|
|
Post by Tim on Jan 16, 2020 15:46:51 GMT
As far as I can see from this FlyBe have got themselves into trouble by taking air passenger duty from said passengers, spending it on other stuff and then failing to pay the tax across to the relevant Government authority.
That happens quite a lot with companies deducting PAYE and VAT and then getting into difficulty because they spend it before it's due to HMRC but on no occasion have HMRC then changed the rules to help out the company that have done this and why should they?
So, why should FlyBe get special treatment?
|
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jan 16, 2020 16:22:03 GMT
Probably because lots of FoBs (Friends of Boris) use it to get from A to B and rang him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 17, 2020 10:14:04 GMT
I tend to think there is a decent argument for FlyBe being helped out do to their rather unique position as the sole carrier on some obscure routes that are very necessary for that group of users.
They shouldn't have spent the APD money though. Very naughty that.
|
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Jan 17, 2020 15:03:40 GMT
I tend to think there is a decent argument for FlyBe being helped out do to their rather unique position as the sole carrier on some obscure routes that are very necessary for that group of users. They shouldn't have spent the APD money though. Very naughty that. Yes to all of that. That Michael O'Learys a rather horrid individual and I call BS on him promising to cover all the routes currently served by FlyBe |
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jan 17, 2020 15:13:11 GMT
The TTP agreement Flybe are talking about is quite common (I've had to use it at a previous place).
The proposal to change APD is not usual though, that'd be like a firm saying they couldn't pay their VAT bill and HMRC offering to reduce the VAT rate for everybody on the back of it!
|
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jan 17, 2020 15:19:15 GMT
I tend to think there is a decent argument for FlyBe being helped out do to their rather unique position as the sole carrier on some obscure routes that are very necessary for that group of users. They shouldn't have spent the APD money though. Very naughty that. Yes to all of that. That Michael O'Learys a rather horrid individual and I call BS on him promising to cover all the routes currently served by FlyBe I think FlyBe are an essential part of the transport system of the country and have to be helped one way or another because without them many areas would be very isolated. Michael O'Leary can't be trusted and might run a service for a month or two before finding a hundred excuses to stop it. I was surprised when I heard people saying that the reduction in APD would result in lower fares. I think that would have no impact at all: the large majority of people flying FlyBe's more outlying routes do so because they have to, not because it is £10 cheaper. If I were FlyBe I wouldn't reduce the prices and would just use the lower APD taxes to bolster my profits which quite clearly need a big leg up. I would have thought that essential transport links (like the ferry links in the Scottish islands) should get Government assistance with no EU intervention. Other airlines don't want these routes. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 17, 2020 17:59:18 GMT
Ferries, like most ships use some of the lowest quality, most polluting fuel going. I’d like to see the Greens apply their arguments to have the CalMac services shut down.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2020 20:35:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
FlymayBe
Jan 17, 2020 22:08:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by Alex on Jan 17, 2020 22:08:34 GMT
I've been on a few Flybe flights and they've usually been full, even the one I took between Jersey and Guernsey last year which was only in the air ten minutes. So clearly they are being used but perhaps the problem is the green levy which is all very well but couldn't be completely passed onto customers because they wouldn't pay the increased fare so airlines have had to essentially subsidise it.
I suppose the only stupid thing about this whole situation is that the levy was meant to discourage flying but because this had led to less people flying, the government are giving an airline state support in order to keep them flying.
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Jan 20, 2020 12:56:35 GMT
If the government are prepared to subsidise the railways (either openly or under the counter) then flights or ferries to remote areas surely come under the same "required transport links" mantra. So subsidising some routes make logical, strategic sense. To pretend that other airlines re just itching to take on the routes is pure marketing bollocks by those airlines.
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Jan 20, 2020 12:58:35 GMT
..I suppose the only stupid thing about this whole situation is that the levy was meant to discourage flying but because this had led to less people flying, the government are giving an airline state support in order to keep them flying.... Ah, the eternal taxation paradox. I tax something to discourage people from doing it and then reap a whole lot of other issues when they actually stop doing it. If they want to have a passenger duty, it would make far more sense for it to be a percentage of the fare and for internal flights to pay a lower rate (like zero) than international flights. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Jan 20, 2020 13:02:50 GMT
I avoid Flybe, really don’t like little planes as they move around too much and there’s no option for an upgraded seat or extra legroom.
They do provide a good service / coverage though, so I don’t have an issue with them getting support. Once, anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2020 13:06:40 GMT
Perhaps creating a sustainable system rather than one off assistance, or is that to simple?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 20, 2020 13:25:48 GMT
I avoid Flybe, really don’t like little planes as they move around too much and there’s no option for an upgraded seat or extra legroom. They do provide a good service / coverage though, so I don’t have an issue with them getting support. Once, anyway. I sometimes use their service from Newcastle to Aberdeen, albeit it's operated by Eastern (Highwaymen) Airlines flying turboprop Jetstream 41 aircraft which seat 29 people in a 1 +2 configuration. I'm not sure who their seats are designed around but even with my relatively pert buttocks if you have a an aisle street (66% probability), one of your cheeks is left hanging in fresh air for the duration. For some reason these aircraft also seem to attract flak as you pass over Dundee, although what us Geordies have done to bring about the wrath of Dundonians I don't know? Last time I flew the whole thing was leaping about all over and landed at Aberdeen sideways. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Jan 20, 2020 13:30:25 GMT
I avoid Flybe, really don’t like little planes as they move around too much and there’s no option for an upgraded seat or extra legroom. They do provide a good service / coverage though, so I don’t have an issue with them getting support. Once, anyway. I sometimes use their service from Newcastle to Aberdeen, albeit it's operated by Eastern (Highwaymen) Airlines flying turboprop Jetstream 41 aircraft which seat 29 people in a 1 +2 configuration. I'm not sure who their seats are designed around but even with my relatively pert buttocks if you have a an aisle street (66% probability), one of your cheeks is left hanging in fresh air for the duration. For some reason these aircraft also seem to attract flak as you pass over Dundee, although what us Geordies have done to bring about the wrath of Dundonians I don't know? Last time I flew the whole thing was leaping about all over and landed at Aberdeen sideways. I flew from Belfast to Glasgow on one of those a few years ago. Belfast city isn't great to fly in/out of at the best of times, but it was like a crisp packet in the wind..... |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 20, 2020 13:35:25 GMT
but it was like a crisp packet in the wind..... Get Elton on the phone that's a great title for a song. |
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 20, 2020 13:41:54 GMT
I don't think the flying taxes are wise. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they discriminate between vehicles of differing efficiency so there's no incentive for the airline industry to move to cleaner technology other than their own fuel savings - for short haul this is unlikely to be relevant against the investment costs.
Given the chance I'd free the industry of the costs and improve connectivity through the air rather than white-elephants like HS2.
|
|
