Another year and another loss. Increasing fuel costs coupled to a weakening pound not to mention an ageing fleet. How long can they go on?

Financial highlights - Group

· 6.4% increase in group revenue to £752.6m (2016/17: £707.4m).

· Loss before tax improved to £9.4m (2016/17: restated to £48.5m) including £11.1m of non-cash revaluation gains on USD aircraft loans (2016/17: losses of £13.2m).

· Adjusted loss before tax1 increased to £19.2m (2016/17: £6.7m loss).

· 4.3% increase in EBITDAR2 to £140.0m (2016/17: restated to £134.2m).

· Net assets of £93.1m (31st March 2017: £124.9m restated to include the £28.6m impact of an Embraer E195 onerous lease provision and related impairment of maintenance assets).

· Net debt (which is all asset backed) decreased to £59.1m (31st March 2017: £64.0m).

https://otp.investis.com/clients/uk/fly ... id=1057157

£93m net assets - whole airline for the list price of a new narrowbody.

Maybe an M&A opportunity for someone who needs a shorthaul network in the UK - new Virgin/Delta/AF/KLM vehicle?

Comes with 7 free daily slot pairs at LHR .

https://www.routesonline.com/news/29/br ... edy-slots/

Probably not.

The last bunch of idiots on the board that decided to go all-jet, despite it clearly not fitting with their usage patterns, likely fired the last few nails into that particular coffin.

I think BE should pull off LHR - EDI/ABZ and leave that to BA and instead use their LHR slots to feed in from places in the UK not served from LHR, like JER/GCI/NQY/LPL/MME.

Their heathrow slots are linked to particular cities as part of the IAG deal to acquire Bmi.

They're a pretty big airline, I thought they had like 10 Dash 8s but it's actually 54 Dash 8s and 20 Embraer jets, 8 million pax a year, 81 destinations (it says here). It's one of those airlines where you can't believe they don't have a role, can't believe they can't make money. Yet here we are.

TC957 wrote:

I think BE should pull off LHR - EDI/ABZ and leave that to BA and instead use their LHR slots to feed in from places in the UK not served from LHR, like JER/GCI/NQY/LPL/MME.

I've seen this discussed on here before. The slots are linked to certain cities for a time restricted period (18 months? 24 months?, not sure exactly), after that they can be used anywhere in Europe. I would be inclined to agree that they are worth more to unserved niche locations, maybe we could see that in the future and Flybe effectively open EDI/ABZ again and take the remaining unassigned pairs. In this case they could be building a slot portfolio at LHR that makes them more attractive to a buyer.

I think they can squeeze a bit more profitability out of their existing network but nothing that is going to make it an exiting investment proposition on its own.

They need to be taken under the wing of a friendly guardian angel and simplify their business enough to make them attractive.

They will be fine and are trying very hard to turn things around.

They are in a fairly precarious position with that little turnover and profit but I'd be optimistic. Fuel Price increase won't kill a company running planes which sip fuel and I think their chosen plane will become cheaper on the market now that others upgauge to larger planes elsewhere around the world.

3AWM wrote:

TC957 wrote:

I think BE should pull off LHR - EDI/ABZ and leave that to BA and instead use their LHR slots to feed in from places in the UK not served from LHR, like JER/GCI/NQY/LPL/MME.

I've seen this discussed on here before. The slots are linked to certain cities for a time restricted period (18 months? 24 months?, not sure exactly), after that they can be used anywhere in Europe. I would be inclined to agree that they are worth more to unserved niche locations, maybe we could see that in the future and Flybe effectively open EDI/ABZ again and take the remaining unassigned pairs. In this case they could be building a slot portfolio at LHR that makes them more attractive to a buyer.

I think they can squeeze a bit more profitability out of their existing network but nothing that is going to make it an exiting investment proposition on its own.

The LHR slots are required to be operated by the same airline for 6 consecutive IATA seasons (so three years) and then become grandfathered to that airline and tradeable. However, even though grandfathered, and even if traded, they can only ever be used for flights within the European Common Aviation Area, or to Moscow or Riyadh as ex BD destinations. The valuable slots at LHR are those that can be adapted to long or medium haul use. Flybe understandably have slots with an average 45 minute turn time, so pretty useless for anything but short-haul, even if they weren't restricted in perpetuity.
Now an airline with a large slot portfolio at LHR that included both short and long haul might be able to make use of the slots, and release some of their existing shorthaul ones for other use, or even sale. But that's really BA, isn't it!

Once those slots become tradeable couldn't they just be traded with another European airline with no intention of providing anything other than flights between LHR and other European airports? Like with AF/KLM CDG and AMS slots?

3AWM wrote:

Once those slots become tradeable couldn't they just be traded with another European airline with no intention of providing anything other than flights between LHR and other European airports? Like with AF/KLM CDG and AMS slots?

Oh yes, they could. But KLM wouldn't be interested as there's a shortage of slots at AMS at the moment, so no way to use them, and AF has been reducing service between LHR and CDG over the years because EuroStar rail services and Easyjet between them have taken an increasing proportion of LON-PAR O&D traffic, leaving mainly the flights that exist for connections. Lufthansa Group might be a possibility, but LHR slots timed with a 45 minute turn are really optimised for domestic or the shortest of international shorthaul. This does seriously affect the tradeable value of the slots.

Wouldn't U2 be interested in those slots?

[email protected] wrote:

They will be fine and are trying very hard to turn things around.

The things is, everything Christine and the new CFO said at the results announcement has been heard before from Saad and his team. Flybe is an extremely marginal airline and it seems even a pax sneezing in the cabin would push them into the red. Now that their legacy issues (E-195) are nearly behind them and with the fleet down-sized, it'll be interesting to see how they perform over the next 6-12 months. They need to start performing as they're running out of cash.

TOGA10 wrote:

Wouldn't U2 be interested in those slots?

If they really wanted them, they could already have had them, by applying to the slot controller for the remedy slots before Virgin Little Red, and then later Flybe, did. So twice they've shown no interest in the slots with the restrictions they currently have. Now if they wait until the end of March 2020, when the restrictions ease to allow use to almost all destinations EasyJet presently fly to, assuming Flybe can keep them operating till then, they might be more interested, but they are still timed to allow operation only from the other end of any routes. There are no RON slots in the package, so no base possibilities.

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.

Might they be better off parking their planes off peak? (and reducing frequency)

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.

Their revenue may be going up but so are their costs. Their rps has gone up 10% but their cps increase is greater.

I agree with your second statement and I have a handful of friends still working for them so I really do hope the turn around works. It is incredibly difficult to see the light at the end of the tunnel though.

They will struggle as oil prices slowly rise. Most well run airlines are reaping major profits from the drop in prices over the past 4 years. They need a niche and not spread themselves too thin. They remind me of BMI near the end where they were snapping at all sorts of routes. I hope they thrive since when I've used them I've found them to be a great airline.

Chaostheory wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

They will be fine and are trying very hard to turn things around.

The things is, everything Christine and the new CFO said at the results announcement has been heard before from Saad and his team. Flybe is an extremely marginal airline and it seems even a pax sneezing in the cabin would push them into the red. Now that their legacy issues (E-195) are nearly behind them and with the fleet down-sized, it'll be interesting to see how they perform over the next 6-12 months. They need to start performing as they're running out of cash.

^^^^ This ^^^^

BE is right on the cusp now of their future. Move on, or gone. Some of the last of the E195s have been subleased to Stobart and the rest have 2020 withdrawal dates. These alone could see BE go into profit once their painful costs are off the balance sheet. They also have SAS contracts to fly the ATR72.

When the deals were first announced, a lot of more knowledgeable people in the industry were saying that this was too much of a commitment for BE to take on. The Brazilian Government were apparently involved as a Lender/Lessor of Last Resort, and deals like that don't come cheap. Needing Government guarantees can mean that bad credit risk rates come into play and that is hair-raising territory.

It didn't surprise me then that recently Stobart walked away after doing due diligence. The amount of toxic debt BE is still carrying must have frightened them off. However there is now an end in sight so as the poster above says, it's time to shit or get off the pot.

Amiga500 wrote:

Might they be better off parking their planes off peak? (and reducing frequency)

The problem is a lot of their routes rely on high frequencies to work especially as about 50% of their passengers are business related.

Not so sure high frequencies are driven by demand as rather than the need to utilise the equipment.

Nearly all of the Q400 flights are 1 - 1.5 hrs long and peak hours are in the morning and evening - ie users fly at the begining and the end of the business day. So if they parked them up in the middle of the day they would be parked up most of the time.

Definately a demand for Flybe and what they do but there are only so many routes you can fly from the UK under 1.5 hour and they have already maxed out those routes so where do you go from there?

Given aviation is like an amnesiac goldfish and loves circularity, I suspect a secured future as BA franchisee.

skipness1E wrote:

Given aviation is like an amnesiac goldfish and loves circularity, I suspect a secured future as BA franchisee.

It would certainly be a way for BA to operate outside of London again...

I think flybe will eventually come out ok, they're doing a massive restructure and have culled a lot of aircraft from the fleet. Sometimes you have to spend your way out of debt.

Andy33 wrote:

3AWM wrote:

Once those slots become tradeable couldn't they just be traded with another European airline with no intention of providing anything other than flights between LHR and other European airports? Like with AF/KLM CDG and AMS slots?

Oh yes, they could. But KLM wouldn't be interested as there's a shortage of slots at AMS at the moment, so no way to use them, and AF has been reducing service between LHR and CDG over the years because EuroStar rail services and Easyjet between them have taken an increasing proportion of LON-PAR O&D traffic, leaving mainly the flights that exist for connections. Lufthansa Group might be a possibility, but LHR slots timed with a 45 minute turn are really optimised for domestic or the shortest of international shorthaul. This does seriously affect the tradeable value of the slots.

I doubt Lufthansa would want them - they stripped all the good slots from BMI before selling out to BA.

[email protected] wrote:

They will be fine and are trying very hard to turn things around.

Seems as if that has been the story for the last 10 years!

I presume Stobart are watching with interest ? Were they not quoted as a potential Flybe buyer a few months ago ?

[email protected] wrote:

They will be fine and are trying very hard to turn things around.

Seems as if that has been the story for the last 10 years![/quote]

Well, let us wish them well and let us hope it is better this time. Clearly they need to be more sustainable going forward.

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.

JannEejit wrote:

I presume Stobart are watching with interest ? Were they not quoted as a potential Flybe buyer a few months ago ?

Yes they were but they walked away from any deal after looking through the books and realising there was far too much toxic debt to take on.

The Stobart/Flybe deal has been well discussed on here and on other aviation forums.

Although Stobart pulled out of any deal to acquire Flybe I personally thought that it would be good for all concerned but I can understand why the deal fell through.

In my opinion the only way forward for Flybe is for the airline to become a BA franchise.

Would BA really want Flybe as a franchisee ? Flybe have only 7 slot pairs at Heathrow and no 150+ seat jets. That means relatively little opportunity for feeder traffic - and I don't see BA handing the LHR-EDI route over to Flybe in a significant way. So apart from the franchise fee, BA gain little. Furthermore, do BA really want all the trouble that goes with extending one's brand to a troubled smaller player in return for the franchise fee ?

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.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Would BA really want Flybe as a franchisee ? Flybe have only 7 slot pairs at Heathrow and no 150+ seat jets. That means relatively little opportunity for feeder traffic - and I don't see BA handing the LHR-EDI route over to Flybe in a significant way. So apart from the franchise fee, BA gain little. Furthermore, do BA really want all the trouble that goes with extending one's brand to a troubled smaller player in return for the franchise fee ?

If and I mean if Flybe ever became a BA franchise it wouldn't necessarily be all about feed to LHR it could work in the same way as Air Nostrum does as a franchise for Iberia.

I’m sure flyBe does have a future, it has a strong route network serving U.K. business and leisure travellers. It has a cost problem and an image problem. It also has a perception of not being very reliable. flyBe needs to decide what it wants to be, either an LCC, a high-frequency domestic airline or a niche/boutique low frequency, convenient option to Europe from small regional airports like CWL and DSA.
The jet fleet is clearly a cost problem and needs to be dumped. If flyBe feel the need for jets, other threads claim A319s (and probably 73G)are going for little more than scrap value. But if the Q400s can’t fly a route and the yield can’t justify increasing frequency, should flyBe even bother? However Volotea do seem to be carving a niche for themselves.
Finally I’m concerned that by acting as a feeder to all kinds of airlines, flyBe is getting a high volume of passengers but little revenue, which is not unlike bmi and they seem to grab any opportunity that comes their way with franchisees such as Stobart, Blue Islands, Eastern but dropping Loganair, adding new airports like SEN, LHR, DSA and CWL, the debacle with the Scottish routes and short-notice schedule changes.

BA turned against having franchises in the UK 10+ years ago when GB Airways was bought by easyJet. It terminated the Loganair franchise at the same time.

BA effectively paid Flybe to take the old BA Connect regional operation off its hands. I certainly don't think IAG would be interested in buying the airline as it would not be the sort of "transformational" deal that IAG seeks.

BrianDromey wrote:

I’m sure flyBe does have a future, it has a strong route network serving U.K. business and leisure travellers. It has a cost problem and an image problem. It also has a perception of not being very reliable. flyBe needs to decide what it wants to be, either an LCC, a high-frequency domestic airline or a niche/boutique low frequency, convenient option to Europe from small regional airports like CWL and DSA.
The jet fleet is clearly a cost problem and needs to be dumped. If flyBe feel the need for jets, other threads claim A319s (and probably 73G)are going for little more than scrap value. But if the Q400s can’t fly a route and the yield can’t justify increasing frequency, should flyBe even bother? However Volotea do seem to be carving a niche for themselves.
Finally I’m concerned that by acting as a feeder to all kinds of airlines, flyBe is getting a high volume of passengers but little revenue, which is not unlike bmi and they seem to grab any opportunity that comes their way with franchisees such as Stobart, Blue Islands, Eastern but dropping Loganair, adding new airports like SEN, LHR, DSA and CWL, the debacle with the Scottish routes and short-notice schedule changes.

The problem for Flybe is that the A319s and 737s are too big for a lot of its regional routes. At Cardiff with the exception of Faro and Rome the E195s were never filled up enough to warrant them on most of the routes the E175s on the other hand are a much better fit same at DSA as well from what I can gather. The franchise with Eastern is a mystery to me but with SEN i think it was just a way of getting someone else to pay for some of the E195s and get a significant London base but with DSA and CWL no doubt incentives were involved though at CWL the 3rd aircraft may have been off their own backs and possibly the same if a 4th turns up as have been rumoured.
I think with the E175s they'll focus them on the likes of CWL, EXT, DSA and NQY operating to Europe and at BHX and MAN focus them on AMS and CDG and MXP with charters on the weekends.

LHRFlyer wrote:

BA turned against having franchises in the UK 10+ years ago when GB Airways was bought by easyJet. It terminated the Loganair franchise at the same time.

BA effectively paid Flybe to take the old BA Connect regional operation off its hands. I certainly don't think IAG would be interested in buying the airline as it would not be the sort of "transformational" deal that IAG seeks.

Agreed, WW hates them.
And yet Air Nostrum is still huge for Iberia and Sun Air and Comair support BA overseas. I have no idea why synergy Sun Air brings to BA.

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.

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.

And under that type of scenario would an IAG operated Flybe, replace Stobart as the operator of Aer Lingus Regional ? In other words in who's best interest could it be to acquire Flybe ? Does anyone have any idea of the finances surrounding the current Aer Lingus Regional operation ?

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

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.

Is it April 1st?!?

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

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.

It's deja vu all over again. BA bought up several smallish UK regional airlines, and operated them under a variety of AOCs over a period of 15-20 years. Despite the lower cost base brought about by different pilot and cabin crew contracts, they were never able to make the operation pay consistently. The biggest part was branded as BAConnect towards the end, and was sold to Flybe.
The remainder, centred on flights to and from London City, is considered fully viable and remains a separate AOC and BA subsidiary as BA Cityflyer. The fleet of BA146/Avro RJs has been completely replaced with E190/E170.

But there's no reason to suppose that BA would be any better at running regional services now than they were before, their overheads are higher even with non-mainline pay scales. If this is the only hope for growth at MAN, cancel those terminal developments now, as if Flybe can't make money out of operating feeder flights into other airlines networks at MAN, nobody else can either. As it is, I suspect that the number of passengers who connect at MAN is not what is producing growth there, it is an increasing number of passengers starting or finishing their air journeys there, unless you have any figure to prove me wrong.

The "BA making moves back into regional markets" is vastly overstated. What in fact is happening is that because the LCY operation is heavily weighted towards business traffic, and the entire airport shuts down between Saturday and Sunday lunchtimes, there is a lot of spare capacity at weekends in the Cityflyer fleet. BA is insisting that the Cityflyer assets are used more intensively. As a result planes that would be idle at LCY, and planes that overnight at other weekday Cityflyer destinations, are being used at weekends to operate leisure flights from a variety of UK regional airports, Until you see Cityflyer flights on, say, a Wednesday, serving UK airports other than LCY, GLA, EDI, and (at a pinch since it isn't technically in the UK) IOM, it isn't correct to suggest BA has any interest in regional markets other than dumping surplus capacity into them at times that suit the airline.

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.

It will be interesting to see what Airline Investments does. They have two strong brands in Loganair and BMI Regional, and can apparently put together a decent enough operation from Scotland. LM used to be the biggest regional player at Manchester and I have a feeling they might well be back soon if the ATR happens.

There is the potential for something big to happen in British regional airlines space. None of which would be good for BE. A link-up between Stobart in the south and west, and AIL in the north and Scotland, could shove BE off the map.

Just my musing but a Stobart-AIL deal could field a decent fleet of the latest ATRs as well as SAABs and Embraer jets.

Channex757 wrote:

It will be interesting to see what Airline Investments does. They have two strong brands in Loganair and BMI Regional, and can apparently put together a decent enough operation from Scotland. LM used to be the biggest regional player at Manchester and I have a feeling they might well be back soon if the ATR happens.

There is the potential for something big to happen in British regional airlines space. None of which would be good for BE. A link-up between Stobart in the south and west, and AIL in the north and Scotland, could shove BE off the map.

Just my musing but a Stobart-AIL deal could field a decent fleet of the latest ATRs as well as SAABs and Embraer jets.

Been wondering about AIL myself. The two airlines (Loganair and BMI-R) have been the subject of pan company fleet renewal talks for a while. It certainly looks like Loganair will re-equip with ATR fleet but the jury is still out as to to whether or not BMI-R will follow suit ? Loganair's aging Saab fleet will of course be wound down, the Saab 2000 fleet only recieved partial new livery as they are slated for return to lessor in the next couple of years, (mainly down to operating costs than age compared to the 340 fleet) at which point one would assume to see the ATR's showing up in tartan garb.

Flybe's reliability has always been an issue (I speak from past personal experience) although it seems to have improved recently and is now merely a bit below average rather than shockingly bad as it used to be. I have a perception that the routes with the fewest cancellations are those on which there is direct competition e.g. EDI-LCY and EDI-LHR although why anyone would chose to fly EDI-LCY on a Q400 when similar money will put you on a BA Cityflyer E190 is a complete mystery. Flybe's basic problem is that it's neither one thing nor the other, it's not a true LCC, it's not a true full-service airline and it isn't even a proper niche player. However it has proved itself a very efficient cash incineration machine and I'll be surprised if it's still operating in eighteen months time.

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

Your geography is crap mate!

You meant the SOUTHWEST not SOUTHEAST (not Southeest) btw your spelling is also crap!

Obviously the Southeast is well covered by numerous airports.

But non the less your wet dreams are getting in the way of reality if you really seriously think that Exeter can sustain such routes!

You must have been well stoned when you made up that list!

Now I've run out of weed today is there any chance I can get some from you!