PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Flybe-V1
Thread: Flybe-V1
View Single Post
Old 7th Sep 2021, 14:23
  #595 (permalink)  
OzzyOzBorn
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: SYD
Posts: 530
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sharklet_321 - Why the condescending attitude? This is a discussion forum and we're here to discuss. Perhaps you should learn to comprehend the "waffle" which others have written before lashing out. I made a very clear distinction between current demand and post-covid demand. The difference between these two economic environments was clearly differentiated by me, alongside recognition of the transition period between the two. With reference to potential start-up carriers such as FlyBe 2.0, post-covid demand will be key. Since you instantly launch into claims about "current demand", I can only presume that you didn't read and absorb what I wrote. Take a look back: I don't wish to annoy more attentive readers with repetition.

On to your points. I have outlined what the incumbent regional carriers are capable of doing. Blue Islands have four ATR72's and one ATR42. FlyBe had 70+ aircraft; a fleet size some 14x larger, and BCI's fleet wasn't lying idle (pre-covid) just waiting for new route opportunities. Eastern have around 26 aircraft, though many of these are long-term grounded. Fifteen of these are JS41's with only around 29 seats each. Loganair has a larger fleet numerically, but many of it's aircraft are dedicated to Highlands and Islands flying. So NO - these carriers can only step up to any meaningful degree on a small selection of routes. They could invest in expansion, but I outlined why they need to be cautious about that whilst Covid still dominates thinking. Furthermore, demand for day return business travel is not yet known: the option has not been offered on the example routes which I cited so we cannot yet know how much take up there will be when the time comes. What we do know is that fares on the services which are offered are extremely high which is usually a sign of healthy yield. As I explained, demand does not need to rebound all the way back to 2019 levels to make sense: a twice daily service on a route which formerly operated six times daily with decent numbers is a perfectly reasonable proposition.

Your point about what is environmentally acceptable is purely subjective. Anti-carbon zealots will applaud you; climate rationalists will not. That is a debate for elsewhere. But your comment on this is an opinion, not a definitive fact.

I have every sympathy with those who suffer financial loss when any company fails. I myself had to expend considerable time and effort chasing up bank chargebacks when FlyBe failed - it wasn't fun, but employees suffered far more than I did. My priority is to see as many of those employees as possible taken back on by other businesses in the space. Your resentment suggests that you would be content to see many left on the scrapheap. I respectfully disagree with you.
OzzyOzBorn is offline