Manchester Airport - General Thread

[Dobbo]

I think I understand @Coathanger16 's point now.

I think the discussion is at cross purposes, but the fundamental agreement is that a route from "X" does not have to be at the exclusion of the same route from "Y" provided each are commercially viable.

As I understand it, Coathanger is saying that, in the same way as the thicker short haul routes are viable from multiple UK airports in close proximity, certain long haul routes should also be viable from multiple points. The example of BHX to Orlando is a good one here because the market plainly exists but is undermined by surface leakage.

What the MAN crew are saying is that MAN provides the most obvious focal point of demand (outside of London) for the thinner long haul routes, which almost certainly would not be viable from any other northern airport.

 

[Dobbo]

Manchester certainly does very well for its size on TATL routes. Saying that, it is rather amusing if not frustrating that whenever an airline launches a new route to N.America, certain members almost immediately jump to "ok, where next?" - certainly when it comes to TCX

Well TCX has been a remarkable story over the past few years. While much of the global focus has been on Norwegian they have quietly gone out and done what many commentators were expecting Norwegian would try at MAN. Only downside is that they are clearly going after VS on SFO and BOS - which may not be best for the consumer in the long term if one (i.e. VS) pulls out.

 

[Coathanger16]

I think I understand @Coathanger16 's point now.

I think the discussion is at cross purposes, but the fundamental agreement is that a route from "X" does not have to be at the exclusion of the same route from "Y" provided each are commercially viable.

As I understand it, Coathanger is saying that, in the same way as the thicker short haul routes are viable from multiple UK airports in close proximity, certain long haul routes should also be viable from multiple points. The example of BHX to Orlando is a good one here because the market plainly exists but is undermined by surface leakage.

What the MAN crew are saying is that MAN provides the most obvious focal point of demand (outside of London) for the thinner long haul routes, which almost certainly would not be viable from any other northern airport.

Pretty much yes. I certainly wouldn't expect the likes of Seattle, or potentially Guangzhou or Shanghai to be viable from other regional airports - yet - like they are from Manchester.

Well TCX has been a remarkable story over the past few years. While much of the global focus has been on Norwegian they have quietly gone out and done what many commentators were expecting Norwegian would try at MAN. Only downside is that they are clearly going after VS on SFO and BOS - which may not be best for the consumer in the long term if one (i.e. VS) pulls out.

Manchester is fortunate enough to have an airline like TCX willing to expand their operations there. Most other airports are reliant on non-UK airlines for their long haul routes, which in turn makes it harder to acquire new routes.

 

[User001]

Coathanger

I've read your posts, and I think you've got the wrong end of a stick here.

I don't think anyone on these threads has advocated that passengers from the surroundings 'MUST' use Manchester, nor that the local airports have no rights to these long haul flights.

What they are saying, is that in the absence of those long haul routes from other regional airports, then why not use MAN to provide those links? If someone wants to use a 1 stop flight from their local, go for it, I don't think anyone here would try and stop that, but, if people are happy to use ground transport and then a non stop flight, then why shouldn't MAN try and attract those passengers?

It's nothing to do with 'God given rights' to long haul, it's nothing to do with trying to stifle long haul from those airports, it's about going after a market that has a choice of alternative options and catering to those people.

At the end of the day, as you have pointed out yourself, airline strategy means that just like Heathrow 'speaks' for the majority of the U.K. When it comes to long haul in particular, MAN is that point where airlines will use a central point to cater for a larger market. It may be down to geography, it may be down to luck, but you can hardly blame MAN for doing the best for itself?

As for being amused or frustrated that some members are always looking for the next long haul route, this is a MAN thread with people having different aspirations. If it irks you so, just ignore it and let us have our fun.

 

[Coathanger16]

What they are saying, is that in the absence of those long haul routes from other regional airports, then why not use MAN to provide those links? If someone wants to use a 1 stop flight from their local, go for it

I don't know if I speak for anyone else, but it often comes across as though supporters of MAN are saying if MAN has a direct route to a particular destination, then they should get as many people to use it from across the North as possible - that's completely fair and I wouldn't expect anything less. Maybe this is where I have misinterpreted however, is that is say somebody wanted to travel fro Newcastle to Houston, that it would be frowned upon if they routed say NCL-AMS-IAH, and not travel to MAN and fly direct. Though it's never explicitly stated, if often feels like we are being asked "MAN has a direct route. Why aren't you using it?".

If that has not been peoples intention to put that point of view across then I apologize if I have offended anyone by suggesting so. However, if that's the impression I've been given, its not out of the question that others have interpreted things the same. Indeed I will admit that I would hope (though not expect) people that are from the East Midlands would use Primera to fly BHX to NYC/BOS rather that fly EMA to AMS/CDG then to the US.

As for being amused or frustrated that some members are always looking for the next long haul route, this is a MAN thread with people having different aspirations. If it irks you so, just ignore it and let us have our fun.

The last point is more of a pet peeve of mine, and I admit us local to BHX have done the same with Primera - they've announced EWR & BOS and we're already asking where next - I guess its in the nature of an aviation enthusiast. Its just that being local to an airport that struggles to get new long haul routes, when MAN gets a new route and people are talking more about what other routes that could be launched rather than the one that has just been announced, the rest of us are saying we'd do anything to get that route - just be glad that you've got what you have.

 

[Aceshigh]

I genuinely think WE (as passionate supporters of Manchester) seem to be answering arguments which we never created in the first place!

"God given right"
"Expectation"

....have been introduced into the narrative by non Manchester supporters. To me there is then a certain subtlety within a number of responses which paraphrase these terms as though WE suggested them.

NOT TRUE !

Not one poster on here who supports Manchester HAS EVER said people in The Midlands , Yorkshire Humberside Tyneside should use Manchester NOT ONE !!!!

Within an hour travel it is "probably" best placed to meet the needs of "potential" long haul passengers in those areas but not to the detriment of Leeds Liverpool or Birmingham should passengers wish to avail themselves of using other options by way of connectivity.

If passengers wish to choose to fly from Liverpool - Dublin
Birmingham - Paris
Or Leeds - Amsterdam they are absolutely free to do so!
_______________________________________

I would draw readers attention to a programme aired in 2014 and presented by Evan Davis, a midlander coincidentally. It's available I believe on You Tube and called Mind The Gap.

Evan Davis is the presenter, ex Harvard where he studied economics. He examines in detail the "economic" arguments as to why Manchester is thee only show in town economically as a counterweight to London, all the economic arguments are forensically explored in that programme. It might urk other cities but it is possibly the reason 18 skyscrapers are currently being built there. For many especially young educated graduates it is the "go to" place in the UK.

The arguments in terms of the use of Manchester Airport are identical and indeed water tight. They are independent of what might be perceived as our evangelical support of Manchester.

"Opportunity cost" however is always available and there are exceptions.
BIrmingham Dublin JFK can still be booked.

PS ..whisper it. Even I have flown from Liverpool!

 

[ethanegcc]

I completely agree with the above. And, for the record, I have flown from EMA LBA LPL EMA BHX LGW and Heathrow!

 

[EGCC_MAN]

say somebody wanted to travel from Newcastle to Houston, that it would be frowned upon if they routed say NCL-AMS-IAH, and not travel to MAN and fly direct

I think we need to take a step back here. Keep in mind that aircraft enthusiasts, although in the majority on this forum, represent probably less than 1% of the general population. Those deemed supporters of a particular airport (a word I reserve for football) are even fewer in number. Most customers have loyalty to their wallet and their convenience when booking travel, nothing else.

The thought-processes of those 99% who don't care about flying through a particular airport, using a new aircraft type or logging a different registration will deviate profoundly from those of many readers here.

Their considerations will typically include some of the points below:

- How much will my flight cost?
- How long will my journey take from end-to-end?
- Is the departure time convenient? Will I need to get up really early? Will I need an airport hotel?
- Will I arrive in time to make use of the day at my destination?
- Is [insert airport] easy to use / straightforward for transfer between flights?
- Is [first airport] easy to access? Good for parking? Good public transport?
- Is everything included onboard my flight or will catering, seat selection, checked baggage cost extra?
- What is the airline like? Good / bad reputation? Service, comfort, seat-pitch, baggage allowance, punctuality?
- Past experience: has this airline let me (or my friends) down before?
- Will I get loyalty points? Are they in my preferred scheme? Can I trade-in points for upgrade / onboard purchases?
- Is the airline family-friendly / good for kids? OR will it be full of screaming brats running round?

Most travellers will book flights having considered those criteria above in the order which they matter to them. Very, very few indeed will make their selection based upon loyalty to one airport over another ... yes, I know that is shocking to some readers here! And if you challenge them about it you'll confirm their prejudice ... "You're right, Doris! That anorak planespotter bloke next door is completely crazy!!!"

 

[Coathanger16]

I genuinely think WE (as passionate supporters of Manchester) seem to be answering arguments which we never created in the first place!

"God given right"
"Expectation"

....have been introduced into the narrative by non Manchester supporters. To me there is then a certain subtlety within a number of responses which paraphrase these terms as though WE suggested them.

NOT TRUE !

Not one poster on here who supports Manchester HAS EVER said people in The Midlands , Yorkshire Humberside Tyneside should use Manchester NOT ONE !!!!

Perhaps it hasn't been stated explicitly, but commenting about pushing MAN's catchment into those places does imply you want people from those areas to use MAN. I'm not blaming anyone on here or even MAG as its their job, but when you have the likes of Hainan sponsoring events in Birmingham to promote their route from Manchester, especially when Birmingham previously had that route served (albeit only by a charter) and has been actively seeking another airline to operate it, it can feel rather like a kick in the teeth. How would supporters of MAN react if say Kuwait Airlines sponsored an event in Manchester specifically to promote their route from London? (I highly expect someone to jump in here and say that Kuwait Airlines intends to launch flights from MAN, whilst Hainan has no intention of launching flights from BHX. The principle of my point is still valid however - take another airline that has no intention of launching flights to MAN).

As I have said in my previous post, I apologize if I have misinterpreted anyone's comments, but you must ask yourself why some members feel as though that is the position. As they say, there is no smoke without fire.

I would draw readers attention to a programme aired in 2014 and presented by Evan Davis, a midlander coincidentally. It's available I believe on You Tube and called Mind The Gap.

Evan Davis is the presenter, ex Harvard where he studied economics. He examines in detail the "economic" arguments as to why Manchester is thee only show in town economically as a counterweight to London, all the economic arguments are forensically explored in that programme. It might urk other cities but it is possibly the reason 18 skyscrapers are currently being built there. For many especially young educated graduates it is the "go to" place in the UK.

The arguments in terms of the use of Manchester Airport are identical and indeed water tight. They are independent of what might be perceived as our evangelical support of Manchester.

I haven't watched the program so I don't know if this is covered or not:

Yes Manchester may be in the best position to counter London, but that doesn't and shouldn't mean to the exclusion of other cities (I'm not suggesting that's what you were implying). Yes Manchester has 18 skyscrapers under construction, but other cities have their own projects going on, for instance Birmingham currently has the largest single office development outside of London being constructed at Snowhill. I'm not local to other cities so don't know about their projects but they are there. Just as London is served by multiple airports, so can the "regional city region". Heathrow acts as the major hub for London, and yes that is Manchester's role in the region, but equally Gatwick supports numerous long haul flights as well. In fact, each London airports operates a unique business model and serves a different market, just like regional airports should.

As long as we continue to look at cities & airports on an individual basis, we will continue to lose out to London. As soon as those cities & airports can work together to grow that region, then they can offer a credible counterweight to London.

 

[EGCC_MAN]

when you have the likes of Hainan sponsoring events in Birmingham to promote their route from Manchester, especially when Birmingham previously had that route served (albeit only by a charter) and has been actively seeking another airline to operate it, it can feel rather like a kick in the teeth.

There is a simple answer to this. Subject to observing a code of conduct regarding decency / accuracy, advertisers are free to promote their products and services wherever they like in the UK. Obviously, it is incumbent on the company paying the bill to to conduct a cost/benefit analysis of the potential return on their promotional budget. Whereas British Airways (for example) may conclude that it is worth promoting their ex-LHR long-haul programme in the North-West market (they do), Hainan Airlines may decide that promoting MAN-PEK in the south of England will not provide a worthwhile ROI. But, based upon the strength and location of the competition, markets closer to the departure point may justify promotional investment. A city within a couple of hours drive with no parallel competing offering would be an obvious choice for this. And if they sponsor a socially-beneficial public event which may not otherwise be financially-viable to stage, everybody wins.

It is self-defeating to get emotionally riled by this. If an advertisement doesn't appeal to you personally, don't give it a second thought. I constantly receive pop-up ads for all manner of flight routes which I'd never have any use for ... some of them are actually quite amusing. Vueling appear convinced that I live in Amsterdam. Meanwhile, a couple of years back I unsubscribed from my subscription to Thomson flight-offers. Despite them knowing my Manchester postcode, it seemed that every offer they sent featured departures from Doncaster. I wasn't offended by this, just puzzled. Did they really think I'd do a journey to DSA when the same company offers similarly-priced flights from the airport just down the road? So I unsubscribed from their e.mail-offers because they were invariably irrelevant to me.

So don't get upset. Just take note of the promoted products / services which interest you and disregard the rest. Chill and keep smiling.

 

[Dobbo]

As long as we continue to look at cities & airports on an individual basis, we will continue to lose out to London. As soon as those cities & airports can work together to grow that region, then they can offer a credible counterweight to London.

There is a slight disconnect between what you say above, and this paragraph.

Developing a regional counterbalance to London will be pooling/centralisation of resources. Considering the points above, my view is that, whilst it would be preferable for these to be supported by the northern/regional population - for a number of reasons this doesn't always happen.

Take the example of air travel. We have heard peoples preference to fly locally within the regions, and there is also cost. What you have at Manchester is a focal point to develop. Other airports serve their markets, but the regions best chance of developing a 40-50mm pax airport (with the route portfolio to support it - no point if they are all holiday flights) is obviously at MAN.

 

[ethanegcc]

Hainan were advertising all over the nation's provincial areas to get people on the only scheduled service out of London to China. They are advertising their Manchester route because their only UK destination is Manchester, and they feel MAN has the capability to serve the regional market, hence why the return of advertising in British regional cities is substantial. Hainan served BHX on a charter summer-seasonal basis and it will be a long-standing debate about whether Hainan chose MAN out of force, but whatever you believe, they chose Manchester, put the effort in, and are a great success, now considering a Guangzhou route, with the Beijing route operating daily in peak season with 787-8/9s.

If Kuwait Airways advertised in Manchester, it would be for their London flight, which is perfectly acceptable as London is currently their only UK gateway that serves the market as the UK on the whole. Thai Airways held an event in Manchester a couple of months back, and they don't serve Manchester, so they would have been garnering support for their London operation.

It just so happens that Air India haven't gone on an advertising offensive in Manchester but, if they did, they would be perfectly entitled to do so and I wouldn't view it as a 'kick in the teeth', rather an example of successful regional long-haul venture getting extra support. Yes, I would love it if AI served MAN but they don't.

And the notion that us MAN supporters would 'frown' on someone travelling via AMS is ridiculous. Yes, I would perhaps say 'did you know you can fly direct from Manchester?', much like BHX supporters do with travellers going to New York, Orlando, Delhi, Dubai etc. and it has been suggested on the BHX forum that Birmingham should advertise in 'Manchester's back yard'. Would you be in favour of that?

 

[Coathanger16]

Take the example of air travel. We have heard peoples preference to fly locally within the regions, and there is also cost. What you have at Manchester is a focal point to develop. Other airports serve their markets, but the regions best chance of developing a 40-50mm pax airport (with the route portfolio to support it - no point if they are all holiday flights) is obviously at MAN.

Yes Manchester has the best chance of reaching that mark, but my point is that we shouldn't therefore put ALL our focus on Manchester. Whether or not you're aware of it, that's how it often feels to the rest of us.

Maybe I'm just being selfish. Manchester's the bigger airport, but if Birmingham were the bigger maybe I'd be doing the same thing that you all are. I guess in the case of Hainan, my opinion (rightly or wrongly) was that by advertising in the Midlands (among other places), Hainan would get passengers from the Midlands to use their service from Manchester, and that that would put off other airlines launching a similar route to BHX as they would consider that Birmingham is already served by Manchester. Again, maybe its me just being naive, but my position would be routes that BHX has little chance of securing anytime soon (e.g. Muscat, Seattle, Riyadh, etc), by all means come and advertise here, but when it comes to routes that BHX is actively trying to secure (Beijing, Hong Kong, etc), I'd rather airlines flying from MAN didn't advertise here. Its unlikely I know, but say if Air India started operating BHX - Mumbai (a destination highly sought by MAN), and then advertised that route in Manchester, are you telling me that that wouldn't bother you in the slightest? Not even a little?

I'm clearly outnumbered here and am making no headway in getting posters to see this point of view. Hopefully no hard feelings guys

 

[Dobbo]

airlines and airports can both advertise what as they like within the standards of ASA. Airlines are free to open up whatever routes they choose.

Something like that would be frustrating, but there are always outliers to the general rule, and AI are one of those.

 

[Seasider]

I am with Coathangar 16 on this one.
After reading numerous posts about MAN being the airport for the North of England, the cities of Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle and Birmingham being in their "catchment area", I was definitely under the impression that we ought to use MAN. That may have not been the intention of the posters, but that is how i read them, hence my earlier posts.

 

[David_itl]

If "the cities of Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle and Birmingham being in their "catchment area"" then it really is stating the obvious the city of Manchester is in the catchment area for the airports in those cities. I have seen adverts place by BA and LHR extolling the multiple frequency flights on LHR-JFK stuck on a billboard hoarding at MAN T1 Car Parks at a time when BA were operating a daily MAN-JFK. I bet you MAN didn't throw a hissy fit at "one of their own" trying to get passengers to ignore the non-stop option. (Mind you, BA's workings were always skewered against any regional long-haul being profitable). The only other serious media campaign I've seen by a airline trying to tap the Manchester catchment was Ryanair highlighting the extensive operation they had out of Liverpool with again billboard advertising.

Perhaps I should bring up when we still had the Bermuda 2 agreement in operation a degree of liberalisation was allowed to let 2 US airlines have access to ANY airport in the UK. Why did MAN have 8 applications for 7 routes by 6 airlines and the rest of Britain had diddly squat? MAN did (and still doesn't!) go round with a handgun to airline executives to say "choose us or else". One of the first stats i heard about for the AA Chicago route after it had been going for a couple of years or so was that around 40% of their passengers came from Yorkshire. Naturally you would have thought such a high percentage should have led to a service operating out of LBA, especially as 757s were appearing already at MAN on transatlantic routes. You may have to consider why this has never occurred?

 

[Dobbo]

In summary: airport catchments overlap. Pay your money, take your choice.

 

[Jerry]

In a country the size of the UK which has a lot of airports quite close together it's only natural most of them are going overlap somehow. The country is lucky in a way that the bulk of the population has such good access to wide variety of airports and services from lots of airlines with quite good competitive prices. Take me for example. I live in Cardiff but i have the option of using LHR, LGW, MAN, BHX, EMA, LTN, EXT and BRS for my flight to Portland and I had the option of CWL and BRS for my flight to EDI in April. They are all in reasonable driving range for me or a train ride. I choose though to use CWL because it's much more easier for me to get to and i like to support my local airport and KLM provide me with a good service at a cheaper price than the direct flight to Portland out of LHR and chose Flybe because they were cheaper than Easyjet (though some people refuse to believe me when i tell them that!). My girlfriend on the other hand doesn't she has Portland Airport or a 4 hour drive north to Seattle and that's it and as a result flying for her can be quite expensive especially if she wants to fly to see her grandparents in Reno or her sister in Denver. I honestly think the UK passenger is quite lucky with it's regional airports and many of the airlines that serve them both long and short haul.

 

[Coathanger16]

Perhaps I should bring up when we still had the Bermuda 2 agreement in operation a degree of liberalisation was allowed to let 2 US airlines have access to ANY airport in the UK. Why did MAN have 8 applications for 7 routes by 6 airlines and the rest of Britain had diddly squat? MAN did (and still doesn't!) go round with a handgun to airline executives to say "choose us or else". One of the first stats i heard about for the AA Chicago route after it had been going for a couple of years or so was that around 40% of their passengers came from Yorkshire. Naturally you would have thought such a high percentage should have led to a service operating out of LBA, especially as 757s were appearing already at MAN on transatlantic routes. You may have to consider why this has never occurred?

This seems to be the point you're missing. The rest of us aren't saying that MAN shouldn't have those flights. Yes Manchester is best placed to serve as a hub for the North. Yes Manchester has the best chance of securing new long haul routes. Yes Manchester is the biggest business center outside of London. Yes Manchester has the best chance of securing new business opportunities. Yes to all of that. But the point is that the way certain members talk about it, makes the rest of us feel that it should ONLY be Manchester that should have that success, that it should only be Manchester who should get those new routes. That may not have been your intention, but that's how its been read by 'outsiders'. For instance you're example of Chicago. Yes Manchester is best placed among the Northern airports to serve that route. But just because American chose Manchester over Leeds doesn't mean that it would be impossible for Leeds to get that route, nor that because Leeds doesn't have a route to Chicago that its not commercially viable. Again, it may not have been your intention, but it often comes across as though Manchester 'supporters' have the view that if a route isn't served from say LBA, LPL, BHX, etc that it therefore must not be commercially viable, otherwise why isn't an airline serving it? Yet look at Manchester. Bangkok isn't served, so surely that means its not commercially viable right? Wrong. How many times has it been pointed out about how many passengers have wanted to fly direct MAN to BKK? I'm not accusing anyone on here, or 'having a go', just pointing out that that's how certain posts are interpreted.

We're not asking that you shower praise on and support other regional cities, just to accept the fact that Manchester isn't the only show in town. As I said, yes Manchester has the best chance of success with airlines & business, but that doesn't mean Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool, Sheffield, etc have no chance.

 

[David_itl]

Only to those with chips on their shoulders is my post saying ONLY use MAN. I did edit my post before submitting that but I will say it now. It smacks of sour grapes that you are unable to accept that MAN is by some quirk of fate what most airlines choose as their initial regional port of call. Tough. Deal with it. Where MAN went in with between 2 and 4 flights per week to some destinations, the same airlines leapt in with DAILY flights to other regional airports. May be it's because MAN proved that you can get the regional flyer on board. No-one BUT no-one is saying MAN is the only show in town... why on earth would I highlight what some airlines were doing in Manchester to poach MAN passengers if I were to think that MAN is the only show in town. YOU brought up Hainan promoting itself outside MAN. This is the flip side. Doesn't suit your argument, does it? Primera being the new airline for transatlantic flights in BHX should be ALL over the Manchester area with cheap flight offers to poach potential Thomas Cook and Virgin passengers away from their MAN services. Not seen any advertising by them whatsoever...why?