[canucklad]

Well rfeguson, it’s time to fess up, as they say…….
As a CP child, I was very much brought up in a n atmosphere of distrust of the national carrier….sometimes almost hostility.
So, being brought up in the close knit family airline, I became interested in the aviation industry as clearly a lot of people here are too.

What I recognised very quickly , was the definite parallels around incumbent national carriers and how they do business with their independent rivals……..

Canada——- AC v CP
UK ————- Ba v BCal and later BMI
Oz ————-QF/TAA v Ansett
France——-AF v UTA
Holland——-KL v Martinair

The common theme, is the government backed airline always held the advantage. In Canada & the UK shockingly so……. AC/BA always had the pick of the routes. And even frequencies were restricted for the independants, thus allowing the carrier of the government , to generally compete in an inefficient manner.

Now BA, certainly has matured, yet it’s biggest asset is still it’s lobbying force, and cynically I’m sure, it’s closed door nod’s and winks in smoke filled Westminster rooms…..And one word comes to mind..
SLOTS

[KarlMarx]

RFerguson

Whoooa! Arrogant? I was very clear to define what I meant, but here we go again, for the sake of enlightenment.

From the Oxford Dictionary: ‘ignorant – ‘Lacking knowledge.’

As an economist I am trained to work from the data and from your post:

“I’m no expert on the political composition of Britain/UK/England ”

Response – would it be better to read up on this before commenting?

“Any airline can fly the british (or english or scottish or…) flag and deem themself a flag carrier.”

Response – there has not been a UK flag carrier since 1973/4.

” I don’t think Britain has the same kind of constitutional make up as say Scandinavia?”

Response – it’s fine not to know, but shouldn’t you find out if you wish to comment with a strong opinion?

“If it didn’t make it out of its post 9/11 so called ‘fight for survival’ I honestly believe the UK government would not have stepped in to save it.”

Response – the UK government did support BA post 9/11 to some degree (and other UK airlines, too.) Unfortunately, I cannot find a reference, but remember it well.

“London is the capital city of the UK/Britain” No it is not, Britain (you actually mean Great Britain) does not have a capital city, it is an island, not a state. London is capital city of the UK and England.

Calling someone ignorant, when they are, is not ‘calling some one a name’ it is simply an observation backed by data.

I don’t mind anyone having an opinion, but when it is based on ignorance, I don’t feel the need to respect it.

[SGJNI1961]

Well, let me see now….. opinions are ok/allowed and are not to be challenged as “facts” can be. Very good.
MY opinion is that your are being unnecessarily rude, and ever so slightly pedantic to the point of boredom! The word “TROLL” certainly springs to mind……… in my opinion.

[FCTraveller]

SGJNI1961 – I totally agree. Anyone who can’t be respectful and curteous should move on.

Reminiscent of another user VintageKrug who I believe was finally barred for being rude to other participants.

[AnthonyDunn]

Responding to the points about BA’s outsourcing – but not at LHR. Contained in the “bible” of all things BA management-thinking-related, aka the Capital Markets Day presentation, much play was made of the very substantial cost reductions in LHR ground services with the implementation of a new contract and T&Cs. If my grey matter serves me, this is in the region of a 50% cut in ground staff costs with the phasing out of older very much more generous T&Cs. That is why/how WW managed not outsource at LHR and why, in the majority of “out-stations” these days, you will very rarely come across a BA uniformed staff member.

And RFerguson, your calm, measured and informative commentaries are always welcome as far as I am concerned.

[MarkivJ]

To the poster who asked about Portland – it’ll be interesting to see if BA starts a service there. Both Icelandair and Condor have started 3-4 weekly flights during the summer season to PDX. Whether BA will follow or not is to be seen….

[rferguson]

– Karlmarx.
May I give two examples of which both essentially mean the same thing?

‘Karlmarx I’m sorry, but I cannot be bothered to respond to such an ignorant post (ignorant in the true meaning of lacking knowledge.)’
versus
‘Karlmarx. Sorry but we will have to agree to disagree on that. There are points in your post which I don’t think are correct because……..’

The first example is insulting, belittling, dismissive and childish. The second you are getting the same point across but remaining polite, respectful, adult and engaging in conversation which is what this forum is meant to be about.

As an economist that deals in ‘facts’ perhaps you can put the same amount of effort into explaining why BA shouln’t be able to use the brand British Airways as you do to explain why I am ignorant? A fact other than “What sticks in my craw is the blatant use of the British branding, when the reality is that they do not fly to international destinations from any country other than England and in particular from London. It is misrepresentation in my opinion and not acceptable.” I don’t think that is fact at all. In fact i’d say it is ignorant.

– Anthonydunn you are spot on regarding ground handling at LHR. BA have taken the same approach to cabin crew. Recruit new staff on far less money and keep the turnover at a healthy level.

– Canucklad. Haha. Yes, those slots – worth a PRETTY penny. I think a pair of peak hour slots can trade at around £30M? Which makes me wonder all the more – WHY did Virgin not snap up the slots being sold by (then) LHR’s largest slot holder BMI? It is something I will never ever understand. Those slots were on the open market – no smoking pipes and cigars in westminster with that one – and Virgin passed it up. I just don’t get that one at all. Speaking of lobbying force – third runway at LHR. It’s interesting BA/IAG still hasn’t said a peep about the new report recommending it.

MarkivJ – India is still BA’s second biggest market by cities served but it is not a profitable one yield wise. While bums on seats are very easy to fill on these routes, generally speaking passengers are connecting to the US and paying literally pennys more to travel say BOM-LHR-SFO than LHR-SFO-LHR (in all classes). Apparently DEL will see the 787-9 soon. I think BA is aiming for a higher slice of O&D premium traffic than the India – North America wave and is adjusting capacity accordingly.

[KarlMarx]

RF, sorry you are offended, but your post was ignorant. But if you read carefully, it was your post I commented on, not you. FWIW, I would not presume to challenge someone on SAS or Norwegian, as I know I don’t know enough about the region and would probably get someone’s back up.

Let’s look at ‘British’ Airways.

Major cities no longer served by ‘British Airways’

– Birmingham (2nd most populous city in England, 2nd most populous city in the UK)

– Cardiff (capital city of Wales, a country of Great Britain and the UK)

Major cities where BA (mainline, not franchisees) flies only to London (regular scheduled services)

Aberdeen, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle, Belfast, Manchester

Recent routes dropped

Manchester to Gatwick,

Aberdeen to London

And the recent BAEC changes mean that people connecting via London now redeem more, even though they have no ability to fly direct. A London centric approach, I think.

Emirates could rightfully claim to operate international flights from more UK airports that BA, yet everyone would fall over laughing if they called themselves ‘British’, in anyway.

As I said in an earlier post, it may be a very good business decision to focus on London as the international centre of operations.

But when more of the population are able to take an international flight with Emirates by driving 1-2 hours, than can do the same with ‘British’ Airways, I find the use of the name to be tacky.

The original airline incorporated BOAC, BEA, Cambrian (there is a clue in the name) and Northeast and had a large footprint over the UK, meaning the name was appropriate for an airline that unified four diverse companies – but I no longer think the label fits.

Others may disagree and are perfectly entitled to that opinion.

[PeterCoultas]

KMx – I feel that your last post is fine if very positively making your point, but your previous I must confess I found “unnecessarily aggressive”…I will in future nevertheless back proposals to call a certain airline ” BE” or, “British Emirates”, a name that in many ways now better reflects the UK’s position in the world!

[rferguson]

– Karlmarx – thanks for the explanation. Anyway….moving on.

I never profess to be an expert on anything. In fact far from it – especially when it comes to the constitutional make up of the UK…or economics. But what I consider myself reasonably versed on is airline stuff (being somewhat an airline geek) and BA (having worked for the past 20 years for them).

Anyone can be an expert of British Airways and it’s history. Wikipdia.com and it’s all there. Like most of the legacy carriers it’s formed from a mish mash amalgamation of many airlines from the past. Hence, many airlines don’t really have a name that really fits it anymore. Southwest in the U.S for example. The former Northwest. Or even QANTAS – the Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Service. Ask those from the Northern Territory or Queensland how they feel served by Qantas in comparison to NSW or Victoria.

I can’t comment how British people feel on an emotional level for BA. I can imagine people that come on here are more airline oriented than the average Joe and I can imagine those in the regions feel a little deserted by BA…some maybe even feeling it’s not worthy of the name.

Many of us in Scandinavia feel the same about SAS – which has basically morphed into a LCC and flights from Norway slashed.

In terms of BHX – it’s only 160KM from London. The middle eastern carriers that operate from there are only feeding their hubs. In terms of Cardiff – even the ME3 don’t fly out of there. Actually I don’t think there are ANY long haul flights from there. Yet, BA maintains a huge engineering base there and employs plenty of local people.

MAN/EDI/GLA – I get it. You can question why BA can’t have some sort of operation out of those cities beyond the shuttle flights to LHR/LGW/LCY.. And the answer really lies in resources and LHR. BA has never said it can’t make money on operating longhaul or international flights from these airports. In fact I imagine with the new cabin crew/ground crew pay and conditions it may be able to make a tidy sum. But it knows full well that unlike say EK (I will have 100 A380’s please) BA’s resources in terms of aircraft are limited. It isn’t slot restricted at LHR thanks to the BMI purchase. And any profitability on say EDI-JFK could never give a return in excess of a flight from LHR. Virgin on the other hand ARE slot restricted. And we see they have the resources free to launch (seasonal) longhaul routes from GLA and other routes from Manchester.

But back to BA as a brand – it is an incredibly strong brand and I don’t see why it should have to give up the name. What if it did and then in five years time it decided to launch flights from elsewhere in the UK? Change it back? It would be corporate brand suicide – i’m sure as an economist you can see that!

[KarlMarx]

RF

You still don’t get my position. I have no problem with BA making business decisions, in reality it is a brand/opco of a Spanish public company that serves to make a profit. I’m not questioning why the company doesn’t operate from some cities, just noting it and reflecting upon it.

But to use the ‘British’ brand, when it serves a population in a small part of England, I find reprehensible.

If British Gas served only the southeast of England or if British Telecom would only service the greater London area, I’d feel the same.

But then I’m born and bred British and you are not, so maybe that’s the difference. (Emotional ties.)

[HarryMonk]

This post is starting to sound like two bald guys fighting over a comb. Let’s get back on track.

[PeterCoultas]

HarryMonk + more than 1

[Carajillo2Sugar]

I have two pairs of tennis shoes in the closet but I don’t play tennis…..

What’s in a name, hey?

[KarlMarx]

Carajillo2Sugar – 04/07/2015 23:20 BST

Presumably your tennis shoes are not running a multi billion pound business?

Harry/Peter

You don’t have to read the posts, if you don’t want to. The last few (both ways) are clarifications, not arguments, but if it bores you, feel free to ignore them.

[Author]

Posts