Aer Lingus - 4
 

The Aer Lingus board considered mounting a takeover of BMI, the UK carrier formerly known as British Midland, earlier this year.

The board was looking at fall-back positions in the event the Open Skies deal, which was concluded last week, did not go ahead.

The airline also ran the rule over a number of other European low-cost carriers, including Flybe, which earlier this month bought all of British Airways regional routes to become the largest regional airline in Europe. It flies on 152 routes from 22 UK airports to 36 European destinations.

Although a number of carriers were looked at, the most serious contender was British Midland.

It is understood that the previous Aer Lingus management, led by Willie Walsh, the current British Airways chief executive, also harboured plans to mount a bid for BMI, once it had restructured Aer Lingus. Discussion with BMI did take place, but it is understood they centred on the possibility of Aer Lingus acquiring a number of long-haul aircraft from BMI.

The airline, which is controlled by former baggage handler Michael Bishop, dropped flights between Heathrow and Mumbai last year due to intense competition, leaving it with two surplus aircraft.

Suitable

The Open Skies deal means those aircraft are no longer surplus as all carriers scamble to increase their transatlantic services.

A shortage of suitable airplanes is hampering the growth of airlines around the world.

Even in advance of knowing whether the Open Skies deal would be signed it is understood the Aer Lingus board decided against mounting a bid for BMI.

One source said: "You buy an airline because you want their aircraft, or you want their slots for new aircraft, or you want their management. None of these apply to Aer Lingus."

Unlike Aer Lingus and Ryanair, which operate only one aircraft type and one engine type on their short-haul routes, BMI operates a number or different types, making it a less attractive acquisition target.

That has not stopped Richard Branson's Virgin running the rule over BMI. Mr Bishop and Nigel Turner, the BMI chief executive, have consistently maintained that the airline is not for sale.

Mr Bishop owns 50pc plus one share in the airline. SAS, a Scandinavian carrier, has 20pc, and Lufthansa, the German flag carrier, owns 30pc, less one share.

Although the possibility of a BMI takeover by Aer Lingus is no longer on the cards, that such a move was considered shows the determination of the Aer Lingus board to pursue an independent strategy.

Ryanair, which owns 26pc of the Aer Lingus, is awaiting a European Commission ruling on whether it can go proceed with a takeover of the former semi-State company.

Source: Irish Independent
http://www.unison.ie/irish_independe...issue_id=15412

Aer Lingus had eye on BMI
 

Well thank God that did not happen.Aer Lingus would have brought bmi down to their "race to the bottom" level leaving Dublin- London Heathrow without a business class service. bmi service on this route is excellent and long may it last.

Err......

Would that be SIR Michael Bishop, the former Manchester station manager for Mercury Airlines, later sold to BMA and who rose through the ranks to become Managing Director of British Midland, ultimately making one of the first management buyouts with his two business partners to become chairman of BMI?

Manners and respect cost nothing as my father taught me.

Well said Oscarh
Talk about demeaning a mans achievements in one sentence...
The guys a legend...
(ok, and he pays my wages......) !

The above article was written by one Tom McEnaney. Anyone familiar with his brand of "journalism", and indeed that of the Irish Independent, will understand the utter lack of respect, which was most likely intended.

A real journalist would no doubt be vexed at how often his (or more accurately ryanairs, masquerading as his own) predictions and forecasts prove wrong.

As for the Irish Independent, it is a rag of the highest degree, made even more insidious by pretending to be a "quality" newspaper. Not only is sensationalist, non-newsworthy pap its forte, it is also an uncritical and simpering unofficial ryanair newsletter. Enough said.

I know foreigners can't buy control of airlines in the USA but can Americans take control of UK airlines. If so could be a way to get some valuable slots if one of the US majors could afford BMI.Mind you if BMI came openly on to the market i reckon their would be a lot of interest..

What a load of old cobblers...Aer Lingus can barely organise themselves, let alone take over another airline - and just where was the money going to come from?? They've been run out of UK regional routes, they're now getting a serious run out of DUB from Ryanair, they can't come to a working relationship with the unions...who does this journalist think he's kidding????

Even if it's true, then the board should be looking to sort out the future of Aer Lingus, not fanny about on Fantasy Island...

Oldlag, your such a stirrer. Ei out perform every UK airline with the exception of Easy and do it to a back drop of Fr. The flights are largely full and and the performance figures speak for themselves add to that 1bn in cash and you can see why Fr wants to by it. I wouldn't discredit Sir Michael Bishops achievements but perhaps you might afford Ei the same curtsy. Camelhair was right on the money with his critique of Tom McEnaney writings. His sniveling,sycophantic outpourings will do nothing but raise your blood pressure and I'm annoyed at myself for even responding to a thread based on his drivel.

..and of course, with the "former baggage handler" :mad: :ugh: having a controlling stake in the privately owned bmi he would have been well within his rights to tell them to go and whistle. Which he would surely have done.

I would imagine that's news to the bmi board. I can only assume he means they would have tried to take over the whole group. Don't make me laugh!! :rolleyes:

...and the point of that statement is?

Obviously this "journalist" (meant in the same derogatory tone as "baggage handler") is of the highest calibre. :yuk:

Hear Hear!
And oldlag53 - get a life.
Or better still, join the Indo as a journalist.

Typical silly season story which was probably hashed together in a pub at dinnertime.

More holes in that than a hole factory. Such as one salient point...you can't mount a takeover bid for a company which isn't traded on the stock market.

So EI were going to buy bmi & then then they'd be collectively bought-out by the Ryans when they launch their next bid for them!

His chance of doing that gets more remote with every cent on the 'Lingus share price.

Its up 105 cents since launch in September, and still climbing.

Too bad, Micko missed out.

If the deal had of gone through and hypothetically speaking FR did buy out Aer Lingus they would have destroyed the Irish aviation industry and part of the UK's aswell.

Curser, could you please clarify the criteria you are using to come up with this assertion??

This is just lazy writing - no facts to back this up whatsoever. If you'd bothered to look at the 2006 prelims, you would see that EIN's load factor is 77.6%, down from 81.4% the previous year.

As someone has already pointed out, the original article was a complete load of tosh as you can't takeover a privately-owned company.

Aer Lingus needs to get real, sort out the unions, come up with a realistic picture of its present and future strategy, and not get sidetracked with starry-eyed nonsense about taking over other airlines.

So why did you feel the irresistible urge to hit the keyboard and pass comment on it then?

Do us a favour, spare us the spin and instead write to Dermot Mannion - ask him why he chose to recently blow a further 16 million euro on the same Suits who screwed up his flotation.

It was the pilots UNION who saved Aer Lingus from the clutches of O'Leary, with no help from that fool.

I refer you to THIS thread.

Corporate Scandal: Snouts in Trough at Aer Lingus
 

This is for all those who blame 'the Unions' for every ill.
Article from Phoenix Magazine.
The corporate snouts are buried deep in the Aer Lingus trough - while Mannion misdirects the mainstream media's attention at the unions.:mad:

Wait 'til you see how much these sort of ******** earn out of the olympics !

So - you want Aer Lingus to be independent of Ryanair (presumably), yet you find payments to Goldman Sachs to be abhorrent.

Tell me, what exactly do you think Goldman Sachs did for this money? Starting with the hundreds of professionals in M&A who would have dropped everything to work on Aer Lingus all night for a period of weeks, resulting in a successful defence of the airline (nevermind that the document was flawed - it was successful).

Do you think these chaps listed acted alone? If so, you are totally incorrect - the names are only those of the MDs and directors who work on the transaction - below them are VPs, Associates and Analysts - who form the bulk of the headcount at investment banks - who were all working hard for you independence.

Don't attack the city if you don't have a clue what you are talking about!!

I must be missing something. My suit says "Austin Reed" on the inside.

Preconceptions and illusion are the art of the newspaper, not the professional advisors.

Morgan Stanley on the Ryanair side, and GS on the Aer Lingus side would both be as expensive.

"Beancounters United" strikes back, eh?

You're misinformed.

The 'document' was directed at the Takeover Panel and perhaps a few 'floating voters' in the stock market. It made no impact on the majority shareholders - the staff and the government - and had no influence on the pilots, who spent tens of millions of their own money buying Aer Lingus shares thus mounting a practical defence from a hostile takeover.
Its pathetic to suggest that a bunch of suits, writing a flawed document backed with a glossy magazine - and charging 16.2M for it - were more effective than those who actually stumped up and invested the same amount or more.

Still, nice to see you think YOU'RE worth your inflated salaries, even if pilots and other workers aren't.

Must be a galling experience to find yourselves the target of media scrutiny for a change?

Clearly you have little understading of what "beancounters" (as you so disparagingly call us) also have up their sleeve as products in their firms - namely M&A advisory as well - the same as the investment banks.

You are utterly incorrect - the document is not simply a check-box requirement with the takeover panel - it is entirely aimed at the floating voters - many of whom were influenced by the plans (certainly not a "few" - who do you think the employee trust purchased the shares from? God?).

Clearly, the actions of the advisors is totally alien to you - let me explain in that case. These guys are working a minimum of 90 hours per week, trying to find hidden value in the business so that it can survive independently, and marketing the business to those who purchased large chunks of share capital in support of management during this episode (a certain Irish investor comes to mind, along with many others). On top of this, they are delivering advice to management on a daily basis, helping the directors to understand what actions to take, what messages to convey, and to whom else they should call on support if Ryanair have a realistic chance of a takeover.

Then comes a huge process of reviewing projections, tearing them apart, re-forecasting with greater knowledge, challenging management assumptions and attempting to place the business on an even more stable footing: those 16.2m euros of fees could potentially have added another 100m+ to the market capitalisation purely through a few insights generated by a couple of PhDs in Goldman Sachs.

Now, take a look at the free float of Aer Lingus, plus the fund managers who own shares as well - whose support has to be shored up - along with other non-strategic holdings...apart for the government of Ireland and the employee shares, the remainder (a large amount more than a "few floating voters") amounts to a huge task.

Justifying large fees? I don't think you really understand - fees are calculated on hours worked and a very thin slice of additional worth created (perhaps less than 0.5%).

I don't really see how you can complain too much about "employee pain" if you are indeed an employee who owns shares - the benefit flows back to you through the worth of those shares instead.

Of course, if you are a communist, simply tell us to save the argument...

Advice? 16.2M for a few weeks 'work'. Beats digging ditches.
The ESOT was allocated shares as part of the IPO. Didn't you know that?
No 'floaters' or deities were required.
Hah! POOR DEARS! I guess the million quid bonus eases the pain.... They were supposed to do that as part of the flotation - but they screwed it up.
That 'Irish Investor' you speak of has an agenda which is unlikely to be swayed by the slobberings of a bunch of discredited merchant bankers.
How did they EVER manage without them?
Is Aer Lingus being run by Goldman Sachs then? Thats a damning indictment of Mr.Mannion and his team!
By the way - give me some evidence of the 100M added to the company by the touts, please.
The free float is about 3.5%. 16.2M would've sucked up a good part of that if spent more judiciously.
Who cares how they calculate it - it's still outrageous! 16.2M for a few weeks work!
You may find this hard to grasp - but believe it or not, many people do not live their lives trying to grab a quick buck at any cost - unlike your ilk.
The really interesting aspect of your long-winded diatribe is the utter self-obsession of the Corporatist mindset you labour under. The total absence of any sense of real personal accountability in your profession is betrayed in the scandals that occur with such regular monotony. Should I list them?
Every pilot on this forum is required to accept and uphold a responsibility of the most demanding and unforgiving nature. Unlike you, there is no walking away from disasters, or blathering excuses to cover up incompetence And Greed.
I'm a Socialist, since you ask. And a Union Member.

EI to SFO
 

Here are the new EI schedules to SFO:

Departing TU, TH and SA.

EI 147 Dep DUB 9.15 Arr SFO 12.15
EI 146 Dep SFO 14.30 Arr DUB 8.30

Will post MCO and IAD when they're on the EI site.

Here are the new EI schedules to SFO:

Departing TU, TH and SA.

EI 147 Dep DUB 9.15 Arr SFO 12.15
EI 146 Dep SFO 14.30 Arr DUB 8.30

Will post MCO and IAD when they're on the EI site.

Where is this aircaft coming from?

Read it here.

Aer Lingus to MCO/IAD
 

MCO
Operated 3 per week
Schedule is: (1200-1550) EI 121 Days 2, 4, 6
Return (1800-0700) EI 120

IAD
Operated 4 per week
Schedule is (1400-1630) EI 119 Days 1,3,5,7
Return (1930-0715) EI 118

A number of years ago Aer Lingus started some of their transatlantic flights from Manchester via Dublin, is their any potential to do the same, i.e. the new SFO flight, a destination not served from MAN.?

Absolutely, and from many other UK and EU destinations too. Mind you, the SFO departure is a bit early (09.15) for westbound connections, but it should be possible to any of the other US destinations.

The other problem is that DUB is not particularly connection-friendly, in that one has to come out through arrivals, go upstairs, head (through the milling crowds) to the far end of the terminal and enter through a very small door, to the security area; the DAA really needs to rethink that; there used to be an airside facility, but I don't know why they removed that.

MCO
Operated 3 per week
Schedule is: (1200-1550) EI 121 Days 2, 4, 6
Return (1800-0700) EI 120

IAD
Operated 4 per week
Schedule is (1400-1630) EI 119 Days 1,3,5,7
Return (1930-0715) EI 118

So if an aircraft goes tech in MCO then it screws up the entire week? Once again, is this not EI spreading themselves a bit thin?

It's the same as always; you try and cover the most flights with as few aircraft and get the highest utilisation. Problems do happen with the existing fleet and it's not just EI's fleet; it can happen anywhere. It's just one of the operational risks an airline has to deal with.

Just keep World's/North American's/Martinair's (etc) numbers handy and hope they have an aircraft going when things go awry!

I didn't think FR charged for pre-seat selection? Infact you can't choose your seat til you get on board so perhaps you're getting confused with their charging for pre-boarding???

Anyhow you can still have the lowest EI fare available you just can't choose where you sit til check-in (as previous), EI are only offering it as an add-on for those that are wanting to sit in a particular seat so they're only cashing in on a "supply and demand" situation. Works for most charters here in the UK.

I don't however understand this fascination with wanting to sit in the front section unless the seats are fluffier, the clientele dressed appropriately and the champagne on ice (and free).:D

At the risk of stating what seems self-evident, given the choice I would look to sit in the front rows if I were travelling with carry-on baggage only and in a hurry to get through the airport (particularly immigration) before 150+ other people. If I am in no rush (e.g. checked baggage, long wait for connecting flight, etc.) there is less of a front-rows imperative. But this is verging on a "Passengers and SLF" discussion...;)

The public get what the public want.

I just hope the public get what the public want when it comes to a family of 4 (2 small kids) checking in at the airport and not getting seats together. How will a punter feel who has paid €3 to preassign a seat when they are asked by the crew to move to seat a family together. IMHO this has nothing to do with giving people what they want...its about extracting as much cash from people. What next...charging a € to take a leak and €2 for the other. Aer Lingus has gone to the dogs. I recently travelled premier to NY and back from Chicago. The service was poor, the food cold, the in-flight entertainment not working and the Cabin Crew scarce.

EI call themselves low cost...I had to laugh. I looked to book DUB-BCN in August. Price excluding bags and seat assignment for 2 pax was €350 approx. FR charged €290, IB charged €230 and Clickair charged €190 (if you book with IB you still end up travelling with Clickair).

I have a feeling that nobody will use this service. Checking in online should guarantee you a decent enough seat anyway.

How are they going to ensure the people who pre-book the emergency exit seats are fit to sit there? I can just imagine someone deciding they need the extra space because their leg is in a cast!

Incidentally, the re-greening of Aer Lingus continues with a new look to the website today.

The new look is much nicer on the new website. But the route maps have still not been updated.
The new logo is much nicer than the big red dot!!

What the public have proved to WANT is a cheap headline fare. Thats what FR gave them to become Europes biggest shorthaul airline. The public stayed away in droves from the 'legacy' carriers - so the solution was obvious.

Hey, Welcome to the brave new world of modern aviation!

You wanted it - You got it.

Take the point Maxalt but the only thing EI seems to have done is called itself a "Low Cost" carrier implying cheaper fares arising from lower costs. The trouble is that they aint that cheap (see my earlier mail).

You quoted fares on a particular day, on a specific route.
Its impossible to say which carrier will be cheapest from day to day. Or who'll be cheaper on any given route. Yield management by online booking engines constantly adjusts fares. Shop around.

The 'average fares' quoted by the likes of O'Leary should be taken with a pinch of salt, just like everything else he says. He doesn't include all his extras. Its a meaningless figure.

Aer Lingus is now dumbing down to become FR Mk2.
I don't like where its going -but its too late to reason with the punters. They refused to see the writing on the wall when differentiation still existed...all you got was complaints about 'expensive legacy carriers' ripping them off.
Now they complain about nasty LoCo's ripping them off!:ugh:

Zero sympathy. And it'll only get worse.