Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is Singapore Airlines An Asian Version Of Emirates  
User currently offlineFL370 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 252 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5795 times:

looking at the past orders Singapore has made and those made by emirates, is Singapore another version of emirates. when both airlines place orders for new planes, they buy a lot!!! and i mean like 50 or more at once.

27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3598 posts, RR: 66
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 5792 times:

No, EK is a Mid-East version of SQ.

Look at who has been in the business longer.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineB742 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 5767 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 1):
No, EK is a Mid-East version of SQ.

Exactly what I was going to say  Wink

Singapore Airlines I feel is a much better airline also! EK used to be great, now I'd rather fly other airlines such as QR, TG, MH, SQ... when travelling to Asia  Smile

Rob!  wave 


User currently offlineAbrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5129 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5608 times:

First, EK and SQ are both Asian carriers. If you want to be specific, I would say EK is a Mid-East version of South-Eastern SQ. Also, please dont compare SQ and EK. As Rob pointed out, EK is a shadow of what it used to be. Even within the Mid-East, I'd rather fly on Qatar, MEA, or Etihad.

Cheers,
A.



Live, and let live.
User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13745 posts, RR: 19
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5439 times:

Quoting FL370 (Thread starter):
is Singapore another version of emirates

Argghg! Don't say that!  hissyfit 



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineAntskip From Australia, joined Jan 2006, 936 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5413 times:

EK and SQ are very dis-similar airlines, other than they are both very successful at what they do, and like to have young and efficient aircraft. Amongst the top airlines - and these 2 are within that elite bracket - whether one airline or another is "better" comes down to personal preference, based only on one's own empirical experience. It is not a judgement that one can make objectively, let alone scientifically. For myself: I have flown EK around 30 times and never had less than a top time. And I fly cattle class...

User currently offlineLeftWing From Singapore, joined Mar 2006, 284 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5383 times:

EK and SQ flown both....cattel class is the best among its peers such as CX, QR etc....Ofcourse EK J class beats SQ by a mile..

User currently offlineFloris From Netherlands, joined Jun 2003, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5292 times:

Quoting LeftWing (Reply 6):
EK and SQ flown both....cattel class is the best among its peers such as CX, QR etc....Ofcourse EK J class beats SQ by a mile..

Are you serious? EK doesn't even begin to come close. Nothing beats SQ business and first class. And EK is below average in economy - if only for the additional seats they squeeze in. Things where different 2 years ago, but now, EK is just a shade of what it used to be.


User currently offlineAntskip From Australia, joined Jan 2006, 936 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5271 times:

Quoting Floris (Reply 7):
Things where different 2 years ago, but now, EK is just a shade of what it used to be.

On the Tasman run they are still fantastic (for me). My comparison airlines over the Tasman are NZ and QF. I am curious: if you don't like EK, who do you like? SQ? Do you pay more? ( and I assume, as you don't like EK any more, that you have stopped flying them?).


User currently offlineAviator27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5250 times:

"No, EK is a Mid-East version of SQ."

My sentiments exactly. Emirates is a Middle-East version of Singapore. Look who has been in business longer and through more business cycles.


User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1290 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5218 times:

Definitely agree. SQ was already SQ when EK was a regional player and had a fleet of like 2 dozen A310s and A300s. EK grew fast to become a look like it would be an SQ class airline. I've flown over 20 times on SQ and the only other airline I flew that was on par or better is CX. Didn't fly EK yet to make my own comparison (I flew to DXB on AF).


I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineCY319 From Cyprus, joined Apr 2006, 396 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5205 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 1):
EK is a Mid-East version of SQ.

that i was exactly what i was about to write!!  Smile



wanna be travel buddies ,sex buddies .. or both ?
User currently offlineBill142 From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 8466 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5185 times:

Also take into mind that Singapore had favourable tax laws which allow SQ to turn over their fleet regularly. This is why the order in large numbers to keep the fleet young and expand in a growing market.

Also SQ is a listed company and its books are there for all to see. Its a proven fact that SQ is a profitable airline and in fact only posted a loss on one or two occasions. While EK management tells us they are profitable, and we have no reason to doubt them, SQ's records are much more transparent.

Yes, they are both airlines which have had heavy government input, but that is probably where the similarities end. At times I worry about EK, they are expanding so rapidly that at some point something has to give. They order in massive quantities for expansion for demand that I'm not sure exists. But I'm no expert.


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4865 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5185 times:

EK is a Middle East version of SQ not the other way around.
Besides EK has not done all its growing simply from hardwork as SQ did, EK doesn't have to pay tax etc which is why it has been able to grow so quickly.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineAntskip From Australia, joined Jan 2006, 936 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5075 times:

SQ flies to 62 cities in 34 countries, EK to 83 cities in 57 countries. I think EK has an ambitious long-term plan to be a real global airline within the next 20 years, which is why they are busy slowly becoming "as if" a local airline everywhere, and why they need huge orders of planes coming into the grid constantly to satisfy that expansion. It shows every sign of a well-run, well-planned enterprise based on solid principles. SQ are not doing to bad, either! Whether they are expecting to match EK's global network saturation, I would be interested to know. Their asset purchase schedule over the next few years should indicate to some degree whether they do or not.

User currently offlineAirbuspilot From Belgium, joined Apr 2000, 416 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5052 times:

SO EK is the middle eastern version of SIA.....I hope some of their managers read these posts as well. It might have them reconsider their arrogance next pilots meeting...

User currently offlinePolymerPlane From United States of America, joined May 2006, 991 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5027 times:

Quoting Bill142 (Reply 12):
Also take into mind that Singapore had favourable tax laws which allow SQ to turn over their fleet regularly. This is why the order in large numbers to keep the fleet young and expand in a growing market.

I do not know how anybody can come into conclusion that favorable tax law allows SQ to turn over their fleet much earlier than other airlines. You have to make profit before you can buy new planes. You can't buy an airplane just by relying on tax breaks.

The tax law allows SQ to depreciate its aircrafts at a faster pace than other airlines, thus, higher depreciation expense and lower tax on profit. However, when SQ sells its aircraft, whatever gain they have from the book value is taxable.

The only advantage you get from this practice is only time value of money, as the total tax you get charged is still the same. Maybe the time value is pretty significant, however, it is not significant enough such that it allows SQ to place fleet renewal program.

Cheers,
PP



One day there will be 100% polymer plane
User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9210 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4933 times:

Also SQ is bigger than EK (quite a lot actually)

User currently offlineSeeTheWorld From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1325 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4912 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 1):
No, EK is a Mid-East version of SQ.

EXACTLY MY THOUGHT WHEN I READ THE TITLE!


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5011 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4821 times:

I would have to say the Singapore Airlines tops the class when it comes to service....Not to mention the gorgoues cabin crew Big grin
Emirates likes to squeeze in Y/C pax!

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineUSADreamliner From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4728 times:

I think is the other way around.

Singapore Airlines is a smart airline.Excellent service and a modern fleet.
Emirates is just an Airline with deep pockets.


USADreamliner


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4682 times:

Quoting Floris (Reply 7):
Are you serious? EK doesn't even begin to come close. Nothing beats SQ business and first class. And EK is below average in economy - if only for the additional seats they squeeze in. Things where different 2 years ago, but now, EK is just a shade of what it used to be.



Quoting B742 (Reply 2):
! EK used to be great, now I'd rather fly other airlines such as QR, TG, MH, SQ... when travelling to Asia

It's nice to see people agreeing with me here after almost 2 years harping on this subject....

EK's standards have gone down quite a bit the past 2-3 years....Back in
1998- 2001..when I first started flying with them..their services were second to none....when I flew JFK-DXB-KHI-DXB-JFK with them in 2004, I was quite shocked to see how much their services have declined......

I only fly them now for DXB-KHI-DXB services...that's about it....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineAbrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5129 posts, RR: 55
Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4586 times:

Quoting USADreamliner (Reply 20):
Singapore Airlines is a smart airline.Excellent service and a modern fleet.
Emirates is just an Airline with deep pockets.

= Very well put.

-A.



Live, and let live.
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4473 times:

Quoting FL370 (Thread starter):
they buy a lot!!! and i mean like 50 or more at once.

That's like a developer buying so-many acres of land, that doesn't mean the houses or apartments or malls are going to rise up from nowhere. I think it is rare for any customer in any industry to pay all at once and get all at once. Large orders like can take YEARS to produce and then more to get back what you bought -- that was probably what they were planned/bought for. A carrier can buy 200 aircraft if their credit history could support it, nothing is arriving tomorrow.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offline767ER From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1092 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4378 times:

Remember SQ has been around a very long time.....1966 was their first flight and they grew very modestly over the next few years. Of course, they had the support of the Singaporean government. What they did well at was marketing and the fact they were ideally positioned in terms of location to serve the serve the expanding Australia/NZ market. The then tapped into into the burgeoning Asia markets and into the USA They rapidly marketed themselves as a truly Top Class Airline which in many respects still holds true today.

I don't think SQ have expanded anywhere near the extent EK has. But remember it was not that many years ago that each country and their national airlines were fiercly protective of the markets and there were incredibly tough regulatory laws in place preventing new airlines gaining access to a new market. 20 years ago EK would not have had a hope and hell of being such a dominant presence in Australia and NZ.

EK expansion has been astounding to say the least and i wish them well in the future.However, there are always problems when any company expands that quickly..there have already murmirings of a decline in service standards. Mind you, you hear the same thing about SQ at times.

Soooo......no..I would not say SQ is the Asian version of EK.



Aircraft flown:F27,Viscount. EMB120, SAAB340, ATR70, 737-200.737-300,DC8, DC10,747-100,747-200,747-300,747-400, A320, A3
25 Pieinthesky : I'm not sure what you've been taking mate but it must be very strong stuff.
26 Ha763 : It is the Singapore laws regarding depreciation that makes it favorable to SQ to replace relatively young aircraft. This allows SQ to quickly write o
27 PolymerPlane : They get taxed from the difference between book value and the actual sell price, so in the end it does not matter. The advantage is higher depreciati
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...
How Is Singapore Airlines An Industry Leader? posted Sun Nov 5 2006 09:03:50 by Shinkai
Europe/Asian Version Of Flightaware? posted Sun Feb 26 2006 19:48:11 by Nyca330
Singapore Airlines Posts H1 Profit Of S$773 Mln posted Fri Oct 25 2002 13:11:27 by Singapore_Air
Why Is Singapore Airlines Listed In DE And Usa? posted Tue Dec 4 2001 23:33:44 by Singapore_Air
Is Alaska Airlines An Airline You Can Trust? posted Sun Aug 5 2001 06:21:26 by Apollo13
How Good Is Singapore Airlines? posted Tue Nov 16 1999 02:36:19 by Gundu
Is An E-version Of The Jeppesen Text Available? posted Sun Apr 9 2006 21:41:26 by Aak777
More Analysis Of Singapore Airlines-ANZ-AN-QF Deal posted Wed May 30 2001 09:43:44 by Singapore_Air
Singapore Airlines Takes Delivery Of B747-400BCF posted Thu Oct 26 2006 18:46:47 by Singapore_Air
Emirates Will Launch The Passenger Version Of 748 posted Mon Jul 17 2006 09:41:03 by Leelaw