Flybe-9
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of being unkind in her first week, does anyone think that the previous experience of the CEO demonstrates an ability to come up with a successful strategy?
My post from 17th January 2017. This is one time I would have preferred to not have been correct.
My post from 17th January 2017. This is one time I would have preferred to not have been correct.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO, The Chairman has been there through it all and must carry full responsibility for his management team. He appoints the CEOs and he terminates them. He has to approve and own the strategy. There's no one else to blame given the time elapsed. Whilst previous management may have signed off on the disastrous Embraer contract, the Chairman was aware of that before he joined and has to own responsibility when staying.
The Board should have long ago recognised they did not have the knowledge and skills to successfully manage this airline out of its past woes and through current turbulent times, and it missed the opportunity to recruit better people 3 years ago. The rest of the airline staff, the shareholders (and the travelling punters) have all been let down very badly. I'm very glad the airline has been saved from the inevitable but just feel it shouldn't have ended this way.
Just hope we don't have to watch the Board disappear into the sunset with fat cheques in their pockets. Failures like these should not be rewarded.
Other insiders can correct me if I have been unfair.
The Board should have long ago recognised they did not have the knowledge and skills to successfully manage this airline out of its past woes and through current turbulent times, and it missed the opportunity to recruit better people 3 years ago. The rest of the airline staff, the shareholders (and the travelling punters) have all been let down very badly. I'm very glad the airline has been saved from the inevitable but just feel it shouldn't have ended this way.
Just hope we don't have to watch the Board disappear into the sunset with fat cheques in their pockets. Failures like these should not be rewarded.
Other insiders can correct me if I have been unfair.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The longer it takes before shareholders in all companies vote, the greater the potential for the deal to fall apart. The precarious state of Flybe's finances suggest that customers will be wary of booking with Fybe, especially for dates far in advance.
If things really are as bad for Flybe as the 1p per share price implies, then all companies involved should presumably be wanting to get all approvals and everything finished earlier rather than later
If things really are as bad for Flybe as the 1p per share price implies, then all companies involved should presumably be wanting to get all approvals and everything finished earlier rather than later
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- Seven pairs of LHR remedy slots can be used for Europe from March next year (2020)
- Same seven pairs can also be swapped or traded from March next year too
- Five more pairs have to be used for domestic until March 2022 then the same applies
Twelve LHR slot pairs for £22.2m down plus whatever it takes to keep the former Flybe going until 2022. How much are well-timed pairs worth?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- As a general rule, the slots obtained by a prospective entrant must be operated on the city pair(s) for which they have been requested… and cannot be used on another city pair unless the prospective entrant has operated them during at least six full consecutive IATA seasons (the ‘ulitisation period’).
- Once the utilisation period has elapsed, the prospective entrant would be entitled to use the slots… to operate services on any route connecting London with any other part of Europe.
- During the utilisation period, the prospective entrant shall not be entitled to transfer, assign, sell, swap or charge… any slots obtained...
Paxing All Over The World
) and he said that, when the big boss announces a merger/takeover and says that jobs are safe - is the time to start looking for a new job.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EastMids - read on!
1.3.7 For the avoidance of doubt, the Slot Release Agreement may: (a) contain prohibitions on the Prospective Entrant transferring its rights to the Slots to a third party, making the Slots available in any way to a third party for the use of that third party, or releasing, surrendering, giving up or otherwise disposing of any rights to the Slots; and/or
1.3.7 For the avoidance of doubt, the Slot Release Agreement may: (a) contain prohibitions on the Prospective Entrant transferring its rights to the Slots to a third party, making the Slots available in any way to a third party for the use of that third party, or releasing, surrendering, giving up or otherwise disposing of any rights to the Slots; and/or
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question to the corporate savvy people out there: What would be the consortium's next move if a majority of shareholders reject the 1p offer, and what do said shareholders have to lose (apart from 1p X shareholding) by rejecting the offer?
Raise the offer to a higher price - maybe 4p per share given the price at the moment - and label the offer as 'final'
Shareholders have to decide if after all debts, leases and other obligations have been paid, whether any money more than 1p per share is left for them in the event of bankruptcy
Shareholders have to decide if after all debts, leases and other obligations have been paid, whether any money more than 1p per share is left for them in the event of bankruptcy
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
75% of shareholders have to accept for the deal to go through. Andrew Tinkler is sitting on 10%. Assuming that he has paid more than 1p per share, he needs to get 25% to be certain of not losing money. If he succeeds in buying a blocking stake, is he going to force his way in to the deal?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tinker has stated that he 'does not intend on disrupting' the process which if true, suggests his purchase was made to help ensure the deal goes through. Whilst he has spent a considerable amount getting a 10% stake in flybe, he owns a good chunk of Stobart who's shares having increased substantially as a result of the bid. The rise in the value of his Stobart holding more than make up for the amount spent on Flybe.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jobsa, have you been reading ‘The Prince’ by Nicola Machiavelli? If I have got this right, you think Andrew Tinkler has been buying shares at greater then the offer price in order to facilitate another company that he is a shareholder in buying flybe at a cheaper price?
If Flybe couldn't make it work and increase fares then why is giving an aircraft a paint job, putting staff in new uniforms and calling it a different name going to make people want to pay more ?
I see little in it for Virgin.
BIG problem however in that Connect bought the shares of Flybe Plc at a particular price and that offer is to the majority of shareholders. An official offer must be made at a certain fixed price. Stock market does NOT allow certain shareholders to get a premium price above other shareholders so holding 100 shares or 100,000 is irrelevant as you get same price.
Therefore if legal agreement settled, such that Mr Tinkler sold his shares at the certain fixed price in consideration that legal agreement was settled. A shareholder who had to sell his shares for 1p may say but Mr Tinkler because of his separate legal action, which forced a separate company involved in this deal to settle, got 12p per share then I should also get the same amount. I am not wholly sure there is settled law on this but can guarantee if I bought at 16p and lost 15p I would be going to court.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway....my thinking is that Tinkler owns about 8% of Stobart. With circa 350m shares in circulation that equates to about 28m in his ownership. As a result of the bid on Friday, Stobarts share price increased 7.7% (10.8p) increasing the value of his stake by about £3m. His purchase in Flybe would have cost him circa £750k meaning he's still up over £2m. If I were him, protecting the value of his Stob stake I'd want the consortium bid to go through. Bizarre - yes. Crazy - maybe not as much as it might appear.
Once the three years are up, it appears that they can be traded... Quoting European Union regulation (EC) No 139/2004 – Merger procedure
- As a general rule, the slots obtained by a prospective entrant must be operated on the city pair(s) for which they have been requested… and cannot be used on another city pair unless the prospective entrant has operated them during at least six full consecutive IATA seasons (the ‘ulitisation period’).
- Once the utilisation period has elapsed, the prospective entrant would be entitled to use the slots… to operate services on any route connecting London with any other part of Europe.
- During the utilisation period, the prospective entrant shall not be entitled to transfer, assign, sell, swap or charge… any slots obtained...
