CHC management are evidently amazed that Bristow have kept the Shell contract as they evidently went in with a very low bid to snatch away the work, even to the extent that it would be at a loss to them. Comments have evidently been made that as CHC were so low, how the heck did BHL get below them?!
BHL's new management have been saying for a while that they will only bid at a price where they can make a profit, and that if they lostg Shell, then it wouldn't be too big a deal as there will be a lot of work in the North Sea for the next 2-3 years.
Could it be that Shell didn't go for the lowest cost operator in this case, taking in to account that the lowest isn't necessarily the best value on such a long term contract? Look what happened the last time Shell went to the lowest cost, BHL had to renegotiate its rates a couple of years later, as I think CHC had to with some of its contracts.
Don't know what happened with the "Ebay" system that Shell have used this time, but could it be that the lowest bid didn't win?