Jet2 in 'David v Goliath' battle
Start-up leisure airline JetXtra.com claims Jet2 is trying to sabotage the launch of its flights to Spain from Humberside this summer by insisting it changes its name.
Jet2 has sent JetXtra a solicitor's letter warning that it will take legal action unless it drops the name JetXtra by tomorrow (Thursday).
It says the name is too similar to Jet2 and that members of the public might mistakenly believe the two companies are the same, or at least related.
JetXtra accused Jet2, which is based at Leeds Bradford Airport, of starting a "David vs Goliath" battle to scupper the launch of JetXtra's flights out of Humberside Airport, just 78 miles away.
JetXtra director Daniel Reilly said: "It is absolutely absurd that Jet2, a well known and generally respected airline is attempting to disrupt our services, I cannot believe they would resort to such dirty tactics to stop a new company which poses no threat to them from entering the market, especially at a time when our country is desperately in need of enterprise and job creation.
"The only similarity between our companies is the word ‘jet', our logos and websites are completely different and Jet2 operate from Leeds Bradford Airport, serving and targeting a different market to that of jetXtra.com.
Reily said he gave the general public a lot more credit than Jet2 and didn't believe they would confuse the two airlines. "This is quite evident by the fact that no visitors to our website have come to it by mistake after searching for Jet2".
JetXtra is planning to launch flights to Palma and Malaga in June.
Jet2 said it supported free and fair competition, but said the name JetXtra was "extremely similar" to Jet2, Jet2.com and Jet2holidays.com, which might cause customers in the north of England to confuse the two, especially as Humberside is within its own catchment area.
It has written to JetXtra.com requesting that it sign a written undertaking to stop using the name by 4pm on Thursday.
With permission from Travelmole (19 Jan)
Update: Start-up airline ordered to suspend sales
Start-up carrier JetXtra.com has been ordered by the Civil Aviation Authority to stop selling seats after the company claimed, incorrectly, that bookings would be protected by travel partner CTT Group's ATOL.
The CAA said today that it had not yet approved an increase in the number of licensed sales CTT could make in a year so JetXtra's bookings were not covered by its ATOL.
The carrier, launched by the founder of failed airline venture Nexus, started selling summer-only flights from Humberside Airport to Majorca and Malaga earlier this month.
It claims on its website that the CAA has forced it to stop taking bookings due to a legal dispute with Leeds-based Jet2.com. As previously reported on TravelMole, Jet2 issued JetXtra with a solicitor's letter last week in which it requested JetXtra to change its name and JetXtra claimed this week the CAA had refused to put JetXtra on CTT's ATOL until the dispute was resolved.
JetXtra director Daniel Reilly said: "The decision would appear to be a kneejerk reaction by the Civil Aviation Authority."
However, the CAA said the legal dispute was not the reason JetXtra had suspended sales. "The name dispute has nothing to do with us," said a spokesman.
"CTT Group has sought permission from the CAA to trade with Jetxtra but we have not yet approved an increase in the numbers of licensed sales they are allowed to make in a year.
"This is unrelated to threatened legal action, and we expect to be able to clarify the companies' position in due course."
Reilly attempted to launch another airline, Nexus Airways, in 2005 when he was just 18-years-old but that venture never got off the ground.
Passengers who had booked flights from Liverpool to the Canary Islands with Nexus were told the airline's licensing partner had gone into liquidation.
With permission from Travelmole (23 Jan)
good job for Jet2 that Jet Airways (who had been around for years before them) didn't have the same petty attitude! If it was me I'd be happy if people stupid enough to confuse 2 for Xtra went somewhere else, it'll save a lot of trouble in the long term!
But the licence business does sound a bit dodgy.
But the licence business does sound a bit dodgy.
Jet Airways and Jet2 are in totally different markets thought. Jet2 and JetXtra will be in competing markets with similar names. I can't see how people will confuse the two names, but they are similar so I can see the argument with an assumption they are linked. They are making it quite clear they are not linked though, they've updated their logo with 'jetXtra.com is an independant company and is in no way associated with Jet2.com'! There shouldn't be a need for that though.
Darren
Darren
Despite initial support for the venture (backed up by people from Humberside Airport telling me that they are serious this time around), I am starting to think that this is nothing more than another Nexus, and that the Jet2 solicitors letter (likely to have been blown out of proportion, we have only heard one side of the story remember), offered nothing more than a conveniant rouse to cover up the true nature of the operation.
Nexus was operating on a similar ATOL setup, in that they could only cover 150 passengers during their allotted time period. The same is true of the current situation. It is a shame, as Humberside passengers want a service such as this, and that has been proven by the rate at which seats have been sold in just over a week. However I would sooner an established airline such as Jet2 came in to offer such a service, than an operator which doesnt seem at all professional and as it transpires probably isnt as professional as it would perhaps like to think.
One positive is that should the flights not go ahead, those already booked should hopefully not lose any money. The passengers booked with Nexus were transferred onto Monarch services.
Hopefully these problems can be ironed out this time around, and jetXtra can become established in the market. Unfortunately though, so far I'm not convinced.
Nexus was operating on a similar ATOL setup, in that they could only cover 150 passengers during their allotted time period. The same is true of the current situation. It is a shame, as Humberside passengers want a service such as this, and that has been proven by the rate at which seats have been sold in just over a week. However I would sooner an established airline such as Jet2 came in to offer such a service, than an operator which doesnt seem at all professional and as it transpires probably isnt as professional as it would perhaps like to think.
One positive is that should the flights not go ahead, those already booked should hopefully not lose any money. The passengers booked with Nexus were transferred onto Monarch services.
Hopefully these problems can be ironed out this time around, and jetXtra can become established in the market. Unfortunately though, so far I'm not convinced.
Dazbo HT Mod wrote:They are making it quite clear they are not linked though, they've updated their logo with 'jetXtra.com is an independant company and is in no way associated with Jet2.com'!
If a company has to point that out then they know there's confusion between the two names.
When I saw the topic title my immediate thought was that JetXtra was a spinoff company of Jet2.
they updated the logo after the solicitors letter. The company may be a bit of nothing (I'm having to be careful with words because of the automatic censor on this board!) but if you can think that a name with Jet in it is a spin of of a previous company with Jet in the name then surely Jet2 would have been seen as the second part of easyJet who came before. Or maybe Wizzair is the east European spin off from Ryanair.
Or that any airline/website with Fly at the start is part of the same group.
The three words are basic parts of airline terminology. Someone should start a company called JetAir with the website FlyJetAir.com and wait for the solicitors letters.....
Or that any airline/website with Fly at the start is part of the same group.
The three words are basic parts of airline terminology. Someone should start a company called JetAir with the website FlyJetAir.com and wait for the solicitors letters.....
It's the use of 'Xtra' after 'Jet' that causes the confusion. I see no possible connection/confusion between Wizzair or Ryanair but 'EasyXtra' would have EasyJet's solicitors chasing them.
I never saw a possible connection between Jet2 and JetXtra (or Jet Airways, Jet Blue, Jetstar). If it had been Jet2Xtra they'd have a complaint.
The words Jet, Fly and Air are duplicated all over the industry - you can't say one is confusing when added to but the others aren't. Are they also going to try to get a block on others using 2 in the name ?
easyjet don't own the use of easy in airline names - that belongs to easygroup and the arguments between them are documented elsewhere. But that's a different issue, easy in itself is not an airline/aircraft term so using it in the aviation industry does suggest a link to an existing company. Dozens if not hundreds of aviation linked companies use Jet somewhere in their marketing.
Anyway this is all academic, it doesn't matter what this company calls itself it doesn't look like it's ever going to do any business. But I suspect we'll see Reilly again soon.
The words Jet, Fly and Air are duplicated all over the industry - you can't say one is confusing when added to but the others aren't. Are they also going to try to get a block on others using 2 in the name ?
easyjet don't own the use of easy in airline names - that belongs to easygroup and the arguments between them are documented elsewhere. But that's a different issue, easy in itself is not an airline/aircraft term so using it in the aviation industry does suggest a link to an existing company. Dozens if not hundreds of aviation linked companies use Jet somewhere in their marketing.
Anyway this is all academic, it doesn't matter what this company calls itself it doesn't look like it's ever going to do any business. But I suspect we'll see Reilly again soon.
Post a Reply
Please sign in or register an account to reply to this post.
