This is how cabotage starts

Pilot Fighter said:
Back to Emirates for moment, am I being cynical for thinking that keeping books that show them struggling financially like everybody else helps them dodge criticism when they try to enter new markets? "Hey, fuel costs are killing us too, can we share a gate?"
Click to expand...


Do you even know what you are talking about?


TP
 
Seggy said:
The are only weak arguments if you want to ignore them.
Click to expand...

They should be ignored, because fighting battles that you can't win is a waste of time and resources.

UAL and DAL aren't state backed national airlines, like Emirates is. No matter how you break it down, or what you say, the Gulf State Airlines are a big shell game funneling money into the government. UAL and DAL don't have the guarantee of survival, Emirates does.
Click to expand...

And no matter what you do, you're never going to change that. Quibbling over little nonsense like financing discounts through the Ex-Im Bank will not impact the advantage that these state-backed carriers have. It's just a distraction from real issues.
 
Emirates hurts between Asia and the US, but they're no factor pretty much from Berlin to Paris to the US. They don't have direct US flights to Paris, Air France made sure of that. It's also about protecting its market vs. whining about what the other are doing. Kinda reminds me of the Concorde case back in the days. Oh so the French and Brits, two pokey nations recovering from WWII have built a fully functional SST ? Let's ban it !
 
Pépé le Pilot said:
UAL and DAL have both (or will both) benefited from Chapter 11 and wether you like it or not, it's somehow a state backing (our good friend Wikipedia explains that a chapter 11 is filed with the FEDERAL bankruptcy court to obtain protection etc. Notice the FEDERAL). This refusal to acknowledge that US airlines have, do or will receive help, protection from the federal government is so hypocrite it makes me want to eat my sidestick.
Click to expand...

What Wikipedia or you didn't mention is that a company can and does get liquidated all the time in bankruptcy. See Pan Am, Braniff, Eastern, ATA, Aloha, etc.



So please stop thinking that brave US companies are surrounded by a bunch of lazy and state funded airlines because it is wrong.
Click to expand...

Think the French Government would let Air France be liquidated?
 
You don't even want to start comparing with say AF or Lufth. Salaries are high there too, and if you look at AF that's close to 5000 pilots with high salaries, 10 weeks paid vacations, state funded retirement, social security, etc. And again, for AF, 750€/ton and still making a profit on long haul...
French Government (well we, really) own 15% of AF. If it goes down, EU regulations will prohibit a bail out... We have lost quite a lot of huge industries in the recent years and nothing could have been done to save them...
 
If you think the US government would let your airline liquidate, you're living in a fantasy world. This isn't 1991, and you don't work for Pan Am. Things have changed.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
They should be ignored, because fighting battles that you can't win is a waste of time and resources.



And no matter what you do, you're never going to change that. Quibbling over little nonsense like financing discounts through the Ex-Im Bank will not impact the advantage that these state-backed carriers have. It's just a distraction from real issues.
Click to expand...

I'm sure people were saying that about those '50 seat RJs'.......

I'd rather fight this than sit idly by.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
If you think the US government would let your airline liquidate, you're living in a fantasy world. This isn't 1991, and you don't work for Pan Am. Things have changed.
Click to expand...

I sure as hell hope not but nothing is guaranteed.

Your hatred of someone is also obscuring your vision with these issues.
 
........AND THIS IS HOW CABOTAGE ENDS....

500px-RedDawnWOLVERINES.jpg


WOLVERINES!!!

Sorry, it's all I could think about when I saw the thread title. I know. Lame.
 
Pépé le Pilot said:
Thinking that the US airlines are like the white knight fighting against the evil state funded airlines is a blatant ignorance of the airline world IMHO... (great thread nonetheless)
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I've seen that sentiment expressed. Emirates does a bunch of stuff right that others get wrong that has nothing to do with its history, structure, or financing. Even if Emirates was given unlimited resources, they understand that running the airline like a real business results in accountability and efficiencies that yield tangible results apart from the bottom line. Saudia never saw the value of their geography despite the billions thrown at their airline.

Emirates recognized the value of its geography, it's tough to fault them for that. As far as state subsidy, sovereign wealth has allowed them to secure some of the most attractive financing in the industry. While it might be ignorant to portray state carriers as evil entities it is ignorant to dismiss the competitive advantages they enjoy. Not discounting domestically-refined jet fuel was a choice and has nothing to do with the the fact that most of the crude originates in the other Emirates. Are you suggesting that Dubai's petroleum-based revenue is proportional to its production and that it doesn't benefit from the production in other Emirates?

While we have reached a point politically where some US carriers might be too big to fail, it isn't even a question with state carriers like Emirates. That's the starting point for analysis. Please describe the circumstances by which Emirates could cease operations. Get my point?
 
I don't see how Emirates could cease ops, that was never my point, furthermore I have absolutely no idea of the financial mechanisms involved in Emirates. However this company has a lot of money outside, in airplanes orders and infrastructures. I'm not sure how they balance all this, but I know for a fact that they don't pay income tax, landing fees, outsource pretty much everything. Paying high salaries is a drop of water and then that's the price you have to pay to keep people from running away this very inhospitable region...
 
@typhoonpilot

Scandinavian media is also being critical of the Irish Aviation Authority....

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...uthority-rebuffs-attacks-its-safety-oversight

Your argument about how the Irish 'is a part of the EU so they will provide oversight of Norwegian' is like saying the government of West Virginia has properly inspected and regulated chemical hold tanks next to their major rivers.

Once again, there are significant safety concerns if the DOT allows for this application.
 
Last edited:
Pépé le Pilot said:
Thinking that the US airlines are like the white knight fighting against the evil state funded airlines is a blatant ignorance of the airline world IMHO... (great thread nonetheless)
Click to expand...

It isn't ignorant to be fighting this.

Look what happened to the United States Merchant Shipping business to see why this fight is of the utmost importance for US Airline Labor.
 
From the article:

"The IAA said it is ranked among the best in the world for civil aviation safety oversight, following an intensive international audit in 2010 by the International Civil Aviation Organization. The 2013 Eurocontrol Performance Review Body also ranked Ireland first among 29 European states for effectiveness of safety management."

This is not a safety issue, it's a labor issue. Many companies register airliners there including about half of the world wide fleet of leased airplanes. The reason to register in Ireland is because they have incredibly favorable tax codes for corporations. Norway has already endorsed the airline’s plan.

From another article:

"While the IAA won’t consider the labor issues, the safe operation of Norwegian is under its purview. The airline’s bases in the U.S. and Bangkok have already been audited, Humphrey said and making sure Norwegian is a safe carrier is no different from what it already does with Ryanair.

“In the event the NAI AOC is granted, we will continue to inspect the stations and operations on an ongoing basis, within the context of the IAA’s safety regulation,” he said. “The oversight of Norwegian Airlines International would not constitute a significant expansion of our existing international aviation safety surveillance.”
 
Last edited:
@A Life Aloft are you being naive to think that the IAA would say anything different?

It is almost exactly what the FAA said after their deplorable regulation of Colgan before (and after) the accident. That lack of regulation contributed to the accident.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top