juventus
Posts: 2017
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:12 pm

Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:22 am

Just read an article related to the terrorist plot which reads "there are 20 daily flights between Los Angeles and London". I imagine there's got to be a market for at least a couple of daily flights between LAX or SFO to MAN.

Agree/disagree?
 
cwldude
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 2:17 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:58 am

I don't see why not... with the right advertising mix a few more UK-LAX could work. Not too sure about SFO, possibly if one or two flights were removed from an airlines LHR programme and moved up to MAN it could work?

I am of course saying all this, not taking into consideration that Z4 are looking at operating UK-LAX/SFO from their UK airports, I suppose as soon as this kicks off (assuming it will from MAN), I doubt there'd be much demand for the higher priced fares with the likes of AA, UA, BA, and VS.
Thomson Airways - The UKs premier charter airline // now flown : BY -AA -AJ -AE -AT; OO -AX -AU -RA -BG; BRIG; OBYD
 
HUYfan
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 9:38 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:07 am

There is a problem with yield on such routes, but maybe VS should'nt get rid of all those 343's and send em up to Manc to operate to LAX and SFO.

Regards

Mike
 
YULYMX
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:11 am

VS could do it successfully
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:12 am

LAX-MAN has been tried repeatedly over the years by everyone from BA itself to charters such as British Airtours, Caledonian, and even Excalibur briefly with its DC-10s.

Ultimately what kills the service is the near total lack of any business demand for the route,and strong seasonal imbalance. BA during the late 90s for several years tried to make a 767 service work. While Y class loads during the summer months were strong, come winter both the Y class demand dropped off substantially with only negligible premium demand. It was not unusual for flights to operate with only 50 passengers on occasion.

I simply cant see either BA, VS, UA making a MAN-LAX service work.
If anything the route could instead successfully operate as a seasonal service by one of the UK charter carriers.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
b777a340fan
Posts: 652
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:42 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:11 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 4):
I simply cant see either BA, VS, UA making a MAN-LAX service work.

I agree, especially when those carriers' main UK operations are based out of LHR. That could be a route BMI might consider, but it seems like there is concensus with regards to a lack of demand.
 
juventus
Posts: 2017
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:12 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:50 am

Quoting YULYMX (Reply 3):
VS could do it successfully

Maybe in the future, VS could do LAX-LHR with the A380, and launch LAX-MAN with the A340 or 747.
 
David_itl
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 5:02 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 4):
BA during the late 90s for several years tried to make a 767 service work

It operated something like April 1993 to Sepember 1994. Given that BA have a plethora of MAN-LHR shuttle services, it does not too much imagination to work out that they'd "persuade" any premium payers to route MAN-LHR-LAX rather than MAN-LAX, so as to ensure that more embarrassment is avoided i.e. another MAN BA long-haul route making a profit. It will always be that way for MAN, GLA and EDI: BA have too much vested interested in routing everyone via LHR.

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 4):
I simply cant see either BA, VS, UA making a MAN-LAX service work.

I can see VS making it work - if they are going to base a couple of 747s here, they do not necessarily have to operate 5 or 6 weekly to LAX but do perhaps a 2 weekly service, with the Virgin Holidays connection and offer in the summer 10 or 11 services a week to MCO, 2 to LAX and 1 to BGI, with winter seeing the LAX service replaced by Caribbean services: 1 to UVF and 1 to ANU.
 
sllevin
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 1:57 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 6:49 am

For that route to work, people on the west coast would have to understand that "England" doesn't mean "London"  Smile

Steve
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:03 am

Quoting David_itl (Reply 7):
It operated something like April 1993 to Sepember 1994.

Dont have the data with me at the moment, however BA operated the MAN-LAX 767 for several years, not the short time frame you mention.
I have quite detailed records including pax boardings etc.. on the service.

Quoting David_itl (Reply 7):
but do perhaps a 2 weekly service, with the Virgin Holidays connection

Possibly as more of a budget/charter style service it would work seasonally. This was proven by both British Airtours and Caledonian which managed low frequency charters going back to the 1980s.
However LA is not the typical mass tourist destination which Virgin Holidays can manage to find 400+ people for on a single flight as they can to a place like MCO.
I'm not sure VS would be too anxious to jump on a long haul low yield route(longer than FL or Carrib) these days.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
WindowSeat
Posts: 1198
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 3:01 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:06 am

A little birdie (who works at BMI) told me LAX-MAN is to start next year... details will be coming out soon!
I'm all in favour of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with keyboards.
 
markabcan
Posts: 199
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:35 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:19 am

BMI seems like an obvious candidate with its current long haul ops to the US from MAN
 
juventus
Posts: 2017
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:12 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:57 am

Quoting WindowSeat (Reply 10):
A little birdie (who works at BMI) told me LAX-MAN is to start next year... details will be coming out soon!

All right, I'll take that. Any chance of BMI at San Francisco???
 
boysteve
Posts: 887
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 7:02 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:59 am

When you consider the amount of people travelling MAN-LAX I am sure that a 3 or 4 times weekly service could work. 2 years ago I flew MAN-DUB-LAX on EI and there were at least 30 of us doing the same routing ex-MAN. Last year I did the trip on BA and once again I was surrounded by people at check-in doing my routing of MAN-LHR-LAX.
 
as739x
Posts: 5001
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:39 am

There was rumor of BMI flying to San Francisco a few years ago. But I think the reasons above about the low business traffic answers your question. Other then a few weekly LAS flights, BMI serves cities farther east. With the combination of low yeild and long route segments (EU- to US West Coast), I don't think you'll see it. This was another reason from what I rememebr that AZ wouldn't return to the SFO/LAX. Very long flights not making much money.

ASLAX
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
 
mainMAN
Posts: 1636
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:55 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:03 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 9):
Dont have the data with me at the moment, however BA operated the MAN-LAX 767 for several years, not the short time frame you mention

No, I'm pretty sure it was for about 18 months or so.......certainly not for several years.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24557
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Vir

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:04 am

It comes down to the fact that even if a California-Manchester flight could make money, the distance between California and the UK is only slightly less than the distance between the UK and China or South Africa, and more than between the UK and India and most of Africa. When it comes down to it, airlines can pull in significantly more revenue flying those LHR-Asia/Africa routes than MAN-California, which is simply a poor allocation of resources. Not only would the yields be very marginal (and likely not profitable with BA, UA, or AA; maybe with BM or VS), but the plane is better used elsewhere.

This is why SAS, Iberia, and Alitalia, among others, have pulled out of California (and, outside of SAS' SEA flight, don't fly more West than Chicago). There are other long-haul markets that can provide much more revenue at similar stage lengths. Where areas to the East Coast, there is a more significant savings in distance versus Asia, and the fares are around the same, if not higher.

Look at California-Paris: AA and UA have both flown from LA and the Bay Area to Paris (LAX-CDG for AA/UA; SFO-CDG for UA; SJC-CDG for AA), and none of those flights were ever profitable, despite filling up (and none were dropped because of 9/11; even though AA's SJC/LAX-CDG flights ended in September 2001, the announcement that they would be discontinued was made before that).

[Edited 2006-08-12 03:06:00]
a.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:26 pm

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 16):

Look at California-Paris: AA and UA have both flown from LA and the Bay Area to Paris (LAX-CDG for AA/UA; SFO-CDG for UA; SJC-CDG for AA), and none of those flights were ever profitable, despite filling up (and none were dropped because of 9/11; even though AA's SJC/LAX-CDG flights ended in September 2001, the announcement that they would be discontinued was made before that).

it's a shame it can't work out....AA has no international service from NoCal.....espeically given that it does have a semi-large loyal AA FF's there....

given everyone from Monterey to Sonoma County, that's a good 7-8 million people which can potentially be tapped...


This seems like a route for the 787-8....
"Up the Irons!"
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:06 pm

My understanding is that a MAN-California flight is likely to be in service by mid-2007, and that it will carry a BMI code.

The difference, however, is that it will be a Boeing 777-200ER operated by Air New Zealand, and will be an extension either of NZ 5/6 (Auckland - Los Angeles) or NZ 7/8 (Auckland - San Francisco).

The logic is that
1) Air NZ has seen a doubling of demand in all classes for UK-NZ/Australia since 2000.
2) 35% of business passengers and 50% of total British passengers from LHR are from north of Northampton.
3) Air NZ cannot acquire further carriage rights from LAX or SFO into LHR.
4) Point-to-point Manchester to LAX or SFO passengers may not fill 26 Business and 27 Premium Economy seats, but the combined northern England to LAX, New Zealand, Fiji and Tahiti markets might.
5) The risk for Air NZ would be reduced if they could contract with United and BMI for each of them to purchase say 50 or 100 seats per flight for codeshare resale.

The factors arguing against such a route extension have been:
1) Regulatory problems with reselling codeshare seats (not primary traffic rights).
2) The MAN-LAX route is less seasonal (better weather) and offers better Air NZ Pacific Island connections, but has less business traffic than SFO.
3) MAN-SFO would not feed into any Air NZ flights other than the continuation to Auckland.

All the same, the next few months will be interesting. With Air NZ unable to get additional carriage rights LAX/SFO-LHR, they have routed their second AKL-LHR service via Hong Kong. If it is not a runaway success, or if NZ1 AKL-LAX-LHR provides better profits, expect the third UK service to be NZ-California-MAN.

[Edited 2006-08-12 09:34:04]
 
Humberside
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:15 pm

Quoting WindowSeat (Reply 10):
A little birdie (who works at BMI) told me LAX-MAN is to start next year... details will be coming out soon!

Very unlikely to happen. bmi's long haul expansion is firmly focused on LHR

MAN-LAX would be ideal for FlyGlobespan - particularly with the likely low yields on the route. And Im sure the GSM chairman said his airline was considering MAN-West Coast USA flights
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
 
David_itl
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:48 pm

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 9):
I have quite detailed records including pax boardings etc.. on the service.

I've got CAA records from 1986 - the years when MAN-LAX has passengers recorded are:

1988: 10762 passengers (charter)
1989: 30157 passengers (charter)
1992: 14646 passengers (charter)
1993: 60605 passengers (scheduled)
1994: 49467 passengers (scheduled)
1996: 00410 passengers (charter)
1997: 08926 passengers (charter)

How many routed MAN-"transit"-LAX is not known.

David
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:32 pm

Quoting Humberside (Reply 19):
Very unlikely to happen. bmi's long haul expansion is firmly focused on LHR

one of BD's most profitable routes is MAN-ORD...even with daily AA competition and 2x/weekly PK competition...

Quoting Humberside (Reply 19):
MAN-LAX would be ideal for FlyGlobespan - particularly with the likely low yields on the route. And Im sure the GSM chairman said his airline was considering MAN-West Coast USA flights

they are leasing a couple of 787's from ILFC..maybe they would start the route when they get them in 2010
"Up the Irons!"
 
CXA330300
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 5:51 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:49 pm

I imagine it would work if there was a strong hub to back it up. Which MAN lacks.

Quoting Juventus (Thread starter):
"there are 20 daily flights between Los Angeles and London"

That would be both LHR-LAX and LAX-LHR, because:

2 daily AA
daily NZ
3 daily BA
2 daily UA
2 daily VS
AC/AA/UA/DL/B6/WN/US*/CO*/FI/BA/IB/AF/SK/LX/Sabena*/TK/LY/SA/MN/SW/AM/CE*/CX/CA/MU/JL/SQ/TG/MH/KA/5J
 
ualcsr
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 12:53 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:22 am

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 16):
Look at California-Paris: AA and UA have both flown from LA and the Bay Area to Paris (LAX-CDG for AA/UA; SFO-CDG for UA; SJC-CDG for AA), and none of those flights were ever profitable, despite filling up (and none were dropped because of 9/11; even though AA's SJC/LAX-CDG flights ended in September 2001, the announcement that they would be discontinued was made before that).

Are UA's and AA's LHR-California routes profitable? Just curious.
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:32 am

Quoting Ualcsr (Reply 23):
Are UA's and AA's LHR-California routes profitable? Just curious.

I have flown the SFO-LHR several times on UA, and it has always been standing room only. I think the problem for MAN is that no Americans (OK, the people I know) want to go to anywhere but London in the UK, therefore any flight to MAN would rely on UK residents living near MAN.
 
sam1987
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 11:27 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:48 am

I think MAN to LAX is unlikely. It is currently so easy to travel via LHR.

If you go on BA, you can buy a through ticket, you can check in your luggage in MAN and not see it until you get to LAX, and you don't even have to change terminals at LHR, as MAN and LAX flights both operate from Terminal 1.

A full fare return between MAN and LAX (via LHR on BA) early next year is just over GBP500. I doubt any other airline flying direct could compete with that, because BA offer so much choice every week.
Next flights: LGW-LBA-LGW, LHR-SIN-SYD, SYD-BKK-LHR, LGW-GRO, GRO-CIA, CIA-MAD, MAD-LGW
 
Humberside
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 2:44 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 21):
Quoting Humberside (Reply 19):
Very unlikely to happen. bmi's long haul expansion is firmly focused on LHR

one of BD's most profitable routes is MAN-ORD...even with daily AA competition and 2x/weekly PK competition...

Yes, MAN-ORD has done very well but with a limited number of longhaul aircraft, longhaul expansion will be totally out of LHR. And routes like LHR-Saudi Arabia are probably more high yielding than MAN-LAX would be
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
 
David_itl
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 7:03 am

Quoting Sam1987 (Reply 25):
It is currently so easy to travel via LHR.

Remind which were the 1st lot of BA cancellations this week? Don't bother as I've err...worked them out: the short-haul ones! Any kind of impediment to LHR operations always seem to see the short-haul flights cancelled/severely delayed.

Quoting Humberside (Reply 26):
expansion will be totally out of LHR.

For the short-term at least; MAN was originally planned to be a base for at least 3 aircraft with around 5 or 6 destinations in the medium to long-term as they would have been able to build up the bmi global presence (such that it is!) using LHR operations thus allegedly making it easier to start thinner duplicate routes ex-MAN. I recollect that bmi did conceive 2 configurations for the A330s - one top-heavy premium (for LHR), and one top-heavy economy (for MAN), and they had to slightly postpone the launch of MAN ops as the aircraft were delivered for LHR ops. Whether they've altered one of the configs back to LHR standard I don't know.

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 24):
I think the problem for MAN is that no Americans (OK, the people I know) want to go to anywhere but London in the UK,

I wonder how extensively is "not London" advertised not just in the US, but globally? If folk want to be ripped off by paying inflated prices for everything, please continue to go to London!
 
ManchesterMAN
Posts: 1040
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 10:57 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 8:15 am

Quoting Sam1987 (Reply 25):
I think MAN to LAX is unlikely. It is currently so easy to travel via LHR.

If you go on BA, you can buy a through ticket, you can check in your luggage in MAN and not see it until you get to LAX, and you don't even have to change terminals at LHR, as MAN and LAX flights both operate from Terminal 1.

A full fare return between MAN and LAX (via LHR on BA) early next year is just over GBP500. I doubt any other airline flying direct could compete with that, because BA offer so much choice every week.

Travelling via LHR is anything but easy and when things go wrong they go wrong. This is the third August in a row where people taking BA flights have ended up queueing in tents.

As for fare, first of all you'd be doing exceptionally to be getting a full fare trip to LAX for anywhere near £500. Full fare economy is usually approaching the cost of restricted business class fares if not more expensive. That aside BA are seldom the cheapest option from MAN-LAX. US Airways and Continental are usually always the cheapest and they can more than compete with BA from MAN.

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 24):
I think the problem for MAN is that no Americans (OK, the people I know) want to go to anywhere but London in the UK, therefore any flight to MAN would rely on UK residents living near MAN.

Partially true although I travel to the US from MAN quite frequently and a lot of Americans on the flights are heading to the Lake District (I find the best form of IFE is listening to other people's conversations  Wink ) I also live in Lancaster and there are a lot of American tourists here this time of year so not all of them head to London.
Flown: A300,A319,A320,A321,A330,A340.A380,717,727,737,747,757,767,777,DC9,DC10,MD11,MD80,F100,F50,ERJ,E190,CRJ,BAe146,Da
 
mainMAN
Posts: 1636
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:55 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 8:32 am

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 24):
I think the problem for MAN is that no Americans (OK, the people I know) want to go to anywhere but London in the UK, therefore any flight to MAN would rely on UK residents living near MAN.

That's a bit of a layman's viewpoint. London is a monumentally HUGE market from almost everywhere (except South America), and for every 10 US citizens flying into London airports, probably 1.96 need to fly somewhere else in the UK. That's a totally made up figure, but there are still large numbers of Americans who need to fly into Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh and all points not within the London/South East region.

And they do.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 8:37 am

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 4):
BA during the late 90s for several years tried to make a 767 service work. While Y class loads during the summer months were strong, come winter both the Y class demand dropped off substantially with only negligible premium demand. It was not unusual for flights to operate with only 50 passengers on occasion

I think that BA only flew the route for about 3 or 4 seasons, but it doesnt really matter......BA tried very hard to make its LAX-MAN service work, with very little success. Its strange....while several US carriers have done quite well at MAN with service to their respective hub cities, BA had a lot of difficulty with the LAX service, especially, in the premium cabins.

Quoting WindowSeat (Reply 10):
A little birdie (who works at BMI) told me LAX-MAN is to start next year... details will be coming out soon!

BMI is the logical choice....but are they now interested in opening new longhaul routes out of MAN or are they focused on LHR? I have always thought that BMI missed a huge opportunity at MAN....MAN could have supported many flights to/from the US if only BMI built up a small hub operation at MAN to help support those flights. They were never interested.

If BMI can make money flying MAN-LAS, they should be able to make the MAN-LAX route work......shouldnt they? Or is the LAS service filled with leisure travellers on vacations packages? Does BMI have adequate longhaul airplanes to consider another long route?

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 16):
This is why SAS, Iberia, and Alitalia, among others, have pulled out of California (and, outside of SAS' SEA flight, don't fly more West than Chicago). There are other long-haul markets that can provide much more revenue at similar stage lengths. Where areas to the East Coast, there is a more significant savings in distance versus Asia, and the fares are around the same, if not higher.

Look at California-Paris: AA and UA have both flown from LA and the Bay Area to Paris (LAX-CDG for AA/UA; SFO-CDG for UA; SJC-CDG for AA), and none of those flights were ever profitable, despite filling up (and none were dropped because of 9/11; even though AA's SJC/LAX-CDG flights ended in September 2001, the announcement that they would be discontinued was made before that).

Very true analysis......West Coast to Europe routes are very difficult markets to make money in.....there is little money to be made in the O&D markets as fares must compete with the zillions of connections available via the route networks of the big US carriers. The big money for the European carriers is connections from LAX/SFO to mideast, gulf and african destinations....check out fares between LAX and the gulf/mideast, in the premium cabins, and you will be amazed, and pax reguarly pay them.

------

Also, there were suggestions that BMI or another airline try a 3 or 4 times per week service on MAN-LAX......too risky, services that do not operate daily fail to attract business traffic; if LAX-MAN cannot be flown daily in the summer and atleast 5 times per week in the winter, its not going to happen unless the flight is operated by a charter carrier or unless the flight is sold in connection with holiday packages....which could or could not happen in a market such as LAX. Many Europeans (British) pax do consider LAX a holiday spot: good weather, movie stars, palm trees, jumping off point for a California tour up and down the coast, the SFO/LAX/LAS combination, with or without the GrandCanyon thrown in is extremely popular, and also think Cruises......lots of Mexican Riviera Cruises depart from the LAX area. An interesting route, indeed.
 
ManchesterMAN
Posts: 1040
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 10:57 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 8:51 am

I'll bet Virgin holidays sells a fair few holidays to LA to North West travellers. If bmi could do a similar deal with them as with Vegas they'd have a great head start in making the route work. I still can't help thinking SFO would be better for them though as it would attract more business pax and they could tap into UA connections and attract the high number of UA Mileage Plus members in the bay area who would be happy for a direct Star Alliance flight to Manchester.
Flown: A300,A319,A320,A321,A330,A340.A380,717,727,737,747,757,767,777,DC9,DC10,MD11,MD80,F100,F50,ERJ,E190,CRJ,BAe146,Da
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24557
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 9:14 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 30):
If BMI can make money flying MAN-LAS, they should be able to make the MAN-LAX route work......shouldnt they?

Other factors come into play, like how bmi is the only network European carrier flying to Las Vegas (with Condor being a holiday airline and Virgin is O&D focus with no short-haul feed).
a.
 
2travel2know
Posts: 2236
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:05 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:00 am

A MAN-LAX-AKL flight by NZ may make some sense and be somewhat profitable, other SFO/LAX-MAN (by VS, BA, UA) might not be a good idea, unless one of those carriers have aircraft available for such a route, summer only on a 3-4 weekly service.
I don't work for COPA Airlines!
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:14 am

Quoting Juventus (Thread starter):
Just read an article related to the terrorist plot which reads "there are 20 daily flights between Los Angeles and London".

That was an error that the Mayor of Los Angeles made in a press conference. As usual another press conference by the City of Los Angeles contained false information. One cant always believe what is in the press..  wink 

LAX-LHR
The correct number of daily nonstop flights is 10, not 20!

1 x Air New Zealand : 747-400 (Rumored to go to 772, or be dropped)
2 x American Airlines : 777-200 (2nd flight is seasonal)
3 x British Airways : 747-400
2 x United Airlines : 777-200/767-300
2 x Virgin Atlantic : A340-600/A340-300
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:41 am

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 32):
Other factors come into play, like how bmi is the only network European carrier flying to Las Vegas (with Condor being a holiday airline and Virgin is O&D focus with no short-haul feed).

There are few if any routes that BMI can connect passengers to and from at Manchester.

Quoting ManchesterMAN (Reply 31):
I still can't help thinking SFO would be better for them though as it would attract more business pax and they could tap into UA connections and attract the high number of UA Mileage Plus members in the bay area who would be happy for a direct Star Alliance flight to Manchester.

One big bonus to LAS over SFO for BD is that BD can turn the LAS aircraft within a 24 hour period. SFO at best is pushing the envelope. In addition SFO has a number of nonstop flights to Europe (2 x FRA, 1 x MUC, 1 x KEF, 1 x AMS, 1 x CDG, 5 x LHR). LAS has flights to Europe but the demand is not yet equal to the service in the market ( 1 x MAN(6 Weekly), 1 x LGW(6 weekly), 1 x FRA(weekly))

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 30):
West Coast to Europe routes are very difficult markets to make money in

This has been proven over and over again. Only the established airlines have made it in the market. United (SFO/LAX), American (LAX), Air New Zealand (LHR), KLM(LAX/SFO), Lufthansa(LAX/SFO), Aeroflot(LAX), Air France(ex UTA) (LAX/SFO), SAS (SEA), Swiss International (LAX), and British Airways(BOAC) (PHX/SEA/LAX/SFO/DEN), have proven success in the West coast markets over the decades they have flown there. In addition Virigin Atlantic(LAS/LAX/SFO) entering the West Coast market really shoke things up. Virgin cam in and overnight was a success. LHR-LAX is one of the jewels in the VS crown, not to mention the premium O/D in the SFO-LHR market. LTU has had not one problem serving Los Angeles over the past decade, however there was a brief suspension a few years ago. BMI (LAS), Air Tahiti Nui (LAX) and Aer Lingus (LAX), have not complained about their figures to the West Coast. However, TN as can be said seems to be on shaky ground.

Two very intersting new airlines to the West Coast market include Icelandair (SFO), and Air Madrid(LAX).

Alitalia(LAX/SFO), Aeroflot(SFO), Minerve (OAK/LAX), Corse Air(OAK/LAX), Tower Air (OAK/LAX), AOM (LAX), Air Liberte (LAX), Swissair (SFO), Finnair(SFO), Iberia(LAX), CityBird(OAK/LAX), SAS (LAX), TWA (SFO/LAX), Pan Am (LAX/SFO), American (SJC), Delta (LAX), and a number of others.. Unfortuantely went under, or did not find the West Coast to me money making!
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 4887
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:43 am

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 34):
LAX-LHR
The correct number of daily nonstop flights is 10, not 20!

Obviously he meant return flights aswell.

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 34):
1 x Air New Zealand : 747-400 (Rumored to go to 772, or be dropped)

Not rumoured, it is going 772 from October 28th. Not heard of it being dropped at all.

Quoting Koruman (Reply 18):
With Air NZ unable to get additional carriage rights LAX/SFO-LHR, they have routed their second AKL-LHR service via Hong Kong.

I'm pretty sure thats for the UK not just LHR. HKG was always in the plan as a stopover for a new NZ LHR flight. Weather they would have gone via SFO if they had the rights I don't no. As for going via the US I think you will find that less people going AKL-LHR fly NZ because of the transit rules in the US, though these may have now changed?

LAX-MAN as a route though is probably like CHC-LAX, fairly low yeilding and very seasonal as people here have stated.
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:56 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 36):
Obviously he meant return flights aswell.

Per the news conference he said "20 flights a day from Los Angeles to London". Well in any case the number was fluffed!
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:11 pm

ZK-NBT, I think the point is that for an MAN-LAX-AKL flight, MAN-LAX would largely be to fill the back of the plane, because there should be a considerable amount of Business and Premium Economy class customers flying all the way through to Auckland, Tahiti or Fiji from Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, Sheffield, Newcastle, Scotland and Germany who could be diverted from the LHR flights onto this flight, especially if limo transfers are available.

We all know that MAN-LAX is a largely low-yield economy route: that's why it's not viable as an O+D route for British or American carriers. But if it is just a sector of a longer flight, it may be viable.
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:17 pm

Quoting Koruman (Reply 38):
ZK-NBT, I think the point is that for an MAN-LAX-AKL flight, MAN-LAX would largely be to fill the back of the plane, because there should be a considerable amount of Business and Premium Economy class customers flying all the way through to Auckland, Tahiti or Fiji from Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, Sheffield, Newcastle, Scotland and Germany who could be diverted from the LHR flights onto this flight, especially if limo transfers are available.

At last check Birmingham, Liverpool, Leeds, and Newcastle did not exactly draw the high yielding crowds. In addition NZ operating a LAX-MAN route would be a blood bath. A 787 in an all economy class configuration on the other hand may work. Lastly Tahiti and Fiji are not exactly the highest yielding destinations.
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24557
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:21 pm

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 39):
Lastly Tahiti and Fiji are not exactly the highest yielding destinations.

Yes they are. Few people can afford to jet set off to the middlle of the Pacific Ocean. Only Australians and New Zealanders see Tahiti and Fiji as "just a vacation".
a.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:46 pm

Quoting Humberside (Reply 26):

Yes, MAN-ORD has done very well but with a limited number of longhaul aircraft, longhaul expansion will be totally out of LHR. And routes like LHR-Saudi Arabia are probably more high yielding than MAN-LAX would be

they might very well be, but it certainly can't be to the United States out of LHR.. no 

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 30):
BMI is the logical choice....but are they now interested in opening new longhaul routes out of MAN or are they focused on LHR? I have always thought that BMI missed a huge opportunity at MAN....MAN could have supported many flights to/from the US if only BMI built up a small hub operation at MAN to help support those flights. They were never interested.

 checkmark ..I've been saying this too....MAN has quite a large population base, and BD could have done very well out of it if they took the time to develop it rather than competing at LHR...especially given Bermuda-II


.....AI serves West Coast (LAX)-Europe also..
"Up the Irons!"
 
koruman
Posts: 2179
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:08 pm

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 4:43 pm

Malpensa, there aren't that many premium seats to fill on a 777. Also, two decades ago who would have imagined that Harvey Nichols would open Neiman Marcus-style department stores in Leeds, Manchester and Birmingham? But the explosion of wealth in the UK in the last decade has created a "new rich" set in each of those cities. And they can afford business travel for leisure, and their wealth comes from work for employers who pay for business class travel. Air NZ has no first class: their business model only requires Business class and Premium Economy class seat sales.

And yes, those people from the UK who go to Tahiti and Fiji are mainly super-luxury discretionary travellers, who fly premium class and pay $2000+ per night to stay on Vatulele Island or Bora Bora. There are a few backpackers to Fiji, but none whatsoever to Tahiti.
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 6:38 pm

Quoting David_itl (Reply 27):
Any kind of impediment to LHR operations always seem to see the short-haul flights cancelled/severely delayed.

Well that makes more sense than cancelling long haul flights.

Quoting David_itl (Reply 27):
If folk want to be ripped off by paying inflated prices for everything, please continue to go to London!

London is the business and tourist centre of the UK. Sorry if you don't like that, but it will always be the case.

Quoting David_itl (Reply 7):
BA have too much vested interested in routing everyone via LHR.

The same way IB route all their long haul pax via Madrid?

If it's going to happen, i'm pretty sure it would be with GSM, once or twice weekly. I can see VS starting more Caribbean services or taking over Caribbean/Las Vegas services from BMI before they even consider the West Coast. AA and UA can route their passengers via ORD or LHR.
 
Humberside
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: Could LAX Or SFO To MAN Work For UA, BA Or Virgin?

Sun Aug 13, 2006 7:12 pm

Quoting MalpensaSFO (Reply 35):
There are few if any routes that BMI can connect passengers to and from at Manchester.

Aberdeen
Edinburgh
Glasgow
London Heathrow
Toulouse

Plus passengers can connect onto LH,SAS and LOT
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 787fan8, airbazar, alberchico, babastud, Baidu [Spider], dolphinflyer, FriscoHeavy, Google [Bot], guppyflyer, Hamlet69, laxman, Mikey711MN, OzarkD9S, PM, Qatara340, sassiciai, SteinarN, StTim, SyeaphanR, Tedd, viasa, WIederling and 350 guests