Ok look, Bruggen, trust me, we have got a hope in hell of keeping this on track, and it starts now.
Sky High, yours and my threads are deleted too, they are off topic.
So, it starts here (well, above actually), any post off topic, or contravening the CoC will be deleted.
Dean
Ok look, Bruggen, trust me, we have got a hope in hell of keeping this on track, and it starts now.
Sky High, yours and my threads are deleted too, they are off topic.
So, it starts here (well, above actually), any post off topic, or contravening the CoC will be deleted.
Dean
He’s our resident Welsh F/O, nice chap, used to play footie for Cardiff City.
Hmm, well that was short & sweet
Hardly surprising, some of the African airlines planes that we park next to in Paris leaves alot to be desired, I wouldn’t fly on them, let alone let my family fly on them.
Topic chaps, or it gets locked 😉
To criticise one’s viewing habits is a cheap shot, and a quite pointless dig at someone for the hell of it. Most seem to be getting on the bandwagon about why viewers watch “such terrible” programs, which to me is a little sad and pathetic. Now as a 36 year old I could understand being criticised for watching The Teletubbies, ( I used to watch it, with my kids 😀 ) but people should be a little more tolerable considering we all must share a diverse taste in the Television we choose to watch and not be made to feel like 2nd rate citizens.
To criticise one’s viewing habits is a cheap shot, and a quite pointless dig at someone for the hell of it. Most seem to be getting on the bandwagon about why viewers watch “such terrible” programs, which to me is a little sad and pathetic. Now as a 36 year old I could understand being criticised for watching The Teletubbies, ( I used to watch it, with my kids 😀 ) but people should be a little more tolerable considering we all must share a diverse taste in the Television we choose to watch and not be made to feel like 2nd rate citizens.
I don’t really see what the issue is here, the tone of this thread is one of abomination toward the people who watch it. Who are we to criticise what people watch & don’t watch? Personally, I watch it, and I watch Strictly, Why? Because it is light entertainment and I don’t take it that seriously.
As for the result last Saturday and people getting knocks all the time, it isn’t about having a knock (r.e. Lucie Jones), it’s about Cowell going back on what he said, he said he will judge the sing-off on the vocals he hears, which he clearly didn’t because Lucie’s attempt was infact excellent.
Cowell took it to the public vote because he knew damn well the weaker act would get through, a weaker act who could potentially make him lots of money, which on the face of it is what it’s about even if people think differently. The ethos sold to the general public is that it’s a show to find talent, not make Cowell an even richer man than he already is, hence the uproar. For that, you cannot blame Mr Layman for posting this type of thread.
I don’t really see what the issue is here, the tone of this thread is one of abomination toward the people who watch it. Who are we to criticise what people watch & don’t watch? Personally, I watch it, and I watch Strictly, Why? Because it is light entertainment and I don’t take it that seriously.
As for the result last Saturday and people getting knocks all the time, it isn’t about having a knock (r.e. Lucie Jones), it’s about Cowell going back on what he said, he said he will judge the sing-off on the vocals he hears, which he clearly didn’t because Lucie’s attempt was infact excellent.
Cowell took it to the public vote because he knew damn well the weaker act would get through, a weaker act who could potentially make him lots of money, which on the face of it is what it’s about even if people think differently. The ethos sold to the general public is that it’s a show to find talent, not make Cowell an even richer man than he already is, hence the uproar. For that, you cannot blame Mr Layman for posting this type of thread.
I don’t like to contradict a moderator but Flybe were rebranded as a low cost carrier in 2002, some years after Ryanair had started LCC operations. A distinct case of let’s follow the market trend!
If you’re looking at date of original founding then yes, I’ll agree.
Dave, don’t worry about contradicting, I’m just a mere member like you.
You are right, they did rebrand and become a LCC in 2002, but they had to in order to survive and grow. What I am trying to say is that ryanair are not completely responsible for the LCC boom in Europe, because if we want to talk dates then Easyjet was formed in April 1992, ryanair were only responsible for trying to undercut the Dublin-London monopoly held by BA & Aer Lingus, it wasn’t until the late 90’s when ryanair became a true LCC 😉
Would there be a LCC industry in Europe if it wernt for Ryanair?
Flybe for example……
Flybe existed long before ryanair, so yes of course there would be a Europe wide LCC industry. Let me make one thing clear (because I know what you’re instigating), I will never, ever be thankful to ryanair for my position at Flybe, ever.
Or Paris Beauvais, £0.01 for your ticket, but £130 return fair by taxi/train to get to the real Paris
Deano…….hint of snobbery,eh,if you’ll pardon me saying so.
You’re pardoned, you can say what you like, I have a thick skin. And it’s an accusation I cannot counter argue. By my own admission, I dislike CHAVS.
I also believe the average FR captain has pay around £30,000 pa HIGHER than EZ so who’s screwing costs for flight crew?
Not sure about the average being this high but inherently they look after their captains. It’s the ones who are willing to be financially raped at the bottom end on the Brookfield contracts that are the issue. This is what they feed on, the desperation of wannabe pilots who will do anything, no matter what it costs to be able to sit in the right hand seat. It’s this blinkered “I’ll do it at any cost, even rape my grandparents life savings” type attitude that has spiralled T&Cs, and will continue to do so.
I am not a chav but if you think your own airline carries any less of them,we’re heavily into the realms of delusion!
Barry
Barry, don’t mis-quote me, I have never said anything to the contrary, but what I would say is yes, we do carry a hell of alot less of them.
Rgds
Dean
More people flying presumably means more people employed as aircrew?
So maybe the cosy old cartels did give better conditions for their pilots, but there were a lot fewer of them.
Moggy
So more with lesser terms is better? I can understand to a point issuing new contracts to new employees but to have your current T&Cs eroded because everyone wants to follow suite is not right. I have no idea what you do for a living Rob but how would you react if your employer started to erode what you have? Put you on fixed based contracts, made you pay for your own tools to do the job they employ you to do, made you pay for your own car parking, own uniform, own refreshments considering you can’t get any through security, own type rating, simulator sessions, charge £50 for them to look at your CV, charge you for an interview, sim check, the list goes on. Because they are doing it everyone wants to follow suite. This doesn’t make it right, and to top it all off you can’t even plug in your own mobile phone at work.
All in the name of low cost tickets, that is not only being subsidised by ancillary revenue, but by the employees as well. If anyone thinks this is normal then it’s a pretty sad state of affairs.