BMI
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Leicestershire
Age: 60
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
very interesting to see such concern about the fate of a well thought of airline and it's employees!!! whilst most bits posted are quite interesting to read can't help think it appears there is emjoyment at raising anxieties and putting the moker on what is potentially profitable model good for the industry and pax. Yes it may need jiggling a little and there may be a need to look at a better corporate image etc......and focus on promoting the standards that are integral to the history of the company etc etc etc....but remember the 'quality circles' of the 1980's anyone at 'The Hall' perhaps a revamped version would instill more loyalty and lead to profitability - it worked before it would be a shame to see the Ryan model creep in too far!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by karnak
can't help think it appears there is emjoyment at raising anxieties and putting the moker on what is potentially profitable model good for the industry and pax.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England.
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That some bmi employees are willing to "forget the pension" demonstrates the increasingly prevalent appalling deficiency in intelligence, backbone and integrity amongst the workforce, which will surely doom the company and them to the scrap heap unless they are suppressed.
Don't "forget the pension". It is part of your terms of employment. You've already invested hugely in it. It is a perfectly feasible benefit, given proper management. It's the lazy, incompetent management of the scheme that's the cause of the problem!
If you roll over like whimps and play dead, the management will chuckle to themselves at how easy it was, grab the cash and leave you to your miserable, self inflicted fate.
So stand up for yourselves! It's surprisingly easy and very satisfying when you do!
"Forget the pension"........that is truly pathetic!
Don't "forget the pension". It is part of your terms of employment. You've already invested hugely in it. It is a perfectly feasible benefit, given proper management. It's the lazy, incompetent management of the scheme that's the cause of the problem!
If you roll over like whimps and play dead, the management will chuckle to themselves at how easy it was, grab the cash and leave you to your miserable, self inflicted fate.
So stand up for yourselves! It's surprisingly easy and very satisfying when you do!
"Forget the pension"........that is truly pathetic!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near MME, England, UK
Age: 35
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Yak97
I see that the CAA have turned down BMI's request to wet-lease a Qatar registered A330.
Where does this leave them??
Where does this leave them??
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DTVAirport
-Sir Michael Bishop no longer seems involved with the airline and there is (circumstantial) evidence to suggest he wants out.
Not meaning to have a go, but you are naming names and in which case you have to be sure of your facts. There is absolutely no basis for the above quote.
Originally Posted by acbus1
If you roll over like whimps and play dead, the management will chuckle to themselves at how easy it was, grab the cash and leave you to your miserable, self inflicted fate.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: North of Land's End, South of John O Groats
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DTVAirport
Interesting! I doubt that'll stop them trying to launch the LHR - Doha route though!
When will this unfair protection stop?
What are BA so scared of, surely one LH route from an airline in decline is no threat to them!!!
Onto the new model topic, I don't understand the issues mentioned with not knowing whats included in a fare type, when booking a flight tonight I notice that you can click on the fare type link before you purchase the ticket and a new page opens telling you exactly what you get for that ticket compared to the 3 other fare types e.g. lounge access, FF points and name changes etc.
It isn't even pages and pages of text, it's a nice and easy to understand table.
Doesn't seem that confusing to me, perhaps it's a sign of the times that we are all becoming lazy and expect things to be there for us without having to look or make any effort.
What did we all do before computers and mobiles!!!
Flying Frog, this is not unfair protection (well, not in my view). Bmi had cooked up a deal with Qatar Airways which was unprecedented and basically saw bmi whoring traffic rights available to UK carriers around for cash.
A short precis of the deal:
Qatar Airways wanted to grow at LHR but couldn't get slots.
QR was also using the full quota of flights available under the UK/Qatar bilateral for Qatari carriers
bmi tottered along and offered to sell Qatar a set of Heathrow slots and provide some of the UK quota of flights to enable QR to launch the extra service
To do so, it required permission from the UK government to wet-lease the QR A330
UK government decided (whether after representations from BA or not) that it did not like the idea of rights that it had negotiated for UK carriers being handed over for cash to foreign carriers. After all, if everyone did this, there would be no point in having air services agreements.
Fair play. It was an idea which was pushing the boundaries, and bmi have had a governmental whack on the nose for their troubles. The only thing which should come as a surprise to no-one is that the idea was formulated by the chaps at Qatar rather than the dullards of Donington Hall.
bmi is a business with no direction, hugely overstaffed HQ, a CEO who allegedly seems to be spending more of his time cruising crew rooms than running the company and a set of uninspired, uninspiring management. It cannot carry on like this. The schoolboy discussions and idle speculation about wanting to see bmi disappear have no place on a mature discussion forum, but it is fair to say that they desperately need to do something - and fast - to stop the rot.
A short precis of the deal:
Qatar Airways wanted to grow at LHR but couldn't get slots.
QR was also using the full quota of flights available under the UK/Qatar bilateral for Qatari carriers
bmi tottered along and offered to sell Qatar a set of Heathrow slots and provide some of the UK quota of flights to enable QR to launch the extra service
To do so, it required permission from the UK government to wet-lease the QR A330
UK government decided (whether after representations from BA or not) that it did not like the idea of rights that it had negotiated for UK carriers being handed over for cash to foreign carriers. After all, if everyone did this, there would be no point in having air services agreements.
Fair play. It was an idea which was pushing the boundaries, and bmi have had a governmental whack on the nose for their troubles. The only thing which should come as a surprise to no-one is that the idea was formulated by the chaps at Qatar rather than the dullards of Donington Hall.
bmi is a business with no direction, hugely overstaffed HQ, a CEO who allegedly seems to be spending more of his time cruising crew rooms than running the company and a set of uninspired, uninspiring management. It cannot carry on like this. The schoolboy discussions and idle speculation about wanting to see bmi disappear have no place on a mature discussion forum, but it is fair to say that they desperately need to do something - and fast - to stop the rot.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst accepting that Aircraft Illustrated probably isn't high on everyone's reading list on here, the piece on bmi centred around an interview with Nigel Turner in the April edition is instructive. Everything is going well according to him, though if the spin on the MAN longhaul operation is anything to go by then the rest can also be taken with a large pinch of salt. All the longhaul routes that have started are mentioned, but for some reason the fact that Toronto stopped, Washington got messed around and stopped, and the replacing of the 330 with a leased 767 on some of the Caribbean routes fails to get a mention!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England.
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are forgetting that the management who you say will be chuckling to themselves are members of the same pension scheme as the rest of us!!
You are forgetting that the playing field is not level, it's their ball, they hold the goalposts and employ the referee!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed Lexxi, but you would think the flights were still operating to read the article! Turner made another remark you could take more than one way: 'all other things being equal the Manchester operation will continue even if bmi is allowed to fly to the US from Heathrow'. That covers most possibilities!
Originally Posted by Flightrider
bmi is a business with no direction, hugely overstaffed HQ, a CEO who allegedly seems to be spending more of his time cruising crew rooms than running the company and a set of uninspired, uninspiring management. It cannot carry on like this. The schoolboy discussions and idle speculation about wanting to see bmi disappear have no place on a mature discussion forum, but it is fair to say that they desperately need to do something - and fast - to stop the rot.
I've heard the rumour about the CEO and alleged crew room "cruising" from two different sources now! EEEWWWW!
Well first it needs some kind of strategy. Someone needs to say where they want to be in say 3 or 5 years from now. It also needs to decide what it's position in the market is and what its proposition to the travelling public should be.
My gut feel is that it should position itself as a value-for-money budget carrier (like Jetblue) rather than a no frills LCC like Ryanair.
I would then carry out a product and fleet rationalisation involving all business units to bring them under one roof.
A consistant product would be offered across the network with the only difference being a slightly better offering on LHR services. Effectively a back-to-basics strategy to go back to the days of Diamond Sservice which was responsible for making the airline the success that it was in the 1980s and 90s - but re-aligned to today's market requirements
LHR services would attract a fare premium. (To me it is ludicrous that it costs £20 to get to Paddington, £60 for a taxi to London and £30 to park your car but that you can fly to ABZ for as little as £20.) But would still be in a reasonable range.
I would have a premium cabin in each aircraft which can be expanded and contracted using a curtain but no difference in seating. Meal service would be enchanced and lounge access included and it would be offered to all pax on Full Y tickets as well as on any economy fare with a plus up of £50-70 per sector depending on length.
I would cut back on frequency at LHR serving trunk routes to 4-5 flights per day and use the spare slots to fly to places which are not served from LHR at present and do not enjoy good connectivity (e.g. Dundee, Maastrict, Bordeaux). These routes will enjoy higher yield than the 7th or 8th rotation on trunk routes plus good connecting potential.
The fleet would be rationalised to a mix of 70 seat turboprops (DH4), 110 seat ERJ190s, 140 seat A319s and 170 seat A320s giving a wide range of capacity that can be switched around the network as required.
How's that as a starter for 10?
My gut feel is that it should position itself as a value-for-money budget carrier (like Jetblue) rather than a no frills LCC like Ryanair.
I would then carry out a product and fleet rationalisation involving all business units to bring them under one roof.
A consistant product would be offered across the network with the only difference being a slightly better offering on LHR services. Effectively a back-to-basics strategy to go back to the days of Diamond Sservice which was responsible for making the airline the success that it was in the 1980s and 90s - but re-aligned to today's market requirements
LHR services would attract a fare premium. (To me it is ludicrous that it costs £20 to get to Paddington, £60 for a taxi to London and £30 to park your car but that you can fly to ABZ for as little as £20.) But would still be in a reasonable range.
I would have a premium cabin in each aircraft which can be expanded and contracted using a curtain but no difference in seating. Meal service would be enchanced and lounge access included and it would be offered to all pax on Full Y tickets as well as on any economy fare with a plus up of £50-70 per sector depending on length.
I would cut back on frequency at LHR serving trunk routes to 4-5 flights per day and use the spare slots to fly to places which are not served from LHR at present and do not enjoy good connectivity (e.g. Dundee, Maastrict, Bordeaux). These routes will enjoy higher yield than the 7th or 8th rotation on trunk routes plus good connecting potential.
The fleet would be rationalised to a mix of 70 seat turboprops (DH4), 110 seat ERJ190s, 140 seat A319s and 170 seat A320s giving a wide range of capacity that can be switched around the network as required.
How's that as a starter for 10?
Last edited by Doors to Automatic; 16th Mar 2006 at 11:37.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
quote "mix of 70 seat turboprops (DH4)"
I dont think the 400 would be a good bet,look at the problems JSY have had with them,the way to go is single fleet so just stick with the 19,20 maybe even an 18 but not TP's,the diamond ideas have already beeen forwarded to the management but no reply has been made,prob dont want to be seen to have made mistakes
rgds
K.I.L.
I dont think the 400 would be a good bet,look at the problems JSY have had with them,the way to go is single fleet so just stick with the 19,20 maybe even an 18 but not TP's,the diamond ideas have already beeen forwarded to the management but no reply has been made,prob dont want to be seen to have made mistakes
rgds
K.I.L.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near MME, England, UK
Age: 35
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with you 100% Doors to Automatic, except for the bit about the fleet, apart from the leased aircraft (TF-FII, PH-MCV and soon PH-AHQ) the fleet is fine, perhaps some A350's to replace the A330's but sadly they cannot afford that.
Last edited by Evileyes; 16th Mar 2006 at 14:16.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If VS did take over bmi long haul and sub in their 346s one would think those 332s with Trents would be good candidates for the RAF Airtanker 330Ks... if that ever happens (the 330ks I mean) 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like the Virgin/bmi takeover/merger is in full swing, Sir RB and Sir MB seen together on a bmi flight back from BRU after a meeting. both with big smiles. watch this space ............