The development of language Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The development of language - Essay Example Today, millions of people speak one of the twenty-eight Mayan languages as their primary language. Apart from for the Waxtek speakers of Veracruz, Mayan languages occupy a large geographical zone in eastern Mexico, Belize, Guatemala, western Honduras, and western El Salvador (Sharer & Traxler 23). Mayan language family includes 31 languages spoken in Guatemala, Belize and southern Mexico. According to general classification, it has five major branches. It is frequently believed that Huastecan split off in the very beginning, followed by Yucatecan and then all other groups branched out (Campbell 71-72).Most of the Mayan speakers are partially bilingual and their second language is Spanish or English in case of Belize(Sharer & Traxler, 23). Other languages have great influence on all Mayan languages. For instance, there is grammatical evidence for prehistoric connections between the Mayan and the adjoining language family, MixeZoquean. Borrowing words started between these groups in the Pre-classic age and was generally from Mixe-Zoquea to Mayan. For instance, in addition to ajaw (lord) and kakaw (cocoa or chocolate), quite a few basic Mayan kinship and body-part terms came from Mixe-Zoquean. Most of the Mayan languages have few numbers of loanwords from Nahuatal. Nahuatal is the language of native peoples from Central Mexico, particularly post-classic Mexica, or Aztecs. Most probably these loanwords refer to the rising importance of the Central Mexican states in the Post-classic era. The Maya not only borrowed but also influenced other languages. For instance, more or less extinct language of southeastern Guatemala, Xinca does not belong to Mayan language family but it has a large number of loanwords from Mayan. Since European contact, the process of this exchange continued with Spanish and English. A very good example is the word kakaw that has entered English as cocoa just like Mayan word xook as the

Factors Influencing the Increase in Temporary Employment Essay

Factors Influencing the Increase in Temporary Employment - Essay Example Temporary employees subsume all forms of non-standard or contingent employment, including part time and contract workers. Originating early in the 1980s, temporary employment has been on a constant rise not just in the United States, but across Europe and the developed world (Hardy and Walker, 2003 p.141) According to the U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the growth in temporary employment through the 1990s was dramatic (Golden And Appelbaum 1992 p.473). A survey carried out late in the 1990s indicated that approximately 90% of U.S business and about 95% of the Fortune 500 firms employed temporary employees or used the services of temporary employment agencies. This rise in the demand and supply of temporary employment is unprecedented. Though, temporary employment used to be restricted to clerical and office jobs, its growth has now encompassed almost every job type. Areas that have witnessed raid increase in temporary employment includes professional, services and technological corporations. However, companies use temporary employees to fill vacancies caused by employee absentee, special assignments, seasonal work increases and temporary workers shortages. In addition, employers often make use of temporary employee to fill staff vacancies when they do not intend to increase the ir staff strength (Temporary Employment, 2005). The first te... employers often make use of temporary employee to fill staff vacancies when they do not intend to increase their staff strength (Temporary Employment, 2005). Background of problem: The first temporary employment firms began operations in the 1940s. It was not until the 1980s and 1990s, however, that temporary employment grew rapidly. Annual average temporary employment grew from 340,000 in 1978 to 695,000 by 1985, increasing three times faster than total service sector employment and eight times faster than total nonagricultural employment. The temporary employment industry experienced its most explosive growth in the early 1990s, expanding by an average of 17 percent a year. Annual average temporary employment rose to 2.2 million workers by 1996 and to nearly 2.8 million by 1998 with an annual growth rate of about 9 percent. Between 1992 and 1998, 18.4 million non-agricultural jobs were added to the U.S. economy. Temporary employment accounted for 1.4 million of these jobs, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The BLS predicts that the temporary employment will increase by 53 percent by 2006, making it one of the most rapidly expanding indu stries. Overall, temporary employment accounts for about 2 percent of the country's employment. In the late 1990s, temporary employment agencies began investing greater more in training employees for their assignments. A NATSS survey from 1998 reported that temporary employment agencies spent $720 million on training 1997, in contrast to only $260 million in 1995. The survey also indicated that 4.8 million workers participated in the training programs and that about 90 percent of all temporary employment agencies provide training for free. Statement of the problem: This section of the research put the

Sexaul harassment in the workplace Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Sexaul harassment in the workplace - Assignment Example The victims are mostly females, and these victims respond in different manners, researchers and practitioners have posited that the following are the common responses displayed by the victims (Cortina & Berdahl, 2008): reporting, confrontation, social support-seeking and denial. Furthermore, reporting as well as confrontation are common amongst the victims those belong to lower occupational strata and responses like avoidance and denial are common amongst victims from affluent families. It is worth inclusion that victims of sexual harassments have been from the same sex as well. Numerous studies (Pina, Gannon, & Saunders, 2009) have been carried out to understand learn more about perpetrators of sexual harassment, the harassers have been found to be lacking social conscience, they engage in immature as well as irresponsible behaviours and as regards their personality measures they are irresponsible, and insensitive towards women.

Factors Influencing the Increase in Temporary Employment Essay

Factors Influencing the Increase in Temporary Employment - Essay Example Temporary employees subsume all forms of non-standard or contingent employment, including part time and contract workers. Originating early in the 1980s, temporary employment has been on a constant rise not just in the United States, but across Europe and the developed world (Hardy and Walker, 2003 p.141) According to the U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the growth in temporary employment through the 1990s was dramatic (Golden And Appelbaum 1992 p.473). A survey carried out late in the 1990s indicated that approximately 90% of U.S business and about 95% of the Fortune 500 firms employed temporary employees or used the services of temporary employment agencies. This rise in the demand and supply of temporary employment is unprecedented. Though, temporary employment used to be restricted to clerical and office jobs, its growth has now encompassed almost every job type. Areas that have witnessed raid increase in temporary employment includes professional, services and technological corporations. However, companies use temporary employees to fill vacancies caused by employee absentee, special assignments, seasonal work increases and temporary workers shortages. In addition, employers often make use of temporary employee to fill staff vacancies when they do not intend to increase the ir staff strength (Temporary Employment, 2005). The first te... employers often make use of temporary employee to fill staff vacancies when they do not intend to increase their staff strength (Temporary Employment, 2005). Background of problem: The first temporary employment firms began operations in the 1940s. It was not until the 1980s and 1990s, however, that temporary employment grew rapidly. Annual average temporary employment grew from 340,000 in 1978 to 695,000 by 1985, increasing three times faster than total service sector employment and eight times faster than total nonagricultural employment. The temporary employment industry experienced its most explosive growth in the early 1990s, expanding by an average of 17 percent a year. Annual average temporary employment rose to 2.2 million workers by 1996 and to nearly 2.8 million by 1998 with an annual growth rate of about 9 percent. Between 1992 and 1998, 18.4 million non-agricultural jobs were added to the U.S. economy. Temporary employment accounted for 1.4 million of these jobs, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The BLS predicts that the temporary employment will increase by 53 percent by 2006, making it one of the most rapidly expanding indu stries. Overall, temporary employment accounts for about 2 percent of the country's employment. In the late 1990s, temporary employment agencies began investing greater more in training employees for their assignments. A NATSS survey from 1998 reported that temporary employment agencies spent $720 million on training 1997, in contrast to only $260 million in 1995. The survey also indicated that 4.8 million workers participated in the training programs and that about 90 percent of all temporary employment agencies provide training for free. Statement of the problem: This section of the research put the

MARKETING AND ITS ENVIRONMENT Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

MARKETING AND ITS ENVIRONMENT - Case Study Example Another major target market for Marks & Spencer includes people who are traveling or vacationing in the area of their outlet. The brand name of Mark & Spencer is synonymous with upscale and high quality products which are extremely desirous to everyone who goes to a Marks & Spencer outlet; especially to foreigners who are traveling into the country. Therefore, these people formulate a significant section of the market which constitutes the consumers of Mark & Spencer's products. Here, we will look at the services that are provided by Marks & Spencer for their brands. The key concept behind the services that are provided by Marks & Spencer is eliminating the crippling feeling of disparity that arises in the minds of the consumers with regards to the retailers and the customers. The shop keepers at Marks & Spencer portray themselves as being one from the legions of customers that formulate their target market, therefore, it becomes considerably easy for customers to associate with the shop keepers which allows for trust to be established between the customers and retailers. In addition, the ambience and general structure of Marks & Spencer outlets is created in such a way in order to create a homely environment for the customers. With soft colours, open space displays and effervescent shop keepers, Marks & Spencer fits the bill of a homely departmental store like a glove due to which their customers are highly energized by the ambience; which is considered to be one of the major reasons why Marks & Spencer enjoys a very loyal clientele and also are able to generate new customers from their existing consumer base due to word of mouth marketing. With these key ingredients as well as value addition services like overseas delivery etc, we can clearly establish that the services employed by Marks & Spencer for their brands formulate the best mix of marketing and customer closeness with regards to the product range that is offered by them; and it certainly has to be considered the most best practice towards services that are provided by firms of this genre. We will now look at the 7 P's of marketing mix in relation with the brands that are offered by Marks & Spencer. The first P that we will look at is Product. Now the product that is offered by Marks & Spencer is of the highest quality

The Non - Importance of Money Essay Example for Free

The Non Importance of Money Essay Money cant buy happiness How many of you have heard of this quote? How many of you agree with this? Don’t answer, this quote is one of most well-known that I know of. How many of you agree with this? Tell me now, would you be happy, if you had all the money you wanted, but no family? Would you still be happy if you lived in a war-torn country, but had all the money in the world? Would you be happy, if you had all the money in the world, but no friends? No, I doubt you would. I mean just the other day, I was with a friend during the job assembly and the speaker was talking about the money that you earned for a certain job, now my friend and I were having a deep conversation and then she said that she wanted more. More, then it dawned on me that she meant more as in More money. I guess having more money would sounds fun and interesting but is it really worth it. I mean just imagine sitting down on a bed with tv, your favourite pack of chips and just watching movies, all day everyday. Its sounds fun but seriously I mean what would you do with all that money. Buy clothes, get a new car, get a mansion. Yeah, yeah ou can get that but what use is it if you don’t spend it with someone like for example a friend, or  Psychologists, philosophers and ordinary folks have debated this question for years. In the last decade, the field of psychology took a dramatic turn from only looking at mental illness, to exploring what makes people feel fulfilled, engaged and happy. This Positive Psychology Movement has produced an expansive amount of researchers who are looking at things such as happiness, positive emotions, optimism and healthy character traits. At some point, every one of these top researchers explored the effects of money on happiness and positive emotions. What we are finding out is that happiness is the ultimate currency. Not only do happy people enjoy life more and have more fun, but they also practice positive lifestyle habits and have stronger immune systems. When faced with illness, happier and more optimistic individuals have been shown to be more proactive in their medical care, more compliant with treatment and medication, have quicker recoveries and show better health outcomes. So, if  we want to be healthier and happier, it’s worth figuring out where money comes into play. When we talk about happiness, we need to look at it from two separate aspectslife satisfaction as a whole vs. moment-to-moment moods. I can be satisfied with my overall life, yet still have moments when I am not happy. Vice versa, some folks can be dissatisfied with their current circumstances and wish for change, but still have many moments of joy throughout the day. Interestingly, money affects our feelings about both aspects of happiness. Income is often thought to be a good measure of happiness and well-being. However, when researched, it was found to be less significant than predicted. Although individuals with higher income levels report overall satisfaction with their lives, they often enjoy themselves less on a daily basis and experience greater moments of stress than those with lower incomes. When does income make a significant difference in our level of happiness? If we struggle to afford good housing, food, or education, both life satisfaction and mood plummets. Edward Diener, a premier researcher in the field of Positive Psychology, found that once a persons basic needs are met, additional income does little to raise his or her sense of satisfaction with life. Many other cross-cultural and longitudinal studies have also shown a very low correlation between material wealth and happiness, except in cases of extreme poverty where people were deprived of basic needs. So, how much income is needed to be comfortable and meet our basic needs? A study from Princeton Universityfound that a larger paycheck does lead to a happier life—but only to a certain point. According to the study, people who earned greater than $75,000 annually had no greater happiness. Does this mean we should all be happy when we reach an income of $75,000 and not strive to make more than that? Does it mean that money doesn’t afford many pleasures and gratifying experiences that are not available to those of lesser means? Absolutely not. What really affects our happiness more than how much we make is our attitude toward money and the way that we handle it. When we hold fast to the belief that money directly determines happiness, life becomes a constant pursuit of accumulating more. So, when is enough, enough? Martin Seligman, father of the Positive Psychology Movement and author of Authentic Happiness, states: Another barrier to raising your level of happiness is the hedontic treadmill, which causes you to rapidly and inevitably adapt to good things by taking them for granted. As you accumulate more material possessions and accomplishments, your expectations rise. The deeds and things you worked so hard for no longer make you happy; you need to get something even better to boost your level of happiness. Sonja Lyubomisrsky, author of The How of Happiness, concurs: having money raises our aspirations about the happiness that we expect in our daily lives, and these raised aspirations can be toxic. Unfortunately, raised aspirations don’t only lead us to take things for granted and impair our savoring abilities. They steer us to consume too much, tax the planets resources, overspend and under save, go into debt, gamble, live beyond our means, and purchase mortgages that we can’t afford.On one hand, we can interpret the above by concurring with the age-old expression, Money is the route of all evil. On the other hand, there are plenty who agree whole-heartedly with the sentiment, Anyone who says money can’t buy happiness hasn’t experienced having enough to do so. So how can you develop the right attitude toward money and keep it in a healthy place in relation to your happiness level? Here are some tips: Cover Your Needs If you are struggling to meet your basic needs, do all that you can to foster a more secure future. Get the help of professionals, whether it’s with career planning, financial planning or government assistance. There are many no-fee or low-fee agencies who can offer you guidance. Save for the Future Determine the amount of savings that would allow you to feel a sense of security toward handling emergencies and your future. Develop a savings plan that works for you, and be consistent. Foster Connections Focus on building stronger relationships with your loved ones. Research has shown the happiest individuals have the strongest commitment and connection to family and friends. Money doesnt guarantee happiness, but good relationships most certainly do! Dont Make Comparisons Savor the pleasures of your spending without comparing yourself to others. Comparison almost always leads to feelings of inadequacy, and often for no good reason. Bask in the joy of your new car without coveting your neighbor’s more expensive one. Appreciate your long weekend vacation instead of wishing for an around-the-world cruise. Create Experiences and Accumulate Memories Spend your energy on having experiences that will make memories instead of having stuff. Many of lifes greatest pleasures cost very little money—and can even be free! Socializing, spending time in nature, embarking on work and/or hobbies that are meaningful, volunteering, and listening to music are some of the many activities that people report bring them the greatest joy. Additionally, here are some examples of experiences that are generally worth spending money on due to the enhancements they can bring to your life: Experiences that help us to grow and develop as individuals, such as education, lessons and entrepreneurial pursuits. Small pleasures, such as a massage or a private Pilates lesson, rather than an extravagant purchase. Gifts for others, rather than for ourselves. Donations to charities that have a personal connection to us. Purchases that have been worked and saved for. Do I think that money can buy me happiness? No, but it can sure bring enjoyment to my world. I will continue to believe that my happiness is not dependent on money. Although important, if I had to make do with less, I could simplify my life, and I would still be happy. I am surrounded by family and friends I love and enjoy, and do work I find amazingly meaningful, purposeful and rewarding. I will continue to work hard and enjoy the fruits of my labor, and hopefully never, ever take all that I have for granted. I hope you will do the same.

The Future of Low Cost Airlines

The Future of Low Cost Airlines In the last ten years low cost airlines such as  Ryanair and EasyJet have transformed the face of international tourism in  Europe. What is the secret of their success and, bearing in mind the mounting  evidence that short-haul aviation is a major contributor to atmospheric  pollution and global warming, what is their future? Contents (Jump to) Introduction Europe’s Skies After Deregulation Conclusion Bibliography Introduction Ryanair signaled Europe’s entry into the low cost carrier market segment in 1991 when it transformed from a normal regional airline to one based on the U.S. Southwest Airlines model (International Civil Aviation Organization, 2003). In reality, the first successful low cost airlines was Pacific Southwest Airlines that began operations on 6 May 1949 and earned the distinction of low cost as it flew sailors for low fares serving San Francisco, San Diego and Burbank in the state of California (jeypsa.com, 2007). The modern day low cost Southwest Airlines initiated service in 1971 and has managed a profit in every year of operation since 1973, and represents the business model that low cost carriers have emulated (Southwest Airlines, 2007). In achieving a thirty percent yearly growth rate, Ryanair has transformed the market utilizing a strategy of serving the leisure market between Ireland and the United Kingdom, expanding to 22 countries (Ryanair, 2007a). The company has built up on is position of being Europe’s first low fare airline to achieve a brand recognition that carries with it that immediate connection in the minds of consumers. It also has aggressively increased its route structure, provides a pleasurable service experience, conducts memorable advertising, and held upon to pricing strategy to lure consumers (Ericsson, 2007). As a globally successful carrier in terms of profits, flights and passengers, Ryanair serves the fare conscious leisure and business segment of the market (Ryanair, 2007b). Founded by Sir Stellios Haji-Ioannou in October 1995, easyJet serves the leisure and business segment of the market, like its competitor Ryanair, and operates in excess of 200 routes to 65 airports throughout Europe (easyJet, 2007). Like Ryanair, easyJet’s business model is patterned after Southwest Airlines, offering low cost fares, flight convenience and service that is comparable to Ryanair, thus their respective strategies are basically the same, with the exception that easyJet flies to more primary airports than Ryanair which utilizes secondary airports to save on operating costs (easyJet, 2007). Thus, fare pricing, name recognition, branding, services, and destinations are behind the success of this carrier. The success of the low cost carrier concept has taken Europe by storm, introducing the market to a â€Å"†¦ cheap, fast mode of transport †¦Ã¢â‚¬  with the low fare carriers â€Å"†¦ making ambitious expansion plans and placing large orders for new planes† (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). However, there are environmental concerns that have come to the forefront as flying has never been easier, or cheaper, where short distance flights has spurred â€Å"†¦ an increased demand for air travel †¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Bowe et al, 2004). Given the relative inexpensiveness of flights, the plethora of destinations, and the ease of Internet booking â€Å"The demand to fly in Europe is forecast to triple by 2030† this has raised serious concerns among environmental groups concerning air pollution as well as the increased rate of greenhouse gas emissions (Bowe et al, 2004). One of the main underpinnings of the low cost airline system popularity is the availability of flights to almost any destination near a suitable airport, either a hub, prime, airport or secondary airport located further from the principle destination which means lower landing fees for carriers, and thus a viable aspect of their internal cost cutting measures (Bo we et al, 2004). The popularity of being able to compare flight costs, travel times, and destinations via Internet booking is a factor that consumers have also taken to, along with the more open travel that has resulted from deregulation that has allowed new entrants into the field. The business model of low cost carriers seek to utilize airports with lower congestion near high population densities, and preferred travel destinations using a single type of airframe to reduce ground maintenance, and crew training/operating costs, to result in a flight turnaround of 25 minutes lacking frills in-flight, and a simple fare structure (ATR, 2006). The preceding operational mode is geared for higher fleet flights, increased labour efficiency, along with lower maintenance, and operating costs (ATR, 2006). Internally, the aircraft have only one passenger class, all with the same seating space, thus increasing cabin density permitting a higher per passenger flight carrying capacity to maximize on space, fuel and extract utilization to support the low fare structure (ATR, 2006). The elimination of food (frills) also eliminates waste, and reduces internal operating costs, add to this equation. Employees at low cost carriers at encouraged not to join trade unions, in order to avoid the unionised working practices that would cut into their efficiency stance (Vella, 2006). All of the foregoing has meant increased flights, resulting in particle emissions in the form of soot, metals, and sulphuric acid that â€Å"†¦ indirectly influence climate change by causing additional cirrus clouds to form †¦Ã¢â‚¬  which traps rising heat (Bowe et al, 2004). The environmental concern has resulted in the European Commission announcing a proposal in December 2006 that would call for airlines that fly â€Å"†¦ within the European Union to follow carbon dioxide emissions trading in 2001 †¦Ã¢â‚¬  which would be imposed on all other flights in 2012 (The Washington Times, 2006). Under the plan, â‚ ¬1.80 and â‚ ¬9 would be added to the cost of tickets for intra European flights, and higher fees imposed for long haul flights (International Herald Tribune, 2006). The preceding means that alternative short trip transportation has become an increasing competitor. Alternative short trip transportation is represented by high-speed rail that results i n substantially reduced CO2 emissions, which are estimated as being approximately 300% lower than air flight transport (Bowe et al, 2004). Ryanair is combating the new emission policy through the purchase of newer fuel-efficient airframes that carry more passengers, and in spite of using more fuel still generate less emission (Airline Bulletin, 2007). The airline, Ryanair, emits an estimated â€Å"†¦ two to three tonnes of harmful greenhouse gases †¦Ã¢â‚¬  which makes it one of Ireland’s largest corporate polluters (UK – Airport – News.info, 2006). It is estimated that it would take 2.25 million trees until 2076 to offset the emission created by Ryanair in 2005 alone, not to mention its continued operations, or roughly one fifth of Ireland would have to be planted with trees for each one year of the company’s operation (UK – Airport – News.info, 2006). Low cost airlines are projected to capture 25% of the intra-European market by 2010 up from the 5% through 7% recorded during 2004 and 2005 (Schneiderbaur and Fainsilber, 2006). The issues of pollution as well as competition from high-speed short haul rail travel, and intense competition within the low cost segment that will bring about consolidation are environmental, and competitive issues, however the European appetite for the fast transportation solutions posed by low cost carriers will not be severely impacted by alternative transportation or environmental issues as airlines will defend and adapt to changing issues. The airline industry is a highly concentrated one, with half of all airframes operated by just 17 carriers (AirlinesGate, 2001). The United States airline industry was deregulated in 1978, prior to which there was a governmental agency that â€Å"†¦ determined the routes each airline flew and oversaw the prices they charged† (AirlinesGate, 2001). The Civil Aeronautics Board in 1976 asked the United States congress to eliminate the governmental regulatory system to allow the industry to operate under free market forces, which was followed by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (Stanford University, 2001). The Airline industry in Europe, prior to a series of liberalisation measures that started in 1987, was a highly regulated market with a number of state owned airlines receiving subsidies, and the restriction that only national flag carriers could fly between countries (AirlinesGate, 2001). Subsidies and restricted access limited the ability of new entrants, and kept fare s high, as well as limited service as the airline cartels set prices, and determined service. The airline industry in Europe prior to deregulation consisted of restricted bilateral agreements between the flag carriers of two countries, usually setting limits or terms concerning capacity, revenue sharing and fares (Button, 1996, pp. 70-80). The European airline industry under a traditional bilateral agreement consisted of a singular â€Å"†¦ designated airline per route from each country†, with the only routes permitted were those as specified in these agreements (Doganis, 1994, pp. 15-25). In terms of capacity, there was a 50- 50 sharing agreement, and the fares were subject to the approval of the government of both countries as negotiated through the International Air Transport Association (Doganis, 1994, pp. 15-25). Under liberalized bilateral agreements the airlines now operated under multiple designations, with open market access, capacity controls were eliminated, and fares were rejected only if the governments of both countries disapproved (Doganis, 1994, pp. 15-25). The 1993 European Union deregulation package provided for a uniform licensing criteria for airlines in all countries belonging to the EU, and eliminated distinctions regarding scheduled, and non-scheduled service. In terms of routes, it p rovides for open market access in all European Union countries, with capacity sharing restrictions removed (Doganis, 1994, pp. 15-25). Lastly, airlines were free to price fares with a very limited double disapproval, and it imposed safeguards concerning predatory fare pricing. Europe’s Skies After Deregulation The European Union embarked upon the road of the deregulation of airline policy in the latter part of 1980, proceeding on a staggered basis starting with the 1987 deregulation package under the Treaty of Rome competition articles (Button and Swan, 1996, pp. 259-282). This allowed for the EU to grant exemptions concerning the rules, thus gradually phasing in the process of deregulation to provide for an orderly entry towards liberalisation and the successive packages to follow (Button and Swan, 1996, pp. 259-282). The three-phased process ended in 1997 whereby carriers were granted permission to operate domestic routes throughout the EU (Button and Swan, 1996, pp. 259-282). The importance of the gradual process of deregulation eliminated the monopoly power that was in place that represented economic regulation that eliminated free competition and under economic theory lowers productivity, resulting in higher prices, and creates inefficiency (Winston, 1993, pp. 1263-1289). In effect th e higher profits expected in a regulated environment that resulted in monopolistic power was offset by higher operating costs due to inefficiencies. Deregulation set the grounds for increased freedom in pricing, and thus increased operating efficiencies as a result of competition as new firms could enter a market and through their improved operations offer lower prices thus taking market share (Doganis, 1994, pp. 15-25). Deregulation represented a change in route structures that was one of the most important aspects (Morrison and Winston, 1989, pp. 61-122). As a result of deregulation national flag carriers have had to contend with new entrants thereby increasing competitive pressures as well as fare changes. The preceding open door for new market entrants has seen a significant increase in regional airlines, and the low cost airlines (AirlinesGate, 2001). Increased competition has caused airline management to improve operations, introduce and seek new technologies, and overall heighten operational management sophistication and marketing. The marketing model of low cost carriers in providing low cost fares to markets through high flight utilization lowered internal operating costs, use where possible of secondary lower fee airports, higher airframe seating capacity, and no in-flight services providing European’s with new options concerning the manner they thought about air travel. The leisure class was affected the most in that the dramatically lower fares enabled consumers to think about three and four day get-aways and mini vacations outside of traditional vacation periods, developing to the point where weekends fitted the mode. Prior to deregulation, â€Å"†¦ the market was neatly divided †¦ (with) †¦ Scheduled carriers, focusing primarily on business travelers, controlled 75 percent of the intra-European market† and charter airline controlling the remaining 25 percent (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). Charter airlines sold aircraft time and seating capacity to tour operators for tourists seeking sun filled vacations (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). Low cost carriers changed these dynamics through their one passenger class, increased airframe seating, fast flight turnaround, no frills, Internet booking business model. These factors permitted low cost carriers to fares that are 50 to 70 percent lower than the flag carriers, or incumbents, attracting price sensitive travelers, but not appealing as much regarding the convenience and flexibility business travelers seek, even though Ryanair has managed to snag a goodly percentage of business travelers (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). And the growth of t he low cost carriers has not come at the expense of the incumbents, but rather as a result of their pricing and service policies. Lower fares have prompted people to fly as a result of increased affordability, opting for planes over rail, vehicles or not traveling at all (Shelley, 2005). And this extends even to the business segment of the market where companies that normally could not afford the expense of a business trip can schedule fares to conduct business on a face-to-face basis (Shelley, 2005). The large number of low cost flights as a result of the increased number of carriers means that finding a flight to suit business parameters is an easy task as a result of Internet booking. Thus the low cost model has grown not as a result of stealing market share, but rather from expanding the consumer base. Low Cost airlines compete on price as opposed to quality, utilizing the aforementioned one passenger class, increased airframe seating, fast flight turnaround, no frills, Internet booking business model. However, the application of the preceding does vary. Ryanair, for example, primarily operates its routes to secondary airports, reaping the benefits of dramatically reduced airport fees that on average are 65 percent below primary airports (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). This internal operational method permits Ryanair to offer fares that are the lowest in the industry, yet turn a profit when more than 55 percent of its seats are occupied (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). EasyJet, which generally flies into main airports, and on average flies to its destinations three times per week as opposed to Ryanair’s two, needs a 75 percent capacity rate (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). EasyJet, because of its increased flight schedule, contends that 50 percent of its passengers tend to be traveling on business (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). The competitive nature of the industry to induce trial has seen Ryanair offer seats for free, requiring passengers to pay just the flight taxes and services charges, that usually amount to around â‚ ¬19 or more, each way (Rockmael, 2005). The elimination of assigned seating, decent legroom, complimentary meals and or beverages, baggage policies and limited service are how low cost carriers cut costs. Competition in this segment has increased to the point whereby there are approximately 60 low cost carriers in Europe, with names such as Flybaboo, JetFree, JetMagaic, Duo, Volareweb.com, Air Berlin, Germanwings and BMIbaby, to name a few (Rockmael, 2005). The efficiency drive at low cost carriers in cutting costs and utilizing standardized operations, and equipment has resulted in, on average, that they need just 80 employees to support each aircraft as opposed to the 115 utilized by incumbents (The Economist, 2004). And in Europe Internet booking has really caught on representing 99 percent of all low cost booking, as opposed to just 75 percent in the United States (The Economist, 2004). Search engines such as wegolo.com, applefares.com, searchlowestfares.com, skyscanner.net and openjet.com aid consumers in finding the lowest fares (Rockmael, 2005). The dynamics of travel in Europe are influenced by a number of geographical factors. In countries such as France, Spain and even Germa ny, low cost travel for pleasure as well as business can also be accomplished by high-speed rail, thus making alternative transport forms more competitive, which is not the case in the United Kingdom (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). High-speed rail gains an advantage in that the departures are from city centre to city centre, thus cutting down on the time to commute to airports and the extra money for cabs or parking fees and gas. This explains the lower growth deferential of low cost carriers on Europe’s continent, as opposed to in the United Kingdom (Airline Bulletin, 2007). Located outside continental Europe, the UK has a higher concentration of easy to reach airports, also balanced with a high level of business and leisure traffic that does not have alternative travel means to the continent. The preceding has been a factor in the tremendous growth of low cost carriers based out of the UK on flights traveling to the continent that has increased by a rate of 25 percent, as oppo sed to intra European flights. Traveling to the UK has increased by just 3 percent, in all making the United Kingdom Europe’s biggest low cost market (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). Security issues at UK airports are resulting in delays in check-in that is affecting the low cost business model that calls for faster flight turnarounds resulting in massive flight cancellations (Capell, 2006). Air travel has changed dramatically from the glamour industry it once was, to one of transporting people. Fares have dropped to the point whereby a flight from London to Turin, Italy, can be as low as  £10 each way, plus  £15 in taxes (Backman, 2002). Ryanair grounded 270 of 750 departures during the summer of 2006, and easyJet suffered in excess of 500 cancelled flights as a result of new security rules delaying boarding (Backman, 2002). The higher security rules are threatening the UK’s low cost carriers, who are thinking of imposing a carry on luggage rule to combat the problem, and potentially adding limited food and drink to passengers to compensate passengers for their inconvenience (Backman, 2002). As a result, the increased delays, and higher ticket costs a s a result of taxes have turned some passengers off utilizing short haul air flights. The preceding situation is aiding rail travel as passenger seek a less restrictive travel means in the UK as well as getting to continental Europe. Eurostar, which provides high speed rail to the continent has seen their passenger traffic increase 27 percent between the 10th and 13th of August 2006 as a result (Airline Bulletin, 2006). Conclusion The issues of pollution, the CO2 emissions trading scheme, higher low cost fare taxes, airport security issues, alternative high speed rail travel, and stiffening competition presents new obstacles to the continued growth of low cost carriers. Thus low cost carriers are looking at long haul routes to offset a slowing short haul market, bringing them into more direct competition with incumbents such as British Airways, and British Midlands, both of whom â€Å"†¦ have cut some fares on a range of short haul routes †¦Ã¢â‚¬  as have â€Å"†¦ KLM and Scandinavian Airlines †¦ and Lufthansa †¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Bonggeli and Pompeo, 2002). This means that incumbents represent another competitor factor facing low cost carriers as they see the high in sector competition weakening their position, thus providing a means for them to further eroded growth and recapture some business themselves in a market that does have finite growth potential. The weaker players in the low cost segment â€Å"†¦ such as SkyEurope and Hungary’s Wizz †¦Ã¢â‚¬  have higher survivability risks as newer entrants which the industry predicts will weed out weaked carriers through consolidation and business model failures (Capell, 2006). The continued realities of rising flight taxes, airport security issues, and carriers such as British Airways, KLM and Lufthansa, to name a few, are making concerted efforts to dip into the low cost model on selected high traffic routes, even though collectively, meaning the UK and continental Europe, holds just 7 percent of all intra European travel in terms of passengers flown, and are still short of the 25 percent market share achieved by low cost carriers in the United States. And that is the reason for the attack of incumbents now, as opposed to waiting for what happened to their U.S. counterparts (Forbes.com, 2002). Incumbents and low cost carriers are converging in terms of each sector looking at the others markets as a means to increased passenger travel, with each adopting some of the features of the others operational model as Europe’s skies become more blended in terms of competing for growth and revenues. Thus the reduction of frills is bringing some incumbents into the province of the low cost carriers to block further passenger inroads. The future for low cost carriers is seemingly summed up by an article in USA Today (2003) that sees Ryanair and easyJets dominant positions, and UK flying base as long-term positives, while low cost competitors on the continent will face increasing competitive pressures from these two dominant players as well as from other low cost carriers and incumbents. Bibliography Airline Bulletin (2007) Is Ryanair the Low-Fare, High Emissions Airline? 7 January 2007. Retrieved on 9 March 2007 from http://www.airlinebulletin.com/ryanair/index.html Airline Bulletin (2006) Security Fallout on European Low-Cost Airlines. 14 August 2006. Retrieved on 8 March 2007 from http://www.airlinebulletin.com/european_carriers/index.html AirlinesGate (2001) Airline Industry. Retrieved on 7 March 2007 from http://airlinesgate.free.fr/industry.htm ATR (2006) Low-fare, Low-cost Business Model in Europe: A Risk or a Chance for Regional Carriers? Retrieved on 7 March 2007 from http://www.atraircraft.com/downl/Fiche low-cost 2005.pdf Backman, M. (2002) Europe shows the way with dirt-cheap flights. 30 May 2002. Retrieved on 8 March 2007 from http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/05/29/1022569791615.html Bowe, R., Hartley, K., O’Connor, R. (20) Flying the Dirty Skies: Environmental Fallout from the Low-budget Travel Craze. September – October 2004. Vol. 15. E Magazine Binggeli, U., Pompeo, L. (2002) Hyped Hopes for Europe’s Low Cost Airlines: Europe’s Most Successful No-Frills Carriers are Making a Lot of Money, but as They Mature They Will Have Problems Expanding. The McKinsey Quarterly Button, K. (1996) Aviation Deregulation in the European Union: Do Actors Learn in the Regulation Game? Vol. 14, Number 1. Contemporary Economic Policy Button, K., Swan, D. (1996) European Community Airlines – Deregulation and its Problems. Vol. 27, Number 4. Journal of common Market Studies Capell, K. (2006) A Low Season for Low Cost Airlines? 16 August 2006. Retrieved on 8 March 2007 from http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/aug2006/gb20060816_732287.htm Doganis, R. (1994) The Impact of Liberalisation on European Airline Strategies and Operations. Vol. 1, Number 1. Journal of Air Transport Management easyJet (2007) Company overview. Retrieved on 6 March 2007 from http://www.easyjet.com/EN/About/Information/index.html Ericsson (2007) The Ryanair Success Story. Price as Brand. Retrieved on 6 March 2007 from http://www.ericsson.com/telecomreport/article.asp?aid=10tid=85ma=1msa=3 Forbes.com (2002) Hyped Hopes for Europe’s Low Cost Airlines. 10 October 2002. Retrieved on 9 March 2007 from http://www.forbes.com/technology/futuretech/2002/10/10/1010mckinsey.html International Civil Aviation Organization (2003) The Impact of Low Cost Carriers in Europe. Retrieved on 6 March 2007 from http://www.icao.int/icao/en/atb/ecp/CaseStudies/Europe_LowCost_En.pdf International Herald Tribune (2006) EU to include airlines in carbon trading program. 20 December 2006. International Herald Tribune jetpsa (2007) The History of PSA. Retrieved on 6 March 2007 from http://www.jetpsa.com/index/history.html Morrison, S., Winston, C. (1989) Enhancing the Performance of the Deregulated Air Transportation System. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity Rockmael, K. (2005) The Dark Side of Europe’s Low-Fare Airlines. 25 February 2005. Retrieved on 8 March 2007 from http://www.budgettravelonline.com/bt-dyn/content/article/2005/06/04/AR2005060400819.html Ryanair (2007a) About Us. Retrieved on 6 March 2007 from http://www.ryanair.com/site/EN/about.php?page=About Ryanair (2007b) Strategy. Retrieved on 6 March 2007 from http://www.ryanair.com/site/about/invest/docs/Strategy.pdf Schneiderbauer, D., Fainsilber, O. (2006) Low-cost Airlines Gaining Momentum in Europe. Retrieved on 7 March 2007 from http://www.mercermc.com/Perspectives/Specialty/MOT_pdfs/3-Low-Cost Airlines.pdf Shelley, M. (2005) Get off to e flying start. 24 November 2005. Daily Record Southwest Airlines (2007) We Weren’t Just Airborne Yesterday. Retrieved on 6 March 2007 from http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/airborne.html Stanford University (2001) The Airline Industry. Retrieved on 7 March 2007 from http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/intro/airlineindustry.html The Economist (24) Turbulent skies. 8 July 2004. The Economist The Washington Times (2006) Europeans Eye Tough Emissions Rules for Airlines. 21 December 2006. The Washington Times UK-Airport-News.info (2006) Ryanair tops Irish air pollution league. 26 February 2006. Retrieved on 9 March 2007 from http://www.uk-airport-news.info/stansted-airport-news-260206a.htm USA Today (2003) European low-cost airlines fly high, but face hard landing. Retrieved on 8 March 2007 from http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2003-11-03-europe-lowcost_x.htm Winston, C. (1993) Economic Deregulation: Days of Reckoning for Macroeconomists. Vol. 31. Journal of Economic Literature Vella, M. (2006) The thrills of no-frills. 12 November 2006. Retrieved on 7 March 2007 from http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2006/11/12/t8.html