Ryanair-Questions, comments, bouquets & brickbats (Merged)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Greater Aldergrove
Age: 52
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks,
All this talk of reading T&Cs is all well and good, but the fact is, none of us read all the T&Cs we're bombarded with. Mobile phone contracts, website registration rules, the small print on your travel insurance...generally, we all accept that the legal terminology is too much for us to digest, but probably reasonable anyway.
But with Ryanair, reasonableness doesn't come into it...'normal' T&Cs are the exception, and I suspect that they know this. They, in a sense, are defrauding passengers, by actively enforcing T&Cs that are different from the norm, in the knowledge that most real people won't ever get round to reading them.
All this talk of reading T&Cs is all well and good, but the fact is, none of us read all the T&Cs we're bombarded with. Mobile phone contracts, website registration rules, the small print on your travel insurance...generally, we all accept that the legal terminology is too much for us to digest, but probably reasonable anyway.
But with Ryanair, reasonableness doesn't come into it...'normal' T&Cs are the exception, and I suspect that they know this. They, in a sense, are defrauding passengers, by actively enforcing T&Cs that are different from the norm, in the knowledge that most real people won't ever get round to reading them.
Caveat Emptor once again, I am afraid to say.
To be honest, where I fly for myself, I try to fly with someone else. However, I do not have a problem flying with Ryanair. They provide a usually very prompt service.
What I do not like about them is the way that they do business, but this is down to our perceiptions of how airlines should do business.
I do not consider them any more rapacious or greedy than any other airline. Being dispassionate, they are probably being a little more honest than the legacy airlines, but we are used to these folks providing a high level of service, but at a higher cost.
To their credit, Ryanair have singled out what is essential to air travel - the fact that you board an aircraft in one location and arrive safely, shortly thereafter in another location. Anything else is secondary, and can be charged for as an optional extra.
I don't like this approach because it is opposite to the way the rest of the industry works, but I do admire their lateral thinking.
The rest of the (legacy) industry, by charging a flat fee for travel, baggage, catering etc. effectively limits their profit per passenger to a maximum limit defined by what the passenger doesn't take advantage of. Whilst as for Ryanair, their business model effectively means they have a limitless profit potential from each passenger, so long as the basic, replacement cost of the flight per passenger is charged.
The other things which bug me about Ryanair are as follows:-
1: Their colour scheme inside the plane
2: Their colour scheme inside the plane
3: Their use of regional airports, but describing them as primary airports. Sorry, but there is nop way in hell that Prestwick should be described as a Glasgow airport. Similarly, Torp is in no way an Oslo airport
To be honest, where I fly for myself, I try to fly with someone else. However, I do not have a problem flying with Ryanair. They provide a usually very prompt service.
What I do not like about them is the way that they do business, but this is down to our perceiptions of how airlines should do business.
I do not consider them any more rapacious or greedy than any other airline. Being dispassionate, they are probably being a little more honest than the legacy airlines, but we are used to these folks providing a high level of service, but at a higher cost.
To their credit, Ryanair have singled out what is essential to air travel - the fact that you board an aircraft in one location and arrive safely, shortly thereafter in another location. Anything else is secondary, and can be charged for as an optional extra.
I don't like this approach because it is opposite to the way the rest of the industry works, but I do admire their lateral thinking.
The rest of the (legacy) industry, by charging a flat fee for travel, baggage, catering etc. effectively limits their profit per passenger to a maximum limit defined by what the passenger doesn't take advantage of. Whilst as for Ryanair, their business model effectively means they have a limitless profit potential from each passenger, so long as the basic, replacement cost of the flight per passenger is charged.
The other things which bug me about Ryanair are as follows:-
1: Their colour scheme inside the plane
2: Their colour scheme inside the plane
3: Their use of regional airports, but describing them as primary airports. Sorry, but there is nop way in hell that Prestwick should be described as a Glasgow airport. Similarly, Torp is in no way an Oslo airport
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LONDON
Age: 51
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Their use of regional airports, but describing them as primary airports. Sorry, but there is nop way in hell that Prestwick should be described as a Glasgow airport. Similarly, Torp is in no way an Oslo airport
PPRuNe Bashaholic
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: The Peoples Alcoholic Republic of Jockistan
Posts: 1,442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used them many times and have had no problem - ever. I always get what I expect, and take note of what I have signed up to. I travel light and don't pay for any of their extras that I don't have to. Ignorance of what you have been told when you make your booking is no excuse, indeed, it is just laziness on your part. Sorry, but you only have yourself to blame, and are hopefully now more aware of how Ryanair operate and can base your future travel decisions on this knowledge.
I don't particularly like them, and I detest O'Leary and his management team with a passion on so many levels, but if they provide what I want, at a price I want, then I'll use them. The fact is though, that quite often they are not the cheapest when you take everything in to account so it pays to shop around and do your sums. As a result, I haven't flown with them for about 8 months, since other airlines have offered a better deal or almost the same price deal but with a better service and terms and conditions at the time. It's your wallet, so do your homework and make the choice that's right for you for any particular trip.
Why not ? Distance to city centre is around 28 miles .. same as Gatwick is for London. Train takes 40 minutes .. quicker than tube takes from Heathrow to central London (Heathrow Express is extortionate). Travel by car in to Glasgow is quicker than trying it from ANY London Airport (except perhaps London City). You sound like a Glasgow Herald reader 
Other airports in their network don't pass the same tests, but Prestwick being tied with Glasgow is as relevant as any of the airports used by London.
I don't particularly like them, and I detest O'Leary and his management team with a passion on so many levels, but if they provide what I want, at a price I want, then I'll use them. The fact is though, that quite often they are not the cheapest when you take everything in to account so it pays to shop around and do your sums. As a result, I haven't flown with them for about 8 months, since other airlines have offered a better deal or almost the same price deal but with a better service and terms and conditions at the time. It's your wallet, so do your homework and make the choice that's right for you for any particular trip.
Sorry, but there is nop way in hell that Prestwick should be described as a Glasgow airport.
Other airports in their network don't pass the same tests, but Prestwick being tied with Glasgow is as relevant as any of the airports used by London.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 69
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Neither thank you.
Well its as they say .... Two things in life should be compulsory :
1. A holiday in Las Vegas.
2. A flight with Ryanair.
1. A holiday in Las Vegas.
2. A flight with Ryanair.
Regarding Prestwick not being Glasgow - well it was the t/atl airport for that part of Scotland for many, many years. They relaxed that rule a decade or two ago - we can't blame Cryanair for that one.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Essex
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew Ryanair for the umpteenth time yesterday. I have never had a problem of any significance with the airline, except for how long it took to refund the payment for a cancelled booking. This compares well with some other airlines I've used - most of which I've flown fewer times than Ryanair - and includes a small number, such as Iberia, which I will never use again.
Whilst rudeness from customer service staff is always unacceptable (although understandable in some circumstances), too many people today believe that the "customer is always right" attitude gives them the power to run shipshod over an airline's regulations - e.g., over baggage weight or cabin baggage dimensions.
[I'll never forget boarding a KLMuk BAe 146 at Amsterdam early one morning and having to put up with the special pleading from "someone important" that he was unaware that his bag was too big for the cabin and that this had been no problem on his first leg, into AMS, on KLM. (I, too, had just flown the Atlantic on KLM and was perfectly aware that the "change of gauge" meant that what could be taken on a 747 might be too big for the 146.) The cabin attendant had the patience of a saint but I bet the passenger later complained about how he was treated.]
It's simple. Read the conditions of the contract (freely entered into!) and stick to them. It's not rocket science! Claiming that it's unreasonable to be expected to read the "small print" is pure laziness (save in cases where passengers are functionally illiterate).
Whilst rudeness from customer service staff is always unacceptable (although understandable in some circumstances), too many people today believe that the "customer is always right" attitude gives them the power to run shipshod over an airline's regulations - e.g., over baggage weight or cabin baggage dimensions.
[I'll never forget boarding a KLMuk BAe 146 at Amsterdam early one morning and having to put up with the special pleading from "someone important" that he was unaware that his bag was too big for the cabin and that this had been no problem on his first leg, into AMS, on KLM. (I, too, had just flown the Atlantic on KLM and was perfectly aware that the "change of gauge" meant that what could be taken on a 747 might be too big for the 146.) The cabin attendant had the patience of a saint but I bet the passenger later complained about how he was treated.]
It's simple. Read the conditions of the contract (freely entered into!) and stick to them. It's not rocket science! Claiming that it's unreasonable to be expected to read the "small print" is pure laziness (save in cases where passengers are functionally illiterate).
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew from Stansted to Knock with Ryanair. As the reason for my visit to Ireland was to measure up some industrial equipment I carried with me a telescopic measuring stick. In collapsed form this was approximately 20mm x 30mm x1metre. I presented it at Stansted as hand luggage, It was approved as such so everything was OK. The flight was completed and off I went to the factory.
Upon my return the following day, I was refused entry to the flight if my "hand luggage" was to accompany me. It had to be entered as hold baggage. When I asked why, I was told "You could use it as a weapon." I complained that no such supposition had been made the previous day at Stansted. My protestations fell on the deaf ears of the teenager who was checking me in. I asked to speak to the supervisor. "There is no supervisor here, she is at lunch!" If I wanted to speak to the supervisor I was welcome to wait until her return. By which time the flight would have left. Fait accompli.
I was allowed to hand my precious implement to the baggage handler actually loading the hold and needless to say the thing was (only slightly) damaged when I saw it again at Stansted.
As it happens that was the last time I flew Ryanair. Adding injury to insult I found later that they had charged my credit card twice for the same flight. I never got my money back.
Upon my return the following day, I was refused entry to the flight if my "hand luggage" was to accompany me. It had to be entered as hold baggage. When I asked why, I was told "You could use it as a weapon." I complained that no such supposition had been made the previous day at Stansted. My protestations fell on the deaf ears of the teenager who was checking me in. I asked to speak to the supervisor. "There is no supervisor here, she is at lunch!" If I wanted to speak to the supervisor I was welcome to wait until her return. By which time the flight would have left. Fait accompli.
I was allowed to hand my precious implement to the baggage handler actually loading the hold and needless to say the thing was (only slightly) damaged when I saw it again at Stansted.
As it happens that was the last time I flew Ryanair. Adding injury to insult I found later that they had charged my credit card twice for the same flight. I never got my money back.
You sound like a Glasgow Herald reader 
Is Gatwick within or adjacent to the London City boundary? - basically the M25 - Not really.
Is Prestwick within or adjacent to the Glasgow City boundary? - in a word - NO.
Is Stansted within or adjacent to the London City boundary? - basically the M25 - Not really.
Is Skidrow within or adjacent to the London City boundary? - basically the M25 - Yes.
Is Glasgow airport within or adjacent to the Weej City boundary? - pretty much, although some would argue that it should really be Paisley International .
Is Edinburgh airport within or adjacent to the Edinburgh City boundary? - Pretty Much.
Basically, I'm willing to acept that if the airport is within the boundary, adjacent to it , or at a stretch within 15 minutes by reasonably priced surface transport, then it's fair to call it after the nearest large settlement, but only after one place.
I do object the their calling an airport after another city purely to confuse the majority of their customers. Honesty is afterall the best policy where geography is concerned.
PPRuNe Bashaholic
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: The Peoples Alcoholic Republic of Jockistan
Posts: 1,442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The London City boundary is the 'square mile'. There are no airports within it to my knowledge. The M25 is your own arbitrary boundary, not a geographical one agreed by the authorities.
The proof in the pudding which passengers (not geography students) care about is accessibiity. Prestwick is as quickly accessible to Glasgow as most other major UK airports are from the city centres after which they are named.
The proof in the pudding which passengers (not geography students) care about is accessibiity. Prestwick is as quickly accessible to Glasgow as most other major UK airports are from the city centres after which they are named.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LONDON
Age: 51
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The proof in the pudding which passengers (not geography students) care about is accessibiity. Prestwick is as quickly accessible to Glasgow as most other major UK airports are from the city centres after which they are named.
Cheers
Jof
p.s. Glasgow Prestwick Airport is allegedly the only place in the UK where Elvis set foot (I seem to recall a placque in the lounge).
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basically, I'm willing to acept that if the airport is within the boundary, adjacent to it , or at a stretch within 15 minutes by reasonably priced surface transport, then it's fair to call it after the nearest large settlement, but only after one place.
Though I agree London Southend is rather pushing it....
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: swindon
Age: 44
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not again. We have heard it a thousand times. There is now no such thing as "normal" or "expected" terms and conditions when it comes to air travel. Life has changed, its time to move on.
Just about to take my 53rd Ryanair flight in 2 years. Always on time, usually very cheap, and as they fly from my local airport - very convenient.
So, if you really dont like Ryanair, and wont fly with them, then im very pleased - because that means an extra seat to be discounted for me.
Smala01
P.s. The next flight incidentally cost me the vast some of £2 return (with nothing extra to pay).
Just about to take my 53rd Ryanair flight in 2 years. Always on time, usually very cheap, and as they fly from my local airport - very convenient.
So, if you really dont like Ryanair, and wont fly with them, then im very pleased - because that means an extra seat to be discounted for me.
Smala01
P.s. The next flight incidentally cost me the vast some of £2 return (with nothing extra to pay).
Last edited by smala01; 29th Jun 2009 at 00:49.
Paxing All Over The World
Dawdler
Sounds like you needed to use the Small Claims Court. FR have been known to respond to that one. They know that any successful claim against them in court could start to push at the gates of their policies.
they had charged my credit card twice for the same flight. I never got my money back.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sandhurst
Age: 50
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole T's & C's thing is a fair point, but if a company does things contrary to what 99% of most other campanies then it should make these differences more obvious. As a frequent traveller you get an idea of what you will be getting. But to have experienced a level of service which makes EasyJet look 100 times more favourable is really quite a shock.
When booking the flights I thought, 'well they are cheap so I expect cheap service, but it is an airline so there must be some standards, and anyway, just how bad can it be?'
'Oh that bad....crikey'
When you fly in some parts of the world, you expect to fly with chickens in crates, engineers still working on the engine with a big spanner and oily cloth whilst you are boarding and the pilot to be chewing a cigar and wearing a Flying Tigers jacket.
But even they seem to provide better service than Ryan Air.
Yes, I hold my hand up, I didn't research fully enough.
Hopefully this thread will be merged with the other Ryan Air warnings for those that do research in the future.
When booking the flights I thought, 'well they are cheap so I expect cheap service, but it is an airline so there must be some standards, and anyway, just how bad can it be?'
'Oh that bad....crikey'
When you fly in some parts of the world, you expect to fly with chickens in crates, engineers still working on the engine with a big spanner and oily cloth whilst you are boarding and the pilot to be chewing a cigar and wearing a Flying Tigers jacket.
But even they seem to provide better service than Ryan Air.
Yes, I hold my hand up, I didn't research fully enough.
Hopefully this thread will be merged with the other Ryan Air warnings for those that do research in the future.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: London
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[Whingers: please find your way to your own site where you can complain at your leasure.]
Find said site at I Hate Ryanair - Filthy thieving bastards
Find said site at I Hate Ryanair - Filthy thieving bastards