BestWestern From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6441 posts, RR: 58 Posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2495 times:
Bmi are more and more moving to reducing capacity from routes where they compete against BA to operate routes where they are the sole UK carrier
LHR - DUB
LHR - BHD
LHR - MME
LHR - INV
LHR - JER
LHR - ALC
LHR - VCE
LHR - NAP
LHR - Bmed markets
LHR - Saudi Arabian markets
Would it just make more sense to "if you cant beat them, join em..."
Bmi could drop their constant market repositioning, and use the power, strength and gravitas of the British Airways brand and global feed at heathrow..
I actually see your point but I feel the only way this would happen is if this became a takeover situation.
Lets be honest, what can BD actually offer to BA as a franchise carrier, other than those few routes, many of which BA ended themselves or moved to LGW. The only thing that I can see would appeal to BA is the MAN based routes, BD have quite a presence up there which may help BA cater for the UK once again. The only other thing would be the BMed routes, but then I suspect if they are that valuable to BA they will set up their own routes following Bmeds purchase and end of franchise this Fall
AIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2365 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2410 times:
Quoting BestWestern (Thread starter): Would it just make more sense to "if you cant beat them, join em..."
Bmi could drop their constant market repositioning, and use the power, strength and gravitas of the British Airways brand and global feed at heathrow..
For me, I think, it would be the ideal solution. Three UK airlines based at LHR is too much and they are could benefit more from working together as from competing. If BMI turn to be a BA franchise, they could stop all duplicated services and lauch new services to cities served by BA from LGW or not served by BA at all.
BMI could keep the flights mentioned above and operate LHR to ALG, KRK, TRN, VCE, TLS, BOD... This would create a strong airline at LHR which could better compete with the likes of AF, LH or KL.
AIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2365 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2344 times:
Quoting EFHK (Reply 3): While this would make sense to me, I really don't think there's any chance this takeover would be accepted by the authorities.
Why would the authroties say no to such a deal? London and the UK are the most open markets in Europe. If you want to travel from London to anywhere else you have a choice of 5 airports and a lot of local and foreign airlines.
I don't see any problem with that.
Pe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 18848 posts, RR: 54 Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2336 times:
Or BA could, if possible, acquire BD, probably for loose change, then rationalise its routes - scrap those that aren't profitable or don't fit with its strategy and integrate those routes that are profitable and well-fitting, and use left-over BD LHR slots for other, more profitable services. It could integrate BD's aircraft into its own fleet with speed and ease. It could sell BD's regional services to BE or someone. It'd have eliminated a competitor, gained routes that it seemingly wants (e.g. LHR-Belfast), obtained very valuable slots, acquired more aircraft... It'd enable BA to greatly increase its overall presence at LHR, its castle.
"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
EFHK From Finland, joined Nov 2006, 392 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2276 times:
Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 4): Why would the authroties say no to such a deal? London and the UK are the most open markets in Europe. If you want to travel from London to anywhere else you have a choice of 5 airports and a lot of local and foreign airlines.
I don't see any problem with that
Name as many British legacy carriers as you can:
- BA
- BD
- VS
- Uh...
Sure, if the objective is to create one strong British airline, why not merge all BA, BD and VS together. But VS operates only long-haul, BD mostly only short-haul. BD and VS would be a perfect fit, but BA and BD would eliminate all (British) short-haul competition. Domestically this would mean only one legacy carrier. While I like BA, and so this would be a nice merger, I doubt it will happen.
One of the best places in the world: McDonald's in T2 at FRA.
RTFM From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 397 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2223 times:
Quoting EFHK (Reply 6): but BA and BD would eliminate all (British) short-haul competition. Domestically this would mean only one legacy carrier.
Who cares how many 'legacy' carriers there are domestically...? Certainly not Joe public. There's plenty of other carriers to choose from both domestically and for short haul and the success of Ryanair, EasyJet, et al are a testament to that.
Lite From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2223 times:
Quoting EFHK (Reply 6): VS operates only long-haul, BD mostly only short-haul. BD and VS would be a perfect fit
I have very mixed feelings about a merger between bmi and virgin atlantic. Virgin enjoys the benefits of bmi's feeder network into Heathrow and Manchester, as well as using bmi's longhaul routes from Manchester for their virgin holidays subsidiary, SRB has also stated he regrets having never launched a UK-based low-cost airline. However, domestically the virgin group are far more keen to push for the success of virgin trains than to substantially invest in a shorthaul subsidiary, and like British Airways have little or no interest in bmi's significant and profitable regional network.
Quoting EFHK (Reply 6): Name as many British legacy carriers as you can:
- BA
- BD
- VS
- Uh...
Does Britain need three legacy carriers, moreover three with the same London hub airport? The UK has BA as our national carrier, even if this is not so much official anymore, with bmi and virgin providing competition at LHR. This doesn't mean the end of competition however, as the no-frills airlines have their largest bases at London, with the charter airlines now also providing scheduled capacity, and that's just the UK airlines (plus Ryanair who are Irish.)
Quoting BestWestern (Thread starter): Would it just make more sense to "if you cant beat them, join em..."
It would make sense, but then when has bmi ever used common sense as an argument for their business model? The airline is very much SMB's baby and after years of building up his empire, I just can't see him, purely for emotional over financial reasons, selling out to his biggest competitor and arch-nemesis. I think bmi would do well to become a second force airline working alongside BA, having taken over the Saudi routes, BMED and could possibly take over some of the GB Airways markets as a code-share partner, but very few people know the future of bmi, the next few months will be very interesting.
EFHK From Finland, joined Nov 2006, 392 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2150 times:
Quoting RTFM (Reply 7): Certainly not Joe public. There's plenty of other carriers to choose from both domestically and for short haul and the success of Ryanair, EasyJet, et al are a testament to that.
Yes there are. But I tend to separate legacy and budget carriers to different leagues. While it's very true that competition nowadays has a lot to do with legacy vs LCC battles, the legacies offer things LCCs don't. For example connections, and alliances. Now I admit I'm not perfectly familiar with the UK market, and the connecting possibilities of airlines such as Easyjet, but the merger would definitely decrease for example international competition at places such as Edinburgh. How many carriers would lose their code-shares to EDI if BD was taken over by BA? And thinking about the positions of global alliances in UK, oneworld would be dominating with the already small Star presence practically gone.
Quoting Lite (Reply 8): Does Britain need three legacy carriers, moreover three with the same London hub airport?
Well, as I said, there are practically two.
Quoting Lite (Reply 8): I have very mixed feelings about a merger between bmi and virgin atlantic.
OK, I don't have really have an insight to this, I just counted 1+1=2. Don't know all these variables of which you mentioned a few.
[Edited 2007-04-06 15:44:07]
One of the best places in the world: McDonald's in T2 at FRA.
Lite From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1982 times:
Quoting EFHK (Reply 9): For example connections, and alliances.
More and more people don't need connections from regional airports with Heathrow on more than one carrier. In terms of shorthaul destinations, most regional airports have now been opened up by low-cost or regional airlines who are flying to more of these destinations point-to-point at significantly lower cost and less hassle than going via LHR. Also more European airlines are launching their own flights from the regions directly to their hubs to encourage more people to use these as an alternative to LHR, even Emirates and Continental now fly directly to the regions discouraging people to go through Heathrow.
Quoting EFHK (Reply 9): How many carriers would lose their code-shares to EDI if BD was taken over by BA?
I remember reading that on some bmi flights there are 19 airlines putting their own codes on the flight. When the airline was British Midland, just before joining Star Alliance, they were referred to as the airline who would jump into bed with anybody (Slut to Virgin as it were)
Quoting EFHK (Reply 9): Don't know all these variables of which you mentioned a few.
A lot of people have a virgin/bmi merger on their wishlists, but this is not shared by bmi employees or faithful bmi passengers in the regions who would lose out. bmi's CEO has stated he is interested in the airline growing by acquiring other airlines, not being acquired, though perhaps this could be done with close co-operation with Star and British Airways.
AlanUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1779 times:
Quoting EFHK (Reply 6): but BA and BD would eliminate all (British) short-haul competition
Gosh... Some people!
How about (to name a few):
EasyJet
Ryanair
Jet2
Air Berlin (British operations despite the name)
Astraeus
Aurigny
Eastern Airways
Emerald Airways
Monarch Scheduled
All these are British and operate short-haul in the UK, that's before you start mentionning the charter competition, and of course, the big boys from Europe).
If you read my posts again you'll hopefully see that I was talking about legacy carriers.
Quoting Lite (Reply 10): More and more people don't need connections from regional airports with Heathrow on more than one carrier.
You make good points. But I still don't see long haul competition as strong with these two airlines merged than without. EK and CO aren't a lot, and to most destinations a transfer at LHR is necessary. (These markets are already served only by BA though.)
One of the best places in the world: McDonald's in T2 at FRA.
AlanUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1526 times:
Quoting EFHK (Reply 12): If you read my posts again you'll hopefully see that I was talking about legacy carriers.
And your point being? The only legacy carrier in the UK are bmi and BA, so we don't have that many to start with. Quite frankly, legacy carrier doesn't mean anything anymore. Customers want to fly, and they couldn't care less wether the service is operated by a legacy carrier or not.
Quoting EFHK (Reply 9): While it's very true that competition nowadays has a lot to do with legacy vs LCC battles, the legacies offer things LCCs don't. For example connections, and alliances. Now I admit I'm not perfectly familiar with the UK market, and the connecting possibilities of airlines such as Easyjet, but the merger would definitely decrease for example international competition at places such as Edinburgh. How many carriers would lose their code-shares to EDI if BD was taken over by BA? And thinking about the positions of global alliances in UK, oneworld would be dominating with the already small Star presence practically gone.
Quoting AlanUK (Reply 13): The only legacy carrier in the UK are bmi and BA, so we don't have that many to start with.
Exactly!
One of the best places in the world: McDonald's in T2 at FRA.
Lite From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1504 times:
Why do we need more than one legacy carrier, look at other European countries like France, Germany, Spain, Italy - they have their legacy flag carrier, then all other competition is from low cost, regional or charter airlines? Britain has a history of having a second airline, after BOAC & BEA merged, the government felt there should be a second force airline, which until the 80s was British Caledonian, and since then the role has been split between British Midland for shorthaul and virgin atlantic for longhaul. There is plenty of competition in the London to the regions market, getting rid of bmi might reduce competition into LHR, but not into London as a whole.
AirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 1913 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1356 times:
The growth of the LCC carriers has made such splits between legacy and LCC irrelevant. LHR isn't the holy grail for European point to point travel, and BD would be missed far less, than say U2.
Sponsor Message: 
From Ireland, joined Sep 2000, 6441 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 2596 posts, 
From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2365 posts, 
From Finland, joined Nov 2006, 392 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
