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.

A good attitude to take. One which would make it even harder for Flybe2 to succeed if adopted by more companies.

Its show business not show friends...... and no, the worlds not fair.... BUT Logan didn't mind trying to put the boot in over the recent OL and RL CAA meeting and I doubt easy are making cash on BHX/MAN to Scotland on a 200 seat Jet.

I do feel for the companies owed cash and even the other regional airlines that have battled trough COVID and racked up debt to survive.
They will have a debt free, well run, low cost airline thats competing hard against them on regional routes and they will struggle to compete and service their debt.

Flybe was in bad health and Covid was the final nail in its coffin, it is ironic that it may actually be the best thing to happen to them going forward.

Don't think you can blame Loganair after Flybe put the boot in following the break up of the franchise. As you say though, all’s fair...

If they do get going it will be interesting to see if you really can run a low cost airline using 78 seat turboprops without racking up huge debts long term.

Will be interesting to see if BALPA go for a class action on TUPE too.

Remind me what happened with BMIR and Loganair?

I think there's a difference between wanting an airline to fail and saying it's all about slots.

I've no axe to grind with Flybe, I very nearly worked for them, but likewise I have a horrible nagging suspicion this is all about slots. I think it is possible, from my perspective anyway, to wish any new airline well but remain suspicious around the motives. That's purely based on my conclusions around the venture capitalists who were involved and reading the EY reports and CAA reports.

If it isn't slot related was the Flybe brand really that revered that it's worth all these legal battles to resurrect?

Just remember whilst you're throwing muck at this new venture, it is exactly that. A BRAND NEW AIRLINE. The name and intellectual property were acquired.. it's a clean beginning.

The bad management gone, airframes gone, routes gone, bases gone, staff gone, the AOC, OL, RL might also be gone, and the slots may go too.

However, what isn't gone, is the willingness to give hope to those who've spent their own money, time, resources to be ready to step up if called to. Aviation professionals.

For these people, have a bit of compassion. I'm sure the naysayers on here would feel different if it were their company.

Very well said. I could not have put it better myself. I do hope that this new Flybe succeeds - it may be all about slots but I think that, at this stage, it's very unlikely. I guess that only time will tell now.

Can somebody just clarify this point? If so, why the long dance with the CAA and the receivers?

southamptonavgeek

Can you give any reasons you expect success? Given it failed in the past, most airlines are barely making any money and it now has competition on the routes it previously operated (often with a monopoly). It’s also chosen to use a brand which was tarnished and most public will remember as that airline that covid killed leaving people out of pocket and stranded. The cards are just not in its favour.

As I said before we all want airlines to succeed. But we also have to be realistic. What are the gaps in the market you see this airline with a couple of Dash 8s serving?

SWBKCB

Due diligence & keeping the existing OL, RL & AOC is substantially easier than setting up new ones. There are many examples of functioning airlines being bought for their AOCs rather than start that process from scratch.

& if there are remedy slots available, albeit limited in what can be flown on them - wouldn't you at least try?

You miss 100% of the shots you don't take!

BA318

Agreed. I think the reality is that if they get off the ground, there’s not nearly enough regional business to sustain everyone currently and at least one airline will go to the ground.

The Flybe brand is trashed, and I really just can’t see any gap in the market for a new ‘Flybe’ in the current climate. Loganair are clearly worried about the new adventure commencing operations given their involvement thus far which probably highlights the fragile nature of UK domestic at the moment and the near to mid future.

southamptonavgeek can add to this.... but here's my take. Which again I assert, you probably don't care for. I think you're here for the skepticism, the Flybe bashing sycophantic posting and trolling.

All the old dead wood is gone, the bad management has gone, all the old airframes are gone, all the expensive jets - with expensive lease and maintenance deals are gone, the big spread of unprofitable routes and bases are gone, the debt is gone... it's a clean slate

Whilst not the best brand, it certainly was the most recognisable in regional aviation and that in itself is valuable. Brands can heal, and those outside of aviation (SLF), give little regard for some lost luggage, or if covid cost someone they don't know the price of a ticket. All companies and airlines get bad press, fortunes turn. They don't sit on twitter and PPrune reading how much you don't like airline x.

Nobody knows at this point, but why can't they focus on Flybe's old profitable routes, from the profitable bases and go from there. The Dash was a great weapon of choice for these. Birmingham, Southampton, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Belfast... maybe with LHR and LCY & some PSO flights to NQY etc. Keep it simple for now. The Dash (even though no future fleet has been decided on) was a better prospect than an ATR or a Saab et al. Flies faster, flies higher, flies further, carries more people.

Here's a challenge to anyone hoping this new airline fails.... before asking why won't it work, I dare you to come up with 1 or 2 reasons it will.

If you've nothing nice to say, say nothing! Good luck to them.

You seem to think I want them to fail. Personally I don’t care. I hope they do succeed but history shows there is only room for so many carriers flying the same routes. I am not one of those who believe they just want the slots. I just don’t think the airline will work because the market has moved on and the gap it once filled has gone.

We don’t have to be silent just because you want to see Flybe back. Everyone has a right to question and look into things.

As for the brand, very few airline brands get redirected after failure. People don’t need to read Pprune to know Flybe failed. It was all over the national media for a week.

The possible routes you list have already been taken over. Blue Islands, Loganair, Aurigny, Eastern have moved in. EasyJet has gone in the bigger ones. The NQY PSO is gone. And no carrier has made LHR-EDI/ABZ work except BA. Just look at the names who failed on it - BMI (even with Lufthansa backing), Virgin, Flybe 1. From most reports LCY lost them money too.

The new carrier will need to find niches. Perhaps London to some of the smaller destinations in Scandinavia/Germany might work. We will have to see how Brexit restrictions affect second homes in France and Spain as that could be another market like the SOU routes (although BA and Eastern have moved on them too).

That’s why I was asking how you think they can succeed. I’m not trolling. I’m just not seeing the same opportunities you seem to. So please stop the name calling and understand people can have a difference of opinion without it being just to wind someone up. And as I said if those optimistic about this can share some possible routes where they see a gap then do share - maybe I’m not aware of gaps in the market and missing part of the picture.

"People don’t need to read PPRuNe to know Flybe failed."

especially those who used it and had bookings there - people have along memory for that sort of thing

As for the Dash - its been eaten alive by the ATR in just about every market in the world

RogueOne

I do struggle to think of any. Most of the old profitable routes have been jumped on by other airlines and they're too thin to require two airlines competing against each other. There's probably a very good reason other airlines haven't jumped on the other routes.

This new airline will no doubt at some point be subject to a TUPE claim. And a new airline will not want the old airline's pilot agreements shackled to them.

As BA318 points out, where is the niche? What will set them aside to make them attractive over other airlines to pax?

I would just add that this is not the “Flybe Appreciation” thread and people are allowed to give their views without it being considered trolling. I largely agree with BA318’s points. Additionally, I don’t believe that a reborn Flybe would create nett new jobs as there’s only so much space in the regional sector and any jobs generated by new Flybe would cause a similar number of jobs to be lost in those airlines that have taken over the ex Flybe routes. BTW I’m sticking to my guns in that I firmly believe that this is just a slots play. Time will tell.

RogueOne

Didn't take Aer Lingus too long... :ok:

Seems like the "BRAND NEW AIRLINE" is the old one without the debtors.

willy wombat

The plan may be misguided, or doomed to failure but if it were to be just a "slots" game then they've gone to quite some extent to disguise it.

It's unlikely that any new carrier would create anything like the number of jobs that FlyBe supported at the end, but if they can build steadily, and turn a profit then who know where the new carrier might be in 5 years time. I don't know, neither does anyone else but a number of aviation professional appear to have taken the view that on balance it's worth a shot, and it's their careers not ours.

Exactly! It's a variation on the "prepack administration" that I discussed several posting up the thread. It unethical, it's unfair and it's wrong - but in UK to name one country, it's legal! I suspect other countries have similarly distasteful processes.