What do you think Ryanair would do with Aer Lingus if they bought it?

fr336

They've been after it a long time..failed at every hurdle..but if the impossible were to happen, what do you think it'd be like? It's easy to say FR would just water down the EI brand whether immediately or over time in line with any agreement they had in place with the government etc to buy it, but would this really be the case? Could FR actually make EI far stronger and robust, still carrying on as a standalone brand?

Irish Steve

I suspect that the simple answer to that is the short haul would be merged into Ryanair, and Aer Lingus would become the Ryanair low cost Trans Atlantic operator, given that they have long haul experience, ETOPS, etc in place, and are well geared to continuing that style of operation.

all the A320 and 319 aircraft would be replaced with Boeing, and we'd only be seeing Aer Lingus 330's (or a replacement over time) operating to where ever was deemed suitable as a long haul destination.

The implications for Irish Aviation don't bear thinking about, the lack of competition on many Irish routes would lead to increases in prices, of that you can be sure.

billie1b

Irish Steve wrote: »

I suspect that the simple answer to that is the short haul would be merged into Ryanair, and Aer Lingus would become the Ryanair low cost Trans Atlantic operator, given that they have long haul experience, ETOPS, etc in place, and are well geared to continuing that style of operation.

all the A320 and 319 aircraft would be replaced with Boeing, and we'd only be seeing Aer Lingus 330's (or a replacement over time) operating to where ever was deemed suitable as a long haul destination.

The implications for Irish Aviation don't bear thinking about, the lack of competition on many Irish routes would lead to increases in prices, of that you can be sure.

So basically Aer Lingus back in the day of well Aer Lingus monopoly before Ryanair came along

fr336

billie1b wrote: »

So basically Aer Lingus back in the day of well Aer Lingus monopoly before Ryanair came along

Interesting point! Lingus are hardly competitive on price even now.

murphaph

fr336 wrote: »

Interesting point! Lingus are hardly competitive on price even now.

Don't you remember their IR300 fares to London? Thank goodness Maggie Thatcher allowed Ryanair to compete (remember it was the Conservative UK government that broke the EI/BA duopoly on those routes, our own government was more than happy to keep fleecing the passengers).

EI is really a very competitive airline these days. It has to be when its main competitor is FR.

Growler!!!

billie1b wrote: »

So basically Aer Lingus back in the day of well Aer Lingus monopoly before Ryanair came along

Ah how easy people forget the de-regulation of aviation. Before that airlines were all pretty much state owned legacy carriers. There was almost zero competition then.

There were some small start ups but they didn't last long, hands up if you remember AB Airlines, JetMagic and Eirjet.

If the Ryan's were to take over what competition would be left for the irish consumer? Poor Aer Arann and more recently Wizz found out to their peril in ORK.

billie1b

fr336 wrote: »

Interesting point! Lingus are hardly competitive on price even now.

He told us that he wouldn't be changing the brand, it would be his frills airline and Ryanair would stay his no frills airline, he said he would be keeping the Airbus aircraft as they already have all the ground equipment that goes with them, pointless in changing them as they are relatively new a/c, keeping Ryanair on its existing routes at the fares as they are, increasing EI's current frequency from what it is and lowering the cost of its fares to encourage competition, also employing about 1000 extra EI staff and offereing voluntary redundencies to the staff that are part of the furniture now.

Now what he says and does are 2 totally different things but he expanded an airline with 9 aircraft when he took the helm into an airline with 300 aircraft, if there was any one person who could do something with EI, I reckon it might just be him, if he got it I could see him expanding the long haul end of it.

suasdaguna2

Surely the post is irrelevant considering FR are directed to sell their share holding albeit under appeal. I agree with the other posters....Europe will be swallowed up ....disagree with the Atlantic . This operation makes money hand over fist for AL in the peak periods and turning the operation into a freddie laker mk2 would be churlish and naive . I think Micheal would accept same.

Jack1985

suasdaguna2 wrote: »

Surely the post is irrelevant considering FR are directed to sell their share holding albeit under appeal.

Exactly.

Irish Steve

I'm going to mention that the Irish Government DID assist Ryanair, there were a number of routes taken off Aer Lingus and given to Ryanair, when they were still mainly concentrated on the regional airports using ATR's.

What was then and what is now are very different things, and Ryanair have made a massive contribution to the changes, but they are not the only driver of change, there are others, like Easyjet, who have never been able (allowed) to break into the Irish market.

While we'd all like to travel for nothing, or next to nothing, there is a limit to how far cost reductions can be taken, and we're already seeing the result, places like Luton now charge to drop passengers off, and no longer allow collections without using expensive parking, which is the airports way to increase their income to recover what the airlines won't pay any more.

There are some areas where cost cutting will have safety implications, but we won't know that for some time to come, the sort of thing I'm thinking of is on maintenance, where an engineer would be allowed to use discretion if a part seemed to be in need of replacement before it's scheduled life limit, now, the bean counters have a mickey fit if something doesn't last it's expected life, and at some stage, that will cause an accident that would have been prevented if the engineer wasn't under pressure to reduce costs.

we've not seen any accidents yet due to fuel carrying pressures, but that's another area that makes me very nervous, if a large number of aircraft all being forced to divert due to weather all then suddenly call Mayday due to fuel issues, how is an under pressure air traffic controller supposed to make priority decisions to deal with it?

There are other areas of concern. I see regular reports on places that I trust (and Pprune is no longer one of them, there are way too many simulator wannabees on there these days) about pilot fatigue, I've had several conversations with a close neighbour who used to fly long haul, and I respect his opinions.

AF447, a serviceable A330 was flown into the ocean because the crew flying it when a minor incident occurred didn't know how to deal with it correctly. the accident report made sickening reading to anyone that's been concerned about the lowering of standards in training and evaluation.

The beancounters (again) have issues with pilots that have an interest and desire to go beyond the basic levels that they've been trained to, simulators cost money to operate, but which is better, a pilot that's learned more about his aircraft (in his own time and without extra pay for doing it) than just the basic SOP's, or someone that just knows the basics.

Sioux City, the Gimli Glider, the Hudson water landing, they are just 3 examples of pilots that knew more than just the basics about their aircraft, and were able to turn a potential total disaster into something less disastrous.

A lot of flying clubs won't hire a light aircraft to an airline pilot any more, because airline pilots don't have the raw data handling skills and recognition abilities needed to fly a non electronic aircraft, and it's those raw data analysis and handling skills that are the difference between success and failure when things go badly wrong, and Standard Operating Procedures are not sufficient to deal with an unexpected event.

So, there's a lot more to this than just Ryanair taking control of Aer Lingus, there's the ongoing future of aviation, which is a lot more complex and challenging than low cost operations, and the potential for problems is immense unless great care is taken to keep the balance between costs and safety.

fr336

suasdaguna2 wrote: »

Surely the post is irrelevant considering FR are directed to sell their share holding albeit under appeal. I agree with the other posters....Europe will be swallowed up ....disagree with the Atlantic . This operation makes money hand over fist for AL in the peak periods and turning the operation into a freddie laker mk2 would be churlish and naive . I think Micheal would accept same.

I made clear it was to discuss a scenario, funny how some people are so scared of the prospect that it can't even be discussed In England where I live things seem a bit less..well..dictatory.

fr336

Thanks for such a detailed and informative post, Irish Steve. You sound a genuine fellow and well informed.

billie1b

fr336 wrote: »

I made clear it was to discuss a scenario, funny how some people are so scared of the prospect that it can't even be discussed In England where I live things seem a bit less..well..dictatory.

Unfortunately some peoples posts are always totally irrelevant

fr336

billie1b wrote: »

Unfortunately some peoples posts are always totally irrelevant

Never one to hold back, Billie boy!

Growler!!!

Irish Steve wrote: »

A lot of flying clubs won't hire a light aircraft to an airline pilot any more.

May I just point out that many flying clubs won't hire aircraft to someone unless they have done a check flight with a senior instructor.

Regardless of the letter before your PL ie. S, P, C or AT

Jack1985

I don't think anyone in EI is at all concerned about anything FR does, therefor the question is a redundant one considering FR will never have there hands on EI - not one of us (4,000 plus) will allow it nor will any elected TD and neither will any competition authority and also finally Europe will simply not allow it.

People from EI don't move to FR (frontline at least) however in recent months in roves the opposite is happening. Ask yourself why that's happening.

fr336

Jack1985 wrote: »

I don't think anyone in EI is at all concerned about anything FR does, therefor the question is a redundant one considering FR will never have there hands on EI - not one of us (4,000 plus) will allow it nor will any elected TD and neither will any competition authority and also finally Europe will simply not allow it.

That's all fine Jack, but it is purely a hypothetical situation I was posing, albeit with a real world starting point. I wasn't asking will this happen or what will happen WHEN it does, it was hypothetical. That you're so defensive makes me think people at EI aren't feeling as secure as you're keen to portray If you really weren't fussed you'd just sit back and laugh at FR not get so worked up over hypothetical threads. I don't personally believe it will happen in the short to medium term if ever. But things can change and change quickly.

fr336

Jack1985 wrote: »

People from EI don't move to FR (frontline at least) however in recent months in roves the opposite is happening. Ask yourself why that's happening.

I asked myself and no answer came back

Why has that been happening recently?

man98

I'd say Aer Lingus would have to remain as a brand because of competition laws. I'd say Aer Lingus would remain largely the same. Flights to Manchester, Glasgow, Bristol and Paris would be reduced probably, as they are in competition with FR.

billie1b

Jack1985 wrote: »

I don't think anyone in EI is at all concerned about anything FR does, therefor the question is a redundant one considering FR will never have there hands on EI - not one of us (4,000 plus) will allow it nor will any elected TD and neither will any competition authority and also finally Europe will simply not allow it.

People from EI don't move to FR (frontline at least) however in recent months in roves the opposite is happening. Ask yourself why that's happening.

I know many of people who have worked for EI and now work with FR, also I know many of people who worked with FR and moved to EI, it works both ways, that includes frontline right up to management

Strumms

fr336 wrote: »

That's all fine Jack, but it is purely a hypothetical situation I was posing, albeit with a real world starting point. I wasn't asking will this happen or what will happen WHEN it does, it was hypothetical. That you're so defensive makes me think people at EI aren't feeling as secure as you're keen to portray If you really weren't fussed you'd just sit back and laugh at FR not get so worked up over hypothetical threads. I don't personally believe it will happen in the short to medium term if ever. But things can change and change quickly.

Err I don't find Jack's reply defensive at all. Simply offering his opinion from what i can tell is from an experience working in the industry which I value rather more then someone who sits for hours behind a computer watching FR24 and praying for bad weather.

Rushing to label somones opinion as defensive when it clearly isn't and labeling other posters and their views as irrelevant just beacuse they don't post want you want to hear is very childish and pointless.. Just as this 'hypothetical' thread might be considered.

fr336

Strumms wrote: »

Err I don't find Jack's reply defensive at all. Simply offering his opinion from what i can tell is from an experience working in the industry which I value rather more then someone who sits for hours behind a computer watching FR24 and praying for bad weather.

Rushing to label somones opinion as defensive when it clearly isn't and labeling other posters and their views as irrelevant just beacuse they don't post want you want to hear is very childish and pointless.. Just as this 'hypothetical' thread might be considered.

Here we go again Strumms.....

All I'll say is, I didn't call anyone irrelevant. Might want to read again.

billie1b

Strumms wrote: »

Err I don't find Jack's reply defensive at all. Simply offering his opinion from what i can tell is from an experience working in the industry which I value rather more then someone who sits for hours behind a computer watching FR24 and praying for bad weather.

Rushing to label somones opinion as defensive when it clearly isn't and labeling other posters and their views as irrelevant just beacuse they don't post want you want to hear is very childish and pointless.. Just as this 'hypothetical' thread might be considered.

In fairness, he never said Jacks post was defensive

fr336

You make some fair points when it comes to me Strumms but what's funny is you take it too far so that you're just making things up and labelling a thread such as this childish and pointless. Stick to the facts and you'll be rid of me quicker I'm guessing

Irish Steve

Growler!!! wrote: »

May I just point out that many flying clubs won't hire aircraft to someone unless they have done a check flight with a senior instructor.

Regardless of the letter before your PL ie. S, P, C or AT

And I wouldn't want to hire an aircraft from any flying club that didn't do a check with an instructor before letting me loose with their aircraft, it goes with the territory.

My point, perhaps not made as well as it might have been, it used to be the case that a pilot learning his trade spent a significant number of hours flying small "clockwork" cockpit instrument aircraft, and doing so solo, before they got to the stage of being allowed to move on.

That's no longer a given, there are pilots out there that have never flown solo, and never flown an analogue cockpit, their experience is with EFIS instruments, and a magenta line on the screen showing them where they are supposed to be going, and without that level of guidance, in a small, slow aircraft, they do get into problems with what in theory is a much simpler level of flying than the speeds and distances they are used to in commercial aircraft.

I noticed something along these lines when I went over to the States to add the ME CPL and IR to my FAA licence, I had over 300 Hrs ME time in the logbook at that stage, ( UK CAA licence) and the instructor they put me with initially had less than 20 Hrs ME time, which made for a massive imbalance in terms of experience and comfort factor, the first flight we took, it became very clear to me that the instructor was way out of his comfort zone with the way in which I was handling the aircraft, (a Seneca II), which I was totally comfortable with, as I'd flown them before. I had a quiet chat with the owner on our return, and a couple of days later, I was paired with a different instructor who was also part of their 145 operation, and it was instantly clear that he had no issues with my handling, and things went very well indeed after that.

We're in danger of drifting off thread here, I guess my main concern about FR gaining control of EI would be that the very high standards that EI have set for a long time could become diluted as a result of the pressures to reduce costs even further.

Before 9/11, I used to do a lot of travelling around Europe, both on scheduled services, and in my own aircraft, and with the more relaxed environment that was normal in those less stressful times, I did a lot of jump seat trips with a lot of different carriers. What was very noticeable was that the different airlines had a very different approach to what is now being called MCC, or CRM, with some being very rigid and formal, and some being very relaxed, and some even casual.

Despite my handle, I'm not Irish, but what I did notice was that the EI flight deck was very professional, but at the same time, was a lot more relaxed than most others, without losing any of the required professionalism that is essential to safe operations.

A couple of years later, I did some MCC work with EI for a course of cadets that hadn't done MCC as part of their (Stateside) cadet training, so I was able to talk informally with some of the training captains about that very factor, to discover that it was very much worked on, and a part of the ethos of the EI flight deck, They were very pleased to hear my feedback on the success of that particular area.

While I am not criticising FR, and their operations record is testament to their standards, I didn't find the same culture in place with FR, and of the two, I know which I was more comfortable with an interested observer and participant.

AirMechMan

billie1b wrote: »

I know many of people who have worked for EI and now work with FR, also I know many of people who worked with FR and moved to EI, it works both ways, that includes frontline right up to management

I'd agree with your post in terms of management positions... Ryanair provide more opportunities for more senior roles being a larger company. However to say that frontline staff move from aerlingus to Ryanair is pushing it a bit.

I'd pay money to you if you could find me one pilot, or cabin crew member of Ryanair who is ex-aerlingus.

From an engineering perspective, Ryanair are paying a much higher starting salary than aerlingus for a B-licensed engineer at the moment, yet there are plenty of Ryanair guys joining aerlingus in recent months. There has to be reasons for this.

While there are engineers in Ryanair who joined from Sr technics after they closed down, I'd also be suprised if there were engineers who are ex-aerlingus (plc).

I'm not a Ryanair basher by any means, they provide apprenticeships, a foot in the aviation door for cabin crew and low hour pilots. They provide jobs and income for Ireland. But at the end of the day, Ryanair doesn't provide the same job security, base security, quality of life, or the benefits that aerlingus (and most other airlines) provide.

I have three friends working as cabin crew for Ryanair, who's take home pay can be as low as 700 a month, and I know one irish pilot in the company for four years, who has yet to be based in ireland, while they have placed many a new (non irish) pilot in dublin ahead of him.

Ryanair is what it is, but treating employees with the respect that they deserve (in my opinion) is not one of their strong points.

You get the odd person who loves working for the company, and is still in their aerosexual phase, which is all well and good. But when you're trying to get a mortgage, and you're working as an outsourced Ryanair employee, with next to no job security, no union, no guarantee you won't be sent from your home to work in eastern Europe next year, and no respect for the job you do, the love of Ryanair soon wears out it seems.

Ryanair is fine when you are young, single, and want a foot in the door. But I wouldn't like to be trying to develop a long term career with them.

I'm not saying that aerlingus is a fantastic airline to work for, I'm saying it's in line with most other airlines, which Ryanair isn't.

billie1b

AirMechMan wrote: »

I'd agree with your post in terms of management positions... Ryanair provide more opportunities for more senior roles being a larger company. However to say that frontline staff move from aerlingus to Ryanair is pushing it a bit.

I'd pay money to you if you could find me one pilot, or cabin crew member of Ryanair who is ex-aerlingus.

From an engineering perspective, Ryanair are paying a much higher starting salary than aerlingus for a B-licensed engineer at the moment, yet there are plenty of Ryanair guys joining aerlingus in recent months. There has to be reasons for this.

While there are engineers in Ryanair who joined from Sr technics after they closed down, I'd also be suprised if there were engineers who are ex-aerlingus (plc).

I'm not a Ryanair basher by any means, they provide apprenticeships, a foot in the aviation door for cabin crew and low hour pilots. They provide jobs and income for Ireland. But at the end of the day, Ryanair doesn't provide the same job security, base security, quality of life, or the benefits that aerlingus (and most other airlines) provide.

I have three friends working as cabin crew for Ryanair, who's take home pay can be as low as 700 a month, and I know one irish pilot in the company for four years, who has yet to be based in ireland, while they have placed many a new (non irish) pilot in dublin ahead of him.

Ryanair is what it is, but treating employees with the respect that they deserve (in my opinion) is not one of their strong points.

You get the odd person who loves working for the company, and is still in their aerosexual phase, which is all well and good. But when you're trying to get a mortgage, and you're working as an outsourced Ryanair employee, with next to no job security, no union, no guarantee you won't be sent from your home to work in eastern Europe next year, and no respect for the job you do, the love of Ryanair soon wears out it seems.

Ryanair is fine when you are young, single, and want a foot in the door. But I wouldn't like to be trying to develop a long term career with them.

I'm not saying that aerlingus is a fantastic airline to work for, I'm saying it's in line with most other airlines, which Ryanair isn't.

How much money you talking about here, I wouldn't be betting too much, I know my cousin was cabin crew for Aer Arann, then Aer Lingus for a couple of years and now shes with FR, I can name 2 pilots that went from FR to EI and then back to FR again after a couple of years, I know another pilot who flew the 74's for EI and then the 73's, when EI retired them he came to FR, he's retired a couple of years now, saying it never happens just simply ain't true.

Jack1985

billie1b wrote: »

How much money you talking about here, I wouldn't be betting too much, I know my cousin was cabin crew for Aer Arann, then Aer Lingus for a couple of years and now shes with FR, I can name 2 pilots that went from FR to EI and then back to FR again after a couple of years, I know another pilot who flew the 74's for EI and then the 73's, when EI retired them he came to FR, he's retired a couple of years now, saying it never happens just simply ain't true.

The point is, there are far more people switching across from FR to EI which makes the select few who transfer from EI to FR not even comparable. There is a reason for that, an ex-senior from FR now in EI (joined with me) earns more now than she did in FR. The amount of people leaving FR not just to EI but to DY etc shows exactly to the 4k plus workforce in EI and to everyone in the aviation community that it is not a company people want to be employed long-term in (generally). That's the complete opposite in EI. And we are both worked as hard. But the fact is in Ireland if you want a long-term aviation career, in a company who values there employees that's the likes of EI/WX and even Air Comtractors. FR looks after it's management. Not the people who pay there wages - frontline.

fr336

Got to love the EI vs FR rivalry

AirMechMan

billie1b wrote: »

How much money you talking about here, I wouldn't be betting too much, I know my cousin was cabin crew for Aer Arann, then Aer Lingus for a couple of years and now shes with FR, I can name 2 pilots that went from FR to EI and then back to FR again after a couple of years, I know another pilot who flew the 74's for EI and then the 73's, when EI retired them he came to FR, he's retired a couple of years now, saying it never happens just simply ain't true.

Well the money aer lingus cabin crew make has been widely published in the past year for obvious reason, and the Ryanair figures aren't difficult to find either. I'll believe you if you say your cousin left aer lingus for Ryanair, but I can with 100% certainty say she almost halved her wage.

If a pilot wants to continue flying after retiring from aer lingus and wants to supplement his pension and continue being involved in aviation, I doubt job security and pay etc were top of his list of priorities.

In terms of engineering money, I actually said that Ryanair are paying a higher starting wage, almost 10k higher, yet people are still leaving Ryanair to come to aerlingus, and I'm sure they are not doing it for no reason.

If you want to argue that Ryanair are a fantastic employer, go ahead. I don't agree.

I don't even believe aerlingus is one of the best employers out there, I'm just making the point them at they offer a hell of a lot more respect for employees than Ryanair.

If you truly believe that Ryanair is a better employer, that's up to you. But if yet to hear someone give one thing that Ryanair offers that provides a better quality of life to its employees in comparison to other airlines.

Jack1985

fr336 wrote: »

Got to love the EI vs FR rivalry

It's a rivalry between the cost. I have many friends in FR, they are great people who deserve a lot more respect. My point is that's not a company anyone in EI would want to be, the difference in managerial respect is astonishing.

billie1b

Jack1985 wrote: »

The point is, there are far more people switching across from FR to EI which makes the select few who transfer from EI to FR not even comparable. There is a reason for that, an ex-senior from FR now in EI (joined with me) earns more now than she did in FR. The amount of people leaving FR not just to EI but to DY etc shows exactly to the 4k plus workforce in EI and to everyone in the aviation community that it is no a l

I wasn't saying they weren't, I even said in my own post that FR staff go to EI, the simple fact that the other poster said it never happens with frontline staff going from EI to FR is untrue, there is also seniors in FR who would never leave due to them being on more then seniors from EI, it works both ways, he also said about frontline FR staff not being secure in their job thats why they go onto to EI, which is also untrue, I have a secure well paid permanent job with good enough perks, a pension, shares, staff travel, based in DUB unless asked to go anywhere else and so on. I also know a lot of people with settled families and mortgages that work with FR and love their job.

fr336

Jack1985 wrote: »

It's a rivalry between the cost. I have many friends in FR, they are great people who deserve a lot more respect. My point is that's not a company anyone in EI would want to be, the difference in managerial respect is astonishing.

I suppose it's a respect for passengers vs respect for workforce issue Jack :pac:

AirMechMan

fr336 wrote: »

Got to love the EI vs FR rivalry

That's what we do best although I'm slightly biased obviously, but I know longer work for either anymore. But I do feel strongly about the way in which Ryanair and various other airlines treat their employees. It's not even an aviation thing, there's certain things every employee of any industry should be entitiled to, and respect is one of them that Ryanair seems reluctant to offer.

nilsonmickey

murphaph wrote: »

Don't you remember their IR300 fares to London? Thank goodness Maggie Thatcher allowed Ryanair to compete (remember it was the Conservative UK government that broke the EI/BA duopoly on those routes, our own government was more than happy to keep fleecing the passengers).

EI is really a very competitive airline these days. It has to be when its main competitor is FR.

Who is FR?

fr336

nilsonmickey wrote: »

Who is FR?

Ryanair

nilsonmickey

But why do you call them FR?

Irish Steve

It's their recognised ICAO designator, which is used all over the place, on radar sites, and arrival and departure information, it's widely recognised as referring to the airline, and typing FR is a lot quicker and easier than typing Ryanair,

billie1b

Its their IATA code, FR IS Ryanair, EI is Aer Lingus, BA is British Airways and so on, an ICAO code is the codes used for airports, for example Dublin is EIDW

markpb

Irish Steve wrote: »

Aer Lingus would become the Ryanair low cost Trans Atlantic operator

Don't the American carriers pretty much fulfil this role right now? They're already quite reasonable on price (if you're willing to fly indirect, to odd airports and at odd times), have aircraft that are less than plush (to put it mildly) and hire staff that hate customers and do the bare minimum to help you. It's hard to see a ryanair owned AL beating them on any of those points.

Irish Steve

markpb wrote: »

Don't the American carriers pretty much fulfil this role right now? They're already quite reasonable on price (if you're willing to fly indirect, to odd airports and at odd times), have aircraft that are less than plush (to put it mildly) and hire staff that hate customers and do the bare minimum to help you. It's hard to see a ryanair owned AL beating them on any of those points.

Have to admit, I can't fault some of your comments there,:D having used some of the American carriers ex DUB on occasions, they do vary, and I think that's one of the reasons that EI get the loads they do, and if FR were to downgrade the quality of the service, I'm not sure that the loads would be as good, I guess it's all down to price and timings.

That said, with the right feeds into each end to provide the numbers, I still maintain that there's a place for a low cost Laker style operation across to the East Coast, but operating from that long (and at present underutilised) runway at Shannon, using A380's. With a slick ground operation, and preclearance properly operated, there's no reason why a pair of 380's couldn't be used to operate 3 rotations a day out of SNN, with good feeds (like the present EI regional feeds into Dublin) this side, and some good feeds on the other side at somewhere like Boston, or Bangor, or similar, the closer to Ireland the better. As it's such a short hop, relatively speaking, there would also be a serious freight capacity, which could be attractive to companies on both sides of the pond. Pre clearance solves the problem of dealing with passengers that are denied entry, they wouldn't exist, and using feeder flights from other places could mean serious numbers willing to use the services.

I'd suggest Dublin, but the capacity problems of the TA stands and preclearance, the limitations of availability of suitable stands for a 380, and the restrictions on slots mean that SNN would be the better bet for a service of this nature at the moment.

Tenger

fr336 wrote: »

I made clear it was to discuss a scenario, funny how some people are so scared of the prospect that it can't even be discussed In England where I live things seem a bit less..well..dictatory.

The reason we are hesitant about this sort of discussion on boards.ie is that this topic can very easily descend in a green vs blue argument (usually with mention of EI £300 fares back in the 1980's)

Then the mods get dictatorial and everyone becomes unhappy.

Tenger

fr336 wrote: »

That's all fine Jack, but it is purely a hypothetical situation I was posing, albeit with a real world starting point........ That you're so defensive makes me think people at EI aren't feeling as secure as you're keen to portray...........

fr336 wrote: »

Here we go again Strumms.....

All I'll say is, I didn't call anyone irrelevant. Might want to read again.

fr336 wrote: »

You make some fair points when it comes to me Strumms but what's funny is you take it too far so that you're just making things up and labelling a thread such as this childish and pointless. Stick to the facts and you'll be rid of me quicker I'm guessing

fr336 wrote: »

Got to love the EI vs FR rivalry

And just after my post above explaining why we dislike these troll-ish threads the OP and the person calling boards.ie "dictatorial" provides the reason why. All it took was 7-8 minutes for me to read the full thread. Fr336 lets allow your 'hypothethical' discussion to develop without you trying to incite an angry debate

There have been some informed comments so far, lets attempt to keep it that way. So much of this topic is flavoured by personal experience that it is hard to give 'definitive' statements. SO lets all try to highlight that any info is given from a personal standpoint. That might reduce the number of 'liar, liar, ...." style response's.

Jack1985

Just wanted to add to I don't think anyone in EI has any agenda to FR employees. It is actually quite the contrary. We might hate the CEO of FR when it comes to his flimsy and cringe worthy remarks but that's purely a managerial disagreement, and I'm quite sure it is the same on the flip side.

Every single person honestly knows what we have is good for competition at the moment. What sickens me and seriously annoys me is comments like, ''ya but Aer Lingus isn't low cost, they still rip people off'' - EI nor FR does not force its customers to pay the price they agree to at booking. Yet we are both profitable companies, increasing load factors, increasing routes and destinations, increasing our workforce. What is wrong with that. The discussion of a merger is simply redundant, and I quite think this thread has been created to incite some of the ''EI v FR'' comments.

My comments in relation to the difference in respect and starting pay in front-line positions in EI compared to FR are correct, and those who disagree have yet to actually provide definitive prove of the contrary, when numerous posters have also confirmed the same. That's not a company the workforce of EI would endeavour to be with. And that's FR's problem, they have actually had to change there model (as we did to compete) to try and get rid of the bad press to stay in competition with EI/U2.

I'm not sure why also people feel its acceptable to in a way anger the workforce of mainly EI with comments like it can't survive on its own but yet independently since 2006 have done so, and have some of the highest (in the top 5) margins and reserves of any European carrier, beating FR with our RASM. I think if we were in major difficulty loosing money by the hour and had a no definitive future than merger talks would be acceptable.

But you simply do not merge for example the ESB with Bord Gais for competition. That is anti-competition, thus it never will be allowed. Other examples could include merging U2 with IAG. The exact same applies to EI/FR.

Idbatterim

came across the below the other day, I then went on to do a bit of research on Finland and Finnair... They have a population of 5.5 million. So less than North and South Ireland. Yet take a look at the destinations they fly to and I doubt they would travel in anywhere near the same numbers that the Irish do to Thailand, Aus etc... Their main airport, Helsinki Vantaa Airport had 15.2 millions passengers last year, 5 million less than Dublin. They also have a hell of a lot more internal routes than Dublin has. So back to Aer Lingus, the one thing I think about them is CONSERVATIVE, thats probably even an understatement! I'd say Ryanair would launch a massive expansion...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnair_destinations
http://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2014/08/13/finnair-unveils-airbus-a350-interior-inaugural-routes/14007545/

From my understanding, these new a350 even the 900 can take off at MTOW with an 8000 foot runway, Dublin is 8600 ish...

Jack1985

Idbatterim wrote: »

came across the below the other day, I then went on to do a bit of research on Finland and Finnair... They have a population of 5.5 million. So less than North and South Ireland. Yet take a look at the destinations they fly to and I doubt they would travel in anywhere near the same numbers that the Irish do to Thailand, Aus etc... Their main airport, Helsinki Vantaa Airport had 15.2 millions passengers last year, 5 million less than Dublin. They also have a hell of a lot more internal routes than Dublin has. So back to Aer Lingus, the one thing I think about them is CONSERVATIVE, thats probably even an understatement! I'd say Ryanair would launch a massive expansion...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnair_destinations
http://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2014/08/13/finnair-unveils-airbus-a350-interior-inaugural-routes/14007545/

From my understanding, these new a350 even the 900 can take off at MTOW with an 8000 foot runway, Dublin is 8600 ish...

There is no demand (viable without subsidy from the state) for internal Irish routes. FR axed their DUB-ORK/KIR routes in 2012.

Aer Lingus are definitely not conservative, the long-haul expansion is absolutely testament to that. Finnair years back created a bridge between Europe and Asia which works very well, EI is now doing that between Europe and the US and it is also performing extremely well.

All airlines in Europe with the exception of for example FR/U2/W6/VY etc are conservative about further expansion when the market remains very competitive to price and in most areas remains saturated.

You aren't going to be expanding massively without massive orders, FR has massive orders as does easyJet and thus both have a lot more scope for potential expansion. Aer Lingus have no immediate short-haul orders, however utilisation continues to be an area looked at to further create capacity.

Idbatterim

There is no demand (viable without subsidy from the state) for internal Irish routes. FR axed their DUB-ORK/KIR routes in 2012.

My point about this was in relation to the 15.2 million through Helsinki airport, when you factor in all of the internal flights, the number of international passengers v Dublin would be considerably lower.

Would they not consider damp leasing aircraft? We always have these routes out of Dublin going to the far east or Us and when they launch "oh they are doing better or far better than expected"... They dont even fly to LA anymore, am I meant to believe a Dublin to LA route is high risk or not profitable for Aer Lingus? A point was made that it would cannibalise their San Fran route by a poster on another thread, but another poster pointed out if he was going LA, San Fran would not be where he would want to route through and I would be the same...

L1011

Idbatterim wrote: »

My point about this was in relation to the 15.2 million through Helsinki airport, when you factor in all of the internal flights, the number of international passengers v Dublin would be considerably lower.

Would they not consider damp leasing aircraft? We always have these routes out of Dublin going to the far east or Us and when they launch "oh they are doing better or far better than expected"... They dont even fly to LA anymore, am I meant to believe a Dublin to LA route is high risk or not profitable for Aer Lingus? A point was made that it would cannibalise their San Fran route by a poster on another thread, but another poster pointed out if he was going LA, San Fran would not be where he would want to route through and I would be the same...

Aer Lingus have only realistically operated as a network carrier in a manner which allows longhaul transfer traffic for a few years - they cannot be expected to have got to the network size of Finnair that quickly.

The 757s are already damp leased. Expanding too quickly is a death sentence for any airline.

There are 4 more aircraft operating for EI TATL in S14 than S13 (from Ireland anyway, IAD-MAD didn't contribute to DUB). There could easily be another 3 or 4 next year. That's significant growth as it is.

Jack1985

Idbatterim wrote: »

My point about this was in relation to the 15.2 million through Helsinki airport, when you factor in all of the internal flights, the number of international passengers v Dublin would be considerably lower.

Would they not consider damp leasing aircraft? We always have these routes out of Dublin going to the far east or Us and when they launch "oh they are doing better or far better than expected"... They dont even fly to LA anymore, am I meant to believe a Dublin to LA route is high risk or not profitable for Aer Lingus? A point was made that it would cannibalise their San Fran route by a poster on another thread, but another poster pointed out if he was going LA, San Fran would not be where he would want to route through and I would be the same...

Regards LA, EI are going to bring SFO into a daily operation in S15 from the current five-weekly service, they will see how the market responds and if its still operating near 95%, than it is possible you could see maybe a thrice-weekly LAX a few years later (possibly S16/17), although should SFO suffer because of that it would be quickly dropped. EI are making considerably more money through Business than they ever have between Ireland and the West Coast and that is a result of the tech companies based in Dublin and within Ireland with there HQ's in Silicon Valley. Also its a result of the clientèle now transferring via DUB not seen before by EI.

As pointed out by MYOB, there are currently 3 damped leased 757's operating DUB-YYZ and SNN-BOS/JFK. And also as pointed out to grow to quickly could be detrimental, the current pace of growth is adequate to the market response in buying the extra seats. EI-EWR (ex-EI) will return next Summer, so the long-haul fleet will grow from 10 to 11 a/c and it's predicted if this pace of growth continues it will be one added for the next few years. That's seriously good and sustainable growth for EI.

Idbatterim

a question to the knowledgeable here, could the fly Dub to La via Vegas i.e. similar to the proposed below?

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/transport-and-tourism/ethiopian-airline-seeks-stopover-in-dublin-1.1865148

Irish Steve

I see little point in comparing Finland with ireland, in that the geography is completely different, the distances in Finland are considerably greater, and they don't have the road structure, or the capability to build it, and the climate is very different, so the requirement for internal flights is also very different.

RE LAX, the problem with that route is that the round trip time is over 24 hours, so it can't be done daily with one airframe, which means that something else has to be changed to accommodate a daily service, or another route has to be found for that airframe on the days it's not going to LA, and that route would probably have to be short haul to ensure that the service the next day is not compromised. A wide body on short haul is OK, but it requires different handling, gate facilities etc, which can limit the places its sent to. At present, there are 330's going to Malaga and Faro some days, within the existing schedule, there's probably not too many other local destinations that would justify the regular use of a 330 on the route.

What might make LAX more attractive would be if EI could sell code share onward to Aus and NZ via LAX, especially if it could be sold in the UK and fed via the regional services.