Advertisement


Flybe issues profit warning

Profit Warning
Flybe Embraer E175 G-FBJC.jpg

Flybe's woes continue with the company issuing a full-year profit warning this morning in a trading update ahead of its results for the first six months of 2018. A full-year tax loss of £12 million is now anticipated which follows a £19.2 million loss in 2017.

Flybe attributes the situation to higher fuel prices, the lower value of sterling and weaker customer demand.

The airline is reviewing further capacity and cost-saving measures along with its current strategy which sees it concentrating on its most popular routes. This has seen passenger seat revenue increase by around 8% but yield was down by 2%.

The profit warning saw over a third of the company's value wiped off this morning with shares now trading around 20 pence.

Since Flybe floated on the stock market at 295 pence per share in 2010 the story has been one of an almost continuous reduction in the company's value.

I've been reading the financial press this morning and there is now a body of opinion that cannot see Flybe continuing in its present form for much longer. The CEO is naturally making optimistic noises - she can't do anything else - but the airline has tried to become all sorts of things since its flotation, none of which has so far worked.

It might be with the share price now so low that someone will be interested in purchasing the airline and will invest some capital. It's hard to see another airline being interested because I can't think of one where a synergy exists, although Stobart might be tempted if they can buy Flybe dirt cheap. But would they want to?

Photo by mathers_wales_uk
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Comments

#2
I genuinely don't understand why the airline is wasting money on a third re-branding exercise when it clearly has bigger problems to deal with at the moment. As I said previously, a newly painted aircraft fleet isn't going to improve the airlines time keeping performance or customer satisfaction. Whilst I agree that operating an airline with three different brands is no way to capture customer loyalty, a costly exercise to re-brand the entire airline might be a step too far at a time when they should be concentrating getting their act together.
 

Advertisement


#3
I have always felt Flybe are very chop n changy , ok if a route isn't working best to not incur more losses on it. However sometimes they just don't give it time to develop. They are the mainstay to a lot of UK domestic flignts, they are quite crucial to that.
 
#4
I genuinely don't understand why the airline is wasting money on a third re-branding exercise when it clearly has bigger problems to deal with at the moment. As I said previously, a newly painted aircraft fleet isn't going to improve the airlines time keeping performance or customer satisfaction. Whilst I agree that operating an airline with three different brands is no way to capture customer loyalty, a costly exercise to re-brand the entire airline might be a step too far at a time when they should be concentrating getting their act together.
To be fair I read something about the repainting of aircraft not costing that much as they would only be repainting aircraft when they were due to be repainted anyway. Even if it was free however you do have to ask what is the benefit of re-branding again?

Think Flybe really need to consolidate and maybe even shrink their operation until they've stabilized, then find out what market exactly they are trying to serve and stick to it. They do the domestic market well, but they also currently have a very mixed operation with some airports seeing destinations served in near Europe, and some with the more traditional sun routes.
 
#5
I think the problem for Flybe is keeping up with the brand recognition of Ryanair and Easyjet and BA in the markets they are serving hence the chopping and changing. Personally I think they needed to stay with the purple and after seeing the new livery up close i think its awful but that is my opinion.
I actual do wonder though if they may be better off doing the same as Air Malta and selling flights through Ryanair as well.
People have mentioned a takeover bid now being more possible but i honestly don't see it happening i think there rivals will just let them die and in many markets not even replace the lost capacity.
 
#6
Flybe look in big trouble it looks like they are going one way pretty slowly and rather painfully like Eastern however they are huge for some airport the likes of Cardiff Doncaster/Sheffield, Exeter and Southampton need Flybe and the smaller aircraft types they use.
 
#7
The statement today will not be a huge shock to the company. They will have known for sometime that things need to improve. The loses posted today aren't good but airlines can turn around. Thomas Cook was brought back from the brink and they are still around today albeit not as healthily as they would like. What matters now is that Flybe are seen to be taking the right steps to turn the business around. Cutting multiple routes might not necessarily be the answer. Certainly from a passengers prospective the airline can make substantial improvements. Whether that would be enough remains to be seen.
 
#8
If anything happened to them, I wonder what would happen in the domestic market, there just isn't the variety of small airlines these days to service these routes.
 
#9
If anything happened to them, I wonder what would happen in the domestic market, there just isn't the variety of small airlines these days to service these routes.
Most of the routes wouldn't be replaced. Airports like Southampton and Exeter and Belfast city would be dead and others like Cardiff badly effected.
Flybe serves a niche that no other airline wants to or can.
 
#10
I understand that at one point shares were down 40pc. That is one back of a drop from any viewpoint.

For the sake of many - passengers, employees, airports and even those of us who just like aviation - I just hope that they can survive. The domestic market, and netwotk, would be devastated overnight if they fail.

I agree with others who suggest that they seriously need to get their house in order, abandon routes out of London City and Heathrow, and return to their regional routes. Help also has to be given by the regional airports by improving check-in times by prioritising security for the airline. If check-in could be reduced to, for example, a guaranteed 45 minutes then I'm sure some domestic routes would see an uplift in passengers. We have seen numerous comments on here where members have switched to road or rail due to queues at airports.
 
#11
I agree with others who suggest that they seriously need to get their house in order, abandon routes out of London City and Heathrow
Interesting that you mention Heathrow. An article the other day seemed to suggest that Flybe wanted to add another Edinburgh to Heathrow flight yet it was charges at Edinburgh that were putting them off.

Help also has to be given by the regional airports by improving check-in times by prioritising security for the airline. If check-in could be reduced to, for example, a guaranteed 45 minutes then I'm sure some domestic routes would see an uplift in passengers. We have seen numerous comments on here where members have switched to road or rail due to queues at airports.
I've mentioned before on here about flying domestically in New Zealand where security checks aren't required on aircraft with less than 100 seats. Besides the main Auckland, Wellington & Christchurch triangle (served by A320), the rest of the domestic network is served by 68 seat ATR's and 50 seat Q300's. With no checked luggage it is perfectly feasible to get to the airport when boarding starts and walk straight onto the aircraft. Obviously we're never going to see no security checks in the UK, but I think a lot could be done to quicken the airport transit. Online check-in, automated self bag drop, and a separate security lane for domestic passengers could make all the difference.
 
#12
Also I've heard it suggested that LCY is very profitable for them so I'd be surprised if they pull out of there.
 
#13
Shares finished the day down over 41% at 18.88 pence (they floated at 295 pence in 2010). The mood of the market over the next few days will be very important. I'd expect some positive reaction as some investors will be looking at what they might think is a bargain at this level. Let's hope any rise tomorrow and in the next few days is more than a 'dead cat bounce' - I don't want to offend animal lovers but it is a financial expression.
 
#14
I've mentioned before on here about flying domestically in New Zealand where security checks aren't required on aircraft with less than 100 seats. Besides the main Auckland, Wellington & Christchurch triangle (served by A320), the rest of the domestic network is served by 68 seat ATR's and 50 seat Q300's. With no checked luggage it is perfectly feasible to get to the airport when boarding starts and walk straight onto the aircraft. Obviously we're never going to see no security checks in the UK, but I think a lot could be done to quicken the airport transit. Online check-in, automated self bag drop, and a separate security lane for domestic passengers could make all the difference.
If I am correct then the law in the UK is aircraft under 10 tonnes. This means aircraft the size of just bigger than a Beech 200 King Air.
 
#15
I'm not a fan of scrapping security checks for smaller commercial passenger aircraft. What would help is if airports got their act together and provide dedicated security for domestic services that is quick rather than domestic passengers mixing with the riff raff heading to the Med.
 
#16
I understand that at one point shares were down 40pc. That is one back of a drop from any viewpoint.

For the sake of many - passengers, employees, airports and even those of us who just like aviation - I just hope that they can survive. The domestic market, and netwotk, would be devastated overnight if they fail.

I agree with others who suggest that they seriously need to get their house in order, abandon routes out of London City and Heathrow, and return to their regional routes. Help also has to be given by the regional airports by improving check-in times by prioritising security for the airline. If check-in could be reduced to, for example, a guaranteed 45 minutes then I'm sure some domestic routes would see an uplift in passengers. We have seen numerous comments on here where members have switched to road or rail due to queues at airports.
Your right what you say Scotie Dog....I used to use them quite often from MAN to NWI , EXT and SOU but I've really moved to using the train because terminal 3 is so congested, not forgetting actually getting along the motorway firstly to actually get there which is clogged in the mornings.

I've found certainly going to the SW the train is easier and time wise good. Norwich is still slow by rail and not a good journey from the NW even with a direct train from Liverpool Warrington and Manchester.
 
#17
I don't think airports have helped the situation by introducing so many new additional charges for one thing or another. Domestic air travel was once a convenience far superior to rail travel. You turned up at the airport, parked close to the terminal building. The parking charges were reasonable. Check-in was taken care of by a human and you proceeded quickly through to departures where you could see your aircraft parked close to the terminal building. The opposite is more often the case now. You get a taxi to the airport or you are dropped off because the parking charges are too high. Your lift gets fleeced by the drop off charges. You join a hefty queue through security alongside Ibiza mobs. Your aircraft is parked furthest away. Your fleeced once again by similar charges at your destination airport.

Airports need to go back to offering business and domestic airline passengers the convenience they used to do.
 
#18
Your right what you say Scotie Dog....I used to use them quite often from MAN to NWI , EXT and SOU but I've really moved to using the train because terminal 3 is so congested, not forgetting actually getting along the motorway firstly to actually get there which is clogged in the mornings.

I've found certainly going to the SW the train is easier and time wise good. Norwich is still slow by rail and not a good journey from the NW even with a direct train from Liverpool Warrington and Manchester.

Man T3 isnt fit for use as a cattle market :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
#19
I don't think airports have helped the situation by introducing so many new additional charges for one thing or another. Domestic air travel was once a convenience far superior to rail travel. You turned up at the airport, parked close to the terminal building. The parking charges were reasonable. Check-in was taken care of by a human and you proceeded quickly through to departures where you could see your aircraft parked close to the terminal building. The opposite is more often the case now. You get a taxi to the airport or you are dropped off because the parking charges are too high. Your lift gets fleeced by the drop off charges. You join a hefty queue through security alongside Ibiza mobs. Your aircraft is parked furthest away. Your fleeced once again by similar charges at your destination airport.

Airports need to go back to offering business and domestic airline passengers the convenience they used to do.
Your right it's just so less appealing than is used to be.
 
#20
Flybe shares down again today. Price at end of trading was 16.55 pence, a fall of 12.32 pence on the day. How low can they fall? Something's got to get the value moving north, even if it's only bargain hunters to begin with.
 

Advertisement


Top Bottom