Flybe-V2

[JobsaGoodun]

That’s the old page, the new one is Let’s flybe

[SWBKCB]

Originally Posted by RogueOne

They aren't back without paying debts. It's a new airline with the same name. The name was bought from the administrators EY to ironically pay some of the debts of Flybe v1 - which is now called:

FBE Realisations Ltd.

https://find-and-update.company-info...mpany/02769768

I'm well aware of the legal games being played.

[BA318]

Originally Posted by airsouthwest

"There's more" lol you've managed to find only a select few, most of those are probably the same people that would moan if the flight was 2 minutes late or because they've got a grudge with the airline anyway. You've also failed to acknowledge that the majority of tweets are asking them when they are going to reopen routes to Exeter, Newquay etc or welcoming them back.

I honestly don't know what your agenda is but you clearly have a grudge with Flybe and anyone who wants them to succeed. I'm all for having an alternative view point but when it's starts getting pathetic and just looking to bring up any old piece of dirty to further your own agenda that's when I get pissed.

Read through previous posts. I’ve no agenda. I want Flybe to succeed. I just think this route is not going to work. There are a few niches and that’s what I suggested. BMI operating LHR-Leeds and Amsterdam couldn’t survive even with Lufthansa’s support, Star Alliance membership and a connecting network - realistically how does anyone think this attempt is going to do anything other than burn money?

Plenty of people will be happy. If I was a regular flyer on that route I’d be happy as cheap fares will be available while it lasts. Same if I was based in Belfast.

However more than half their new routes are up against serious competition- IAG, KLM, Easyjet. All have deep pockets to fight competition. And what is the USP of Flybe on those routes? Why would I chose them over the others? Nobody has explained that and I’m not sure demand is at the level that people have no choice but to just book what’s available.

You can want an airline to succeed but disagree with their strategy. I’m an SAS gold card holder and love the carrier but think they are now a basket case and will use Ryanair as there is no difference. I also want Flybe to succeed for the sake of regional airports. We risk losing some if they don’t do better but that only works with a strong Flybe.

[Buster the Bear]

Originally Posted by tictack67

Loganair will be using ATR into LHR from the Isle of Man which is even slower.

Codeshare tie ups are not money makers, Flybe would typicall pick up around £25-£30 per codeshare ticket and flybe would be left with the lost luggage liability at the other end in LBA or Ams
KLM often used Embraer into LHR and BA A319 suggesting the Pax numbers aren't just there these days

Rate of climb/speed on departure is more of an issue.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

It's not as if KLM lack traffic at all, they still use Embraers to slot sit, they have a large and valuable LHR slot portfolio. They used to have a F70 and a B737 depart within 10 mins of each other at T4. Not interested in using larger aircraft, they hold the frequency high and the gauge low. The Loganair ATR also comes with an IOM govt subsidy attached, so apples and pears comparison vs. Flybe2. With KLM feeding long haul at one end and BA the other, there's no USP for flybe to be at LHR at all. No BA Exec Club, no feed at either end, using a Q400 from a remote stand? Just WHYYYYY?

[cavokblues]

I guess their USP offering will be low fares? I, personally, don't see how they will appeal to business folk etc and the other folk who are the the ones prepared to pay the extra costs to drive yields as they're not really offering the frequency required. A quick search on google flights over the summer and Flybe are very, very competitive price wise, even against easyJet out of LGW and LTN.

[tictack67]

Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot

It's not as if KLM lack traffic at all, they still use Embraers to slot sit, they have a large and valuable LHR slot portfolio. They used to have a F70 and a B737 depart within 10 mins of each other at T4. Not interested in using larger aircraft, they hold the frequency high and the gauge low. The Loganair ATR also comes with an IOM govt subsidy attached, so apples and pears comparison vs. Flybe2. With KLM feeding long haul at one end and BA the other, there's no USP for flybe to be at LHR at all. No BA Exec Club, no feed at either end, using a Q400 from a remote stand? Just WHYYYYY?

QUOTE
I was quoting Loganair and Luxair as a previous poster said Q400 never flew to LHR, and that there were no turboprops planned.

[BA318]

Originally Posted by cavokblues

I guess their USP offering will be low fares? I, personally, don't see how they will appeal to business folk etc and the other folk who are the the ones prepared to pay the extra costs to drive yields as they're not really offering the frequency required. A quick search on google flights over the summer and Flybe are very, very competitive price wise, even against easyJet out of LGW and LTN.

The problem is, especially on the LHR routes, Flybe’s costs will be high - using a Q400 there’s fewer seats to share the cost and low fares + high costs =

[dantheflyboy]

I have booked Flybe to LHR on price and to support them against the IAG high cost fares. I have been willing to pay a premium for a better product in the past but this has unfortunately come to an end due appalling back office customer service, loss of money with third party products attached to my booking. I now have a travel voucher which is of limited use to me. I was unable to get them on the phone, email or even self manage through the website because the booking wasn't flight only. I can only hope flybe2 is better with their customer service, meanwhile I am happy to take the perceived risk and the savings offered.

[BA318]

Originally Posted by dantheflyboy

I have booked Flybe to LHR on price and to support them against the IAG high cost fares. I have been willing to pay a premium for a better product in the past but this has unfortunately come to an end due appalling back office customer service, loss of money with third party products attached to my booking. I now have a travel voucher which is of limited use to me. I was unable to get them on the phone, email or even self manage through the website because the booking wasn't flight only. I can only hope flybe2 is better with their customer service, meanwhile I am happy to take the perceived risk and the savings offered.

The terrible state of BA service is probably the best thing going for Flybe on the LHR routes but then why not go for LCY and avoid the whole LHR mess. Supposedly their LCY-BFS and EDI services were doing well at the end (so much so they were leasing E190s due to the demand). There’s also a much better focus on p2p rather than connections which is more helpful when you have no connecting network or partners.

[ATNotts]

Originally Posted by BA318

The problem is, especially on the LHR routes, Flybe’s costs will be high - using a Q400 there’s fewer seats to share the cost and low fares + high costs =

I agree completely, most of the routes into LHR appear on the face of it to be, to put it mildly, mistakes. Is it conceivable that they are being paid to operate them as some kind of slot sitting exercise for BA perhaps? I confess I'm not au fait with the politics and regulations regarding slot usage (or lack thereof) but it would appear to be the only logical reason for operating ex BHD and AMS to LHR.

[RogueOne]

Thanks to the Mod team for this new fresh thread to try and separate an old airline from this new company. (despite the views of some).

If you disliked the old company you’re probably best to post in the Flybe V1 thread. If you didn’t like their bag policies you’re probably best to post in the Flybe V1 thread. If they owe you money you’re probably best to post in the Flybe V1 thread or if you just don’t like someone other than the airline you work for guess what…. you’re probably best to post in the Flybe V1 thread!

Looking forward to reasoned discussion about this new aviation job generator. Well done to all.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Originally Posted by RogueOne

Actually 318, Flybe’s cost base is staggeringly low compared to what you might think it is. Or if you want to compare it to another Q400 operator of the past.
As a new market entrant they’re very likely to have been able to negotiate very low lease costs, deals on ground handling, there are no legacy costs on the balance sheet. I know many companies have been falling over themselves to tender for work with them, to get in on the ground floor, well poised for expansion.
Just an example you’ll understand, without being able to see behind the veil.

They've got a staggeringly low cost base because they crashed and left a trail of debt.
There are no legacy costs on the balance sheet because they were reneged on.
To say they're a "new market entrant" is untrue, and flybe themselves acknowledge this when they openly talk of "returning to former markets" !

[RogueOne]

Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot

They've got a staggeringly low cost base because they crashed and left a trail of debt.
There are no legacy costs on the balance sheet because they were reneged on.
To say they're a "new market entrant" is untrue, and flybe themselves acknowledge this when they openly talk of "returning to former markets" !

I think you're thinking of another company. Zzzz

[bean]

Originally Posted by BA318

The problem is, especially on the LHR routes, Flybe’s costs will be high - using a Q400 there’s fewer seats to share the cost and low fares + high costs =

You don"t and will never know what Flybe's costs are and what deals they have negotiated with the airport operators

[bean]

Originally Posted by Buster the Bear

Rate of climb/speed on departure is more of an issue.

Wrong
Q400 climbs at 210 knots and has jet rates of climb at low altitudes.
Latcc never had problems with Flybe 1 operational performance

[RogueOne]

Originally Posted by bean

Wrong
Q400 climbs at 210 knots and has jet rates of climb at low altitudes.
Latcc never had problems with Flybe 1 operational performance

& BE LHR Q400 SOPs were to climb out at 230kts!!

[RogueOne]

Both now accepted and have been flying today.
G-JECX
G-JECY

These 2 should be the next to be accepted.
G-ECOE
G-ECOR

Airframes right now are coming from NAC and Aergo, may be possible that acceptances may not have been BE airframes in the past. All will have the new livery and from what I've been told, a new interior.

[Fletch]

Not sure handling charges, etc will be lower than other operators already giving these companies business. If they are, they're low for a reason or they'll normalise pretty quickly.
I can't see how Flybe's costs will be lower than Eastern's, Loganair's or Emerald's costs. There can't be much in it even compared to easyJet or BA.
One of their competitors will have no legacy costs either. Others have profitable established routes/operations to help offset losses on competitive routes. Others have substantial cash reserves- with historic profitable operations.

[bean]

Originally Posted by RogueOne

& BE LHR Q400 SOPs were to climb out at 230kts!!

Even better