bmi shrinking

[Red 69]

Why is everyone else expanding and getting larger aircraft but bmi are shrinking and replacing larger (321) aircraft with smaller (319) ones? They're even about to put a leased 757 on a route they nearly destroyed (MAN-IAD-MAN) before by dropping it. Surely they could've found a more suitable leased aircraft for a route that is served by a comfortable 3 cabin aircraft (330) with a fantastic service? How can a narrow body 757 compete? Will this kill the route once and for all? It probably looked a cheap option to the accountants without a second thought as to why people choose to fly bmi on this route. Most I believe would call it incompetence by the 'managers' This once great airline is now a mere shadow of its former self. Its survival down to its slots at Heathrow and nothing to do with 'shrewd management' as some like to claim. It is a market follower, not a market leader. Why are seemingly good profitable international routes dropped in favour of new low yield domestic ones? Nearly 50 pilots have left over the past few months, totally disillusioned, resulting in the majority of crews now flying captain/captain. Not an ideal situation and one not practised by many other airlines. I've never seen morale so low at any other airline but do the 'managers' care? Not in the slightest. They can always get new inexperienced guys at a lower cost to the company. What will that cost eventually be though? My money's on the fact that bmi will not exist in its present form in the next 18-24 months. It has no direction and needs new management that are go getting, with innovative ideas and understand marketing! More people know about baby than bmi and it's only been going a few years! Hell, even ATC call bmi aircraft 'baby' now! The rebranding from British Midland to bmi was an opportunity lost. What could've been a real new lease of life and the introduction of a new, modern brand, has turned out where people now wonder who the hell bmi are and only realise when you say "British Midland" When originally asked what the 'i' stood for, all the company could reply was "It does not stand for international" What an answer! (Clearly obvious though!)

Bring back Hogan! he had the right ideas but wasn't allowed by 'management' to implement them. He's turned Gulf Air around which can't have been easy as you'd have the cultural barrier to deal with too. Still, just a different kind of cultural barrier at bmi eh?

What are other peoples thoughts on all this? Am I wrong? I sure as hell seem to have the same thoughts on these matters as everyone else there. NT has brought a tiny bit more communication in to the equation and the management prescence in the crew room is more than of late, but they have nothing at all inspiring to say. They still give us no hope that there's a bright future and bmi will once again become a fun place to work where people want to spend the rest of their careers.

As for Fast Track, JS, it's ok getting the pilots to do it but you should organise the rest of the equation too to make it work. Ground handlers, fuellers, dispatchers et al. They still turn up as they used to making it a farce. The crew have to stand on the seats to brief now, not ideal is it? If implemented properly we could also go back to a 45 minute report at Heathrow, now that'd make better use of manpower!

Anyway, enough ranting, and yes if I don't like it I can always vote with my feet. I intend to as things seem to go from bad to worse! Such a shame.

:sad:

[Dutchie]

Do I miss something? Isn't BA doing the same thing: replacing 757 with A320s...

The rationel is : Yield ie less cost (because of smaller more efficient aircraft) more frequencies if possible gives better paying passengers! Thus more money.

If I follow your rationel that bigger is better than Ezy should also fly A320s instead of A319s...

Bigger only works if the volume is right.. that is at BMI, BA, heck at all airlines!

Regarding the internal issue I have no clue :8

[ATNotts]

Dutchie:

Absolutely correct - smaller aircraft = better yields, and also potentially higher frequencies, which suit business customers better, and it's that sector that pays for the cheap seats down the back.

Of course, with smaller aircraft, the number of cheap seats is probably also reduced.

[Richard Taylor]

I'm sure I heard yesterday a Flightline Bae146 operating BMI 671 to Heathrow.

It returned just after 11pm as BMI 9575 or similar.

Also 2 Airbuses positioned from ABZ to LHR yesterday evening.

Indeed Barbies have been operating LHR-ABZ,especially(but not exclusively so)at weekend when mainline are operating IT flights.

[Mark Lewis]

Hardly any bmi buses at LHR yesterday. Lots of ERJs, a Titan 757, and a Flightline 146.

Must have been expensive!

[Red 69]

My point was that despite the size of aircraft shrinking, bmi as a company are also still shrinking! They'll soon disappear up their own a**e!

The question was that why can the likes of Easy expand and get larger aircraft? I fully understand the yield thing but with the theories provided above we should all be operating Senecas! Why choose and operate routes with low passenger numbers when there are routes out there that warrant bigger aircraft with at least equivalent yields?

As for the BA 757's, the routes they operate don't really warrant that size aircraft with its operating costs (Far higher than a 320/1) while not really carrying many more passengers than a 320/1 BA also have the luxury of being able to use any of its types on a route if it outgrows the current one. bmi don't, or won't have!

Come on Sir Richard, get that cheque book out!!!

[Richard Taylor]

Not on my wages Jetset! :rolleyes:

[Lite]

I will definately agree with you that "average joe" is far more aware of the name "bmibaby" than they are of "bmi" despite the fact that bmi have a national advertising campaign with their "bmibirdies" (I think thats what they are called) as well as big billboards with destinations & attractive prices.

The problem is clearly that they've gone from British Midland to bmi. BMA was a well-liked & respected brand in the communities that they've been serving, and then they come up with this new "dot-com-age" name. I preferred it when it was "bmi british midland" under the original name change. "bmi" sounded cool enough as a new brand, but also kept the name "british midland".

I am not a bmi-basher. I've used the airline & their no-frills airline a few times, and despite the product slowly getting worse, I enjoy my flights with them - the crew are always charming (especially when they find out I'm crew!), the aircraft cabins are often well-maintained & the overall service is very professional & competitive. However, bmi needs to find its footing in key markets, rather than constantly testing the water here there & everywhere.

To step into armchair CEO mode, I think more cities served by baby from EMA/BHX also ought to be served by mainline from LHR/MAN. Despite AGP for example, being fairly low yield, its a popular route like ALC & PMI served by mainline, and bmi's product would be popular. If I was Lufthansa I'd send in a turnaround team, because bmi have the facilities & crew to be one of the best airlines in Europe, as I believe they once were, they just need vision & a good kick up the a*se, which I think LH (or to a lesser extent) SK could give them!

Just my $?0.02

[Young Paul]

Mmm. Actually, the only people who had heard of British Midland were the people who had flown on it. If you mentioned it, people would say, "Oh, do they fly from the Midlands, then?" - to which you would point out that actually a sixth of the movements at LHR were theirs. They were remarkably good at keeping a low profile.

bmi have done better at making the brand visible. But still, nobody has basically heard of them.

[CarltonBrowne the FO]

AFAIK the A319s are not to replace A321s, but are additional aircraft, perhaps more accurately considered as a replacement for the Fokker.

[acbus1]

Its survival down to its slots at Heathrow and nothing to do with 'shrewd management' as some like to claim.
Spot on!

Once LHR stopped laying golden eggs, in the form of easy profit, the whole shooting match started heading back from where it came........a tin pot operator with a cash flow crisis every Winter.

The only difference nowadays is the extra pit props supplied at LH and SK expense to stop the whole lot caving in.

MB and his partners in crime will be gone as soon as the cash benefits peak and then it'll be carnage.

Good luck.........you'll need it.


Cue the usual acbus1 bashers...... :rolleyes: :}

[Young Paul]

Yeah, right, and of course they were just given the slots at LHR by a man down the market who said he thought they might need them one day ... and the deal they negotiated with LH and SK just happened to work very well in their favour, thank you very much ... and for the record, have a look at the average size of BA's aircraft on shorthaul routes from LHR compared to six years ago - I think you'll find that they have also downsized on just about every route ... and what about the fact that BA is grumbling about the fact that they make more money on the London Eye than they do on shorthaul?

You can call it luck if you like - but when an airline has lasted as long as bmi has in various guises, and seen off as many rivals, I think the intelligent money has to be on shrewd management. Given the fact they have been sat on by VS and BA and all the US majors which has prevented them capitalising on their LHR slots, I think their survival has to be counted as highly significant.

[StarAllianceGold]

quote:

CarltonBrowne the FO

AFAIK the A319s are not to replace A321s, but are additional aircraft, perhaps more accurately considered as a replacement for the Fokker.

-------------

I believe the first few A319s replaced Fokkers (and that there is only one Fokker left). However the latest two A319s have replaced two A321s which are now with Turkish Airlines.

More info here: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=417023

Sorry to see the A321s go as they obviously offered more cheap seats and more importantly offer a better chance of getting an empty middle seat. Though it is nice to see more of the "new" colours at Heathrow.

Will be interesting to see the outcome of the new Chief Exec's review of the business. Personally I'd like to see baby integrated back into mainline. BA seem to do well appealing to business and leisure passengers with just one, admittedly much stronger, brand.

[Young Paul]

More cheap seats aren't much good if nobody is sitting in them. An empty middle seat may be nice for the passenger, but it isn't nice for the airline. Except possibly in business class, where you can allow the higher yield to pay for the seats that aren't filled. What are the loads like at the front of most shorthaul aircraft at the moment? I think the locos have changed the culture of shorthaul travel in that regard.

[I.C.Nosignal]

what a surprise to see acbus1 spouting his regular anti bmi cr*p again. The fact is bmi will remain to be a major player in the UK despite his wishing otherwise, and yes we do seem to have the luck , after all we managed to get rid of acbus1:ok: that was lucky for the rest of us who actually like working for bmi!!!

[ALLMCC]

I know I'll probably be shot down for saying this but here goes! I can't help feeling that BMI/Baby would have a better standing in the N Ireland market if both operated from the same airport.

BMI operating from BHD and Baby from BFS does cause considerable confusion and, IMHO, all should operate from BHD.

(Better get the flak jacket on!!!)

[eastern wiseguy]

Allmcc said(just for a change)

BMI/Baby would have a better standing in the N Ireland market if both operated from the same airport.

Couldn't agree more old boy.......now if only there was an all weather airport with 24 hour opening and a choice of runways .......oh wait!!.....fill in the rest and as far as I am concerned correspondence is closed:ok: :ok:

[bmibaby.com]

Personally, I think one of the positive moves that the bmi group has introduced was the bmi brand, because it was taking a very tired old livery & logo, and really bringing it into the 21st century. The aircraft stand out at airports, although the uniforms that were introduced are pretty bland. I do agree however, that getting rid of the name "british midland" was a bad move, because this was a well liked & respected brand in the UK & in markets where they had been well-established.

Very few people, despite the huge publicity campaigns are really aware of what exactly bmi is, and I think it was silly to get rid of the "british midland" name. Recently, when in MCO I showed the UA checkin agent by diamond club card & said I was a member of the bmi frequent flyer programme. She gave me a quizzed look until I mentioned "british midland" when all became clear!

The bmibaby brand has done a lot to get the bmi group back ontrack, and to go for its small profit for 2004. I believe that the company does have a future in the bmi group, but that it needs to know what it wants to be when it grows up. The airline picks up routes as quickly as they drop them & in very few of the cities in Europe where they fly to, is their operation well established or well known.

bmi ought to consolidate their route network with baby. There are plenty of markets in; France, Spain, Portugual & Italy that the two airlines could be successful in - with mainline at LHR/MAN & baby perhaps in the Midlands. Until then, neither brand will be well-established enough! I agree with Lite that AGP for example would be a great market for bmi to try to muscle in on, and this is a popular baby route from all of their bases.

[Maddog Red]

bmi is and was a great idea, the problem is that people within the company and 3rd party agents don’t use the correct name. You still see at many airports old signs with British Midland on them and a prime example of this is Frankfurt also the bmi crew sometimes forget and still use the old name. I flew Lufthansa recently into Birmingham and they still call the company British Midland. bmi really needs to get everyone using bmi now and lose the old name. It has also taken them far to long to re-brand their aircraft, bmi regional have only just started to swap their liveries, and as for the Embraer Star Alliance livery aircraft, they still have Ansett stickers on, need I say any more about being slow of the mark.

Its is a shame that the company does not look ahead and plan for the future, it seems to react to what has just happened, take the start of bmibaby out of Nottingham EMA, only happened due to the orange company stepping on its toes. This will happen again if the other 2 low cost operators expand at Nottingham, as from what I can see at the moment, bmibaby are shrinking there and putting too much focas on Birmingham and forgetting about its own back yard again.

[wawkrk]

I think BMI have missed some good opportunities over the last few years.
A good example is LBA. They already had a strong and established presence and could have brought in baby.
Jet2 took the initiative and now they have 9 based aircraft with more to come.

[CarltonBrowne the FO]

I've been keeping count, and between the old livery, the transitional livery, the washing line, the 2 versions of the new livery, and the second-hand and dryleased aircraft, regional has seven different paint schemes on its aircraft. Not bad for a fleet of 14!

[IMHO]

Has anything come out of the Business Review???
... or did we miss it!!!

Was expecting great things from the great white hope...
but nothing.........yet, (admittedly these things take time)






In My Honest Opinion.

[gmidc]

Re Business Review........

Memo out today from NT saying that there is a senior management meeting next Friday, followed a series of staff briefings, commencing Monday 23rd May.