beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,287
i would point Santander to all the news today that says otherwise.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Monarch into admin
- Thread starter Rugrat
- Start date
i would point Santander to all the news today that says otherwise.
Garage_Doors
Originally the Swankers
I know, that's the point, Santander are shirking there responsibilities as a bank.
I booked some through LLoyds and others with Santander, Rang Lloyds, no problem, but Santander just no.
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 70,128
Yup, they were still sending out emails touting for bookings on Friday evening, in the full knowledge that they'd be ceasing trading on the Monday morning. If that doesn't amount to criminal deception, I don't know what does.
nicko31
Well-known member
Of course the result of all this will be higher fares, supply / demand...
As mentioned earlier in this thread and it is reported and confirmed in the press, last October the CAA forced Monarch to take an ATOL contribution on their Seat Only fares (95% of their business) but on the 14th December last year, the CAA were relaxed enough about their financial restructuring that they removed the requirement to make the contribution on their Seat Only fares. The package holiday arm of the business was a Tour Operator (5% of their business) so they had to offer ATOL protection on this business.
Re Santander, I'm presuming you purchased a Seat Only fare and they were asking when you purchased it as to whether they would pick it up or referred you back to Monarch?
ATOL is really a minefield, with different types of protection dependent on how you purchased flights/holidays, but the important thing to note is airlines selling just seats, are not required to have an ATOL licence, hence Monarch could have continued trading. The majority of ATOL licences are held by Tour Operators (Thomson, Cooks and other Trade Only Ops) for Package Holiday sales and Travel Agents for Flight Plus sales (Flights and ground arrangements booked at the same time together via an Agent)
Unfortunately down to the way we handle bankruptcy / administration etc... a Chapter 11 style thing like the Yanks have would be much better for the consumer.
GreersElbow
New member
Brexit caused the Arab spring and subsequent upheaval in the region?
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,287
and just what has that got to do with this issue?
Travelled back from Faro yesterday, there were a couple of Monarch flights on the board that had been picked up by another airline (code EB) and appeared to be running to schedule. One of the guys I was travelling with is an MD at TUI...gave some interesting insight on how difficult/choosy Monarch were to try to do business with.
GreersElbow
New member
A regular comment made by some of our colleagues/contacts, management was not adaptable and were often beaten by the likes of Ryanair. Too static and unresponsive to the Arab Spring as well.
From a trade perspective (and this is just a personal view) I'm not sure Monarch in the latter years were really sure what they wanted to be - they were both a scheduled airline and a package holiday business (95% Airline, 5% Package tells it's own story!) Historically they were one of the pioneers of the Package, remember Cosmos? They were trying to be all things to all men and didn't have the economies of scale.
On the Seat Only side, they were interesting to deal with, competitors like Easyjet and Ryanair want all your money up front, as per the low cost model, but while Monarch followed this on their direct business, we in the trade could book flight only with them with a £75 deposit. They didn't pay us any commission, but then again it's hard to make any money on low cost short haul flights as there are no special Agent fares that we enjoy through long haul scheduled airlines. £75 deposit was a way of securing business, but on the package side, they treated the trade very much like Thomson - very little commission hence the trade didn't support them and tried to "switch sell" using other flights/suppliers. No surprise their package business accounted for 5%. Compare them to Thomas Cook who give the trade "price parity" and healthier commissions and you can see where the trade places business!
Granted they didn't have a great deal of luck as they had big programmes in Turkey and Egypt and those markets essentially dried up (although Turkey is becoming popular again) but imho there was no clear direction as to what they wanted to be.
Pretty much exactly what my TUI pal was explaining yesterday. He also said they moved away from full charters - his part of TUI ideally wanted to charter whole planes as they could then fill them, but Monarch only wanted to deal with them by selling seats, and they were often not the best price.
- Thread starter
- #114
Looks to me like Lloyds fobbed you off and Santander gave you duff info!
ATOL really has nothing to do with it unless you booked a package holiday and then you'll claim via ATOL. If you booked seats only and the cost was over £100 you should get your money back from the bank if you paid by credit card (section 75 consumer credit act stuff) if you paid by debit card or the tickets were less than £100 it's unlikely that you'll get anything although you should at least ask the bank if you can get it from a chargeback. Ordinarily not but this is such a good example of a monumental f**k up that the Gov't might put up more money ... unlikely though
Last edited:
GreersElbow
New member
Literally this, perfectly summed up.
Greybull are quoted as saying the terrorism and the collapse of the pound after the Brexit vote are the 2 main reasons for Monarch’s collapse
- Thread starter
- #117
They're hardly going to say "a managment team that didn't respond to the changing geo political landscape" or "a lack of scrutiny over trading losses resulting in us just running out of money"
It's sarcastic yes ... but these things impacted everyone and a key pillar of any good business strategy is having sound risk management plans in place. Certainly just running out of money and going pop is unaceptabely negligent imo
GreersElbow
New member
Monarch had a sizeable amount of £/€ forward contracts with us this month with a rate of approx 1.15, compared to the current spot price. Every company who deals with international payments will have some considerable forward rates.
They also had some large £/$ forward contracts, again, with favourable rates.
I keep seeing people blaming brexit for this, they're underestimating the impact of the Syrian war, Turkey's internal strife with ISIS and Kurdish separatists then volatility in Tunisia. Egypt has slowly been returning back to disarray. These were Monarch's primary destinations, management was not adapting to the changing landscape and was stubborn to change.
I'm not defending brexit here, I voted remain and think it's a foolish idea. But Brexit isn't playing as big as a role in this as some may think.
Last edited:
There’s no doubt that when companies go bust the causes are often multi-factorial. That said, if they can get away with it they’ll be slow to blame themselves and quick to look for “factors beyond their control “. Whatever the acts or omissions of those managing Monarch one of the factors must’ve been the deteriorating exchange rate and, to go back to the original point, that’s what Brexit had to do with it.
GreersElbow
New member
Yes....but nowhere near as much as what people think.