Single Brand

[Paul_PER]

How about copying Qantas with a two brand strategy, i.e.

V Australia (or Virgin Blue if they can sort out the royalty issues) which would cover:
- the 777's
- two class 737's, with a real business class, included meals & AV in the fare, to fly Syd/Mel/Bne and Syd/Mel to Per (perhaps with new 737-900's?)

Pacific Blue:
- 737's & e-jets in single class LCC configuration (with the existing exit row "Blue Zone") flying all other international and domestic routes
- charge for everything like a LCC

 

[dajop]

Or the British airways domestic operations in Scotland, Wales and Ireland.*

No, Scotland and Wales are part of Great Britain, it is British Airways not English Airways. Point taken re Ireland though, if they have any domestic flights there at all.

 

[medhead]

No, Scotland and Wales are part of Great Britain, it is British Airways not English Airways. Point taken re Ireland though, if they have any domestic flights there at all.

Of course. I'm a goose, got UK, GB and England all mixed up

 

[DJ737]

Trying to think of a country where domestic operations are conducted by an airline with another country name in it's name,

The closest I could get: Air Berlin operate Stansted to Manchester.
Ryanair has an Irish flag and rego on it's aircraft on domestic flights all over Europe.

 

[bjm76]

Love it!

And think of the money they could save in the domestic terminals - you can still see where the Ansett Australia lettering was at the baggage carousels in T2 in SYD, and I think you can see them in BNE too.
Maybe Virgin could bring back the 767s too.... would love to see Virgin operate wide bodied aircraft on the golden triangle!

Maybe they could just called it Ansett??

 

[docjames]

My preference is for it all to be "V", but with differentiations based on markets ie:

- V Australia
- V Pacific
- V NZ

in the way Lan does Lan Chile, Lan Peru, Lan Equador, Lan Colombia etc and is overall called "Lan".

I really feel a move away from the Virgin branding is necessary, unless they perpetually need to follow a "Virgin" (therefore discount) model and also perpetually pay royalties for a brand they cant une outside Australia.

 

[haydensydney]

I'm a big fan of V Australia, afterall they have spent all this time creating that brand which is relatively well respected in Oz.

I'm not a fan of Pacific Blue / V Oz / Virgin Australia - I just think they sound odd.

 

[ANstar]

My preference is for it all to be "V", but with differentiations based on markets ie:

- V Australia
- V Pacific
- V NZ.

Probably don't need VNZ... Could just be V Australia and V Pacific as V Pac could cover NZ.

 

[Andyzx]

The problem we keep comming back to is the single brand. Currently they have domestic, pacific and intercontinental brands. Assuming that you can call an island off the coast of NZ a Continent

Lets try Vansett, sounds good to me:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:

Ok, i'm out of here :arrow:

 

[JeniSkunk]

Probably don't need VNZ... Could just be V Australia and V Pacific as V Pac could cover NZ.

V Pacific is all that is needed as a country non-specific for the routes currently handled by V Australia and Pacific Blue.

Jenifur Charne

 

[Sequel]

What's in a name? Virgin's blue with Branson

Looks like V Pacific was the plan, it is just Sir Rich is playing hardball.

 

[markis10]

What's in a name? Virgin's blue with Branson

Looks like V Pacific was the plan, it is just Sir Rich is playing hardball.

And SQ who required the clause in the first place.

 

[Siegfried]

Virginis Intacte? Sorry - old joke, but may fly as a play on words if they bring it all under one umbrella

 

[cove]

Why not VBA as it is the stock market code.
The company is struggling and there is no need to pay royalties if the Virgin name is dropped.
The company has struggled for 10 years so the new management should do a clean sweep as Branson only has 26 per cent.
I still do not know why Singapore Air doesn't buy a stake on the cheap now that the company is around 30 cents a share.

 

[markis10]

Why not VBA as it is the stock market code.
The company is struggling and there is no need to pay royalties if the Virgin name is dropped.
The company has struggled for 10 years so the new management should do a clean sweep as Branson only has 26 per cent.
I still do not know why Singapore Air doesn't buy a stake on the cheap now that the company is around 30 cents a share.

I am not sure that DJ has "struggled" for 10 years, their yields have been significant compared to overseas like for like comparisons, they certainly have gone a long way compared to previous attempts by startups to do the same thing, namely Impulse, Compass Mk 1 and II etc etc.

 

[moa999]

I still do not know why Singapore Air doesn't buy a stake on the cheap now that the company is around 30 cents a share.

Because SQ has a 34.4% stake in Tiger, and because SQ reportedly wants out of its 50/50 investment in Virgin Atlantic.

 

[dajop]

Why not VBA as it is the stock market code.
The company is struggling and there is no need to pay royalties if the Virgin name is dropped.

From what I read into it is not only the Virgin branding that is the problem also the "V" branding, which would mean a complete rebranding.

 

[scibo10]

At this point in the negotiations, I am not sure if there is any benefit in trying to retain the "V" name. It stands for nothing, or at the very best, stands for something the airline can't have. I think the "V" brand is too new for it to have any material goodwill.

I think it would be great to have a completely new name, new colour scheme, livery and make it a complete rebrand, not just a half baked one. And yes, no ongoing royalties need be paid.

 

[docjames]

As I read it, DJ are claiming ownership of "V", Branson claiming it is derivative of "Virgin" and it's a trademark and thus royalties continue to be paid to him for use of "V".

The design of the "V" logo may also come into it and the "derivative" arguement.

Frankly, I'd rather they dumped the whole lot and stopped paying royalties to Branson, and went for something else entirely.

In the Aus/NZ/Pacific market, they're hardly going to lose much with a complete rebrand as the second major payer, the market will know who the "new" player is.

Their loss would probably not be that great given the short time in US/SthAfrica/Thailand.

 

[markis10]

Turn the V upside down, whack a line throught the middle and you get......history repeating itself A