Utah 01 Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Mr Bonatti, welcome to the forum. You make an assumption that I have been dropped 'in it'. Yes, I have in that a very useful air route to London that I use has been lost (hopefully) temporarily. More importantly, it is the Island's air passengers who have been 'dropped in it' (by the disappearance of a competitive airline market that the government's so-called Open Skies policy was there to sustain) along, of course, with the Euromanx staff and its suppliers. Rumours have abounded for a long time concerning Euromanx's finances but when a competitor smells blood it will, naturally, go for the kill and that is precisely what Flybe did - blood is on their hands from that aspect. Apart from the express aim of driving the nail into the Euromanx coffin there was no reason for Flybe to start operations into Liverpool. Flybe is by no means the root cause of Euromanx's demise (some other reasons were listed) but it has been a contributing factor. Airport statistics clearly show that Flybe, like BA City before them, was unable to make any breakthrough against Euromanx on the Manchester route, but it realised that halving Euromanx's passenger numbers on the Liverpool route would be the 'coup de grace'. In the meantime, enjoy your employment with Flybe (there, I've made an assumption) and the Island's now 'Closed Skies'. And by the way, did and wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanxfella Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 oldmanxfella: It's not so much that I support the Government, it's more that I feel there is a substantial number of roles for which is it not the best tool, a tourism management, is one of these, which I think would be better off with much greater involvement from those working in the industry. There is one basic thing wrong with that argument. Those working in the tourist industry do so to make money, if they don't make money their companies go bust and they are unemployed. Are you suggesting that anyone wants to deliberately put themselves in that position by not getting involved with the DTL to push the industry forward or to maximise potential? It does not make logical sense. Euromanx - I doubt - went deliberately bust but they did have a virtual monopoly and still failed to make it pay - that says something to me. The only ones who can get away with sitting on their backsides is the DTL all of whom will still be employed if only 5 tourists came here. My preference would be to ditch the DTL in its entirety. Everything. And let the private businesses get on and do what they do to maximise their turnover. At the moment were sinking millions into a business rejection unit. As for but if there aren't the Island businesses in place to provide these services then its capacity to deliver is rather limited. What logical private business invests into a dead industry? We have to have reasons for people to come here before it becomes worthwhile providing good privately funded tourist services. Nobody invests money when there is no clear way of getting a return on the cash. Thats why this bollocks "£70m" bus station hotel complex will never happen, because I can't see any developer mental enough to fund it as it will take far too many years to recoup the costs. If it had legs Dandara would have done it by now as they could stick it up in no time take the cash and move on to the next project. As for questioning Flybe's generosity,remember, it was'nt them that dropped you in it! Its maybe not them thats paying for all this helpfulness either. This smacks of "taxpayer subsidised" assistance and face saving to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 "£70m" bus station hotel complex will never happen, because I can't see any developer mental enough to fund it as it will take far too many years to recoup the costs. Don't forget that the Modern Manx for appartment block is 'hotel complex' - just ignore its unconnected meaning in English Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 oldmanxfella, you are trapped in your own circular logic. If there are no attractive service providers there is nothing the DTL can do to get tourists over no matter how much your spout hollowisms like 'tourist strategy.' Decent holiday recreation services, which might include diving or kayaking, or cycle trails, would be used by locals anyway, so this is not a 'chicken/egg' situation. The DTL can't create tourism in order to attract businesses, the attractions, or means of exploiting them, have to come first. The TT wasn't created in order to give the tourists in late May/early June something to do, nor were the beaches of southern Spain installed to entertain package holiday-makers. Your argument for ditching the whole DTL makes absolutely no sense: You go on to argue that private industry isn't going to invest, yet concurrently insist they would be better off left to it - bwuh? My suggestion that a body with greater input from those involved in those industries involved or potentially involved (restauranters, carriers, hoteliers etc etc) was based on a (perhaps flawed) understanding of bodies like visitScotland, which operate as public bodies, but not as part of actual departments. I was also influenced in this by a post here questioning whether having visitisleofman.com so explicitly related to the Government was a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballaughbiker Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Hey bonatti welcome to the forum. Is your real name Jim French? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonatti Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Hey bonatti welcome to the forum. Is your real name Jim French? My God ! how did you guess I have simply been "dropped in it " by Euromanx myself ,once too often! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanna Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Approvals for LCY ops also require that the operating company has appropriate procedures and training in place. Regarding the Q400 fleet, all I've flow have all been placarded to say they not approved for steep approach anyway. In theory though they could be used by flybe at LCY, just would require an update in procedires/training - not quite the wide sweeping have no aircraft at all. The 145 and 195 cannot fly from lcy. Runway is too short. Also the 146 fleet is grounded, so as Steve says there is only the q400 that is maybe possible but it would take months to carry out the steep approach mods and cost alot so that is not going to happen. So back to the original post that said flybe have no a/c to take over the lcy route. That is 100% correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True Grit Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 One boat and one plane etc, doh that is the price you pay for living in an isolated English county, there is always a boat in the morn. Laugh, Laugh, Don't stop me now, havin a good time, havin a......................... LOL True Grit To your Motherland. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1man Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 The fact that some of us choose to live on a rock in the middle of the Irish Sea should not preclude us from having a reliable service (air and sea). Do you really think the Northern Irish would put up this sh1t?? Given that the government ‘enables’ the ‘freedom to flourish’ it really should look to safeguard the Island’s significant key routes. Alas, a number of years ago it had the opportunity to do this but declined. I think we are now getting the kind of fly /maybe / bynight (delete as applicable) operations that our government have fostered. It looks more like a freedom to flounder non-action policy to me. Just out of interest, does anybody know who actually licences the slots into and out of the Island? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilf_uk Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Approvals for LCY ops also require that the operating company has appropriate procedures and training in place. Regarding the Q400 fleet, all I've flow have all been placarded to say they not approved for steep approach anyway. In theory though they could be used by flybe at LCY, just would require an update in procedires/training - not quite the wide sweeping have no aircraft at all. The 145 and 195 cannot fly from lcy. Runway is too short. Also the 146 fleet is grounded, so as Steve says there is only the q400 that is maybe possible but it would take months to carry out the steep approach mods and cost alot so that is not going to happen. So back to the original post that said flybe have no a/c to take over the lcy route. That is 100% correct. They do have aircraft that could take over the LCY route (Q400 and 146), just maybe not straight away, therefore it is not 100% correct. In any case, as I said it is very unlikely they would in any case due to the BA non-compete element. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanxfella Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 One boat and one plane etc, doh that is the price you pay for living in an isolated English county, there is always a boat in the morn. Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 I'm always slightly sceptical of new, single issue posters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True Grit Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 One boat and one plane etc, doh that is the price you pay for living in an isolated English county, there is always a boat in the morn. Dick I'm always slightly sceptical of new, single issue posters The truth hurts my fellow Dick and DIY persona. True Grit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snappy Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Oh dear........ £3-4 million debt, up to 40,000 creditors -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry for being somewhat uneducated on company law & practice, but how could their accountants and auditors have let things get so bad without pulling the plug?? http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/EuroManx-ha...tors.4073110.jp edit by ans to fix link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Oh dear........ £3-4 million debt, up to 40,000 creditors -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sorry for being somewhat uneducated on company law & practice, but how could their accountants and auditors have let things get so bad without pulling the plug?? http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/EuroManx-ha...tors.4073110.jp edit by ans to fix link Your external auditors only get an occasional look in. The in-house accountants would have an up-to-date picture of the financial position but ultimately, the responsibility for ensuring that a company doesn't trade while it is insolvent lies with its directors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.