Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Emirates Profit Slumps 72%  
User currently offlineUAEflyer From United Arab Emirates, joined Nov 2006, 1084 posts, RR: 1
Posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 20649 times:

It seems that the oil price ate their profit

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/emira...72-as-fuel-bill-surges-457389.html

94 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1151 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 20603 times:

Quoting UAEflyer (Thread starter):
It seems that the oil price ate their profit

Though times. But EK's doing much better than most major airlines.


User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19230 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 20352 times:

A big drop, but a decent profit nonetheless.

Quoting Chiad (Reply 1):
But EK's doing much better than most major airlines.

Indeed.



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineEKGOLD From Australia, joined May 2005, 207 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 20081 times:

I guess it is just as well that they don't pay full price for their fuel as professed on this website by others... The result would have been diabolical otherwise   

User currently offlineRaptor1090 From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2011, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 20013 times:

The financial statements can be found here:
http://www.theemiratesgroup.com/engl...h/facts-figures/annual-report.aspx


User currently offlineafterburner From Indonesia, joined Jun 2005, 1211 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 19964 times:

Hey, they still makes some profit, while lots of other airlines don't.

User currently offlinesomething From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 1633 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19780 times:

Quoting Chiad (Reply 1):
But EK's doing much better than most major airlines.

If ''most major airlines'' raised capital under the same low interest rates, if ''most major airlines'' didn't have to do regional/domestic flying and hub feeding, if ''most major airlines'' could hire and fire people willy-nilly, if ''most other major airlines'' were supported by the government behind them and weren't tied to regulations, they'd be profitable too.

Creating the EK brand was an impressive undertaking, because they're profitable (~ it works). If they weren't, EK could hardly be called an ''achievement''.



..sick of it. -K. Pilkington.
User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1596 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 19356 times:

Quoting something (Reply 6):
If ''most major airlines'' raised capital under the same low interest rates, if ''most major airlines'' didn't have to do regional/domestic flying and hub feeding, if ''most major airlines'' could hire and fire people willy-nilly, if ''most other major airlines'' were supported by the government behind them and weren't tied to regulations, they'd be profitable too.

Curious do you even know what interest rates EK pays on their capital? What other international carriers are paying? I read an annual report a couple of years ago, and rates didn't seem all that unusual to me, if you aren't just running your mouth and actually have facts to back it his statement, please post the rates, I would love to see the difference.

While EK doesn't do any "domestic flying", they most certainly do regional flying. They do a lot of regional flying as a matter of fact. And to suggest they don't do hub feeding is just asinine! That is all they do, DXB is one of the largest airports in the world (pax traffic), not because Dubai is some sort of massive business center or tourist destination but because Emirates funnels almost all of its traffic through their DXB hub! I would bet their connecting traffic at their DXB hub is probably the largest percentage of any airline in the world, and certainly top 5.

Outside of N. America and Europe, most airlines (and companies in general) enjoy the ability to fire people "wily-nily" as you say. That is not unique to Emirates. But I don't see how this is relevant. I have heard no complaints about former Emirates employees who were unjustly fired. I also hear very few complaints from employees about the airline mistreating or under paying them. Which ironically is quite unique, since that is a common complaint from employees of "most major airlines".

Not sure what you mean by supported by government. "Most major airlines" are supported by the government behind them. And all major airlines follow regulations!!! In fact they all follow the same regulations, because everywhere they fly they must adhere to the local regulations in place!

Emirates might enjoy some benefits like low taxation (and they certainly arent the only ones - heck even in the US where we have high taxes, because of bankruptcy certain airlines were allowed to carry credits that allowed them to reduce or eliminate their tax bill for years to come), but they are profitable mainly because of their business model and how they execute it. There is no benefit that Emirates has that is not enjoyed by other airlines around the world, in other words there is nothing unique to Emirates. You show me their interest rate and I'll show you an airline with a cheaper rate, you show me their domestic/regional ops and I'll show you an airline doing less, you show me the support they get from government and I'll show you an airline with more government support. I think you get the point (at least I hope you do).


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 19357 times:

As something already said, put that in relation with the work conditions LH and AF/Kl have to live and deal with and the profit is not that bright at all. And, making that statement, I assume that they pay market prices for fuel.

But work conditons alone, the lack of taxation, social conributions (in Germany alone, the direct employers contribution to health, pension job less insurance amounts to more than 20% of the salary, the other 20 % paid by the workers have to be generated as well in the company. Low skilled labour is by far less expensive than in Europe and the conditions would be intolerable here.

.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1114 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 19358 times:

Quoting something (Reply 6):
If ''most major airlines'' raised capital under the same low interest rates, if ''most major airlines'' didn't have to do regional/domestic flying and hub feeding, if ''most major airlines'' could hire and fire people willy-nilly, if ''most other major airlines'' were supported by the government behind them and weren't tied to regulations, they'd be profitable too.

Last I checked, most of these airlines eventually go bust.

That EK went in the other direction in terms of profitability and growth says alot about the validity of your assumptions.

Meanwhile, SQ's profits also plunged 69% for the Jan-Mar 2012 period. It must be a truly pathetic airline to do this badly despite all the advantages!

[Edited 2012-05-10 04:54:47]


It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 18579 times:

Historically, airlines both in the USA and outside have required massive capital injections to remain in business. Quite simply the record shows they have not actually made money since KLM was founded (1919 ?)

http://chartingtheeconomy.com/?p=1541

Note Warren Buffett's comments in this one:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3679292/...truggle-paths-profit/#.T6vHi1Kuk9g



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19230 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 18487 times:

I wish such threads wouldn't inevitably descend into the same tired and cliched comments.


"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4920 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 18414 times:

Even though profits have dropped guarantee EK announce another billion $$$ profit...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19230 posts, RR: 52
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 18327 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 12):
Even though profits have dropped guarantee EK announce another billion $$$ profit...

EK itself (the airline) earned $409m.



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 18173 times:

Right, that is roughly 300 million € on sales of roughly € 12,750 Billion which stands against LH sales of € 28 734 billion with a resulting operational profit of € 820,00 million.

Good show, LH, I'd say, under much rougher conditions than EK enjoys. (Unions, social contributions, legal system etc.)



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1114 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 18010 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 14):
under much rougher conditions than EK enjoys. (Unions, social contributions, legal system etc.)

But most legacy European and American carriers had a much earlier headstart during times when such "rough conditions" were still in their infancy decades ago. That the recent upstarts have risen to rival the older airlines despite the current operating climate is surely something to be lauded.



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 17806 times:

It is always comparing apples and peaches when companies based in such different countries like the UAE and Germany are compared. If you can get the EBITDA from EK to show against the 2.546 Billion EBITDA of LH we would even have a better comparison.

Now, EK is owned by the UAE government whereas LH is a private company, listed at the FRA stock exchange which gets slammed wth taxes and ETS trades by the German government. Besides that they have to observe all kind of laws, rules and regulations in a state ruled by the law where every citiuzen can sue the government, a company or any other authority. The UAE is ruled by decret. No need to say anmore.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17508 posts, RR: 45
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 17728 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 15):
But most legacy European and American carriers had a much earlier headstart during times when such "rough conditions" were still in their infancy decades ago.

True, and by comparison it's only going to get more difficult and competitive for EK, especially if India and Pakistan ever gets their house in order.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinewill777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 17563 times:

Quoting something (Reply 6):
because they're profitable (~ it works). If they weren't, EK could hardly be called an ''achievement

This applies to literally any business in the entire world. If Apple lost money, they wouldn't be here anymore. But no, it is one of the most profitable companies in the world and continues to grow at amazing rates.

If Emirates is profitable, clearly they are doing something right, and they should continue to expand.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 17380 times:

Quoting will777 (Reply 18):
This applies to literally any business in the entire world. If Apple lost money,

Apples are apples and peaches are peaches.

Apple is a manufacturer and airlines are service industry. You cannot compare manufacturers and service businesses both directly.

Does not even work in the same country.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineHachikoDog From Finland, joined Dec 2010, 13 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 16201 times:

I´ll drink to that. EK has always been overpraised airline. Don´t know why... Because of IFE? Or B77W´s? There are a lot of better airlines than EK. Even in "low cost" concept...

User currently offlinesomething From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 1633 posts, RR: 21
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 15768 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 7):
Curious do you even know what interest rates EK pays on their capital?

I don't, but it's a logical inference. Their default risk, with Abu Dhabi behind them, is practically zero. They also don't pay taxes and they don't have shareholders, ie they can repay their credits as freely as they please. EK can virtually use their entire profit for investments/depreciation. LH can't. A.) Legally, they can't depreciate more than their profits and B.) They need to pay off stake- and shareholders with about 2/3 of their profits, rendering their credit period - per default - 66% longer than that of EK.

Also, EK can also order in larger quantities than LH can. Buying 100 A380s will obviously get you a cheaper unit-price than buying 20 of them. Even if LH wanted to buy that many A380s, they could never find creditors to raise that much capital.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 7):
And to suggest they don't do hub feeding is just asinine! That is all they do, DXB is one of the largest airports in the world (pax traffic), not because Dubai is some sort of massive business center or tourist destination but because Emirates funnels almost all of its traffic through their DXB hub! I would bet their connecting traffic at their DXB hub is probably the largest percentage of any airline in the world, and certainly top 5.

Interesting. They can't seem to emphasize enough how valuable of a destination Dubai is, and that only 42% (or so) of their traffic are transits. If that isn't true, and DXB is as you say, nothing but an airport, what incentive would Germany have to grant EK more landing rights? Trade is quid pro quo, so if EK can suck all of the passengers out of Germany, what will the German airlines get in return? Germany has a population of 82m., Dubai has 0 if as you say, nobody leaves or enters the airplane there.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 7):
Not sure what you mean by supported by government. "Most major airlines" are supported by the government behind them. And all major airlines follow regulations!!! In fact they all follow the same regulations, because everywhere they fly they must adhere to the local regulations in place!
EK wants a new airport, they get it. EK doesn't want a ban on night flights, so there's none. EK doesn't want unions, so there are none. EK doesn't want labor protection, so there is none (hire today, fire tomorrow). EK doesn't want to pay benefits to their employees, or at least their employee's dependents, so they don't have to. I could extend this list for quite a bit.

Why? Because the government creates the most convenient business environment for EK, whereas in Western democracies, like it or not, the people create the business environment for the companies by being able to vote on what is cool and what is not. Night flights for example, are usually voted ''not cool'' in most countries. Ask LH what that is doing to their bottom line.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 7):
But I don't see how this is relevant. I have heard no complaints about former Emirates employees who were unjustly fired. I also hear very few complaints from employees about the airline mistreating or under paying them. Which ironically is quite unique, since that is a common complaint from employees of "most major airlines".

If having a boy- or girlfriend is a just cause for your employment's termination, to name just one of the many reasons people have gotten fired for, then you're probably right.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 7):
in other words there is nothing unique to Emirates.

Of course EK isn't unique. There are also Qatar, Oman, Etihad, Gulf Air etc. Heck, not even their business idea is unique as it's almost an identical copy of Singapore Airlines. They even copied Silk Air with FlyDubai. So I absolutely agree. EK isn't unique at all.

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 15):
That the recent upstarts have risen to rival the older airlines despite the current operating climate is surely something to be lauded.

Don't get me wrong, I do find the whole EK operation very impressive and laudable. More companies should be like them in many ways. Many of their marketing strategies are genius. But it's all been done before (SQ) and secondly, more companies probably would be like them if they had the means to. In view of those facts, I just don't find their results very impressive. They're decent and testament of the viability of their business model. If they [the numbers] weren't [decent], then what would EK be other than a failed dream, is what I'm trying to say. They make money, their model works, good for them, other airlines can learn things from them, but in light of what others are doing under much rougher conditions, EK are nothing new under the sun.

[Edited 2012-05-10 11:36:29]


..sick of it. -K. Pilkington.
User currently offlineFURUREFA From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 802 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 15770 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 8):
As something already said, put that in relation with the work conditions LH and AF/Kl have to live and deal with and the profit is not that bright at all. And, making that statement, I assume that they pay market prices for fuel.

Right, but in the end, it doesn't matter. If France wants more competitive airlines in the global market, then perhaps it should modify its work requirements and taxation levels. That's the thing with global trade.

It's not EK's fault they are headquartered in a country with low taxes, just like it's not AF's fault it operates in a country with regulatory policies that are hostile to business and investment.

Quoting something (Reply 6):
If ''most major airlines'' raised capital under the same low interest rates, if ''most major airlines'' didn't have to do regional/domestic flying and hub feeding, if ''most major airlines'' could hire and fire people willy-nilly, if ''most other major airlines'' were supported by the government behind them and weren't tied to regulations, they'd be profitable too.

Show me the rates at which EK raises capital? Do you know at what rate they most recently floated their debt? I remember hearing that last year they raised about $500 million at an interest rate of about 4% - that's what one would expect for a corporation of that size and stability.

Likewise, no airline has to do regional/domestic flying and hub feeding. The airline industries in the US (apart of EAS) and Europe are unregulated. They only fly the routes they do out of choice and strategy. No one forces DL to fly to AGS.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 13651 times:

Quoting something (Reply 21):
They need to pay off stake- and shareholders with about 2/3 of their profits

In bad years the shareholders get nothing, in not so good years they get 0,25 € per share 8for 2011) and in the best year ever it was - i think € 1,10. In any case, 1/3 for the shareholders, 1/3 for the employees as boni and 1(3 retained in the company.

Quoting something (Reply 21):
Even if LH wanted to buy that many A380s, they could never find creditors to raise that much capital.

That's not LHs ppolicy anyhow. i have shown here how EK finances some of their assets. LH is a bit more conservative. I don't have the time to analyse the annual returns, but EK is by far in a batter position, I mentioned that here as well.

Quoting FURUREFA (Reply 22):
It's not EK's fault they are headquartered in a country with low taxes,

There's nothing about fault, in business it's about facts. facts only is what companies have to cope with. Politics and business have different interestes, except in well run countries like Singapore. France or Germany won't change their social laws, the poltics are populistics and the industry is the cash cow that keeps it running.

In Dubai, the state owns not only the airline but the airport, the handling company, it runs the aviation authorities and most important, it sets the game rules as well. These are the facts, European, Asian and American airlines have to cope with.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinegreenwichsud From United States of America, joined May 2008, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12821 times:

my my..

Just a few short years ago (when the A380 orders started rolling in) EK was the toast of Europe on these boards. The rhetoric has changed dramatically (a near 180 degree turn) now that it is clear just what they intended to do with all that capacity.

Quoting FURUREFA (Reply 22):
Likewise, no airline has to do regional/domestic flying and hub feeding.

I've always wondered how this model would work in the US - an airline that connected only the top 15-20 key domestic cities with reduced frequency and larger aircraft and placed a larger focus on international flying. Presumably that model is not workable here as no carrier seems to be moving wholeheartedly in that direction.


User currently offlineKAL7478 From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 15 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 12286 times:

Quote HachicoDog "I´ll drink to that. EK has always been overpraised airline. Don´t know why... Because of IFE? Or B77W´s? There are a lot of better airlines than EK. Even in "low cost" concept..."

I beg to differ here, IMO EK has done well enough to deserve praise....Their IFE is one of the best if not the best in the business and 77W's are once again IMHO the best all around commercial aircrafts out there.
If it also happens to be the back bone of their fleet well that is a good thing, the bit about (a lot of other airlines better than Ek that is definitely up for debate).....


User currently onlineSuperCaravelle From Netherlands, joined Jan 2012, 237 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11971 times:

Look at how many EU airlines still serve Dubai, some even adding flights. It indicates both that EK is not on another planet and that Dubai is not only a transit hub, but also a important city on it's own.

[Edited 2012-05-10 16:01:50]

User currently offlineFURUREFA From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 802 posts, RR: 2
Reply 27, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 11606 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 23):
Quoting FURUREFA (Reply 22):
It's not EK's fault they are headquartered in a country with low taxes,

There's nothing about fault, in business it's about facts. facts only is what companies have to cope with. Politics and business have different interestes, except in well run countries like Singapore. France or Germany won't change their social laws, the poltics are populistics and the industry is the cash cow that keeps it running.

In Dubai, the state owns not only the airline but the airport, the handling company, it runs the aviation authorities and most important, it sets the game rules as well. These are the facts, European, Asian and American airlines have to cope with.

Right, so the fact is that EK operates in an environment that is conducive to increasing capital growth, business, and investment. "Well run" is certainly a term that is subjective - I would argue that, in some ways, the UAE is indeed well run; do I agree with the government's social policies and every fiscal policy? Absolutely not, but that doesn't mean that their business-friendly practices make the country "poorly run".

Quoting greenwichsud (Reply 24):

Quoting FURUREFA (Reply 22):
Likewise, no airline has to do regional/domestic flying and hub feeding.

I've always wondered how this model would work in the US - an airline that connected only the top 15-20 key domestic cities with reduced frequency and larger aircraft and placed a larger focus on international flying. Presumably that model is not workable here as no carrier seems to be moving wholeheartedly in that direction.

I don't think it would work either, but no one forces US carriers to do so.


User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 28, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 11237 times:

Quoting something (Reply 21):
Why? Because the government creates the most convenient business environment for EK, whereas in Western democracies, like it or not, the people create the business environment for the companies by being able to vote on what is cool and what is not. Night flights for example, are usually voted ''not cool'' in most countries. Ask LH what that is doing to their bottom line.

Yes, but in other countries they are a fact of life. Most of India's international flights used to operate at night to get into Europe early AM. Flying patterns have been dictated by Europe to a large degree - with their limited hours, airlines around the world have to operate at all hours to make sure they can use their slots.

Not much sympathy there, I am afraid. Democracy means many things, but it does not mean NIMBYISM. If a democratic state cannot figure out what is in the national interest, choosing instead to bow down to one small group, then it isn't functioning very well. Some might even say that in cases like LHR and FRA, its a case of the tyranny of the minority.

These are, ultimately, self-inflicted wounds. Airplanes are noisy? Yes. Don't like it? Move elsewhere or soundproof your house.

Quoting something (Reply 21):
If having a boy- or girlfriend is a just cause for your employment's termination, to name just one of the many reasons people have gotten fired for, then you're probably right.

I suppose. But then again, we live in a world where, despite the law, an employer can choose to not hire someone on the basis of their race, sexual orientation etc. The only catch is that the employer can't admit that was his reasoning. Granted, its difficult to fire someone if you never hire them in the first place. But then again, there is something to be said for honesty. I mean, one need only look at the waiting list for 'black' students at traditionally 'white' schools in the Netherlands to know that discrimination may be illegal, but the loopholes ensure that it persists.

Quoting greenwichsud (Reply 24):
Just a few short years ago (when the A380 orders started rolling in) EK was the toast of Europe on these boards. The rhetoric has changed dramatically (a near 180 degree turn) now that it is clear just what they intended to do with all that capacity.

Everyone's great. Till they become a threat. AC was quite willing to let EK in. All they wanted was 50% of the EKs profits, without actually spending a dime or investing anything on YYZ-DXB (think freeloading). EK said no, and the rest is history.

Quoting HachikoDog (Reply 20):
I´ll drink to that. EK has always been overpraised airline. Don´t know why... Because of IFE? Or B77W´s? There are a lot of better airlines than EK. Even in "low cost" concept...

If there is a list of the most pointless post on a.net, this will definitely make it.

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 26):
Look at how many EU airlines still serve Dubai, some even adding flights. It indicates both that EK is not on another planet and that Dubai is not only a transit hub, but also a important city on it's own.

Either that, or AF flies pax to DXB so that they can connect to Mauritius or India. I quite enjoy the way people like belittling this little country.

Is EK a great airline? Not really. Has what it done for Dubai impressive? Probably.


User currently offlinejuantrippe82 From Bahamas, joined Sep 2011, 26 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 11102 times:

Quoting greenwichsud (Reply 24):

There was an airline like that, I think it was called Pan Am . And we all know how that turned out.



Don't worry, I'm never wrong.
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1114 posts, RR: 1
Reply 30, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 10182 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 16):
Now, EK is owned by the UAE government whereas LH is a private company, listed at the FRA stock exchange which gets slammed wth taxes and ETS trades by the German government. Besides that they have to observe all kind of laws, rules and regulations in a state ruled by the law where every citiuzen can sue the government, a company or any other authority. The UAE is ruled by decret. No need to say anmore.

Yes, and so LH and its predecesors were never government owned? Really?

Read my comment again, as I implied that EK is now growing at a stage of its history similar to how most modern Western carriers today used to be government-supported or owned during their growth spurts, which is often the most challenging periods for a company. Once the market and the company stabilises, and the airline has archieved significant market share, they are better able to survive after privatisation.

Hence I find that it reeks of double standards when people insist upstarts from less developed economies should operate in the same social/politica/economic environment as their peers in more developed economies, just because they are now direct competitors.

As many has said, it is not EK's fault that it's government adopted business-friendly policies. As thriving democracies, western nations have only themselves to blame if they continue to elect populist governments who are not neccesarily doing the things companies desire.

Quoting something (Reply 21):
more companies probably would be like them if they had the means to.

Again, it is the company's choice. May I also point out that although the aviation industry is one of the most regulated ones around, companies ambitious and determined enough can find ways to plant themselves in places with more favourable business climates. Some airlines buy up stakes in other carriers precisely for this purpose, and where politically/jurisdically possible, even establish wholely-owned subsidiaries there.

Qantas is one example of a company trying to uproot themselves from their homeland and implant themselves in Asia to ensure their own long-term survival, although of course we know it was met with domestic opposition. But if the business gets to run the way it should be run, it is exactly the best way forward for them. So ultimately, let us blame less on the circumstances beyond our control, and focus on how best we can take full advantage of any available opportunities open to us.

[Edited 2012-05-10 19:06:18]


It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineflightsimer From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 556 posts, RR: 1
Reply 31, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9680 times:

Quoting juantrippe82 (Reply 29):

I was thinking the same thing, but when deregulation came, it did not allow PanAm to expand what little of a domestic route system it had on its own. Therefore, to keep from loosing all it's market share to the other airlines that had Domestic markets, it was forced into buying airlines which had a domestic system. When they bought national they paid way too much and could never recover from it.

I could see a new airline being able to do it successfully if they chose to do that type of airline.



Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
User currently offlinecheeken From Singapore, joined Feb 2010, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9673 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 9):
Meanwhile, SQ's profits also plunged 69% for the Jan-Mar 2012 period. It must be a truly pathetic airline to do this badly despite all the advantages!

I think EK has the huge advantage of having a website that works...   


User currently offlineDocpepz From Singapore, joined May 2001, 1971 posts, RR: 3
Reply 33, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9527 times:

SIA's bond yields are 2.15%, while when EK issued bonds they had a coupon rate of 5.1%. As such, SQ can raise money at much lower interest rates (but they are sitting on billions of dollars of cash, so only issue bonds every now and then just for purposes of rebalancing their balance sheet)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/21/sia-idUSSGE68K00520100921

http://gulfnews.com/business/aviatio...-dives-as-travel-picks-up-1.991888

This is largely because Singapore's sovereign rating is rated higher than the UAE, and Singapore generally has extremely low interest rates for a variety of reasons (safe haven flows, enormous liquidity in the banking system, etc) . For example, I can get a housing loan at 1% interest or less these days, compared to an Australian who has to pay 6% to borrow in AUD in his own country, or even an American who has to pay 4%.

The income tax I would pay in Singapore on $100k USD is around 5% after deductions, whereas for someone in Australia or the US it would be 25-30%.

Is it my fault that I can get access to capital far more cheaply than an American or Australian, or that I have access to a lower tax regime? Is it SQ's fault that they can raise capital cheaply in Singapore (as with any other company who wants to issue SGD bonds) In the same vein, is it EK's fault that they come from a tax free state, and also can raise capital fairly easily?

If low taxes, no night curfew and access to a flexible labour force is the be all and end all, then Etihad and Qatar Airways should be making billions today. Alas, they're not even profitable or barely breaking even. So Emirates obviously is doing something right.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 34, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9447 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting something (Reply 21):
Their default risk, with Abu Dhabi behind them, is practically zero.

EY competes with EK. If anything, Abu Dhabi has been trying to curb there once lesser cousin.

Quoting something (Reply 21):
EK wants a new airport, they get it. EK doesn't want a ban on night flights, so there's none.

I remember once upon a time Western nations tried to expand their transportation options. I've posted many a time on a.net that I have a theory that the mid-east hubs were incubated in an environment of night-curfews and lack of European hub expansion that allowed their rapid growth. That isn't a fault. For service to and from Europe, middle of the night operations are required for a mid-east or Indian based hub. It is adapting to a competitive necessity.

Quoting greenwichsud (Reply 24):
Presumably that model is not workable here as no carrier seems to be moving wholeheartedly in that direction.

For the model to work, limited bilateral rights need to be present.


Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4524 posts, RR: 18
Reply 35, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 8250 times:

Quoting KAL7478 (Reply 25):
Quote HachicoDog "I´ll drink to that. EK has always been overpraised airline. Don´t know why... Because of IFE? Or B77W´s? There are a lot of better airlines than EK. Even in "low cost" concept..."

I beg to differ here, IMO EK has done well enough to deserve praise....Their IFE is one of the best if not the best in the business

Seriously, this is how we judge Airlines these days ?



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 36, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 8161 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 30):
Yes, and so LH and its predecesors were never government owned? Really?

These were the days of national carriers, when infrastructure that was vital for the rest of the industry needed to be build up. We can talk about this again after EK went public, floated on major world stock exchanges and without any control of the Dubai government, not even a seat on the supervisory board. And no DXB stockholding as well.

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 30):
As many has said, it is not EK's fault that it's government adopted business-friendly policies. As thriving democracies, western nations have only themselves to blame if they continue to elect populist governments who are not neccesarily doing the things companies desire.

And I say again, in business it is not about fault it is only about facts. I made a compliment towards SIN saying that your country is efficiently run. I may add, at the expense of some democratic rights, but still a fairly free country. In the western democracies, the days of the realists will come because it is inevitable. In Germany, we are on the proper way, at least until the next election.

At the end of the day, countries like the UAE will have to learn that they have to live with some restrictions on traffic rights. Honestly, I cannot understand it anyway, they have exfcellent rigfhts in Germany, what the complaint really is



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 37, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 7382 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would like to have more of a discussion of EK's actual operations.

For example, I find it interesting how cargo grew only 1.6%. Now, the prediction (below link) for 2011 was 1.4%. This implies that EK is basically 'treading water' from a market share perspective. But the anual report notes a shrinking world air cargo market (pg 8). Which is the case? Did cargo shrink or grow in 2011?

The available seat kilometers grew fractionally more than employees. Was this operational efficiency, the A380, or ???

http://www.aircargoworld.com/Air-Car...irfreight-growth-projection/212111

From the annual report, there were 11 new destinations:
Europe: Geneva, Copenhagen, St. Petersburg, Dublin
Regional: Baghdad,
Americas: Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires, Dallas-Fort Worth, Seattle
Africa: Lusaka, Harare

One sees the need for gauge growth (Europe/Americas seem to be bulk of growth by city count).

I would also like to discuss the available seat miles weighted load factor (annual report pdf pg. 43). The break even load factor went up 2.3 % while the actual load factor (when weighted by available seat kilometers/miles) dropped 2.2%! It looks like EK barely scrapped a profit and I speculate the last quarter of the reporting period was operated at a loss.

For the overall picture on EK shows they are under financial pressure. Some of that is self inflicted due to growth. How much due to regional competition? (QR/EY?)

I also note EK is definitely growing by frequency and gauge. Looking at pg. 129 of the annual report, I see they grew from 2002-03 from 46 aircraft to 169 and 64 destinations to 122. Or 367% of the aircraft to servie 191% of the cities.

EK is a very interesting airline due to its business model and growth.

Quoting something (Reply 21):
Of course EK isn't unique. There are also Qatar, Oman, Etihad, Gulf Air etc. Heck, not even their business idea is unique as it's almost an identical copy of Singapore Airlines. They even copied Silk Air with FlyDubai. So I absolutely agree. EK isn't unique at all.

Which has me curious to learn more about EK. Is it their first mover advantage? Superior hub banks versus the regional competition? Better fleet purchases? (e.g., ditching the A346 for the 77W?)

I also want to comment that EK's fleet turnover seems far slower than in the past. Until this year, they just were not rotating many aircraft out of the fleet. (IIRC, we'll see the A343s all leave the fleet in this fiscal year for EK.) I see, per pg 45 of the annual report, the 8 of the 10 A345s are leased. When do those circa 2003 aircraft have their leases expire? (e.g., are they 10 year leases or longer?) Do I recall correctly that the 77W leases expire in 2014?

One last question. How did so many A330-200s become owned by EK? The prior annual report had one owned by EK. All of the financial leases on the A332 were bought out and it looks as if one operating lease either expired or was bought out. Did EK just sell enough bonds that buying out the financial lease was the cheapest option?

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinewindshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2330 posts, RR: 11
Reply 38, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 7371 times:

How can their profit drop almost completely out of the floor only in 2011 because of the price on oil, if their claim that they always had paid for their fuel?!

I think 2011 was the first year they did this, welcome to reality UAE...

Boaz.



"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 39, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 7060 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37):
Which is the case? Did cargo shrink or grow in 2011?

yes, started in the second half. EK is bstill doing well, they have an excellent cargo team. They invest a lot in marketing. They have excellent conditions at their home airport, benefit from sea air with transit times from container yrad in Jebel Ali to aircraft in 6 hours. They have no curfews, no restrictions European carriers have. Makes live easier and they use the benefits.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37):
t looks like EK barely scrapped a profit and I speculate the last quarter of the reporting period was operated at a loss.

Compare LH and EK figures and they are pretty much on par. EK shows an EBITDAR which is better than LH's EBITDA but then it has to be analized how much the "Rent" is and what they understand as rent, If leasing is included than I'd say they had a really bad year.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinevegetables2001 From UK - England, joined Mar 2012, 93 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6681 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 36):
Honestly, I cannot understand it anyway, they have exfcellent rigfhts in Germany, what the complaint really is

Complaint is that limiting rights costs jobs and denies local service to those customers who wish it.

The only people who benefit are LH's shareholders.

If the UK can manage EK serving 7 airports why can't Germany with 20million more citizens? BA still (occasionally) makes a profit why can't LH?



A306,319,333 ATR72 BAC113/5, B703/704,717,721,732/3/4/5/7/8,741/1/4,757,763,773/E, DC8-6,9-3/5,10-30, DC106
User currently offlinesomething From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 1633 posts, RR: 21
Reply 41, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6543 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 28):
Democracy means many things, but it does not mean NIMBYISM. If a democratic state cannot figure out what is in the national interest, choosing instead to bow down to one small group, then it isn't functioning very well. Some might even say that in cases like LHR and FRA, its a case of the tyranny of the minority.

You don't understand the term 'democracy' then. Democracy is a form of self-governance. That's why the US Americans can have their death penalties and why Danes can have their social securities. France can have as many nuclear reactors as they like, Germany will have none from 2020 on. Germany could forbid aviation altogether if the people there wished that. This 'ulterior motive' or 'greater good' thought you seem to think is defining of a democracy is actually the one of the defining elements of communism.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 28):
I mean, one need only look at the waiting list for 'black' students at traditionally 'white' schools in the Netherlands to know that discrimination may be illegal, but the loopholes ensure that it persists.
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 28):
Either that, or AF flies pax to DXB so that they can connect to Mauritius or India.

Nobody connects through DXB on their own. Look at the airport's layout.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 28):
I quite enjoy the way people like belittling this little country.

Dubai is not a country.

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 30):
As many has said, it is not EK's fault that it's government adopted business-friendly policies. As thriving democracies, western nations have only themselves to blame if they continue to elect populist governments who are not neccesarily doing the things companies desire.

I am not blaming anybody. I am just saying that EK's success was made possible by circumstances other companies didn't have.

Quoting Docpepz (Reply 33):
SIA's bond yields are 2.15%, while when EK issued bonds they had a coupon rate of 5.1%.
EK borrows money at around 3-4 percent.

Quoting Docpepz (Reply 33):
Is it my fault that I can get access to capital far more cheaply than an American or Australian, or that I have access to a lower tax regime? Is it SQ's fault that they can raise capital cheaply in Singapore (as with any other company who wants to issue SGD bonds) In the same vein, is it EK's fault that they come from a tax free state, and also can raise capital fairly easily?

It's good for them. I am not an EK hater. I just don't find their business model impressive.

Quoting Docpepz (Reply 33):
So Emirates obviously is doing something right.

They are. They have understood that approaching business conservatively isn't always the right thing to do. LH buys A380s because their demand, and match it with a suitable aircraft. EK on the other hand, seems to do things the ''build it, and they will come..'' way. Look at that Burj Khalifa project. I doubt it'll ever earn money - directly. But it is a huge attraction and people come to Dubai, among other things, because of the impressive architecture. And that is a spirit I miss in Europe. Putting money first, and expecting people to do as you tell them, as opposed to listening to what the people want (ie flying in big aircraft, as opposed to narrow bodies) and then be rewarded with their business.

Of course Dubai carries a huge financial risk. Those widebodies and big buildings can become a liability..

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 34):
Quoting something (Reply 21):
Their default risk, with Abu Dhabi behind them, is practically zero.

EY competes with EK. If anything, Abu Dhabi has been trying to curb there once lesser cousin.

Dubai was on the brink of defaulting and was then saved by a $10bn. bail out by Abu Dhabi. If Dubai goes bankrupt, they're taking EK with them.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 36):
At the end of the day, countries like the UAE will have to learn that they have to live with some restrictions on traffic rights.

I don't see the restrictions, honestly. They're getting much more out of Germany, than Germany is getting out of them. That's hardly a restriction.

Their new document tries to argue otherwise, but I have yet to read it to comment on that.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37):
Which has me curious to learn more about EK. Is it their first mover advantage? Superior hub banks versus the regional competition? Better fleet purchases? (e.g., ditching the A346 for the 77W?)

They embody the ''go big or go home'' approach to business. They throw multiple daily widebody frequencies at regional airports. Qatar's spotty 3-weekly A319 network is just not doing it for the needs of most travellers. EK can single-handledly offer the connection and schedule convenience that would otherwise take the cooperation of 2-3 airlines.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37):
Until this year, they just were not rotating many aircraft out of the fleet. (IIRC, we'll see the A343s all leave the fleet in this fiscal year for EK.) I see, per pg 45 of the annual report, the 8 of the 10 A345s are leased. When do those circa 2003 aircraft have their leases expire? (e.g., are they 10 year leases or longer?) Do I recall correctly that the 77W leases expire in 2014?

The ''fleet rollover'' was said to begin in 2012 but was then postponed because they need the lift of these aircraft for longer than anticipated. Delays of other aircraft or faster than anticipated growth should be the drivers.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37):
One last question. How did so many A330-200s become owned by EK? The prior annual report had one owned by EK. All of the financial leases on the A332 were bought out and it looks as if one operating lease either expired or was bought out. Did EK just sell enough bonds that buying out the financial lease was the cheapest option?

They need the aircraft and buying them out of their leases might have been the cheapest, or even only feasible option for them.

Quoting vegetables2001 (Reply 40):
If the UK can manage EK serving 7 airports why can't Germany with 20million more citizens? BA still (occasionally) makes a profit why can't LH?

Protectionism, if you will. Business is always quid pro quo. EK is getting much more quid for the quo they're giving.

[Edited 2012-05-11 01:50:16]


..sick of it. -K. Pilkington.
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 42, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6157 times:

Quoting vegetables2001 (Reply 40):
Complaint is that limiting rights costs jobs and denies local service to those customers who wish it.

well, thanks for reminding me. Why don't you complain to your boss that he does not pay you a million quid per month , yu could boost the eocnomy that way and create jobs.

Seripously, EK has generous traffic rights. They can chose between 49 flights per week to 7 destinations or unlimited nukmber of flights per week , any aircraft size to 4 destinations.

The destinations they have cjose are strategically localed so they can servie the whole of Germany. no resident here is denied local service. The 2 airports in question , BER and STR have QR service, BER has EY service on top of that.


Quoting vegetables2001 (Reply 40):
If the UK can manage EK serving 7 airports why can't Germany with 20million more citizens? BA still (occasionally) makes a profit why can't LH?

LH has not only been occasionally profitable but consistently . Contrary to BA, aka as Air London, LH as never given up the secondary and tertiary airports in Germany. They are serving their home market. An airline that does not, leaving wide gaps, has no reason to complain when those gaps are filled.

Quoting something (Reply 41):
I don't see the restrictions, honestly.

Me neither, see above. EK sees it that way and they will until they have gained access to BRE, HAJ, FMO, NUE LEJ DRS and whatever else as well. OK, won't happen....



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 43, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6010 times:

Quoting something (Reply 41):

You don't understand the term 'democracy' then. Democracy is a form of self-governance. That's why the US Americans can have their death penalties and why Danes can have their social securities. France can have as many nuclear reactors as they like, Germany will have none from 2020 on. Germany could forbid aviation altogether if the people there wished that. This 'ulterior motive' or 'greater good' thought you seem to think is defining of a democracy is actually the one of the defining elements of communism.

No, I am afraid it is you who have misinterpreted democracy. Democracy is meant to be self-governance, but in the day-to-day realities of this world, democracy is compromised by (deliberately) powerful executives (PM/Cabinet), party whips and party discipline. The latter two are about as anti-democratic /communist (as you call it) as they come - last thing any MP wants to do is get thrown out of the party. Whether they represent the will of those who elected them, or the will of their party leader....its a grey area at the best of times.

Which is why your form of 'self-governance' in the UK will never allow the laws to be changed to support, say, internet piracy. Many people do it. If you put up a national referendum, I suspect more people would vote for free downloading than wouldn't. But will that question ever be posed to the public? Probably not, because democracies use the executive to temper populism in the name of the 'greater good'.

As for the death penalty, it is not a function of US democracy. It is a function of federalism. Sure the majority of people in some states might support it, but that does not mean that all Americans will vote for it if it is put to a national vote.

Quoting something (Reply 41):
Protectionism, if you will. Business is always quid pro quo. EK is getting much more quid for the quo they're giving.

Its simplistic to look at aviation as separate from two countries relationships. Its part of an overall agreement and I guess the UK, as a whole, is gaining as much as it is giving to the UAE, as a whole.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 42):

LH has not only been occasionally profitable but consistently . Contrary to BA, aka as Air London, LH as never given up the secondary and tertiary airports in Germany. They are serving their home market. An airline that does not, leaving wide gaps, has no reason to complain when those gaps are filled.

Still begs the questions - why is it left to LH to decide if it is meeting the consumers needs in secondary / tertiary markets. LH determines the schedules for these secondary markets, no? Why should some Germans have to fly through FRA because LH deems it fit, while other get to fly directly to their destination? In other words, if LH thinks it has the country properly covered, then why is it afraid of losing passengers? And on a more fundamental level, why would the government discriminate against its own people by forcing them to fly LH, just because LH has deigned to send a few aircraft to their 'secondary/tertiary' market? LH may have service, but that doesn't mean that, for consumers, it is cost-effective or convenient.

Right now, we have LHs word that it is doing enough. But the fear of EK suggests that they are afraid that if people have a choice, LH might not be it. What gives?


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 44, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 5923 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 43):
Still begs the questions - why is it left to LH to decide if it is meeting the consumers needs in secondary / tertiary markets. LH determines the schedules for these secondary markets, no?

Nobody has to fly through FRA to get to DXB. People can fly via LHR, CDG, MUC, ZRH, VIE, DOH, there is ample choice. Price wise it is competetive as well. If DXB is your destination you are likely better of with any other carrier than EK. However,m aqs ,market dictates matters, there won't be enough business form BER or STR to DXB to justify a direct flight.

Only transit beyond makes such flights evebntually profitable. Those people you are pitying, living in such secondary markets like STR or BER do not have direct flights to many overseas destinations, but those who live close, within 60 minutes to an airport, always have a ultiple choice of connecting cities. Then there are at least 40 million or so in the polycentric country who have more than 100 minutes to reach the nearest airport. People living in STR can reach FRA in 70 minutes, EK is on their doorstep.

The country has an excellent infrastructure by rail and road. So, what seems to be the problem? If 10 fligthts a day with the majority 773 in which EK jams more tna 400 pax are not enough, they can add frequencies. Or switch to 380s. What does EK really want they not already have?




Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 43):
would the government discriminate against its own people by forcing them to fly LH

No one in this country is forced to do anything, except paying taxes. It is completely up to the individuals to fly what they want when they want and where they want and no one has to travel thousands of miles to reach an airport with EK service, as in Canada. For those who live in BER or STR, EK is 70 mins resp. 120 minutes away.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 45, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5813 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 44):

Ah yes, I keep ignoring high speed rail links (our rail infrastructure here in Canada is a bit.... outdated). I see your point with STR, but I do find BER an odd case. As a capital enjoying something of a cultural renaissance, I really feel that it could benefit from more direct flights (and no, not just EK). Which major airport is BER close to?

But of course, living in Canada, I m also quite sick and tired of Canadians on a.net insisting that we have 'enough' choice, which I find about as contradictory as a 'regulated free market'. Hence my questioning of this notion that a market is served well enough. Is that for the airline to decide or the consumer?

To be honest, I don't think EK needs more access - my support for EK in Europe is based almost exclusively in the hope that the competitive pressure will result in a better product on the EU carriers. Living in Canada, my choices on eastbound are essentially limited to EU carriers that are generally not very good in Y - especially compared to EK. AF 777 or EK 777? EK 380 or LH 380? In Y, EK comes out on top. Not that I fly EK. Personally, I much prefer TK and I hope they get a daily frequency to Canada by next year.

You Germans are spoilt for choice in comparison to us  


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 46, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5739 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 45):
ut I do find BER an odd case. As a capital enjoying something of a cultural renaissance, I really feel that it could benefit from more direct flights (and no, not just EK). Which major airport is BER close to?

BER had three airports and if they are keep going the way they are it will be zero by the end of the year. Anyhow, BER has an airport, but the catchment area is relatively small and does not warrant international flights, except a few spokes to US hub and now they have AUH through the EY affiliating with AB. . If they get btheir act together and finally open the new BER terminal sometime this year, a mini hub for AB might do it.

If you insist flying EK ex BER instead of QR or EY/AB, drive to HAM or take the ICE train that takes you in 90 mins to HAM central station and another 20 minutes by suburban train, puts you right smack in the ternminal building, 2 flights EK to DXB daily. I guess London /Ont. to Malton takes longer. Also, it is amazing that so many people insit on flying EK to connect to somewhere when LH flies them N/s from FRA or MUC to their destination. You name the place and there are multiple choices from each corner of Germany to anywhere in the world.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineSIA747Megatop From Singapore, joined Apr 2012, 295 posts, RR: 0
Reply 47, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5701 times:

Many airlines aren't doing (relatively) well under the current economic circumstances, SQ included. EK is no different. Emirates is a great marketing tool for the UAE and Dubai as it is just one of the many ways the country can showcase itself, the same way Singapore Airlines is considered a worldwide brand for the island nation. Both airlines' earnings were hurt by higher fuel costs.

The UAE and many western nations are at different stages of economic development and not only is their home market currently growing but so are many markets within the region. SIA benefits from the economic boom in India, China and South East Asia.

Unfortunately, Europe and the US don't have much economic potential for growth. This combined with uncompetitive economic restrictions such as high taxes and operating/labour costs automatically puts carriers from these regions at a disadvantage. This is no fault of EK or SIA, it's just natural economic growth and recessive cycles.

That being said, I don't find EK's on board products to be that great.

[Edited 2012-05-11 07:13:58]


That's Mr. Bovine Joni to you.
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4920 posts, RR: 4
Reply 48, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5533 times:

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 13):

Quoting EK413 (Reply 12):
Even though profits have dropped guarantee EK announce another billion $$$ profit...
EK itself (the airline) earned $409m.

My bad, didn't read the article prior to my statement....

Quoting KAL7478 (Reply 25):
I beg to differ here, IMO EK has done well enough to deserve praise....Their IFE is one of the best if not the best in the business and 77W's are once again IMHO the best all around commercial aircrafts out there.
If it also happens to be the back bone of their fleet well that is a good thing, the bit about (a lot of other airlines better than Ek that is definitely up for debate).....

Ain't going to argue your points as I too believe they have probably one of if not the best IFE but I certainly don't agree on EK having the greatest in flight service... SQ blows EK no doubt about it hands down...

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 34):
EY competes with EK. If anything, Abu Dhabi has been trying to curb there once lesser cousin.
Quoting something (Reply 41):
Dubai was on the brink of defaulting and was then saved by a $10bn. bail out by Abu Dhabi. If Dubai goes bankrupt, they're taking EK with them.

You beat me to it... During the world recession DXB was bailed out by AUH with a $10 billion bail out injection...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 49, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5050 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting something (Reply 41):
Dubai is not a country.

But it is a city state as Qatar showed (early in the UAE), city states have the ability to leave the UAE.

In effect, each Emirate competes with the others. The UAE is a federation more than a nation.

Quoting something (Reply 41):
Dubai was on the brink of defaulting and was then saved by a $10bn. bail out by Abu Dhabi. If Dubai goes bankrupt, they're taking EK with them.

Agreed. But that was more due to Dubai's place in the regional banking system. It was due to if Dubai defaulted, they would have created a greater expense for Abu Dhabi than collecting on a loan. There were conditions placed on Dubai/EK due to that loan; I wish I knew the terms. During the worst of the crisis, Abu-Dhabi wanted to buy EK but Dubai set down their foot and said 'not for sale.'

That loan was also pressured by French banks ironically as without the loan, the European crisis would have been worse. If Dubai had defaulted, Abu-Dhabi would have been in trouble due to association. So they do compete and not-always in a friendly manner. (e.g., when EK tried to push from 6X/weekly to YYZ, EY stepped in and took half the slots).

In many ways Abu Dhabi would have lost their hold on the UAE if they didn't help Dubai. It was interesting how dragged out the bailout was.
FWIW, the loan was $20bn by the sources I find:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...-percent-interest-in-debt-proposal

In many ways, Abu Dhabi are analogous to Samsung and Apple. They are "frenimies." Abu Dhabi is dependent on Dubai for certain parts of their economy (logistics, banking despite competition) and is rather upset the weaker upstart has grown so fast.

Quoting something (Reply 41):
They embody the ''go big or go home'' approach to business.

It is more than that. Most 'go big or go home' business do not have the open accounting EK does. There annual reports are clearer than most airlines. For example, the details on leases that raise a.net questions. There is a reason regional headquarters do not have as tough a time bringing families to Dubai than Saudi or Abu Dhabi.

Dubai is far from perfect. There are warts. But 'sheikh Mo' seems to have read 'The Lexus and the Olive Tree' and "The Birth of Plenty' and is implementing policy to attract business. Now much of that policy is to copy Hong Kong or Singapore, so much is not original. But why are they the *only* ones willing to do so in the region?

Quoting something (Reply 41):
They need the aircraft and buying them out of their leases might have been the cheapest, or even only feasible option for them.

I can believe cheapest. But I wonder if this is an indication of further A332s rolling out of their fleet as the 77Ws and A380s enter the fleet this year and next. By HB-IWC's excellent analysis, the A332 is rarely being used for its range capability. My opininion is that it makes sense to rotate the type out of EK's fleet while resale values are excellent with 77Ws as they arrive (up-gauge).

Emirates At DXB - Ultimate Operational Analysis (by HB-IWC Sep 27 2010 in Civil Aviation)

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 46):
Anyhow, BER has an airport, but the catchment area is relatively small and does not warrant international flights, except a few spokes to US hub and now they have AUH through the EY affiliating with AB. . If they get btheir act together and finally open the new BER terminal sometime this year, a mini hub for AB might do it.

Why do you say it doesn't warrant international flights? It is a growing city and if certain industries are going to thrive, the number of international connections must grow. I believe once AB implements their hub *and* repairs their balance sheet more (which EY's investment was a crucial part of), then they will start an international expansion. At first slow, but growing. However, they will be handicapped, as with so many European airports, by the curfew.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 46):
If you insist flying EK ex BER instead of QR or EY/AB, drive to HAM or take the ICE train that takes you in 90 mins to HAM central station and another 20 minutes by suburban train, puts you right smack in the ternminal building,

Every seat switch cuts the number of customers willing to take a transportation by 75%. Why? It seems the inconvenience is obvious. I have a cousin who design transportation cities (mostly for China today) and that many seat switches kill any business plan.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 50, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 4986 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 49):
Why do you say it doesn't warrant international flights? It is a growing city and if certain industries are going to thrive,

Should read : Intercontinental. The "growing cities" problem is that 25% of its inhabitants live on social securiry/welfare and tha city itself is supported with 4 Billion € by the rest of Germany. That would not be so bad, but the famous mayor is not interested in actively locaiting industry to BER. Worse, BERlins location is remote, in the north east, once out of the city there's a whole lot of sand and little else. Maybe with the AB hib and getting in enough transfer connctions, some intercont might be viable.

But look at DUS with a catchment of 20 million plus.....

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 49):
Every seat switch cuts the number of customers willing to take a transportation by 75%. W

someone here said the German government should give Germans access to EK. This is bull, it's none of the German governments business how people fly. We do not have to apply for permits and the government stays out of our travel plans. Even if EK flies to BER and STR, plus the existing, more that 50 million Germans still would have to switch seats.

Right now actually , the ICE train station at FRA is the fifth runway and you should see how many people switch seats there in one hour on any given day.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 51, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 4934 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 50):
Right now actually , the ICE train station at FRA is the fifth runway and you should see how many people switch seats there in one hour on any given day.

Thank you for your reply. While people do switch seats, it reduces the number of potential passengers. The question is, which is better for Germany? I speculate that with better access to the East, Germany has actually benefited from EK in their markets so far. (If one includes the provisions of the bilateral that includes other industries than aviation.) The debate is, would an EK expansion benefit Germany? I believe so.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 50):
But look at DUS with a catchment of 20 million plus.....

My impression is that its international flights are steadily expanding. However BER will be a better hub. The problem with DUS is how easy it is for many to drive to FRA and catch the non-stop or take the train to FRA. My employer sends employees to Europe all the time where DUS or even AMS would be the closest airport. But FRA is often the O&D point due to a variety of factors.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 52, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4862 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 51):
I speculate that with better access to the East, Germany has actually benefited from

There is ample and easy access to BER from all directions. QR serves BEr and with the financial investment of EY into AB, that region is coveered as well. At least one stop service to the top 100 destinaitons worldwide is given.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 51):
Europe all the time where DUS or even AMS would be the closest airport.

Goes both ways, many Dutch fly from DUS and many Germans from AMS. Market forces work here as well.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 51):
But FRA is often the O&D point due to a variety of factors.
FRA is my home airport for over 30 years now.You'd be surprised how few people stand at the baggage belt sometimes. I once counted 9 from a L/D 744 flight, including myself. The number of L/D services from FRA or MUC is a reason for locating a company. But many industroes in Germany have a long tradition, sometimes over 150 years or longer. Earlier this week I took a train through a remote area from FRA via Giessen Herborn, Siegen to Hagen. In each city there was heavy industry, sometimes world wide know firms. Most airliner kitchens / galleys flying around the world are made in that valley. Lots of heavy industry too.

O&D traffic is all across the country and that is one of LHs strenghts, connecting about 15 or 16 airports throughout Germany with FRA and MUC.


The essence is, wherever you live in Germany, from north to south, you have mutliple choices for overseas, or European travel. You can drive or take a train to an intercontinantal airport, you can fly to a hub in Germany or any place in Europe or take a spoke flight to an overseas hub. The claim by EK that Germans are prohibited by their government from enjoying the benefits EK , because access to BER and STR is not given, is a joke.,

[Edited 2012-05-12 03:53:46]


E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinesomething From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 1633 posts, RR: 21
Reply 53, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4798 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 49):
Quoting something (Reply 41):
They need the aircraft and buying them out of their leases might have been the cheapest, or even only feasible option for them.

I can believe cheapest. But I wonder if this is an indication of further A332s rolling out of their fleet as the 77Ws and A380s enter the fleet this year and next. By HB-IWC's excellent analysis, the A332 is rarely being used for its range capability. My opininion is that it makes sense to rotate the type out of EK's fleet while resale values are excellent with 77Ws as they arrive (up-gauge).

What if EK needs/wants to grow their network faster than they can get new airplanes delivered? Of course they want to get rid of them but that might not be possible at the moment. As for their range.. I don't think EK has ever really flown A332 on routes that maxed out their range.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 51):
While people do switch seats, it reduces the number of potential passengers.

I'm not sure what to make of that. If you must or want to go to Hong Kong, and there is no nonstop flight, it's not like you're flying to New York because it saves you switching planes once. You'd have to change planes once in Dubai anyway.

As it stands, Berlin has connections to Istanbul, Rome, Milan, Munich, Frankfurt, Düsseldorf, Brussels, Paris, London, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Madrid, Lisbon, Amman, Doha, Abu Dhabi, Beijing, Newark, JFK, Los Angeles, Miami, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Bangkok, Phuket, Mombasa, Cairo, Vancouver, Windhoek.

Those are the ones I can remember. Possible that a few of them have been discontinued in the meanwhile, but I'm sure there's other I've forgotten to mention. The point being.. the number of passengers that each year have to change planes twice because of the absense of Emirates at Berlin's airports, is probably below not even three digits strong.

Besides, with EK at BER you only decrease the likelihood of other airlines, that actually do have demand on their end, to go there. I would much rather see Cathay, Singapore or Qantas (via HKG or SIN) at BER than EK.



..sick of it. -K. Pilkington.
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 54, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4791 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 52):

If BER is so well-served, then what difference does it make if EK comes in. You point out that they will be competing with QR and an EY-supported AB. Fair. So why not let EK compete with them?

In other words, why is there a penchant to ignore the consumer perspective and keep saying that a place has enough service. The quality of this service rarely factors in, which I find problematic. Given, the reality of time - sensitivity, the 'within 120 minutes' argument carries only so much weight as a viable option (if it did, BUF would be a hub for international airlines wanting to serve Canada by now. It's not.) From a consumer perspective, quality matters insofar as it helps consumers decide value-for-money.

Why is there a reluctance to accept that? Why sit on a pedestal and determine that the masses have 'enough' options? If they do, then what difference will an extra carrier make? If LH has an extensive system in DE , why would it lose pax? After all, there are multiple one stop options, right? So why not add DXB to that list? It's just another airport- another option. Why not let the consumer decide, rather than dictate from a pedestal that a consumer has enough choice?

And to be clear, I m not advocating these rights solely for EK - they apply to all airlines. If Germany is as competitive as you claim, it's simply going to be another option.


User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 55, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4771 times:

Quoting something (Reply 53):
As it stands, Berlin has connections to Istanbul, Rome, Milan, Munich, Frankfurt, Düsseldorf, Brussels, Paris, London, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Madrid, Lisbon, Amman, Doha, Abu Dhabi, Beijing, Newark, JFK, Los Angeles, Miami, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Bangkok, Phuket, Mombasa, Cairo, Vancouver, Windhoek.

YVR? Scheduled service or seasonal/charter? How many of the other ones are scheduled services?

Quoting something (Reply 53):
I'm not sure what to make of that. If you must or want to go to Hong Kong, and there is no nonstop flight, it's not like you're flying to New York because it saves you switching planes once. You'd have to change planes once in Dubai anyway.

I think he's referring to the mode of transportation switch (ICE to airline). I would question the viability of that too - or else BUF would now be a thriving center for airlines that Transport Canada's archaic rules are keeping out, not to mention the high landing fees and whatnot.

Quoting something (Reply 53):
Besides, with EK at BER you only decrease the likelihood of other airlines, that actually do have demand on their end, to go there. I would much rather see Cathay, Singapore or Qantas (via HKG or SIN) at BER than EK.

If those airlines have enough demand, then the routes will be viable regardless. In any event, this suggest thats SQ, CX, QF don't have access to BER. Do they? Are they interested in starting the route? If they're not, then why keep EK out?

And what other service will diminish? Looking at that list of destinations you've listed, EK is only in a postion to compete for BKK and Mombasa. They don't operate to WIndhoek. Will service to North America diminish? I doubt it. Will service within Europe diminish? I really doubt it. People don't connect to Asia through MAD or LIS. MXP...maybe, but I m pretty sure theres enough O&D traffic there.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 56, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 4724 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 54):
If BER is so well-served, then what difference does it make if EK comes in. You point out that they will be competing with QR and an EY-supported AB. Fair. So why not let EK compete with them?

I think I - and others - have said it multiple times. The bi-lateral gives EK a choice between 49 flights per week to any number of destinations they want or unlimited flights to 4 destinations.,What reason should Germany have to change that bi-lateral? Dubai has nothing to offer in return.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 54):
In other words, why is there a penchant to ignore the consumer perspective and keep saying that a place has enoug

Is it so difficult to understand that BER has ample services and consumer perspectives are fully observed?



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 57, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 4640 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 52):
The claim by EK that Germans are prohibited by their government from enjoying the benefits EK , because access to BER and STR is not given, is a joke.,
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 56):
What reason should Germany have to change that bi-lateral? Dubai has nothing to offer in return.

Not quite a joke, then.

As you've so succinctly (and perhaps unwittingly) put it, the German government IS prohibiting Germans from enjoying the benefits of EK because (and completely rationally, I might add), Dubai has nothing to offer in return for more access.

What reason should Germany have to change that bi-lateral? The views of its own citizens, perhaps? Germany is a democracy - put it to referendum.  

I say that fallaciously but I am sure you get the point. If the question was posed to consumers in BER/STR, would they line up behind LH and the bureaucrats? Or would they line up in favor of more service?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 56):
Is it so difficult to understand that BER has ample services and consumer perspectives are fully observed?

If there are German citizens (or BER/STR in particular) who want more EK access, then yes, I do find it "difficult to underestand" that consumer perspectives "are fully observed". 'Fully' has an absoluteness about it that is very questionable in this context. 'Ample service' is a relative term - it applies differently in different contexts.

[Edited 2012-05-12 05:19:41]

User currently offlinesomething From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 1633 posts, RR: 21
Reply 58, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4557 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 54):
You point out that they will be competing with QR and an EY-supported AB. Fair. So why not let EK compete with them?
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 54):
Why is there a reluctance to accept that?

Because they have very generous traffic rights as it is. Besides, maybe Germany has given Qatar guarantees to keep EK out of BER and STR. Purely speculative, but Qatar is a huge investor in Germany.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 55):
I think he's referring to the mode of transportation switch (ICE to airline). I would question the viability of that too - or else BUF would now be a thriving center for airlines that Transport Canada's archaic rules are keeping out, not to mention the high landing fees and whatnot.

Well, there's the border problem. If there was a fast rail link between Toronto downtown and Buffalo airport and you could clear immigration onboard the train, I have no doubts Buffalo would get some intercontinental service.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 55):
Quoting something (Reply 53):
As it stands, Berlin has connections to Istanbul, Rome, Milan, Munich, Frankfurt, Düsseldorf, Brussels, Paris, London, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Madrid, Lisbon, Amman, Doha, Abu Dhabi, Beijing, Newark, JFK, Los Angeles, Miami, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Bangkok, Phuket, Mombasa, Cairo, Vancouver, Windhoek.

YVR? Scheduled service or seasonal/charter? How many of the other ones are scheduled services?

I'm not sure, Miami and San Francisco and Vancouver might be. The rest should be year around. Since Air Berlin's One World entry, you can hardly consider them charter anymore either.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 57):
What reason should Germany have to change that bi-lateral? The views of its own citizens, perhaps? Germany is a democracy - put it to referendum.

Honestly, if people weren't as useless as they are but actually knew how Emirates operated, what laws they subject their employees to, what economcial consequences using EK entails etc. they'd be out of business (in Germany) within 2 months.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 57):
I say that fallaciously but I am sure you get the point.

What you say sounds fallacious indeed  
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 57):
If there are German citizens (or BER/STR in particular) who want more EK access, then yes, I do find it "difficult to underestand" that consumer perspectives "are fully observed". 'Fully' has an absoluteness about it that is very questionable in this context. 'Ample service' is a relative term - it applies differently in different contexts.

Ask people if they want cheaper flights and they'll say yes. Ask them if they wanna pay higher taxes to finance the welfare for those Germans who'd lose their job as a consequence, and they'll say no.

Emirates, along with cheap Asian imports, subsist on the ignorance of the masses.



..sick of it. -K. Pilkington.
User currently offlineimiakhtar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 59, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4519 times:

Quoting something (Reply 41):
EK borrows money at around 3-4 percent.

Source?

Quoting something (Reply 41):
I just don't find their business model impressive.

Not impressive? A business model which has consistently kept them in the black for over two decades. A model which has delivered double digit growth in pax numbers year on year whilst their competitors have stagnated. If you don't find any of that impressive, your on the wrong forum laddy.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 60, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4522 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 57):
What reason should Germany have to change that bi-lateral? The views of its own citizens, perhaps? Germany is a democracy - put it to referendum.

Are you joking? A referendum for the commercial interests of a foreign company owned by a feudalist country? Besides that we have a representative democracy and referendi on a national base are not part of the system., at least not on a national base.

Even if we had that option, such a demand would not be in the public interest. This is really the most ridiculous statement I have read n a long time



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 61, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4342 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting something (Reply 53):
If you must or want to go to Hong Kong, and there is no nonstop flight, it's not like you're flying to New York because it saves you switching planes once. You'd have to change planes once in Dubai anyway.

What if you have the option to switch the location? For example, I know individuals who are directors in IT outsourcing. During the boom years, it became too difficult grab a batch of J class ticked for 'snap inspections' from LAX to their operations in India. So the operations were moved to Malaysia! The ones that have to go... go. Most travel has more flexibility than that.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 52):
There is ample and easy access to BER from all directions. QR serves BEr and with the financial investment of EY into AB, that region is coveered as well. At least one stop service to the top 100 destinaitons worldwide is given.

What grows business is the ability to quickly move large teams of people who already are working 60+ hours a week. EY is impressive, but does not have the level of connections of EK. If its too tough to base a team from BER to all the areas they must travel... a company won't. Or more precisely, their competitors located elsewhere will grab the business.

It isn't a matter of if they could, it is a matter of job growth rates. Jobs are always being destroyed in a free economy. The trick is to create them fast enough so that salaries rise.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 52):
Goes both ways, many Dutch fly from DUS and many Germans from AMS. Market forces work here as well.

True. FRA benefits tremendously from its ground transportation options and links.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 52):
The claim by EK that Germans are prohibited by their government from enjoying the benefits EK , because access to BER and STR is not given, is a joke.,

You seem to have a strong opinion. I personally see my home airport, LAX, having benefited by numerous outside airlines providing long haul service. In this downturn, it has saved the jobs of about a quarter of the people I know. It makes it possible to do engineering, bank auditing, IT auditing, and numerous other travel oriented tasks that just seem to 'die off' at non-hub cities.

Quoting something (Reply 53):
What if EK needs/wants to grow their network faster than they can get new airplanes delivered?

That is possible. I speculate EK doesn't have access at this time to as much aircraft financing as they would like. Thus, to fund expansion, they will have to rotate a few A332s out of the fleet. Note: They will grow in 2012/2013, just not as fast as the 77Ws and A380 arrive and A343s depart.

Quoting something (Reply 53):
I don't think EK has ever really flown A332 on routes that maxed out their range.

I thought they flew them to PER at one point? In general I agree with you. But there used to be a few flights outside of A333 range (then again, that was when the A333 only had 5000nm still air range).

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 62, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4320 times:

Quoting something (Reply 58):
What you say sounds fallacious indeed

I meant facetious. But fallacious works too.

Quoting something (Reply 58):
Well, there's the border problem. If there was a fast rail link between Toronto downtown and Buffalo airport and you could clear immigration onboard the train, I have no doubts Buffalo would get some intercontinental service.

Perhaps, though we can argue on how much of it was lost on the seat-switch concept. As it stands, you can drive there in 2-2.5 hrs.

Quoting something (Reply 58):
Honestly, if people weren't as useless as they are but actually knew how Emirates operated, what laws they subject their employees to, what economcial consequences using EK entails etc. they'd be out of business (in Germany) within 2 months.

I see. People are useless, but democracy is a good thing. Being a bit elitist, no?

I'll point simply towards the Walmart phenomenon. Everyone knows the conditions those goods are made in (the price gives it away). Everyone includes politicians, bureaucrats and the masses. No one would dare ban them. Why, I wonder? Its not about lack of information. The information is readily available. Yet, they persist.

I would venture to suggest that there is a more fundamental economic principle at play here - one that derives utility from cheap goods by affording more money to spend elsehwere, thereby using the "extra"/saved disposable income to drive growth. Everyone realises its value, or else we would go back to the days of protectionism since virtually every country possesses some type of 'unfair' advantage, whether its the weather, resources (human or otherwise), labor laws, etc etc.

Quoting something (Reply 58):
Ask people if they want cheaper flights and they'll say yes. Ask them if they wanna pay higher taxes to finance the welfare for those Germans who'd lose their job as a consequence, and they'll say no.

Emirates, along with cheap Asian imports, subsist on the ignorance of the masses.

Firstly, I disagree with the second statement for the reasons outlined above. Protectionism never helped anyone.

Secondly, the assumption that cheap flights will result in job losses is....questionable. As I understand it, DLR (apparently Germany's "national research center for aeronautics and space. Its extensive research and development work in aeronautics, space, transportation, energy, defence and security research is integrated into national and international cooperative ventures.") claims the follwoing : “Our analysis shows that the German economy benefits significantly from the operations of Emirates in Germany. This economic benefit would rise further if Emirates received additional rights for Berlin and Stuttgart.”

I believe theres another thread on a.net about this as well. As a national research center, I can only assume its federally owned/funded and therefore completely accountable. I don't know if a referendum question could make that assertion (cheap flights = job losses) wihtout some basis.

Additionally, I would like to point out that people can, and do, vote for more/less taxes and welfare. Thats essentially what the US presidential election is about ( I use that as an example since its the most visible one). Elections here in Canada are not much different.

Suffice it to say, I don't think that the masses are "useless" or "ignorant". They generally know what they want. They know what the risk is. And they know what the pay off is.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 60):
Even if we had that option, such a demand would not be in the public interest. This is really the most ridiculous statement I have read n a long time

I see you missed my admission that the point was indeed fallacious/facetious.

However, it does speak to a broader point: What is "the public interest"? And crucially, who defines it? Would the public know what is in the public interest?

One would imagine that, in a democracy, the public interest is whatever is in the interest of the public. After all, the public puts the government in power to pursue its own interests (welfare states, immigration policies, minimum wages etc), does it not? Election campaigns are, after all, the platform on which political parties explain to voters how they would be acting in the voters (and not the political parties) interests. Is it not? Because if it isn, then I don't know what kind of a democracy you have in mind.

I will add something that you will, I am sure, find even more annoying.

It is a fundamental question: Why should a German living in FRA have access to EK, but not one in BER? I'll give you a hint - the simplest, and most common, answer may not be the correct one here. I say this because that answer is based on commerical matters - namely that the supplier will not supply a market because there is not enough demand to make it viable.

However, in this case, the supplier is willing to supply the good, so the decision is not a commercial one. I can only speculate that it is one based on political machinations and/or interest/lobby group influence. Neither of which necessarily take the interests of the people of Berlin into account ( I don't think LH gives a damn about them, other than how much money it can make off them).

So I will pose to you the question again: What is the "public interest"? And who defines it? I have always been under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that the residents of the areas surrounding FRA were the main actors in the ban on night operations. If that is true, then why should they be more involved in these types of issues than Berliners?

Imagine if Germany one day stopped a Chinese company from selling computers in Berlin, but allowed them to do so in FRA despite that company's pleas to get into Berlin. Would you condone that by saying that there are enough computer providers already in Berlin, but that if the Berliner wanted one desperately, he could go ride on a train for 2 hrs to get one? ITheres a question of equality somewhere in there.



[Edited 2012-05-12 09:40:18]

[Edited 2012-05-12 09:46:04]

User currently offlinesomething From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 1633 posts, RR: 21
Reply 63, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4202 times:

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 59):
Quoting something (Reply 41):
EK borrows money at around 3-4 percent.

Source?
The US Air Transport Association cited the financing of three Boeing 777s for Delta Airlines, which without any export-backed credit insurance last year raised capital directly from banks and arranged interest rates at more than 8 per cent. By contrast, Emirates raised $414m for three 777s last year, paying an interest rate of 3.4 per cent through bonds backed by the Export-Import Bank.

http://www.thenational.ae/business/a...carriers-face-financing-turbulence

You can also read page 14 of Emirates own view on the allegations made against them.. They point out that ''Delta’s competitor, Continental, in March 2012 raised $892 million at an all-in interest rate of 4.38%'' but do not disclose at what rate they raised capital. Which leaves no doubt it's substantially below the cited rate.

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 59):
Not impressive? A business model which has consistently kept them in the black for over two decades. A model which has delivered double digit growth in pax numbers year on year whilst their competitors have stagnated. If you don't find any of that impressive, your on the wrong forum laddy.

Angola's annual economic growth has been as high as 22.6% in the recent past. Those numbers are all relative.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 62):
It is a fundamental question: Why should a German living in FRA have access to EK, but not one in BER? I'll give you a hint - the simplest, and most common, answer may not be the correct one here. I say this because that answer is based on commerical matters - namely that the supplier will not supply a market because there is not enough demand to make it viable.

I shall get to your other points later when I have more time, but just so much for now: Nobody is keeping EK out of BER. As PanHAM has mentioned countless times, the bilateral between Germany and EK (not the UAE) states that EK can either fly 49 weekly flights into Germany, or can alternatively serve 4 airports at unlimited frequency. People at BER are deprived of EK service not because the German government excersized favoritism - EK does. They prefer higher frequencies at MUC/FRA/DUS/HAM over a broader network in Germany.

If EK was all about equality and fairness and altruism, because they give a damn about the people in Berlin as opposed to LH who only want their money, EK could fly daily A380s into HAM/BER/DUS/STR/MUC and retain two daily A380s into FRA. ''The market has spoken.''



..sick of it. -K. Pilkington.
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 64, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4136 times:

Quoting something (Reply 63):
I shall get to your other points later when I have more time, but just so much for now: Nobody is keeping EK out of BER. As PanHAM has mentioned countless times, the bilateral between Germany and EK (not the UAE) states that EK can either fly 49 weekly flights into Germany, or can alternatively serve 4 airports at unlimited frequency. People at BER are deprived of EK service not because the German government excersized favoritism - EK does. They prefer higher frequencies at MUC/FRA/DUS/HAM over a broader network in Germany.

If EK was all about equality and fairness and altruism, because they give a damn about the people in Berlin as opposed to LH who only want their money, EK could fly daily A380s into HAM/BER/DUS/STR/MUC and retain two daily A380s into FRA. ''The market has spoken.''

But it still begs a question - why take from Peter to give to Paul when theres more than enough around for Peter and Paul?

I never said EK was about fairness or altruism - but why should they be penalised to serve another market? Either which way, it STILL comes at the cost of the consumer. If they fly to BER, it disadvantages the folk at FRA (at least those who were benefitting from the extra flights that EK will have to discard). If they fly to FRA, it disadvantages the folk at BER. That makes snese, if there is limited supply, but there isn't.

So has the market spoken? Like I said, its not the supply side thats limited, nor is there any proof that there is no demand, so I challenge the notion that the market has spoken. The market isn't free enough to speak - its been given a zero-sum game and been told to choose. But that makes no sense when its not (and shouldnt be) a zero sum game.

To be clear, I don't give a damn about EK, or QR or AF or Air Koryo (no idea what their callsign is). My focus is on the consumer. I am trying to focus on what is best for the consumer, not necessarily what is best for EK, LH or Bearskin Airlines.


User currently offlineRaptor1090 From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2011, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 65, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4038 times:

In Dubai, the state owns not only the airline but the airport, the handling company, it runs the aviation authorities and most important, it sets the game rules as well. These are the facts, European, Asian and American airlines have to cope with.

Quoting something (Reply 63):
The US Air Transport Association cited the financing of three Boeing 777s for Delta Airlines, which without any export-backed credit insurance last year raised capital directly from banks and arranged interest rates at more than 8 per cent. By contrast, Emirates raised $414m for three 777s last year, paying an interest rate of 3.4 per cent through bonds backed by the Export-Import Bank.

http://www.thenational.ae/business/a...carriers-face-financing-turbulence

You can also read page 14 of Emirates own view on the allegations made against them.. They point out that ''Delta’s competitor, Continental, in March 2012 raised $892 million at an all-in interest rate of 4.38%'' but do not disclose at what rate they raised capital. Which leaves no doubt it's substantially below the cited rate.

Well, you've got to credit EK to be able to get such low interest rate financing, not critisize them. They do that in a volatile region with comparetively high capital risk.

5-year Dubai government bonds have interest rates of 6.70% (http://www.dubaifaqs.com/dubai-government-bonds.php), with comparative US bonds yielding 0.75% (http://markets.ft.com/research/Markets/Bonds). With that, you get perspective on the way things are in the region and the fact that EK can get financing cheaper than the city of Dubai, its owner, should be considered as a big credit to them.

Also, to comment on your comparison: United and Continental are loss making airlines; hence with very high risk and higher interest rates on financing. EK on the other hand has always been profitable. Their financing is based solely on their financial performance, not anything else. Your comments are irrelavant in discrediting Emirates airline.

[Edited 2012-05-12 13:51:41]

User currently offlineRaptor1090 From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2011, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4028 times:

Quoting something (Reply 63):
The US Air Transport Association cited the financing of three Boeing 777s for Delta Airlines, which without any export-backed credit insurance last year raised capital directly from banks and arranged interest rates at more than 8 per cent. By contrast, Emirates raised $414m for three 777s last year, paying an interest rate of 3.4 per cent through bonds backed by the Export-Import Bank.

http://www.thenational.ae/business/a...carriers-face-financing-turbulence

You can also read page 14 of Emirates own view on the allegations made against them.. They point out that ''Delta’s competitor, Continental, in March 2012 raised $892 million at an all-in interest rate of 4.38%'' but do not disclose at what rate they raised capital. Which leaves no doubt it's substantially below the cited rate.

The last Emirates airline bond issued had an interest rate of 5.125%
XS0632833553 5.125% Emirates Airlines 08.06.2016

Just google the bond code for proof.

[Edited 2012-05-12 13:39:12]

User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 67, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3900 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Raptor1090 (Reply 65):
the fact that EK can get financing cheaper than the city of Dubai, its owner, should be considered as a big credit to them.

That is amazing... the bond market has spoken.

What rates are QR, EY, AI, LH, BA, QF and AF paying? I'm just curious at their rated comparative health. (Sorry if I just asked for a lot of work... I'm just curious.)

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 68, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 62):
It is a fundamental question: Why should a German living in FRA have access to EK, but not one in BER?

First of all, you confuse "public" interest with "personal" interest. There is a public inhterest to have an infrastrcture available which includes airports. If people have personal interestes regarding airline preferrence, then this is not a public interest.

Any German has access to any airline of his choice, Berliners have access to EK as well, they have to take a train. Tough luck., If the particular person does not like it, move to FRA, or MUC or DUS or HAM. It's none of the government business. Is that so hard to udnerstand? And again, for your book, a Berliner flying overseas in the direction of Asia or Africa has the following choices: LH, AB, KL, AF, BA, LX, OS, AZ, IB, EY QR, SN I may have missed some additional choices,


nice to have the edit function, I forgot AY

[Edited 2012-05-12 23:30:19]


E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10032 posts, RR: 96
Reply 69, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3630 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting greenwichsud (Reply 24):
Just a few short years ago (when the A380 orders started rolling in) EK was the toast of Europe on these boards. The rhetoric has changed dramatically (a near 180 degree turn) now that it is clear just what they intended to do with all that capacity.

????
From my seat, the A380 orders rolling in was the catalyst for all the anti EK rhetoric on these fora.

Quoting something (Reply 41):
Dubai was on the brink of defaulting and was then saved by a $10bn. bail out by Abu Dhabi. If Dubai goes bankrupt, they're taking EK with them

Not sure that a $10Bn bailout example means very much these days. In comparison to what is going on in the rest of the world it sounds positively restrained........

Your "dominoes" analogy has some much bigger parallels much closer to home, by the way.....
In case you hadn't noticed  

Rgds


User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3377 posts, RR: 9
Reply 70, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3476 times:

Quoting will777 (Reply 18):
If Emirates is profitable, clearly they are doing something right, and they should continue to expand.

They should expand, the question I have is whether they are growing too fast to be sustainable

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 55):
I think he's referring to the mode of transportation switch (ICE to airline). I would question the viability of that too - or else BUF would now be a thriving center for airlines that Transport Canada's archaic rules are keeping out, not to mention the high landing fees and whatnot.

BUF steals low-yielding VFR traffic from YYZ, and it is hardly an issue for airlines serving YYZ and unless you live on the west side or Toronto BUF is too much of a hassle to save $100

EK couldn't fly there if they wanted to regardless because BUF is too small to handle anything. Also if EK served there to stick it to Canada they have one big issue, many people from the Indian sub-continent will need Visas to enter the US.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlinesomething From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 1633 posts, RR: 21
Reply 71, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3355 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 64):
I never said EK was about fairness or altruism - but why should they be penalised to serve another market?

They are not penalized. Trade is, per definition, a giving and taking. EK is given more than Germany is taking. The aviation trade balance is already negative for Germany. Why would they weaken their position further?

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 64):
Either which way, it STILL comes at the cost of the consumer.

You might argue that this is not an argument in the spirit of a globalized free market, but the reality of things is this: LH and AB provide Germans with jobs, and provide the German treasury with tax revenues. EK's profits don't help the German state at all. You provide social layers above the upper middle class with marginally lower air fares, decrease your own tax revenues, have to look for other sources of income which, will in any case from from the middle and below middle class layers of society. In other words, you have poor people subsidize the flying of wealthier people. Not sure that is in the interest of the consumer - less jobs and higher taxes.

Quoting Raptor1090 (Reply 65):
Well, you've got to credit EK to be able to get such low interest rate financing, not critisize them. They do that in a volatile region with comparetively high capital risk.

1. I don't critisize anything. I am merely pointing facts out.
2. If Dubai was a politically unstable, volatile region with high capital risk, they wouldn't be getting cheap money.

Quoting Raptor1090 (Reply 65):
Also, to comment on your comparison

It's not my comparison, it's a verbatim quote from a document Emirates themselves have published. It's their comparison. I take no credit for this.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 67):
What rates are QR, EY, AI, LH, BA, QF and AF paying? I'm just curious at their rated comparative health. (Sorry if I just asked for a lot of work... I'm just curious.)

Lufthansa issues bonds at 6.75%. This should be their cheapest source of capital.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 68):
a Berliner flying overseas in the direction of Asia or Africa has the following choices: LH, AB, KL, AF, BA, LX, OS, AZ, IB, EY QR, SN I may have missed some additional choices,


nice to have the edit function, I forgot AY

As listed above, there are also SAS to CPH, TK to IST and RJ to AMM. Especially TK moves a lot of the Asia and Africa traffic.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 69):
Not sure that a $10Bn bailout example means very much these days. In comparison to what is going on in the rest of the world it sounds positively restrained........

Some say it was a $20bn. injection, but even if it's just half that: Dubai has a population of 1.53m. Greece's population is 10.8m. and their bailout is $170bn.. In other words, Greece's bailout was only 2.5 times larger on a per capita basis than what Abu Dhabi pumped into Dubai. If however not the $10bn. figure, but the $20bn. are correct, than the bailout Dubai received was almost on par with that of Greece.

Even if this isn't a fair apples to apples comparison, it still a fairly useable indication of the economy of Dubai. An economy that is based on growth can hardly be considered sustainable.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 69):
Your "dominoes" analogy has some much bigger parallels much closer to home, by the way.....
In case you hadn't noticed

I am not painting an 'us' versus 'them' black and white picture. But one can still point out that..

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 70):
Quoting will777 (Reply 18):
If Emirates is profitable, clearly they are doing something right, and they should continue to expand.

They should expand, the question I have is whether they are growing too fast to be sustainable



..sick of it. -K. Pilkington.
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 72, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3284 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 70):
They should expand, the question I have is whether they are growing too fast to be sustainable

They've been profitably sustaining growth that most other airlines can only dream about for years (literally decades). There's nothing that I can see to suggest that they either don't know how to cope with it, or that the growth isn't sustainable.

Despite this drop in profit, revenue and passenger numbers continue to grow year on year.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineimiakhtar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 73, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3228 times:

Quoting something (Reply 63):
The US Air Transport Association cited the financing of three Boeing 777s for Delta Airlines, which without any export-backed credit insurance last year raised capital directly from banks and arranged interest rates at more than 8 per cent. By contrast, Emirates raised $414m for three 777s last year, paying an interest rate of 3.4 per cent through bonds backed by the Export-Import Bank.

http://www.thenational.ae/business/a...lence

That's not unparalleled. If it wasn't for the US Exim bank and the similarly low interest rates on offer, PK would not have been able to finance their initial and latest B777 orders. The same holds true for many other foreign airlines. PK corporate reports available below:

http://www.piac.com.pk/PIA_About/pia-about_corpreport.asp

Quoting something (Reply 63):
Angola's annual economic growth has been as high as 22.6% in the recent past. Those numbers are all relative.

How about an apples to apples comparison rather than an apples to zebra?

Are there any other airlines that have weathered the downturns and performed as well as EK in the AIRLINE industry?


User currently offlineRaptor1090 From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2011, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 74, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3215 times:

Quoting something (Reply 71):
2. If Dubai was a politically unstable, volatile region with high capital risk, they wouldn't be getting cheap money.

And they don't. Dubai is not a corporation, it is a government - and gets money at much higher rates compared to other similar governments. The Dubai debt crisis of 2009 and the recent instability in the region, including the tension with Iran, has resulted in higher than average costs of funds for those looking to borrow.

Quoting something (Reply 71):
Dubai has a population of 1.53m

Population is different from people living in the place. The current population of Dubai is around 2.2m, with only about 350k being Emirati citizens.


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 75, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3068 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 68):
First of all, you confuse "public" interest with "personal" interest. There is a public inhterest to have an infrastrcture available which includes airports. If people have personal interestes regarding airline preferrence, then this is not a public interest.

And you're confusing an individual company interests with national interest. Germany has a lot more to loose from trade restrictions than they can hope to gain by keeping LH artificially in balance with EK.

The failure of LH is to not provide the most attractive product despite holding almost all trump cards.


User currently offlineRaptor1090 From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2011, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3003 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 67):
What rates are QR, EY, AI, LH, BA, QF and AF paying? I'm just curious at their rated comparative health. (Sorry if I just asked for a lot of work... I'm just curious.)
Quoting something (Reply 71):
Lufthansa issues bonds at 6.75%. This should be their cheapest source of capital.

Well, you wouldn't get a very good idea on the financing based on the bond rates alone as all airlines issue them in various different currencies, with various term lengths so the comparisons would be apples to oranges.
For example, you can get a government of India bond paying in excess of 8.5% per annum for a 10 year issue, but with the depreciating Indian Rupee and its negative outlook, at the end of the 10 year period you may end up with a net yield of just 2% (Considering INR depreciates by 6.5% pa, which is not uncommon).

The last LH bond interest rates were6.50% for 7 year bonds. There is a considerable difference in the rate of a 5 year and 7 year bond. You can see the usual trend here. Also to note is that the bond is in Euro which has a negative outlook because of the Euro-zone crisis, hence the higher interest rate.

AI: nothing concrete, but from a couple of articles here and here, they're looking for a coupon of 25 to 50 basis points above the government yield which comes to 0.25% to 0.5% above the recent 8.79% bond which is 9.29% for a 10 year INR bond.

AF: Check out their debt profile and according to that their average cost of funds is 3.87%. Regarding bonds, one of their recent ones in 2009 had a coupon of 4.97%.

Couldn't get anything on the rest.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 77, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2979 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 75):
And you're confusing an individual company interests with national interest. Germany has a lot more to loose from trade restrictions than they can hope to gain by keeping LH artificially in balance with EK.

Which national interests ? Those of Dubai? Obviously you did not read the test. EK has generous rights into Germany, theya can fly as often as they want with equipment they want to four destinations. What else they want. LH as morning gift?

BTW, the trade is not handled by "Germany" but individually by German companies. They maniufacture excellent high class products which sell on the market. Without state intervention.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 78, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2884 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 77):
Which national interests ? Those of Dubai? Obviously you did not read the test. EK has generous rights into Germany, theya can fly as often as they want with equipment they want to four destinations. What else they want. LH as morning gift?

You think they have generous rights. They think there is demand for additional flights. We should all be able to agree there are restrictions.

What else do they want, full access of course. Just as LH want in the places they fly to, and over.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 77):
BTW, the trade is not handled by "Germany" but individually by German companies.

Thank you for the revelation.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 77):
They maniufacture excellent high class products which sell on the market. Without state intervention.

Which is what EK want to be able to do.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 79, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2881 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 70):
They should expand, the question I have is whether they are growing too fast to be sustainable

Part of the issue is EK must grow fast or QR/EY will overtake them. While EK has a significant passenger and cargo volume advantage, its regional competitors are closing the gap.

With a hattip to CMF, we see that we have the following levels of connections:
EK: 102 cities
EK+FZ: 130 cities

Compare that with
QR: 91
EY: 69

See posts 142 and 144 in this thread:
Emirates - Debunking Myths Over Subsidies (by SInGAPORE_AIR Apr 28 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Since EK is profitable, it is sustainable.

Quoting Raptor1090 (Reply 74):
The current population of Dubai is around 2.2m, with only about 350k being Emirati citizens.

One can almost 'get the pulse' of Dubai's economic growth by their population growth.

Note: Dubai just crossed 2 million population:
http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/ge...opulation-crosses-2m-mark-1.955699

Since the rate of population growth is about 7k persons per month, they'll need a little while longer to hit 2.2m.  
Side topic: Long term Dubai must balance the male/female ratio (e.g., hire more female office workers?).

Quoting Raptor1090 (Reply 76):
AI: nothing concrete, but from a couple of articles here and here, they're looking for a coupon of 25 to 50 basis points above the government yield which comes to 0.25% to 0.5% above the recent 8.79% bond which is 9.29% for a 10 year INR bond.

You brought up a good point: currency. Which currency are the AI bonds in? Rupee, dollar, Euro, or ???. It does imply a significant handicap for AI for fleet replacement.

Quoting cmf (Reply 75):
The failure of LH is to not provide the most attractive product despite holding almost all trump cards.

I would actually point to two weak points of LH
1. Lack of infrastructure support for expansion (curfew, long fight for runway)
2. Lack of a longer haul twin fleet (A332/787)

In the past it was more acceptable to 'double hop' for a flight or have an extremely long layover. One of the goals of the alliances (not yet achieved) was to connect 99% of the world's population in 24 hours travel time. I'm a huge fan of fragmentation. Due to European constraints on expansion, the European airlines are having a tougher time opening up new markets. For not only does the new market need to be opened, but additional connecting feed must be grown to help feed the new route.

LH has done well with a 'discounted J product.' By that, it seems they are offering Fortune 500 companies bulk deals that make them *extremely* attractive. I am shocked how much less my employer pays for a LAX-FRA/DUS J class ticket than LAX-AMS. (There is no business case for the AMS ticket.) I'm convinced that the lowest cost lie flat J is going to have a huge advantage due to corporate contracts. It is a market LH does well in.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 80, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2758 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 78):
You think they have generous rights. They think there is demand for additional flights. We should all be able to agree there are restrictions.

They can have additional flights. I said that many times

Quoting cmf (Reply 78):
What else do they want, full access of course. Just as LH want in the places they fly to, and over.

LH is restricted in many markets, including their home market as the German governments resp. the EU commission imposes departure taxes, emission trading, night curfews

It is customary oin the world BTW that traffic rights are granted on a reciprocal base.

Quoting cmf (Reply 78):
Which is what EK want to be able to do.

yes, fine, but what has that to do with the traffic rights issue which is 10:1 in favor of EK? I mean, I am not complaining, for LH DXB is a spoke and there's nothing else to fly to in that Sheikhdom. We have more to offer and EK is taking advantage of that, again, no complaints. But what is happening now they get greedy, although they cover the market quite well with 4 destinations strategically placed. If they ant BER they can have it, but they'd have to give up HAM or DUS.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 81, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2708 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 68):
Any German has access to any airline of his choice, Berliners have access to EK as well, they have to take a train. Tough luck., If the particular person does not like it, move to FRA, or MUC or DUS or HAM. It's none of the government business. Is that so hard to udnerstand?

Very hard to understand, actually. If its none of the government's business, then why is the government impeding EKs right to fly there?

Move to FRA, MUC, DUS, HAM? Why? Because LH prefers it that way? Like I said, the supplier is willing to supply, so if the demand is there, then not allowing it to be matched the way it is in other cities is discriminatory - are Berliners second-class citizens in the German democracy? Do Berliners have to stop being Berliners to start enjoying the benefits Frankfurters do?

I think you're mixing up Germany's interests with LH's interests. I can understand why you would make that mistake - its the same here in Canada, where AC's interests are mistaken to be in Canada's interests, at cost to our military and our taxpayers.

Berliners may be (or are) second-class citizens to LH (hence the decision to shephard them through FRA), but there is no reason for the German state to adopt that view too. LHs decision to shephard them through FRA is a commercial decision. Which is fine. But if thats the case, then let commercial processes determine who offers what options in BER.

Ultimately, from a consumer's perspective, the market, not the government, should be determining choices. When the government determines the choices....well, I believe they called it communism. (facetious again, with a big grin)

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 68):
And again, for your book, a Berliner flying overseas in the direction of Asia or Africa has the following choices: LH, AB, KL, AF, BA, LX, OS, AZ, IB, EY QR, SN I may have missed some additional choices,

So what? They have choices. They can have one more choice. Who are you to determine they have enough choices? You're sounding awfully Canadian. Like those Canadians who love pointing out that one can fly Transaero from YYZ-DEL and therefore have 'enough' choice/options. Its an argument that lacks reason and/or logic. If there's that many carriers, then EK is going to face stiff competition. In general, more competition = good for consumer.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 68):
First of all, you confuse "public" interest with "personal" interest. There is a public inhterest to have an infrastrcture available which includes airports. If people have personal interestes regarding airline preferrence, then this is not a public interest.

No.

You are confusing private interest (read LH) with public interest. For the record, democracies ARE built on personal interests because people vote on the basis of PERSONAL preferences, not public interest. That, incidentally, is why you baulk at the idea of a referendum in Berlin. Its too democratic. And not in keeping with LH's private interest.

On a separate note, how is Germany dealing with the public/private interest divide on the issue of night flights at FRA? After all, by your logic, the government is caving to the personal interests of the local residents. Odd, I find.

Quoting something (Reply 71):
They are not penalized. Trade is, per definition, a giving and taking. EK is given more than Germany is taking. The aviation trade balance is already negative for Germany. Why would they weaken their position further?

Probably the most sensible argument so far (and one I will probably use in the future when I switch my Devil's Advocate hat), but at the same time, I would question the idea that the aviation trade balance is negative for Germany. I will concede that the balance is probably negative for LH, but that, suggests that you are focused too much on the minutiae of airlines, as opposed to wider effects on the economy.

I quoted a DLR report above. I don't know much about them, but my understanding is that they are a federally owned/funded organization - and therefore accountable (feel free to correct me). If they say Germany benefits as a whole, then I see some grouns to question your assertion that the aviation trade balance is negative. LH may be hurting, but LH is not the Germany economy as a whole. Therefore if there are second- or third-order benefits for the economy, I would expect them to be accounted for too in the aviation trade balance.

So, while I will grant that LH may be negatively affected, the overall benefit, as DLR has suggested) is positive. Why should one company's performance adversely affect what is in the benefit of the nation?

Quoting something (Reply 71):
You might argue that this is not an argument in the spirit of a globalized free market, but the reality of things is this: LH and AB provide Germans with jobs, and provide the German treasury with tax revenues. EK's profits don't help the German state at all.

Again, I will point to the DLR report. Net benefit. Focusing on individual companies is all well and good, but one doesn't even have to use the globalized free market to prove it. German companies have factories all over the world so that they don't have to employ Germans/buy material from German companies etc. I mean, you could argue that they are taxed on their profit, but it doesn't take much to realize that those taxes on profits will yield less to the German treasury than having those companies employ people in Germany, charging them income and consumption taxes and not having them on the dole.

By your logic, German companies should be forced to stay in Germany, employ only Germans, and so on. If they do not, they are not providing the German treasury with the tax revenues that they might otherwise have generated.

I will point out that the German government is fine with this outsourcing, despite its impact on tax revenues.Why? Net benefit, I would assume. Theres obviously something in the set up that allows Germany to benefit from it. I won't speculate abotu what it is, but if a non-partisan entity like DLR says there is net benefit, then I would be reluctant to accept that this is a simple case of keeping Germans employed and tax revenues high. It strikes me as too simple an explanation.


User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 82, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2671 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 80):
for LH DXB is a spoke and there's nothing else to fly to in that Sheikhdom.

Indeed, as is just about every international destination that LH serves.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 80):
But what is happening now they get greedy, although they cover the market quite well with 4 destinations strategically placed. If they ant BER they can have it, but they'd have to give up HAM or DUS.

Why should they have to give up anything? Why should this be about taking from Peter (HAM) to give to Paul (BER), when there is more than enough to go around for Peter and Paul? Why is it a zero-sum game?

The only answer I can think of is that it suits LH better that way. Got a better explanation? Preferrably one that explains how this is good for consumers - or as some might call them, ordinary citizens of Germany, regardless of City.

Greedy? There is demand. There is supply. Where does greed come into the picture from? I would argue that LH is being greedy, and demanding that supply be constrained so that it can benefit from all the demand itself.


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 83, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2484 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 79):
I would actually point to two weak points of LH
1. Lack of infrastructure support for expansion (curfew, long fight for runway)
2. Lack of a longer haul twin fleet (A332/787)

I partially agree on the curfew. I think they could do with a few more flights up to 23:00 but doubt the rest of the curfew matters much. Even airports with loads of late flights tend to drop quickly after midnight.

Please correct me but has lack of runways held back FRA a lot? It is my understanding the 4th runway pretty much came at the right time. Even if that isn't the case LH certainly have plenty of other runways available to them.

Fleet composition is a self inflicted wound, if a wound at all  
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 80):
They can have additional flights. I said that many times

Why is it so hard for you to call a restriction a restriction?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 80):
LH is restricted in many markets, including their home market as the German governments resp. the EU commission imposes departure taxes, emission trading, night curfews

It is customary oin the world BTW that traffic rights are granted on a reciprocal base.

Yes they too must live with restrictions. But apart from ETS I don't think the ones you listed are because of EU.

Dubai have granted access to 100% of their commercial airports, why hasn't Germany granted the same...

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 80):
yes, fine, but what has that to do with the traffic rights issue which is 10:1 in favor of EK?

Either you're for free trade or you're not. Germany would be in a lot of trouble if other nations required equal import for everything exported.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 84, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2352 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 80):
LH is restricted in many markets, including their home market

That part I do not understand why the home market restricts LH as they do. There is no credit given to a nation self imposing a handicap on their business; that is just pushing opportunities out there to the first to take them. Due to the curfews in Europe, there is a natural need for a hub in either the mid-east or India for connections from the East. Dubai was just the first to create a Wayport and expand on it.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 80):
If they ant BER they can have it, but they'd have to give up HAM or DUS.

Sensibly, due to the costs of starting up a new station, EK is staying put. (I do not see the ROI being positive if the abandon DUS. HAM? I would have to know more about the yield to make a guess.) But why wouldn't EK ask for more? Dubai is the gateway for the chemical and pharmaceutical industries to the mid-east. They have some to offer other German business. Is it enough? That is a political question and I refuse to believe logic applies.  
Quoting cmf (Reply 83):
I think they could do with a few more flights up to 23:00 but doubt the rest of the curfew matters much. Even airports with loads of late flights tend to drop quickly after midnight.

I think it is hurting more than that. If night flights were truly unlimited, LH could slightly improve utilization with some of the passenger flights having inbound fligths to FRA later and a few late night takeoffs for passengers. Most of the late night activity would be freight. By having inbound night-time freight, the morning passenger flights would be more profitable (due to better belly cargo yield) and thus faster expansion. Also, late arriving passenger flights would have more cargo connection opportunities and thus better revenue too. Thus, more demand for those flights...

While the overall additional number of night flights would be small (perhaps a few dozen flights), I believe if FRA had unlimited night flights, they would have been requiring the addition runway (and terminals) earlier.

I'm personally a fan of redeye flights for longer flights (> 5 hours). I believe the NEO and MAX will help fragment markets further by virtue of their range extension. Due to the night curfew at FRA, LH won't be able to run planes on long haul a la B6 that maximizes their air time per day.

Quoting cmf (Reply 83):
Either you're for free trade or you're not. Germany would be in a lot of trouble if other nations required equal import for everything exported.

That used to be the case... hence why the global economy grew slower. Germany has been a prime beneficiary of asymmetric trade.

It amazes me how one little city (barely over 2 million) that is an oil importer is somehow so threatening? Their hotels seem expensive (on my budget...); a night is as much or more than a similar room in Paris! It is only a two runway airport (until DWC truly comes online...). Plus they have multiple neighbors that have ever imaginable advantage *except* for a willingness to open up their airport, ports, and bilaterals. Seriously, I had fun tracking BBC's 'red box' as it hauled Scotch through Dubai's harbor. Would QR's port have been as accommodating? It is the port of Dubai that helps drive the belly cargo demand for EK by motivating logistical companies to grow within Dubai...


Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 85, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2081 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 81):
EKs right to fly there?

Under the current bi-lateral, EK has no rights to fly to Berlin.

Quoting cmf (Reply 83):
Either you're for free trade or you're not. Germany would be in a lot of trouble if other nations required equal import for everything exported.

You confuse things here. We have the Chicago mconvention which regulates internaitonal bi-lateral agreements, among others.

Trading merchadises under the GATT General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs a different ballgame. Germany does not restrict and import, quotas have been abolished a long time ago and the EU commission is in charge anyhow, Germany itself could not do anything by itself,

Germany BTW is one of the few countries in the world where you can really get anything and everything without restrictions. Try to import pralinees filled with Cognac or "Surprise Eggs" into the USA. or try to open a company in Dubai without a sponsor. No problem in Germany, register, get a permitt and start.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 86, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1873 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 85):

Right. Admittedly, badly phrased on my part. Doesn't change much though. Why is the government actively impeding the negotiations for a new bilateral that will match demand and supply (both of which evolve naturally over time)? What is the driving factor behind refusing to acknowledge that the world has changed since the last bilateral in 2000 (I think)?

Could it be because EK is greedy and wants more access? Or could it be that LH is greedy and wants the market for itself?

And what outcome is optimal for the consumers/ordinary German citizens of ALL German cities?

My poor phrasing notwithstanding, I can't help but feel that the interests of one private company are overshadowing the public interest of German citizens.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 87, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1849 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 86):
Could it be because EK is greedy and wants more access? Or could it be that LH is greedy and wants the market for itself?

LH has a market share in Germany of about a third. When LH started back in 1955,m the market was divided up between it's neighbours who all had a head start.On top of that PanAm was more orl less a German airline with unlimited traffic rights-. LH did well, but Germany always has been an open market. However, even in an open market, some rules must apply. Yes, EK is greedy,

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 86):
My poor phrasing notwithstanding, I can't help but feel that the interests of one private company are overshadowing the public interest of German citizens.

The interests of German citizens are well served. Allowing a foreign carrier excessive traffic rights into Germany is really not a public issue and not in the interest of the German people. We are about 80 million and only a tiny fraction of that would be interested in having EK services at BER or STR. Their needs are well served by QR and EY or other carriers, listing above.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 88, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1800 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 87):

What you call 'rules' is simply a case of constraining supply. I suppose you could pass it off as a 'rule', but no matter how many ways you cut it, given LHs public objections to EK leave me very much under the impression that rules are as relevant to the outcome as my prayers are on the World Cup final (ie diddly squat). EK isn't breaking any rules per se - they re simply asking to renegotiate the agreement in a manner that is consistent with the rules.

What you are trying to pass off as rules is little more than rank protectionism (generally considered to be inconsistent with the idea of an open market). I think one can legitimately ask how much it has to do with rules and how much it has to do with an old boys network consisting of LH execs and senior bureaucrats. Are these decisions made on merit, or are they favors to old friends? The DLR report has me very confused, since it suggests that the rationale to not renegotiate is based on flimsy grounds that have nothing to do with rules and everything to do with interest group politics.

As for markets being served 'adequately'/'well'/whatever... who decides that? Do you? Does LH? Does the government? Or does the consumer? Personally, I feel that the consumer/ordinary citizen should have that choice. They should have the choice to not fly EK rather than have the government decide for them. Let them
Vote with their wallets on who serves them best. Or is that too outrageous for an open market democracy?

I fear a blind hatred of EK is hurting consumers. It's a miracle they run up profits given the hostility towards them in aviation circles. The power of the consumer, I believe.

On the bright side, it is forcing LH to improve its product.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...nd-diminishing-perks-a-832101.html

Good for consumers, no? Note pic of EK in story. Competition is a great thing. More = better.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9384 posts, RR: 29
Reply 89, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1746 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 88):
What you call 'rules' is simply a case of constraining supply.

"Rules" are for instance to obey existing contracts. There is no constrainment of supply either, you still have not understood that EK has almost unlimited rights in terms of size and frequency. It's getting boring to reply this time after time.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 88):
The DLR report has me very confused, since it suggests that the rationale to not renegotiate is based on flimsy grounds that have nothing to do with rules and everything to do with interest group politics.

The rationale is that Germany is a sovereign country and that there is no need to renegotiate a current bi-lateral agreement which offers excellent conditions to the side that is trying to break into 2 other doors by using a sledgehammer and an axe.

How you see a "public interest" here is difficult to understand. Public transport is a public interest, adequate infrastructure is a public interest. How the infrastructure is used and by whom is not.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineElPistolero From Canada, joined Feb 2012, 1019 posts, RR: 4
Reply 90, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1691 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 89):

You are right. We are on different wave lengths. I always thought something was in the public interest if it was in the interest of ordinary citizens. It is clear that we cannot agree even on first principles (what is a free market? What are rules? What is the definition of public interest?), which renders the discussion pointless.

As such, it has been interesting. But, as always, issues involving the deadly triumvirate of EK, AC and LH leave one with more questions than answers.

The most pertinent one for me is: who is representing ordinary citizens / consumers? To me, the entire situation reeks of interest group lobbying / political favors. Not quite as democratic as one would hope.


User currently offlinerwy04LGA From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 91, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1655 times:

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 81):
are Berliners second-class citizens in the German democracy? Do Berliners have to stop being Berliners to start enjoying the benefits Frankfurters do?

Hmm, donuts or hot dogs...STOP, I'm getting hungry!

Quoting cmf (Reply 83):
Dubai have granted access to 100% of their commercial airports, why hasn't Germany granted the same...

How many commercial airports does Dubai have?? Same question for Germany? Seems to be an imbalance, don't you think?



Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 92, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1639 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 84):
That part I do not understand why the home market restricts LH as they do.

I think they have gone a bit far but I fully understand why airports are not allowed to operate at full capacity during nights.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 84):
I think it is hurting more than that. If night flights were truly unlimited, LH could slightly improve utilization with some of the passenger flights having inbound fligths to FRA later and a few late night takeoffs for passengers. Most of the late night activity would be freight.

I agree on the freight side.

I'm having problems seeing it with passenger traffic. At most airports there traffic drops dramatically after 22:00. By 23:00 it will be a trickle and after midnight very few. DXB clearly is an exemption to this rule and there are others. But I do not see any European airport with demand for much traffic at night. There are just too few routes where it makes sense.

FRA opens at 5:00 and full capacity from 6:00. I don't see many flights being limited by these times. With that I'm having problems seeing how the few extra flights would have created much additional need for runway and terminals earlier. I don't see they would create demand for more destinations during the morning rush. I doubt it would create the need for more frequency during the morning rush. I don't see it.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 85):
You confuse things here. We have the Chicago mconvention which regulates internaitonal bi-lateral agreements, among others.

Your understanding of the Chicago Convention is wrong. It regulates overflying rights, rights to fuel stops, taxes on fuels, the rights to have offices, etc. It does not regulate traffic between two nations as it relates to capacity.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 85):
Trading merchadises under the GATT General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs a different ballgame. Germany does not restrict and import, quotas have been abolished a long time ago and the EU commission is in charge anyhow, Germany itself could not do anything by itself,

Your right in that trading good is not as restricted. Why should aviation be different? Compete with your product. If LH's product is better noone will pick EK.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 85):
Germany BTW is one of the few countries in the world where you can really get anything and everything without restrictions.

Easy with the chest thumping. Beer, tobacco, food, even books are just some areas I know about.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 85):
try to open a company in Dubai without a sponsor

Easy, go to a free trade zone. Try opening a German company without a local registered manager. Try doing bookkeeping outside Germany.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 87):
The interests of German citizens are well served. Allowing a foreign carrier excessive traffic rights into Germany is really not a public issue and not in the interest of the German people. We are about 80 million and only a tiny fraction of that would be interested in having EK services at BER or STR. Their needs are well served by QR and EY or other carriers, listing above.

If the interests of German citizens is so well served then why the fear of letting other airlines in? Obviously the well served German citizens will not use them.


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 93, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1561 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 89):
you still have not understood that EK has almost unlimited rights in terms of size and frequency.

Exempt they do not have access to all airports. That is a restriction. You can argue for that it is a reasonable restriction but to pretend it isn't an restriction is dishonest.

Quoting rwy04LGA (Reply 91):
How many commercial airports does Dubai have?? Same question for Germany? Seems to be an imbalance, don't you think?

Sorry you missed the intended message. When you compare different sized countries and population there will always be differences in absolute numbers. There are a lot more Germans working in Dubai than Dubaians in Germany. Should they send them home? There are a lot more German companies operating in Dubai than the other way around, should they be closed? It doesn't make sense to have an aviation bilateral limiting number of airports can be used in Germany. It is old protectionist thinking. It doesn't make sense to keep it in just one or a few areas. Especially not when you live on others giving uneven access as is the case with Germany.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 94, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1501 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cmf (Reply 92):
I think they have gone a bit far but I fully understand why airports are not allowed to operate at full capacity during nights.

I would rather see a noise quota myself. The current restrictions have indeed 'gone too far' at FRA. I would argue MUC and BER too. How does one fully compete with the hubs constrained? That just gives an advantage to the mid-east hubs which have the customers shop until takeoff time...

Quoting cmf (Reply 92):
By 23:00 it will be a trickle and after midnight very few.

I could see a few in the 01:00 to 03:00 window. It would be a 'trickle,' but would help seed other flights. I believe we agree in principal and not magnitude.

Quoting cmf (Reply 92):
Beer, tobacco, food, even books are just some areas I know about.

I do not understand Germany having the restrictions on books that they do for such a literary nation. I'm not talking about the banned Nazi books. (For as much as I dislike censorship, that isn't worth debating for another century.) I'm talking the limits on book distribution from a commercial standpoint (not the content). I have *really* enjoyed the translations of a variety of German books that I've had the opportunity to read. But by limiting book sales, in a way analogous to how the French do so, it limits indie-author growth. I'll be curious how ebooks do in the long run in Germany (it took four years to mature the market in the USA). But I digress...

Germany should keep up their regulations on beer.    Only with the micro-brewery revolution has the US beer market improved enough to be palatable. (we'll ignore how Stohs does so much of the actual brewing). There is a reason the little I drink is mostly wine (I came of age when US beer was still a yellow water).

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
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 Airline Profit Rises 5.8% To US$674M posted Wed Apr 26 2006 10:30:56 by Singapore_Air
Emirates Profit Drops 88% .. posted Mon Nov 10 2008 03:11:00 by Beaucaire
Cathay Pacific's 2007 Profit Up 72 Percent posted Tue Mar 4 2008 22:46:02 by Wowpeter
Emirates Profit Is Dh3.1 Billion, 25% More Than'06 posted Fri Apr 27 2007 23:51:15 by QatarA340
Emirates Profit Up 73.5% posted Sun Jul 18 2004 16:58:28 by Captain777
Emirates Announces $1.1 Bn Profit posted Wed May 12 2010 00:08:55 by AirIndia
Emirates Eyeing US$1 Billion Profit Next Year posted Thu Nov 19 2009 13:40:15 by SQ_EK_freak
Emirates Is Expecting To Make A Small Profit 2009 posted Mon Apr 6 2009 13:25:18 by EK156
Emirates To Post Full Year Profit Of Around US$1B posted Wed Feb 20 2008 09:25:11 by SINGAPORE_AIR
Emirates Half-year Profit Grows 29% posted Tue Nov 7 2006 04:31:38 by UAEflyer
Emirates Airline Profit Rises 5.8% To US$674M posted Wed Apr 26 2006 10:30:56 by Singapore_Air
Emirates Eyeing US$1 Billion Profit Next Year posted Thu Nov 19 2009 13:40:15 by SQ_EK_freak
Emirates Is Expecting To Make A Small Profit 2009 posted Mon Apr 6 2009 13:25:18 by EK156
Emirates To Post Full Year Profit Of Around US$1B posted Wed Feb 20 2008 09:25:11 by SINGAPORE_AIR
Emirates Half-year Profit Grows 29% posted Tue Nov 7 2006 04:31:38 by UAEflyer
Emirates Airline Profit Rises 5.8% To US$674M posted Wed Apr 26 2006 10:30:56 by Singapore_Air