Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Other European Airlines
Reload this Page >

Thomas Cook Enters Compulsory Liquidation

Thomas Cook Enters Compulsory Liquidation

Old Sep 25, 19, 10:31 am
  #151  
2020 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Programs: Top Tier with all 3 alliances
Posts: 3,756
Originally Posted by irishguy28 View Post
...
To condemn Condor to face the winter alone, having had its circumstances so brutally altered just now, through no fault of its own, just as it faces into the tough part of the year, appears quite vindictive. …
That's a National Geographic line...I can hear the narrator...
rickg523 likes this.
nk15 is offline  
Old Sep 25, 19, 1:08 pm
  #152  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,016
Originally Posted by speed.skater View Post
I view it differently.
I don't see what is different to what I've written.

Yes, maybe it's TUI who will buy Condor. Maybe it's Lufthansa. Maybe it's someone else. The most likely buyers at this moment - TUI and LH - are both not in their best shapes - even if they are more healthy than their competitors. In every case there will be changes of Condor due to its integration in a new structure. Changes means problems for a while. And there is still the risk of bankrupty - if the potential buyers prefer to buy parts from Condor instead of buying the whole company.

Based on that I won't book a Condor flight now and in the next months and many other customers won't book a Condor flight for the same reasons.

I agree that it's very likely that a buyer will use the Condor brand. But brands haven't much to do with operations.

And I'm wondering about speculations about Condor's profitability. Condor was part of a large group. In a large group the profitability of a single legal entity doesn't mean a lot. The truth is, that you can not predict the profitability of Condor when it's not part of TC. It is very unlikely, that Condor is viable on its own.
thbe is offline  
Old Sep 25, 19, 2:57 pm
  #153  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 44,692
Originally Posted by irishguy28 View Post
Then I would advise you, as a reasonable person, to go and look.

You will find that, unlike its parent and former owner, it is a profitable business. With Thomas Cook's collapse - taking Condor's profit with it - Condor finds itself with the rug pulled from under its feet, and would struggle to survive the lean winter period. Many airlines - particularly those that are highly seasonal, such as holiday charters - make their profit in the high (summer) season.

To condemn Condor to face the winter alone, having had its circumstances so brutally altered just now, through no fault of its own, just as it faces into the tough part of the year, appears quite vindictive. That Condor, like many other airlines, has a seasonal business model is not one that means it is inherently unprofitable. That it should now, with its profit-making season just completed - and those profits ripped away - somehow be expected to survive the lean winter months, unaided, is not something that appears fair.

Should all businesses that seek credit be denied and then pushed to failure?

Note that Thomas Cook was in the same boat last week - but no-one was prepared to stump up the credit there, as it was clear that it would not be enough to get them through the winter.

No point in sending a good airline after a bad one!
It is a business relationship. The same for Thomas Cook. A pity for many, many people employed directly and indirectly. But, that does not change my self-protection instincts.
Often1 is online now  
Old Sep 25, 19, 3:04 pm
  #154  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 7,668
Originally Posted by thbe View Post
It is very unlikely, that Condor is viable on its own.
I am almost certain that Condor is not viable on its own.
Ldnn1 is online now  
Old Sep 25, 19, 4:58 pm
  #155  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 44,692
Originally Posted by Ldnn1 View Post
I am almost certain that Condor is not viable on its own.
Which is good reason not to tie up personal funds and risk having to spend a fortune later.
Often1 is online now  
Old Sep 26, 19, 1:07 am
  #156  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pacific Northwest
Programs: UA 1MM, AS MVP, Bonvoyed Gold, Honors Dia, IHG Plat, ...
Posts: 8,597
Originally Posted by Ldnn1 View Post
I am almost certain that Condor is not viable on its own.

Based on my one post-TC-liquidation DE flight the other day (which was fairly full despite not carrying any TC customers), I am almost certain that Condor is viable on its own.

I fully realize that my one data point is not worth much, but it’s more data to back up my claim than you provided for yours, so I win :-)

Ultimately, unless you are an insider at DE with access to internal financial data and the ability to predict the development of the overall economy for the next few years, I think it is very difficult to make “almost certain” predictions.

Originally Posted by thbe View Post

The truth is, that you can not predict the profitability of Condor when it's not part of TC. It is very unlikely, that Condor is viable on its own.

If the truth is that you can’t predict the profitability of Condor when it’s not part of TC, how can you then conclude that it is very unlikely to be viable on its own?
notquiteaff is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 5:02 am
  #157  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,016
Originally Posted by notquiteaff View Post
If the truth is that you canít predict the profitability of Condor when itís not part of TC, how can you then conclude that it is very unlikely to be viable on its own?
Because of its size, structure and business model. Maybe you are not aware what it means for a company to be part of a large group. There are pros and cons, but for sure it's a different kind of business. You need much more additional money for a change like that.

Btw: TC wanted to sell Condor before. So it's likely that Condor's books are shining brighter than the reality.
thbe is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 11:48 am
  #158  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 4
Real shame that Manchester has had it's flights to the States decimated by TC's demise.

TC flew to NYC, Vegas, San Francisco, Orlando, LA, Seattle and Miami from memory.

Virgin offer some options, TUI cover Orlando and there is some minor competition on the NYC route with United offering a daily flight as well as Virgin, but I'm going to take a guess that 50% of capacity has gone overnight along with some of the destinations. Hope someone steps in to offer some options as Virgin's prices have gone through the roof (might be temporary, but they were always more expensive even when TC were flying).
Fawltyaces is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 12:16 pm
  #159  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: Gold: A3, KL Silver: AZ, BA
Posts: 24,339
Originally Posted by thbe View Post
Because of its size, structure and business model. Maybe you are not aware what it means for a company to be part of a large group. There are pros and cons, but for sure it's a different kind of business. You need much more additional money for a change like that.

Btw: TC wanted to sell Condor before. So it's likely that Condor's books are shining brighter than the reality.
Condor made a €43 million profit for 2018, with expectations for 2019 to beat that.
TC announced a £1.5 billion half-year loss last May. That's why they looked again at selling various assets - but it became clear that offloading the divisions that actually made money was unsustainable and would have hastened the end of the parent.

Cutting them free from the sinking TC corpse would have been the right thing to do; TCUK would have gone under before the summer, so at least hundreds of thousands of Brits managed to get their last TC summer holiday.
irishguy28 is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 12:37 pm
  #160  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Programs: AAdvantage GLD; AGR
Posts: 2,478
Originally Posted by Fawltyaces View Post
Real shame that Manchester has had it's flights to the States decimated by TC's demise.

TC flew to NYC, Vegas, San Francisco, Orlando, LA, Seattle and Miami from memory.

Virgin offer some options, TUI cover Orlando and there is some minor competition on the NYC route with United offering a daily flight as well as Virgin, but I'm going to take a guess that 50% of capacity has gone overnight along with some of the destinations. Hope someone steps in to offer some options as Virgin's prices have gone through the roof (might be temporary, but they were always more expensive even when TC were flying).
This shows several other airlines too:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Airport

AA MAN-PHL
DL MAN-BOS (seasonal)
SG MAN-HOU

AA used to fly to JFK from MAN but they stopped a while back.
salut0 is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 12:50 pm
  #161  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 4
BA also used to fly MAN - JFK but they pulled the route years ago. I thought Boston was a Virgin flight (Delta codeshare) but could be wrong.

Point is that Manchester's offering to the States has been decimated - for example TC flew twice per day to Orlando peak season - TUI fly twice a week, Virgin seem to be daily so that is 23 direct flights a week down to 9.

For a regional airport to lose 20-30 transatlantic flights per week plus the likes of Cuba and other Caribbean destinations isn't great. Can't see who else will dive in other than Virgin.
Fawltyaces is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 12:57 pm
  #162  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Programs: AAdvantage GLD; AGR
Posts: 2,478
Originally Posted by Fawltyaces View Post
For a regional airport to lose 20-30 transatlantic flights per week plus the likes of Cuba and other Caribbean destinations isn't great. Can't see who else will dive in other than Virgin.
True. But maybe connecting carriers will pick up the traffic and offer cheaper fares than VS. LH? KL? AF? etc
salut0 is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 1:28 pm
  #163  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Programs: TK E+, BA Gold, HH Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 770
Originally Posted by salut0 View Post
SG MAN-HOU
This is naturally Singapore Airlines (SQ), not SpiceJet (SG)
irishguy28 likes this.
duvin is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 2:21 pm
  #164  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Programs: AAdvantage GLD; AGR
Posts: 2,478
Originally Posted by duvin View Post
This is naturally Singapore Airlines (SQ), not SpiceJet (SG)
Of course. Iím a OneWorld not a Star Alliance flyer so I was working from vague memory.
salut0 is offline  
Old Sep 26, 19, 3:36 pm
  #165  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 44,692
Originally Posted by salut0 View Post
True. But maybe connecting carriers will pick up the traffic and offer cheaper fares than VS. LH? KL? AF? etc
More likely, it will simply drive up nonstop fares xMAN. Simply adding capacity to routes where TC could not make money seems to be a poor idea.
Often1 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: