Flybe-9
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Crawley
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For example:
Virgin Trains named worst rail service: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/v...vice-2sh3pdqr6
Highest number of complaints: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ail-firms.html
Virgin Trains West Coast is most complained about train company: https://www.insider.co.uk/news/virgi...aints-12814110
Virgin Trains hires extra staff to deal with rising complaints: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...ng-complaints/
Virgin Trains named worst rail service: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/v...vice-2sh3pdqr6
Highest number of complaints: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ail-firms.html
Virgin Trains West Coast is most complained about train company: https://www.insider.co.uk/news/virgi...aints-12814110
Virgin Trains hires extra staff to deal with rising complaints: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...ng-complaints/
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two of those articles are from early 2018 and the other two from 2017. I'm not saying Virgin trains are perfect by any means but are you aware of the shambles of the May'18 timetable changes (not all the fault of train operators admittedly) or that Northern have had strikes every Saturday for months and months with further cancellations of some Sunday services.
Anyway, as 22/04 wrote, back to thread. Not being aware of all the legal implications, I am nervous about Mr T's intervention by buying that chunk of shares. There was a reported denial that it was done to scupper the deal but it begs the question why he would pay the price he did if he was only going to get 1p for them. How likely is it that it would force a higher offer?
Anyway, as 22/04 wrote, back to thread. Not being aware of all the legal implications, I am nervous about Mr T's intervention by buying that chunk of shares. There was a reported denial that it was done to scupper the deal but it begs the question why he would pay the price he did if he was only going to get 1p for them. How likely is it that it would force a higher offer?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two of those articles are from early 2018 and the other two from 2017. I'm not saying Virgin trains are perfect by any means but are you aware of the shambles of the May'18 timetable changes (not all the fault of train operators admittedly) or that Northern have had strikes every Saturday for months and months with further cancellations of some Sunday services.
Anyway, as 22/04 wrote, back to thread. Not being aware of all the legal implications, I am nervous about Mr T's intervention by buying that chunk of shares. There was a reported denial that it was done to scupper the deal but it begs the question why he would pay the price he did if he was only going to get 1p for them. How likely is it that it would force a higher offer?
Anyway, as 22/04 wrote, back to thread. Not being aware of all the legal implications, I am nervous about Mr T's intervention by buying that chunk of shares. There was a reported denial that it was done to scupper the deal but it begs the question why he would pay the price he did if he was only going to get 1p for them. How likely is it that it would force a higher offer?
.....................back to thread.
Why would any shareholder want to sell for 1p if 4p is available in the market. Of course if all shareholders sold in the market the price would come down to the offer price and the bidding company would mop them up for cash. This is not going to happen in this case because the offer is by scheme of arrangement so Connect will not buy any shares until they have the agreement of 75% of shareholders. So assuming that Tinkler isn’t just throwing his money away you have to assume that there is another bid on the way but whether Tinkler has tied his hands by publicly declaring that he is only making an investment and won’t interfere with the bid, I don’t know. As a well known EU negotiator said, “The clock is ticking” and I do hope that these people don’t hate each other so much that they are prepared to destroy this airline just to score points.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Crawley
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that, as far as I see it, Virgin Trains habitually is the least reliable / liked / punctual UK train operator, it sounds like a brilliant idea to re-brand the UK's largest (and for all practical purposes, outside niches only remaining) domestic airline as a Virgin company.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I took this from the Guardian
Specific allegations include having “wished to extract at least £30m in cash from the company” through a share buyback that the board rejected; planning to acquire the company’s airline business as part of a potential takeover of Flybe for no cost, “to the advantage of himself ... and the disadvantage of the company’s shareholders as a whole”.
I think we can see which way this is going.
Specific allegations include having “wished to extract at least £30m in cash from the company” through a share buyback that the board rejected; planning to acquire the company’s airline business as part of a potential takeover of Flybe for no cost, “to the advantage of himself ... and the disadvantage of the company’s shareholders as a whole”.
I think we can see which way this is going.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stobart and Flybe combined have approx. 25 ATRs and 50 or so Q400s. With Stobart now calling the shots, one has to wonder what that will mean in the long run for Virgin#s turboprop fleet.
Generally speaking, the idea of franchsing or licensing a brand is that positive connotations will benefit a new product so that you sort of piggy-back instead of building a new brand. To discuss whether or not there are other train operators with even lower satisfaction or reliability levels than Virgin Trains sort of misses the point the idea behind branding. Apparently they are not on top of the table and there are some issues unless all these articles are made up. And in terms of the impact of marketing disasters, they are not really old - remember the old saying that it takes years to win (back) a customer, but only the blink of an eye to lose him.
Generally speaking, the idea of franchsing or licensing a brand is that positive connotations will benefit a new product so that you sort of piggy-back instead of building a new brand. To discuss whether or not there are other train operators with even lower satisfaction or reliability levels than Virgin Trains sort of misses the point the idea behind branding. Apparently they are not on top of the table and there are some issues unless all these articles are made up. And in terms of the impact of marketing disasters, they are not really old - remember the old saying that it takes years to win (back) a customer, but only the blink of an eye to lose him.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: London
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Stobart are in charge then expect LCY to close down and everything to be consolidated at SEN if not at LHR.
What Virgin is getting out of this I cannot understand. I get a franchise with Virgin. I get a codeshare/interline agreement. But this kind of deep and complex web of trouble?! WHY!!
What Virgin is getting out of this I cannot understand. I get a franchise with Virgin. I get a codeshare/interline agreement. But this kind of deep and complex web of trouble?! WHY!!
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wales
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Stobart are in charge then expect LCY to close down and everything to be consolidated at SEN if not at LHR.
What Virgin is getting out of this I cannot understand. I get a franchise with Virgin. I get a codeshare/interline agreement. But this kind of deep and complex web of trouble?! WHY!!
What Virgin is getting out of this I cannot understand. I get a franchise with Virgin. I get a codeshare/interline agreement. But this kind of deep and complex web of trouble?! WHY!!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Stobart are in charge then expect LCY to close down and everything to be consolidated at SEN if not at LHR.
What Virgin is getting out of this I cannot understand. I get a franchise with Virgin. I get a codeshare/interline agreement. But this kind of deep and complex web of trouble?! WHY!!
What Virgin is getting out of this I cannot understand. I get a franchise with Virgin. I get a codeshare/interline agreement. But this kind of deep and complex web of trouble?! WHY!!
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Outer London
Age: 43
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I imagine EDI and BHD would run into SEN at slightly lower frequency. These are routes the airport could almost certainly support with that size aircraft and would conveniently fit between the waves of based aircraft. ABZ could potentially go there too, there is after all no competition at STN. DUS is a base I can see closing. AMS would go, as it’s obsolete. EXT could end up at LHR where it might actually be better off.
Whats interesting is which direction the franchise carriers go, the JER route is Blue Islands and I can’t see it surviving elsewhere.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hemel Hempstead
Posts: 1,092
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sale is going to bypass shareholders, so now a done deal: (From Head from Points)
Flybe Group plc (“Flybe” or the “Company”)
Offer Update
On 11 January 2019, Connect Airways Limited (“Connect Airways”) announced a recommended cash offer (the “Recommended Offer”) for all of the issued and to be issued share capital of Flybe Group plc (“Flybe”).
Together with the announcement of the Recommended Offer, Flybe entered into a secured bridge loan facility (the “Bridge Facility Agreement”) with the shareholders of Connect Airways (the “Consortium”) pursuant to which the Consortium agreed to make available to Flybe a committed credit facility of up to £20 million, subject to a number of conditions. Despite significant efforts it has not been possible to satisfy these conditions and so Flybe has been unable to draw any funds under the Bridge Facility Agreement.
Divestment of Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and Flybe.com Limited and agreement on a Revised Bridge Facility
In light of the above, the Board of Flybe and Connect Airways are pleased to announce that they have reached agreement on:
· the purchase by Connect Airways of the Group’s main trading company, Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and the digital company Flybe.com Limited for £2.8 million (the “Divestment”), subject only to a limited number of conditions; and
· a revised Bridge Facility of up to £20 million to provide funding to Flybe Limited, of which £10 million will be released today to support the business. In addition, a number of improved agreements with banks have also been reached today to improve liquidity.
Furthermore, the Consortium has confirmed to Flybe that its plans for the future of the Flybe business including the combination with Stobart Air remain as set out in the Recommended Offer including its commitment to provide £80 million of further funding.
Flybe confirms that following its transfer to a Standard Listing which becomes effective on 17 January 2019, the Divestment will not require shareholder approval. The long stop date for the Divestment is 22 February 2019.
The Board of Flybe believes that obtaining this revised facility from the Consortium provides the security that the business needs to continue to trade successfully. This preserves the interests of its stakeholders, customers, employees, partners and pension members.
Status of recommended offer by the Consortium for Flybe
Shareholders should note that the Recommended Offer announced on 11 January 2019 will proceed irrespective of the Divestment. Further communications will be made as appropriate.
Flybe Group plc (“Flybe” or the “Company”)
Offer Update
On 11 January 2019, Connect Airways Limited (“Connect Airways”) announced a recommended cash offer (the “Recommended Offer”) for all of the issued and to be issued share capital of Flybe Group plc (“Flybe”).
Together with the announcement of the Recommended Offer, Flybe entered into a secured bridge loan facility (the “Bridge Facility Agreement”) with the shareholders of Connect Airways (the “Consortium”) pursuant to which the Consortium agreed to make available to Flybe a committed credit facility of up to £20 million, subject to a number of conditions. Despite significant efforts it has not been possible to satisfy these conditions and so Flybe has been unable to draw any funds under the Bridge Facility Agreement.
Divestment of Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and Flybe.com Limited and agreement on a Revised Bridge Facility
In light of the above, the Board of Flybe and Connect Airways are pleased to announce that they have reached agreement on:
· the purchase by Connect Airways of the Group’s main trading company, Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and the digital company Flybe.com Limited for £2.8 million (the “Divestment”), subject only to a limited number of conditions; and
· a revised Bridge Facility of up to £20 million to provide funding to Flybe Limited, of which £10 million will be released today to support the business. In addition, a number of improved agreements with banks have also been reached today to improve liquidity.
Furthermore, the Consortium has confirmed to Flybe that its plans for the future of the Flybe business including the combination with Stobart Air remain as set out in the Recommended Offer including its commitment to provide £80 million of further funding.
Flybe confirms that following its transfer to a Standard Listing which becomes effective on 17 January 2019, the Divestment will not require shareholder approval. The long stop date for the Divestment is 22 February 2019.
The Board of Flybe believes that obtaining this revised facility from the Consortium provides the security that the business needs to continue to trade successfully. This preserves the interests of its stakeholders, customers, employees, partners and pension members.
Status of recommended offer by the Consortium for Flybe
Shareholders should note that the Recommended Offer announced on 11 January 2019 will proceed irrespective of the Divestment. Further communications will be made as appropriate.
The sale is going to bypass shareholders, so now a done deal: (From Head from Points)
Flybe Group plc (“Flybe” or the “Company”)
Offer Update
On 11 January 2019, Connect Airways Limited (“Connect Airways”) announced a recommended cash offer (the “Recommended Offer”) for all of the issued and to be issued share capital of Flybe Group plc (“Flybe”).
Together with the announcement of the Recommended Offer, Flybe entered into a secured bridge loan facility (the “Bridge Facility Agreement”) with the shareholders of Connect Airways (the “Consortium”) pursuant to which the Consortium agreed to make available to Flybe a committed credit facility of up to £20 million, subject to a number of conditions. Despite significant efforts it has not been possible to satisfy these conditions and so Flybe has been unable to draw any funds under the Bridge Facility Agreement.
Divestment of Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and Flybe.com Limited and agreement on a Revised Bridge Facility
In light of the above, the Board of Flybe and Connect Airways are pleased to announce that they have reached agreement on:
· the purchase by Connect Airways of the Group’s main trading company, Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and the digital company Flybe.com Limited for £2.8 million (the “Divestment”), subject only to a limited number of conditions; and
· a revised Bridge Facility of up to £20 million to provide funding to Flybe Limited, of which £10 million will be released today to support the business. In addition, a number of improved agreements with banks have also been reached today to improve liquidity.
Furthermore, the Consortium has confirmed to Flybe that its plans for the future of the Flybe business including the combination with Stobart Air remain as set out in the Recommended Offer including its commitment to provide £80 million of further funding.
Flybe confirms that following its transfer to a Standard Listing which becomes effective on 17 January 2019, the Divestment will not require shareholder approval. The long stop date for the Divestment is 22 February 2019.
The Board of Flybe believes that obtaining this revised facility from the Consortium provides the security that the business needs to continue to trade successfully. This preserves the interests of its stakeholders, customers, employees, partners and pension members.
Status of recommended offer by the Consortium for Flybe
Shareholders should note that the Recommended Offer announced on 11 January 2019 will proceed irrespective of the Divestment. Further communications will be made as appropriate.
Flybe Group plc (“Flybe” or the “Company”)
Offer Update
On 11 January 2019, Connect Airways Limited (“Connect Airways”) announced a recommended cash offer (the “Recommended Offer”) for all of the issued and to be issued share capital of Flybe Group plc (“Flybe”).
Together with the announcement of the Recommended Offer, Flybe entered into a secured bridge loan facility (the “Bridge Facility Agreement”) with the shareholders of Connect Airways (the “Consortium”) pursuant to which the Consortium agreed to make available to Flybe a committed credit facility of up to £20 million, subject to a number of conditions. Despite significant efforts it has not been possible to satisfy these conditions and so Flybe has been unable to draw any funds under the Bridge Facility Agreement.
Divestment of Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and Flybe.com Limited and agreement on a Revised Bridge Facility
In light of the above, the Board of Flybe and Connect Airways are pleased to announce that they have reached agreement on:
· the purchase by Connect Airways of the Group’s main trading company, Flybe Limited (including Flybe Aviation Services Limited) and the digital company Flybe.com Limited for £2.8 million (the “Divestment”), subject only to a limited number of conditions; and
· a revised Bridge Facility of up to £20 million to provide funding to Flybe Limited, of which £10 million will be released today to support the business. In addition, a number of improved agreements with banks have also been reached today to improve liquidity.
Furthermore, the Consortium has confirmed to Flybe that its plans for the future of the Flybe business including the combination with Stobart Air remain as set out in the Recommended Offer including its commitment to provide £80 million of further funding.
Flybe confirms that following its transfer to a Standard Listing which becomes effective on 17 January 2019, the Divestment will not require shareholder approval. The long stop date for the Divestment is 22 February 2019.
The Board of Flybe believes that obtaining this revised facility from the Consortium provides the security that the business needs to continue to trade successfully. This preserves the interests of its stakeholders, customers, employees, partners and pension members.
Status of recommended offer by the Consortium for Flybe
Shareholders should note that the Recommended Offer announced on 11 January 2019 will proceed irrespective of the Divestment. Further communications will be made as appropriate.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before the offer for the plc is decided, the directors have decided to sell the trading subsiduaries, the plc becomes a cash shell and moves from a premium listing to a standard listing. Under a standard listing they don’t need to ask shareholder’s permission to sell the subsiduaries. I know that seems to have gone around in a circle to justify blocking out shareholders from having to give their permission but seems to be what has happened.