View Poll Results: Is Emirates A Financial Scam?
Yes
27
15.52%
No
106
60.92%
Dont care
35
20.11%
Undecided
6
3.45%
Voters: 174. You may not vote on this poll
Is Emirates a financial scam?
#1996
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BOS
Posts: 15,027
Also, IAG joined the ME3 in denouncing the US3 report.
http://www.eturbonews.com/58984/wron...tes-and-qatar-
http://www.eturbonews.com/58984/wron...tes-and-qatar-
#1997
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BOS
Posts: 15,027
Interview with Tim Clark: http://www.thenational.ae/business/a...airlines#page1
#1998
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2008
Programs: Everything is refundable
Posts: 3,727
The outcome was obvious from the start, it became worse, especially after the US3 commissioned a lot of highly paid experts to come up with a report describing the practices in greater detail.
Some ME3 appologists started to panic resulting in unpleasant comments on TV and FT. There is an old saying in German, if you do not have to hide anything, there is no reason to panic and scream.
I compared the situation of EK to parents after supporting their kid for 25 years, after all those years of financial support, their kid can finally make it without financial support from their parents,but the accumulated debt has to be paid and accounted for somehow... @:-)
This is basically the situation of EK right now and considering their debt and the debt of their owner, it is about time.
Last edited by eightblack; May 16, 2015 at 6:07 am Reason: removed off topic reference to QR and EY. Stay on topic
#1999
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2008
Programs: Everything is refundable
Posts: 3,727
Interview with Tim Clark: http://www.thenational.ae/business/a...airlines#page1
Anyway, who cares whether the debt of EK or the owner of EK increased by nearly 3 billion?
It is one big cash Register after all...
I would love to do business like this, but I guess I have to move to the land of (financial) fairy tales in order to do so.
And pointing out the obvious, that every state-owned airline received subsidies like crazy, has been my main argument, so Mr.Clark, so I really urge to come up with something different to keep us entertained.
#2000
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,454
I could not agree more, but as pointed out numerous times, I really appreciate the effort by folks like yourself or irish to put up a fight against 42 billion opponents and a few industry experts with insider knowledge.
The outcome was obvious from the start, it became worse, especially after the US3 commissioned a lot of highly paid experts to come up with a report describing the practices in greater detail.
Some ME3 appologists started to panic resulting in unpleasant comments on TV and FT. There is an old saying in German, if you do not have to hide anything, there is no reason to panic and scream.
As pointed out before as well, Etihad and Qatar are the real culprits, they are far away from having a halfway sustainable business model. EK received billions in subsidies, but they are far ahead of Etihad and Qatar, when it comes to break even from ops.
I compared the situation of EK to parents after supporting their kid for 25 years, after all those years of financial support, their kid can finally make it without financial support from their parents,but the accumulated debt has to be paid and accounted for somehow... @:-)
This is basically the situation of EK right now and considering their debt and the debt of their owner, it is about time.
The outcome was obvious from the start, it became worse, especially after the US3 commissioned a lot of highly paid experts to come up with a report describing the practices in greater detail.
Some ME3 appologists started to panic resulting in unpleasant comments on TV and FT. There is an old saying in German, if you do not have to hide anything, there is no reason to panic and scream.
As pointed out before as well, Etihad and Qatar are the real culprits, they are far away from having a halfway sustainable business model. EK received billions in subsidies, but they are far ahead of Etihad and Qatar, when it comes to break even from ops.
I compared the situation of EK to parents after supporting their kid for 25 years, after all those years of financial support, their kid can finally make it without financial support from their parents,but the accumulated debt has to be paid and accounted for somehow... @:-)
This is basically the situation of EK right now and considering their debt and the debt of their owner, it is about time.
That's the point I have trouble with, considering Dubai's relative poverty and lack of resources to do such a thing, and that total expenditure didn't even reach the 3 billion USD mark until 2002 (I appreciate you think their published information is a lie, though), and that Dubai borrowed a lot of money to do other projects. If you haven't got any transparency anyway, why wouldn't you just borrow money straight onto EKs books instead of going through this charade of publishing accounts back in the 2000s and before?
If the point is a more general one, that Dubai borrowed lots of money to build airports and hotels and tourist attractions, which had the effect of making people use EK to get to Dubai - I think you are widening the definition of subsidy to be totally meaningless, because that is a perfectly legitimate way for governments to spend their money. Infrastructure investments don't have to pay for themselves - they form part of the critical infrastructure of a country in order for it to function properly. The economic impact is unquantifiable. If that way of thinking was dominant last century, we would never have the Eisenhower Interstate System (which still doesn't pay for itself), the Marshall Plan, European motorways, energy transmission systems etc. Now that the idea that everything, in part and in full, has to pay for itself - and debt is not acceptable - has become quite popular recently, we have these problems where infrastructure starts to decay and becomes a hinderance to GDP growth as direct usage charges are politically unacceptable/don't cover costs. Germany is in fact a bit of a culprit here, along with the US. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2014/wp14227.pdf, http://www.wsj.com/articles/imf-call...ure-1431344662, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft.../02/pdf/c3.pdf. So governments take on debt for a variety of reasons - and there are many governments out there with wholly state-owned companies, with high sovereign debt loads and continually run deficits.
Yet we don't accuse state owned infrastructure management companies as scams, even when they make profits with large debt loads. Take for instance, Network Rail in the UK, which made 1bn GBP profit in 2014, is a public sector organisation whose debts are now part of the sovereign's debt, borrows money from the government instead of capital markets, yet could only be considered a scam of an organisation by the most extreme libertarian economic views.
Still, that is a bit of an economic digression. The point is that infrastructure spending is perfectly legitimate, debt financing is perfectly legitimate, and it is clearly absurd to expect that any spending from which EK benefits from in an ancillary manner (as in, not targeted at them - state aid rules in the EU agree here, aid has to be on a selective basis: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/stat.../index_en.html), that EK now has to find the cash to "pay it back" in order to be seen as "clean". That is such an outrageous standard to hold any company to that I think qualifies as "panic and screaming". After all over 100 airlines and air cargo companies operate using infrastructure that both directly (such as an airport) and indirectly (low taxes for its workers and highways for them to get around) benefits them - why are they not being told to repay the cost of the historical Dubai government investments? The only thing selective here is the singling out of EK for flimsy reasons at best and quite prejudiced ones at worst.
As to the panic and screaming - I think Tim Clark has been quite measured in his responses, considering that he is accused of consistently lying through his teeth for years. It's one thing to attack the company he runs, but to be de facto personally accused of orchestrating a massive fraud I think speaks volumes about "panic and screaming" on the part of the accusers (who have yet to come up with any definitive proof apart from disbelief) rather than on Tim Clark.
Akbar Al-Baker is of course, Akbar Al-Baker - one can draw one's own conclusions about this airline. James Hogan is being rather quiet.
P.S. what is this insider knowledge though - is it a leak from the internal EK audit/finance departments showing a smoking gun of falsifying statements, or is it incomplete information from a snapshot of the network, or one small part, disclosed by people with an agenda, which is then being extrapolated to paint an inaccurate picture of the whole? Not all experts and not all insider information is of the same value - I would welcome any of that here with the associated methodology in order to push the discussion onwards from the whole "innocent until proven guilty/guilt until proven innocent" merry-go-round that we are stuck in...
Last edited by eternaltransit; May 16, 2015 at 7:48 am Reason: added postscript, cleanup
#2001
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,454
I still like the spin he puts on the losses from the hedges, which went down the hill some years ago.
Anyway, who cares whether the debt of EK or the owner of EK increased by nearly 3 billion?
It is one big cash Register after all...
I would love to do business like this, but I guess I have to move to the land of (financial) fairy tales in order to do so.
And pointing out the obvious, that every state-owned airline received subsidies like crazy, has been my main argument, so Mr.Clark, so I really urge to come up with something different to keep us entertained.
Anyway, who cares whether the debt of EK or the owner of EK increased by nearly 3 billion?
It is one big cash Register after all...
I would love to do business like this, but I guess I have to move to the land of (financial) fairy tales in order to do so.
And pointing out the obvious, that every state-owned airline received subsidies like crazy, has been my main argument, so Mr.Clark, so I really urge to come up with something different to keep us entertained.
Still, making a loss doesn't make you "dirty", as said before.
The idea that all of Dubai's GREs are one big sovereign entity is now, after the Dubai World default and restructure, completely discredited. Every commercial lender now knows that each entity they lend to is pretty much on their own and has to be evaluated without the idea there is an implicit sovereign guarantee.
Dubai is not one big cash register with pooled money and resources. There isn't even any money in the register!
#2002
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada
Programs: UA*1K MM SK EBG LATAM BL
Posts: 23,314
Also, Lee Moak wrote for The Hill's blog: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-bl...the-food-fight
Moak is president of Americans for Fair Skies, a veteran U.S. Marine Corp and Navy fighter pilot, former United States Commercial Airline pilot, and the former president of Air Line Pilots Association, International.
Yeah... Iwould trust this guy to be objective
#2003
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,796
Who are the "42 billion"? That's more than 5 (nearly 6) times the world's population.
Exaggerate much?
And who are they? You mean the self-proclaimed "experts"?
What outcome? I haven't heard that there's an official conclusion to the claims and counter claims.
Here's the thing about "highly paid experts" - they tend to come up with whatever the person paying them wants them to say.
Again, we haven't seen any "detail" - just more unsubstantiated claims based on information taken out of context. Have you read the IAG response? No one is buying the US3 White paper.
And yet this thread is about EK.
Focus.
According to a self-proclaimed "expert" with no actual proof, this is the "situation". And it's about time for what?
Do you have any actual substantiated information to supply, or just more insults and vague assertions?
Exaggerate much?
And who are they? You mean the self-proclaimed "experts"?
What outcome? I haven't heard that there's an official conclusion to the claims and counter claims.
Again, we haven't seen any "detail" - just more unsubstantiated claims based on information taken out of context. Have you read the IAG response? No one is buying the US3 White paper.
Focus.
Do you have any actual substantiated information to supply, or just more insults and vague assertions?
#2004
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BOS
Posts: 15,027
Thus, we’re left to conclude that this whole battle over alleged subsidies and unfair competition is really nothing more than a meaningless-yet-amusing catfight on a grand and global scale.
#2005
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: Amex Platinum, Chase Sapphire Reserve
Posts: 811
US3 have released a new study regarding the economic impact of ME3 on US3.
http://www.openandfairskies.com/wp-c...-Traffic-1.pdf
Edit: Much like any regression analysis, you can change the dependent variables to change the correlation factor. I mean, "Number of Gulf Carriers Present"? Looks quite sophomoric to me, to be honest. I would have used the number of seats instead. If they release the dataset, I would probably be able to conclude the exact opposite.
Once again:
The US has no national interest in protecting the alliance or JV partners of the US3.
http://www.openandfairskies.com/wp-c...-Traffic-1.pdf
Edit: Much like any regression analysis, you can change the dependent variables to change the correlation factor. I mean, "Number of Gulf Carriers Present"? Looks quite sophomoric to me, to be honest. I would have used the number of seats instead. If they release the dataset, I would probably be able to conclude the exact opposite.
Once again:
The US has no national interest in protecting the alliance or JV partners of the US3.
Last edited by Xlr; May 16, 2015 at 12:34 pm Reason: Thoughts on the paper
#2006
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
US3 have released a new study regarding the economic impact of ME3 on US3.
http://www.openandfairskies.com/wp-c...-Traffic-1.pdf
http://www.openandfairskies.com/wp-c...-Traffic-1.pdf
#2007
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,454
US3 have released a new study regarding the economic impact of ME3 on US3.
http://www.openandfairskies.com/wp-c...-Traffic-1.pdf
Edit: Much like any regression analysis, you can change the dependent variables to change the correlation factor. I mean, "Number of Gulf Carriers Present"? Looks quite sophomoric to me, to be honest. I would have used the number of seats instead. If they release the dataset, I would probably be able to conclude the exact opposite.
Once again:
The US has no national interest in protecting the alliance or JV partners of the US3.
http://www.openandfairskies.com/wp-c...-Traffic-1.pdf
Edit: Much like any regression analysis, you can change the dependent variables to change the correlation factor. I mean, "Number of Gulf Carriers Present"? Looks quite sophomoric to me, to be honest. I would have used the number of seats instead. If they release the dataset, I would probably be able to conclude the exact opposite.
Once again:
The US has no national interest in protecting the alliance or JV partners of the US3.
The conclusion of the report is that with the introduction of ME3 service to the US, US carriers are seeing their bookings drop. End of story - YMMV whether you think this is a bona-fide, sincere attempt at trying to fight for US national interests.
It's almost as if the argument put forward by the US3 is that every carrier has a natural right to certain amounts of traffic, passenger preferences be damned. It's not as if passengers care about in-flight services, network connectivity, fleet age, staff age (base as it may be), or all of that. No, none of those things could ever be a factor in why new competitors make people change to them...! As for the allegation of dumping, aka predatory pricing....we don't need to go over that again, do we?
All sides are able to find a kernel of truth and get a consultant to provide opinions-for-hire to peddle the various lines for the PR battle - EK has done this with their "aviation supports x amount of jobs in the EU and US of course that gets wheeled out - but the simple matter is, on the basis of independent available data, not opinion pieces or intentionally skewed snapshots of information taken out of context, the fraud argument just doesn't stack up.
Last edited by eternaltransit; May 16, 2015 at 12:52 pm
#2008
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 134
I still like the spin he puts on the losses from the hedges, which went down the hill some years ago.
Anyway, who cares whether the debt of EK or the owner of EK increased by nearly 3 billion?
It is one big cash Register after all...
I would love to do business like this, but I guess I have to move to the land of (financial) fairy tales in order to do so.
And pointing out the obvious, that every state-owned airline received subsidies like crazy, has been my main argument, so Mr.Clark, so I really urge to come up with something different to keep us entertained.
Anyway, who cares whether the debt of EK or the owner of EK increased by nearly 3 billion?
It is one big cash Register after all...
I would love to do business like this, but I guess I have to move to the land of (financial) fairy tales in order to do so.
And pointing out the obvious, that every state-owned airline received subsidies like crazy, has been my main argument, so Mr.Clark, so I really urge to come up with something different to keep us entertained.
This is the same as the US3 is taking advantage of their domestic networks to make 10% and more margins to ensure huge profits for their shareholders. The UAE doesn't have this advantage, so they created an advantage for themselves, along with the natural advantage that they have at the "centre" of the world to transport people.
I compared the situation of EK to parents after supporting their kid for 25 years, after all those years of financial support, their kid can finally make it without financial support from their parents,but the accumulated debt has to be paid and accounted for somehow... @:-)
This is basically the situation of EK right now and considering their debt and the debt of their owner, it is about time.
This is basically the situation of EK right now and considering their debt and the debt of their owner, it is about time.
Seeing that their position is that they should have a pre-determined amount of passengers gifted to them, is it any wonder their service and aircraft are so sub-standard? They can do what they want because they will always have x amount of passengers gifted to them.
#2009
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: Amex Platinum, Chase Sapphire Reserve
Posts: 811
Well, the US3 can't compete on product for price paid. For the federal government to do something as serious as open skies consultations, they need to demonstrate that:
(a) ME3 are subsidized
(b) US3 business is hurt by this
We know that their attempt at (a) didn't stack up with regards to EK, which really means their attempt at (b) means nothing in relation to competition from EK.
(a) ME3 are subsidized
(b) US3 business is hurt by this
We know that their attempt at (a) didn't stack up with regards to EK, which really means their attempt at (b) means nothing in relation to competition from EK.
#2010
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BOS
Posts: 15,027
Pandering to a small section of the business landscape (such as the US3) is not in the interest of the Citizens of the United States.