Aer Lingus - the Dublin airline

parsi · 23-07-2003 9:19am #1

Last year Aer Lingus virtually abandoned Shannon Airport - now they want to stop the Cork - Dublin service because it's not profitable (it used certainly be quite full).

What next for the nationally funded airline - a rename to Aer Dublin ?

The sooner the taxpayers are relived of the burden of paying for an airline that refuses to serve its customers the better for all of us. We need more airlines like Jetmagic who seem to be able to operate without heavy public subsidies.

parsi

Tazz T · 23-07-2003 9:27am

As long as it's there with pricey flights others will come in and undercut it - so let it be. Eventually they might wise up and compete back.

Cork · 23-07-2003 9:45am

Aer Lingus is our Naional Airline. It is owned by us & it will no longer be offering flights from Cork to Dublin.

This is an absolute disgrace. What public service remit does this company have?

or is it the case they could not compete with Aer Arann ?

Eurorunner · 23-07-2003 10:20am

You should be happy!

Public service airline....all that means is that it will (always) cost the taxpayer. The damn thing should have been sold off years ago...if they had got their act together and had it ready for privatisation before 9/11 and before it started to lose €€€€ again, then we would all be better off.

If this is a 'viable' route then someone else will come in and provide it. Hell, even if its far from viable, from what i hear aer arann get in subsidies, they will do that run if they arent doing it already.

dmeehan · 23-07-2003 12:13pm

aer aran currently do 10 daily flights between dub and ork, aer fungus only do 2

aer fungus should try and generate new routes out of cork instead... look at all the routes out of dublin and 2 new ones in the near future

if jetmagic can charge a fortune surely aer lingus could undercut them. jetmagic have proven the market is there

Tazz T · 23-07-2003 12:23pm

They could do with opening up a few new routes to countries that aren't served by any direct flights from Ireland. Greece for example.

Victor · 23-07-2003 2:05pm

Originally posted by parsi
The sooner the taxpayers are relived of the burden of paying for an airline that refuses to serve its customers the better for all of us.

I think in all it's history, Aer Lingus has only once got any money from the State, everything else has been self financed.

parsi · 23-07-2003 2:44pm

I think in all it's history, Aer Lingus has only once got any money from the State, everything else has been self financed.

Well a quick google of "aer lingus subsidy" gives results dating from 1947 detailing yearly Bills which authorised subsidies to Aer Lingus to cover their losses.

Aer Lingus is semi-state and like every semi-state it has received subsidies which rightly enable it to operate both commercial and non-commercial (almost public service) activities.

I have no problem with Semi-State companies and indeed I fear full privatisation which will lead to Cherrypicking and diminishment of oevrall services to consumers. However I dislike Semi-State companies receiving public funds and failing to provide services to all sectors of the community.

Victor · 23-07-2003 3:38pm

Originally posted by parsi
Well a quick google of "aer lingus subsidy" gives results dating from 1947 detailing yearly Bills which authorised subsidies to Aer Lingus to cover their losses.

Which were payable to Aer Rianta. I can't find anything there to indicate actual subsidies to Aer Lingus, it all appears to go to Aer Rianta. The only instance I am aware of was 1990 or so.

parsi · 23-07-2003 3:55pm

"3. In this Order—

the expression " the Company " means Aer-Rianta, Teóranta ;

the expression " the subsidiary Companies " means Aer Lingus, Teóranta, and Aerlínte Éireann, Teóranta ;

the expression " the year 1947-48 " means the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1948.

4. (1) The Minister for Industry and Commerce is hereby authorised to pay to the Company (in addition to the subsidies amounting to three hundred and fourteen thousand, three hundred and fifty pounds, heretofore authorised) a subsidy (in this Order referred to as the subsidy) equal to the lesser of the following—

(a) one hundred and sixty thousand pounds ;

(b) the sum which the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Industry and Commerce estimate will be the losses sustained by the Company and the subsidiary Companies in the year 1947-48, together with the sum of one hundred and fifty-three pounds, fourteen shillings and ten pence, by which the subsidy paid under the Subsidy (Aer-Rianta, Teóranta) Order, 1939 (S. R. & O. No. 31 of 1939) fell short of the actual loss of the Company, as determined in accordance with that Order.

(2) The subsidy shall be paid to the Company before the 1st day of April, 1948, at such times and in such instalments as the Minister for Industry and Commerce, after consultation with the Minister for Finance, thinks proper.

5. For the purposes of this Order—

(a) the losses sustained by the Company or the subsidiary Companies in the year 1947-48 shall be the losses so sustained in any activities in connection with aviation (other than the management by the Company of the Dublin Airport on behalf of the Minister for Industry and Commerce) undertaken by the relevant Company in accordance with the policy from time to time approved by the Minister for Industry and Commerce "

This (to me) seems to state that the subsidy is for Aer Rianta and its subsidiaries and Aer Lingus is cited as one of them. I think it is inconceivable that a Semi State would get a subsidy only once in its history..

(anyway this is a bit of a tangent I suppose ?)

Victor · 23-07-2003 6:09pm

OK you can contend they might have got money 50+ years ago and recently?

Do I have it right that Aer Arann have their Cork-Dublin flights subsidised, but Aer Lingus don't?

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/1079647?view=Eircomnet

Aer Lingus cuts 'unprofitable' Cork route
From:ireland.com
Wednesday, 23rd July, 2003

The daily Aer Lingus service between Dublin and Cork will come to an end this October because the airline says the route is unprofitable.

Occupancy on the flights was below 60 per cent and they are losing money, according to the company.

The move has been criticised by business representatives in Cork. Mr Michael Geary, chief executive of the Cork Chamber of commerce said the move had been made without consultation with the business community.

Ceasing daily internal flights by the "national" airline might also create a "negative perception in the eyes of some Cork-based multi-nationals", he said.

Aside from this, Mr Geary said the impact "would not be fatal to [Cork] airport" as the Cork to Dublin route is well served by Aer Arann and Aer Wales.

Mr Seamus Kearney, chief operations officer at Aer Lingus, denied the move would be a blow for businesses operating in Cork and Dublin.

Speaking on RTÉ radio this morning, Mr Kearney said: "Aer Lingus is by far and away, and will continue to be by far and away, the biggest operator into and out of Cork airport, taking nearly half of the passenger total in and out of Cork this year.

Part of the reason for stopping the flights was that the jets operated by Aer Lingus are too big to be economical on such short flights.

Mr Kearney said Aer Lingus was now concentrating on international services from Cork. "We are extremely confident that the service we are providing to the Irish customer in terms of low fares is working successfully," he added.

Aer Lingus operates three return flights between Dublin and Cork on Monday to Friday, one return flight on a Saturday and two return flights on Sundays. The service will stop on October 26th.

Occidental · 23-07-2003 6:35pm

No subsidies for anyone on Dublin-Cork.

The PSO routes are

Dublin-Kerry Aer Arann
Dublin-Galway Aer Arann
Dublin-Knock Aer Arann
Dublin-Sligo Aer Arann
Dublin-Donegal Aer Arann
Dublin-Derry Loganair

It should also be noted that not all flights on the above routes receive PSO money.

Aer Lingus want to pull Dublin-Cork because they intend to pull the 146 from service in October. This would leave them with 737's at around 120 passengers as the smallest aircraft they operate. This is also expected to rise to the 130/140+ mark, as Aer Lingus replaces the 737's over the next few years.

parsi · 24-07-2003 8:57am

I didn't think they operated the 146 on Dub-Cork anymore ? I know they pulled from London City because they were using 146s but for the last year (or two) I thought it has been 737s on Cork-Dublin - the only 146 you see in Cork these days is the TNT plane.

definitely the night flight is a 737 ..

(of course I may be totally wrong)

Victor · 24-07-2003 5:23pm

On Cork-Dublin, Aer Lingus use a 146 for their lunchtime service. Aer Arann uses AT7s and AT4s. Air Wales uses AT4s.

To correct an earlier post the runway in cork is of course 1,800m not 2,100m.

parsi · 24-07-2003 7:59pm

I didn´t know the 146 was at lunchtime. Then again I would rarely see Cork airport at lunchtime. These days its the odd evening and most Sunday afternoons (bring junior in the car for his nap) and of course whatever I see going overhead.

I was on the ATRs last week and have to say I was impressed by them - the space was definitely better than the 146 and you didn´t get the feeling that if you sat in the window seat your neck would be permanently deformed :-)

John R · 24-07-2003 9:54pm

I fail to see how an air service between these two cities should be subsidised at all, there are good bus and rail links which are of value to the general public, these should be supported by government if necessary. An air service however is a luxury that is not of great value to the general public at all, its users are mainly from the business sector whose transport should not be publicly funded. If there is a market for these services it should be left to the private sector to operate it if the state airline cannot do so without making a loss.

What I would like to know is why Aer Lingus cannot run the service without subsidy when other operators can.

Victor · 24-07-2003 9:59pm

Originally posted by John R
What I would like to know is why Aer Lingus cannot run the service without subsidy when other operators can.

Aer Lingus don't get subsidies. As Occidental said only Aer Arann and Loganair get subsidies for certain routes.

BKtje · 25-07-2003 1:28pm

..and the reason (as someone said above) that they are loosing money while the others arent is because they use a larger aircraft which costs more to run in fuel,maintenance and staffing costs.
If they really wantesd i guess they could buy a couple smaller planes to service this route...but why bother if there are already carriers doing the route.

Occidental · 25-07-2003 1:54pm

Aer Arann are increasing capacity to eight return flights a day between Cork & Dublin this winter. Bright days indeed for Cork Airport.

Hairy Homer · 25-07-2003 2:05pm

Originally posted by dmeehan
aer aran currently do 10 daily flights between dub and ork, aer fungus only do 2

So if there are already 10 flights a day between Cork and Dublin, why are people so outraged?

If you want to get to Dublin (and who'd blame you) you can still fly, take the train or (assuming you can navigate your way out of the unsignposted labyrinth that is the city by the Lee) you can drive.

Move on, people. Cork is only the second city of the Republic —or third if you consider Dun Laoghaire on its own.

Live with it.

BKtje · 25-07-2003 3:53pm

Sorry fpr Off topic, but is Dun Laoghaire considered a city!?

Victor · 25-07-2003 11:05pm

Originally posted by B-K-DzR
Sorry fpr Off topic, but is Dun Laoghaire considered a city!?

No.

http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/1089661?view=Eircomnet

Airline's 'anti-family' child fare hikes attacked
From:The Irish Independent
Friday, 25th July, 2003
Frank Khan Tourism Correspondent

.....

Many Aer Lingus competitors no longer offer child discounts, including BMI and Ryanair. Aer Arann is now the only Irish airline that does.

Meanwhile, Ryanair last night offered to double capacity on the Cork to Dublin route following the Aer Lingus decision to abandon the route - but only if it was given a deal on airport charges, writes Ralph Riegel.

"This is all about excessive landing charges. If Ryanair is given a proper incentive package, we will more than double passenger numbers," a Ryanair spokesman vowed.

The move came after Aer Arann confirmed that it will be increasing its Dublin-Cork services from six to nine flights per day.

jesus_thats_gre · 30-07-2003 4:00pm

I am gonna take a very simplistic view on this. Forgive me if I am off the mark.

Aer Lingus are our national airline and offer the most long haul routes, of which the majority are run at a profit. While their short haul internatal flight are operated at a loss.

The smaller regional airlines in this country offer internal short haul flights at reasonable cost and are able to run these at a profit.

Would it not just be better to let Aer Lingus to keep operating as our national airline, connecting Ireland to the rest of the world in an efficient and profitable manner, and then just let the smaller airlines offer internal services. That way the smaller companies can operate on a equal basis without the possibility of Aer Lingus bullying them out of service, thus encouraging local companies to grow and allow Aer Lingue to also grow in the troubled airline industry.

Got muddled half way through but I hope ya get my point.

dmeehan · 30-07-2003 6:15pm

The smaller regional airlines in this country offer internal short haul flights at reasonable cost and are able to run these at a profit.

most (if not all) internal routes are subsidised by the government

Victor · 06-08-2003 9:38pm

http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/1151606?view=Eircomnet

Ryanair Cork link offer grounded
From:The Irish Independent
Wednesday, 6th August, 2003
Ralph Riegel

RYANAIR'S offer to replace Aer Lingus on the Dublin-Cork link is set to be dashed by Aer Rianta's insistence the proposal does not rank as a new route and does not qualify for a money-spinning discount package.

The budget airline had offered to replace Aer Lingus on the busy Dublin-Cork route after the State carrier confirmed it was axing its service from next October.

The route was axed after the State carrier blamed unsustainable losses. However, two smaller carriers - Aer Arann and Air Wales - already operate on the route, though both use turboprop aircraft.

These are smaller and more economical on short-haul routes than a jet aircraft - but suffer from a smaller capacity.

Now, Ryanair's bold attempt to operate a near hourly service on the Dublin-Cork link is set to be dashed by an Aer Rianta ruling which states that such a route will not qualify as a new service.

Without qualifying as a new route, the service will not benefit from Aer Rianta's attractive landing charges discounts as well as potential marketing support.

New routes can be supported by discount packages on landing charges amounting to reduction in fees over the first five years by as much as 75pc net.

Aer Rianta sources stressed that they are confident capacity will not be an issue on the Cork-Dublin route given commitments from both Aer Arann and Air Wales to increase their daily operations on the particular route.

Victor · 06-08-2003 9:43pm

Aer Lingus reports €14.3m half-year profit
From:ireland.com
Wednesday, 6th August, 2003

Aer Lingus made an operating profit €14.3 million for the first half of 2003 and reported progress in cutting costs.

The operating profit marks a turnaround for the airline, which reported a loss of €12.6 million for the same period last year and a loss of €38.1 million for the first half of 2001.

Turnover at €414.1 million was down 8.6 per cent from €453.1 million for the first half of 2002 - driven by the continuing reduction in fares. Aer Lingus said costs were €399.8 million, 14.2 per cent lower than in the first half of 2002 and 30 per cent down on 2001.

The cost savings passed on as lower fares helped lift the passenger-load factor passenger to 80 per cent for the first half of 2003 compared with 73 per cent for the same period last year and 69 per cent in the first six months of 2001.

Aer Lingus chief executive Mr Willie Walsh the airline was making "good progress" towards becoming a low-fares airline delivering a quality service.

Commenting on the break-up of Aer Rianta Mr Willie Walsh said: "We are excited by the opportunities opening up in the Irish air travel market. Independent airports at Cork, Dublin and Shannon represent great growth potential and we are poised to take advantage of the impending change in the Ireland/US bilateral which will open up new US gateways for Aer Lingus".

Mr Walsh warned that many challenges still lay ahead to improve profitability reduce costs and add new routes.

"The progress we have made will act as a spur to further change," Mr Walsh said. #

bloggs · 18-08-2003 10:43pm

Ryanair fly from Cork to London, Knock to London and Kerry to London (i think), and they don't get a cent from the government.

Victor · 18-08-2003 10:49pm

Originally posted by bloggs
Ryanair fly from Cork to London, Knock to London and Kerry to London (i think), and they don't get a cent from the government.

(a) the routes are international (b) they are commercially viable (c) they get lots of nice incentives from airports like marketing subsidies and lower landing charges.

secret_squirrel · 18-08-2003 11:18pm

Some Aer Lingus Facts for you

parsi & Eurorunner

1.. The last time Aer Lingus were 'bailed out' was around 1992 when they instituted a restructuring known as the Cahill Plan. Since then the only money paid by tax payers was for the subsidy of routes, that Aer Lingus have completely pulled out of in recent years. How many of you were paying tax 10 years ago???

2.. The Government (indeed all EU Govts) are explictly forbidden by the European Commission by bailling out their national carriers more than once. Hence the last restructuring (2000+ jobs lost) was entirely self funded by Aer Lingus. Of course unless you want to blame Aer Lingus for the extra burden on the tax payer of all those unemployed people?

3. Aer Arann have been quite happy to take over national routes that Aer Lingus have pulled out of preserving those routes for an Irish Airline. Arguably if Aer Lingus fly international routes and Aer Arann fly domestic routes profitably both the Economy and the Tax Payers benefit.

Tazz T

4. Aer Lingus fares on similar routes are an average of €5 dearer than Ryan Air's. A fact held up by a complaint made to the Advertising Standards in June. Indeed Ryan Air flights tend to leave you a long way out from your destintation compared to Aer Lingus. Eg Stansted not Heathrow. Charleroi not Charles De Gaul.

Tazz T

5. Aer Lingus have added loads of New routes in the last few years - Tenerife and Tolouse Flights start in October. You can now fly to Malaga, Faro, Alicante . Willie Walsh wants to open 8 more routes to N America. Give them time. Also if you compare Ryan Airs new route announcements you will they have 'followed' announcements by Aer Lingus.

6. Those of you that want to see Aer Lingus privatised, do you really want another Eircom fiasco where Bertie and the Boys get to piss your money up the wall selling your airline to a few thousand shareholders. Aer Lingus is best left where it is as a Semi-State Company being run well at a profit bringing in large sums of personal and corporate tax revenue to the Govt.

sceptre · 19-08-2003 12:17am

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
How many of you were paying tax 10 years ago???

Well, that's somewhat irrelevant. Even someone on social welfare who's not paying tax gets to complain about where the State's money goes. Plenty of people around now who weren't paying tax in 1977 get to complain about the Finance Act that year. People get to complain about the conduct of the Vietnam war too should they feel like it even if they weren't born until the 1970s and outside the US (or Vietnam) at that.

Incidentally, I was paying tax in 1993. Not, as I said, that that's relevant in any way, so it's not really relevant whether Eurorunner or parsi made a net contribution to the central fund or AerLingus "bailout" basket collection or not.

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
4. Aer Lingus fares on similar routes are an average of €5 dearer than Ryan Air's. A fact held up by a complaint made to the Advertising Standards in June.

Not quite. The ruling is here. AerLingus may have mentioned a fiver in their complaint, the ASAI certainly didn't uphold this figure in their ruling (they didn't even mention it). They did agree that the particular advertising was unfair and misleading but there's no mention whatever of a particular figure. I'd like to see your evidence that the price difference is a fiver. If you can produce it, I'd be pleased to fly into LHR, even if it means using one of the other locations for the cheapest Aerlingus fares™.

Indeed Ryan Air flights tend to leave you a long way out from your destintation compared to Aer Lingus. Eg Stansted not Heathrow. Charleroi not Charles De Gaul.

I assume you mean Beauvais. Charleroi serves Brussels and is rather too far from Paris for even Ryanair to claim that it's a Paris airport:). Bar that, your point is correct.

Eurorunner · 19-08-2003 12:31am

6. Those of you that want to see Aer Lingus privatised, do you really want another Eircom fiasco where Bertie and the Boys get to piss your money up the wall selling your airline to a few thousand shareholders. Aer Lingus is best left where it is as a Semi-State Company being run well at a profit bringing in large sums of personal and corporate tax revenue to the Govt.

Privatise now....the words Swiss Air spring to mind...and you should note secret squirrel that when ryanair finally get to dig into the irish market, aer lingus are finished. Aer lingus simply are not 'thin' enough to compete head to head with ryanair...ok, you will say that they are already doing it but just wait..wait and see...;)

Yes, the government f_ucked up the sale of €ircon...agreed..but a privatisation handled correctly is what im talking about. Remember, we are as much to blame as the government, we vote these arse_holes in!! The €ircon biddies have gotten €80k in share value apiece ...of what is tax payers money.....

The last time Aer Lingus were 'bailed out' was around 1992

OK, so they havnt been bailed out recently simply because European law forbids it....point accepted.

4. Aer Lingus fares on similar routes are an average of €5 dearer than Ryan Air's. A fact held up by a complaint made to the Advertising Standards in June. Indeed Ryan Air flights tend to leave you a long way out from your destintation compared to Aer Lingus. Eg Stansted not Heathrow. Charleroi not Charles De Gaul.

Well, maybe for some but in my experience, this is definitely not the case. I was looking for a flight recently to any major European destination..booking two months in advance..decided to give aer lingus a try seeing as they have supposedly gone down the 'value for money' route......what they promote on is all bull$hit. Ryanair are very transparent in how they sell...there isnt anyone who takes the odd flight here and there that doesnt know by this stage that :
yes, all of ryanairs airports are up to an hour outside the major centres. (and by the way, i dont think you meant to compare Charleroi with Charles De Gaul:D )

Booked my flight for Shannon-Charleroi for €50 return inclusive of all fees last night for 25/27 October. Run along to aer lingus and see what they can offer for these dates...:rolleyes:

5. Aer Lingus have added loads of New routes in the last few years - Tenerife and Tolouse Flights start in October. You can now fly to Malaga, Faro, Alicante . Willie Walsh wants to open 8 more routes to N America. Give them time. Also if you compare Ryan Airs new route announcements you will they have 'followed' announcements by Aer Lingus.

Dont know what you want to prove with this..that aer lingus are progressive...ok, i think its great that they've turned things round in such a short space of time but ultimately, they will not be able to compete head to head with ryanair in the long run....erm, maybe thats why ryanair are following them on routes!

Now, this thread has lost its focus and i am also partly to blame for that...getting back to the main issue, i think it makes sense what aer lingus are doing...they want to streamline maintenance with one fleet of similar machines...so they drop the really short range stuff...i have no problem with this..i dont think we should be pressuring them into this public service role...thats how we drag them into trouble in the first place. The route is well serviced, and in the current climate, if a route is economic it WILL be served.

sceptre · 19-08-2003 12:52am

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
6. Those of you that want to see Aer Lingus privatised, do you really want another Eircom fiasco where Bertie and the Boys get to piss your money up the wall selling your airline to a few thousand shareholders.

Key difference between the two. Eircom was overpriced, sure. The key problem we've got with Eircom these days is that it's a privately held company with a monopoly at the last mile level. Aer Lingus is not and will not be a company with any sort of monopoly.

Hence the only problem with a sell-off of Aer Lingus may be that idiots buy an overpriced company and can't understand why their shares fail to hold value if the bottom falls out of the overpriced market. That's the investor's problem, not the problem of the country as a whole. Why? That lack of monopoly status.

The Eircom selloff was an immense sucess from the point of view of the Department of Finance. They got a pile of gullible fools to pour money into an overpriced selloff and made 5 billion quid from the deal. I didn't agree with the copper infrastructure being sold off but believe me - the government didn't "piss (our) money up the wall." We (not including me, it was overpriced, remember?) did that ourselves when the possibility of guaranteed (not really) free wads of cash entered our greedy little minds. The government made 5 billion pounds from the deal and they'd quite like to do it again. Whether they should or not is another matter but nothing to do with pissing money up against the wall.

parsi · 19-08-2003 9:12am

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
Some Aer Lingus Facts for you

parsi & Eurorunner

1.. The last time Aer Lingus were 'bailed out' was around 1992 when they instituted a restructuring known as the Cahill Plan. Since then the only money paid by tax payers was for the subsidy of routes, that Aer Lingus have completely pulled out of in recent years. How many of you were paying tax 10 years ago???

I was. And I still am. And I have a right to expect that a Semi-State company provide a service for the citizens of the country. Yes, Aer Arann fly Cork-Dublin. They are private. They can decide tomorrow to pull out and concentrate somewhere else. Thats what being private is about - you are responsible only to your backers/investors/shareholders.

Aer Lingus is Semi-State - people in Clare, Cork, Donegal and elsewhere are its shareholders with the Government as our proxy. We deserve service. As I said before if Aer Lingus want to act private let them go private and have to fight for everything in every airport just like the other guys. However if they want the protection (perceived or otherwise) of semi-state then they should provide the services that go with that.

Imposter · 19-08-2003 9:47am

Originally posted by parsi
Aer Lingus is Semi-State - people in Clare, Cork, Donegal and elsewhere are its shareholders with the Government as our proxy. We deserve service. As I said before if Aer Lingus want to act private let them go private and have to fight for everything in every airport just like the other guys. However if they want the protection (perceived or otherwise) of semi-state then they should provide the services that go with that. [/B]

That's a lot of rubbish in fairness. The State provides bus and/or rail 'services' to all of these areas. To provide a service to a given area is one thing but to suggest that just because a town/city has an airport that the government must provide the service is wrong. One single 'service' should be provided to every area and after that sensible services that make a profit should exist. After all who wants to waste taxpayers money?

As for Aer Lingus providing a public service, they do. They provide a service to people who want to get out of Ireland (and come in) for whatever reason. As someone else pointed out this service is largely concentrated in Dublin just like most national airlines have a base airport, live with it or move to Dublin like everyone else seems to be doing.

parsi · 19-08-2003 11:49am

Originally posted by Imposter
That's a lot of rubbish in fairness. The State provides bus and/or rail 'services' to all of these areas. To provide a service to a given area is one thing but to suggest that just because a town/city has an airport that the government must provide the service is wrong. One single 'service' should be provided to every area and after that sensible services that make a profit should exist. After all who wants to waste taxpayers money?

As for Aer Lingus providing a public service, they do. They provide a service to people who want to get out of Ireland (and come in) for whatever reason. As someone else pointed out this service is largely concentrated in Dublin just like most national airlines have a base airport, live with it or move to Dublin like everyone else seems to be doing.

I thought the whole idea of Boards was that we could discuss things and not have to "live with it or move to Dublin". With that response the Ireland Offline forum would die down to "live with it or move to Germany where DSL is cheaper and freely available".

The point is that those of us who don't dwell in the capital should have access to a similar range of services as those who live in the capital. When we are dealing with private companies we have sweet-all chance of influencing them but with State services we do have an option.

Imposter · 19-08-2003 12:10pm

Originally posted by parsi
I thought the whole idea of Boards was that we could discuss things and not have to "live with it or move to Dublin". With that response the Ireland Offline forum would die down to "live with it or move to Germany where DSL is cheaper and freely available".

The point is that those of us who don't dwell in the capital should have access to a similar range of services as those who live in the capital. When we are dealing with private companies we have sweet-all chance of influencing them but with State services we do have an option.

Sorry about that move to the capital jibe but it was meant in jest!

But why do you see the need for a publicly funded flight connection between Dublin and Cork if both bus and rail connections already exist and in theory only take 3 to 4 hours?
Ireland is not a big island. if it was say a 6+ hour trip between cities then such a connection would make sense even if it ran at a loss.

How long does it take to get from city centre Dublin to city centre Cork when flying (including waiting time in airport)? How much is such a service going to cost? If it was running at a profit I don't think Aer Lingus would be shutting it down. Add to that there still are the private options.

IMO people are not 'entitled' to a similar range of services. They may be 'entitled' to transport links that ensure they can get virtually everywhere but a similar range, I don't think so. With that logic Leitrim could decide it is 'entitled' to an airport and direct flights to Prague, Paris and New York but such a service would be a bit stupid, wouldn't it?

Personally i'd much prefer to see rail and road infrastructures improved to cut journey times and then provide decent services on these and not the haphazard ones public companies do now.
Also maybe some sort of integrated ticketing between road, rail, ferry and air transport but that's probably all just a bit too much to happen.

parsi · 19-08-2003 12:43pm

Ok. You're right and I'm a bit right. I'm not going to argue anymore cos we seem to share the same basic views.

I think Leitrim having an airport is a good idea - save them clogging up all the other airports ;-)

Integrated ticketing is a good idea as well - I see Dublin Bus have a tender out for it - probably be implemented any day now ;-) (edited to include: sarcastic comment - how many times have we seen integrated ticketing plans/aspirations before)

Victor · 19-08-2003 3:18pm

OK, tone it down a little. If anyone on this thread works in or for the transport industry, I want to know now.

Originally posted by Imposter
IMO people are not 'entitled' to a similar range of services. They may be 'entitled' to transport links that ensure they can get virtually everywhere but a similar range, I don't think so. With that logic Leitrim could decide it is 'entitled' to an airport and direct flights to Prague, Paris and New York but such a service would be a bit stupid, wouldn't it?

I think people are entitled to "balance", not equality per se in this. By this I mean taxation should be spent somewhere between splitting it according to genuine need and spending it on a purely per capita basis. Theres about 25,000 people in Leitrim, 1,100,000 in Dublin. If we are spending €1,125,000 (to keep the number simple) on say a bus service, at least €1,000,000 (90%) should go to Dublin. At least €22,500 (90%) should go to Leitrim. The €22,500 will only provide a part-time service in Leitrim and Leitrim people should get used to this.

secret_squirrel · 20-08-2003 9:21pm

I should have mentioned that I work for Aer Lingus and Im proud to. I've seen a bloated ineffiecent company turned round into a model of how a full service airline can compete with a No Frills carrier like Ryan Air.

The tax thing was flippant - shouldnt have mentioned it sorry.

The €5 thing was mentioned in an internal company memo around the time of the ruling and accompanied this press release here

Im pretty sure it was the Glasgow route as mentioned in that press release and the Ryan Air average was around €41. But I freely admit that I have no way to prove those figures - you'll just have to trust me or not - your choice.

As to Ryan Air being able to drive Aer Lingus out of business/or even take them over - of course they could - but it would be a nasty drawn out process where the only losers would be the public. Ryan Air have much bigger fish to fry (Lufthansa mostly at the mo- the Irish market is in the end fairly limited. Ryan Airs hub at Stansted is already bigger than Dublin's, they also have 2 rapidly developing hubs in europe.

And completely back on topic (sorry for all the diversions) - privatisation is and always has been a scam. A government takes something we all own and flogs it off to a few shareholders, for short term gains. Aer Lingus is valued at around €400m (last newspaper speculation that I saw

)which amounts to pocket change for most national Govts. Plus then theres potentially nothing stopping a majority of shareholders flogging Aer Lingus off or stripping its assets and closing it down - something I think which would be very detrimental to the economy. Unlike Eircom a good deal of Aer Lingus's assets are portable or out of the country which is added incentives for one of the big boys in avation to strip the company.
I lived in the UK during the late 80's early 90's and saw loads of companies flogged off - mostly at the long term expense of consumers. (Water/Power/Gas/Buses) . I think a well run semi-state provides the best compromise between giving value to the country (even without Cork-Dublin flights) and operating in commercial realities.

Victor · 20-08-2003 9:42pm

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
The €5 thing was mentioned in an internal company memo around the time of the ruling and accompanied this press release here

Link appears to be cookie dependant can you show the path to it or include a quote.

secret_squirrel · 20-08-2003 9:57pm

sorry 'bout that!

Full text can be found following aerlingus.com---> site map ---> Aer Lingus News ---> Press Release 13 May

Excerpt here -

Aer Lingus challenges Ryanair on "untruthful and grossly misleading" fares publicity

Aer Lingus today condemned recent Ryanair advertising on supposed "average" fares as "untruthful and grossly misleading".

...yada yada yada...

....... Ryanair advertising has claimed the Aer Lingus "average" fare to be €185.86. Willie Walsh dismissed this as "bizarre and basic financial miscalculation by Ryanair to vastly and knowingly inflate the Aer Lingus "average" fare."

The actual Aer Lingus average fares on a range of routes where the airline competes directly with Ryanair are as follows:

* Birmingham:
€61.14
* Edinburgh:
€45.90
* Glasgow:
€46.11
* London Gatwick:
€59.07
* Manchester:
€64.52

sceptre · 21-08-2003 1:10am

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
sorry 'bout that!

Full text can be found following aerlingus.com---> site map ---> Aer Lingus News ---> Press Release 13 May

Ta muchy. I was reasonably happy to accept your claim anyway rather than just argue it. One point though: the ASAI didn't vindicate the claim of the price difference being 5 euros, contrary to what you said. Ryanair misled in their advertising (which AL have also done in recent past but not quite so badly & probably not so deliberately/maliciously) but there's no independent verification of the fiver claim. It's an Aerlingus press release. An Aer Lingus press release that itself doesn't mention the fiver claim. Let's discount the fiver claim.

I book a flight to London (usually from Shannon but I also check Cork and Dublin) about once a month. Ryanair have been significantly cheaper 75% of the time (even allowing for the 20 quid from Stansted in rather than the 5.80 from LHR on the tube (the travel times are the same if not using the heathrow express to paddington)). Of the remainder (25%), Aer Lingus win out over all opposition most of the time but cheaper fares on the same flights are usually (not always) found on the BA website rather than the AL one). Most of the time AL don't even come close.

I'm not too sure why you're continuing the Eircom comparison (which I brought up initially but for different reasons as I mentioned). The trouble with Eircom is that we can't get rid of them or have an alternative. If Aer Lingus disappeared tomorrow the main losers would be the workers - alternative services would still exist.
I realise I'm just being lazy here at this late hour but why are you sure that stripping Aer Lingus or closing it would be of significant detriment to the economy (apart from the obvious loss in PAYE revenue due to redundancies)?

(I'm not anti-Aer Lingus btw - I'm just picking up on this specific "we really need it" point and I'm probably going to stick just to that one)

secret_squirrel · 21-08-2003 8:23pm

Well I dont think we absolutely need it. I just think the economy is better with it - from a simple tax view if nothing else. Most of Aer Lingus's business is transatlantic - if they go so does the tax revenue from that trade - it all goes to non-irish carriers. There no other irish airline else in any position to take up that slack. Plus the americans are very restrictive about their airspace you can bet they would delay granting another Irish airline permission to fly to the US as long as possible. Its also quite likely that a european airline would force you fly via one of their bases rather than direct. IMHO real alternatives wouldnt exist.

And whilst Aer Lingus is not big enough, or efficient enough to compete with Ryan air directly we're big enough to keep them honest. Do you honestly believe that Ryan air would keep prices from ireland as low as they are right now with some reasonably sized competition?

You are more likely to find cheaper fares on BA (and I assume you mean BA tickets on an Aer Lingus flight) rather than Aerlingus because they are less likely to sell out as quickly - simply because less people would think to check BA for those flights.

Im not stuck on Eircom was just using it because its most recent privatisation that would stick in most peoples minds. Although I dont honestly think there one real alternative to Aer Lingus currently.

And on the subject no-one has yet explained to me how privatisation will give us a better situation than now.
Could some one from the city old boys club have turned aer lingus around so fast? - I dont think so.
Aer Lingus is heading for a decent sized profit this year - when most quoted (full service airlines) are still barely adapting to a Post 11/9 market. There's this myth that privatisation always brings better more effiecent companies any one who has watched some of the privatise everything madness in the UK will know that in a lot of cases its just not true.

Any maybe this is being picky but since the poll appears open again and since Aer Lingus hasnt been bailed out since 1992 and the Govt is specifically forbidden by the EU commission to invest in Aer Lingus dont some of the poll options merit a change??

parsi · 26-08-2003 2:10pm

"Aer Lingus to run three new routes from Cork

Aer Lingus has announced plans to open three new routes between Cork and continental Europe next year.

The company said it would begin operating flights from Cork to Barcelona, Alicante and Milan from next March. It said the expansion confirmed its commitment to developing its operations out of Cork.

The new flights will represent a 50% increase in the capacity of Aer Lingus flights between Cork and continental Europe. "

source: http://www.examiner.ie/breaking/2003/08/26/story111118.html

I suppose we should thank them. Surely it would be better to open additional routes rather than just compete with the popular JetMagic routes ?

Eurorunner · 26-08-2003 3:02pm

"Aer Lingus to run three new routes from Cork

Well, i would say that this is more positive..routes between the regions and europe as opposed to the regions and dublin are going to be a hell of a lot more valueable in terns of investment, tourism and convenience.

Aer Lingus obviously see jetmagic as a threat they want to stomp out..theyre probably both going after the same type of customer - but theres nothing like a bit of competition!

secret_squirrel · 26-08-2003 8:10pm

and on a kinda related note - you wait until you see the new ad campaign...lets just say it might fuel some more debate lol.

The man shagging whale icon is especially interesting. Im unable to make up my mind if its sh*te or clever or both

sceptre · 26-08-2003 9:06pm

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
Well I dont think we absolutely need it. I just think the economy is better with it

That's fair enough and (for what it's worth:D) I agree with you.

You are more likely to find cheaper fares on BA (and I assume you mean BA tickets on an Aer Lingus flight) rather than Aerlingus because they are less likely to sell out as quickly - simply because less people would think to check BA for those flights.

Ah, thanks for the explanation (yeah, that's what I meant). So I'm being a sharp consumer.

And on the subject no-one has yet explained to me how privatisation will give us a better situation than now.
...
any one who has watched some of the privatise everything madness in the UK will know that in a lot of cases its just not true.

I'm very much against privatisation just for the sake of privatisation. Actually the actions in the UK in the mid-eighties and since have made me rather suspicious of privatisation in general. If there's a particular advantage to be gained from a particular privatisation then that's OK. Or if service level can be guaranteed with some free money for the State that's OK too (this pretty much never happens). Even the PPP with the London underground is something I'm still very suspicios of.

I haven't offered an advantage to privatising AL because I can't think of one. That's the reason I'm not all that inclined to privatise the company at all, or at least not very much in favour of it. I'd be very interested in hearing from anyone who can though.

Victor · 18-09-2003 12:17am

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/1509750?view=Eircomnet

Airbus to supply Aer Lingus with 17 aircraft
From:ireland.com
Wednesday, 17th September, 2003

Aer Lingus today confirmed Airbus as the sole supplier of aircraft for its extended European route network that it intends to operate as a budget carrier.

Under the deal announced today, Aer Lingus will acquire 17 A320 aircraft from Airbus, of which seven will be purchased outright and ten will be leased. The airline already operates 10 Airbus aircraft.

The deal also includes options for a further ten A320 aircraft.

Aer Lingus chief executive Mr Willie Walsh said he was "delighted" with the result of the 15-month evaluation process and described the order as an "excellent financial deal achieved at precisely the right time in the industry cycle".

Aer Lingus will use the aircraft on the 15 new European routes it intends to open in the next two years, bringing to 30 the number of new routes opened since the end of 2001.

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/1510727?view=Eircomnet

Aer Lingus staff to get 14.9% stake of airline
From:ireland.com
Wednesday, 17th September, 2003

Aer Lingus employees have been given an increased holding of 14.9 per cent in the company, which could lead to a windfall if it is sold or floated on the stock exchange.

The Aer Lingus Bill, 2003, published today creates an Employee Share Ownership Plan (ESOP) agreed between the Government and the unions as part of the survival plan for the airline.

Since September 11th, the Aer Lingus has trimmed its cost base by €300 million, which included cutting one-third of its staff and half of its management team.

The Bill also provides for Aer Lingus to establish superannuation schemes for general employees and pensioners and for amendments in relation to the appointment of directors, including worker directors.

The Minister for Transport, Mr Brennan, said today said the publication of the Bill will be the final phase of the survival plan and is the "concrete acknowledgement" of the contribution of the staff to the turnaround of the airline following the terrorist attacks on the United States.

Aer Lingus - the Dublin airline

Should Aer Lingus be privatised ? 21 votes

Comments