Wikiposts
Search
Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

FlyBe - 6

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 23rd May 2013, 20:46
  #3041 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thing is, flybe aren't really low cost, in that the costs of their tickets are, well ....high
Depends who you compare them to - when I fly with them, they are usually cheaper than the German competition. Prices only get really steep near the time (but still less than alternative).

Overall, I thought it was quite a clever spin on what is clearly a massive strategic retrenchment overall
I agree - but it is probably better to focus on routes where they can make their fleet and cost base work. For that reason I don't see any significant presence closer to LON than SOU. Where could they get a defensible advantage over EZY to a core base?

What do people make of the reduction in the E195s whilst still taking 175s? Is that because they have no choice to take the 175s or is there a compelling reason to have 175s over 195s?
E75toDUS is offline  
Old 23rd May 2013, 20:50
  #3042 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe the 195 leases were only for ten years, coming up to that soon for the first bunch.

They are taking 3 or 4 more little 'uns this year then deferring the rest until 2016 according to the latest gumpf. So not so much a replacement but more timing.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 23rd May 2013, 21:55
  #3043 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: UK
Age: 41
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the costs of their tickets are, well ....high
And to put it into context, in 2012 the passenger revenue (fare and ancillary) of BE UK was £565.6m and they carried ~7.6m passengers. As such, their average one-way fare (based on passengers and not seats), including ancillaries, was £74.42. (Excluding ancillaries, it was £60.70.) Given their strategic position and their broadly targeted customers, this average fare doesn't strike me as being particularly high. Of course, it looks worse given their their average sector length is short (466km, 290mi), hence their high yields.

Last edited by G-JNHP; 23rd May 2013 at 22:04.
G-JNHP is offline  
Old 23rd May 2013, 21:59
  #3044 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Could be that the really high fares were never bought and paid for though. Just a thought.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 24th May 2013, 12:58
  #3045 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: The Mysterious East
Posts: 384
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Norwich Airport boss offers support to struggling regional airline operator Flybe
Eastern Daily Press
Friday, May 24, 2013

Norwich Airport boss Andrew Bell pledged his support to struggling airline Flybe as it made fresh manoeuvres to cut its costs.

LINK
LXGB is offline  
Old 24th May 2013, 13:20
  #3046 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: PLH
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Only the Q400 could use LCY, the ERJ 175/195 are not certified for the steep approach. So I think it's rather unlikely.
PlymSpotter is offline  
Old 24th May 2013, 16:30
  #3047 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cityflyer use the 170 and 190 into LCY, wouldnt the certification be the same for the 175 and 195?
hampshireandy is offline  
Old 24th May 2013, 21:02
  #3048 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As the E175 and E195 are stretched variants of the baseline models, I guess they are more challenged performance-wise when operating from LCY. The E190 also requires some mods that result in a new "SR"-subvariant (the E170 only requires a software modifivation).

Don't see BE operating from LCY anyway. If LGW has become too expensive for them, how could a move to LCY make sense? LCY is - allegedly - one of the most expensive airports in Europe.

Last edited by virginblue; 24th May 2013 at 21:03.
virginblue is offline  
Old 25th May 2013, 06:08
  #3049 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: PPrune nominee 2011!
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
how could a move to LCY make sense? LCY is - allegedly - one of the most expensive airports in Europe.
Because LCY has more yeild in the airfare they can charge as its more business originated.
Skystar320 is offline  
Old 25th May 2013, 08:27
  #3050 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am aware of that. But it does not exactly fit Flybe's branding and if there are lucrative routes not served, why shouldn't BACF or Cityjet operate them as well established LCY carriers? The problem for BE is that they simply cannot dump a multi-aircraft operation on LCY as they will not have the necessary runway and apron slots to offer a decent schedule.
virginblue is offline  
Old 25th May 2013, 08:42
  #3051 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Regrettably far from 50°N
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Of course it's true that LCY is an expensive airport to operate into. However, we should bear in mind that BE (in the British European days) made much of its LCY losses using -300s and smaller Dash 8 variants; 78 seats on a quieter aircraft is significantly more attractive. In any case there are enough F50, AT4, D38 and DH8 operations from LCY (SI to JER, LG to LUX and EZ to BLL being notable successes) to prove that, although partly due to its runway capacity, the charging regime must make these sorts of ops viable given the inevitably higher yields.

Now I won't get into fantasy timetable land but the following destinations might work, given no current route from LCY and potential use by previous BE LGW passengers as well as some who had used competitors' services to other LON airports (notably LHR) as point-to-point services:

INV: Competition from U2 at LGW/LTN and BA at LHR.

BHD: Competition from U2 at LGW/LTN/STN/SEN, EI at LHR/LGW and BA at LHR.

NCL: Competition from BA at LHR.

GCI: Competition from GR at LGW/STN.

NQY: Competition (thrice weekly) from U2 at SEN.

These on the premise of specific demand by business passengers and a twice or thrice daily service with early morning and evening slots using aircraft based elsewhere. It would allow BE to keep a reduced but notable London presence with higher yields off a lower (DH8) cost-base.

Last edited by Aero Mad; 25th May 2013 at 08:50.
Aero Mad is offline  
Old 25th May 2013, 09:06
  #3052 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: inv
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 2 Posts
INV: Competition from U2 at LGW/LTN and BA at LHR
INV has not had a BA LHR route since 1997, BMI did operate it for a couple of years a few years ago but has long gone. At the moment if you want to do a day trip to London from INV the BE to LGW is the only option. And their are quite a few business passengers that do this as well as a lot that go down on Monday morning and come back Friday night.
scr1 is offline  
Old 25th May 2013, 09:15
  #3053 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I will ask again - how about slots at LCY to do all that?

The problem is that, IIRC, other than STN, there is no London airport where you can schedule a proper operation with, say, 3 or 4 flights to a new destination as there are no slots for arrivals between 0715-0815 (and the resulting departure times). Not at LHR, not at LCY, not at LTN.

Last edited by virginblue; 25th May 2013 at 09:19.
virginblue is offline  
Old 25th May 2013, 09:16
  #3054 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: jersey
Age: 74
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
flybe

Is it just me, or did I read an official Flybe press release stating that they were NOT going to operate from another "London" airport instead of Gatwick?
kcockayne is offline  
Old 25th May 2013, 10:43
  #3055 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
my bet is that they will move to southampton
lfc84 is offline  
Old 25th May 2013, 12:27
  #3056 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Now I won't get into fantasy timetable land but the following destinations might work
Except you just did exactly that (!)
INV, BHD, NCL, and NQY have no connection to Canary Wharf and the City. BHD and NQY have both been tried before and both failed, Belfast very badly quite recently. NCL just about worked before the financial crash then once the sweetener route opening period was over, it just wasn't viable on a 29 seat J41. If they can't begin to fill a BE DHD from LGW that sits idle half the day, LCY is not going to make it better. INV will get left to the locos and the only one I think might be worth a bash, is Guernsey.

The issue here that might change matters is some form of sale or consolidation around the fate of CityJet.

Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 25th May 2013 at 12:28.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 14:29
  #3057 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EDI, LHR, NQY
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Skipness One Echo
The issue here that might change matters is some form of sale or consolidation around the fate of CityJet.
Exactly.
Originally Posted by scr1
And their [sic] are quite a few business passengers that do this as well as a lot that go down on Monday morning and come back Friday night.
There are a few, but nowhere near enough required to make a peak-time slot to LCY or LHR viable.
Originally Posted by Aero Mad
NQY: Competition (thrice weekly) from U2 at SEN
Minor point, but one that bugs me: people keep citing this "route", but it only operates on a limited number of weeks within one season's timetable and even then it's only 3 times a week, and then again at varying times of the day (all of them useless). Barely worth mentioning, and certainly not meaningful competition to anyone operating a proper service.
ajamieson is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 19:05
  #3058 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I see the schedule of WAT-MAN/BHX has changed on the weekly Wednesday flights to:

BHX 07:15 -WAT 08:30
WAT 08:55 - MAN 10:15
MAN 10:50 - WAT 12:10
WAT 12:35 - BHX 13:50

17-Jul-13 - 31-Jul-13

Any reason why or would it just planning ahead for some maintenance?

Does anybody know if WAT-LTN is in the pipeline at the moment?

--
--

Also on fligthglobal is that BE may be looking at switching the deferred E175's to the new re-engined versions, which may be available around 2018. Is there really any need for the Embraer's at all?
78Whiskey is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 19:19
  #3059 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Re-engined versions could be a good bet, presumably not too much more expensive than the current ones, plus better economics and also a slightly longer range would both benefit Flybe.
adfly is online now  
Old 28th May 2013, 19:21
  #3060 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wonder if they'll get a Dash equalling deal the next time though?!
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.