Flybe-V1
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cavokblues. The website you quote is total bs.
Flybe realisations still owes millions and if previous airline insolvencys are anything to go by, the winding up will take decades.
Thyme opco merely purchased the brand name and LHR slots.
Here we are on the same never ending band wagon again and again and again and again
Flybe realisations still owes millions and if previous airline insolvencys are anything to go by, the winding up will take decades.
Thyme opco merely purchased the brand name and LHR slots.
Here we are on the same never ending band wagon again and again and again and again
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cavokblues. The website you quote is total bs.
Flybe realisations still owes millions and if previous airline insolvencys are anything to go by, the winding up will take decades.
Thyme opco merely purchased the brand name and LHR slots.
Here we are on the same never ending band wagon again and again and again and again
Flybe realisations still owes millions and if previous airline insolvencys are anything to go by, the winding up will take decades.
Thyme opco merely purchased the brand name and LHR slots.
Here we are on the same never ending band wagon again and again and again and again
Right.
The saving from insolvency relates to selling the Flybe business to Virgin Atlantic, Stobart and Cyrus Capital S advisors to the Flybe board. It made a lot of money for EY as consultants
That worked well didn't it?
EY are making loads of money as administrators of Flybe Realisations Ltd as well
The saving from insolvency relates to selling the Flybe business to Virgin Atlantic, Stobart and Cyrus Capital S advisors to the Flybe board. It made a lot of money for EY as consultants
That worked well didn't it?
EY are making loads of money as administrators of Flybe Realisations Ltd as well
Last edited by bean; 22nd Mar 2022 at 17:04.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right.
The saving from insolvency relates to selling the Flybe business to Virgin Atlantic, Stobart and Cyrus Capital S advisors to the Flybe board. It made a lot of money for EY as consultants
That worked well didn't it?
EY are making loads of money as administrators of Flybe Realisations Ltd as well
The saving from insolvency relates to selling the Flybe business to Virgin Atlantic, Stobart and Cyrus Capital S advisors to the Flybe board. It made a lot of money for EY as consultants
That worked well didn't it?
EY are making loads of money as administrators of Flybe Realisations Ltd as well
The article mentions selling Flybe and then continues with the problems they face and ultimately the sale of the new Flybe.
The curtain on the stage has *finally* been lifted and the show has (almost) begun. No, not some kind of funny "virtual airline", but a real proper airline that both sells tickets and also flies the passengers. I didn't think it would really get to this stage, but we should now give Flybe and its employees a chance. We all have our doubts... the CEO will also have his (privately held) doubts as well... but that's the same whenever a theatre puts on a new performance. It is now a case of waiting to see how many punters want to buy tickets for the show
First flight is in 3 weeks time. Anecdotal data on how the commercial side is going will be available from mid May. We will know by summer from the CAA's statistics for May how the airline is really doing
First flight is in 3 weeks time. Anecdotal data on how the commercial side is going will be available from mid May. We will know by summer from the CAA's statistics for May how the airline is really doing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An airline needs an Operating Licence to be a going concern. The legal entity wasn't sold, there was no ongoing business. I think they sold the name and a passenger database which amounts to sod all.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“The M&A process attracted nine credible expressions of interest and the ultimate sale of Flybe to a new company, called Flybe Ltd and, as Edel explains, “the sale provided the possibility for growth, new jobs and the chance for Flybe Ltd to be a valuable economic contributor to regional communities across the UK and EU.” In the context of the Government’s ‘leveling up’ agenda and its emphasis on restoring regional connectivity, the prospects are good.”
The LHR and AMS slots are from Flybe1 so clearly they went with the sale too.
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bean, I'm well aware FBE Realisations is the remains of the old legal entity.
But just because a new legal entity is set up does not mean it's a completely different airline. It's not a binary matter and quite often companies are said to be sold when in actual fact the old legal entity registered at companies house is liquidated with assets transferred to a new legal entity. As I said earlier, it's common place in football. I'm not sure Rangers FC fans north of the border think their club is a new club following their rescue from financial problems a decade ago.
Interesting how Lucien Farrell was registered as a director of the 'new' airline. What would someone who was so heavily involved in the previous rescue attempt of the old airline, be doing at the new airline if it's a brand new airline with no links whatsoever? They even argued in the OL appeal decision against the CAA that 'had Flybe known that the consequence of pursuing an asset purchase agreement was that it would not be able to retain its OL, it would not have chosen to pursue such a transaction in preference to an alternative form of financial reconstruction.'
They basically liquidated the old company to transfer the assets they wanted to the new company and avoid the debt. All perfectly legal. If you want to think it's a brand new company with no links whatsoever to the old company than fill your boots. I don't think it is. A company is a bit more than just a registration at companies house.
Anyway, that aside, as I said I do wish the new airline well. It's always good to see airlines succeed.
But just because a new legal entity is set up does not mean it's a completely different airline. It's not a binary matter and quite often companies are said to be sold when in actual fact the old legal entity registered at companies house is liquidated with assets transferred to a new legal entity. As I said earlier, it's common place in football. I'm not sure Rangers FC fans north of the border think their club is a new club following their rescue from financial problems a decade ago.
Interesting how Lucien Farrell was registered as a director of the 'new' airline. What would someone who was so heavily involved in the previous rescue attempt of the old airline, be doing at the new airline if it's a brand new airline with no links whatsoever? They even argued in the OL appeal decision against the CAA that 'had Flybe known that the consequence of pursuing an asset purchase agreement was that it would not be able to retain its OL, it would not have chosen to pursue such a transaction in preference to an alternative form of financial reconstruction.'
They basically liquidated the old company to transfer the assets they wanted to the new company and avoid the debt. All perfectly legal. If you want to think it's a brand new company with no links whatsoever to the old company than fill your boots. I don't think it is. A company is a bit more than just a registration at companies house.
Anyway, that aside, as I said I do wish the new airline well. It's always good to see airlines succeed.
Jesus christ. The old airline was liquiidated because Virgin needed to save themselves. Stobart who had only contributed assets simply could'nt afford amy more. So that only left Cyrus under Lucien Farrell to poor millions upon millions into a bottomless pit.
I can't believe we are here again
I can't believe we are here again
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jesus christ. The old airline was luquidated because Virgin needed to save themselves. Stobart who had only contributed assets simply could'nt afford amy more. So that only left Cyrus under Lucien Farrell to poor millions upon millions into a bottomless pit.
I can't believe we are here again
I can't believe we are here again
Is that all you can contribute?. Do you dispute the facts. I tell yòu what? Let's continue this pointless twaddle for another 73 pages shall we?
please enlighten me as to the dynamite information which will enlighten me? Or, be a good boy and do some research
please enlighten me as to the dynamite information which will enlighten me? Or, be a good boy and do some research
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the worlds leading auditors and consultants literally put in writing and you still tell people you are right. That’s why the discussion goes on and on.
Anyway we can talk about how Flybe thinks it makes sense to go up against 19 daily flights on LHR-AMS using a twice daily Q400.
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand your post about Farrell.
So he was pouring millions into a bottomless pit so had to liquidate the old airline and start afresh with a new airline with him as the registered director?
If you set up a 'new' company registered at company house, with the same name as an old airline, with the same aircraft, with the same director initially, with a lot of old flight crew, replicating some of their old routes, and then argue to the CAA that you didn't have to close down the old airline but you thought it was their preference, it's probably safe to say it's a continuation rather than a complete separate company with no links whatsoever.
I accept you might disagree. But I'm not to going to whinge again and again on the thread because people disagree with me.
So he was pouring millions into a bottomless pit so had to liquidate the old airline and start afresh with a new airline with him as the registered director?
If you set up a 'new' company registered at company house, with the same name as an old airline, with the same aircraft, with the same director initially, with a lot of old flight crew, replicating some of their old routes, and then argue to the CAA that you didn't have to close down the old airline but you thought it was their preference, it's probably safe to say it's a continuation rather than a complete separate company with no links whatsoever.
I accept you might disagree. But I'm not to going to whinge again and again on the thread because people disagree with me.
[QUOTE=BA318;11204151]I dispute your interpretation of the facts but you don’t answer the points put back. You just change the story or repeat the same incorrect, rude and badly written points.
One of the worlds leading auditors and consultants literally put in writing and you still tell people you are right. That’s why the discussion goes on and on.
Anyway we can talk about how Flybe thinks it makes sense to go up against 19 daily flights on LHR-AMS using a twice daily Q400.[/QUOTE
The EY post is advertising blurb they are making megabucks out of this administration
as far as the rest of your post goes, when Flybe was a PLC and Saad Hammad was in charge, i tried time and time and time again to direct people to the investors web pages for the full story but, nobody ever took notice.
Have a lovely day
One of the worlds leading auditors and consultants literally put in writing and you still tell people you are right. That’s why the discussion goes on and on.
Anyway we can talk about how Flybe thinks it makes sense to go up against 19 daily flights on LHR-AMS using a twice daily Q400.[/QUOTE
The EY post is advertising blurb they are making megabucks out of this administration
as far as the rest of your post goes, when Flybe was a PLC and Saad Hammad was in charge, i tried time and time and time again to direct people to the investors web pages for the full story but, nobody ever took notice.
Have a lovely day
Christ almighty, I had to check the date when I saw that list of routes announced. It’s not April 1st but it might as well be. Utter madness. There going to be a lot of money being lost in the next few weeks and months.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Aalborg
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think today went well, seems very well received on social media platforms and the comments left. I don’t think the general public care if it’s a reincarnation or new company, they just appear happy Flybe are back and are pleased with the offerings. I’m biased but I do think the new website also looks good.
As for the choice of routes and the doom and gloom predictions…… just wait and see. This isn’t back of a fag packet planning with them plucked out of thin air. I’m sure all will become clearer with the ramping up of the business over the next few months.
As for the choice of routes and the doom and gloom predictions…… just wait and see. This isn’t back of a fag packet planning with them plucked out of thin air. I’m sure all will become clearer with the ramping up of the business over the next few months.