Why does everyone get at ryanair and easyjet
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having left easyJet 3 years ago to work for a major UK airline with good job security (or so i thought!) the airline which i now see as the good long term bet is ... orange!
I hear they now have hundreds of cv's from pilots in BA and the major charter airlines. Amazing how things change!!!
I hear they now have hundreds of cv's from pilots in BA and the major charter airlines. Amazing how things change!!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
FWIW, I have travelled on all three of our low cost carriers. My money for the long term is on GO for the simple reason that it offers a superior product at a competitive price.
Travel on Easy or Ryanair is for the penny-pinching morons whose sources of income will soon be drying up.
The discerning budget traveller will remain, but will require far better treatment than Easy or Ryan seem able or willing to give them.
Go GO!!!
Travel on Easy or Ryanair is for the penny-pinching morons whose sources of income will soon be drying up.
The discerning budget traveller will remain, but will require far better treatment than Easy or Ryan seem able or willing to give them.
Go GO!!!
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's quite obvious that not evryone does get at Easy or ryan. Both managements are than willing to put their heads above the parapet and if you do that yopu will get shot at. However, I do have my doubts about Ryans latest ploys. Add to this the advantage of the Irish FTLs and the famous (or infamous) "levl playing field" goes out the window. What is important is that this is a reaaly new amrket. What needs to be asked is how many of the passengers flying from Glasgow to Belfast with Easy and Go have actually been on an aircraft before? This will expand into other routes ifthey play it right. Long live flying. It's the second best thrill in the world!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: near EGKK
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If BA had not spent so much time and money attacking VS to get their pax, I for one would be more pro BA.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Desert
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The "majors" have had the market carved up for a very long time,Ryan and Easy are a thorn in their side.
They offer the pax cheap travel,their overheads are much lower than the majors,the result is dramatic growth,great opportunities for those involved including OLeary and The Big Easy,neither who are short of a bob or two.
However,eventually,the state carriers will hurt,and this perceived predatory business tactic is resented by the fat cats who have enjoyed the cream and their employees.
I say good luck to them all,but business is business and only the really well managed operators will survive,BA,AF and LH.Those airlines have high costs,but will be around longer than those less well managed.
Until then,if slots are available,let them be up for grabs for all takers,and see how they fare,competition is best for all,I believe.The strong will survive,regardless.
They offer the pax cheap travel,their overheads are much lower than the majors,the result is dramatic growth,great opportunities for those involved including OLeary and The Big Easy,neither who are short of a bob or two.
However,eventually,the state carriers will hurt,and this perceived predatory business tactic is resented by the fat cats who have enjoyed the cream and their employees.
I say good luck to them all,but business is business and only the really well managed operators will survive,BA,AF and LH.Those airlines have high costs,but will be around longer than those less well managed.
Until then,if slots are available,let them be up for grabs for all takers,and see how they fare,competition is best for all,I believe.The strong will survive,regardless.
Paxing All Over The World
DD: Thanks, I was really sad that BA did the dirty tricks - as they had no need to. They had (and have) an excellent product.
tilii
I am not so sure, eventhough I agree that GO is good product. Certainly, in my experience, both EZY and GO are better than FR. However, FR is based in a country where he has had the home market to himself, that always make life easier!
EZY and GO sensibly keep to separate home fields. I might use GO more but they are 1hr 10min drive away at STN but LTN is only 15mins away! Catchment area means a LOT. All the talk of EZY leaving LTN was always a nonsense, he has his own patch and no point in going head-to head tiwth GO (and Buzz).
When speaking with other pax on EZY (both biz and leisure) I have found a very high level of satisfaction. If things go wrong, they say, "It's a cheap ticket, you must expect that."
This leaves the main carriers in a double bind. 1) Their customers are leaving for low-cost carriers 2) When they do pay for BA and their like, the pax REALLY expect something for their money!!
tilii
Travel on Easy or Ryanair is for the penny-pinching morons whose sources of income will soon be drying up.
The discerning budget traveller will remain, but will require far better treatment than Easy or Ryan seem able or willing to give them.
The discerning budget traveller will remain, but will require far better treatment than Easy or Ryan seem able or willing to give them.
EZY and GO sensibly keep to separate home fields. I might use GO more but they are 1hr 10min drive away at STN but LTN is only 15mins away! Catchment area means a LOT. All the talk of EZY leaving LTN was always a nonsense, he has his own patch and no point in going head-to head tiwth GO (and Buzz).
When speaking with other pax on EZY (both biz and leisure) I have found a very high level of satisfaction. If things go wrong, they say, "It's a cheap ticket, you must expect that."
This leaves the main carriers in a double bind. 1) Their customers are leaving for low-cost carriers 2) When they do pay for BA and their like, the pax REALLY expect something for their money!!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DD said: "Travel on Easy or Ryanair is for the penny-pinching morons whose sources of income will soon be drying up." If the only thing that will save BA is a recession and their own deep pockets, the low cost airlines have already won.
Magnus Picus said, "Safety matters." That was after I said all that mattered to most pax was price and punctuality. Well, for me and most people, safety is assumed as an invariable across all airlines. And on the whole I think that is fair. Does anyone here really think easy, Go and Ryan are in any way LESS SAFE than BA or BD? Thought not.
Magnus Picus said, "Safety matters." That was after I said all that mattered to most pax was price and punctuality. Well, for me and most people, safety is assumed as an invariable across all airlines. And on the whole I think that is fair. Does anyone here really think easy, Go and Ryan are in any way LESS SAFE than BA or BD? Thought not.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Epsom Hold 2
You are probably quite right in making the observation that:
That you and most people make this assumption is merely a measure of your, and most people's, gross ignorance of aviation matters.
It might be better that you concentrate upon your stated alternative interests of music and writing than to comment so naively upon things about which you clearly know so very little.
The answer to your rudely self-answered question is a resounding YES.
[ 31 October 2001: Message edited by: tilii ]
You are probably quite right in making the observation that:
[F]or me and most people, safety is assumed as an invariable across all airlines.
It might be better that you concentrate upon your stated alternative interests of music and writing than to comment so naively upon things about which you clearly know so very little.
The answer to your rudely self-answered question is a resounding YES.
[ 31 October 2001: Message edited by: tilii ]
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, for me and most people, safety is assumed as an invariable across all airlines.
Most large airlines employ great resources to monitoring trends in the way their aircraft are operated via use of equipment that 'flags' transgressions in the normal operating procedure, as well as software that makes the deferral of defects by the hard-pressed engineers, harder to grant.
Consequently these aspects make (IMHO) an airline safer.
These 'tools' are avoided in the Ryanairs of this world as they COST MONEY.
I am not, in any way, questioning the professionalism or integrity of employees of the airlines we are debating, but it is the constant pressure of Cost containment that was the greatest contributor to the demise of ValueJet.
Human error caused by...
- Fatigue
- Time pressure
- Outdated safety systems
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
easy/Go/Ryan must adhere to the same regulations and inspections as BA/EI/BD, right? Obviously BA have a huge maintenance base with decades of experience and black boxes on the aircraft that monitor equipment and pilot performance (rate of rotation etc) which easy et al may lack but nonetheless I still don't accept that easy/Go/Ryan are less safe (they may lack the operational history and experience of BA but surely their third party maintenance subcontractors makes up for that?). The ValuJet example is slightly spurious, there is mention of the "tombstone / autopsy approach" but an airline don't have to actually write aircraft off to show a trend - a VJ DC9 burned out on the runway at ATL and there were other serious incidents before the big one in Florida. I don't recall anything of that severity from any of our own low cost airlines. Just on the subject of fleet age, there is no comparison. Fleets of youngish or early-middle aged 737-300s and spanking NGs (other than Ryanair's remaining -200s) are hardly the same as VJ's clapped out 30 year old DC9-30s.
Perhaps if I'm so sure about the safety of European low cost airlines I didn't need to post here but I was curious about others' reactions. Anyone else? Tilii, I don't think my "rudely self answered question" was as rude as your dismissive reply.
Perhaps if I'm so sure about the safety of European low cost airlines I didn't need to post here but I was curious about others' reactions. Anyone else? Tilii, I don't think my "rudely self answered question" was as rude as your dismissive reply.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Four points:
1. The difference in prices between , say easy and BA is not just due to a meal. This is a myth perpetuated by the marketing departments of some budget airlines. In the US (correct me if I'm wrong) southwest provide free coffee and snacks.
2. As for budget airlines taking slots at heathrow, this is simply a nice piece of spin. Belfast to LHR with a budget carrier would be expensive. For many many reasons, which most in this industry already know, LHR is expensive to operate from whether you are a budget carrier or not. Easy 'fans' somehow think that easyjet can make the same level of fares profitable from LHR as they do from luton. It really isn't so.
3. If you are a 'fan' of budget airlines always do check the fares on other airlines, as you will frequently find cheaper fares. If you only ever book a flight via one budget airlines website (because they say they are cheaper) without checking other flight prices then you are a fool. Their is no point in quoting fares here, because people from the respective marketing and sales departments will just quote cheaper fares on other routes. I recently got a quote from a so called'traditional'(BA) carrier which was almost £100 cheaper than Ryanair. If you really want a cheap flight check out the prices available from all the airlines (including budgets) serving the route, otherwise you will be ripped off. No one airline is always cheaper (despite what you may hear), always check out all prices (pretty easy on the net).
4. The reason why people have 'had a go' at certain budget airlines recently is because of the way in which they have treated staff, and the crass way in which they have used redundancy of many airlines ataff to gloat about 'success' (shareholder hype). Last night on TV, the staff on a cruise line were shown to be paid £1 per day, and relied on tips and very long hours to make a decent wage- there is at least one budget airline I could think of who would do this if given half the chance.
1. The difference in prices between , say easy and BA is not just due to a meal. This is a myth perpetuated by the marketing departments of some budget airlines. In the US (correct me if I'm wrong) southwest provide free coffee and snacks.
2. As for budget airlines taking slots at heathrow, this is simply a nice piece of spin. Belfast to LHR with a budget carrier would be expensive. For many many reasons, which most in this industry already know, LHR is expensive to operate from whether you are a budget carrier or not. Easy 'fans' somehow think that easyjet can make the same level of fares profitable from LHR as they do from luton. It really isn't so.
3. If you are a 'fan' of budget airlines always do check the fares on other airlines, as you will frequently find cheaper fares. If you only ever book a flight via one budget airlines website (because they say they are cheaper) without checking other flight prices then you are a fool. Their is no point in quoting fares here, because people from the respective marketing and sales departments will just quote cheaper fares on other routes. I recently got a quote from a so called'traditional'(BA) carrier which was almost £100 cheaper than Ryanair. If you really want a cheap flight check out the prices available from all the airlines (including budgets) serving the route, otherwise you will be ripped off. No one airline is always cheaper (despite what you may hear), always check out all prices (pretty easy on the net).
4. The reason why people have 'had a go' at certain budget airlines recently is because of the way in which they have treated staff, and the crass way in which they have used redundancy of many airlines ataff to gloat about 'success' (shareholder hype). Last night on TV, the staff on a cruise line were shown to be paid £1 per day, and relied on tips and very long hours to make a decent wage- there is at least one budget airline I could think of who would do this if given half the chance.
Just a point. Go aircraft have Flydras installed which monitors hundreds of parameters for the purpose of flight safety. We also fly BA procedures and BA SOP's.
Its a complete red herring to think safety is a cost saving in low cost aviation. The very first low cost carrier to have a major accident will be bust by the end of the week. Whereas BA or any major world player can suffer a hull loss without 100% of their customers choosing to fly with someone else next time.
This fact would make a ridulous basis for arguing that BA is unsafe to fly with.
Which is why its ridiculous to speculate that Ryan, easy or Go are less safe.
Cheers,
WWW
Its a complete red herring to think safety is a cost saving in low cost aviation. The very first low cost carrier to have a major accident will be bust by the end of the week. Whereas BA or any major world player can suffer a hull loss without 100% of their customers choosing to fly with someone else next time.
This fact would make a ridulous basis for arguing that BA is unsafe to fly with.
Which is why its ridiculous to speculate that Ryan, easy or Go are less safe.
Cheers,
WWW
Paxing All Over The World
WWW: For myself, i don't think that easy and GO are less safe but the problem with ANY new company is that it does not yet have 'corporate memory'.
An organisation - commercial - or a govt dept - is vulnerable to mistakes, whilst it builds up experience. It does not matter if the majority of employees in the new company are all experienced in the field (airline/govt) because, until they have worked together and made mistakes together, they will not build up a corporate memory. Each organisation functions in its own way and experience can be transferred but will have to be fitted into the new company.
This means someone saying, "Hang on - last time we did this it all stopped working the next day. What he have to do is ..."
That does not mean that low cost airlines are more likely to major failures and hull loss but, I suggest, start-up companies are more likely to have that kind of problem. I stress again - in any field.
An organisation - commercial - or a govt dept - is vulnerable to mistakes, whilst it builds up experience. It does not matter if the majority of employees in the new company are all experienced in the field (airline/govt) because, until they have worked together and made mistakes together, they will not build up a corporate memory. Each organisation functions in its own way and experience can be transferred but will have to be fitted into the new company.
This means someone saying, "Hang on - last time we did this it all stopped working the next day. What he have to do is ..."
That does not mean that low cost airlines are more likely to major failures and hull loss but, I suggest, start-up companies are more likely to have that kind of problem. I stress again - in any field.
A counter argument would be that old established airlines suffer from a culture of complacency.
Which would be equally spurious.
Cheers,
WWW
Which would be equally spurious.
Cheers,
WWW
Guest
Posts: n/a
Don't forget there's a world of difference between what airlines can get away with in the States (which has a remarkably poor standard of maintenance, as anyone that's ever inspected any aircraft coming in from a US carrier will be well aware of) and here in the UK where the CAA has a fearsome reputation.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irish Laddie - Bravo; very well thought out comment.
Let me think: has any large national carrier ever had an accident? Oh yes; well thats it then - must have been because they were too big and therefore lets not fly national carriers anymore. If it could happen to one, it could happen again.
As for the suggestion that eJ and others are less safe than other airlines; I can speak for eJ my current (and 4th) employer and that is rubbish. eJ trains to high standards and does not cut corners in the training department. In addition, pilots have been recruited from the whole spectrum of sources including very inexperienced F/O's from the ATP Academy through to DE Capts from major international scheduled operators.
I think someone mentioned eJ and other low cost carriers gloating at the poor fortune of others. I don't think they have gloated but they have put forward their case against subsidies etc which they are entitled to do.
Finally, even if there had been any gloating it would have only been a drop in the ocean compared to the 'sneering' they have received from Big Airways etc over the past years.
Let me think: has any large national carrier ever had an accident? Oh yes; well thats it then - must have been because they were too big and therefore lets not fly national carriers anymore. If it could happen to one, it could happen again.
As for the suggestion that eJ and others are less safe than other airlines; I can speak for eJ my current (and 4th) employer and that is rubbish. eJ trains to high standards and does not cut corners in the training department. In addition, pilots have been recruited from the whole spectrum of sources including very inexperienced F/O's from the ATP Academy through to DE Capts from major international scheduled operators.
I think someone mentioned eJ and other low cost carriers gloating at the poor fortune of others. I don't think they have gloated but they have put forward their case against subsidies etc which they are entitled to do.
Finally, even if there had been any gloating it would have only been a drop in the ocean compared to the 'sneering' they have received from Big Airways etc over the past years.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I see, Stelios et al. are geniuses, as they have made a mint flying cheaply to somewhere near to where they wanna go. Good on them, I fly them, and will do in future. It doen't mean I won't fly BA etc, depends where I'm going.
On a side line, I love Easy/Ryanair/GO from an ATC aspect anyway, they certainly know aircraft performance when you need it!!!!!!!!
On a side line, I love Easy/Ryanair/GO from an ATC aspect anyway, they certainly know aircraft performance when you need it!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fantasy Island
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just did a bit of research....
15NOV NCL LHR BA1325 0950 1100
18NOV LHR NCL BA1338 1930 2035
Total price if booked today - £106.30 (including £5 discount if you take an eticket).
The 'low cost' alternative.
15NOV NCL STN GO614 0800 0900
18NOV STN NCL GO611 1850 1945
Total price if booked today - £77.40
So BA mainline is a grand total of £29 more expensive.
I can see for many people this would be worth paying. For a start, you get into LHR with its myriad of connections - and the HeX may be overpriced but it's the best airport rail link of them all.
Of them all, the train is the most surprising - over £160 if you want to take an early morning (arrive in KX by 1100) train.
15NOV NCL LHR BA1325 0950 1100
18NOV LHR NCL BA1338 1930 2035
Total price if booked today - £106.30 (including £5 discount if you take an eticket).
The 'low cost' alternative.
15NOV NCL STN GO614 0800 0900
18NOV STN NCL GO611 1850 1945
Total price if booked today - £77.40
So BA mainline is a grand total of £29 more expensive.
I can see for many people this would be worth paying. For a start, you get into LHR with its myriad of connections - and the HeX may be overpriced but it's the best airport rail link of them all.
Of them all, the train is the most surprising - over £160 if you want to take an early morning (arrive in KX by 1100) train.