SkyEurope
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the "serious" advice Bubba, (ignoring b b)...
It is important and I do have a contingency plan with CSA via Prague, it's just when to jump ship and make that decision.
It is important and I do have a contingency plan with CSA via Prague, it's just when to jump ship and make that decision.
I thing many readers will agree that was good and serious advice
Let the poor guy get married so he can understand what happiness is...........how each of us define happiness is another debate.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: inside of a pretty bustard
Age: 53
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sky Europe plane almost grounded in Bucharest
It is due to bankrupcy announced 3 days ago,the plane made however the inbound flight but without any passanger after a few hours delay and after paying the previous bills.I am sad to hear this, some of my friends were in Slovakia when they started their operations.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just heard from an engineer who was supposed to be looking after the Air Slovakia planes at MAN that they are no longer flying for Sky Europe on that route, can anyone confirm that and also what is now being used.
Maybe it is just time to book another carrier!
Maybe it is just time to book another carrier!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, I don't think you need to worry about that particular route. Generally speaking, if SkyEurope still operates by that time, then the flight will take place. Somehow. By someone.
Weather it's going to be an Air Slovakia, an MD80, a 737 NG or a 737 vintage is the surprise-factor. Could be anything.
Unless another plane gets chained up somewhere meanwhile, there should be a flight going. Don't expect too much from the on-time-performance, though; if there ever was one, there is no more guarantee for that anymore. You might find yourself waiting at either airport for a few hours now.
As long as you're not under time-pressure (and you even have a contingency-plan as you say), go for it.
Weather it's going to be an Air Slovakia, an MD80, a 737 NG or a 737 vintage is the surprise-factor. Could be anything.
Unless another plane gets chained up somewhere meanwhile, there should be a flight going. Don't expect too much from the on-time-performance, though; if there ever was one, there is no more guarantee for that anymore. You might find yourself waiting at either airport for a few hours now.
As long as you're not under time-pressure (and you even have a contingency-plan as you say), go for it.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it all goes t1ts up between now and then how expensive is a replacement ticket going to be with another carrier. Don't think I would take the chance. It's a miracle it has lasted this long, do you really want your plans curtailed/cancelled at the last moment ? If not, well you know what to do. Stag night in Prague or was it Bratislava? well, much the same "attractions" anyhow 
and here's me talking about risks . . . . 
and here's me talking about risks . . . .
...
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Budapest
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the difference between Sky and Wizz? Remember the cases when Ryan started operation from BGY to BTS and HHN to BUD? Sky responded by starting two flights daily. Wizz cancelled the flight in a short time. One is playing Russian roulette with a Desert Eagle, the other is playing chess.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Doncaster
Age: 63
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You should be a poet or a philospher Bubba. Meanwhile the Sunday Times travel section had a bit that didn't discourage travel by SkyEurope. No link as I read the physical paper, not the online version.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Another difference between SkyEurope and WIZZ was, that WIZZ had a strategy that worked out, done by a professional management. Wizz was, like SkyEurope, also a new startup company, low-cost, and from Central Europe. I don't even think that the Airbusses gave them a signifficant head-start over Sky's classic Threesevens.
SkyEurope just went by "try-and-error", often changing their plans from black to white within only a few months. Many of their management were just plain incompetent, or over estimated themselves and the company's strength. Instead of develloping their own market-segment where they hardly had any competition, they chose to attack their competitors. As if they had stood any chance against Ryanair and the like.
Other things were self-made problems. For example, the installation of Espresso-Machines in their new aircraft; ridiculously expensive, totally useless, and quietly removed again - the investment gone to waste.
Or ridiculous investments of millions into one particular base, re-locating employees, spending on advertising and infrastructure, then closing it down just a year later. They also opened their own ground-handling company on one occasion, bought seccond-hand junk from different airports throughout western Europe. Most of this equipment never actually worked, but stood around on the airport for a few months, rusting and rotting. Until that base was also closed down one year later.
Or operating flights from Vienna to Innsbruck, advertising themselves as Central Europe's first low-cost carrier on a domestic route in Austria. Guess why!
SkyEurope had several good chances in the beginning. And for a few years, it even looked quite prosperous, when the got more and more aircraft and the load-factors increased. They were popular and got good feed-back from passengers (according to Skytrax). Many minor problems, like on-time-performance or old aircraft interior, were generously forgiven; newspapers and aviation magazines were quite welcoming towards the new company. SkyEurope's service really stood out against the dull, unfriendly "service" of famous other lo-co airlines.
When they started replacing the old "classics" with new "NGs", went on the stock-market and got a new management, things went downhill. They failed to expand, wasted too much time and money on ideas that weren't thought through properly, had internal fights for competence, and so gradually lost ground to everyone else.
SkyEuropes end now is not unexpected or surprising. It came slowly and gradually. In fact, many of us expected this to happen years ago.
Funny how everybody saw it, except for those being responsible.
SkyEurope just went by "try-and-error", often changing their plans from black to white within only a few months. Many of their management were just plain incompetent, or over estimated themselves and the company's strength. Instead of develloping their own market-segment where they hardly had any competition, they chose to attack their competitors. As if they had stood any chance against Ryanair and the like.
Other things were self-made problems. For example, the installation of Espresso-Machines in their new aircraft; ridiculously expensive, totally useless, and quietly removed again - the investment gone to waste.
Or ridiculous investments of millions into one particular base, re-locating employees, spending on advertising and infrastructure, then closing it down just a year later. They also opened their own ground-handling company on one occasion, bought seccond-hand junk from different airports throughout western Europe. Most of this equipment never actually worked, but stood around on the airport for a few months, rusting and rotting. Until that base was also closed down one year later.
Or operating flights from Vienna to Innsbruck, advertising themselves as Central Europe's first low-cost carrier on a domestic route in Austria. Guess why!
SkyEurope had several good chances in the beginning. And for a few years, it even looked quite prosperous, when the got more and more aircraft and the load-factors increased. They were popular and got good feed-back from passengers (according to Skytrax). Many minor problems, like on-time-performance or old aircraft interior, were generously forgiven; newspapers and aviation magazines were quite welcoming towards the new company. SkyEurope's service really stood out against the dull, unfriendly "service" of famous other lo-co airlines.
When they started replacing the old "classics" with new "NGs", went on the stock-market and got a new management, things went downhill. They failed to expand, wasted too much time and money on ideas that weren't thought through properly, had internal fights for competence, and so gradually lost ground to everyone else.
SkyEuropes end now is not unexpected or surprising. It came slowly and gradually. In fact, many of us expected this to happen years ago.
Funny how everybody saw it, except for those being responsible.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Another difference between SkyEurope and WIZZ was, that WIZZ had a strategy that worked out, done by a professional management. Wizz was, like SkyEurope, also a new startup company, low-cost, and from Central Europe. I don't even think that the Airbusses gave them a signifficant head-start over Sky's classic Threesevens.
Let some Wizz-guys elaborate further on that, I don't know much about them.
SkyEurope's strategy was to go by "try-and-error", sometimes changing their plans from black to white within only a few months. Many of their management were either just plain incompetent, or they over-estimated themselves and the company's strength (for the sake of doubt, let's call that "inexperienced", and not "daydreamers"). Instead of develloping their own market-segment and advantages where they hardly had any competition, they chose to attack their competitors. As if they had stood any chance against Ryanair and the like. Just as Bubba already said.
Other things were self-made problems. For example, the installation of Espresso-Machines in their new aircraft; ridiculously expensive, totally useless, and quietly removed again - the investment gone to waste, nobody responsible.
Or ridiculous investments of millions into one particular base. Re-locating employees sometimes by blackmail, sometimes by promises; spending on advertising and infrastructure - then closing the base down again just a year later. They also opened their own ground-handling company on one occasion, so they bought seccond-hand junk from different airports throughout western Europe. Most of this equipment never actually worked, but stood around on the airport for a few months - airstairs, generators, trucks and vehicles, rusting and rotting away under the snow, rain and sunlight. Until that base was also closed down a year or so later.
Or operating flights from Vienna to Innsbruck, advertising themselves as Central Europe's first low-cost carrier on a domestic route in Austria. Guess why!
SkyEurope had several good chances in the beginning. And for a few years, it even looked quite prosperous, as they received more and more aircraft and the load-factors increased year by year. They were getting popular and enjoyed good feed-back from passengers (according to Skytrax). Many minor problems, like on-time-performance or old aircraft interior, were generously forgiven, passengers praised the free coffee and the smiling Cabin Attendants instead. Newspapers and aviation magazines were quite welcoming towards the new startup-company.
When they started replacing the old "classics" with new "NGs", went on the stock-market and got a new management, things went visibly downhill. Nobody knows about the true status of the airline previously, but from that moment everybody could see that things were not going well. SkyEurope failed to expand at the right time, and wasted too much time and money on ideas that weren't thought through properly, had internal fights for competence, and so gradually lost ground to everyone else, including Wizz.
Looking at the shares: I sold mine long ago, at 20% of what I had paid for them in the first place - which was probably a wise decision, compared to their value now.
SkyEuropes end now is not unexpected or surprising. It came slowly and gradually. In fact, most of us expected this to happen years ago.
Funny how everybody noticed it, except for those being responsible.
Johnnychips: It's true that, at the moment, passengers don't really need to worry about their flights. CAP 11 means also that the company is now protected against their planes being seized. Guys like Peterpaul are probably relieved that they can walk into their bank again, without fear of having their credit-card being confiscated by the teller.
However, it just gives some gratuity-time. Unless Skyeurope now really gets many major improvements that convince, it will not change a thing. And "major improvements" this time doesn't mean just to change some managers, cancelling the free coffee for pilots, and closing one or two routes.
They would now need a complete restructuring, with very painful consequences (looking at the history of companies like Delta or United, who each had to lay off more than 40% of their employees).
But for a while now, things will drag on.
Let some Wizz-guys elaborate further on that, I don't know much about them.
SkyEurope's strategy was to go by "try-and-error", sometimes changing their plans from black to white within only a few months. Many of their management were either just plain incompetent, or they over-estimated themselves and the company's strength (for the sake of doubt, let's call that "inexperienced", and not "daydreamers"). Instead of develloping their own market-segment and advantages where they hardly had any competition, they chose to attack their competitors. As if they had stood any chance against Ryanair and the like. Just as Bubba already said.
Other things were self-made problems. For example, the installation of Espresso-Machines in their new aircraft; ridiculously expensive, totally useless, and quietly removed again - the investment gone to waste, nobody responsible.
Or ridiculous investments of millions into one particular base. Re-locating employees sometimes by blackmail, sometimes by promises; spending on advertising and infrastructure - then closing the base down again just a year later. They also opened their own ground-handling company on one occasion, so they bought seccond-hand junk from different airports throughout western Europe. Most of this equipment never actually worked, but stood around on the airport for a few months - airstairs, generators, trucks and vehicles, rusting and rotting away under the snow, rain and sunlight. Until that base was also closed down a year or so later.
Or operating flights from Vienna to Innsbruck, advertising themselves as Central Europe's first low-cost carrier on a domestic route in Austria. Guess why!
SkyEurope had several good chances in the beginning. And for a few years, it even looked quite prosperous, as they received more and more aircraft and the load-factors increased year by year. They were getting popular and enjoyed good feed-back from passengers (according to Skytrax). Many minor problems, like on-time-performance or old aircraft interior, were generously forgiven, passengers praised the free coffee and the smiling Cabin Attendants instead. Newspapers and aviation magazines were quite welcoming towards the new startup-company.
When they started replacing the old "classics" with new "NGs", went on the stock-market and got a new management, things went visibly downhill. Nobody knows about the true status of the airline previously, but from that moment everybody could see that things were not going well. SkyEurope failed to expand at the right time, and wasted too much time and money on ideas that weren't thought through properly, had internal fights for competence, and so gradually lost ground to everyone else, including Wizz.
Looking at the shares: I sold mine long ago, at 20% of what I had paid for them in the first place - which was probably a wise decision, compared to their value now.
SkyEuropes end now is not unexpected or surprising. It came slowly and gradually. In fact, most of us expected this to happen years ago.
Funny how everybody noticed it, except for those being responsible.
Johnnychips: It's true that, at the moment, passengers don't really need to worry about their flights. CAP 11 means also that the company is now protected against their planes being seized. Guys like Peterpaul are probably relieved that they can walk into their bank again, without fear of having their credit-card being confiscated by the teller.
However, it just gives some gratuity-time. Unless Skyeurope now really gets many major improvements that convince, it will not change a thing. And "major improvements" this time doesn't mean just to change some managers, cancelling the free coffee for pilots, and closing one or two routes.
They would now need a complete restructuring, with very painful consequences (looking at the history of companies like Delta or United, who each had to lay off more than 40% of their employees).
But for a while now, things will drag on.
Last edited by Nightfire; 29th Jun 2009 at 12:38.