Varsity Express
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: LHR
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to this months Airliner World (I only read it cos it was in the crew room - honest!!) he worked for Blue Islands for 6 motnhs before being sacked and then got picked up by some unknown Greek start-up Airline that, no doubt although it doesn't say, he paid for a A320 TR for that was done on the BMI sims. This company then went bust before it had started (hmmm, bit of a theme here!) and he was left high and dry. He has never worked for BMI. Another load of bull, from "Baby Bull$%*t"!
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: England
Age: 53
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: linlithgow
Age: 49
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello - I'm new here and this is my first post.
I've followed all of this with great interest. Varsity caught my eye because I used to live in Oxford, although I've spent most of my life in London, and I recently moved to Linlithgow, near Edinburgh. I was planning a trip to see my family and friends in London, and Varsity's forty-nine quid fares attracted me. I'd seen some peoples' reservations, but I fell for the hype, and booked a ticket for last Thursday, 11th. Just as well I'd been following developments, because if I'd not bothered checking the news regularly, I could have missed everything, and I would have turned up at Edinburgh Airport none the wiser. As it happens, I found out the day the operation went tits-up and was able to book a train ticket instead.
The whole thing is absolutely disgusting, and shows how the doubters have been vindicated. Utterly disgraceful behaviour - I can't cope with such blatant dishonesty, it makes me furious, and I'm taking this personally because I was taken for a ride, albeit in a very small way. I should have known better - the signs were there right from the start, from the utterly useless (no doubt cheap!) booking system on the website, to the stupid posy pictures of MH on the publicity, trying to look like Captain Jack or something.
Now the truth has emerged, it's obvious to anyone with any sense that his business model was completely fraudulent and flawed. What's not been answered so far is whether he managed to fool himself. He managed to con everyone else - but did he do this deliberately, or did he live in such a fantasy world that he thought it would all work?
I'll admit to being no expert in aviation - railways are my forte - but I think one thing common to both trains and planes is an extremely active enthusiast scene. Often enthusiasts know a lot about the business and often they work in it with some success, but often...errr...they don't. Halstead strikes me as the classic unrealistic and deluded enthusiast with a passion for things that just don't work. He clearly seems to love both Oxford Airport and Jetstream 31s, despite the fact that Oxford isn't going to become a major hub anytime soon, and Jetstream 31s are too small, too noisy and too uneconomic to operate profitably for any length of time on a route like this. I've seen it in the railway industry so often, when enthusiasts do their nut when their favourite locos or coaches are withdrawn in favour of something more appropriate, modern, comfortable and economic. Railways - and airlines - are not theme parks for enthusiasts to play around in. That's what the preservation movement and private flying clubs are for. If you're going into business, there's no room for sentimentality or nostalgia for anything - you need to be extremely hard-nosed and realistic. Clearly MH lives in a fantasy world where things like taking responsibility for your own actions don't matter.
I watch further developments with interest...
PP
I've followed all of this with great interest. Varsity caught my eye because I used to live in Oxford, although I've spent most of my life in London, and I recently moved to Linlithgow, near Edinburgh. I was planning a trip to see my family and friends in London, and Varsity's forty-nine quid fares attracted me. I'd seen some peoples' reservations, but I fell for the hype, and booked a ticket for last Thursday, 11th. Just as well I'd been following developments, because if I'd not bothered checking the news regularly, I could have missed everything, and I would have turned up at Edinburgh Airport none the wiser. As it happens, I found out the day the operation went tits-up and was able to book a train ticket instead.
The whole thing is absolutely disgusting, and shows how the doubters have been vindicated. Utterly disgraceful behaviour - I can't cope with such blatant dishonesty, it makes me furious, and I'm taking this personally because I was taken for a ride, albeit in a very small way. I should have known better - the signs were there right from the start, from the utterly useless (no doubt cheap!) booking system on the website, to the stupid posy pictures of MH on the publicity, trying to look like Captain Jack or something.
Now the truth has emerged, it's obvious to anyone with any sense that his business model was completely fraudulent and flawed. What's not been answered so far is whether he managed to fool himself. He managed to con everyone else - but did he do this deliberately, or did he live in such a fantasy world that he thought it would all work?
I'll admit to being no expert in aviation - railways are my forte - but I think one thing common to both trains and planes is an extremely active enthusiast scene. Often enthusiasts know a lot about the business and often they work in it with some success, but often...errr...they don't. Halstead strikes me as the classic unrealistic and deluded enthusiast with a passion for things that just don't work. He clearly seems to love both Oxford Airport and Jetstream 31s, despite the fact that Oxford isn't going to become a major hub anytime soon, and Jetstream 31s are too small, too noisy and too uneconomic to operate profitably for any length of time on a route like this. I've seen it in the railway industry so often, when enthusiasts do their nut when their favourite locos or coaches are withdrawn in favour of something more appropriate, modern, comfortable and economic. Railways - and airlines - are not theme parks for enthusiasts to play around in. That's what the preservation movement and private flying clubs are for. If you're going into business, there's no room for sentimentality or nostalgia for anything - you need to be extremely hard-nosed and realistic. Clearly MH lives in a fantasy world where things like taking responsibility for your own actions don't matter.
I watch further developments with interest...
PP
I don't know the guy, have never met him and have never had anything to do with anything of his ventures. It does however seem to me that people seem rather too keen to wield the knife now. The guy knows what he's done, he's all over the web and the police are involved. I know I'm not a mod, so this is only a polite request, but would it be possible to keep the personal stuff out of it ?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twin Aisle expresses concern for the airports in post 140.
I think the Oxford Airport staff knew MH was behind VE, so I have no sympathy whatsoever for them, though I'll bet they didn't lose much money, if any. All their day-to-day dealings would have been with Links Air, but I think they succumbed to a naive desire to see their own growth plan succeed. Even today one of them is quoted in a story on the BBC web site saying almost every seat was full the first week and 500 additional tickets had been sold. I wonder if they had convincing proof of this, or just MH's sterling word? Even now they are hoping these numbers convince another airline to takeover the Oxford to Edinburgh route.
As Potential has written previously, a simple credit check on Varsity Air Services revealed the sole Director was MH. An elaborate new set of CAA rules is no substitute for such common sense.
To Primitive Person - The Jetstream 31 has 19 seats. Regulations would most likely require an ATOL if he were using a 20 seat or larger aircraft. He would never have passed the sniff test to get an ATOL, so the aircraft choice could be seen as circumstantial evidence that he knew he had much to hide. Applying for an ATOL would have flushed out the fictitiousness of Will Gilligan and perhaps would even have flushed out the other person involved as being banned from holding a company Director position in the UK.
To DavidJohnson6 - The whole media campaign for his first airline attempt was based on self promoting his personality and Bransonesqueness. It is ludicrous to request that the very thing he used to con people be left out of the discussion. From his very recent statements to the press that he did nothing wrong in creating the Will Gilligan persona, it is painfully obvious that he has not learnt is lesson!
I think the Oxford Airport staff knew MH was behind VE, so I have no sympathy whatsoever for them, though I'll bet they didn't lose much money, if any. All their day-to-day dealings would have been with Links Air, but I think they succumbed to a naive desire to see their own growth plan succeed. Even today one of them is quoted in a story on the BBC web site saying almost every seat was full the first week and 500 additional tickets had been sold. I wonder if they had convincing proof of this, or just MH's sterling word? Even now they are hoping these numbers convince another airline to takeover the Oxford to Edinburgh route.
As Potential has written previously, a simple credit check on Varsity Air Services revealed the sole Director was MH. An elaborate new set of CAA rules is no substitute for such common sense.
To Primitive Person - The Jetstream 31 has 19 seats. Regulations would most likely require an ATOL if he were using a 20 seat or larger aircraft. He would never have passed the sniff test to get an ATOL, so the aircraft choice could be seen as circumstantial evidence that he knew he had much to hide. Applying for an ATOL would have flushed out the fictitiousness of Will Gilligan and perhaps would even have flushed out the other person involved as being banned from holding a company Director position in the UK.
To DavidJohnson6 - The whole media campaign for his first airline attempt was based on self promoting his personality and Bransonesqueness. It is ludicrous to request that the very thing he used to con people be left out of the discussion. From his very recent statements to the press that he did nothing wrong in creating the Will Gilligan persona, it is painfully obvious that he has not learnt is lesson!
Last edited by Adios; 16th Mar 2010 at 22:04. Reason: Spelling error
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Google "NPD DSM-IV" and see if the criteria sound familiar:
1. An exaggerated sense of self-importance, exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements.
2. Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
3. Believes he is "special" and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people or institutions.
4. Requires excessive admiration.
5. Has a sense of entitlement.
6. Selfishly takes advantage of others to achieve own ends, uses other people to get what they want without caring about the cost to the other people.
7. Lacks empathy.
8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him.
9. Shows arrogant, haughty, patronizing, or contemptuous behaviours or attitudes.
1. An exaggerated sense of self-importance, exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements.
2. Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
3. Believes he is "special" and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people or institutions.
4. Requires excessive admiration.
5. Has a sense of entitlement.
6. Selfishly takes advantage of others to achieve own ends, uses other people to get what they want without caring about the cost to the other people.
7. Lacks empathy.
8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him.
9. Shows arrogant, haughty, patronizing, or contemptuous behaviours or attitudes.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great detective work there CaptiveP and Flightrider!
Even the Wikipedia mods are suspicious that Cryton4 is MH himself and they called him out for suspected self-promotion and conflict of interest here: User talk:Cryton4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
He truly is the gift that keeps on giving. Even made the BBC news this afternoon, still denying any wrongdoing and saying a way has been found to repay the pilots their money. Why doesn't PPrune have an icon of a flying pig when you need one?
Even the Wikipedia mods are suspicious that Cryton4 is MH himself and they called him out for suspected self-promotion and conflict of interest here: User talk:Cryton4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
He truly is the gift that keeps on giving. Even made the BBC news this afternoon, still denying any wrongdoing and saying a way has been found to repay the pilots their money. Why doesn't PPrune have an icon of a flying pig when you need one?
It's an interesting read back through the full thread. We never did establish whether Oxjob was simply another Halstead alias to talk up the venture, but I will maintain my suspicions.
In terms of the CAA role, previous posters have (rightly) pointed out that the CAA ATOL Exemption 1 removes the need for anyone chartering aircraft of less than 20 seats to hold an ATOL. It is the very same piece of legislation used by Manx2 to launch and sustain its operations and in fairness to them, they appear to be hanging in there quite nicely after three years. Is it right to throw out a piece of legislation under which one business has thrived because someone like MH comes along and abuses it? I'd argue not, but I would argue that there is a strong case for action to be taken against MH for the fiasco which was Varsity Express.
The important thing here is to ensure that any action taken after this mess does not deter other, credible people from trying to make similar ventures work. TwinAisle's suggestions are all very well, but if applied nowadays would mean that easyJet would never have got started (it was a virtual airline to begin with too). It is equally the case that the airline licensing laws are EU law rather than UK law. Even if the CAA changed its policy, there would be nothing to stop under-funded Type B operators from other EU nations setting up shop in the UK to conduct operations. I don't think any of these suggestions could or would ever be practically applied.
In terms of the CAA role, previous posters have (rightly) pointed out that the CAA ATOL Exemption 1 removes the need for anyone chartering aircraft of less than 20 seats to hold an ATOL. It is the very same piece of legislation used by Manx2 to launch and sustain its operations and in fairness to them, they appear to be hanging in there quite nicely after three years. Is it right to throw out a piece of legislation under which one business has thrived because someone like MH comes along and abuses it? I'd argue not, but I would argue that there is a strong case for action to be taken against MH for the fiasco which was Varsity Express.
The important thing here is to ensure that any action taken after this mess does not deter other, credible people from trying to make similar ventures work. TwinAisle's suggestions are all very well, but if applied nowadays would mean that easyJet would never have got started (it was a virtual airline to begin with too). It is equally the case that the airline licensing laws are EU law rather than UK law. Even if the CAA changed its policy, there would be nothing to stop under-funded Type B operators from other EU nations setting up shop in the UK to conduct operations. I don't think any of these suggestions could or would ever be practically applied.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm alright Jack...
I think the Oxford Airport staff knew MH was behind VE, so I have no sympathy whatsoever for them, though I'll bet they didn't lose much money, if any.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the Polis do an even half decent job the guy is actually spectacularly likely to fall on his sword this time; thanks to a New Labour mania for new legislation and new offences that looks very worthwhile on this ocassion.
It would therefore be useful if the people who have attended the interview with him would provide statements to the police to same effect as the descriptions of the interviews they have posted here. Even if they haven't lost money; his attempt to get it still represents an act of fraud by false representation and giving a statement would help nail him for the people that have lost money.
Fraud by false representation is committed very simply. It is where a person dishonestly makes a false representation and intends by making the representation to make a gain for himself or another or to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
A representation is false if it is untrue or misleading and the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
There are two areas where he has made untrue statements that he must have known were untrue, with the intention of causing a gain for himself.
He made statements regarding the existence of investors with the intention of getting people to do business with him, to receive the gain of use of a leased aircraft, and to receive funds from would be pilots in respect of training.
He also made false statements as regards has identity, also with the (acknowledged) intention of gaining the benefit of getting people to do business with him.
It is also necessary to show that he "dishonestly" made these false statements.
Dishonesty has two elements:
- That the thing done was dishonest by the standards of reasonable honest people
- The the person doing the thing must have known that it was dishonest by those standards.
I would strongly argue that this test is met in respect of the statements regarding investors. That's wrong in anyone's book; and the guy had form - he knew that he needed to reassure people he had capital after what happened the last time. He needed money off pilots, and he knew he had to lie to get it, and he knew what lie he had to say in order to get it.
His Oxford Mail and Times statements tend towards him trying to suggest he doesn't meet the second of these tests in respect of the false name. However the reason he gives for using the false name itself shows dishonestly. He must have known it was wrong to make people that he knew didn't want to do business with him and that were ignoring him do business with him by pretending he was someone else. That's wrong in any person's book!
There are no other tests or hurdles to cross other than the ones I listed. A fraud is a fraud even if it is only an attempted fraud, and it is a fraud even if the intended victim knows from the outset that it's a fraud.
Obviously there are other potential areas, like the possible implied false representation that he was even capable of providing the money he took off people for the training. I don't know the ins and outs of the legislation relevant to that...
Very best wishes to CIT850, Potential, and the others. I hope you find real jobs with honest people really soon!
Edit: I've read further. All the best to CIT850, and congratulations to Potential!
It would therefore be useful if the people who have attended the interview with him would provide statements to the police to same effect as the descriptions of the interviews they have posted here. Even if they haven't lost money; his attempt to get it still represents an act of fraud by false representation and giving a statement would help nail him for the people that have lost money.
Fraud by false representation is committed very simply. It is where a person dishonestly makes a false representation and intends by making the representation to make a gain for himself or another or to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
A representation is false if it is untrue or misleading and the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
There are two areas where he has made untrue statements that he must have known were untrue, with the intention of causing a gain for himself.
He made statements regarding the existence of investors with the intention of getting people to do business with him, to receive the gain of use of a leased aircraft, and to receive funds from would be pilots in respect of training.
He also made false statements as regards has identity, also with the (acknowledged) intention of gaining the benefit of getting people to do business with him.
It is also necessary to show that he "dishonestly" made these false statements.
Dishonesty has two elements:
- That the thing done was dishonest by the standards of reasonable honest people
- The the person doing the thing must have known that it was dishonest by those standards.
I would strongly argue that this test is met in respect of the statements regarding investors. That's wrong in anyone's book; and the guy had form - he knew that he needed to reassure people he had capital after what happened the last time. He needed money off pilots, and he knew he had to lie to get it, and he knew what lie he had to say in order to get it.
His Oxford Mail and Times statements tend towards him trying to suggest he doesn't meet the second of these tests in respect of the false name. However the reason he gives for using the false name itself shows dishonestly. He must have known it was wrong to make people that he knew didn't want to do business with him and that were ignoring him do business with him by pretending he was someone else. That's wrong in any person's book!
There are no other tests or hurdles to cross other than the ones I listed. A fraud is a fraud even if it is only an attempted fraud, and it is a fraud even if the intended victim knows from the outset that it's a fraud.
Obviously there are other potential areas, like the possible implied false representation that he was even capable of providing the money he took off people for the training. I don't know the ins and outs of the legislation relevant to that...
Very best wishes to CIT850, Potential, and the others. I hope you find real jobs with honest people really soon!
Edit: I've read further. All the best to CIT850, and congratulations to Potential!
Last edited by 01475; 17th Mar 2010 at 01:37.
Scourge of Bad Airline Management!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Global Nomad
Age: 55
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think LearJet 50 wins the "I told you so" T-Shirt.
TwinAisle's suggestions are all very well, but if applied nowadays would mean that easyJet would never have got started
Adios - I did indeed have sympathy with ANYONE who lost money on this debacle. However, in the light of Pilot Positive's post, I may reconsider that....
Under the principles of EU subsidiarity, I would bet that the CAA can indeed put extra rules in place in line with my post, btw - the conditions would be that they have to be applied consistently and in addition, not detracting from, EU regulation. Manx2 are a bit of a special case, since the IoM is not in the EU...
TA
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Body
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although his comments to the press help sell papers and keep people interested in developments here and elsewhere I would give MH one piece of free advice.
STOP saying anything to anybody other than a good lawyer because you will only make it worse for yourself.
"No comment" should have been the reply from the beginning.
I do not support his actions, merely pointing out the obvious.
A self-publicist should know when to say little, just as he knows when to say a lot.
But I suspect it has taken on a life of its own already.
STOP saying anything to anybody other than a good lawyer because you will only make it worse for yourself.
"No comment" should have been the reply from the beginning.
I do not support his actions, merely pointing out the obvious.
A self-publicist should know when to say little, just as he knows when to say a lot.
But I suspect it has taken on a life of its own already.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Age: 48
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To all other wannabees with £15k to spend it is also worth avoiding another bloke called Mark Davies.
He tried in 2006/2007 and got almost as far as Mr H. The similarities are endless.
Link:
http://www.pprune.org/biz-jets-ag-fl...r-swansea.html
He tried in 2006/2007 and got almost as far as Mr H. The similarities are endless.
Link:
http://www.pprune.org/biz-jets-ag-fl...r-swansea.html
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: very close to STN!!
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fast track to a bank director's position!
this, or these individuals are well on their way to an impressive CV for a fast track to a bank director's position!!!
'i've started two airlines, neither one got off the ground, but i have good experience in big talking and big dreaming!'
'you're hired! let's now review the golden parachute clauses in the event of the predictable demise of this bank!'
'i've started two airlines, neither one got off the ground, but i have good experience in big talking and big dreaming!'
'you're hired! let's now review the golden parachute clauses in the event of the predictable demise of this bank!'
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loose ends...
If you are successful you will be placed on a Jetstream 31/32 type rating course starting at Oxford Aviation in Woodford, Manchester, on March 1st 2010. Your salary of £24,000 per year will be paid from your first line flight in early April 2010. You will be required to pay £15,000 for your type rating prior to the start of your training.
Kind regards,
Will Gilligan
Commercial Director
Varsity Express
[email protected]
Home
Kind regards,
Will Gilligan
Commercial Director
Varsity Express
[email protected]
Home
Let me support 01475's comments by suggesting to those who did receive this email (regardless of outcome) that they take it to the Thames Valley Police.
PP
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not a Martin Gilligan-Lawrence enterprise is it by any chance? 
When you say "Scheme" do you mean "Scam"?
If there is another scam then it just reinforces the point that at the moment this pay to fly route is being unscrupulously exploited at the expense of young FO's. And its a culture we've created!
Wouldn't it great if all the young FO's STOPPED paying for TR's and line training and put some value back into the pilot employment market for their own futures.
Easier said then done.
When you say "Scheme" do you mean "Scam"?
If there is another scam then it just reinforces the point that at the moment this pay to fly route is being unscrupulously exploited at the expense of young FO's. And its a culture we've created!
Wouldn't it great if all the young FO's STOPPED paying for TR's and line training and put some value back into the pilot employment market for their own futures.
Easier said then done.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Africa
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are successful you will be placed on a Jetstream 31/32 type rating course starting at Oxford Aviation in Woodford, Manchester