|
Post by pug on Jan 23, 2012 17:24:14 GMT
The CAA have said that the suspension of jetXtra selling seats has nothing to do with the move by Jet2. Of course jetXtra have twisted it to suggest this on their website, but that just makes them look even less professional.
The truth is that they have been intending to sell flights on an ATOL licence which covers them for 150 passengers only. Which is exactly what happened with Nexus.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 23, 2012 17:38:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jan 23, 2012 19:17:04 GMT
There has been a reply on the facebook page as follows.......
>"jetXtra.com Hi ( ) , it seems quite a few stories are going around now. The CAA are telling us now that until there is no contention over our name that they will not allow us to use the name jetXtra.com on the ATOL licence. The ATOL licence covers a...t this moment the first 620 people booked, we had applied to increase that to cover those booked after the first 620, however it seems the CAA will not approve that yet while this issue remains. It's all very much a bureaucratic nightmare and we are working hard to try to resolve this and get back on track"<
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 23, 2012 19:33:08 GMT
So why have the CAA told various other media organisations that this has nothing to do with the dispute with Jet2 over their name?
The CAA have also stated that the ATOL cover for 620 people on the CTT Group licence, is the cover for the full year upto september. The period in which jetxtra intend to operate covers just 150 passengers of the 9000 they hope to carry.
Unless jetXtra and its partners can convince the CAA of the rigidity of their business plan, then they are unlikely to take the risk of extending the licence and allowing jetXtra to use the CTT licence.
The Jet2 dispute appears to be little more than a conveniant cover up I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 23, 2012 23:51:25 GMT
www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=582&pagetype=90&pageid=9498Hopefully their partnership with CTT Group may help their cause.. AFAIK jetXtra intend to be covered by the CTT Group ATOL Licence, and it would therefore require CTT Group to increase their bond?? Perhaps wrong to assume, but could the highlighted above be the current situation? I still think its wrong blaming Jet2 for the current issues, and fear it could come back to bite them further down the line should they actually be granted an extension to the licence.. I feel I should point out that I do hope I'm proven completely wrong on this. We know people in the region want this, and those working at the airport are excited by the possibilities..
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 24, 2012 13:26:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 25, 2012 11:24:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tugman on Jan 26, 2012 9:28:27 GMT
What a pickle. Purely shambolic and detrimental to the customer loyalty at HUY. If I had a booking and was messed around like this ,I would not bother through HUY/HAT in future,why take the risk??I know it has nothing to do with them directly but when mud is thrown about it splashes everywhere.If these flights do not happen there are not many more alternatives left other than use a different airport. Very poor for future business.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 26, 2012 10:20:49 GMT
I agree tugman. We should know within a week what is actually happening regarding the ATOL licence. I think it is irresponsile for an operator no matter how small, to mislead the public. Not only that but to also blame it on another airline which only strengthens Jet2's case against them. I honestly believe he saw he was getting some support, and decided to milk it for what it was worth, which I believe shows the level of maturity involved in this setup.
So when we look at it. They intend to use a small foreign airline, presumably on their AOC, who use three ageing 734 aircraft. I dont know about anyone else, but that says to me strong possibilities of delays and cancellations. Considering all that, and the actions by jetXtra themselves in the last week, are the CAA really going to be prepared to take the risk and allow jetXtra to sell their flights with the full ATOL cover for passengers? I'm thinking unlikely, unless the CTT Group can convince them otherwise.
As for HAT, they have clearly done an excellent job selling the seats in the short space of time they were available. Unfortunately however, mud can stick, lets just hope passengers dont lose confidence booking with them in future if the flights dont go ahead, however the passengers that are booked should not lose money and will likely still get their holidays just from other airports, so hopefully no damage done to their reputation.
|
|
|
Post by tugman on Jan 26, 2012 11:48:18 GMT
No damage to their reputation,granted,but once your proposed holiday is spoiled/cancelled do you remain loyal to a small operation (HAT) based and selling for a small airport who's portfolio of flight destinations in the short haul sector is,at best,poor and minimal. I believed all the free publicity from the 2/xtra saga was excellent.New airline,TV publicity, david v goliath et al.Unfortunately it has merely shown up the VERY large cracks within the HUY set-up.Few flights to few destinations,reliant on any titbits offered,regardless of credibility.Surely a company like HUY/MAG must make enquiries into potential customers for the airport.If so, why was it not discovered that the required certification/bonds were not in place.Amateurish and desperate. This situation must be resolved sooner rather than later.I cannot see HUY telling Jetxtra to sling their hook because they probably didn't bother to look for contingencies in case it failed.Now we are within weeks of the season,people want to book and all we can do is hope that something gives and CAA/Jetx/2 work something out.There doesn't seem anything else on the horizon.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 26, 2012 12:57:31 GMT
But HUY is in a relatively small market, with a customer base of around 1 million within the 45 minute driving time. This as opposed to over 3 million from LBA and EMA. Therefore you can see why the airlines might perhaps be concerned about investing too much in the airport. Tony Lavan had said that they were not looking for large step growth, primarily because he knew that if an airline put an aircraft or two in, and the routes werent profitable, it would set the airport yet further back. DSA and easyjet are tesament to that. Of course this could change with the recent management reshuffle.
We know there is strong demand, we have seen flybe going to AGP with average loads of 90%. We saw strong loads on the Ryanair route to Alicante last summer. These two routes have not returned due to issues outside of HUY's control (though its said that flybe were driving a very hard bargain which could not be accepted).
I'm not too sure its HUY managements' job to check that its partner airlines have everything in place, to be honest I think they were probably happy to talk on the strength of the financial backer, and it would be wrong to dismiss a new-start airline on the off chance that it could in future become something big.
Things will pick up eventually, even if these jetXtra flights dont happen.
|
|
|
Post by tugman on Jan 27, 2012 9:25:37 GMT
I feel I have drifted somewhat from thesubject, but my fear is that it has become cyclonic at the airport.Negative growth in flights means service providers have cut staff.This will affect performance which does not encourage new growth.Morale is reduced across the board which will mean a negativity hanging around the place like a bad smell.I personally will always try to look for positives in any situation but I am really struggling to find much in the present position we have found ourselves in..............................Oh there are plenty of parking places available and there seems to be a permanent supply of cheap near to date goodies at Smithies. I think the airport has got to really look at why,with absolutely outstanding loads on summer sun flights,that the airlines/holiday companies do not stay.Small step growth? How many flights did we have on Lavan's arrival and how many now!!!I assume his shoes were on backwards.Only time will tell for the new management but up to now the jury is definately out. Going back to the jetX/2 issue, does anyone know how long these court proceedings are likely to take or what needs to happen for the ATOL bonding to be put in place and likely timescale?Has any monies been returned for those who booked?Is there going to be an alternative from HUY for them?
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 27, 2012 11:11:01 GMT
tugman, I dont envy anyone in the job of attracting new business while keeping the shareholders happy at the same time. I should imagine its far more complex than we on an aviation forum could comprehend.
We know the airport has a good track record of filling flights (BHD and DUB excepted), so is it yield? I know how one tour operater manages its yield, and would assume the others are similar. By that I mean flights being a fixed cost; so yield depends on types of accomodation, type of holiday booked (all inclusive/self catered)... I believe this is the reason that many flights, previously on third party airlines (formerly Futura, Air Europa) had been stretched due to increased fixed cost per seat, clearly pushing the price of holidays up considerably. That is only part of the problem however, also factor in that Thomson decided to base at DSA and have scaled back to zilch now, who else is there? Jet2, we all know that, but they just dont seem interested and probably have bigger ideas than a 1 or 2 a/c base in between EMA and LBA.. Clearly FR aren't too interested. Thomas Cook have cut capacity considerably. flybe would probably need to base an aircraft and I find that unlikely. Easyjet? Tend to open bases with minimum three aircraft these days.. We just have to hope that MAG and its shareholders continue to support HUY through the slump, much like the pressure from shareholders to keep hold of HUY during the last review a few years ago.
This has nothing to do with Jet2, as the CAA have said. I dont really think Jet2 have a case against jetXtra (or didnt until jetXtra wrongly blamed Jet2 publically for their latest predicament, and added a strap line saying 'we are independant of Jet2'..). The CAA are saying that they hope to make a decision next week. I think there are two issues, firstly that jetXtra were selling flights on the ATOL badge when only having cover for 150 passengers, and secondly I dont think the CAA have approved their cover under the CTT ATOL licence. Hopefully their extension will be approved on the strength of the CTT Group, however that remains to be seen.
As for an alternative from HUY. I think TCX have a weekly flight to PMI this summer, but I would think it too late to replace AGP.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Jan 31, 2012 13:03:44 GMT
Strange that theres been absolutely no update yet.
|
|
|
Post by springy on Jan 31, 2012 15:01:58 GMT
HAT are still selling hols for them on facebook
|
|