Businesses in financial trouble

[mavhc]

But it's got to be easier to pay those fees than move all the people using other planes.

 

Maybe airlines should be forced to have "get everyone home insurance"

[bald_pig]

Maybe airlines should be forced to have "get everyone home insurance"

What do you think the ATOL scheme is?

[Dos_Box]

Not sure why they can't just fly all the planes back to the UK with people on them. Planes are there, pilots are there, people are there.

 

The minute an airline goes bust they lose their operators licence. No licence, no insurance, no flying. They also lose things like manufacturer support and other necessities.

Also, planes are impounded by the liquidators immediately although, as @ZeroHour says, sometimes airport operators do try to 'secure' them to ensure payments of debts.

[SpuffMonkey]

What do you think the ATOL scheme is?

 

Yeah - but it ONLY covers package holidays - not flights or hotels separately booked

[Rob_D]

Yeah - but it ONLY covers package holidays - not flights or hotels separately booked

True it wouldn't help with the hotel, but I thought it covered independent flights. EasyJet apparently have an extra ticket levy to cover the ATOL payments.

[LeMarchand]

Once all those people are flown back, there should be a silver lining to Thomas Cook's collapse: lower fuel emissions for a few months.

[mavhc]

Other option is to not run an airline when you have negative amount of money. Maybe don't fly people out if you can't fly them back.

[bald_pig]

Other option is to not run an airline when you have negative amount of money. Maybe don't fly people out if you can't fly them back.

 

That's great and all, except no airline would ever be formed again, since new businesses of that scale would need financing to start up...

[mikeprice]

I have learned from this that, in the event that I get stuck abroad due to a similar situation, if the hotel tries to charge me to stay then they are either uninformed or just trying to scam double payment

 

The cost of the hotel is met by the ATOL arrangements - so the hotel is not justified in demanding extra payments from the clients

useful to know - although I have probably read it several times before but not absorbed it

 

 

I am assuming that I have interpreted this correctly - any corrections welcome!

[unixman_again]

Wrightbus: Job loss fears as firm enters administration The last UK bus manufacturer, who make the Boris Bus.

[mavhc]

Now we can buy electric buses from China, excellent, they make 1000s of them

[mikeprice]

We can buy them from the USA - we will have a REALLY good trade deal with them VERY SOON

[Andrew_C]

The cost of the hotel is met by the ATOL arrangements

Do ATOL pay directly, or does the tourist pay then reclaim later? I can well see the hotels trying to hang on to the little bargaining power they have.

[mavhc]

Seems like it'd be easier to pay for insurance to fly them home on the dates they were already leaving, with the planes that already were booked and therefore have all the seats required.

[Boredguy]

Do ATOL pay directly, or does the tourist pay then reclaim later? I can well see the hotels trying to hang on to the little bargaining power they have.

 

ATOL pays.

However not all hotels seem to understand this hence the demands for tourist to pay (which they should not).

[Dos_Box]

Seems like it'd be easier to pay for insurance to fly them home on the dates they were already leaving, with the planes that already were booked and therefore have all the seats required.

 

This is because the planes are now the property of the liquidators and they have no operators licence to fly them.

They do not let commercial planes fly without a lot of boxes being ticked and international standards being in place. Once TC went bust that was it for the aircraft.

If they leased any, they will (eventually) be returned to the leasing company and any they owned will be sold to pay off debts. But as it it, none can move unless flown by a company with an operators licence.

It's the rules.

Edited September 25, 2019 by Dos_Box

[bald_pig]

Seems like it'd be easier to pay for insurance to fly them home on the dates they were already leaving, with the planes that already were booked and therefore have all the seats required.

 

This has been explained to you more than once now, are you being dense or awkward?

[LukeRowberry]

This has been explained to you more than once now, are you being dense or awkward?

mavhc being deliberately awkward? I'm having none of it!

[mavhc]

So make a new rule, that's what politicians do. Cunning really. Turns out you can change the laws of mankind.

 

Create an insurance system so that if you go bankrupt, the money is released, allowing you only to fly people home, and then go bankrupt.

 

Obviously they just picked a date and time at will to declare bankruptcy, wasn't like they ran out of money at that exact second, was planned for ages. In which case why are they still flying people out on the days leading up to it?

[Andrew_C]

In which case why are they still flying people out on the days leading up to it?

All businesses trade right up to the wire. Otherwise your shareholders bail out early.

[mavhc]

I'm glad you bought this server from me, and paid for it, I've purchased half the server using your money and posted it to you. Oh noes, I ran out of money, sucks to be you.

[Andrew_C]

I'm glad you bought this server from me, and paid for it, I've purchased half the server using your money and posted it to you. Oh noes, I ran out of money, sucks to be you.

You missed the bit where you start a new entity called mvach next week, and carry on as if nothing happened.

[Dos_Box]

So make a new rule, that's what politicians do. Cunning really. Turns out you can change the laws of mankind.

 

Create an insurance system so that if you go bankrupt, the money is released, allowing you only to fly people home, and then go bankrupt.

 

Obviously they just picked a date and time at will to declare bankruptcy, wasn't like they ran out of money at that exact second, was planned for ages. In which case why are they still flying people out on the days leading up to it?

 

You have to remember that these are international standards and even if the UK govt went 'OK, we have these new rules' it wouldn't matter as most of the TC fleet would be stranded in other countries around the world who are abiding to the agreed standards.

These planes also require expensive expensive maintenance and repairs, not including standard fuelling and ground services, are taxpayers supposed to pay for those too?

Edited September 26, 2019 by Dos_Box

[mavhc]

Just wondering why it's considered better to leave all the planes where they are at some point in time, then use other planes to bring people home. And also why they're allowed to take people on half of their journey when they know they'll be unable to bring them home.

 

Have you got enough money to bring people home? No? Then you can't go on this trip. Now your insurance is cheaper.

 

Also weird that it only applies to package holidays that involve air travel.

 

Gov can start a company, call it Oceanic Airlines or something, buy the planes, hire the same pilots, fly everyone home, and then sell it all again, problem solved. And now all your planes are in 1 place for ease of inspection by the new buyer

[FishCustard]

Gov can start a company, call it Oceanic Airlines or something, buy the planes, hire the same pilots, fly everyone home, and then sell it all again, problem solved. And now all your planes are in 1 place for ease of inspection by the new buyer

That is a massive undertaking that cannot be done overnight when an airline collapses.

 

The CAA has been planning Operation Matterhorn (the repatriation) for weeks. Starting and operating an airline is (rightly!) an immensely complicated process, even for governments.