Delta777Jet From Germany, joined Jun 2000, 1131 posts, RR: 3 Posted (8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3414 times:
Flew today on Finnair flights (EMB-170 & ATR 72) both operated by FlyBe. The livery of the Embraer was the old Finnair one, while the ATR was in full FlyBe colours. I see that more and more Finnair is loosing it, because FlyBe is going with their own brand and not too much with the Finnair one. Even the flight attendants running around with FlyBe name stickers etc.
May be I'm mistaken, but I see Finnair still as a reputable airline with a good name and brand, who don't need to replace it by some low-cost regional branding. Anyways I don't see, where Finnair got the saving if even the FlyBe crews are Fins , aircraft in Finland registered and AOC too ? The service level anyway is on the bottom in Eco class.
traveler_7 From Estonia, joined May 2000, 540 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (8 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3223 times:
Most probably old model does not work for Finnair any more? So they are in search for some model which will work.
Back in 2001 they established Aero Airlines in Estonia. Some years ago Aero stopped operation and all ATRs were transferred to FinnCom. Most probably it was not enough and not to loose money on their domestic and European flights they need more radical solution. Just my guess. FlyBe have a lot of experience as regional airline so perhaps choice was quite logical. But I share your concern that Finnair brand will disappear from some routs in Europe. What really puzzles me is that Finnair owns just 40% of FlyBe Nordic and FlyBe 60%. Why not 50/50?
yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15990 posts, RR: 59 Reply 2, posted (8 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3201 times:
The airline business is a commodity business. Whatever can be done to cut costs (or, manage costs to maximize revenue), should be done.
Quoting Delta777Jet (Thread starter): I see Finnair still as a reputable airline with a good name and brand, who don't need to replace it by some low-cost regional branding.
What does reputable mean? All that matters is profit. That is the only reason FlyBE and Finnair are in business (separately, and together).
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
FlyingAY From Finland, joined Jun 2007, 645 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (8 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3163 times:
Quoting traveler_7 (Reply 1): Finnair owns just 40% of FlyBe Nordic and FlyBe 60%. Why not 50/50?
If I remember correctly, they'd have to follow the Finnish working laws and agreements if the company was 50% owned by Finnair.
I'm not thrilled about this either, but it's better to outsource the route than axe it totally if you can't operate it profitably. But anyhow, isn't this something that is done all over the world? In US there are several smaller companies flying regional flights for the majors, and in Europe there are regionals for Iberia, LH, AF etc...
JobsaGoodun From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 94 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (8 months 23 hours ago) and read 2959 times:
Quoting FlyingAY (Reply 3): Quoting traveler_7 (Reply 1):
Finnair owns just 40% of FlyBe Nordic and FlyBe 60%. Why not 50/50?
If I remember correctly, they'd have to follow the Finnish working laws and agreements if the company was 50% owned by Finnair.
I'm not sure it has anything to do with Finnish working laws as I imagine that you are governed by the company in which you are employed, not your nationality. I think it's more that Flybe are the ones who influence and manage the directions and day-to-day running of the business rather than Finnair and so they have the larger share. Finnair as a legacy airline, has a cost structure to match. If this were imported into Finncomm all you would have is Finnair by another name - and continued mounting losses.
This week, for the third year running, Flybe have been named the largest independant regional airline in the world and it is their independance and control of their own destiny that has enabled them to be successful. Linking with major legacy carriers brings benefits to both organisations.
Flybe know how to 'do' regional, Finnair know how to 'do' long-haul and these are very different things. BA realised this some time ago and now have very few, if any regional routes that do not touch London, and for good reason, they would never be able to achieve the cost structure to operate them profitably. The sooner some of the other European legacy carriers realise this too, the better their balance sheet will become.
ZuluTime From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 151 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (8 months 21 hours ago) and read 2776 times:
Quoting JobsaGoodun (Reply 4): Flybe have been named the largest independant regional airline in the world and it is their independance and control of their own destiny that has enabled them to be successful
I wouldn't define Flybe as a success on the basis of its current financial results. It grew quickly based on aggressive marketshare capture from other airlines, but the main business in the UK is now failing miserably to build on that. Recent cuts at LGW, most of the new routes launched this summer already being cancelled, four aircraft grounded this winter.....it is not a good record. Perhaps they are spreading themselves too thinly.
Delta777Jet From Germany, joined Jun 2000, 1131 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (8 months 3 hours ago) and read 2408 times:
I don't argue that many airlines using feeders nowadays, but these feeders normally adopting themselves to their customer and working entirely under the customers branding and may be mention that the flight is operated by XYZ in behalf of XXXX. It is basically just a cost saving measure. But I doubt that any of the big airlines will allow the ACMI airline to become too independant shifting away customers. Before FlyBe touched the Baltics I'm sure almost nobody in Finland knew what is FlyBe all about and now they getting basically marketing for free and opening their own sales channels on a dedicated Finish (Baltic) website, but giving just 40 % of this success to their main contributor which is Finnair. Also I doubt that the cost base is lower as they still operating under Finland working laws etc....
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11144 posts, RR: 63 Reply 7, posted (8 months 3 hours ago) and read 2369 times:
Quoting ZuluTime (Reply 5): I wouldn't define Flybe as a success on the basis of its current financial results. It grew quickly based on aggressive marketshare capture from other airlines, but the main business in the UK is now failing miserably to build on that. Recent cuts at LGW, most of the new routes launched this summer already being cancelled, four aircraft grounded this winter.....it is not a good record. Perhaps they are spreading themselves too thinly.
Indeed, there is a great deal of analyst and investor concern at BE right now. They've had a few major hiccups recently and are seeing some of their most profitable routes picked off by the likes of easyJet, against which they simply cannot compete. The worry is that they don't seem to have a decent solution for this, except contract the business.
traveler_7 From Estonia, joined May 2000, 540 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2186 times:
Actually when FlyBe entered Estonian market last year, they served more flights directly from Tallinn, but now in addition to the TLL-HEL route which they serve only under AY flight number , the only route out of TLL is Stockholm Bromma.
As to Finland I did not find on their web sites such destinations like Oulu or Rovaniemi. So some (most probably more important) routs Finnair still keeps under own control. Another point to note is that basically networks of FlyBe and FlyBe Nordic do not intersect.
I wonder if agreement with Finnair would allow to open more flights out of Tallinn in future. I mean not just a regional flights operated by turboprops but some longer flights perhaps to FlyBe bases in UK or some destinations in Southern Europe.
Delta777Jet From Germany, joined Jun 2000, 1131 posts, RR: 3 Reply 11, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2117 times:
Why they not just continued Finncom ? Wasn't FIncom just renamed to FlyBe ? If so, probably nothing changed, except that FlyBe probably want to earn some money with it ?
FlyingAY From Finland, joined Jun 2007, 645 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1936 times:
Quoting Delta777Jet (Reply 9): FlyBe also now operates the EMB-170 for Finnair
Has been operating for a long time. Finncomm already operated the EMB-170s for AY. Flybe Nordic will also operate AYs Embraer 190s starting from October.
Quoting Delta777Jet (Reply 6): Also I doubt that the cost base is lower as they still operating under Finland working laws etc.
The pilots and cabin crew at AY have very powerful unions behind them. There is no general collective agreement for pilots or cabin crew in Finland, but each company have a separate agreement with their pilots. Thus the cost structure is very different in different companies and AYs cost structure is definitely on the higher end of the scale.
Quoting Delta777Jet (Reply 11): Why they not just continued Finncom ? Wasn't FIncom just renamed to FlyBe ?
But FlyBe now has 60% of the shares - they most likely want to bring out their brand as well. Thus FlyBe has also 60% of the risk, which probably seemed appealing to AY, who had already seen the problems related to the profitable operation of these routes. And on the other hand does matter for AY if the airline is called Finncomm or FlyBe Nordic? Neither of them are Finnair anyway...
teme82 From Finland, joined Mar 2007, 1149 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1806 times:
Quoting FlyingAY (Reply 14): Thus the cost structure is very different in different companies and AYs cost structure is definitely on the higher end of the scale.
I would say that it is the highest in Finland! If I'm not mistaken the FRA/CDG/LHR/ARN are the profitable short haul routes for AY. The rest isn't.
traveler_7 From Estonia, joined May 2000, 540 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1635 times:
Quoting teme82 (Reply 15): I would say that it is the highest in Finland! If I'm not mistaken the FRA/CDG/LHR/ARN are the profitable short haul routes for AY. The rest isn't.
Most probably those routes Finnair will serve by own metal and remaining routs will be transfered to FlyBe Nordic. Actually they may find few more partners for some other routes.
I wonder why Madrid Barcelona and Oulu are not profitable?
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Jun 2000, 1131 posts, 
From Estonia, joined May 2000, 540 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15990 posts, 
From Finland, joined Jun 2007, 645 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 94 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11144 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
