs - I see you haven't responded to my challenge. Like I said, you lack the cojones. http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/tosser1.gif

Incidentally, I'm getting some rather fascinating information out of Australia at the moment. For someone who is seemingly the self-appointed guardian of PPRuNe morals (though I'd like to know who died and made you God!) I understand you have rather a 'history' back home. ;) Did you forget to mention this to your current employer? :D :D

[ 18 December 2001: Message edited by: The Guvnor ]

[Wide-Body]

Just a passing point, Sir Richard has dismissed pilots onto the jobless queue. BA for all its sins and press reports has not forced a single pilot leave and will be carrying an over establishment during the summer. When all the PR B@%%&$%t is said and done. I know If I were job hunting in the future, I would be with BA in my sights
Warm Seasons greetings to all
RGDS Wide

[Sid's Stars]

Lay off bashing the Guv OzDude and unless you want to provide proof of your claims of all these people you reckon that he's bludged then I'd say you're a yellow bellied skank meself. Lets have some names then!

[twistedenginestarter]

It's a good piece of publicity altjhough slightly unfair given BA hasn't got £20 million and if it had, it would come out of taxed income whereas Sir Richard would pull it off a long string of dodgy offshore stashes (why else offshore?).

I'm not sure what's particularly different anyway. BA and AA have already got all these slots so it's not a question of pinching anything off Sir R. If anything they would reduce services thus creating some space.

The issue must be through-ticketing and I can't see why Virgin can't come up with a way of competing with that proposition.

[ducksoup]

Knold,
No. What I am saying is that the Great Smiling Pullover is a boring publicist who gets on my wick.
To issue a "Challenge" in this way is about as crass as it gets and, no, I am not BA before you ask.

[Vfrpilotpb]

Sir Tricky, is just that, and history will show that he shouts and screams , normally to hide something that he can't cure!

[Knold]

Well, it seems only natural for the competing BA to be so keen in poiting out what the authorities should confirm had it been the case, Branson obviously wouldn't miss the chance just to prove BA wrong.
Yes, yes, I know that many of you would state just that with a little grin after. :D

Being lazy isn't exactly what made him famous...

[ 18 December 2001: Message edited by: Knold ]

[ducksoup]

Pardon?

[Knold]

Following repeated claims by BA that slots are available to competitors...

What I mean is that had it been so easy Virgin would have got the by now renowned slots.

Of course BA will insist on creating a public opinion that it’s all fair play. That there is no need to take their slots and give them to Virgin. That would be two losses in one throw for them.

[ 18 December 2001: Message edited by: Knold ]

[Recover]

I don't know whether the Bearded Jumper has noticed, but at the moment BA are not really in a position to waste money on stupid bets, whether its for charity (mate) or not. Skippy should have told BJ to **** up a rope the moment he laid the challenge. Now is the time for BA to just concentrate on trying to make a bit of dosh, not rising to another media event for Branson.

Perhaps he should be looking closer at keeping his airline afloat than attempting to expand LHR for the benefit of his Singapore backers and trying to make everybody look bad but him.

Charity my a*%e, it's called my job :mad:

And.....

Recover

[Scottie]

The grinning jumper is so two faced :mad: He's all for competition until bmi wanted bermuda 2 scrapped so they could operate out of Heathrow.

Then he starts bleeting like a sheep :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Carpe]

Since when did BA become the good guys? Let us not forget that if the BA/AA deal goes through, it will be bad news for all of us.

And for all you BA guys defending poor Rod's predicament, that means you too. More frequent services on offer by flogging seats on AA flights means BA can cut frequencies on its own ac. 10,000 are rumoured to be going down the road next year with pilots being mentioned for the first time as prime candidates. This controlled leak from BA management regarding redundancies is just too coincidental, running a week before the news of the likely success with the BA/AA alliance. It's like dropping 1000 pounders at Tora Bora before the B-52s arrive.

So if Branson is successful in putting a spanner in the works, it's not BA management who should be making charitable donations. Those a little closer to the shop floor might have reason to be grateful.

[yellowdog]

BA might not be the good guys, at the moment, but they certainly are not the bad boys.
Everybody is currently jumping all over this press report that 10000 are going to be made redundant, well I've got news for everyone, no-one knows what is going to happen yet. Admitedly, managment are looking at loads of options, from shutting everything down to doing nothing.
What did RB do as soon as everything kicked off, laid people off, including pilots.
The guy is just a self publicist who hides his failings behind bravado. He realises that he will never make money flying airplanes, and wants to beat down everyone that can do a better job than him, would we still see his planes flying if Singapore hadn't helped him out?
He managed to get slots from LHR for all his services didn't he so why bleat like a lamb about BA holding slots. I bet he wouldn't give his up without a fight!!
Lets give up on the BA bashing for a while eh? and wait to see what they have in store after Christmas, then we can go on facts not speculation.

[overstress]

Heh. So Ozdude reckons I'm 'out of order' flaming the Guv, then goes on to expose the guy as a shameless fantasist, Walter Mitty-type character. Well, Ozdude, I don't care. You make your postings, I'll make mine.

[Brenoch]

I do find it amazing how quickly and effortless the OzDude, after not insulting only me, but several others, were shut up..

You go Matlock... :D :D :D

[Young Paul]

Er, I think a few people have missed the point. Let me try and summarise what it seems to be.

1. BA/AA say its OK for them to work completely together, giving up nothing, as anybody could come along and start up North Atlantic routes with LHR as it is today with no problem.

2. Branson said that this was not so. In fact it would not be possible to even set up an operation with ten flights per day throughout the week using the same slots (i.e. same time of flight - a pretty basic requirement to attract business traffic). In fact, he was so sure of this that he would place £20M of his own money in a bet.

BA were being challenged to substantiate their claims. They didn't.

Branson may have his faults, but he has fought to get where he is. Unlike BA, who were given a fleet, virtual control over the largest UK airport, a market position which is still more dominant than those of almost any other privatised national insdustry, and who still can't make money on anything other than long haul monopoly routes.


Actually, upon review, maybe that had been established. Oh well.

[ 20 December 2001: Message edited by: Exile from Groggs ]</p>

[fantom]

Oz: if the Guv is such a waste of space as you imply (and I would beware litigation aspects if I were you) then you should not compliment him with a reply. It takes ages to scroll thro all this dross and find no result at the end. Admitted, this is 'rumours and news' but debate is better than pointless slanging. Not just you, of course,but let us raise the game a bit eh?
Me new to this and have no idea at all who Guv is.or anyone else, for that matter! <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

[Blackball]

Guvnor, I really believe that you are just ANTI B.A. You don't really expect responsible airlines to get involved in such obvious publicity stunts that your precious Sir Richard tries to pull do you?
You evidently do, so I would expect that should ever decide to get your somewhat large feet off the ground. Then you do so with an airline who evidently prefers to spend its time making crass statements, rather than one that gets on with the job in hand namely "THE SAFE TRANSPORT OF FARE PAYING PASSENGERS".

[The Guvnor]

Blackball - so do you think I should rather support a carrier that is grossly anti-competitive; seeks to damage or destroy the reputations of individuals and companies wherever possible; reneges on its contractual obligations at the drop (including to staff); has as its Chairman and President-for-Life two individuals that orchestrated illegal and unethical operations that would have seen them jailed in many countries; and sees fit to waste hundreds of millions of pounds of its shareholder's money?

Let me put it this way: I started my career with Laker in '81. Nuff said! <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

[Blackball]

As you say, you started your "career" with Laker in 81 Nuff said!!! Look what happened there.

[Young Paul]

Yeah, that's right. Didn't BA handle competition from Laker really, really well "apparently"? Them and BCal, I think. And don't they have an excellent record of behaving ethically towards Virgin?

If BA are so brilliant, then how come they make an operating loss in many places other than North Atlantic, where they and other carriers (including ironically Virgin) are protected by Bermuda 2, and they were given such a massive commercial advantage over the competition to start with? Have you any idea how tough OFTEL were on BT?! What anti-competitive restrictions have BA had to deal with? How come the odour of "dirty tricks and subterfuge" has continued to stick so closely to them? Do they really need these to beat competition?

Branson may have pulled a stunt, but at least this is a fair and legitimate means of promotion - even self promotion. What's wrong with that? Aren't you influenced by advertising? Whose trainers are you wearing? Whose aftershave? Whose coffee do you drink? Whose soft drinks? Where do you eat out? Is that based on an evaluation of comparative qualities of brands? Now, if you bought a pair of Nike trainers that cost the same as a rival pair because an executive from there came up to you and said, "I'll slip you a fiver if you buy those ones", would that be ethical?

[Edited as worried about libel ....]

[ 21 December 2001: Message edited by: Exile from Groggs ]</p>

[The Guvnor]

Exile - don't forget DanDare (both before and after Big Airways shafted their staff) and of course Air Europe... <img src="mad.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="mad.gif" border="0">

[Egg Mayo]

I must confess the "slot politics" aren't my strong point, but I'm going to stick my neck out to a degree.

Wasn't there an argument sometime ago that BA didn't actually own their slots at LHR as they weren't actually listed as an asset in the Balance Sheet at the time of privatisation? Therefore, BA can't actually sell what it doesn't own?

If someone could refresh my memory or put me straight etc.

Egg Mayo

[calmar]

I've only got one thing to say: 1011 's the best


/Baj-Kaj

[ 22 December 2001: Message edited by: Mach OverSpeed ]</p>

[mahonysherms]

Branson is only ever concerned about himself. He doesn't seem to take into account the fact that other heathrow based carriers would finally be allowed to take a slice of the N. atlantic cake. I am sure BMI would jump at the chance help to bring competition to the market. Sir Micheal Bishop has indicated he is all for the BA/AA deal.

The bottom line is Dicky B is on the edge and his cherry picking days are numbered. He is using his excellent P.R skills to hang on a little longer.

[Young Paul]

Are there any company CEO's who are not centrally concerned about themselves/their company? If so, why are they running it?

[t'aint natural]

Egg Mayo:
There was indeed a tenable argument that BA did not own its Heathrow slots. It was said that the question of the ownership of slots should have been settled in the public's favour when the asset value of the airline was being calculated for the purposes of privatisation. Unfortunately the government lawyer who headed the privatisation task force neglected to do this. His name, you'll recall, was Bob Ayling.

[Egg Mayo]

t'aint natural

Many thanks. I do believe that the argument I outlined above was first made by Richard Branson!

[Taildragger67]

Sorry guys, I'm sick of all this BA-bashing. No, I do not work for them, but am privileged to fly with them frequently. Always very professional both in the cabin and cockpit (sometimes the groundies are drips but that's industry-wide), rather than other airlines who hire their space-waitresses primarily on looks and their ability to keep the lip-gloss on for 8 hours. I know who I'll be looking to when I need help getting out of a bent tube. In any case, BA has been a plc for 13 years now - so it's learnt to compete. For most of that time, it was the world's most profitable airline - so it grew organically. So one gets rather flustered when one hears of someone who usually pleads for open competition, but only when he's been bailed out by a largely state-owned enterprise, now bleating about needing more regulation to be competitive!! the real issue is when the US will open THEIR skies... but I digress. Sure, BA have made mistakes - buying 50-odd 744s was one of them - and as we all know, airline managers the world over are idiotic ogres who should all be on the next Voyager rocket - but BA are a professinal outfit in the air, whose home base exposes them to more competition than any other major (ie. more people want to fly in/out of LHR than pretty much anywhere else) but they generally still manage to turn a quid. Bit of a lesson to most of us, really...