BMI finally gone into administration

Discuss all things 'aviation' that do not fit into a more appropriate forum
Post Reply
User avatar
Red Dragon
Posts: 1721
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 6:56 pm

BMI finally gone into administration

Post by Red Dragon »

Just been announced on BBC News website

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47267901

clearstone
Posts: 431
Joined: Mon 08 Sep 2008, 9:09 am
Location: UK

Re: Flybe finally gone into administration

Post by clearstone »

Its Flybmi, not FlyBe. Perhaps you should change the title.

jules48
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 6:18 pm

Re: Flybe finally gone into administration

Post by jules48 »

BMI Regional.Typical BBC ppor reporting.

jules48
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 6:18 pm

Re: Flybe finally gone into administration

Post by jules48 »

Why blame Brexit.they were operating old aircraft that used alot of fuel on stupid routes that were non profitable.

Poor management is the reason

User avatar
MarkL
UKAR Supporter
Posts: 1874
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 5:44 pm

Re: Flybe finally gone into administration

Post by MarkL »

jules48 wrote:Why blame Brexit.they were operating old aircraft that used alot of fuel on stupid routes that were non profitable.

Poor management is the reason


wow Jules, with that sort of knowledge at your fingertips you could have saved them !!

Did you even try ?
HTAFC

cg_341
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sun 09 Aug 2015, 1:39 pm

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by cg_341 »

Are Embraer 145s really that uneconomical? Perhaps someone should tell the US regional carriers...

McG
Posts: 996
Joined: Wed 03 Sep 2008, 11:26 am
Contact:

Re: Flybe finally gone into administration

Post by McG »

jules48 wrote:Why blame Brexit.they were operating old aircraft that used alot of fuel on stupid routes that were non profitable.

Poor management is the reason


Read the press release - due to Brexit they have been excluded from the EU Carbon Trading Scheme. This has forced up costs for them. They have been unable to bid for corporate shuttle contracts involving flying within mainland Europe due to Brexit, and were unsure if they would be able to continue flying existing routes within mainland Europe after 29th March - note these are not UK to Europe routes.

These will not be the only factors, but they will have been contributory factors.

User avatar
boff180
UKAR Staff
Posts: 9830
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 2:28 pm
Location: Solihull
Contact:

Re: Flybe finally gone into administration

Post by boff180 »

jules48 wrote:Why blame Brexit.


Because it is the truth and has been announced as one of the major factors causing the company issues in recent months.

Or... would you like the news span to say the nasty EU wouldn’t let them play and that’s why we should leave as they can then fuel their aircraft with Unicorn poop in order to avoid the regulations?

Concorde216
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat 11 Jul 2009, 3:06 pm

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by Concorde216 »

The airline is called FlyBMI, not BMI Regional. At least the BBC posted from Flybe's twitter page that they are not the airline concerned.

ERJ-145s are nice jets but the economics of operating them are questionable. Operating 49-seat jets on flights less than an hour is inefficient and so higher fares are warranted in order to cover the costs. We had them in BA Connect and we found that the Dash 8-300s were more profitable than the ERJ-145. Turboprop have always been the ideal aircraft for regional flights but it's passenger perception.

Concorde216
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat 11 Jul 2009, 3:06 pm

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by Concorde216 »

cg_341 wrote:Are Embraer 145s really that uneconomical? Perhaps someone should tell the US regional carriers...


Different operating economics. They have an extremely lower cost base compared to Europe. Regional airline crews in the US are not as well paid as you may think.

User avatar
starbuck
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue 28 Mar 2017, 9:35 pm

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by starbuck »

I saw Simon Calder (I know, I know) on the BBC this morning saying they were averaging 18 passengers per flight. If that's true I would say it doesn't matter what aircraft you are flying or where you are flying them to, it's unsustainable.

User avatar
bigfatron
Posts: 918
Joined: Mon 06 Jul 2009, 11:40 am

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by bigfatron »

Funny how almost all the footage on the news shows planes of the long since defunct 'proper' BMI and not FlyBMI.

Big Eric
Posts: 2155
Joined: Sun 22 Aug 2010, 6:15 pm

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by Big Eric »

starbuck wrote:I saw Simon Calder (I know, I know) on the BBC this morning saying they were averaging 18 passengers per flight. If that's true I would say it doesn't matter what aircraft you are flying or where you are flying them to, it's unsustainable.


His figure of 18 passengers per flight comes from the news reports, the BBC one says "The airline last year ran 29,000 flights carrying 522,000 passengers." That also means that the fleet of 17 aircraft each did an average of 4.67 sectors per day.

Concorde216
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat 11 Jul 2009, 3:06 pm

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by Concorde216 »

I would go with 16 as you will tend to have at least one aircraft in maintenance at any one time.

cg_341
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sun 09 Aug 2015, 1:39 pm

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by cg_341 »

Concorde216 wrote:
cg_341 wrote:Are Embraer 145s really that uneconomical? Perhaps someone should tell the US regional carriers...


Different operating economics. They have an extremely lower cost base compared to Europe. Regional airline crews in the US are not as well paid as you may think.

But it wasn't operating economics I meant, I've highlighted the section of the post I was referring to:
jules48 wrote:they were operating old aircraft that used alot of fuel on stupid routes that were non profitable.


Also, picking up another post, weren't they still doing Airbus charters? Fairly sure I've seen photos of these flying empty because Airbus are paying for them to operate the route, whether or not they have people on. That'll certainly bring the averages down!

Concorde216
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat 11 Jul 2009, 3:06 pm

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by Concorde216 »

For charter work, yes the charterer is paying for the whole aircraft and crew. But on normal scheduled flights, not so. Having worked at BA Connect, we had 28 of them. On the longer routes to Germany and even Manchester to Madrid, it was economical. However, many flights were an hour and even from new they were expensive to operate. They were profitable only because of the high fares being charged before the low cost airlines came in. After that, offering low price tickets and offering the same service and product, profit margins shrunk.

FlyBMI were doing work for Airbus as well as Brussels Airlines plus the PSO route between Ferry and Stansted. A couple of contracts now requiring a new carrier.

User avatar
Euan Buchan
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue 23 Oct 2018, 1:20 pm
Location: Edinburgh UK

Re: BMI finally gone into administration

Post by Euan Buchan »

I heard Loganair will be doing some of the BMI routes
The Concorde Forum
A Site Dedicated For Concorde Fans
http://theconcordeforum.freeforums.net/

Post Reply