Out of curiosity, why does Jet2 Holidays have a totally different brand to market than Jet2 yet fly on the same routes and network. Not a criticism, just curious as to the reason as this is uncommon.
The reason for the separation between flight only sales and holidays is the legal requirement to be bonded for selling holiday packages by the CAA. The CAA issue an ATOL (Air Travel Organisers’ Licence) to the holiday company that gives protection to the passengers that buy a holiday package in the event that the holiday company go bankrupt. The sale of a flight seat does not require any ATOL protection, so that JET2 would separate sales through different web sites. There is a cost involved in bonding holiday packages, so you would want to separate the flight seat only sales from the holidays if you can. As JET2 Holidays is a fairly new additional venture to the original flight only seat sales, separating would seem logical and cost saving. In the case of Thomson Holidays and Thomas Cook, who are essentially holiday companies (Tour Operators if you like), they would bond all their activities as they would normally aim at selling all their flight seats with hotel accommodation.
Incidently many customers consider quite wrongly that Easyjet and Ryanair sell holidays and they do not, as they are not bonded by the CAA to do so and therefore have no ATOL. For example on making a flight reservation with Easyjet if you select the option to make a hotel booking you are redirected to another web site and if you book a hotel, your contract for that booking will be with a completeley different company to Easyjet. You will in fact end up with your flight booking contracted with Easyjet and a hotel booking contracted with a hotel booking agency. This is a neat way of getting round the “package” holiday legislation and avoid the need to get the costly ATOL bonding from the CAA.
All in MHO....