Where do you think BA SHOULD start flying to?Back to Forum
Haven’t had a real chance to read through the whole thread, so apologies if this has already been mentioned, (but I suppose the more mentions a route gets, the more likely are it will happen, correct?)
I would like a route from the Far-East to Manchester direct, preferably HKG. SIA still do a direct flight to Manchester. Once upon a time CX also did a Manchester flight with a stop off in Amsterdam. At the moment, there are currently 7 daily direct flights between HKG and LHR, and I am sure there are at least 40% of those passengers would be heading to the north of the UK.10 May 2011
It seems that LHR is full and should use airports outside London. Ba is losing a ton of passengers from MAN. I fly once a month to India and Asia. EK and QR are always full in all classes and the view “there is no money to be made out of MAN” is poor. The prices are more or about the same if I fly from London or MAN. BA could offer MAN – HKG or DEL10 May 2011
I hope BA would reintroduce LHR – Jakarta service one day. How about an early morning flight leaving Jakarta at 7 a.m. with a stop in BKK or Phuket and arrive when Londoners are ready for supper?10 May 2011
There is capacity at LHR – but no slots. What is needed is larger aircraft flying longhaul.
BA makes money by having a large hub in London Heathrow/New York JFk (and to a lesser extent Gatwick) where it can manage costs through economies of scale.
While having a few longhaul flights from Manchester might seem a good idea, the cost of basing a 777 away from home base, the cost of crewing away from home base, the cost of marketing to a non-London target audience must all be taken into account.
Being “full in all classes” and “prices being the same” as exLHR does not really tell us anything about the profitability of a flight; margin is the key to all this and BA can operate at a lower cost exLHR than it can exMAN, and (in general terms) the regular and frequent potential for high margin fully flex fares and Business/First trafffic is considerably higher from the South East than is the case from the North West.
This is for three reasons:
1. The generally higher population and number of international business sited close to LHR which need employees to travel regularly
2. The higher per capita income prevalent in the South East
3. The enormous global catchment area which can connect through LHR on a BA flight, which wouldn’t be possible in MAN as it is not a Hub airport
I would of course like to see BA focussing on longhaul and European flights from other UK destinations, but other carriers can do this more efficiently while BA focusses on the markets it knows best: exLHR, Premium, International Connecting traffic and Transatlantic and an emerging focus on India.10 May 2011
Your last post has almost come full circle to my point earlier in this thread that BA has a cheek calling themselves British Airways
Importantly what is their resposibility ensuring LHR is predominately a One world Hub —-As Terminal 1transforms itself into a modern facility i’m sure that the people at Star will look at challenging BA,,,
Will that mean that BA will re-evaluate the importance of “the regions”10 May 2011
Canucklad, I disagree. To the outside world the UK is London, and BA’s hub is the iconic British destination. Whether they serve ANY regionals is irrelevant (as I think domestic operations should cease, at least in England).10 May 2011
Your key phrase was ” to the outside world” and I would agree as the Royal wedding clearly demonstrated….However….
I don’t live in the outside world, I live inside Britain….and when outside world airlines such as Emirates, KLM , Air France et al target my business as being more valuable to them than my own ” Flag carrier” then i can reciprocate their loyalty to me by flirting and sleeping with these outside world carriers .
I do feel sorry for BA and other Inside world carriers in as much as our money grabbing goverment taxmen punish their own citizens who wish to remain loyal to home carriers
Finally I also agree that if we had a decent rail service –funded by our green tax– then domestic air travel would be irrelevant—-unfortunately we lag behind and will be lapped in the race to have rail service that is worthy of one of Europes leading countries !!10 May 2011
canucklad – “I do feel sorry for BA and other Inside world carriers in as much as our money grabbing goverment taxmen punish their own citizens who wish to remain loyal to home carriers” – no matter the carrier, if the flight departs from the UK the pax pays the tax, whether it be EK, BA, or SQ granted it is less if flying first into the continent.
In regards to trains, you can get from Manchester to London just as quick if not quicker by train rather than flying, when you take into account check in times. Scotland seems to be quicker for flying so far, but only just.
Now to your first point, A very large minority (just a guess but could it even be a small majority) of BA traffic isnt even british pax, but LHR transit pax from all over the world. ( NYC-CAI)(LAX-ROM), why should they subsidize a regional network just to validate the name British Airways?10 May 2011
BA should move the Gatwick-Thessaloniki Greece service to Heathrow and operate daily, in the evening from LHR and early in the morning from SKG to capture all connecting passengers to the Americas and other points in the UK. Also service from Gatwick to Heraklion, Rhodes and Corfu.10 May 2011
craigwatson, What about NCL my local airport…you think that route should be cut by B.A…..something that takes less than an hour to fly from A to B in and saving a 5 hour car trip or a 4 hour train and tube trip to LHR? the day that happens will be the day i head back to AMS or CDG and i give up on B.A. and LHR for good, Yes maybe from MAN or BHX but not NCL.10 May 2011
I think BA could strengthen its Asian network, after all, it is where global economic growth is supposed to be coming from, for example AF/KLM are building an impressive Chinese network that includes secondary airports. Similarly I am surprised that BA does not fly direct to more cities in South Asia given the large communities from these countries in the UK and the booming Indian economy, I understand there might be security concerns in Pakistan, but I am surprised there are no more cities covered in India, like Ahmedabad or Kolkata (that was in its network a few years ago), Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, even Nepal…even LHA and AF/KLM have stronger networks there. Seoul and Santiago de Chile are other emerging destinations that might interesting…11 May 2011