bmi longhaul
 

Looks like bmi are getting their A330 back from SAA Anyone know what the grand plan is? Heard talk of Manchester direct to Miami! Also is it true that bmi had a firm order for an A340 which could be used to go to HKG from LHR.

Anyone got the lowdown to seperate fact from fiction???

http://www.airbus.com/doc/media/orde...deliveries.xls
Official Airbus Orders and Options - No evidence of an A340 order or option.:sad:

A330 to be 'stored' at MAN over the winter (at least), minus one engine (lease engine going back to RR).

Definately no other longhaul aircraft on order.

It's hardly a secret that British Midland have been heavily involved with AirTanker, one of the consortia bidding for the RAF's Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft programme. AirTanker are proposing the A330-200 platform and their bid 'may' include used aircraft.

The announcement of the preferred bidder, whether AirTanker using new or nearly new A330s - or their competitor TTSC using the old B767-336s from ba - is expected by year end.

So, British Midland 'storing' aircraft at just the time that the preferred bidder is expected to be announced....?? Hmmm......

Why is it the BMI board are so frightend to start another route? The success of the current IAD and ORD routes would sureley make them think that they had a good thing going for them, and it seems to be the only thing in Mainline that's making a profit at the mo!!! It looks like Bishop is not bothered any more and Reid just wants to get his retirement payout next year. At a time when other airlines are taking the plunge and having a go (and usually making profits) there are so many other options that bmi could do and make money, middle east, far east, south Africa, evan more american routes from Man. Youve got to speculate to accumulate, so take the pluge Bish, youve got a great product, I tried it myself and its definatly one of, if not the best in the sky.

Success at ORD and IAD - You must be Joking. :O :O :O

BMI are losing their shirts on these routes at present - hence aircraft subleased at rockbottom prices, engines being sent back and brand new aircraft left to rot at Manchester.

Sorry to have to correct you Copenhagen, but they are making money on the routes and enjoying a high load factor, evan though the yield may not be as much as they would like. there are also high cargo loads and have been for a long time which sometimes pay for half the flight!!! trust me I know!!!

Without wanting to labour the point, the routes are losing money heavily. Loads are acceptable, but the start-up, training and product development costs are stratospheric. And frankly, my source couldn't be any better ;)

... which would be a reason for starting another route - 'cos the cost of training and product development would then be spread further.

Basically, what is being said here is that in terms of operating costs/income, the routes are OK - but in terms of overheads they aren't. The Concorde problem.

You can't get "a little bit" into longhaul - or the costs you are talking about will clobber you.

ajamieson (and others):

Actually both sides could be right. The costs ajamieson describes are one-off costs that occur when a route is first started. Conventional accounting then recovers these costs over subsequent years. So on day-to-day costs and revenues the routes could now be doing alright, but to the accountants taking the overall view and recharging these "stratospheric" costs it is making a loss.

This is where management has to face the beancounters and decide what to do. On the one hand it appears ludicrous to abandon a profitable route where the start up costs are now history, on the other hand the money borrowed to cover the start up costs is eating away interest and has to be paid back somehow.

Remember, at the end of the day it's the management that employs the beanies, not the other way round!

With bmi's adventure into long haul travel not being a complete success (although in fairness, that's partly due to it not being allowed to operate to US from LHR) and now, LHR's third runway likely to be delayed considerably, isn't it about time that MB and Branson finally got this merger thing worked out. Both are high quality carriers with networks that would complement each other; both would benefit from being part of a larger organisation and having the mutual feed.

Both must know it's going to happen sometime, so why not get things under way?

bmibaby long haul Man to Miami. 'Trust me I know':}

bmi are deep in the brown stuff on longhaul and not likely to make progress as one of the main paddlers is Austin Reed who is apparantly more concerned about transporting his Xmas crackers intact with bangers in place than making decisions about the companys future. Where has he been for the last few weeks anyway? According to my impecable source, the legal eagle and finance director run the place between them and are doing a pretty good job without a chief exec. Give Reed a golden parachute without a ripcord!!

orders
 

Thanks for posting the link for the airbus orders page. It is interesting to note that it show bmi as only having one A330 currently. which is of course incorrect!

It is very easy to obtain A340s quickly, by slipping another carriers option for example or leasing.

bmi is at a crossroad. Bishop will not want to carry on in his present capacity for much longer. He dreams of his own heavy metal trundling down the LHR Rwy carrying BA business pax across the pond - fair ambition I think. How will this be acheived??

Bishop thinks there maybe a way in to the transatlantic market from LHR on the back of the Virgin/Cathay proposition.

He knows branson would merge tommorow (that will remain up his sleeve).

How much more valuable will bmi be if it can get just the rights across the atlantic - let alone operate them? Branson would have to offer considerably more to Sir micheal.

Lets not forget that bmi is his retirement, why not play brinksmanship with potential suitors?? it makes perfect sense.

I Suspect that if he didn't think LHR long haul rights would come within the next two years bmi/virgin would already be one.

I recommend we all make a note of posters Ajamieson and Fly me again as they both definitely know inside information that is in complete contradiction. so either they are both full of hot air or one of them is the bish himself.............

I think there are three people in bmi who genuinely think they know the plan, I suspect one of them is quite capable of suprising the other two.

Copenhagen

What is your source that bmi's longhaul operation is not succeeding. Granted the Washington service is rather disappointing at this time of year. However, the ORD is in profit. Not bad after two years

Copenhagen

you're way off the mark.

Sublease at rock bottom prices

The SAA contract was an absolute winner - and the next contract will be too.

Chicago is full and making a good profit but Washington is slow regaining it's previous strength after the return to the route - not unexpected when you do that (but it was worth it).

As to long haul out of LHR, it would be good to see the A330's going to the US if the stranglehold can be broken but it doesn't preclude other routes from there. bmi is, after all, the second largest user of LHR - out of all the world's airlines!

Anne :O

When bmibaby goes longhaul will the pilots be able to make their own sandwiches such that they wont curl up at the edges after
a 10 hour flight.And l hope they can bring a thermos big enough for the journey.(bmibaby=no crewmeals)

Guys - come off it - The SAA adventure was seriously loss making, as was the brief period the A330 flew in my part of the world.

In a period when virtually all long haul airlines have excess capacity sub lease rates plummet - only those with seriously written down equipment can hope to make any money out of it (a certain Icelandic airline comes to mind, as does a certain 747 operator out of BOH). It was probably a great success operationally, but profit wise - it probably lost less money than a Manchester self operated service. Remember the EI 767 operation in Mexico? - a similar story that cost the airline a fortune in a less depressed period than this one.

Another problem with Miami is the lack of a strong Star Alliance base there - and the lack of high yielding traffic to those markets.

I'm waiting to hear that BMIbaby is profitable also, just like Buzz was!

Copenhagen
Just where do you get your info from?

The SAA operation was the saving grace of the long haul 'adventure' in what was a very difficult trading environment. I am not qualified however to comment on the SAS situation, as I do not have the facts about that particular operation. I presume you do from your comments.

TIEFIBOY: I agree with you:: Copenhagen, where do you get your info from???????
You've been listening to the caterers and cleaners too much!!!
The SAA was a great money earner for the company roughly £10 million, which covered the cost of the start up of the longhaul operation, (which is why I said origionally that they where now making a profit!), not only that, but it made more money than keeping the IAD opp for last winter. I just wish that I had a bubble to burst that ballon of yours but I'd be scared to get my head blown off with all that hot air inside!!