London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #211   Report Post  
Old October 17th 09, 01:59 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,018
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:13:36 +0100, "Recliner"
wrote:
"Bruce" wrote in message

On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:27:44 +0100, "Recliner"
wrote:
"Bruce" wrote:

Probably not interested in a ragbag assortment of tired old
aircraft.

... which are probably leased anyway.



Yes, but the leases don't lapse when a firm is taken over. Unless a
termination is negotiated, at a considerable cost, the leases will
simply be assigned to the new owners and continue to the end of their
terms.

So the condition of the fleet is important, and whether they are owned
or leased, they remain a liability.


So Lufthansa now has those leases. It's not likely that any airline
interested in operating the bmibaby routes would want to use those
particular aircraft to operate them -- they'd be much more likely to
want to use aircraft compatible with the rest of their fleets. So, the
chances are that, even if some of those routes continue to flown by
someone, it won't be those aircraft flying them, nor will the planes be
wearing bmibaby liveries.



Conversely, if Lufthansa succeeds in selling bmibaby, it will be a
high priority for Lufthansa to transfer those leases to the buyer as
part of the deal. The new owner of bmibaby, a low cost airline, is
perhaps rather more likely than Lufthansa to have any use for a
clapped out fleet, hopefully with much lower leasing costs than buying
new.

If the leases are not transferred on sale, Lufthansa will rightly
expect a higher price for bmibaby to compensate for the retained
liability of all those leases.


  #212   Report Post  
Old October 17th 09, 02:55 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 111
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport

In message
John B wrote:

On Oct 16, 6:15*pm, rail wrote:
In message
* * * * * John B wrote:

On Oct 16, 11:00*am, rail wrote:
EZY have a good relationship with Balpa, whereas FR ... yes, well.


Given FR is an Irish based company, why should it have any
relationship with Balpa?


Because their permanent Stansted staff (their largest site) are
employed in the UK under English law?


But does that include pilots?


Yes, and cabin crew.


I wasn't convinced given the large proportion of flight (as opposed to cabin)
crew that were from Eastern Europe. I could easily believe that O'Leary was
saving money by using pilots 'based' in eg Poland, being paid Polish salaries
rather than British rates.

That would certainly be a cause of friction with Balpa.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
  #213   Report Post  
Old October 17th 09, 02:59 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,008
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport

"Bruce" wrote in message


If the leases are not transferred on sale, Lufthansa will rightly
expect a higher price for bmibaby to compensate for the retained
liability of all those leases.


But why would anyone pay any significant amount for bmibaby? Its brand
is worthless and it has no significant assets (such as the valuable
Heathrow slots and more modern aircraft owned by bmi mainline). Any
airline wanting to expand on to its routes is free to do so, and could
probably do it more efficiently than by buying a failing small airline.

It's far more likely that Lufthansa either has to pay someone to take it
away, or just shuts it down. And at least Lufthansa does still operate
similar, but larger, 737-300 and 737-500 fleets. In fact, Lufthansa's
737-300s are on average significantly older than bmi's, so it could
probably use the bmibaby fleet to *upgrade* its own fleet (the oldest
Lufthansa 737 is five years older than the oldest bmibaby one). My
experience of Lufthansa's planes is that they can be very tatty indeed,
so the bmibaby ones may actually be in better condition, too.


  #214   Report Post  
Old October 17th 09, 03:12 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,008
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport

"rail" wrote in message

In message


John B wrote:

On Oct 16, 6:15 pm, rail wrote:
In message

John B wrote:

On Oct 16, 11:00 am, rail wrote:
EZY have a good relationship with Balpa, whereas FR ... yes,
well.

Given FR is an Irish based company, why should it have any
relationship with Balpa?

Because their permanent Stansted staff (their largest site) are
employed in the UK under English law?

But does that include pilots?


Yes, and cabin crew.


I wasn't convinced given the large proportion of flight (as opposed
to cabin) crew that were from Eastern Europe. I could easily believe
that O'Leary was saving money by using pilots 'based' in eg Poland,
being paid Polish salaries rather than British rates.

That would certainly be a cause of friction with Balpa.


Yes, that makes a lot of sense.


  #215   Report Post  
Old October 17th 09, 03:19 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,018
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:59:47 +0100, "Recliner"
wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message


If the leases are not transferred on sale, Lufthansa will rightly
expect a higher price for bmibaby to compensate for the retained
liability of all those leases.


But why would anyone pay any significant amount for bmibaby? Its brand
is worthless and it has no significant assets (such as the valuable
Heathrow slots and more modern aircraft owned by bmi mainline). Any
airline wanting to expand on to its routes is free to do so, and could
probably do it more efficiently than by buying a failing small airline.

It's far more likely that Lufthansa either has to pay someone to take it
away, or just shuts it down. And at least Lufthansa does still operate
similar, but larger, 737-300 and 737-500 fleets. In fact, Lufthansa's
737-300s are on average significantly older than bmi's, so it could
probably use the bmibaby fleet to *upgrade* its own fleet (the oldest
Lufthansa 737 is five years older than the oldest bmibaby one). My
experience of Lufthansa's planes is that they can be very tatty indeed,
so the bmibaby ones may actually be in better condition, too.



You can try to grind me down as much as you like g, but the problem
of the lease liability remains. There will almost certainly be parent
company guarantees from Lufthansa, so this liability really cannot be
ignored.



  #216   Report Post  
Old October 17th 09, 03:41 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,125
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport

In message , at 15:59:47 on
Sat, 17 Oct 2009, Recliner remarked:
Any airline wanting to expand on to its routes is free to do so, and
could probably do it more efficiently than by buying a failing small
airline.


Ironically, BMIbaby has just announced a significant expansion at EMA to
replace many of the routes previously flow by Easyjet (ex BA-Go) from
there, which are being chopped at the end of the year.

But if the EMA-AMS flights are eventually a casualty, it'll
inconvenience me quite a bit. They are always full, but there's not an
obvious replacement carrier unless Flybe does indeed start a hub at EMA
(they fly to AMS from several other UK regional airports).
--
Roland Perry
  #217   Report Post  
Old October 18th 09, 07:04 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 112
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport

Recliner wrote:
My
experience of Lufthansa's planes is that they can be very tatty indeed,
so the bmibaby ones may actually be in better condition, too.


Not my experience (primarily Airbus A320 family planes and an occasional
Boeing 737 on MAN-FRA)...
--
Jeremy Double {real address, include nospam}
Rail and transport photos at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmdoubl...7603834894248/
  #218   Report Post  
Old October 18th 09, 02:21 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,796
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:21:24 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

I'm a bit confused here. It seems they don't run any ERJ145's any more,


I meant those. Didn't know they'd got rid of them, but then I
(deliberately) haven't flown with them for a while.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.
  #219   Report Post  
Old October 23rd 09, 07:20 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Oct 2009
Posts: 283
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 20:30:26 on Wed, 14 Oct
2009, " remarked:
There was a service a few years ago, that was running trains out of
Waterloo to Southampton for about 1.


Still is, called Megatrain.

The problem, however, was that passengers who paid that fare were confined
to one car on the train.


Didn't last long, according to reports from travellers. Now any carriage
is acceptable.

I'm under the impression that it was not the most pleasant journey.


Why's that? Many advance purchase train tickets today are issued with
compulsory reservations. What's the unpleasantness if they turn out to be
all in one carriage?


Several foreign railways fill up the seats - carriage by carriage and lock
the unused ones out of use.

It is pot luck whether you are in a completely full carriage or an almost
empty one

tim





  #220   Report Post  
Old October 23rd 09, 08:48 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london,alt.travel.uk.air
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Oct 2009
Posts: 50
Default Wafted from paradise to Luton Airport


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
I've heard that this is already happening, unfortunately.


No, the opposite is true.



The majority of flights I make are in classless aircraft, those that are not
have either no FC section or only 12 - 16 FC seats

The traditional FC passenger is now the private jet hirer.

I don't suggest that BC and FC will disappear just that most airlines will
have to depend on the price sensitive market.
The companies I have worked for have all had policies for travelling that
mandate coach for 4Hrs and then case by case above that..
e.g. Business class if working within 8 hours of arrival.



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Way to Paradise algagaa London Transport 4 February 3rd 08 11:20 PM
Luton airport - Central London (Bayswater) Aglians London Transport 5 June 17th 07 12:48 PM
Best Station for Luton Airport... Marcus Fox London Transport 6 September 20th 04 06:50 PM
Did you waft in from paradise? Dave Arquati London Transport 5 September 16th 04 06:42 PM
Luton Airport Robin May London Transport 14 January 22nd 04 08:14 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017