BA = London Airways?
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: GLA
Programs: BAEC: Silver. Nothing else as TopCashBack trumps all hotel programs
Posts: 801
BA = London Airways?
Hi. I'm wondering, are there any other national carriers (in the developed world), that only fly internationally from one city? I can't find any. I don't understand why BA (Apparently the UK's national carrier) only fly through London. This isn't the case in other countries.
As a Glasgow based person, it's very frustrating that the only destination my national carrier fly's to is London. As I travel to the states a lot, I typically fly United, Delta or American. I mean of course, why would I voluntarily fly via London with a stop when I can fly direct? I'm just curious why BA is happy to loose my business? I would fly BA more if I could get the America from Glasgow, or Edinburgh, or Manchester etc etc and I am sure there are more like me. Most of the people I know in Glasgow who fly for business have status in an American carrier, not BA. Are BA aware that some people in the UK actually live in other places than London? It's a personal nuisance to me as my points are scattered across United, Delta and American. I hold status in each, but if BA were to fly other places than just London, I would be able to have top tier status. And (long haul) I actually quite like the BA product. Better than most American carriers anyway. (Although new the new Delta metal from Edinburgh is really nice).
Just curious as to why BA do this, and do any other national carriers do it the same way? Why make it difficult for me to use BA. Seems counter productive.
As a Glasgow based person, it's very frustrating that the only destination my national carrier fly's to is London. As I travel to the states a lot, I typically fly United, Delta or American. I mean of course, why would I voluntarily fly via London with a stop when I can fly direct? I'm just curious why BA is happy to loose my business? I would fly BA more if I could get the America from Glasgow, or Edinburgh, or Manchester etc etc and I am sure there are more like me. Most of the people I know in Glasgow who fly for business have status in an American carrier, not BA. Are BA aware that some people in the UK actually live in other places than London? It's a personal nuisance to me as my points are scattered across United, Delta and American. I hold status in each, but if BA were to fly other places than just London, I would be able to have top tier status. And (long haul) I actually quite like the BA product. Better than most American carriers anyway. (Although new the new Delta metal from Edinburgh is really nice).
Just curious as to why BA do this, and do any other national carriers do it the same way? Why make it difficult for me to use BA. Seems counter productive.
#3
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Godalming, Surrey, UK.
Programs: Nowt of note.
Posts: 1,628
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 12,262
I wouldn't consider British Airways a national carrier. They are a privately owned airline with their Hub at London Heathrow, They'd most likely be bust if they were still a nationalised airline !
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,364
You were born at the wrong time. You would need to go back to the pre-airliine liberalisation days where point-to-point flying ruled the day. Nowadays, hub-based network is the way for major carriers. Even in a decentralised country like Germany, LH found that it could no longer sustain international flights from multiple German airports took out of its network all flights other than those from its two hubs (FRA and MUC).
#8
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 63,821
In a way Germany points to another problem here: in Germany the LCC have very little leverage compared to the rest of Europe, with less choice and higher fares as a result, not that German consumers seem too worried about that, judging by the response to airberlin's failure. The one advantage of BA's approach is that LCC can offer direct services in competition, and BA needs to keep on their toes with fares if they want to stay in the market. Sometimes fares from GLA/INV/NCL are below that of London prices if there is the perception of leakage to (e.g.) KLM-AF. If BA had a total stranglehold on the UK market then I doubt that would be in anyone's long term interest.
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brighton. UK
Programs: BA Gold / VS /IHG Diamond & Ambassador
Posts: 14,200
The concept of a 'national carrier' is long dead. Based on passenger numbers Easy Jet is the UK national carrier!
It simply comes down to economics. BA finds it more economic (profitable) to funnel passengers through LHR and LGW (which geographically is in West Sussex not London) and can offer more services - by operating the hub and spoke model - than if it flew internationally from other UK Airports.
ISTBC but I think KLM only flies to the US from AMS though of course it is a much smaller country than the UK.
It simply comes down to economics. BA finds it more economic (profitable) to funnel passengers through LHR and LGW (which geographically is in West Sussex not London) and can offer more services - by operating the hub and spoke model - than if it flew internationally from other UK Airports.
ISTBC but I think KLM only flies to the US from AMS though of course it is a much smaller country than the UK.
#11
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: London
Programs: BAEC Gold, IHG Spire Ambassador, Starbucks Gold,
Posts: 624
As a Glasgow based person, it's very frustrating that the only destination my national carrier fly's to is London. As I travel to the states a lot, I typically fly United, Delta or American. I mean of course, why would I voluntarily fly via London with a stop when I can fly direct? I'm just curious why BA is happy to loose my business? I would fly BA more if I could get the America from Glasgow, or Edinburgh, or Manchester etc etc and I am sure there are more like me. Most of the people I know in Glasgow who fly for business have status in an American carrier, not BA. Are BA aware that some people in the UK actually live in other places than London? It's a personal nuisance to me as my points are scattered across United, Delta and American. I hold status in each, but if BA were to fly other places than just London, I would be able to have top tier status. And (long haul) I actually quite like the BA product. Better than most American carriers anyway. (Although new the new Delta metal from Edinburgh is really nice).
Just curious as to why BA do this, and do any other national carriers do it the same way? Why make it difficult for me to use BA. Seems counter productive.
Just curious as to why BA do this, and do any other national carriers do it the same way? Why make it difficult for me to use BA. Seems counter productive.
BA is not the national carrier - can we please stop referring to it as such?
BA dont care about making your life easier - they care about making a profit.
BA dont care about your business - they care about big bucks of which you are small fry (as we all are individually)
BA are aware that people live outside of London and they do fly to other places in the UK (INV, ABZ, GLA, EDI, NCL, MAN, BFS)
They are a hub and spoke outfit, with a massive hub at LHR, and smaller ones at LGW and LCY. It makes sense to feed into one as they increase their margins and viability of routes. You have the options to go elsewhere, and fly with other carriers, so do that if you want to.
But think about it on the flipside - in the states, there are many places that you have to fly into to connect onto an international flight to the UK, yet we have some relatively random routes from the UK to what are, for us, small places. Bet those people feel the same as you. You cannot have all routes to all places.
Bottom line is, with a country of population more than 5 times smaller than the USA, you cannot expect it to be able to support such a wide spread regional international market as in the States. That is the reason that BA have London as a hub - simply because there are more people there to sustain the flights. There are more people in greater London than the whole of Scotland!
#12
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Krakow
Programs: BAEC Silver, Miles and More(FTL), IHG(Platinum), Accor, HHonors(Diamond), SPG, Hertz Five Star
Posts: 5,925
Any time BA tries to expand its offering from Glasgow the take up is poor and the flights are quickly discontinued, as per the Salzburg flights a years or so ago, I believe some European cities other than London may be getting served from EDI and/or MAN, especially at the weekends over the summer but I could be wrong.
#13
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,968
Ba through BA cityflyer do seem to be flying more from regional airports (MAN, BRS, BHX, EDI) direct in to Europe, there is a thread here about them New CityFlyer routes from Manchester
#14
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Why do people still refer to BA as the "national carrier"? Not only is it not, but it has not been such for many, many years.
BA operates for the benefit of its shareholders.
If you give your custom to BA because you believe that the term "British" means that it is British, than your custom is misplaced.
BA operates for the benefit of its shareholders.
If you give your custom to BA because you believe that the term "British" means that it is British, than your custom is misplaced.
#15
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: OSL
Posts: 2,646