Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Emirates -Goodbye 777/787, Hello A350?  
User currently offlineBkkair From Thailand, joined Aug 2001, 409 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 25935 times:

Will the UAE retaliate because of Dubai Ports World? Will Bush's veto save US jobs?

From MSNBC...

WASHINGTON - Next week's expected vote by the House of Representatives to kill the deal in which a state-owned Dubai firm was to run several U.S. container facilities may be a good thing for Republicans...

But is it a bad omen for the employees of Boeing that sell billions of dollars worth of goods to the United Arab Emirates?

Last November Boeing clinched a mammoth deal: the sale of nearly $10 billion worth of commercial aircraft to Emirates, the U.A.E. airline. Once the 42 planes in the transaction are delivered, Emirates airline will be the world’s largest Boeing 777 operator.

Middle Eastern demand for jets is huge. According to the International Civil Aviation Organization, air traffic will grow in the Middle East by 12 percent this year compared to growth of 4 percent in North America.


Retaliation likely?
Cai von Rumohr, an aerospace industry analyst with the investment firm Cowen & Co., said the Emirates is considering the Boeing 787 instead of the Airbus 350 and has already committed to the Boeing 777 due to its superior fuel economy versus the Airbus 340.

An eye on Airbus
But given the Dubai ports furor, von Rumohr said, “I assume it’s something Airbus would try to use in their favor.”

As for the executives running Emirates, von Rumohr said, “I don’t know how they view it — whether they’ll say, ‘It’s just the crazies in Congress.’”

Boeing employs more than 63,000 people in the state of Washington.

For Congress to kill the Dubai Ports deal would “send the exact opposite signal to the rest of the world and to the Middle East from the one the United States should be sending,” said Bruce Josten, executive vice president for government affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

“If there’s going to be retaliation, which frequently takes place in the trade world — the kind of retaliation would be either tariff barriers, non-tariff barriers, or prohibitions similar to any that the Congress of the United States may choose to impose on the ports deal,” Josten said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11724975/

159 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4504 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 25878 times:

The execs at Emirates are businessmen, not politicians, and will choose the aircraft that benefits the company, its shareholders, and customers, the most.

User currently offlineSeanp11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 25815 times:

well, then I guess United, NWA, and US Airways shouldn't be flying Airbusses after that spat our government had with the French over the Iraqui war.

User currently offlineAfterburner From Indonesia, joined Jun 2005, 1211 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 25721 times:

Quoting Seanp11 (Reply 2):
Iraqui war

Is Iraqui is one of the native American tribes?  Confused Big grin


User currently offlineHawk44 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 759 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 25682 times:

Quoting Aloha717200 (Reply 1):
The execs at Emirates are businessmen, not politicians, and will choose the aircraft that benefits the company, its shareholders, and customers, the most.

Well said, I doubt the port situation would have any impact on them purchasing an aircraft. Remember airplanes last 20 plus years this port topic will be dead by the end of next year.

Hawk44



Never under estimate the power of US
User currently offlineBN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5613 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 25656 times:

Quoting Hawk44 (Reply 4):
Well said, I doubt the port situation would have any impact on them purchasing an aircraft. Remember airplanes last 20 plus years this port topic will be dead by the end of next year.

I hate to disagree, but I can't help but believe that some of the Emirates holdings may also be parties of interest on the Ports deal. And given what's at stake here, if that deal goes down the drain--expect retaliation. It might not come immediately, but it will come.

BN747



"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1710 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 25589 times:

Considering they have signed contracts for the 777s and paid deposits, it may not be the best decision to simply walk away. 787/350 is another subject, but I think this is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall relationship.

Cheers


User currently offlineMurchmo From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 166 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 25405 times:

Quoting Bkkair (Thread starter):
For Congress to kill the Dubai Ports deal would “send the exact opposite signal to the rest of the world and to the Middle East from the one the United States should be sending,”

This is a good point in the article. Mainly because the reason the ports deal has come under fire is simply because the country is in the Middle East and specifically the UAE--i guess some alleged terrorist made their way through there...I dont have the exact info. I can see the UAE taking it personally and i think it is justified, that will be Bush's fault for not bringing the deal to light earlier...kinda fishy...However if the 787 is just plain more efficient and profitable then they'll go with that.  twocents 



to strive to seek to find and not to yield
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21532 posts, RR: 60
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 25373 times:

Quoting Murchmo (Reply 7):
i guess some alleged terrorist made their way through there...

some of the 9/11 19 were from there.

but the whole issue is dumb. and notice how the article has NO SOURCE for this claim. It's all conjecture by a guy named "Rumohr", including a suggestion that Airbus try to use it to their advantage. Typical MSNBC anti-America reporting. Which might explain why nobody watches them.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2968 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 25242 times:

I don't get US politicians - globalisation suits them when they have to go somewhere - but not when someone buys into them. The bush presidency whatever its faults is far more progressive on trade than many US Senators and Congressmen, and in the interests of global trade he should veto silly protectionism measures taken by politicians.
Plus, for gods sake, why on earth does AF operate so many 777's and why are there almost 500 A320 family aircraft flying in the US?



A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 24749 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 13):
No, I have not.

Most of the 19 were from Saudi Arabia. A few (I believe it was 3) were from the UAE. This is one of the "points" that loudmouth radio show hosts have used to say the deal is dangerous for America.

Good point. If the saudis were doing this deal instead of the UAE the reaction would be quite different ....


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 24110 times:

Quoting BN747 (Reply 5):
I hate to disagree, but I can't help but believe that some of the Emirates holdings may also be parties of interest on the Ports deal. And given what's at stake here, if that deal goes down the drain--expect retaliation. It might not come immediately, but it will come.

 checkmark  Even if the parties aren't the same, this will impact negatively if some face saving compromise isn't worked out.

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 6):
787/350 is another subject, but I think this is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall relationship.

IMO,the A350/787 deal will likely go to Airbus if this port deal is quashed.

Quoting Cricket (Reply 10):
I don't get US politicians

They are just like yours--fully capable of demgoguing any issue that they will feel will accrue to their advantage. What makes this deal so incendiary is the security dimension.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineTifoso From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 23374 times:

Are you telling me that EK will dump 93 777s just because the Ports Deal did not go through? Not a chance.

They are a commercial entity. Boeing may now have to make a sweeter deal on the 787, but I doubt this is going to impact the order in any significant way.


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 23206 times:

Yes, getting back to Dubai. I dont think this will have any effect on the T7 order at all. As for the A350/787 order I cant see a significant impact there either.

User currently offlineKrisYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 21617 times:

EK is not a new to the airline industry. They will not cancel or sign a new order out of spite. EK is a growing airline that need new planes to keep up with its business plan.

EK will order the aircraft that will best meet its operational requirements, be it a Boeing or Airbus.

KrisYYZ


User currently offlineBkkair From Thailand, joined Aug 2001, 409 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 21506 times:

They won’t dump their current or ordered 777’s, but this could affect future orders. If the US doesn't need the UAE's investment, why would the UAE buy from the US?

Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum is also Prime Minister of the UAE, which includes:






Depending on how Dubai Ports and the hysterics go, the airlines and people of Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Sharjah can be expected to be biased towards Airbus in the future. In the end, whether they buy Boeing will probably be based on economics, not politics.


User currently offlineMptpa From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 546 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 20560 times:

This is totally out of proportion. As one A.netter said "Port seal is for a set finite year, and aircraft last a longer time". Besides, UAE rulers are very close to the US and they said themselves that they will not do a business deal that will sour their relationships. They are allies and therefore like the protection US provides. Besides, US warships are calling UAE ports home, and that is the most effective way for UAE to have security where they are smack in the middle of the hot zone (hello, how far is Iran???)


Emirates will do a business deal, and will not get politics play a role here. France and Europe can use this to their favor.. What about the court case re DWP and UK ports then? Airbus is owned by BAE as well. Albeit, that case got turned to the DWP favor.

This will turn out to be a business deal, and nothing more.


User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 20463 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 29):
No. The 777 deal is probably safe. Its the A350/787 selection that will most likely be lost for Boeing due to quid pro quo retaliation.

Does that mean the end of the 787-10?


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 19828 times:

Quoting Mptpa (Reply 44):
This is totally out of proportion. As one A.netter said "Port seal is for a set finite year, and aircraft last a longer time". Besides, UAE rulers are very close to the US and they said themselves that they will not do a business deal that will sour their relationships. They are allies and therefore like the protection US provides. Besides, US warships are calling UAE ports home, and that is the most effective way for UAE to have security where they are smack in the middle of the hot zone (hello, how far is Iran???)
Emirates will do a business deal, and will not get politics play a role here. France and Europe can use this to their favor.. What about the court case re DWP and UK ports then? Airbus is owned by BAE as well. Albeit, that case got turned to the DWP favor.
This will turn out to be a business deal, and nothing more.

As you correctly note there is a lot more at stake here than just the ports deal. But...if this deal gets shot down over security concerns (legitimate or otherwise) then there will be enormous pressure on the UAE government to save face. Quid pro quo's will be forthcoming--not the least will be that Boeing will lose out on the next aircraft deal. Post 9/11, the UAE has been a big supporter of the U.S. in the region--a fact lost on those morons in the press and Congress. Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail in the Senate. I already see a counter-offensive taking shape in the media regarding the possible impact of Congress disapproving the ports deal (and over-riding Bush's certain veto). When the Patti Murray's of the Senate start assessing the potential impact, I strongly suspect there will be a negotiated settlement that is acceptable to all parties. In other words, cosmetic changes will be made which will allow those horses a$$es in the House of Representative to trumphet their "success" and reconsider their actions. Maybe that's too much wishful thinking on my part, but legislators over here need to remember two arabic words: "Al Yamamah".



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlinePosti From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 19722 times:

As an American who has some sense of what the world is like, this ports fiasco is embarrassing. These politicians are making us look like foolish, racist, xenophobic, two faced hypocrites. Anyone who knows anything about UAE knows it is a progressive, modern ally in a hostile region. The US is acting like that childhood friend who, when they want something from you are best friends but turns his back on you the instant you ask for something in return. I haven’t agreed much with the prez in the last few years, and he may not know what xenophobic means, but I admire his firm stance on this issue.

Somebody has got to tell these politicians to get their heads out of the sand. It would be very disconcerting if their misguided actions cost us a large 787 order and soured relations with an Arab ally.


User currently offlineB777A340Fan From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 774 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 19258 times:

Quoting Aloha717200 (Reply 1):
The execs at Emirates are businessmen, not politicians, and will choose the aircraft that benefits the company, its shareholders, and customers, the most.

I would disagree on this point. The chairman of Emirates is a member of the ruling royal family of UAE. Politics, not necessarily referring to this case particularly, can always have a positive and/or negative effect on business. Business is about profits and you do whatever you have to do to increase your profits, even if it means calling your friend or your family.

Quoting BN747 (Reply 5):
I hate to disagree, but I can't help but believe that some of the Emirates holdings may also be parties of interest on the Ports deal. And given what's at stake here, if that deal goes down the drain--expect retaliation. It might not come immediately, but it will come.

I agree. I don't think retaliation will be explicit, but there may be some undue international hardship to endure. But it would be in UAE's best interest to be on America's good side. It goes both ways too.

Quoting Cricket (Reply 10):
I don't get US politicians - globalisation suits them when they have to go somewhere - but not when someone buys into them. The bush presidency whatever its faults is far more progressive on trade than many US Senators and Congressmen, and in the interests of global trade he should veto silly protectionism measures taken by politicians.
Plus, for gods sake, why on earth does AF operate so many 777's and why are there almost 500 A320 family aircraft flying in the US?

I think the last point was very good. Globalization does prosper anywhere during times of peace. However, you must realize that there hasn't been much "peace" since before 9/11. Every government is on the watch for possible terrorist attacks. Governments other than the US wonder if such terrorism can exist on their soil, while the US constantly wonders when the next terrorist attack is going to hit. I don't think it's being hypocritical in the sense that your own nation's national security should be your utmost priority. Blocking the port deal doesn't mean that the US dislikes the UAE, it's just following the "it's better to prevent than to heal" theory. Americans are understandbly concerned about letting a middle-eastern nation control its ports, it would somewhat be equivalent to the Trojan horse.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 25):
The real retaliation, if Dubai is estopped from investing in the USA, is likely to be that they will start pricing an increasing proportion of their oil in Euros or pounds, and depositing/investing more of the proceeds in Europe instead of in the USA.

I think oil reserves are what gives the UAE a say in today's world, just like Iran.

Quoting Joni (Reply 33):
So what? Timothy McVeigh was American, not to mention Henry Kissinger. Should other countries then ban sales of ports to US companies?

Hmm, you seem to forget that McVeigh was an american terrorist committing a crime in america. How can America discriminate itself?


One of the best topics I've read on A.net! Kudos to Bkkair  Big grin  bigthumbsup 


User currently offlineRobTrent From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 260 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 19208 times:

Newbie here so please bear that in mind.

I have read the posts above with interest. I was suprised at some of the reaction to the potential purchase of the port areas by a UAE company.
I am from the UK where port/airport security is managed overall by the government and I assumed that this was the same in the US, (my apologies for any ignorance on my part if I have been under a false impression in this respect) if this is the case then the worries arppear to be unfounded.

As for the issue of B777 V/S 350 I think that the UAE businessmen faced with the realities of airline costs will make the most cost effective decision.

Just my 2 Cents
Rob

 Smile



T7 - You know it makes sense !
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 19155 times:

Quoting Posti (Reply 48):
As an American who has some sense of what the world is like, this ports fiasco is embarrassing. These politicians are making us look like foolish, racist, xenophobic, two faced hypocrites. Anyone who knows anything about UAE knows it is a progressive, modern ally in a hostile region. The US is acting like that childhood friend who, when they want something from you are best friends but turns his back on you the instant you ask for something in return. I haven’t agreed much with the prez in the last few years, and he may not know what xenophobic means, but I admire his firm stance on this issue.

Considering that 80% of US Ports are already controlled by foriegn owned companies, it's readily obvious to me at least that this was just fear-mongering by the JackAssed Political Party otherwise known as the Democrats. The only reason this became an issue is because of all the utter ignorant lack of knowledge of the UAE and their government.

I'd sure hate to see Boeing suffer for the political fallout of some highly inept politicians.


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8018 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 19101 times:

I think EK will continue to buy the 777-200LR and 777-300ER for one good reason: low fuel burn and the fact the 777-200LR has the range to fly from DXB to anywhere on the US West Coast on more or less a full load.

I do think EK may buy the A350-900 to replace the older 777-200ER's down the road, though. (By the way, an Airbus plane isn't all-European--something like 1/3 of the parts of the A350 will come from US companies.)


User currently offlineChristiaan From United States of America, joined May 2004, 76 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 19050 times:

The difference with the Port sale is that other ports in the US are owned and operated by foreign companies, whereas the UAE Port deal would be owned and operated by the Govt of the UAE....


"Give me the luxuries of life and I will willingly do without the necessities" Frank Lloyd Wright 1932
25 Flying-Tiger : This deal already went through the mandatory 45-day period, what is "minimum demand" right now is that another 45-day scrunity period comes into play.
26 BoomBoom : You conveniently ignore the fact that much of the opposition is coming from the Republicans. No one does fear-mongering like the GOP. That's how we w
27 Trex8 : when the GOP does it its patriotic, when anyone else does it its anything but good. where was Cheney, Gingrich, Buchanan and others in 68??? Hiding a
28 Jacobin777 : wrong..there are ports controlled by the Chinese and possibly Singapore Govt. also...
29 Posti : Agreed. If we really want to win the war on terror we must think long term. Out aim should not only be to prevent imminent attacks but to put an end
30 BEYauty : So what? The hijackers also lived and trained in Europe and the US, so should Germany and the US governments and US companies be held responsible for
31 Post contains links Jaysit : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2006/03/09/AR2006030901124.html End of story. This way everyone can come out smelling like roses. The Presid
32 We're Nuts : I believe US intelligence only after protracted congressional investigations, thank you.
33 Post contains images USAF336TFS : Technically no, this is not so. The ports themselves, Baltimore, New York, etc. are owned by their respective quasi-Goverment enities (Port of Baltim
34 Post contains images Jacobin777 : so do I ......... ......
35 JakeOrion : Off-topic: The simple fact that the deal was done behind the scenes and "nobody" knew anything about it until it was "finalized" is what caught everyo
36 Swissy : [quote=JakeOrion,reply=67]Off-topic: The simple fact that the deal was done behind the scenes and "nobody" knew anything about it until it was "finali
37 Ikramerica : So whenever anyone questions the financials of EK, they are a completely autonomous company, but now they are just an arm of the Dubai government? Ki
38 Post contains links MalpensaSFO : http://www.thehill.com/thehill/expor...l/News/Frontpage/030906/news1.html Another Link....
39 Post contains images Astuteman : The bulk of the UK merchant fleet, and the intense (historical) patriotic pride that accompanied it disappeared about 20 - 30 years ago. P+O (and its
40 Halibut : Wooh ! Hold on here , I'm a big Bush supporter who feels Mr W should have handled this whole Port deal much differently , a little less heavy handed I
41 Airbazar : This has nothing to do with security and the War in Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. It's all about perception however. Joe Shmoe who's going to go t
42 AirFrnt : Democrats are out for blood, and the blood in the water has sparked a feeding frenzy that they are keep to captitalize on at any cost, even at the cos
43 Dougloid : Concur. I'm a democrat but this ports deal has offered the chance for some republicans to jump ship and piss all over Bush because he's a lame duck a
44 Post contains images ImperialEagle : Yeah, and if something like the ports "debacle" is what it takes to get the average American focused on what is going on within our government, and n
45 Posti : We're getting off topic here but I think this is the opinion of the majority of Americans, problem is we're either too indifferent, lazy, or clueless
46 Atmx2000 : The acquisition of P+O was a public affair that started last year. Buying P+O meant DPW bought whatever operations it had, including its US operation
47 Gr8Circle : Well, it seems that the new owners of P&O in UAE have decided to come to a compromise solution....they have announced that they will transfer all the
48 AviationAddict : The folks at Emirates are a heck of a lot smarter than the folks at all those U.S. based airlines, no offense to anyone who may work for any of those
49 Lumberton : You mean it had nothing to do with the fact that they got a better business deal from Airbus? Or theat they thought the Airbus product served their b
50 AviationAddict : I said a huge reason why, not he ONLY reason. Airbus has a long reputation of offering airlines deals they can't refuse, I don't blame the airlines f
51 LH477 : Will this effect current order with Boeing? No Will this effect future orders to Emirates and Ethihad? Quiet Possible. Emirates is owned by the Dubai
52 AviationAddict : Without a doubt this situation was made more complicated than it should have been because it was a Middle Eastern company in question, but not everyo
53 Trex8 : well they weren't that upset the last few years while it was run by a British company (who just happen to want to be bought out by a Dubai company)!
54 Post contains images LH477 : It wasn't an issue when the Brit's were running the ports. It's not issue that the Chinese and Singaporean gov'ts run other US ports. This is only an
55 Atmx2000 : But it was already controlled by a foreign company. IMHO, this got started because Democratic politicians wanted to use this as a wedge issue to boos
56 AviationAddict : Well, like I said, Congress is mostly to blame for the situation. Living in D.C. I tend to get bombarded with all their BS a lot. They couldn't bring
57 ER757 : To those of you in other countries, please don't judge all Americans based on the rantings of Imperial Eagle. We are not all jingoistic xenophobes. S
58 Jacobin777 : actually, in an unusual sort of way, EK might still go with the 787.......they will base their decisions on......... 1) if its a better business case
59 Atmx2000 : A Saudi company is already involved with port operations.
60 Bennett123 : Joni So what? Timothy McVeigh was American, not to mention Henry Kissinger. Should other countries then ban sales of ports to US companies? What is th
61 Atmx2000 : Administration != Congress. Administration = executive branch. As Jacobin777 indicated, the US administration "hasn't played to the gallery."
62 Dougloid : This whole issue may become moot. Looks like Dubai Ports World is going to slough off the US ops from the P&O package.
63 Longhaulheavy : Bush was the only rational actor in this whole charade. He stood up for the deal. Way to intentionally misrepresent the situation. Had it not been fo
64 Post contains links Jacobin777 : maybe I'm right......... " Emirates' Clark Says DP World Debate Benefits U.S. Expansion March 9, 2006 14:24 EST -- DP World's controversial position
65 Aileron11 : This link might clear the air that Emirates will go with A350 rather then 787 because of the strong oppesiation we gave them so click the link and rea
66 Post contains images ImperialEagle : Not "rantings" just an opinion. I never said that---you just did. Am referring to terrorists. I expressed my opinion you expressed yours. They are JU
67 Tockeyhockey : i've got an idea, why don't you let pakistan take over control of all of india's ports? does that sit well with you? i didn't think so.
68 Tockeyhockey : al qaeda has admitted to infiltrating government agencies in the UAE. while security at the ports will continue to be controlled by the states, don't
69 Post contains images FLY2LIM : Let me see here (head spinning from all the turns this thread has taken), if I am not mistaken, Emirates will soon become the largest operator of the
70 Chgoflyer : Not quite right.... current deficts are widely talked about in the press and in other anti Bush platforms. The fact is that we can accue debt because
71 EKGOLD : In the end, P&O was a bidding war between between two Government controlled companies located in Dubai and Singapore... One has to play devils advocat
72 Post contains links Aileron11 : Sorry for the link missing dont mean to repeat myself but here is the link http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/09/port.security/index.html this link m
73 ZKNEA : Says who? I was actually going to argue the other way. Suddenly, when calls of zenophobia are cried, EK is seperate to the UAE government.
74 Post contains images RayChuang : However, I thought about it and I wonder will EK will just buy the A350-900, though. EK isn't exactly happy with the overweight status of the A380-800
75 Trex8 : the EIS of a 787-10 isn't likely to be any sooner than a A359.
76 Atmx2000 : I guess the UAE must be insane allow the US Navy to operate out of their ports.
77 BoeingFever777 : Many have stated it and I will back it... the guys running EK are business men and do not care about dumbshit politicians. They choose the best a/c f
78 EnviroTO : The reaction to the port situation would depend on the public opinion in the UAE. Even though the UAE government isn't elected they need to portray th
79 Ikramerica : Last time I checked, P&O also has arms that build ships and run construction companies that build skyscrapers in New York. So, why aren't we all upse
80 Post contains images Ikramerica : BTW - after checking, it seems that P&O completed divestment of it's USA construction and property development arm, so they no longer would be able to
81 Post contains links Antskip : no way is this over. it has just begun. I have just been watching an analysis on the Jim Lehrer Newshour, transcribed at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/
82 Atmx2000 : Just to note, Islamist Iran's biggest ally in the region is a European-styled fascist state: Baathist Syria.
83 Post contains links and images Keesje : since when is that Last time I checked Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum (the multibillionaire crown prince of Dubai, which owns the airline) app
84 Glareskin : What is this? Some kind of game?
85 Antskip : The Shiite nationalist Iranian regime has very little in common with fascist Syria, other than a shared antipathy to foreign policies of the US in th
86 Atmx2000 : Syria is not Sunni regime. No, they also shared an antipathy to Sunni dominated Baathist Iraq as well as the other Sunni governments of the region. W
87 Post contains links Halibut : As I stated before : I can't blame folks for being very concerned about having Arabs owning our ports . However , regarding your money laundering com
88 Joni : This is obviously not true - the US is -not- technically at war with the UAE. There are lots of countries that launder money and harbour terrorists (
89 Bennett123 : technically speaking, the US is at war with the UAE. Since when?. OK, it is congress that is doing this not the administration.
90 Halibut : Very well said Antskip, I wish more could see through the spin & the political partisan BS as you . But , some just can't or are just unwilling to se
91 Tsnamm : 3 of the loudest voices condemning this deal have been Sen Hillary Clinton,Chuck Schumer, and Diane Finestein. And yet all you hear is how "the Republ
92 BEYauty : Does it bother you that a Chinese company COSCO virtually runs one of the largest ports in the US (Long Beach)? I don't hear you complaining about th
93 Post contains links Desh : yeah like the businessmen who decided the ports deal right ..... ? Foreign Owners Overboard? In Blocking Dubai Ports World, America Ignores Its Debto
94 Post contains images BEYauty : This has got to be the dumbest thing I've read on A.net. The fact is that al-qaeda has operatives and does operate in the US, the fact is that alot o
95 Post contains links Keesje : Few observers believe it will torpedo recent orders by two UAE airlines of Boeing passenger jets. But Chicago-based Boeing Co. may have to look outsid
96 Post contains images Jacobin777 : it will be nice to see Lou Dobbs on the tube when Boeing has to lay off a few thousand employees........ that being said, I think EK isn't so stupid,
97 Ikramerica : Those numbers would not be the end of the world. Mortgages are getting there anyway, $4 gas is lower than much of the world that doesn't grow it's ow
98 USAF336TFS : Keesje, my friend, nope... Fox morning crew has been echoing just how idioic this whole thing has been. Nice thing about Democracy is that all points
99 BoomBoom : If it were only a few Republican congressman then Bush could have vetoed and the Dems would lack the votes to overide. It wasn't just Democrats. The
100 Jacobin777 : who's going to run the ports now? a bunch of union controlled mob-enforced entitiy?
101 Post contains images ER757 : Sorry, but I'd call expressing your opinions with such inflammatory statements as the one above as rants. I calls 'em as I sees 'em. And that MY opin
102 Post contains links BA : Arab Firms May Reconsider U.S. Investments U.S. and UAE postpone free trade talks amid ports row
103 Post contains images NAV20 : Good article, BA, thanks. Perfectly clear that the Gulf States are in a position to retaliate big-time over the next few years, if they care to. "Last
104 Post contains links and images Jacobin777 : again, I think EK will do what makes best business cases for them..if the 787-10 is better, they will order it.......if the A350 is better suited for
105 MarshalN : The part about "why cooperate with the US if they're going to treat you as a terrorist anyway" is so true. UAE must feel snubbed because they're being
106 Dougloid : You're overreacting and haven't been listening to the news. Nobody treated anyone like a terrorist. It was a security concern that was jumped on by a
107 RayChuang : Like I said earlier, EK will unlikely cancel the 777-200LR/777-300ER order out of spite over the Dubai Ports World fiasco. Mostly because EK will have
108 Post contains images Jacobin777 : thats a bunch of rubbish.....it was thinly-veiled racism...... Peter the Idiot...all he talks about is that "some of the 9/11 hijackers came from the
109 474218 : The difference between the UAE running the ports in the UA and the Chinese and Singapore Govt. running ports in the US is: The Singapore and Chinese
110 Jacobin777 : true, but that doesn't change the situation.......these bozo politicians said they don't want any ports controlled by govt. owned entities.......so e
111 MarshalN : Considering that the people who matter in the USA can't seem to act intelligently, I don't see why people in UAE will be particularly different. For
112 Subkk : You may also want to read other reports of how CIA intervened to the save the brain behind this network from Dutch/ belgian authorities.
113 Post contains images Halibut : Jacobin777, I find myself agreeing with you on this one . I am very disappointed with many of our polititians , both Dem & Rep.. Some spun it & many h
114 Post contains links and images Keesje : Analysts said Friday, however, that with Gulf nations awash in cash from oil profits, the United States remains a tempting market to invest. So inste
115 Sabenapilot : I think there answer to the question raised by the tread starter must have a much wider scope than EY to be any good. Personally, I can't see Emirates
116 Patrickj : I thought this was a thread about whether or not the DPW fiasco would result in order cancellations for Boeing aircraft. Yes the UAE and Emrates are b
117 Post contains links Halibut : I find your comment to be completely bogus since FOX was simply reporting on the possible aftermath of the Port deal . " target=_blank>http://www.fox
118 Post contains images Jacobin777 : got ya. I agree....EK isn't going to retaliate.......they have 2x/daily flights to the JFK which is very profitable (not to mention, its been mention
119 Keesje : You can choose who to quote and who to ignore. E.g. if you interview Richard Aboulafia, you´ll know what you get. Many media are customer driven the
120 Halibut : With that comment you were insinuating that FOX was making an outragiously false comment . Which is in it of its self , False ! Bill O'Reilly was for
121 Post contains links BoomBoom : Speaking of Richard A, here's his take on the DPW fiasco. http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Stor...=newsfinder&siteid=google&keyword= That says more ab
122 Post contains images Jacobin777 : just to make it clear, I wasn't accusing you of Anti-Arab racism...my context was within your qoute where I assumed you meant that none of the politi
123 Post contains links MarshalN : How about an American general, commander of the American forces in the Middle East? "Nonetheless, opposition to the DP takeover comes across as racis
124 Aileron11 : How did we go from discussing U.A.E. switching from Boeing to Airbus because of what is going on with this port deal to talking about U.A.E. having te
125 Post contains images Jacobin777 : I agree exactly.......thank you very much.
126 LAXDESI : I find myself in agreement with you on your political views except that I am registered as a Democrat and consider myself a centrist and dislike many
127 GeorgiaAME : That little dictatorial fiefdom in the middle of the Persian gulf wants to dump Boeing for Airbus as "retaliation"? Hey, I'm pro business. Go for it b
128 Post contains images Keesje : No, this is exactly what to expect from Richard & why he is not in the Figaro (and seldom any outside of US media for that matter). Airbus has a far
129 Dougloid : Concur. Never thought for a minute you'd accuse me of racism, anti Arab or otherwise. It's simply not in me, and if I seemed a bit out of line, I am
130 Swissy : Like I said before it will effect the future between the US and the middle east for sure, some Americans reacted like the government is selling out th
131 AerospaceFan : In a sense, yes, because of our dependence on oil. But the economies of the Middle East are comparatively brittle, in that they are narrowly based on
132 LAXDESI : It does happen more in Russia and China and that is precisely the reason their currencies are not reserve currencies internationally. US enjoys a hig
133 Antskip : The US public's reaction against conservative Arab investment in their country is unfortunately a reflection of the success of Bush's misleading prop
134 Post contains images Jacobin777 : laxdesi, I couldn't agree with you more... good, I'm glad to know we got that cleared and their wasn't any ill-will towards each other ...miscommunic
135 Art : I confess that I find the attitudes of the US President (if you're not our friend, I consider you to be our enemy) and executive and people (even if y
136 Dougloid : And give up three years of revenue before the A350 gets off the stocks? They just aren't as stupid as everyone thinks. Y'see, the A350 is three years
137 Post contains images Boeing767-300 : I have to say the title of this thread is ridiculous. There is absolutely no way in hell Emirates will return their 777's They have just ordered 42 G
138 AA777223 : I am forced to disagree with you, yet again. While the US economy is very dependent on Middle Eastern oil, we do have many other areas of economic st
139 Post contains links Antskip : An article published today as the "top story" in the UAE newspaper the Khaleej Times covers many of the questions brought up by the initial query: Go
140 NAV20 : The more I think about it, the more it occurs to me that this is a godsend to the Dubai rulers. Whatever else they are, they are not unintelligent, an
141 Trex8 : except GWB is a lame duck president who is unlikely to get anything major done the rest of his term and can't even keep his party with him so what cou
142 Kaitak : Excellent points, NAV20; I agree totally. I think that the UAE is very well run and ultimately, these people have cool heads. They will see that the U
143 Post contains links Halibut : I have to disagree with you . Many of the middle eastern countries that have hepled the US on the war on Terror are also catoring to the terrorist .
144 Halibut : Something I forgot to mention . I feel the burden is not on the US to have the UAE own US ports . The burden should be on them . They should take step
145 Jacobin777 : Halibut, what countries would you be referring to? Many of those countries are themselves afraid of the terrorists....not to mentin, the Bin Laden an
146 Art : If we want people to like us (I'm from "the West"), it is helpful if we are friendly towards others elsewhere in the world. I don't view the people o
147 Halibut : The Saudi's for starters . It does seem however , that they are more on our side now . And you are correct that the Saudi's are afraid of the Terrori
148 Post contains images Jacobin777 : I know your weren't critising me.... many are from south asia, of which man are from India and Pakistan....these are older labour workers (many in th
149 Post contains links Keesje : Dubai Royals Said 'Furious' at U.S. Members of Dubai’s royal family were said to be furious on Thursday over U.S. plans to reject their bid to opera
150 Art : Agreed, this might usually be the case. However the situation is not normal: the US passed a law to specifically exclude Dubai from commercial activi
151 Antskip : The Iran-Iraq war? An example of Iranian terrorism? A war in which Iraq, supplied (including weapons of mass destruction) and encouraged by the US an
152 Swissy : Agree with you [quote=Jacobin777,reply=180]simple, take a flight to the UAE.......you can get an instant visa and it will be an eye-opening experience
153 Post contains images Halibut : I have known about the UAE wealth for quite some time . Ironicly, I was turned on to the UAE from A-net . All the talk & photos of the Dubai airport
154 Post contains images Jacobin777 : more now than ever before.. in fact, there was a short Bloomberg report stating that EK's Clark mentioning this whole DPW fiasco will be a boon for E
155 Post contains links Keesje : UAE turns back on dollar in foreign reserves shake-up The United Arab Emirates is planning to switch 10pc of its foreign reserves from dollars to euro
156 Swissy : Keesje, Thanks for the link and it showes that the middle east is taking it personal..... I am sure it will be very interesting in the next little whi
157 Post contains links Tockeyhockey : my boy clinton? what makes you think i'm a democrat? for the record, i'm not. the issue at hand is that george bush has justified the entire war on t
158 USAF336TFS : Okay, predictably, this thread has deteriorated. NEWSFLASH EVERYONE. The port deal is dead! Regards, Sal
159 Garnetpalmetto : Indeed it has and I'm locking this thread up. I began to clean it out, but after seeing just how far it's gone off topic, it's more worthwhile to loc
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Emirates May Opt For 787 As A350 Hits A Snag posted Sat May 13 2006 14:16:07 by BoomBoom
A350 Tackles 767, 777, 787; Replaces 300, 310 & 330 posted Fri May 20 2005 11:41:36 by BrightCedars
Air Canada 777/787 Order? posted Wed Nov 1 2006 01:15:55 by ZBBYLW
Why Only Two Engine Choices On 787 And A350? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 02:02:16 by 1337Delta764
EK's 787 Vs A350 Decision Not Imminent posted Mon May 22 2006 12:01:21 by Atmx2000
Thomsonfly Looking At 787 And A350 posted Mon May 15 2006 19:37:10 by TomatLTN
Emirates Boeing 777-300ER Fleet posted Tue Apr 11 2006 15:16:32 by Boeing767-300
787 Vs A350 In South America posted Thu Mar 30 2006 20:37:11 by Georgiabill
Interesting 787 & A350 Sales Comparison. posted Thu Jan 19 2006 16:12:30 by EI321
Potential 787 And A350 Customers On Wikipedia posted Thu Jan 12 2006 21:16:44 by 1337Delta764