Very true but virtually all those I know in the north are self-employed/consultants who can travel how they choose, whereas those who travel north for work purposes are mostly employed and as you say prohibited from flying.

Not sure how representative that is of the wider world but certainly there is a market there, but equally yes in the wider sense corporate sustainability is a challenging factor to domestic that wasn’t there for BE Mk 1. I guess we’re both right!

It remains to be seen what the day before air fares are so as to compare like with like.

There's always been a bit of a market to SW London and Surrey, offices in Woking, Kingston etc. But surely the main LBA-LHR market has been connections to the world. The morning flight up to LBA was always a godsend after a long overnight flight arriving into LHR at 6 am. But will long haul travellers be willing to do self-connect? That feels a bit risky to me.

majority of the public? The majority of the public couldn’t care less and if you look at social media there is a fair amount of negative comments.

Let’s just see how it goes before making presumptuous comments and acting like society is crying out for Flybe2.

The addition of LHR-LBA and LHR-AMS don’t really scream serious airline planning to keep those slots long term…

Id love you to be able to substantiate that assertion but I’m guessing you won’t be able to. Let’s see what happens, but I think you maybe having to eat some humble pie in the future.

They haven't flown one revenue flight yet.

Where was this gem of insight pulled from?

Bit of an assumption there assuming I’m a spotter isn’t it? You’ve made a statement of fact, I’m asking if you can back it up which it seems you can’t.

I have just checked the Flybe Facebook page. First thing you see is the administration notice from March 2020. No recent posts and nothing about the new routes announced.

Another polite user. I’ll give you a hand. Rather than going to the propaganda source, go to Twitter, use the search function and write in Flybe.

Here’s some examples of the results:

“Is the Flybe sizer scam back too, or is it just commercial creditors taking a reaming this time?”

“@flybe
I’ve paid for flights and not received any Confirmation? Money has been taken out of my account.”

“Same planes , same baggage policies , no doubt the same unreliable service . Airlines run by VCs are all about money, it won’t be mine. Why keep the name of such a dreadful company with an awful reputation”

“Must say I’m surprised to see them trading again after going bust not that long ago,do these companies have to make good on previous debts before being licensed again,surely there were losers when Flybe went bust”

“So
@flybe
are back! I'll still never fly with you guys again. Charlatans and thieves.”

“Hi again flybe, good to know you are back. Now, how can I get my money back for the flights you cancelled 2 years ago?”

“I thought fly(may)be went under? Not in a rush to book soon after leaving me stranded in Southend a few years back in the middle of the night”

There’s more but at least it gives an example.

I can only assume the defenders of Flybe2 have a horse in the race hence their passion to call people they have never met profanities and insults, which is bizarre as it would make me even less likely to want to use the carrier.

no - they have good memories of the Airline

What they don't want to believe is that others got burnt

personally I don't think they were any better or worse than any other small European airline of the time. I'd use the new FB - but without any rose tinted specs as to what might occur. They might be important for a few of the smaller airports if they are successful but a new major player they are not

What confuses me about Flybe 2 is as follows (and I have no axe to grind, either way). Normally a company, not just an airline, is founded to meet a perceived need, to “fill a hole”, if you will. But this does not seem to be obviously the case here. Virtually all the routes announced are already served by competitors, and those that aren’t don’t look like gold mines. So what is the purpose - what is the usp that will drive Flybe 2’s profitability? I just keep coming back to the LHR and AMS slots, even though I can’t quite see how. One other comment. A few years ago I was sitting next to COW at an industry lunch. I remarked that I thought the Flybe business model was very complicated with bases all over the place and a route network that looked like a spiders web. Seems Flybe 2 is already going the same way.

BA318:

I admire your diligence in locating and transcribing negative posting about Flybe from people who have suffered financial loss from the failure of the previous business, or have found fault in the new airline's booking process. However it can't have been too difficult a task, anyone could find negative postings on [email protected] about a myriad of other airlines, bus companies, hotels. And don't get me wrong, if I had lost money as a result of the collapse of a business, be it retail, travel or whatever I would be similarly miffed. What neither of the postings quoted appear to grasp is that whatever the name, this is not the Flybe that went bust, it happens to simply be trading under the same name. Personally I don't believe that was a particularly wise decision, but I'm not a marketing guru and I am guessing that the view of the new management and their marketing advisors the positives of the brand out weigh the negatives in the minds of the majority of the people from whom they hope to get booking. Would it have been better to call the new carrier "Flyme" and paint their aircraft pink? Perhaps; perhaps not.

Time alone will tell whether their marketing and route strategies are correct or not.

I think that tells the story - it's as ridiculous to say nobody likes flyBe based on Twitter comments as it is to say the majority of the public are behind them (or to believe Twitter relfects the real world in anyway...)

And I know it's all legal, but what I despise is that they can come back under the same name, pretending to be back, without paying their debts.

LHR-AMS certainly doesn't make much sense given the stiff competition that they'll likely face from both BA & KLM; LHR-LBA makes a little more sense given it's currently an unserved route that has been previously operated from/to LHR, however it's already been discussed that a lack of a codeshare/interline agreement to allow for connections will not really help as customers will be required to pick their bags up and re-check in with the onward carrier.

I did hear a rather intriguing rumour from someone yesterday that they [Flybe 2.0] won't actually fly from/to LHR...they've just announced and put those routes on sale in order to avoid risk losing the slots. When I enquired as to a reason why, I was told it had something to do with the aircraft being too slow to be able to land at LHR, but Flybe 1.0 previously operated the Dash 8 from/to there and the runway length at LHR surely isn't an issue so I can't/don't believe this could be the case, however I'm not sure if any other airline has used the same aircraft type into LHR though and experienced issue(s)...?

Loganair will be using ATR into LHR from the Isle of Man which is even slower.

Codeshare tie ups are not money makers, Flybe would typicall pick up around £25-£30 per codeshare ticket and flybe would be left with the lost luggage liability at the other end in LBA or Ams
KLM often used Embraer into LHR and BA A319 suggesting the Pax numbers aren't just there these days

Exactly. I don’t think the public care. If the price is right and it’s a route they want then they will use it. Otherwise they couldn’t care less.

The real test will be once ops start. A few issues and the names will stick. Hopefully things go well and they can expand into some of the missing niches.

Problem seems to be that the one aircraft they have been using for crew training appears to have been something of a "hangar queen" over the last couple of months. Tech issues and cancellations from the outset is the last thing they need as the MSM and Twitterati will be all over them like the proverbial rash.

But I’m
 

I imagine it’s whispers and rumours to be honest and they have no basis in reality. flyBe 1.0 flew them for a fair number of years. A quick Google suggests flyBe we’re the only operator of the Q400 to Heathrow. So either operationally or commercially it’s a dubious idea…

All of that said the LBA-LHR timetable works for some trips I need to make, so I’m taking a risk they will successfully launch and fly the route. A new airline for the logbook, if not a new brand, I suppose.

Luxair used to fly the Q400 into LHR from Luxembourg circa 2006 until pressure from LHR Auth.


https://www.flightglobal.com/baa-pre.../76296.article

KLM were also regulars with the Fokker 50 until 2010.