Noshow wrote:

And what strength is that? That they are VERY well known for offering a garbage product at discount rates rather than somewhat known for doing the same?

They are a true low ticket price carrier by some margin. They are super punctual and well organised almost military drill style. They give you exactly what was promised (and certainly nothing more) if you strictly stick to their rules like baggage size and weight and being at the gate on time. This is no case of overpromise and underdeliver but just a no-nonsense safe flight onboard a young fleet on time.
The backside: In case of any (rare) cancelled flights you are pretty much left on your own and can try to fight for refunding later on. Expect no service. However they are child friendly and carry pre-registered handicapped people with boarding priority.

They are far from a "garbage product" for sure.

I understand what you are saying, but my point still stands. If they are forced into paying the market rate for a new fleet and consequently no longer the cheapest option, then they are going to have big problems.

With regard to being “safe” – Well yeah, so far so good, but I seriously doubt it has anything to do with good management and/or practises. I personally stopped flying Ryanair after MOL issued a memo demanding that flight crews carry less reserve fuel in order to save costs, and then the flurry of Ryanair flights having to declare a “Mayday Low Fuel”

This article details some of that drama, and I would love to provide you a better more detailed link, however there have been so many staff\management\Mol disputes at Ryanair its actually difficult to find the relevant one.

I could say a lot more regarding Ryanair and its “operational style” but I don’t want to derail the thread, so will simply leave it at “garbage product”

reidar76 wrote:

I find it more likely that galley space is preserved on a potential Ryanair 737-10, and that they might also need to add a fourth lavatory on those longer runs. My best guess would be 217 seats. That seat count would retain standard rear galley, same as on their 189 seat 737-800, but not a fourth lavatory.

That sounds reasonable. More room for galley space as well as seats, increasing on-board sales. Certainly for longer flights. But they could also decrease the cost per seat on shorter flights by offering a high number of seats on routes with a lot of competition from other airlines.

There is something confusing in this discussion.

Let us go through it slowly.

At one point, a comment said that Airbus would not do any deal with Ryanair.
In another one it was said that Airbus would sell to Ryanair at good pricing.

And then someone expects Boeing to sell 737 MAX to Ryanair at depressed pricing?

What if Boeing plays hard ball? What is Ryanair going to do? Buy some E2? LOL.

VV wrote:

There is something confusing in this discussion.

Let us go through it slowly.

At one point, a comment said that Airbus would not do any deal with Ryanair.
In another one it was said that Airbus would sell to Ryanair at good pricing.

And then someone expects Boeing to sell 737 MAX to Ryanair at depressed pricing?

What if Boeing plays hard ball? What is Ryanair going to do? Buy some E2? LOL.

There is nothing confusing about any of this - its all speculation. Regardless, Ryanair does this with Boeing with every order - publicly complains about price, then places an order.

If Boeing is too high Ryanair can get Airbus thru lessors, buy say 10 at “standard “ prices - then come back to order 90 more, or pick up planes from another airline- AirAsia has 350 on order.

Much like the WN A220, none of these are very likely to happen.

VV wrote:

There is something confusing in this discussion.

Let us go through it slowly.

At one point, a comment said that Airbus would not do any deal with Ryanair.
In another one it was said that Airbus would sell to Ryanair at good pricing.

And then someone expects Boeing to sell 737 MAX to Ryanair at depressed pricing?

What if Boeing plays hard ball? What is Ryanair going to do? Buy some E2? LOL.

That’s sort of what I tried to say a few posts ago. I suspect Ryanair’s ability to be profitable whilst still offering the lowest fairs has a lot to do with the incredible deal they managed to get from Boeing on the NG’s a few years ago.

If they are unable to get a similar deal for the replacements and are forced to raise ticket prices in order to remain profitable then I can see them struggling against other European LCC. In fact, they maybe in somewhat of a worse situation if they really have burned the Airbus bridge and no longer have them as a negotiating tactic.

It is also worth bearing in mind that Mol has also really upset Boeing in the past, I am struggling to find links as this was 15 or so years ago but if I remember rightly he over ordered the NG’s as he was getting such an incredible price on them due to the 911 downturn. He was then either selling or at least offering new aircraft to other operators cheaper than Boeing themselves could produce them at the time. I could have the exact details wrong as it was a long time ago, but I know he really upset Boeing.

As I said in a previous post, love him or hate him, he is a good businessman and I hope Boeing have the balls to demand a fair price for the Max10’s as there Is no chance he is ordering Airbus or E2 as you suggest. But given the Max’s recent issues combined with covid, then I wouldn’t like to be on the Boeing sales team right now. He will get his way…probably

So what is the difference between Easyjet and RyanAir? I have flown Easyjet, it got me to my destination ontime, I can't expect more.

The only real negotiating position that Ryanair have is the timing of delivery, with things improving this is a less useful card to play than it would have been months back

william wrote:

So what is the difference between Easyjet and RyanAir? I have flown Easyjet, it got me to my destination ontime, I can't expect more.

No difference at all, nor with very many other airlines, and you are quite correct in your statement. Ryanair are very good at what they do and I, personally, have never had a bad experience on any Ryanair flight ever. When I fly them I know exactly what the limitations are and find that perfectly acceptable for what I want at that particular time. I have no need of frills on any destination I fly them to and they are both a very safe, and very punctual airline,, and which certainly can't be said for most of those who the usual detracting suspects claim as their favourite. As you say, and which I agree 100% with you on, I don't expect more from Ryanair than what I always receive.....which is getting me safely, punctually and courteously to my destination.

william wrote:

So what is the difference between Easyjet and RyanAir? I have flown Easyjet, it got me to my destination ontime, I can't expect more.

Extra width of A320 series really has an impact if you are fat. Lots of people are fat and willing to spend an extra 50 Euros for a more comfortable experience.

Not only that but Ryanair seat belts seem to be quite short in length. Wizzair and Easyjet seatbelts fit me comfortably while Ryanair is hit and miss. 25% chance of being embarrassed by having to ask for the orange extension.

jbs2886 wrote:

VV wrote:

There is something confusing in this discussion.

Let us go through it slowly.

At one point, a comment said that Airbus would not do any deal with Ryanair.
In another one it was said that Airbus would sell to Ryanair at good pricing.

And then someone expects Boeing to sell 737 MAX to Ryanair at depressed pricing?

What if Boeing plays hard ball? What is Ryanair going to do? Buy some E2? LOL.

There is nothing confusing about any of this - its all speculation. Regardless, Ryanair does this with Boeing with every order - publicly complains about price, then places an order.

Is it all "speculation" or is it just random and incoherent babbling?

Regardless, there have been airlines that switched their aircraft model from one manufacturer to another.

Even if Airbus really wouldn't talk to them, the actual cost to Ryanair of dealing with Airbus through an appropriate lessor as an intermediary would not be significant surely, so they would not be stuck in a sole Being supplier situation whatever Airbus said?

JibberJim wrote:

Even if Airbus really wouldn't talk to them, the actual cost to Ryanair of dealing with Airbus through an appropriate lessor as an intermediary would not be significant surely, so they would not be stuck in a sole Being supplier situation whatever Airbus said?

What if they want to own some of the aircraft?
Leased aircraft is not always the best solution.

LDRA wrote:

Translation: Order imminent

If so, why hasn't it happened already, given MOL has been talking about wanting MAX10s for months now?

I agree with smartplane, the window to get cheap MAXes has closed.

MOL got himself a nice tranche of MAX8 cheap, presumably using compensation and credits, but when he went for seconds the buffet had closed.

It closed because Boeing hit its targets for orders to get the production line rebooted and now MOL is on the outside looking in when it comes to MAX10.

Boeing's biggest problem now is avoiding snafus like the electrical grounding issue that can stop production and get on with filling all those orders.

Presumably given MOL is a bottom feeder he'll just have to wait for the next time Boeing is in need of a big order.

Given how the business has its peaks and valleys, chances are he'll get what he wants eventually.

Daysleeper wrote:

And what strength is that? That they are VERY well known for offering a garbage product at discount rates rather than somewhat known for doing the same?

And known for treating their employees like garbage too.

For those of you who remember a previous Airbus spat (I think they did forward list prices!):Article ii n French:
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fi ... -faim.html

JibberJim wrote:

Even if Airbus really wouldn't talk to them, the actual cost to Ryanair of dealing with Airbus through an appropriate lessor as an intermediary would not be significant surely, so they would not be stuck in a sole Being supplier situation whatever Airbus said?

Ryanair isn't stuck with Boeing - it's a conscious choice, just as Southwest has made. Fleet simplification has labor cost value (less training, fewer fragmented work groups), as well as parts commonality.

Revelation wrote:

And known for treating their employees like garbage too.

And yet they have been able to staff a growing airline, indicating they're paying - at least - market wages. It's the AFs, Alitalia and AAs that are overpaying, relative to labor productivity.

JibberJim wrote:

Even if Airbus really wouldn't talk to them, the actual cost to Ryanair of dealing with Airbus through an appropriate lessor as an intermediary would not be significant surely, so they would not be stuck in a sole Being supplier situation whatever Airbus said?

The group already operates ~30 A320s at Lauda, a mix of CFM and IAE engines. If Ryanair Wants A320s they will be able to get them, either second hand or fresh from a lessors backlog. New ones would have to be NEO's and it sounds like Airbus might not play ball. I don't understand why Airbus would be so upset with being used as a bargaining chip for Boeing. They have forced Boeing to sell a large quantity of aircraft at "new customer, mega order" pricing to an existing customer. surely that puts downward pressure on Boeings margins and allows Airbus to sell a large number of more profitable frames?

MIflyer12 wrote:

JibberJim wrote:

Even if Airbus really wouldn't talk to them, the actual cost to Ryanair of dealing with Airbus through an appropriate lessor as an intermediary would not be significant surely, so they would not be stuck in a sole Being supplier situation whatever Airbus said?

Ryanair isn't stuck with Boeing - it's a conscious choice, just as Southwest has made. Fleet simplification has labor cost value (less training, fewer fragmented work groups), as well as parts commonality.

Actually, I'd say that Ryanair has consciously cornered themselves into Boeing's corner: they want a single fleet for its simplification, they've burned bridges with Airbus and try to use the latter to lower the former's pricing offer. It only works for so long, and the fact that MOL has been talking about this order for so long but has yet to put it in ink shows that this strategy is hitting its limit.
Good for MOL to drive a hard bargain... until your sole supplier does the same.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

And known for treating their employees like garbage too.

And yet they have been able to staff a growing airline, indicating they're paying - at least - market wages. It's the AFs, Alitalia and AAs that are overpaying, relative to labor productivity.

What about letting your pilots fly for free because you know they have to keep their lincenses / flight hours. Smart business or exploitation?

It might not be soley over price. Perhaps the issue is future compensation credits or cancellation fees for missed delivery or performance targets on MAX10. Perhaps Boeing doesn't want it's next crisis forcing it to give away huge subsidies to every tom, dick and harry that has ordered planes from them. Maybe they are tightening that down. Who knows? It may be more than just unit price that is holding up the deal.

WayexTDI wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

JibberJim wrote:

Even if Airbus really wouldn't talk to them, the actual cost to Ryanair of dealing with Airbus through an appropriate lessor as an intermediary would not be significant surely, so they would not be stuck in a sole Being supplier situation whatever Airbus said?

Ryanair isn't stuck with Boeing - it's a conscious choice, just as Southwest has made. Fleet simplification has labor cost value (less training, fewer fragmented work groups), as well as parts commonality.

Actually, I'd say that Ryanair has consciously cornered themselves into Boeing's corner: they want a single fleet for its simplification, they've burned bridges with Airbus and try to use the latter to lower the former's pricing offer. It only works for so long, and the fact that MOL has been talking about this order for so long but has yet to put it in ink shows that this strategy is hitting its limit.
Good for MOL to drive a hard bargain... until your sole supplier does the same.

One can make the same argument about EasyJet. Is EasyJet stupid for being beholden to Airbus? What about Spirit? Frontier?

Noshow wrote:

Germany terminated nuclear power development after the Fukushima accident and because of unknown long term storage, clean up and costs. They have installed a lot of wind power, actually too much to consume.
What IS schizophrenic is that Germany buys power needed in peak times from third countries and that can be nuclear as well.

And lots of hydrocarbons from Russia, anyway.

william wrote:

One can make the same argument about EasyJet. Is EasyJet stupid for being beholden to Airbus? What about Spirit? Frontier?

I know for a fact that Spirit got an outstanding tender from Boeing on a fleet replacement plan.

It ultimately wasn't accepted (most likely due to logistics/management bandwidth versus the particulars of any airframe) but these negotiations happen, all the time.

Now, with any single fleet carrier, you have all sorts of costs/risk baked into that. It look great when your training costs, maintenance costs, etc. are awesome and controlled, and terrible when systemic risk like a MAX production shutdown occurs.

eta unknown wrote:

For those of you who remember a previous Airbus spat (I think they did forward list prices!):Article ii n French:
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fi ... -faim.html

My French is rusty as heck, but were I a AB stockholder, I'd be a little concerned that the management thinks so highly of their product that they could afford to just walk away from business.

FlapOperator wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

For those of you who remember a previous Airbus spat (I think they did forward list prices!):Article ii n French:
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fi ... -faim.html

My French is rusty as heck, but were I a AB stockholder, I'd be a little concerned that the management thinks so highly of their product that they could afford to just walk away from business.

As an small Airbus stockholder I really don't mind Airbus giving Ryanair the finger. Its an customer that wants you to work harder for less when you are in need the most. High effort low profit...

JonesNL wrote:

As an small Airbus stockholder I really don't mind Airbus giving Ryanair the finger. Its an customer that wants you to work harder for less when you are in need the most. High effort low profit...

Well, good luck with that.

Oddly enough, in any economic system, maximizers tend to do the best.

VV wrote:

JibberJim wrote:

Even if Airbus really wouldn't talk to them, the actual cost to Ryanair of dealing with Airbus through an appropriate lessor as an intermediary would not be significant surely, so they would not be stuck in a sole Being supplier situation whatever Airbus said?

What if they want to own some of the aircraft?
Leased aircraft is not always the best solution.

The Lessor would sell them to RyanAir, the point is that Airbus (supposedly) are refusing to negotiate sales with FR, if "Fred's Leasing Company" comes along and does all the negotiations for a simple transaction fee, that would purely be the cost to RyanAir, they wouldn't have to pay list price for the planes, just whatever Fred's leasing wants to be the middleman.

I simply don't accept that RyanAir are in boeing's pocket, even if the relationship between the sales teams directly are bad.

FlapOperator wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

For those of you who remember a previous Airbus spat (I think they did forward list prices!):Article ii n French:
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fi ... -faim.html

My French is rusty as heck, but were I a AB stockholder, I'd be a little concerned that the management thinks so highly of their product that they could afford to just walk away from business.

Simple rule of business: walk away if terms aren't in your favour or if it's not a win-win scenario for you and your customer.

FlapOperator wrote:

william wrote:

One can make the same argument about EasyJet. Is EasyJet stupid for being beholden to Airbus? What about Spirit? Frontier?

I know for a fact that Spirit got an outstanding tender from Boeing on a fleet replacement plan.

It ultimately wasn't accepted (most likely due to logistics/management bandwidth versus the particulars of any airframe) but these negotiations happen, all the time.

Now, with any single fleet carrier, you have all sorts of costs/risk baked into that. It look great when your training costs, maintenance costs, etc. are awesome and controlled, and terrible when systemic risk like a MAX production shutdown occurs.

True, with a simple fleet there are risks riding that one horse. But the benefits far outweigh the risks. How do we know, airlines that know their niche are using this business.

The simple fact is the 320 series is sold out for the next 9 years unless you are willing to pay a premium to jump the queue, pay enough to justify an increase in production or manage to pick up someone else’s orders, either directly or via lessors, which is easier said than done for an order this big. Airbus don’t need to sell at or below cost as Ryanair are used to getting, the margins they are making on the 321 in particular are supposedly excellent right now because there’s no competition and thus they don’t have to price too aggressively. Ryanair were selling used 738s for more than they paid for them new in the 9/11 order, they made another killing in the GFC order. Boeing were over a barrel with the MAX but that fire sale is over. Ryanair missed their shot on this one.

737-10MAX will be the ULCC dream plane. That will be a money printer, and Ryanair knows it.

SEU wrote:

737-10MAX will be the ULCC dream plane. That will be a money printer, and Ryanair knows it.

And how many so-called ULCC have decided for the competition ? Dream on !

oldJoe wrote:

SEU wrote:

737-10MAX will be the ULCC dream plane. That will be a money printer, and Ryanair knows it.

And how many so-called ULCC have decided for the competition ? Dream on !

737 max/NG ULCC and general operators would find it very attractive and that’s all it needs to do. Boeing knows the plane is disadvantaged generally but it’s good enough to allow 737 operators to have an aircraft that can at least do most of what the 321 can do from a capacity point of view predominantly

Not that much more, as it would become AoA limited on take-off as well.

Opus99 wrote:

VMCA787 wrote:

jomur wrote:

So why would Boeing even give them a discount as they know Ryanair want their aircraft and not Airbus? I certainly would not. Could shoot Ryanair in the foot here..

Don't be so sure. Airbus can cut some pretty amazing deals and if Airbus really wanted to make a deal with FR, they could. It would have to cover the training costs though and that is the real fly in the ointment.

Airbus won’t answer Ryanair. Ryanair did Airbus dirty a few years back if I recall correctly. Something along the lines of the deal was pretty much ready to go and then Ryanair did a last minute with Boeing and that was it.

Also Airbus don’t need the business

A bit rich to say Airbus doesn't need the business. Every entity on every industry needs as many deals as it can get. Problem sometimes is being able to deliver on them. Airbus cannot with Ryanair maybe for many reasons (backlog, product unsuitability, etc...).

Maybe that's why they cannot, for example, convince AF/KL to go full Airbus rather than allow them to keep KL on Boeing/Embraer...

DaCubbyBearBar wrote:

Good strategy.... would probably secure GREAT PRICING per aircraft at this juncture in time

I don't think Boeing is in that market mood anymore. They want profits before loss leading market share now.

VV wrote:

Considering A321neo's backlog, how fast could Ryanair expect to get deliveries if they wanted to switch to A321neo?

Out of question. The MAX10 can cater for Ryanair on this level. One might say that there are millions of differences in favor of one or another but the fact that Ryanair has never looked into the plane.

The only (hypothetical) chance would be if Ryanair detects, for one reason or another, the need for something in the range of the A321XLR - but then, maybe they would wait then for Boeing's new MoM and go for that instead...

FlapOperator wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

For those of you who remember a previous Airbus spat (I think they did forward list prices!):Article ii n French:
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fi ... -faim.html

My French is rusty as heck, but were I a AB stockholder, I'd be a little concerned that the management thinks so highly of their product that they could afford to just walk away from business.

So Airbus spent time to present a RFP to Ryanair, who never had an intention to buy the aircraft but to only use it as a negotiation tactic against Boeing, should now again spend time and money on a RFP to Ryanair so they can use that against Boeing again? Maybe know the history before making meaningless statements.

Opus99 wrote:

oldJoe wrote:

SEU wrote:

737-10MAX will be the ULCC dream plane. That will be a money printer, and Ryanair knows it.

And how many so-called ULCC have decided for the competition ? Dream on !

737 max/NG ULCC and general operators would find it very attractive and that’s all it needs to do. Boeing knows the plane is disadvantaged generally but it’s good enough to allow 737 operators to have an aircraft that can at least do most of what the 321 can do from a capacity point of view predominantly

I think you agree with the premise, the 737-10MAX is not a ULCC dream plane. Yes it will be attractive for certain airlines, but it is not a dream plane and print money for all ULCC. You seem to mention it is disadvantaged but good enough for current operators. Not all ULCC. Not sure if that was your intention.

Revelation wrote:

Presumably given MOL is a bottom feeder he'll just have to wait for the next time Boeing is in need of a big order.

So Ryanair will take Boeing to the cleaners now, seeing as BCA is still a mess and needs the orders. Good time to buy, right?

enzo011 wrote:

FlapOperator wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

For those of you who remember a previous Airbus spat (I think they did forward list prices!):Article ii n French:
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fi ... -faim.html

My French is rusty as heck, but were I a AB stockholder, I'd be a little concerned that the management thinks so highly of their product that they could afford to just walk away from business.

So Airbus spent time to present a RFP to Ryanair, who never had an intention to buy the aircraft but to only use it as a negotiation tactic against Boeing, should now again spend time and money on a RFP to Ryanair so they can use that against Boeing again? Maybe know the history before making meaningless statements.

Opus99 wrote:

oldJoe wrote:

And how many so-called ULCC have decided for the competition ? Dream on !

737 max/NG ULCC and general operators would find it very attractive and that’s all it needs to do. Boeing knows the plane is disadvantaged generally but it’s good enough to allow 737 operators to have an aircraft that can at least do most of what the 321 can do from a capacity point of view predominantly

I think you agree with the premise, the 737-10MAX is not a ULCC dream plane. Yes it will be attractive for certain airlines, but it is not a dream plane and print money for all ULCC. You seem to mention it is disadvantaged but good enough for current operators. Not all ULCC. Not sure if that was your intention.

Revelation wrote:

Presumably given MOL is a bottom feeder he'll just have to wait for the next time Boeing is in need of a big order.

So Ryanair will take Boeing to the cleaners now, seeing as BCA is still a mess and needs the orders. Good time to buy, right?

You can be disadvantaged in some sense and still be very good that’s easily possible. Disadvantaged in range and runway performance but still very efficient and matching (at least close to) the capacity of the 321NEO. The Max 10 is not to steal 321 business. It’s not going to do that but it’s to extract more business from 737 operators who would like that size so Ryanair, southwest maybe?, KLM, United, GOL, Aeromexico, flydubai, Korean air, JAL, lion air, spice jet, air Canada?, flair etc.

If the 737-10 establishes itself as a very good proposition all those customers are potential business. Especially if it gives you superior economics over the -8 which I think the 321neo has over the 320neo - slightly.

But it can be a ULCC dream plane not by its performance but if it’s cheap enough to acquire compared to the 321NEO but no there’s nothing about the -10 that makes me think it will be a ULCC dream plane.

FlapOperator wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

For those of you who remember a previous Airbus spat (I think they did forward list prices!):Article ii n French:
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fi ... -faim.html

My French is rusty as heck, but were I a AB stockholder, I'd be a little concerned that the management thinks so highly of their product that they could afford to just walk away from business.

Not all deals are good deals; sometimes you have to tell a customer like MOL to go pound sand.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

And known for treating their employees like garbage too.

And yet they have been able to staff a growing airline, indicating they're paying - at least - market wages. It's the AFs, Alitalia and AAs that are overpaying, relative to labor productivity.

How terrible AF etc aren't wringing the last penny out of the dollar! Maybe they can be as good as Wal*Mart and get their employees on public support as well. Yay, Capitalism!

O’Leary is brutal negotiator. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got the planes at cost. He ordered after 9/11 and got the deal of the century.

Revelation wrote:

How terrible AF etc aren't wringing the last penny out of the dollar! Maybe they can be as good as Wal*Mart and get their employees on public support as well. Yay, Capitalism!

This is totally OT and I would not resent the moderators if they remove it. But YAY Revelation! Lol

We have both been here a long time, and we have clashed over a difference of opinion more than once, which is cool, its what forums are for. But here we 100% agree. I don’t care what airline I am flying be it an ULCC or LCC or BA, I want the flight crew to be well rested, well paid and in the right mindset should shit go south.

I have often wondered about the business model of LCC’s. I understand that they are no frills hence cheap, therefore you can go without service. As a fattish European I can happily go almost a month without food, so a three-hour flight should be fine. Hell I could perhaps even do 4 days without water and still live to tell the tail. But what I can’t do is survive at 40K feet without jet fuel.

As much as I respect MOL, and I really do, he is really pushing the limits to what is acceptable, just because its cheap.