Heathrow and tourism

lemansky · 18-08-2007 08:19PM

therecklessone wrote:

How many marched when Easyjet cancelled their Shannon-Gatwick service?

Exactly. People just seem to think that because it's Aer Lingus, they can twist them into believing that they have some obligation to stay, and bully them into changing their minds.

The fact is, Aer Lingus isn't just looking at the profitability of the SNN-LHR route, they are looking at it is a whole and are making a business decision to pull out for reasons of their own. In an industry as volatile as this they wouldn't be doing this unless they had a very good reason. They have one, and it's none of our business to question them about it or demand that they explain themselves. They have as much a right to make this decision as any company.
These business people in Shannon can't tell me that if something they or their company was involved with would do better if located somewhere else, they wouldn't just up sticks and leave. They would be out of there like a light without a thought of potential economic problems, present and future, that they would be leaving behind them. It is not their responsibility as a business to stay just to support the region (no matter how small the contribution), and so it is not down to Aer Lingus to support the area either as they too are a business and they are free to do what they like. Nobody has any right to question them, and they won't be beaten down by bullies.

As has been said before, if the Shannon area comes under this level of threat from the axing of one route, thats their fault for allowing themselves to allow the route to act like a crutch supporting a fair amount of their weight, if the stories are to be believed. One thing is for sure it's not the airline's fault, and they should, and will, not let this uproar have any impact on their decision.

themole · 18-08-2007 08:52PM

stepbar wrote:

Tourism and inward investment is the real issue and the fact that Aer Lingus is pulling a profitable route bearing all this in mind is just madness :rolleyes:

Not if your a commercial company it isn't, profit for the airline is the only concern.

Aerlingus felt they were not making enough money on the route so they decided to maximise profits on the planes and landing slots they had by moving to belfast.

cailinoBAC · 18-08-2007 10:41PM

I love the way everybody wishes aer lingus would be more like ryanair but then when it is (makes a decision based on profit) they are supposed to be a state airline, aren't they?

There is a free market. If the route is profitable another airline will take it. Slots at Heathrow are precious and if Aer Lingus wanted to fly to Belfast, they had to take the flights from somewhere, and Shannon was obviously not very cost effective. SAA charges Aer Lingus and Ryanair different landing fees, doesn't it?

fly_agaric · 18-08-2007 11:30PM

Terry wrote:

Ask anyone from the countries you listed above if their country is perfect and you will get a similar list to the one you presented about Ireland.

If Orange69 asks people who come to live here they will have realised that their country (assuming it is a very wealthy 1st world one) wasn't doing so badly after all in the areas they moaned about while at home!:D

***got up from machine with slow-poke excuse for "broadband"...gets a glass of water and prays there is no ecoli or cryptosporidium floating in it...:-)

ircoha · 18-08-2007 11:54PM

REAGAN FIRES AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS

"They are in violation of the law, and if they do not report for work within forty-eight hours, they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated." (Washington, D.C., August 3, 1981)

On August 3, 1981, almost 13,000 air-traffic controllers went on strike after negotiations with the federal government to raise their pay and shorten their workweek proved fruitless. The controllers complained of difficult working conditions and a lack of recognition of the pressures they face. Across the country some seven thousand flights were canceled. The same day, President Ronald Reagan called the strike illegal and threatened to fire any controller who had not returned to work within forty-eight hours. Robert Poli, president of the Professional Air-Traffic Controllers Association(PATCO), was found in contempt by a federal judge and ordered to pay $1,000 a day in fines. On August 5, an angry President Reagan carried out his threat and fired the 11,359 air-traffic controllers who had not returned to work. In addition, he declared a lifetime ban on the rehiring of the strikers by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Zebra3 · 19-08-2007 08:50AM

luckat wrote:

Do those eejits in government not realise that they're destroying the tourist industry by letting Aer Lingus export the Heathrow slots?

Most American tourists, and most European tourists, don't want to see Dublin.

They want to see the West of Ireland, and they want to see London. So they fly into Heathrow and go tootling around seeing London's cutesy union jack icons - the Tower, the Changing of the Guard, Westminster.

Then they tootle back to Heathrow, now familiar to them, and they get on the plane to Shannon, and tootle around the west of Ireland.

They don't want to go to some other mingy little airport.

How did we re-elect this crowd of dolts?

Howaya Willie!!!

Great 'tache you have!!

19,000+ first preference votes! Well done!

luckat · 20-08-2007 10:33AM

Zebra3 wrote:

Howaya Willie!!!

Great 'tache you have!!

19,000+ first preference votes! Well done!

Why, thank you! <grooms tache>

luckat · 21-08-2007 01:44PM

And of course nobody should mention that this makes Shannon more dependent on the American troop runs...

Heathrow and tourism

Comments