Bmibaby
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wiccan,
The point of the article is that MME mgt have lost a fortune on the legal case - this is in addition to the business losses due to falling pax figures.
CC, I think the probs at CVT were down to too many changes in management, and lack of local government support, rather than rapid expansion on its own.
In either case though, hevy legal fees have been involved in defending the airports' positions. CVT drove themselves into a corner, and have now given up on pax - this is a great shame, but following FR's takeover of a lot of former BACON slots at BHX, together with suitability questions over CVT's runway & 737-800s, I guess they ran out of options.
MME must be a natural base for FR, surely £1m would have been better allocated doing a deal with MOL to take a based a/c or two, and divert any possible growth from NCL.
The point of the article is that MME mgt have lost a fortune on the legal case - this is in addition to the business losses due to falling pax figures.
CC, I think the probs at CVT were down to too many changes in management, and lack of local government support, rather than rapid expansion on its own.
In either case though, hevy legal fees have been involved in defending the airports' positions. CVT drove themselves into a corner, and have now given up on pax - this is a great shame, but following FR's takeover of a lot of former BACON slots at BHX, together with suitability questions over CVT's runway & 737-800s, I guess they ran out of options.
MME must be a natural base for FR, surely £1m would have been better allocated doing a deal with MOL to take a based a/c or two, and divert any possible growth from NCL.
Why on earth do we need BLK, LPL, LBA, HUY, DSA etc when MAN is under utilised.
WRT the Times article, I am sure that BMI operated into DVT, sorry DTV until last month, or am I missing something
Funnily enough, there is an arguement that similar mistakes contributed to the decline of the MME-LHR service - customers heard that bmibaby had pulled out and assumed this related to the mainline bmi service as well.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Refunds on Airline Cancelled Flights
We had some flights CWL to LEI booked with 'baby. The airline has since cancelled this route. Now that is pretty aweful behaviour as most bookings will have also booked some of parking, car hire and accomodation, and not all will be relevent to a new flight. I accept that most airlines will pull this stunt from time to time, and this is not a 'baby specific problem.
However, what has really annoyed me is that Baby decided to refund us £10 less than they charged us. I can see no reason for this. There was no mention of them attempting to do so on the refund e-mail, and we hadn't booked any non-flight related extras (although I would expect those to also be refunded as part of the same contract).
Its not particularly the amount, but it is a really shoddy way to try to make a few quid, and makes me worried about booking with 'baby again if they are so skint that they have to try such a trick for a tenner.
However, what has really annoyed me is that Baby decided to refund us £10 less than they charged us. I can see no reason for this. There was no mention of them attempting to do so on the refund e-mail, and we hadn't booked any non-flight related extras (although I would expect those to also be refunded as part of the same contract).
Its not particularly the amount, but it is a really shoddy way to try to make a few quid, and makes me worried about booking with 'baby again if they are so skint that they have to try such a trick for a tenner.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lichfield
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a similar experience with baby after they refunded me for cancelling BHX-FAO flights during the winter season just gone. The total refunded was less than the total I originally paid, by about £12, if I remember correctly.
When I checked the original booking material, the difference was the credit card fee. Perhaps this is the same with you?
I didn't bother to chase it (more fool me, perhaps) because the hassle of getting the money back was worth more than the £12. I suspect baby might have argued that the original fee was charged when I made the booking and as such, there was no obligation on them to refund it. That is speculation on my part, however.
I agree that it is shoddy behaviour. As an aside, I subsequently booked CVT-FAO and when TOM pulled out of CVT, they refunded the entire booking cost. It was professionally done with a full refund being credited to my card promptly.
So, would I book with baby again? No and finally secured flights with Monarch instead. I regard it as a bit of a cheap trick to withhold part of a supposed full refund with no explanation.
When I checked the original booking material, the difference was the credit card fee. Perhaps this is the same with you?
I didn't bother to chase it (more fool me, perhaps) because the hassle of getting the money back was worth more than the £12. I suspect baby might have argued that the original fee was charged when I made the booking and as such, there was no obligation on them to refund it. That is speculation on my part, however.
I agree that it is shoddy behaviour. As an aside, I subsequently booked CVT-FAO and when TOM pulled out of CVT, they refunded the entire booking cost. It was professionally done with a full refund being credited to my card promptly.
So, would I book with baby again? No and finally secured flights with Monarch instead. I regard it as a bit of a cheap trick to withhold part of a supposed full refund with no explanation.
Similar tales can be found on the Skytrax website, where disgruntled pax complain about Baby pocketing fees for flights they (Baby) have cancelled.
I don't think they are doing themselves any favours here.
I don't think they are doing themselves any favours here.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In its article dated 23.06.2009, the online edition of 'Travel Weekly' carries an article entitled "Lufthansa to take control of BMI." This article includes the statement that "[the deal] spells the end of low-cost subsidiary BMI Baby." The article concludes by reporting that Lufthansa has previously made clear that it has little interest in BMI Baby.
From the article I am unclear whether "Travel Weekly" is reporting a fact already confirmed in the Lufthansa-BMI deal, or expressing an opinion based on past statements from Lufthansa.
I would welcome any clarification from other contributors. Good luck to all those directly affected.
SHED.
From the article I am unclear whether "Travel Weekly" is reporting a fact already confirmed in the Lufthansa-BMI deal, or expressing an opinion based on past statements from Lufthansa.
I would welcome any clarification from other contributors. Good luck to all those directly affected.
SHED.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Summer 2010
The summer schedule has been adjusted/further released and there
seems to be a need for up to 19 aircraft, an extra 2 from now.
BHX is certainly six based from June (Mo-Fr) on the current schedule
EMA requires six on a Friday and a very tight 5 based schedule on Sunday
MAN remains at four and Cardiff at three.
Routes not bookable yet BHX-NQY, EMA-PRG & CWL-GLA.
The BHX schedule has plenty of gaps between 10.30-16.30 and no
doubt it could be adjusted to go back to five aircraft if necessary and same with East Mids.
The Cardiff schedule is busy except for Wednesday and Manchester has
a few gaps which could be filled with new routes.
Any ideas if the aim is 19 aircraft and if so where are the two extra
ones coming from?
Pete
seems to be a need for up to 19 aircraft, an extra 2 from now.
BHX is certainly six based from June (Mo-Fr) on the current schedule
EMA requires six on a Friday and a very tight 5 based schedule on Sunday
MAN remains at four and Cardiff at three.
Routes not bookable yet BHX-NQY, EMA-PRG & CWL-GLA.
The BHX schedule has plenty of gaps between 10.30-16.30 and no
doubt it could be adjusted to go back to five aircraft if necessary and same with East Mids.
The Cardiff schedule is busy except for Wednesday and Manchester has
a few gaps which could be filled with new routes.
Any ideas if the aim is 19 aircraft and if so where are the two extra
ones coming from?
Pete
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Summer 2010
Just to clarify my previous post, I did only select two weeks in June
and I understand there are changes for July and August.
OliWW - those destinations would definitely fit in flight-time wise.
The other aspect of course is that a couple of the domestic routes
could be transferred to BMI Regional and that would take care of
the increase in units but is that likely to happen?
BHX-ABZ seems to have done okay since it changed from the 737 to
the 145. However most routes seem to be carrying 737 loads at the
moment but of course this is to be expected at this time of year.
Pete
and I understand there are changes for July and August.
OliWW - those destinations would definitely fit in flight-time wise.
The other aspect of course is that a couple of the domestic routes
could be transferred to BMI Regional and that would take care of
the increase in units but is that likely to happen?
BHX-ABZ seems to have done okay since it changed from the 737 to
the 145. However most routes seem to be carrying 737 loads at the
moment but of course this is to be expected at this time of year.
Pete
I Have Control
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kidology.
Don't be fooled. The bmibaby summer 2010 "timetable" is simply a negotiating tool with LH. The more flights, the better. And the greater the penalties if they are not undertaken.
bmi baby are dead in the water, unless a saviour appears rapidly. Sorry folks.
bmi baby are dead in the water, unless a saviour appears rapidly. Sorry folks.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North East
Age: 37
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bmi baby are dead in the water, unless a saviour appears rapidly. Sorry folks.
RH do you have anything to back up your assertion that WW are 'dead in the water', or is it just pure speculation/hope/guesswork?
And remember, with regards to LH: If they do sell the bmi group, this will include baby. We don't know what plans any potential buyer has for the airline. So lets just wait and see if baby are 'dead in the water'. For all I know they might be, but for all you know the next owners might just be able to give it the capital it needs to invest and expand... you never know.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: gate 67 JFK
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bmi baby are dead in the water, unless a saviour appears rapidly. Sorry folks.
Roy Hodd
You might be right, you might be wrong, but like everyone else other than senior LH management you don't know, its that simple. Being anti bmi because of your previous with them is no foundation for saying the above.
2010 is a live program, which could change depending on what LH decide for the future for various parts of the group.
Time will tell
Roy Hodd
You might be right, you might be wrong, but like everyone else other than senior LH management you don't know, its that simple. Being anti bmi because of your previous with them is no foundation for saying the above.
2010 is a live program, which could change depending on what LH decide for the future for various parts of the group.
Time will tell
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EMA/BHX
stuart
Thank you for the information, do you know which tour operator is
using the AGP and is there any sign of IT work from BHX?
It is very noticeable that BHX needs six aircraft in the week but
Saturday is crammed into 4, maybe 5 at most.
Pete
Thank you for the information, do you know which tour operator is
using the AGP and is there any sign of IT work from BHX?
It is very noticeable that BHX needs six aircraft in the week but
Saturday is crammed into 4, maybe 5 at most.
Pete
Last edited by OltonPete; 28th Aug 2009 at 17:53. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What baby are doing is throwing absolutely everything they can think of at the market as early as possible and hoping there is enough business out there to make a case. Make no mistake this has been done to try and stave off LH and the bmi board. If it works it will have to be flown with 17 aircraft there will be no more unless forward bookings are phenominal (which they aren't). If it fails it will have to be flown with 13 aircraft (4 leases running out and we know what happened last time) or perhaps none !
The deal with TCX is clever. If baby have written the contract well they will have given TCX a massive payout if the obligations can not be met, hopefully more than the savings to LH by getting rid of 4 more aircraft ! However, if they bite the bullet and just decide to shut it down that all becomes irrelavent.
Baby sees itself less dead in the water more in a holding pattern running the QRH hoping to stay alive until they can work out how to !
The deal with TCX is clever. If baby have written the contract well they will have given TCX a massive payout if the obligations can not be met, hopefully more than the savings to LH by getting rid of 4 more aircraft ! However, if they bite the bullet and just decide to shut it down that all becomes irrelavent.
Baby sees itself less dead in the water more in a holding pattern running the QRH hoping to stay alive until they can work out how to !