Birmingham Airport renaming?

[Ray Finkle]

Some interesting comments and Shakespeare seems to be a popular choice both on here and elsewhere.

What doesn't appear to be such a popular choice is the potential of 'London - Birmingham Airport' which seems to have attracted much criticism in various quarters.

What are peoples thoughts on BHX becoming another London airport?

 

[User0001]

I think the idea of 'Birmingham London airport' is ridiculous.

Firstly, theres the 'small' issue with the fact that BHX to central london is 113 miles. To think anything 113 miles away can be considered in the same city is just proposterous. Its already utterly stupid Oxford is trying that trick, let alone an airport 113 miles away. While we are at it, shall we have Edinburgh-Paris North Airport? Manchester-Munich Airport anyone?

Secondly, we have the much lauded HS2 and 'putting BHX in zone whatever of the underground', but, even if/when that is built, its still only 1 mode of transport that can be used. What about the poor sod that books a flight from say, Delhi to 'Birmingham-London' and doesnt want to get the HS2 (lets face it, we have no idea the fares of HS2 that will be needed to cover the consturction cost), and imagine the horror on their face when you tell them they are still 3 hours away from central London by road, or 1.5 hours by rail after an 8, possibly much longer if connected before, flight!?! I know Id be p*ssed off!

If I want to go to London, I go to London, not Birmingham. If I want to go to Los Angeles, I go to Los Angeles, not San Diego. If I want to go to Paris, I go to Orly/CDG, not Lyon! People aren't as easily led as they used to be. Look at Ryanair, finally going into major airports because they were loosing customers fed up of the 'Frankfurt Hahn', Brussels Charleroi' (in another country may I add).

Thirdly, Ive said it before, Birmingham is its own city. If BHX needs to resort to tagging a distant city to increase passenger numbers, then, it seems you have bigger problems to solve than just a name change!

Fourthly, you may get some passengers fall for it, but, would the airlines play ball. I would hope some airlines have the sense to say 'nah, thats quite misleading, were not calling it that on our website/magazine/etc.

Using shakespeare is fine, but the idea of calling BHX a london airport is misleading, incorrect, laughable and quite frankly, if they are serious, a desperate cry for attention/help.

 

[DaveBham]

That'd be a dreadful idea.

We as a nation have got to get out of the habit of viewing the rest of the UK through a London prism. The fact is, of the 65 million people here in the UK, most of them do not live or work in London.

It's a wonderful city, and I'm proud to have London as our capital, but Birmingham is a wonderful city too, in different ways, as numerous international journalists have discovered for themselves.

This is Birmingham, and people actually choose to live and work here. There is enough about this place, industrially, culturally, historically to stand on its own merits.

All the indications are showing that this is the place to be at the moment. To attach other cities names to us would be foolish.

 

[nwoody2001]

Again, why are people so caught up on a name of Birmingham-London Airport? Personally I cant see it happening myself but if it did, then you can only assume such a decision was taken because it would cause benefit to the airport.

As far-fetched as it sounds, again, if a re-brand bought more flights, more routes, more airlines and more passengers to the airport, then I would be happy for the airport to be called Birmingham-big boobs Airport.

Reading previous posts, a renamed airport would a) not result in the loss of any existing routes, b) be unlikely to turn away airlines which are interested in using the airport. Would it attract additional airlines/routes is a different matter but that is yet to be seen. As for the argument of distance, we this should be irrelevant. There are many airports that depend on a single mode of transport to get from the airport to the city, so why HS2 should be any different is beyond me!? It takes ‘A’ Minutes to get from Stansted to Central London, but it takes ‘B’ minutes to get from Stansted to Central London on a Donkey! Is it misleading by suggesting there are longer route options? Of course not!

In fairness, this situation is a long way off, but the reality is, is there are airports that are using the London brand and gaining its benefit which take longer to get to from central London than Birmingham airport, then why not use it to our benefit. Its also worth noting that London is unlike ANY other city in Europe in terms of wealth, power and business, with only New York and Tokyo comparable. For Birmingham to not tap into that opportunity because of some stubborn, territorial pride would be ridiculous.

 

[User0001]

Mwoody

You say distance is irrelevent? Its 113 miles, not 'just outside London'. Away from HS2 the quickest option from BHX-London is 1h30 minutes. This is not an 'irrelevent' distance and WOULD be misleading to class BHX a Lobdon airport

Tell me, if you flew 10 hours BHX-PEK, tired and jetlagged only to find you have another 2 hour journey ahead as you had landed in Shanghai as it was advertised 'Beijing-Shanghai airport', your telling me you wouldnt be the slightest bit bothered or consider it a tad misleading.

I have a sneaky suspicion if the shoe was on the other foot it wouldnt be so irrelevent.

Or how about this scenario, how about LHR reposition as Heathrow-Birmingham Airport, taking away even more midlands traffic? Why not? Distance is irrelevent, and hey, may lead to an increase in traffic?

 

[Ray Finkle]

Secondly, we have the much lauded HS2 and 'putting BHX in zone whatever of the underground', but, even if/when that is built, its still only 1 mode of transport that can be used. What about the poor sod that books a flight from say, Delhi to 'Birmingham-London' and doesnt want to get the HS2 (lets face it, we have no idea the fares of HS2 that will be needed to cover the consturction cost), and imagine the horror on their face when you tell them they are still 3 hours away from central London by road, or 1.5 hours by rail after an 8, possibly much longer if connected before, flight!?! I know Id be p*ssed off!

If I want to go to London, I go to London, not Birmingham. If I want to go to Los Angeles, I go to Los Angeles, not San Diego. If I want to go to Paris, I go to Orly/CDG, not Lyon! People aren't as easily led as they used to be. Look at Ryanair, finally going into major airports because they were loosing customers fed up of the 'Frankfurt Hahn', Brussels Charleroi' (in another country may I add).

I think this is a very good point.

There is every chance tickets for HS2 will be priced beyond what is affordable for many which means the next quickest route is the West Coast Mainline at 1 hour and 14 minutes from Birmingham International to London Euston, that is if the train is ready and waiting when you get to the platform. The other alternative is a 2 hour road journey (it could be more if there is traffic) and that's after you've queued to pick up the hire car.

I too would be annoyed if I'd had a long flight and then found out I'd got another 1:14 hour train journey ahead of me. Could we end up with a situation where after landing at BHX and facing either a hugely expensive train ticket or yet another lengthy journey people think to themselves 'next time I'll just use LHR'? Long term it could be counter productive.

What I would like to see is BHX broker a deal where airlines can offer HS2 seats as part of the flight. Avoiding the hassle of the congested London airports and BHX to Central London in under 40 mins could be a big selling point. If the seat is ready and waiting and the transit from BHX to the HS2 station is smooth and swift I could see it being very appealing for many.

 

[Ray Finkle]

It seems as if some aren't too keen on the Shakespeare idea.

'Shakespeare's airport': Birmingham airport rebranding 'ridiculous'

I think I agree with Ms Lloyd :s_yes

Ms Lloyd said the "Shakespeare" tag was for tour operators only - the name "Birmingham Airport" would remain unchanged on departure boards.

"This is a marketing exercise," she said. "At the moment, there is no intention of changing the name.

"We just want people to think Birmingham, think Shakespeare. Tour operators will tell people to fly to Shakespeare's airport. It's a nice, feel-good way of connecting people."

 

[Brum X]

And who are the "marketing experts" ????


Probably the BBC in salford or London who would say anything to "talk down" this city. Just saying.

 

[jfy1999]

They're just envious because it's a fantastic market ploy that neither of them could realistically have started.

 

[Jon Dempsey]

If it brings in extra business, it's got to be worth considering.