Just found this thread and listened to the interview with Harbison.
Things that I noted;
1, His frequent use of the word "we" when ever he had to make a decisive statement ( sounds like he won't take ownership of decisions)
2.Use of the words "Our partners" (means they don't want to pay for services but , would rather work on commissions / percentages - they have little or no money).
3. "We are leasing from 777 Partners, who have the planes at a very good price" ( means to me that; 777 are maybe a " partner" and maybe not the parent company/ backer; great for 777 if they get paid higher rates than they pay but, see above)
4. He is hoping for 80-90% loadings, hope his break even is around the 50% mark and not 80% ( Tell 'im he's dreaming)
5. The word 'Bonza " hasn't been used in Australia since the 70's. He is a Pom and I can understand the out of date notions about Australian culture and sophistication ( Virgin "Blue" was another poor choice).
A more relevant name might be " Hipster Airlines" or "Woke" today, surely ( not that I would).
Starting an airline is very much more than just thinking of a name , places that are not serviced by airlines and having some "T" shirts printed for the interviews..
There generally is a reason why these places are not serviced by others.
6. He stated that "provided "we" do everything that we should in the eyes of the regulator, we will be airborne 2nd quarter of '22
( Buckley's chance of that.)
Even if all was in order, no way they can jump through all the hoops by 2nd quarter ( you want CASA to put in a fair day's work for $190 per hour ?) .
Has he thought about the minefield ahead ( obviously not)?
Pilot/FA/Groundcrew employment & training, training course approvals, aircraft registration ( hope that they are already here ) security, airport and route approvals, a reservations system, insurance, industrial relations ( that scourge of the modern times - HR) , realestate, remodeling, marketing, the list goes on.
Would probably take that much time to get ASIC cards issued.
Wish them luck but, someone once said that Australia can only support 1.5 airlines.
First there were many and that didn't work ( pre regulation), then there were two ( regulation) , then 3, then 2 , then 3, now 4 and he wants to go back to to 5?
I recall that he said that the population has grown by some mythical percentage since he started dreaming but, the rate isn't anything like 5/1.5 and, assuming that people will have money to spend on leisure travel ( because as he said , "they are not in business" - I thought the objective is to be in business).
We are about to pay for Covid for the next 1-2 generations through; unemployment, rising costs , rising taxes ( governments have been waiting for an opportunity to get the GST to their idea of "fair rates" say; 17 - 22% ) and stagnant wages ( unless we want interest rates to soar) and, he wants people to spend money on leisure flights.