FlyBe Financial Analysis

Flybe Group PLC
Financial Analysis

ULMS701
2012 Is the domestic air travel boom over?

ULMS 701 – Managing Financial Resources
Report
Module Leader: Dr. David Brookfield

Student: Marco Rodolfo Marabese
ID 200819669 - The Liverpool MBA

Word Count : 1,996 (excluding Table of Contents, Captions, Footnotes, Appendixes and
References)

Flybe Group PLC

Flybe Group PLC
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2
2. Market and Competitors ............................................................................................ 3
3. Financial Analysis ......................................................................................................... 4
4. Value Drivers’s Analysis ........................................................................................... 11
5. Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 12
6. Appendixes ................................................................................................................ 16
7. Table of Figures ........................................................................................................ 19
8. References .................................................................................................................. 20

Page 1

Flybe Group PLC

1. Introduction

December 10, 2010 was a crucial day in the history of Flybe1—a leading UK airline. Eight
years after its establishment, the Exeter-based company announced its flotation at London Stock
Exchange (LSE). The launch price of the company was 295p per share, with the global value of
the business an estimated £215 million; just one day after flotation, shares rose in value by
16%, subsequently equating to 341.25p with revenue of £60 million for the airline operator. An
enthusiastic Jim French2, Chairman of the company, stated that, ‘The listing has given the business
the platform to expand in continental Europe. It is a massive market. We are taking Flybe into
Europe as a regional airline’ (Milmo, 2010b). The highly positive start promised a great future
for the company as a leader in the UK’s top airline operators. Finally, the great investment of
Jack Walker and his family was accomplished.

However, after a few months, something went wrong: the shares’ value fell to 65p 3 with a loss of
78% following flotation. Subsequently, Jim French stated, ‘I'm more frustrated than cross. I'm
frustrated for my staff and management who are delivering a great business but see the shares
given a kicking by people who don't appreciate the complexities of this business’ (Osborne,
2011). Despite good results of Flybe in a doldrums market, the investors did not reward the
business of the company. With this in mind, in an attempt to gain understanding, this report will
analyse the historical record of the company and its position in the market, and will further
assess the value drivers and financial company performance with the use of key performance
indicators (KPIs) and key ratios.

1 Flybe Group PLC (styled Flybe) (LSE: FLYB).
2 Jim French is the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Flybe since its creation (2002). Considered one of the
best managers in the airline industry, he was elected twice as “Airline Executive of the Year” (2002 and 2004)
(source Flybe Corporate Media : http://www.flybe.com/corporate/media/management_team.htm).
3 Share price on October 6, 2011 (Osborne, 2011).

Page 2

Flybe Group PLC

2. Market and Competitors

Flybe is a leading UK airline company and, with over 6.7 million passengers in 2010, is the fifth
most popular airline company in the UK (the third excluding Thomson Airways and Thomas Cook
Airlines—two specialised charter companies)4.

The company, born as Jersey European Airways in 1979, was re-branded in 2002 as Flybe
(with ‘be’ representing British European), and accordingly changed its strategy and structure. In
order to survive in a new competitive arena, the airline operator changed its model and became
a low-cost regional airline based on the no-frills model, leveraging regional airports in Europe
with a focus on the UK market. With this new model, Flybe was in strong competition with two
major low-cost operators in the European market—Ryanair and EasyJet—as well as direct
competitors represented by other UK no-frills and regional operators, such as Jet2.com, Monarch
and Bmibaby.

As defined by Jim French, ‘Ryanair's appeal is based on price. Ours is convenience’(Milmo,
2010b), meaning that the organisational strategy is concerned with a particular sector of the
market and pursuing an affordable way to travel from the nearest regional airport. Proof of
this strategy is the high number of UK airports served by the company (405), which makes the
company one of the most widespread in the country.

4 According to Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) data (http://www.caa.co.uk) the total number of passengers (PAX) in
2010 was: EasyJet 42.4m (passengers); British Airways 29.7m; Thomson Airways 10.9m; Thomas Cook 8.1m; Flybe
6.7m.
5 As stated in Flybe Annual Report 2010-11(p. 3).

Page 3

Flybe Group PLC

3. Financial Analysis

This section will analyse Flybe’s performance compared with two major competitors: Ryanair6
and EasyJet.7.

Despite a turbulent market8, Flybe has increased its year-by-year revenue during the last 4
years (with the exception of 2010). In actual fact, as can be seen from Flybe’s 2010 Annual
Report, there was a decrease in turnover of 1% (Flybe, 2010); nevertheless, good performance
was recognised during the financial year 2010–2011, which enabled the company to gain more
than 4.4% in revenue9.

Total Revenues (2008-2011)
600

590

580

570

560
£ Million

550

540

530

520

510

500
2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE
Figure 1 - Flybe Total Revenues (2008-2011)

6 Ryanair (LSE: RYA) (http://www.ryanair.com) is an Irish low-cost airline based in Dublin. According to its 2011
Annual Report, it is “The World’s favourite Airline” with the highest number of international scheduled passengers. It
is one of the most prominent low-cost company in the world and it is leader in Europe. It can be used as a
benchmark inside the low-cost airline industry.
7 EasyJet (EasyJet Airline Company Limited) (LSE: EZJ) (http://www.easyjet.com/) is a British low-cost airline based

in London Luton Airport. It is the second largest low-cost carrier with over 40million passenger in 2010 (Source: Civil
Aviation Authority). Both with Ryanair represents one of the most successful low-cost model in Europe. For the
financial year 2010-11 (ended on 30 September 2011) EasyJet published a short report of strong performances.
8 As stated in CNNMoney Special Report: Airline Turbulence (http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/airlines/) the

sector is in one of the most difficult periods of its history due to several factors.
9 With an average annual increase of 3.64%, lower than the competitor's average.

Page 4

Flybe Group PLC

Revenue Increase (Decrease) Comparison (2008-2011)
25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
-5.00%

FLYBE RYANAIR EASYJET

Figure 2 : Revenue increase (decrease) comparison (2008-2011)

However, recent history suggests that the company has been struggling in the face of mounting
costs and increasing competitions. As can be seen from Figure 3, Flybe has faced a drastic
decline in terms of operating profit, experiencing a fall of 88% during 2008–2011, from £39.6
million to £4.7 million (with a significant reduction of 52.3% in 2011). Furthermore, by analysing
the EBIT, the company can be seen to have incurred a loss of £4.3 million (2011) compared with
a profit of £24.6 million the previous year (2010).

Operating Profit (2008-2011)
45

40

35

30

25
£ Million

20

15

10

5

0
2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE
Figure 3: Operating profit (2008-2009)

Page 5

Flybe Group PLC

Moreover, taking into account the gross profits margin of Flybe for the years 2008–2011, these
are seen to be lower than competitors. Despite ratio stability, showing an average of 12.59%
(lower in 2009 at a rate of 9.66%; higher in 2010 by 14.81%), Figure 4 shows that Ryanair
and EasyJet have better margins10.

Gross Margin Comparison (2008 - 2011)
35.00%

30.00%

25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%
2008 2009 2010 2011

Figure 4: Gross Margin comparison (2008-2011)

The situation is similar for the ‘Net Profit Margin’ ratio; this indicator has been drastically slashed
to 0.77% in the accounting year 2010–2011, starting from 4.58% in 2010. During the same
period, Ryanair experienced an average of 10.3% 11.

Despite the worsening of company performance, expectations of Flybe’s board were in-line with
the results, which is believed to be owing to a challenging condition for all airline operators 12. In
Flybe’s case, several factors contribute to the low profitability of the business. First of all, the
price of fuel which, in February 2011, hit the record of $110 per barrel; the total cost of fuel
increased more than 6.8% during the last two financial years (from £86.6 million to £92.5

10 Ryanair 25,13%, EasyJet 14,48%.
11 EasyJet 8.23%.
12 As stated in Flybe Annual Report 2010-11.

Page 6

Flybe Group PLC

million), with an average per-seat cost of £7.9713. In order to improve this situation, Flybe
introduced a fuel surcharge of £3.00 per passenger14.

Net Profit Margin Comparison (2008-2011)
20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%
2008 2009 2010 2011

-5.00%

-10.00%


Figure 5: Net profit comparison (2008-2011)

Furthermore, ‘Aircraft ownership costs’—which include maintenance, insurance and other
expenses—and ‘Net airport costs’—comprising route charges and control provider charges—
both increased; in the first case, there was an increment of 14.4%, whilst in the second case, the
percentage was 4.3%. According to the Annual Report, these two items increased as a result of
exchange rate movements and increases in suppliers’/partners’ rates.

However, despite a reduction of 1.3% during the last financial year (from £111.7 million to
£110.3 million), staff costs represent one of the highest expenses to the company. The actual
staff is recognised as being made up of 2,949 people15 and, by analysing the ‘Revenue per
Employee’ ratio of the Exeter-based company, it can be seen that staff figures are lower by less
than a half when compared with the other two competitors (not in line with a normal low-cost
company performance). Figure 6 shows the comparison with Ryanair and EasyJet during the last

13 As stated in Flybe Annual Report 2010-11.
14 As reported in BBC article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-13297311) (5 May 2011)
15 Ryanair has 8,063 staff; EasyJet has 7,359.

Page 7

Flybe Group PLC

four years16. Furthermore, Return on Capital Employed (ROCE), is dropped to 2.13%, less than
Ryanair (7.64%)17.

Revenue per Employee comparison (2008-2011)
500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
2008 2009 2010 2011

Figure 6: Revenue per Employee comparison (2008-2011)

ROCE comparison (2008-2011)
30.00%

25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%
2008 2009 2010 2011

Figure 7: ROCE comparison (2008-2011)

16 In order to convert Ryanair’s revenue was used the exchange rate GBR/EUR 1.1546 (average exchange rate in
past four years). EasyJet performance cannot be evaluated in Financial Year 2010-11.
17 In the financial year 2009-2010 this ratio was in line with competitors.

Page 8

Flybe Group PLC

Despite this, the liquidity of the company increased by 4% during the last four years (from 1.04
to 1.09 using the acid test ratio, and from 1.09 to 1.12 using the acid test ratio). With this in
mind, notably, liquidity was found to be in crisis during the financial year 2009–2010, with the
value of the acid test ratio and current ratio below 1, thus causing liquidity problems.

In comparison with competitors, is it possible to notice that Flybe liquidity is lower than EasyJet
and Ryanair. This means that the company cannot convert quickly its assets in cash and had
major problem in a market shaped by crisis.

Current Ratio comparison (2008-2011)
2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
2008 2009 2010 2011

Figure 8: Current ratio comparison (2008-2011)

Page 9

Flybe Group PLC

Acid Test ratio comparison (2008-2011)
2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
2008 2009 2010 2011

Figure 9: Acid test ratio comparison (2008-2011)

Finally, gearing ratio is in line with competitors and, during the last financial year, Flybe
improved this ratio.

Gearing ratio comparison (2008-2011)
50%

45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%
2008 2009 2010 2011

Figure 10: Gearing ratio comparison (2008-2011)

Page 10

Flybe Group PLC

4. Value Drivers’ Analysis

As can be seen from the previous analysis, Flybe business is at a difficult stage. Accordingly, in
order to understand and compare the company’s performance alongside its competitors, this
section will focus on value drivers affecting the business of the Exeter-based airline operator;
these will be compared with the two major UK airlines companies (British Airways and EasyJet),
as well as two of the major UK low-cost airlines with a business similar to Flybe (Jet2.com and
Monarch)18.

The first driver—which is recognised as being the most important to an airline company—is the
‘load factor’, which is the proportion between ‘Seat-Km Available’ and ‘Seat-Km Used’; the
higher the ratio, the better the company performance. According to CAA, during the period
2006–2010, the load factor of Flybe decreased from 63.32% to 60.97%, but remained stable
during 2009–2010, with an average of 60.80%.

Load Factor (Trend 2006 - 2010)
90.00%

85.00%

80.00%

75.00%

70.00%

65.00%

60.00%

55.00%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
BRITISH AIRWAYS EASYJET FLYBE JET2.COM MONARCH

Figure 11 : Load Factor Trend (2006-2010)

18 In this section data from Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) were analysed (see ‘References’). All indicators were
calculated from tables provided by the CAA (see ‘Appendixes - Civil Aviation Authority Data Analysis’).

Page 11

Flybe Group PLC

Comparing these data with competitor performance, it can be seen that, notwithstanding a
turbulent market, British Airways consolidated an average 76.6% in the years 2006–2010.
With this in mind, it can also be seen that all the other no-frills operators that have been
analysed have also experienced a ratio increase. Importantly, all three of these companies have
a load factor close to 85%—25% more than Flybe’s poor performance19. In order to obtain
better performance and reduce costs, it is necessary to increase this ratio and to attempt to
capitalise on all the ‘Seat-Km’ available. Moreover, comparing the ratio with low-cost
competitors, it is necessary to ensure improvement.

Another value driver is the ‘Average Yield per Revenue Passenger Kilometre (RPK)’. Flybe’s yield
per RPK has improved, increasing by 20% between 2007 and 2010; notably, however, it fell
by 2% between 2009 and 2010. The increase between 2007 and 2010 is the greatest rise
compared with other competitors20.

Average Yield per Revenue Passenger Kilometre (2007-2010)
£0.180

£0.160

£0.140

£0.120

£0.100

£0.080

£0.060

£0.040

£0.020

£0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010
BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC EASYJET AIRLINE COMPANY LTD FLYBE LTD JET2.COM LTD MONARCH AIRLINES

Figure 12: Average Yeld per Revenue Passenger Kilometre

A similar situation can be seen in terms of the ‘Average Yield per Revenue Passenger Kilometre
Available (RPKA)’. In consideration to this ratio, Flybe improved during the years 2007–2010,

19 In actual fact, EasyJet’s load factor grew by 2.98%, Monarch’s by 3.17%, and Jet2.com’s by an extraordinary
9.07%.
20 According to Civil Aviation Authority data, during the same period, British Airways and Jet2.com’s yield per RPK

growth were 3% whilst Monarch’s was 15%.

Page 12

Flybe Group PLC

although this improvement is lower than for the previous ratio. Markedly, all other companies
analysed were found to have performed better than the previous ratio during this period; this is
strictly in terms of the relationship with the load factor, whereupon all companies increased this
ratio and their ability to maximise their turnaround per passenger. Furthermore, it should also be
noted that Flybe maintained the highest yield in this cluster21.

Average Yield per Revenue Passenger Kilometre Available (2007-2010)
£0.120

£0.100

£0.080

£0.060

£0.040

£0.020

£0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010

Figure 13: Average Yeld per Revenue Passenger Kilometre Available

What is alarming is that this high yield is also related to high costs. Considering the ‘Average
Cost Passenger Kilometre’, Flybe’s ratio growth was 16% during 2007–2011. Importantly, this
index is the highest in the cluster—almost double than competitors—with a value of £0.10(
2010)22.

21 With an average annual increase of 3.64%, lower than the competitor's average.
22 The best performance is from Monarch, which shows only 3.6p per seat per kilometre.

Page 13

Flybe Group PLC

Average Cost Passenger Kilometre (2007-2010)
£0.120

£0.100

£0.080

£0.060

£0.040

£0.020

£0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010

Figure 14: Average Cost Passenger Kilometre

According to the aforementioned ratios, the business model of Flybe cannot be completely
considered a low-cost model: despite the company’s attempts to cut costs, these remain too high.
Markedly, during a period of market crisis, maintaining this structure it is considered risky.

Page 14

Flybe Group PLC

5. Conclusions

Although it is clear that Flybe continues to build a good name and reputation as a reliable
airline operator, it is also clear that measures will need to be taken to kick-start improvements
for 2012. The first factor known to have shaped the decline of the company concerns the present
situation in the UK domestic market, which shows a negative trend across the industry owing to
the economic crisis and, as a result, companies like Ryanair and EasyJet are having to scale
down their domestic routes within the UK23.

The second factor is the increasing power of substitutes. Between 2007 and 2010, the number of
passengers reported was seen to fall by 22%24,with the main beneficiary of this reduction train
and coach operators. As stated by ATOC, ‘In what is a highly competitive market, better services
and more cheap tickets are encouraging more and more people to choose rail to travel between
the UK's main cities’ (Milmo, 2011).

In my view, in order to achieve a better position in the future, Flybe needs to improve its cost
model, which can be achieved over the course of three steps: the first is renewing its fleet with
new, more efficient aircrafts, which has been implemented by the organisation, as can be seen
from the order of 105 new aircraft; the second step is continuing in its staff reductions so as to
create a lean structure within the company; and the third is expanding into the rest of Europe
through the purchase of other carriers, or otherwise through creating solid alliances with other
low-cost airlines that serve secondary or regional airports. Essentially, only with the
implementation of these three stages can Flybe survive in the future and maintain its leadership
as ‘regional operator’. Nevertheless, exporting the domestic model outside of the UK represents
a significant challenge for the British carrier.

23 As stated in Milmo’s article on “The Guardian” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/nov/09/flybe-says-
domestic-air-boom-is-over)
24 From 48.7 million to 38 million.

Page 15

Flybe Group PLC

6. Appendixes

Financial Ratios
Gross Margin 2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE 12.35% 9.66% 14.81% 13.55%
RYANAIR 31.41% 17.02% 26.16% 25.92%
EASYJET 12.44% 10.20% 17.11% 18.19%

Net Profit Margin 2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE 6.51% 0.71% 4.58% 0.77%
RYANAIR 14.40% -5.75% 10.22% 10.32%
EASYJET 4.17% 3.31% 2.43% 8.23%

Return on Capital Employed ratio 2008 2009 2010 2011
(ROCE)
FLYBE 25.05% 13.78% 7.07% 2.13%
RYANAIR 11.49% 2.88% 6.68% 7.64%
EASYJET 4.75% 1.34% 6.84% -

Return on Total Assets (ROTA) 2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE 9.59% 0.03% 7.45% -1.04%
RYANAIR 6.94% -2.83% 4.51% 4.90%
EASYJET 3.55% 1.49% 3.85%

Acid Test Ratio 2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE 1.04 0.97 0.72 1.09
RYANAIR 1.53 1.84 1.98 1.89
EASYJET 1.55 1.40 1.42 -

Page 16

Flybe Group PLC

Current Ratio 2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE 1.09 1.01 0.75 1.12
RYANAIR 1.53 1.84 1.98 1.89
EASYJET 1.55 1.40 1.42 -

Revenue per Employee (£000) 2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE 184.98 201.61 173.16 168.40
RYANAIR 446.68 400.07 368.03 389.87
EASYJET 326.79 322.61 326.36 -

Gearing Ratio 2008 2009 2010 2011
FLYBE 41.61% 40.01% 35.93% 27.31%
RYANAIR 35.85% 40.45% 41.85% 44.26%
EASYJET 29.27% 35.49% 35.91% -

Civil Aviation Authority Data Analysis

Yeld Passenger Km RPK 2007 2008 2009 2010
BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC £0.068 £0.070 £0.074 £0.070
EASYJET AIRLINE COMPANY LTD £0.060 £0.060 £0.059 £0.060
FLYBE LTD £0.139 £0.166 £0.171 £0.167
JET2.COM LTD £0.055 £0.053 £0.058 £0.057
MONARCH AIRLINES £0.036 £0.038 £0.040 £0.041

Yeld Passenger Km (Available) 2007 2008 2009 2010
FLYBE LTD £0.088 £0.103 £0.107 £0.102
JET2.COM LTD £0.043 £0.039 £0.046 £0.047

Page 17

Flybe Group PLC

Avarage Cost Passenger Km (Available) 2007 2008 2009 2010
FLYBE LTD £0.087 £0.101 £0.109 £0.101
JET2.COM LTD £0.043 £0.042 £0.043 £0.046

Load Factor 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC 76.75% 75.81% 74.75% 78.28% 77.69%
EASYJET AIRLINE COMPANY LTD 81.47% 81.44% 82.67% 83.22% 84.46%
FLYBE LTD 63.32% 61.34% 63.57% 60.62% 60.97%
JET2.COM LTD 77.25% 73.57% 79.38% 81.65% 86.32%
MONARCH AIRLINES 82.04% 82.56% 83.60% 83.61% 85.21%

Page 18

Flybe Group PLC

7. Table of Figures

Figure 1 - Flybe Total Revenues (2008-2011).............................................................. 4
Figure 2 : Revenue increase (decrease) comparison (2008-2011) ........................... 5
Figure 3: Operating profit (2008-2009) ....................................................................... 5
Figure 4: Gross Margin comparison (2008-2011) ....................................................... 6
Figure 5: Net profit comparison (2008-2011) .............................................................. 7
Figure 6: Revenue per Employee comparison (2008-2011) ...................................... 8
Figure 7: ROCE comparison (2008-2011) ..................................................................... 8
Figure 8: Current ratio comparison (2008-2011) ......................................................... 9
Figure 9: Acid test ratio comparison (2008-2011) ................................................... 10
Figure 10: Gearing ratio comparison (2008-2011) ................................................. 10
Figure 11 : Load Factor Trend (2006-2010).............................................................. 11
Figure 12: Average Yeld per Revenue Passenger Kilometre .................................. 12
Figure 13: Average Yeld per Revenue Passenger Kilometre Available ............... 13
Figure 14: Average Cost Passenger Kilometre .......................................................... 14

Page 19

Flybe Group PLC

8. References

Annual Reports

EasyJet. (2011). ‘Results for the year ended 30 September 2011’. Easyjet Airline Company LTD.
Available from: <http://corporate.easyjet.com/media/latest-news/news-year-
2011/~/media/Files/E/Easyjet-Plc-V2/pdf/media/latest-news/2011/15-November-easyJet-
plc.pdf>. [Accessed December 21, 2011].

EasyJet. (2008). ‘EasyJet Annual Report 2007-08’. Easyjet Airline Company LTD. Available
from: <http://2008annualreport.easyjet.com/files/pdf/Full_Report_easyJet_AR08.pdf>.
[Accessed December 21, 2011].



Flybe. (2008). ‘Flybe Annual Report 2007-08’. Flybe Group PLC. Available from: <
http://www.flybe.com/pdf/annual_report/2007-08.pdf >. [Accessed December 21, 2011].

http://www.flybe.com/pdf/annual_report/2008-09.pdf >. [Accessed December 21, 2011].

http://www.flybe.com/pdf/annual_report/2009-10’.pdf >. [Accessed December 21, 2011].

http://www.flybe.com/pdf/annual_report/2010-11.pdf>. [Accessed December 21, 2011].

Page 20

Flybe Group PLC

Ryanair. (2008).‘Ryanair - Annual Report 2008’. Ryanair LTD. Available from:
<http://www.ryanair.com/doc/investor/2008/Annual_Report_2008_Final.pdf>. [Accessed
December 22, 2011].

December 22, 2011].

<http://www.ryanair.com/doc/investor/2010/Annual_report_2010_web.pdf>. [Accessed
December 22, 2011].

December 22, 2011].

Civil Aviation Authority Data
CAA – Aviation Statistics. (2010).‘CAA –Aviation Statistic’. UK Civil Aviation Authority. Available
from: < http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=80&pagetype=90>. [Accessed December
22, 2011].

Report used for the analysis:

Airline Personnel Cost UK and Overseas - 2007;




All Scheduled Services - 2007;



Page 21

Flybe Group PLC


All Services - 2007;




Major UK Airlines Individual Airline Balance Sheets 2007;




Major UK Airlines Individual Airline Profit and Loss Account 2007;




Major UK Airlines Individual Appropriation Accounts 2007;




Size of UK Airlines by Available Capacity - 2007;




Total Scheduled and Non-Scheduled Services Operating and Traffic Statistics for the Financial
Years of Reporting Airlines 2007;


Page 22

Flybe Group PLC



Other References

Arnott, S. (2010). 'Flybe's $1.3bn order fuels hopes of airline recovery '. The Indipendent. July
21, 2010. Available from: <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/flybes-13bn-
order-fuels-hopes-of-airline-recovery-2031192.html>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

BBC (2010). 'Flybe announces £850m Embraer plane order'. BBC. July 20, 2011. Available
from: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10693875>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

BBC (2011). 'Airline Flybe adding £3 fuel surcharge'. BBC. May 5, 2011. Available from:
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-13297311>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

CNNMoney (2011). ‘Special Report: Airline Turbulence’. CNNMoney. Available from: <
http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/airlines/>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

Flybe Corporate (2011). 'Flybe Corporate Media'. Flybe Group PLC. Available from: <
http://www.flybe.com/corporate/media/management_team.htm>. [Accessed December 16,
2011].

Hawkes, A. (2010). 'Budget airline Flybe announces flotation'. The Guardian. November 30,
2010. Available from: <http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/nov/30/airline-flybe-
announces-flotation?INTCMP=SRCH>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

Milmo,D. (2010). 'Flybe floats high on the stock market and sets its sights on Europe'. The
Guardian. December 19, 2010. Available from:
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/dec/19/flybe-jim-french>. [Accessed December
21, 2011].

Page 23

Flybe Group PLC

Milmo,D. (2010b). 'Regional airline Flybe raised £66m from stock market flotation'. The
Guardian. December 10, 2010. Available from:
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/dec/10/flybe-airline-industry-
travel?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

Milmo,D. (2011). 'UK's domestic air travel boom is over, says Flybe'. The Guardian. November
9, 2011. Available from: <http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/nov/09/flybe-says-
domestic-air-boom-is-over>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

Osborne, A. (2011). 'Flybe boss Jim French 'frustrated' as shares fall 36pc'. The Telegraph.
October 6, 2011. Available from:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/8809573/Flybe-boss-Jim-
French-frustrated-as-shares-fall-36pc.html>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

Ruddick, G. (2010). 'Flybe raises £60m in London float'. The Telegraph. December 10, 2010.
Available from:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/8193735/Flybe-raises-60m-in-
London-float.html>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

The Telegraph (2010). 'Flybe - the personalities behind its success'. The Telegraph. December
10, 2010. Available from:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/8193602/Flybe-the-
personalities-behind-its-success.html>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

The Telegraph (2010b). 'Flybe IPO: the main points'. The Telegraph. December 10, 2010.
Available from:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/8193597/Flybe-IPO-the-main-
points.html>. [Accessed December 16, 2011].

Page 24

FlyBe Financial Analysis

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (13)

Semelhante a FlyBe Financial Analysis

Semelhante a FlyBe Financial Analysis (20)

FlyBe Financial Analysis