Pakistania From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1313 times:
has BA decided to drop the world images scheme? im not surprised they were quite bad except for the more subtle ones like "Waves of The City","Golden Kol...something","Delft Blue" and "Chelsea Rose" the Chinese one was also ok in the brighter ones i liked the South African scheme, what about the Union flag on the Concorde? does that also get replaced with the new flag? hope so, it will look different.
Udo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1237 times:
That was flying art, just impressive! I cannot believe how ignorant people are...
The whole BA fleet in that boring thing of red, blue and white now... What is it? The real Union Jack would look much better. That thing now looks like a colored napkin that has been catched by the aircraft's tail in the wind while take off...
Why not keep the Chelsea Rose, Benyhone or Grand Union? These are British designs, but still not 'British' enough, right? Nationalistic crap!
Greggj From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1197 times:
I'm in the minority..but I liked BA's world image. It made LHR and LGW a lot more interesting. I think it was creative and grossly underrated when compared to a lot of the 'cookie cutter' schemes out there......
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1183 times:
Loved the BA world-tail schemes.
It showed that the airline was hip, cool, and way ahead of the competition.
The new Union Jack colors looked good on the Concorde, but look dreadful on a 747. The airline napkin comparison had me in stitches.
It appears that complaining Thatcherites (yes, they still unfortunatley exist) clamored on and on about BA losing its identity as a "British" airline with quote, unquote "all those third world" designs on her tail. Yep, those old tories don't mince their words.
I agree that some were bad, but the vast majority were great !
Airmale From Botswana, joined Sep 2004, 368 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1162 times:
i dont like the new union flag on the 747's either and wish i get to see world images live before theyre gone, actually id heard that British airways were going to retain world images on 60% of their fleet, so why the change then? it would be good to see the Concorde in the new flag livery.
Bcl From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1139 times:
Personally, I am glad to see the demise of the World Images because not only were they awful (in my opinion) but they also blurred BA's image and its nationality. Every national airline should be proud of its heritage - something that is often achieved by many of the Asian airlines such as MH and SQ.
The St George design being applied to many of the BA aircraft is not only an excellent mix of national pride and heritage but it is also modern.
BA should be proud to be British and in adopting the World Images scheme, I beleive that they lost many passengers who were rightly upset about BA's perceived dropping of its Britishness.
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1138 times:
I thought Ayling got the sack for a bunch of reasons that had precious little to do with the aesthetics of the World tails. In fact, consumer opinion was almost mixed concerning the new tails, as is shown by the varying responses on here. I'm not sure I buy the muddled image argument, because BA are so well known and have such a rock-solid reputation, that they could paint their planes pea-green and still have passengers lining up to fly their planes.
BA had a slew of labor problems at around the time the World Tails logo was launched (at enormous expense, I may add). Minimal raises, declining stock options, more US based competition, the hiring of temps to process work, ageing 747-100s, etc. Plus, Branson's Media machine did some pretty slick work at portraying BA as a greedy behemoth that disobeyed every anti-trust law possible.
Still, the sight of a multitude of 747 and 777 tails at T-4 at LHR with the backdrop of a setting sun was always a glorious sight !
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1128 times:
In Britain, the vast majority of BA's customers were totally disgusted by the tails. Remember Margaret Thatcher?? (She placed a hankercheif over a "World Images" tail of a model plane, within a BA exhibit, and claimed "We fly the British flag, not this..."
Quite right too.
Sorry, the world images fiasco has a lot to do with Ayling's sacking. He made a BIG mistake which cost the airline many millions of ££, which could have been invested in far better things. The investors (including my Father), were horrified, and from that day on, "annoyed" was a gross understatement of how they felt about Ayling's decision.
You sighted other factors. Well I'm no expert, I'll leave that to someone else to explain.
The above opinion is shared by many BA investors, and ultimately, the majority of the UK public. I don't care about the foreign public, it's a BRITISH airline based in Britain. Full stop.
Texairport From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1113 times:
To answer Paksitania's question, BA is converting all World Image liveries to the "Stylised Union Jack" as seen on the Concorde.
I have a mixed opinion about the whole World Image debate. I think that BA should keep the British designs on their aircraft, either doing each a/c type in a single tail, the franchisees could use the World Image design that is homogenous to their country, Comair-South African design, Maersk-Danish, etc...
There were simply, IMHO, too many designs, but I do think this marketing idea was a little ahead of its time. Just think if the BA/KLM merger had gone through, would it be one airline and how would the Dutch like BA as their "national" airline?
RIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1785 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1097 times:
I'm a non-UK customer but I agree: it's a British airline based in Britain. Udo, I'm amazed by your comment as usually your messages deserve nothing but respect. But this "Nationalistic crap!" reminded me of "internationalists" in Latvia that couldn't get why the Latvian flag is no more a kind of Red Banner. Not a direct analogy, of course, just the same words...
P.S. Honestly, their words there were much more hot ...
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1090 times:
No offence to non-Brits at all; I'm simply saying that one of Britain's main airlines (or flag carrier, although Virgin can also claim to take that position-just look beneath their cockpit windows!), should really aim to act as a "Representative" or "Ambassador" to the country of origin.
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1082 times:
BA's proposed mergers do raise an interesting question concerning Airline identity. Clearly, a large number of the British public still consider BA to be a "british" national entity, answerable to the british public although technically BA is a private corporation. So, even though the British public may still consider BA to be their national airline (a debatable premise, but valid still the same), how will the airline market itself and the merged party to a pan-European public?
Would they go in for a bland euro scheme, change their name (not an impossible idea, given that BOAC used to be a brand name that gave way to BA pretty easily), go in for a NW-KLM type marketing scheme where each airline continues to propagate its brand name, or just subsume the other airline? If the last scenario occurred, I assume that citizen's of the other country would be furious. After all, nationalism to some degree does exist everywhere, especially in places you would least likely to expect it. I also believe that the now-dying/defunct BA-KLM merger would have been a clear cut case of ownership rather than a mere marketing-partial ownership paradigm that the KLM-NW scheme was based on.
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1074 times:
To be honest, I think foreigners don't think any differently of BA, whether they fly a British flag, or a Spanish one (pure example). In the end, people abroad will know BA as being either a good airline, or a bad one, regardless of the cartoons on the tails.
However, BA has to answer to it's investors demands (within reasonable limits), after all, it's their (the investor's) money; they should have a say on most aspects of running the airline, including the way the planes look.
Whilst I readily accept many foreigners, enthusiasts loved the schemes, I have met many of my father's collegues (American, British, South African, Australian businessmen), who preferred* the old "To Fly-To Serve" scheme.
In the end though, they didn't really care, so long as the service remained the same, and the seats continued to get larger
*In italics, because although they preferred, they didn't really care what the plane looked like, as long as they could see the words "British Airways", somewhere!
RIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1785 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1068 times:
Can tell nothing about British Rail as never tried it (except Heathrow Express which is probably the best train I ever saw) but I tried both NY and London subway. Should I comment the difference and say which of them is crap (not "load of crap", it may be understood wrong way, 777x... meaning it was a load of crap when you were trying it... shame on me , I know I'm offensive, I'm really sorry )?
P.S.There are plenty of things American say they "know how to do" so what? Especially as they really do know. Why can't British?
P.P.S. I live in NY, like the city very much as well as London that I visited only twice.
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1065 times:
RIX and Co;
I am ashamed to say this, but "British Rail" (or just British rail Co's in general), are a complete shambles, and an embarrassment, especially when foregners get on the train here.
They're stuck in the 80's. A typical Birmingham-London service takes THREE HOURS (sorry, unacceptable, look at France's TGV service between Paris and Lille, and Spain's AVE train, from Madrid-Seville; much larger distances, and done in 2hours!)
Our trains are: Slow, dirty, a complete and utter rip-off, hardly on-time,.....
777x From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1058 times:
Have to agree that the Heathrow express is great! Having lived in London for 4 years, it was a wonderful experience when that alternative to Heathrow arrived.
Yes, the title British Airways should appear somewhere highly prominent (otherwise who would know?) but I find the varied tails very becoming on the whole. IMHO it was just a few bad tail designs that caused the whole upset to begin with.
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (12 years 8 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1055 times:
I guess Picard has it right.
BA has to continue to answer to its share holders and its passengers up front who by and large tend to be male, anglo-saxon, and conservative. The World tails ethos was a bit too multi-culti and trendy for a lot of the share holders.
I'm not surprised they liked the old "to fly, to serve" coat of arms. When it first debuted, it was new and striking, yet formalistic in keeping with the 1980s.