Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
EK Wants To Add YVR, Calgary And Up Toronto #2  
User currently offlinejayeshrulz From India, joined Apr 2007, 1029 posts, RR: 2
Posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7625 times:

EK Wants To Add Vancouver, Calgary And Up Toronto (by EK156 Feb 25 2010 in Civil Aviation)
Please continue here.


Keep flying, because the sky is no limit!
89 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3070 posts, RR: 37
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 7490 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck from previous thread: "When I was regularly flying through DXB, I was connecting to Yemen, Iran, Jordan and other middle eastern locals". "I don't know of a single person flying from YYC to DXB who wouldn't have preferred a non stop over a connection".

I just don't get why you were making your trips so complicated. You could have flown YYC - FRA - AMM/THR/ADE/SAH (one-stop), instead of YYC - LHR/AMS/FRA - DXB - AMM/THR/ADE/SAH (2 stop). If EK were flying YYC - DXB, it would still be a 1 stop on to AMM/THR/ADE/SAH, the same as transiting FRA. And AMM and THR are both significant backtracks from DXB, compared to FRA.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlinejoecanuck From Canada, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7417 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 1):
I just don't get why you were making your trips so complicated. You could have flown YYC - FRA - AMM/THR/ADE/SAH (one-stop), instead of YYC - LHR/AMS/FRA - DXB - AMM/THR/ADE/SAH (2 stop). If EK were flying YYC - DXB, it would still be a 1 stop on to AMM/THR/ADE/SAH, the same as transiting FRA. And AMM and THR are both significant backtracks from DXB, compared to FRA.

What are you talking about? I was flying yyc-(fra or LHR) - dxb. That's one extra stop. DXB is a hub for the middle east. My final destination in Yemen was NOT Sanaa. It was ALWAYS the best routing to go through the UAE. Non stop to Dubai means one less stop in my journey.

Even if it was Sanaa, transiting through dubai rather than europe is much more convenient since I can get immigration passes for quick transit through the UAE. One long flight and one short flight is better for my metabolism than two medium flights.

Trust me...I did this trip dozens of times. Do you really think I didn't consider the best routing? Our head offices were in the UAE. We staged out of there because it was the most convenient. We looked at every single alternative available and if we could have gotten non stop from Calgary, that would have been the best solution for us.

Now, if you prefer to waste your time in European airports dicking around standing in lines for security, overpriced airport food and losing sleep in the process, you are welcome to it.

Me...? I would welcome DXB non stop for my own travel needs.



What the...?
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3070 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 7328 times:

Quoting joecanuck (Reply 2):
Our head offices were in the UAE. We staged out of there because it was the most convenient.

Obviously that makes a big difference - which you hadn't mentioned before.

Quoting joecanuck (Reply 2):
One long flight and one short flight is better for my metabolism than two medium flights.

Maybe other people have different metabolisms?

But my main point is still:

" 2. Dubai is offering nothing of value in return for increased flights. It has DECLINED to negotiate open skies, which would allow AC to fly beyond DXB. In other words, EK wants to compete with AC/Star for traffic into Asia/Africa, WITHOUT allowing AC to compete with EK on a level playing field through DXB".

Obviously, everyone has their personal preferences - I wish NZ flew into ORD, so I don't have to transit in LAX (way worse than any European transit point). But governments make decisions based on reciprocal trade / commercial value and interests, and Dubai is not prepared to offer comparative value.

[Edited 2010-03-14 07:15:22]


Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlinethreepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2185 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7157 times:

I think our suggestions have been based upon your comment:

Quote:
When I was regularly flying through DXB, I was connecting to Yemen, Iran, Jordan and other middle eastern locals. I really can't imagine AC every flying direct to any of them. To get to these destinations, the most practical routing was through Dubai.

So it seems you fly from Calgary to Dubai to stage at the company's office for a period of time, and then travel onwards to the field in Yemen, Iran, Jordan wherever? Are we reading this correctly? Because your routing through Dubai makes sense if you spend some 'down time' there; not so much if it's just a transit point. And I get the limited routing options one faces when traveling to Yemeni cities outside Sana'a.



The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
User currently offlineyegbey01 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1732 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7152 times:

Quoting threepoint (Reply 4):
Quote:
When I was regularly flying through DXB, I was connecting to Yemen, Iran, Jordan and other middle eastern locals. I really can't imagine AC every flying direct to any of them. To get to these destinations, the most practical routing was through Dubai.

I think it would make more sense to connect in FRA, AMS and LHR when flying to Jordan, Iran and even Yemen....


User currently offlinethreepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2185 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7119 times:

Quoting yegbey01 (Reply 5):
I think it would make more sense to connect in FRA, AMS and LHR when flying to Jordan, Iran and even Yemen....

Note that it's not my quote; it belongs to 'joecanuck'. This was mentioned in the locked half of the thread; only LH offers service to all his destinations. However, it now appears that our friend may also be traveling to some out-of-the-way Yemeni locales not served by any European carriers, in which case it may be required to connect through the UAE. Add the fact that the company offices are in Dubai and I sense why he's going there. But for straight trips to Iran and Jordan or Sana'a itself, then yes, European routes do make more sense. But one (or a hundred) man's travels to Camelpit, Yemen do not warrant daily EK service to Canada - the focus of this thread.

[Edited 2010-03-14 11:15:35]


The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
User currently onlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 7049 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 281):
Read it carefully:

"Meanwhile, the UAE's major carriers, Emirates and Etihad Airways, have been aggressively lobbying for an "open skies" agreement with Canada in recent years that would allow them to fly anywhere IN Canada as often as they would like, in exchange for RECIPROCAL benefits for Canadian airlines.

This is "open skies" as EK and EY define it - i.e. WITHOUT rights for AC to fly BEYOND UAE and compete on a level playing field with EK/EY. In other words, NOT open skies as it is usually understood..

..your comments from the previous thread:


You are completely wrong. If the Canadian govt. approves open skies with the UAE it will allow Canadian carriers all rights beyond Dubai. That is how the UAE signs its open skies treaties. If AA wants to hub at DXB and fly DXB-LHR routes, it certainly has the rights to. The only thing it would have to do is get approval from the European/British Govt. bodies-which is obviously not a problem.Likewise,the only thing AC would have to do to fly DXB-SYD is get approval from the Australian Govt.

Now obviously neither EK/EY,etc. should have the right to fly YYZ-YVR but I don't think EK/EY have that in their priorities list..  



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlinethreepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2185 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6970 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 7):
If the Canadian govt. approves open skies with the UAE it will allow Canadian carriers all rights beyond Dubai. That is how the UAE signs its open skies treaties.

Are you sure about this? My understanding is that the negotiations EK is pursuing simply allow EK to fly from the UAE to any Canadian airport, and in return any Canadian carrier can serve any UAE airport from Canada. Given that there are but two viable destinations a hundred km apart in the UAE vs. thousands of km separating many more viable markets in Canada, it would stand to reason that any Canadian airline's options to "fly to any airport" within the UAE are of very limited benefit.

Would EK consent to AC flying YYZ-DXB-BOM? That would be attractive, and I'm not sure that's on the table. EK would want the arrangement to be XXX-YYZ- DXB, no? And that YYZ-DXB leg is all but useless in terms of revenue potential for a Canadian airline.
Sixth freedoms involving Canada and the UAE are awesome if you're Emirati; not so useful if you're Canadian. DXB is the transit point between several large O&D markets, but Canada sits at the end of the line - it doesn't make geographic sense to fly between Dubai and Asia/Europe/Africa/Australia/Middle East via Canada. So how would Canadian airlines benefit? Remember, comparatively few people want to go to Dubai. They're nearly all bound elsewhere. Thar be the issue, matey.



The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25978 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6965 times:

Quoting threepoint (Reply 8):
So how would Canadian airlines benefit? Remember, comparatively few people want to go to Dubai. They're nearly all bound elsewhere. Thar be the issue, matey.

Canadian airlines would NOT benefit, which is why I can't see the Canadian government ever agreeiing to more than possible minor liberalization of the UAE bilateral. Why offer open skies to government-owned airlines from a country where there are no taxes? That's hardly fair competition.


User currently onlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 6867 times:

Quoting threepoint (Reply 8):

Are you sure about this? My understanding is that the negotiations EK is pursuing simply allow EK to fly from the UAE to any Canadian airport, and in return any Canadian carrier can serve any UAE airport from Canada. Given that there are but two viable destinations a hundred km apart in the UAE vs. thousands of km separating many more viable markets in Canada, it would stand to reason that any Canadian airline's options to "fly to any airport" within the UAE are of very limited benefit.

..again, I've stated my comments based on how the UAE does its bilaterals with other countries. The devil is in the details as they say, but there is no reason the Canadian Govt. couldn't get this "one-sided" approach i.e. Canadian carriers can "hub" out of DXB/SHJ/AUH/etc. while EK/EY can only fly direct to DXB/AUH.

...another approach can be that the Canadian Govt. have a "pax cap"...i.e.-EK can fly YYZ-DXB 7x/weekly, but they can't fly more than "x-amount" of pax per week/month/etc.-this again is quite easy to monitor.



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6774 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 3):
Quoting joecanuck (Reply 2):
Our head offices were in the UAE. We staged out of there because it was the most convenient.

Obviously that makes a big difference - which you hadn't mentioned before.

What should have been obvious is that since I was the one regularly flying that route, that I may know what I am talking about, without need of a caveat.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 3):
Maybe other people have different metabolisms?

Right...so that's why I stated non stop as MY preference without making assumptions regarding the preferences of others.

My main point is that regardless of open skies or any other agreement with the UAE, non stop from YYC to DXB would be convenient for me. It is unlikely my preferences will have any impact on negotiations.

While I don't approve of the cheap bullying tactics being employed by the UAE in this, AC has a history of using monopolistic tactics to drive out competition and raise ticket prices domestically. I guess that's why they're so paranoid about EK.



What the...?
User currently offlinethreepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2185 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6738 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 11):
AC has a history of using monopolistic tactics to drive out competition and raise ticket prices domestically. I guess that's why they're so paranoid about EK.

Perceptions over the business practices of AC aside, keep in mind that Air Canada is only one of several airlines - Canadian and otherwise - vociferously opposing the proposed EK expansion. Ask yourself why KL, LH, BA and others would also speak against this plan yet remain silent over hundreds of other service expansions by foreign carriers in other locations.



The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 6647 times:

Quoting threepoint (Reply 12):
Ask yourself why KL, LH, BA and others would also speak against this plan yet remain silent over hundreds of other service expansions by foreign carriers in other locations.

To tell the truth, I don't care. There isn't an airline still in existence whose hands are totally clean. The entire industry is guilty of every sort of double dealing, backstabbing and rip offs.

I look at the industry primarily from a customer standpoint. Some of EK's offerings I won't use...for instance their 10 wide 777's are terrible...not just the width but the seats are, (or were), very uncomfortable.

I don't believe AC, EK or any airline gives a rat's a$$ about me except as it impacts their bottom line. My loyalty to a business only extends to as far as they offer a product I want. Frankly, I've been screwed by AC a lot more than any other airline. I don't owe them a thing.



What the...?
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3070 posts, RR: 37
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6444 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 7):

You are completely wrong. If the Canadian govt. approves open skies with the UAE it will allow Canadian carriers all rights beyond Dubai. That is how the UAE signs its open skies treaties.

If I'm wrong, then so is EK's Chief Executive. Quote: "In the U.A.E.] we have an open skies environment and we would love to see a Canadian airline fly anywhere WITHIN THE U.A.E. every day," he said. What is it about "within" that you don't get.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 7):
If AA wants to hub at DXB and fly DXB-LHR routes, it certainly has the rights to

Maybe the U.S.-UAE bilateral includes 5th/6th freedom rights (I don't know). So what? It's a bilateral, and calling it "open skies" doesn't mean it automatically includes those rights - it includes whichever freedoms the two countries negotiate.

The fact remains that UAE is not interested and has declined to negotiate 5th or 6th freedom rights in a UAE-Canada bilateral. You keep on telling me that this is "completely false" and that I am "completely wrong". Yet even EK has publicly stated that it would "love" (tongue in cheek, I'm sure) "to see a Canadian airline fly ANYWHERE WITHIN THE UAE EVERY DAY". I'm sure EK understands the meaning of "within" - no 5th freedom rights, period!!

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 11):
What should have been obvious is that since I was the one regularly flying that route, that I may know what I am talking about, without need of a caveat.

Why should it have been obvious to me that your company has it's head office in UAE?          Unfortunately I've misplaced my crystal ball and I'm just not that omniscient.

[Edited 2010-03-15 04:11:56]


Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 5010 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6392 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 11):
While I don't approve of the cheap bullying tactics being employed by the UAE in this, AC has a history of using monopolistic tactics to drive out competition and raise ticket prices domestically. I guess that's why they're so paranoid about EK.

How is this true? WestJet is eating up Air Canada's domestic market share, and in the last 10 year I can count at least 10 new foreign carriers to have served Canada, or foreign carriers adding incremental Canadian destinations.

You need to present hard facts to this argument.


User currently offlineytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 2355 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 6345 times:

I have always wondered...What's stopping Star Alliance from putting a hub in Dubai or elsewhere in the Middle East to service India, the ME and some of Africa. Why not build a hub, which all of Star's members fly to, but is not necessarily owned by one airline. This way, for example, YYZ-BOM travel could be facilitated by AC and AI through a Middle East transit hub. Is there anything stopping Star from putting up a hub in Dubai or anywhere else in the Middle East?

User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3070 posts, RR: 37
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 6315 times:

Quoting ytz (Reply 16):
Is there anything stopping Star from putting up a hub in Dubai or anywhere else in the Middle East?

Approval from the UAE/Dubai. Route/airline/ATI approval from the government of every country being served from DXB (or wherever), including European/Middle Eastern/Asian/African departure/destination countries, and the U.S. and Canada. Slots at DXB. That's just a start.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently onlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 6302 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 7):

You are completely wrong. If the Canadian govt. approves open skies with the UAE it will allow Canadian carriers all rights beyond Dubai. That is how the UAE signs its open skies treaties.

If I'm wrong, then so is EK's Chief Executive. Quote: "In the U.A.E.] we have an open skies environment and we would love to see a Canadian airline fly anywhere WITHIN THE U.A.E. every day," he said. What is it about "within" that you don't get

..what you don't seem to understand is there is no case to fly "within" the UAE as the various airports (such as DXB-AUH, DXB-SJH) are only 10-80 miles apart. Any intelligent person can figure out Clark is talking about...I'll give you a hint....he's not talking flying a prop from DXB-SJH-which would be "within" the UAE. Is that too difficult for you to understand?

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
The fact remains that UAE is not interested and has declined to negotiate 5th or 6th freedom rights in a UAE-Canada bilateral.

The simple fact remains the UAE practically guarantees any carrier to set a hub up in from AUH, DXB and SJH and fly anywhere in the world from there. AC, or any Canadian carrier for that matter is probably no exception.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
Maybe the U.S.-UAE bilateral includes 5th/6th freedom rights (I don't know). So what? It's a bilateral, and calling it "open skies" doesn't mean it automatically includes those rights - it includes whichever freedoms the two countries negotiate.

As I mentioned above, there are a multitude of options are available to the Canadian government. I've even mentioned it doesn't have to be an exact quid pro quo....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 6279 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
Why should it have been obvious to me that your company has it's head office in UAE? Unfortunately I've misplaced my crystal ball and I'm just not that omniscient

I didn't say it should be obvious my company has a head office in the UAE. I said

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 14):
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 11):
What should have been obvious is that since I was the one regularly flying that route, that I may know what I am talking about, without need of a caveat

Since I had previously said

Quoting joecanuck (Reply 2):
Trust me...I did this trip dozens of times

which should have made my experience doing this route clear, without need of a crystal ball.

That our head office was in the UAE made little difference to our travel plans. DXB had the best connections to wherever we were traveling in the middle east. Since we work throughout the middle east, the logistics of hubbing out of DXB or AUH are head and shoulders above any other options.

Regardless, non stop, connecting, whatever...it's personal preference. If one chooses to stop more often, that's swell. I choose not to if I can help it. It's all about choice and if EK offered the choice of flying out of YYC direct to DXB, I would have taken that flight...unless it was on one of their 777's...that, I would have avoided.



What the...?
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3070 posts, RR: 37
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 6275 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 18):

The simple fact remains the UAE practically guarantees any carrier to set a hub up in from AUH, DXB and SJH and fly anywhere in the world from there.

Do you have a source for this "fact"? I'm asking because I actually know what's been happening regarding the UAE-Canada bilat?



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlineytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 2355 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 6193 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 20):
Do you have a source for this "fact"? I'm asking because I actually know what's been happening regarding the UAE-Canada bilat?

Oooh...Do share. Any good details?


User currently onlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6132 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 20):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 18):

The simple fact remains the UAE practically guarantees any carrier to set a hub up in from AUH, DXB and SJH and fly anywhere in the world from there.

Do you have a source for this "fact"? I'm asking because I actually know what's been happening regarding the UAE-Canada bilat?

I've mentioned above I don't have direct evidence (so to answer your question, no its not even close to being a "fact"), but as with >90% of the UAE's bilaterals, carriers are allowed full 5th freedom rights out of DXB/AUH, etc.

I don't know what the exact bi-laterals with Canada are..but you claim to know more than we do......  

edit:

As I mentioned above, it doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. If the Canadian Govt. wants to prevent EK from "flooding" the market, they can put total pax restrictions.

For example: EK's 3-class B77W has 358 seats, which is about 2500 seats/week or 10,000-11,000/month if flown daily.

The Canadian Govt. can say "no more than 10,000 seats" allowed to EK/month. That would basically mean a 100% l.f. everyday of the month yet they will have daily service.

Right now EK has their 489 seater A380 which provides around 6,000 seats/month. This allows EK to increase capacity but not really "flood" the market.

There are variations to this as well...

[Edited 2010-03-15 08:48:49]


"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3070 posts, RR: 37
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6106 times:

Quoting ytz (Reply 21):

Nothing I can share explicitly. But read between the lines in my earlier posts - UAE does not want to include 5th/6th freedoms in a bilateral, the Throne Speech explicitly linked open skies agreements and free trade:

"Given the disappointing results of the Doha round of multilateral trade negotiations and the rapidly evolving global marketplace, our Government will aggressively diversify opportunities for Canadian business through bilateral trade agreements. It will continue trade negotiations with the European Union, India, the Republic of Korea, the Caribbean Community and other countries of the Americas. Building on the successful negotiation of new or expanded air agreements with 50 countries around the world, our Government will pursue additional agreements to achieve more competition, more choice for Canadians and more economic growth."

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 18):
..what you don't seem to understand is there is no case to fly "within" the UAE as the various airports (such as DXB-AUH, DXB-SJH) are only 10-80 miles apart.
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 18):
I'll give you a hint....he's not talking flying a prop from DXB-SJH-which would be "within" the UAE. Is that too difficult for you to understand?

Really - I didn't realize that   

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 18):
Any intelligent person can figure out Clark is talking about..

Exactly - he's talking about 3rd/4th freedom flights between Canada and DXB/AUH/SHJ (and maybe 8th freedom), not about 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th freedom onward flights.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlineEmirates773ER From Pakistan, joined Jun 2005, 1450 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6097 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 22):
As I mentioned above, it doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. If the Canadian Govt. wants to prevent EK from "flooding" the market, they can put total pax restrictions.

For example: EK's 3-class B77W has 358 seats, which is about 2500 seats/week or 10,000-11,000/month if flown daily.

The Canadian Govt. can say "no more than 10,000 seats" allowed to EK/month. That would basically mean a 100% l.f. everyday of the month yet they will have daily service.

Right now EK has their 489 seater A380 which provides around 6,000 seats/month. This allows EK to increase capacity but not really "flood" the market.

There are variations to this as well...

Jacobin, the simple fact is that Star alliance cannot compete with Emirates on their routes to the middle east and south east asia. No one wants to be herded through London, Frankfurt or any other European airport and much rather stop in Dubai. Air Canada knows this and thus all the fuss.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 20):
Do you have a source for this "fact"? I'm asking because I actually know what's been happening regarding the UAE-Canada bilat?

Please search the old threads on this issue, it has been discussed at length in the past, an open skies treaty was what UAE offered repeatredly over the years and was denied. How you 'actually know' this fact is beyond me.



The Truth is Out There ---- Face It!!!!!
25 Post contains links david_itl : Like this? From this news article UAE signs "open skies" agreement with Georgia The agreement includes unlimited capacities, numbers of frequencies a
26 Kaiarahi : 1. With which freedoms? Open skies is a blanket term covering multiple combinations of 3rd - 9th freedoms - not necessarily (in fact, rarely) all of
27 ytz : Jacobin777, Good point. IMHO that's exactly what the GOC (govt of Canada) should do. They should put seat restrictions to Dubai. Then we'll know where
28 Emirates773ER : So there are no sources with specific freedom rights listed, but we know for a FACT that UAE offers 5th and 6th freedom rights when negotiating for o
29 Post contains links and images Emirates773ER : This is the best post I have seen in this thread yet. Quoting from http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs....=/20100315/BUSINESS/703149924/1137 For his
30 Emirates773ER : To suggest that Emirates offered 5ht and 6th freedom rights in the past, but due to the A380's changed their strategy of 'open skies' is ludicrous. W
31 Kaiarahi : Right. But obviously EK / EY / QR will not be too worried about competition from A9. If anything, the agreement will likely bring additional pax thro
32 Kaiarahi : And the statements of EK's CEO?
33 ytz : To be fair though, it's one thing for the UAE to offer 5th/6th freedom rights to Georgia and Yemen and quite another to pursue the same deal in Canada
34 Kaiarahi : About what you'd expect from a UAE newspaper (and Canadian papers would be no different if it became an issue of reduced international service from e
35 ytz : @Emirates773ER Is all protectionism bad though? While I generally have some reservations about our protectionist stance (and I am no fan of directing
36 Kaiarahi : Me too. But at the end of the day, I keep coming back to the fact that UAE/EK is offering nothing of value in return for increased flights. BTW, is a
37 starac17 : In the short term yes the consumer will benefit but if EK moves into YYC and both KH and LH start losing money on their YYC-FRA and YYC-AMS flights t
38 AirIndia : Value for canadian travellers in terms of choice of lower fares.............. customer will eventually benefit. I am sure you and I and most of us wo
39 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ...well judging from your comments, you seem to not have understood what I have been referring to..... ....that would be incorrect.....as david_itl p
40 Kaiarahi : Versus potential reductions in service by other carriers into other Canadian cities. Bottom line is each country has its own value proposition and wi
41 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ...well judging from your comments, you seem to not have understood what I have been referring to..... ....that would be incorrect.....as david_itl p
42 Kaiarahi : Ummm ... Canada (which the EK CEO was talking about) is not Georgia ....
43 Jacobin777 : ....it was in reference to how the UAE structures most, if not all of its bi-laterals....
44 JRadier : Don't want to start a full argument about EKs profitability, but just wanted to point out that profit is something that is very easy to manipulate. F
45 ytz : SOME customers will benefit. This is a big country (the size of a continent). And that's why direct connections between Canadian cities and internati
46 Viscount724 : Sorry, not correct. The CURRENT Canada-UAE bilateral already permits 5th freedom rights, both for UAE carriers (but restricted to Canada-USA) at both
47 ytz : The problem here though is that 5th freedom rights benefit Emirates far more than it does Air Canada. Emirates gets to take passengers Toronto to Indi
48 ytz : Is there anyway to quantify the hit to AC and its Star Alliance partners from increased Emirates service? For example, what's the Calgary and Edmonton
49 Kaiarahi : I should have been more explicit - 5th, 6th freedom rights in accordance with Canada's new Blue Skies policy, which also puts a heavy emphasis on 7th
50 Kaiarahi : Bingo. That's the hope, but it may not be that easy. The UAE-India agreement is 3rd/4th freedoms, with restrictions on the total number of pax. Exact
51 Post contains links ytz : http://www.centreforaviation.com/new...liberalism-whos-got-it-right/page1 It is tempting to compare Canada to Australia and see the situation as analo
52 Post contains links pnwtraveler : Colin Rovinescu of AC has taken the gloves off and in a speech in Montreal clearly lays out his views on EK wanting unrestricted service to Canada. He
53 ytz : ^ Meh. Rovinescu would say that wouldn't he? What's the difference whether somebody is connection in Europe or connecting in Dubai? And why shouldn't
54 Post contains images Kaiarahi : Looks like LHR is doing OK - AC has announced an A333 for the summer. I don't know the numbers, but YUL has significant pax to Lebanon, Tunisia, Moro
55 ytz : Ottawa or Edmonton? That makes for an interesting question. How much of this traffic will really be hurt by Emirates increasing service to Toronto or
56 Kaiarahi : YOW It may be why YUL is not on their radar screen - in addition to not backtracking, I suspect most francophone pax would choose AC for service in F
57 pnwtraveler : And a signifcant number fly KLM or AF and then connect through their hubs to Africa and other locations.
58 FLYYUL : If Montreal is deemed as too small, what's the case for the Calgary market? The local demand barely satisfies a BEH1900 per day (minus stimulation of
59 Kaiarahi : Exactly. Which is why EK's suggestion that they will add YYC at some future date, maybe, is just a smokescreen to suck up YYZ. According to StatsCan,
60 Viscount724 : EK carrying YYZ-DXB-India traffic, or EY YYZ-AUH-India, is 6th freedom, not 5th freedom, and 6th freedom traffic has no bilateral restrictions. They
61 ytz : Agreed. I'd actually think that maybe LH and KL would be in trouble since flights to Frankfurt and Amsterdam could just route through London. Either
62 airceo : I read that piece too and I was totally horrified at how bad and flat out wrong it was. Massaging parallels out of tiny similarities is ridiculous. T
63 Sebring : Indeed, and how would Calgarians answer if you put this question to them this way: Do you prefer non-stop service to Tokyo or Dubai?
64 Post contains links and images Jacobin777 : Thanks for the very interesting update ...while I found their website: http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/menu.htm I couldn't find the exact link....d
65 Post contains links Viscount724 : Here's the link with details on the current Canada-UAE bilateral. I should have referred to the Canadian Transportation Agency, not Transport Canada,
66 Kaiarahi : Check out my post 49 - the Government of India isn't there yet. Even UAE (EK) has only manged to negotiate 3rd/4th freedom rights. There are also (hi
67 starac17 : I'm pretty sure that they could do it with the 77L but I do not think that they have the desired capacity to make money on that flight also they have
68 Multimark : Do you honestly think any private company in any industry "cares" about you, except as a vehicle to make money?
69 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ...interesting... ......but if AI flies to India, then there is no reason AC shouldn't.....and since AI is joining Star soon (eventually...hahaha)...
70 starac17 : Yeah and when AC gets them I think you will see a big jump in places where they will serve such as potentially YVR-MEL/BNE/AKL although NZ does YVR-A
71 jamincan : It's not even that simple. The AC route which would likely be most affected by EK expanding its service further is YYZ-FRA. Should loads drop on that
72 Kaiarahi : Normally a 772, with a 744 occasionally subbed in. The couple of times I've flown it, the load was close to 100% and I've noticed that discounted J/Y
73 Kaiarahi : And perhaps YEG-LHR, which is already thin, if the large Indo-Pakistani community in YEG decided to connect to EK in YYZ rather than AI, PK etc in LH
74 Kaiarahi : Except that it contradicts Canada's Blue Skies policy, and the GoC wont want to set that example when the policy is barely 18 months old. Incidentall
75 Jacobin777 : ..well they can't have it both ways done...either open it up or have some kind of restraints.....the Canadian Govt. needs to decide what they want to
76 Kaiarahi : They're not trying to have it both ways. GoC is saying either we negotiate a truly open arrangement in accordance with the Blue Skies policy (as Kuwa
77 rafaelyyz : Not necessarily true anymore: A host of cultural industries may see a shift in foreign ownership rules. Books, telecommunications, television and rad
78 Post contains links JoeCanuck : This kind of stuff, even more than the economic downturn, will cost Dubai tourism dollars; http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/100317/world/uae_aviation_tr
79 Jacobin777 : If that's true then why would AC be so "afraid" of EK?
80 Kaiarahi : Because under the current arrangement, they can't compete effectively because they can't code share on 5th freedom flights, and increased EK capacity
81 Sebring : Canada can have it any way it likes. Politicians will have to answer for it, but as I have explained many times, this government, like the one before
82 Emirates773ER : What a brilliant statement, so me as a Canadian consumer should get F@Q'ed in turn as well eh? With such an attitude no doubt the country is going to
83 FLYYUL : The consumer is not better in the long run with a massive and baseless EK expansion into Canada. There is too much for Canadian carriers and foreign
84 Sebring : There are two problems with your statement. 1. Canada is a very large country and it dangerous to talk about the "Canadian consumer" as if he/she is
85 Emirates773ER : Oh really? Let me give you a dose of reality, UAE as a whole has more than a trillion in funds sittings all over the world (yes that includes Canada)
86 trojanclipper : Does anyone know how they are doing on their SFO route? So many airlines with single daily services end up ditching SFO after reasonably short periods
87 Kaiarahi : Now you're just being incoherent - I can smell the Emirates on your breath. Why don't you check out some of the reasoned details about the bilateral
88 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Don't know if its a cash cow, after all, AC was bankrupt and Canadian Airlines did go under.... ... Sounds a bit "short-sighted" by the Canadian Govt
89 Kaiarahi : I tend to agree. But it is a balancing act - ensuring that a geographically huge but very thinly populated country has adequate service, without reso
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...
EK Wants To Add Vancouver, Calgary And Up Toronto posted Thu Feb 25 2010 03:45:39 by EK156
LH Cargo Wants To Add Equivalent Of 6 MD-11 posted Tue Nov 30 2010 04:47:20 by robffm2
DL Wants To Delay SEA-PEK And ATL-PVG To 2011 posted Thu Apr 22 2010 06:12:30 by PSU.DTW.SCE
EK Consider To Add MAD, CPH, STR, TXL Among Others posted Wed Nov 18 2009 04:43:42 by LIPZ
BEG Deputy CEO - EK Wants To Fly Here posted Thu Oct 8 2009 00:50:47 by JoKeR
Wizz Air: To Add New 320 And New Routes At BUD posted Tue Oct 14 2008 09:09:13 by Pe@rson
Rumour :EK Wants To Serve Berlin -via Poland.. posted Sun Oct 21 2007 03:13:21 by Beaucaire
AC Jazz To Add YVR-Yellowknife Dec-Apr posted Thu Jun 7 2007 20:20:45 by Tuffer
Transaero To Add Kuala Lumpur And Ho Chi Mihn City posted Thu Dec 28 2006 01:46:12 by Kevin
FlyPorter Wants To Add YTZ-LGA/EWR posted Tue Nov 28 2006 17:50:46 by FA4B6
Wizz Air: To Add New 320 And New Routes At BUD posted Tue Oct 14 2008 09:09:13 by Pe@rson
Rumour :EK Wants To Serve Berlin -via Poland.. posted Sun Oct 21 2007 03:13:21 by Beaucaire
AC Jazz To Add YVR-Yellowknife Dec-Apr posted Thu Jun 7 2007 20:20:45 by Tuffer
Transaero To Add Kuala Lumpur And Ho Chi Mihn City posted Thu Dec 28 2006 01:46:12 by Kevin
FlyPorter Wants To Add YTZ-LGA/EWR posted Tue Nov 28 2006 17:50:46 by FA4B6