Delta CEO Links Gulf Carriers With 9/11 as U.S. Legacies’ War Over ‘Open Skies’ Wages On
Joe Cortez February 17, 2015
Pointed comments made by Delta Air Lines’ CEO during CNN interview linked Arabian carriers with the 9/11 tragedy; airline representative later clarifies.
The ongoing debate over Open Skies agreements between U.S. legacies and Gulf carriers is heating up once more. In the latest round of controversial commentary, Delta Air Lines CEO Richard Anderson made remarks during an interview on CNN’s Quest Means Business suggesting a tie between the UAE and the September 11 attacks.
Anderson’s comments come as U.S. legacy carriers urge the Obama administration to reconsider Open Skies agreements with Qatar and the UAE. Earlier this month, Anderson joined his legacy counterparts to present a report to the White House alleging illegal subsidies received by Emirates, Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways.
During Monday’s live interview, host Richard Quest commented that the counter-argument of the Arabian carriers is based on the legacy carriers’ restructuring in bankruptcy. “The argument is that you, in your own ways, have had your hand in the bailout trough,” said Quest.
“That is categorically false,” replied Anderson. “And it’s a great irony to have the UAE from the Arabian Peninsula talk about that, given the fact that our industry was really shocked by the terrorism of 9/11, which came from terrorists from the Arabian Peninsula. That caused us to go through a massive restructuring. And in the U.S. our restructuring process is transparent and there is no government subsidy.”
In an statement emailed to International Business Times on Tuesday, a Delta representative clarified the comment around the fact that bankruptcy did not act as a subsidy for the carrier. Spokeswoman Betsy Talton wrote:
The point [Anderson] was making is this: Emirates, Qatar and Etihad have long tried to defend their government bankrolls by characterizing the 9/11 payments and Chapter 11 bankruptcy as subsidies. This couldn’t be further from the truth. The first was a modest one-time payment to U.S. airlines in the aftermath of the U.S. airspace closure after 9/11. That shutdown and its aftermath resulted in the loss of tens of thousands airline jobs and billions of dollars in debt and equity for investors. [Chapter 11] is a completely transparent process that involves no government funding.
[Photo: CNN]
You’re Reading
Why is it that every time Richard Anderson opens his mouth, the exaggeration pours forth? To link the Gulf Carriers to 9/11 is a very big stretch. While Bankruptcy isn't a subsidy per say, it does provide a way for DL to write off a chunk of debt without having to pay for it. CEOs in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Perhaps Delta could compete against these carriers if they had a decent coach product.
From the first time I heard this guy on the delta safety video he struck me as a bit odd. If I worked in their PR dept I'd spend a lot of time working hard to keep him away from the cameras. Actually listening to Anderson and Quest in the same segment would be my idea of hell!!
All N. American airlines are the pits and they need to find someone to blame so lets blame the Middle East airlines. Come on, get your act together.
Obviously crossing the line to pointedly put the motives of a governments actions in the context of a terrorist attack, but then again he's an American businessman that got burned severely by the fallout of all this and not a diplomat, so I wouldn't expect him to see it any other way. Nonetheless it remains a fair assessment that the 9/11 economic impact was unprecedented and should not be thrown in the face of these companies as equivalent to their hidden government subsidies. Their region did not suffer from the drop in air travel during this time and at this point they are using these subsidies to gain a competitive advantage globally. That's not surprising, the UAE is desperate to give their money to whatever cause safeguards their future economic prosperity beyond oil and clearly that agenda includes dominating global travel and tourism.
I think CEO Anderson has it about right, as do the other U.S. legacy carrier CEOs. I have lived in the Gulf and know it well. Yes, they made a case about the 9/11 shut-down tax help, but that is small stuff, lunch money. A foolish PR try. Those big-three Gulf carriers are not airlines, they are governments. And in that regard they can do what they wish. All books are closed. I have used all three of these airlines on occasion because flying via Dubai, especially, to Asia is quite inexpensive. Going DL, AA, or UL from the U.S. is a bunch of money. Also, these new Boeing and Airbus aircraft are really comfortable and the service is just great. What to do? Best, I think, for DL and others to go head-to-head with the Gulfies: get some new aircraft, have better service from younger cabin crews, and stop diminishing the FF programs. DL, where I am a DM, is no longer worth the effort for me.