Boeing74741R From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2007, 1184 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks ago) and read 20699 times:
I wanted to post in the MAN 45 thread, but due to inactivity it's been archived, so I thought I'd start a new thread...
My parents flew on LS875 to FAO this morning and after getting off the phone to them a while ago they told me that they were delayed by over an hour and from what I hear it wasn't a Jet2 aircraft. I understand Jet2 has/had a Strategic A320 (reg LX-STA) on lease based at MAN for the summer. Can someone please confirm whether this was the aircraft on that flight or something else, and if so whether it's allocated to LS875/876 or whether it was stepped up to do that due to the original aircraft going tech?
david_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7442 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 20063 times:
Quoting Ant72LBA (Reply 5): anyone know why it came into MAN as it was a long way north when it turned round?
Medical diversion. Helps having Wythenshawe Hospital nearby.
MAN pax numbers fell slighly last month - probably due only 1 bank holiday, June's figure may compensate having had a double bank holiday plus what appread to be a delayed half-term holiday for schools going off the lack of traffic last week. The moving annual total figures show roughly 5% growth and not 5% fall as they've published.
gkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24964 posts, RR: 56
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 19502 times:
May 2012 Provisional stats out:
Paris CDG +4%
Milan MXP +17% Not bad considering FR's entry onto Bergamo
Abu Dhabi +46%
New York JFK - 31%
Belfast City -13%
When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
david_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7442 posts, RR: 13
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 18368 times:
Quite why MAN didn't try to advise that if all 3 services ran at the same time at the same time of day then no-one would be happy I don't understand. There are appears to be enough of a market there for 1 airline to make go of it. Heard about the U2 service going a few days ago but when you look at the 1-way prices for MAD and HAM then there's no comparison. MAD prices are a lot higher than the HAM ones so unless they've managed to get a load of walk-on fares and corporate business to make the HAM route worthwhile, then i wonder why that route is not going instead. And before anyone says anything, I know that looking at the lead-in prices means nothing to the bean-counters but for a layman, it's a nice indication of how popular a route is.
boysteve From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 956 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 17740 times:
Quoting david_itl (Reply 15): Quite why MAN didn't try to advise that if all 3 services ran at the same time at the same time of day then no-one would be happy I don't understand.
Well I don't think it's MAN's place to give such commercial advice! Surely the airlines own marketing and research departments should have to come to this conclusion. I understand IB going for the route due to the IAG/BA link, and I can then understand one LCC trying, but whichever LCC announed the start up second is quite clearly nuts.
"We have scope to grow and we want Manchester to be seen as the key northern gateway hub. We don't want Manchester to be lost in the discussion and want a level playing field – we have an absolutely key role to play. We want to attract more long-haul passengers and are quite confident we will continue to develop".
What could be a possible help to furter long-haul growth may be a rising of APD for those passengers using LHR/LGW and a reduction for those outside the London area so that there is scope for some claw back of passengers form the regions who are inclined to only think of LHR/LGW for their travel needs, and a better marketing campaign i.e unlike the woeful lack of promotion for the soon-to-be-culled IB service. Perhaps using advertising boards dotted around LHR/LGW may be a start?
skipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 16539 times:
Quoting david_itl (Reply 21): "We have scope to grow and we want Manchester to be seen as the key northern gateway hub. We don't want Manchester to be lost in the discussion and want a level playing field – we have an absolutely key role to play. We want to attract more long-haul passengers and are quite confident we will continue to develop".
Agree absolutely, MAN is not jusy another airport, it is a massively strategic piece of infrastructure that does well but could do better of treated properly. I say that as a firm supporter of LHR as the UK's main hub, recognising that we should have primary and secondary airports, local and strategic if you will. I also don't think differential APD is in any way a good idea as parts of the UK are subsidised quite well enough thank you and it will actually mean EZY and FR being subsidised by minimum wage taxpayers trying to get by in the overpriced South East. Utterly brain dead IMHO.
mainMAN From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 2115 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 16428 times:
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 22): I say that as a firm supporter of LHR as the UK's main hub, recognising that we should have primary and secondary airports, local and strategic if you will.
Official status of any given airport is an irrelevance. It may well be the South East's main hub, but it certainly isn't to the thousands of Glaswegians transferring at DXB, EWR or AMS. Similarly to those travelling in the other direction.
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 22): I also don't think differential APD is in any way a good idea as parts of the UK are subsidised quite well enough thank you
Can you quantify this?
Quote: and it will actually mean EZY and FR being subsidised by minimum wage taxpayers trying to get by in the overpriced South East.
Direct taxation is a subsidy? It's starting to become clear that in a country with such vastly different levels of regional GDP, a ''one size fits all'' taxation system is going to be detrimental to the poorest region's ability to increase their contribution to the national pot, if you like. The gap isn't closing as it was supposed to, it's getting wider.
There's already consideration being given to differing regional pay levels, and also latterly regional benefits levels, so it follows that taxation should also be treated in exactly the same way.