But there is no argument here. Only civilised discussion (and that is the purpose of the forum). Respectful exchange of views. And this particular discussion concerns by far the biggest single challenge Manchester Airport has faced since WW2. If exchange of abusive content arises (and it won't from me), then I'm sure Scottie Dog will deal with it. But F4A enjoys a good record on that score.
At the end of September 2019, the Moving Annual Total of passengers at MAN was: 29,510,599
By the end of March 2021, the Moving Annual Total of passengers at MAN was: 2,844,918
That is literally a greater than 90% drop. It is aviation 'Armageddon'.
As of the end of September 2021, the MAT has climbed off the deck to reach 3,821,874. An increase of fewer than one million passengers across the peak months of April through September. That translates to a lost Summer for the second successive year.
Our airlines are in a desperate state. Airports likewise. They're carrying a fraction the number of passengers which they would normally expect, and many of those brave enough to endure the hassle and additional expense implied by flying at all these days are redeeming travel vouchers. That is not new revenue for our hard-pressed carriers.
The UK Government continues to insist on mandatory Covid testing for all international travellers. We're about to switch from a regime of expensive tests to less expensive ones, but the hassle factor remains firmly present, along with all the soul-destroying form-filling and app-management requirements, queues, and risk of quarantine. Overseas governments impose restrictions of their own, each jurisdiction different from the next. Yes, there is alot of opinion involved in whether any of this is justified eighteen months on, but I contend that this is something which should be eligible for open discussion on an airport forum. This is THE key issue which will determine whether our industry will see a return to prosperity in 2022 - or not. The airlines are desperate for clarity so they can plan ahead with confidence. They simply can't do that yet. Clarity isn't there. They're planning based on hope and prayer.
And then there is the travelling public. Yes, 3.8 million have made the brave decision to fly through Manchester over the past twelve months. But that tells us that around 26 million have not. There are many reasons for this. Some remain terrified of the virus, having been subjected to doom-laden media coverage for eighteen months. Others pass on the obligation to undergo a series of invasive tests at considerable expense. Form-filling and managing apps is a big turn-off for many, especially older less-confident travellers. Some will endure it if the reward is finally seeing the grandkids after two years, but for a week in the sun ... maybe not. That can wait. I come across so many people expressing this view.
I have flown through MAN twice this week, on Sunday, and again yesterday. I travelled aboard one of MAN's largest carriers. Upon boarding the first of these flights, the usual smile and welcome aboard was conspicuously missing. Instead, the lead cabin attendant was challenging passengers about adjusting masks, or wearing 'the wrong sort of masks' ("The gate staff should have told you!!!"). Once boarding was completed, a PA announcement followed. "If anybody doesn't feel like wearing a mask today, we can arrange to offload you RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW!!! And if you don't want to wear one enroute, we can arrange to divert the plane and drop you off anywhere between here and [destination]!!!" All this on a flight which was a quarter-filled, with the most placid bunch of passengers you ever saw. They just wanted to sleep, having been up so early. Later, we got: "You may remove your masks BRIEFLY for eating and drinking. But then you must put them back on IMMEDIATELY!!! And no queueing for the wash rooms!" I decided not to bother with the eating and drinking, thanks. It was like Air Colditz on there. The return flight experience was less "in your face", but still the full gammut of Covid announcements. Do the airlines think this reassures customers? I find it hugely offputting. Miserable.
Why would regular everyday passengers voluntarily pay to put themselves through this ... for fun? I can fully understand why 26 million have stayed away from Manchester Airport this year alone. Who wants to be addressed like that on a flight? It is completely uncalled for, and it is high time this nonsense was rolled back. We won't see a real recovery until it is. Yes, I'm expressing an opinion ... sorry ... but we need 'normal' back, and with all eligible folks in the UK now having been offered full vaccination, the time is right to give us that. It is a core element of the "vaccine dividend" which we were promised.
I realise that nobody likes to focus on bad news. But this particular bad news is a fact of life in contemporary international travel. We can't avoid mentioning it. And if our prognostications about Manchester Airport are to have any validity whatsoever, the C-19 factor must be taken into account above all else. To call it 'the elephant in the room' doesn't do it justice.
So I must take account of Covid in all assessments of Manchester Airport's prospects over the coming months. It can't be an inconvenient side topic to file away in a corner where no-one will look. It is centre stage, like it or not. I promise not to "degenerate into argument" - nobody here has done that. But healthy debate concerning the most pressing topic affecting air travel in our lifetimes is a good thing. And it is the reason why we refer to forums in the first place.
I welcome respectful pushback or comments, even if you disagree with me. There is no forum without healthy debate.
