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

Flybe-9

Old 2nd May 2020, 07:53
  #4061 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 7,120
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by euromanxdude View Post
Any idea how they will be crewed?
Presumably one of the big ferry companies will pick up the contract?

Where into Europe are they heading to be parked ?
All the LGW a/c went to Bratislava
SWBKCB is offline  
Old 2nd May 2020, 09:19
  #4062 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: In front of a computer
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 2 Posts
Just read all of this..................

https://assets.ey.com/content/dam/ey...-proposals.pdf

Having watched these events, from the inside, for nearly 10 years it felt like an accident report. I always wondered why Saad left so suddenly but a possible explanation is that he saw the the airline was heading for bankruptcy and proposed another huge reorganisation. The board wouldn't agree so off he went and their only idea was to appoint Christine O-W.
She was clearly unable to do anything meaningful hence those dreadful FY18/19 figures - which I had not seen before.

The bit that I still don't fully understand is where did all the revenue go? Flights were busy with some routes regularly full (every seat occupied) and no one would claim that crews were overpaid. Was just the EMB leases? I don't see that directors fees of £2 million is particularly high in relation to the turnover.

All in all a very sad end to a great "purple family" - you were a great bunch

Shame about the management...........
ETOPS is offline  
Old 2nd May 2020, 11:59
  #4063 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Various at the moment
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Presumably one of the big ferry companies will pick up the contract?

Not necessarily so. These aircraft are owned by multiple organisations and so more than one ferry company is likely to be selected.
dc9-32 is offline  
Old 3rd May 2020, 22:09
  #4064 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Flybe administrators fight to retain carrier’s operating licence

UK regional carrier Flybe’s administrators intend to appeal to the government in a bid to retain the airline’s operating licence, warning that a sale of the business would become improbable if the licence is revoked.

https://www.flightglobal.com/airline...138191.article
allan1987 is online now  
Old 3rd May 2020, 22:31
  #4065 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,092
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Sounds like an administrator trying to generate some extra fees for themselves because there might still be some extra cash left in the business after they get paid off for work done so far - or the administrators want to cover their backsides against being sued by creditors for not having ticked the right boxes
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 3rd May 2020, 23:39
  #4066 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: IOM
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by davidjohnson6 View Post
Sounds like an administrator trying to generate some extra fees for themselves because there might still be some extra cash left in the business after they get paid off for work done so far - or the administrators want to cover their backsides against being sued by creditors for not having ticked the right boxes
I think more likely than not their may be certain contractual terms with debtors and or insurance provisions that may only be valid in the event of an active AOC, with penalties if licence is revoked.

But it is ridiculous that across the US and most of Europe, airlines can apply for some degree of bankruptcy protection to at least try fix things whilst maintaining an AOC.
JSCL is offline  
Old 4th May 2020, 12:56
  #4067 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To be fair they had years to try to fix things with radical changes that was needed, instead, since Saad left they just sat there and did next to nothing. This is most likely why the government didn't bail them out because in 18 months time they'll have been coming back for yet more handouts to add to the litany of handouts they'd received over the last 17 years.
Reversethrustset is offline  
Old 4th May 2020, 12:58
  #4068 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
https://www.flightglobal.com/mro/fly...138205.article

Wow! Past management should (but probably wont) feel ashamed on how bad this situation got.
jamestkirk is offline  
Old 4th May 2020, 17:46
  #4069 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The numbers (as also contained in the doc shared by ETOPS last week) are indeed truly shameful and (sadly) indicate why the Govt was not willing to intervene.

Slightly worrying (for what I would say was considered to be safe/professional operation) that the "return of the aircraft has been “hampered” by the fleet’s not being
in the condition required, the administrators state, with a need for a “significant amount” of asset swaps to restore them", or is that just because nearly all of the a/c
concerned have been sat on the ground for nearly 2 months with the minimum required attention? (with perhaps a few exceptions)
Wycombe is offline  
Old 4th May 2020, 18:12
  #4070 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wycombe View Post
The numbers (as also contained in the doc shared by ETOPS last week) are indeed truly shameful and (sadly) indicate why the Govt was not willing to intervene.
Slightly worrying (for what I would say was considered to be safe/professional operation) that the "return of the aircraft has been “hampered” by the fleet’s not being
in the condition required, the administrators state, with a need for a “significant amount” of asset swaps to restore them", or is that just because nearly all of the a/c
concerned have been sat on the ground for nearly 2 months with the minimum required attention? (with perhaps a few exceptions)
I don't believe it has any reflection on any unsafe practices; it's not worded brilliantly. It's more that engines get swapped around the fleet during their lifespan with an airline and when the aircraft are returned to lessors in an orderly fashion, the correct engines are back on the correct aircraft for the handover. However, with the airline suddenly being grounded overnight - engines are not on the correct aircraft, so need to be swapped before they can be returned to the lessors. A good operation wouldn't ground an aircraft because its engine needed to be sent off for servicing - they'd pop a different engine on and the aircraft returns to service, which is why they're all on different airframes. It's a good way of balancing out hours on airframes and engines in a normal operation and all airlines will do it. Just means there's some work to do to get everything back the way it should be.

If an aircraft is owned by lessor A, they're not going to want their aircraft back with lessor B's engines.
BOHEuropean is offline  
Old 4th May 2020, 18:19
  #4071 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dorset
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Those financial numbers - assuming they are trading losses and not the "gone concern" losses - are truly shocking. By that, I mean that when an airline defaults under a lease, the lease contains a term that all remaining payments until the end of that lease agreement become due and payable. If you had 50 aircraft at $100k/month each, your lease rental outgoings this month would normally be $5m. If you ceased trading and each lease had 5 years left to run, the lessors would suddenly consider that you owed $300m and so all of a sudden, the amount owing when you've gone bust is several multiples of what you'd have paid out if you were still trading. If the £215m loss is before any of those penalty payments were claimed, that's unbelievably bad.

In terms of the aircraft, the situation is not as shocking as it sounds. Within a large fleet of aircraft, it is inevitable that things like engines, props and gear legs will be swapped around over the life of the many aircraft in the fleet. Aircraft A might be delivered with engine serial numbers 1 and 2 installed; aircraft B has engine serial numbers 3 and 4, and the airline has a spare engine number 5. By the end of two years, you'd probably find that aircraft A has engines 2 and 5 fitted, aircraft B has 1 and 4 and engine 3 is sitting as the spare. However, each engine technically "belongs" to the aircraft with which it was delivered.

When working towards your handback dates, you'd routinely try to swap engines and major components within the fleet so that each aircraft arrives at its end-of-lease date with the right engines, props etc installed. At least, that is what you should be doing. In the case of Flybe where everything came to a sudden stop, it means that the components would not be attached to the right aircraft. If just one leasing company then insists on having Aircraft A redelivered with engines 1 and 2, and they won't accept engines 2 and 5 as fitted, you're into a major fleet-wide exercise of having to swap all of the out-of-place bits back. That's what has been going on here. It does not automatically mean that the aircraft were in a poor condition - I'm sure that they were not, but it just means that they were not in line with the required conditions at the end of the lease - due to the abrupt termination of it.

There were some regulatory findings and issues, so I've been told by people very close to it. To the best of my knowledge, those aren't the same as the issues being referred to here which are really about the leasing companies exercising their contractual rights to the property that they own - and perhaps one or two being precious in the process about what they will and won't accept.
Albert Hall is offline  
Old 4th May 2020, 18:20
  #4072 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dorset
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry - BOH, you beat me to it as I was typing. We're saying the same thing.
Albert Hall is offline  
Old 5th May 2020, 08:21
  #4073 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't believe it has any reflection on any unsafe practices; it's not worded brilliantly. It's more that engines get swapped around the fleet during their lifespan with an airline and when the aircraft are returned to lessors in an orderly fashion, the correct engines are back on the correct aircraft for the handover. However, with the airline suddenly being grounded overnight - engines are not on the correct aircraft, so need to be swapped before they can be returned to the lessors.
Appreciate the insight from those who responded, thanks. I work in IT and a lot of the "tin" humming away in Data Centre's these days is leased. Same kind of things go on (bits get moved around, robbed and ultimately replaced etc).

I saw on a FB group used by some staff at SOU that a few of the Dashes there have had some work done (there was a pic of one hangared, I think in the Signature hangar, which I was surprised to see), so I guess things are starting to move?
Wycombe is offline  
Old 5th May 2020, 13:56
  #4074 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: aberdeen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I get the impression that some where thinking Flybe may be risen from the ashes. Now easyJet are doing MAN, GLA, BHX to BFS and MAN to ABZ. Who in their right mind would want to take on easyJet on these routes. The saying that if Flybe didn’t exist you would have to invent it is and was self promoting PR nonsense and gave the staff a false sense of security. As said so many times on this forum, great staff let down by talentless people in management positions.
cabsav is offline  
Old 5th May 2020, 14:08
  #4075 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cabsav View Post
Now easyJet are doing MAN, GLA, BHX to BFS and MAN to ABZ. Who in their right mind would want to take on easyJet on these routes.
Well Flybe competed (successfully?) for years against Easyjet on MAN, GLA and BHX to Belfast. Sure Easy have recently announced MAN-ABZ but only single daily so an operator could compete against Easyjet on frequency if they had low enough trip costs.

Sending a 180 seat 320 to ABZ once a day is not a cheap exercise and not everyone will be prepared or willing to sacrifice convenience of travelling when they want to (rather than when Easyjet want them too) for price. I'd say there would be room for both Easy and Loganair when you start to compare monthly lease costs of the equipment used.
JobsaGoodun is offline  
Old 5th May 2020, 14:37
  #4076 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: aberdeen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
jobsa..

Yes, sorry, should have clarified. I meant in the current aviation climate to risk taking on a major player.
cabsav is offline  
Old 5th May 2020, 22:36
  #4077 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,092
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It'll likely be at least 12 months, most likely considerably longer, before air travel demand in the UK returns to what it was in 2019. In the meantime, the remaining core routes with the greatest chance of profit will all have been carved up by other airlines if they haven't been already. A resurrected Flybe would have a mountain to climb
Many of the companies interested in talking to EY about Flybe will be doing so to pick up individual bits of the remains - I don't see all 20 parties each being interested in buying the whole company

Yes, lovely little airline to fly on as a passenger, but as a company that lost large quantities of money for years and whose industry is in crisis, it's time to bid it a fond farewell
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 6th May 2020, 03:48
  #4078 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: britain
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
airsouthwest
I could'nt agree with more in what you said about Jim French and Saad Hammad
bean is offline  
Old 6th May 2020, 22:53
  #4079 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: u.k.
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SH

Why will we “never know” why Saad left?? ( I assume he is still with us and not a victim of the current plague). Yes he will have signed a non-disclosure agreement - but with an entity that no longer exists! so he could speak out now if he was asked, or chooses to do so - although to what effect I know not.
His sudden departure sure puzzled me at the time but I retired a few months later (on schedule) so had other priorities.
twinboom is offline  
Old 7th May 2020, 13:43
  #4080 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: aberdeen
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Asset strip

It is sad for ex employees that this is now the most likely outcome.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f...ence-29npbg5th
Its a subscribe if anyone has but the gist is there. I would guess that the vast majority of offers are in the realms of buying assets then selling them on for a profit. I think Eastern did that to airsouthwest. I cannot see the government overruling the CAA on the appeal and with the other carriers picking up routes, why would they?. And why would a buyer think 'i will spend millions to buy an airline that has been an abject failure, in an industry thats on its knees'.

cabsav is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.