Innovators in the air transport industry? Well it depends on your view point
Some make a success out of taking an established range(established by someone else of course with at least a core customer base) of operations, adding some real marketing flair and delivering point of sale direct to the customer. Furthermore, delivering that which was promised and successfully competing against the incumbent.
Lets be honest - they're stealing the customer base of the established carrier ! Really? Well why did the incumbent leave the door open?
Others start with a completely clean sheet of paper. New never before flown routes, theoretical customer volumes, new marketing concept, new inventory distribution, new (or no ) on board service - throw all the original rules out of the window and develop to take on the established carriers in terms of size carryings and profitability.
One thing's clear. The original operator was too arrogant about his market position or missing a trick or two and leaving a gap for the newcomer to establish a competitive ( and many times better) operation. How well did he know his customers and those customers' needs? Looking at the headstones in the airline graveyard, maybe not well at all. And given the contraction of 'legacy'' operations Europe, wide this arrogance or ignorance continues.
Well good for the innovator!-- You need the 'out of the ordinary' to come along and shake up the industry once in a while.
Innovation is not just seen in the Low cost environment. There are plenty of success stories in a number of legacy carriers . Neither is there a protective cover around the low cost model ensuring that it is immune from failure. There have been and will continue to be failures in this area - you need a good combination of innovation, sound finance and business principals and the inevitable stroke of luck or two to carry it off.
But why then are the innovators luckier than the 'head in the sand' brigade? !" Sometimes the staff from the 'old school'' just haven't got what it takes to innovate and from a marketing perspective are too risk averse.
And the same applies to airports . Those who sit and wait for the established airlines to improve frequency or wait for new carriers to turn up with new operations find those services being delivered down the road at the competitor. Birmingham is seeing new operations and some respectability in volumes whilst Manchester has seen a quarter with passenger and cargo monthly volumes decline by up to 10% year on year. So who is innovating and who is resting on its laurels? Manchester is not alone . Those too reliant upon full service operators and traditional markets are witnessing similar volume deterioration.
What do you think ?
Some make a success out of taking an established range(established by someone else of course with at least a core customer base) of operations, adding some real marketing flair and delivering point of sale direct to the customer. Furthermore, delivering that which was promised and successfully competing against the incumbent.
Lets be honest - they're stealing the customer base of the established carrier ! Really? Well why did the incumbent leave the door open?
Others start with a completely clean sheet of paper. New never before flown routes, theoretical customer volumes, new marketing concept, new inventory distribution, new (or no ) on board service - throw all the original rules out of the window and develop to take on the established carriers in terms of size carryings and profitability.
One thing's clear. The original operator was too arrogant about his market position or missing a trick or two and leaving a gap for the newcomer to establish a competitive ( and many times better) operation. How well did he know his customers and those customers' needs? Looking at the headstones in the airline graveyard, maybe not well at all. And given the contraction of 'legacy'' operations Europe, wide this arrogance or ignorance continues.
Well good for the innovator!-- You need the 'out of the ordinary' to come along and shake up the industry once in a while.
Innovation is not just seen in the Low cost environment. There are plenty of success stories in a number of legacy carriers . Neither is there a protective cover around the low cost model ensuring that it is immune from failure. There have been and will continue to be failures in this area - you need a good combination of innovation, sound finance and business principals and the inevitable stroke of luck or two to carry it off.
But why then are the innovators luckier than the 'head in the sand' brigade? !" Sometimes the staff from the 'old school'' just haven't got what it takes to innovate and from a marketing perspective are too risk averse.
And the same applies to airports . Those who sit and wait for the established airlines to improve frequency or wait for new carriers to turn up with new operations find those services being delivered down the road at the competitor. Birmingham is seeing new operations and some respectability in volumes whilst Manchester has seen a quarter with passenger and cargo monthly volumes decline by up to 10% year on year. So who is innovating and who is resting on its laurels? Manchester is not alone . Those too reliant upon full service operators and traditional markets are witnessing similar volume deterioration.
Those who want to surive should have been innovating for some while now. Those innovating stand a better chance of survival . Who are practicing the ''same old, same old'' and seeing their volumes decline and market share deteriorating?
What do you think ?
No comments:
Post a Comment