Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > TravelBuzz
Reload this Page >

"Invasion" by Arab Gulf Airlines.

"Invasion" by Arab Gulf Airlines.

Old Mar 19, 2015, 10:03 am
  #286  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
Originally Posted by wco81
So the US carriers complained because of the JFK-MXP route or is it more of a pre-emptive strike, as they anticipate more TATL routes between the US and Europe?

Or do they not like the US to Dubai routes either?
To me it seems like more of a pre-emptive strike. They know that if EK started 4 daily A380s flying DXB-LHR-JFK people would flee AA/DL/BA etc. in droves.
cmd320 is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 11:21 am
  #287  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountain Time Zone
Programs: AS Million Miler/Marriott Lifetime Titanium/ IGH Ambassador
Posts: 5,980
Originally Posted by cmd320
To me it seems like more of a pre-emptive strike. They know that if EK started 4 daily A380s flying DXB-LHR-JFK people would flee AA/DL/BA etc. in droves.
On the west coast many of EK's routes make sense !
edgewood49 is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 11:35 am
  #288  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Programs: A3, AA. Plasticy things! That give me, y'know, Stuff!
Posts: 6,293
Originally Posted by Tchiowa
And the US laws are designed to protect tax and payroll first. That's what it means to protect against creditors. You owe my company money and you go into Chapter 11, employee and the government get protected before I do. I'm a creditor. I'm last. That's why I'm willing to negotiate a restructuring of debt and keep the company alive. Otherwise I get nothing.
You fundamentally misunderstand IMO. In "most western countries" bankruptcy laws are generally designed to wind up the company, protecting tax and payroll first. That's explicitly not the case in US Chapter 11 which is specifically designed to allow the company to continue by shedding debt through a court/government approved method.

In most other countries the receivers (the court appointed managers who take over the company to wind it up) may see a way to save the company and that may include trying to renegotiate debts, but that's seldom the way it happens. The US is (almost (I know of one other country that has broadly similar laws)) unique in allowing companies to reorganize and simply shed/renegotiate debt, in allowing the current managers to remain in place while they (having run the company to bankruptcy in the first place) apply very generous rules to get themselves out of the situation.

Just to drag this back towards topic, I'm of the opinion that the ME carriers are playing a very careful game within the rules. They don't get subsidies. They do, as they say, get capital investments, just as US carriers do - only it's government money going in, which is neither here nor there IMO. US carriers, however, do get similar (& IMO greater) benefits in that the tax laws are written in a way that they can avoid most, if not all, US tax. I don't see how the subsidy is dressed up really matters. US carriers wouldn't survive a genuinely free market and they know it. It's why no US carrier is genuinely competitive globally: they have the power/rights/potential to do exactly what the ME carriers are trying. They don't because they know they'd fail.
SeriouslyLost is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 11:41 am
  #289  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by edgewood49
On the west coast many of EK's routes make sense !
You mean flying all the way from SFO to Dubai and then flying back west to Europe?
wco81 is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 11:48 am
  #290  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by wco81
You mean flying all the way from SFO to Dubai and then flying back west to Europe?
SFO-DXB-Some parts of Asia.

SFO-Europe-DXB.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 1:50 pm
  #291  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountain Time Zone
Programs: AS Million Miler/Marriott Lifetime Titanium/ IGH Ambassador
Posts: 5,980
Originally Posted by wco81
You mean flying all the way from SFO to Dubai and then flying back west to Europe?
If you look at flying from west coast to JNB for example the time "in air" is close except flying on EK for example is a hell of a lot more pleasant than DL 767 or the "new" american in generic AB's where only UA has a worse ghetto bird in the air. Plus laying over in Dubai for example is not bad whether you chose the airport hotel, their lounge or as we did last year stayed at the Hyatt and hired a driver to "show us the town" in 6 hours or less!

So yes for the most part. Now when we go to Paris this fall it's AF metal and from VCE back EK.
edgewood49 is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 2:41 pm
  #292  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by GUWonder
SFO-DXB-Some parts of Asia.

SFO-Europe-DXB.
Can you just go to Europe without going through DXB?

That would be how these carriers get more business from Americans.
wco81 is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 3:38 pm
  #293  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Scotland
Programs: Star Alliance
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by wco81
You mean flying all the way from SFO to Dubai and then flying back west to Europe?
Personally it is worth it just to avoid the useless US and EU carriers, yes it's longer but it is so much more pleasant.
chris19992 is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 3:54 pm
  #294  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountain Time Zone
Programs: AS Million Miler/Marriott Lifetime Titanium/ IGH Ambassador
Posts: 5,980
Originally Posted by chris19992
Personally it is worth it just to avoid the useless US and EU carriers, yes it's longer but it is so much more pleasant.
^^^^^^^^^^
edgewood49 is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 7:43 pm
  #295  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,790
Originally Posted by chris19992
Personally it is worth it just to avoid the useless US and EU carriers, yes it's longer but it is so much more pleasant.
^^^^^^^^^^
airplanegod is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 7:49 pm
  #296  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountain Time Zone
Programs: AS Million Miler/Marriott Lifetime Titanium/ IGH Ambassador
Posts: 5,980
Originally Posted by airplanegod
^^^^^^^^^^
Well we seem to have a growing consensus of opinion !!!!!
edgewood49 is offline  
Old Mar 19, 2015, 8:43 pm
  #297  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: IAD/DCA
Posts: 31,805
im not going to fly to EU via ME, but then im paying cash for nonstop Y

re non-EU carrier >
SQ JFK-FRA (A380 suites) and IAH-DME as well as GRU-BCN
9W EWR/YYZ-BRU
NZ LAX-LHR

back to EK >
JFK HAM oct 29 2006 - mar 30 2008 (announced stop in dec 2007)
JFK MXP oct 1 2013 -

i guess US carriers are feeling comfortable/profitable enough now so they are willing to spend money and energy on this "issue" and perhaps they feel now is a good time politically as well, perhaps including 2016 US elections

ah, italian court had ruled that EK had to stop after march 2015, but appeal just overturned that in mid december

thread in EK forum (started same time as this thread - nov 2014) still going strong >

Originally Posted by NOIR
The Obama administration, marking its first written response to US airlines’ lobbying effort, has asked for more information on their claims that Gulf carriers have received market-distorting subsidies.

The administration asked US airline representatives about 20 questions in writing last week about their method in determining the subsidy allegations and about the market harm they say Gulf carriers have caused them, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The request for more proof reflects the growing focus on the debate in Washington. The questions are factual and did not suggest that the US administration was either swayed or skeptical.

Leaders in the US House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure recently called on the administration to look into the allegations, while US airlines repeated their request on Tuesday for the United States to open talks with Qatar and the UAE on the “Open Skies” agreements that authorise flying between the nations.

http://khaleejtimes.ae/biz/inside.as...on_March29.xml
jul 2014 - US airlines and airbus release Q2 financials
aug 2014 - A380 thread started
oct 2014 - US airlines release Q3 financials
nov 2014 - 2 threads started after US mid term elections (was lobbying happening prior?)

re dropping JFK HAM in dec 2007, EK #s >

Originally Posted by Kagehitokiri
load factor minus break even load factor =
2.7 - 2007-2008
5.2 - 2006-2007
(their fiscal year runs april to march)

Last edited by Kagehitokiri; Mar 20, 2015 at 1:56 am
Kagehitokiri is offline  
Old Mar 20, 2015, 8:44 am
  #298  
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: UA Plat/2MM [23-yr. 1K, now emeritus] clawing way back to WN-A List; MR LT Titanium; HY Whateverist.
Posts: 12,390
Moderator reminder.

A final reminder of post 268 above, in case some members are looking for the whereabouts of their very recent posts.... Thanks to those who have avoided digressions into politics. Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator.


Originally Posted by Ocn Vw 1K
As some members have noted, and it's appreciated, this TravelBuzz thread needs to avoid open political discussion that would be fine in FT's OMNI/PR forum, but not here.

At the same time, general economic considerations could be germane to the thread's topic. Going forward, could we focus away from overt political discussion? Recent posts stepping over the line have been edited/deleted. Thanks, Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator.
Ocn Vw 1K is offline  
Old Mar 20, 2015, 9:40 am
  #299  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountain Time Zone
Programs: AS Million Miler/Marriott Lifetime Titanium/ IGH Ambassador
Posts: 5,980
Originally Posted by Ocn Vw 1K
A final reminder of post 268 above, in case some members are looking for the whereabouts of their very recent posts.... Thanks to those who have avoided digressions into politics. Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator.
I agree if your referring to my last post. I wrote the moderator about other post.

So let's try it this way does anyone really think that there will be sanctions on Mid Eastern Countries that provide oil as well as as "friendly" face in a very troubled region?

AND do we simply because their US based carriers simply roll over and block free market expansion? And don't forget the EU is not overly friendly in their interpretation of "open skies" Having spent several years serving in the AF I can say Hmm

my thoughts with a lot of lipstick on it ! Go for it guys
edgewood49 is offline  
Old Mar 20, 2015, 9:47 am
  #300  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
Originally Posted by edgewood49
I agree if your referring to my last post. I wrote the moderator about other post.

So let's try it this way does anyone really think that there will be sanctions on Mid Eastern Countries that provide oil as well as as "friendly" face in a very troubled region?

AND do we simply because their US based carriers simply roll over and block free market expansion? And don't forget the EU is not overly friendly in their interpretation of "open skies" Having spent several years serving in the AF I can say Hmm

my thoughts with a lot of lipstick on it ! Go for it guys
I don't really believe anything is going to happen. This is all just an excuse for the US airlines to throw a pity-party in an attempt to make their already Utopian business environment just a little more cozy. They've generated so much bad will with the general public at this point though, I don't really see anyone giving them the time of day.
cmd320 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.