Virgin Atlantic - what’s my issue

As the title explains, in this blog post, I’m going to explain what my issue is with Virgin Atlantic.

Now, those of you that follow me on Twitter will know I’ve been somewhat vocal of Virgin Atlantic’s strategy when it comes to Manchester. Some of you may be exasperated with my constant moans, but it does come from a place of concern, as opposed to ‘all out hating’ a brand.

what do we know so far?

The last 2 years have been trying for Virgin. They have spent that time fighting to survive a pandemic and that did come with costs. And for Manchester, they were the ones to bear a seemingly disproportionate amount of that cost.

Routes to Las Vegas, Islamabad and Los Angeles were lost, Barbados went winter seasonal, while routes to Mumbai, Montego Bay and Delhi failed to start. One could also add Boston failed to start if you consider the Virgin/Delta partnership overall. Lastly, the promised clubhouse now looks to be dead in the water (and more on why that’s an issue later)

Notwithstanding the various reasons why those routes were targeted, on the face of it that’s not the best track record for just 2 years of decision making. While I appreciate there are market dynamics to consider for those cuts, I do also believe some of the issues at Virgin are self inflicted, and may find some of those issues deliberate too.

So, what’s my issue?

Despite all of the above, Virgin remains adamant that Manchester plays an important part in its future, and that it’s capacity and staffing issues causing the reductions. Yet in the face of continued Heathrow expansion, it’s easy for any outsider to see those words of commitment as ‘hollow’ or full of broken promises.

However this isn’t just a moan that Manchester should have a right to every route to every corner of the world, it’s about trying to understand what’s been lost and what could be gained with these routes.

So, while Virgin state it’s capacity and staffing issues have caused the downturn in Manchester flights, it’s clear that theres the ever present issue of yield. Of course Heathrow will always command a higher yield, and it would be foolish to think otherwise. But some of the yield damage can be blamed on Virgin themselves.

Let’s look at it this way. You want to get from the U.K. to New York and back, in upper class. MAN is say, £3000 and LHR is also £3000. Exactly the same fare. But, at Heathrow, you get access to the clubhouse, arrivals services and newer, better aircraft. Which fare are you choosing? Of course it’s the one where you get more for your money. Yet Virgin seem almost surprised that people will take that option, and then in turn blame the Manchester market for the lack of those using the higher fare cabins. And this is where the lack of clubhouse becomes an issue, as I eluded to earlier.

And of course, Virgin may be doing this deliberately. Heathrow is the ‘mothership’. It has to be protected at all costs. And to a degree that’s fine. It’s your business, you run it how you see fit. But, one could argue demand is being ‘funnelled’ to Heathrow. I mean, the more higher yield passengers that use Manchester, undermines the Heathrow operation to an extent. And again, that’s fine, you run your business how you want. But as said, to then blame the Manchester market demographics for the lower yield, despite that ‘funnelling’ seems hardly fair.

Now, the other issue I have with Virgin is the almost air of arrogance they have with their brand. In a recent interview, one sales manager insinuated that people would travel by road/train to use Virgin at Heathrow. Now, while no doubt some do just that, he seemed to forget the competition. To just assume passengers will either wait for routes to be added/reinstated or travel to London just to travel the Virgin brand, seems rather arrogant and short sighted. Aer Lingus seems to be reaping rewards as people message me regularly to tell me they have switched to Aer Lingus/Avios due to the Virgin dartboard of ‘will the route remain or not’. People aren’t waiting or travelling, they are switching. 

Ok, what’s the concern?

The more Virgin sits on the fence with its Manchester operation, I fear the harder it will be to ‘build back better’. By the time they get their act together, it may be too late and they may find a large swathe of their customer base has been lost. 

Also without important features like the clubhouse, while they insist on charging the same price at Manchester as they do at Heathrow while omitting one of the brands biggest appeals, there will always be an issue attracting the higher yielding passengers. If the demand isn’t there, then fine, but artificially suppressing the demand creates another issue all together. Trying to fight a problem is one thing, creating the problem yourself seems rather counter productive. 

In summary.

Despite the moans, I do actually like the Virgin brand. They are a brand that could have a huge market share and have a lot of appeal to fly with. But anyone from the Manchester catchment who says they haven’t even slightly frustrated by recent decisions clearly have a much higher tolerance level than me (and many others going by messages I receive). I desperately want to be positive about Virgin again. I desperately want them to do well at Manchester, but lately, they aren’t making it easy to be positive. And going off rumours I’m hearing, there won’t be any positivity for a while yet. 

Come on Virgin, show us why your a brand with a difference once again. Be the trailblazers you often claim to be, rather than just another airline that will go down in history as another one who saw the bright lights of Heathrow and forgot the U.K. regions exist.