TOM100

I think in this context it means bringing everything together under one umbrella to turn the plan into an operational entity.

Flybe hires former BA 'dirty tricks' executive in last ditch attempt for new operating licence (msn.com)

Have you acyually read the link posted above. The deal isbirtually done and the operating licence was kept open on appeal to the CAA months ago
the article is rubbish

You're exactly right. For one thing, Thyme is hardly a 'shell' considering that it is the one being renamed as 'Flybe'. Besides, the title "...last ditch attempt for new operating licence" makes no sense - a new operating licence is not what's being fought for, rather it's the old one that's wanted.

I have also noticed the media losing interest since Farrell's departure, as they think that's the end for them. It's been said by others before, but all I see is a slimy fellow who realised he isn't going to make an effortless profit by heading up a regional airline.

If Farrell is no longer involved (and I use the word 'if''), then who is putting up the money to (re)start the airline ?

Is Thyme Opco not just a subsidiary of Cyrus? Therefore still involved?

Lucien Farrell runs the London office of Cyrus Capital. If Cyrus Capital is putting up money, then it's because Farrell has decided to do so

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/n...-inherits-debt

is there any chance of something similar happening with this Flybe?

I find it deeply wrong morally that they are able to jettison all the debt and staff but relaunch keeping the good bits - slots and license.

The London office...or as one newspaper referred to it this morning as "the Mayfair hedge fund".

Flybe Ltd is now "FBE Realisations 2021 Ltd"

Can't necessarily see why that conclusion would be drawn. They've changed the name understandably from FlyBe Ltd and plumped for that one which I imagine ensured there would be no conflict of interest with other businesses of a similar name.

What does anyone realistically think is going to happen here. Either 1/ they lose the OL and thus the slots and that's the end of it all or 2/ they keep the OL and the slots and somehow manage to sell them (possibly after operating them for a short while) and then that is also the end of it all, except that slots which were supposed to produce a competitive remedy, regardless of how unlikely that was, are now sold off and unavailable. Option 3, a revitalised, vibrant Flybe is not going to happen.

Flybe Limited has changed its company name to “FBE Realisations 2021 Ltd”, Thyme Opco Limited changing company name to Flybe Limited

It is all explained in the EY report linked above. Flybe Ltd (in administration) has now had its name changed to FBE Realisations 2021 (presumably because they will continue to realise some more cash for the creditors by selling off the remaining unwanted assets). Meanwhile, Thyme Opco will change its name to Flybe Limited as they have bought the operating business, retained staff, IT and infrastructure to presumably run an airline called something like Flybe. Thyme have been paying the wages of the core airline since August and given the capable board they have put together with significant experience and competency, there is just a chance that this will actually be an operating airline. LF may well want to extract some of his cash at some point down the line but it doesn't necessarily mean just through a sell and dump of slots. The details of the deal are confidential but seem to involve paying a very small amount up front and then paying more to EY further down the line, if it all works out. There is no point in speculating about intentions until they start actually taking on staff, aircraft leases, advertising routes and selling tickets.

The report does explain it all. It also says the senior secured creditor has a £3.5m payout from the administration so far - it must have gone a long way to cover the costs that the same senior secured creditor has racked up to pay staff to keep this bandwagon rolling to try to make a return on the first gambling stake. If that's now run dry, it would explain the pay cuts in Exeter recently that led to some jumping ship.

It'll be interesting to see how things go. The CAA report says that they need to keep Old Flybe alive until 3 June for this to work out with the slots even if New Flybe gets its licences between now and then. I hope to Christ you aren't too far into this. It looks like a gamble and as with the best of them it could go either way.

I'm still shocked how many bitter people there are on here, willing and eager to twist the knife, to stir up bad sentiment and wish away the hopes of 100s of employees made redundant that it's some sort of scam.

You've no better information than those inside, developing and fighting for a phoenix from the flames.

If for no better reason than it's been a bast**d of a year... leave these people alone, wish them well and good luck, and take yourself off to facebook if you're bored.

Well said rogueone

Most people want to see airlines succeed but is really ok that a carrier can run up huge debts then restart using only the good parts? What about all the other companies that lose out? So it’s fine for catering companies and ground handlers to lose out because Flybe deserves another shot? Someone has to pay when these things don’t work out and the carrier leaves a debt behind.

That’s before you even look if it’s realistic to relaunch. The carrier didn’t make money in good times. Now it’s hard to travel and rival carriers have already expanded taking over most of the worthwhile services.

I’d love to see a thriving regional scene but you also have to be realistic. Perhaps the owners do genuinely want to run an airline but at the moment, the approach of repeating Flybe (same planes/bases/operations etc) isn’t a winner in my opinion.

This happens every day when businesses are put into administration and immediately brought out of administration by their former management, or a suitor in what is called a "pre-pack administration". They are thoroughly unethical, and as you quite correctly say, leave suppliers out of pocket as the "new owners" rarely buy the liabilities, just the assets.

Distasteful though it is is, it is legal, and there is no reason why airlines shouldn't be resurrected in the same way. In my opinion, having been on the wrong end of a number of "pre packs" I would like to see the practise stopped across the board, and our response to a "phoenix business" looking to work with us was simple - "you're a cash account until such time as you settle the outstanding debt from the failed business". It was a win win policy, we either got positive cash flow by being paid up front, or the new business settled the old debt and resumed normal trading with us.