Jet2-6
The is no difference between a Ryanair base at STN and a Jet2 base are PMI/ALC. However, if Ryanair wasn't to fly inside the UK they need to do so on a G- reg and equally if Jet2 want to fly inside EU, they need an EU reg. As you know Jet2 don't do that so they don't need an EU operating airline or EU reg aircraft. This all relates to scheduled services.
Yes, Jet2 could base a couple of aircraft in Alicante or Palma or wherever. If they were UK-registered aircraft, they would need (post-Brexit) to be flown by pilots with UK and not EASA licences. Although there are quite a lot of pilots with the right to live and work in the UK who hold an EASA licence (so fine for Ryanair STN, LPL bases etc) then there are far fewer who have the right to live and work in Europe but hold a UK CAA licence. You'd therefore have a fairly big issue matching your UK aircraft based in ALC/PMI/wherever with UK-licensed crews who have the right to live and work to be based at the same places.
If they were keen to do it, one option may be to base some of the European ACMI aircraft in such a location. But putting their own aircraft may be much more problematic.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Co
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a factor being overlooked here, which is around crew licensing and right to live and work.
Yes, Jet2 could base a couple of aircraft in Alicante or Palma or wherever. If they were UK-registered aircraft, they would need (post-Brexit) to be flown by pilots with UK and not EASA licences. Although there are quite a lot of pilots with the right to live and work in the UK who hold an EASA licence (so fine for Ryanair STN, LPL bases etc) then there are far fewer who have the right to live and work in Europe but hold a UK CAA licence. You'd therefore have a fairly big issue matching your UK aircraft based in ALC/PMI/wherever with UK-licensed crews who have the right to live and work to be based at the same places.
If they were keen to do it, one option may be to base some of the European ACMI aircraft in such a location. But putting their own aircraft may be much more problematic.
Yes, Jet2 could base a couple of aircraft in Alicante or Palma or wherever. If they were UK-registered aircraft, they would need (post-Brexit) to be flown by pilots with UK and not EASA licences. Although there are quite a lot of pilots with the right to live and work in the UK who hold an EASA licence (so fine for Ryanair STN, LPL bases etc) then there are far fewer who have the right to live and work in Europe but hold a UK CAA licence. You'd therefore have a fairly big issue matching your UK aircraft based in ALC/PMI/wherever with UK-licensed crews who have the right to live and work to be based at the same places.
If they were keen to do it, one option may be to base some of the European ACMI aircraft in such a location. But putting their own aircraft may be much more problematic.
this isn’t necessarily true - they have a TFS base in the winter which is fully crewed, on UK registered aircraft and mostly crewed by ex PMI / ALC based crew who stay in TFS along with other UK Crew. They also have a few hundred cabin crew who all hold EASA licenses to operate on non uk reg aircraft. I.e leases
this isn’t necessarily true - they have a TFS base in the winter which is fully crewed, on UK registered aircraft and mostly crewed by ex PMI / ALC based crew who stay in TFS along with other UK Crew. They also have a few hundred cabin crew who all hold EASA licenses to operate on non uk reg aircraft. I.e leases
Possibly a fault where a longer runway was needed?
EDIT: LBA enthusiasts' group mentions flap issues.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nonsense.
You can rent a house, you can pay a mortgage, or you buy with cash.
Renting a house is costly, you lose money and have nothing to show for it at the end of your tenancy.
Paying a mortgage is also costly at the beginning, but once it’s paid off then you have an asset that’s all yours and have all the benefits of it.
Buying outright is the optimal, you have the asset to do as you like with, and none of the ongoing overheads.
Jet2 are using a mixture of the last two options for their purchases, just like they always have done.
You can rent a house, you can pay a mortgage, or you buy with cash.
Renting a house is costly, you lose money and have nothing to show for it at the end of your tenancy.
Paying a mortgage is also costly at the beginning, but once it’s paid off then you have an asset that’s all yours and have all the benefits of it.
Buying outright is the optimal, you have the asset to do as you like with, and none of the ongoing overheads.
Jet2 are using a mixture of the last two options for their purchases, just like they always have done.
New aircraft are expensive, however you pay for them. They need to fly. All week, all year. I don’t understand why you fanboys can’t accept that?
Even Jet2 agree, their whole business model thus far has been to fly older, cheaper aircraft because their operations are so seasonal. It doesn’t cost much to park up a 20 year old aircraft for the winter. They don’t need to fly every day of the week. Their 757s fly once every 14 days in the Winter just to avoid being put into long term storage. Fuel savings only offset the cost of new aircraft if they’re flown regularly over long periods of time. The increased capacity only pays off if the aircraft is full. The improved performance only matters if it’s required.
To go from having older, owned and paid off 737s and 757s to a fleet of 100 new build A320/1s is a significant change to their operating model. Accept it. They operated as few as 19 flights on many Tuesdays and Wednesdays this Winter.
I thought it was just the grossly insecure Jet2 pilots that were so defensive. Turns out it’s the spotters too. Fascinating.
Join Date: Jul 2023
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a ridiculous comparison. So is a house worth more as spares after the 25 year mortgage is paid off too? Does buying an aircraft outright mean it’s free, or do Jet2 still have to pay for it?
New aircraft are expensive, however you pay for them. They need to fly. All week, all year. I don’t understand why you fanboys can’t accept that?
Even Jet2 agree, their whole business model thus far has been to fly older, cheaper aircraft because their operations are so seasonal. It doesn’t cost much to park up a 20 year old aircraft for the winter. They don’t need to fly every day of the week. Their 757s fly once every 14 days in the Winter just to avoid being put into long term storage. Fuel savings only offset the cost of new aircraft if they’re flown regularly over long periods of time. The increased capacity only pays off if the aircraft is full. The improved performance only matters if it’s required.
To go from having older, owned and paid off 737s and 757s to a fleet of 100 new build A320/1s is a significant change to their operating model. Accept it. They operated as few as 19 flights on many Tuesdays and Wednesdays this Winter.
I thought it was just the grossly insecure Jet2 pilots that were so defensive. Turns out it’s the spotters too. Fascinating.
New aircraft are expensive, however you pay for them. They need to fly. All week, all year. I don’t understand why you fanboys can’t accept that?
Even Jet2 agree, their whole business model thus far has been to fly older, cheaper aircraft because their operations are so seasonal. It doesn’t cost much to park up a 20 year old aircraft for the winter. They don’t need to fly every day of the week. Their 757s fly once every 14 days in the Winter just to avoid being put into long term storage. Fuel savings only offset the cost of new aircraft if they’re flown regularly over long periods of time. The increased capacity only pays off if the aircraft is full. The improved performance only matters if it’s required.
To go from having older, owned and paid off 737s and 757s to a fleet of 100 new build A320/1s is a significant change to their operating model. Accept it. They operated as few as 19 flights on many Tuesdays and Wednesdays this Winter.
I thought it was just the grossly insecure Jet2 pilots that were so defensive. Turns out it’s the spotters too. Fascinating.
The only difference it makes it it will probably take 35 years to be life expired rather than 30, as it will have less cycles on it. Another benefit in the real world.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is about future cash v P&L.
From a P&L point of view, with an expensive capital asset, you need to work it hard to get the healthy returns because of the high depreciation hitting the P&L.
From a cash point of view, once you’ve spent the money it makes no future cash difference whether you use an old or new plane.
So, both of the above posts are right, but one is arguing on future cash outflows (no difference), one is arguing on the health of the P&L (it does make a difference).
From a P&L point of view, with an expensive capital asset, you need to work it hard to get the healthy returns because of the high depreciation hitting the P&L.
From a cash point of view, once you’ve spent the money it makes no future cash difference whether you use an old or new plane.
So, both of the above posts are right, but one is arguing on future cash outflows (no difference), one is arguing on the health of the P&L (it does make a difference).
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depreciation is the cost of the asset allocated to the P&L over a period of years/cycles.
Lead time doesn’t come into it.
This is why higher cost assets affect the P&L more than lower cost assets as you spread a previous cash outlay over a number of financial years.
Lead time doesn’t come into it.
This is why higher cost assets affect the P&L more than lower cost assets as you spread a previous cash outlay over a number of financial years.
I think the point being made is that long lead times will maintain the value of the newer aircraft on the second hand market - don't know if this impact their value in the accounts. Would the rate of depreciation be modified?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In practice, whether airlines amend the depreciation policy annually to reflect market conditions, I don't know.
Long term observers of airline finances will have noticed that BA Domestics have long been "loss making". Despite which they continue in operation. I do recall that in the past in connecting fares at Heathrow to intercontinentals they allocated £1 to the domestic leg ! The rest was all scooped by the intercontinental side, due to inter-department jousting at Waterside and its predecessor buildings. I think Jet2 is a bit more straightforward than that.
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Scotland
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As ever with "accounting", an imprecise science if there ever was one, it all depends how you choose to do the arithmetic. Depreciation is meant to represent the real loss of initial value, but as you are not actually selling it then it's just a best guess. In some countries there are multiple different depreciation methods used in formal accounting reporting. Australia has one for your accounts, and a separate parallel one for tax calculation purposed. USA railroads are similar, the depreciation of assets for reporting results to the federal authorities are quite different to the one used for calculating reports to shareholders and owners.
Long term observers of airline finances will have noticed that BA Domestics have long been "loss making". Despite which they continue in operation. I do recall that in the past in connecting fares at Heathrow to intercontinentals they allocated £1 to the domestic leg ! The rest was all scooped by the intercontinental side, due to inter-department jousting at Waterside and its predecessor buildings. I think Jet2 is a bit more straightforward than that.
Long term observers of airline finances will have noticed that BA Domestics have long been "loss making". Despite which they continue in operation. I do recall that in the past in connecting fares at Heathrow to intercontinentals they allocated £1 to the domestic leg ! The rest was all scooped by the intercontinental side, due to inter-department jousting at Waterside and its predecessor buildings. I think Jet2 is a bit more straightforward than that.
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Manchester
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This might put Jet2 in an awkward position if it goes ahead, with their relationship with AirTanker..divisive topic I know *hides*
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-airline-talks
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-airline-talks