Loganair
- Thread starter David_itl
- Start date
Advertisement
- Moderator
- #42
Same happened with the website when the axed the Leeds-Glasgow service. And we all know what happened with that route!
User001
New Member
- Jul 16, 2015
- 0
- 0
Fair enough, it was fully bookable for me 30 minutes ago.
Also, it’s nothing to do with not liking bad news, it’s just I wish posters not usually on the MAN threads were as enthusiastic about good news as they are bad news, in that they rarely comment or like for the good, but can’t post quickly enough for the bad.
Also, it’s nothing to do with not liking bad news, it’s just I wish posters not usually on the MAN threads were as enthusiastic about good news as they are bad news, in that they rarely comment or like for the good, but can’t post quickly enough for the bad.
Under the unusual circumstances surrounding the MAN-GLA route, I can't bring myself to call the restoration of common sense bad news. Reports that the two big egos each running an airline with shallow pockets have finally reached a sensible accord is excellent news. Three flights per day operated by one carrier is quite sufficient for this route. The madness of the last few weeks is rather like the final year of Monarch: great whilst it lasts followed by inevitable calamity. If everybody loses their shirt a void will be the final outcome.
Now it is to be hoped that the two will agree a codeshare deal across their networks again. We need common sense to prevail over bruised pride. But the bad blood may endure for a while yet. Meanwhile, the CEO's of both carriers owe their shareholders a huge apology. This whole situation was a costly disgrace which neither company could afford. There ought to be no bonuses for those two clowns this year.
I have to say that I always preferred FlyBe's strategy of low basic fare and charging a fee for checked luggage over Loganair's 'checked luggage is free' claim underwritten by an eyewateringly-high base fare. The majority of passengers on a route such as MAN-GLA do not require a 20kg checked-in suitcase, thanks. There is still a way to go before the MAN-Scotland routes become customer-friendly again. They've been run as the plaything of jumped-up CEO's egos rather than as a service to customers. That needs to change quickly.
FlyBe has issued too many profit warnings. And launched too many daft routes. Loganair isn't that strong either. Time for both boards to show some maturity and financial responsibility.
Now it is to be hoped that the two will agree a codeshare deal across their networks again. We need common sense to prevail over bruised pride. But the bad blood may endure for a while yet. Meanwhile, the CEO's of both carriers owe their shareholders a huge apology. This whole situation was a costly disgrace which neither company could afford. There ought to be no bonuses for those two clowns this year.
I have to say that I always preferred FlyBe's strategy of low basic fare and charging a fee for checked luggage over Loganair's 'checked luggage is free' claim underwritten by an eyewateringly-high base fare. The majority of passengers on a route such as MAN-GLA do not require a 20kg checked-in suitcase, thanks. There is still a way to go before the MAN-Scotland routes become customer-friendly again. They've been run as the plaything of jumped-up CEO's egos rather than as a service to customers. That needs to change quickly.
FlyBe has issued too many profit warnings. And launched too many daft routes. Loganair isn't that strong either. Time for both boards to show some maturity and financial responsibility.
as EGCC_MAN has said, common sense does seem to have been used eventually. Let's hope that Loganair/Eastern come to agreement with their routes through MME.
Aceshigh
Well-Known Member
- Nov 24, 2015
- 783
- 63
Here, here, there are lots of opportunities for Loganair without the need to burn money on GLA.
Direct flights to the Shetland Islands Orkey and Stornoway should be a money spinner. I know for a fact lots of bid watches bird migrate North in the summer and will pay a premium for a direct service.
Stornoway is usually full, July August again some people will gladly pay handsomely to save the 7 hour hike.
Up the frequency and there will be opportunities for traffic coming the other way re shopping, music, sport etc.
Sense prevails !
Direct flights to the Shetland Islands Orkey and Stornoway should be a money spinner. I know for a fact lots of bid watches bird migrate North in the summer and will pay a premium for a direct service.
Stornoway is usually full, July August again some people will gladly pay handsomely to save the 7 hour hike.
Up the frequency and there will be opportunities for traffic coming the other way re shopping, music, sport etc.
Sense prevails !
- Moderator
- #47
There is not just the islands but Inverness as well. I noticed they've just recently announced Inverness to Norwich. Something similar may work at other airports around the country.
The “analysis” of what has happened between LM and BE on here is so basic and lacking in understanding. Essentially BE tried to obliterate LM and thereby acquire a greater market share. Common sense breaking out as you all sing together could not occur until LM established that it could not be bullied out of existence. They achieved this by staying strong at the smaller Scottish airports and hurting BE on some of their routes. Now there is an agreement beneficial to both airlines. Previously BE had no incentive to do this as they thought LM were vulnerable.
I’ve not seen any evidence of either airline burning money on MAN-GLA as some seem happy to propagate.
There seems less arrogance and ego in the boardrooms of these airlines than in the told-you-so posts floating about in here. You all predicted a bloodbath for which there is no evidence.
I’ve not seen any evidence of either airline burning money on MAN-GLA as some seem happy to propagate.
There seems less arrogance and ego in the boardrooms of these airlines than in the told-you-so posts floating about in here. You all predicted a bloodbath for which there is no evidence.
Yawner - You are welcome to your OPINION. And that is exactly what it is. I stand by my own opinion also.
The first line of your post is openly rude and provocative. In the spirit of Christmas I will not respond in kind. However, your tone is unwelcome and unnecessary in this discussion. It is possible to debate different points of view without resorting to insults. And you will earn greater respect by discussing the issues cordially.
If you believe that FlyBe and Loganair were both making money on MAN-GLA in the weeks since September I would love to see your evidence for that assertion.
The first line of your post is openly rude and provocative. In the spirit of Christmas I will not respond in kind. However, your tone is unwelcome and unnecessary in this discussion. It is possible to debate different points of view without resorting to insults. And you will earn greater respect by discussing the issues cordially.
If you believe that FlyBe and Loganair were both making money on MAN-GLA in the weeks since September I would love to see your evidence for that assertion.
Aceshigh
Well-Known Member
- Nov 24, 2015
- 783
- 63
Yawner
And your inability to argue a point without a civil tongue also lacks some basic understanding of how to converse with your fellow human beings !
You are articulate so why not make a point without sneering at others ?
Try it. I'm sure you'll feel better.
And your inability to argue a point without a civil tongue also lacks some basic understanding of how to converse with your fellow human beings !
You are articulate so why not make a point without sneering at others ?
Try it. I'm sure you'll feel better.
I can’t converse with you mostly because I don’t want to, but also because we have different sources for our “opinions”.
Aceshigh you come on here and instruct Loganair on what they need to do to be a success. EGCC.... accuses people he doesn’t know making decisions based on information he doesn’t have of being egoistic. All spouted with authority. Many on here with an interest in aviation or Manchester may assume they are reading facts rather than the opinions of posters banned from other sites for their relentless agenda pushing.
I apologise for my attitude but if you stopped posting your opinions as informed fact I might not get so irritated. I guess I’m a bit blunt but feel that’s far better than posting bs politely.
Aceshigh you come on here and instruct Loganair on what they need to do to be a success. EGCC.... accuses people he doesn’t know making decisions based on information he doesn’t have of being egoistic. All spouted with authority. Many on here with an interest in aviation or Manchester may assume they are reading facts rather than the opinions of posters banned from other sites for their relentless agenda pushing.
I apologise for my attitude but if you stopped posting your opinions as informed fact I might not get so irritated. I guess I’m a bit blunt but feel that’s far better than posting bs politely.
- Moderator
- #53
Thank you gentlemen for calling a truce.
This site has, as far as I'm aware, been able to remain above the heated and sometimes almost nasty and personal attacks that have been too familiar on "Dried Fruit" etc.
Hopefully we all will remember that everyone has the right to their own opinion and, on occasions, that may not agree with our own thoughts.
As I have said elsewhere have a very happy Christmas and please do keep posting your thoughts and individual opinions.
This site has, as far as I'm aware, been able to remain above the heated and sometimes almost nasty and personal attacks that have been too familiar on "Dried Fruit" etc.
Hopefully we all will remember that everyone has the right to their own opinion and, on occasions, that may not agree with our own thoughts.
As I have said elsewhere have a very happy Christmas and please do keep posting your thoughts and individual opinions.
Yawner - If you want to pick a personal fight with someone you will have to agitate elsewhere. I'm not interested.
What I am prepared to do is discuss points of interest arising within the aviation industry. You are right that I was banned from PPRuNe. My crime there was presenting the case for a second runway at LGW in preference to a third at LHR. The new moderator there took exception to this and barred myself and a number of posters who shared my point of view (the former moderator didn't ever act in this way). I find it difficult to respect a forum which is moderated according to an individual's personal opinion on a discussion topic, rather than on the basis of free speech within the bounds of legal responsibility and common etiquette. That issue doesn't arise on F4A.
The dispute between FlyBe and Loganair arose from their conflicting business models. Loganair signed up to the FlyBe franchise but then declined to harmonise their cabin product with that of the core brand. FlyBe offered a low base fare with checked luggage as a paid-extra, card fees added-on and inflight refreshments offered for sale. In contrast, Loganair charged a high base fare but made it inclusive of checked-in luggage, free catering and no card fees. This caused confusion and complaint amongst connecting passengers encountering completely different product offerings when connecting between two "FlyBe" sectors. Loganair rejected FlyBe's appeals to harmonise their respective offerings to customers. I'm not judging the rights or wrongs of that ... simply stating that this is where the most visible fault-line manifested. And when FlyBe marketed promotional 'seat sales' the Loganair-operated routes were invariably excluded. They appeared to operate a 'no discounting' policy on these. The eventual outcome was the two carriers going their seperate ways. It is most unfortunate that the two chose a damaging head-to-head battle on thin routes rather than addressing issues arising from their differing corporate cultures. Perhaps they could even have reached out to an independent arbitrator. Both companies would be significantly better off today had they done so.
The contention that FlyBe went for Loganair's jugular has some merit. There was certainly no love lost in the heat of battle. But FlyBe would point out (with justification) that they couldn't allow GLA to disappear from their domestic hubbing capability over MAN. Head-to-head confrontation on the Highlands and Islands routes is more contentious. And we must keep in mind that FlyBe's own financial performance has not drawn plaudits from city investment houses in recent times.
The best hope now is that some kind of interline agreement can be salvaged from the debris. But that may be a challenge given the bad blood between the two companies. Certainly, the domestic hubbing concept which FlyBe developed is devalued if unable to access NWI and INV. And feed from points such as EXT, JER and SOU can only benefit Loganair's bottom line too.
If any readers hold a differing view on this, that's fine. Contribute your comments and observations. But let's discuss the issues on a friendly and mutually respectful basis. And it's OK to agree to disagree if necessary.
What I am prepared to do is discuss points of interest arising within the aviation industry. You are right that I was banned from PPRuNe. My crime there was presenting the case for a second runway at LGW in preference to a third at LHR. The new moderator there took exception to this and barred myself and a number of posters who shared my point of view (the former moderator didn't ever act in this way). I find it difficult to respect a forum which is moderated according to an individual's personal opinion on a discussion topic, rather than on the basis of free speech within the bounds of legal responsibility and common etiquette. That issue doesn't arise on F4A.
The dispute between FlyBe and Loganair arose from their conflicting business models. Loganair signed up to the FlyBe franchise but then declined to harmonise their cabin product with that of the core brand. FlyBe offered a low base fare with checked luggage as a paid-extra, card fees added-on and inflight refreshments offered for sale. In contrast, Loganair charged a high base fare but made it inclusive of checked-in luggage, free catering and no card fees. This caused confusion and complaint amongst connecting passengers encountering completely different product offerings when connecting between two "FlyBe" sectors. Loganair rejected FlyBe's appeals to harmonise their respective offerings to customers. I'm not judging the rights or wrongs of that ... simply stating that this is where the most visible fault-line manifested. And when FlyBe marketed promotional 'seat sales' the Loganair-operated routes were invariably excluded. They appeared to operate a 'no discounting' policy on these. The eventual outcome was the two carriers going their seperate ways. It is most unfortunate that the two chose a damaging head-to-head battle on thin routes rather than addressing issues arising from their differing corporate cultures. Perhaps they could even have reached out to an independent arbitrator. Both companies would be significantly better off today had they done so.
The contention that FlyBe went for Loganair's jugular has some merit. There was certainly no love lost in the heat of battle. But FlyBe would point out (with justification) that they couldn't allow GLA to disappear from their domestic hubbing capability over MAN. Head-to-head confrontation on the Highlands and Islands routes is more contentious. And we must keep in mind that FlyBe's own financial performance has not drawn plaudits from city investment houses in recent times.
The best hope now is that some kind of interline agreement can be salvaged from the debris. But that may be a challenge given the bad blood between the two companies. Certainly, the domestic hubbing concept which FlyBe developed is devalued if unable to access NWI and INV. And feed from points such as EXT, JER and SOU can only benefit Loganair's bottom line too.
If any readers hold a differing view on this, that's fine. Contribute your comments and observations. But let's discuss the issues on a friendly and mutually respectful basis. And it's OK to agree to disagree if necessary.
- Admin
- #56
That's not a great figure and I doubt the route would be sustainable if that is a regular load. I hope you have a safe journey and I look forward to your inbound report Carl!
Just landed waiting for bag, actually was 5 passegers. 3 including me got off and 2 stopped on for Glasgow.
David_itl
Platinum Member
- Jan 31, 2016
- 1,517
- 143
- 51
- Thread starter
- #58
Stornoway increased to 2 weekly with a Wednesday service introduced
https://bdaily.co.uk/articles/2018/02/20/scottish-carrier-loganair-increases-links-between-manchester-and-western-isles
https://bdaily.co.uk/articles/2018/02/20/scottish-carrier-loganair-increases-links-between-manchester-and-western-isles
- Moderator
- #59
Norwich reduces to 2 per day, from 3, from 4th September.
- Moderator
- #60
Confirmation from the start of season Winter 2018 ACL report:
Bergen continues from Summer 2018. Cancellation are Glasgow, Kirkwall (Orkney) and Stornaway.
Bergen continues from Summer 2018. Cancellation are Glasgow, Kirkwall (Orkney) and Stornaway.