'Bog' standard Ryanair

[Globaliser]

Originally Posted by slim_slag

Just looked at the raw data for people who are constrained in the way you describe. For that period I looked at, on every day you will always get a cheaper fare on Ryanair than BA.

I don't doubt that this is often true. But, IME, the difference is usually not what some would like claim it to be. Often the prices for a certain date are pretty comparable. A person who needs to fly on 14 and 18 September would not have set out to pay the maximum possible fare on each airline on those dates. Much more likely that they would have looked at the lowest fare possible on each airline - producing the fare difference that has already been posted. A £40 difference between those fares is a world apart from the £440 that daz211's post suggested that it was.

[slim_slag]

Yep, the difference on those days is £40 if you take each carrier's cheapest offering. You can say 'It's only £40 more for BA", or you can say "BA wants twice as much as Ryanair". Some people will pay BA an extra £40, some will not. Neither are wrong.

Now leave the day earlier, hard to justify paying BA almost £140 when you can do it on Ryanair for a penny

(Taxes extra of course, so for those who want a gross price it's about £155 vs £15).

[PAXboy]

slim_slag

Now leave the day earlier,

Well, naturally, if you have free accomodation at your destination and work/family permits, that is ...

[Globaliser]

Originally Posted by slim_slag

Some people will pay BA an extra £40, some will not. Neither are wrong.

But what is undoubtedly wrong - and where my disagreement came in to this - was the following:-

Originally Posted by daz211

I could fly from stansted with ryanair and fly to CIA as it is closer to ROME i pay less than half the price of BA

...

Ba 14sep-18sep LHR-FCO £552.30
FR 14sep-18sep STN-CIA £113.75

I didnt think I had to buy a meal for all pax on BA flight

Except that the "base fare" comparison, FWIW, was £37.98 vs £60.00, and the total payable was £66.75 vs £106.30. So in neither case was FR quite as low as half of BA's price.

But, anyway, that's a technical quibble.

More substantively, it's wrong because it was a meaningless comparison and posted for its misleading effect.

[SXB]

Some people will pay BA an extra £40, some will not

I certainly would.

[CARR30]

Originally Posted by PAXboy

slim_slag Well, naturally, if you have free accomodation at your destination ...

Not really. You can buy a lot of accomodation for £140. If you are travelling as a a couple to France profonde we're talking 4 star + gourmet dinners.

It's all about choice.

[Globaliser]

Originally Posted by CARR30

Not really. You can buy a lot of accomodation for £140. If you are travelling as a a couple to France profonde we're talking 4 star + gourmet dinners.

It's all about choice.

To be perfectly fair, a fare difference of £140 per person would make me think. But usually neither my partner or I have the luxury of just saying we'll go a day early, which is why I have become very adept/expert/weary of looking at prices across airlines for a single day out and a single day back.

My guess is that this reflects the purchasing needs of a substantial part of the market, which is why fare comparisons that look at an entire week at a time are not very realistic. Nor are fare comparisons that compare airlines one day at a time, but then only look at flexible business fares which are not what this part of the leisure market is after.

[Crepello]

To me, it's not about price alone. I just made a reservation on a route where several locos offer service. Ryanair tendered for GBP25. A competitor wanted GBP53. I paid the higher fare and no, I'm not expensing this one.

Why? I'm no Ryanair-basher but having looked around their website, I'm alarmed by the childish rant about security restrictions. In these difficult times, nobody claims the measures are perfect but little is achieved by stirring things up. Thoroughly unprofessional job. So they can whistle for my business.

[CARR30]

During the recent unpleasantness both Walsh and O'Leary have been singing off the same songsheet and both airlines are talking about suing BAA.

O'Leary's politics on Ryanair.com are typically robust, but which of these two famously once said "a reasonable man gets nowhere in negotiations".?

[Crepello]

(Slight thread creep)

Interesting, CARR30. The US public seem sympathetic to the cause of national security, and would generally rather have strict measures initially, later scaled back, rather than pushing for lesser reactions in future - which would surely make a criminal's task easier.

I suspect that in the UK, chickens are coming home to roost after years of OTT "safety" paranoia, from wiring regulations to drawn-out accident investigations, born of tiny minds with insufficient workloads. Perhaps some folks are so so sick of the minutia they no longer differentiate major threats from hypothetical.

Apologies for going off-topic; back to FR...

[HELL FIRE]

well if your so anti-ryanair you should learn your facts.MOL took over in 1990 and Declan has not been with Ryanair for years just like his bro Cathal....................

[Final 3 Greens]

Thread Ceep

Perhaps some folks are so so sick of the minutia they no longer differentiate major threats from hypothetical.

Crepello

Maybe folks here have experienced terrorism up close and personal for a lot longer than in the US and are more sanguine about it.

[CARR30]

I was obviously referring to Willie Walsh BTW, HellFire.

He's the boss of another airline whose name may not be mentioned in the same sentence as Ryanair.

[CARR30]

Originally Posted by Crepello

(Slight thread creep)
.. after years of OTT "safety" paranoia, ..
...

An interesting comment from the land where a notice must be engraved on car wing mirrors explaining how the convex lens works.

We are under the impression that the elfin safety compensation culture has been
imported from the US.

Best stay on topic methinks.

[slim_slag]

Originally Posted by Globaliser

My guess is that this reflects the purchasing needs of a substantial part of the market, which is why fare comparisons that look at an entire week at a time are not very realistic

OK, if a week isn't long enough for you I'll run it for a month, that will give a lot more data points. You select a city pair and a month and I'll run the program comparing prices on FR and BA. I'll provide the raw data so you can check I'm not telling porkies. Unlike some on here I really don't care which airline is cheaper. You pick the cities/dates and I'll run the program. Sounds fair?

[Globaliser]

Originally Posted by slim_slag

OK, if a week isn't long enough for you I'll run it for a month, that will give a lot more data points.

I wonder how my words "looking at prices across airlines for a single day out and a single day back" translate into a suggestion that we should look at prices for an entire month?

My point is that using a week is too long. Many people - like myself - usually have to go on day x and have to come back on day y. They're looking for the cheapest flights on those specific days only.

But when you did your last two comparisons, you used "the most expensive fares on each day for the round trip" to give "an idea of the maximum fares you might pay". The more realistic comparison, for leisure travellers, is to look at a single day each way, and to look at the minimum fares on those specific days.

That's how we came up (at the time) with the fact that on 14 Sep/18 Sep, BA was only £40 more expensive than FR.

[slim_slag]

Yes, Globaliser, I read what you said, I was obviously mistaken when I assumed an understanding of how simple statistics work.

You appear to like to judge the relative costs of airline tickets by looking at a single trip. When I look at a 7 day period I am actually looking at all 28 possible trips. If I took a 31 day period I would be looking at all 496 possible trips. So I am doing exactly the same as you are, but just more of them. Then I take all the possible trips and apply real simple statistics to them to give a rough idea of relative costs. Most people would say the more data points the better, so most people would say looking at a long period is better than looking at a short period.

Whan you took your single data point you said BA was 'only' £40 more and that is completely correct, for that trip. It was also £40 more than £40.
Look at it another way. There is a petrol station selling unleaded for £1 a litre, and it takes 40 litres to fill your tank. Cost £40.

Across the road is another petrol station and it charges £2 a litre for unleaded, cost to fill your tank is £80. It's only £40 more, but which petrol station would you use?

Ah you say, but if I pay £2 a litre I get a free sandwich. Well it's your money and you can do with it what you wish. I would pay the £1 a litre and buy a nicer sandwich at Marks and Spencer.

[daz211]

well said
lets see how BA stand when FR start MADRID flights

the best thing BA could have done was to sell up and keep
GO airlines as its main business what a mistake BA made

[CARR30]

It's better than an M&S sandwich, it's dinner ..



.. plus enough left over for the wine.

http://www.hotel-volvic.com

'Only £40' indeed!

[Final 3 Greens]

Ah you say, but if I pay £2 a litre I get a free sandwich. Well it's your money and you can do with it what you wish. I would pay the £1 a litre and buy a nicer sandwich at Marks and Spencer.

You won't get much of a sandwich at M&S for a quid, but you might get some earrings form Ratners