Flybe nosedives on profits warning

[dilligaf]

1 minute ago, finlo said:

146.

Oops. I have been on that several times, so should have known. Fantastic breakfast served on the way back from Heathrow

[dilligaf]

14 minutes ago, finlo said:

146.

Ps what's the other bit of memorabilia in the bottom corner? Oh and your grass could do with a mow.

The stand for it. Been stuck together more times than The two Ronnies

[Derek Flint]

We need to work on a Ryanair model and, with the exception of Manchester perhaps (for the medical flights), go to cheaper airports like Southend. Maybe a tripartite arrangement with Aurigny/Loganair/BA Regional might work, with our ‘contribution’ being no landing or handling charges at this end? 

Yes, I know that this means running the airport at. ‘Loss’, but if we look at it more along the lines on building attractive routes and maintaining the lifeline, it makes some sense. In my head anyway. 

[woolley]

9 hours ago, John Wright said:

 

In someways too successfully. The expansion into Manx Europe, then BRAL, then the BA franchising all came before the sale. Indicative of the costs and difficulties of running a multi hub, feeder, regional airline.

When Manx Airlines Europe commenced flying their non- Manx routes as a BA franchise in BA livery and then became BRAL that was pretty obviously the beginning of the endgame. After a few years flying as BA you lose your business identity and you either continue on their terms, they buy you or you don't have a business. I had that conversation with members of Manx management in mid 90s even before BRAL came along. As JW says the strategic decisions such as the ultimate sale to BA were well out of TL's hands. I tecall that he did encourage the Manx govt to take a stake in BRAL at one stage probably foreseeing what came to pass. For a time Manx was second only to BA for number of aircraft movements in and out of Manchester. It was a cool operation.

Edited July 16, 2020 by woolley

[dilligaf]

54 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

We need to work on a Ryanair model and, with the exception of Manchester perhaps (for the medical flights), go to cheaper airports like Southend. Maybe a tripartite arrangement with Aurigny/Loganair/BA Regional might work, with our ‘contribution’ being no landing or handling charges at this end? 

Yes, I know that this means running the airport at. ‘Loss’, but if we look at it more along the lines on building attractive routes and maintaining the lifeline, it makes some sense. In my head anyway. 

So when we end up paying £100 each way to the arsehole of the NW of England, we will all be happy that we binned easyJet and their £20 flights. Is that what you want ? Unless we are prepared to lose millions each month, that is what will happen

[Derek Flint]

7 hours ago, dilligaf said:

So when we end up paying £100 each way to the arsehole of the NW of England, we will all be happy that we binned easyJet and their £20 flights. Is that what you want ? Unless we are prepared to lose millions each month, that is what will happen

My concern is that Easyjet won’t be back, at least for some time. 

Cheap flights are unlikely to be sustainable for airlines on much reduced densities. We shall see, but I think flying is about to get a lot more expensive

Edited July 17, 2020 by Derek Flint

[John Wright]

10 hours ago, dilligaf said:

Oops. I have been on that several times, so should have known. Fantastic breakfast served on the way back from Heathrow

Was better on way out, on the red eye. After all, it was prepared on island, and cooked on plane. The food on the return leg had been hanging about before heating. 

However for a small plane, on a short route, it was a good breakfast.

[John Wright]

9 hours ago, Derek Flint said:

We need to work on a Ryanair model and, with the exception of Manchester perhaps (for the medical flights), go to cheaper airports like Southend. Maybe a tripartite arrangement with Aurigny/Loganair/BA Regional might work, with our ‘contribution’ being no landing or handling charges at this end? 

Yes, I know that this means running the airport at. ‘Loss’, but if we look at it more along the lines on building attractive routes and maintaining the lifeline, it makes some sense. In my head anyway. 

 

58 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

My concern is that Easyjet won’t be back, at least for some time. 

Cheap flights are unlikely to be sustainable for airlines on much reduced densities. We shall see, but I think flying is about to get a lot more expensive

What? Derek? That’s bizarre!

Theres no comparison to Ryanair, economically or travel requirement wise. It’s just not a business model that could work for the Island.

First, we don’t have the volume to mean a plane is in the air, earning, 18+ hours per day. At most we might get 14. Even if we can utilise intensively that comes at an additional cost, be it the need for a back up plane, extended airport hours and associated staffing, engineering, and crewing.

Second, much off Island travel is the start of a journey, going elsewhere. Yes, we might get deals at Teeside/Durham, Sheffield/Robin Hood, Eastleigh, London Southend, Anglesey,  West of Ireland (Knock), Carlisle  but just like Ryanair and it’s airports,  miles away, even in different countries, there is an add on cost to get to the big city or the next airport. Ryanair have mainly stopped their daft destinations, as the travelling public got wise.

Third, PT to Manchester? What planet are you on? 95% of patients are treated in Liverpool. The add on onward transport costs, the wear and tear on patients far outweigh any imagined savings.

I agree, flying will get more expensive. Budget carriers like EasyJet and Ryanair will manage costs by operating fewer planes and flights, and employing less crew. There’s still going to be the fact that fitting in one rotation per day to IOM in between other  rotations, keeping the plane in the air, earning.

Aurigny/British Regional/LoganAir does not bring any synergy in terms of routes, hubs, engineering, staff location. The expensive bits.  Manx, initially,  worked because it had one base, one hub.

And that brings us back to plane numbers, not just back up,  but the desire to have early flights out, return, and same at end of day.

Your suggestion may provide a lifeline ( isn’t that the Steamie?) but the routes wouldn’t be attractive.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

This is the real picture.  Lockdown provides no commercially viable options for airline (anywhere really, not just the Isle of Man).

We need flights into proper cities.  Not crappy outliers like Southend.

I see Easyjet are now binning August bookings from IOM and you can't book until into September.  

The answer isn't a government owned airline for a number of reasons.  The real answer is a return to normal travel which seems a long way away.  The likes of Easyjet will be back no problem.  Just not until they can fill their planes.

[Derek Flint]

26 minutes ago, John Wright said:

 

What? Derek? That’s bizarre!

Theres no comparison to Ryanair, economically or travel requirement wise. It’s just not a business model that could work for the Island.

First, we don’t have the volume to mean a plane is in the air, earning, 18+ hours per day. At most we might get 14. Even if we can utilise intensively that comes at an additional cost, be it the need for a back up plane, extended airport hours and associated staffing, engineering, and crewing.

Second, much off Island travel is the start of a journey, going elsewhere. Yes, we might get deals at Teeside/Durham, Sheffield/Robin Hood, Eastleigh, London Southend, Anglesey,  West of Ireland (Knock), Carlisle  but just like Ryanair and it’s airports,  miles away, even in different countries, there is an add on cost to get to the big city or the next airport. Ryanair have mainly stopped their daft destinations, as the travelling public got wise.

Third, PT to Manchester? What planet are you on? 95% of patients are treated in Liverpool. The add on onward transport costs, the wear and tear on patients far outweigh any imagined savings.

I agree, flying will get more expensive. Budget carriers like EasyJet and Ryanair will manage costs by operating fewer planes and flights, and employing less crew. There’s still going to be the fact that fitting in one rotation per day to IOM in between other  rotations, keeping the plane in the air, earning.

Aurigny/British Regional/LoganAir does not bring any synergy in terms of routes, hubs, engineering, staff location. The expensive bits.  Manx, initially,  worked because it had one base, one hub.

And that brings us back to plane numbers, not just back up,  but the desire to have early flights out, return, and same at end of day.

Your suggestion may provide a lifeline ( isn’t that the Steamie?) but the routes wouldn’t be attractive.

Sorry, yes - more clarification needed. 

‘Ryanair’ was a reference to its early model of going to more obscure airports, that was all. The reason was that it was cheap. A new consortium of providers in the new world might have to do the same to keep stuff at least reasonably cost effective for the masses. It may be the difference between it happening and not happening at all. Any subventions we make should be kept as low as possible.

I take your point on Manchester, but it was more to have the scope for multiple rotations a day, with capacity to get the general public into at least one long haul airport directly. But yes, patients get a hard enough time as it is. Maybe we just provide capacity for PT, and anyone else that wants to go to Liverpool uses the twice daily all weathers fast craft service that must surely be coming to support the business case for a £38m ferry port?

 

[John Wright]

22 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

Maybe we just provide capacity for PT, and anyone else that wants to go to Liverpool uses the twice daily all weathers fast craft service that must surely be coming to support the business case for a £38m ferry port?

Well there’s an immediate saving. Drop the Liverpool terminal. Now. Has anyone seen this mythical business case.

And could there ever be a business case for a twice a day, all weather, all year round, fast craft to Liverpool, if Ben or Ben2 are going to do the same to Heysham?

The Superfast design is so expensive to build and run, and operators like BF and Minoan run them at standard speed for fuel economy. Although if they fall behind schedule the extra turn of speed is useful

[GD4ELI]

Just now, John Wright said:

Well there’s an immediate saving. Drop the Liverpool terminal. Now. Has anyone seen this mythical business case.

And could there ever be a business case for a twice a day, all weather, all year round, fast craft to Liverpool, if Ben or Ben2 are going to do the same to Heysham?

The Superfast design is so expensive to build and run, and operators like BF and Minoan run them at standard speed for fuel economy. Although if they fall behind schedule the extra turn of speed is useful

Would new fast craft be allowed? I think I saw a new standard emerging which would effectively ban them around the UK.

[John Wright]

20 minutes ago, GD4ELI said:

Would new fast craft be allowed? I think I saw a new standard emerging which would effectively ban them around the UK.

There are environmental standards, emissions. Yes they could. But at huge design, build and operational cost.

But the catamaran SeaCat designs have wave operating parameters which mean they can’t reliably sail all year round.

The Superfast design can, and does. But there seems to be a minimum size, 200m+, which our harbours can’t support.

They sail in the med, Adriatic, bay of Biscay, Baltic and Belfast Cairnryan at 30kn+ ( 56kph+)

Significantly no new ferries of this design have been launched in the last decade.

[snowman]

imagine that the government owned an airline. then imagine all the millions that would be lost supporting a grounded airline and issuing refunds during the next pandemic. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by snowman

[John Wright]

2 hours ago, snowman said:

imagine that the government owned an airline. then imagine all the millions that would be lost supporting a grounded airline and issuing refunds during the next pandemic. 

Except they aren’t handing out cash refunds. Not if they can help it. I’ve just got Easy refunds for two pre Covid cancellations on 15/16 February. 9 flights in April, they’ve confirmed refunds but cash hasn’t hit my card yet.

Ba are just as bad. In January I booked a long weekend in London in mid December via City. Couple months ago BA announced they were dropping the LCY route at end September. I’ve heard nothing, cancellation or refund. 

I checked and they are offering the flights, but via Dublin. 8 hours out, with 6 hour stop over, and 12 hours back with 9hrs30 mins stop over.

Today I rang. 30 mins to get through. Special number for assisted passengers.  They are contacting to confirm if we will accept the new routing and timings. But in date order. They’re up to end August flight changes. And no, they can’t refund whilst I was on the phone. I have to wait until they get through to notifying December customers, which may be in early October.

Choices. Gatwick and Gatwick Express to Victoria? Or Liverpool and train to Euston? Choices.