kl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4994 posts, RR: 13 Posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5545 times:
This is to show all Ryanair bashers here on A.net that Ryanair continues to be the favorite lowcost airline in Europe.
Mind you, this is a story where in July 2012 8,72 million people flew with Ryanair because they wanted to, not because they are forced.
Again, I dont work for/with them, but i'm a passenger twho is extremely sattisfied with the FR product, no time consuming frills, just arrive at the gate , board and fly.For close to nothing.
Quote:
Ryanair Friday said it sold more seats on its aircraft in July than it has sold before in a single month, underlining the strength of the budget carrier's lower-cost business model as European flag carriers struggle with rising fuel costs and the effects of the economic downturn.
Ryanair, Europe's biggest discount carrier by passenger numbers, said it carried a record 8.72 million passengers in July, up 8% from 8.08 million in July 2011. For the year to date, Ryanair carried 77.7 million passengers, up 2.4% from the same period last year.
Ryanair and low-cost rival EasyJet continue to benefit from increasingly budget-conscious travelers down-trading to discount carriers from flag carriers which were finding it more difficult to get passengers at higher fares, Mr. Hyde said.
Full article: ( Somehow I cant get the link here, but its on www.wsj.com )
EMAman From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2008, 89 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5463 times:
I dont entirely agree with this post
FR have indeed carried all of these pax, but it is becoming increasingly the case that they have stifled out the competition and that little alternative exists on some routes
I disagree with 'close to nothing' - yes sometimes - but FR can also be extremely expensive, its called strategic pricing
I woud also disagree in part with 'just arrive at the gate, board and fly' - FR are known for having one of the most disorganised boarding procedures, and at many airports across europe the FR boarding gate is an absolute chaotic melee of people trying to get on first
Good business generally on the part of FR, but this is generally not good for the consumer
I too use FR from time to time and dont hate them and dont bash them to death like some, but feel that the OP, as do many posts, would benefit from taking a two-sided approach
kl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4994 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5418 times:
Quoting EMAman (Reply 1): I too use FR from time to time and dont hate them and dont bash them to death like some, but feel that the OP, as do many posts, would benefit from taking a two-sided approach
Quoting EMAman (Reply 1): FR are known for having one of the most disorganised boarding procedures, and at many airports across europe the FR boarding gate is an absolute chaotic melee of people trying to get on first
Well, it might be me, but at the airports i use a lot, BUD MAD BGY GRQ EIN and ACE the only disorganisation i saw was at MAD, but really at every gate for every airline. Boarding a KLM flight AMS - BUD which i sometime take too the boarding is way more chaotic and slower because everybody wants to board at the same time, with seatnumbers all mixed up, and ofcourse only boarding from the front.
Ofcourse FR can do it different or better, but there is a price attached. Which I personally dont want to pay and not need.
Regarding prices, yes, Ryanair can be expensive, but thats the whole fun of planning trips, follow prices, dates and routes daily till I find a nice cheap destination to spend a week or weekend.
ju068 From Serbia, joined Aug 2009, 2579 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5305 times:
Quoting kl911 (Reply 2): Regarding prices, yes, Ryanair can be expensive, but thats the whole fun of planning trips, follow prices, dates and routes daily till I find a nice cheap destination to spend a week or weekend.
That applies for almost every airline out there, not only for Ryanair. For example I can fly from Larnaca to Thessaloniki for 84 Euros if I ''follow prices, dates and routes''. So your argument is not really valid.
kl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4994 posts, RR: 13 Reply 4, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5275 times:
Quoting ju068 (Reply 3): That applies for almost every airline out there, not only for Ryanair. For example I can fly from Larnaca to Thessaloniki for 84 Euros if I ''follow prices, dates and routes''. So your argument is not really valid.
Why not? FR is a leisure - holiday airline. So destinations are flexible as dates often as well.
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5918 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5100 times:
Quoting EMAman (Reply 1): FR have indeed carried all of these pax, but it is becoming increasingly the case that they have stifled out the competition and that little alternative exists on some routes
Somewhat of a surprize since most politicians and regulators across the EU have a history of "getting on" FR, wonder how the were able to run the competition off without breaking any laws / rules....
EMAman From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2008, 89 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5002 times:
Quoting ju068 (Reply 5):
My point is that if you are flexible with dates and destinations then you can find cheap flights on any airline, not just Ryanair.
Yes exxactly. I wasnt saying that FR are never cheap, you can get bargains, but you can on all airlines.
tonyban From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 314 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4975 times:
Did they also hit a record of trying to flog smokeless cigarettes, lottery tickets, bus passes, magazines, newspapers, perfumes and (enter your item here).
What about the silly prerecorded 'Another on-time flight' announcement they play at each landing. Must be some record there too....
xjramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2352 posts, RR: 52 Reply 10, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4955 times:
Added capacity generally means bigger numbers. Just because it's the cheapest, and is how most people buy, doesn't mean it's a favourite among passengers. It means people needed to move from point a to point b at the cheapest available rate and it just happened to be FR.
peterinlisbon From Portugal, joined Jan 2006, 237 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4857 times:
I have to travel from Marrakesh to my brother's wedding in Cyprus this September. The return trip, outbound via Seville and Milan and back via Thessaloniki and Rome cost me 200€ (100€ each way) with Ryanair. Just to show what the competition is offering - TAP via Lisbon and Athens is 800€ and BA from Casablanca via LHR is 1200€ - ridiculous!!! What the hell are these companies thinking pricing at these levels. It looks like they've given up, that they don't even want to try to offer a decent fare that someone might actually buy. Are they surpised when people choose instead to fly with Ryanair? Sure, I'd prefer to have an assigned seat, a nice sandwhich and some tea or coffee, but it's not worth an extra 600-1000€. Of course, with RY the thing to watch out for is the extra fees - if I checked in one bag, I would pay 20€ x 6 = 120€ more.
peterinlisbon From Portugal, joined Jan 2006, 237 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4831 times:
Actually, I just checked BA's website and it costs 1800€ return for Marrakesh - Paphos in September (compared to under 200€ on Ryanair), and I could probably make the round trip for under 100€ if I needed to go in October via Milan / Rome. So of course I love Ryanair (for their prices, not their service). I'd rather fly BA and have a nice coffee and a more relaxing flight, but 1800€ - what's wrong with them????
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3160 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (10 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4773 times:
Quoting kl911 (Thread starter): Ryanair Friday said it sold more seats on its aircraft in July than it has sold before in a single month, underlining the strength of the budget carrier's lower-cost business model as European flag carriers struggle with rising fuel costs and the effects of the economic downturn.
Ryanair doesn't have a low-cost business model, it has a "take public money" business model. Its profits are less than the sum total of tax-breaks and subsidies it receives from airports and local governments to land at their doorstop.
No subsidies = no profit
Between the recession and traffic numbers not near what Ryanair promised, the number of airports willing to pay is declining, so I'd say Ryanair's ingenuous business model has a limited shelf life.
larspl From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 468 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4538 times:
Dear KL911
Quoting kl911 (Thread starter): Again, I dont work for/with them, but i'm a passenger twho is extremely sattisfied with the FR product, no time consuming frills, just arrive at the gate , board and fly.For close to nothing.
Your satisfaction will drop as soon as you are one of the passengers on the recent FR flight where passengers pointed out to the cabin crew who then told the captain he just HIT another aircraft. There after the captain, having lots of experience of not hitting an aircraft of course, decided to fly without investigating.
Mistakes can happen on every airline.. At my airline i am encouraged to investigate and/or satisfy passengers with concerns. Ryanair takes the passengers and makes the profit because there is almost no room to make up for delay.
The low fares have to come from somewhere; don't forget that.
mikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4158 times:
Quoting bestwestern (Reply 22): This is an aviation forum. Keep your politics to non-aviation sites.
With respect you did say I was anti-European. Seeing as I quite happily support the continent by driving BMW's and Mercedes', drinking Chassagne-Montrachet and holidaying on the Amalfi coast.......I took offence. I love Europe, all of it.....I just don't want it running my patch of it.
And no I'm not rich or a snob I just like quality 'and' value. Frankly I'd rather not fly than do so with a company who's management treat their customers with such contempt.
Quoting bestwestern (Reply 22): And your opinion is WRONG. Your opinion that the only people who fly Ryanair are, and I quote "European nomad variety or yobs and tarts on stag/hen nights" is inaccurate, wrong and idiotic, but if thats your opinion, so be it.
It is.
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6351 posts, RR: 23 Reply 18, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4144 times:
Quoting EMAman (Reply 8): Yes exxactly. I wasnt saying that FR are never cheap, you can get bargains, but you can on all airlines.
Well, yes - but not that cheap. Flying twice a month for nearly three years, my average fare with a little forward planning worked out around forty pounds - and that incorporates higher fares around Christmas etc. Such a low price would not be achievable with pretty much any other airline.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
eurowings From UK - England, joined Sep 2011, 298 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4128 times:
I am neutral towards FR firstly and they are not my preferred choice of carrier but...
Quoting larspl (Reply 15): At my airline i am encouraged to investigate and/or satisfy passengers with concerns. Ryanair takes the passengers and makes the profit because there is almost no room to make up for delay.
The low fares have to come from somewhere; don't forget that.
FR obviously disagreed with the actions of the captain in that case since she faced disciplinary proceedings resulting in demotion and eventually she left the company. I have been on several FR flights which were delayed because of technical problems.
As an aside, the incident has also improved the training given to crews about the importance of good communication between cabin crews and pilots.
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 18): Financially challenged people of the new European nomad variety or yobs and tarts on stag/hen nights lured by the prospect of a cheap ticket who inadvertently more often than not get ripped off and treated like dirt to boot.
That is my summary of FR.
Well, it's a load of rubbish and demonstrates that you know very little about LCCs. FR carried almost 50% more passengers than BA/IB combined did last year, you really think that all of them fit into the above categories?
The truth is that the demographics of passengers on FR flights depends almost entirely on the origin and destination of the flight. FR has an extremely diverse network of routes, such as core city routes (e.g. LGW - DUB, CIA - MAD, STN - SXF), traditional leisure routes (e.g. EDI - AGP, BRE - TFS), premium leisure routes (e.g. BRS - BZR, BLL - CCF), 'EU migrant labour routes' (e.g. LTN - BZG, BGY - CND), domestic 'commuter routes' (e.g. FAO - OPO, BCN - SDR), immigrant/VFR routes (MRS - TNG, NRN - LPP). The routes can be used by all different types of travellers, but those are just some of the categories of flights I'd identify.
Contrary to popular belief, they do actually think about their routes and while some of them seem strange at first glance, there is usually a market out there. So, aside from all the rest, I think part of their success is actually offering routes which suit the needs of markets which are not already catered for.
mikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4101 times:
Quoting eurowings (Reply 21): Well, it's a load of rubbish and demonstrates that you know very little about LCCs. FR carried almost 50% more passengers than BA/IB combined did last year, you really think that all of them fit into the above categories?
It's just my opinion.
I'm going to Venice on the 20th for a week with a friend.. I've just checked the FR fare and it's £25.00 more expensive than BA.
(Believe it or not I like to travel with more than 1 spare pair of knickers.)
Considering the added benefits of flying BA.....far better located airports, couple of 'free' drinks etc etc
FR are taking the pi** !!
[Edited 2012-08-04 05:24:10]
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
Well, it could be construed as quite an insulting opinion to say that all FR passengers are penniless and/or are yobs and tarts?
I am not sure what the wealthy contingent of second home owners in France would make of it either (e.g. David Dimbleby). They make up a substantial amount of traffic on the FR routes between the UK and provincial France.
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 22): I'm going to Venice on the 20th for a week with a friend.. I've just checked the FR fare and it's £25.00 more expensive than BA.
Considering the added benefits of flying BA.....far better located airports, couple of 'free' drinks etc etc
FR are taking the pi** !!
In your specific circumstances, BA may be cheaper and more convenient. That's not going to be the case for many though, for example, I don't live anywhere near LHR or LCY for a start. Not everyone is travelling city to city and that's part of FR's success, offering direct services where the legacies won't (see examples listed in my post above).
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6351 posts, RR: 23 Reply 22, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4035 times:
Quoting eurowings (Reply 23):
Well, it could be construed as quite an insulting opinion to say that all FR passengers are penniless and/or are yobs and tarts?
Any such assertion would also just be totally incorrect. Working at STN, it is abundantly clear that all cross-sections of society opt to fly Ryanair. Any fool could see that within half an hour of working there. If your only experience of flying FR is a couple of times on STN-MJV for example then I can see how one might form that opinion, but the diversity of routes and people carried just don't support such a silly claim.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18883 posts, RR: 54 Reply 23, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4143 times:
Frankly, it is pointless arguing with mikey72.
Anyway, I think most need to simply consider FR's average one-way fare including ancillaries: €49.90. At the average €-£ exchange rate in 2011 of around 1.15, this was about £43.40. In contrast, and for the same period, EZY's average one-way fare was £63.34, an increase of 46%. Alas, it wouldn't be prudent to compare average fares with BA given it has multiple classes and long-haul flights. As such, I will briefly compare with some other EU LCCs for which I have easily accessible data. Norwegian's average one-way was around £71 while Vueling's was about £61.05. This means Norwegian is on average 63.6% more expensive than FR, while Vueling is around 40.7% more. While merely averages, you may perceive the differentials to be great or not that much.
For clarity, the average sector lengths for those 4 are:
FR: 1170km
EZY: 1110km
DY: 1648km
VY: 867km
Don't get me wrong: the purpose isn't to suggest EZY, DY, or VY are expensive or anything, but simply to compare.
Note: all based on data from 2011 annual reports. All include ancillaries.
[Edited 2012-08-04 06:03:02]
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
U2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 304 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4111 times:
Quoting larspl (Reply 15): The low fares have to come from somewhere; don't forget that.
Yeah, they do, but it's certainly not through compromising safety. If I were you I'd have a look at Ryanair's safety record before making uninformed and misleading statements.
ClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4528 posts, RR: 25 Reply 25, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4164 times:
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 25): Note: all based on data from 2011 annual reports. All include ancillaries.
Great post!
I always find it interesting that people are so rabidly anti-Ryanair.I guess all of this comes from the innovations they introduced into the European aviation market. The fact that they are an extremely successful airline, that has connected many cities that previously would never have been served, can never be taken away from them.
I'm very interested to see what the future holds for the airline!
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
mikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2 Reply 26, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4135 times:
Quoting eurowings (Reply 23): Well, it could be construed as quite an insulting opinion to say that all FR passengers are penniless and/or are yobs and tarts?
I didn't say they were 'penniless' and I didn't say they were 'all' yobs and tarts.
I am not sure what the wealthy contingent of second home owners in France would make of it either (e.g. David Dimbleby). They make up a substantial amount of traffic on the FR routes between the UK and provincial France.
Yes and who was it that poured scorn on these people (with such venom) who complain about FR when all of a sudden the plug gets pulled on their 'supposedly' cheap flight to their obscurely located villas ?
Quoting eurowings (Reply 23): In your specific circumstances, BA may be cheaper and more convenient. That's not going to be the case for many though, for example, I don't live anywhere near LHR or LCY for a start. Not everyone is travelling city to city and that's part of FR's success, offering direct services where the legacies won't (see examples listed in my post above).
That's all very well and good but I'm afraid I (and many people I know) just 'will not' fly with an airline who's management openly talk about their customers in the way that FR's managament do.
At least have the guts to stand by and support Michael O'Leary and his attitude.
Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 27): I always find it interesting that people are so rabidly anti-Ryanair.I guess all of this comes from the innovations they introduced into the European aviation market. The fact that they are an extremely successful airline, that has connected many cities that previously would never have been served, can never be taken away from them.
Talk about a bum rap.
The Americans got WN....we got FR.
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18883 posts, RR: 54 Reply 27, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4142 times:
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 28): The Americans got WN....we got FR.
Average-fare-wise, Europeans have it better: WN's average one-way fare in FY2011 was $150.59, or, and after converting from 0.62 average for the year, around £93.37. Remember: FR's average was £43.30 including ancillaries, meaning WN's average one-way fare was 115.6% higher than FR's. This is compounded when you consider FR's average sector length (1,170km) is longer than WN's (1,093km).
In terms of EZY, its average one-way fare was £63.34 - meaning WN is 47.4% higher.
Again, this is not mean to say one is cheap, one expensive, or whatever. It is simply for average fare comparison. You may draw your own conclusions. And, again, data from their 2011 annual reports.
[Edited 2012-08-04 06:56:50]
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
eurowings From UK - England, joined Sep 2011, 298 posts, RR: 0 Reply 28, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4100 times:
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 28): That's all very well and good but I'm afraid I (and many people I know) just 'will not' fly with an airline who's management openly talk about their customers in the way that FR's managament do.
At least have the guts to stand by and support Michael O'Leary and his attitude.
That's fine and I have no issue with that. No one is forced to fly with FR, you either accept the package or you don't. However, others don't feel the same way and see that FR meets their requirements.
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 28): The Americans got WN....we got FR.
What about easyJet and the rest? It's hardly a case of legacies versus FR in Europe, is it? Some commentators on here forget that FR isn't the only "low cost" player in this industry!
BE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0 Reply 30, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4013 times:
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 14): Its profits are less than the sum total of tax-breaks and subsidies it receives from airports and local governments to land at their doorstop
Interesting observation for sure - but it's usually not possible to tie the profits to just one part of the business. This is like the discussions about "Airlines make $Billions in Fees" when it is really that they just have a new price model - if you dug deeply through it they made a few $million at most (if anything) just because of the fees as the old price model would have had about the same revenue (the rest is marketing and perception - if they stayed with the old model their competition would have been perceived to be less expensive even if they were not. Similarly, FR profits are not 1:1 related to the 'breaks'.
Regardless, the best thing about the FR business model with respect to their station selection process is that it keeps competitive pressure on the Governments and Airports to control costs - not just at the ones chasing FR, but at the 'main' airports in those markets that FR is serving, since if the difference in fees gets too high, other airlines could follow them (especially to the places where FR has proven that the market will accept the alternative airport).
Without this sort of pressure, there is absolutely no incentive for the ariport fees to be kept low...so they don't even try to. New terminals are built that sit underused for years, or which are not even wanted by the airlines (since they know it will mean higher fees), and those terminals are architectural wonders (ie $$$$) instead of being focussed on cost of construction and operations / maintenance. Yes, I like a nice terminal, but is it really worth the $25 "Airport Improvement Fee" that I paid to sit in it? A $5 or $10 building might have have worked too. Landing fees, AIF, Taxi fees, high priced water due to the concession fees - all with no competition - other than when somone like FR manages to find a way to create competition where none existed - and usually among local govenrments to boot!
So, economically, even if you would 'never' fly FR, you probably owe them a lot more than you think for the benefits you receive from their mere existence - they are keeping a lot of pressure on the fees and taxes of the airports you use - and that may be even more of an effect on your airfare than the competition they provide to other airlines!
U2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 304 posts, RR: 0 Reply 31, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3993 times:
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 14): Its profits are less than the sum total of tax-breaks and subsidies it receives from airports and local governments to land at their doorstop.
I'm not saying that this isn't true, I'm just a little dubious, do you have any evidence?
bestwestern From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6510 posts, RR: 58 Reply 32, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3975 times:
Quoting BE77 (Reply 32): So, economically, even if you would 'never' fly FR, you probably owe them a lot more than you think for the benefits you receive from their mere existence
I agree 100%. The service level of the Irish home carrier (EI) has improved dramatically as they have to justify every Euro they charge more than Ryanair. Small things, like an edible breakfast (buy on board), punctuality, flight timing, fleet choice have all improved thanks to Ryanair.
OK, so you don't get a free Gin and Tonic onboard - but you have daily flights when before you had weekly with a good value fare to match.
Carriers around europe have to adapt to survive the arrival of Ryanair. Aer Lingus has done so, successfully and is now a stronger, better airline. Companies that ignore the change in European air travel will not survive. What will happen with Iberia over the next two years will be a carbon copy of what happened in Aer Lingus. The IAG ceo was the ceo of Aer Lingus when the company decided to survive and grow, rather than moan about the boys in Blue.
krisyyz From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1576 posts, RR: 0 Reply 33, posted (10 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3690 times:
Quoting kl911 (Thread starter): This is to show all Ryanair bashers here on A.net that Ryanair continues to be the favorite lowcost airline in Europe.
I would respectfully disagree with FR being the "favourite" LCC in Europe , they are the biggest and most travelled, but that is because of very low fares, not passenger satisfaction. Obviously the cost of the ticket plays a big part in customer satisfaction, but from what I have read, FR is not known for great service but for low fares. You get what you pay for theory.
Their success is undeniable and their business strategy has changed the face of aviation in Europe, there is no doubt about that. My only beef with FR is based on second hand information regarding the way FR handled employee relations. So I would definitely like to hear both sides of the argument. Is it true that FR makes their pilots pay for water? Or that FR often skips on the required background checks on new hires? I also saw a BBC documentary that had a pilot complaining about only having 20 minutes to prepare up to 6 flight plans for the day.
Anyone know the stats on staff retention at FR vs. other LCC's in Europe?
cuban8 From Kiribati, joined Sep 2009, 213 posts, RR: 0 Reply 34, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3392 times:
Ryanair's success when it comes to being a profitable company is unquestionable. They have a business model that works and they keep making more money when a lot of companies are bleeding money in Europe. But I don't completely agree with this:
Quoting BE77 (Reply 32): So, economically, even if you would 'never' fly FR, you probably owe them a lot more than you think for the benefits you receive from their mere existence - they are keeping a lot of pressure on the fees and taxes of the airports you use - and that may be even more of an effect on your airfare than the competition they provide to other airlines!
I do agree that Ryanair has changed a few things for the better when it comes to new destination, lower fees and a cheaper ways of travelling. On the other hand, I think they have made a lot of things worse for aviation. You may say I should not live in the past, but the aviation enthusiast in me thinks that Ryanair has made aviation boring, stressful and less exciting.
I like to be able not to worry about things like how much luggage I have, if I paid for a drink or not, if my boarding-pass is with me or not. I also want to enjoy nice airports with duty-free, shops, restaurants and bars and not being pushed around during boarding. The last thing I want starting a vacation or business trip is stress, and on that part Ryanair is a very bad option.
The second things that Ryanair has made worse is this:
Quoting krisyyz (Reply 35): My only beef with FR is based on second hand information regarding the way FR handled employee relations. So I would definitely like to hear both sides of the argument. Is it true that FR makes their pilots pay for water? Or that FR often skips on the required background checks on new hires? I also saw a BBC documentary that had a pilot complaining about only having 20 minutes to prepare up to 6 flight plans for the day.
Even if you need to take the FR bashing with a pinch of salt, there is no smoke without fire. Ryanair is constantly pushing the limits with its crew when it comes to rest time, turn-arounds, flight limitations and contracts in general. As long as there is a surplus of pilots and cabin-crew and no union to defend their rights, things will go on like this and will affect other airlines who tries to follow suit.
I know several training captains in Ryanair who says that the flight training is very good but that you can not train away stress coming from tight schedule (pilot fatigue) and short turn-arounds (increased risk of stress and mistakes). Ryanair still remains an airline with no fatal accidents. The question that remains is if they can keep it that way while trying to find ways to be more efficient when it comes to reducing cost. Everything has a limit.....
ju068 From Serbia, joined Aug 2009, 2579 posts, RR: 6 Reply 36, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3364 times:
Quoting krisyyz (Reply 35): Is it true that FR makes their pilots pay for water? Or that FR often skips on the required background checks on new hires?
A Hungarian friend of mine went for a job interview and after a short conversation they told him that he could start his training if he could come up with €5.000. Then they told him if he doesn't have the money he could pay it off through work, I guess they would deduct it from him salary.
He said the whole process was very unprofessional and the office looked like a storage room. He did not have to provide any kind of special documents. I do not know if this is a norm or the way they do it in Hungary.
adg737800 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2008, 47 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3332 times:
I'm no fan of FR, but I've used them a number of times in the past. I'm not keen on the unassigned seating and the airports they fly to and from are, on the whole, just are not convenient for me. It's quicker, easier and cheaper for me to get to LCY and LHR rather than STN, LTN of LGW. However, when I have flown with FR I've always been impressed by the punctuality and the standard of the product. FR do what they say on the tin - nothing more, nothing less! And for anyone thinking FR's passenger base is as described earlier, take a flight with them between STN and FKB. When I did earlier this year, the majority of passengers were business people in suits and ties!
As for subsidies, isn't it the job of any company's management in any sector to secure the best deal possible for its shareholders? If a city or region is willing to pay a subsidy, I see that as fair and reasonable. This has been going on for years with airports offering incentives to airlines - FR have just exploited it and fair play to them for doing that!
Next flights: LCY-GVA (LX); LCY-AGP (BA); LHR-HKG (BA- A380!!!)
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18883 posts, RR: 54 Reply 38, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3247 times:
Of course FR has a product. Every airline does. Or, more specifically, a service-price offer or value proposition. For FR, it is, of course, based upon simplification and the fundamental elements of air transport and low average fares.
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
vfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 3645 posts, RR: 5 Reply 39, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2866 times:
Quoting kl911 (Thread starter): Ryanair Friday said it sold more seats on its aircraft in July than it has sold before in a single month, underlining the strength of the budget carrier's lower-cost business model as European flag carriers struggle with rising fuel costs and the effects of the economic downturn.
Ryanair, Europe's biggest discount carrier by passenger numbers, said it carried a record 8.72 million passengers in July, up 8% from 8.08 million in July 2011. For the year to date, Ryanair carried 77.7 million passengers, up 2.4% from the same period last year
IIRC, Ryanair never talks about bums on seats, but only about tickets sold. So is this about sold tickets or transported passengers?
BE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0 Reply 40, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2841 times:
Quoting kl911 (Reply 47): Which is true and very sad, there are quite a few rich folks on here who would like to keep the right to be able to fly to themselves and who dont understand that it is no different from taking a 2 hour train or bus journey anymore. Just get us from A to B for the lowest poss price please, thats all we want.
Which really makes me crack up at the FR bashers. Yes, there is a market for some of the premium services, but almost all of the succesful (profitable) airlines are safely providing cheap transportation from A to B. Some of those succesful 'cheap' flights also include significant high end perq's for those willing to pay, EK for example. But, there is a large group of airlines that 'just - don't - get - it' and go broke.
A lot of the things that FR and others do not offer for 'free' are things that a lot of customers would forego, if it meant they could actually afford the flight. Another contingent would take more flights if they didn't have all the extra costs to pay for stuff they don't need. This applies to the airlines, and to the airports and govenrments who keep adding expensive things that some people don't need (it's not just at airports, but that's out of A.net's realm).
So for kl911, when I am in an airliner for work, the people that hire me expect me to show up on time and ready to go, so that takes me out of the lowest price group when working.
On my flights for personal reasons, I move a long way down market, and am looking for price + a few very select options that I value (and am willing to pay for) but there are a LOT of things in most airlines and airports that I really don't want to pay for, but have to in my ticket. At least the FR pricing approach is much more transparent (not perfect, but better).
kl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4994 posts, RR: 13 Reply 41, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2816 times:
Quoting BE77 (Reply 42): Every time I see this line in A.net, I wonder if anyone has ever studied the city pair economics of flights from A to B, say from SEA to TLS.
Every segment on a LCC is a seperate ticket, so yes, a journey can involve 3 or 4x a flight from A to B
I can forgive Sir Richard Branson for his verbal attacks in the past on airlines that have built up over 9 decades the very industry he makes so much money from because at least he is the head of a class outfit.
Unfortunately I cannot say the same for the head of FR.
Combine that with the contempt they regularly display to their customers and I won't be partaking of their services anytime soon.
(not only that I will have no need to travel from the middle of nowhere to the middle of nowhere in the near future)
Doing it with some style and 'grace'....that would have been the real trick.
That said they do get you from A to B and they do make a reasonable profit....even if they do have to carry 80,000,000 passengers a year to do it and flog them everything bar the kitchen sink at a premium.
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
U2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 304 posts, RR: 0 Reply 43, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2668 times:
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 44): he makes so much money from because at least he is the head of a class outfit.
Makes so much money on? Or looses so much money on? VS are certainly not a class outfit and he doesn't own any of the other Virgin branded Airlines.
The difference between the two is that O' Leary actually knows whats he's talking about. Behind the publicity stunts is a man that has built a very successful Airline. The market is there and he uses that to his advantage brilliantly. FR has no direct competitor and they have achieved that through ruthlessly destroying the competition, airlines are businesses and they are designed to make money. FR print money.
VS on the other hand, well, they are outclassed by every single one of their competitors.
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18883 posts, RR: 54 Reply 44, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2609 times:
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 44): they do make a reasonable profit
To be accurate and fair, FR earned the world's 7th highest net profit in 2011, per the July 2012 edition of ATW. They were also the highest-earning European airline and the top-performing LCC. The results for the top-10 were:
1) JL: $2,349 million
2) AC: $1,071 million
3) CZ: $957 million
4) DL: $854 million
5) UA: $840 million
6) MU: $722 million
7) FR: $709 million
8) CX: $707 million
9) IAG: $695 million
10) SU: $491 million
To me, that is more than "reasonable profit" for an industry renowed for fickle and dire financial performance. That FR consistently achieves decent operating results...
(The next LCC was EZY in 13th with $397 million followed by AK in 18th with $277 million, WN in 22nd with $178 million, and WS in 24th with $146 million.)
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
mikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2 Reply 45, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2595 times:
Quoting U2380 (Reply 45): The difference between the two is that O' Leary actually knows whats he's talking about
I would imagine that building up a multi aircraft type fleet operating in a successful intercontinental sheduled airline for nigh on 30 years requires the builder to know a little bit about what they are talking about ?
As opposed to say a short-haul single aircraft type LCC whose only real competition is the short-haul networks of legacy carriers bogged down by massive restructuring and increased competition to their long-haul networks ?
My advice to FR would be....make hay whilst the sun shines....because the oil price is only going in one direction as will the strength of the (consolidating) legacies.
[Edited 2012-08-05 11:49:02]
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
I was thinking a direct flight in a 787 or 350, taking full advantage of the new point to point economics of the new generation.
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 46): To me, that is more than "reasonable profit" for an industry renowed for fickle and dire financial performance
Cool - adding facts to the thread!
The numbers do make FR look pretty good, relatively speaking.
I'm glad you put in the caveat pointing out that the industry sucks financially...given the capital, risk, and revenues, there is nothing "reasonable" about the profits - they are pretty pathetic compared to other industries if you ignore year to year numbers and look at 10 year periods!
If they ever invent a time machine, the Airline Investment Industry is going use it to go back and kneecap the Wright Brothers in order to save themselves $trillions.
CPHFF From Sweden, joined Aug 2011, 121 posts, RR: 0 Reply 47, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2476 times:
Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 27): I always find it interesting that people are so rabidly anti-Ryanair.I guess all of this comes from the innovations they introduced into the European aviation market. The fact that they are an extremely successful airline, that has connected many cities that previously would never have been served, can never be taken away from them.
THANK YOU! You are absolutely correct. Most people on here "hate FR", probably mostly due to their innovative business model and their "false advertising", such as Frankfurt (Hahn). How ever, I'm so tired of people expecting fantastic service and "legacy" pirks on FR. For gods sake, what do you expect from a € 99 round trip from Stanstead to Poland. Hello?
I do fly FR on occation, but only when absolutely needed. As I live 25min from CPH, I mostly go SK, LH or OS. It takes very advanced planning to get any round trip flights with *A for under € 200 in EU, and then you get the same crappy arrival/departure times as FR any way. The only difference is that you end up at an airport closer to where you're actually going.
I don't mind the F/A's trying to sell lottery tickets or other stuff. It's not like they're forcing them on you. Say no..
Detroit is bankrupt. Don't forget to thank UAW folks!
eurowings From UK - England, joined Sep 2011, 298 posts, RR: 0 Reply 48, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2467 times:
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 47): As opposed to say a short-haul single aircraft type LCC whose only real competition is the short-haul networks of legacy carriers bogged down by massive restructuring and increased competition to their long-haul networks ?
Ryanair's only real competition is from legacies? I'd strongly dispute that, take a trip to the likes of STN, BRS, EMA, LPL, LBA e.t.c and you can see easily that's not the case. These are places where legacies have limited or no presence. Short-haul out of the UK excluding LHR and LCY is dominated by LCCs.
in the UK market, they compete directly or indirectly with other LCCs such as easyJet (largest British carrier), Monarch, Jet2 and Flybe. Even the charters. All over Europe, they face direct and indirect competition from the likes of Norwegian, Vueling, Wizzair, Transavia, Germanwings e.t.c
European aviation isn't a two horse race between FR and the legacies, although from reading some threads you'd think it was...
adg737800 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2008, 47 posts, RR: 0 Reply 49, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2386 times:
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 47): I would imagine that building up a multi aircraft type fleet operating in a successful intercontinental sheduled airline for nigh on 30 years requires the builder to know a little bit about what they are talking about ?
That would be the "successful intercontinental airline" that last year lost £80m (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19111376)...
I'm not a fan of FR (Exec Club Silver here!) but credit where it's due. O'Leary is a genius and visionary. He saw where the market was going and exploited it seven years or so before his competitors.
Next flights: LCY-GVA (LX); LCY-AGP (BA); LHR-HKG (BA- A380!!!)
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3160 posts, RR: 1 Reply 50, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2350 times:
Quoting BE77 (Reply 32): Interesting observation for sure - but it's usually not possible to tie the profits to just one part of the business.
When any business receives more in subsidies than it makes in profit, it is always good to question what would happen to the profits if the subsidies were eliminated or severely cut. In essence, local and regional governments are paying for a portion of passengers' tickets. I dare say that if passengers were willing to pay more to cover the share that subsidies take care of today, Ryanair would have figured that already and would have raised fares while continuing to collect their subsidies to earn an even bigger profit.
I think it is unlikely that Ryanair might be able to cut costs from their barebone operation to make up for lost subsidies and that shareholders will accept a lower profit, or none at all, without demanding that management does react, but I think they are left with few options:
a) raise fares, but as I assume above, it can't be done on a scale sufficient to replace lost subsidies, so at best profit will diminish, at worse it will turn into a loss;
b) cut routes that are no longer profitable without subsidies, but their disappearance will itself also negatively affect profit.
Quoting adg737800 (Reply 39): As for subsidies, isn't it the job of any company's management in any sector to secure the best deal possible for its shareholders? If a city or region is willing to pay a subsidy, I see that as fair and reasonable.
I don't begrudge Ryanair for getting the best deal they can, but I do believe that the scale of the subsidies they receive is such that it has to be part of the business plan, and not an after-thought alternative revenue stream. I further believe that these subsidies are coming to an end, be it because the recession is thinning the budgets of cities and regions these subsidies come from, or because Ryanair is reportedly not often delivering on the promises they make to secure these subsidies, or yet again because they were granted with legally-enforceable time limits.
So if these subsidies are disappearing and they are part of the business model, if these subsidies can't easily be replaced (how many more airports that Ryanair doesn't fly to already are interested - and interesting), if passengers won't make up for the missing subsidies (see above), then Ryanair needs a new business model...
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 46): To be accurate and fair, FR earned the world's 7th highest net profit in 2011
To be accurate and fair, a ROI ranking would be a lot more useful than a "who's biggest" list. I am not saying that to bash Ryanair, for all I know, they'd come in on top, all I am saying is that ranking companies by profit doesn't mean a whole lot, especially when their markets and business models are so different, such as between Ryanair and JAL.
U2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 304 posts, RR: 0 Reply 51, posted (10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2333 times:
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 54): When any business receives more in subsidies than it makes in profit, it is always good to question what would happen to the profits if the subsidies were eliminated or severely cut.
I did ask before, but it got lost in the crowd. Would you be able to back that statement up? I can't find anything on the matter and you haven't provided anything to back it up despite being the only one to have said it. As far as I know there is no definitive data on how much they receive in subsidies, merely speculation.
I'm sure FR receive a large sum in the form of subsidies I just find it hard to believe that the sum is greater than their profits. I'd be interested to see some data on the matter, my 'belief' is probably wrong.
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18883 posts, RR: 54 Reply 52, posted (10 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2193 times:
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 50): a ROI ranking would be a lot more useful than a "who's biggest" list
Yes, it would. But I'm a busy person and cannot spend time finding and calculating data for it to be ignored by A.net. Net profit, for informal purposes, is sufficiently indicative - and it disapproved the earlier claim that FR's net result is not merely 'reasonable' by airline standards.
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
mikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2 Reply 53, posted (10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2112 times:
Quoting adg737800 (Reply 49): That would be the "successful intercontinental airline" that last year lost £80m
AF lost 1B....are you saying they are wholly unsuccessful ? Of course they are not.
That is all immaterial anyway.
It would be a fool who did not see that their business model works and that they do enable millions to fly from local airports at reasonable cost. Even if the whole experience is relatively rather tawdry. I accept that to many that is not an issue. I also accept that many people have varying travel requirements.
However, me being me I just don't...how shall I put it....'appreciate'....the style/way in which the airline operates.
Some people like Neiman Marcus and some people like Sears.
[Edited 2012-08-06 01:22:57]
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
BE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0 Reply 54, posted (10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2055 times:
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 50): Ryanair would have figured that already and would have raised fares while continuing to collect their subsidies to earn an even bigger profit.
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 50): cut routes that are no longer profitable without subsidies
Both are very smart ways to run your business - amazing how many businesses don't figure it out.
PS - I left the 'without subsidies' in the quote, but, those words add nothing. They should cut routes that are not profitable anyway - and they should even cut profitable routes if they can find more profitable routes elsewhere if they are constrained in capacity.
As far as a business is concerned, 'subsidies' are nothing in the accounting. They will probably have to be reported in the management discussion pages of the annual report, but, for accounting purposes they don't normally even show up, since they would simply be part of a negotiated cost of using the facilities. If it is a per passenger 'subsidy', then it just gets recorded as revenue along with the fares (and for FR, apparently a lot of fees). Nothing special about it - just money for services that someone is willing to pay...and apparently many governments around the world are willing to pay for the service of having airline service (if the people don't like it, they can vote differently next time).
Anyway, in many (most?) cases, the subsidy is either the same as if you get a good deal at an office supply store for your business - it doesn't magically make a profit or loss difference, just the cost of your inputs went down, or alternatively, you are an employee that gets a night shift premium since no one, even you, would do it without the premium.
Note: I really, really, really detest governments paying subsidies for anything. It totally distorts the decisions, makes people do dumb things, someone elses hard work (taxes) are paying for benefits that they probably don't wnat, and so on. Then when they try to remove the subsidy you get riots, protests, and all sorts of other bad fallout. But, in your own life or if running a business they are part of the equation and you have to make your decisions with them as part of the math.
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 50): but their disappearance will itself also negatively affect profit
Only if they can't find another place to put the equipement - which FR seems good at.
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 52): Quoting blueflyer (Reply 50):
a ROI ranking would be a lot more useful than a "who's biggest" list
Yes, it would.
Good reply - not needed for this discusion (although it would be informative, I'm not going to bother either, since the absolute last thing I am going to do is invest in an airline - the ROI sucks accross the entire business. Aircraft manufacturers and service providers to the airlines is a completely different story...and I do keep a apreadsheet of the relative merits of many of those!).
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3160 posts, RR: 1 Reply 55, posted (10 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1734 times:
Quoting U2380 (Reply 51): I did ask before, but it got lost in the crowd. Would you be able to back that statement up?
Sorry, I did apparently miss it earlier. I've seen a number of reports on the subject.
If I recall correctly, the earliest one was issued two or three years ago by AirObserver (http://airobserver.wordpress.com/) and concluded that subsidies account for about 20% of revenues. While the exact percentage certainly changes from year to year, that would amount to approximately €865 millions in subsidies compared to an after-tax profit of €503 millions when calculated againt Ryanair's latest results.
In 2010, Air France claimed to have found that 25 airports alone gave €600 millions in subsidies and tax-waivers to Ryanair (http://www.connexionfrance.com/ryanair-airport-subsidies-just-business-news-article.html)
The latest one was commissioned by the Association of European Airlines (admittedly no friend of Ryanair's) this Spring. That study, done against the same latest results used above, concludes that Ryanair received subsidies exceeding €700 millions during the period, and that without any subsidy, Ryanair would have lost over €300 millions.
(I am on the road so I don't have URL handy, but I'll try and remember to post them when back - sorry)
Quoting BE77 (Reply 54): Only if they can't find another place to put the equipement - which FR seems good at.
Not to nitpick, but even if Ryanair found alternate use for the equipment, it wouldn't contribute as much to the profit as the subsidized routes because if these replacement routes did, Ryanair would be flying these and not the ones that need subsidies to make a profit, therefore Ryanair's profit would be negatively affected either way.
lukeyboy95 From Papua New Guinea, joined Apr 2008, 953 posts, RR: 34 Reply 57, posted (10 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1695 times:
I would like to add my congratulations to FR for yet another milestone in it's rapidly developing story.
The airline polarises the community of Anet in quite an extraordinary (verging on churlish) way.
My overwhelming opinion is that the model is great, the fares can be great if you are crafty enough - but beneath it all, there remains justified reasons to be a sceptic e.g. subsidies/ ethics.
The analogy that FR is somehow people's 'favourite' airline is dilussional. Good fares, large customer base, yes. Favourite? Don't think so.
Quoting kl911 (Reply 4): Why not? FR is a leisure - holiday airline
Erm. No it's not.
With respect, the language you use on these forums with regards to FR tends to only fuel the flames of the bashers. Calm down, we know you adore the airline, but you aren't it's PR officer. You're opinions are of course respected regardless
BrouAviation From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 984 posts, RR: 1 Reply 61, posted (10 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1608 times:
Quoting kl911 (Reply 4): FR is a leisure - holiday airline. So destinations are flexible as dates often as well.
You say you regularly fly through EIN and still believe this to be true? What is your medical condition?
EIN is packed every morning with business travellers in suits flying FR and WizzAir. Again, why don't you start looking at other airlines in the way you look at FR? You might come back surprised. I did, I flew AMS-MUC-AMS on KL for 89,- EUR return last week. Yes, that is 44,50 each way which is lower than FR's average ticket price as displayed by Pearson. And it brought me into airports where wi-fi, good accesible public transport and a decent car rental company were available.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 22): Working at STN, it is abundantly clear that all cross-sections of society opt to fly Ryanair.
Exactly. Which can be said of almost all airlines, except of NetJets.
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 23): In contrast, and for the same period, EZY's average one-way fare was £63.34, an increase of 46%.
Invalid comparison, as FR doesn't operate to hubs like AMS, GVA, FCO etc. Seriously, don't give me the there-are-also-people-living-very-close-to-BVA-or-HHN-argument here. A hub like AMS is expensive to fly to, but for me as a passenger much more convenient and easy to reach especially by public transport.
FR chooses to operate from EIN, and U2 picks AMS. That is all fine, but it makes comparisons like this worthless. For me, the expensive train ticket to EIN makes FR more expensive than U2 based on the prices you gave.
Quoting kl911 (Reply 41):
Every segment on a LCC is a seperate ticket, so yes, a journey can involve 3 or 4x a flight from A to B
Can this mean that somebody flying EIN-STN-ACE-STN-EIN is counted as 4 passengers in this monthly record? If yes, I can see where it is coming from..
Quoting lukeyboy95 (Reply 57): Erm. No it's not.
With respect, the language you use on these forums with regards to FR tends to only fuel the flames of the bashers. Calm down, we know you adore the airline, but you aren't it's PR officer. You're opinions are of course respected regardless
Never ask somebody if he's a pilot. If he is, he will let you know soon enough!
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18883 posts, RR: 54 Reply 62, posted (10 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1597 times:
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 61): That is all fine, but it makes comparisons like this worthless.
Of course it doesn't. FR and EZY are substitutes on endless routes across Europe. It was a simple comparison between LCCs in Europe. As I said at the time, it wasn't to portray one as more expensive or whatever but merely to show differences. If you wish to moan about its invalidity, fine. Who cares?
I notice you didn't mention, say, that FR serves LGW, MAN (base), MAD (base), BCN (base), DUB (base), BHX (base), EDI (base), BUD (base), etc, etc, etc. Yet you gave an example of not serving GVA. But that is besides the point and I can't be bothered to argue about it given the frequency with which it has previously been discussed.
[Edited 2012-08-08 02:34:57]
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
BrouAviation From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 984 posts, RR: 1 Reply 63, posted (10 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1518 times:
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 62):
As I said at the time, it wasn't to portray one as more expensive or whatever but merely to show differences.
Wait, What? How is showing differences not portraying one as more expensive? What then, is the actual value of those differences? Zilch? Nothing?
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 62):
If you wish to moan about its invalidity, fine. Who cares?
If pointing out the invalidity of a comparison is considered moaning, then further discussion is useless I guess.
Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 62): I notice you didn't mention, say, that FR serves LGW, MAN (base), MAD (base), BCN (base), DUB (base), BHX (base), EDI (base), BUD (base), etc, etc, etc. Yet you gave an example of not serving GVA. But that is besides the point and I can't be bothered to argue about it given the frequency with which it has previously been discussed.
Oh, please. Yes, FR serves MAD and BCN and some others. But all in all, we can conclude EZY serves more expensive airports than FR does. Nothing to be ashamed of, but a simple fact, and it might be partly responsible for the average pricing difference between the two. It's a fact you can't deny, and it's why EZY is my preferred LCC. I have flown AMS-GVA vv at least 20 times the last 5 years. It was almost always more expensive than the average FR fare-price, but how is that a surprise when you are flying AMS-GVA? Those are two expensive and well-equipped airports. And percentage-wise, EZY has a lot more of these routes than FR has.
Never ask somebody if he's a pilot. If he is, he will let you know soon enough!
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18883 posts, RR: 54 Reply 64, posted (10 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1519 times:
Quoting BrouAviation (Reply 63): Wait, What? How is showing differences not portraying one as more expensive? What then, is the actual value of those differences? Zilch? Nothing?
For goodness sake. Yes, it obviously does that. However, my purpose was merely to demonstrate differences not to say 'look, EZY is more!'
raaadek From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2007, 49 posts, RR: 0 Reply 65, posted (10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1353 times:
Well done Ryanair!!! All the moaners have been proved wrong again. I can't imagine anyone could say something like 'I would rather not fly at all than fly FR'. If you have half a brain you will have no issues flying with them.
- not flying into main airports?
Maybe people should think twice before booking, instead of complaining that they fly into say Hahn and not Frankfurt. Destination has not changed in-flight has it? It's like getting on the bus to Manchester when you actually want to go to Liverpool and then complaining that it didn't take you where you wanted. Or complaining to LH that they fly to FRA when you actually need to go to Hahn.
- FR is often more expensive than 'legacy' airlines?
Again, think. I'm currently looking to buy my christmas travel and surprise, surprise, FR IS more expensive than other airlines. Million dollar question - Will I buy my ticket with them and moan they were more expensive than BA? After reading some comments I am lead to believe that it's exactly what many people would do. I won't, but it doesn't change the fact that I have flown with them many times from STN paying anything from £2 to £50 return, all in. For £2 they have taken me to OPO, MAD, DUB, BHD, PIK, MRS, BRE, LRH, EIN, TSF, TRF, REU and NYO. That's £26 for 13 return weekend flights, all in.
- you don't get the service that you get on legacies / FR treats passengers like s**t?
What 'service' exactly do you get flying short haul coach on BA or LH? Please enlighten me, is it the peanuts?. Miserable cabin crew can be as often found on any other airline as on FR. Did you try to get away with over-sized hand luggage but it didn't work and they charged £50 to put it in the hold? Yes, moan about them sticking to their rules and treating you like s**t. The only service I expect is to get to my destination on time and FR has so far been best at doing so.
- they sell all that crap on board. Here is a hint - don't buy!
- you don't get the 'proper flying experience'?
For me, flying experience is not about glitzy terminals, or 'free' stale sandwich. It's the smell of jet fuel when standing on the apron 5m away from the aircraft, roar of the engines on take-off, turbulence in freak weather, sunset/sunrise seen from FL35. I would even argue that FR is offering flying experience at its purest available, to people who are not professionally involved in the industry. Flying into shabby airports boasting 5 departures a day that have never seen a jet aircraft before, with no air bridges and hardly any other infrastructure. I love it.
And the most annoying of all, are those who have never actually flown with FR but are ready to give opinions nevertheless
Don't get me wrong, there are many things about FR that annoy me as well. Their website and booking process is horrible. I know, that if there is a delay or a cancellation I will probably not receive the same support as if flying with BA. But it hasn't happened yet, and if it does, by that time I will have saved more than enough by flying FR to pay for my hotel etc.
Ryanair has changed people's lives in a way that no other airline in Europe have, they are an amazing business machine and enabled me to visit my family whenever I want to - not whenever I can afford to. To say, that you would rather not fly at all than fly FR is a silly thing to say indeed.
raaadek From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2007, 49 posts, RR: 0 Reply 66, posted (10 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1274 times:
and one more thing, complaining that FR flies to secondary airports is in fact complaining about the sole fact that some service is being offered, or the very existence of FR. It's like a Waitrose customer moaning to the world the sole existance of Lidl (of course the gap in our example is nowhere that big, if there is any at all, that is). Or a bus service to Bath when you only ever go to Bristol. It just doesn't make sense. Why would you hate that? It's another service, more competion, more options, more, shock horror, interesting! It only shows that the subject is highly emotional to some, this is very often the case when opinions are not backed by logic, and the worst thing is that some of those opinions carry with them prejudice, bigotry and well, snobbery.
It is simply the sheer scale of success this company enjoyed, that fuels all the negative opinions + some passengers who were unlucky and got screwed by the airline. Mind you, FR is not the only airline that will leave you boiling when things go pear-shaped, you can probably find a 'hate site' on any airline you can think of. Fly them if you like, do not if you don't. Why the hate and ridicule I seriously don't get.
But not to worry, Ryanair has shown over the years that they thrive on publicity and controversy (positive or otherwise) as their main marketing tool, along with the rule that 'it doesn't matter what they write, it's that they do, what matters'.
Happy travels everyone!
Sponsor Message: 
From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4994 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2008, 89 posts, 
From Serbia, joined Aug 2009, 2579 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5918 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 314 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2010, 104 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Jan 2006, 237 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 468 posts, 
From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6351 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Sep 2011, 298 posts, 
From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, 
From Kiribati, joined Sep 2009, 213 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Aug 2011, 121 posts, 
From Papua New Guinea, joined Apr 2008, 953 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22874 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
