Emirates' "Golden Age of Travel"

MikeD said:
Pardon me if this has already been explained before or elsewhere, but what is the general reason(s) or agenda of the underlined carriers and their respective stances on this issue........the three US ones being with the ME, and the 2 foreign ones being against?
Click to expand...

The article left out Air France/KLM

http://centreforaviation.com/news/a...e-owned-airlines--in-qatar-and-the-uae-456867

The Netherlands is also limiting the rights of the ME3 Carriers into the Netherlands.

https://login.flightglobal.com/?Ret...herlands-to-limit-gulf-carrier-access-412600/
 
typhoonpilot said:
The easiest one to explain is FedEx. FedEx relies heavily on 5th and 7th freedom flying. They have over 40 frequencies per week through Dubai, none of which are non-stop to the USA. They are carrying packages from Dubai to countries other than the USA. Any moves towards protectionism by the U.S. government could result in a backlash against FedEx, not only in the UAE but in many other parts of the world.

JetBlue codeshares with carriers operating into JFK. They get a benefit in the form of connecting traffic to/from their route network. So any move to reduce the flying of their code share partners would end up being a reduction in revenue for them. Hawaiian is probably similar, although I am not sure.

Lufthansa and Air Canada share the view of the Legacy U.S. carriers towards protecting their home carriers from competition. In the case of Canada, they only allow 3 times weekly service to Emirates even though the market could easily sustain daily service and even though Air Canada does not serve the YYZ-DXB route. Germany restricts Emirates to 4 cities in their country. They will not allow any further expansion.

The important thing to remember is that not one U.S. pilot job has been lost or harmed by the emergence of the Middle East carriers. Since Emirates began operating to the USA both Delta and United have started service to Dubai and their flights are doing quite well. Look at the graphs showing the growth in Africa, Asia, and Other markets that I posted in another thread and you'll see the tremendous emergence of new traffic in those regions that the ME3 are serving. What truly confounds me is why the U.S. carriers do not see that simple truth and why they are not taking steps to capture some of that revenue.


Typhoonpilot
Click to expand...

All of this is rhetoric. Pure rhetoric

You claim that 'not one U.S. pilot job has been lost or harmed....'

We are trying to prevent what is happening to the Qantas Pilots and the other employees of that company. Who does Qantas have an alliance with? Oh yeah, that is right...

BTW, well paying unionized Qantas jobs are being 'farmed out' to Emirates for those that aren't aware.
 
Seggy said:
All of this is rhetoric. Pure rhetoric

You claim that 'not one U.S. pilot job has been lost or harmed....'

We are trying to prevent what is happening to the Qantas Pilots and the other employees of that company. Who does Qantas have an alliance with? Oh yeah, that is right...

BTW, well paying unionized Qantas jobs are being 'farmed out' to Emirates for those that aren't aware.
Click to expand...


Are you joking? Over ten years ago Qantas started JetStar then JetStar International. Qantas management have been hell bent on reducing Qantas mainline jobs in favor of JetStar ever since. How exactly does Emirates or any foreign airline have any impact on Australian domestic flying? Qantas were reacting to Virgin Blue with the creation of JetStar.

Again, you are so deluded in your thinking. You just do not understand economics and the changing marketplace. Australia is a nation of only a little over 20 million people. It's a prosperous nation and mostly filled with recent (last 100 years) immigrants from British Commonwealth countries and more recently Asian countries. It has an over-sized airline market for it's population. That is very difficult to manage well with all the international competition, not just competition from the Middle East based carriers.

What you have effectively done, I will say, is hurt American jobs in both the manufacturing and tourism industries. Congratulations on that effort. Ex-Im has not been re-authorized as of now and that could reasonably cost tens of thousands of American well paying jobs. Well done!!


Typhoonpilot
 
typhoonpilot said:
Are you joking? Over ten years ago Qantas started JetStar then JetStar International. Qantas management have been hell bent on reducing Qantas mainline jobs in favor of JetStar ever since. How exactly does Emirates or any foreign airline have any impact on Australian domestic flying? Qantas were reacting to Virgin Blue with the creation of JetStar.
Click to expand...

Passengers are flying Melbourne to Dubai to London instead of say Melbourne to Sydney to London. You are basically saying that it was 'ok' for Emirates to come in and pick up the scraps of the decimation of Qantas.

Again, you are so deluded in your thinking. You just do not understand economics and the changing marketplace. Australia is a nation of only a little over 20 million people. It's a prosperous nation and mostly filled with recent (last 100 years) immigrants from British Commonwealth countries and more recently Asian countries. It has an over-sized airline market for it's population. That is very difficult to manage well with all the international competition, not just competition from the Middle East based carriers.
Click to expand...

The Netherlands have 16 million people and have a very successful airline with KLM. That country is also calling bullfecal matter on what the ME3 wants to do and is fighting back. They are 'managing' the international competition very nicely.


What you have effectively done, I will say, is hurt American jobs in both the manufacturing and tourism industries. Congratulations on that effort. Ex-Im has not been re-authorized as of now and that could reasonably cost tens of thousands of American well paying jobs. Well done!!


Typhoonpilot
Click to expand...

Once again, more rhetoric. MANY folks feel that the Ex-Import bank needs to be changed.
 
Seggy said:
It has been proven.

http://www.openandfairskies.com/wp-content/themes/custom/media/White.Paper.pdf
Click to expand...

OMG LOL. Taken from page 2 bullet point #4

"Unlike U.S. and third country carriers, the Gulf carriers are adding this new capacity (all of which will be deployed on international routes) at rates that substantially exceed global GDP growth, which drives growth in demand for air transport services."

Yes, have you looked at the map, where else is it going to go? Was there is a point on publishing this?

Second, demand is tied in with GDP? Talk about simplifying the complex, this speaks nothing about the macro/ micro environment, sales, marketing, business strategies are totally disregarded, if airline management was only so simple. This make me wonder why we don't have more Nobel Peace Prize winners in economics. I'm only on the first few pages of this paper and I've yet to read anything about prices (air fare) because that is what truly drives consumer demand. I'm a bit skeptical about where there is overlap between US3 vs ME3 network.

Needless to say, this is going to make for some good Sunday morning reading. Thanks @Seggy :)
 
Huh?

You do realize they are pumping the market filled with seats that don't have the demand. Do you realize that? Do you see the economic issues that this can cause?
 
typhoonpilot said:
“Emirates can submit as many pages as it wants, but it still won’t paper over what has been well-documented: Emirates has received billions in subsidies and unfair benefits from the treasury of the UAE,” says a spokesperson for the Partnership for Open and Fair Skies. “We respectfully ask that the US government request consultations with Qatar and the UAE, and stand up against these unfair government subsidies that violate our open skies agreement.”
Click to expand...

Haha! Glad we have this one on the record.
 
Seggy said:
Huh?

You do realize they are pumping the market filled with seats that don't have the demand. Do you realize that? Do you see the economic issues that this can cause?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but you're argument is totally baseless, please show us where there is overlap between Emirates network vs. the combined network of US3? Let me do some of the leg work for you, currently Emirates flies between DXB and the following US cities (BOS, JFK, IAD, MCO (9/1 start), ORD, DFW, IAH, SEA, SFO, LAX). All of these flights fly direct from the US to Dubai with the exception of the Milan flight. Of course, DXB isn't the final destination but do a comparison of Emirate's global network to that of the US3.

Also, please explain where why you seem to believe that there is no demand for additional capacity? Based off of Emirates' 14-15 annual report, they've reported a healthy load factor of 79.6% (fact checkers please confirm). It would not make economic sense of adding additional capacity on routes where you have little to no competition because you would want to limit capacity to drive demand vs. supply rather than having it the other way around.

Additionally, its been well documented that Emirates is chasing growth by capturing market share and not looking at immediate profitability and can you blame them? NA is the biggest travel market in the world, and it holds a tremendous value for anyone who can run a successful enterprise. I'm sorry but cost advantage does not always side with the home team, someone can always come in and challenge the status quo and do it better. If that weren't the case we wouldn't have the Toyotas and the Hondas that we have today or another point (related to aviation), how come JetBlue, Virgin America, Spirit, Frontier have managed to stay afloat in spite of facing fierce competition from the US3?
 
citrus said:
I'm sorry but you're argument is totally baseless, please show us where there is overlap between Emirates network vs. the combined network of US3? Let me do some of the leg work for you, currently Emirates flies between DXB and the following US cities (BOS, JFK, IAD, MCO (9/1 start), ORD, DFW, IAH, SEA, SFO, LAX). All of these flights fly direct from the US to Dubai with the exception of the Milan flight. Of course, DXB isn't the final destination but do a comparison of Emirate's global network to that of the US3.
Click to expand...

Nothing is baseless from what I am saying.

Emirates wants to do more than just fly between the United States Cities and DXB. They want to fly between large United States cities and other destinations in Europe as well across the Pacific. They can pump the market filled with seats, lower the price, afford to take a loss, and decimate the United States airline industry.

Also, please explain where why you seem to believe that there is no demand for additional capacity? Based off of Emirates' 14-15 annual report, they've reported a healthy load factor of 79.6% (fact checkers please confirm). It would not make economic sense of adding additional capacity on routes where you have little to no competition because you would want to limit capacity to drive demand vs. supply rather than having it the other way around.
Click to expand...

United States Airlines have much higher load factors, upwards of 90%. So it sounds like they are just adding capacity to try to drive down competitors revenue.


Additionally, its been well documented that Emirates is chasing growth by capturing market share and not looking at immediate profitability and can you blame them? NA is the biggest travel market in the world, and it holds a tremendous value for anyone who can run a successful enterprise. I'm sorry but cost advantage does not always side with the home team, someone can always come in and challenge the status quo and do it better. If that weren't the case we wouldn't have the Toyotas and the Hondas that we have today or another point (related to aviation), how come JetBlue, Virgin America, Spirit, Frontier have managed to stay afloat in spite of facing fierce competition from the US3?
Click to expand...

So if they are not looking to make an immediate profit wouldn't that be predatory to businesses that are looking to make a profit?

You are also missing the much bigger point that Emirates is subsidized heavily from the government of Dubai.
 
Last edited:
While I agree with a lot of what Citrus says, the point about not wanting immediate profitability is incorrect in the case of Emirates. All routes that Emirates plans; implements; and flies have requirements to be profitable within a very short period of time and to remain profitable. If they do not meet these requirements then they will not start them, and if they have started them, they will cease operations. Note the second daily LAX as an example. Once Turkish entered the market they took 90 passengers a day away from Emirates which destroyed the profitability of the second flight so they reduced to a single daily flight.

Now the interesting kicker on those 90 passengers. They were mostly Iranian, and that is a market that no U.S. carrier serves. Instead of over-flying Tehran on Emirates, it's a shorter connection for them to go via Istanbul on Turkish. Plus Turkish isn't as rigid on baggage weight as Emirates, or so I'm told.

What Citrus says about immediate profitability is, in fact, correct in regards to Etihad and Qatar. Again, another reason that the U.S. airline coalition and ALPA should not lump Emirates in with those two other carriers. They are run very differently. Emirates is run as a business that must be profitable. They track each route's profitability on a weekly basis and will pull out of a route if it starts under-performing. That kind of attention to numbers is just one of the things that keeps them as strong as they are.


Typhoonpilot
 
Seggy said:
The article left out Air France/KLM

http://centreforaviation.com/news/a...e-owned-airlines--in-qatar-and-the-uae-456867

The Netherlands is also limiting the rights of the ME3 Carriers into the Netherlands.

https://login.flightglobal.com/?Ret...herlands-to-limit-gulf-carrier-access-412600/
Click to expand...

And yet BA opposes AEA's stance on ME competition, a bit ironic considering their lone bastion of Heathrow.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/british...airline-trade-group-in-policy-spat-1429180240
 
Seggy said:
All of this is rhetoric. Pure rhetoric

You claim that 'not one U.S. pilot job has been lost or harmed....'

We are trying to prevent what is happening to the Qantas Pilots and the other employees of that company. Who does Qantas have an alliance with? Oh yeah, that is right...

BTW, well paying unionized Qantas jobs are being 'farmed out' to Emirates for those that aren't aware.
Click to expand...

Please provide some back up, how QF jobs are they being "farmed out"? Emirates flew to Australia prior to their tie up with Qantas and they still would've continued to do so regardless of their partnership. EK had very little to gain because they would've gone after the Australian market by themselves if needed. Their partnership gives traffic originating from Australia more options to connect out of DXB vs. flying through Singapore enroute to London and thence to your final destination (if necessary). The same principle applies by opening up additional traffic onto the Qantas network going the other way. Qantas is extremely happy with their relationship w/ Emirates and they're looking to extend their partnership beyond their initial term.

Parting thoughts, taking a look at the BA/AA JV from JFK-LHR. On a daily basis, BA operates 9 744 vs. AA's 3 77W out of JFK, so looking at this why does BA have exponentially more ASMs out of JFK than AA? A partnership only exists if it benefits both parties and its the same case for BA/AA and QF/EK.
 
Seggy said:
United States Airlines have much higher load factors, upwards of 90%. So it sounds like they are just adding capacity to try to drive down competitors revenue.
Click to expand...

I hate to ask you this but where exactly did you pull the 90% load factor from? I've yet to read AA, DL or UA report that on their quarterly or annual reports for that matter. Please see the links for yourself for Q1 performance data.

http://ir.united.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=83680&p=irol-newsArticle&id=2039191

http://ir.delta.com/news-and-events...s-Announces-March-Quarter-Profit/default.aspx

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=117098&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=2039822
 
citrus said:
Please provide some back up, how QF jobs are they being "farmed out"? Emirates flew to Australia prior to their tie up with Qantas and they still would've continued to do so regardless of their partnership. EK had very little to gain because they would've gone after the Australian market by themselves if needed. Their partnership gives traffic originating from Australia more options to connect out of DXB vs. flying through Singapore enroute to London and thence to your final destination (if necessary). The same principle applies by opening up additional traffic onto the Qantas network going the other way. Qantas is extremely happy with their relationship w/ Emirates and they're looking to extend their partnership beyond their initial term.

Parting thoughts, taking a look at the BA/AA JV from JFK-LHR. On a daily basis, BA operates 9 744 vs. AA's 3 77W out of JFK, so looking at this why does BA have exponentially more ASMs out of JFK than AA? A partnership only exists if it benefits both parties and its the same case for BA/AA and QF/EK.
Click to expand...


Are you serious? Let me ask you this...who do you think gets paid more...a Qantas 747 Captain or an Emirates 777 Captain?
 
citrus said:
I hate to ask you this but where exactly did you pull the 90% load factor from? I've yet to read AA, DL or UA report that on their quarterly or annual reports for that matter. Please see the links for yourself for Q1 performance data.

http://ir.united.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=83680&p=irol-newsArticle&id=2039191

http://ir.delta.com/news-and-events...s-Announces-March-Quarter-Profit/default.aspx

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=117098&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=2039822
Click to expand...

You seriously linked the slowest time period load factors? Look at the yearly load factors for the last 3 years.
 
Seggy said:
Passengers are flying Melbourne to Dubai to London instead of say Melbourne to Sydney to London. You are basically saying that it was 'ok' for Emirates to come in and pick up the scraps of the decimation of Qantas.
Click to expand...

Ask anyone who is traveling from Australia to London, would you rather make 1 connection or 2? So going your argument, you're saying that for the sake of saying QF "jobs" passengers from Melbourne should bear the additional cost of connecting through Sydney enroute to London?

Luckily, for them QF flies 2x A380s MEL-DXB-LHR vs. EK 1x A380s MEL-DXB-LHR service.
 
citrus said:
Ask anyone who is traveling from Australia to London, would you rather make 1 connection or 2? So going your argument, you're saying that for the sake of saying QF "jobs" passengers from Melbourne should bear the additional cost of connecting through Sydney enroute to London?

Luckily, for them QF flies 2x A380s MEL-DXB-LHR vs. EK 1x A380s MEL-DXB-LHR service.
Click to expand...

Once again, Qantas is shrinking, while they expand a code share, an agreement where management gets revenue, but hurts the employees and you OK with that? Seriously?

Qantas has one destination in Europe, London. They used to go to Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Rome, and Manchester. Now, Emirates does that. How is that good?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top