Jump to content

Flybe nosedives on profits warning


Andy Onchan

Recommended Posts

Back on topic.

A lot of people reckon we were better of with the old Manx Airlines scenario, where the Heathrow route was concerned we were, Reliability of flights (no consolidation as so frequently happens now) respectful treatment of travellers etc.

But with a return fare to London of £264.00. 

A lot to pay though for a free cooked breakfast and those pleasantries

Edited by Sentience
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sentience said:

Back on topic.

A lot of people reckon we were better of with the old Manx Airlines scenario, where the Heathrow route was concerned we were, Reliability of flights (no consolidation as so frequently happens now) respectful treatment of travellers etc.

But with a return fare to London of £264.00. 

A lot to pay hough for a free cooked breakfast and those pleasantries

A cooked breakfast, but no "t". No wonder they failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dilligaf said:

A cooked breakfast, but no "t". No wonder they failed.

I don’t think Manx Airlines did fail Dilli - they were doing very well and BA bought them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

.I don’t think Manx Airlines did fail Dilli - they were doing very well and BA bought them.

Some say, IOMG had an opportunity to step in and nationalise Manx Airlines at that time.

Some say, "it was a missed opportunity".

However where do the records show our government making a success out of EVER stepping in where a commercial business is concerned and making a success of it TO OUR BENEFIT!

I have the same doubts and fears about their new involvement with IOMSC.

However on this occasion I would sincerely like/love to be proven wrong.

We wait, and we wonder.

Edited by Sentience
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

I don’t think Manx Airlines did fail Dilli - they were doing very well and BA bought them.

Largely to get their hands on Manx's Heathrow landing slots, worth a small fortune in themselves.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

Largely to get their hands on Manx's Heathrow landing slots, worth a small fortune in themselves.

Which was pointed out to government at the time who dismissed the realities of the situation. !

Never mind we still have 2.5 million passengers a year ........   oh hang on ........

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Sentience said:

Back on topic.

A lot of people reckon we were better of with the old Manx Airlines scenario, where the Heathrow route was concerned we were, Reliability of flights (no consolidation as so frequently happens now) respectful treatment of travellers etc.

But with a return fare to London of £264.00. 

A lot to pay though for a free cooked breakfast and those pleasantries

Compared to back then you have to say the island's travel links have improved. Sure we're at the mercy of the market but you can fly to three separate London airports daily with a selection of travel; premium prices and a day return with BA and budget prices at leisure times to Gatwick and Luton with Easyjet. You can get a return ticket to the capital for the price of a taxi from Ramsay to the airport.

Liverpool is also well served with £20 fares. I get the concern about frequency if they decide to do Manchester too but if whoever buys Flybe doesn't view the island as a core market it'll be an open goal for them there too. I'm sure they will be watching the Flybe scenario unfold to see what opportunities it presents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This merry go round of airline business has continued here for 25yrs +. None of it is good for island based staff nor passengers ! It is difficult to envisage why government is so regulatory in respect of sea services but insists on an open skies policy which in the end always results in a race to the bottom. From a business perspective there is little to recommend investment in the IOM from an airline as their routes can be poached at any times by others ! I do not believe there is a case for the SPCO situation but some light touch regulation would imo give better and more sustainable results for the consumers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, asitis said:

This merry go round of airline business has continued here for 25yrs +. None of it is good for island based staff nor passengers ! It is difficult to envisage why government is so regulatory in respect of sea services but insists on an open skies policy which in the end always results in a race to the bottom. From a business perspective there is little to recommend investment in the IOM from an airline as their routes can be poached at any times by others ! I do not believe there is a case for the SPCO situation but some light touch regulation would imo give better and more sustainable results for the consumers.

How can you say the current offering isn't good for passengers? Granted it's all built on sand and could easily fall apart due to market forces but people said that when Easyjet came here a few years ago. Now their flights are full most days with fares from £20. This constant doom and gloom around the air services has been here since the day I came here and flights have got progressively cheaper in the past decade, whilst the routes that we're served seem to work for us.

We could always go down an Aurigny model and lose £5m a year I suppose.

Out of interest what 'light touch' regulation would you like to see? The likes of Easyjet wouldn't entertain it, it goes against their whole business model and I don't see the rest of the airline industry beating a path to our door to get tied down to an agreement with a tiny island of 80,000 people. We could maybe extend the hand to Stobart, offer them incentives to have a base here but if it doesn't make commercial sense to them they'll thank us and move on.

The reason we have open skies is probably because it's the only real option open to us.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lxxx said:

Compared to back then you have to say the island's travel links have improved. Sure we're at the mercy of the market but you can fly to three separate London airports daily with a selection of travel; premium prices and a day return with BA and budget prices at leisure times to Gatwick and Luton with Easyjet. You can get a return ticket to the capital for the price of a taxi from Ramsay to the airport.

Liverpool is also well served with £20 fares. I get the concern about frequency if they decide to do Manchester too but if whoever buys Flybe doesn't view the island as a core market it'll be an open goal for them there too. I'm sure they will be watching the Flybe scenario unfold to see what opportunities it presents.

I don't think I have ever seen a £20 fare.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Lxxx said:

How can you say the current offering isn't good for passengers? Granted it's all built on sand and could easily fall apart due to market forces but people said that when Easyjet came here a few years ago. Now their flights are full most days with fares from £20. This constant doom and gloom around the air services has been here since the day I came here and flights have got progressively cheaper in the past decade, whilst the routes that we're served seem to work for us.

We could always go down an Aurigny model and lose £5m a year I suppose.

Out of interest what 'light touch' regulation would you like to see? The likes of Easyjet wouldn't entertain it, it goes against their whole business model and I don't see the rest of the airline industry beating a path to our door to get tied down to an agreement with a tiny island of 80,000 people. We could maybe extend the hand to Stobart, offer them incentives to have a base here but if it doesn't make commercial sense to them they'll thank us and move on.

The reason we have open skies is probably because it's the only real option open to us.

I don't see how a light touch regulation is bad for anyone ! it seems to me that if you are a cheap airline and you are meeting the capacities you require, then how would you cope if someone even cheaper descended on the route and put you far below your load minima, if they were sufficiently business aggressive to, in effect, buy you off the route and didn't care about short term losses  ? 

Government attracted easy jet to the island, not a bad move for consumers I agree, but it did have consequences, the loss of the Gatwick Flybe aircraft was the catalyst to the base closure and the loss of maybe 100 taxable incomes when people re located.

What I am suggesting is the protection of businesses who are making a go of our niche market, not preventing anyone who wishes to start a route not already served. Maybe Easy are big enough and cost effective enough to not worry about competitors but that won't be true of every operator and route !

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...