Today's Mail on Sunday reports that BD is being sued for over £12m by Durham Tees Valley for breach of contract regarding bmibaby's operations there.

Well we all beleive what the daily rag writes!! The same newspaper that reports week on week, year on year that someone has bought BD!

Roll on the VS merger

I for one find it highly interesting that BMI are phoning the next (Ex-Astraeus) CC course intake and asking them if they will stay on with AEU to complete the subs which can't be presently fulfilled................

I have recentally heard that Virgin Nigeria's B733's are to be sold to bmibaby before the end of 2008. Ex easyjet aircraft..

Reg.

5N-VNC ex G-EZYN
5N-VND ex G-EZYM
5N-VNE ex G-EZYP
5N-VNF ex G-EZYR
5N-VNG ex G-EZYS
and also
UR-GAH of Ukraine Intl Airlines

OliWW

You have proven to be a very good source of rumours on here, have you got this on good source??

Possible redundancies looming in the bmi Group?
 

Where will the axe fall first, any thoughts from anyone who received the memo from NT?

The memo had no mention of redunduncies at all....:ugh:

looks like its almost a certainty :{

BmiBaby Gdansk
 

Looks like BmiBaby are ending there Gdansk service from both Cardiff and East Midlands.

http://www.airport.gdansk.pl/service...p?click=wyloty

Also is there any new BmiBaby routes to be announced soon from BHX. :ok:

Rumours that WW will also drop their Cork services at the end of the summer schedule owing to lower yields from increased competition.

Is this just the BHX services or the MAN as well? BHX now sees daily competition from EI to BHX and FR to EMA.

Brian.

Bhx-ork
 

The CAA stats show that the route had a bad time last winter but EI
are no longer daily. 5 a week now and 6 next winter, I was hoping Baby
would carry on at around 4-5 a week for next winter.

If Cork was bad, BHX - Knock is fast catching it up for falling pax,
another one which might see reduced service or the chop completely.

Pete

BMI Baby fly, and/or have flown, from Cork to Birmingham, Manchester, Durham Tees Valley, East Midlands, Gatwick and Cardiff*.
(Have I forgotten any?)
And BMI used to do Cork - Leeds Bradford.

It would be a desperate shame to see BMI (Baby) completely withdraw from Cork. And moreover it wouldn't be very good for competition or airfares either :(

I suspect the drop off in BHX-ORK numbers might partially be because of the FR presence to EMA, although that only happened quite recently, IIRC.

It would be sad to see WW pull completely out of ORK, as mentioned, but the flights are operated by aircraft from different bases, so just because BHX goes would not necessarily mean the MAN would, or vice-versa.

I use ORK-MAN regularly, as does my uncle. We both agree that WW are the pits for timekeeping and know how to charge. Loads have tended to be very high on my flights with them, usually in the 80% range, often 100% full. Now if EI can make WW scurry away with only a 4x weekly service (to be 5x for winter) and fares which are not bargains I would be very worried for WW. FR and U2 are going to absolutely eat them alive.

Brian.

chalk it up to low fares high fuel and not enough pax to share around:ugh:
All airlines are now seriously looking at flights and dropping what used to make a profit pre usd127 a barrell fuel prices (look at AA man-ord)
Things are not pretty:{

Lufthansa buy-out of bmi
 

Nothing more here than we already know - rumour and conjecture. Article in Aviation Interactive

Lufthansa is still on track to equal or better its 2007 results, CEO Wolfgang Mayrhuber told reporters in London yesterday.

Though he conceded that the market would weaken going forward, Mayrhuber expressed confidence that Lufthansa’s bottom line wouldn’t suffer, adding that bookings remained strong. The airline is targeting a seven per cent growth in capacity this summer.

A strong hedging position has allowed the company a measure of stability in the face of high fuel prices, with 85 per cent of Lufthansa’s fuel requirement hedged this year. A strong home base in Germany, a country with a multi-tiered, multi-industry economy, is also vital to the airline’s success, the CEO said.

One cause of concern for Mayrhuber was the number of failing airlines still in business. He pointed out that carriers with negative balance sheets could still access aircraft through leasing companies. I asked him whether he thought the proliferation of leasing companies was damaging the industry long term. “They [leasing companies] are a good instrument as long as they are not the only instrument,” he replied.
On consolidation in the US, Mayrhuber agreed that certain airlines could draw benefits from mergers, but pointed out that there was little sense in joining businesses if synergies weren’t sought out and realised. He added that Lufthansa hadn’t been contacted by any US major with regard to a tie-up.

In Europe, Lufthansa is expected to buy Michael Bishop’s stake in bmi (50 per cent plus one share). They will be able to do so from December 20, though Mayrhuber wouldn’t be drawn on whether it was a done deal. All signals, however, indicated that it was.

Control of bmi would grant Lufthansa access to its lucrative slots at Heathrow, an airport Mayrhuber was “not happy” with. He reiterated calls for Star Alliance carriers to have their own terminal at the hub by 2012.

He was also unhappy with the focus of media attention in recent times. He said investment in the Lufthansa’s Frankfurt hub was a “no-brainer”, yet reports largely ignore the delays in favour of obsessing over setbacks to massively complex aircraft programmes. “Even the Romans knew how to pour concrete,” he added wryly.

Asked about Lufthansa’s interest in Austrian Airlines – which recently lost a major potential investor – or Belgium’s SN Brussels, Mayrhuber repeated his mantra: “We are not in the business of buying airlines.” For good measure he told reporters that Lufthansa had “never put in a bid” for Austrian, which, for its part, had never approached Lufthansa. With regard to SN Brussels, he believed it would be a “useful addition” to Star Alliance.

Much more likely seemed a merger between Germanwings and TUI’s charter and no-frills business. Mayrhuber said this would create a “very strong” low-cost carrier that would operate purely under the Germanwings brand.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2008/0523/bmi.htmlWhy always so much dooming and glooming on here about BMI.
The guys are still making a profit. So can't complain really in my opinion.
It's normal that their profits should be falling with the current economic conditions (fuel prices etc.).
But a profit is a profit is a profit :cool:

Also BMed integration has affected the profits

as a private company (not a PLC) they get much more latitude as to what they need to show and how much tax (not to pay) seem to have good cash balances as well, no doubt they have charged all the Bmed intergration cost into year one (why wouldn't you)?

Still be around next year i suspect

Swiss is owned by Lufthansa, operates as Swiss, why wouldn't bmi. Even if SMB cashes in I think bmi will be here for the long term.

The Bmi profit is thanks to a deal signed by SAS and Lufthansa in 2000 that has propped BD up for seven years by providing hundreds of millions to BD over that time. Without this BD would be highly loss making.

The Bmi profit is also thanks to asset sales.


In Bmi's case A profit isnt a profit isnt a profit.

Copenhagen: Got any proof / links to substantiate this out of interest?

Naturally

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...irlineindustry

Bmi is also under pressure from the expiry last year of the European Cooperation Agreement, which pools the profits and losses from bmi's short-haul business with SAS and Lufthansa's UK flights. According to ABN, bmi's underlying business will be loss-making without the contribution of the ECA.


http://www.atwonline.com/channels/ai...articleID=2286

As SAS gets further into 2008, one thing it won't miss is the expiration at the end of 2007 of the eight-year European Cooperation Arrangement among itself, Lufthansa and bmi under which LH and SAS agreed to subsidize bmi for its financial losses. Last year the agreement cost SEK652 million, up from SEK415 million in 2006. "If you ask me for the business rationale behind this kind of arrangement I must be honest, I cannot see it,"

652 Million Swedish Kroner = £55m Sterling.

For further information on the Deal -see

http://books.google.de/books?id=lY1x...PF-2E3U4IJNDuY

Enough Proof? :ugh:

CPH
 

The deal was designed to stop British Midland (as it was then) expanding into both SAS & Luftansa home markets, at that time BM was seen as having a lower cost base and able to both undercut both carriers and provide a far better service in diamond class.

They got into bed with BM to protect their home markets, however since Easyjet and to a lesser extent Ryanair it doesn't make much sense.

The really interesting thing in bmi 2007 accounts is the rolling in of £770m in slot valuation in respect of the slots that it holds at LHR, this move could depending on the terms of the various put/call change the figures for both SAS & LF

bmi have of course been aware of end of the ECA for years and project blue sky was implemented to address the end of this.

The ABN came up with some very fancy ideas as to what would happen in 2008/2009 including LH buying the SIA 49% stake in Virgin and merging it with bmi, the only problem is that whilst 49% will get you seats at the board table the other 51% still call the shots and in bmi that means SMB who is sole owner of the other 51%.

Expect the unexpected where bmi are concerned

An interesting time for all at bmi. Turner could be playing the game that the show must go on regardless what SMB and LH are up to.
The fall in profits does not come as a surprise with the way the industry has been performing and the former BMED routes joining bmi mainline. More bums on seats on these routes would be great but, some of the destinations don’t shout holiday or even business. Pax up by 1% and 17 new routes hmmm that has me thinking all these new routes and only a 1% in pax figures. Where are they falling down?

The financial results maybe be seen on the flybmi website in the press-center.

As for the feature ownership of bmi, SMB will most likely sell out to LH. What LH decides to do with it from there is any ones guess. Keep it like Swiss with the same brand name and everything or sell it on to someone else. The likely hood of nothing happening is very slim. VS seem to be having some money worries with all in flight beauty cut and other people saying that may be able to afford bmi in its current state. As for BA I think WW can look on and wish, yes BA has the money to buy bmi but will competition rights allow such a dominant airline over LHR slots. If BA took over bmi it’s the end of the bmi brand.
Overall bmi are the wild cards at the mo.

Mr Flaps,

Why is it that if BA bought bmi, the competition commission wouldn't allow it yet BA would only have 52% of slots. I don't know the figures, but at FRA LH have way over 50% of slots, and that's allowed. :confused:

I wouldn't be very surprised if BA put in a bid for BMI. I know the competition people, and SRB would moan about BA having 52% of the slots but then as has been pointed out other airlines at other airports have a similar percentage of slots.
Even if BA could buy BMI and have to relinquish half of the slots from BMI I am sure they would do it.

Thanks Copenhagen. I wasn't questioning your opinion, just wanted to read more on it to form an opinion.

BMI baby and Cork
 

BMI Baby's flts from MAN and BHX to ORK both diverted to SNN tonight. Does anyone know why WW has never carried out a CAT 2 approach there since it began opertions to ORK in 2002. They are the only scheduled airline operating to Cork that has never availed of this facility.

Maybe they are lacking in get-home-itis? Only assumption that can be made is that the crew/aircraft combination is not certified, or company rules prohibit CATII at ORK - I cant think why though!

Honestly, the slightest hit of cloud and WW get skittish. Its ridiculous. At least twice on flights I've been on we have been told there is a good chance of ending up in SNN. Weather conditions at the time have been quite good, even RE getting in.

I'll put it like this, if I needed to be somewhere important at a certain time, I don't think I'd book WW. Too unreliable. Shame really, because almost all of the crews are really quite nice.

The Bmi profit is thanks to a deal signed by SAS and Lufthansa in 2000 that has propped BD up for seven years by providing hundreds of millions to BD over that time. Without this BD would be highly loss making.


It's all down to the Star Alliance - or nicknamed 'STAALIENS are coming':D

bmibaby & Cork
 

Ryan, I think you will find Cork Cat II RW17 is a problem for baby for a number of reasons. Operationally, baby treat a Cat II the same as a Cat III and autoland but to Cat II minima. They have found the 73 Classic doesn't like the combination of the undulating terrain in the undershoot of 17 and then the initial slope of the runway resulting in the aircraft landing half way down the runway.

They trialled disconnecting the autopilot at DH but as it's already trimmed significantly nose up [dual channel] the results in the sim weren't pretty.

From recollection there is an additional limitation [AFM] on UK registered Classics that prevents descent below 200ft AAL without visual reference combined with an unltimate min disconnect height of 140ft so a single channel approach wasn't going to work either [below 200ft] IFR.

All in all the airline chose not to pursue different SOPs for one runway in it's route network [as the alternative was considered unsafe] and has to accept the commercial disadvantage to other operators with different types or working to diifferent regulations in this one case.

As for the majority of its destinations it's quite happily a Cat III operator [50ft/200m] in BHX/EMA/MAN/GLA/EDI/BFS[25]/CDG/AMS etc etc.

Hope that explains?

Jet2 have 737s of a similiar vintage and they never have to divert to Shannon, and they're subject to the same regulatory rules as Baby. Centralwings which operated to Cork until recently also have 737s of the same vintage and again they never had to divert to Shannon. I find it so strange that Baby have to divert on occasions when planes from all other airlines can land fine, including Aer Arann with their much smaller ATR72s.

Saudi Arabia
 

On June 27th bmi published a press release stating:

Under an agreement reached by the two governments (Saudi/UK), the number of weekly frequencies permitted between the two countries has been increased to 35. bmi intends to take full advantage of the opportunity this provides and will seek to add to its existing services from Heathrow to Riyadh, Jeddah and Dammam.

bmi has only 3 A330, 2 in MAN and 1 in LHR dedicated to Saudi routes. Are they planning to move an aircraft from MAN to LHR? Or maybe use one of the B757? Any idea anyone?

A321, A320.

where will the 757 go
 

Baku perhaps

The airline route news blog shows 4xFreetown and 3xAlmaty/Bishkek for the B757 this winter - i.e. just one aircraft. Not sure were that leaves Uralsk. Could it be done on an Airbus?

There are two 757's operating out of LHR and they are they here for at least two years.

The rumours here suggest Tehran.

6

The Scandinavian Airlines quarterly earnings report outlines significant profitability issues at Bmi.

143m SEK = €15m loss

http://feed.ne.cision.com/wpyfs/00/0...9B/wkr0003.pdf