Aer Lingus transfer SNN-LHR flights to BFS

markf909

MG wrote:

Seems to me that he is doing exactly the job he was elected for. It's natural for the media to pick up on the big number but the underlying fact is that transport links are intergral to building and sustaining the long term economy of a region. I think what he was saying is that 40-50k jobs in the region are international companies which are not inclined to commit to a region without reasonable transport links. Therefore, in the medium to long term what he is saying may not be hyperbole.

I agree he is doing his job, I was trying to make a point that all the hysteria will undoubtedly (IMO) lead to some sort of fudge on the issue which may involve cutting back some of Dublin or Cork services to keep a token service to Shannon.

MG

markf909 wrote:

I agree he is doing his job, I was trying to make a point that all the hysteria will undoubtedly (IMO) lead to some sort of fudge on the issue which may involve cutting back some of Dublin or Cork services to keep a token service to Shannon.

More than possible and unsatisfactory for all involved. What this sorry mess highlights for me is that government policy on aviation is in complete disarray. The alternative, as someone else mentioned, and this is also highly plausible, is that a deliberate policy decision to make Belfast the second city and their ploicy is working very well indeed.

bill_ashmount

MG wrote:

More than possible and unsatisfactory for all involved. What this sorry mess highlights for me is that government policy on aviation is in complete disarray. The alternative, as someone else mentioned, and this is also highly plausible, is that a deliberate policy decision to make Belfast the second city and their ploicy is working very well indeed.

Deliberate policy decision from who? The British and Irish governments???
I really don't understand how people can read so much into one situation.

dowlingm

Just to clarify a point above - Cork is NOT barred from transatlantic. Slattery's did try it but cancelled due to poor takeup (not surprising since it wasn't even daily).

However, the runway is not as long as it could be (being on top of a hill) and it has mid-grade navigation aids (again due to topography) so there are issues with the amount of load an A330 could lift for transatlantic and how often it would have to divert to Shannon or Dublin due to low visibility.

MG

bill_ashmount wrote:

Deliberate policy decision from who? The British and Irish governments???
I really don't understand how people can read so much into one situation.

Two situations - also reneging on promise to allow Cork airport to compete debt free.

{edit} And indeed it is somewhat coincidental that Ryanair and Aer Lingus both decided to operate from Belfast within two weeks of each other.

The_Conductor

MG wrote:

Two situations - also reneging on promise to allow Cork airport to compete debt free.

{edit} And indeed it is somewhat coincidental that Ryanair and Aer Lingus both decided to operate from Belfast within two weeks of each other.

The unfortunate problem with allowing Cork to compete debt free- was they also guaranteed the DAA it could proceed with raising funding for a new terminal, as a stand-alone company. Simultaneously they banned it from raising passenger fees to pay for it- and forfeit the proceeds of the sale of the GSH group to plug a hole in pension deficits. So- everyone was promised the earth the moon and the stars- despite the fact that these promises were all competing against each other.

Corks new terminal is brilliant by the way- I very much doubt that Dublin airport will manage to build anything similar to it in terms of functionality and facilities.

invincibleirish

just heard on the nine o clock news in a voxpop a shannonsider saying that dublin has nine slots and cork has 5,he says they should take 2 from dublin and 1 from cork and leave shannons alone,typical shannon attitude,protect it by damaging the other 2.

dowlingm

Great idea mr. shannonside telly voxpoper. You can have the 1325/1455 arrivals from Dublin and the 1325 arrival from Cork.

What's that you say? Not convenient? Not business friendly? You shock me, voxpoper. You were now doubt aware that slots are timed, not merely tokens to be used whenever you feel like?

Also - you could also ask Aer Arann to open a route to Luton, but given Shannonside's record on supporting Aer Arann in the past I wouldn't count on it.

jimmycrackcorm

If Shannon-LHR was so profitable surely it would make sense to fly Shannon-Dublin stopover - LHR and back using the Dublin stops.

After all if the US stopover was good enough for the rest of us why can't a dublin stopover be good enough for Shannon?

Won't the sight of Ian Paisley boarding an Aer Lingus plane at Altergrove be well worth the move.

The_Conductor

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

If Shannon-LHR was so profitable surely it would make sense to fly Shannon-Dublin stopover - LHR and back using the Dublin stops.

After all if the US stopover was good enough for the rest of us why can't a dublin stopover be good enough for Shannon?

Won't the sight of Ian Paisley boarding an Aer Lingus plane at Altergrove be well worth the move.

Ian Paisley has flown Aerlingus before- its his son who wouldn't be seen dead on Aerlingus......

A Dublin-stopover...... ha! That would be one way to totally kill off any enthusiasm anyone had for the flight

Its the usual one rule for us, and a different rule for the rest of the country.

What is people's problem with flying into Stansted anyhow- its transport links to the city will be far better than Heathrows are within 4 years.

S.

fitzyshea

antoinolachtnai wrote:

The issue is that the whole point of the State maintaining a 25 percent share in the airline was that stuff like this wasn't supposed to happen. Now it has happened. It turns out that Aer Lingus can do anything they like with those Heathrow slots.

It happened this way because the government didn't structure the sale of the company properly. Now the government is sitting with a useless, worthless 25 percent stake in the company which is of no use whatsoever to influence the airline and is nothing but a political liability.

Why should the government have any say in a commerial airlines business? The board of aerlingus is there to get the best return for there sharholders money! Even if thats the government or ryanair or the staff of aerlingus.

Patrickof

smccarrick wrote:

Simultaneously they banned it from raising passenger fees to pay for it- ...
Corks new terminal is brilliant by the way- I very much doubt that Dublin airport will manage to build anything similar to it in terms of functionality and facilities.

This always gets to me, why should they be allowed to raise passenger fees to pay for a new terminal? The idea of a new terminal is to increase traffic, and this increased business should justify the increased investment on its own - otherwise it shouldn't be done.

I don't remember Arnotts putting up their prices to fund the refurbishment of their store a few years back.

ednwireland

MG wrote:

ednwireland wrote:

as far as i can see this is a commercial decision by AL because of the inherited cost base at shannon easier to start afresh at belfast.
QUOTE]

Interestingly the share price didn't seem to reflect it being a good commercial decision with a small gain in share price on around the day of the announcement attributed to Oil price falls.

yeh they also announced reduced load factors due to new planes on transatlantic if the stock market thought this was a bad decision i think youd have seen more movement

On short-haul flights the load factor rose to 82.2 percent from 81 percent, and on long-haul flights slipped to 80.8 percent from 87.5 percent.
the share price has hardly moved see attached gif

The_Conductor

Patrickof wrote:

This always gets to me, why should they be allowed to raise passenger fees to pay for a new terminal? The idea of a new terminal is to increase traffic, and this increased business should justify the increased investment on its own - otherwise it shouldn't be done.

I don't remember Arnotts putting up their prices to fund the refurbishment of their store a few years back.

They weren't able to raise the funding privately- as a state body with massive debts already (as the government is not allowed to underwrite the debts- once again under State Aid rules). So they were left to go and find the money- but simultaneously had the method of finding the money pulled from them.

Its no wonder that the board of Aerlingus wanted out, and the boards of the other State Bodies are hopping. There seems to be a policy- if at all possible, do nothing for as long as possible, and only when everything grinds to a halt should you go in fire fighting. Dublin airport is at firefighting stage- its simply incapable of handling its passenger numbers. You shouldn't have to be at the airport at 4AM for an 8AM flight- but thats the way it is.

I do feel sorry for Shannon's predicament, but do feel that instead of the usual wallowing in a "Poor us" sentiment- why not take the bull by the horns and use it as an opportunity to get out from under the government's apron strings and really invent itself into a viable freestanding operation. It does have the potential to be a viable commercial operation- whether this means it has to put greater emphasis on military traffic (as it already controls the western airspace approaches to Europe anyway- its not too big a swing for the airport to develope in other directions).

This little country of ours is in one hell of a mess, and no-one is answerable to the people.

mike65

Ha! Its amazing what a small crisis can do, suddenly Shannon reckon they can squeeze 4 million euro per year of savings out of thier operations.

Mike.

fly_agaric

NewDubliner wrote:

Well, everyone's been calling for public-sector privitisation and for public-sector outfits to behave more like the provate sector.

Sometimes, if you're unlucky, you get what you wish for.

So true. I wonder do any of the govt./semi-state bad private sector good people (IBEC?) complaining about this see their own hypocrisy?
Perhaps they should really just stfu and take their lumps from the invisible hand.:p [-which doesn't care about lesser objectives like balanced development or any of that other "do goody good bullshít!"]

dowlingm wrote:

smccarrick - antoin is in his own little world, circa 1960. Don't disturb him with stuff like EU competition law.

I thought that the govt. actually could have invested in Aer Lingus or loaned it money to enable it to purchase new aircraft (rather than privatising it) because it was profitable + a going concern at the time.
Govt's bailing out loss-making airlines was forbidden by the EU.
Am I wrong abut this??

parsi

Patrickof wrote:

I don't remember Arnotts putting up their prices to fund the refurbishment of their store a few years back.

They might have. The fact is that unlike the airports they don't have to publicly apply for a price increase - they can just add it on without anyone being much the wiser...

dowlingm

fly_agaric - you are I'm afraid. Even when profitable governments are not allowed to preferentially treat state airlines compared with private sector ones. There are still strokes pulled but not billions like there used to be.

ircoha

mike65 wrote:

Ha! Its amazing what a small crisis can do, suddenly Shannon reckon they can squeeze 4 million euro per year of savings out of thier operations.

Mike.

It is wonderful to see them scurry around like lemmings. By the time they get it sorted global warming will have the airfield flooded anyway so it will be back to

which is what they are at now anyway

Slice

Another article in the SBP today about it:

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS-qqqs=news-qqqid=25845-qqqx=1.asp

This is the most interesting quote from the topic:

Aer Lingus is expected to benefit from lower costs associated with more favourable work practices at its new Belfast base. Among the cost advantages are the ability to outsource ground operations, such as check-in facilities, to third party providers as well as a requirement for fewer staff due to more flexible arrangements regarding holiday entitlements.

Shannon have obviously priced themselve out of the service and now unions are saying they will push for similar conditions for staff in Belfast instead of facing up to the reality that it's these very conditions that caused IE to move away from Shannon in the first place...

Red Alert

There's an interesting paradox in Aer Lingus - it's private but the moaners and groaners in Shannon would prefer it to act like it wasn't so, as would many of its staff. Yet I suspect a lot of them had FF as number one on their ballot paper last June. Then the government get cold feet when Mick O'Leary offers to lend a helping hand.

jrar

Conspiracy theory #4783

In the run-up to getting final agreement on power sharing in the North, Bertie's mob promise Tony Blair et al a number of carrots. On the transport front, lots of co-operation on crossborder routes plus an announcement to part-fund further capital projects in this area. Bertie also promises big Ian to have Aer Lingus reflect a new all-island approach and provide services from Belfast to the "mainland". Bertie's mob use minority share-holding plus political influence to get move announced, timed to co-incide with Bank Holiday, the start of the silly season in the media, and with all the cabinet ministers safely ensconced in their holiday boltholes.

Pesky Shannonsiders start to kick up fuss - Dempsey eventually told to get out there, defuse the situation, and to tell them to hush up and stop giving radio interviews left, right, and centre. O'Dea censured for making moronic comments as per usual.

AlekSmart

Slice wrote:

Another article in the SBP today about it:

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS-qqqs=news-qqqid=25845-qqqx=1.asp

This is the most interesting quote from the topic:


Shannon have obviously priced themselve out of the service and now unions are saying they will push for similar conditions for staff in Belfast instead of facing up to the reality that it's these very conditions that caused IE to move away from Shannon in the first place...

This cuts to the chase I feel and has the capacity to pulsate out far beyond the Airline Industry.
Does anybody have the current State of Play concerning the UK Government`s position on the "Social Charter" aspects of the various EU Treaty`s we all rushed out to embrace in recent times.

I am particularly interested in the differences in Irish and UK practices regarding the "Working Time Directives" and several other well meaning but hugely expensive "entitlements" other EU workplace laws.

Given that the Land Frontier remains a legal border,perhaps it should be remembered that the Northern Ireland Pillar Boxes remain Red ...?

BostonB

The other angle is that it could be the start of a new cost cutting strategy at Aer Lingus internally. Basically copying The Ryan Air model. Fire and move (literally) to keep costs down, externally of course, but also internally. It will put pressure on the unions internally. Theres been some noises in that direction in the press of late. Shannon could be just unlucky to be an easy target as AL management start making moves against internal staff costs. Ryan Air use these tactics to start basing staff out of Ireland, and bringing new staff at lower cost.

FlutterinBantam

I think thats the plan BB.
No way the unions will"back down" and accept lower costs on a partnership basis.As I have stated many times on these forums Ei need to cut their cost base,and rejig work practices,to remain profitable in low cost carrier mode. The unions wont agree,this is one way to force some action from the entrenched ones.

jimmycrackcorm

the Shannon outcry is ridiculous when you take into account that other parts of the country make a noise out of how useful the subsidised access is to regional airports.

If I want to fly to a major city in the U.S. it will usually involve a changeover and for a lesser known destination it will mean more than one so what's the big deal over someone flying into dublin and then a changeover to shannon.

Serves shannon right imho for having us put up with the stopover for so long, a legacy way of thinking from the times that aircraft could barely fly that distance over the Atlantic.

antoinolachtnai

The big deal is that

- it is no longer possible to get up in the morning, go to the Airport, spend the day in London (particularly West London) and be back for dinner (or 'tea' as they say in the West). A two day trip becomes necessary.

- there is no longer direct access to all the connections that are available from London Heathrow

Of course there is a broader problem. As a nation, we are not taking regional development seriously (and that includes the people in the regions).

Slice

Th

e big deal is that

- it is no longer possible to get up in the morning, go to the Airport, spend the day in London (particularly West London) and be back for dinner (or 'tea' as they say in the West). A two day trip becomes necessary.

London is still served by Shannon to two other airports, and one of them (Gatwick) happens to be the second busiest airport in Britain.

Red Alert

Would the very well run Gatwick Express be too much for the pampered people of shannon? Honestly, they expect barefaced special treatment and then wonder why nobody else really cares about them!

lostinsuperfunk

Yes, Gatwick has much better rail connections than Heathrow, you can easily get to London, the south coast, Surrey and even Reading from there.
The only loss with Heathrow is the possibility of making onward flight connections, but if Air France step into the fray with a Paris-CDG service I think SNN would be even better off than it is now with the Heathrow service.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0813/breaking8.htm