SRB has hinted he may start up a new US airline venture while speaking to Bloomberg TV

Billionaire Richard Branson signaled he may jump back into the U.S. airline business after tussling with Alaska Air Group Inc. over how long the carrier must pay royalties on his Virgin America brand.
Alaska has to keep paying “unless we decide to start another airline. So, we’ll see what happens,” Branson said in an interview Thursday with Bloomberg TV. When asked if he would create a new carrier, he said, “watch this space.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ith-alaska

Cue the "quickest way to become a millionaire" statement.... seriously.

"If you want to be a Millionaire, start with a billion dollars and launch a new airline." - Richard Branson

I thought he was enjoying retirement spending more time on the island?

Two words spring to mind...HUGE EGO.....!

Sounds like he is negociating via the media. If they don't want to pay the licence fees for the trademark he would be free to reuse the virgin brand. If they don't want him to use the brand, pay up and do what they want with the licence.

They cannot pay nothing and restrict his use on his trademark.

Good luck finding space to grow in any meaningful primary airport

I don't see the value in starting another airline with the same name and branding. VA's value was its assets, not its brand.

zeke wrote:

...... They cannot pay nothing and restrict his use on his trademark.

Has anyone seen the details of the contract for this. Likely there is much lawyerly talk which we haven't seen.

His virgin brand is worthless in america...on an airline or anything else.

Have at it sir...PIT and STL have plenty of gates.

zeke wrote:

Sounds like he is negociating via the media. If they don't want to pay the licence fees for the trademark he would be free to reuse the virgin brand. If they don't want him to use the brand, pay up and do what they want with the licence.

They cannot pay nothing and restrict his use on his trademark.

You nailed it. It's an empty threat IMHO. If his brand goes on another airline, it won't be because he started it. It would be something like Eastern which already exists putting his brand on it. He had a horrible time financing VX and sold a lot of VS. Seems to me that he is getting out not getting in.

He kinda took the one remaining high-fare O/D (almost)-monopoly and made it an AS hub. Where else could he start an airline of any decent size in the US?

He could invest in Metropolitan Airways.

http://metroairways.net

But why? Seems like more trouble than it's worth.

ahj2000 wrote:

He kinda took the one remaining high-fare O/D (almost)-monopoly and made it an AS hub. Where else could he start an airline of any decent size in the US?

He won't start anything, he'll hope somebody else does and pays him for using the Virgin brand. He doesn't run anything, his main role is self promotion through talking to the media. He'd make a great US president !!

Geoff

Think people are reading far too much into this statement, basically all he seems to be saying the only way AS have for getting out of paying royalties if for his group to launch a new airline using the Virgin branding, nothing he says in the above quote even remotely suggests he's actually going to do so

I would love to see another airline in the U.S. but I doubt this will come to fruition.

If it were to happen however I wonder whether it would be another Virgin America type carrier that plows into large markets with high competition and hoping they will attract customers based on their brand appeal or if they will go another route and try to enter smaller markets with less competition like PIT, MCI, MSY, IND or somewhere else.

Geoff1947 wrote:

ahj2000 wrote:

He kinda took the one remaining high-fare O/D (almost)-monopoly and made it an AS hub. Where else could he start an airline of any decent size in the US?

He won't start anything, he'll hope somebody else does and pays him for using the Virgin brand. He doesn't run anything, his main role is self promotion through talking to the media. He'd make a great US president !!

Geoff

His main goal is increasing his wealth and as such he will consider risk / reward in any investment opportunity. As a fan of VX I'd like to see that fun and high service level back into another airline, I find AS and every other legacy airline in the US to be poor in comparison so I would welcome it. That said, I suggest this is bluster and nothing will happen.

Well, Branson is certainly no Virgin when launching airlines!

zeke wrote:

Sounds like he is negociating via the media.

Which is a silver arrow in his quiver, that people fall for all the time.

Remember the whole "I can fly Concorde, give it to me for 1p!" charade?

All I see is him re-creating another Virgin with more flights between the coasts. As if more competition is needed.

The Virgin brand, as far as airlines go, does not carry the same special cachet that it did in the 1990's and the early to mid-2000's. There is really nothing unique about any of the Virgin branded carriers (Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Australia, and Virgin America, now fading into Alaska). The marketing, mood lighting, on board bars and the purple and red color scheme are pleasing to the eye, but none of the airlines are winning awards or really differentiating themselves relative to the competition. The entire Virgin brand concept now seems a little dated and done. Virgin America succeeded by offering a really different product than most major US airlines, and appealed to a specific type of consumer, but having flown it a few times over the years, there was nothing overwhelming about it.

Isn't the obvious thing for him to do is to form a partnership and launch Trump-Virgin Airlines?

Washington DCA to Palm Beach PBI ought to be the launch route.

I'll leave it to your imagination to decide who should be the model for the flying near-virgin logo wrapped in the American flag.

khinstorff wrote:

I don't see the value in starting another airline with the same name and branding. VA's value was its assets, not its brand.

Well, from statements he have said, seems like he think otherwise

c933103 wrote:

khinstorff wrote:

I don't see the value in starting another airline with the same name and branding. VA's value was its assets, not its brand.

Well, from statements he have said, seems like he think otherwise

SRB was a great salesman. I say was as his bikini marketing with someone younger than his grandchildren doesn't market well today.

The Virgin brand isn't what it once was. AS wouldn't be retiring the brand if it was worth it. VX has not been a business success, nor any Virgin except VS.

Let him start another airline.

Lightsaber

Hes not starting anything. all hes doing is positioning himself for negotiations to get out of the branding deal with some cash that runs until 2040 with Virgin America which Alaska now has to pay for as long as VX is around. He will glady take a payout for Alaska to terminate that deal and I'm guessing will agree to NOT start another Virgin Branded Airline in the US for X amount of years thus why he keeps pretending that he will start another airline.

He is basically saying, "your move Alaska"

My personal opinion is Alaska will call his bluff....

I would love to see Branson start another airline. I bet money he is looking at Eastern Airlines. Imagine Eastern with a touch of Virgin? Yeah!!! That would be awesome!

What problems do people here have with Branson and the Virgin brand in airlines? At least those airlines did not follow the footsteps of the former airlines that the US3 now consist of and went bankrupt.*

So we will have a new Airline with limited options and mood lighting. If I was AS I would say go for it SRB

BobPatterson wrote:

Isn't the obvious thing for him to do is to form a partnership and launch Trump-Virgin Airlines?

Washington DCA to Palm Beach PBI ought to be the launch route.

I'll leave it to your imagination to decide who should be the model for the flying near-virgin logo wrapped in the American flag.

A joke post made worse because his Florida resort is closed half of the year.

In the theoretical chance of SRB starting a new US carrier, Im left wondering where a VX v2 would be based. LAX, SFO, and ORD are full. There may be a few gates somewhere at JFK, but nothing to start a hub operation. The DAL gates are gone so they would have to use DFW. Maybe MCI could finally be a hub again like so many here wish for.

F9Animal wrote:

I would love to see Branson start another airline. I bet money he is looking at Eastern Airlines. Imagine Eastern with a touch of Virgin? Yeah!!! That would be awesome!

Can't...tell...if...serious? That combo would lose money twice as fast as VX or EA separately

Or he could take that money buy back the rest of VS and put as much effort into VS as he did VX to make it like the airline it used to be.

jetmatt777 wrote:

He could invest in Metropolitan Airways.

http://metroairways.net

I heard Baltia is also looking for investors.

AZ anyone?

Given how high fares can be, especially in summer, I welcome Virgin 2.0 as a passenger. Let's get some more competition that isn't coming from ULCCs like Spirit!

Safe royalty payments - risky airline startup that even when going perfectly well will not bring in tons of cash. There's not even a choice here.

Cointrin330 wrote:

The Virgin brand, as far as airlines go, does not carry the same special cachet that it did in the 1990's and the early to mid-2000's. There is really nothing unique about any of the Virgin branded carriers (Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Australia, and Virgin America, now fading into Alaska). The marketing, mood lighting, on board bars and the purple and red color scheme are pleasing to the eye, but none of the airlines are winning awards or really differentiating themselves relative to the competition. The entire Virgin brand concept now seems a little dated and done. Virgin America succeeded by offering a really different product than most major US airlines, and appealed to a specific type of consumer, but having flown it a few times over the years, there was nothing overwhelming about it.

The single reason VX did not end up in the landfill was that fuel prices dropped dramatically. It was proven over and over that nobody would pay a premium they were counting on for their mood lighting and hipster vibe. Only continuous massive cash infusions kept it going until they caught a break when jet A fell to levels where they could make a buck. VX was anything but a "success".

mjoelnir wrote:

What problems do people here have with Branson and the Virgin brand in airlines? At least those airlines did not follow the footsteps of the former airlines that the US3 now consist of and went bankrupt.*

I don't have a problem with him or the brand, I actually loved the VA brand. But, I think a lot of consumers would see VA 2.0 and roll their eyes. If SRB wants to show us something, flex that creative muscle and give us a brand and product we'd love to fly.

I flew VX for the first time a couple of weeks ago LAX-JFK, EWR-SFO, and SFO-PDX. I found it interesting, but underwhelming. The planes are nice and fairly comfortable, and the in-flight service concept is unique, but none of it is worth a premium. I thought the mood lighting on the plane was a little hilarious -- 10 years ago, absolutely it was an innovation... but today they're actually behind the competition. As far as I could tell, even on a relatively new A320, the cabin lighting wasn't LED -- just a static purple color, with them forcing on reading lights to actually brighten the cabin. How quaint.

One place that things stood out was the ground service: absolutely atrocious at LAX, EWR, and SFO. I get it that mergers make people cranky, but I don't need gate staff barking at us to move faster and then come onboard and start sorting through the overhead bins for us. Very few people cared at all about what was going on. It was very un-Alaska, and I suspect, probably not like it was when VX first launched.

Branson seems to like starting things, but he has a decidedly bad track record with keeping things fresh. VX was successful in the short term and failed in the long term because SRB doesn't have a long game. I'd suspect any new venture he'd bring to the US would suffer a similar fate.

exunited wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

The Virgin brand, as far as airlines go, does not carry the same special cachet that it did in the 1990's and the early to mid-2000's. There is really nothing unique about any of the Virgin branded carriers (Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Australia, and Virgin America, now fading into Alaska). The marketing, mood lighting, on board bars and the purple and red color scheme are pleasing to the eye, but none of the airlines are winning awards or really differentiating themselves relative to the competition. The entire Virgin brand concept now seems a little dated and done. Virgin America succeeded by offering a really different product than most major US airlines, and appealed to a specific type of consumer, but having flown it a few times over the years, there was nothing overwhelming about it.

The single reason VX did not end up in the landfill was that fuel prices dropped dramatically. It was proven over and over that nobody would pay a premium they were counting on for their mood lighting and hipster vibe. Only continuous massive cash infusions kept it going until they caught a break when jet A fell to levels where they could make a buck. VX was anything but a "success".

When I said "succeeded" I meant in terms of differentiation. Indeed, VX was a money losing venture from day 1 and approached Bankruptcy in 2013. Agree, the drop in oil prices helped it. They cut their network substantially in 2013-2014 because they were running low on cash. As I said, the Virgin premium is over and done with.

He is welcome to start another US airline... as soon as he immigrates and becomes a US citizen. That process will take him at least 4 years if he marries a US citizen after legally entering the US on a marriage visa (and it will likely take 12-24 months to get a marriage visa after he finds a suitable US citizen to marry - even if he marries outside of the USA). More likely 6-7 years minimum after legally entering the US if he does not wish to use the marriage immigration process.

Until then all he can be is a minority owner of a US airline... Which means he has to find other investors who will put up more money than he will - and they will be in control.

Personally, sounds like a bluff... and it's a really weak one in my opinion. Have at it Richard...

Have a great day,

exunited wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

The Virgin brand, as far as airlines go, does not carry the same special cachet that it did in the 1990's and the early to mid-2000's. There is really nothing unique about any of the Virgin branded carriers (Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Australia, and Virgin America, now fading into Alaska). The marketing, mood lighting, on board bars and the purple and red color scheme are pleasing to the eye, but none of the airlines are winning awards or really differentiating themselves relative to the competition. The entire Virgin brand concept now seems a little dated and done. Virgin America succeeded by offering a really different product than most major US airlines, and appealed to a specific type of consumer, but having flown it a few times over the years, there was nothing overwhelming about it.

The single reason VX did not end up in the landfill was that fuel prices dropped dramatically. It was proven over and over that nobody would pay a premium they were counting on for their mood lighting and hipster vibe. Only continuous massive cash infusions kept it going until they caught a break when jet A fell to levels where they could make a buck. VX was anything but a "success".

Might be true for VX, not true for similar airlines, like B6. B6 came up with a "customer friendly" offering of no fees (obviously that has changed, still lower than the competition excluding WN), free snacks, free PTV's, and more legroom. It seems the newest US airlines, who are also "customer friendly" (WN and B6) have survived while AA, CO, US, DL, NW, UA have either merged, gone bankrupt, or both.

Niki Lauda did the same thing after Lauda got bought up by Austrian. Also guys who ran airlines before that either got bought out or went bankrupt turned around and got into new ventures - Sun Country is a good example stateside of this.

I personally find the Virgin brand tacky and old. Sort of like a nightclub that was the spot in the 1990s and hasn't been refurbished or deep cleaned since. I'm not sure that image helps sell plane tickets anymore.

If losing money in the airline business makes you a bad airline, then every American airline is bad, since they've all gone through bankruptcy or had bailouts.

Ryanair01 wrote:

I personally find the Virgin brand tacky and old. Sort of like a nightclub that was the spot in the 1990s and hasn't been refurbished or deep cleaned since. I'm not sure that image helps sell plane tickets anymore.

I feel that way too. Atleast as an American. I can't speak for the rest of the world. I think the brand virgin is washed up or even nearly unheard of to the younger generation. I can recall flying them in 98 from JFK to London. At that point, they seemed very cool. Not so much anymore. I think Virgin America was also largely irrelevant if you didn't fly much on a few select routes. I guess if they can ever get the whole Virgin Galactic thing sorted out that could change peoples response to the brand. But for now, they are a rear view mirror brand.

I never understood by A.net has always been so aggressively opposed to the creation of new Airlines in the U.S. market, especially as competition,after a series of mergers and acquisitions, is at an all time low(along with customer satisfaction) 8 years ago it made sense with a struggling industry, but not so much any more.

allegiantflyer wrote:

I never understood by A.net has always been so aggressively opposed to the creation of new Airlines in the U.S. market, especially as competition,after a series of mergers and acquisitions, is at an all time low(along with customer satisfaction) 8 years ago it made sense with a struggling industry, but not so much any more.

Many here are employed by these airlines, and others see their favorite airline like I do my favorite football team. They get defensive and protective.

allegiantflyer wrote:

I never understood by A.net has always been so aggressively opposed to the creation of new Airlines in the U.S. market, especially as competition,after a series of mergers and acquisitions, is at an all time low(along with customer satisfaction) 8 years ago it made sense with a struggling industry, but not so much any more.

According to JD Power, your assertion is 100% wrong.

According to the J.D. Power 2017 North America Airline Satisfaction Study,SM released today, overall customer satisfaction with airlines has reached its highest level ever, continuing a trend that now stretches five consecutive years.