View Full Version : Dan Air V Romanic Trading

19th Aug 2006, 19:01
Many moons ago when Dan Air were registering DH Comets from overseas or ex RAF - some were reg to Dan Air and some to Romanic Trading. This poss applied to other types.
Any one know why? Romanic Trading is now a `dead` company amongst the British Airways list of companies.........

20th Aug 2006, 12:31
I recall Romanic Trading were a wholly owned Davies & Newman subsidiary so I imagine it was a vehicle to buy in aircraft & then lease them on to DA thus ensuring that at least the leasing company ,within the D&N group ,would show a profit. I also think that I recall the Romanic Trading plates appearing on some of the first 1-11's delivered to DA ,that were used in the Luton start up in April 1970 for Lunn Poly ,etc.
Please note usage of the phrase "I THINK I recall"!

21st Aug 2006, 16:09
I THINK ! you are correct, that is my recollection also.

26th Aug 2006, 07:34
Having an Aircraft Trading company in the Group was (and possibly still is) a popular option for Airlines which tend to operate 'second user aircraft', or have multiple Airlines in the same group.

The Trading company can produce a positive revenue stream from its trading, even when the aircraft do not end up on the Group Airline(s) Fleet.

However sometimes it can go horribly wrong (as in the case of Hudson Place (? - could have got the name wrong)/Air Europe Group).

Or the Trading Group becomes so focussed on making money, it's role in providing a service to the Group Airline(s) is neglected.

The reason Romanic are on the British Airways 'dead list' is that it was part of the Dan Air takeover. BA must have one of the longest lists of unused brands in the World (but sometime, somewhere, one or more may prove useful).

26th Aug 2006, 08:13
a lot of these brands are worthless, just not worth resurrecting.
dan-air was the butt of jokes for yrs.
bit like lancia and ratners jewellers. it would be brave man to try again with those names.

26th Aug 2006, 08:55
Good Day ormus.

a lot of these brands are worthless, just not worth resurrecting

True and it is best they R.I.P.

But some may be brought back to cover a short-term requirement
(a non-BA example from a long while ago - Britavia was ressurected for a Zambian support contract during Rhodesian UDI),

Ressurected because a previously abandoned segment of the business is being revived.

Some may even be sold (probably not for much in relative terms) to a start-up wanting to use the name!

As for:

dan-air was the butt of jokes for yrs.

It was and to my shame I repeated some of those jokes. However I have become more objective and now believe that in many ways much of what Dan achieved whilst being starved of any decent level of financial resources, reflects a huge credit on the Management and Staff.
But I do agree it is unlikely the Dan Air brand will be used again.