FlyBe - 6

[Aero Mad]

It is not difficult to be cheaper than the competition. The real trick is to be more profitable than the competition....

With all due respect to that witticism, it's a shame Flybe can't seem to master either of those concepts at the moment.

[virginblue]

AeroMad, you are absolutely right. But "The real trick is to loose less money than the competition" did sound a bit to negative to my ears, so I put it somewhat more optimistic...



As we are at it, given Flybe's complaints about fuel costs, I was wondering the other day if the E175 purchase makes sense from today's perspective - the E175 consumes more fuel than the Q400 yet Flybe still do not seem to operate too many long routes that really require the E175s speed compared to the Q400. So the E175 appears to be a bit of a luxury (unless the Q400 were operating at 100 per cent loads on the routes on which they have been replaced by E175s that offers ten more seats).

[Maverick8701]

Capetonian A bit of a 'no-brainer', as the saying goes. I've booked BA.

Interesting points although would beg to differ on the reliability comment the below would seem to contradict.

http://www.flybe.com/corporate/media/news/1304/12.ht


APRIL
5
2013
Flybe Tops Again For London Commuters
Leading regional airline is again most punctual carrier on key London route from Jersey

Despite significant disruption due to bad weather in the middle of January, Flybe, Europe’s largest regional airline, again outperformed British Airways for above-average punctuality on the lifeline Jersey to London Gatwick route. Punctuality statistics just released by the Civil Aviation Authority(CAA) for January 2013 record Flybe’s 90% on-time performance on this popular route. This comfortably outperforms its competitor by some 15 percentage points.

Flybe operates up to 248 jet operated flights a month between Jersey and Gatwick at which airport it continues to outperform all other carriers for its on-time performance having won its Gold Award as the most punctual airline every quarter since it was initiated back in 2011.

Andrew Strong, Managing Director Flybe UK comments: “We are rightly proud of our above average punctuality record on this crucial route to London that is so important for both business and leisure travellers. We appreciate that passengers’ time is at a premium and realise the importance of providing customers with an affordable service that they can rely upon. The statistics speak for themselves.”

[Capetonian]

Maverick8701
Based on a press release by Flybe?

I have social, family, and professional contacts with the islands and go there frequently. Our observations are that Flybe are unreliable, and worse, don't care when things go wrong. Service levels are unacceptable and below those of their competitors.
Whatever Andrew Strong says, I disagree. So do many others.

[Maverick8701]

Capetonian

You have hit the nail on the head...public perception is not good.

Take your point about company press releases in general however it is based on the CAA stats which don't lie BE have beaten BA punctuality wise (specific to LGW-JER) since 2011 I personally think that is a pretty impressive record. Obviously bad experiences stick in people's mind. BE need to look at how they deal with disruption as BE and BA stats are the opposite of what people would expect.

The problem seems to in the main be public perception. Which has to be addressed.

[Capetonian]

The correct URL for that press release is :
Flybe | Corporate | Media | News archive

It would be interesting to see stats over a longer period, for example, a year. As we all know, stats can be manipulated and I would question whether, for example, the stats have been selectively manipulated to only give punctuality on flights that operated as scheduled, thus excluded those that were cancelled, consolidated, or re-routed, something which Flybe seem to do quite often.

Reminds me of one of my favourite examples of how misleading statistical sampling can be. Years ago, the SA Post Office took full page ads in all the newspapers publishing statistics how 'x'% of all mail items posted arrived at destinations in the same province within 2 days, across provincial borders 3 days, etc, etc, all tabulated.

Right at the bottom, in tiny print it said :

These figures only consider those mail items which actually arrived at their destinations.

[Rivet Joint]

I'm glad you have noticed that Virgin Blue. I have long asked the question why the 175 was purchased. I think it can be argued that BE's rise to the top has a lot to do with the q400 an despite the recession is it merely a coincidence that profits are now sliding with their demise?

Surely you have to ask the question why Brussels, Olympic etc are willing to take the q400's of BE's hands an pay them for the privilege? Why the likes of Eurolot, Baltic Air, Luxair are all ditching jets for the q400? Why Porter have become so big and are not nose diving like BE?

Is the 175 a folly to please morons? I think it speaks volumes that the only country that turns its nose up at the q400 is America.

[EMB-145LR]

America doesn't turn it's nose up at the Q400. United Express have over 20 of them operated by Republic Airways, but unfortunately the aircraft don't have the range for the vast majority of 'regional' flying in the USA. The Q is great for sub 500 mile sectors, but at the regional I fly for our average sector length is 773 miles. The Q just isn't the right aircraft type to cover that sort of flying.

However, back at home in the UK, there really is very little need for the E175 on flights like MAN-EXT. The Q is perfect for the mission. The fact that the 175 has been brought in to fly GCI-LGW is just proof that the use of the E175 is more about misplaced pride and less about the lack of performance from the Q400.

[E75toDUS]

However, back at home in the UK, there really is very little need for the
E175 on flights like MAN-EXT. The Q is perfect for the mission. The fact that
the 175 has been brought in to fly GCI-LGW is just proof that the use of the
E175 is more about misplaced pride and less about the lack of performance from
the Q400.

Is the 175 a folly to please morons?

Both these posts hit the nail on the head for me. If the main driver of buying is price, and customers aren't too bothered then obviously the Q400 is the best choice if it offers lower cost and sufficient seats.

However, I would suggest that on routes like BHX/MAN-DUS, the real profit comes from business travellers who book late, pay >£300, are more sensitive to the equipment (Audible groans when a Q400 turns up unexpectedly) and have the choice of LH CRJs. In which case, extra cost of the jet could be outweighed by the additional high-yield passengers. Obviously the challenge for BE is to figure out which routes this actually makes a difference (DUS only needs 2xE175s... how many ordered?), and whether they are doing the right scheduling, marketing and pricing to attract these passengers.

[>70/88 this morning would have pleased the managers, though perhaps helped by LH's strike on Monday - perhaps increasing perception that it is high-fare LH cannot be relied on until the dispute with the Ver.Di Union is resolved.]

[Marty82]

I know it's about profitability but price is also important and as a Aero Mad said, Flybe don't seem to manage either on many occasions.

The BE price was without APD, Flybe was covering the cost of this, yet BM was still cheaper. So BM is cheaper, faster, includes luggage and food/drink. It's a no brainer for me!

I know that BM are newly independent so may be discounting fares to attract business but ABZ-MAN is a busy market that I'd have thought that BE would want to hold onto. BE really seem to be retreating at ABZ which is a shame.

I really don't see how the better economics of BE (aircraft type, economies of scale, pay scales, no catering and reduced baggage allowances) can't compete with BM's fares.

Moan over! Lol.

[JC25]

The MAN-ABZ route as you stated is a busy market. BE's flights are often very busy on up to five daily rotations. Perhaps it's performing well as it is and reducing fares to grab a few extra passengers who might otherwise fly BMI Regional wouldn't really serve any purpose.

If Flybe were flying this route with crap loads, then I'd see the need to reduce fares, but generally speaking, it seems to do well as it is.

High load + high fares = PROFIT
High load + low fares = Small profit/break even
Low load + high fares = small profit/loss/break even
Low load + low fares = disaster

The difficulty for Flybe (and every other airline) is finding that sweet spot where you can carry the highest number of passengers paying the highest fare possible.

[Rivet Joint]

Emb-145lr - You make a good point on the range. I still think the prop is seen in a negative light over their though.

E75todus - Also a good point. Although can BE really compete with carriers like LH? Not for me, the only way they can compete even for the business traffic is by price and that means they need the q400.

Can't deny a jet as a passenger is better and possibly a small sub-fleet of 12 like they have with the 195 would have made sense but to order 35 and with the aim to replace the q400?! Madness. Think about it, they are the only substantial UK airline with large modern props and they wiped away all the dinosaurs like BMI/bacon only to now be ditching them and being the ones being chased. Yeah that was $1bil well invested . What's that old saying, if it ain't broke don't fix it?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

It's called pandering to the whim of the travelling public.

Oh, and the 175 range ain't much better than the Dash.

[E75toDUS]

Although can BE really compete with carriers like LH? Not for me, the only
way they can compete even for the business traffic is by price

@Rivetjoint:
Pros of BE: E175>CRJ, Term C at DUS, timings of morning flight to DUS, punctuality/reliability. Free snack on LH
Pros of LH: Timing of evening flight from DUS, free drink. Flybe Q400 on some flights still

Would say 75% of passengers are carry-on only so baggage allowance a non-issue for many.

So this is not a carte blanche for FlyBe to think they can charge LH fares, but my experience is that it isn't only price. It is quite common for my colleagues to get the early BE flight to DUS (to get to destination before 1030), and then LH back (because BE flights back to Blighty are either too early, before 5, or too late at ~9pm). I might be on the wrong flights but the critical issue may be BE's ability to attract German customers.

But Rivetjoint makes the excellent point - are their business oriented routes where all the above matters enough to get the full value of the 35 E175s? Hmmm, that feels like a long-shot. But that is only a contract - negotiation is always an option. I do not think Embraer want BE to fail, then not pay for planes ordered which then leaves Embraer trying to find a buyer for E-Jets originally ordered by BE, at the moment when the now closed BE's jets are dumped onto the 2nd hand market...

It's called pandering to the whim of the travelling public.

But unfortunately it's the travelling public that pay the wages and keep the whole show on the road. When companies start thinking they know better than their customers, they are usually heading for a fall.

But it's an interesting point to think about - as a weekly commuter drawing against a budget, would I pay £20 more per week (i.e. 1 return) for E175 over Q400? Ummm hard... I would pay £10, but not £30. What about the other 50 odd people on the plane, does that cover the extra cost? I don't know but you'd hope BE do.

[Leg]

Many posters are spectacularly missing the point here

When the decision was taken to replace the Dash with the E175 it was done on a cost saving basis, not to cost more!

It is a known fact that flybe fell out with Bombardier over the despatch reliability (among other technical issues which I will not bore the spotters on this thread with), and this accelerated the need for fleet replacement.

A deal was done to introduce the E175 into the fleet at NIL increase in operating costs, I will repeat that in plain English, the E175 costs the SAME as the Dash to operate, and it has 10 more seats to increase revenue with.

Spandex, wind your neck in, you are not party to the deals that were done, you are just trying to undermine your ex employer, not very honourable.

E75toDus, keep your £10 in your pocket, see above!

Edited to add, before some smart Alec does so, although the E175 burns more fuel than the Dash, the overall deal, finance, maintenance etc brings it out at the same cost basis. Also to give the customer a better product, not pandering, it's called customer satisfaction and repeat customers.
Where it has gone pear shaped now is the issue of being able to fund the new jets, but they will arrive, given time.

[Serenity]

Hear this mornings NCL/LGW canx due to he captain being made redundant and not wanting to work his notice.
Apparently the rest of the flight deck are in a work to rule??

[Leg]

Serenity, none of what you have posted is even close to the real situation.

And how about some empathy for loyal employees being tossed on the scrap heap by an unscrupulous employer?

There is no 'work to rule' in flybe.

[Some Old Fart]

Many posters are spectacularly missing the point here

When the decision was taken to replace the Dash with the E175 it was done on a cost saving basis, not to cost more!

It is a known fact that flybe fell out with Bombardier over the despatch reliability (among other technical issues which I will not bore the spotters on this thread with), and this accelerated the need for fleet replacement.

A deal was done to introduce the E175 into the fleet at NIL increase in operating costs, I will repeat that in plain English, the E175 costs the SAME as the Dash to operate, and it has 10 more seats to increase revenue with.

E75toDus, keep your £10 in your pocket, see above!

Edited to add, before some smart Alec does so, although the E175 burns more fuel than the Dash, the overall deal, finance, maintenance etc brings it out at the same cost basis. Also to give the customer a better product, not pandering, it's called customer satisfaction and repeat customers.
Where it has gone pear shaped now is the issue of being able to fund the new jets, but they will arrive, given time.

Indeed,some true facts here!

[Serenity]

Just passing on what a pax on the canx flight told me.

[virginblue]

A deal was done to introduce the E175 into the fleet at NIL increase in operating costs, I will repeat that in plain English, the E175 costs the SAME as the Dash to operate, and it has 10 more seats to increase revenue with.

Your admission that the E175 burns more fuel pretty much ruins your argument as fuel costs are flexible - or has Embraer hedged the fuel costs on Flybe's behalf at a certain level for the next 20 years? The calculation that the costs of the Q400 are the same as the E175 must be based on a certain fuel price. So is today's fuel price the same as the one on which the pre-order calculations were based? If today's fuel costs are higher, logic would dictate that the overall costs of the E175 today are higher than those of the Q400.