JMC A330's to go??
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: MCO
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I AM HEARING THE SAME THING. THEY ARE HAVING A HARD TIME MAKING COMMERCIAL SENSE WITH THE A330. LONGHAUL BOOKINGS ARE BADLY DOWN FOR S02 AND NOW I HEAR COMPETING CHARTER AIRLINES ARE ADDING 747'S TO THERE FLEETS FOR PEAK SEASON AT CHEAPER SEAT RATES. THE PINCH IS EVEN MORE ON JMC THAN EVER NOW. 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yikes! I've got an idea---Let's put the Guv
in charge. Right away he will slash salaries, slash morale, and get rid of all new and costly equipment in favor of L1011's.
Yeah....right.
Thanks---Donkey Duke
in charge. Right away he will slash salaries, slash morale, and get rid of all new and costly equipment in favor of L1011's.
Yeah....right.
Thanks---Donkey Duke
Guest
Posts: n/a
Donkey Duke - if you knew anything about airline (or even business) economics you'd be aware that reducing your fixed (overhead) costs as far as possible is the name of the game. Don't worry too much about the direct operating costs - but if you've got aircraft parked, I'd rather it was fully amortised L1011s than A330s costing over US$1m a month - each! 
In fact, with the price of fuel so low, an L1011 has a lower cost per seat than an A330.
So how's that?
In fact, with the price of fuel so low, an L1011 has a lower cost per seat than an A330.
So how's that?
Guest
Posts: n/a
By sheer coincidence, JMC sold their four 393 seater L1011-100s today, for far less than the rental of a single A330 for one month.
Sure, they need some doing on them - but at a comparatively minor cost. Obsession with operating the brightest, shiniest, newest toys (plus trying to merge a shell-suit operation with a quality one) has brought JMC to the point it's at today. A similar reason (the brightest, shiniest kit bit) is apparently the principal cause of BWA's downfall as well - in other words, when the cash stops coming in, there's still a massive outflow required to cover the bills.
The lesson is - stick with older kit. It's cheaper in the long run - and you know it makes sense! 
Sure, they need some doing on them - but at a comparatively minor cost. Obsession with operating the brightest, shiniest, newest toys (plus trying to merge a shell-suit operation with a quality one) has brought JMC to the point it's at today. A similar reason (the brightest, shiniest kit bit) is apparently the principal cause of BWA's downfall as well - in other words, when the cash stops coming in, there's still a massive outflow required to cover the bills.
The lesson is - stick with older kit. It's cheaper in the long run - and you know it makes sense!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Beverly Hills 90210
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Guv,
I agree with your depreciation cost comparison between the new A330s and older, but still flyable L-1011s (I like the L15s). Some carriers continue to use Tristars effectively - I believe Air Transat still uses them - and it will fill them now that C3 is gone.
Still no word on Novair from you - are they bust? Are the A330s VG Airlines will use being wet-leased from Novair (i.e., Novair crews)? What's the word with Novair, Guv?
Cheers
I agree with your depreciation cost comparison between the new A330s and older, but still flyable L-1011s (I like the L15s). Some carriers continue to use Tristars effectively - I believe Air Transat still uses them - and it will fill them now that C3 is gone.
Still no word on Novair from you - are they bust? Are the A330s VG Airlines will use being wet-leased from Novair (i.e., Novair crews)? What's the word with Novair, Guv?
Cheers
Guest
Posts: n/a
LAVDUMPER - not sure what's happening with Novair; heard that they were having a few problems but nothing concrete.
VG Airlines and its viability has taken a huge battering in my eyes today:
No businessman with an ounce of intelligence should ever say that a business plan is pointless - that establishes your goals, your financial targets and requirements in the form of a budget, personnel requirements, marketing strategies etc. An airline business plan (and I've written a few!) can run to several hundred pages including detailed financial projections.
Under JAR, an airline requires two bits of paper to operate: the Air Operator's Certificate (AOC) which is clearance from your aviation authorities that you're technically and operationally competent to fly the aircraft (ie that you have the correct manuals written, operational infrastructure, quality controls etc). The other is the Operating Licence (OL), which gives financial fitness clearance. To obtain this, you must submit to the airworthiness authority's economic regulation department a detailed business plan and proof of sufficient cash to (in the UK at any rate) cover three months operating expenses assuming nil income.
Here in the UK, this is a 6 to 9 month process.
Once he has those two documents - and only once he has them - he can apply for a DOT402 which allows him to operate to the States. This is another fairly lengthy process, taking several months.
In addition, if he thinks he's going to get SN's AOC and OL, he's smoking something! Those documents are strictly non transferable; the only way he could get them would be to buy SN and make an arrangement with its creditors.
I'd say his chances of being operational by March - based on what I've read here - are nil. Zip. Zero. Nada. Nichevo.
Incidentally, American Trans Air are also intending to keep flying their L15s for at least another 5 - 7 years; as are Air Luxor in Portugal. It's a lovely aircraft - probably the best designed and built one ever.
VG Airlines and its viability has taken a huge battering in my eyes today:
Freddy Van Gaever announced today, during a press conference, that VG AIRLINES will start services beginning February 2002 with flights from Brussels to destinations in Europe to get his airline known among the consumer market. VG Airlines hope to start the first transatlantic services to the USA on the 1st March, with Boston as the first destination which will also be the airline's official inaugural flight [I assume therefore that the 'flights to destinations in Europe' will simply be training/PR flights].
As Van Gaever still doesn't have an AOC he expects that this wouldn't be such a gigant problem. The government demands that when you want to start an airline you need to have a businessplan before you can receive an AOC. Van Gaever still did not succeed to buy off the ex-Sabena AOC. Van Gaever has his doubts about the necessaty to have a businessplan as nobody who starts an airline can predict how many passengers an airline will carry the next year. Van Gaever told the press that: "businessplans are for people who not know their market and who are not sure about, believe and conviced in their own goals and targets. Setting up a businessplan costs millions of francs; wasted money."
As Van Gaever still doesn't have an AOC he expects that this wouldn't be such a gigant problem. The government demands that when you want to start an airline you need to have a businessplan before you can receive an AOC. Van Gaever still did not succeed to buy off the ex-Sabena AOC. Van Gaever has his doubts about the necessaty to have a businessplan as nobody who starts an airline can predict how many passengers an airline will carry the next year. Van Gaever told the press that: "businessplans are for people who not know their market and who are not sure about, believe and conviced in their own goals and targets. Setting up a businessplan costs millions of francs; wasted money."
Under JAR, an airline requires two bits of paper to operate: the Air Operator's Certificate (AOC) which is clearance from your aviation authorities that you're technically and operationally competent to fly the aircraft (ie that you have the correct manuals written, operational infrastructure, quality controls etc). The other is the Operating Licence (OL), which gives financial fitness clearance. To obtain this, you must submit to the airworthiness authority's economic regulation department a detailed business plan and proof of sufficient cash to (in the UK at any rate) cover three months operating expenses assuming nil income.
Here in the UK, this is a 6 to 9 month process.
Once he has those two documents - and only once he has them - he can apply for a DOT402 which allows him to operate to the States. This is another fairly lengthy process, taking several months.
In addition, if he thinks he's going to get SN's AOC and OL, he's smoking something! Those documents are strictly non transferable; the only way he could get them would be to buy SN and make an arrangement with its creditors.
I'd say his chances of being operational by March - based on what I've read here - are nil. Zip. Zero. Nada. Nichevo.
Incidentally, American Trans Air are also intending to keep flying their L15s for at least another 5 - 7 years; as are Air Luxor in Portugal. It's a lovely aircraft - probably the best designed and built one ever.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There goes GUV again, out of touch with reality. Hello??? Lease rates now on fairly new airplanes that are parked in the desert are a lot less than pre 9-11, so picking up a nice new "toy" that sparkles
makes sense-----as long as you have enough capital behind it. Passengers like new and shiny planes. Am I right GUV? Why did JetBlue go after new A320's? Volume discounts with Airbus. But, they could have done the same thing with ILFC or GATX with some cheaper used 737-400's etc. That's what you would have done, wouldn't you GUV?
Go for cheap. PAX satisfaction NOT guaranteed. Maybe JMC could not get out of their high lease rates, and they should get rid of their pair of A330's for the time being---hopefully without an exit fee. But, I am sure they could find some more A330's
available pronto. A330's are perfect planes for long range high density charters. (Alot
more economical than JMC's old DC10's-----that's right GUV!!!You're wrong!---get over it) (Wut wut??)
I hope JMC can keep or eventually replace their current A330's with some cheaper ones.
And to my buddy GUV, it is possible to fly nice new planes with affordable leases---especially in bad times. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure that out, now does it---GUV? What? You're wrong.
Thanks. Donkey Duke
makes sense-----as long as you have enough capital behind it. Passengers like new and shiny planes. Am I right GUV? Why did JetBlue go after new A320's? Volume discounts with Airbus. But, they could have done the same thing with ILFC or GATX with some cheaper used 737-400's etc. That's what you would have done, wouldn't you GUV?
Go for cheap. PAX satisfaction NOT guaranteed. Maybe JMC could not get out of their high lease rates, and they should get rid of their pair of A330's for the time being---hopefully without an exit fee. But, I am sure they could find some more A330's
available pronto. A330's are perfect planes for long range high density charters. (Alot
more economical than JMC's old DC10's-----that's right GUV!!!You're wrong!---get over it) (Wut wut??)
I hope JMC can keep or eventually replace their current A330's with some cheaper ones.
And to my buddy GUV, it is possible to fly nice new planes with affordable leases---especially in bad times. It doesn't take an economics degree to figure that out, now does it---GUV? What? You're wrong.
Thanks. Donkey Duke
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London, England
Age: 56
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guv,
It's all very well having ageing aircraft plying the longhaul rotes, but passengers don't like it and vote with their feet.
Sadly, after flying thousands on sectors on L1011's and DC10's, even the old Cale passengers, who weren't all shellsuiters, complained like mad at 48 hr delays, no IFE, ceiling panels falling down, tatty tired cabins.
Passengers and therefore tour operators like new airplanes, so although it might make economic sense to try and keep those L1011 in the sky, realistically the move to go to A330's might be the better option.
Perhaps I might still be in tartan if Cale had made that move a few years ago rather than losing all pax confidence with tired, tech aircraft.
It's all very well having ageing aircraft plying the longhaul rotes, but passengers don't like it and vote with their feet.
Sadly, after flying thousands on sectors on L1011's and DC10's, even the old Cale passengers, who weren't all shellsuiters, complained like mad at 48 hr delays, no IFE, ceiling panels falling down, tatty tired cabins.
Passengers and therefore tour operators like new airplanes, so although it might make economic sense to try and keep those L1011 in the sky, realistically the move to go to A330's might be the better option.
Perhaps I might still be in tartan if Cale had made that move a few years ago rather than losing all pax confidence with tired, tech aircraft.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Donkey Duke - whilst it is true that new leases are available at remarkably cheap rates, I somehow don't think that JMC (or very few other airlines) are currently adding aircraft, do you?
As for trying to return existing aircraft to take advantage of better deals - are you smoking something? What lessor is going to want to take back aircraft in the present climate - when they would have to lease them out again for less than they are getting at the moment? Why do you think BA (and VS) parked their 747 classics rather than their -400s?
Good grief!
yellowdog - the problem with Cale was that its Technical Director, a certain Mr Bradbury, didn't like the L1011s - so refused to spend anything on them. Consequently, they suffered.
Compare them with aircraft from Transat and ATA which have had money spent on new interiors - those aircraft look as good as new - and cost under 10% of the price of an A330 or 767.
If you're going to operate older aircraft (or cars, or anything mechanical!), then you just have to spend a bit on coddling them - and on making (and keeping them) looking good. A stitch in time, and all that.
Unfortunately, some people tend to equate cheap to buy with cheap to maintain - and that isn't the case. The business plan for my transatlantic operation which was going to operate L15s from Delta was based around buying runout aircraft for next to nothing and spending a fraction of the money we'd have spent on 767s or similar modern aircraft on D checks and brand new interiors that would have had the aircraft looking like 777s.
As for trying to return existing aircraft to take advantage of better deals - are you smoking something?
What lessor is going to want to take back aircraft in the present climate - when they would have to lease them out again for less than they are getting at the moment? Why do you think BA (and VS) parked their 747 classics rather than their -400s?Good grief!
yellowdog - the problem with Cale was that its Technical Director, a certain Mr Bradbury, didn't like the L1011s - so refused to spend anything on them. Consequently, they suffered.
Compare them with aircraft from Transat and ATA which have had money spent on new interiors - those aircraft look as good as new - and cost under 10% of the price of an A330 or 767.
If you're going to operate older aircraft (or cars, or anything mechanical!), then you just have to spend a bit on coddling them - and on making (and keeping them) looking good. A stitch in time, and all that.
Unfortunately, some people tend to equate cheap to buy with cheap to maintain - and that isn't the case. The business plan for my transatlantic operation which was going to operate L15s from Delta was based around buying runout aircraft for next to nothing and spending a fraction of the money we'd have spent on 767s or similar modern aircraft on D checks and brand new interiors that would have had the aircraft looking like 777s.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Middle England
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guv, you are indeed privileged to have foreseen Sept 11. My beloved industry is in crisis and all you ever do is take cheap shots at it's sad demise. When your 44 L1011s arrive (happiness is a warm L1011) all PPruners will no doubt be beating your door down for a job. You are talking cr@p as usual. PLEASE EITHER PUT UP OR SHUT UP. 
[ 15 December 2001: Message edited by: 763 jock ]
[ 15 December 2001: Message edited by: 763 jock ]
[ 15 December 2001: Message edited by: 763 jock ]
[ 15 December 2001: Message edited by: 763 jock ]
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GUV,
Those L15's you were talking about from Delta were pieces of sh!t. How do I know?
I've been on them MANY MANY times. Very unreliable. They were always breaking down.
The pilots liked them, but everyone else hated them. And you wanted to buy them? Hey, I've got a bridge for sale if you are interested........sheesh!
Back to JMC and the A330's. I am sure JMC
could pressure the leasing companies for some cheaper leases--and if they say no---just go bankrupt and no one gets any money
and the planes are parked. That will teach them! And, of course, it was the pilots'
fault. Yeah GUV, I knew that's what you thought.
Thanks. Donkey Duke
Contact Departure!
Those L15's you were talking about from Delta were pieces of sh!t. How do I know?
I've been on them MANY MANY times. Very unreliable. They were always breaking down.
The pilots liked them, but everyone else hated them. And you wanted to buy them? Hey, I've got a bridge for sale if you are interested........sheesh!
Back to JMC and the A330's. I am sure JMC
could pressure the leasing companies for some cheaper leases--and if they say no---just go bankrupt and no one gets any money
and the planes are parked. That will teach them! And, of course, it was the pilots'
fault. Yeah GUV, I knew that's what you thought.
Thanks. Donkey Duke
Contact Departure!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: anywhere
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guv is wrong when stating the aircraft that has the lowest lease rate is the cheapest.
In fact in times of crisis like we have now the aircraft that get the jobs are the aircraft with the lowest direct operating costs, and that is not the DC-10's or the L1011's.
And as from a ceratin threshold, say 250-300 hours per month, the newer aircraft with the higher lease rate will always come out cheaper per seat/hour, an advantage which comes on top of the all important higher reliability and of the more attractive interiors of the newer aircraft.
Of course, GUV must be far off in his aircraft comparisons and conclusions for as long as he keeps estimating A330 lease rates at around US 1Mio per month.
Beware of the quality of his basic data and hence of the quality of his judgment.
In fact in times of crisis like we have now the aircraft that get the jobs are the aircraft with the lowest direct operating costs, and that is not the DC-10's or the L1011's.
And as from a ceratin threshold, say 250-300 hours per month, the newer aircraft with the higher lease rate will always come out cheaper per seat/hour, an advantage which comes on top of the all important higher reliability and of the more attractive interiors of the newer aircraft.
Of course, GUV must be far off in his aircraft comparisons and conclusions for as long as he keeps estimating A330 lease rates at around US 1Mio per month.
Beware of the quality of his basic data and hence of the quality of his judgment.