Great Job Delta!

Avgirl said:
So, now the conversation goes a completely different direction because I don't agree with you? You seem to be quite the grumpy one on this board and quick to stir the pot and start throwing insults. I addressed the issue, and didn't get off-topic at all. You did. They both need to act like grown-ups and if they are going to box each other out, get more creative because it was so obvious that move was absolutely planned.
Click to expand...

It is more than not agreeing with anyone. It is about actually having skin in the game and then having to listen to someone whose opinion is based on a sponsorship and the fact that one needs to 'play nice with each other'. That view is so naive. Are you informed on the working conditions of Qatar Airlines?

http://www.tourmag.com/Work-conditions-the-gilded-cage-of-Qatar-Airways-Air-Crew_a71398.html
 
Last edited:
Avgirl said:
Would you have that same attitude if it involved losing your job? Business is business, but when you start strong arming people to get your way, for one party, that crosses a line. No matter who you are.
Click to expand...

Considering that the ME3 want folks on here including myself unemployed I don't see any line crossed in what Delta did.

As stated, great job by them!
 
Seggy said:
It is more than not agreeing with anyone. It is about actually having skin in the game and then having to listen to someone whose opinion is based on a sponsorship and the fact that one needs to 'play nice with each other'. That view is so naive. Are you informed on the working conditions of Qatar Airlines?

http://www.tourmag.com/Work-conditions-the-gilded-cage-of-Qatar-Airways-Air-Crew_a71398.html
Click to expand...

Oh, so you assume I don't have any investment with Delta...because you happen to know me? I don't think it is necessary for me to qualify what stakes I have in this game. I may be naive in your view, but couldn't that also apply to Delta and Qatar? So, now we are getting completely off-topic because now I will certainly be persuaded based on working conditions of Qatar. I am sorry, neither one is the hero in any of this. There are no angels in any of this, past or present. They can both take the high road, but because this dispute started with Delta, I think it is their move. Qatar is hardly a drop in their revenue bucket. At this moment, they aren't even really competition, except they do have a more awesome plane. Stop acting like Trump.
 
To play Devils advocate, and only to play, how about pilots at LCCs like Virgin, JetBlue, and Alaska?

These 3 don't do any international Europe/Africa/Asia. The business model is such that that kind of flying is not likely either. No widebodies. So if carriers like these codeshare with ME3, they are increasing profits and bring in in revenue which they otherwise would not have brought in themselves. A guy going from Dubai to Spokane GEG would fly Emirates to SEA, then connect Alaska to GEG. And Alaska makes money on it.

Again, Devils advocate only. If I'm at AA/DL/UA then yes they are a huge competition because we do international widebodies and fly to the similar places they fly. But as a major LCC, with no wide body, can't it be argued the ME3 actually help the airline's bottom dollar?
 
@Avgirl not picking, but you obviously are not that well versed on this issue, beyond sound bites. The issue did not start with Delta, it started with the State sponsored ME airlines. Delta was just the first to call BS to their subsidies. Delta has stated, that they have no problem competing on a level field, in accordance with international laws and accords, but the ME airlines, maybe Emirates excepted, refuse to leave the government teat, and compete fairly.

When an oil rich nation is covering the losses for flying A-380s all over the globe, it's easy to put on the ritz. Delta has to answer to the shareholders, thats why they don't operate the biggest money hole in the sky.

I just find it incredulous that so many people in this country see this as a "scrappy good guy" fighting the "evil bad Delta" when in actuality, the scrappy good guy is 100% supported and run by the most mysoginistic, bigoted, hateful, racist, homophobic group of individuals this side of the National Socialists. I guess a good PR department can fix a lot of stuff. But sure, let's overlook who these people actually are.
 
I think it went over YOOJ. Went over great.

It was BEEG, real BEEG. BEEELIONS and BEEELIONS of really BEEG.

I can't stop imitating Trump. Eek!

But seriously, these things happen all the damned time and it's cool to see a US carrier on the other end of it for once. Try to, as a US carrier, fly to some of those countries, you've got to glad hand, dance, pay off, have the right political connections, kiss the proper butts and then you MAY be granted access. Conversely, the US is darned near "come one come ALL! Our voters want low air fares at all costs!"

This happens all the damned time. Hell, even the Brits trolled the world with Gatwick. "Sorry mate, you can only fly into an airport impossibly far from London, which is really in remote-assed Crawley, if you want to serve the market, unless, of course you grease the right palms…"

All the time.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
To play Devils advocate, and only to play, how about pilots at LCCs like Virgin, JetBlue, and Alaska?

These 3 don't do any international Europe/Africa/Asia. The business model is such that that kind of flying is not likely either. No widebodies. So if carriers like these codeshare with ME3, they are increasing profits and bring in in revenue which they otherwise would not have brought in themselves. A guy going from Dubai to Spokane GEG would fly Emirates to SEA, then connect Alaska to GEG. And Alaska makes money on it.

Again, Devils advocate only. If I'm at AA/DL/UA then yes they are a huge competition because we do international widebodies and fly to the similar places they fly. But as a major LCC, with no wide body, can't it be argued the ME3 actually help the airline's bottom dollar?
Click to expand...
You would think that it's ok. What are your thoughts on our own government awarding a a DOD contract to JB for a city they can't even fly to? You better care because they aren't far behind NAI and they have the money to do it because they still operate whether they make money or not, in some cases just to prove a point/poke the bear.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
To play Devils advocate, and only to play, how about pilots at LCCs like Virgin, JetBlue, and Alaska?

These 3 don't do any international Europe/Africa/Asia. The business model is such that that kind of flying is not likely either. No widebodies. So if carriers like these codeshare with ME3, they are increasing profits and bring in in revenue which they otherwise would not have brought in themselves. A guy going from Dubai to Spokane GEG would fly Emirates to SEA, then connect Alaska to GEG. And Alaska makes money on it.

Again, Devils advocate only. If I'm at AA/DL/UA then yes they are a huge competition because we do international widebodies and fly to the similar places they fly. But as a major LCC, with no wide body, can't it be argued the ME3 actually help the airline's bottom dollar?
Click to expand...
They may increase the airlines bottom dollar, but that doesn't necessarily mean that any of the employees will see any of that bottom dollar. Maybe if those airlines had good scope, then, if management wanted to gain that incremental bottom dollar, they would do so using their own pilots, and then the employees would benefit more.
 
Seggy said:
My God.

More awesome plane??? REALLY????

If you knew what you were talking about you would say, it really isn't competition because Delta and the other United States Carriers are going up against state (heavily) subsidized airlines who are trying to decimate the likes of Delta, American, United, etc.
Click to expand...

Hey, the A380 is pretty impressive and I was kidding, BTW. I understand that. But, how many flights does Qatar have to Atlanta and how often? Do you even know and of those flights are they really hurting Delta financially when passengers don't have another choice? So, how is sharing a gate going to destroy the livelihood of Delta and all the American carriers? I don't agree with the way that those carriers in the middle east are being subsidized, but it doesn't mean that I have to play games and play stupid when the gate issue is questioned. Why couldn't Delta just say that they didn't agree with their policies, etc. instead of act coy about it? Oopsie, we coudn't give up those gates for an arrival that we knew about for at least three months? That is where I have the problem. If you don't like Qatar and you don't want them at your airport, just state it that way.

I am specifically talking about Delta and their issue with the Atlanta airport. Not the all encompassing issue, which doesn't apply because they were allowed to fly into Atlanta. I am fully aware of the political issues behind what is going on in the middle east. But, that greater scope doesn't apply here. It was a gate, and playing dumb..

So, now it turns into a personal attack because I am the diplomatic one? Stick to the topic, and stop trying to insult me personally, because you have no business doing that, and it certainly isn't going to help me respect your position further. If you don't agree, leave it at that, but you aren't going to change my mind that Delta not facing the issue truthfully and instead pretending like they didn't know the gates were going to be conveniently occupied wasn't a dick move.

I have no problem with Delta standing up to Qatar, just do it truthfully and stand ground without acting like a spoiled brat.
 
Delta owns the gate. Qatar publicly stated that the only reason they were going to fly to Atlanta was to rub salt into Delta's wounds, even if they lose money to do it. Delta told them to go pound sand. Just because what you read in the paper may have sounded coy, don't assume that was the language actually used.
 
Avgirl said:
Hey, the A380 is pretty impressive and I was kidding, BTW. I understand that. But, how many flights does Qatar have to Atlanta and how often? Do you even know and of those flights are they really hurting Delta financially when passengers don't have another choice? So, how is sharing a gate going to destroy the livelihood of Delta and all the American carriers? I don't agree with the way that those carriers in the middle east are being subsidized, but it doesn't mean that I have to play games and play stupid when the gate issue is questioned. Why couldn't Delta just say that they didn't agree with their policies, etc. instead of act coy about it? Oopsie, we coudn't give up those gates for an arrival that we knew about for at least three months? That is where I have the problem. If you don't like Qatar and you don't want them at your airport, just state it that way.

I am specifically talking about Delta and their issue with the Atlanta airport. Not the all encompassing issue, which doesn't apply because they were allowed to fly into Atlanta. I am fully aware of the political issues behind what is going on in the middle east. But, that greater scope doesn't apply here. It was a gate, and playing dumb..

So, now it turns into a personal attack because I am the diplomatic one? Stick to the topic, and stop trying to insult me personally, because you have no business doing that, and it certainly isn't going to help me respect your position further. If you don't agree, leave it at that, but you aren't going to change my mind that Delta not facing the issue truthfully and instead pretending like they didn't know the gates were going to be conveniently occupied wasn't a dick move.

I have no problem with Delta standing up to Qatar, just do it truthfully and stand ground without acting like a spoiled brat.
Click to expand...
http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2016/03/10/qatar-airways-atlanta-ceo/



Do some research
 
Avgirl said:
Would you have that same attitude if it involved losing your job? Business is business, but when you start strong arming people to get your way, for one party, that crosses a line. No matter who you are.
Click to expand...

You say that as if I've never lost a job before. I dunno how long you've been in the professional workplace, but I've been out of college for over 20 years now, and am on my 3rd career.

Of course. Business is business, not charity or friendship.
 
ClarkGriswold said:
You would think that it's ok. What are your thoughts on our own government awarding a a DOD contract to JB for a city they can't even fly to? You better care because they aren't far behind NAI and they have the money to do it because they still operate whether they make money or not, in some cases just to prove a point/poke the bear.
Click to expand...

You must have been pretty upset when AA got awarded the JFK-DOHA GSA contract (Operated by Qatar) or the IAD-Addis Ababa GSA awarded to United (Flown by Ethiopian). I guess we're all good as long as it's goes to one of the 3 oligopoly alliances?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top