VCy
Topic Author
Posts: 420
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:01 am

Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:42 am

I always wondered why British Airways seems to ignore all other markets except London.

Getting to Heathrow or Gatwick by any other city in the UK is a very big hassle, often meaning a train journey into the city and then change 2 underground lines. If i am not mistaken most UK airports do not have a flight to LHR (expt MAN & Scotland) but even the ones that do don't have LGW flights to connect on their leisure flights.

Couldn't BA offer services from other UK airports to the London airports like BHX, EMA, LPL?

Or better yet, can't they offer services from those airports to places like NYC or short haul destinations?

I know low cost carriers seem to have this covered, but BA (and VS) is the only full sevice carrier of the UK. They offer more that puts them in a better position, for example being part of One World and the close cooperation with all the other airlines.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4891
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:55 am

The distances involved would make the ticket cost prohibitive - people would rather drive the three or four hours from Birmingham to LHR than pay £100 per person to fly.
 
commavia
Posts: 11489
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:57 am

For the same reason why - as mentioned in a thread within the last few months - Air France is struggling with France outside PAR, and why Lufthansa is handing over virtually all of its operations outside FRA/MUC to Eurowings. Namely - the economics of the 'regions' of these countries simply can no longer support the cost structure and business model of European network carriers, at least not beyond (generally) linking said 'regions' to the national hubs. The 'regions' are far better aligned to the cost structure and business model of low-cost carriers like Ryanair, EasyJet, Eurowings, etc., which is precisely why those carriers have flourished in these markets.

[Edited 2015-08-24 05:15:10]
 
Lofty
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 5:23 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 12:13 pm

BA operates from Leeds Bradford and Newcastle to LHR.
 
User avatar
DolphinAir747
Posts: 1896
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:07 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 12:20 pm

Quoting commavia (Reply 2):
at least not beyond (generally) linking said 'regions' to the national hubs.

Yes but BA barely does that outside MAN LBA NCL. They don't fly to the UK's second largest city, BHX. It's insane. LHR doesn't have direct train connections to other UK cities, and transferring through Central London is  Wow!
 
Andy33
Posts: 2474
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:30 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 12:26 pm

Quoting VCy (Thread starter):
I always wondered why British Airways seems to ignore all other markets except London.

Getting to Heathrow or Gatwick by any other city in the UK is a very big hassle, often meaning a train journey into the city and then change 2 underground lines. If i am not mistaken most UK airports do not have a flight to LHR (expt MAN & Scotland) but even the ones that do don't have LGW flights to connect on their leisure flights.

Couldn't BA offer services from other UK airports to the London airports like BHX, EMA, LPL?

You can add NCL, LBA and BHD to the list of UK airports with BA flights to LHR. That's seven in total, with ABZ, EDI, GLA and MAN
GLA and EDI have flights to LGW, and BA codeshare with EI from BHD. Until recently BA offered MAN-LGW but cancelled it due to losses.

Absolutely nobody offers flights from BHX or EMA or LPL to any London airports, and they haven't for several years (even Ryanair or EasyJet). The reason is simple as far as EMA is concerned at least - far from a difficult connection in Central London, you arrive at St Pancras, go down two levels and get straight onto Thameslink to Gatwick or the Piccadilly line to Heathrow.

Quoting VCy (Thread starter):
Or better yet, can't they offer services from those airports to places like NYC or short haul destinations?

Well, BA sell tickets on AA flights to the USA from UK regional airports such as BHX, MAN, and EDI. It is a true joint venture, and it is always cheaper to operate a route if you have a base at at least one end, which AA does and BA doesn't.
They did short haul from regional airports as BA Connect, and sold the network to Flybe as again it was making substantial losses.
Now that IAG is buying EI, connecting across Dublin from UK regional airports for long haul, especially to the USA, will keep things in the family too.
 
edina
Posts: 579
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:51 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 12:43 pm

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 4):
They don't fly to the UK's second largest city, BHX. It's insane.

It's 102 miles from BHX to LHR.....It's insane to fly a journey that is achievable by road in 90 minutes! Even bus/coach services are only just over 2 hours.
Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
 
factsonly
Posts: 2700
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 12:49 pm

Quoting commavia (Reply 2):
the economics of the 'regions' of these countries simply can no longer support the cost structure and business model of European network carriers

Not entirely correct, though I understand what you are trying to say.

The 'home' disadvantage in serving 'regions' does not apply to the regional services of other European network carriers.

The UK regions are very well connected to the global air transport network via AMS, FRA, CDG, etc....

And ultimately it doesn't matter to passengers in Humberside, Norwich, Teesside, Exeter, etc.. which hub they use, as long as they can get to NRT, HKG, SIN, JNB, GRU, NYC, LAX, etc...conveniently and at a reasonable cost.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4891
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 1:05 pm

Quoting factsonly (Reply 7):
And ultimately it doesn't matter to passengers in Humberside, Norwich, Teesside, Exeter, etc.. which hub they use, as long as they can get to NRT, HKG, SIN, JNB, GRU, NYC, LAX, etc...conveniently and at a reasonable cost.

Yup, I would much rather take a 10 minute taxi ride to Norwich airport, hop over to AMS and fly from there than bother with getting to LHR or LGW.
 
yenne09
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:02 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 1:10 pm

This is why many years ago there was a funny publicity of Amsterdam: Amsterdam, London's third airport?. The
question mark was important. Now, IAG is using Dublin and Madrid as alternate hub. Why Emirates is serving
regional long-haul services? Now people from regional UK airports can go via Dublin for transatlantic flights, via Dubai
for Asia and via Amsterdam/Paris for worldwide connections. We see that the role of London is becoming less important
for UK regions. In the same time BA is continuingly loosinf passengers to other carriers.

LYS has a large European operation with some flights to Dubai ans Montreal.

The Eurowings development doesn't necessarily mean the end of region in Germany. For example the carrier is
estabishing a new hub in Koln/Bonn. The difference maybe is in developping leisure market like what Air Canada is doing
with Air Canada Rouge.
 
User avatar
DolphinAir747
Posts: 1896
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:07 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 1:41 pm

Quoting edina (Reply 6):
It's 102 miles from BHX to LHR.....It's insane to fly a journey that is achievable by road in 90 minutes! Even bus/coach services are only just over 2 hours.

Right but KL and EK's strength in those areas means that most passengers are unwilling to go through LHR even if it's as easy as some here claim.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4518
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 1:47 pm

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 4):
They don't fly to the UK's second largest city, BHX.

BA had based fleets of One Elevens and B737s at MAN / BHX as well as crew bases at GLA where the ATPs and HS748s were based.
The cold hearted bottom line is that BA could not and still cannot compete with the locos in that market. There's a lot of google-able history on this. The bottom line is no one will fly GLA-MAN-xyz if a based loco flies GLA-xyz direct. This is why they left that market, there was no competing on cost base versus revenue.
 
factsonly
Posts: 2700
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 3:19 pm

Quoting edina (Reply 6):
It's 102 miles from BHX to LHR.....It's insane to fly a journey that is achievable by road in 90 minutes! Even bus/coach services are only just over 2 hours.
Quoting moo (Reply 8):
Yup, I would much rather take a 10 minute taxi ride to Norwich airport, hop over to AMS and fly from there than bother with getting to LHR or LGW.

Yor comments reminded me to check the CAA - July 2015 statistics to see how UK regions are performing.

This is what I found, data just for AMS (sorry):

- ABZ-AMS new pax record July 2015 = 30.000 pax/month

- BHD-AMS new pax record July 2015 = 4.017 pax/month (KLM more pax in 3rd month, than BMI ever did)

- BHX-AMS new pax record July 2015 = 52.024 pax/month

- EDI-AMS new pax record July 2015 = 63.145 pax/month (TK, QR, EY have no impact apparently)

- TOTAL UK-AMS new pax record in July 2015 = over 850.000 pax/month

It seems the UK regions are heading for a record breaking year, so the UK regions must be well connected to the outside world.

data: http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?ca...=80&pagetype=88&pageid=11&sglid=11
 
MonsieurX
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 12:28 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 3:33 pm

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 10):
Right but KL and EK's strength in those areas means that most passengers are unwilling to go through LHR even if it's as easy as some here claim.

You've also got to factor destinations and markets into that though. Australia and New Zealand, for example, are two very large markets for Emirates et al out of the UK. Both of these destinations obviously require at least one intermediate transfer. Between Birmingham and Sydney, for example, you could either fly Emirates, with just one stop in Dubai, or you could (hypothetically) fly BA to London, and then London to Sydney via Singapore (i.e. two stops). Which one is the more attractive offer based upon ease of travel, therefore?

X
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8330
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 3:36 pm

Why doesn't Emirates fly from Rak to Birmingham - Dubai airways pah!!!
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
User avatar
nighthawk
Posts: 4851
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2001 2:33 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 3:40 pm

It's worth noting that if Heathrow's 3rd runway is ever built, then this will be used primarily for regional flying. This will allow BA to open up new destinations in the UK, such as Inverness, or perhaps Liverpool. Birmingham is too close to Heathrow, and driving is going to be quicker than flying, so a new flight here is unlikely.

I understand the benefits of BA operating from a single hub and channelling traffic through there, but I still believe they have missed a trick by not creating a small base at some of the larger UK airports. Easyjet/Ryanair have done quite well operating small bases in the regions, offering a few direct flights to popular destinations. There's no reason that BA couldn't have made this work too.

Doing it under the BA mainline name and contract may have been prohibitive, but as a low cost entity it could have been a winner. Selling GO was a mistake IMHO. It should have been re-branded better to identify it is a BA subsidiary, and more effort put into growing and marketing the airline. Hopefully BA will make use of Vueling in future and expand it's presence into the UK regions.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4518
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 4:05 pm

Quoting nighthawk (Reply 16):
It's worth noting that if Heathrow's 3rd runway is ever built, then this will be used primarily for regional flying.

Not sure you can fill a third runway with 3 daily JER / IOM / GCI / JER / LPL / MME?

Quoting nighthawk (Reply 16):
Selling GO was a mistake IMHO. It should have been re-branded better to identify it is a BA subsidiary,

With hindsight and distance perhaps. However as BA's profits came from LHR, if you were with BA at the time, many internally saw GO as a threat to BA's existing markets. Remember short haul LHR/LGW has never managed to achieve respectable profitability and they were faced with a easyJet eroding that market alongside Ryanair and then their own low cost subsidiary doing exactly the same thing. There we NO synergies with BA, partly because there were serious issues of brand confusion. Think of BMI in it's later todays, it was in a confusing place in the market with different products offered by route. Branding GO as BA Express or similar would have devalued and cannibalised the BA branding, and more importantly, BA culturally are rubbish at most things that don't involve LHR or at a push LGW.

Besides that I suspect BALPA and BASSA would have fought tooth and nail to prevent what they would have seen as an existential threat to Ts & Cs.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 4:32 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 13):
Why doesn't Delta fly from Hartford to Rome?

I think the closer analogy would be DL only flying to JFK from LAX and nowhere else (Manchester is UK's second biggest population area I believe and BA only flies to LHR I believe)
-or-
DL not serving Chicago at all (like BA not serving BHX).

I know these are smaller cities comparatively but I am surprised that BA doesn't serve these markets.

tortugamon
 
WorldspotterPL
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 2:40 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 4:46 pm

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 10):
Quoting edina (Reply 6):
It's 102 miles from BHX to LHR.....It's insane to fly a journey that is achievable by road in 90 minutes! Even bus/coach services are only just over 2 hours.

Right but KL and EK's strength in those areas means that most passengers are unwilling to go through LHR even if it's as easy as some here claim.

Correct. It may seem insane at first sight but if you look at how a hub works it's very sane. Lufthansa, for example, has to offer money burning flights from Nuremberg and Stuttgart to its Munich hub (similar distances as BHX-LHR) simply because people a) want to fly the entire journey and b) want to start flying at their home airport. So if Lufthansa relied on people driving from Nuremberg and Stuttgart to MUC to take intercontinental flights they miss out on many people that rather fly NUE/STR via CDG, AMS, IST, CPH, LHR etc. to the world. Also, don't forget that connecting flights are generally cheaper that direct flights - so those NUE-CDG/AMSetc.-world flights will not only be more convenient than having to drive to MUC (at own costs!) first, but the MUC flight will in general also be more expensive.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11849
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 4:52 pm

Quoting VCy (Thread starter):
don't have LGW flights to connect on their leisure flights
Quoting VCy (Thread starter):
I know low cost carriers seem to have this covered, but BA (and VS) is the only full sevice carrier of the UK. They offer more that puts them in a better position, for example being part of One World and the close cooperation with all the other airlines.

Leisure flights on full service carriers ? Passengers going partying to some sunny place caring about miles and such more than price ?

Does not compute.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
TeamintheSky
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 10:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 4:55 pm

Quoting edina (Reply 6):
It's 102 miles from BHX to LHR.....It's insane to fly a journey that is achievable by road in 90 minutes! Even bus/coach services are only just over 2 hours.

Fair point here. I live in East London, and I have a colleague in Birmingham. She routinely clocks as good if not better times to Heathrow if I get caught in traffic (which with all the Cycle Super Highways being installed, is regular). Here's a vote for LCY to LHR!

Regards,

Team
Since 2010: DL, KL, AF, WX, IG, FR , FL, U2, AK, BA, OK, UX, VS, VN, K6, AT, US, AY, BE, EI, LG, AZ, 9W, SG, AA, JL, W6
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4518
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 4:58 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 18):
I know these are smaller cities comparatively but I am surprised that BA doesn't serve these markets.

They're not remotely competitive on their cost base in these markets, that's why.
 
IADCA
Posts: 1868
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 5:00 pm

Quoting VCy (Thread starter):
Couldn't BA offer services from other UK airports to the London airports like BHX, EMA, LPL?

Or better yet, can't they offer services from those airports to places like NYC or short haul destinations?

It's more or less a function of the economics of LHR. LHR is heavily slot-constrained, and London itself (plus traffic generated by trans-Atlantic connections) is a more profitable use of those slots than flying to most of England. Because of LHR's location, basically none of the traffic on a hypothetical EMA-LHR, BHX-LHR (same for the bulk of the Manchester area, hence the relatively low level of MAN-LHR) will be O&D because trains win out. At that point, you're talking about running a loss-making E190 on a very short flight to suck up some connecting traffic that you're now competing on with every other European carrier at MAN.

It only makes sense on routes where either there is enough premium long haul traffic to justify the corresponding loss on the local sector or a long enough stage length to actually get O&D. England just isn't big enough for most of that, especially given the population distribution.

When you get to offering something like longhaul from MAN or BHX, you're in a different ballgame, but those are relatively small markets, especially up front, and the lower-yielding VFR and leisure traffic is often hoovered up by carriers with cost structures that BA can't touch.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 5:25 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 22):
They're not remotely competitive on their cost base in these markets, that's why.

I would not want the third runway at LHR either if I was BA. Not competitive on regional routes, makes me wonder what we will see when long haul on LCCs becomes more common.

tortugamon
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4518
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 5:38 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 24):
I would not want the third runway at LHR either if I was BA. Not competitive on regional routes, makes me wonder what we will see when long haul on LCCs becomes more common.

Agreed, this is why Wille Walsh doesn't want a third runway, easyJet would try to do to LHR short haul what they did at LGW and WW and Keith would have to take on the BA unions again to remain remotely competitive.

Quoting IADCA (Reply 23):
When you get to offering something like longhaul from MAN or BHX, you're in a different ballgame, but those are relatively small markets, especially up front, and the lower-yielding VFR and leisure traffic is often hoovered up by carriers with cost structures that BA can't touch.

Not quite, most long haul out of MAN is all spoke to hub on legacy carriers. It's a misconception btw that there is little market down the pointy end, this analogy only works if you hold MAN up against the insanity of London money and again relatively small only in comparison to a World Citty like London.

There is a lot of good money to be made out of MAN as the presence of multiple daily Emirates A380s will testify to. The difference is that the US carriers don't take MAN seriously now they're in Alliances.

Delta gifted MAN-ATL to Virgin (good move), and flies MAN-JFK on a B757.
American are still flying B763s and UNITED only offer the now increasingly unreliable B757.
It's worth noting American are happy to allow their customer base to connect over LHR with and fly on a far superior hard product on a B77W / B772.
 
User avatar
FlyCaledonian
Posts: 1929
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 6:54 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 17):
With hindsight and distance perhaps. However as BA's profits came from LHR, if you were with BA at the time, many internally saw GO as a threat to BA's existing markets. Remember short haul LHR/LGW has never managed to achieve respectable profitability and they were faced with a easyJet eroding that market alongside Ryanair and then their own low cost subsidiary doing exactly the same thing. There we NO synergies with BA, partly because there were serious issues of brand confusion. Think of BMI in it's later todays, it was in a confusing place in the market with different products offered by route. Branding GO as BA Express or similar would have devalued and cannibalised the BA branding, and more importantly, BA culturally are rubbish at most things that don't involve LHR or at a push LGW.

Besides that I suspect BALPA and BASSA would have fought tooth and nail to prevent what they would have seen as an existential threat to Ts & Cs.

I think the last point is important here. It should be remembered the pain BA went through to get the Mixed Fleet crew established at LHR; the fact that BA CityFlyer can't operate out of LHR or LGW.

Go was seen as canabalising London traffic from the parent airline at LHR/LGW, and in the regions it was canabalising BA Express (e.g. Go at Bristol was up against BA subsiduary Brymon Airways!).

So often on here people criticise BA for just giving up on the UK regions, but I think it's also forgotten that it was coping with a legacy cost base. Competition after European open skies was fierce in the UK. Yet BA couldn't just rip up what it had in place and create a new low cost operation. Mind you, merging BA Regional, BRAL and Brymon Airways to try and solve things as BA Connect wasn't necessarily the right move either. But at least BA did try - but as a business it decided to cut its losses and focus on where the money is.
Let's Go British Caledonian!
 
IADCA
Posts: 1868
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 7:08 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 25):
Not quite, most long haul out of MAN is all spoke to hub on legacy carriers. It's a misconception btw that there is little market down the pointy end, this analogy only works if you hold MAN up against the insanity of London money and again relatively small only in comparison to a World Citty like London.

That's precisely why the word "relatively" was in my post. Relative to London. I wish BA ran a parallel longhaul operation out of MAN. I would have used it, and it strikes me that it would have been good as a connecting hub for traffic that didn't need to travel over LHR. But that was a decision made years ago by BA, and since then they (IAG) have acquired or are acquiring several alternate transfer hubs.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4518
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 7:36 pm

Quoting IADCA (Reply 27):
I wish BA ran a parallel longhaul operation out of MAN. I would have used it, and it strikes me that it would have been good as a connecting hub for traffic that didn't need to travel over LHR. But that was a decision made years ago by BA, and since then they (IAG) have acquired or are acquiring several alternate transfer hubs.

You do know they did used to have one of these at MAN right? Fed the Scottish flights through MAN / BHX and at MAN fed long haul to JFK / MCO / HKG / LAX though not all at once. The key point was that it was relatively poor connecting hub for traffic, MAN is not a hub, it's a spoke.
 
civetfive
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:44 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 7:41 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 25):

Multiple A380s funnel pax across the entire EK network (and the networks of EY, QR, TK, LH, KL, AF, EI, etc), not a single destination. It would be great if someone could show daily O&D figures for the top markets ex-MAN; I think that would help us get a sense for which destinations a true nonstop hub could support now (and where it might have been stimulatable 10-15 years ago).

As was mentioned above, LHR is horrible congested and slot constrained, so flights to the Regions are tough to justify.

LH has a split hub and clearly MUC can stand on its own, but its portfolio of destinations still isn't that of FRA. My guess is MAN could have looked like MUC does today. FRA has been constrained and especially was in the late 90s and early 2000s, so a lot of growth had to have come from a secondary hub and upgauging.

I think that other than LH, Europe shows us that split hubs are the exception, not the rule. AF is consolidated on CDG and ORY. AZ couldn't make a dual FCO-MXP hub work. SAS runs a very split operation and appears to mostly service O&D rather than connecting flows and probably has bilateral issues at play too. IB couldn't make BCN and MAD work. LO has tried chasing ORD/JFK/EWR O&D to Wroclaw and Krakow with limited success, and TAP has tried the same thing with Brazil and OPO. Going abroad, SA couldn't make it work with CPT, the Japanese carriers have struggled to make almost anything outside of Tokyo work.

I'm much more interested in seeing how things will play out in Brazil (and Mercosur in general). There's so many large coastal cities and not a lot of large central cities other than Brasilia and Belo Horizonte, so its either going to end up with lots of P2P or split hub operations.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4518
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 7:57 pm

Quoting civetfive (Reply 29):
LH has a split hub and clearly MUC can stand on its own, but its portfolio of destinations still isn't that of FRA. My guess is MAN could have looked like MUC does today.

Your guess would be way off sadly as the population density split between MUC and FRA permits something which the equivalent between LHR and MAN does not.

Quoting civetfive (Reply 29):
Multiple A380s funnel pax across the entire EK network (and the networks of EY, QR, TK, LH, KL, AF, EI, etc), not a single destination.

The single destination is.....DUBAI. One hub going to the four winds, just like LHR.
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 8:15 pm

Quoting VCy (Thread starter):
Couldn't BA offer services from other UK airports to the London airports like BHX, EMA, LPL?


One of the inherent problems with the hub and spoke model is that it forces customers to use a hub - even when there is a good market between two non-hub city pairs. The fact that many non-London UK airports have better service from foreign airlines than BA is quite revealing. Hub and spoke carriers happily give up business in every market except their hub.

I feel the hub and spoke model is inherently unstable because there will always be an expanding opportunity for competitors to overfly the hub with non-stop service. Improving technologies encourage this, air travel market growth encourages this and the necessary overhead costs of the high cost hub operation mean undercutting the legacies is always a growth market.

BA's answer to your complaint: "But we offer flat-bed premium seating and lounges across the world all from our London hub. If the joy of changing @ Heathrow is not to your needs, we don't want your business."



Pu.
 
factsonly
Posts: 2700
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 8:26 pm

Quoting civetfive (Reply 29):
It would be great if someone could show daily O&D figures for the top markets ex-MAN

DATA Monthly Passengers - July 2015:

1. - MANCHESTER - DUBLIN 77.183
2. - MANCHESTER - AMSTERDAM 74.662
3. - MANCHESTER - LONDON LHR 60.110
4. - MANCHESTER - PARIS CDG 42.399
5. - MANCHESTER - FRANKFURT MAIN 38.688
6. - MANCHESTER - MUNICH 32.040
7. - MANCHESTER - COPENHAGEN 24.134
8. - MANCHESTER - LISBON 19.871
9. - MANCHESTER - BRUSSELS 17.579
10. - MANCHESTER - HELSINKI 10.273
11. - MANCHESTER - ZURICH 10.115
12. - MANCHESTER - STOCKHOLM ARN 10.080
13. - MANCHESTER - ROME FCO 9.881
14. - MANCHESTER - KEFLAVIK 8.502
15. - MANCHESTER - MADRID 8.296
16. - MANCHESTER - MILAN MXP 6.932
17. - MANCHESTER - OSLO OSL 6.260
 
David_itl
Posts: 6365
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 8:31 pm

Quoting civetfive (Reply 29):
It would be great if someone could show daily O&D figures for the top markets ex-MAN; I think that would help us get a sense for which destinations a true nonstop hub could support now

Only ones of the top of my head is EK's 200,000 pax O+D to DXB and the approx 100,000 to BKK.

What would be interesting is to see the breakdown for the States now that TCX is poking their noses in and expanding their portfolio but I don't know what percentage is actually made up of the BE services tailored to co-ordinate primarily on to their own network but also allowing the opportunity to connect on to the range of long-haul.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 30):
The single destination is.....DUBAI. One hub going to the four winds, just like LHR.

Yet we have CX coming in and achieving 96% loads last month to HKG non-stop and pretty sure they've been 80%+ in a lot of the months they've operated; this on a route where EK.was the market leader in one-stop to HKG prior to the CX launch Begs the question of whether airlines are chicken when competing against EK and/or operating to the regions.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 26):
But at least BA did try - but as a business it decided to cut its losses and focus on where the money is.

To Southern folk it would appear that they tried but to sensible folk they didn't. BA Regional had to compete against BA London poaching the premium payer due to London's microscopic yield that needed to be helped by getting passengers out of the regions and onto their shuttle services. Oh, even if BA had the cost structure in place they would STILL be clueless on how to operate out of the regions as collectively the executive board has approximately 1 brain cell.
 
IADCA
Posts: 1868
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 8:45 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 28):
You do know they did used to have one of these at MAN right? Fed the Scottish flights through MAN / BHX and at MAN fed long haul to JFK / MCO / HKG / LAX though not all at once. The key point was that it was relatively poor connecting hub for traffic, MAN is not a hub, it's a spoke.

Yes, I do, and it wasn't even that long ago. However, the decision to pull it apart was made in a different commercial environment as to LHR flights, especially to the USA and a different alliance/JV world, and it was certainly the correct one then. But hubs are all about scale. When you're basing something as purely a connecting hub, you need a lot more than what that operation was, especially when you have BA's cost structure. It's either go big or go home, as the anti-intellectual crowd frequently posits as to things like this. With no incentive (or perhaps ability) to try something like that, it is a spoke.

I find it strange that I made a post supporting the idea that MAN doesn't have what's needed to support a BA longhaul operation, and you disagreed with me to point out that apparently there IS some premium demand. Now when I point out that it could do ok as a purely connecting hub (and as a theoretical exercise), you point out that BA made a half-baked attempt at that (in a different commercial environment at that) in support of the idea that it is and should be a spoke given the BA of today. Considering my point originally about these airports was that given their spoke status, BA can't compete with the other carriers that serve them as an explanation of why there's not BA longhaul there, you seem to just have disagreed your way all the way back to my original meaning.
 
theginge
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:53 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 8:56 pm

Quoting david_itl (Reply 33):
Yet we have CX coming in and achieving 96% loads last month to HKG non-stop and pretty sure they've been 80%+ in a lot of the months they've operated; this on a route where EK.was the market leader in one-stop to HKG prior to the CX launch Begs the question of whether airlines are chicken when competing against EK and/or operating to the regions.

And CX are still connecting in their hub, how many of these passengers from Manchester are finishing in Hong Kong or transferring onwards?!
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4518
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:12 pm

Quoting IADCA (Reply 34):
I find it strange that I made a post supporting the idea that MAN doesn't have what's needed to support a BA longhaul operation, and you disagreed with me to point out that apparently there IS some premium demand. Now when I point out that it could do ok as a purely connecting hub (and as a theoretical exercise), you point out that BA made a half-baked attempt at that (in a different commercial environment at that) in support of the idea that it is and should be a spoke given the BA of today. Considering my point originally about these airports was that given their spoke status, BA can't compete with the other carriers that serve them as an explanation of why there's not BA longhaul there, you seem to just have disagreed your way all the way back to my original meaning.

Your conflating some semi related points here.
It's a myth there's little premium demand out of MAN, there's loads.
This does not mean BA could monetise it as they'd sandwiched between the current hub to spoke carriers and the loco long haul / leisure brigade.
So your point that it could do "OK as a purely connecting hub" is confused as all like Europe hubs rely on a rather large dose of P2P to remain viable and BA would really struggle in P2P as the market is really cost driven on short haul and they would consequently struggle to make a hub work with so little feed. Also when you say "a lot more than that operation was", it was a whole fleet of One Eleven jets and a substantial tuboprop operation with748s and ATPs, BA were the largest carrier at MAN for many years.
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:26 pm

Quoting david_itl (Reply 33):
To Southern folk it would appear that they tried but to sensible folk they didn't. BA Regional had to compete against BA London poaching the premium payer due to London's microscopic yield that needed to be helped by getting passengers out of the regions and onto their shuttle services. Oh, even if BA had the cost structure in place they would STILL be clueless on how to operate out of the regions as collectively the executive board has approximately 1 brain cell.

When are we going to drop this "There's pots of gold to be made in setting up a hub at MAN and if BA wasn't so clueless it would notice it."

BA, EK, CX all essentially do the same thing at MAN: Feed traffic from MAN to their hub.

It's a perfectly simple concept.
 
Ryanair01
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:27 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:53 pm

Heathrow's location is pretty good for the motorway network heading South West; West; or North from London and this covers most of the UK population. BA has flights to cities when driving times hit about 3 hours, but destinations in the Midlands which might be served via Birmingham or East Mids can be reached by road in 90 minutes. The only exception as such is Liverpool, but Manchester and Liverpool serve basically the same market.

So by the time you'd have driven to Birmingham or East Mids from a home in the Midlands, taxied, taken off and then circled London in the stack for 20 minutes, frankly driving would be very similar in terms of time if you were making a connecting flight. So the benefit of a connecting flight would be modest. With 8 trains per hour between Birmingham and London provided by three competing train companies, 3 of which do city centre to city centre in 1h 24m, the market doesn't need flights, so they would just attract connecting traffic.

In terms of leisure destinations from Gatwick, most of these places are covered by the charter airlines from Manchester. Also don't forget VS does have some regional holiday routes. So there isn't really any need for someone to connect via London when direct flights are already available.

BA's business model is based around offering the facility to get basically anywhere to big corporate travel clients in the world's biggest aviation market, which is London. Outside of London in the UK there isn't the scale of corporate travel, so those markets don't fit BA's model.

Of course the regional airports are doing very well, they don't need BA!

Conversely BA doesn't really need them.
 
fiddlerkrt
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:23 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:18 pm

Quoting Ryanair01 (Reply 38):
Heathrow's location is pretty good for the motorway network heading South West; West; or North from London and this covers most of the UK population. BA has flights to cities when driving times hit about 3 hours, but destinations in the Midlands which might be served via Birmingham or East Mids can be reached by road in 90 minutes. The only exception as such is Liverpool, but Manchester and Liverpool serve basically the same market.

So by the time you'd have driven to Birmingham or East Mids from a home in the Midlands, taxied, taken off and then circled London in the stack for 20 minutes, frankly driving would be very similar in terms of time if you were making a connecting flight. So the benefit of a connecting flight would be modest. With 8 trains per hour between Birmingham and London provided by three competing train companies, 3 of which do city centre to city centre in 1h 24m, the market doesn't need flights, so they would just attract connecting traffic.

In terms of leisure destinations from Gatwick, most of these places are covered by the charter airlines from Manchester. Also don't forget VS does have some regional holiday routes. So there isn't really any need for someone to connect via London when direct flights are already available.

BA's business model is based around offering the facility to get basically anywhere to big corporate travel clients in the world's biggest aviation market, which is London. Outside of London in the UK there isn't the scale of corporate travel, so those markets don't fit BA's model.

Of course the regional airports are doing very well, they don't need BA!

Conversely BA doesn't really need them.

Good post!

There was a really interesting "theorem" so to speak posited by a member here recently about the "visitor" advantage. It is easier for a foreign airline to serve secondary markets in the home country of the "incumbent airline." A great example is KL which serves a vast array of UK markets while BA only offers ABZ, EDI, GLA, LBA, MAN, NCL from LHR. On the flip side, BA can offer a lot of direct routes from LHR to the US while the US3 only fly from their hubs to Europe (although there are some exceptions such as AA on RDU-LHR and DL on PHL-LHR).

As for not serving BHX, at less than 100 miles from LHR it can't possibly be profitable for BA to dump an A319 route on it and waste 4 slot pairs to offer a sufficient number of connections. The flight would probably spend more time in a holding pattern than it would actually going between the two cities.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7052
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:58 pm

Quoting yenne09 (Reply 9):
via Amsterdam/Paris for worldwide connections

KLM and Air France have made a nice business of long haul connections from UK regions. The new Dublin hub should help with connections to North America. Next merger for IAG should have a European hub, hey Copenhagen could be nice.
 
User avatar
FlyCaledonian
Posts: 1929
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:04 am

Quoting david_itl (Reply 33):
Yet we have CX coming in and achieving 96% loads last month to HKG non-stop and pretty sure they've been 80%+ in a lot of the months they've operated; this on a route where EK.was the market leader in one-stop to HKG prior to the CX launch Begs the question of whether airlines are chicken when competing against EK and/or operating to the regions.

Yet CX is serving a hub in HKG, just like EK is serving a hub in DXB. And the launch of the nonstop MAN flight by CX is on the back of other expansion within Europe. CX has built up HKG to a much greater extent than the operation that it had in place when MAN was served as a one-stop via AMS.

Contrast that to SQ, who still don't offer a daily non-stop to MAN, despite having stuck with the airport for years. But then HKG is better positioned as a hub for more Asian connections than SIN.

Quoting david_itl (Reply 33):
Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 26):
But at least BA did try - but as a business it decided to cut its losses and focus on where the money is.

To Southern folk it would appear that they tried but to sensible folk they didn't. BA Regional had to compete against BA London poaching the premium payer due to London's microscopic yield that needed to be helped by getting passengers out of the regions and onto their shuttle services. Oh, even if BA had the cost structure in place they would STILL be clueless on how to operate out of the regions as collectively the executive board has approximately 1 brain cell.

But that's the issue - two hubs close together do poach traffic from each other. Like it or lump it, hub and spoke works on economy of scale - a flight being a mix of O&D traffic and then a few pax each transferring to multiple flights. Start splitting that traffic across two hubs in close proximety and something starts to give. Heck, a clear example of that was BA with the attempted LHR/LGW dual-hub. Splitting the European flights didn't work, because whilst both hubs had feed, the O&D traffic wanting frequency didn't want to flip between LHR or LGW.

BD couldn't make MAN work after it got the A332s (expecting LHR access a few years too early for TATL flights). VS is supporting its longhaul operation on the back of Virgin Holidays. Nobody else has stepped up to make MAN a hub. Yet BA should have been able to run multiple UK hubs when nobody else has been interested?
Let's Go British Caledonian!
 
User avatar
kngkyle
Moderator
Posts: 505
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:33 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:07 am

It is a little strange. This is definitely not the case in the US. For example, Chicago to Milwaukee is about 80 miles, takes about an hour on the train and a little longer via car. There were 17 flights from ORD to MKE today. Now Milwaukee is a good sized city, but even smaller close-by cities like Rockford and South Bend have 5+ daily flights to ORD. Of course it's all about the connecting traffic, but that would be the case at LHR as well. Perhaps because LHR is slot restricted they just can't afford to use the slots on such small routes.
 
cornishsimon
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:10 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:12 am

One of the main advantages for IAG to purchase EI is the DUB hub and the EI regional UK connectivity to said hub.

Aer Lingus offer much better UK regional connectivity to DUB from many more UK airports than BA do so the IAG group will soon be able to address the issue of UK regional customers not choosing the IAG group of airlines.

However, having said that I can see BA changing its thinking a little more over the coming years, BA have already been trying out different ways of flying regionally to Europe using a night stopping aircraft last year at EDI with a MF crew, this year they are trying it over the winter operating a W pattern using a LGW crew LGW-GLA-XXX-GLA-LGW, I very much suspect that if they can make this pay by using LGW based crew and aircraft that we will see more of this during the coming summer season, the coming GLA experiment I suspect is aimed at a package tour company with remaining seats being sold by BA and available for avios redemptions.

BA have reduced rotations on MAN-LHR recently with MAN-LGW dropped a couple of years ago, with LGW longhaul mainly aimed at Point to Point I suspect that the MAN shuttle wont be returning any time soon, however fuel prices are going down and staying down and BA now have airbus replacing old boeings, so perhaps we could see BA try MAN again in an effort to shunt MAN-LON point to point via LGW instead of LHR and provide a small amount of feed to the expanding longhaul network at Crawley, however I would of thought that we would need to see at least a couple more 772s make the move before we see any domestic expansion at LGW.

Im fairly certain that LHR have agreed to ringfence slots at LHR if R3 gets built to allow new unserved UK domestic routes access to LHR, so the likes of INV, PIK, NQY, EXT, JER, GCI etc would all in theory be given access to mothership heathrow.

cs
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:17 am

Quoting fiddlerkrt (Reply 39):
There was a really interesting "theorem" so to speak posited by a member here recently about the "visitor" advantage. It is easier for a foreign airline to serve secondary markets in the home country of the "incumbent airline." A great

Take a look at where Tesla puts its super chargers to power their electric cars. They are not necessarily in the city where the cars are as much as where the cars are going. For example there are not any chargers in Milwaukee but there is a charger between Chicago and Milwaukee for people traveling between the cities that might need a charge. I don't see this analogy as being too far off for the airline business and is in-line with the posit above.

tortugamon
 
fiddlerkrt
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:23 am

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 1:36 am

Quoting kngkyle (Reply 42):
It is a little strange. This is definitely not the case in the US. For example, Chicago to Milwaukee is about 80 miles, takes about an hour on the train and a little longer via car. There were 17 flights from ORD to MKE today. Now Milwaukee is a good sized city, but even smaller close-by cities like Rockford and South Bend have 5+ daily flights to ORD. Of course it's all about the connecting traffic, but that would be the case at LHR as well. Perhaps because LHR is slot restricted they just can't afford to use the slots on such small routes.

There are definitely shorter routes served in the US but two major differences between MKE/ORD vs. BHX/LHR are that BA have no aircraft smaller than an A318 whereas both UA and AA have RJ's and ORD has far more runway capacity than LHR, so BA have to make choices about what cities are worth their while so to speak. The only way to fill a BHX-LON flight is to offer connections since the train is much easier. This is why BHX doesn't have any flights to LON at all since O/D traffic wouldn't dream of flying when there are faster/easier options. Another thing to consider is that air taxes in the UK are higher which makes it less appealing economically for very short distances.

Quoting Cornishsimon (Reply 43):
Aer Lingus offer much better UK regional connectivity to DUB from many more UK airports than BA do so the IAG group will soon be able to address the issue of UK regional customers not choosing the IAG group of airlines.

Completely agree and I shall be very curious to see how a) this affects the BA shuttle routes and b) how much EI and EI Regional will increase flights to the UK. I don't expect it to affect a) very much since BA don't have any direct competitors on its domestic routes.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 44):
Take a look at where Tesla puts its super chargers to power their electric cars. They are not necessarily in the city where the cars are as much as where the cars are going. For example there are not any chargers in Milwaukee but there is a charger between Chicago and Milwaukee for people traveling between the cities that might need a charge. I don't see this analogy as being too far off for the airline business and is in-line with the posit above.

This is very interesting and I had no idea Tesla was doing this. Thank-you for mentioning it.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26496
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 2:30 am

Quoting DolphinAir747 (Reply 4):
They don't fly to the UK's second largest city, BHX. It's insane. LHR doesn't have direct train connections to other UK cities, and transferring through Central London is

There are plans to bring Heathrow into the train network. The idiotic private ownership has stifled that, so far.

Quoting factsonly (Reply 7):
The UK regions are very well connected to the global air transport network via AMS, FRA, CDG, etc....

Exactly.

Quoting yenne09 (Reply 9):
Now, IAG is using Dublin and Madrid as alternate hub.

DUB is going to be a huge part of this equation.

Quoting civetfive (Reply 29):
LH has a split hub and clearly MUC can stand on its own, but its portfolio of destinations still isn't that of FRA. My guess is MAN could have looked like MUC does today. FRA has been constrained and especially was in the late 90s and early 2000s, so a lot of growth had to have come from a secondary hub and upgauging.

The difference is that Germany has more people than the UK and is more spread out. The home market alone helps make up for lots of differences.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
factsonly
Posts: 2700
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:01 am

And now some long haul destinations from Manchester - July 2015:

- MANCHESTER - DUBAI 73.429
- MANCHESTER - ORLANDO 54.573
- MANCHESTER - ABU DHABI 43.220
- MANCHESTER - DOHA 27.647
- MANCHESTER - NEW YORK JFK 24.389
- MANCHESTER - TORONTO 22.590
- MANCHESTER - CANCUN 21.490
- MANCHESTER - ATLANTA 12.062
- MANCHESTER - PHILADELPHIA 11.423
- MANCHESTER - LAS VEGAS 11.350
- MANCHESTER - SINGAPORE 11.148
- MANCHESTER - HONG KONG 11.121
- MANCHESTER - CHICAGO 11.032
- MANCHESTER - WASHINGTON 8.396
- MANCHESTER - SANFORD 7.498
- MANCHESTER - MIAMI 4.791

Source: CAA
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9731
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:22 am

Quoting Aesma (Reply 20):
Leisure flights on full service carriers ? Passengers going partying to some sunny place caring about miles and such more than price ?

Well, did that already 3 times on LH to Mediterranean destinations. OK, we do no have LCCs at FRA except Vueling. But I would not go EZY or FR if they where here.

LH did a good Job with switching their off hub Network to German/Eurowings and I hope that they will settle the disputes with the Pilots and cabin creww soon. There is not way around These cost cutting measures. The alternative is lower paid Jobs or no jobs at all.
It is not too far ago that BA operated a mini hb at BHX, I used BHX transfer flights quite often, the dedicated terminal was quick easy to use. Giving up the second largest City of a Country is, IMHO unthinkable. .
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
User avatar
DolphinAir747
Posts: 1896
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:07 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 8:11 am

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 36):
it was a whole fleet of One Eleven jets and a substantial tuboprop operation with748s and ATPs, BA were the largest carrier at MAN for many years.
Quoting Cornishsimon (Reply 43):
One of the main advantages for IAG to purchase EI is the DUB hub and the EI regional UK connectivity to said hub.

Aer Lingus offer much better UK regional connectivity to DUB from many more UK airports than BA do so the IAG group will soon be able to address the issue of UK regional customers not choosing the IAG group of airlines.

The huge problem is EI's lack of connections ex-DUB. They fly only a few US routes that overlap with BA's. Nothing in Asia, Latin America, or Africa. I doubt BA can fill flights from DUB to the Regions if they offer only six longhaul connections (BOS JFK IAD MCO ORD SFO). DUB is a decent O&D market with a few niche longhaul markets like SFO for the tech industry, but it makes for a lousy reliever hub.
 
SKAirbus
Posts: 1535
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:18 pm

RE: Why Won't BA Expand In The UK? ( Out Of London)

Tue Aug 25, 2015 8:30 am

Quoting david_itl (Reply 33):
To Southern folk it would appear that they tried but to sensible folk they didn't. BA Regional had to compete against BA London poaching the premium payer due to London's microscopic yield that needed to be helped by getting passengers out of the regions and onto their shuttle services. Oh, even if BA had the cost structure in place they would STILL be clueless on how to operate out of the regions as collectively the executive board has approximately 1 brain cell.

Interesting that you claim to be one of the "sensible folk" with a sensationalist comment like that...

Anyway. The fact of the matter is that the UK market is saturated and BA has lost out on a lot of that market apart from shuttling businessmen down from Scotland to LCY or connecting passengers down from Scotland + Northern England to LHR. As it stands MAN is very well served by other carriers as are many other cities all of whom have KL/EK or other connections to world hubs. The likes of BE, FR and U2 also have a huge presence "oop nawf" so people up there hardly miss out.

I'm not really sure where all this regional anger about BA comes from. The fact of the matter is that they were priced out the markets they operated in and could not make money outside of London. I'd only understand this anger if there weren't ample connection opportunities from regional destinations in the UK but there are. So... it's probably time to get over it.
Base: BRU

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos