Aviation Discussion

[YorkshireBear]

Apologies for asking obvious questions. Flying lots and sorting out my own flights is quite a new thing to me. And i've started to find it all quite interesting.

Looking at prices for Manchester to Paris for November 2018 (i am aware EasyJet have yet to release their flights and they may be cheapest so will be holding off). There are lots of flights marked as Flybe or AirFrance but operated by the other. What is the crack here is it just codesharing?

Also is it worth paying extra for AirFrance over Flybe, i've never heard many glowing reports of FlyBe?

 

[gsnedders]

Looking at prices for Manchester to Paris for November 2018 (i am aware EasyJet have yet to release their flights and they may be cheapest so will be holding off). There are lots of flights marked as Flybe or AirFrance but operated by the other. What is the crack here is it just codesharing?

That's just codesharing.

Also is it worth paying extra for AirFrance over Flybe, i've never heard many glowing reports of FlyBe?

For such a short flight, I'd be inclined to go for the cheapest at the time of day I'd rather travel, rather than caring; I don't rate AF short-haul as that great either.

 

[atillathehunn]

As gsnedders says, they codeshare.

Personally I would go for the best timed flight and the best price. If all other things are equal, I choose the Embraer flight. 2+2 seating. Neither airline are going to do anything spectacular on this 1 hour flight. Flybe's reputation for being Flymaybe has been disproven on my last 10 flights with them, surprisingly.

I would wait for easyJet to release their flights and check out their pricing.

 

[AlterEgo]

WestJet are to operate the new Boeing 737 max aircraft later this year between Gatwick & Halifax (Nova Scotia, Canada).

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/276892/westjet-expands-737-max-8-network-in-s18/

In other news, Primera Air have cancelled planned launch of flights between Birmingham and Boston according to the link below. No new start date available at the current time.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/3...cels-birmingham-boston-late-june-2018-launch/

Cheers

Ben

Heh. I posted about my cynicism a while ago:

Aviation Discussion

 

[atillathehunn]

As did I.

Ben: am I imagining it or did WestJet operate a Gatwick - St John's flight? Is the Halifax flight in addition to or in place of that? A couple of friends used this service to visit St John's as there is a thriving university there. Some passengers were connecting to other cities in Canada.

 

[Dentonian]

I don't think that my reply warranted to the reply "I won't waste my breathe". I think that's quite unfair.

I do not know what the post-Brexit relationship will be like. As a Brit living in the EU (though privately insured as a requirement of the country I live in) I hope for a favourable outcome. I never implied in anyway that you don't confirm to a Darwinean norm, and not sure I ever would. However, my point was that the older population which you cited are statistically more likely to have a PEMC, and yet travel the world with big companies such as SAGA.

But, if you want a reply which will not waste your breathe. I think we need to examine the self selection problem we have when looking at the propensity of the older population to travel. I don't think there is an exogenous factor which means they are more likely to travel as age increases. I think they are more likely to travel because they have more money and more free time. I believe that the extra money for an insurance package that covers for the loss of EU health rights (we don't know this will happen. Cf: Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Iceland). Let's also imagine that as they are a bit older their risk aversion is a little lower, which means they wouldn't gamble their last £1 on a holiday and therefore the marginal propensity to go on holiday is not seeing a significant decrease with a small increase in holiday price.

I would also suggest that the destinations they frequent are limited, and won't damage the British aviation industry to a huge degree. Business and inelastic travel patterns pay for the travel industry with higher prices.

Apologies, "atilla". Despite your handle being more in keeping with the attitude displayed it was NOT your reply I had a problem with. A bit jargonistic - I'm guessing you have a degree in Economics (lol) - but you did at least partly answer my question, and indeed keeping it on topic by recognising I was partly considering the entire market segment involved, not just me. My problem was with Shaw S Hunter's reply, particularly the totally unnecessarily antagonistic "I don't see what you expect anyone to do about it".
Still, that's why the so called free market fails. The private sector demands that the "customer" falls into their ideal of a "core demographic", and those that don't should get out of the market place.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

My problem was with Shaw S Hunter's reply, particularly the totally unnecessarily antagonistic "I don't see what you expect anyone to do about it".

If you view that as antagonistic then that's your prerogative. Alternatively you could take it as an invitation to offer a viable alternative rather than simply complaining. This is after all a discussion forum so give us something to discuss/debate/dissect.

Still, that's why the so called free market fails. The private sector demands that the "customer" falls into their ideal of a "core demographic", and those that don't should get out of the market place.

So you would rather government intervenes to rig the market in the name of inclusion? That's not how democratic market economies work, have a look at Zimbabwe. And since this is an aviation thread perhaps you would like to tell us which democratic countries still have a government owned passenger carrying airline? Or how much market regulation exists? The whole point of a market is that demand is met by suppliers in a profitable manner. Where a social need is identified it may well be politically acceptable to provide some public support but I don't think foreign leisure travel falls into that category.

 

[Clip]

As did I.

Ben: am I imagining it or did WestJet operate a Gatwick - St John's flight? Is the Halifax flight in addition to or in place of that? A couple of friends used this service to visit St John's as there is a thriving university there. Some passengers were connecting to other cities in Canada.

it is replacing the st johns flight

Halifax – London Gatwick eff 29APR18 1 daily (New WestJet service, replacing St. John's NFLD – London Gatwick)

 

[Crawley Ben]

it is replacing the st johns flight

Indeed so, believe Air Canada is now the only carrier to operate between London (Heathrow) and St. John's (using an Airbus A319?)

Cheers

Ben

 

[Dentonian]

If you view that as antagonistic then that's your prerogative. Alternatively you could take it as an invitation to offer a viable alternative rather than simply complaining. This is after all a discussion forum so give us something to discuss/debate/dissect.



So you would rather government intervenes to rig the market in the name of inclusion? That's not how democratic market economies work, have a look at Zimbabwe. And since this is an aviation thread perhaps you would like to tell us which democratic countries still have a government owned passenger carrying airline? Or how much market regulation exists? The whole point of a market is that demand is met by suppliers in a profitable manner. Where a social need is identified it may well be politically acceptable to provide some public support but I don't think foreign leisure travel falls into that category.

You seem to have completely misunderstood my original question, which was what are the likely effects of a big increase in costs of European travel for about 10% of the population? I didn't say, what are the Airline and travel industries in general going to do about it? I'm just a customer, I don't have the expertise to come up with a "viable" alternative - other than lobbying for replacement bilateral Reciprocal arrangements, I suppose. Bear in mind, no one knows the significance of 30th March 2019, or the 18 month/2 year transition period. Using, EHIC as one of no doubt hundreds of examples affecting the general populous of Britain and the EU, we have no idea if EHIC will be scrapped on 30/3/19, or whether it will continue to when the clocks go forward in 2021, or sometime in between, that's before we get into the argument of individual countries negotiating a replacement and others not.

I'm not talking about "rigging" the market, nor Government intervention in non essential industries. I was merely making an observation that many industries (not just the Airline industry) seem to limit their appeal to specific markets. And note, I said industries, not individual companies. For instance, an even bigger demographic than "PEMC's" is, apparently, single travellers. Whether that be single holidaymakers (with or without non-travelling partners) or business people travelling alone, it is supposedly a massive and everr growing market. Yet, of all the millions of hotel beds in the world, how many are designed to make it cost effective for single travellers to pay only a little more than multi-travellers? I've never heard of any.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

You seem to have completely misunderstood my original question, which was what are the likely effects of a big increase in costs of European travel for about 10% of the population?

The answer to that question should be self-evident! A more pertinent question is what effect a smaller increase in costs for the other 90% will have. In aggregate that will likely be more damaging to the travel sector than the effect on the 10% so any mitigation measures will surely be targeted at the 90%. Airlines have already complained bitterly at the lack of clarity going forward and of course easyJet have set up their Austrian operation to safeguard (they hope) their future intra-EU rights.

Yet, of all the millions of hotel beds in the world, how many are designed to make it cost effective for single travellers to pay only a little more than multi-travellers? I've never heard of any.

Hotels use room rates rather than per-person rates because their costs are hardly affected by the number of people using an individual room. The administration required for such differentiation is not cost effective.

 

[theageofthetra]

The answer to that question should be self-evident! A more pertinent question is what effect a smaller increase in costs for the other 90% will have. In aggregate that will likely be more damaging to the travel sector than the effect on the 10% so any mitigation measures will surely be targeted at the 90%. Airlines have already complained bitterly at the lack of clarity going forward and of course easyJet have set up their Austrian operation to safeguard (they hope) their future intra-EU rights.



Hotels use room rates rather than per-person rates because their costs are hardly affected by the number of people using an individual room. The administration required for such differentiation is not cost effective.

Most hotel rooms in Japan are set up for the single (mostly male) commercial traveller making it a very good value destination for the solo traveller. What is called a 'double' is only suitable for an adult & child (common in Japan)- you have to pay more for a twin or a full sized 'western' double - which smaller properties often don't have.

 

[Tetchytyke]

You seem to have completely misunderstood my original question, which was what are the likely effects of a big increase in costs of European travel for about 10% of the population?

I doubt it will make any difference whatsoever, given the popularity of travel to the United States despite the astronomical cost of travel insurance covering the US.

et, of all the millions of hotel beds in the world, how many are designed to make it cost effective for single travellers to pay only a little more than multi-travellers? I've never heard of any.

The cost of managing a hotel room, at least on room only, is the same regardless of how many people are in it. A double bed needs to be changed and a bathroom needs to be cleaned exactly the same whether you're in it by yourself or whether you've had half the city in it with you.

 

[Dentonian]

The answer to that question should be self-evident! A more pertinent question is what effect a smaller increase in costs for the other 90% will have. In aggregate that will likely be more damaging to the travel sector than the effect on the 10% so any mitigation measures will surely be targeted at the 90%. Airlines have already complained bitterly at the lack of clarity going forward and of course easyJet have set up their Austrian operation to safeguard (they hope) their future intra-EU rights.

> Not necessarily more pertinent but it only goes to emphasise my point in raising the issue in the first place.


Hotels use room rates rather than per-person rates because their costs are hardly affected by the number of people using an individual room. The administration required for such differentiation is not cost effective.

Given the Hotel trade is notorious for paying low wages, surely admin doesn't account for such a high percentage of the industry's costs. Single occupants use less amenities, taking twice (or more) as long to use up towels, bathroom condiments, complimentary refreshments etc. When staying for two or three nights (my average) I often say to cleaners they don't need to clean my room. And all that is apart from the fact that the entire Industry hasn't produced ONE rich innovator saying; "There are 100 hotels in this area, and continuing demand....why don't we build a hotel for single people with smaller rooms and profit by undercutting the other 100 hotels and offering single travellers rooms at say, 25% off?"

 

[Dentonian]

I doubt it will make any difference whatsoever, given the popularity of travel to the United States despite the astronomical cost of travel insurance covering the US.



The cost of managing a hotel room, at least on room only, is the same regardless of how many people are in it. A double bed needs to be changed and a bathroom needs to be cleaned exactly the same whether you're in it by yourself or whether you've had half the city in it with you.

Same principle would apply to the US, but the market is unaffected by Brexit. As for the US (and overseas in general), if you are fit and healthy, Insurance is still barely about 3-5% of the total cost of the holiday. With PEMCs, there is not only the massive cost itself to take into account, but also the increased chance of being ill or fatigued after such a long flight/holiday. Maybe in the short-term, it will mean more Airlines either going under of refocussing from short-haul to medium/long haul - with a more moderate change to the Aircraft industry given the vast majority of single-aisle aircraft are being built for China and other Asian countries, anyway. Longer-term, there will be a slight reversal back to the pre-1960s, where foreign travel becomes the preserve of the relatively well off.

As regards hotels; single travellers don't need double beds and as I said above, given the flexibility, often don't use bathroom and other complimentary amenities as much as multi-occupants. Obviously, you can't suddenly convert existing hotels or even hotel floors, but does it really need that much thinking outside the box to:
a. Build smaller annexes (a common feature at many hotels I've used) with smaller rooms.
b. Adopt the Lo-Co airline model of charging a lower base rate (say £70pn instead of £100pn) for rooms that might be 20% smaller, and then add moderate charges for towels, tea/coffee etc. I'm sure the charge for towels will be a positive selling point for the green lobby, given that most hotels now ask you not to throw towels out for cleaning unnecesarilly.

 

[Tetchytyke]

single travellers don't need double beds

Pfft, I do!

But the cost of washing a single sheet is pretty much the same as a double sheet, it takes just as long to change a single bed as a double one, it takes just as long to hygienically clean a toilet and a shower/bath.

I can see the appeal in making smaller rooms for single travellers, in order to squeeze more units into a building, although I'm not sure how well this would sit with the more premium traveller. If hotels started putting me in a tiny single bedroom when I'm on business, I'd stop using them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some hotel concepts (the likes of Hub by Premier Inn) make a fairly big thing about making rooms small but very well-designed - but the one thing they won't compromise on is the size of the bed.

I imagine this is because the vast majority of leisure travel demand is for couples i.e. double rooms, and so if they have too many single rooms they will lose a load of their weekend income.

The other aspect of it (in relation to per-room pricing specifically) is that nobody gets their back up at "this room costs £X, you can put up to Y people in it", because the idea of you hiring that specific bit of the hotel costing £X regardless of what you do with it makes a lot of sense, but they very much do if you do per-person pricing with a hefty single supplement, even if the two are near enough the same thing.

I'm actually genuinely surprised CS haven't gone that way, though I suppose it might be hard to do it within the confines of existing railway ticketing systems.

 

[gsnedders]

Some hotel concepts (the likes of Hub by Premier Inn) make a fairly big thing about making rooms small but very well-designed - but the one thing they won't compromise on is the size of the bed.

I imagine this is because the vast majority of leisure travel demand is for couples i.e. double rooms, and so if they have too many single rooms they will lose a load of their weekend income.

I can think of several chains abroad which have varying sized rooms with varying sized beds (all the way down to singles); https://smarthotel.no/en/ in Norway, https://www.cabinn.com/en/ in Denmark to name two. Smarthotel's Oslo hotel (at least; I've never been to any of the others) doesn't have any roomkeeping service at the weekend, which implies most of the custom is during the week. There's definitely plenty of business custom at the Smarthotel, probably because it's frequently half the price of anywhere else in central Oslo.

 

[Dentonian]

Pfft, I do!

But the cost of washing a single sheet is pretty much the same as a double sheet, it takes just as long to change a single bed as a double one, it takes just as long to hygienically clean a toilet and a shower/bath.

I can see the appeal in making smaller rooms for single travellers, in order to squeeze more units into a building, although I'm not sure how well this would sit with the more premium traveller. If hotels started putting me in a tiny single bedroom when I'm on business, I'd stop using them.

I'm talking about a tiny minority of establishments making their "product" more attractive to a much bigger (in numbers, not individual size) minority of the "market place". And with all due respect, if you are on business, your employer (and ultimately your customer!) will be paying, and the growth in single travellers is presumably much more in the leisure market than in the business market.

And again, toilets, showers, tea/coffee etc are all used less by single occupants.

 

[Dentonian]

I imagine this is because the vast majority of leisure travel demand is for couples i.e. double rooms, and so if they have too many single rooms they will lose a load of their weekend income.

If the vast majority of leisure travel demand at Premier Inns is for couples, its probably because they tend to be located on/near motorways not town centres - although major city centres such as Manchester do have them. Single people are more likely to be travelling by public transport and so value more centrally located chains. I've never stayed in a Premier Inn, but my brother and other people I know have and the ones they've quoted have been near Motorway/By-pass junctions or on Industrial Estates


Again, it depends what you mean by "vast majority". A theme that is running through the transport/leisure industry and modern society in general is that 51.8% constitutes a vast majority, and the other 48.2% are weirdos who shouldn't be catered for. And like I said, its a growing market.

 

[Speedbird96]

Indeed so, believe Air Canada is now the only carrier to operate between London (Heathrow) and St. John's (using an Airbus A319?)

Cheers

Ben

Correct, however now operated by Boeing 767-300ERs during this winter with the flight originating from Halifax on Tuesday and Saturday only.

Returns back to daily operation from 1st May 2018 using Boeing 737 MAX 8s.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Given the Hotel trade is notorious for paying low wages, surely admin doesn't account for such a high percentage of the industry's costs. Single occupants use less amenities, taking twice (or more) as long to use up towels, bathroom condiments, complimentary refreshments etc. When staying for two or three nights (my average) I often say to cleaners they don't need to clean my room.

The administration I was referring to is that which would be required to manage differential room rates according to occupancy. For example, most of the big US chains, as well as the theme hotels in Vegas, furnish their rooms with two double beds. Clearly they do so because at times there is demand for those beds. But what happens when such a room is occupied by just two people: do you price based on use of just one bed or both? Would it be ethical to attempt to police that usage? As others have said the actual operational costs of that room don't vary very much by occupancy. All in all it's much more straightforward to price on the worst case scenario (maximum occupancy) and use that as the room rate. Yield management is done according to expected demand which depends purely on the calendar and requires no policing.

And all that is apart from the fact that the entire Industry hasn't produced ONE rich innovator saying; "There are 100 hotels in this area, and continuing demand....why don't we build a hotel for single people with smaller rooms and profit by undercutting the other 100 hotels and offering single travellers rooms at say, 25% off?"

The most developed hotel market in the world is in the US which also happens to have arguably the most developed free market economy. If there was genuinely a profitable market for hotels for single travellers on the basis you describe I think it is fair to assume that such hotels would already exist in the US. It appears they don't...

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the vast majority of leisure travel demand at Premier Inns is for couples, its probably because they tend to be located on/near motorways not town centres - although major city centres such as Manchester do have them. Single people are more likely to be travelling by public transport and so value more centrally located chains. I've never stayed in a Premier Inn, but my brother and other people I know have and the ones they've quoted have been near Motorway/By-pass junctions or on Industrial Estates

Again, it depends what you mean by "vast majority". A theme that is running through the transport/leisure industry and modern society in general is that 51.8% constitutes a vast majority, and the other 48.2% are weirdos who shouldn't be catered for. And like I said, its a growing market.

I often stay in Premier Inns on my own and I don't feel treated as a weirdo. I get a large room with a large bed to myself, and enjoy it. The other reason to charge a different price to single people, breakfast, is not included anyway so that doesn't apply.

 

[AlterEgo]

And again, toilets, showers, tea/coffee etc are all used less by single occupants.

Toilet still needs cleaning whether one person has used it or 20. Same with the shower.

Someone still needs to replenish the tea and coffee if one person has used it or you’ve cleaned the whole thing out. In fact the cleaning staff still need to check if anything has been used.

 

[Crawley Ben]

The new Airbus A321LR aircraft has completed its maiden test flight over in Germany (Hamburg).

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...nge-jet-completes-maiden-flight-idUSKBN1FK1H3

The A321LR, a long-range version of Airbus’s (AIR.PA) largest and newest single-aisle jet, made its maiden flight on Wednesday as the European planemaker looks to retain part of the market where it has been outselling rival Boeing (BA.N).

The reconfigured version of the 185-230-seat A321neo is capable of carrying up to 240 people. It took off from Airbus’ Hamburg factory in northern Germany shortly after 11 a.m. (1000 GMT) and landed just before 2 p.m. (1300 GMT), witnesses said.

Airbus says the jet is the world’s longest-range single-aisle aircraft, capable of flying up to 4,000 nautical miles when configured with 206 seats including lie-flat beds.

That makes it a contender to replace long-serving Boeing 757s that are nearing retirement. But Boeing is studying proposals to leapfrog the plane with a compact new twin-aisle jet, designed to serve a broader market from 200 to 270 seats...

Cheers

Ben

 

[OwlMan]

http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/News/1.3135767

A new airline Air Belgium is to launch services between Belgium and Hong Kong. The airline has existed on paper for the past two years and is now ready to start up for real. The new airline should create 600 jobs and will operate a total of 4 planes that it hopes will transport a total of 500,000 passengers a year.


However, it will need an aviation licence before it can do so.

With a launch capital of 20 million euro Air Belgium has a 10-year partnership contract with Charleroi (also known as “Brussels South”) Airport in Hainaut.

The launch of the airline should create 600 jobs, 360 at the airline its self and 240 elsewhere at the airport. A new terminal will be built and the runway extended by 700 metres to 3,200 metres.

Initially Air Belgium will fly to Hong Kong. However, before it can start operating, it will require an Air Operator Certificate, something that it hopes to obtain by March. Furthermore, as yet no planes have been registered to Air Belgium.

But why China? This is because there is little if any room for a new player on the market for European short-haul flights, the same is true on trans-Atlantic routes and competition on routes to and from the Middle East is getting stiffer all the time.

The Far East is just about the only region where there is still growth potential. The growing middle class in China has fuelled a growth in air travel within, to and from the World’s most populous country.

The man behind Air Belgium is the Greek Nikci Terzakis. Until 2014 he was the CEO of the courier TNT. He has financial backing from investors from Belgium and from Hong Kong.

It is expected that the airline’s maiden flight will be at the end of March. Initially it will offer 3 flights a week to and from Hong Kong. By June it is hoped that the airline will be able to offer 6 Asian destinations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I give it a year or two at most. Do any of these ever last?

 

[Crawley Ben]

I give it a year or two at most. Do any of these ever last?

Using a 4x A340 aircraft for their ops (fuel thirsty things those are too). Good luck with that!

Cheers

Ben

 

[atillathehunn]

New airline Air Belgium to be launched.
A new airline Air Belgium is to launch services between Belgium and Hong Kong. The airline has existed on paper for the past two years and is now ready to start up for real. The new airline should create 600 jobs and will operate a total of 4 planes that it hopes will transport a total of 500,000 passengers a year.
However, it will need an aviation licence before it can do so.
With a launch capital of 20 million euro Air Belgium has a 10-year partnership contract with Charleroi (also known as “Brussels South”) Airport in Hainaut.
The launch of the airline should create 600 jobs, 360 at the airline its self and 240 elsewhere at the airport. A new terminal will be built and the runway extended by 700 metres to 3,200 metres............................

I'll take "things that will never happen" for 20 please, Bob.

Even taking into account the porous border between NL, BE, LUX, FR for the Belgian airports (I live in NL and use Brussels more frequently than Dutch airports) this won't work. From BRU I have Emirates, Etihad, Hainan, Cathay (soon), Qatar, Turkish and the usual European suspects this won't last 10 minutes. Their fares can be quite competitive.

I would imagine that if there is a Chinese diaspora in Belgium it's most likely to be in Brussels (very, very willing to be proven wrong) and Charleroi is a fag to get to.

 

[atillathehunn]

You seem to have completely misunderstood my original question, which was what are the likely effects of a big increase in costs of European travel for about 10% of the population? I didn't say, what are the Airline and travel industries in general going to do about it? I'm just a customer, I don't have the expertise to come up with a "viable" alternative - other than lobbying for replacement bilateral Reciprocal arrangements, I suppose. Bear in mind, no one knows the significance of 30th March 2019, or the 18 month/2 year transition period. Using, EHIC as one of no doubt hundreds of examples affecting the general populous of Britain and the EU, we have no idea if EHIC will be scrapped on 30/3/19, or whether it will continue to when the clocks go forward in 2021, or sometime in between, that's before we get into the argument of individual countries negotiating a replacement and others not.

I'm not talking about "rigging" the market, nor Government intervention in non essential industries. I was merely making an observation that many industries (not just the Airline industry) seem to limit their appeal to specific markets. And note, I said industries, not individual companies. For instance, an even bigger demographic than "PEMC's" is, apparently, single travellers. Whether that be single holidaymakers (with or without non-travelling partners) or business people travelling alone, it is supposedly a massive and everr growing market. Yet, of all the millions of hotel beds in the world, how many are designed to make it cost effective for single travellers to pay only a little more than multi-travellers? I've never heard of any.

Actually of the various degrees I have, none are in economics; but I'll take the compliment nevertheless.

If we do lose our European insurance at a national level I would suggest that someone (government entity or otherwise) will come along with a solution. Health tourism could be both a profitable source of income and also a source of fraud and loss. There is also the challenge of the large number of non-UK citizens in the country with insurance needs. Risk pooling works better with large numbers, so I'm sure someone will fill the void, with provision for those with PEMCs.

I would suggest that companies are not outwardly discriminating, simply they will adopt first degree price discrimination to maximise revenue; at the moment they feel they can charge these prices and achieve X yield. If, as you hypothesise, the market is shifting, I would expect them to do likewise. Evidence, I would suggest, of this could be the number of tour companies which cater to single travellers. At the moment these are often aimed at the young, though this is changing. Apparently my targeted ads thing I am getting older and single and offer me more 'mature' singles holidays. I try not to take it personally (in my late twenties I really try not to feel old that often).

In other news, we decided to scrap the idea of going for a Northern Lights tour before my next overseas posting and have instead booked 4 nights in Jordan, a country we've both lived in and like very much. AirFrance shall be our steed with a connection via the Thalys from Brussels Midi