Air Sylhet
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Sword,
I find your comment quite bizaare, and instead of questioning other posters being involved in RBA, I question you being involved in this apparent airline.
Laywer71 is quite correct in what he has said, it is illegal in the UK to try to sell shares in a company to the public without having the correct authority for it to be regulated, this is in place to protect the public who may invest, and certainly should be for this company, which gives me no confidence at all from looking at it, however are hoping to convince people to give them £1000, without any legal protection in place.
Everybody who has posted has made a valid point, what they are doing is illegal and therefore it should be stopped, certainly it doesn't give any positive signs if they are trying to raise funds illegally, how do you expect them to operate an airline if they can't even stay on the right side of the law in the first stages of capital raising.
What these comments do is make people aware that they should be extremely cautious when dealing with this company, until such time they can operate properly and legally.
For all you know, these people could just take your money and then do one with it, there is currently nothing stopping them from doing just that.
FYI, there is no "legal speculation" in this thread, section 21 of the Financial Services and Marketing Act, quotes:
"Section 21 makes it a criminal offence to issue a financial promotion in the United Kingdom unless it is issued or approved by an authorised firm or exempt via the Financial Promotions Order."
So no smearing, just a lot of scepticism and caution, which is certainly advisable in their present form.
Since my career is in law, I feel quite confident in giving advice on this subject.
I find your comment quite bizaare, and instead of questioning other posters being involved in RBA, I question you being involved in this apparent airline.
Laywer71 is quite correct in what he has said, it is illegal in the UK to try to sell shares in a company to the public without having the correct authority for it to be regulated, this is in place to protect the public who may invest, and certainly should be for this company, which gives me no confidence at all from looking at it, however are hoping to convince people to give them £1000, without any legal protection in place.
Everybody who has posted has made a valid point, what they are doing is illegal and therefore it should be stopped, certainly it doesn't give any positive signs if they are trying to raise funds illegally, how do you expect them to operate an airline if they can't even stay on the right side of the law in the first stages of capital raising.
What these comments do is make people aware that they should be extremely cautious when dealing with this company, until such time they can operate properly and legally.
For all you know, these people could just take your money and then do one with it, there is currently nothing stopping them from doing just that.
FYI, there is no "legal speculation" in this thread, section 21 of the Financial Services and Marketing Act, quotes:
"Section 21 makes it a criminal offence to issue a financial promotion in the United Kingdom unless it is issued or approved by an authorised firm or exempt via the Financial Promotions Order."
So no smearing, just a lot of scepticism and caution, which is certainly advisable in their present form.
Since my career is in law, I feel quite confident in giving advice on this subject.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An axe to grind?
Danny,
I think you are way, way out of line.
It isn't your place to call Air Sylhet illegal.
Does your legal training include company law related to Public Limited companies?
I think not.
All PLCs are entitled to sell shares and the sale of those
is regulated by a strict set of rules.
Which of these rules specifically do you believe that Air Sylhet have broken?
Pray tell.
I think you are way, way out of line.
It isn't your place to call Air Sylhet illegal.
Does your legal training include company law related to Public Limited companies?
I think not.
All PLCs are entitled to sell shares and the sale of those
is regulated by a strict set of rules.
Which of these rules specifically do you believe that Air Sylhet have broken?
Pray tell.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BS,
Which of these rules specifically do you believe that Air Sylhet have broken?
You have asked which laws we think are being broken, so I will emphasis the word think. Just like AS's revenue projections, this is speculation on my part, but in case you haven't realised, this is a rumour network after all.
Let's start with:
1) Copyright - see above re: photoshopped image.
2) Offering shares for sale without regulatory protection.
3) Associating share ownership with employment opportunity.
4) Claims of holding operating licence (since removed, quite possibly after reading this thread).
I am glad someone is trying to defend them - that is the whole point in having a forum thread. As I think both Cyrano and myself have said, there is a clear need for competition on these routes.
We don't question the existence of that need for one minute. We just don't think Air Sylhet are in a position to satisfy that need. If you think we are doing the Bengali community a dis-service by saying this, then I suggest you re-read the thread, and work out the difference between a good idea and a good plan.
Perhaps you might also like to give us your opinions on ASs extremely tight scheduling proposals, and whether or not you think there might be technical issues with operating a B767 to Bangladesh from BHX. Or should that be one of Easyjet's borrowed A319s - I suppose you think that will make it there and back in 24 hours too?
Which of these rules specifically do you believe that Air Sylhet have broken?
You have asked which laws we think are being broken, so I will emphasis the word think. Just like AS's revenue projections, this is speculation on my part, but in case you haven't realised, this is a rumour network after all.
Let's start with:
1) Copyright - see above re: photoshopped image.
2) Offering shares for sale without regulatory protection.
3) Associating share ownership with employment opportunity.
4) Claims of holding operating licence (since removed, quite possibly after reading this thread).
I am glad someone is trying to defend them - that is the whole point in having a forum thread. As I think both Cyrano and myself have said, there is a clear need for competition on these routes.
We don't question the existence of that need for one minute. We just don't think Air Sylhet are in a position to satisfy that need. If you think we are doing the Bengali community a dis-service by saying this, then I suggest you re-read the thread, and work out the difference between a good idea and a good plan.
Perhaps you might also like to give us your opinions on ASs extremely tight scheduling proposals, and whether or not you think there might be technical issues with operating a B767 to Bangladesh from BHX. Or should that be one of Easyjet's borrowed A319s - I suppose you think that will make it there and back in 24 hours too?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jabird,
1) Copyright - how has this been broken? Are you the copyright holder?
If not, how do you know copyright has been broken?
A websearch reveals that Air Sylhet employed a reputable TV production company to produce their PR material.......
The A319 3D model was amusing, but it was just PR material.
2) There is NO evidence of illegal offering of shares.
What specific regulation are you claiming has been broken?
And where is your proof?
3) Share ownership and job opportunities - whats your point?
4) AOC - again whats your point?
Are you suggesting that Air Sylhet will fly without an AOC?
I think the CAA are big enough to handle that.
You are entitled to your opinion, but you are going way beyond
that by accusing a company of breaking the law whilst pretending
to have the interests of ordinary people at heart.
1) Copyright - how has this been broken? Are you the copyright holder?
If not, how do you know copyright has been broken?
A websearch reveals that Air Sylhet employed a reputable TV production company to produce their PR material.......
The A319 3D model was amusing, but it was just PR material.
2) There is NO evidence of illegal offering of shares.
What specific regulation are you claiming has been broken?
And where is your proof?
3) Share ownership and job opportunities - whats your point?
4) AOC - again whats your point?
Are you suggesting that Air Sylhet will fly without an AOC?
I think the CAA are big enough to handle that.
You are entitled to your opinion, but you are going way beyond
that by accusing a company of breaking the law whilst pretending
to have the interests of ordinary people at heart.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BlackSword, I kind of agree with your first post in this thread in that this forum shouldn't be about accusations of illegality. For the record I don't have any personal interest in this and I am not saying that anyone has broken the law, I'm just trying to shed a bit of light on what English law says about financial promotions (which, by the way can include things like websites and even pprune postings!)
The people behind this start-up are clearly very talented at what they do - their web design is pretty slick for example. No doubt they have good intentions, and no one wants to discourage entrepreneurialism.
All that most posters here are trying to say is that commercial aviation and corporate finance are both complicated businesses and are not playthings for amateurs to have a go at unless they want to get their fingers burnt. If that means they lose their own money then that's an unfortunate lesson of life for them, but if it means other people lose theirs then it is something much more serious. That is what the law is there to try to prevent.
The people behind this start-up are clearly very talented at what they do - their web design is pretty slick for example. No doubt they have good intentions, and no one wants to discourage entrepreneurialism.
All that most posters here are trying to say is that commercial aviation and corporate finance are both complicated businesses and are not playthings for amateurs to have a go at unless they want to get their fingers burnt. If that means they lose their own money then that's an unfortunate lesson of life for them, but if it means other people lose theirs then it is something much more serious. That is what the law is there to try to prevent.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that there is a very good debate going on here.
For clarification I have no personal interest in any airline.
I don't think anyone in this forum directly accused AS of breaking the law, however there are elements that they are not following properly.
The main issue is assurance. AS are giving the investors no asssurance.
The difference I have seen between RBA and AS is that AS are very explicit in advertising shares. Every promotional material contains share advertisement, which (hands up) you won't see in RBA's. But I guess that's because RBA are a private limited company and shares can only be sold to friends and family therefore it serves them right to indirectly sell shares. However, not to corner AS, RBA have not provided assurance as well, but the clever thing is that by indirectly selling shares RBA are protected from FSA because their investments were based on people approaching them (whether it be word of mouth or friends/ family), there are some lawers posting here so maybe you could expand and correct me if I'm wrong.
Also no one in this world can accuse AS of breaking copyright laws except the person holding the copyright (of the picture in this case). Therefore Jabird and anyone else stop accusing them.
About AOC, although we know they have a host AOC, infact they have told me personally when I called that they don't have their own AOC, their wording was wrong- this is the only reason why they are guilty, but they are learning as they go along and have changed it since
.
This all shows that they are trying now, opening an airline is a very big business for little entrepreneurs, therefore we should give them time to mould into a big corporation. to Air Sylhet for their positive side. We keep on mentioning the negative side therefore make our self lose trust.
Good Luck
For clarification I have no personal interest in any airline.
I don't think anyone in this forum directly accused AS of breaking the law, however there are elements that they are not following properly.
The main issue is assurance. AS are giving the investors no asssurance.
The difference I have seen between RBA and AS is that AS are very explicit in advertising shares. Every promotional material contains share advertisement, which (hands up) you won't see in RBA's. But I guess that's because RBA are a private limited company and shares can only be sold to friends and family therefore it serves them right to indirectly sell shares. However, not to corner AS, RBA have not provided assurance as well, but the clever thing is that by indirectly selling shares RBA are protected from FSA because their investments were based on people approaching them (whether it be word of mouth or friends/ family), there are some lawers posting here so maybe you could expand and correct me if I'm wrong.
Also no one in this world can accuse AS of breaking copyright laws except the person holding the copyright (of the picture in this case). Therefore Jabird and anyone else stop accusing them.
About AOC, although we know they have a host AOC, infact they have told me personally when I called that they don't have their own AOC, their wording was wrong- this is the only reason why they are guilty, but they are learning as they go along and have changed it since
.This all shows that they are trying now, opening an airline is a very big business for little entrepreneurs, therefore we should give them time to mould into a big corporation.
to Air Sylhet for their positive side. We keep on mentioning the negative side therefore make our self lose trust.Good Luck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blacksword,
As per my previous posts, I have merely drawn attention to concerns which I think are perfectly legitmate.
As per my last post, this is a rumour network, and there are many more people who are far better qualified on individual operations procedures than I am. For the record though, I do not work for any airline, and never have done. I have no commercial interest in whether Air Sylhet succeeds or fails, but do have a pretty good understanding of how and why air routes get launched.
I still stand by the concerns I have raised above.
Even if the management team at Air Sylhet have both the best intentions (which I'm sure they do), and a top notch business plan (which I haven't seen much evidence of), there are still huge obstacles that they would need to go through to make it work, not least the political situation in Bangladesh, for anyone who pays attention to FCO alerts. State of emergency since Jan 11th isn't a good environment in which to start a low cost operation. High yielding full service maybe - and BA certainly seem to be milking it right now - but starting a single plane service is fraught with massive risks, which I really don't think the people behind AS have properly explored.
To give credit where it is due, they have acknowledged that the UK offers a better regulatory environment in which to start an airline than Bangladesh does. The directors behind this have clearly enjoyed success in other business ventures, but the implication is also that they will continue with these. I think it was Laker who said the easiest way to become a millionaire in aviation was to start off as a billionaire. But even to attempt to make money needs full time commitment, and a credible business plan.
Perhaps I am overdwelling on the image issue, but it doesn't change the fact that the prospectus places great emphasis on the use of B767 equipment, and they show an image of an A319. That is pretty basic stuff for a long haul airline, not just a quick over-sight. The fact that the logo is then derived from the Easyjet colour scheme which the original aircraft has, and that the slogan "Let's Fly" is used, when Easyjet's is "Come on Let's Fly", is at best sailing very close to the wind.
In the grand scheme of things, you are welcome to tell me that these points are picking at details, but that's where the devil always hides.
I'm sorry, but these concerns all give me plenty of reasons to be extremely sceptical about this venture.
As for the interlinkage of share ownership to employment opportunities - that is just plain wrong!
As per my previous posts, I have merely drawn attention to concerns which I think are perfectly legitmate.
As per my last post, this is a rumour network, and there are many more people who are far better qualified on individual operations procedures than I am. For the record though, I do not work for any airline, and never have done. I have no commercial interest in whether Air Sylhet succeeds or fails, but do have a pretty good understanding of how and why air routes get launched.
I still stand by the concerns I have raised above.
Even if the management team at Air Sylhet have both the best intentions (which I'm sure they do), and a top notch business plan (which I haven't seen much evidence of), there are still huge obstacles that they would need to go through to make it work, not least the political situation in Bangladesh, for anyone who pays attention to FCO alerts. State of emergency since Jan 11th isn't a good environment in which to start a low cost operation. High yielding full service maybe - and BA certainly seem to be milking it right now - but starting a single plane service is fraught with massive risks, which I really don't think the people behind AS have properly explored.
To give credit where it is due, they have acknowledged that the UK offers a better regulatory environment in which to start an airline than Bangladesh does. The directors behind this have clearly enjoyed success in other business ventures, but the implication is also that they will continue with these. I think it was Laker who said the easiest way to become a millionaire in aviation was to start off as a billionaire. But even to attempt to make money needs full time commitment, and a credible business plan.
Perhaps I am overdwelling on the image issue, but it doesn't change the fact that the prospectus places great emphasis on the use of B767 equipment, and they show an image of an A319. That is pretty basic stuff for a long haul airline, not just a quick over-sight. The fact that the logo is then derived from the Easyjet colour scheme which the original aircraft has, and that the slogan "Let's Fly" is used, when Easyjet's is "Come on Let's Fly", is at best sailing very close to the wind.
In the grand scheme of things, you are welcome to tell me that these points are picking at details, but that's where the devil always hides.
I'm sorry, but these concerns all give me plenty of reasons to be extremely sceptical about this venture.
As for the interlinkage of share ownership to employment opportunities - that is just plain wrong!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does your legal training include company law related to Public Limited companies?
I think not.
I think not.
Regardless if they are a PLC, they still need to abide by the regulatory law which is in place to offer shares to the UK public, if they are doing this by being prepresented by a FSA firm, then no laws are being broken. However from their website they do not show this, which is my major concern, as you can download a share holder application form directly to send to them. Everything should be going through a FSA registered firm who would deal with the share allotments etc.
As long as the FSA are aware of this, it will hopefully be sorted out, I just hope that nobody has invested their savings before they have had any protection in place.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So much for Fairplay
Danny_R
Well, well, Danny - then you would be wise to re-read the Act and state what irregularities you believe have been breached......... and evidence of such.
You are simply quoting bits of the Act as if this proves some wrongdoing, trying to imply (again) that FSA irregularities exist, when there are none and no evidence of such has ever been offered by you or anyone else.
Be careful now - you are claiming to be an expert.
It is interesting that you admit to not knowing anything about how Air Sylhet has made its shares available to the public or who is administering that issue or anything else of substance, but still feel free to wade in with non-Sequiturs implying some wrongdoing or other or some lack of protection to the public.
That hardly seems fair or reasonable.
Jabird - why would any airline publish its full business plan to you?
Most regard them as a commercial secret of their plans and intentions.
Hardly seems sensible to tell the opposition what they are planning, now does it?
The problems in Bangladesh are serious, but are a diversion from the serious and unfounded allegations you have made.
Hacker and Lawyer's contributions try to distance themselves from their extreme statements, but still imply something to be wrong - what exactly?
No mealy words please - you alleged criiminality - now prove it.
I believe all of this is nothing more than an attempt to smear a startup airline.
As if life wasn't hard enough.
Well, well, Danny - then you would be wise to re-read the Act and state what irregularities you believe have been breached......... and evidence of such.
You are simply quoting bits of the Act as if this proves some wrongdoing, trying to imply (again) that FSA irregularities exist, when there are none and no evidence of such has ever been offered by you or anyone else.
Be careful now - you are claiming to be an expert.
It is interesting that you admit to not knowing anything about how Air Sylhet has made its shares available to the public or who is administering that issue or anything else of substance, but still feel free to wade in with non-Sequiturs implying some wrongdoing or other or some lack of protection to the public.
That hardly seems fair or reasonable.
Jabird - why would any airline publish its full business plan to you?
Most regard them as a commercial secret of their plans and intentions.
Hardly seems sensible to tell the opposition what they are planning, now does it?
The problems in Bangladesh are serious, but are a diversion from the serious and unfounded allegations you have made.
Hacker and Lawyer's contributions try to distance themselves from their extreme statements, but still imply something to be wrong - what exactly?
No mealy words please - you alleged criiminality - now prove it.
I believe all of this is nothing more than an attempt to smear a startup airline.
As if life wasn't hard enough.
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you please tell us the details of your FSA authority Blacksword - whether your own or the firm of chartered accountants acting on your behalf?
It is probably an oversight on my part but I'm presently unable to find the details or the normally required verbiage within your publicly available materials. It would appear several share my annoying blind spot.
Can you be of assistance in clearing this up?
It is probably an oversight on my part but I'm presently unable to find the details or the normally required verbiage within your publicly available materials. It would appear several share my annoying blind spot.
Can you be of assistance in clearing this up?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jabird - why would any airline publish its full business plan to you?
Err, because they are appealing for investors, and have made the majority of their proposals available on their website. I have also acquired a paper copy of the business plan.
Most regard them as a commercial secret of their plans and intentions.You are quite right in this respect - many airlines do indeed keep their intended route plans closely guarded. Air Sylhet could indeed have merely said that they intend to "satisfy the massive need for better UK-Bangladesh flights", and left details of their route plans out.
Instead, they chose to publish a list of intended airports (including New York - good luck with that one!) I am still awaiting answers with regards to the scheduling of out and back rotations to Sylhet AND Dhaka within 24 hours - and comments on the technical feasibility of doing this, with a full load of freight, from BHX.
Hardly seems sensible to tell the opposition what they are planning, now does it?You tell me - the opposition must be quaking in their boots right now.
The problems in Bangladesh are serious, but are a diversion from the serious and unfounded allegations you have made.A state of emergency cannot be dismissed as a mere distraction. It would be one thing for an airline like BA to have to suspend a route to an unstable country, as they could easily move their aircraft onto another destination. It is quite another for a low cost airline to attempt to start up service in such a clearly volatile market.
I have provided explanation and justification for all of my comments. You have merely replied with diversionary and irrelevant responses. Perhaps you'd like to reply to the specific technical points I have raised above, then we can move on.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So now Pprune reneges on confidentiality too?
Sinking a little low aren't we Pprune Towers?
"Can you please tell us the details of your FSA authority Blacksword"
Surely you can't be breaking confidentiality with the identity of a
Pprune subscriber? Tut tut!
I have a much better idea my wrinkly Pprune:
Why not get in touch with the FSA and tell them of
your concerns and see what they say?
After all, if there is any truth (any truth at all) in what you are suggesting,
then we'll all find out quickly enough - won't we?
Don't forget to provide something tangible to the FSA, a few facts perhaps?
It is interesting that other posters have stated their intentions
to get in touch with the FSA - but have strangely not reported back.
I wonder why? Perhaps they didn't get the "right" answer?
I don't expect you'll apologise for defaming a startup airline? (Lord have mercy!).
This feels like a medieval inquisition.
Repent! Repent! Repent! - but we'll burn you anyway.
After all, how dare an airline startup without Pprune's most royal approval?
Can you really believe all this vitriol is justified?
Or is this all just for your amusement?
"Can you please tell us the details of your FSA authority Blacksword"
Surely you can't be breaking confidentiality with the identity of a
Pprune subscriber? Tut tut!
I have a much better idea my wrinkly Pprune:
Why not get in touch with the FSA and tell them of
your concerns and see what they say?
After all, if there is any truth (any truth at all) in what you are suggesting,
then we'll all find out quickly enough - won't we?
Don't forget to provide something tangible to the FSA, a few facts perhaps?
It is interesting that other posters have stated their intentions
to get in touch with the FSA - but have strangely not reported back.
I wonder why? Perhaps they didn't get the "right" answer?
I don't expect you'll apologise for defaming a startup airline? (Lord have mercy!).
This feels like a medieval inquisition.
Repent! Repent! Repent! - but we'll burn you anyway.
After all, how dare an airline startup without Pprune's most royal approval?
Can you really believe all this vitriol is justified?
Or is this all just for your amusement?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jabird,
What specific "technical points"? You haven't made any!
Just more innuendo.
If Air Sylhet needs your editorial help, I'm sure they'll call.
Have AirSylhet said they intend to fly into warzones?
I'm sure they will do exactly what any other airline would,
including taking the advice of the foreign office, CAA, insurers etc. etc.
Why suggest otherwise?
You have made wild and unsubstantiated claims and
are simply trying to change the subject.
You have not justified any of the claims you have made.
You have suggested that the Financial Services Act
has been criminally breached - where is your evidence?
What specific "technical points"? You haven't made any!
Just more innuendo.
If Air Sylhet needs your editorial help, I'm sure they'll call.
Have AirSylhet said they intend to fly into warzones?
I'm sure they will do exactly what any other airline would,
including taking the advice of the foreign office, CAA, insurers etc. etc.
Why suggest otherwise?
You have made wild and unsubstantiated claims and
are simply trying to change the subject.
You have not justified any of the claims you have made.
You have suggested that the Financial Services Act
has been criminally breached - where is your evidence?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BS,
What specific "technical points"? You haven't made any!
1) I have suggested that, based from my understanding of BHX's limited runway length, there will be challenges with taking a B767 with a full (especially if in the high density configuration suggested in AS's brochure) passenger load, and the volumes of freight suggested, on a non-stop journey to Bangladesh. This is not innuendo, this is based on the well-documented fact that BHX has runway constraints. That is why they have plans to extend it. If you can confirm otherwise, with detailed technical information, then please do so.
2) I have pointed out that to make a return flight to Bangladesh, with a double-drop in both Dhaka and Sylhet, within a 24 hour period, is an extremely challenging task.
3) I have pointed out that the photo used on Air Sylhet's website is a photoshopped version of a photo of an Easyjet Airbus A319 at LGW. Both images are online, and it is clear to see that the former is taken from the latter. Regardless of whether or not there may be a material breach of the original photographer's copyright, the fact remains that the colour scheme, logo font, and slogan, are very close to those used by Easyjet.
4) I have pointed out that an Airbus A319 is not a suitable piece of equipment for long haul operations. Whilst I have acknowledged that this, on its own, might not be a big deal, it is clearly a substantial concern when seen as part of a much wider jigsaw.
5) I have repeatedly drawn concerns over the association between share ownership and job opportunities.
6) I have pointed out that, according to the FCO, Bangladesh has been in a "State of Emergency" since 11th January. I'm afraid you are the one suggesting it is a warzone, not me - that is your innuendo, not mine. There is a clear different between the two - as we know, BA fly into numerous "unstable" destinations around the world. My point was that there is a substantial difference in risk between BA engaging in such operations, and a start up carrier launching its first route into such a country.
7) The CAA have confirmed that any claims of holding an operators licence (even if subsequently withdrawn, my understanding is that the claims were still made on the website ticker, as per above post) - were false.
8) You mention insurance, but this is one of the many ommissions under the "costs" section of Air Sylhet's business plan.
9) There is also a mere 0.5% allocation of budget for marketing. To the best of my knowledge, only Ryanair have ever come close to this figure, with around 1% of costs spent on marketing. As we know, MOL is able to maintain this figure by blagging free publicity every time he opens his blue-stained mouth.
10) I have pointed out that projected profit margins are grossly optimistic, especially during year one of operation (it is virtually unheard of for a start up operation to make profits in this period).
11) I have pointed out that the three year revenue figures do not match up with the stated intention of having "10 aircrafts" (sic) by year 2.
I am not the one who is trying to change the subject, but you are the one who is continuing to evade the questions I raise. For the record, I have informed the FSA, but as we know with any bureacratic organisation, they may or may not respond in a timely manner.
The more I look into this operation, the more worried I get. You are getting hypersensitive over whether or not any laws have been broken. As you rightly point out, that would be up to the relevant regulatory bodies to determine. In the meantime, all you are doing is making me even more convinced to stick to my original concerns, namely that an investment in this operation would be an extremely unwise way to put away any hard earned savings.
After all, how dare an airline startup without Pprune's most royal approval?
Well, if you go through the archives, you will indeed find naysayers for every start up which has been attempted, as long as this forum has been here. What else do you expect from a website which calls itself a rumour network? Your problem seems to be that you don't like any kind of debate which challenges this company. All I can say is that the information you will find here is a lot more robust than the speculation and hyperbole which you will find by reading the Air Sylhet prospectus.
Can you really believe all this vitriol is justified?
I would not expect anything different if I attempted to start up an airline myself. Any business worth its salt is going to have to see off naysayers. The problem with Air Sylhet is that the whole proposition seems to be built on bragging rights, and not on a solid financial footing. Therefore, its apologists have to react violently when challenged.
Or is this all just for your amusement?
I would not find anything amusing about finding out that a whole load of people had lost their savings by investing in an airline which had never got off the ground. Nor would I find anything amusing about finding that passengers had lost money by purchasing flights from a company which had gone out of business.
This operation happens to have come to my attention, I happen to be in a position to do something about it, whilst others who are in a position to act do nothing. I also happen to have done a little digging, and found that the deeper I go, the more there is to worry me.
What specific "technical points"? You haven't made any!
1) I have suggested that, based from my understanding of BHX's limited runway length, there will be challenges with taking a B767 with a full (especially if in the high density configuration suggested in AS's brochure) passenger load, and the volumes of freight suggested, on a non-stop journey to Bangladesh. This is not innuendo, this is based on the well-documented fact that BHX has runway constraints. That is why they have plans to extend it. If you can confirm otherwise, with detailed technical information, then please do so.
2) I have pointed out that to make a return flight to Bangladesh, with a double-drop in both Dhaka and Sylhet, within a 24 hour period, is an extremely challenging task.
3) I have pointed out that the photo used on Air Sylhet's website is a photoshopped version of a photo of an Easyjet Airbus A319 at LGW. Both images are online, and it is clear to see that the former is taken from the latter. Regardless of whether or not there may be a material breach of the original photographer's copyright, the fact remains that the colour scheme, logo font, and slogan, are very close to those used by Easyjet.
4) I have pointed out that an Airbus A319 is not a suitable piece of equipment for long haul operations. Whilst I have acknowledged that this, on its own, might not be a big deal, it is clearly a substantial concern when seen as part of a much wider jigsaw.
5) I have repeatedly drawn concerns over the association between share ownership and job opportunities.
6) I have pointed out that, according to the FCO, Bangladesh has been in a "State of Emergency" since 11th January. I'm afraid you are the one suggesting it is a warzone, not me - that is your innuendo, not mine. There is a clear different between the two - as we know, BA fly into numerous "unstable" destinations around the world. My point was that there is a substantial difference in risk between BA engaging in such operations, and a start up carrier launching its first route into such a country.
7) The CAA have confirmed that any claims of holding an operators licence (even if subsequently withdrawn, my understanding is that the claims were still made on the website ticker, as per above post) - were false.
8) You mention insurance, but this is one of the many ommissions under the "costs" section of Air Sylhet's business plan.
9) There is also a mere 0.5% allocation of budget for marketing. To the best of my knowledge, only Ryanair have ever come close to this figure, with around 1% of costs spent on marketing. As we know, MOL is able to maintain this figure by blagging free publicity every time he opens his blue-stained mouth.
10) I have pointed out that projected profit margins are grossly optimistic, especially during year one of operation (it is virtually unheard of for a start up operation to make profits in this period).
11) I have pointed out that the three year revenue figures do not match up with the stated intention of having "10 aircrafts" (sic) by year 2.
I am not the one who is trying to change the subject, but you are the one who is continuing to evade the questions I raise. For the record, I have informed the FSA, but as we know with any bureacratic organisation, they may or may not respond in a timely manner.
The more I look into this operation, the more worried I get. You are getting hypersensitive over whether or not any laws have been broken. As you rightly point out, that would be up to the relevant regulatory bodies to determine. In the meantime, all you are doing is making me even more convinced to stick to my original concerns, namely that an investment in this operation would be an extremely unwise way to put away any hard earned savings.
After all, how dare an airline startup without Pprune's most royal approval?
Well, if you go through the archives, you will indeed find naysayers for every start up which has been attempted, as long as this forum has been here. What else do you expect from a website which calls itself a rumour network? Your problem seems to be that you don't like any kind of debate which challenges this company. All I can say is that the information you will find here is a lot more robust than the speculation and hyperbole which you will find by reading the Air Sylhet prospectus.
Can you really believe all this vitriol is justified?
I would not expect anything different if I attempted to start up an airline myself. Any business worth its salt is going to have to see off naysayers. The problem with Air Sylhet is that the whole proposition seems to be built on bragging rights, and not on a solid financial footing. Therefore, its apologists have to react violently when challenged.
Or is this all just for your amusement?
I would not find anything amusing about finding out that a whole load of people had lost their savings by investing in an airline which had never got off the ground. Nor would I find anything amusing about finding that passengers had lost money by purchasing flights from a company which had gone out of business.
This operation happens to have come to my attention, I happen to be in a position to do something about it, whilst others who are in a position to act do nothing. I also happen to have done a little digging, and found that the deeper I go, the more there is to worry me.
Last edited by jabird; 17th Jun 2007 at 02:18.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For anyone reading this thread from the start, it is worth pointing out that the photoshopped image of the Easyjet A319 has now been replaced with an unmarked B767.
This reminds me of one which sat at BHX for a few months, following a failed attempt to start flights to India - can anyone remember the name?
This reminds me of one which sat at BHX for a few months, following a failed attempt to start flights to India - can anyone remember the name?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once more into the breach
Jabird,
Really, you go too far.
I have given up believing anyone in this forum is capable of fairplay.
Air Sylhet is a startup airline, gearing up to launch its first flights.
The exact details of its startup schedule will depend on many factors.
Its stated intent is to fly from Manchester, Birmingham and Stansted
to many points in Asia. It starts with one aircraft - initially a B767, building up to
10 aircraft over a 2 year period. During that period it will shift from Wet to Dry
and will almost certainly change its aircraft type accordingly.
The exact details of this transition are commercially sensitive.
As anyone with any common sense will understand.
(Ever negotiated with a Lessor?)
Hence, whilst all your shouting about BHX's short runway length is interesting
it has nothing at all to do with Air Sylhet's operational plans.
Your observations about destinations and turnaround times are based on flawed assumptions.
I am not going to help you out there - you simply need to think outside the box.
The truth is, you are trying to second guess Air Sylhet's operational plans.
Where, when and how Air Sylhet flies, you will simply have to wait and see.
All the A319 stuff is irrelevant as this is just the output of the
TV company hired to produce promotional material (3D models etc).
Amusing maybe, but relevant - certainly not.
The copyright stuff is nonsense, as no copyright has been broken.
All copyright fees, wherever due, have been paid.
The suggestion that the "t" in Air Sylhet is subject to another airline's
copyright is ridiculous - its a font for goodness sake!
The Share issue and fundraising stuff suggested by your thread is extremely defamatory.
The campaign against Air Sylhet by certain financial interests has been very, very dirty.
But it won't work.
Quite extraordinary conditions have been put in place to protect shareholders.
Anyone who has applied for shares and read the share application forms will be aware of this.
Why? Because Air Sylhet is a community owned airline.
There is no group of get rich quick directors.
There is no one who can financially gain by deceiving shareholders.
Yet, the founding directors have borne all the risk to date. All of it.
I think this is something few people outside the Bangladeshi community will understand.
The benefits will be felt by the Bangladeshi community
who deserve far better services than those they currently get.
Unless you are a Bangladeshi, this will also be difficult to fully understand.
The community has suffered greatly for many years.
95% of British Bangladeshi's come from Sylhet.
Yet there is no direct service to Sylhet and current travel times are often 24 hours or worse.
Taking a large family with children and grandparents home, in high temperatures
and in high humidity in such conditions involves much hardship.
No wonder the community wants to do something about it.
I am sorry Pprune can't see past its vitriolic outlook to appreciate this.
Perhaps Pprune even believes it is helping in some strange way, but I doubt it.
Insurance is in place and is a regulatory condition of operations.
This is simply not an issue.
As to costings, the business plan has to refer to the most conservative projections.
As such, the Business Plan financials are based on a minimum of 2 aircraft operations,
whilst indicating an objective to operate up to 10 aircraft in the same period.
Air Sylhet is currently contractually committed to two aircraft,
and has yet to complete negotiations for further aircraft (hardly surprising).
Anyone who has expressed a serious interest has been given
sight of this more sensitive information.
It is a long and flexible piece of string, but no investor has ever been deceived.
There is no reason why Air Sylhet would give out sensitive commercial information
on its website or in this forum.
Your continued references to the FSA and to shareholders money
is yet another attempt to smear Air Sylhet.
Not one shred of evidence has been produced to justify this campaign.
NOT ONE.
Where is the evidence of wrongdoing? Who would benefit from it? How?
I am shocked that forum members continue to say such things without any justification.
As stated, there is no one who could benefit from deceiving shareholders.
The company will literally be owned by the community.
If you have contacted the FSA, then you will discover this fact in due course.
UK law does not permit any illegal share offering.
I believe in the rule of law - so why don't you?
Unfortunately, I do not expect this pernicious and malicious campaign to stop,
as I see nothing more than a group of self-serving individuals indulging
in the sport of smearing an airline startup by innuendo and downright lies.
It may be fun for you, but it is very hurtful to all those committed to Air Sylhet.
Whatever happened to common decency?
Pprune knows that web optimisation has been done to promote this thread in Google.
All within a couple of days of the thread appearing.
Clever maybe, but also very deliberate (can I hear malicious chuckling?).
I wonder why it was done?
Could it be - to give the impression that something must be wrong??
What you may not understand, is the depth of determination in the Bangaldeshi community
to improve air services to Bangaldesh and to other destinations.
If you are a Bangladeshi, then you really need to speak to community leaders.
If you are not, then I guess its understandable that you just don't care.
Indeed, other communities have approached Air Sylhet to provide links
to other destinations that have been very poorly served to date.
I believe Air Sylhet is doing its very best to help.
Really, you go too far.
I have given up believing anyone in this forum is capable of fairplay.
Air Sylhet is a startup airline, gearing up to launch its first flights.
The exact details of its startup schedule will depend on many factors.
Its stated intent is to fly from Manchester, Birmingham and Stansted
to many points in Asia. It starts with one aircraft - initially a B767, building up to
10 aircraft over a 2 year period. During that period it will shift from Wet to Dry
and will almost certainly change its aircraft type accordingly.
The exact details of this transition are commercially sensitive.
As anyone with any common sense will understand.
(Ever negotiated with a Lessor?)
Hence, whilst all your shouting about BHX's short runway length is interesting
it has nothing at all to do with Air Sylhet's operational plans.
Your observations about destinations and turnaround times are based on flawed assumptions.
I am not going to help you out there - you simply need to think outside the box.
The truth is, you are trying to second guess Air Sylhet's operational plans.
Where, when and how Air Sylhet flies, you will simply have to wait and see.
All the A319 stuff is irrelevant as this is just the output of the
TV company hired to produce promotional material (3D models etc).
Amusing maybe, but relevant - certainly not.
The copyright stuff is nonsense, as no copyright has been broken.
All copyright fees, wherever due, have been paid.
The suggestion that the "t" in Air Sylhet is subject to another airline's
copyright is ridiculous - its a font for goodness sake!
The Share issue and fundraising stuff suggested by your thread is extremely defamatory.
The campaign against Air Sylhet by certain financial interests has been very, very dirty.
But it won't work.
Quite extraordinary conditions have been put in place to protect shareholders.
Anyone who has applied for shares and read the share application forms will be aware of this.
Why? Because Air Sylhet is a community owned airline.
There is no group of get rich quick directors.
There is no one who can financially gain by deceiving shareholders.
Yet, the founding directors have borne all the risk to date. All of it.
I think this is something few people outside the Bangladeshi community will understand.
The benefits will be felt by the Bangladeshi community
who deserve far better services than those they currently get.
Unless you are a Bangladeshi, this will also be difficult to fully understand.
The community has suffered greatly for many years.
95% of British Bangladeshi's come from Sylhet.
Yet there is no direct service to Sylhet and current travel times are often 24 hours or worse.
Taking a large family with children and grandparents home, in high temperatures
and in high humidity in such conditions involves much hardship.
No wonder the community wants to do something about it.
I am sorry Pprune can't see past its vitriolic outlook to appreciate this.
Perhaps Pprune even believes it is helping in some strange way, but I doubt it.
Insurance is in place and is a regulatory condition of operations.
This is simply not an issue.
As to costings, the business plan has to refer to the most conservative projections.
As such, the Business Plan financials are based on a minimum of 2 aircraft operations,
whilst indicating an objective to operate up to 10 aircraft in the same period.
Air Sylhet is currently contractually committed to two aircraft,
and has yet to complete negotiations for further aircraft (hardly surprising).
Anyone who has expressed a serious interest has been given
sight of this more sensitive information.
It is a long and flexible piece of string, but no investor has ever been deceived.
There is no reason why Air Sylhet would give out sensitive commercial information
on its website or in this forum.
Your continued references to the FSA and to shareholders money
is yet another attempt to smear Air Sylhet.
Not one shred of evidence has been produced to justify this campaign.
NOT ONE.
Where is the evidence of wrongdoing? Who would benefit from it? How?
I am shocked that forum members continue to say such things without any justification.
As stated, there is no one who could benefit from deceiving shareholders.
The company will literally be owned by the community.
If you have contacted the FSA, then you will discover this fact in due course.
UK law does not permit any illegal share offering.
I believe in the rule of law - so why don't you?
Unfortunately, I do not expect this pernicious and malicious campaign to stop,
as I see nothing more than a group of self-serving individuals indulging
in the sport of smearing an airline startup by innuendo and downright lies.
It may be fun for you, but it is very hurtful to all those committed to Air Sylhet.
Whatever happened to common decency?
Pprune knows that web optimisation has been done to promote this thread in Google.
All within a couple of days of the thread appearing.
Clever maybe, but also very deliberate (can I hear malicious chuckling?).
I wonder why it was done?
Could it be - to give the impression that something must be wrong??
What you may not understand, is the depth of determination in the Bangaldeshi community
to improve air services to Bangaldesh and to other destinations.
If you are a Bangladeshi, then you really need to speak to community leaders.
If you are not, then I guess its understandable that you just don't care.
Indeed, other communities have approached Air Sylhet to provide links
to other destinations that have been very poorly served to date.
I believe Air Sylhet is doing its very best to help.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bishkek (nr Luton)
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B767 at BHX
That would be Midland Airways/Airlines. Had that clapped out old B767-200 N606TW that they were trying to get on the Slovak register as OM-NSH, to be operated via Bratislava to India etc, by Slovak Airlines, in competition with Air Slovakia.
Hmm... clapped out B767-200 sitting around at UK airport before, supposedly, operating to the Indian Sub-continent. Ring any bells today??
Hmm... clapped out B767-200 sitting around at UK airport before, supposedly, operating to the Indian Sub-continent. Ring any bells today??
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Black Sword,
I suggest you try not to get to excited about web optimisation - the artificial shoving up the tree in search engines. It ramps up paranoia amongst excited young business people who, these days get all moist at the thought of such tactics and employ talent to do this for them.
PPRuNe is somewhat different having never issued a press release or advert for our entire 10 years of operation. As an adept group of computer literate bright young things this is simple enough to verifiy. We have also made every attempt to exclude ourselves from search engines for many years.
The simple fact is that airline people come here, there are 2,000 plus views of this thread and this overwhelms the numbers you have visiting your own site. The result of a google search can only reflect this.
Now before we get to the operational and technical areas lets get back to the important thing - protection of money. You have to face these questions from us and others for that reason. If a booking engine appears on the home page of your site people have every right to check.
As before my questions to a responsible and law abiding UK PLC are:
Where are the details of your FSA approval or that of your chartered accountants within your website, e-mails and .pdf brochure as you actively approach and seek investors?
If investment was going to be channeled through a third party, where is the verbiage detailing this and the details of that party's company status and its approvals?
This is all very straightforward stuff isn't it?
I suggest you try not to get to excited about web optimisation - the artificial shoving up the tree in search engines. It ramps up paranoia amongst excited young business people who, these days get all moist at the thought of such tactics and employ talent to do this for them.
PPRuNe is somewhat different having never issued a press release or advert for our entire 10 years of operation. As an adept group of computer literate bright young things this is simple enough to verifiy. We have also made every attempt to exclude ourselves from search engines for many years.
The simple fact is that airline people come here, there are 2,000 plus views of this thread and this overwhelms the numbers you have visiting your own site. The result of a google search can only reflect this.
Now before we get to the operational and technical areas lets get back to the important thing - protection of money. You have to face these questions from us and others for that reason. If a booking engine appears on the home page of your site people have every right to check.
As before my questions to a responsible and law abiding UK PLC are:
Where are the details of your FSA approval or that of your chartered accountants within your website, e-mails and .pdf brochure as you actively approach and seek investors?
If investment was going to be channeled through a third party, where is the verbiage detailing this and the details of that party's company status and its approvals?
This is all very straightforward stuff isn't it?
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mystery 767
Possibly found the new a/c i.d.....
Is it an old SAS 767 (LN-RCE c/n 24846/309) pictured while stored at Shannon ?
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0372478/M/
The latest photo of it shows it in basic Israir scheme (now TF-FIC).
Where do I collect my prize
Is it an old SAS 767 (LN-RCE c/n 24846/309) pictured while stored at Shannon ?
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0372478/M/
The latest photo of it shows it in basic Israir scheme (now TF-FIC).
Where do I collect my prize
Last edited by eggc; 17th Jun 2007 at 08:45.