Clearly quids-in from the Flybe IOM cancellations with flights on some dates on IOM-LHR up to as much as £235 from their previous £54. Evidently not just focused on serving the island despite what Mr. Hinkles may claim!

I haven't got inside info here, but that just looks like what happens when there is a spike in demand on any route (such as when a competitor stops flying it): To anyone on the outside, it looks like the airline has put up prices, but in reality the cheapest places on the flight (aka the cheap seats) seats sell first, meaning that the more expensive places are the only ones left.

Isn't this what every airline in the world does, as hotels etc do

As availability goes m the prices go up, Flybe did it too. They ain't a charity

that model was developed by American A/L I think - its since been adopted by just about every industry that sells dated things to a lot of punters.

Loganair are, in my opinion, particularly bad with it, though. On most of their uncontested routes the fares are extortionate and I don't believe that it can all be due to demand. I have seen similar comments from a lot of fellow regional airport users in recent months.

Is that the Loganair thats one of the longest operating UK airlines? Heaven forbid that they try and make a profit.

Ticketmaster are doing it for concert tickets now, Dynamic Pricing they call it. I managed to secure two Bruce Springsteen facevalue tkts on ticketmaster. When it came to check out they were £400 each. Ram it

Look at LCY-LUX, theory says competition is good so BA decided to compete against long standing Luxair who not surprisingly defended the route strongly. BA had to walk away, because on many high frequency E-Jet / turboprop routes, there's only room for one operator. If you want cheap fares, then a once daily Ryanair or easyJet will work, but they are opposing models. Look at the IOM and JER to see how it plays out.

Only 1 Bruce Springsteen and several million people would pay to see him - so unless he's (and his people) a Saint the market takes over

They are a regional airline operating a fleet of mostly 33-50 seaters that almost everyone else has deemed uneconominal and obsolete. So unless they operate on subsidized routes, it should be obvious that their average ticket price has to be quite high. And even it is slightly higher than it has to be to break even, isn't that what every business should to do generate as much profit for its shareholders as it can? And as any business they have to walk a fine line - if they overcharge, they will be without customers. And those who complain need to be aware of the fact that there will not be anyone else around that could take over. They are pretty much the only regional airline left in Europe operating 50 seaters on non-subsidized routes.

And may long it continue.

Loganair's MD going for it, complete with "No more maybes" tag line on their ad.

"Loganair's 60-year history is built upon service to local communities; it's a fundamental part of what we do. Other airlines come and go.

Some promise to come back, yet tell their customers less than 72 hours before they're due to land that they've completely cancelled the routes. It's undoubtedly been a tough summer for our industry as a whole, but I'm still taken aback that any airline would or could cancel whole routes only three days before their inaugural flights are due to take off.

And so with that in mind, I'm pleased to confirm that Loganair flies daily from the Isle of Man to London Heathrow, and up to twice daily from Isle of Man to London City. [We fly to the Isle of Man from Birmingham, Edinburgh, Liverpool and Manchester too.]

Our locally-based Isle of Man pilots and cabin crew will be delighted to welcome you aboard a Loganair aircraft, maintained by our great team of Isle of Man-based engineers. With same-ticket onward connections at Heathrow to several of the world's major airlines, we're truly in it for the long haul - just like our commitment to the communities we serve."

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jonat...member_desktop

BA318,

You rarely see many more open goals than the one he was shooting into!

Disappointing to see folks again baying for the failure of Flybe Mk2.

I get that there are people with axes to grind in relation to the previous business (some for very personal reasons), but the way some take delight in the troubles/failure of others is really not a good look!

Do you really think that they wanted to end up in the situation they find themselves (primarily, it seems to me, let down by suppliers)?

It's not people baying for their failure. It's just most of this was said from the beginning as likely to happen and we were shot down and told Flybe had their pick of the planes and everything was great. The reality it seems is they have no choice, lessors who don't seem to be particularly efficient (other carriers seem to have fewer problems sourcing aircraft - Emerald, Wideroe just got a new (2nd hand) Q400. At the end of the day Flybe picked who they would do business with. They chose these lessors. This is now the 2nd or 3rd time they have cancelled routes because of no aircraft. Even after cancelling these routes they are still having big issues with lots of cancelations and delays on the rest of the network.

Flybe are also trying to cause trouble for other carriers who've stuck around and worked hard. Look at Loganair. What was the point in trying to go up against them on the IOM routes? It just seems designed to become a pain in the hope someone buys them out.

You will understand from my postings on the Flybe thread that I have been much more often supportive of their efforts to build a viable business, but that really doesn't mean that when they do something so obviously crass as pull an operating 72 hours before its inauguration comment shouldn't be passed. Loganair, as their release shows were shooting at an open goal, and when all is said and done, why shouldn't they, business is business.

The full accounts are up on Companies House.

Some bits from it:

LF is 47%,
910,119 scheduled pax carried.
Contract and charter work makes up 20% of their turnover.
Gross profit £17.8m

Some very crude analysis - if you take the 20% from contract and charter work off their turnover then scheduled flying is losing them quite a bit of money. No contract and charter work and that £17.8m gross profit becomes a £14.5m loss.

They're making revenue per pax of about £142, which is to be commended.

Have you factored any contribution made when operating PSO s into that?

I really don't understand why there are many regional jets (admittedly mostly CRJs but some Embraer's) operating in the US by airlines like Endeavour and mostly in alliance with majors? How is the business model so different to Europe.

Similarly, much of the contact and charter flying is done by the same a/c and crew as the scheduled services, so the position isn't as simple as that - which cavokblues has acknowledged

Surely you'd have to take off the operating costs of the contract and charter flying - this assumes you'd still be doing all of the flying and incurring the costs even with no revenue, which logically no-one would do? From a quick read, I don't think it's possible to come up with any meaningful analysis, which is probably exactly why the accounts are presented in the way they are!

I've a few friends who have worked in the US on regionals and from speaking to them I would suspect crew at Loganair are paid more than what they are over there . And I would imagine a lot of those regional airlines are feeding their associated majors at their big hubs.

Fair points. I was hoping the accounts would have broken down their revenue by charter / freight work and pax.

Presumably the contract flying includes patient transport under an NHS contract. This will be on normal scheduled services.

Loganair are terminating services between Edinburgh and Derry from January 3, citing rising fuel costs and competition from LCCs from Belfast. Increasing flights from Derry to Glasgow.

Which makes no sense?

Makes sense to consolidate into one route to be honest, Glasgow has stronger historical and cultural links to the northwestern part of Ulster & Ireland.
The Glenshane Pass is still a pain in the rear end in the winter!

How is the part time Accountancy job going?

LOG to acquire up to 8 ATRs (doesn't say split between 42/72 unless I've missed it) to replace the remaining 8 Saab 340Bs, which seem to have been sold/disposed stateside over the coming months.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...iness-63503449

Interesting. I was sure someone said the ATRs were unable to have the capability like for like with the Saabs for eg crosswind landings. Perhaps they have now revised after a few years experience. Wonder what will ultimately replace the Embs

Initially thought the same but the ATR 42 actually has a higher crosswind limit than the Saab. 42knots vs 35knots if I remember correctly, I was quite surprised!

Isn’t a bit odd to commit to such a substantial investment a very short time after putting the business up for sale? What if potential new owners see a different way forward?

I wonder how "new" these 8 will be. The previous batch were not much newer than the aircraft they were replacing.

My understanding is that they want an owner who will maintain Loganair's position as a provider of essential air services in Scotland.

By deciding on fleet renewal before disposal they are indicating that if you want to be the custodian of this business you will follow our plan because our plan is best.

It's more likely that this has been the plan for some time and only being made public now. You don't pull together an entire sale of the Saab 340s and lease replacement ATRs in the space of a couple of weeks.

Operating crosswind limit on the 42s is the same as the 340 at 35kts. 72 is 27kts on a wet runway.

Saabdriver, I absolutely agree with you, the fleet renewal plan should have been in progress for some time. However the timing of the sale wasn't forced on the owners, that is entirely their decision.

Loganair said they didn’t expect a sale until much later next year so it’s not unreasonable to continue running the carrier as normal in the meantime. Any new buyer would do their due diligence and be aware of any commitments the carrier has made before making their decision on whether or not to purchase.

Since the current owners of Loganair don't need to sell, they want to sell, so they should be able to be picky as regards who buys the business, and could take into account not just the best price, but what is also best for the business, its customers and its employees so carrying forward their current strategy appears a thoroughly sensible move.

It is to be hoped that the sale doesn't wind up being to "vulture" capitalists or a private equity firm, again particularly for the well being and employment security of the staff.

How many seats does the loganair ATR42 have and is it a 1 cabin crew or 2 cabin crew that loganair have operating on the ATR42

Thanks

Crew: 2 pilots 1 cabin crew

Capacity: 48

Seat pitch: 30in

Range: 825mi 1326km

Cruise speed: 350mph 563km/h

Didn't British World have some operational issues with their ATR72 when operating into Shetland? Or was this mainly a Scatsta issue?