easy buys GB
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
easy buys GB
I feel this is a shame for Gatwick and another slide into just becoming a lo-cost and charter based airport with very little for the discerning customer to be attracted to...
I realise that GB is a real 'sunshine route' airline , but with it's franchise arrangement and longstanding identity for quality it gave the customer a worthy alternative to just being crammed in with a tin of pringles ....
Easyjet are fine , if you are going to hop onboard for an a hour or hour and a half, but with GB operating some much longer routes where a little comfort and service are a real bonus, this will now be lost with its decision to sell out to EZY.
Will there ever be a day when flying will again have some form of attraction , rather than being herded around in cramped conditions and being made to 'put up' ....
GB had a real chance at LGW of becoming the real alternative , every flight we took with them was great and i wish their hardworking and dedicated crew all the best
I realise that GB is a real 'sunshine route' airline , but with it's franchise arrangement and longstanding identity for quality it gave the customer a worthy alternative to just being crammed in with a tin of pringles ....
Easyjet are fine , if you are going to hop onboard for an a hour or hour and a half, but with GB operating some much longer routes where a little comfort and service are a real bonus, this will now be lost with its decision to sell out to EZY.
Will there ever be a day when flying will again have some form of attraction , rather than being herded around in cramped conditions and being made to 'put up' ....
GB had a real chance at LGW of becoming the real alternative , every flight we took with them was great and i wish their hardworking and dedicated crew all the best
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dunstable
Age: 44
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel this is a shame for Gatwick and another slide into just becoming a lo-cost and charter based airport with very little for the discerning customer to be attracted to...
I realise that GB is a real 'sunshine route' airline , but with it's franchise arrangement and longstanding identity for quality it gave the customer a worthy alternative to just being crammed in with a tin of pringles ....
Easyjet are fine , if you are going to hop onboard for an a hour or hour and a half, but with GB operating some much longer routes where a little comfort and service are a real bonus, this will now be lost with its decision to sell out to EZY.
Will there ever be a day when flying will again have some form of attraction , rather than being herded around in cramped conditions and being made to 'put up' ....
I realise that GB is a real 'sunshine route' airline , but with it's franchise arrangement and longstanding identity for quality it gave the customer a worthy alternative to just being crammed in with a tin of pringles ....
Easyjet are fine , if you are going to hop onboard for an a hour or hour and a half, but with GB operating some much longer routes where a little comfort and service are a real bonus, this will now be lost with its decision to sell out to EZY.
Will there ever be a day when flying will again have some form of attraction , rather than being herded around in cramped conditions and being made to 'put up' ....
Firstly what is the difference between a 'Real' airline and a 'Low Cost' airline?
I think, to be fair, what is meant to be said is it is a shame an airline I dont mind paying through the nose for, for free inflight service, is being replaced by airlines were flights are cheaper but you have to pay for inflight products.
With regards to its ok to hop onto easy flights for an hour or so is ok, but not for longer routes. Easy has been operating long sectors eg Athens, Istanbul with very busy full loads and no complaints.
At the end of the day its the customers choice, and obviously the Low Cost choice is more favoured as this is what the customer is prefering.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Staines UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbourne-Adamski,
As you say, it is all about "choice", and with the disappearance of GB our choice is diminished. On the Athens route, one could choose between squeezy jet and their no frills service or BA/Olympic where you get seated where you desire and fed/watered. I am sure that those who chose the no-frills option did not complain about the scrum for boarding and the expensive pringles - it was their choice.
Now, If we look at flights to the Canaries or Hurghada where GB were the only "full service" operator, our choice is now between Easy, a no frills operator, and the charters (MON, TCX, TOM etc) with their 28" seat pitch and additional-cost meals/luggage.
Where is the choice there for those who value a full-service flight as part of the holiday and not just a way of getting to the destination?
Jet.
As you say, it is all about "choice", and with the disappearance of GB our choice is diminished. On the Athens route, one could choose between squeezy jet and their no frills service or BA/Olympic where you get seated where you desire and fed/watered. I am sure that those who chose the no-frills option did not complain about the scrum for boarding and the expensive pringles - it was their choice.
Now, If we look at flights to the Canaries or Hurghada where GB were the only "full service" operator, our choice is now between Easy, a no frills operator, and the charters (MON, TCX, TOM etc) with their 28" seat pitch and additional-cost meals/luggage.
Where is the choice there for those who value a full-service flight as part of the holiday and not just a way of getting to the destination?
Jet.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dunstable
Age: 44
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetnoise
I fully understand your points, and see were you are coming from. I was not just saying what I said just because I work for easy.
It is true that the customers choice is becoming less and less as the low cost market is now so big.
I dont have anything against those people who do not wish to fly low cost and would rather pay for the comforts.
I was only saying really I wish people would not put it across as low cost airlines are not 'Real Airines' because its no frills.
Low Cost airlines are real airlines but we provide a certain business model catering for a ceratin area of the market.
I fully understand your points, and see were you are coming from. I was not just saying what I said just because I work for easy.
It is true that the customers choice is becoming less and less as the low cost market is now so big.
I dont have anything against those people who do not wish to fly low cost and would rather pay for the comforts.
I was only saying really I wish people would not put it across as low cost airlines are not 'Real Airines' because its no frills.
Low Cost airlines are real airlines but we provide a certain business model catering for a ceratin area of the market.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: london
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F4F,
Bit of a silly comment suggesting NetJets (private jet charter) instead of Easyjet, don't you think?
Airbourne-Adamski,
You paint a very PR speak picture of budget airlines from and EZT/Ryanair perspective, and the market they operate in. You also greatly oversimplify the nature of budget airlines. Not everyone wants cheap rubbish.
Budget airlines in Europe meet the needs of some pax, but not all, and many choose not to fly with them whenever possible. Sadly some people believe the hype, and assume budget airlines are always cheaper, which in fact is NOT the case.
Let's also consider the way the marketplace is maturing. For example, in Australia, VirginBlue (which is actually rather good), launched some years ago, with the usual stuff about one class, cheap fares, and how they culd beat the two class 'legacy carriers etc.... But in 2008, guess what, they will launch Virgin blue premium economy, which for a higher price offers bigger seats with more legroom in the front few rows, food included, and lounge access etc... Is this just not re-inforcing what the so-called legacy airlines said all along. There is always money to be made from premium travellers. not everyone wants to fly easyjet 'cramped' class.
Another example Jetblue in USA, aother excellent airline, that is head and shoulders way above the likes of EZY,Ryanair(who isn't) and other european budget carriers. not only is some food and drinks included, but more legroom, and live TV/movies via seat back screens.
Or let's consider the recently launched Virgin America, again two classes, with first and economy, all seat back tvs, music and movies, more legroom etc..
The difficulty is that most people who sing the praises of European 'budget' carriers, have zero experience of budget carriers anywhere else. In my opinion, consumers in Europe get a rotten deal from the likes of EZY and Ryanair, which is why they make such ridiculous profits. Hopefully sometime soon, pax in Europe will wise up to the rotten service they get from budget airlines in Europe, and also get over the notion, that just because an airline doesn't offer food, it must be the cheapest. It just ain't so.
Bit of a silly comment suggesting NetJets (private jet charter) instead of Easyjet, don't you think?
Airbourne-Adamski,
You paint a very PR speak picture of budget airlines from and EZT/Ryanair perspective, and the market they operate in. You also greatly oversimplify the nature of budget airlines. Not everyone wants cheap rubbish.
Budget airlines in Europe meet the needs of some pax, but not all, and many choose not to fly with them whenever possible. Sadly some people believe the hype, and assume budget airlines are always cheaper, which in fact is NOT the case.
Let's also consider the way the marketplace is maturing. For example, in Australia, VirginBlue (which is actually rather good), launched some years ago, with the usual stuff about one class, cheap fares, and how they culd beat the two class 'legacy carriers etc.... But in 2008, guess what, they will launch Virgin blue premium economy, which for a higher price offers bigger seats with more legroom in the front few rows, food included, and lounge access etc... Is this just not re-inforcing what the so-called legacy airlines said all along. There is always money to be made from premium travellers. not everyone wants to fly easyjet 'cramped' class.
Another example Jetblue in USA, aother excellent airline, that is head and shoulders way above the likes of EZY,Ryanair(who isn't) and other european budget carriers. not only is some food and drinks included, but more legroom, and live TV/movies via seat back screens.
Or let's consider the recently launched Virgin America, again two classes, with first and economy, all seat back tvs, music and movies, more legroom etc..
The difficulty is that most people who sing the praises of European 'budget' carriers, have zero experience of budget carriers anywhere else. In my opinion, consumers in Europe get a rotten deal from the likes of EZY and Ryanair, which is why they make such ridiculous profits. Hopefully sometime soon, pax in Europe will wise up to the rotten service they get from budget airlines in Europe, and also get over the notion, that just because an airline doesn't offer food, it must be the cheapest. It just ain't so.
Paxing All Over The World
10seconds gives a good summary of the way the airline market is changing generations. The old carriers have become top heavy and complacent, so new entrants replace them and then work their way up the scale. The old ones then close/bought out and the cycle starts again. Every area of commerce does it. As to the Europeans wise-ing up to the fact that they are getting a raw deal? I doubt it. Money is everything and - in the financial crisis that is now upon us - money will be twice the price it is now. (to coin a phrase).
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To pick up on some of the debate between lo-co and full service carriers.
A couple of points:
1. What is the seat pitch on an easy A319? against a Y seat on a BA 320/21? Is there any difference?
I've travelled both and don't believe that ezy are any worse.
2. The gate 'scrum'.
A well managed sequential boarding process works well for either a 'seated' flight or a non seated flight. If you are board at some airports it's not better or worse between carriers; often it's the destination that decrees the standard - try boarding an Italian destination on a full service flight.
A couple of points:
1. What is the seat pitch on an easy A319? against a Y seat on a BA 320/21? Is there any difference?
I've travelled both and don't believe that ezy are any worse.
2. The gate 'scrum'.
A well managed sequential boarding process works well for either a 'seated' flight or a non seated flight. If you are board at some airports it's not better or worse between carriers; often it's the destination that decrees the standard - try boarding an Italian destination on a full service flight.
Paxing All Over The World
The allocated seating and boarding debate has done the rounds before. We have had many examples here of gate agents that just do not marshal the pax correctly and opinion has been that to do so, risks anger from the pax and that means hassle. So the scrum becomes an everyday event, whether it's allocated or not full service or not. I have endured the scrum at all four airports around London for all kinds of services.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Middlesbrough
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You paint a very PR speak picture of budget airlines from and EZT/Ryanair perspective, and the market they operate in. You also greatly oversimplify the nature of budget airlines. Not everyone wants cheap rubbish.
And ill enjoy my extra money
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You enjoy your comfy leather seats and your extra inch(es)
And ill enjoy my extra money
And ill enjoy my extra money
