Flybe-V1
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RogueOne
I do struggle to think of any. Most of the old profitable routes have been jumped on by other airlines and they're too thin to require two airlines competing against each other. There's probably a very good reason other airlines haven't jumped on the other routes.
This new airline will no doubt at some point be subject to a TUPE claim. And a new airline will not want the old airline's pilot agreements shackled to them.
As BA318 points out, where is the niche? What will set them aside to make them attractive over other airlines to pax?
I do struggle to think of any. Most of the old profitable routes have been jumped on by other airlines and they're too thin to require two airlines competing against each other. There's probably a very good reason other airlines haven't jumped on the other routes.
This new airline will no doubt at some point be subject to a TUPE claim. And a new airline will not want the old airline's pilot agreements shackled to them.
As BA318 points out, where is the niche? What will set them aside to make them attractive over other airlines to pax?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would just add that this is not the “Flybe Appreciation” thread and people are allowed to give their views without it being considered trolling. I largely agree with BA318’s points. Additionally, I don’t believe that a reborn Flybe would create nett new jobs as there’s only so much space in the regional sector and any jobs generated by new Flybe would cause a similar number of jobs to be lost in those airlines that have taken over the ex Flybe routes. BTW I’m sticking to my guns in that I firmly believe that this is just a slots play. Time will tell.
willy wombat
The plan may be misguided, or doomed to failure but if it were to be just a "slots" game then they've gone to quite some extent to disguise it.
It's unlikely that any new carrier would create anything like the number of jobs that FlyBe supported at the end, but if they can build steadily, and turn a profit then who know where the new carrier might be in 5 years time. I don't know, neither does anyone else but a number of aviation professional appear to have taken the view that on balance it's worth a shot, and it's their careers not ours.
The plan may be misguided, or doomed to failure but if it were to be just a "slots" game then they've gone to quite some extent to disguise it.
It's unlikely that any new carrier would create anything like the number of jobs that FlyBe supported at the end, but if they can build steadily, and turn a profit then who know where the new carrier might be in 5 years time. I don't know, neither does anyone else but a number of aviation professional appear to have taken the view that on balance it's worth a shot, and it's their careers not ours.
Exactly! It's a variation on the "prepack administration" that I discussed several posting up the thread. It unethical, it's unfair and it's wrong - but in UK to name one country, it's legal! I suspect other countries have similarly distasteful processes.
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's similar as to what happens when football clubs go bust. The holding company is placed into administration and a new company set up with the football club name transferred over. Creditors are screwed over etc.
Absolutely that. I have seen cases where companies have been "prepacked" twice - the original company morphed into a new one, debt free, only to repeat the same fundamental business error, that is not turning a profit, and be flogged on again through a prepack. The only winners are the directors / shareholders or private companies and of course the accountants and lawyers.
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Nantgarw
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA318;
I did not state that I expected success, rather that I hope for it.
Personally I think that 'new Flybe' could operate on niche routes in a similar manner to that of Blue Islands - having said that, SI/BCI do appear to have quite a bit of government funding.
I have spoken to a few family members who all spoke very highly of the airline despite having little or no knowledge of aviation, so the brand can't be entirely tarnished. As I have said before, we can only speculate currently, as no real announcements have been made regarding routes, dates, etc.
Exactly. The original Flybe (this is surely what we must refer to it as?) grew to a size that it could not manage - debts grew as leases could not be ended, and the latest CEOs seemed to bring the airline to a temporary state of profitability before withdrawing all efforts and sinking back into the red.
I did not state that I expected success, rather that I hope for it.
Personally I think that 'new Flybe' could operate on niche routes in a similar manner to that of Blue Islands - having said that, SI/BCI do appear to have quite a bit of government funding.
I have spoken to a few family members who all spoke very highly of the airline despite having little or no knowledge of aviation, so the brand can't be entirely tarnished. As I have said before, we can only speculate currently, as no real announcements have been made regarding routes, dates, etc.
All the old dead wood is gone, the bad management has gone, all the old airframes are gone, all the expensive jets - with expensive lease and maintenance deals are gone, the big spread of unprofitable routes and bases are gone, the debt is gone... it's a clean slate
ATNotts
So if a new flybe comes to fruition it could actually kill off Loganair and Eastern. A bankrupt business loses it's debts, screws its creditors and comes back debt free post COVID to put the survivors out of business as they are now carrying unsustainable debts. I have a problem with that, it's the unacceptabe face of capitalism IMHO.
So if a new flybe comes to fruition it could actually kill off Loganair and Eastern. A bankrupt business loses it's debts, screws its creditors and comes back debt free post COVID to put the survivors out of business as they are now carrying unsustainable debts. I have a problem with that, it's the unacceptabe face of capitalism IMHO.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Aalborg
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what? We live in the real world and it’s legal. On the other points you’ve hit the nail on the head. Average flight time for flybe was 56 mins, price and schedule will be the deciding factors for most.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Happy to be proven wrong - but I can't think of an example of an airline successfully making it through any form of 'pre-pack' (to be clear, I'm not talking about a US-style Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection procedure, I mean a 'proper' placement into administration to enable the shedding of debts as being discussed here). Under normal circumstances, one whiff of an airline going into administration (or even the threat of) and punters lose faith overnight. (In reality, I think Covid was only part of flybe Mk1's cash issue - the hanging, and well publicised, threat of potential cessation of ops had already caused a far greater cash crisis).
All this said, the world has never experienced a major close-down of the air travel industry such as that of the last 12 months. In many respects an awful lot of carriers are pretty much going to be starting again from scratch on the vast majority of their routes once travel restrictions ease. At the same time, so much has happened since March last year that I'd wager a decent percentage of flybe's potential future customer base will have forgotten all about the whys and wherefores of their failure.
Could this be the one case of an airline/brand that manages to essentially struggle through administration and back out the other side?
(Whether there's any place left for them in what is frankly a very different market is, of course, the far more fundamental question - let's face it, if the brand was as tainted as some believe, its hardly the end of the world to change it!)
All this said, the world has never experienced a major close-down of the air travel industry such as that of the last 12 months. In many respects an awful lot of carriers are pretty much going to be starting again from scratch on the vast majority of their routes once travel restrictions ease. At the same time, so much has happened since March last year that I'd wager a decent percentage of flybe's potential future customer base will have forgotten all about the whys and wherefores of their failure.
Could this be the one case of an airline/brand that manages to essentially struggle through administration and back out the other side?
(Whether there's any place left for them in what is frankly a very different market is, of course, the far more fundamental question - let's face it, if the brand was as tainted as some believe, its hardly the end of the world to change it!)
Swissair morphing into Swiss, and SABENA into Brussels Airlines were pretty close to pre-packs that are still around.
Jamie2009
So what? I'm uncomfortable with it, legal as it may be. Hence I won't be wishing them well and every success. Same with the contortions Norwegian went through, all legal but not something I would support.
Having said that airports will be in such a weak position that all sorts of subsidy will be thrown at them to encourage folk to fly again. They could make a killing, and as I said, wipe out the competition who survived COVID. It's all a bit Chapter 11....
So what? I'm uncomfortable with it, legal as it may be. Hence I won't be wishing them well and every success. Same with the contortions Norwegian went through, all legal but not something I would support.
Having said that airports will be in such a weak position that all sorts of subsidy will be thrown at them to encourage folk to fly again. They could make a killing, and as I said, wipe out the competition who survived COVID. It's all a bit Chapter 11....
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure Loganair should feel too aggrieved about the relaunch. They closed down loss making BMIR, placed it into administration thus wiping the debts, and transferred a lot of the business over to Loganair.
Calm down and get some fresh air. I'm not a communist at all, stop thinking in extremes. I am being mildly critical of being able to bring a company back from the dead minus it's debts and allowing it to start afresh as a new entity. If you think that's communism then....
They're businesses, commercial enterprises and when they fail, it's healthier for all that they stay dead. It skews the market less. Yes Loganair screwed BMI Regional, yes Eastern screwed Air Southwest. And if Zombie Flybe comes back, make no mistake, it will screw Logan and Eastern. The key difference with Logan/BMI was that many of the staff came over from the failing business and went straight back to work.
We should stop skewing the market like this, two wrongs don't make a right, and no, flybe should stay dead. It's not being a communist to state that anyone with ambitions to take on the incumbents with a new airline is free to do so and should surely try. Hardly Marxism/Leninism.
They're businesses, commercial enterprises and when they fail, it's healthier for all that they stay dead. It skews the market less. Yes Loganair screwed BMI Regional, yes Eastern screwed Air Southwest. And if Zombie Flybe comes back, make no mistake, it will screw Logan and Eastern. The key difference with Logan/BMI was that many of the staff came over from the failing business and went straight back to work.
We should stop skewing the market like this, two wrongs don't make a right, and no, flybe should stay dead. It's not being a communist to state that anyone with ambitions to take on the incumbents with a new airline is free to do so and should surely try. Hardly Marxism/Leninism.
S1F - I'm going to counter your argument. The shareholders of Flybe have been wiped out. The creditors will likely see a few pence in the pound if anything. The management and staff have (almost) all received a P45. While the staff might well be hired in non-flying jobs, the senior managers are likely to find their CVs are tainted. What remains now is just a legal framework with various licences and rights, as well as a (very) small number of employees to ensure compliance with continued retention of those licences. What the shell company does have, is a lot of systems, procedures / policies and software, which are necesary to make an airline work. Essentially we are left with plumbing, but plumbing that, critically, is known to operate effectively at scale, subject to a suitable business model
If Flybe were left to liquidation, then all the plumbing gets sent to landfill
If Cyrus are just trying to get their hands on the slots, sell them on, and then shut down the company anyway, then I agree this is one of the undesirable parts of capitalism - essentially people getting their hands on things without having worked fairly to earn them
However.... if there is a genuine desire to restart an airline, then it seems wasteful in a society to throw away all the plumbing if it can be reused. Furthermore, by selling the assets, the creditors get to recover a bit more of the money they were owed. The shareholders of course still lose all their money, and the senior managers are unlikely to be rehired, so those who caused the company to decline over the years don't get rewarded for failure
An analogy might be a house that is in disrepair and was repossessed because the previous owner couldn't pay the mortgage. Do you demolish the house and just sell a bare plot of land, or do you sell it to a builder who knows how to fix the leaky roof and install a new kitchen, in the knowledge that the builder will make a big pile of money when selling the house in 12 months time to another buyer ?
If Flybe were left to liquidation, then all the plumbing gets sent to landfill
If Cyrus are just trying to get their hands on the slots, sell them on, and then shut down the company anyway, then I agree this is one of the undesirable parts of capitalism - essentially people getting their hands on things without having worked fairly to earn them
However.... if there is a genuine desire to restart an airline, then it seems wasteful in a society to throw away all the plumbing if it can be reused. Furthermore, by selling the assets, the creditors get to recover a bit more of the money they were owed. The shareholders of course still lose all their money, and the senior managers are unlikely to be rehired, so those who caused the company to decline over the years don't get rewarded for failure
An analogy might be a house that is in disrepair and was repossessed because the previous owner couldn't pay the mortgage. Do you demolish the house and just sell a bare plot of land, or do you sell it to a builder who knows how to fix the leaky roof and install a new kitchen, in the knowledge that the builder will make a big pile of money when selling the house in 12 months time to another buyer ?
Last edited by davidjohnson6; 11th Apr 2021 at 18:36.
