FANS

Reading through this thread, almost every post you have made has been extremely negative and you are seemingly trying to 'fan the flames' of doom and gloom.

What exactly is your agenda?

Really quite sad to read how some people seem to revel in this sort of thing.
:(

I am surprised to see Twitter has taken over the good old solid info and everyone has become an expert in doom and gloom.
I don't know what the situation is anymore as I have left the company 2 years ago.
But i would still buy tickets from them for the simple reason they are the only airline to be bonded.
Indeed some people explained it earlier but let me explain egain...anyone buying a Monarch ticket does not buy it directly but via a third party (First Aviation) . That means that F A protects you from any financial collapse.
In the meantime radio gossip has got a very damaging effect on the company...and it may collapse if the bookings stop dry because a vicious rumour was started. And all the experts I read could have their part in the responsibility of it.
Once again I know nothing but Monarch via First Aviation is bonded . So your flight tickets are secure.

I don't think that this is a comforting perspective if there is alternative to avoid any ATOL-bonded chaos at all by booking with another airline...

What I don't understand as not being from the UK: If ATOL is a mechanism to protect customers of tour operators, why would the inability of a tour operator owned by an airline to pay the ATOL fee have an effect on the airline itself? So technically, if the ATOL expires, the subsidiary could not legally sell tickets on Monarch or any other airline, but it would not stop Monarch as an ailrine from trading immediately.

That's not quite true. Read the FAQ's on their site. For scheduled service they recommend travel insurance and paying with a credit card.

If you're referring to

then its perfectly true. If you read the wording again on Monarchs website you will see it's clearly out of date. It mentions charter flights, which they no longer operate. All flights are scheduled and are via First Aviation and come with an Atol certifcate. Charter and Avro no longer come into it.

It is a fact that aircraft, including two United 747s, were chartered and positioned to various places in southern europe where Brits go for holidays etc. Further, arrival boards at UK airports showed United flights arriving from those places in southern europe in patterns that appeared to replicate ZB schedules

People on this on this forum and, more pertinently in social media, have discussed and perhaps speculated on reasons for that. When that speculation is, inevitably, picked up by mainstream media then another risk adds to those already being discussed.

That's 21st century reality.

Website discusses flights and holidays. States holidays are bonded.

2) Book scheduled flights on a Credit Card or Visa Debit card

If your flights cost over £100 and you pay for them using a credit card (Visa / Mastercard) you'll be entitled to a refund in the event of scheduled airline failure (this is protected under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act). You'll need to contact your card issuer to make the claim. If your flights cost less than £100 you may still be entitled to a refund, but you'll need to check with your card issuer and claim in good time.


And here...
http://www.monarch.co.uk/terms/flights/post-28-october-2014

Meanwhile, the BBC reports the prolonged talks between Monarch and the CAA related to renewal of Monarch's licence, which is due to expire at the end of the week. Part of the licence renewal procedure relates to the company's financials.
Following this morning's outbound rush with 30 of their fleet of 35 on the move, there are now 24 doing the afternoon rush. All seems to be running as one would expect.

If the "licence" (which licence exactly?) is not due to expire until the end of the week it seems somewhat premature to have sub-chartered aircraft available already.

It doesn't change the fact that ZB flight only bought direct are Atol bonded, and First Aviation issue a flight only Atol certificate. I'm looking at two right now.

It's the Atol.

Noted but if it expires at the end of the week I still think the sub-chartering a bit premature

What is there to be optimistic about?

There has been no explanation from Monarch or the CAA about these chartered in aircraft so I'll make my own assumptions

The company is currently going through an emergency fundraising round

It was apparently in talks with the CAA on a Sunday night (didn't know the CAA worked Sundays!)

The information available is extremely limited, except twitter which says there's nothing to worry about so we can all relax

I take no comfort from them being backed by Greybull, because they'll do and have done what their spreadsheet tells them is the best answer

If you book a flight - i.e. deposit money in the company's bank account - you're apparently fine because of ATOL or maybe your credit card protection.

Won't the credit card companies now want greater funding/guarantees? Will they refund the rest of the cost of the holiday? I've no idea, but I can't see the benefit of incurring time and expenses to find out when you could just book with BA/EZY/RYR etc.

I think you'd be nuts to do business with these guys unless it's mega cheap.

I'd love to be optimistic as one who was around to watch the very first departure of G-AOVI to Madrid on 5 April 1968 and has flown with Monarch many times since. But...

My guess is that Greybull have been trying to secure new investment or sell Monarch for several months and still may succeed. However if they do not then they may be about to throw in the towel now rather than incur losses over the winter which would make the end inevitable and more costly (and to be fair affect many more (summer) bookings not yet made). It is surprising they have lasted so long.

The extra capacity will be taken up by Jet2 at Birmingham Leeds and Manchester and EasyJet at Luton and Gatwick with all or almost all routes already being served by them (may be not Ovda or Gibraltar at LTN). Greybull may be able to recover income from the slots at Gatwick - not sure how corporate law would affect that.

Isn't this deja vue - weren't we here in September 2014 or does my memory serve me poorly.

And Greybull and Comet? Deja vue again.

"I wonder how some of the posters on this thread, e.g. Skipness One Echo and Heathrow Harry, would enjoy people posting mere rumours on PPRuNe about the imminent demise of their employers..."

I've been there - more than once - and for sure it's a dreadful feeling...... but then often it just crsytallises something you already knew (if you were in managment) or suspected (if you were the poor bloody infantry).

I never liked the mis-representation and false optimism peddled to try and keep the ship afloat when you knew it was likely that people were still putting up money that they were unlikely to recover

With luck Monarch may survive - I hope it does. Not impressed bythe time it took to get out a decent press release tho' - if that had come out yesterday early it might have quelled a lot of the internet frenzy

Having your money protected is one thing, but plenty will fret about disruption to travel plans and look to a different operator instead.

Am i the only one here who's more likely to book a cheap flight with them knowing that i could get a flight home on a 747?

Yep, the only one.

Always good to see the CEO leading from the front and putting the record straight in person - beats hiding behind a 2 para press release and Gary the twitter account manager!

FANS - what is your beef, why such negativity. Did they turn you down for a job or something?