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

Starting an Airline.

Old 15th Aug 2009, 09:09
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 10
Starting an Airline.

Was talking to an old aviation expert this morning, and we were commenting on how hard it is now to start an airline for any entrepreneur in the UK now. Apparently the CAA are requiring a minimum of 6 months financials in the bank plus £5/6 million in reserve and then on top of this they are asking for other bonds. I dont know if this is true or not, but he seems sure this is the case.

On top of all the AOC stuff I have to say that it is hardly surprising that so many airlines fail and so many staff are in trouble because it seems to be stupid over regulation yet again by a bunch of civil servants.

I know they have single handed destroyed the small charter operator and tour operators with bonding regulations under the Tour Operator act of 1992 where they are very evil to new operators with excess bond quota requirements.

In an era of electronic banking is this really necessary, surely an agreement with the Merchant Account holder for the new business or perhaps a trust account facility would be far more appropriate it strikes me that the CAA are actually a waste of space that are simply justifying there jobs by creating a nightmare for any business trying to start.

In reality the starting of an airline should be realitively an easy process, enough planes about so why on earth are the restrictions holding so many from stopping this. Its crazy in my opinion.

Interesting conversation this, but I thought I would field it, just for anyones views on it?
scottcalvin is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2009, 18:44
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 279
I think that the majority of operators and 100% of passengers who have ever been repatriated following the demise of an airline would agree that the CAA ATOL Bonding scheme is a good idea.

There have been enough dodgy geezers who've tried to start and run airlines in exactly the manner which you advocate, hence the rules and regulations.
If the industry wasn't as heavily regulated as it is, ther'd be far more rogue operators leaving more suppliers and customers high and dry.
goatface is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2009, 20:25
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,950
I know they have single handed destroyed the small charter operator and tour operators with bonding regulations under the Tour Operator act of 1992 where they are very evil to new operators with excess bond quota requirements.
Perhaps you will give us a few details to back this statement.
TSR2 is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2009, 22:42
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Newcastle
Age: 50
Posts: 512
Would that be the regulation to protect passenger safety, consumer regulations, and other pointless details?

Get real man.
andrewmcharlton is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 01:13
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 66
Posts: 452
scottcalvin

You have GOT to be a troll.
al446 is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 02:58
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 610
If you are a die hard fan of the airline industry then you would never complain about regulations put in place to ensure it is a safer and a more reliable industry...
Nakata77 is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 19:02
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: west of the tamar
Age: 71
Posts: 781
Love to know which airlines your old aviation expert actually started. Sorry this is absolute bollards and I write as someone who HAS started an airline and also held an ATOL licence for many years.
GROUNDHOG is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 20:13
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 66
Posts: 452
Groundhog, please don't feed the troll, joined Aug 2009 & 5 posts then posts rubbish.
al446 is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2009, 08:32
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: west of the tamar
Age: 71
Posts: 781
Al446 - Your right of course I only checked after posting!! Never mind the man/woman that never made a mistake never made anything!
GROUNDHOG is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2009, 10:32
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 3,887
It is possible that scott is a troll, however:

Scott does partly have a point, in that when Govt requires a high degree of protection by industry participants of consumers against purchase of a particular type of product, the barrier to entry for companies new to the industry becomes higher, and entrepreneurs are discouraged from opening a new company.

The strong protection afforded to consumers certainly helps those who have already purchased a product, but it may hurt consumers since new start-up companies look at things in different ways, and have the energy to shake up previous industry practices - an example is easyJet being one of the first to start the whole low-cost short-haul thing in the UK. It is highly unlikely BA would have voluntarily dropped their short-haul fares and adopted one-way pricing if they hadn't had EasyJet and Ryanair eating away at their customer base.

Air transport as an industry is regulated rather more tighly than many other industries. Of course it may well be entirely appropriate that the CAA demands an entrepreneur put up a large amount of cash when opening a new airline, both to ensure that consumers can be repatriated if necessary, and also to discourage the cowboy element. It may however incentivise people to start airlines elsewhere in the world where regulation is less stringent instead, or to choose a different industry when setting up a new business.

Last edited by davidjohnson6; 17th Aug 2009 at 11:11.
davidjohnson6 is online now  
Old 17th Aug 2009, 21:36
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Newcastle
Age: 50
Posts: 512
They tend to be more heavily regulated than other sectors because if you get it very wrong you wind up witha big smokin hole in the ground and a lot of bodies on your hands which tends to be both bad for business and the consumer!

As evidenced by lo-co's in nice de-regulated (or perhaps non-regulated) places like say Indonesia for example.
andrewmcharlton is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 08:58
  #12 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 10
Firstly AL446 and Groundhog, I am not a troll. I am very successful running 11 businesses and also have successfully run 3 airline operations from start up that have been sold on. However this is not about how big my balls are or how small yours might be, it was a stated fact that the CAA are very over regulated and make it nearly impossible to start a new operation from the UK such as the days of Sir Freddie Laker, Sir Richard etc...

Air transport as an industry is regulated far more tightly than many other industries that are far riskier because of the glamour image that it offers and that it is an easy target. Yes some will argue that this may well be appropriate what the CAA demands but in reality it is wrong.

I was not on about operational regulations such as safety or anything as this; I was on about financial guarantees, and other matters required and the legislation that is involved with the CAA. If you have NOT been exposed to this then you will not have a clue what I am on about, you will only see small details online, but lets for example give you a home truth. As a CEO of an airline approximately 3 months of working year will be taken up with CAA guideline completion for financial preparations and the submit process, it will then go through a slow return from the CAA and then all aspects will need to rushed through last minute. This happens with all airlines regular.

In the process of tour operators who run there own charter operators such as Thomson, Thomas Cook and others they are unfairly controlled by the CAA Bonding Regulations.

Fact: A bond is to protect a customer and suppliers.

Fact: CAA requires a bond to cover all the costs they believe will match the forecast.

Fact: The airline or charter operator will use a merchant credit banking facility to take 99% of its business. This in its own right will have regulations, so for example lets take the major banking institutes that provide merchant facilities they in most cases with smaller operators retain 5 to 10% of each transaction for 6 months (thatís each transaction) on a rolling scale to cover failure as well. They will also in 95% of cases now only pay 7 days in arrears I am led to believe by a number of senior operators, which means that the operator firstly sees 5 to 10% of its transactional profit retained and then a further delay on receiving its funds from the merchant in the mean time. They are in effect offering a restricted service to the travel industry.

Fact: A £1 levy for tour operator that was proposed to help all businesses has not really worked because it has gone up already, when it was brought in for tour operators, it was promised and I quote "this charge will not go up for at least 3 years..." well that lasted a long time, all over 11 months for the poor tour operators.

Groundhog you stat that you have started an airline and also held an ATOL license for many years, then you will know 100% that I am correct on the points above generally across the board and not on a single case by case basis. You say you have an airline with your operator well I do not envy you with all this legislation and financial restrictions.

In simple terms this was not about how many posts an individual has on this forum it was a post to start a discussion following conversations that I have been involved with over the month with others and wanted a wider perspective it is clear that instead of stimulating the conversation it in fact has brought insults, and a contest of how big your balls are!

Which is a great shame? I expect you to reply with more insults, as that is human nature but at the end of the day the fact remains that the CAA is run by civil servants who have no clue of the pressures of business and have created a paper trail of miss-management so long you can't even find the starting point. Aviation is a wonderful business and fun to be involved but once again the British mentality restricts growth with negativity and paperwork instead of positive thinking.

I rest my case; you guys have proved my point!

Last edited by scottcalvin; 19th Aug 2009 at 09:22.
scottcalvin is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 09:08
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 67
Railroad tracks. This is fascinating.


Be sure to read the final paragraph; your understanding of it will depend on the earlier part of the content.


The US standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That's an exceedingly odd number.



Why was that gauge used? Because that's the way they built them in England , and English expatriates designed the US railroads.



Why did the English build them like that? Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used.



Why did 'they' use that gauge then? Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they had used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.



Why did the wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing? Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads in England , because that's the spacing of the wheel ruts.



So who built those old rutted roads? Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (including England ) for their legions. Those roads have been used ever since.



And the ruts in the roads? Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome , they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing. Therefore the United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot. Bureaucracies live forever.



So the next time you are handed a specification/procedure/process and wonder 'What horse's ass came up with this?', you may be exactly right.Imperial Roman army chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the rear ends of two war horses. (Two horses' asses.) Now, the twist to the story:



When you see a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory in Utah The


engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains, and the SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is about as wide as two horses' behinds.



So, a major Space Shuttle design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of a horse's ass. And you thought being a horse's ass wasn't important? Ancient horse's asses control almost everything... and


CURRENT Horses Asses are controlling everything else.



The majority of them have taken up residence at CAA House.
The Member is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 09:15
  #14 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 10
Simply cracking....
scottcalvin is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 10:09
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Newcastle
Age: 50
Posts: 512
What utter bollocks. Nothing like trying to make a few leaps of faith to try and prove a point not worth proving.
andrewmcharlton is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 15:20
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,950
Perhaps the CAA regulations are specifically designed to protect passengers from would be fly-by-night cowboys just out to make a swift buck.
TSR2 is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 15:28
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 2,354
Scottcalvin

Your inital post certainly didn't sound as if it was from someone who "(has) successfully run 3 airlines from start up that have been sold on.", but I suppose if you say so then it must be correct.

I'm just find it hard to believe that you were, apparently, surprised at the way things operate CAA-wise as told to you by "an old aviation expert". I only set up and ran an AOC operation for eight years (which was itself sold on) so I don't suppose you think I know what I'm talking about any more than do AL446, Groundhog or Andrewcharlton so I won't comment further.

I hope you don't take this post as an 'insult', as it's not intended to be.
Expressflight is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 16:05
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: In the dark
Posts: 109
The engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains, and the SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is about as wide as two horses' behinds.
So, a major Space Shuttle design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of a horse's ass.
According to Wiki,
Each is 149.16 ft (45.46 m) long and 12.17 ft (3.71 m) in diameter.
or aprox 3 times the width of a horses arse, Roman or not...
I wonder how much of the rest of that is nonsense too?
Flying_Frisbee is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 19:03
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 66
Posts: 452
Scottcalvin

Please do excuse me, I had given the crystal ball out on loan, the tarot cards were being used in a poker school (don't ask) and the runes were all over the place, the Mah-Jong set is short of a few tiles. So I was entirely unable to discern whether you were a troll or a businessman who is "very successful running 11 businesses and also have successfully run 3 airline operations from start up that have been sold on." My oversight. Now of course I will take you seriously. Honest. Really, I will.

Could I suggest you take some time out of your busy life to talk to someone about the gonad fixation you seem to have, nobody mentioned balls before you did.
al446 is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2009, 21:09
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 410
This has got to be the strangest thread I have read in a while. Scotcalvin starts a thread without any back up, and can't or won't name the three airlines he has started and sold on.
Originally Posted by Scottcalvin
Firstly AL446 and Groundhog, I am not a troll. I am very successful running 11 businesses and also have successfully run 3 airline operations from start up that have been sold on. However this is not about how big my balls are or how small yours might be, it was a stated fact that the CAA are very over regulated and make it nearly impossible to start a new operation from the UK such as the days of Sir Freddie Laker, Sir Richard etc...
I doubt he should be called a Troll unless he can't back up this statement.Although it sounds farfetched I agree.

Originally Posted by al446
Could I suggest you take some time out of your busy life to talk to someone about the gonad fixation you seem to have, nobody mentioned balls before you did.
"gonad" fixation - gonad is as poor a choice of word as it can apply to female organs.

LINK: Gonad definition - Medical Dictionary definitions of popular medical terms easily defined on MedTerms

Originally Posted by Flying_Frisbee
According to Wiki,
Quote:
Each is 149.16 ft (45.46 m) long and 12.17 ft (3.71 m) in diameter.
or aprox 3 times the width of a horses arse, Roman or not...
I wonder how much of the rest of that is nonsense too?
The voice of reason is what is little else than a rumour thread, in other words claims with no link to back up as yet. Flying_Frisbee has at least done some research.

Last edited by Ernest Lanc's; 19th Aug 2009 at 22:28. Reason: To make slight change of text
Ernest Lanc's is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.