Thomas Cook

[Brum X]

Apologies I was at work and only had a brief chance to check. It doesn't look as if there is anything new, not sure about frequencies.

I'm afraid it appears that TCX are all about MAG at the moment so it looks like BHX is stuck with just Thomson as the sole long haul leisure provider :s_sad

THOMSON however is a very good product, id rather have Thomson as our sole operator than have Thomas cook as our sole operator, however to have some choice would be even better.

Shame on you TCX. And they didnt even bother to respond to my email. Pffffffffffffffffft

 

[User0001]

THOMSON however is a very good product, id rather have Thomson as our sole operator than have Thomas cook as our sole operator, however to have some choice would be even better.

Have you seen the new TCX product? Thomson may have the dreamliner but the new interiors on the A330 is pretty swish.

Also, TCX is better for viability in that their long haul flights are now sold as full scheduled, which means the flight are visible in GDS and other booking platforms rather than just on the airlines website as a charter product. What this means is that people searching say, MAN-MCO flight only on a 3rd party site, will see TCX and VS flights, but unlikely to find TOM flights into SFB.

Then we look at the network TCX is now building up. Im not sure if your comments are sour grapes, but, Im pretty sure if TCX offered BHX a deal to promote their flights over TOM, and in return offered BHX-LAS/MCO/JFK/LAX/MIA as they have done at MAN (and incidently TOM do not offer any UK routes to those destinations), then the comment about which carrier you would rather have as your sole operator would dimish.

I know it sounds like I am trying to defend TCX, but, Im sorry, I don't agree with your comments at all. TOM may have been kinder to BHX than TCX, but, certainly at MAN the TCX offering both destination wise and product wise is streets ahead, and, once TCX establish themselves and get good at what they are doing, they will then develop BHX and comments like this soon disappear.

 

[Brum X]

I honestly think Thomson are a better quality product than Thomas cook, this isnt just about the airlines but also the holiday company. I also think overall people would rate Thomson higher than Thomas cook. With the greatest respect to you, most people dont care if TCX can be found in GDS and Thomson are not.

Of course i would love TCX to serve all those destinations, however in the back of my mind i would wish Thomson would offer them more. Just my preference. I would also prefer Virgin Holidays/Airline to operate those flights over Thomson.

 

[User0001]

BrumX

You have completely missed the point I made regarding GDS.

Its not about people 'caring' if its in GDS or not, its about the increased visibility GDS brings and the fact you can see the flights on many mainstream sites, particularly flight only, so, where people may previously may not have known the flight existed is suddenly revealed to them without having to rely on solely one site.

GDS can be a lot more valuable than your flippant comment suggests.

 

[dazzler]

From first hand experience I can say that Thomson's product is excellent from the website,travel & accommodation. I was very impressed when I used it last year. A good integrated customer experience. It is useful and time/cost saving to have those long haul options operating from BHX.

TCX can't match it for us at the moment. Their network may be building but that doesn't work here. It's streets ahead at MAN because they give them some great destinations and routes, but at BHX well as a few other regional UK airports its Thomson providing the long haul activity.

As for GDS I'm not sure how that additional visibility affects us here in Birmingham but Thomas Cook don't own any hotels therefore will need that exposure to help sell their seats. TUI Group owns 300 hotels and most people who buy accommodation from them will be arriving on Thomsonfly, Arkefly or TUIfly flights.

 

[User0001]

As for GDS I'm not sure how that additional visibility affects us here in Birmingham but Thomas Cook don't own any hotels therefore will need that exposure to help sell their seats

Well given there is no long haul at BHX from TCX at the moment, obviously GDS isn't going to help BHX at this time.

What I was saying, is that GDS will help sell seats on a multitude of sites, and, to many flight only and flight+hotel options, that, for Thomson is mainly only offered via its own site. How many people would realisticly know that TCX now fly MAN-JFK? Being on GDS means that those searching MAN-JFK on the generic 3rd party site now see TCX flights alongside Delta/American and United.

Another reason GDS and the move to scheduled helps is that TCX now uses flybe to offer a 1 ticket, through checked luggage experience from the flybe network into the MAN long haul network. TOM doesn't offer that.

You are correct that TCX doesn't have the hotel offering to fill seats, which is why GDS is important to them, as TCX is moving away from a reliance on Thomas Cook group holidays to build up its own airline portfolio ala Condor, and lets face it, I would defy any aviation enthusiast, BHX/MAN/London or otherwise to say they would not love some routes from the Condor Long haul network! Cape Town? No thanks, rather have Thomson and its 1 weekly MCO.

This also means it has more say on its network, rather than being pressured to provide seats on the 'same old same old' routes, its enabled them to build up the routes they have ex-MAN. There is little chance we would have seen MIA/LAX/JFK had the holiday arm still have control over the airline.

I suppose my main point was, that, initialy, the comments that prompted me to reply just smacked of sour grapes. It just seemed like a 'who needs TCX anyway, TOM is better'.

Lets not forget, TOM hasn't been uber-kind to BHX either. Its TOM who have stubbornly refused to move up from 1 weekly MCO. Its TOM that still doesn't base a full time B787 at BHX for long haul despite using B787's on short haul ex MAN/LGW so obviously have the frames to do full week long haul ex-BHX, yet its TOMS's offering that is apparently 'streets ahead'.

I know its easy for me to say as a MAN-fan, but in terms of long haul potential, there is one carrier that is certainly giving a lot more bang for its buck at the moment, as GLA/BFS/STN have also seen what TCX can do for them too not just growth wise, but the new interiors, AVOD and food offerings are a far cry from the old charter past.

Im sorry this post defends TCX so much, but, I just have a hard time believing that some of these comments would be said if TCX were expanding BHX at a similar pace to MAN. Im almost 100% sure that if TCX announced BHX-JFK/MIA/MCO/LAS/LAX tomorrow, they would be treated like the best things since sliced bread!

 

[Brum X]

Of course it would be "great news" if TCX announced BHX-MCO tomorrow, however nobody has said TCX are "rubbish" or "are not welcome" I have been on TCX and there holidays, had a great holiday at one of there SENTIDO HOTELS in tunisia last year. However i have had even better holidays at the PRINCESS HOTELS offered by Thomson.

I really hope TCX do see the potential of BHX in the future, long haul wise. It is long overdue.

 

[nwoody2001]

interesting response user001 and an interesting perspective to someone not I the aviation industry.is very clear that wth TCX expanding MN and STN it doesn't ake a rocket scientist to see tht TCX and MAG hve a geat relationship, and for the forseabe future that is where TCX is going to focus their growth. This is business afterall...

interesting though, and to be fair to TCX, didn't they increase their summer base from BHX this summer by 1x aircraft??? i.e. capacity out of BHX in S15 will be higher than it was in S14...

 

[User0001]

had a great holiday at one of there SENTIDO HOTELS in tunisia last year. However i have had even better holidays at there PRINCESS HOTELS offered by Thomson

I think our wires are crossing, as you seem to be talking about the whole 'charter package' experience including hotels, but, Ive been focusing on the stand alone airline side of things, after all this is an aviation forum.

For the good ole' fashioned charter holiday experience, I agree Thomson holidays are better. However, as a stand alone airline experience, Thomas Cook Airlines has a better offering than Thomson Airlines, to which I have tried to explain Thomas Cook Airlines are for all intents and purpose now not the charter airline for Thomas Cook in the way Thomson Airlines is for Thomson holidays.

Ive personally used TCX and TOM long haul, and, Im being 100% honest that the TCX airline offering was vastly better than TOM.

The new interiors are superb, modern, spacious and comfortable. In terms of ease of travel, passengers can book flight only very easily, they can book connecting flights, have access to what I deem more varied destinations and in terms of the on board product, TCX economy is more than on parr with BA/AF/LH etc economy, and the premium cabin can now give VS a run for its money.

In terms of what TCX can bring to the airport operators:

More passengers via connetions. Great destinations on the departure boards (only airline to offer LAX/BOS/MIA/UVF/ANU outside London). Offers more passengers as higher capacity aircraft than the dreamliners (for example TCX's 6 weekly JFK next year offers more capacity than BHX's daily JFK). fleet flexibilty by bringing the only condor base outside Germany and more.

So, you can see why I think Thomas Cook Airlines is a better prospect than Thomson Airlines and I think counters the argument as to which airline I would prefer to operate from airport X (if you like TOM holibobs, can always buy a seat on TCX if it was your main leisure airline

 

[Ray Finkle]

I've had a brief look at S16 compared to S15.

Dalaman remains daily, Bodrum drops from 2x weekly to 1x weekly as does Bourgas. Mahon drops from 3x weekly down to 2x weekly, Palma stays at 5x weekly but the Sat flight moves to a Wed? Sharm el Sheikh drops from 2x weekly down to 1x weekly.

Djerba isn't bookable at the moment.

Santorini isn't currently bookable from mid July until the end of August, dates before and after are so I imagine things are still to be finalised.

Malta, Reus, Naples, Skiathos and Orlando all remain in the drop down menu but are not currently bookable.

No increases at all so initially it doesn't look great but it's very, very early days and I'm sure flights will be added and removed to fit with demand.

 

[Brum X]

Orlando ???? Am i missing something ??

Why would Orlando be in the drop list, they are expected to operate ZILCH flights from BHX to Orlando in 2015 so why would they be in the drop down list to start with ?????????

 

[Ray Finkle]

It's been in the drop down list ever since they did that one off Easter flight a couple of years ago.

Naples appeared last year but has never been bookable.

Maybe the IT department need to do a bit of housekeeping.

 

[dazzler]

The new interiors are superb, modern, spacious and comfortable. In terms of ease of travel, passengers can book flight only very easily, they can book connecting flights, have access to what I deem more varied destinations and in terms of the on board product, TCX economy is more than on parr with BA/AF/LH etc economy, and the premium cabin can now give VS a run for its money.

In terms of what TCX can bring to the airport operators:

More passengers via connetions. Great destinations on the departure boards (only airline to offer LAX/BOS/MIA/UVF/ANU outside London). Offers more passengers as higher capacity aircraft than the dreamliners (for example TCX's 6 weekly JFK next year offers more capacity than BHX's daily JFK). fleet flexibilty by bringing the only condor base outside Germany and more.

So, you can see why I think Thomas Cook Airlines is a better prospect than Thomson Airlines and I think counters the argument as to which airline I would prefer to operate from airport X (if you like TOM holibobs, can always buy a seat on TCX if it was your main leisure airline [/quote]
None of this benefits BHX, Birmingham or the West Midlands.

 

[User0001]

None of this benefits BHX, Birmingham or the West Midlands.

You sure about that?

So, the flights from MAN are of no benefit to those living in the Northern areas of the Midlands? Or those in the Midlands in general it is of no benefit to them that the 6 days a week they cannot fly to MCO from BHX they can use MAN/STN with relative ease?

Its of no benefit that the people in Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke and numerous other areas have acces to a growing range of long haul from 2 airports.

Nope, no benefit at all to anyone that!

 

[nwoody2001]

on that Logic then, you're a fan of expanding heathrow then.. because that will 'benefit the whole country' user001!

you know the point he is making user001, stop trying to be pedantic!

 

[User0001]

Im not trying to be pedantic at all, at least Im offering reasoned debate instead of one lines that intend to shoot down without debate purely because you don't like whats being written. Notice how he copied and pasted the nice long post I took the time to write and offer debate, for him to only offer 5 words as a counter. Thats not debate, thts aiming to 'shout down'.

on that Logic then, you're a fan of expanding heathrow then.. because that will 'benefit the whole country' user001!

LHR does benefit the whole country and would be stupid to say it doesn't, but thats another debate all together.

What my point was, that yes, in a perfect world, you would be able to access any destination direct from your local airport. However, its not a perfect world, and, for those in the northern edge of the midlands, MAN is a very viable alternative, and many from that area do use MAN to access flights they cannot at BHX. Look at Stoke city FC, they use MAN for any charters their teams/fans need.

So, in the debate about which long haul carrier from TCX/TOM is better for travellers, to say the long haul network ex-MAN (and even STN) is 'of no use to those in the midlands' is just falicy at best. Of course it is of use to those in the midlands. Just in October I flew MAN-LAS on TCX, and there were a number of midlands accents on that flight. Was that flight 'of no use to them?'

You may call it pedantic, but, to shout down the claims with such comments, I call that burying your head in the sand.

 

[nwoody2001]

well you seem to confuse the words 'use' and 'benefit', only because people use something, does not mean it benefits them. People from Birmingham will use Manchester as an airport, similarly, people from Manchester will use Heathrow AND (though less I appreciate) Birmingham as an airport, but that's not because it benefits them to do so, but because its the only real options available to them! Dazzler did not suggest people don't use routes outside Birmingham, he suggested it doesn't benefit them, and your post above does not respond to that point!!!

As someone who lives in Leeds, I use Manchester and Birmingham Airports often, but I can safely say that it would be of much more benefit to me if those routes were also served from my closest airport!!!!

 

[Aviador]

Birmingham has a sufficiently large catchment area to sustain it's own regular TCX flights to the likes of MCO and multiple other destinations not currently served by Thomas Cook at the airport.

The argument of airports at either side of BHX doesn't wash with me. As somebody who also lives in Leeds, I know all too well about this problem. Our airport is hugely undeserved and we have people passing the end of our runway in droves heading to other airports that offer more flights and destinations.

I agree with nwoody2001 completely in that I will always favour using my local airport over using other airports when a route is available locally. People living local to Manchester airport or the London airports are fortunate enough not to have a problem flying from their local airport. Travelling to another airport miles away from your home is no fun before or after an 8 hour flight.

User001, you have a vested interest in flights from Manchester so you would always opt for the argument that doesn't favour the potential dilution of operations from your local airport however, if Manchester airport was faced with the same problem Leeds and Birmingham are, you would argue the reverse and say Manchester had a sufficient catchment area to sustain more direct flights from there.

As for Thomas Cook, so long as their customers from the West Midlands region show willingness to endure the road to other airports to catch flights they will continue to not offer the flights from Birmingham to protect the yield of flights from their other bases which do offer such flights.

I would hazard a guess the Birmingham airport managers will be seeking alternative operators if current operators already serving the airport aren't showing any willingness to expand.

 

[Brum X]

Hopefully an airline called Norweigan Air Shuttle would be nice.

 

[User0001]

I feel i am wasting my breath. Snappy one liners seem to be more favoured than detailed responses so im just going to leave it there.

Maybe im not explaining myself properly, i dont know, but i stand by my original comments that had TCX offered BHX long haul, half of this debate wouldnt have happened......