Despite the extremely challenging conditions that coincided with the launch of services to Washington and Chicago from Manchester, bmi remains committed to its transatlantic services. This commitment is further enhanced by a number of achievements so far, these include:
passenger numbers topping 180,000 on the two routes
the establishment of a 51% market share on the Chicago route, marking the end of the American Airlines monopoly on the route
fares from London Heathrow to Washington being driven down due to bmi’s entry onto the route from Manchester with business fares upto 75% cheaper than the same fare offered from Heathrow by its rivals
recent load factors of 70% on transatlantic flights
All I wish for is a speeding-up of the opening up of LHR, so bmi can start services there with a view to getting more routes from here in the medium-term rather the extremely long-term!
Arsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 21 Reply 1, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1834 times:
Well this has come up as a suprise to me. I never thought BMI would have had any success with transatlantic flights out of MAN. AA was already there on the ORD route and it looked like there was no more room for another carrier. But well done to BMI, i hope the route continues to develop, there could even be a transatlantic hub at MAN for BMI to develop, maybe not.
N175dz From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2000, 274 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1832 times:
Maybe I'm missing the point here, but how would opening up services from LHR aid the development of more long-haul services from MAN?
I really hope that they do continue to develop from MAN - since BMI started IAD/ORD, I use them whenever possible and hope to continue doing so. I'm glad to see them doing well - they certainly appear to be doing better - the amenity packs are back in ecomony
David_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7266 posts, RR: 14 Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1775 times:
The reason why I put my comment is that LHR is the principal bmi hub with better connections available which should aid them in making a success of their routes from there. Once the profile of bmi is raised in the US then it will not be too much of a shock to the system for them to start duplicating services to MAN. It would even give them some breathing space to start their own hub operations here rather than have SAS and Lufthansa feeding them (the anorak in me wants the foreign stuff but the idealist in me says bmi flights ought to feed these routes).
Of all the routes they've applied for (the same 12 USA routes as they've applied for from LHR, YYZ and JNB), I would imagine, as MAH4546 has mentioned, the BOS, SFO and MIA ones to be launched in the medium term.
N175dz From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2000, 274 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1766 times:
Thanks for the reply. As I suspected - I'd missed the point! I'd never really thought about it in terms of US presence - but that makes perfect sense. I didn't realise that SAS/LH were feeding the ex-MAN flights!
Personally, I hope they develop both at MAN and LHR - I'd certainly be prepared to make the trip to Heathrow if necessary!
An F/A on my last flight mentioned SFO as a possibility. I think that would work well (no existing flight, good UA connections).
David_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7266 posts, RR: 14 Reply 8, posted (11 years 7 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1756 times:
Arsenal, believe it or not, 1996 saw a grand total of 172,000 passengers on the MAN-ORD route; AA were operating double daily (after much shennigans with BA over the rights of them doing this!). 12 amp plug for you to go to my website to see the 2001 statistics and Jan & Feb 2002 stats: http://fly.to/northwest-spotters. I hope I've got all the links sorted out correctly!
Phil, the CPH, ARN, MUC, DUS & FRA services should theoretically allow people to transfer onwards. MAN has been the lucky recipient of having the initial transatlantic operations given the pecking order for them of:
a) LHR to begin with, MAN coming online later,
b) LHR and MAN to have simultaneously launches, and
c) MAN operations only pending Bermuda II being torn up and allowing LHR routes
EGNM-LBA From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 156 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (11 years 7 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1703 times:
Its the yields that still concern me on the IAD/ORD flights. In a recent press release, bmi quoted that LF was up to 70% but in the next breath stated that the transatlantic operation was 3 years away from profitability! Suggests to me that the yields from the UA connecting pax are not sufficient to cover the running costs and that they think it will take a few more years for word to spread around to generate some high yield repeat business traffic at the front-end.
Much does depend on bmi getting access to LHR. Whilst ever they are flighting for this, the MAN services will remain. Politically it would do their cause no good at all if they made any negative moves in the short-term. If however the prognosis for UK/US open-skies remains as bleak as it does at the present, I am sceptical that the transatlantic ambitions will be persued ad-infinitum.
Arsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 21 Reply 10, posted (11 years 7 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1697 times:
Don't you think there's already enough carriers to operate to all the makor US destinations from LHR? I mean you have UA/AA/BA and VS all operating to the major US cities from LHR, is there more room for another fully established carrier like BMI. I hope BMI get the slots they need at LHR, but the routes from LHR look well covered to me.
BlueShamu330s From UK - England, joined Sep 2001, 2721 posts, RR: 24 Reply 11, posted (11 years 7 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1680 times:
Some of you chaps make me laugh with your analytical hypothses.
bmi have always set a 3 year timeframe in which to make the MAN transatlantics profitable.
All set-up costs associated with the operation are incorporated in the transatlantic budget sheet. Until those exceptional charges are paid off, the division will show a negative balance sheet. Without those charges, bmi transatlantic made money over the past 12 months.......despite 9/11.
For the sceptics, the hard figures and facts are clear:
Loads are up and increasing.
Loads did not suffer as much as operators into London, and as a result, bmi did not have to jump on the discount bandwagon to regain market share.
In 12 months, bmi have taken 51% market share on ORD from an established carrier who has been on the route for over a decade.
Cabin service is widely regarded as excellent and this is slowly filtering through to the media; see the latest Business Traveller survey in which bmi was the ONLY carrier to receive 5* for it's business class product. This is fantastic PR targetted at exactly the people an airline hopes to attract; high yield, repeat business travellers.
March freight figures out of MAN revealed bmi transatlantic as the largest passenger airline and third largest carrier overall (950 tonnes), behind Dragonair and Air Hong Kong.
Advance bookings for summer are excellent, with many days now blacked out in The Biz.
However, there is a problem which needs addressing.
bmi's longhaul services currently revolve around 2 airplanes. The huge investment required to create, launch and maintain such an operation is immense. A 2 airplane operation alone cannot justify such an outlay.
That is why bmi are desperately keen to launch service out of London in conjunction and alongside the MAN operation.
Of course there are routes not yet serviced out of MAN which could turn a healthy profit for the airline.
However, there is a reluctance within bmi to invest exclusively in one longhaul base; the phrase "don't put all your eggs in one basket" springs to mind.
Have no doubt that as soon as it is possible, bmi will operate from LHR to the USA.
The already decided 2-base strategy convinces me that so long as IAD and ORD remain self-sufficient, then the routes will be safe and that they will be joined by other long haul services in the not too distant future.
So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(