IDAWA From Italy, joined Aug 2004, 301 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5564 times:
I've flown some 7 segments with FR since 1999, and last weekend I first flew with U2.
Personally, being used to FR's low cost service, I was quite impressed by U2, since they seem to have a look even at the quality of their service!
While I credit Ryanair a lot for pioneering low-cost flying in Europe, and I will for sure be flying with them again, I think they are at the border of boasting themselves for treating you badly to get a low-cost service! I'm not saying that U2 provides you with free champagne during their flights, but at least they try to minimize the disadvantages from keeping the fare low.
I live near Turin, Italy, and I went to London for a weekend. The flight is operated both by FR and U2, and here's a comparison between the two services:
- The FR return flight on sunday was very early in the morning, so it was completely unuseful for me, the return should have been on monday morning (so, one more night at the hotel). U2 had a return flight on sunday evening!
- The airport: FR flies to STN, that is farther from London than LTN (U2 destination) is. Apart from the time for getting to the city, last time I went to STN in 2000 the train ticket for London was 22 pounds return, while easyBus service took me to a northern tube station for just 2 pounds return.
- FR wants you to be at the check-in two hours before departure, U2 allows you to be there till 30 minutes before.
- And finally, unlike FR, nobody bothered me while taking pictures of the U2 passenger cabin..
Again, I'm NOT saying that U2 is good and FR is evil. They're in fact both good carriers, and I'll enjoy flying both of them in the future. I'd just like to know if some of you has had the same impressions as me!
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5473 times:
Re: Again, I'm NOT saying that U2 is good and FR is evil.
I am !
Seriously, U2 have a good product, their scheduling is convenient and they fly to convenient airports. That, and their attempts at service recovery when things go pear-shaped and it's their fault, put them ahead of FR. For instance, I was due to fly ORY-NCE a few weeks back, but owing to a ground-handling strike, the flight was cancelled. Without any fuss or bother, the U2 staff on the ticket desk put me on a flight out of CDG that evening, no charge, I didn't even have to ask, they just rebooked me, which was great.
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19023 posts, RR: 53 Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5363 times:
"FR flies to STN, that is farther from London than LTN."
The difference is about 4 miles. Hardly anything important. The cost of getting to Heathrow (using the Heathrow Express) and back is £25 and takes about 15 minutes each way; the cost of getting to Gatwick (using the Gatwick Express) and back is £23.50 and takes about 30 minutes each way; the cost of getting to Stansted (using the Stansted Express) and back is £24.00 and takes about 45 minutes each way. In view of the difference in duration, the price to get to and from Stansted is better than the others. I would be more annoyed about paying £25 for a total of 30 minutes on a train.
FR wants you to be at the check-in two hours before departure, U2 allows you to be there till 30 minutes before."
No. You can check-in until 40 minutes before departure on FR, which goes someway in ensuring that its flights depart ontime, which is why U2's punctuality is always worse than FR's.
JPG - if FR cancels a flight, it will either a) put you onto its next available flight; or b) refund your money. What it won't do, just like U2, trains, buses, etc., is put you into a hotel and give you meals, etc. But FR VERY RARELY cancels a flight. From FR's T&Cs:
'All monies paid (including taxes, fees and charges) are non-refundable unless your flight is cancelled or significantly rescheduled by Ryanair in which case you are entitled to a travel credit or full refund of all monies paid.'
I ALWAYS get exactly what I want when I fly with FR - a friendly service; always cheap fares; superb punctuality; brilliant reliability; and a great, uneventful flight. I am 6', yet I find the legroom perfectly fine and the seats are always, in my opinion, comfortable. No frills, but then I don't need sub-standard food or drink, or a newspaper, anyway.
[Edited 2004-10-22 13:25:57]
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19023 posts, RR: 53 Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5323 times:
"The FR return flight on sunday was very early in the morning."
Odd, seeing FR flies STN-TRN twice-daily, even on Sundays! The flights leave STN at 0630 and 1840, and arrive into TRN at 0930 and 2140 respectively. From TRN to STN, the flights leave at 0955 and 2205, getting into STN at 1055 and 2305 respectively.
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
IDAWA From Italy, joined Aug 2004, 301 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5200 times:
strange thing about the London to Turin flight, when I looked for reservations on www.ryanair.com I wasn't shown that flight, but only the earlier one (departing at 0630 and arriving at 0930). I can't find an explaination on this, may you help me?
You are right about the check-in time, I've looked at the confirmation email of my last FR flight and it tells that the check-in closes 40 minutes before departure, even 30 in many airports. This was my own fault, sorry about.
About the airport in London, I'm happy I spent just 2 GBP return to get to a tube station, since you showed me that Luton is not only chaper than Stansted, but also than Heathrow and Gatwick!
Adriaticflight From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2004, 511 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5067 times:
I'm flown lots with both U2 and FR and they are very similar. Easyjet has the best website, FR wibsite is a mess.
U2 fly to 'major' airports like Amsterdam Schiphol and Copenhagen Kastrup. This is great and I use them 2/3times a year to fly to Holland. However this doesn't mean that the 'grass strips' as people sometimes call them are anyless useful. I have actually wanted/needed to go to Klagenfurt, Graz or Trieste. So in this respect FR are better as they have made it easier to get to some areas of our beautiful continent.
P.S. Have you seen the new Easyjet website. very nice.
Katanapilot From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 170 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4823 times:
i have to agree with all the differences.
i have a better time on easyjet. i think the staff are treated better by the company than ryanair. the pilots are always friendly sounding, and typically even crack a joke. ryanair staff has always seemed cold to me.
i still can't believe that i flew to hamburg(lubeck) with FR and when i got there, FR had a bus waiting to go to Hamburg which they charged 8 euros for. a little steep in my opinion...especially since they fly you into an airfield an hour out of hamburg.
Foxiboy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 208 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4789 times:
I much prefer U2 to FR and always have done not that i fly locost very often,i would never fly FR again i flew with them once and that was enough, besides EI was cheaper and the service better even now they have gone loco,besides any airline that treats its people they way FR does deserves all the shit it gets.
FJWH From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 968 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4710 times:
I've flown FR twice now and U2 4 times! I like them both and on the 20th of November my next U2 flight is planned.
But you have to be carefull with judging U2 & FR (or any other airline) if you have only like flown them one's or twice....! (the usual; cabincrew had a bad day etc etc)
FlightS in the next 3 months: MSP, PHX, MEM, NCE, TFS, BCN. All round trips from AMS
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 37 Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4653 times:
I prefer Easyjet by far. When I fly them, I almost feel like i'm flying a full-fare airline with premium service. The aircraft are clean, modern and airy, have a charter airline feel to them. Staff are friendly, apologetic if there is a delay and endeavour to help with anything that goes wrong, rather than give you the finger. They fly at more appropriate times to more appropriate airports and have a good in-flight magazine . You do feel they're trying to save on costs but it doesn't effect you that much, like asking for your magazine back if you don't want it, charging for food but not being extortionate, and offering a reasonable product.
IDAWA From Italy, joined Aug 2004, 301 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4560 times:
This is the most likely reason.
You're absoutely right with your statement that you can't judge an airline if you have flown it just twice. I've been told that sometimes even Singapore Airlines' service screws up! The aim of this thread was to see if the impressions I collected in these two flights were right or not
DouglasDC10 From Germany, joined Feb 2000, 168 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4538 times:
I flew both, U2 and FR and would give a slight advantage for Ryanair. Their service might be worse than that of Easyjet. But the chances of getting the low fares are better with Ryanair and FR's punctuality is better than EZY's. Similar to IDAWA, I do not want to say that EZY is evil and FR is good. It's just my first impression of both carriers.
Greenjet From Ireland, joined Aug 2001, 934 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4411 times:
I have flown Ryanair 55 times and never had a problem. I have flown easyJet 8 times and experienced several delays and a diversion (not the airline's fault I have to say). In terms of price and punctuality FR are better*. In terms of comfort and service EZY are better*. However to me price and punctuality are the two key criteria when flying so I prefer FR. I don't care about buying food onboard or receiving a smile from cabin crew - I just want to get from A to B. Some people say easyJet fly to more convenient airports. That may be the case for a lot of pax but a lot of the FR airports are convenient for people who previosuly had to travel long distances to avail of air services. For example people living in Trier are served by Hahn, people in Sandefjord are served by Torp, people in Nykoping can use Skavsta, etc. It doesn't really matter though which of the two is better - it's just nice to have a choice.
RedDragon From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 1135 posts, RR: 7 Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4356 times:
Most of the differences noted between Ryanair and easyJet stem from their differing strategies. Ryanair goes primarily after the leisure market, giving the rock-bottom fares that come from, amongst other things, using small regional airports. easyJet is more conscious of the business market, with more convenient frequencies to more central airports in exchange for slightly higher fares than Ryanair. Which suits you best often depends largely on whether you're a business or holiday passenger.