Not the Comfy Chair Posted July 2, 2006 Share Posted July 2, 2006 (hence the £19 fare), this is not sustainable Depends how many seats you make available at the lead in fare of £19.... B) Agreed! But if there are very few, the perception is that the headline fare is a con! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstain Posted July 3, 2006 Author Share Posted July 3, 2006 You need to match the size of aircraft to the number of passengers who are likely to fly hence Eastern Airways have taken over the Southampton route but with a much smaller aircraft and probably will do quite well. You can fly to SOU via MAN for half the price Eastern charge but it takes twice as long and a businessman is willing to (let his company) pay the premium. Air travel from the IOM is in decline but looking at last year's figs nearly 800.000 passengers and considering the poulation is about 76.000 that would mean 5 round trips a year for every Manxman. Of course most of that traffic would be business related. The last time l flew with EuroManx the plane was full ex LCY (an ancient turboprop from Air Atlantique) and coming back 38 passengers on an 80+ seater aircraft. The only onboard free catering was a boiled sweet both ways and the cabin crew were very chav! Not so much an airline as a pantomime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfc84 Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 (hence the £19 fare), this is not sustainable Depends how many seats you make available at the lead in fare of £19.... B) Agreed! But if there are very few, the perception is that the headline fare is a con! And if there are no fares at such a price (with the company having done it once) the perception 12 months on, is that fares are too high Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 The CEO of EuroManx seems to have gone quiet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 The CEO of EuroManx seems to have gone quiet! He was due to be back tonight but for some reason his flight was delayed. Will post tomorrow after a costly overnight in Liverpool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haX0red_Account Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 I got a couple of things here to get off my chest; - how much do you think is a reasonable fare to pay? £150 to London city seems pretty good to me. Likewise given the prices rising due to fuel costs they seem much better after inflation compared to about 10 or 20 years ago...anyone got any old tickets and booking dates so we could compare? Compare a few hundred quid to getting across and back with 30-odd quid dhoolish to peel/ramsey by tacsi?! eh! you pay thru the nose for late booking but there you go - I'm as sick as anyone as the constant route jockeying. It looks tacky and unprofessional. - got to be honest and say I don't feel safety is as important with euromanx as it is with BA. I'm sure it is but my perception is that it isn't. I mean, how could anyone buy emerald airways and fail to do their due diligence? - look at other similar routes round the UK and we're no different. If anything (except the easyjet/ryanair routes), on regional we look pretty good. Try booking easyjet last minute from city to city and it's mega £££ - that reward scheme by euromanx is/was appalling. If you can't do it properly, don't do it all. And don;t make anyone cough up extra to join a loyalty scheme unless it;s at p diddy's niteclub or something. First rule of biz skool. And that CEO lurking on the forum was lame, you shouldn't do that man in your position, it;s asking for trouble, if you need any troubleshooting, I'm here but not cheap!!! that's all HA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 - how much do you think is a reasonable fare to pay? £150 to London city seems pretty good to me. Likewise given the prices rising due to fuel costs they seem much better after inflation compared to about 10 or 20 years ago...anyone got any old tickets and booking dates so we could compare? Compare a few hundred quid to getting across and back with 30-odd quid dhoolish to peel/ramsey by tacsi?! eh!you pay thru the nose for late booking but there you go - I'm as sick as anyone as the constant route jockeying. It looks tacky and unprofessional. As an island there has always been a very strong argument for state control. Historically the IOMG kept golden stakes in the Steampacket and Manx Airlines and whilst it was politically questioned at the time it was probably the right thing to do. But stakes were sold off. A free skies policy works but how many airlines have come and gone, when really all people want to do is get here for a reasonable price and leave for a reasonable price. We are not competing for low cost routes. Drunken chav stag night organisers don't weigh up the relative merits of coming here or Amsterdam - let them go to Amsterdam for £25 ... they're arseholes anyway and who wants their trade. The fact is that the only people flying to the Isle of Man WANT (or need) to fly here so as long as the price is reasonable and the flights reliable they will continue to do so. This is a simple fact I cannot believe some airlines have not cottoned on to. The problem is when your flight is delayed it does not matter how much it cost .. you won't come again not matter how cheap, and as the Island relies on people coming in by boat or plane you're stuck with that. Plus if you look at the profit Montagu Private Equity made on the Steampacket in 2 years you can see what the potential is for manx people as stakeholders (accepting that sometimes the market has to be with you). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haX0red_Account Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 can't argue with that, seems pretty reasonable; all eyes on BA Connect then...clock has got to be ticking now given it's strict deadline until profitability... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not the Comfy Chair Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 "Historically the IOMG kept golden stakes in the Steampacket and Manx Airlines and whilst it was politically questioned at the time it was probably the right thing to do. But stakes were sold off." Sorry, hboy, but this is not true. The IOM Government has never had a financial stake or controlling interest in Manx Airlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 "Historically the IOMG kept golden stakes in the Steampacket and Manx Airlines and whilst it was politically questioned at the time it was probably the right thing to do. But stakes were sold off." Sorry, hboy, but this is not true. The IOM Government has never had a financial stake or controlling interest in Manx Airlines. Sorry I'm getting that confused with them underwriting the airlines liability insurance post 911. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not the Comfy Chair Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 "Historically the IOMG kept golden stakes in the Steampacket and Manx Airlines and whilst it was politically questioned at the time it was probably the right thing to do. But stakes were sold off." Sorry, hboy, but this is not true. The IOM Government has never had a financial stake or controlling interest in Manx Airlines. Sorry I'm getting that confused with them underwriting the airlines liability insurance post 911. All UK airlines had temporary support for war risk insurance following the huge rise in premiums in the insurance marketplace following 9/11. And, of course, 9/11 was in 2001, at which stage BA had taken over ownership of Manx Airlines. This has nothing to do with control of Manx Airlines in particular, nor any other airline - it was to protect the whole of the British airline business until the insurance market stabilised. At no stage did the IOM Government have any control over the actions of Mnax Airlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah 01 Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 willstain Unless you have any factual information or constructive comment to add to this thread and not Strand Street conjecture - kindly leave the stage. You're talking thro' your jetpipe! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islander Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 I got a couple of things here to get off my chest; - how much do you think is a reasonable fare to pay? £150 to London city seems pretty good to me. Likewise given the prices rising due to fuel costs they seem much better after inflation compared to about 10 or 20 years ago...anyone got any old tickets and booking dates so we could compare? Compare a few hundred quid to getting across and back with 30-odd quid dhoolish to peel/ramsey by tacsi?! eh! you pay thru the nose for late booking but there you go - I'm as sick as anyone as the constant route jockeying. It looks tacky and unprofessional. - got to be honest and say I don't feel safety is as important with euromanx as it is with BA. I'm sure it is but my perception is that it isn't. I mean, how could anyone buy emerald airways and fail to do their due diligence? - look at other similar routes round the UK and we're no different. If anything (except the easyjet/ryanair routes), on regional we look pretty good. Try booking easyjet last minute from city to city and it's mega £££ - that reward scheme by euromanx is/was appalling. If you can't do it properly, don't do it all. And don;t make anyone cough up extra to join a loyalty scheme unless it;s at p diddy's niteclub or something. First rule of biz skool. And that CEO lurking on the forum was lame, you shouldn't do that man in your position, it;s asking for trouble, if you need any troubleshooting, I'm here but not cheap!!! that's all HA I'm concerned about you comments relating to safety. Could you please clarify. John Seymour CEO EuroManx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 All UK airlines had temporary support for war risk insurance following the huge rise in premiums in the insurance marketplace following 9/11. And, of course, 9/11 was in 2001, at which stage BA had taken over ownership of Manx Airlines. This has nothing to do with control of Manx Airlines in particular, nor any other airline - it was to protect the whole of the British airline business until the insurance market stabilised. I apologise, and I am not trying to point score. Any talk of any golden stake in MA was totally wrong. However MA was sold in 2002 well after the uncertainties (and insurance problems) posed in the months surrounding the 911 attacks. I stand to be corrected but MA still existed at the time of the deal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manx_Airlines I quote:- “Manx Airlines ceased operations in 2002. The last flight, supposed to be flown by BAe 146 G-MIMA, which suffered from technical difficulties, was replaced by another. The BRAL group was bought out for about £72 million by British Airways, and Manx Airlines ceased to exist” Anyway I'm not being critical - what IOMG did at the time was pretty brave and forward thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstain Posted July 4, 2006 Author Share Posted July 4, 2006 willstain Unless you have any factual information or constructive comment to add to this thread and not Strand Street conjecture - kindly leave the stage. You're talking thro' your jetpipe! Put a windsock in it yer self, my posting was brim full of facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.