Airport Service Intensity Report 2012 · 2018-09-07 · (80), Leeds/Bradford (51), London City (41), Heathrow (327), Gatwick (223), Liverpool (57) Luton (47) Manchester (199) Newcastle

Airport Service Intensity Report 2012

© BDRC Continental 2012 Author: Colin Shaddick Contact: [email protected] T: 020 7490 9103

Contents Introduction 4

Survey details 5

20121 Passenger statistics 7

Transport to airport 9

Check-in 12

Airport Security 18

Airside facilities and shopping 22

Emotional attachment to airports 32

Passenger effort required 35

Service Intensity score 37

Business air travellers 41

Individual Airport summaries 55

About BDRC Continental 73

Terms and Conditions 74

mailto:[email protected]



3 © BDRC Continental 2012 Author: Colin Shaddick Contact: [email protected] T: 020 7490 9103

© BDRC Continental 2012

© BDRC Continental 2012

The BDRC Continental Airport Service Intensity Report is produced by BDRC Continental for purchasers on the explicit understanding that the data reported is for the use only of the purchasing organisation. No part of the report, or survey data, may be lent or sold, either in whole or in part, to non-purchasing organisations. All the data, reports, and other outputs from the survey are subject to this confidentiality condition.

Copyright of the data belongs exclusively to BDRC Continental and no publication or circulation of any data from the survey may take place without the express written permission of BDRC Continental.

The results of the study may be used by purchasers for PR purposes but all proposed releases should be sent to BDRC Continental for approval prior to their dispatch. This is to ensure no mis-representation of the data or undue use of knocking copy. Statements made from findings arising from small sample sizes should acknowledge this fact and the potential statistical unreliability.

These terms of confidentiality and copyright are designed for the protection of all purchasers to ensure the accuracy of any published information. By purchasing the The Airport Service Intensity Report, all purchasers are bound to agreement of these terms and conditions as stated. The publishers of the report use their best endeavours to ensure the accuracy of the report, but do not warrant the accuracy of the data provided nor do they accept liability for any error contained in or omission from the report or any loss direct or indirect arising there from.





Introduction

The air travel industry continues to evolve to keep pace with changing passenger requirements. People are travelling by air more frequently, many with the expectation of paying bargain prices. To satisfy this demand airports are reinventing themselves to provide environments that are efficient yet still welcoming.

However, for some the novelty of air travel has worn off. A separate report published by BDRC Continental ‘2012 Holiday Report’ found that a third (33%) of UK residents now found the UK more appealing as holiday destination with 29% of these mentioning the hassle of air travel as a reason for not going abroad.

To sustain high passenger numbers both airlines and airports need to continually find ways to improve the customer experience. This Airport Service Intensity Report looks in detail at how individual UK airports scored for their customer service provision. The report looks at the complete passenger experience whilst journeying through an airport, including the transport used by passengers to the airport, check-in facilities, security procedures and the satisfaction with different airside services.





Survey details

The 2012 Airport Service Intensity report is based on 1,300 interviews with UK residents aged 20 to 64 years who used a UK airport in the last 12 months. Oversampling occurred in some regions (Scotland, Northern Ireland, North East , Wales and the South West) to enable a sufficient numbers of interviews to be achieved for the airports serving these regions. The data was weighted at the analysis stage to the profile of UK airport users aged 20 to 64 years (source BDRC Continental 2011 Airport report). All interviewing was carried out in February 2012.

The base sizes of the individual airports reported are: Aberdeen (50), Belfast International (44), Birmingham (112), Bristol (74) Cardiff (55) East Midlands (58), Edinburgh (74), Glasgow International (80), Leeds/Bradford (51), London City (41), Heathrow (327), Gatwick (223), Liverpool (57) Luton (47) Manchester (199) Newcastle (91) Stansted (61).

It should be observed that the figures reported relate to the number of individual adults who used an airport, and do not relate to the number of trips made. Therefore if a traveller used Heathrow ten times in the last 12 months they would only count once (not ten times).

Statistical caution

For those airports with a base size between 40 and 50 statistical caution should be used when reviewing their individual data.

Note: Data relates to the number of UK individuals using the airport (not passenger trips)





Data reporting This report comprises three sections:

Section 1: All passengers (mainly leisure)

This section reports on the findings from passengers who used one or more of 16 UK airports in the last year. For all these airports more of the passengers reported on a leisure trip than a business trip and the findings in this section mainly reflects the views of leisure travellers. As nearly 60% of the passengers interviewed for London City were business travellers this airport has only been reported in the Business Section of this report. The following table shows the percentage of business passengers interviewed at each airport.

30 %

58 %

39 % 33 % 33 % 31 % 30 % 29 % 25 % 25 % 23 % 21 % 21 % 21 % 21 % 20 % 10 % 10 %

All

Section 2: Business travellers

This comprises the findings for those airports who had a sufficient number of business travellers to enable separate reporting. London City Airport has also been included in this section as a high number (58%) of City airport passengers were business travellers and their profile was more comparable to the business traveller profile. The LCY sample did include some leisure travellers most of these also travelled by business and were therefore more likely to replicate the views of business travellers.

Section 3: Individual Airport summary.

This provides an overview of the key findings for each airport.

LCY LHR BHX CWL EDI ABZ GLA LBA LPL BFS EMA LGW MAN NCL STN BRS LTN

Percentage of business travellers

Base: All (1300)





2012 Passenger Statistics

The passenger numbers predicted by the CAA for 2012 for the 17 airports covered by the report is:

2012 passenger estimates 000’s Heathrow 69507 Gatwick 33663 Manchester 18854 Stansted 17972 Luton 9516 Edinburgh 9358 Birmingham 8587 Glasgow 6857 Bristol 5756 Liverpool 5233 Newcastle 4328 East Midlands 4201 Belfast International 4123 Aberdeen 3110 London City 3004 Leeds Bradford 2920 Cardiff 1189

These numbers will include overseas passengers and it should be noted that all data provided in this report is based on UK passengers only.





Arriving at the airport





Transport used to the airport

The first section of the report looks at the method of transport used by passengers to arrive at the airport. Across all airports nearly two–thirds (63%) came by car; either their own, or a lift from a friend/relative or in a hire car. Airports which were especially popular to drive to were Cardiff (84%), Belfast International (80%), Aberdeen (76%) and East Midlands (75%).

One in five 20% used a taxi., this was an especially popular method of getting to Glasgow International (36%).

For Edinburgh there was good use of buses/coaches to the airport (38%).

10% used the Heathrow Express and 11% the Gatwick Express to arrive at each of these respective airport.

Main methods of transport used to arrive at UK airports

63 %

28 %

23 %

20 %

13 %

11 %

9 %

7 %

4 %

1 %

Any car (NET)

Own car parked at airport

Friends/relatives dropped us off

Taxi

Own car parked away from airport

Train

Bus/coach

Hire car

Tube/DLR/Metro

Other Base: All (1300)





Satisfaction with transport used

To identify customer’s satisfaction with the transport they used to an airport all were asked to rate between 1 and 10 their satisfaction with the method of transport they used. To determine those airports where travellers were especially pleased with the transport they used the percentage who gave the top score of 9 or 10 are shown in the table below.

Satisfaction with transport method used (score 9 or 10)

Base: All (1300)

45 % 60 % 60 % 55 % 53 % 52 % 50 % 49 % 48 % 45 % 43 % 40 % 40 % 39 % 38 % 37 %

23 %

All LHR BHX CWL EDI ABZ GLA LBA LPL BFS EMA LGW MAN NCL STN BRS LTN

For several airports high scores were achieved, particularly Liverpool, Stansted and East Midlands. Possible reasons for why Aberdeen achieved a lower score is it serves a wide catchment area throughout the Highlands for which there are limited public transport options.





Time at Airport Most people arrived at the airport 2 hours before their flight. This was quite consistent for all airports.

Time arrived at airport before flight

9%

42% 38%

9%

Across all airports an average of 8 in 10 passengers (79%) checked in baggage on their last trip. This dropped considerable for Luton airport (61%) which mainly comprises budget airlines who charge to check-in luggage.

Base: All (1300)

1 to 2 hours Under 1 hour

2 to 3 hours Over 3 hours





Check-in





Check-in The growth of online travel services has revolutionised the way people arrange and book their air travel. One such area is how people check-in at the airport. The chart below shows that approximately two thirds of people (63%) used some form of online process. The most popular being where passengers print out their boarding pass at home or work before arriving at the airport. Downloading boarding passes onto mobile or other electronic devices is relatively new and already 6% used this method on their last flight from a UK airport. Online was especially popular for Heathrow T5 passengers (87%).

Method used to check-in

44%

18% 6% 10%

29%

3%

Base: All (1300)

Online with boarding pass printed at home / work Online with pass printed at airport Online with pass on mobile / laptop Self-service machine at airport Manned check-in desk Baggage drop





Length of time to check-in The numbers who had a very good experience and gave a top score of 9 or 10 varied quiet considerably

across the different airports. Cardiff (58%) Liverpool (56%) , Stansted (56%) and Heathrow T5 (56%) were especially praised for their check-in times. There was little difference between the two Gatwick terminals and Manchester’s T1 and T2.

In comparison Luton (36%). Belfast International (36%) and Gatwick (35%) scored less favourably.

For increasing numbers of passengers (10% overall) it is possible to skip this part of the airport process if they only have hand luggage and have already checked in online. Those that were able to do this were added to the 9 and 10 scores shown in the table below as they would have experienced no queue times. For Luton a considerably higher number went straight to security (22%).

If more people can get used to travelling with just hand luggage this may help increase satisfaction levels with the airport experience overall.

Base: All (1300)

Length of check-in time (score 9 or 10)

42 % 58 % 56 % 56 %

49 % 44 % 44 % 43 % 41 % 40 % 39 % 39 % 38 % 37 % 36 % 36 % 35 %






Friendliness of check-in / baggage staff Overall the friendliness of the check-in staff was positive for most airports and was particularly good

for Cardiff (65%) and Glasgow (55%). Scores were also high for Edinburgh, Luton and Liverpool. As a higher number of Luton passengers did not need to check-in at the airport this helped increase this score.

The friendliness of check-in / baggage staff (score 9 or 10)

47 %

65 % 55 % 52 % 52 % 52 % 49 % 49 % 49 % 48 % 48 % 46 % 46 % 45 % 43 % 40 % 39 %


Base: All (1300)





Rating of the landside part of the airport It could be argued that passengers pay less attention to the landside part of the airport as their mind

is more focussed on clearing check-in and security so they can relax whilst waiting for their flight. It is however, recognised that passengers are more stressed landside and anything that can be done to increase their enjoyment and relax them whilst landside will benefit overall perceptions of an airport. Spacious un-crowded check-in halls all help enhance the passenger experience.

Airports more likely to make an impression with their landside facilities and appearance were Edinburgh, Heathrow (especially T5 = 36%), Liverpool, Manchester (especially T2 = 34%), Newcastle and Stansted. Around a third of passengers to each of these gave a top score of 9 or 10.

Birmingham, and Belfast International made less of an impression.

Overall rating of the landside part of each airport

Base: All (1300)

25 % 34 % 33 % 32 % 31 % 31 % 30 % 28 % 25 % 24 % 23 % 22 % 21 % 20 % 19 % 15 % 12 %






Security





Length of time it took to clear security

Since 9/11 security has come under much review. Some welcome the much stricter procedures whilst others feel they are intrusive and overzealous. As a result passengers satisfaction of security tended to be mixed.

This polarisation of views was evident regarding the time spent queuing at security. For all airports a third (33%) were dissatisfied and gave queuing time a low score of 1 to 6 , compared to a quarter (24%) who gave it the top score of 9 or 10.

Airports where 30% or more of passengers gave a high score were Cardiff, Leeds/Bradford, and Newcastle. Gatwick’s North Terminal achieved a higher score (24%) compared to the South (16%) . Heathrow’s T5 was praised considerable more (28%) than its T3 (19%).

Satisfaction with security queue times

Base: All (1300)

24 % 38 % 34 % 33 % 29 % 28 % 27 % 26 % 26 % 24 % 23 % 22 % 21 % 21 % 19 % 18 % 13 %






Security staff

On this attribute there was much similarity across most airports. Passengers accept that security staff cannot be too friendly, however this does not mean they need to be officious and rude. A high score of 9 or 10 was achieved by 25% or more of customers. The attitude of security staff at Cardiff (40%) , Glasgow (39%) Stansted (39%) and Newcastle (38%) was especially praised.

The attitude of the security staff (score 9 or 10)

30 % 40 % 39 % 39 % 38 % 34 % 34 % 33 % 31 % 31 % 30 % 28 % 27 % 24 % 24 % 23 % 23 %


Base: All (1300)

The professionalism (i.e. doing checks efficiently and effectively) of the security staff at most UK airports was recognised and praised, with seven airports being scored the top marks of 9 or 10 by 40% or more of passengers. Birmingham was rated lower suggesting the relationship between passengers and security staff could be improved.

The checks being carried out efficiently and effectively (score 9 or 10)

35 % 48 % 47 % 44 % 43 % 41 % 41 % 40 % 39 % 37 % 34 % 34 % 33 % 33 % 33 % 27 % 23 %






Space at security

Space at security is more of an issue with only a fifth (22%) giving ‘the amount of space provided to your belongings after screening’ a top score of 9 or 10. The problem was more apparent at Birmingham, Bristol, Luton and Stansted.

The amount of space provided to gather your belongings after screening (score 9 or 10)

22 %

33 % 31 % 31 % 29 % 28 % 27 % 26 % 24 % 23 % 21 % 20 % 16 % 15 % 15 % 14 % 12 %


Base: All (1300)





Airside





Activities carried out airside Once passengers have passed security they can relax and take advantage of the facilities provided

airside. Having suitable refreshment facilities is essential as over three quarters had something to eat or drink.

Shopping is an important part of the airside experience and many airports have modernised their retail offering to capitalise on this revenue stream. Two thirds (65%) of passengers on their last trip from a UK airport browsed in a shop airside.

The Service Intensity analysis reported later identifies that the range of shops and eating and drinking outlets provided at an airport contribute to a passengers emotional attachment and satisfaction with an airport.

76%

65%

52%

44%

28%

19%

13%

11%

5%

4%

Ate/drank anything (NET)

Browsed in shops

Had a coffee or snack

Purchased item from shop

Had a meal

Had an alcoholic drink

Used WIFI

Changed money

Used internet station

Used a power socket

Base: All (1300)





Shopping at the airport As shopping represents an important source of revenue the survey also looked at how passengers feel

about shopping at airports. Nearly one in five (17%) said they liked to shop at airports and often buy things and a further 47% like to browse and sometimes buy. A substantial number of passengers are therefore in a frame of mind to shop thus providing a good income source, especially for those airports who have a good idea of their passenger profiles and the products they are interested in.

Airport shoppers

17%

47%

26%

10% I like to shop at airport and often buy things I like to browse in airport shops and sometimes buy things I like to browse in airport shops but rarely buy things I rarely visit shops at the airport





Browsing in airport shops Airports which were particularly popular with shoppers to browse in were Stansted, Manchester and

Gatwick.

Numbers browsing in shops

Base: All (1300)

65 %

86 % 79 % 74 % 72 % 71 % 71 % 68 % 66 % 65 % 64 % 64 % 63 % 62 % 56 %

48 % 48 %


For Heathrow the numbers browsing in shops did vary by terminal, with Terminal 4 and 5 being the most popular:

Heathrow Terminal 1 57%








Items purchased The popular items purchased, by those who bought something were books, magazines and confectionary. Prompted by the thought of good weather and relaxing times, over one in ten purchased sunglasses.

Base: (829)

Items purchased

75 %

55 %

24 %

17 %

17 %

16 %

11 %

9 %

8 %

8 %

6 %

6 %

5 %

3 %

4 %

Books/magazines/newspapers

Confectionary

Fragrances/cosmetics

Tobacco

Toiletries/pharmacy

Spirits/wine

Sunglasses

Speciality foods

DVD’s/CD’s/games

Clothes/accessories

Souvenirs/crafts

Electrical goods/computing/mobile

Watches/jewellery

Luggage travel items

Other





Range of shops

Manchester was also especially praised for its range of shops available, especially at T1 (35%). Heathrow’s Terminal 5 was also praised for its shops with 31% giving it the top score of 9 or 10. Bristol, Luton and Stansted could do more to make their range of shops appealing to their passengers.

Having a good range of shops (score 9 or 10)

Base: All (1300)

21 % 32 % 29 % 29 % 27 % 25 % 25 % 24 % 23 % 21 % 21 % 21 % 16 % 14 % 9 % 9 % 9 %






Rating of airside facilities

Besides the range of shops passengers views of other airside facilities were also explored. The facilities measured and the numbers giving a high score of 9 or 10 for each are shown in the following table.

Summary of airside service scores for all airports (score 9 or 10)

The upkeep and cleanliness

The flight information and direction signs

The toilet facilities

The friendliness and helpfulness of airport staff

Having restaurants/bars that appeal

The range of shops

Comfort and provision of seating

The prices charged

33%

30%

27%

26%

22%

21%

19%

12%

Overall UK airports are praised for their cleanliness, information provision, toilets and friendliness of their airside staff. There were some criticisms of the seating and the prices charged. Pricing is a key issue for airports as travellers often expect lower tax free prices, yet in reality find the price differential to the high street not that considerable. Many are however in the mood to spend, especially as there is often time to browse in the shops before catching a flight. The look, layout and products sold at the airport need to keep pace with changing passenger shopping requirements. The range of shops also adds considerably to passengers perceptions of an airport. As reported later in the Service Intensity section of this report the choice of shops contribute to the emotional attachment passengers have for an airport which in turn helps raise satisfaction levels.

The scores for the individual airports for each of these airside facilities were as follows:





Choice of restaurants and bars Friendliness of staff

Adding to the airside ambience is the choice of restaurants, bars and cafes available. Manchester, Edinburgh and Newcastle all scored well for this. A significant number of passengers have a coffee, snack or meal before flying and providing good refreshment services will help increase perceptions of an airport.

Having restaurants, bars and cafes that appeal (score 9 or 10)

Base: All (1300)

22 % 32 % 31 % 30 % 26 % 25 % 25 % 24 % 23 % 22 % 22 % 22 % 16 % 16 % 12 % 12 % 10 %


Overall airports were praised for the friendliness of their airside staff, and for most 25% or more of passengers gave a top score of 9 or 10. Cardiff, Glasgow, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle and Stansted all achieved particularly high scores.

Friendliness of airside staff (score 9 or 10)

26 % 42 % 38 % 35 % 33 % 33 % 32 % 28 % 27 % 25 % 25 % 25 % 25 % 25 % 20 %

11 % 11 %






Upkeep, cleanliness and comfort of the airside area

The upkeep and cleanliness for all airports was generally praised. This was especially true for Glasgow, Cardiff, and Newcastle. Differences did occur at Manchester between T1 (40%) and T2 (29%).

33 % 46 % 42 % 41 % 38 % 37 % 37 % 37 % 37 % 34 % 32 % 32 % 32 % 29 % 29 % 28 % 26 %


The upkeep and cleanliness of the airside area overall (score 9 or 10)

Base: All (1300)

Seating generally received a lower score than other airside facilities. Stansted and Luton which have high volumes of leisure travellers received lower scores than most. The three airports that achieved scores of over 30% were Newcastle (35%), Liverpool (33%) and Glasgow (32%).

19 % 35 % 33 % 32 % 27 % 25 % 25 % 24 % 23 % 19 % 19 % 17 % 15 % 14 % 13 % 8 % 4 %


The comfort and provision of seating (score 9 or 10)





The prices charged

In comparison to other aspects of the airport the prices charged were one of the least praised. This could be because expectations of cheap prices are somewhat inflated by advertising and the thought of a good duty/tax free bargain.

Base: All (1300)

12 % 26 %

19 % 17 % 16 % 15 % 13 % 12 % 11 % 11 % 11 % 10 % 9 % 9 % 8 % 7 % 7 %


The prices charged (score 9 or 10)





Overall rating of airside facilities

The same scoring procedure was used for passengers to rate the airside part of the airport overall. The top three were Newcastle, Manchester and Edinburgh. All three were also rated for their restaurants/cafes and bars. And having the right mix of these would appear to contribute considerably to raising passenger satisfaction levels airside. Heathrow’s Terminal 4 (35%) and Terminal 5 (31%) were also praised.

Base: All (1300)

25 % 40 %

33 % 31 % 29 % 28 % 27 % 26 % 25 % 24 % 23 % 23 % 22 % 21 % 20 % 16 % 6 %


Overall rating of airside facilities (score 9 or 10)





Emotional attachment to an airport






BDRC Continental’s Service intensity analysis revealed that passenger’s emotional attachment to an airport contributed significantly to overall satisfaction levels. To achieve good scores here is a strong indication that an airport’s service is popular.

The emotional attributes each airport was rated on and the numbers giving each a high score of 9 or 10 are shown in the next set of charts.

Two airports particularly praised for understanding their customer’s needs were Glasgow and Liverpool. Newcastle and Heathrow also scored well, especially Heathrow’s T5 which achieved the top score of 34%..

23 % 32 % 30 % 29 % 27 % 26 % 25 % 23 % 23 % 23 % 23 % 21 % 21 % 18 % 16 % 15 %

7 %


Understands what their customers want from an airport (score 9 or 10)

Both Newcastle and Cardiff have achieved high scores for their friendliness and this will have contributed to both airports being praised for valuing their customers.

22 % 34 % 30 % 28 % 26 % 25 % 25 % 24 % 23 % 23 % 20 % 18 % 18 % 17 % 17 % 13 % 12 %


Values me as a customer (score 9 or 10)

Base: All (1300)






The smaller regional airports score well on their location and six achieved the top score of 9 or 10 by 35% or more of their passengers; Cardiff, East Midlands, Glasgow, Leeds/Bradford, Newcastle and Stansted. Heathrow’s T5 also scored well (36%).

30 % 46 % 42 % 39 % 38 % 38 % 36 % 35 % 34 % 32 % 30 % 29 % 28 % 27 % 26 % 24 % 23 % 17 %


Easy and convenient to use (score 9 or 10)

LCY

Encouragingly for many airports high scores were achieved for attracting repeat business. Those scoring especially well were Glasgow, Newcastle, Stansted, Liverpool, Manchester, and East Midlands. Heathrow’s T4 (48%) and T5 (46%) also scored well.

44 %

63 % 60 % 57 % 54 % 54 % 53 % 49 % 48 % 46 % 43 % 43 % 41 % 38 % 37 % 32 % 21 %


I would be happy to use this airport again (score 9 or 10)

Base: All (1300)





Effort

Some stages of the passenger experience at an airport are more demanding than others. For example before arriving airside passengers need to make sure they have the right documents, check flight details, and queue for security all of which can add to a passenger’s stress level. The more an airport can do to make these processes effortless will help enhance passenger’s opinions of the airport. The Harvard Business review reported that the amount of effort a customer needs to put into a transaction has a direct influence on how likely they are to make a repeat purchase and/or recommend the product or service to others.

The table overleaf shows those that gave a very high score (i.e. their airport experience required little personal effort) and those giving a very low score (i.e. they had to make considerable personal effort to ensure their airport experience was satisfactory). Noticeable differences do occur between different airports.

Newcastle and Stansted passengers gave very high scores. Stansted was particularly praised for its quick check in procedures. Both Aberdeen and Leeds Bradford tended to polarise their customers. Aberdeen achieved an average score of 31% yet a considerable number also rated the airport poor on effort required (13%). The respective figures for Leeds/Bradford were 39% and 10%.

As seen throughout this report customer’s affinity and views of Luton airport tended to be lower than others. Luton passengers felt they needed to make more effort to ensure their use of the airport was satisfactory. If something could be done to increase passengers perceptions that they are valued as a customer this may help increase Luton’s rating.





Effort needed to ensure airport experience is satisfactory

Passenger effort required to ensure satisfactory airport experiences

Detractor Score 0-6 Promoter score 9-10

4 % 1 % 7 % 10 % 1 % 5 % 2 % 1 % 4 % 3 % 13 % 4 % 6 % 1 % 3 % 4 % 11 %

31 % 41 % 40 % 39 % 38 % 38 % 35 % 34 % 32 % 32 % 31 % 30 % 30 % 28 %

24 % 23 % 21 %

ALL

STN LBA CWL LPL EMA EDI GLA MAN ABZ BFS LHR LGW BHX BRS LTN NCL





Service Intensity





Service Intensity The BDRC Continental analysis team identified that three key components make up the customer satisfaction experience:

• Rational

• Emotional

• Effort

Using this logic a questionnaire was developed to specifically measure the customer experience at individual UK airports. Those interviewed were asked to think about their last trip from a UK airport and to rate each part of the process by giving a score of 1 to 10.

The areas that were evaluated to determine the Service Intensity (SI) score for each airport are shown below. These have also been grouped into the rational, the effort or the emotional part of the SI score that they contributed towards.

Rational • The length of time it took to check in

• The ease of finding information on how to check in

• The friendliness and helpfulness of the check in/baggage drop staff

• The length of time it took to clear security

• The attitude of the security staff

• The checks being carried out efficiently and effectively

• The amount of space provided to gather your belongings after screening

• The toilet facilities

• The flight information and directions signs

• The upkeep and cleanliness of the airside area overall





Service Intensity Emotional • This airport understands what their customers want from an airport

• This airport values me as a customer

• This airport is convenient to use

• I would be happy to use this airport again

• The comfort and provision of seating

• Having restaurants, bars and cafes that appeal

• The range of shops

• The friendliness and helpfulness of shop staff

• The friendliness and helpfulness of other airport staff

Effort • How much individual passenger effort was required to ensure they checked in easily, passed

security satisfactory and were comfortable airside.

Structured equation modelling was applied to this information to determine how much each of the three components contributed to passenger’s overall satisfaction of an airport. This then enabled one SI score to be determined for each airport.

Out of one hundred the importance weight each of the three factors had on the SI score were:

Importance weight Rational 31% Effort 32% Emotion 38%





Service Intensity This then enabled one SI score to be calculated for each airport. As emotional factors had a higher impact on the Service Intensity score achieved (38%), those airports that did well on the emotional attributes measured were more likely to get a higher SI score as these factors had a stronger influence on satisfaction.

The SI score achieved by each of the airports measured in the survey were as follows:

70 77 74 74 73 72 72 71 71 71 71 70 69 69 68

60 59

All LHE BHX CWL EDI ABZ GLA LBA LPL BFS EMA LGW MAN NCL STN BRS LTN

Base: All (1300)

The average SI score achieved across all airports was 70. The three airports that scored particularly favourably were Newcastle, Manchester and Cardiff. All three were seen as convenient airports to get to and this appeared to give them a good local identity. Newcastle was especially praised for most of its services (landside, security and airside). At Cardiff staff were praised for their friendliness and efficiency. Manchester, besides being convenient to use was liked for its range of shops and catering facilities.

Aberdeen was different from most other airports in that it strongly polarised passengers into having either a positive or negative view of the airport and this pulled down its SI score. A likely explanation is a slightly higher number experienced a delay with their flight from Aberdeen which possibly deflated views generally of the airport. For Luton passengers appeared to have limited affinity and enthusiasm for the airport, compared to some others. Perhaps if it appeared less utilitarian and more customer friendly this might help improve passenger perceptions.

Some differences did occur at the larger airports between their different terminals. The SI score for the individual terminals were:

Heathrow Manchester Gatwick T1 69 T1 74 North 72 T3 67 T2 74 South 70 T4 73 T5 73





Business air travel





Business Introduction The needs and views of business travellers are quite different from those of a leisure

traveller. In particular their frequency of air travel is much greater and as a result business traveller’s service expectations from an airport are often more demanding.

This section of the report looks at the views of business travellers using the following airports; London Heathrow, London Gatwick, London City and Manchester. The profile of London City Airport was significantly different from the sample interviewed for all other airports with nearly 60% being business travellers. For this reason this airport has been reported in this section as the passenger profile was more compatible with business travellers. It should be noted that the London City sample does include some leisure travellers, whereas the other three airports reported in this section are based on business travellers only.

The base sizes of the individual airports reported are: London City (41), London Heathrow (115), London Gatwick (45), and Manchester (41)

Statistical caution

For those airports with a base size between 40 and 50 statistical caution should be used when reviewing their individual data.





Business travellers Transport used to the airport

There was greater use of taxis by business air travellers (25%). This was significantly higher for London City (41%) and Manchester (30%). The Gatwick Express was used by a quarter of business travellers to the airport (25%). For Heathrow a considerable number used their own car (40%) which they parked at the airport.

Satisfaction with transport to the airport was lower amongst business travellers than for leisure travellers. 36% gave the top score of 9 or 10 compared to 48% of leisure travellers. This could be because they are often pressed for time and the journey from a city centre to the airport can take time, especially in the rush hour.

The Gatwick Express provides good access to the airport and this has helped give the airport a good score. A high number of London City passengers used a taxi to the airport and the cost of this plus the heavy London traffic may have contributed to its lower than average transport score.

Satisfaction with transport used (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Gatwick

Heathrow

London City

35 %

49 %

42 %

34 %

26 %

Base: All business (530)





Business travellers Check-in

Business travellers were more likely to use an online method (73%) to check-in compared to leisure travellers (59%). Downloading the boarding pass onto a mobile device was also more popular for business travellers (10%) compared to leisure travellers (4%).

Length of time to check-in

The speed of passing through an airport is important to business travellers, and overall there was good satisfaction (42%) with the speed of check-in business travellers experienced. London City does particular well (57%) and their score is helped by a significant number of passengers (29%) being able to go straight to security as they had already checked in online and only had hand luggage.

Satisfaction with check in time (score 9 or 10)

All

London City

Heathrow

Manchester

Gatwick

42 %

57 %

42 %

38 %

31 %






Business travellers Security

The ratings for the security procedures at three of the airports (Heathrow, London City and Manchester) were generally consistent. Gatwick did have lower scores for the time it took to clear security, the attitude of the staff, and the space provided to gather belongs. London City was also criticised for space provision.

Satisfaction with security queue time (score 9 or 10)

All

Heathrow

London City

Manchester

Gatwick

23 %

24 %

24 %

24 %

15 %

Satisfaction with attitude of security staff (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Heathrow

London City

Gatwick

27 %

30 %

28 %

25 %

17 % Base: All business (530)





Business travellers Security

Satisfaction with checks being efficient and effective (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Gatwick

London City

Heathrow

30 %

39 %

32 %

27 %

26 %

Satisfaction with space provision to gather belongings (score 9 or 10)

All

Heathrow

Manchester

Gatwick

London City

22 %

24 %

24 %

15 %

15 %






Business travellers Activities carried out airside

Once airside business travellers were more likely to use the airport wi-fi service than leisure travellers, but less likely to browse in shops.

74 %

56 %

51 %

34 %

28 %

20 %

19 %

14 %

8 %

6 %

76 %

69 %

53 %

48 %

28 %

19 %

10 %

10 %

4 %

3 %

Business %

Leisure %

Activities carried out airside

Ate/drank anything (net)

Browsed in shops

Had a coffee or snack

Purchased item from shop

Had a meal

Had an alcoholic drink

Used WIFI

Changed money

Used an Internet station

Used a power socket

Base: 510/1317





Business travellers Items purchased

Amongst those who shopped the items purchased were quite similar to a leisure traveller. Business travellers were, however, more likely to purchase sunglasses, speciality foods, DVD’s/computer games, electrical goods, and watches and jewellery.

74 %

56 %

24 %

22 %

19 %

18 %

18 %

17 %

16 %

12 %

9 %

9 %

8 %

3 %

75 %

54 %

24 %

16 %

15 %

16 %

7 %

6 %

9 %

4 %

8 %

3 %

6 %

3 %

Business %

Leisure %

Items purchased

Base: all shopping (185/644)

Books/mags/newspapers

Confectionary

Fragrances/cosmetics

Tobacco

Sprites/wine

Toiletries/pharmacy

Speciality foods

DVDs/CDs/Computer games

Sunglasses

Electrical/mobile computer items

Clothes/shoes/accessories

Watches/Jewellery

Souvenirs/crafts

Luggage/travel items





Business travellers Range of shops, cafes and bars

As seen in the main report there was considerable praise for the range of shops at Manchester and Heathrow. Most probably because of its size London City did not achieve as high a score as the other three airports for its range of shops.

Having a good range of shops (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Heathrow

Gatwick

London City

21 %

35 %

28 %

22 %

10 %


Besides the range of shops business travellers’ views of other airside facilities were also explored. The facilities measured and the numbers giving a high score of 9 or 10 for each of the four airports are shown on the following table.

Having restaurants, bars and cafes that appeal (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Heathrow

Gatwick

London City

22 %

36 %

26 %

19 %

19 %





Business travellers Rating of airside comfort and cleanliness


The comfort and provision of seating (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Heathrow

Gatwick

London City

20 %

35 %

21 %

16 %

13 %

The upkeep and cleanliness of the airside area overall (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Heathrow

Gatwick

London City

33 %

46 %

35 %

27 %

25 %





Business travellers Emotional attachment to an airport

BDRC Continental’s Service Intensity analysis revealed that passenger’s emotional attachment to an airport contributed significantly to their overall satisfaction levels. To achieve high scores here is a strong indication that an airport’s service provision is good.

The emotional attributes measured and the numbers giving each a high score of 9 or 10 for each are shown in the next set to charts (overleaf).

All four airports score well on most dimensions. London City and Manchester are praised for making business travellers feel valued. Manchester is especially praised for being easy and convenient to use and a high number would be happy to use the airport again.

Gatwick is appreciated although it was a little weaker than the others in understanding what a business traveller wants from an airport.







Understands what their customers want from an airport (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Heathrow

London City

Gatwick

23 %

28 %

27 %

26 %

19 %

Values me as a customer (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

London City

Gatwick

Heathrow

24 %

31 %

30 %

24 %

24 %







Easy and convenient to use (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

Heathrow

London City

Gatwick

29 %

45 %

30 %

27 %

22 %

I would be happy to use this airport again (score 9 or 10)

All

Manchester

London City

Gatwick

Heathrow

38 %

58 %

40 %

39 %

38 %






Business travellers Service Intensity

The Service Intensity scores calculated for the four Airports measured in this business travellers section used the same process as described in Service Intensity section of the main report (see page s 38 and 39). Overall leisure travellers gave a slightly higher Service Intensity rating of UK airports (score 71) than Business Travellers (score 68).

For business travellers, Heathrow, Gatwick and London City achieved similar scores. Manchester, as with the main sample, was more popular and achieved a score of 74 out of 100.


Service Intensity score (out of 100)

All

Manchester

Gatwick

London City

Heathrow

68

74

71

69

67

Although Gatwick did not achieve as high a top score of 9 or 10 for many of the individual service attributes reported in this section is still achieved the second highest SI business score. The reason for this is that there were fewer passengers who gave it a very low score of 1 to 3 than some of the other airports, suggesting that although Gatwick may not have as many top scoring passengers as the other airports it also does not have as many detractors either. The more neutral views of Gatwick’s business passengers suggests the airport meets expectations but does not over or under achieve on these.





Individual Airport Summaries





45

25

25

36

53

59

19

22

16

Landside

Security

Airside

Aberdeen (ABZ) Passenger details Terminal passengers in 2012 3,110,00 (trips) (source CAA)

BDRC Continental 2012 Holiday Survey data Service Intensity score

Summary of Airport Satisfaction Score

Base: Users of Aberdeen Airport (50)

Passenger observations Passengers at Aberdeen were polarised between those who praised the airport and those who were quite critical.

This passenger divide is apparent at all stages of the passenger journey through the airport from check in, to security to the comfort provided airside. This suggests that some customers have had a bad experience (e.g. suffered from a long delay) which has diminished their views of the airport overall.

At the emotional level Aberdeen does not connect as well with its customers compared to some other smaller regional airports; 56% gave a low score of 1 to 6 for the airport valuing them as a customer. As a result the Service Intensity score for Aberdeen was lower than most.

Summary of emotional attachment to airport

41%

27%

32%

60 out of 100 lower than average

Score 1 to 6 Score 7 to 8 Score 9 to 10

Happy to use airport again Values me as a customer

56% 19%

24%

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Belfast International (BFS)

Passenger details Terminal passengers in 2012 4,123,000 (trips) (source CAA)



Base: Users Belfast International Airport (44)

Passenger observations Belfast International does not create a great impact landside, however its security and airside facilities do achieve acceptable satisfaction scores.

It could do more to connect with its customers at the emotional level as a low number gave the top score of 9 or 10 for ‘values me as a customer’. Just under 4 in 10 (38%) said they would be happy to use the airport again. This was lower than quite a few of the other UK airports. For this reason the Service Intensity score for Belfast International was slightly lower than the average.


31%

31%

38%

69 out of 100 slightly lower than average



46% 37%

17%

39

26

33

46

46

38

15

28

29

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Birmingham (BHX)




Base: Users Birmingham Airport (112)

Passenger observations Like Belfast International, Birmingham does not create a great impression landside. There was also slight criticisms of the efficiency of the security checks.

Birmingham cold do more to connect with its passengers at the emotional level and make them feel more valued. If Birmingham had more of an identity or connection with passengers within its catchment area this might help strengthen the value customers feel towards it and in turn improve its slightly lower than average Service Intensity score.


23%

40%

37%




41%

46%

13%

29

26

28

59

49

52

12

25

20

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Bristol (BRS)




Base: Users Bristol Airport (74)

Passenger observations Overall Bristol achieves satisfactory scores for most of the services it provides to passengers. It weakness is the range of shops and restaurants and bars provided airside, as fewer gave the top 9 or 10 score for these compared to most other airports.

The airport appears to lack the character and identity seen for other regional airports thus lowering the emotional connection passengers have for Bristol airport.

Although people would be happy to use the airport again, it could do more to make passengers feel valued. This in turn would help improve Bristol’s slightly lower than average Service Intensity score.


13%

44%

43%




44%

39%

17%

37

21

35

41

52

42

22

27

23

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Cardiff (CWL)




Base: Users Cardiff Airport (55)

Passenger observations Cardiff airport achieved good to high satisfaction scores for most of its services. The efficiency and friendliness of its staff were especially praised.

It also connected well with its passengers at the emotional level with good numbers feeling valued as customers and happy to use the airport again. Although it was one of the smaller airports measured, its airside facilities did well, especially the prices charged. It was also seen as a convenient airport to use. As passengers were happy with the service they received, thought highly of the staff, and connected with the airport at an emotional level, it achieve one of the highest Service Intensity scores.


11%

43% 46%

74 out of 100 higher than average



22%

44%

34%

37

25

17

35

41

57

28

34

26

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





East Midlands (EMA)




Base: Users East Midlands Airport (58)

Passenger observations Overall East Midlands performs well. Although its facilities do not necessarily excite its customers they work and all aspects of the passenger process through the airport achieved satisfactory scores. The security processes at the airport did particularly well.

The airport is seen as convenient to use and this helped raise its profile and importance in the local area. A high number (54%) gave of top score of 9 or 10 for being happy to use the airport again. It could do more to make customers feel more special and valued. Its good service levels and convenience contributed to East Midlands obtaining a higher than average Service Intensity score.


15%

31% 46%




41%

41%

18%

30

23

21

45

40

57

25

37

22

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Edinburgh (EDI)




Base: Users Edinburgh Airport (74)

Passenger observations Overall Edinburgh rates well with passengers. All areas of the airport achieved favourable scores.

Its recent re-fit appears to have benefitted passengers and many were pleased with the choices of cafes /restaurants and bars airside. These are important to passengers as many have a beverage or snack before flying. Also such facilities help passengers connect with an airport at the emotional level and help raise their perceptions and satisfaction of an airport.

A high number would be happy to use Edinburgh again and as a result the airport has achieved a higher than average Service Intensity score.


18%

33% 49%




36%

36%

28%

29

23

27

37

44

42

34

33

31

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Glasgow International (GLA)




Base: Users Glasgow International Airport (80)

Passenger observations Glasgow is a popular airport and is viewed fondly by its passengers. The airport is also convenient to use which helps raise its profile and importance to those within its catchment area.

Besides scoring well on the services and facilities it provides, Glasgow’s staff are particularly liked for being friendly and helpful. All these elements help increase passengers appreciation and raise their emotional attachment to the airport. A high number would be happy to use Glasgow again. As a result Glasgow achieved a higher than average Service Intensity score.


12%

28% 60%




32%

45%

23%

31

22

27

45

41

50

24

37

23

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Leeds / Bradford (LBA)




Base: Users Leeds / Bradford Airport (51)

Passenger observations The landside and airside part of Leeds / Bradford do not create a high impact with passengers. However, its security and airside services and facilities do score well.

The time spent passing through security is particularly praised. However the range of restaurants, cafes and bars airside, although satisfactory, could be more appealing. Similar to East Midlands and Glasgow, Leeds / Bradford is seen as a convenient airport to use. This will increase its importance and relevance to the area and help increase passengers rating of the airport. As it connects with passengers at the emotional level it achieved a slightly higher than average Service Intensity score.


16%

36% 48%

71 out of 100 Slightly higher than average



35%

39%

26%

36

29

41

41

39

32

23

32

23

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





London City Airport (LCY)




Base: Users London City Airport (41)

Passenger observations London City is noticeably different from other airports measured as a high number of its customers were business travellers, who have different needs and views of an airport. A much higher number arrived at the airport by taxi, and spent a shorter amount of time between arriving at the airport and their flight departure. The airport’s check in services scored well. This was helped by many passengers checking in online and being able to go straight to security as they only had hand luggage. Clearing security did tend to divide passengers into two camps suggesting that sometimes it was very efficient and sometimes slow. One of the strengths of London City airport is it does rate well on key customer service issues and makes its passengers feel valued.


22%

37%

40%

see business section



27%

43%

30%

27

31

33

56

37

46

17

33

27

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





London Heathrow (LHR) all terminals




Base: Users London Heathrow Airport (327)

Passenger observations The size of the airport does create an impression and Heathrow, especially Terminal 5 was more praised for its landside area than most. Heathrow’s newest terminal, Terminal 5, achieved considerably higher scores than its other three terminals. The speed of passing through security at Terminal 3 could be improved. The airside services and facility of Heathrow’s Terminal 4 and 5 was praised. Even though Heathrow is the UK’s largest airport it does score well on some of the emotional factors and a high number, especially for Terminal 4 (48%) and 5 (45%) said they would be happy to use the airport again. Overall Heathrow had an average Service Intensity score. However Terminals 4 and 5 did achieve higher than average scores.


18%

39%

43%

70 out of 100 average, and higher than average

For terminal 5 (73)



35%

40%

25%

27

24

24

43

43

48

31

33

28

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





London Gatwick (LGW)




Base: Users Gatwick Airport (223)

Passenger observations Overall London Gatwick’s services scored well. There was little difference between the North and South terminal, except that the North terminal appeared to be more efficient with its check in and security lines.

As an airport there is good demand for Gatwick’s shops and catering services. A large number browsed in the airport shops and a high number had a coffee, drink or snack.

It appears Gatwick has a good understanding of what its customers want. Over four in ten gave the top score of 9 or 10 for wanting to use the airport again.

For these reasons Gatwick achieved a higher than average Service Intensity score.


21%

38%

49%

71 out of 100 slightly higher than average



34%

45%

28%

29

27

28

49

40

48

21

33

24

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Liverpool (LPL)




Base: Users Liverpool Airport (57)

Passenger observations For most parts of the customer journey through the airport Liverpool scored above average for its level of service and facilities.

The landside part of the airport was praised and the staff at the airport were seen as friendly and helpful.

The airport is appreciated by those within its catchment area and it has built up a close affinity with its customers. A high number said the would be happy to use the airport again.


19%

25% 57%




38%

39%

23%

31

21

25

37

42

50

31

37

25

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Luton (LTN)




Base: Users Luton Airport (47)

Passenger observations Luton does not appear to have as close an affinity with its customers as other airports.

All parts of the passenger journey received lower than average scores with security criticised for its length of queues and provision of space.

Having a lower than average engagement with its customers also meant that most of the emotional values measured tended to have lower than average scores. As a result Luton’s Service Intensity score was low. The airport appears to lack any strong identity, perhaps because it competes with other London airports. If Luton had a stronger positioning statement and more character this might make customers view it more favourably.


39%

39%

21%

59 out of 100 low



54% 34%

12%

51

35

41

30

36

54

20

29

6

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Manchester (MAN)




Base: Users Manchester Airport (199)

Passenger observations Manchester was one of the most popular airports surveyed.

There were good scores for its landside, security and airside services and facilities.

Like Gatwick there was good use of the shops and catering facilities available. The range of shops at Manchester's Terminal 1 was popular and scored well.

The upkeep and cleanliness of Terminal 1 scored better than Terminal 2. The airport also connects well with passengers at the emotional level and as a result Manchester, along with Cardiff, obtained the second highest Service Intensity score.


10%

37% 53%

74 out of 100 high



31%

44%

25%

17

14

17

51

48

50

32

38

33

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Newcastle (NCL)




Base: Users Newcastle Airport (91)

Passenger observations Newcastle was a very popular airport and achieved good scores for most of its services.

Where it stood out from many other airports was its staff were complimented for their friendly and helpful attitude.

Customers did feel valued, and along with London City airport achieved one of the highest scores for this attribute.

Newcastle was also convenient to use and clearly has an identity within the area it serves.

As a result Newcastle achieved the highest Service Intensity score.


8%

29% 63%

77 out of 100 high



22%

49%

30%

19

15

19

48

41

41

33

44

40

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





Stansted (STN)




Base: Users Stansted Airport (61)

Passenger observations Opinions of Stansted’s landside services divided passengers. It’s security procedures did however achieve good scores.

Airside there was good use of the catering and shops. Like landside views of the airside services and facilities tended to divide passengers. Stansted’s strength is it is a convenient airport for many to use and this helped passengers connect with the airport at an emotional level. A high number said they would be happy to use the airport gain. It could, however do more to make passengers feel valued.


14%

32% 54%




31%

51%

18%

40

20

25

30

29

54

30

51

21

Landside

Security

Airside

Score 7 to 8

Score 1 to 6

Score 9 to 10





About us

BDRC Continental is the UK’s largest independent market research agency. Established in 1991, we have built an unrivalled reputation as a full service consultancy, providing our clients with critical evidence-based intelligence to inform major business decisions. We are committed to providing our clients with excellent service throughout the research process - that’s why our clients keep coming back to us.

One of our main areas of specialism is the travel sector with deep expertise in: Culture, Tourism & Leisure Transport & Travel Hotels, Meetings & Hospitality

BDRC Continental is quality accredited (ISO 20252) and Members of the MRS (Market Research Society) Company Partner Scheme.





Terms and Conditions

Conditions of Contract / 1 1. DEFINITIONS In these conditions:- 1.1 “the Client” means the person, firm, company or organisation to whom the

proposal is addressed. 1.2 “the Company” means BDRC Continental Ltd (and any of its subsidiaries) whose

registered office is at Kingsbourne House, 229-231 High Holborn, London WC1V 7DA.

1.3 “the Contract Date” means the date of confirmation of contract. 1.4 “the Information” means all data produced pursuant to the provision of the Service,

including but not limited to completed questionnaires, electronic media, the findings of the survey and the survey report or presentation.

1.5 “the Service” means the provision by the Company to the Client of the research and the information, details of which are set out in the proposal.

2. FORMATION OF THE CONTRACT 2.1 These conditions shall form the basis of the contract between the Company and

the Client. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Client’s standard booking conditions, these conditions shall apply except so far as expressly agreed in writing by a person authorised to sign on behalf of the Company. Any variation to this contract in terms of techniques or sample shall not affect any of the other terms of this contract.

2.2 No servant or agent or the Company has power to vary these conditions orally. 2.3 Unless otherwise expressly stated in writing, all quotations and estimates by the

Company are invitations to treat. The Client’s confirmation of commissioning is an offer which will be accepted by the Company posting its confirmation of contract.

2.4 The signature of the Client or its representative of this confirmation of contract shall constitute acceptance by the Client of these conditions. In the absence of signature by or on behalf of the Client of these conditions, the agreement of the Client by e-mail will constitute acceptance by the Client of these conditions.

2.5 The Company will provide the Service to the Client at the request of any representative of the Client unless otherwise instructed in writing by the Client.

2.6 The construction, validity and performance of these conditions and this contract shall be governed by English Law.

2.7 These conditions supersede all previous terms and conditions of contract issued by the Company.

2.8 These general conditions shall be subject to such special conditions as may appear in the letter.

2.9 In the event of any conflict, or apparent conflict, between the special conditions and these general conditions, the special conditions shall prevail.

2.10 All notices to be served hereunder shall be served by first class pre-paid post, facsimile message or e-mail at the registered office or principal trading address of the intended recipient.

Notices shall be deemed served when they would ordinarily have been received in normal business hours according to the means of transmission of such notices.

2.11 All proposals and fees are valid for a period of three months unless otherwise stated. If after this period no major part of the project has started, the Company reserves the right to reappraise the fees.

3. CANCELLATION 3.1 The consent of the Company to cancellation or variation of the contract shall not in

any way prejudice the Company’s right to recover from the Client full compensation for any loss or expense arising from such cancellation or variation on an indemnity basis.

3.2 Subject to any special conditions appearing in the proposal, the Client may terminate the contract by giving not less than 1 month's prior notice of termination.

3.3 In the event of termination of the contract prior to completion of the Service, the Client will be liable to pay that proportion of the fees (as set out in the survey confirmation email) as represents all work carried out, expenses incurred and financial commitments entered into by the Company as at the date of termination of the contract in accordance with clause 3.2 above, such proportion to be calculated by the Company at its sole discretion.

4. PRICE 4.1 The fees set out in the proposal shall apply only in relation to the

techniques and sample description set out therein. Any alterations to techniques or sample proposed by the Client may, at the sole discretion of the Company, result in increased fees being payable.

4.2 The provision by the Client of inaccurate information in relation to the Service may result in an increase in the fees set out in the proposal.

4.3 The fees are quoted exclusive of VAT which will be added to all invoices at the rate applying at the appropriate tax point, except as varied for export clients.

4.4 If, through any currency fluctuation, the sterling equivalent of the cost to the Company of any obligations incurred in respect of overseas work for the Client exceeds the cost reflected in the proposal, the Company shall be entitled to charge for such obligations at the exchange rate which is in operation at the time remittance is made abroad.

5. PAYMENT 5.1 Unless the proposal makes specific provision for phased payments, the

fees payable in respect of the Service will be invoiced as [50% upon commissioning and 50% upon delivery of the information][1/3 within 7 days of the contract Date, 1/3 at the start of work and 1/3 upon delivery of the information].

5.2 Invoices in respect of the Service are payable within 30 days of the date of the invoice.

5.3 The Company reserves the right to charge interest on overdue invoices at 3% per annum above the base rate from time to time in force of HSBC PLC.

5.4 The Client shall not be entitled to set off against any amount payable under this contract any amount due by the Company to the Client under any other agreement.

5.5 Without prejudice to any other rights of the Company, if the Client shall fail to make punctual payments of any monies due under any agreement between the Company and the Client, the Company may at its option, either withhold the provision of the Service and/or the information, until the total indebtedness of the Client to the Company has been discharged, or cancel this contract. 5.6 The Company reserves the right at any time at its discretion to demand security for payments before continuing with the provision of the Service or delivering any of the information to the Client, notwithstanding any subsisting agreement to provide credit to the Client or any provision to the contrary contained in these conditions.

6. COPYRIGHT AND CONFIDENTIALITY 6.1 The copyright in the information and research design shall be and shall

remain owned by the Company. 6.2 All of the information is confidential to the Company. To the extent that

the information is given to the Client, the Client undertakes to take all reasonable precautions to maintain the confidentiality of the information and not to allow access to the information other than to:-





Terms and Conditions

Conditions of Contract / 2 6.2.1 those of the Client’s employees who have reasonable need to have

access to same; and 6.2.2 professional advisers to the Client (such as advertising agencies and

P.R. Consultants) but only on the specific understanding that such professional advisers do not pass on or use any of the information for clients of theirs other than the Client.

6.3 In the event of the Client wishing to publish all or any part of the information, the Client must obtain the prior written approval of the Company and must acknowledge the Company as the source of the published material, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld.

6.4 The information (in whatever form) shall at all times remain the property of the Company which may, at its discretion, destroy all or part of same after one year following the date of delivery of the information.

6.5 Any Research Plan or Research Proposal submitted to the Client by the Company before contract is agreed, is submitted on the understanding that it is for the Client's consideration only and that it will not be shown to any third party. The Client shall not be entitled to use such plan or proposal if the contract is not awarded to the Company.

6.6 Where the Company's name is associated with any public presentation or with any widely circulated document relating to the information, the Client agrees that the Company shall have the right to publish relevant results and information about the research with its own interpretation, if the Company considers such publication necessary to correct a misleading impression or to protect its reputation.

7. CARRYING OUT OF SERVICE 7.1 In the event that the Company shall be commissioned to conduct a survey

requiring interviewees to examine or use any products, the Client shall indemnify the Company against any action by any interviewee or third party relating to the description, presentation or use of such products whether or not the Client is the manufacturer, distributor or agent for such products.

7.2 Any alteration to techniques or sample sizes from those set out in the proposal, proposed or acquiesced to by the Client, may result in the delivery of the Information being delayed.

7.3 The Company reserves the right to sub-contract all or any part of the Service, including but not limited to the research described in the proposal, to recognised suppliers, but subject to the appropriate quality controls and to the prior notification to the Client of the intention to sub-contract.

7.4 If the Company is required by the Client to sub-contract any part or parts of the Service to a named sub-contractor or one or more named sub-contractor, no warranty can be given by the Company as to the quality of accuracy of such part or parts of the Service.

7.5 The Company will use its reasonable endeavours to deliver the information on or before the date stated as the Delivery Date in the proposal but time of delivery of the Information shall not be of the essence unless otherwise specifically stated.

8. TUPE 8.1 The Client will endeavour to ascertain whether there is any potential

obligation under TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment)) for staff engaged in any service coming under this contract to transfer across to the Company.

8.2 Should a potential TUPE responsibility become apparent, the Client will inform the Company before this contract is agreed. The Company then reserves the right to renegotiate the quoted fee in order to take account of TUPE costs.

9. NON-SOLICITATION 9.1 The parties each undertake with the other that during the period

commencing on the Contract Date and ending six months following the date of delivery of the Information, neither party shall canvass, or solicit for direct or indirect employment, any personnel of the other party, or proceed with any approach made by or on behalf of any such personnel, unless the prior written consent of the employing party is obtained.

10. QUALITY OF SERVICE 10.1 The Information will contain material derived from sample surveys carried

out in accordance with accepted market research methods and as such, are subject to limits of statistical error.

10.2 The Company shall use all reasonable endeavours to ensure the accuracy of the Information, but no warranty is given as to the accuracy of any data provided by interviewees.

10.3 All warranties or other terms implied by statute or otherwise shall not apply to this contract, including but not limited to those implied by the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 and the Consumer Protection Act 1987.

10.4 The Company shall not be liable for any consequential or indirect loss suffered by the Client or any third party in relation to the contract and the Client shall indemnify the Company in respect of any claim of any person in respect of such consequential or indirect loss.

10.5 The entire liability of the Company under this contract shall not in any event exceed the fees payable under this contract, save in respect of the Company’s liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence, where liability shall not exceed the company's insured limit.

11. FORCE MAJEURE 11.1 The Company shall not be liable for any delays in or failure to provide the

Service arising from circumstances outside its control, including but not limited to changes in government policy (in the country where the research is undertaken), lockouts, fire, accident, adverse weather conditions, war, terrorism, civil unrest, or postal or railway strikes.

12. WAIVER 12.1 The failure by a party to enforce in any instance the performance by the

other of any provision of the contract shall not be construed as a waiver of the first party’s rights to future performance of such or any other provision of the contract.




Documents

Airport Service Intensity Report 2012 · 2018-09-07 · (80), Leeds/Bradford (51), London City (41), Heathrow (327), Gatwick (223), Liverpool (57) Luton (47) Manchester (199) Newcastle