You failed to even spell "professional" and "network". So get off your high horse, truth be told GDPR does have some grey areas, and any complaint may well succeed. Having had to deal with the legislation, we always erred on the side of caution, these guys have not. That's not to say I think they're breaking the rules, that's to say only the lawyers will win in the end if a case is raised.

Rubbish. They've inherited a database and have done the right thing by not sending unsolicited messaging but ASKING if the recipients wish to receive anything or want to opt out. Nothing wrong with that.

"Inherited"? How quaint. Thought they were a fresh start, totally seperate entity?

Might actually be worth reading what was said at #1280

Do they have consent to market? No.
Can they ask? Grey area, it's not "rubbish", it's just not super clear what's "reasonable". IMHO and presumably their lawyers, it's legal but it's not good practice and among data marketeers it's rightly frowned upon. It's basically a cold email from a bankrupt business from two years ago who may well owe you money (except it's an all new business when it suits them to be and legally they don't)!

https://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/con...ting-databases
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-s...dpr-i-chu-chao

Oil prices have jumped a fair bit today, and quiet news days aren't on the immediate horizon

They are. It just happens that they bought some liquidated assets from the administrators including the marketing database. If they were called Brum air would your opinion be the same? They clealy feel there is some value in the brand and that's why they've bought it.

Yes - its not the name I've got an issue with, but the way the situation has been engineered to get out of paying the money they owe. Yes, I know it's legal, yes I know it business but doesn't make it right.

The flip flopping between "Hey, we are back" and "no connection, fresh start" when it suits is just irritating in the grand scheme of things.

...to get out of paying the money they owe?? := Fbe Realisations Ltd (Old Flybe) owe the money. Not this newly named Flybe (Old Thyme Opco Ltd) But yes, they engineered a global pandemic to go out of business and make thousands redundant.

https://find-and-update.company-info...mpany/02769768

All Thyme Opco did was purchase the Flybe name, and a bit of intellectual property. There was no airline. They had to create one. It's a brand new entity. New AOC, new approvals, new licenses.

..and whilst you might wax lyrically about the owner/investor of the Flybe1 v Flybe2... let's not forget what year they actually bought Flybe1 (along with Stobart and Virgin) and the ****show they inherited, after decades of incompetence. The damage had been done by then.

But carry on grinding that axe.

Yes - will do, and you just read again what you've just written...

Many people would be surprised to hear anyone think that the pandemic was the reason for Flybe1 to go out of business.

In insolation you're 100% correct. Legally and technically right. But let's add some details.
They also seem to have bought the LHR slots which given the charging regime will be nigh on impossible to turn a profit on. The name they bought was a failed business which collapsed in a mess owing a lot of people money they'll never see. So it's a fair criticism to say that's maybe a mistake. Any other name and we'd not be having this conversation. Add to the fact the new flybe are marketing this, in their words as a "return" and a "relaunch". So they're trying to have this both ways. It's that bit I am finding somewhat dishonest and disreputable. Making deals on the one hand with out of pocket handling agents and airports saying "we're all brand new and no relation to old flybe" and then saying to the public "look it's flybe, we're back again".

It leaves a bad taste.

Can't find anything to criticise in what Skipness has said. All very underhand by the "new Flybe", in my opinion.

I endorse those comments too. Nothing against those who are seeking employment in aviation in these difficult times, but Skipness has hit the nail on the head perfectly.

1321 posts on this subject. Then:Sums this whole thread in a nutshell!

One thing I do not understand, (Please forgive my ignorance) Is why the insistence of keeping the amended 'Purple' a/c livery? Brand new airline, but relying on our predecessors brand....Odd

They must have calculated that it has a commercial or marketing value.

Shouldn't there be a new FlyBE2 thread linked to the old one in a loose way?

Better might be those who disagree with the way UK corporate law works and wish to use this thread to vent their frustration about it open a Jet Blast thread to do so?

Well said. Same repetetive nonsense over, and over, and over again

Agree. Take the twaddle to JB and let the adults talk here. Or rename this thread “Flybe Realisations Ltd” and we’ll have a new thread called Flybe.

Maybe if people say it again it’ll get through some thick skulls. So many agendas here.

Albert - do you happen to know the new date for the Flybe announcement ? I can't see anything on Google - I'm guessing that if Flybe had made an announcement, this would have been picked up somewhere. No, I'm not trying to be snarky - just would like to know when to keep an eye on the press for a Flybe announcement