You fail to undrstand the status quo....not for the first time I should add quickly.

The ball is clearly in the playing field of the ME3 , not in the US anymore.

I hope we do not have to wagt for two years for their next move, so far their responses were rather thin, not really smart and , most importantly, not helping their cause.

This thread is not about the ME3.

.....and yet again I'm going to have to rain on your parade cause you don't have over whelming proof EK is subsidized, nor will you ever.

Prove it, or basically put up, or shut up.

Again, playing field. EK has to explain subsidies worth $8 Billion. And I even offer them some relief, I only care about 2.3 of them!

Since when does EK have to prove any thing to you??? Honestly who are you?

They basically replied to the proper authorities, and said they will prove with out a doubt with a Sledgehammer effect that they are not subsidized in they're own time. Does it bother you that they're in no rush???

What don't you understand??? Would you like us to draw you a picture, would that help??

Again you prove nothing, nor can you because EK isn't subsidized, but your sure insistent on being a pest.

We are on to you so give it a rest. :cool:

And that is not answering the question that I asked. If you are 100% convinced of your stance you wouldn't need to bring in wrong information in your posts to enhance your point of view. No-one will deny that $44 Billion looks a lot better than $2.3 Billion. So again, why do you feel the need to bring up the wrong figures related to EK (this thread is about EK, not EY or QR).

You might not agree with this, but it is this sort of posting that hurts your credibility. I ask again, if everyone in the industry knows that EK is a scam and has been subsidized for the past 30 years to the tune of Billions of USD, why hasn't the German or French Government stepped in to protect their airlines and employees? Why have they allowed this behemoth to continue to hurt their airlines and employees? Why haven't the learned analysts and consultants spoken up before now (the disputed US3 White Paper) to voice their opinions? Where is the proof for all of this?

I am not trying to catch you out, I am trying to give you the chance to cement your opinion as an expert on this thread. Just posting, I cannot be bothered to try and explain it to you because you are beneath me and my qualifications, it doesn't help your argument (even if it may be true). It looks more and more like a get out clause for the supposed experts in the US and EU, when their bosses asks them, How is EK able to order this amount of A380s when we struggle to make 10 work? When you cannot adequately explain it the easy answer must be, it is a scam otherwise I would have been able to predict this 10 years ago....:confused:

Very interesting article today from CAPA.

http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...u-dhabi-223254

If the figures are true (i.e. not a scam), then the net benefit to (some) of the US legacy carriers in domestic transfer market is huge,

Who is the "us" of which you speak? Is it off-topic to address posts in this topic with factual comments, even if, and especially when, the posts don't align with your beliefs about this topic and the posts responding to you? Your post seems to indicate a problem with such posts, but that is not my issue.

You commented about "doing business internally". Anyone with any proper understanding of the US3 or EU3 with a FFP realizes that the FFP is one way of "doing business internally" too.

With respect, I don't think that's true. It is impossible to hurt that which does not exist. ;)

There is no credibility in "I'm an expert so I know stuff" or "you are all stupid fans" or "everyone knows this". There is no credibility in making random assertions without any factual backup. There is no credibility in confusing $44 Billion with $8 Billion with $2.3 Billion. There is no credibility in going off on goat tracks about unemployment in the GDR or Bernie Madoff or pop music references. There is no credibility in "So-and-so lied about such-and-such therefore Tim Clark is lying about EK" or "the whole region is corrupt so EK must be a scam."

IOW he started with no credibility and has been heading downwards ever since.

or British (seeming as EK and QF have 10 flights/day to LON. Why, then, would BA continue to have a partnership with QF, where I can earn the same mileage on LONDXB in D class no matter which of the 2 I fly? Especially the case since QR, one of EK's competitors only has 6 flights/day to DOH and owns 10% of IAG.)

Fares increasing
Cutbacks to FFP benefits
Cutbacks to partner earnings
Award chart devaluation
PQD/MQD on UA/DL
Reduced benefits to employees (look at CX secrets/FAU page in the case of CX.)
Government protection against strikes (AC)
No fuel savings passed on to customers
Need I say more?

Emirates CEO isn't too happy with Chicago's Mayor Emmanuel for taking sides in the trade dispute with the big 3 US carriers.

From an article in today's Chicago Tribune:

Emirates Airline President Tim Clark chastised Mayor Rahm Emanuel in a letter for publicly siding with U.S. airlines in a trade dispute without contacting Emirates for its side of the story.

* * *

Clark said Emirates was lobbied more than a dozen times by Chicago officials since 2010 before deciding to start service last year. "Considering we have carried more than 115,000 passengers to your city in less than a year, our partnership seems to be exceeding expectations," Clark wrote.


* * *

"Let me be very clear. As far as Emirates is concerned, the allegations of subsidy are demonstrably false," he wrote.

For example, Clark said in the letter, allegations that Emirates was dumping capacity in the United States — essentially claiming it was flying mostly empty, unprofitable planes to steal market share — are untrue. He said the airline's load factor — how full its planes are — was more than 80 percent both in Chicago and in the U.S. overall. That demand is why Emirates on May 1 began flying a larger plane model, a Boeing 777-300ER, from Chicago, he said. He noted that neither United nor American offers nonstop service from Chicago to Dubai, where Emirates flies.


Full article here:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...526-story.html

Google it to avoid the paywall.

Do not get me wrong, but judging from various side discussions via PM, I really doubt that my comments hurt my credibility, actually it is quite the opposite, at least among people interested in objective information & insider sources.

Of course, EK fans and apologists might have a different opinion and this discussion takes place on their playground with most of them in attendance screaming from the stands: Clark is right, Clark is right, Clark is right followed by another round of DC3, DC3, DC3

But you seem to confuse one other highly important fact:

Dubai = EK

Qatar = Qatar Airways

Abu Dhabi = Etihad

France = minority owner of AF

UK = not an owner of BEA/BOAC/NA any longer

Germany = not an owner of LH any longer.

In a deregulated market that is interesting financially, it is Eco 101 (& common sense) that airlines will offer enough service...

Dubai, as pointed out by the US3 more than once, is different, it is such a small market that the natural demand does not exceed much more than a few flights to Europe and India and maybe another few flights to Asia and New York aside from regional connections.

Dubai decided that Aviation&Tourism will get them out of oil dependancy and on the map somehow, they probably underestimated the cost and are deeply burried in debt now, same with EK.

Again, just take a look at the development of debt at EK starting 15 years ago... ;)

In other words, in order to make Aviation account of 30 or so % of GDP (there are numerous studies out there in case you want to know the exact number) they had to lend Money from all over the world and were not able to pay it back property a few years ago...

In case you invest, in case you pay subsidies for the greater good, examples were pointed out by myself multiple times throughout the thread, you certainly do not care whether or not your vehicle loses a few hundred million from ops every year as long as you gain much more in tax income.

But Dubai is not Dortmund, Dortmund could survive without an airport, Dubai would not survive without Aviation and Emirates, hence we see the drastic reactions by Clark and his followers.

They simply fear that it will be all over sooner than later and that the growth targets are just a Mirage after all... @:-)

Hence, your conclusion what Germany should have done are wrong deductions from the situation you see in Dubai. All airlines and airports in Germany constantly complain that they are not taken seriously in Berlin, so once again, the situation is exactly the opposite in comparison to the ME3... ;)

We have to give Clark the same credit we give contributors like Irish or eternal here on FT.

They continue to fight the obvious truth and invest a lot of time and effort, which is always adorable, at least in my book. ^

Maybe, we should ask Clark to define the idea behind granting airlines 5th and 6th freedom rights...this could explain why the biggest airlines on the planet do not serve Dubai from a giant market like Chicago, which is also a giant hub for both of them.

I do not know, you just described a highly consolidated market and a marketing tool at a certain point in its life cycle...

The last time I checked, the US is a Democracy and the majority of the US residents voted for the politicians who approved the Mergers and as far as I know companies in the US are free to decide how to invest their budget when it comes to Marketing..., in other words we read the typical complaint of a guy stuck in history who has issues getting along with a market that evolved over time.

EK continues to show its inability to deal with key foreign political leaders. Chastising Rahm Emanuel is not going to any good, it will definitely do more harm.

Politicians don't side without their own analysis, and it has nothing to do facts.

Anyway, still contemplating between bad lobby firm and EK's ignorance.