EasyJet Advert targets Ryanair

EasyJet and Ryanair once again face each other in an advertising clash. This is not the first time that one of the airline's advert features the other company. This is what EasyJet did in its last campaign as it was promoting the fact that they fly to major airports whereas the others fly to smaller out of town airports!

The outdoor advert featured the tagline 'Who loves flying you to the place you actually booked?', obviously implying that Ryanair flies to airports some distance from the supposed destination city (sometime the airport can be as far outside the city as two hours bus ride). Under the Ryanair section the advert reported that 'Barcelona = Girona, Paris = Beauvais, Milan = Bergamo, Venice = Treviso'. In comparison to this, under EasyJet section, the same advert reported that they fly to 'Barcelona = Barcelona, Paris = Paris, Milan = Milan, Venice = Venice'.

Ryanair filed a complaint with the Advertising Standards Authority claiming that Beauvais, Bergamo and Treviso had been officially designated as airports for their corresponding cities by the International Air Transport Association (IATA). The budget carrier said also that the way they advertise the destination is faithful to the destination...in fact they report Girona as 'Girona (Barcelona)', rather than 'Barcelona (Girona)'.

The ASA took note of the complaint and agreed with Ryanairn on the basis that it was true that IATA had designated the airports for Paris, Milan and Venice respectively, and advised easyJet to seek copy advice from CAP for future campaigns.

EasyJet UK general manager Paul Simmons said he was "disappointed" by the ruling. He said: "It is a well-know fact that easyJet flies to major airports whereas Ryanair serves out-of-town airfields which can be a two hour bus ride away from your destination."

Aer Lingus in a stuggle to save itself against another takeover attempt

Aer Lingus has started sounding the takeover alarm. The new head of the airline has warned the company risks being taken over by its larger rival Ryanair unless all employees agree to his restructuring plans for sweeping cost cuts.

The issue is that if Aer Lingus isn't capable to control it's own costs and plan ahead , then the likelihood of being taken over and hence remain non independent is more likely to occur. Aer Lingus biggest rival is Ryanair, which has already placed two bids for Aer Lingus over the past years. Ryanair first bid €2.80 a share for Aer Lingus in October 2006, valuing the company at €1.48bn. That takeover was blocked by the European Commission on competition grounds. A second bid worth half that of the first in December last year also failed after the Irish government, which has a 25 per cent stake in Aer Lingus, said it undervalued the airline.

According to Irish takeover laws, Ryanair has the opportunity of making another takeover bid in late January...it is believed that the failure to reach an agreement with unions will increase the likelihood of the bid. Ryanair who already control just over 29 per cent of Aer Lingus is seeking to increase it shareholding to take full control.

The new chief executive officer of Aer Lingus who joined just a few months ago has devised plans and started talks to cut job and pays in order to save about €97m, however the Airline is still struggling in the negotiations with the pilots.

Aer Lingus this year reported a pre-tax loss of €119.7m and analysts say a failure to cut costs could jeopardise its independence.

Ryanair comes up with another low cost idea...what do you think?

Ryanair strikes again...It was not enough to introduce a fee for using toilets, but they were able to come up with something more unexpected. Budget airline Ryanair is now considering making some of its passengers stand during flights in a bid to squeeze as many as 30% more people on board. Customers could elect to pay less (50% of the price) to stand and sit on a small stool with seat belts fastened around them.

The company is currently seeking users opinion on http://www.ryanair.com/site/EN/news.php?yr=09&month=jul&story=gen-en-090709 on the idea to see whether there's a market potential that could be exploited. Michael O'Leary, chief executive of Ryanair, has reportedly held talks with US plane manufacturer Boeing about designing an aircraft with standing room (picture below).

Proposed Vertical seating (source: www.ryanair.com)

A spokesman from Ryanair was reported to have said to the MailOnline that the seating would completely adhere to safety procedures. This strategy could lead Ryanair to increase seating capacity by 20% to 30% which could result in a good increase in revenues.

Ryanair does not seem to be the only airline considering this strategy. Chinese airline Spring has also put forward similar plans, estimating it could fit in up to 50% more passengers.

The latest idea of Ryainair is in line with the recent ideas, as it will introduce a charge for the use of toilets onboard as well as planning to make passengers carry their own luggage to the aircraft which would slash about 90% of its baggage handlers. Could there be anything else that wasn't thought of that Ryanair might come up with to reduce costs?

Ryanair to take low cost to a new Level

I was searching for flight ticket yesterday and accidentally I found an article on Ryanair...honestly I could not believe what I was reading and in fact diverted my research from one on flights to one specifically on Ryanair. Read through the following article and let me know what you think....

In a drive to cut down costs, Ryanair is hoping to axe 90% of its baggage handlers and instead allow passengers to carry their own luggage to the plane.

The move has been met with dismay by the airport industry amid concerns that it will make the already tedious security check in process even longer. There is also concern that travellers with bulky luggage to carry are unlikely to splash so much cash in Duty Free. This will enable Ryanair to cut down about £44 million in luggage handling fees.

Ryanair's chief executive Michael O'Leary, commented: ‘What it means is no more waiting at the carousel, no more losing your bags, no more wasting your life in over-priced airport terminals.'

Budget airline Ryanair will be taking no-frills to new levels as it also has plans to to introduce a charge of £1 for the use of toilets onboard. As reported by the Telegraph, Michael O'Leary justified this charge by hinting that lead to fewer people needed to use the toilets and so Ryanair could provide fewer cubicles and put in more seats, therefore cutting prices for all.

Courtesy of: http://aviationgazette.blogspot.com/

Additionally during an interview on Sky television while discussing the airline's cost-cutting measures, Mr Randall (the interviewer) asked Michael O'Leary if he would charge for sick bags. Mr O'Leary replied: "Yes."Although it is unclear if the airline boss was teasing his host, this would once more lead to a new low cost level....what could be next?

Examples of how Failing to use Social Networking may lead to PR Blunders

I was reading a number of articles and came across this really interesting article written by Mr. Graham Charlton on the 8th of June 2009 and that shows how companies can misuse Social Networking.

A number of brands have fallen foul of social media over the last few years, either due to lack of understanding of how information spreads online, or by attempting to manipulate the system and getting caught out.

The listed ten examples show the reaction of companies who have suffered PR nightmares online, in most cases the bad publicity has come via social media sites...

Ryanair

After a blogger criticised a flaw in the airline's online booking process, staff from the airline left several childish and insulting comments in response to the post. To make matters worse, after the episode was publicised around the web, the company issued a statement saying that 'it is Ryanair policy not to waste time and energy in corresponding with idiot bloggers and Ryanair can confirm that it won’t be happening again.'

Domino's

The video showing Domino's employees doing all sort of disgusting stuff to the food they were preparing went viral on YouTube (mentioned in an earlier post on this blog), and was a PR nightmare for the company. The company did what it could by posting a video response on YouTube, though some found the delivery by President Patrick Doyle less than perfect (the video did not have the same viral effect as the initial one posted on YouTube).

Belkin

A Belkin employee was caught red handed offering to pay other Amazon Mechanical Turk users to write positive reviews of one of its products on the site. These reviews were especially unconvincing given the fact that the router in question had several bad reviews already, making the positives stick out like a sore thumb. The paid reviews have since been removed.

Whole Foods

Whole Foods CEO John Mackey left a bunch of anonymous postings about rival company Wild Oats before being rumbled, causing a great deal of embarrassment for him and his company. The same CEO apologised to shareholders afterwards, but the damage was done.

Wal-Mart

The company was outed in 2006 after a blog chronicling a duo's travels across America while camping in Wal-Mart car parks turned out to have been the work of PR firm Edelman.

Amazon

After removing books with adult content, including Brokeback Mountain and Lady Chatterly's Lover, from its bestseller lists, Amazon was subjected to a torrent of bad publicity on Twitter and elsewhere. The company blamed a glitch but didn't directly respond on Twitter.

Kodak

Kodak recently decided to charge an annual fee for storing photos in its online Gallery, and though it claimed to have emailed everyone concerned, some were clearly surprised when their photos started to vanish. Obviously the company received lots of bad publicity for the company on Twitter.

Target

US retailer Target got itself some bad publicity in the New York Times last year after dismissing a complaint from a blogger about one of its ads with the phrase: 'we are unable to respond to your inquiry because Target does not participate with nontraditional media outlets'.

Just months before, the company was outed for encouraging Facebook users, who were receiving various freebies, to praise the company on the site. Was this a nontraditional media outlet?

Neal's Yard


The retailer of organic products pulled out of an online debate as part of The Guardian's 'You ask, they answer' feature. It seems the company didn't like the question concerning the withdrawal of one of its products last year; a homeopathic remedy for malaria.

As pointed out here, this refusal to engage is not the way to deal with criticism online, and represents a PR failure for the firm. In this way to leave users to draw up their own conclusions.

ExxonMobil

An example of why companies should own their social media profiles, and monitor sites like Twitter comes from ExxonMobil. Someone calling herself Janet set up an account on the site in the company's name and managed to fool plenty of people before the account was taken down.

All these examples are just a snippet of all examples that one might find about Companies failing to use social media effectively to correct or respond to blunders. In this way they let users draw up their own conclusions and possibly offer a the possibility to competitors to have their say too!