easyJet, Ryanair, Monarch - shame on you!
Paxing All Over The World
Joao da Silva.
I don't think the pax see it like that. For many FR have extended choice rather dramatically.
To the best of my knowledge, the main reason (there will be others) why BA cancels the domestics first when weather or other events prevent normal ops is:- Heathrow.
In bad weather, or if one runway is closed, there is no spare capacity. The airport operates way above any sensible balance of traffic loading. It has zero spare capacity and, consequently, even a small disruption, can cause enormous problems. If an a/c cannot clear a runway (for any reason) then that is 50% of capacity gone. At FRA it would only be 33% and at AMS it would be (dependent on wind direction and length of runway required) 16.6%. Since their second hub, LGW, has a single runway, they have nowhere to go.
I sit to be corrected on that, on which, thanks Parapunter for the update on regulations in your field and the apples/apples point - which was part of my point! Nonetheless, the airlines are still mid-way in their change from legacy to whatever they are going to be in 20 years time.
Again I refer back to the great shipping lines. Cunard, P&O etc ruled the world and then along came the 747 to take their pax and then the shipping container took their freight. They merged or went bust and had no idea what to do. Now? They cruise the world, they have built bigger and more complex ships that have many enticing features (for some, not me!) and they are making money. That's what humans do and the airline world has done very well on the widebodies over the past 40 years but the LCCs, and now the deep global recession are another matter.
Unfortunately, Ryanair's strategy is cost leadership and that has set a trend in a market where the pax have limited choices.
BA ... cancels domestic services first when there is disruption ...
In bad weather, or if one runway is closed, there is no spare capacity. The airport operates way above any sensible balance of traffic loading. It has zero spare capacity and, consequently, even a small disruption, can cause enormous problems. If an a/c cannot clear a runway (for any reason) then that is 50% of capacity gone. At FRA it would only be 33% and at AMS it would be (dependent on wind direction and length of runway required) 16.6%. Since their second hub, LGW, has a single runway, they have nowhere to go.
I sit to be corrected on that, on which, thanks Parapunter for the update on regulations in your field and the apples/apples point - which was part of my point! Nonetheless, the airlines are still mid-way in their change from legacy to whatever they are going to be in 20 years time.
Again I refer back to the great shipping lines. Cunard, P&O etc ruled the world and then along came the 747 to take their pax and then the shipping container took their freight. They merged or went bust and had no idea what to do. Now? They cruise the world, they have built bigger and more complex ships that have many enticing features (for some, not me!) and they are making money. That's what humans do and the airline world has done very well on the widebodies over the past 40 years but the LCCs, and now the deep global recession are another matter.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lisbon
Age: 51
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paxboy
You misinterpret my meaning, Ryanair has applied cost pressure to the shorthaul airline model and the legacy airlines have reacted by taking cost out of the business, at the expense of service.
On most shorthaul routes, there are only 2-3 airlines competing and they tend to offer a very similar service, thus the lack of consumer choice.
As to you point about Heathrow being the cause for cancelling short haul services, I am sorry but that does not make sense. to me
If BA chooses to operate in a constrained environment, then it is accepting that customer service may be impacted and it chooses to do this to domestic and short haul travellers, year upon year.
This is the point that Hipennine made eloquently in his last.
You misinterpret my meaning, Ryanair has applied cost pressure to the shorthaul airline model and the legacy airlines have reacted by taking cost out of the business, at the expense of service.
On most shorthaul routes, there are only 2-3 airlines competing and they tend to offer a very similar service, thus the lack of consumer choice.
As to you point about Heathrow being the cause for cancelling short haul services, I am sorry but that does not make sense. to me
If BA chooses to operate in a constrained environment, then it is accepting that customer service may be impacted and it chooses to do this to domestic and short haul travellers, year upon year.
This is the point that Hipennine made eloquently in his last.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For example BA (not bashing the company, but quoting a fact) cancels domestic services first when there is disruption, because the travellers have other options!
We are perforce ingenious folks, but not a single one of us can walk on water - yet.
Back to you J da S.
Paxing All Over The World
Joao da Silva
Indeed. One company tried more service and found it was, after all, price. In about 2002/3 (I think) American removed several rows from their economy service and said that you now had more leg room for the same price. It didn't work and they put the seats back in again.
Airline seats have become a supermarket item and, if I compare the big three supermarkets in the UK - we find that on some products they charge the same; some are loss leaders; some are higher than their competitors and some are less. They have loyalty systems and self service tills and online shopping with home delivery.
That's the mass market and in the worst recession since the depression, price will win. If the recession gets worse, which I think it will, there will be fewer pax and fewer options.
I'm certainly not going to defend BA (who are not my first choice of long haul carrier for more than 20 years now) but the UK govt has made no serious decisions about key airport infrastructure for (guess) 30 years. No politician has wanted to fight the public to expand LHR or to build a new, as it were, 'central' facility for the the South East of England. They preferred to let regional fields be opened up and provide some competition and service on short and medium haul.
They sold off the govt department that ran the airports and washed their hands of this vital resource. They set no policy, other than 'Just keep toddling along and keep your head down'. LHR is slot constrained and always will be, so is LGW. So, if BA decided to go elsewhere, where would they go?
That said, I agree that their service recovery is poor and, almost certainly getting poorer. THAT I ascribe to the overall attitude of UK companies in the past 20 years to remove all possible 'stand by' capacity. Whether it be directly at the front line, or fewer back room staff who can help out in a crisis.
Also, if you outsource many functions, give them strict rules of engagement with zero flexibility - then service recovery will be poor. In the UK, a remarkable number of companies now do this. They prefer not to have 'insurance' but to fix it when it goes wrong. You can only do that just so many times.
Lastly, as has been said here many times, many of the legacy carriers are at the end of their natural life span as companies. In due course they will fold, be bought up and then change can happen.
I have just read this headline on BBC News - Search and rescue fleet 'could be privatised'
More than half of coastguard stations across the country could be closed as part of the government's spending cuts. The UK's search and rescue helicopter fleet, which is currently run by the RAF and the Royal Navy, plus civilian helicopters through the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) will be taken over by a private company.
The government is expected to confirm further details this week.
Dani Sinha reports.
So the UK govt is taking resources out to save money and outsourcing the machines to save money. I am by no means of the 'govt must own everything' group but I have never been a fan of outsourcing, I won't bore you with the reasons why. So UK govts continue to see money not value. What chance pax services?
[Probably constitutes thread drift]
You misinterpret my meaning, Ryanair has applied cost pressure to the shorthaul airline model and the legacy airlines have reacted by taking cost out of the business, at the expense of service.
Airline seats have become a supermarket item and, if I compare the big three supermarkets in the UK - we find that on some products they charge the same; some are loss leaders; some are higher than their competitors and some are less. They have loyalty systems and self service tills and online shopping with home delivery.
That's the mass market and in the worst recession since the depression, price will win. If the recession gets worse, which I think it will, there will be fewer pax and fewer options.
As to you point about Heathrow being the cause for cancelling short haul services, I am sorry but that does not make sense to me.
If BA chooses to operate in a constrained environment, then it is accepting that customer service may be impacted and it chooses to do this to domestic and short haul travellers, year upon year.
If BA chooses to operate in a constrained environment, then it is accepting that customer service may be impacted and it chooses to do this to domestic and short haul travellers, year upon year.
They sold off the govt department that ran the airports and washed their hands of this vital resource. They set no policy, other than 'Just keep toddling along and keep your head down'. LHR is slot constrained and always will be, so is LGW. So, if BA decided to go elsewhere, where would they go?
That said, I agree that their service recovery is poor and, almost certainly getting poorer. THAT I ascribe to the overall attitude of UK companies in the past 20 years to remove all possible 'stand by' capacity. Whether it be directly at the front line, or fewer back room staff who can help out in a crisis.
Also, if you outsource many functions, give them strict rules of engagement with zero flexibility - then service recovery will be poor. In the UK, a remarkable number of companies now do this. They prefer not to have 'insurance' but to fix it when it goes wrong. You can only do that just so many times.
Lastly, as has been said here many times, many of the legacy carriers are at the end of their natural life span as companies. In due course they will fold, be bought up and then change can happen.
I have just read this headline on BBC News - Search and rescue fleet 'could be privatised'
More than half of coastguard stations across the country could be closed as part of the government's spending cuts. The UK's search and rescue helicopter fleet, which is currently run by the RAF and the Royal Navy, plus civilian helicopters through the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) will be taken over by a private company.
The government is expected to confirm further details this week.
Dani Sinha reports.
So the UK govt is taking resources out to save money and outsourcing the machines to save money. I am by no means of the 'govt must own everything' group but I have never been a fan of outsourcing, I won't bore you with the reasons why. So UK govts continue to see money not value. What chance pax services?
[Probably constitutes thread drift]
Last edited by PAXboy; 13th Dec 2010 at 00:45. Reason: Add BBC news item
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 83
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Search and Rescue Services
Yep, good old Gorden sold off the rights to a private consortium as a PFI (Private Finance Initative?) before he left for Northern climes - so the RAF and RN among others will lose all skills and knowledge in future of operating in this very specialist field - interestingly, it is being said that the new choppers to be used, whilst faster, possibly won't have the same range/capability of the current Sea King's - have a look at the threads in the MIL area of PP. A further reduction in the capabilities of our armed forces.
In any event, there's another new syndicate and financial opportunity for someone, created by Labour, after they had spent all the countries money.
In any event, there's another new syndicate and financial opportunity for someone, created by Labour, after they had spent all the countries money.
Last edited by Entaxei; 13th Dec 2010 at 06:30.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sunny Sussex
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed. One company tried more service and found it was, after all, price.
So, what goes on in my game is suppliers fall over themselves to differentiate from one another, whether it be live gps consignment tracking, electronic signature capture & real time billing, bungs in brown envelopes, anything.
What is salient though is that technology has exceeded by some margin the old turn up at an airport model, check in, answer a few questions & hang around for a couple of hours & get on a plane. It really isn't that much of a leap to think that an airline, faced with a weather crisis couldn't at the point of booking take a working mobile number and/or email address & text or mail pax to inform that flight xxx is canxd, don't come to the airport, get a cab instead to hotel yyy & keep your phone on for further updates at 1234 hours, alternatively, these are the services running, text a, b, or c to this number to be booked on a different flight/refund, whatever.
Pretty much cost free or certainly cheaper than staffing a desk with half a dozen people all day, definitely an improvement over what happens now & a hundred times easier for all involved.
If you think about it, companies like Ebay, Amazon, DHL run global operations this way, there is no impediment that I can see for the airlines to get onboard with it, especially, when you consider that what they do is simply fly from one point to another - the rest of it could easily be engineered for the benefit of the customer & that ultimately translates into benefit for the airline. State of mind innit.
Paxing All Over The World
Parapunter Now we are in agreement! Having been in technology for 25+ years, I agree that the carrier's have a dismal use of technology. They think that checking in on the (over hyped) iPhone is all that is needed.
On a trip through MUC six years ago, after check-in, we had a gate change and was advised via an SMS, just in case we did not check the displays. Simple! On the other hand, I had an LCC who told me that they had emailed me about the reschedule of departure - but they hadn't.
However, it is my view that the old fashioned thinking in the airlines, the entrenched way of doing things will make it very difficult for them to introduce such changes.
On a trip through MUC six years ago, after check-in, we had a gate change and was advised via an SMS, just in case we did not check the displays. Simple! On the other hand, I had an LCC who told me that they had emailed me about the reschedule of departure - but they hadn't.
However, it is my view that the old fashioned thinking in the airlines, the entrenched way of doing things will make it very difficult for them to introduce such changes.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heck the NHS can use technology
I popped in my GPs (local family Doctor for non-brits) and made an appointment for next Monday. Walking out the door I get a text, it's from the GP's computer telling me the appointment time etc. Great, I keep it in my inbox as a reminder.
It's a bit scry when the NHS is ahead of the private sector..
Still behind the trains though. In the recent snow the next train to Leeds was platform 2, the slow one. Then the fast one comes into 3 so we all troop to 3 as instructed. Sit on the train for 3 and then watch 2 set off, and we're stuck behind it all the way to Leeds. Argh! Why couldn't the conductor say on the tannoy jump over to Platform 2 PDQ to get to Leeds sooner..
G
It's a bit scry when the NHS is ahead of the private sector..
Still behind the trains though. In the recent snow the next train to Leeds was platform 2, the slow one. Then the fast one comes into 3 so we all troop to 3 as instructed. Sit on the train for 3 and then watch 2 set off, and we're stuck behind it all the way to Leeds. Argh! Why couldn't the conductor say on the tannoy jump over to Platform 2 PDQ to get to Leeds sooner..
G
Paxing All Over The World
groundbum Ah yes, that's a railway special! I think that part of this is the whole move in the UK to separate functions. This started in the very late 1980s, following the USA. Firstly, they made the departments of an organisation more 'independent' and 'able to make their own choices' etc. This was intended to foster better service but I won't bore you with the empire building and inter-departmental rivalry that then ensued. Secondly, there was the dreaded Outsourcing, which I first saw at my then employer's NYC head office in 1989 and I didn't like it from the off.
All of this has led to fragmentation of the organisation. Often there are now legal contracts between 'departments' in separate buildings (even countries) that used to be colleagues who met in the canteen at lunch to sort things out.
The airlines have fallen for this game like everyone else has because it can be shown to save money - on paper. Since the recession of 1990/92, the accountants have been running the asylum. The situation will not change for a long time.
Lastly, I think that giving departments more 'choice' over their actions has also allowed senior management to avoid blame. They can pass the blame (for anything) to the lower manager and then get rid of them if they choose. The same has happened in UK politics - no minister resigns any more, because they have shifted the blame lower down. The UK govt equivalent of this is the 'Agency' game. They are still govt but not central govt and so the minister escapes.
All of this has led to fragmentation of the organisation. Often there are now legal contracts between 'departments' in separate buildings (even countries) that used to be colleagues who met in the canteen at lunch to sort things out.
The airlines have fallen for this game like everyone else has because it can be shown to save money - on paper. Since the recession of 1990/92, the accountants have been running the asylum. The situation will not change for a long time.
Lastly, I think that giving departments more 'choice' over their actions has also allowed senior management to avoid blame. They can pass the blame (for anything) to the lower manager and then get rid of them if they choose. The same has happened in UK politics - no minister resigns any more, because they have shifted the blame lower down. The UK govt equivalent of this is the 'Agency' game. They are still govt but not central govt and so the minister escapes.
Last edited by PAXboy; 15th Dec 2010 at 11:12. Reason: Typographical errors
I'm coming to this late, but I flew out of Gatwick to Spain on 5th Dec and have just returned. Let me just tell you my thoughts on the events at Gatwick.
OK, I knew from the Wednesday that exceptional amounts of snow had fallen on Gatwick, the M25 and M23. From BBC News aerial shots, it appeared that Gatwick had only 4 snowploughs working to clear the runway. With continued snow, then fog, it looked as if my flight from Gatwick would be "unlikely" without a rapid thaw. Consequently I emailed asking if the flight might be possible from Stansted, if it wasn't already socked in at Gatwick. The email system was a pain, redirecting to the FAQ and hoping that resolved your question. It didn't and I repeatedly contacted them to discover whether the flight was likely to be possible either from Gatwick or Stansted or wherever, as I didn't think it fair to expect my disabled wife to drive me through icy conditions to Gatwick at 3 o'clock in the morning if the flight was then cancelled and have to make another trip to collect me, in perhaps even worse conditions. I never had a response.
That was fairly galling, but then the Spanish ATC all contracted Spanish Flu (or Not Flu) so no flights on Saturday, and Sunday flights from 7 am.... with my departure being scheduled for 7:20 am... so still unsure whether to go to Gatwick or not. Decided that we'd give it a try, so set off and roads were clear, as was Gatwick. My flight was scheduled so I got out to Spain with about an hour delay. Not too bad considering some of the nightmare experiences related in this thread, but still one where I was left uncertain what to do. OK, so no doubt there was a heavy workload on the staff that were able to work, but much of it could have been avoided by clearer and unambiguous messages on the website.
On my return, the incoming flight was 2 hours late in arriving, yet my wife was saying the airline was showing it departed on time and in fact had even landed, whereas I could see empty tarmac!
Even boarding was a bit of a farce; we were fed through to airside but to an area too small to accommodate us all whilst the aircraft slowly unloaded. It looked as if the reason was that a small regional airliner parked adjacent had started its engines, so why park another aircraft next to it, when there appeared to be plenty of empty stands. That's not the airline, but the airport, nonetheless, it still held up any attempt to make up lost time.
When we were finally released to board, there were a number of wheelchair and disabled passengers, carried on an extending transporter, so access to the door was possible. Instead of clearing the first rows for these disabled passengers and letting the rest of us on, the disabled passengers were loaded on through the opposite front door and obviously took some time to be comfortably accommodated. Meantime, the rear door passengers filled up and by the time we were able to look for seats a lot of overhead bins had been filled, not just a single case, but many extra carry on and duty free bags. Consequently it took longer than necessary to board and that meant a later departure slot.
The reasons for delay given by cabin crew to various passengers ranged from a faulty PA system, fog at Gatwick, heavy traffic at Gatwick or Greek ATC strike...
In essence, what it needs is for some clear contingency planning for a designated person to be fully informed as to any specific situation and then be given courses of action so that the message gets quickly to those affected.
It ought to be clear to all by now that given the correct information, most passengers can work out alternative plans for themselves, or fit in with one recommended by the carrier. Good, reliable information is the key, so perhaps great minds in the airline industry should make it a high priority for their passengers. You wouldn't expect pilots to put up with uncertainty, so why should passengers?
OK, I knew from the Wednesday that exceptional amounts of snow had fallen on Gatwick, the M25 and M23. From BBC News aerial shots, it appeared that Gatwick had only 4 snowploughs working to clear the runway. With continued snow, then fog, it looked as if my flight from Gatwick would be "unlikely" without a rapid thaw. Consequently I emailed asking if the flight might be possible from Stansted, if it wasn't already socked in at Gatwick. The email system was a pain, redirecting to the FAQ and hoping that resolved your question. It didn't and I repeatedly contacted them to discover whether the flight was likely to be possible either from Gatwick or Stansted or wherever, as I didn't think it fair to expect my disabled wife to drive me through icy conditions to Gatwick at 3 o'clock in the morning if the flight was then cancelled and have to make another trip to collect me, in perhaps even worse conditions. I never had a response.
That was fairly galling, but then the Spanish ATC all contracted Spanish Flu (or Not Flu) so no flights on Saturday, and Sunday flights from 7 am.... with my departure being scheduled for 7:20 am... so still unsure whether to go to Gatwick or not. Decided that we'd give it a try, so set off and roads were clear, as was Gatwick. My flight was scheduled so I got out to Spain with about an hour delay. Not too bad considering some of the nightmare experiences related in this thread, but still one where I was left uncertain what to do. OK, so no doubt there was a heavy workload on the staff that were able to work, but much of it could have been avoided by clearer and unambiguous messages on the website.
On my return, the incoming flight was 2 hours late in arriving, yet my wife was saying the airline was showing it departed on time and in fact had even landed, whereas I could see empty tarmac!
Even boarding was a bit of a farce; we were fed through to airside but to an area too small to accommodate us all whilst the aircraft slowly unloaded. It looked as if the reason was that a small regional airliner parked adjacent had started its engines, so why park another aircraft next to it, when there appeared to be plenty of empty stands. That's not the airline, but the airport, nonetheless, it still held up any attempt to make up lost time.
When we were finally released to board, there were a number of wheelchair and disabled passengers, carried on an extending transporter, so access to the door was possible. Instead of clearing the first rows for these disabled passengers and letting the rest of us on, the disabled passengers were loaded on through the opposite front door and obviously took some time to be comfortably accommodated. Meantime, the rear door passengers filled up and by the time we were able to look for seats a lot of overhead bins had been filled, not just a single case, but many extra carry on and duty free bags. Consequently it took longer than necessary to board and that meant a later departure slot.
The reasons for delay given by cabin crew to various passengers ranged from a faulty PA system, fog at Gatwick, heavy traffic at Gatwick or Greek ATC strike...
In essence, what it needs is for some clear contingency planning for a designated person to be fully informed as to any specific situation and then be given courses of action so that the message gets quickly to those affected.
It ought to be clear to all by now that given the correct information, most passengers can work out alternative plans for themselves, or fit in with one recommended by the carrier. Good, reliable information is the key, so perhaps great minds in the airline industry should make it a high priority for their passengers. You wouldn't expect pilots to put up with uncertainty, so why should passengers?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A friend's recent in-stock Amazon order has just taken 5 days to reach their "North West" distribution centre from Scotland due to "adverse weather". Seems unlikely it will be delivered down south until Tues or Weds next week.
Seems the logist. sorry, delivery business isn't exactly beyond reproach either despite its monopoly of all the latest whizz-bang technology.
Seems the logist. sorry, delivery business isn't exactly beyond reproach either despite its monopoly of all the latest whizz-bang technology.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sunny Sussex
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure anyone has said it is & I'm still waiting for my Christmas shopping from Amazon too. At this rate, I'll be running round co-op at half four on Christmas Eve buying the family jars of Dolmio for Christmas.
Still, there's a decent thread over on JB explaining the realities of parcel company operations & economics, along with a good bit of DHL/City Link/Yodel bashing thrown in for good measure.
Still, there's a decent thread over on JB explaining the realities of parcel company operations & economics, along with a good bit of DHL/City Link/Yodel bashing thrown in for good measure.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: up north
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going way off topic here, but:
AB, your gripe is with Amazon, not the logistics provider. If they have chosen to rely on a supply chain where they do not hold the stock, but rely on a third party product supplier to deliver into amazon's DC once your order is placed, that is putting a major risk element in the chain. Presumably though, the IT systems have identified the delay and at least provided some updating info to your friend.
Generally, I would suggest that people look to the example of the Swiss Railway system as a good example as to how to deal with disruption. Some Swiss may disagree, because there is some disquiet currently over falling punctuality standards, but the railway seems to have a detailed contingency planning process in place, where every possible form of disruption has been considered for any particular length of track, and a contingency plan written up. When the disruption occurs, the plan gets implemented very quickly, and is communicated through the web-site, SMS, etc. The plans are designed to not only maintain at least a point to point service of some sort between affected stations, but also to quickly minimise knock-on disruption to the rest of the network.
AB, your gripe is with Amazon, not the logistics provider. If they have chosen to rely on a supply chain where they do not hold the stock, but rely on a third party product supplier to deliver into amazon's DC once your order is placed, that is putting a major risk element in the chain. Presumably though, the IT systems have identified the delay and at least provided some updating info to your friend.
Generally, I would suggest that people look to the example of the Swiss Railway system as a good example as to how to deal with disruption. Some Swiss may disagree, because there is some disquiet currently over falling punctuality standards, but the railway seems to have a detailed contingency planning process in place, where every possible form of disruption has been considered for any particular length of track, and a contingency plan written up. When the disruption occurs, the plan gets implemented very quickly, and is communicated through the web-site, SMS, etc. The plans are designed to not only maintain at least a point to point service of some sort between affected stations, but also to quickly minimise knock-on disruption to the rest of the network.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A friend's recent in-stock Amazon order
Fact is weather like this causes severe difficulties in all industries that rely on transport and the ensuing backlogs are often slow to clear, particularly just before Christmas when everything is so busy.
Swiss railways. The big difference is that they planned the system to work that way from the sleepers upwards, bought equipment designed to cope and are manned and trained sufficiently to do the job. But at what cost? Our systems generally manage reasonably well I think, its just when an unexpected 5 times the usual rain/snow/drought/wind happens things go pear-shaped, If Swiss rail plans to cope with a 3m snowfall I expect they'd be bolllixed too if the got hit with 15. Not so?
ps. carying a parcel from A to B is a delivery, a postman's job. It is no more "logistics" than a Big Issue seller is a publishing magnate.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sunny Sussex
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ps. carying a parcel from A to B is a delivery, a postman's job. It is no more "logistics" than a Big Issue seller is a publishing magnate.
That's a bit like saying flying from Heathrow to Tokyo is a pilot's job - neatly omitting the sizeable support network in place to make certain that the flight happens in the first place. Besides, this topic has evolved into the possibilities that are available to the airline chaps, not a pis&ing contest between two industries that makes no sense to me.
