Flyr aftermath

The cleanup after Flyr has brought to the front a number of ways the airline wasted its investors money.

A number of staff had fancifull titles whcih point to an overflow of staff that wasn't completely necessary for a small startup company. Lots of VP's under the Chief level. Maybe some of the urge to comit to more planes was due to an overhiring of well titled staff that needed someone to manage which could only be justified by becoming a larger airline. 

Where the ex-Norwegian managmenet building the backoffice of the new airline Flyr based on what the much larger airline Norwegian had. An airline that also went under unable to manage its debt or comitments, before being resurrected. A plane needs sa certain amount of pilots and cabinstaff to fly a certain schedule. It is the backoffice saving are to be had. Just as many staff in the back as flying staff seems excessive. Specially when one knows large parts of its ground handling and maintenance were outsourced

A lot of effort was spent on creating the F in Flyr's logo. And possibly part of it outsourced to a third party consultancy. That sort of excessive spend should have waited to a time of profitability. Who cares how the F looks when you are looking for a ticket. I hadn't even noticed it before I saw a comment on its part of 2 circles design after Flyr's end.

It seems that not only credit card companies have had their hand in the company pockets with not transfering funds for seats sold. Banks have held of a a sizable chunk of Flyr's cash as a guarantee. And deposits for the lease of planes also seems to have taken a sizeable chunk of the airlne's take form investors.

The official norwegian hr system also lead to the build up of a sizable debt to cover sample hollliday pay for staff. This is usually only paid out for the summer following the year of earning. Often in the size of 10% of total payroll. 

At the end they had only 50 million nkr in cash. And 40 of that was a minimum holding guarantee for the bank to ensure deliveries of sample fuel. Then they sample owed 30 million in wages and holliday pay and as we already knew 150 million in CO2 quota liabilities for 2022.

So they really had run out of money. Knowing they had burned through at least the 250 million invested about 4 months ago it is questionable even if they had succeded with getting another 350 million it would have lasted them over the summer. And then another winter would have set in. Flyr was in need of serious changes and their last management weren't able to see them or make them or both.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is this the endgame for Norse, not necessarily

Norse have again announced that they need another capital injection. This time it might be different because last time they needed money the ceo and large owner Larsen said that it was the last time he injected more from own funds. Thi reminds me of the endgame ein Flyr where major investor Braathen said something similar in the autumn. When they agin needed money the following Januar nobody came forward and that was the end for an airline that could have been saved after the October refill with some major mangement changes that could have implemented even stricter cost savings, found income immediately and not paid out cash  immediately for possible charter incomes in the future. If Norse turns to more subleasing out of planes or charters they need to ensure that there will be upfront payments because it will mean upfront costs. Difficuolt concept for underfinanced charterers but rquired for an airline on the brink. Norse management also need to be based closer to where the action...
Read more

When will Boeing's new chief get around to solving problems instead of letting new ones happen

So far the new Boeing CEO is not standing out as a problem solver. His first couple of months has more been a deepening of the Boeing rut. Maybe his immediate and well announced (partial) relocation to Seattle was not such a smart move after all. It certainly have given the machinists the guts to demand back stuff they gave up 10 years ago because Boeing then threatened to move more production away from the area. He needs to be careful with letting his division leutenants run the show by playing hardball with the unions at a time when Boeing needs to ramp up production, not let it grind to a halt altogether. They may have more experience from within Boeing and been seen by the previous CEO as leading lights but it is time for a new regime. The previous one created and proeeded with more trouble than it was worth for both customers and the company itself. Boeing might be too critical to the for all practical purposes duopoly in passenger plane making in the western world, but that deepl...
Read more

Questionmarks over how Boeing saved costs when using plug instead of door

 What on the overwing exits stop them physically from being opened by a passenger with poor survival instincts during flight and did Boeing design engineers remove this safety mechanism from instructions for when installing a plug instead of a door. What other safety features did they omit on the grounds of cost saving in the design for using a door plug instead of a real emergency exit.  Normal cabin doors can't be opened during flight by design since they swing forward into the wind. There are few comments around on how this door (when installed) pivots. Is it up like the overwing exits or is it down since with such a small door there are probably no self inflating slide like the normal cabin doors. Or is it left or right. On the 737-200 the emergency exit overwing door came out loose and into the cabin. On the 737-NG-800 they swing up and out of the way. I doubt it just is pushed out and fall down because that could damage it during testing / maintenance. Would the overwing...
Read more