Airtours name change
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: A country that most people dislike but we adore
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, but at least call the airline Airtours International, the in-house airline for MyTravel still . . . I mean that wouldn't hurt would it?
I mean, you don't have First Choice/Unijet Airlines, Thomsons International or Cosmos/Sunworld Airlines etc . . . do you?
Furthermore, keeping just the airline would save so much money for the company . . . consider it, no offices would need to be changed, no airport signs, no stationary / logo replacement , no aircraft interior re-design, no aircraft exterior re-paint etc. Have Airtours considered this?
Incidentally, does anyone know just what "Gradual Fleet Replacement" entails?
SFly
I mean, you don't have First Choice/Unijet Airlines, Thomsons International or Cosmos/Sunworld Airlines etc . . . do you?
Furthermore, keeping just the airline would save so much money for the company . . . consider it, no offices would need to be changed, no airport signs, no stationary / logo replacement , no aircraft interior re-design, no aircraft exterior re-paint etc. Have Airtours considered this?
Incidentally, does anyone know just what "Gradual Fleet Replacement" entails?
SFly
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Click Clack
I can see you are doing very well. Looking at your profile, you registered on 2nd December 2001, you have three posts and looking at them (another in the "French ATC strike" thread) are quite remarkable! Regarding your ATC posting, please don't embarass the British. France happens to be just to the South of the UK and perhaps that explains why "the frogs", as you call them, affect "the brits". It's them French, in it mate!! Whatever.
[ 08 December 2001: Message edited by: Viscount Sussex ]
I can see you are doing very well. Looking at your profile, you registered on 2nd December 2001, you have three posts and looking at them (another in the "French ATC strike" thread) are quite remarkable! Regarding your ATC posting, please don't embarass the British. France happens to be just to the South of the UK and perhaps that explains why "the frogs", as you call them, affect "the brits". It's them French, in it mate!! Whatever.
[ 08 December 2001: Message edited by: Viscount Sussex ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, around half of those posting in this thread are opposed to the name change because they see the Airtours name as a valuable asset - whilst the other half are opposed because they don’t think a simple name change will help eradicate Airtours’ bad reputation. Hum.
I agree that it is an insensitive time to be spending money on this kind of thing, but if they take two years to make the changeovers (as someone told me was the case) it shouldn’t be too bad as aircraft eventually come up for repainting anyway, etc.
The new MyTravel Website is pretty good - allowing online flight bookings unlike the old Airtours site. The only bad thing is the name itself, which is about as inventive as something not very uninventive. Maybe they went for a simple name to appeal to their new American customers?
I agree that it is an insensitive time to be spending money on this kind of thing, but if they take two years to make the changeovers (as someone told me was the case) it shouldn’t be too bad as aircraft eventually come up for repainting anyway, etc.
The new MyTravel Website is pretty good - allowing online flight bookings unlike the old Airtours site. The only bad thing is the name itself, which is about as inventive as something not very uninventive. Maybe they went for a simple name to appeal to their new American customers?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: A country that most people dislike but we adore
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There seems to be far too much change in recent months in this portion of the industry for it's own good . . .
(I say this in response to the whole JMC/Thomas Cook Airlines thread but thought it more relevant here.)
Names and identities are changing all over the place, airlines are mucking about with who they are (or, indeed, just completely changing altogether).
In this time of crisis industry-wide, does it not seem a little wiser for the airlines to rest on what little laurels they have accumulated and have left and just try to ride the storm to come out in one piece?
My word, in a few years there might be a complete reversal of this area and after all the airlines have completely changed their identities, names and owner's groups to nonsensical people's initials or names, or some foreign tour group's moniker, they will all start changing back again. Perhaps they will change back to the regular old airlines we have grown to love and passengers have grown to accept . . . Airtours, JMC, Britannia (minus the communist etching on the side of a light blue banana!) etc. They have all been building their identities for years, and suddenly they all jump on the change bandwagon just when it would do them the least good, when the whole aviation business has been thrown into a cyclonic turmoil. Numerous respected airlines have already gone under, and what these "change-mongers" don't realize (or at least demonstrate so) is that at any moment their businesses could change for the worse. I think they should save their funds, grin and bear the economic strife, and carry on.
It's just common sense, yet these groups seem to lack it.
SFly
:o 
(I say this in response to the whole JMC/Thomas Cook Airlines thread but thought it more relevant here.)
Names and identities are changing all over the place, airlines are mucking about with who they are (or, indeed, just completely changing altogether).
In this time of crisis industry-wide, does it not seem a little wiser for the airlines to rest on what little laurels they have accumulated and have left and just try to ride the storm to come out in one piece?
My word, in a few years there might be a complete reversal of this area and after all the airlines have completely changed their identities, names and owner's groups to nonsensical people's initials or names, or some foreign tour group's moniker, they will all start changing back again. Perhaps they will change back to the regular old airlines we have grown to love and passengers have grown to accept . . . Airtours, JMC, Britannia (minus the communist etching on the side of a light blue banana!) etc. They have all been building their identities for years, and suddenly they all jump on the change bandwagon just when it would do them the least good, when the whole aviation business has been thrown into a cyclonic turmoil.
Numerous respected airlines have already gone under, and what these "change-mongers" don't realize (or at least demonstrate so) is that at any moment their businesses could change for the worse. I think they should save their funds, grin and bear the economic strife, and carry on. It's just common sense, yet these groups seem to lack it.
SFly
:o
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: A country that most people dislike but we adore
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forgive me for going on and on about this topic (but isn't that what PPRuNe is for? 
)
Just found out about the so called "minimal spending" required to transfer the name.
Was approximately forecasted at £100 million pre-September 11th, now that has been "revised" and it still sits at a whopping £63 million. And, speculating, I expect it'll end up as more than that too. Now with that kind of money they could buy a new aircraft or two, or . . . (gasp!) improve the lot of their pilots, financially, perhaps! <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> Especially as forecasted profits for 2002 are down £45 million, almost equal to the cost of the rebranding.
However, the whole thing depends on the die being cast by the shareholders who will meet on 7 February 2002. Now what do you suppose they're going to do?? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
It just doesn't seem good business practice to me, especially if you take into account my earlier point about passenger familiarity. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
SFly
)Just found out about the so called "minimal spending" required to transfer the name.
Was approximately forecasted at £100 million pre-September 11th, now that has been "revised" and it still sits at a whopping £63 million. And, speculating, I expect it'll end up as more than that too. Now with that kind of money they could buy a new aircraft or two, or . . . (gasp!) improve the lot of their pilots, financially, perhaps! <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> Especially as forecasted profits for 2002 are down £45 million, almost equal to the cost of the rebranding.
However, the whole thing depends on the die being cast by the shareholders who will meet on 7 February 2002. Now what do you suppose they're going to do?? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
It just doesn't seem good business practice to me, especially if you take into account my earlier point about passenger familiarity. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
SFly
