chunhimlai wrote:

tomkell92 wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

buy 25 a320neo and 25 B787
and build a international hub in EXE

Intercontinental route
EXE-YYZ
EXE-YVR
EXE-JFK
EXE-LAX
EXE-SFO
EXE-MIA
EXE-IAD
EXE-JNB-CPT
EXE-DXB
EXE-BKK
EXE-BOM
EXE-DEL
EXE-HKG
EXE-SIN
EXE-PVG
EXE-PEK
EXE-NRT
EXE-GRU-EZE

I assume you mean EXT (Exeter) ?
I don't think there's enough demand (if any) from Exeter to these places.

Southeest England is the least served UK region
There is seasonal charter brs-mco/puj and 5w cwl-doh only

There is a reason for that and that's because the region couldn't sustain those routes that you just suggested.

chunhimlai wrote:

tomkell92 wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

buy 25 a320neo and 25 B787
and build a international hub in EXE

Intercontinental route
EXE-YYZ
EXE-YVR
EXE-JFK
EXE-LAX
EXE-SFO
EXE-MIA
EXE-IAD
EXE-JNB-CPT
EXE-DXB
EXE-BKK
EXE-BOM
EXE-DEL
EXE-HKG
EXE-SIN
EXE-PVG
EXE-PEK
EXE-NRT
EXE-GRU-EZE

I assume you mean EXT (Exeter) ?
I don't think there's enough demand (if any) from Exeter to these places.

Southeest England is the least served UK region
There is seasonal charter brs-mco/puj and 5w cwl-doh only

CWL is in Wales not South West England.

Jerry123 wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

tomkell92 wrote:

I assume you mean EXT (Exeter) ?
I don't think there's enough demand (if any) from Exeter to these places.

Southeest England is the least served UK region
There is seasonal charter brs-mco/puj and 5w cwl-doh only

There is a reason for that and that's because the region couldn't sustain those routes that you just suggested.

It is more related to airport infrastructure than the demand—none of the major civil airport in southwest UK has runway longer than 2500m

Jerry123 wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

tomkell92 wrote:

I assume you mean EXT (Exeter) ?
I don't think there's enough demand (if any) from Exeter to these places.

Southeest UK is the least served UK region
There is seasonal charter brs-mco/puj and 5w cwl-doh only

CWL is in Wales not South West England.

NRT is in Chiba but not in Tokyo

Bankrupty is also a kind of future

I am with MOL here - Flybe wont be around in 5 years, the UK is a decent sized market, but between BA, Virgin, Easyjet, Ryanair, Thomas Cook, Norwegian and Jet 2 will have it covered, there is no need for flybe as the UK is so small in land scale there is only real demand for a few domestic routes that will be covered by the airlines mentioned above and the rest is by road/rail.

The UK might be small in land scale but it's still a fair distance between the south and the north and those internal flights by Flybe aren't really covered by the Airlines you have mentioned.

There is a market for those flights that's why Flybe fly from the likes of Southampton to Manchester upto 6 times daily otherwise it's a 220 mile or 5 hour journey by road or rail!

And Scotland is a further 200 miles distance.

chunhimlai wrote:

Jerry123 wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

Southeest UK is the least served UK region
There is seasonal charter brs-mco/puj and 5w cwl-doh only

CWL is in Wales not South West England.

NRT is in Chiba but not in Tokyo

That's a totally pointless comment as most of the worlds major airports are on the periphery of the city it serves, in that sense you could say that LHR is in Hounslow and CDG is in Roissy and FCO is in Fiumicino and ZUR is in Kloten, the list is endless!

Jerry123 wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

tomkell92 wrote:

I assume you mean EXT (Exeter) ?
I don't think there's enough demand (if any) from Exeter to these places.

Southeest England is the least served UK region
There is seasonal charter brs-mco/puj and 5w cwl-doh only

CWL is in Wales not South West England.

Jerry

I did say that his Geography is crap

I got a feeling that he doesn't reside in the United Kingdom!

Cunard wrote:

The UK might be small in land scale but it's still a fair distance between the south and the north and those internal flights by Flybe aren't really covered by the Airlines you have mentioned.

There is a market for those flights that's why Flybe fly from the likes of Southampton to Manchester upto 6 times daily otherwise it's a 220 mile or 5 hour journey by road or rail!

And Scotland is a further 200 miles distance.

On many routes passengers have the choice of road or rail as an alternative (the latter often being prohibitively expensive though), but for some places like Belfast, IOM, Jersey and Guernsey it is the only real option available, we really do depend on air travel. It's often sad to see airlines like Flybe, who have a fantastic set of pilots, crew and engineers in their company, being run into the ground by a high turnover of incompetent management. The CEO hates the Q400, but is stuck with it as they have no money, they are frantically trying to get rid of the last of the expensive 195s, there are other issues they simply don't want to address at all, and now they are going down the centralised load control route, on an aircraft that is often difficult to balance.

Flybe need to focus on SOU and EXT - there is no competition here, and people hate travelling to London/Bristol, the issue is that Flybe keep swapping and changing things. Southampton should be a cash cow, Hampshire has the third largest GVA in the U.K. and the 3rd largest population outside London, Birmingham and Manchester - it’s a prime market where money can be made. I think ultimately a rebrand is required with a new fleet of planes.

The original thinking with LHR slots was to utilise them as a new entrant, even if it meant making a small loss, for the stipulated amount of time until they could be divested for what was anticipated to be a significant profit. Shortly after it was announced that a decision on taking up the slots had been pushed back pending consultation with the board, so it's not certain on what basis they ultimately decided to launch Heathrow flights.

User001 wrote:

TurnaroudUK wrote:

Could Flybe be bought out and fly under the BA Cityflyer umbrella with them making moves back into regional markets couldn't they in theory operate in the regions again but with lower costs. The backing of IAG could do wonders for BE. The codeshare and feeder service that BE provide for regional Airports especially MAN is vital for UK aviaiton without BE we would not see the expansion we are seeing in the North. That being said some cost cutting on loss making routes should be undertaken.

Flybe are not essential to growth at MAN. The numbers on long haul coming from flybe transfers are minuscule. There are on avarage more transfers from the EY to AA at MAN than there are flybe flights all day. So with that, while they do play a key part in domestic connectivity from MAN. Flybe have had very little part in the expansion of other services from MAN.

Does anyone know what the feeder numbers are like for other Airports? If the connecting numbers are that low it would be interesting to know what the cost element is of codesharing on these flights for minimal passenger numbers?
Speaking specifically about CWL i know the numbers on the AF CDG codeshare and EI DUB are generally quite good, but there's AZ on the Italian routes, CDG and DUB, VS to GLA and AY to CDG. Are these really needed? If these are echoed through different UK routes it begs the question how much to BE actually benefit from them?
Would it make more sense for BE to chop these codeshare agreements, keep some core ones, and downsize the aircraft (assuming it's a jet) or frequency to support their own originating passengers?

MAN, BHX and SOU operate as hubs for BE. CWL also sees a number of BE connections to/from various places as some of the CWL route network aren't served by many other UK airports, if at all. Could they build a niche in building minihubs?

SotonLAX wrote:

Flybe need to focus on SOU and EXT - there is no competition here, and people hate travelling to London/Bristol, the issue is that Flybe keep swapping and changing things. Southampton should be a cash cow, Hampshire has the third largest GVA in the U.K. and the 3rd largest population outside London, Birmingham and Manchester - it’s a prime market where money can be made. I think ultimately a rebrand is required with a new fleet of planes.

Problem with Southampton is it's so close to Heathrow and i think they already have everything that is viable already covered. Exeter is also a limited market with Bristol having sucking up a lot of it's passengers.

chunhimlai wrote:

buy 25 a320neo and 25 B787
and build a international hub in EXE

Intercontinental route
EXE-YYZ
EXE-YVR
EXE-JFK
EXE-LAX
EXE-SFO
EXE-MIA
EXE-IAD
EXE-JNB-CPT
EXE-DXB
EXE-BKK
EXE-BOM
EXE-DEL
EXE-HKG
EXE-SIN
EXE-PVG
EXE-PEK
EXE-NRT
EXE-GRU-EZE

"Signed, Airliners.net"

Although it's struggling just now, Flybe in one guise or another has a future, even if it's a rebirth. With the level of demand on some domestic citypairs sustaining 6-8 flights a day, there is clearly demand that cannot go unmet.

Also probably worth clarifying some of the incorrect comments in this post regarding LHR. It's correct that the remedy slots must be used on a select number of routes (EDI/ABZ included) for at least 6 IATA seasons before these can be move to alternative routes, but don't be mistaken for thinking that at any point these become a Flybe asset that can be traded - they don't, They remain the property of IAG and should Flybe decide not to operate the slots for whatever reason, they return to IAG to be fulfilled as a remedy slot by another operator. It would be wrong to think that any possible buyer for Flybe will suddenly inherit a very valuable LHR slot portfolio that can be sold in the future.

I don't think this is correct, the details are here: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers ... 290_EN.pdf

(639) Once Flybe have operated the existing slots for 2 IATA seasons they can apply for any/all of the existing remedy slots to operate wherever they like in Europe, providing they continue operating the orginal 2 routes.

(644/645) After 6 IATA seasons they have grandfathering rights and can sell or transfer the slots but they can only be operated on European routes (however the airline can choose which routes).

The airline asks IAG for the slots, so basically the timings of the flights are up for negotiation but I guess Flybe requested the slots with tight turnaround times because that suited them.

You’re correct that this is indeed the legal position under EU law but there is also the position under UK law to consider.

In theory, under EU law, slot trading for monetary compensation is illegal and does not happen at any Mainland EU airport and yet in the UK this ruling was overturned in the UK’s High Court to permit this activity. It’s why Monarch’s slots at LGW and LTN were sold as a separate asset from the business and yet Air Berlin’s slots could only be acquired if parts of the entire business were purchased.

I remain of the opinion that although Flybe obtain grandfather rights to the historic slots they operate from IATA season to season, if they ever choose to cease flying at LHR, the slots return to IAG.

I saw a quote somewhere, it might have been said by the previous CEO, that you'd have to establish an airline that fulfills Flybe's role if it did not exist. By the nature of geography, Britain needs regional air connectivity. Places like the Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Northern Ireland, South West England, North East Scotland etc rely on Flybe for essential services. It's not a Monarch situation where FR, EZY or BA mainline can easily fill in the routes. Even where EZY have eaten into BE's share, like LPL-IOM for instance, BE still retain services due to the frequency they can offer with their smaller aircraft.

In one way or another they will stick around, where that be as Stobart Air, easyJet Express or whatever.

chunhimlai wrote:

buy 25 a320neo and 25 B787
and build a international hub in EXE

Intercontinental route
EXE-YYZ
EXE-YVR
EXE-JFK
EXE-LAX
EXE-SFO
EXE-MIA
EXE-IAD
EXE-JNB-CPT
EXE-DXB
EXE-BKK
EXE-BOM
EXE-DEL
EXE-HKG
EXE-SIN
EXE-PVG
EXE-PEK
EXE-NRT
EXE-GRU-EZE

That was fun, thanks for animating the topic

JobsaGoodun wrote:

You’re correct that this is indeed the legal position under EU law but there is also the position under UK law to consider.

In theory, under EU law, slot trading for monetary compensation is illegal and does not happen at any Mainland EU airport and yet in the UK this ruling was overturned in the UK’s High Court to permit this activity. It’s why Monarch’s slots at LGW and LTN were sold as a separate asset from the business and yet Air Berlin’s slots could only be acquired if parts of the entire business were purchased.

I remain of the opinion that although Flybe obtain grandfather rights to the historic slots they operate from IATA season to season, if they ever choose to cease flying at LHR, the slots return to IAG.

If any airline stops flying their slots at LHR they go back into the slot pool and they can be re-distributed. It's not clear whether in this case they would go back to IAG or the slot pool, but it doesn't really matter as once they become grandfathered, if Flybe don't need them any more they will lease them or sell them. There is too much value in the slots to give them back unneccessarily.

If EU law doesn't stop the sale of slots at restricted airports now it's not going to in 3 years time.

It doesn't really matter what's in the EU ruling, UK law matches this and goes further to restrict the sale of any remedy slots.

These slots are an asset of IAG through their acquisition of BMI. IAG are obliged to provide them to a competitor if a submission to use them is successful, however if there are no takers then IAG are able to use remedy slots on any route of their choosing to ensure the capacity does not go unutilised. They have to operate on them to retain the historic rights. The slots are effectively held in trust forever as a concession to the BMI deal meaning that any operator, IAG included can operate on them but can never profit financially by trading them, unless the current ruling and legal position were overturned.

They've negotiated reduced payments on extended leases for Q400s.
https://newsroom.aviator.aero/flybe-gro ... with-goal/

Hopefully, the planes stay reliable and there is a net saving there. Those planes appear to be 10 years old according to the report.

Everyone seems to be discussing the idea of a BA franchise, and I just don't get it. BA already have plenty of UK feed into LHR, which is where they clearly concentrate most of their traffic. Flybe struggles to compete with TUI & MT on holiday/leisure routes, and struggles to compete with U2 & FR on European city pairs. Do they have a future as a more consolidated airline, with less capacity? Yes. As part of BA? I don't see it.

JobsaGoodun wrote:

Also probably worth clarifying some of the incorrect comments in this post regarding LHR. It's correct that the remedy slots must be used on a select number of routes (EDI/ABZ included) for at least 6 IATA seasons before these can be move to alternative routes, but don't be mistaken for thinking that at any point these become a Flybe asset that can be traded - they don't, They remain the property of IAG and should Flybe decide not to operate the slots for whatever reason, they return to IAG to be fulfilled as a remedy slot by another operator. It would be wrong to think that any possible buyer for Flybe will suddenly inherit a very valuable LHR slot portfolio that can be sold in the future.

As others have pointed out, it's not necessarily as open and shut as this. For what it's worth I interpret the rules on the same lines as yourself, but senior management at FlyBe have in the past interpreted it very differently. Although I should also add, I have very little confidence in their prior analysis and decision making.

Jerry123 wrote:

I'd be surprised if they came a BA franchise plus I honestly think BA couldn't give 2 hoots about the regional airports and expanding their brand to them.
As for Stobart i don't see how they would've benefited Flybe and how they would've taken Flybe forward in anyway.
It is interesting times for Flybe but i do believe they'll pull through.

A BA franchise wouldn't be that beneficial to either BA or Flybe. BA won't want to be responsible for a comparatively small and struggling airline. They should just make a bigger codeshare network with each other.
Flybe's new CEO seems to be doing a good job and its turnaround is on track. Load factors are improving too. Once the 195s are gone things will improve quickly.

Twitter is awash with disgruntled Customers for cancelled and delayed flights complaining bitterly.
This is nothing unusual in that every airline has disgruntled passengers on Twitter but Flybe are smaller than most and shouldn't be seeing so many cancellations and delays. They also, can't afford to pay EU261 payouts.

leghorn wrote:

Twitter is awash with disgruntled Customers for cancelled and delayed flights complaining bitterly.
This is nothing unusual in that every airline has disgruntled passengers on Twitter but Flybe are smaller than most and shouldn't be seeing so many cancellations and delays. They also, can't afford to pay EU261 payouts.

Flybe operate around 500 flights a day on average i'm led to believe, there aircraft generally operate 6 to 8 flights a day some even more so although there fleet isn't as large as Ryanair say it gets intensive use plus it has franchise partners like Eastern that aren't very reliable on some routes so that will increase it.

jghealey wrote:

Jerry123 wrote:

I'd be surprised if they came a BA franchise plus I honestly think BA couldn't give 2 hoots about the regional airports and expanding their brand to them.
As for Stobart i don't see how they would've benefited Flybe and how they would've taken Flybe forward in anyway.
It is interesting times for Flybe but i do believe they'll pull through.

A BA franchise wouldn't be that beneficial to either BA or Flybe. BA won't want to be responsible for a comparatively small and struggling airline. They should just make a bigger codeshare network with each other.
Flybe's new CEO seems to be doing a good job and its turnaround is on track. Load factors are improving too. Once the 195s are gone things will improve quickly.

Good to hear, i've flown with them a few times from Cardiff and find them a brilliant airline and great to fly with especially in the E jets.

https://www.hmgaerospace.com/news/lara/ ... y-returns/

This indicates that FlyBE's strategy is working and Management now understand their niche but I wouldn't use the report as an excuse to become irrationally exuberant.

Kinnear commented: “The Q400, with its 53-56 seats, hits a real sweet spot for us, and then that fits in really nicely with the E175.”

A quote from the article. Aren't there 78 seats in the Q400's?
Forgive me but i thought the seat reduction was reducing the fleet size, not the number of seats in each aircraft! I hope this is a typo and not an embarassing error by the COO!

Honestly, if that's a genuine quote then I'm disappointed and still concerned. Part of their problem over the past years has been having a senior management team who didn't have even a vague technical understanding of the business they were running. This led to misguided strategies which couldn't be implemented and inevitably led to losses.

OA260 wrote:

Jerry123 wrote:

Yes Flybe does have a future. The losses are coming down and their revenue is going up and the amount they earn per passenger that they earn is going up. They are on the right path to recovery after some bad decisions.

If they did go bust it would be a disaster for a lot of airports around the UK. Exeter Belfast city and Southampton would be ghost airports over night. Cardiff and Doncaster and Newquay would be severely damaged. Birmingham Manchester Glasgow and Edinburgh would lose a lot of passengers and a lot of connectivity and virtually none of those routes would be replaced because there isn't another airline that can or is willing to do what Flybe does in the UK.

Totally agree. They really need to get their act together though their reliability was never great but recently on certain routes hours of delays are common place.

Yes, I am a bit worried, because I am flying with them tomorrow from BHX to Milan. In the last 7 days, two flights have been over 3 hours late.

Up to 118 passengers (E195) claiming 250 Euros each can not do a lot of good to their profits!