Babcock offshore contract.
 

Babcock new contract.
https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandga...orth-sea-deal/

Possibly this link?

https://helihub.com/2020/08/03/babco...h-total-ep-uk/

Was it the contract previously held by NHV Denmark? (at least for the danish part)

My 10c worth here is that CHC and Babcock bid at the same profitability rates but B's overall lower cost structure from a cost of aircraft and corporate credit card perspective won the day. CHC's post Ch 11 strategy is to only take contracts they can make money on. It's just that their level of 'make money' is higher than some others. Seeing as no one has that many spare aircraft anymore, you would certainly hope that bidding is becoming more and more rational.

June 2020: But speaking on a full-year results call on 11 June, Babcock chief executive Archie Bethel said the “major problem area” in its aviation division “continues to be the offshore oil and gas business”.
“When you combine this with the likely impact of Covid-19, we no longer believe this to be an attractive long-term market for Babcock,” he says.
Bethel had warned in the February trading update that it did “not intend to invest further to stay in that [offshore] market” and said it would not chase the low pricing of its rivals, most of which had shed debts via US Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

August 2020: "We are committed to the offshore market "

...and I'll bet undercut CHC to get it.

Yup, that pretty much sums up the competitive tendering process. If CHC had won the contract, then they would have undercut Babcock.

nowherespecial is probably on the money. CHC's overhead is still too large and that has to be paid for. The US based part of the organisation needs to be dismantled and a lean European based overhead established. If they don't do this then the European operations will always be carrying a financial disadvantage when bidding for work.

NHV view
 

There is a piece on the Air & Sea Analytics website today with the NHV view

Here: https://www.airandseaanalytics.com/renewals

Sounds about right. It is fairly clear that Babcock bid on and were awarded the IAC contract in Shetland, and seemed to have no idea what they had won. They clearly bid cheap on a speculative finger in the air assessment, and then seemed shocked that they had won it, that it came with staff, that the salaries were more than they wanted to pay, that there was a new airfield that they had to set up and that they were not going to be able to make money doing it.

No wonder the big bosses at Babcock Group are getting frustrated!

New airfield to set up???

That comment alone goes to show you havent a clue what you are typing.

In reference to the Air & Sea article, it's rich for NHV to be bemoaning the 'race to the bottom' that they help accelerate...

His whole post, bar one comment, sounds like it was written by an 11 year old. The only comment getting close to anything in the real world was the issue of TUPE. TUPE is something of a legal minefield and I'm still surprised that Babcock decided at the 11th hour that they would accept TUPE applies. As for the comment regarding salaries, they had no way of knowing when bidding which staff were based in Scatsta, let alone what pay points the individuals would be on or what allowances, etc they were entitled to. There is no legal way of establishing that due to GDPR, etc.

Archie Bithell's comments regarding the O&G part of Babcock were made before the Consortium and Total wins, so they were not related to these contracts. Big Babcock have written off a substantial amount of assett value and debt that would have been hampering the ability to bid competatively. This is no different really to what Bristow and CHC have done with their CHapter 11 filings, just not as clean and tidy from a business perspective. Perhaps it was this moving of debt that has enabled Babcock to be more competative over the last few months and win some work?

Rumour has it that the CHC boss admitted yesterday in a staff briefing that they bid with no profit margin (at a loss?) and still lost the work. So who was trying to undermine the market? A simlar comment was made during the UK SAR bid that Bristow won and CHC was excluded from on price. Bristow must have bid at a loss!! Or are CHCs overhead costs still way too high?

Amen to that Brother!

Haven't logged in for a few days - Surprised to see so much criticism.

OK, when I said new base to set up, I mean that the IAC has run out of Scatsta for many years - It will now have to run out of Sumburgh. There's a fair bit to set up.

But it was evident that Babcock really hadn't planned ahead for this. They didn't seem to have an idea how the contract was run by Bristow. They told all their staff that 'its fine - TUPE won't apply'. They hired new pilots. There was a level of arrogance about their whole bid. This is a contract that has been bid on remarkably cheaply and now they are asking the pilots to take a cut, because they cannot afford this new work they have just won.

Big Babcock put out two Statements to say they were pulling out of the O&G market. One just before winning the IAC and the second, not long before winning Total. OK, so the managers have run around trying to convince staff that the barn isn't on fire, and perhaps they have managed to convince the clients too, but personally I suspect the clients don't care too much, so long as they are getting a cheap service.

So do I really not have a clue what I'm typing?? Does anyone here really think that Babcock can make a profit on either of these two contracts?? The various incumbent companies had held the work for several years, so we can assume that the profit margins had gradually been eroded and they weren't major money makers by the end - So the idea that someone has undercut the existing contracts and despite significant start up costs, can supposedly deliver a profit making service?? I just don't see how that is plausible

Im pretty sure this was only a NHV contract due to the take over of Dancopter,
Correct me if im wrong but I dont think NHV won this contract ever, So its a bit of a pointless opinion from NHV. They will have bid it on old dancopter expensive rates.
Never seen a contract price go up.

Who says babcock was cheapest? I wasnt aware you were privy to the tenders

Very little set up in sumburgh, babcock has always (give or take) operated out of there in 1 form or another, but operated CAT flights from there as a base for about 5 years

Could this be why Babcock are now asking their pilots to take a pay cut?

More like redundancy