Virgin Atlantic
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: 0ft
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also ones pan European. Ones U.K. Why doesn’t easyJet also go to the European Union for money?
As a tax payer, I’d rather pay a UK carrier, of an owner that’s not only donated $250million, and Necker Island, then another airline that’s got an arrogant pig of a major shareholder, who’s donated sweet FA, not paid his dividend back, and publicly throws a tantrum. I know who’s side I’m on and it isn’t the arrogant.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: 0ft
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This was about the procurement of NHS contracts under a different government in 2006. Virgin highlighted the serious flaws in the process, as did 7 other NHS trusts/local authorities. The commissioners said they would investigate, which they failed to do signing off the contract they awarded under a flawed process. This went into settlement of money due to the failure of an investigation that Virgin highlighted. Virgin highlighted a serious flaw in the process, which NHS trusts/local authorities had also highlighted, but because they are private obviously it was brought about like this by the government which wanted the attention on a private company sueing the NHS rather then highlighting attention to the failings of the process.
Find it laughable that some people, not saying you did by the way, but some people voted for a Conservative Government back in December to continue the privatisation of our NHS and yet happily see Virgin go under even though it employs near on 9,000 staff and probably brings a heft tax income to HMRC. Vote Conservative let them privatise the NHS.
As i said up there - why should one get preferential treatment (easy) when the majority shareholder has donated sweet FA and taken a lovely dividend yet we seem heel bent on letting Virgin go, despite $250mil donation, re-morgate of slots etc. What have easy done to deserve £600million loan?
Find it laughable that some people, not saying you did by the way, but some people voted for a Conservative Government back in December to continue the privatisation of our NHS and yet happily see Virgin go under even though it employs near on 9,000 staff and probably brings a heft tax income to HMRC. Vote Conservative let them privatise the NHS.
As i said up there - why should one get preferential treatment (easy) when the majority shareholder has donated sweet FA and taken a lovely dividend yet we seem heel bent on letting Virgin go, despite $250mil donation, re-morgate of slots etc. What have easy done to deserve £600million loan?
As i said up there - why should one get preferential treatment (easy) when the majority shareholder has donated sweet FA and taken a lovely dividend yet we seem heel bent on letting Virgin go, despite $250mil donation, re-morgate of slots etc. What have easy done to deserve £600million loan?
All this nonsense about Neckar island, dividends, scoundrels etc is just fluff - shiny beads and mirriors to distract the press. Fit the criteria and you'll be fine - looks like Virgin either don't meet the criteria or don't understand the process, so have decided to go public and make it a political decision.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They would have a better case for rescue if they were normally profitable which they are not. They have been making loses for years which is why the shareholders are reluctant to put more money into the airline.
This is basically you phoning up for a loan/credit card/overdraft, being told computer says "No", and you going "but my mate got one, I want to speak to your supervisor" on a bigger stage...
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wales
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I remember correctly they were due to be profitable this year and now have a younger and more fuel efficient fleet which would stand them in good stead for the future. VS problem is that they as an airline aren't important to London compared to Easyjet and BA and their major shareholder isn't liked hence why the government won't exactly bend over backwards to help them. The people I feel sorry for are the staff who must be seriously wondering if they will have a job to go back to while watching social media relish the thought of Virgin Atlantic going bust just to stick the middle finger up to Branson.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Outer London
Age: 43
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats on an ‘operating’ level, it doesn’t take account of assets etc - there is clearly some considerable value or it would have ceased years ago. Admittedly that is based on pre-Covid slot worth although much of the operation must be worthwhile, the holidays side of it must do OK or they wouldn’t open new shops, set up at MAN or retain LGW.
VS problem is that they as an airline aren't important to London compared to Easyjet and BA and their major shareholder isn't liked hence why the government won't exactly bend over backwards to help them.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NW England
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NW England
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for MAN, they've been there since the mid-90's, have grown there presence over the last 5 years in particular and a Clubhouse is on the way this year. Given routes were axed under Craig Kreeger but MAN remain unscathed except for Little Red and saw more routes added, I would suggest MAN was profitable and it would be interesting to see whether the impending withdrawal of the 747's and the introduction of A330neo's and A350's on MAN routes would have a positive impact on the profitability of the MAN operation. I know loadings doesn't necessarily reflect profitability, but every time in the last 6 years I've flown on a VS long-haul flight to/from MAN it's been very well loaded - the lowest loadings was around 85%, the highest was only a single figure of seats being free on the whole aircraft.
If VS survives, I'm curious to see what shape or form the MAN operation will look like.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If VS survive what’s the chances they pull out of Heathrow completely and move all ops to Manchester??
sell or lease all the slots they hold at Heathrow out to other airlines
sell or lease all the slots they hold at Heathrow out to other airlines
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: London
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low.... more chance of pulling from LGW they’ve already moved a few routes to LHR and some could go to MAN, or the extra capacity.
It's SRB who is now playing politics - Treasury will have devised a set of economic criteria which will be applied to the company to determine whether they are eligible. Nothing to do with personalities etc
Easyjet have met the criteria and Wizz are now saying they have also
Flight - Wizz Air qualifies for UK coronavirus fund support
Easyjet have met the criteria and Wizz are now saying they have also
Flight - Wizz Air qualifies for UK coronavirus fund support
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One was about to turn a profit. For the first time in a while, thanks to DL strategy. And further profits next year.
Also ones pan European. Ones U.K. Why doesn’t easyJet also go to the European Union for money?
As a tax payer, I’d rather pay a UK carrier, of an owner that’s not only donated $250million, and Necker Island, then another airline that’s got an arrogant pig of a major shareholder, who’s donated sweet FA, not paid his dividend back, and publicly throws a tantrum. I know who’s side I’m on and it isn’t the arrogant.
Also ones pan European. Ones U.K. Why doesn’t easyJet also go to the European Union for money?
As a tax payer, I’d rather pay a UK carrier, of an owner that’s not only donated $250million, and Necker Island, then another airline that’s got an arrogant pig of a major shareholder, who’s donated sweet FA, not paid his dividend back, and publicly throws a tantrum. I know who’s side I’m on and it isn’t the arrogant.
If they’re rarely posting profits, they cannot gain any capital off their shareholders, then how can you expect them to be bailed out to the tune of £500/£600M? Nobody knows how long this will continue for too and this could easily be the first time they go to the “well” for taxpayers cash.
As someone has put it earlier in the thread, would you expect a bank to continue to bankroll you just because someone else has been funded? The answer is a clear no. EasyJet and Virgin are poles apart in regards to profitability and ability to repay this huge sum of money. EasyJet must have a substantially better credit rating than Virgin one could imagine.
However, people need to stop falling for the Branson should fund it as it is complete BS. He is a billionaire by assets and surely has no where near that amount of readily available capital. Could DL seek funding from the American government though? They’re the majority shareholder.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wales
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they’re rarely posting profits, they cannot gain any capital off their shareholders, then how can you expect them to be bailed out to the tune of £500/£600M? Nobody knows how long this will continue for too and this could easily be the first time they go to the “well” for taxpayers.
These are not normal trading conditions so why should it just be determined on whether they were profitable or not before.
There needs to be some sort of objective criteria for the use of Government money - you don't just get what you ask for.
