VS's Future at MAN

What’s the plan for the existing airside areas in what is currently T2 once this new section opens? I would imagine once the new check-in /security areas open the existing landside areas will close for renovation/rebuilding. Will the airside areas also close too? If so there will be no access to the current V:Room or other lounges on the upper level.

I think (but happy to stand corrected) that there will he access the the present lounges in the upper level of the old part of T2, via the upper level on the new bit (I think you go up the escalator, turn left, double back on yourself and then turn right).

Hi there - I hope the link below works.

It should be post number 3326 (Scottie Dog) and you are looking at the fourth image (titles Terminal 2 extension).

https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airport ... st10550000

Ah thank you! Normally those get posted to a-net but I guess they haven't been

My pleasure!

The MAN Clubhouse is just about the worst kept secret out! Am amazed Virgin have not announced it officially yet.

It is a surprise this has taken so long.

VS are certainly building up MAN related announcements. Clubhouse, Summer 2020 long haul and “virgin connect”...

The MAN Clubhouse is just about the worst kept secret out! Am amazed Virgin have not announced it officially yet.

It is a surprise this has taken so long.

VS are certainly building up MAN related announcements. Clubhouse, Summer 2020 long haul and “virgin connect”...

Hopefully not too long now....

Is that a knowing wink?!

An interesting article in the redevelopment, which is sponsored by Virgin atlantic...

https://www.businesstraveller.com/featu ... expansion/

I wonder whether VS will have plans to aggressively take the Thomas Cook market share from Manchester before any other operators plan new routes. There must be a number of routes which were operated by Thomas Cook which would be very attractive.

Agreed

LAS/MCO/JFK/LAX and even a return to SFO are all on the cards.

SEA? I’m not so sure how successful this was for TCX.

Caribbean routes? If the demand is there I suspect VS will try to take up the mantel, but I do suspect that we may see a return to some 2 Class aircraft with a more charter feel, W and Y?

VS could take TCX frames in the short term and then exercise their options for the additional 339s?

I would be shocked if VS weren’t already looking at this possibility, so they probably have a decent idea of what they would like to try and achieve.

Whether this can be achieved within a reasonable timeframe is a key question as is the “how”.

For example, there will be a number of spare airframes from TCX, but would VS be better to delay retirements of A346 / B744? There will be a lot of high quality staff from TCX at MAN, but would they be able to be integrated quickly into an erstwhile competitor?

There should be leeway to add frequency to MCO, JFK, LAX and LAS. Perhaps some of these could hold a far longer season. There might well be a market to add SFO back into the network, and perhaps some more Caribbean routes but it would require the A332s which are allocated elsewhere I believe.

One thing’s for sure - VS have made a lot of noise about what they want to do at MAN, they will never get a clearer run to add 3-5 long haul frames to MAN in one go again. If there is to be a “Big Bang” at MAN - the time is almost certainly now...

[mitchja]

Other than taking LAX and LAS daily, I don't see much benefit to VS from this as MCO and the Caribbean are still pretty seasonal.

ATL also needs to be daily and year-round to improve connections to DL. Another JFK service possibly may work?

SEA may also work, but again as I've always maintained for VS operations out of MAN, unless VS op those flights daily and year-round, SEA would be another route of no use what so ever to corporate pax. I believe MT only operated the SEA route during a short summer season didn't they?

Fair points - albeit VS *should* want to build a critical mass at MAN so the symbiotic relationship between VS on long haul and Connect on short haul can develop. If that is so, the odd seasonal route (around a strong foundation of 5/6 core routes) that is not too bad.

Taking the “core” markets from MAN-USA upon which we can all agree:

1 - LAS (where the combined VS/TCX was around 11 weekly) and LAX (combined VS/TCX 5x weekly) to daily on VS all year is an achievable priority in the short term.

2 - ATL is daily year round is also a realistic short timer goal (is it 5x weekly this winter?).

3 - JFK is a market that can likely support 11-14 weekly on VS.

Now the more peripheral TATL:

4 - the Caribbean routes are not business routes, so in my view there is less of an issue with a scatter of 2-4 weekly seasonal services. As TCX have retreated from a market, so VS can step in to service it appropriately.

5 - VS have clearly taken a view that the introduction of longer and thinner routes requires a 3/4x weekly seasonal taster first. I have no problem with this provided some of these stick and grow. In the above scenario, I think additional MAN-USA capacity to Florida and California or the Pacific north west would be useful. Seasonal routes to MIA and SFO/SEA would help this - with a view to further development.

Now the rest of the world:

6 - MAN briefly showed great promise as a connecting hub between India and the USA. VS should, if possible, capture that. Daily services between MAN and DEL/BOM should be possible, linking in the to TATL ones above. This should make each serious of routes more viable. TCX has served Goa for a considerable period - I’m not advocating VS do the same - but this is something to consider.

7 - MAN-BKK is one of the largest unserved markets in the world. BKK-JFK another. VS could connect the dots via MAN pretty economically as each leg is fairly popular.

8- if TATL continues to show some seasonality, this can be balanced with services to South Africa. It would be low frequency seasonal - but if that is the foot in the door to get more, I’m okay with that.

This is obviously too much in one go, but is the type of thinking I hope they have been doing over the past few years.

Don't disagree with any of the two posts.

The opportunity is there to make LAX more regular and LAS. It would be nice to see SFO back on the map as I got the impression that VS pulling that route combined with Thomas Cook pulling BOS was some sort of mutual recognition that the routes were too thin to support two airlines. SEA is an interesting one - I wonder if DL are better suited to that route given their hub that way? Double-daily MCO I can see happening, as well as maybe a third rotation on some days? Thomas Cook had a few days where they ran 2 flights per day to MCO, so it's a big market that VS know well already, though TUI may also have an eye on plugging the gap with more flights to SFB if they get a surge in demand.

As for the Caribbean, when it comes to divvy out routes I can see TUI getting the lion's share of the market here, though I wouldn't be surprised if we see more VS flights to BGI and maybe consider MBJ. I'd be surprised if they launch MAN-UVF given they've tried once before and given they're pulling their LGW route.

I will preface my next statement by saying I'm sad to see Thomas Cook go and really feel for the staff whom I hope all find new jobs quickly. From a VS perspective, this is now an opportunity to make themselves the number one TATL airline out of MAN and own the market. I'm not sure it will be wise to jump in with both feet given the economic headwinds and the organic growth strategy they've followed over the last 5 years has served them well, but opportunities to consolidate their position from an airport which they've clearly identified as pivotal to their future strategy (e.g. the Flybe acquisition) don't get handed to them on a plate often. I also don't think Norwegian are any threat from MAN at the moment given their own financial issues, retreats from certain markets and having their hands full with 787 engine issues and 737 MAX groundings.

I will preface my next statement by saying I'm sad to see Thomas Cook go and really feel for the staff whom I hope all find new jobs quickly. From a VS perspective, this is now an opportunity to make themselves the number one TATL airline out of MAN and own the market.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with highlighting the opportunity this presents to VS.

I’m basic terms that is because VS expanding as a consequence means opportunities available to ex-TCX employees that otherwise would not have it, and more choice for consumers. Basically making the best of a bad situation.

If there isn't additional seasonal MAN -> MCO rotations I'll be surprised is all I'm saying.
There is clearly demand as TCX had full "daily" A330 rotations I believe, and I can't see TUI taking all of that. Otherwise there will be substantial additional price inflation on the MCO route, as I cannot believe less people will go next year!

But clearly seasonal and to meet demand.

Otherwise there will be substantial additional price inflation on the MCO route, as I cannot believe less people will go next year!

That could happen. Analysts were quick to point out yesterday that supply exceeds demand in the holiday business and Thomas Cook’s demise will go some way to rectifying what are artificially low prices, as unpalatable as that may be to consumers.

I'm not entirely sure that the Long Haul markets were both TCX and VS have enjoyed growth from Manchester are routes on which there is plenty of demand, and supply doesn't always outstrip it even in the high season, not a lot of those VS 747s are going out empty, and I understand that on some days TC are even double daily on MCO.

But clearly seasonal and to meet demand.

That sums up the dilemma for VS and others. All good and well stepping into the breach to replace the lost capacity, but assuming there is an oversupply what do you do with the aircraft outside the peaks? I suppose if VS did take on more aircraft to make up for the lost Thomas Cook capacity to Florida in the summer months, they could be redeployed onto Caribbean and South African flights in the winter months (and not necessarily from MAN).

There are also indirect options for passengers too such as via DUB, AMS, various US airports or even with Icelandair via KEF to MCO or TPA. They may be cheaper than the direct options if that capacity isn't replaced, plus DUB is compelling with its US Border Pre-Clearance facility.

In any case, the weak GBP/USD rate doesn't seem to be deterring people.

That could happen. Analysts were quick to point out yesterday that supply exceeds demand in the holiday business and Thomas Cook’s demise will go some way to rectifying what are artificially low prices, as unpalatable as that may be to consumers.

I think you're right. People love to bash Ryanair and Michael O'Leary, but he's been warning for a while now that prices are artificially low and would stay like that for the foreseeable. He was specifically talking about flights, but the same applies to holidays I guess. With Thomas Cook sadly no more, we'll probably see price increases as airlines and tour operators adjust to supply being closer to real levels of demand - this will of course differ from location to location.

I'm not entirely sure that the Long Haul markets were both TCX and VS have enjoyed growth from Manchester are routes on which there is plenty of demand, and supply doesn't always outstrip it even in the high season, not a lot of those VS 747s are going out empty, and I understand that on some days TC are even double daily on MCO.

Correct . On the final day of operations Thomas Cook had two MAN-MCO return flights scheduled and did so on certain dates over 2019.

In the case of Florida, don't forget that up until a few years ago you also had Monarch operating charter flights to Sanford and back in the 2000's every UK charter airline had flights to Sanford in addition to BA and VS to MCO. Who remembers the Travel City Direct-branded 747's that were operated by Air Atlanta and later XL Airways?

You really have to wonder what they're going to do with the MCO route. In the summer VS already have 3 747 flights a day to MCO on some days and with the 747 retirement in the distance, with the replacement being the A35K, how many frequencies are they are going to have? I can't imagine them cutting capacity and this is a golden opportunity for them to increase capacity on the route, but once the 747s are gone they'd be needing 4-5 A35K flights on the busiest days and that just sounds unrealistic.

You really have to wonder what they're going to do with the MCO route. In the summer VS already have 3 747 flights a day to MCO on some days .

Sometimes 5 or 6

3FA2E4A4-E752-44E9-A49D-1EEEC1959A0B.jpeg (197.41 KiB) Viewed 2597 times

I’ve been saying this for ages with MCO, even before this golden opportunity emerged, that they will not meet the same level of peak demand they currently do with the 747s in the peak.

My view on MCO (which is viewed from the perspective of MAN) is that VS should consider it from the perspective of MAN-Florida rather than just MAN-MCO.

If you look at it from that perspective, commercially attractive demand to Florida might be satisfied with double daily MAN-MCO with supplemental MAN-MIA/TPA.

The MCO route is certainly a very nice little earner for VS from all the UK airports at peak times (school holidays) with up to 6 x 747's a day at really peak demand times (3 x LGW, 2 x MAN & 1 x GLA or BFS). This is an opportunity they should be grabbing by the horns, especially with the impending demise of the 747's and the capacity reduction the A350-1000's in leisure configuration will deliver. This is before you consider the effect of the demise of the Thomas Cook capacity reduction on the route.

Of course, the problem is "what do you do with this capacity in low season?" I & many v-flyers have been on MCO flights where the passenger load has been well under 50%. Interestingly, Upper Class is generally always full, so VS are missing a trick there. Sure, Virgin can send the aircraft off for heavy maintenance checks at quieter times - but they are not going to be alone in wanting these maintenance slots & heavy maintenance is expensive - you only get it done when it needs doing.

I would have thought that the BGI route would support a fairly J/W heavy configuration given the hotel prices on the island. UVF is another obvious option for a similar config, but Virgin are in a bit of a spat with the local government there & have pulled the route.

Without meaning to sound nasty, the demise of Thomas Cook does provide Virgin with a pretty unique opportunity IMO - probably better than when bmi ceased trading & Branson did not get his way and wheeled out all the publicity about how Virgin was being treated unfairly.

I'd love some of this speculation to come true, but I think VS will be very cautious and will therefore move slowly. I don't see any new routes coming anytime soon. They're still experimenting with BOS/LAX/SFO. ATL is still in flux since it's been daily, 3/4 weekly and everything in between over the last few years and it's been operated by the 332, 333 and 744. Even LAS now this year with a smaller aircraft and frequency increase. So that's a lot of juggling and uncertainty already and I just don't see them taking on anymore anytime soon. I'll be happy to be wrong though if they do.

MCO demand explodes in the kids school holidays, obviously. However UC demand can be light. This year during August there were loads and loads of G's available on MAN-MCO. VS want good loads year round, ideally in all cabins. Personally, I think it will be quite simple. Smaller aircraft with frequency increases for GLA and BFS. They'll get capacity as close as possible to current levels with the leisure config A35K. Maybe the odd 333 when demand really is high, but remember, in its current config, that's a lot of UC seats for MAN-MCO . For me that would push loads up year round and they'll push the price point out to make the route lucrative. I was told VS exited DXB despite having good loads because the price point was compressed by competition to a point where it wasn't profitable even then. MCO leaves them almost free now to figure out the price point all by themselves.

Without meaning to sound nasty, the demise of Thomas Cook does provide Virgin with a pretty unique opportunity

Yes. But what is that opportunity?

VS (and other airlines) have a choice: they can throw extra resources at routes like MCO during peak times to fill the void left by TC and maintain existing capacity at current prices. Good news for consumers but far from ideal for VS as it would require additional aircraft which would only be needed for a few weeks each year, as off-peak demand can easily be met with existing resources.

Or they can do nothing, thereby reducing overall capacity on the route and pushing up fares while keeping costs the same. From a business point of view, that’s surely the more attractive option - albeit an unpalatable one for consumers.

Or they can do nothing, thereby reducing overall capacity on the route and pushing up fares while keeping costs the same. From a business point of view, that’s surely the more attractive option - albeit an unpalatable one for consumers.

That's a much better explanation of what I was trying to say