Originally Posted by
iahphx
Again, this is incorrect thinking. The US airlines can compete against anyone. They are very mean and lean. They are run by outstanding businessmen (well, I don't really know about UA due to their current turmoil). But you can't compete against a company that's controlled by a government that's willing to pour billions into subsidizing the product. Nobody can compete against that. As a for-profit enterprise, you have to fly routes and offer service where your revenues cover your costs (and then try to make a profit for your shareholders). The ME3 don't have these constraints -- they have the proverbial blank check. So you just have to stay out of their way, or complain to your elected officials about what's going on.
US airlines have some of the highest labor costs for some of the worst employees in the industry. They are run by lawyers and drunks, and they could dip into their billions in profit and pretty easily offer the exact same product ME3 offer on most of their aircraft. They don't because it's easier to complain to (and presumably bribe) the government than it is to explain to the shareholders why they need to cater some Dom and Krug for intercontinental F, spend more money on training employees on how to properly offer service in a premium cabin, refresh menus to offer edible and presentable food, get rid of the ridiculously terrible regional business products (misleading labeled as domestic "first") and add something acceptable, and offer an explanation as to why none of this was done 10 years ago when it should have been.
If AA were willing to offer the same product EK does on its A380s, this whole debate would come down to price. In reality, US airlines
can undercut ME3 on price, and do at times, but they
cannot offer an equivalent product.