I actually think there is something wrong with the mindset of some of the senior people in charterland for not installing seatback flatscreens!

1. They are not an expense, they are an asset. This comes from a number of rationales:

a. Advertisers (even in today’s downtrodden market) will pay significant amounts for a captive audience of 150-200 people for 8 hours (4 hours there, 4 hours back).

b. Inflight sales can be increased if the pax can order products (and reserve hire cars, or whatever) in their own time, from their own seat. Buying from a trolley that whizzes down the aisle is a method which minimises revenue, not maximises it.

c. Inflight gambling or pay per view TV could easily be installed as an option, particularly if the aircraft has online connectivity, such as the Boeing Connexion system.

d. And of course don’t forget that it rarely hurts to keep people amused or occupied on flights.

e. There will be no immedicate impact on an airline’s profits due to the cost of installing the system. This is because of an accounting standard called FRS15 which allows the company to describe expenditure on fixed assets as capital expenditure and not revenue expenditure. It’s usualy called capitalising the expenditure. The equipment will need to be depreciated over its useful life, but this will typically be at least 4 or 5 years rather than 1 year.

London is very extensive and for sheer range of stations and ease of use it wins.

However it is very run down and LUL have a sado-masochistic hatred, blind hatred, of air conditioning. Conditions inside a packed tube in rush hour in the middle of summer are horrible. Hot and smelly, especially if someone is holding on to a ceiling rail and their wet armpit is in your face. Disgusting, you can’t really move away.

Sorry for maybe appearing either naive or disingenuous, but what exactly is the threat to the US from NK?

We all know the NK regime is “evil” and I will not attempt to deny that. But specificaly, what is the threat?

The 787 would presumably be competing with the A330.

By the time it is available, the 330 will be mature, well established and there will presumably be new versions (330-400, 330-500?) under development with flight deck commonality.

I think only the Boeing diehards will be interested in a 787.

I think BA acted totally unreasonably and I hope the FA’s child throws a tantrum next time they’re in Sainsbury’s!

Maybe they’ll both be put in a cell for antisocial behaviour.

Well for a start you cannot compare India/China to Europe/US because the level of penetration of air travel is totally different.

The number of Europeans or Americans who can afford to take flights and equally as relevant, who are in the routine habit of doing so, is fairly high compared to the rest of the world. Asia and Australasia being the obvious exceptions.

Secondly, locos rely upon credit card payment and internet booking for a lot of their cost savings – again, take up and willingness to use these is far greater, per head of population, in Europe/US.