Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

Jet2-6

Old 2nd Apr 2024, 15:39
  #1901 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,511
Received 20 Likes on 12 Posts
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.
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.
Flightrider is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2024, 21:21
  #1902 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Co
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Flightrider
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.

this isnít 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
irishlad06 is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2024, 08:03
  #1903 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Wolverhampton
Posts: 415
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by irishlad06
this isnít 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
Per piost 1869, Thanks irishlad06 for clearing that up. I just couldn't remember where it was based.
Flying Hi is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2024, 08:25
  #1904 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: FL350
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BTW : Do you kmow Wet-Lease partner S 24?
dcten is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2024, 08:54
  #1905 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Wolverhampton
Posts: 415
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LS249 diverting to EMA

G-JZBX LEEDS TO FUE LS249 diverted to EMA squawking 7700.
currently stationary on runway.
Flying Hi is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2024, 09:55
  #1906 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Northampton, England
Age: 64
Posts: 473
Received 62 Likes on 44 Posts
Originally Posted by Flying Hi
G-JZBX LEEDS TO FUE LS249 diverted to EMA squawking 7700.
currently stationary on runway.
Did several orbits over LBA before diverting. Seems to be off the runway now.

Possibly a fault where a longer runway was needed?

EDIT: LBA enthusiasts' group mentions flap issues.
Airbanda is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2024, 23:23
  #1907 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by 1889LS
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 itís paid off then you have an asset thatís 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.
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 itís 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 donít understand why you fanboys canít 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 doesnít cost much to park up a 20 year old aircraft for the winter. They donít 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 theyíre flown regularly over long periods of time. The increased capacity only pays off if the aircraft is full. The improved performance only matters if itís 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 itís the spotters too. Fascinating.


Vokes55 is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2024, 05:58
  #1908 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,713
Likes: 0
Received 58 Likes on 30 Posts
Originally Posted by Vokes55
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 think you will find they bought 33 brand new 737-800s from Boeing back in 2016-17, one of the largest European holiday flight operator purchases of recent times. These aircraft are now heading for middle age. Meanwhile they have continued to buy secondhand mid-life aircraft of the same type as well, including this year, and of course also to lease in by the season aircraft from the open market, as required. Now they have a new Airbus fleet coming. It's an effective balance of new aircraft finance costs and older aircraft maintenance and other costs. It saw them through Lockdown better than most.
WHBM is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2024, 16:17
  #1909 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: stockport
Posts: 499
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think the 757 were flying more that once every two weeks in winter as on Saturdays and Sundays most of them flew both days and some during week as well
chaps1954 is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2024, 16:56
  #1910 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2023
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Vokes55
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 itís 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 donít understand why you fanboys canít 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 doesnít cost much to park up a 20 year old aircraft for the winter. They donít 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 theyíre flown regularly over long periods of time. The increased capacity only pays off if the aircraft is full. The improved performance only matters if itís 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 itís the spotters too. Fascinating.
If an aircraft is fully owned and paid for then it makes absolutely no difference whether itís a cheap second hand frame or a new shiny one, you donít lose any money by not flying it every day.

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.

1889LS is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2024, 18:20
  #1911 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 661
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 youíve 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).
P330 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2024, 11:04
  #1912 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Wallsend
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
With the lead time for new airframes from Airbus or Boeing is depreciation that heavy?
Wallsendmag is online now  
Old 9th Apr 2024, 11:41
  #1913 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 661
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 doesnít 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.
P330 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2024, 11:50
  #1914 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,699
Received 131 Likes on 84 Posts
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?
SWBKCB is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2024, 11:55
  #1915 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SWBKCB
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?
Apologies, yes it would. In theory, this scenario would mean the frame takes longer to depreciate and has a higher book value later in life, so the annual depreciation charge would be lower.

In practice, whether airlines amend the depreciation policy annually to reflect market conditions, I don't know.
P330 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2024, 17:20
  #1916 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,713
Likes: 0
Received 58 Likes on 30 Posts
Originally Posted by SWBKCB
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?
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.
WHBM is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2024, 19:52
  #1917 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Scotland
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by WHBM
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.
It will depend on how they calculate depreciation on how it will affect their P&L. One thing is sure that if tomorrow they decided to sell the A321neo's they would almost certainly be able to get more than they paid for them due to the demand from other operators for them
Kevgti is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2024, 20:52
  #1918 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: GB
Posts: 254
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Indeed, with BA, I find myself being able to add a MAN-LHR tag to a long haul rewards redemption for practically nothing.
laviation is online now  
Old 10th Apr 2024, 18:07
  #1919 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,713
Likes: 0
Received 58 Likes on 30 Posts
Originally Posted by laviation
Indeed, with BA, I find myself being able to add a MAN-LHR tag to a long haul rewards redemption for practically nothing.
There are commercial reasons and justifications for doing this, but not really on-topic for a Jet2 discussion.
WHBM is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2024, 13:54
  #1920 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Manchester
Posts: 40
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
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
bobradamus is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.