An effort to educate (world airline strategy)

[Baronman]

I think the important thing to take from this is the other countries treat commercial aviation as a priority. In the US it's viewed as a cash cow, various government agencies tacking on tax after tax. An air traffic system that is reactive vs proactive. Limited investment in infrastructure. Millions siphoned off to serve EAS which serves few passengers.

Hell, just think of the experience from a passenger standpoint today.

Flying used to be an exciting experience, people looked forward to it. Now, it's a chore to even get through security. Employees treat passengers as an inconvenience vs. the source that pays their mortgage.

Great post.....

 

[dasleben]

I think the important thing to take from this is the other countries treat commercial aviation as a priority. In the US it's viewed as a cash cow, various government agencies tacking on tax after tax. An air traffic system that is reactive vs proactive. Limited investment in infrastructure. Millions siphoned off to serve EAS which serves few passengers.

Hell, just think of the experience from a passenger standpoint today.

Flying used to be an exciting experience, people looked forward to it. Now, it's a chore to even get through security. Employees treat passengers as an inconvenience vs. the source that pays their mortgage.

True story. I ride in the back on full fare tickets, out of uniform, a lot. God forbid you ring your call button if you need something... Somehow FAs at most US airlines have gotten it into their heads that ringing the call button is rude and demeaning, and they'll often give you attitude in response. I don't understand it.

 

[Baronman]

True story. I ride in the back on full fare tickets, out of uniform, a lot. God forbid you ring your call button if you need something... Somehow FAs at most US airlines have gotten it into their heads that ringing the call button is rude and demeaning, and they'll often give you attitude in response. I don't understand it.

FA's are here for your safety pal!

 

[mshunter]

True story. I ride in the back on full fare tickets, out of uniform, a lot. God forbid you ring your call button if you need something... Somehow FAs at most US airlines have gotten it into their heads that ringing the call button is rude and demeaning, and they'll often give you attitude in response. I don't understand it.

I see FA's give attitude way to often.

 

[dasleben]

FA's are here for your safety pal!

Oh, you're preaching to the choir on that one, but service is still part of the job.

EDIT to add: I'm not saying FAs are there for every beck and call, but when a jumpseater is treated far, far better than a regular paying passenger, the system is broken.

 

[mshunter]

Oh, you're preaching to the choir on that one, but service is still part of the job.

EDIT to add: I'm not saying FAs are there for every beck and call, but when a jumpseater is treated far, far better than a regular paying passenger, the system is broken.

I hate to agree with that, because I jumpseat A LOT, and am usually treated like a king. But yeah, there has been a serious disconnect with customer service in this country, in general.

 

[Seggy]

Markets change Seggy. You're too young to remember when Pan Am and TWA were the two big international carriers. They failed to survive because they did not adapt to the changing marketplace. You can cry all you want about the changing marketplace and keep up with the protectionist agenda. It will only result in the failure of American carriers to adapt to the world market which will make your worst fears come true.

Yeah, the US Airlines ARE adapting. Look at the purchase of stake in the Brazilian carriers by United and Delta. Look how the Joint Ventures and Alliances are changing. That is playing fairly in the global marketplace

I'd be fully supportive of movements by ALPA and other coalitions to get more route rights into China and other growing markets. Full supportive of more 5th and 7th freedom flying for U.S. carriers. Fully supportive of government backed financing for U.S. carriers akin to what the Ex-Im gives foreign carriers. Go with those issues, they are the ones that will help American carriers in the changing marketplace over the long term.



Typhoonpilot

All of these are pipe dreams and you know that. Also, didn't FedEx have some issues with corporate sabotage in their Chinese hub?

 

[Seggy]

What's fairly clear to me, someone who is working in the international airline industry, is that the growth in air travel worldwide is pretty incredible; the U.S. carriers are not making the right moves to try to capture that growth; and young pilots who fly domestic in the USA believe the tripe that ALPA puts out. Continuation of that course of action for the U.S. carriers is what will be the unmitigated disaster over the long term.


Typhoonpilot

Oh please. Look at the long thin routes that my place is starting like SFO-CTU, the addition of Air India in the Star Alliance, the recent purchases of Brazilian Airlines by United and Delta for easier code-share rights, and a host of other things shows that the United States Carriers aren't forgetting that international air travel is the bread and butter of the business.

ALPA went down the wrong road with RJs and now they are going down the wrong road with this issue. You just don't see the growth in air travel unless you are constantly traversing the globe. When I went to work in Taiwan in 1995 there were only 300-400 commercial airliners in all of China, and that includes old Tupolevs. Now there are closer to 2500. The same kind of growth is happening in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Eastern Europe, etc. Passengers first start flying domestically, then they progress to short international flights, and then finally long international flights. It's Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, and others who are taking advantage of this growth all while U.S. carriers sit back crying, "they're stealing our passengers".

They are not stealing your passengers. These are generally new passengers from new markets that the U.S. carriers and their alliance partners have failed to effectively capture.



Typhoonpilot

Just to remind folks, the coalition against the ME3, which includes industry here in the states, international players such as Air Canada, Lufthansa, Air France/KLM, and labor want 2 of the 115 Open Skies agreements looked at. We aren't afraid of fair competition, we want fair competition. You have admitted that Qatar and Ethiad are getting unfair government subsidies. Emirates does as well, you just won't admit it. That creates an unfair advantage and needs to be addressed.

 

[Seggy]

I for one am very appreciative of what Typhoon Pilot has been posting here.

I just want to make it clear to everyone that he has A LOT of interests in the success of these ME3 Carriers. He isn't giving an impartial view. I will admit my view is obviously skewed towards the US Airlines, but folks need to make sure he also has a very skewed view. Would @Derg say that bankruptcy law is a government subsidy? I don't think so. Neither would 99.99999% of other pilots that went through that process or under the laws of the treaties in place.

 

[BEEF SUPREME]

I just want to make it clear to everyone that he has A LOT of interests in the success of these ME3 Carriers. He isn't giving an impartial view. I will admit my view is obviously skewed towards the US Airlines, but folks need to make sure he also has a very skewed view. Would @Derg say that bankruptcy law is a government subsidy? I don't think so. Neither would 99.99999% of other pilots that went through that process or under the laws of the treaties in place.

When it comes to international trade agreements we little people have no say in the matter. I only encourage pilots to research the trends of international economics and how it will affect their career. Every viewpoint counts, including yours Seggy. It is up to individuals to keep an open mind and try to decide for themselves what the various impacts will be.

 

[typhoonpilot]

Oh please. Look at the long thin routes that my place is starting like SFO-CTU, the addition of Air India in the Star Alliance, the recent purchases of Brazilian Airlines by United and Delta for easier code-share rights, and a host of other things shows that the United States Carriers aren't forgetting that international air travel is the bread and butter of the business.

I have, in fact, mentioned the SFO-CTU route as a shining example of what needs to be done by the U.S. carriers. It's a good start, but that is about the only example that can be found. There needs to be about 100 more of those routes started to catch up to where they need to be.

In regards to Air India, I would not hold that up as a good decision in any context. That airline is not a good addition to the alliance. Anybody that flies a code shared ticket bought from UAL on them one time will probably not return to UAL again.

Since you bring up the alliances with Brazilian carriers, I'll chime in. Here you are trying to "protect" U.S. airline jobs on the one hand, but when they are given away with the other hand you use that as a good example. UAL's new alliance with Azul will likely mean no new flying by UAL into Brazil and perhaps even a reduction of the current flying over time. While there may be an increase in revenue to the parent company and there may be increased domestic flying as a result of connecting passenger, I do not see alliances like that as a win for the U.S. airline pilot. That was who we are trying to help after all, isn't it?

Just to remind folks, the coalition against the ME3, which includes industry here in the states, international players such as Air Canada, Lufthansa, Air France/KLM, and labor want 2 of the 115 Open Skies agreements looked at. We aren't afraid of fair competition, we want fair competition. You have admitted that Qatar and Ethiad are getting unfair government subsidies. Emirates does as well, you just won't admit it. That creates an unfair advantage and needs to be addressed.

Again, there is no proof that Emirates is subsidized like you and the coalition claim. You've been given a link to read that will help you see the facts.

I just want to make it clear to everyone that he has A LOT of interests in the success of these ME3 Carriers. He isn't giving an impartial view. I will admit my view is obviously skewed towards the US Airlines, but folks need to make sure he also has a very skewed view. Would @Derg say that bankruptcy law is a government subsidy? I don't think so. Neither would 99.99999% of other pilots that went through that process or under the laws of the treaties in place.

Ah, the old attack the messenger ploy.

Actually most people outside of the USA see U.S. bankruptcy laws as an unfair competitive advantage for U.S. companies. That is a simple fact.

Now since you are so against subsidies and export credit financing might I ask why it is okay that the heavily subsidized Airbus industries and their export credit agency financing are okay? If the U.S. carriers and ALPA are so much against subsidies and so much against government back financing why is it they are taking advantage of it to buy hundreds of Airbus aircraft? The hypocritical nature of it would be laughable if it were not for the fact that it adversely affects American workers at companies like Boeing, Honeywell, Goodrich, GE, Pratt & Whitney, etc.


Typhoonpilot

 

[Roger Roger]

What's the pay like at all these Asian LCCs that are popping up like weeds?

 

[typhoonpilot]

What's the pay like at all these Asian LCCs that are popping up like weeds?

The mainland Chinese carriers pay pretty well, but I suspect you mean more the like of Air Asia, JetStar Asia, Peach, etc. Japanese carriers tend to pay okay, but the places in Malaysia, Indonesia, Taiwan, Vietnam, Thailand, etc are not really up to snuff. Vietjet, an A320 operator is only around $11,000-$13,000/month for captains.


TP

 

[Seggy]

I have, in fact, mentioned the SFO-CTU route as a shining example of what needs to be done by the U.S. carriers. It's a good start, but that is about the only example that can be found. There needs to be about 100 more of those routes started to catch up to where they need to be.

Once again, you miss the point that the legacy carriers do cover the world in their alliances.

In regards to Air India, I would not hold that up as a good decision in any context. That airline is not a good addition to the alliance. Anybody that flies a code shared ticket bought from UAL on them one time will probably not return to UAL again.

Folks say that all the time...'I am never flying XYZ airline again...' You know as well as I do that they do.

Since you bring up the alliances with Brazilian carriers, I'll chime in. Here you are trying to "protect" U.S. airline jobs on the one hand, but when they are given away with the other hand you use that as a good example. UAL's new alliance with Azul will likely mean no new flying by UAL into Brazil and perhaps even a reduction of the current flying over time. While there may be an increase in revenue to the parent company and there may be increased domestic flying as a result of connecting passenger, I do not see alliances like that as a win for the U.S. airline pilot. That was who we are trying to help after all, isn't it?

Oh, so you are an expert on the United Pilot's scope provisions in their contract that protect them with these types of transactions and code-shares?

Again, there is no proof that Emirates is subsidized like you and the coalition claim. You've been given a link to read that will help you see the facts.

http://www.openandfairskies.com/dubai-inc/

Ah, the old attack the messenger ploy.

I am calling it as I see it.

Actually most people outside of the USA see U.S. bankruptcy laws as an unfair competitive advantage for U.S. companies. That is a simple fact.

Per the Open Skies, which is the law, bankruptcy is not seen as a government subsidy. Also, I don't see the EU making a huge deal over this.

Now since you are so against subsidies and export credit financing might I ask why it is okay that the heavily subsidized Airbus industries and their export credit agency financing are okay? If the U.S. carriers and ALPA are so much against subsidies and so much against government back financing why is it they are taking advantage of it to buy hundreds of Airbus aircraft? The hypocritical nature of it would be laughable if it were not for the fact that it adversely affects American workers at companies like Boeing, Honeywell, Goodrich, GE, Pratt & Whitney, etc.


Typhoonpilot

Let us not skew the facts here. The United States airlines have orders from both aircraft manufacturers on the books. They are playing them off against each other to get the best total deal they can get. That goes well beyond the initial price.

Also, you keep bringing up the Export Import Bank and making it sound like ALPA is the only ones calling for change to that Bank. There is wide spread calls for reform.

You fail to acknowledge that pretty much the entire continent of Europe is against what the ME3 is doing. You are skewing the facts, playing the 'big bad ALPA' card here. They aren't beating the drum against this alone.

 

[Koenigsberger_Katjase]

For the record SFO-CTU is losing United a lot of money and most likely going to be cancelled soon.

Just providing some information I have from a coworker. No commentary from me in regards to the fight going on.

 

[mshunter]

For the record SFO-CTU is losing United a lot of money and most likely going to be cancelled soon.

Just providing some information I have from a coworker. No commentary from me in regards to the fight going on.

On one flight on the jumpseat, from the mouths of the Delta pilots

"Delta hates the 717. We are losing our asses on them!"

On the commute home from that trip, 4 days later, different set of Delta pilots

"Delta loves the 717, we are making a crap ton of money with them!"

Moral of the story, don't believe a word someone on the outside has to say. It's most likely a bunch of b.s. And yes, pilots are on the outside with this kind of knowledge.

 

[Baronman]

Oh, you're preaching to the choir on that one, but service is still part of the job.

EDIT to add: I'm not saying FAs are there for every beck and call, but when a jumpseater is treated far, far better than a regular paying passenger, the system is broken.

Sorry....I was being sarcastic.

 

[Ecl!pse]

For the record SFO-CTU is losing United a lot of money and most likely going to be cancelled soon.

Just providing some information I have from a coworker. No commentary from me in regards to the fight going on.

Seeing as United moved it to 1x daily this summer (from 3x weekly previously), I don't buy this.

I would also be very, very shocked if United went into that market without significant launch support from CTU. United may be "losing" money on a standalone basis early on here, but I would expect CTU to be covering some or all of the losses via an incentive package. If it's not profitable after 2-3 years or so still, then I would expect Inited to bail.

 

[Koenigsberger_Katjase]

Seeing as United moved it to 1x daily this summer (from 3x weekly previously), I don't buy this.

I would also be very, very shocked if United went into that market without significant launch support from CTU. United may be "losing" money on a standalone basis early on here, but I would expect CTU to be covering some or all of the losses via an incentive package. If it's not profitable after 2-3 years or so still, then I would expect Inited to bail.

My source is the head of pacific network planning. It's fine to disagree. But I am confident.

Yes CTU airport is paying but not enough to cover costs. Flight on winter season should dead be.

 

[Ecl!pse]

My source is the head of pacific network planning. It's fine to disagree. But I am confident.

Yes CTU airport is paying but not enough to cover costs. Flight on winter season should dead be.

Fair enough - if true, hard to argue straight from the horse's mouth. Just find it odd they would start a completely new market, essentially building it from scratch, and walk away without allowing it to mature over 2-3 years.