If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
Last night's airing of Tonight with Trevor McDonald (for those who are
not conversant with British television, this is a twice-weekly half-hour current affairs programme for the not very cerebrally inclined - but I watch it anyway) was about Ryanair passengers whose return flights had been cancelled due to circumstances beyond what Ryanair called "their control", fog being one. The people in question had to find their own way home, being dissatisfied with whatever alternative arrangements Ryanair had offered. The passengers claimed that they had not been treated fairly by the company. Ryanair came off quite badly on the face of it, although I couldn't help feeling that the travellers themselves seemed to be allowing their emotions to rule their heads. Anyway, food for thought, given that I have just had two successful trips with Ryanair. MM |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
"MM" wrote in message ... Last night's airing of Tonight with Trevor McDonald (for those who are not conversant with British television, this is a twice-weekly half-hour current affairs programme for the not very cerebrally inclined - but I watch it anyway) was about Ryanair passengers whose return flights had been cancelled due to circumstances beyond what Ryanair called "their control", fog being one. The people in question had to find their own way home, being dissatisfied with whatever alternative arrangements Ryanair had offered. Whilst Ryanair are undoubtedly the worst offender, this type of treatment is only going to become more common with all airlines. The customer has demanded the cheapest price and all airlines are now having to give this. More and more are going to strip out all the little luxuries like spare planes to make special extra trips when one is cancelled. If an airline only flys somewhere once a day and is 85% full each trip[1], when there is an on the day cancellation it is a certainty that some people are going to have to wait 6 days for an alternative flight with the same airline (which is all that they are legally required to offer in an 'outside of their control' cancellation) or pay the market price with some other airline for the trip (which the defaulting airline don't have to provide). There is a case that this type of cancellation is not outside of the airline's control as is has been caused by unnecessary cost cutting, but who's going take on a large compnay in that battle? Nope, the only way IMHO to fix this is to make the airlines responsibe for 'all' delays and force the industry to 'insure' against the likely eventualies. Not all of the airline's customers can get commercial insurance for these delays (because amongst other reasons only 'holiday' insurance is offered) and a corporate policy is certain to be more economic. The passengers claimed that they had not been treated fairly by the company. Ryanair came off quite badly on the face of it, As they always do. Molly Malone just seems to go out of his way to make the publicity worse than it might have been. although I couldn't help feeling that the travellers themselves seemed to be allowing their emotions to rule their heads. Anyway, food for thought, given that I have just had two successful trips with Ryanair. Tim [1] If an FR route doesn't load to 85%, it gets pulled. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:17:02 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)"
wrote: Nope, the only way IMHO to fix this is to make the airlines responsibe for 'all' delays and force the industry to 'insure' against the likely eventualies. Why does it need "fixing" ? It's part of the service the airline provides, as you say, there's nothing wrong with it, if you want an agreement to be flown home within X hours of a delay regardless of the cause, then fly with an airline that offers that (or pay for 3rd party insurance that will provide it) Either way you'll pay more, that's not a problem you're expecting better service. a corporate policy is certain to be more economic. Only if you believe the service is something that should be provided... I don't see any reason why it should be. [1] If an FR route doesn't load to 85%, it gets pulled. Although strangely it seems Lamezia is back in - it was pulled originally, indeed for awhile they were paying the taxes on flights to get people to go there to meet their contracted minimum numbers to the airport so they could pull it. Jim. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
"Jim Ley" wrote in message ... On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:17:02 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)" wrote: Nope, the only way IMHO to fix this is to make the airlines responsibe for 'all' delays and force the industry to 'insure' against the likely eventualies. Why does it need "fixing" ? Because the average punter doesn't want it to happen the way that FR think is acceptable. It's part of the service the airline provides, as you say, there's nothing wrong with it, if you want an agreement to be flown home within X hours of a delay regardless of the cause, then fly with an airline that offers that There soon won't be any offering this. There already aren't on some routes (or pay for 3rd party insurance that will provide it) Because such a policy doesn't exist. And if it did, on an individual basis it is bound to be a significant multiple (10 or more) of the cost per person of a corporate insurance offering the same thing. Either way you'll pay more, that's not a problem you're expecting better service. I don't give a toss about better service, but I do want what I contracted to. A journey from A to B on a given day. Why is it that you think it is OK for the airlines to be able to opt out of this? (not expecting an answer I haven't had one from the previous three times we have had this conversation) tim a corporate policy is certain to be more economic. Only if you believe the service is something that should be provided... I don't see any reason why it should be. [1] If an FR route doesn't load to 85%, it gets pulled. Although strangely it seems Lamezia is back in - it was pulled originally, indeed for awhile they were paying the taxes on flights to get people to go there to meet their contracted minimum numbers to the airport so they could pull it. Jim. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:44:56 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)"
wrote: "Jim Ley" wrote in message ... On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:17:02 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)" wrote: Nope, the only way IMHO to fix this is to make the airlines responsibe for 'all' delays and force the industry to 'insure' against the likely eventualies. Why does it need "fixing" ? Because the average punter doesn't want it to happen the way that FR think is acceptable. So every company should be forced to provide the service that the average customer wants? The average customer doesn't want to put together their own furniture, so should IKEA be forced to sell only ready-assembled products? (or pay for 3rd party insurance that will provide it) Because such a policy doesn't exist. If you're so sure that the average customer wants this service, then why isn't there such a policy? And if it did, on an individual basis it is bound to be a significant multiple (10 or more) of the cost per person of a corporate insurance offering the same thing. Sure, so? it'd be cheaper per car if the government provided free cars to everyone in the country, doesn't mean it's a good idea. I don't give a toss about better service, but I do want what I contracted to. A journey from A to B on a given day. Except of course you've not contracted for that, or the airlines couldn't escape providing it... (without paying you cash to put you in the same position as if they had) Jim. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:17:02 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)"
wrote: "MM" wrote in message .. . Last night's airing of Tonight with Trevor McDonald (for those who are not conversant with British television, this is a twice-weekly half-hour current affairs programme for the not very cerebrally inclined - but I watch it anyway) was about Ryanair passengers whose return flights had been cancelled due to circumstances beyond what Ryanair called "their control", fog being one. The people in question had to find their own way home, being dissatisfied with whatever alternative arrangements Ryanair had offered. Whilst Ryanair are undoubtedly the worst offender, this type of treatment is only going to become more common with all airlines. The customer has demanded the cheapest price and all airlines are now having to give this. More and more are going to strip out all the little luxuries like spare planes to make special extra trips when one is cancelled. If an airline only flys somewhere once a day and is 85% full each trip[1], when there is an on the day cancellation it is a certainty that some people are going to have to wait 6 days for an alternative flight with the same airline (which is all that they are legally required to offer in an 'outside of their control' cancellation) or pay the market price with some other airline for the trip (which the defaulting airline don't have to provide). There is a case that this type of cancellation is not outside of the airline's control as is has been caused by unnecessary cost cutting, but who's going take on a large compnay in that battle? Nope, the only way IMHO to fix this is to make the airlines responsibe for 'all' delays and force the industry to 'insure' against the likely eventualies. Not all of the airline's customers can get commercial insurance for these delays (because amongst other reasons only 'holiday' insurance is offered) and a corporate policy is certain to be more economic. The passengers claimed that they had not been treated fairly by the company. Ryanair came off quite badly on the face of it, As they always do. Molly Malone just seems to go out of his way to make the publicity worse than it might have been. although I couldn't help feeling that the travellers themselves seemed to be allowing their emotions to rule their heads. Anyway, food for thought, given that I have just had two successful trips with Ryanair. Tim [1] If an FR route doesn't load to 85%, it gets pulled. Crikey! I didn't know that. How often does this happen? Is Ryanair alone in this? Maybe Ryanair is something to steer well clear of after all. I mean, there I go, paying, say, 70 quid for a return flight, instead of, say, 140 with Lufthansa. But if the Ryanair return doesn't fly for some reason and I'm then expected to either pay hotel bills for up to six nights or pay full whack for a normal ticket, the 70 quid I've saved doesn't look quite such of a bargain. How does Easyjet's service compare to Ryanair's? MM |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
"Jim Ley" wrote in message ... On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:44:56 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)" wrote: "Jim Ley" wrote in message ... On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:17:02 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)" wrote: Nope, the only way IMHO to fix this is to make the airlines responsibe for 'all' delays and force the industry to 'insure' against the likely eventualies. Why does it need "fixing" ? Because the average punter doesn't want it to happen the way that FR think is acceptable. So every company should be forced to provide the service that the average customer wants? I think that it is far more than the average. I would contest that it is most. The average customer doesn't want to put together their own furniture, so should IKEA be forced to sell only ready-assembled products? I don't accept this analogy. IKEA furniture opts out of putting it together. In Airline terms this is like FR opting out of providing in flight services. (or pay for 3rd party insurance that will provide it) Because such a policy doesn't exist. If you're so sure that the average customer wants this service, then why isn't there such a policy? Because historically there was never the need. The rise of LCCs has been too rapid for the insurance market to decide that there is a market for a single trip cancellation policy And if it did, on an individual basis it is bound to be a significant multiple (10 or more) of the cost per person of a corporate insurance offering the same thing. Sure, so? it'd be cheaper per car if the government provided free cars to everyone in the country, doesn't mean it's a good idea. This is so far away in terms of scale, it is stupid. My suggestion is the same (as I have said to you before) of forcing shops to 'insure' goods against them being faulty instead of expecting customers to always buy separate extended warrenties. And what is it that is happening in this market? I don't give a toss about better service, but I do want what I contracted to. A journey from A to B on a given day. Except of course you've not contracted for that, Only because the airline have a sneaky way of not providing it. or the airlines couldn't escape providing it... (without paying you cash to put you in the same position as if they had) Actually, I believe that FR position when it say's 'outside of our control' is much like that of a DSG shop when it claims 'not our problem' to a consumer complaint. FR not being able to land in fog when every other airline is landing, is well inside its control if it were to spend money on equipping its planes with the required equipment. If this were to go to court I believe that FR would lose. But it bullies its way into not going to court just like DSG does. tim |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 19:01:03 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)"
wrote: If this were to go to court I believe that FR would lose. But it bullies its way into not going to court just like DSG does. Then that's a failure of the courts which should be rectified before forcing all carriers to give a few passengers lots money for being late home. If the failure is in the courts, fix the courts, it means your current laws aren't working, writing new laws aren't the way to fix it. Jim. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ryanair got a drubbing on Tonight
"MM" wrote in message ... On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 15:17:02 +0100, "tim \(moved to sweden\)" wrote: Tim [1] If an FR route doesn't load to 85%, it gets pulled. Crikey! I didn't know that. I don't mean that it pulls an individual flight on a per day basis. It pulls the whole route on a 'forever' basis. It does this with some notice, but perhaps not enough. It has pulled a few destinations. But none that I know of since the new EU rules came in. How often does this happen? Is Ryanair alone in this? Maybe Ryanair is something to steer well clear of after all. I mean, there I go, paying, say, 70 quid for a return flight, Never paid more than 40 round trip. instead of, say, 140 with Lufthansa. But if the Ryanair return doesn't fly for some reason and I'm then expected to either pay hotel bills for up to six nights or pay full whack for a normal ticket, the 70 quid I've saved doesn't look quite such of a bargain. I agree with you. I only book FR if I don't really need to fly at all. Given the weather round here and the fact that one of FR's costs cutting is in poor weather equipment, I won't be booking with them over the Winter. (I'd like to find out what their track record for last year is, I wonder how I do this?) How does Easyjet's service compare to Ryanair's? No idea. They are however much more expensive for my route. tim |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group | [email protected] | Europe | 80 | October 17th, 2005 03:21 PM |
HAL Zuiderdam -- The Unfinished Travelogue | Jeff Coudriet | Cruises | 6 | February 17th, 2005 11:10 AM |
Times: Ryanair cabin crew struggles to open doors on burning plane | Sufaud | Air travel | 0 | August 2nd, 2004 06:55 AM |
Ryanair - no refund if booking cancelled | Nige | Europe | 38 | July 9th, 2004 11:16 PM |
Ryanair imposes a 50p charge to cover for wheelchair costs | Mikko Peltoniemi | Air travel | 4 | February 1st, 2004 08:01 PM |