scotron11
Posts: 1191
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 3:05 pm

Martin Broughton, chairman of BA , today expressed hope fresh 'open skies' talks between the EU and the US could lead to fundamental reform of the aviation industry.

In a speech to the Royal Aeronautical Society, made just days after European transport ministers told the EU Commission to resume negotiations on a new transatlantic air treaty, Broughton said airlines needed to escape the 'regulatory wonderland' created for the industry 60 years ago. He described the Chicago Convention of 1944, which regulates the global aviation industry, as 'the Mad Hatters Tea Party'.

'Contrary to many peoples expectations, BA would welcome a true open aviation area. We are not protectionist,' said the chairman.

He said what BA did not like was the proposal that was ultimately rejected last year -- a partial opening up which gave the Americans 'everything they wanted', but kept foreign ownership limits for US carriers (of 25 pct), cabotage and the 'Fly America' policy, which dictates that US government officials must fly with a US based carrier, intact.

Broughton said BA has been encouraged by calls from US airlines and FedEx for a change in the rules on foreign ownership and by the EU Commission's recognition of the need for consolidation.

Under Bermuda II - only two British carriers, currently BA and VS, and two American, AA and UA, are allowed to fly non-stop transatlantic routes from and to London Heathrow.(AFX)

Will it happen? I think it's about time it did!
 
commavia
Posts: 10067
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 8:17 pm

Quoting Scotron11 (Thread starter):
Martin Broughton, chairman of BA , today expressed hope fresh 'open skies' talks between the EU and the US could lead to fundamental reform of the aviation industry.

I would give just about anything if the EU and US could agree on Open Skies, and AA and BA could get ATI, but I am not holding my breath. As long as Europe continues to insist on cabotage within the US, it will never happen.
 
lowrider
Posts: 2542
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:09 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:41 pm

Quoting Scotron11 (Thread starter):
Will it happen? I think it's about time it did!

I disagree. In order to get domestic routes within the US, the EU needs to offer a package with a monetary value equal to the domestic market. I don't think unlimited access to Heathrow will cut it. Unlimited access to all EU markets might.

Besides, with many US carriers struggling right now, why should we bring in more carriers and divide the pie into even smaller slices? What benefit is that to the US?
Proud OOTSK member
 
commavia
Posts: 10067
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:52 pm

Quoting Lowrider (Reply 2):
I disagree. In order to get domestic routes within the US, the EU needs to offer a package with a monetary value equal to the domestic market. I don't think unlimited access to Heathrow will cut it. Unlimited access to all EU markets might.

No, it won't, and here's why: because it isn't a fair trade. The US giving European airlines free and open access to the U.S. domestic market is a much bigger package that the same being reciprocated for U.S. airlines in Europe.

The U.S. market is dramatically larger than the European market, and airports and capacity in the U.S. are much less constricted than in Europe. In the U.S., there are only a handful of airports with slots, while in Europe, virtually every major airport has them.

This is the fundamental difference between the U.S. and E.U. over this issue: the U.S. is not going to trade away unfettered competition from foreign rivals with lower-paid employees just so that United can fly on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday from Paris to Frankfurt. (Obviously dramatizing!)

Here is my Modest Proposal on EU-US open skies:


  • The U.S. allows European carriers to acquire up to 49% of U.S. carriers, and the same is reciprocated for U.S. carriers
  • U.S. and E.U. airlines are given unlimited access to flights and frequencies from anywhere in the U.S. to anywhere in the E.U.
  • U.S. and E.U. airlines are given unlimited rights to Antitrust Immunity and alliances.
  • The U.S. renounces all former rights of its carriers to flights within Europe.
  • Other U.S. carriers are given at least limited access to LHR (believe it or not, I think that the U.S. would compromise on this issue if the E.U. gave up the cabotage demand)
  • The U.S. ends the requirement of mandatory U.S. carrier travel for government employees on foreign trips.


The E.U. gives up a little, the U.S. gives up a little.
 
lowrider
Posts: 2542
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:09 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:07 pm

Quoting Commavia (Reply 3):
The U.S. market is dramatically larger than the European market,

You might be right. I just don't have the numbers for total dollars spent in each market. Your proposal is interesting, but I think one more point is in order. A restriction or limit on the amount of government ownership or subsidies on participating airlines.
Proud OOTSK member
 
commavia
Posts: 10067
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:15 pm

Quoting Lowrider (Reply 4):
A restriction or limit on the amount of government ownership or subsidies on participating airlines.

I agree, this is important. The U.S. and E.U. must agree not to provide aid or financing for their carriers, except in situations of emergency (i.e., September 11).
 
IADLHR
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:25 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:47 pm

I do not see any way that the US will accept limited access to LHR and still grant ATI to AA/BA. Simply wont happen.Among other things, the other countiries and airlines that already have ATI and whose airports are fully opened to all US carriers will cry foul and rightfully so.
 
Beany
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:18 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:49 pm

Quoting Commavia (Reply 3):
The U.S. market is dramatically larger than the European market

How can you say that. Europe has a far greater population and a bigger combined wealth than the USA. I would agree with your argument if you said that the US market is larger than say the French market, but saying its larger than the European market is rubbish.

I love America and its people (I have to, half my family live there) but its hardly the 'land of the free' as its so referred to. You guys seem to be scared of a bit of foreign competition.

if European carriers had access to the US market then you might just see a few US carriers go under and thats what your government is trying to protect.

When Virgin announced they were looking into setting up a Virgin America, some members on here vowed never to fly them as they would be using non American assembled planes, a certain SRB would be a stockholder and that the American market could not handle another LCC and they didn't want to see the likes of US Airways and United be lost forever because of some 'foreign' Airline in the US.

Not the fact that parts for the Airbuses would be made in the USA, it would be American owned and employ thousands of American staff.

Until the US Government lowers its Patriotic shield, then these talks will go nowhere. Its just the same situation as what happened with the US steel embargo on Europe. Your Government thought it would be a good idea to heavily tax cheaper European steel imports so US firms would buy American steel that before import tax, was more expensive than European steel.
 
pixuk
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 8:44 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:55 pm

Quoting Commavia (Reply 5):
I agree, this is important. The U.S. and E.U. must agree not to provide aid or financing for their carriers, except in situations of emergency (i.e., September 11)

So it's ok if America decides it is, but not when anybody else does? Ok. Fair enough.
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:57 pm

Quoting Beany (Reply 7):
Quoting Commavia (Reply 3):
The U.S. market is dramatically larger than the European market

How can you say that. Europe has a far greater population and a bigger combined wealth than the USA. I would agree with your argument if you said that the US market is larger than say the French market, but saying its larger than the European market is rubbish.

Actually he is right. The US domestic air transport market alone is roughly the same size as the world's entire international market (and I'm including flights between EU countries as international).

US domestic and international combined is far far greater than anywhere else.
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
User avatar
Richard28
Posts: 1638
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:42 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:10 pm

Remember also that Chapter 11 is also considered a subsidy by those outside of the US.

As this is a protection which saves the company from bancrupcy, and protects it from fiscal realities.

[Edited 2005-04-27 16:12:02]
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:24 pm

Quoting Richard28 (Reply 10):
Remember also that Chapter 11 is also considered a subsidy by those outside of the US.

Why is it a subsidy? If creditors/lenders agree to reorganize their loans what does this have to do with any government? It's free enterprise here. Lenders at time feel that they can maintain some value by doing just this - even if its little... much better than nothing. The reason US and United are still is because thier creditors extend them loans and not because of Uncle Sam.

This is not a government handout as a subsidy would suggest. Following your much so wonderful UK model, are you proud to see Rover go under like it did???? Business must have protections from vile creditors/lenders who sometimes their intentions are for a corporate take overs and wipe competition.

If the EU doesnt have it... maybe they should? Just maybe the UK would still have an Auto industry. This is not about national pride its about people. Their is a human side to every company...
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
tinpusher007
Posts: 895
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:03 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:34 pm

Okay, the EU wants cabotage in the US in exchange for access to LHR. Do US carriers have cabotage in the EU?
"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5498
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:51 pm

Quoting Commavia (Reply 3):
Here is my Modest Proposal on EU-US open skies:


* The U.S. allows European carriers to acquire up to 49% of U.S. carriers, and the same is reciprocated for U.S. carriers
* U.S. and E.U. airlines are given unlimited access to flights and frequencies from anywhere in the U.S. to anywhere in the E.U.
* U.S. and E.U. airlines are given unlimited rights to Antitrust Immunity and alliances.
* The U.S. renounces all former rights of its carriers to flights within Europe.
* Other U.S. carriers are given at least limited access to LHR (believe it or not, I think that the U.S. would compromise on this issue if the E.U. gave up the cabotage demand)
* The U.S. ends the requirement of mandatory U.S. carrier travel for government employees on foreign trips.

#1.. I say let it go to 40%.. 49% just seems too high.. no foreign country should have that much control over what goes on in your countries airspace... the terrorist group could easily get 49% control of an airline then dive them wherever.. it would be their planes for the most part.. they can crash them if they want..
#2, 4.. I agree.. but no point-to-point in either area.. they have to only allow NS service.. with the introduction of the 787 and 380, this is now totally feasible..
#5.. US carriers should be given complete access to LHR... with an open skies, US carriers should be allowed to buy as many gates as they can afford.. its not the US fault that the airport is packed.. if EU carriers want to fly to the US and get access to any airport whenever they want, so should the US.. sorry... BA would just have to give up some of it's slots.. and share.
#6.. that would be dumb to me.. if the US is paying for it's people to fly on US carriers, why would it matter.. plus, it is sort of national security because the US holds its airlines to certain regulations that other airlines may/may not be held to.. I think they should maintain this requirement..
Aiming High and going far..
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:57 pm

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 13):
#1.. I say let it go to 40%.. 49% just seems too high.. no foreign country should have that much control over what goes on in your countries airspace... the terrorist group could easily get 49% control of an airline then dive them wherever.. it would be their planes for the most part.. they can crash them if they want..

Because Europe is full of airlines that are really terrorist fronts to target America. Ho Hum.....

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 13):
US carriers should be given complete access to LHR... with an open skies, US carriers should be allowed to buy as many gates as they can afford

Nobody - not even BA, BD or VS own any gates or terminals at LHR. They are all owned by the airport.

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 13):
sorry... BA would just have to give up some of it's slots.. and share.

and perhaps AA and UA could give up some of their numerous slots too.....
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5498
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:17 am

Quoting Cornish (Reply 14):
Because Europe is full of airlines that are really terrorist fronts to target America. Ho Hum.....

you never know.. same could be said about US airlines.. terrorist who are US citizens could do the same.. Ha Hum...

Quoting Cornish (Reply 14):
Nobody - not even BA, BD or VS own any gates or terminals at LHR. They are all owned by the airport.

Very well then.. common use gates.. is that better?

Quoting Cornish (Reply 14):
and perhaps AA and UA could give up some of their numerous slots too.....

With the open skies agreement, i don't think that would much matter as any US airline would now be able to fly their.. but to answer your question.. yes, all the slots should be revoked and redistributed amongst any airline that wishes to serve LHR..
Aiming High and going far..
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:18 am

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 13):
49% just seems too high.. no foreign country should have that much control over what goes on in your countries airspace... the terrorist group could easily get 49% control of an airline then dive them wherever.. it would be their planes for the most part.. they can crash them if they want..

Yeah - Al Queda went ahead and bought 51% of AA and UA before hijacking their aircraft ! Mmmmm, standard terrorist technique, definitely. HELLLOOO !!
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:25 am

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 15):
Quoting Cornish (Reply 14):
Because Europe is full of airlines that are really terrorist fronts to target America. Ho Hum.....

you never know.. same could be said about US airlines.. terrorist who are US citizens could do the same.. Ha Hum...

What buy a large chunk of an airline rather than merely hijack a plane. Don't think so somehow.

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 15):
Very well then.. common use gates.. is that better?

Absolutely - just pointing out that in Europe airlines don't tend to own their own terminals/gates like in the US.

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 15):
yes, all the slots should be revoked and redistributed amongst any airline that wishes to serve LHR..

Fair enough - but that would be bad news for UA. They're one of the biggest assets it's got right now.

Actually the whole slot trading/dealing issue needs looking at anyway....
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
DLPMMM
Posts: 2136
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:34 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:28 am

Just to beat a dead horse.

Cabotage is a non-starter. There is no reason for it. There is plenty of competition on both continents, and to my knowledge there is presently no cabotage on either continent. Please correct me with specific flights if I am wrong.

There is no reason for increasing the ownership percentages, and there would be no way to get this approved through congress (due to MATS concerns). The only one begging for this is UA because on one in the USA is willing to throw good money after bad. We will loosing some carriers in the USA in the near future, and that is economically a good thing. The EU can restrict USA ownership to 25% if they feel it is in their own best interest.

Point to point between the EU and the USA for any carrier either USA or EU.

The ATI thing is iffy. Could go either way, but I think this will continue to be on an airline and route specific basis as approved by both the EU and the USA. The bureaucrats need something to do, and the competition factors in particular markets make a one size fits all rule very difficult here. This is where LHR slot allocation could be handled.

Chapter 11 (don't forget that the Canadian equivalent is very close to the USA's regulations) is not airline specific. The regulations are the same across all USA industry. While I do not like many aspects of the Chapter 11 regulations, they are not airline specific, and so they are not an airline subsidy. I suppose that the next demand would be for the USA to adopt a tax code that is identical to the EU's and also impose a VAT. And the USA should demand that the EU impose the same fees and charges in intra-EU flights that the USA charges their airlines. Different regulations and tax structures are a part of international business.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
 
shawnnyc
Posts: 234
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 9:48 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:30 am

Why should the US give up rights to fly between European countries in the EU? Those are international routes. The US domestic market is a "domestic" market and is protected as such. There is a difference between flying routes internally in France to say Paris to Madrid. Let's compare apples to apples. If the EU wants to be treated as "one country," then they should be prepared to have one voice and representative on international bodies like the UN security council.
 
Concorde001
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:53 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:30 am

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 13):
US carriers should be given complete access to LHR... with an open skies, US carriers should be allowed to buy as many gates as they can afford.. its not the US fault that the airport is packed.. if EU carriers want to fly to the US and get access to any airport whenever they want, so should the US.. sorry... BA would just have to give up some of it's slots.. and share

Why? That is simply not fair to BA. BA has LHR as its main hub, and compared to LH and AF, still has far less number of slots...about 45-50%, compare that with LH which has 60 odd % at FRA and AF with a similar figure. The problem is that BAA and the Government need to get a new runway open (I know that will take time). Until that happens, LHR is always going to be packed, and therefore suggesting that BA should therefore give up her valuable slots at LHR, slots which without BA would not be a viable profitable busines is frankly stupid! Politicians at Westminster need to realise that while there may certainly be a case to answer regarding NIMBY's, London is one of the World's most important cities, and probably the most important in Europe. With that being the case, and LHR already bursting at the seams with more passengers than any other airport at Europe, they need to act CDG, AMS and FRA already have several runways, and LHR only has two! Come on....thats just silly. Sort it out people!
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:32 am

Does this help LHR get a third runway?
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:32 am

Quoting Shawnnyc (Reply 19):
Let's compare apples to apples.

So whay are you comparing the EU in civil aviation to the EU in the UN security council then ?  Wink
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
avek00
Posts: 3166
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:41 am

Quoting Scotron11 (Thread starter):
'Contrary to many peoples expectations, BA would welcome a true open aviation area. We are not protectionist,' said the chairman.

Bullsh!t - this is just propaganda for mindless masses. BA is *highly* protectionist - heck, it defends LHR so well that it's a prime mover for the construction of the A380, as its LHR longhaul competitors can only compete by flying in bigger planes, not by adding frequencies.

Quoting Commavia (Reply 3):
The U.S. ends the requirement of mandatory U.S. carrier travel for government employees on foreign trips.

This requirement is neither unusual nor unique to the USA, and is based on solid public policy and fiscal grounds. It should also be noted that the Fly America Act only a requires a US flag-carrier code on the flight, so one can, for instance, buy NW and fly KLM.  Wink
Live life to the fullest.
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5498
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:42 am

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 20):
Why? That is simply not fair to BA. BA has LHR as its main hub, and compared to LH and AF, still has far less number of slots...about 45-50%, compare that with LH which has 60 odd % at FRA and AF with a similar figure. The problem is that BAA and the Government need to get a new runway open (I know that will take time). Until that happens, LHR is always going to be packed, and therefore suggesting that BA should therefore give up her valuable slots at LHR, slots which without BA would not be a viable profitable busines is frankly stupid!

Very well, with the open skies agreement, tell me what airport that BA would not be allowed access to? LGA? DCA? LGB? All of those are otherwise available by alternative airport within 15 miles of those airports... Would BA want to go to LGA/DCA/LGB.. I don't think so.. (perhaps DCA but the perimenter rule and national security issue takes precedent).. So if BA gets free rule to ORD, LAX, MIA, JFK, DEN, PHX, LAS, SAV, ATL, GRR, MSP, BOI, SEA.. wherever.. then why should US airlines have to bow down about getting to go where they want to? THAT is what is not fair.. seems like a very onesided pact to me.. and seems like the deciding factor about whether this agreement is agreed upon or not..

Here's a suggestion.. if LHR is too small/crowded.. do what Japan did and build something in the Channel.. BAA too heavily concentrated at LHR.. spread themselves out some... I'm sorry, but I think that unless that issue is solved, this is a dead horse.
Aiming High and going far..
 
IADLHR
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:25 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:47 am

Also keep in mind for a US/EU openskies to happen that the SNN stopover in ireland will also have to be removed. Something, that, so far, the Irish government has refused to do.
Also at LHR , remember that NO foreign airlines flying to the US has ever paid as mucvh as a cent to but slots at any US airport. If the US carriers have to buy slots at LHR, the US will not stand for that and I would predict retaliation to the UK and BA from the US gogernment. BA, VS etc may soon find themselves paying for slots at LAX,JFK, ORd etc.
I think the day is here when LHR will simply have to go to mixed mode on the 2 runways, which should create some slots. The best answer is a third runway, but as we know, that is years and years away. US/EU openskies is not that many years away.
 
Oftwftwoab
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 4:53 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:48 am

Quoting Shawnnyc (Reply 19):
Why should the US give up rights to fly between European countries in the EU? Those are international routes. The US domestic market is a "domestic" market and is protected as such. There is a difference between flying routes internally in France to say Paris to Madrid. Let's compare apples to apples. If the EU wants to be treated as "one country," then they should be prepared to have one voice and representative on international bodies like the UN security council.

The EU is unique in international law. It is not a sovereign state, but the member states have pooled their sovereignty in limited areas. For those areas, the EU has competence to exercise the sovereignty; is the entity involved in international negotiations (for instance over the Boeing/Airbus subsidies dispute) and the member of international bodies (for instance the WTO), and therefore the EU is the relevant domestic area (because 'domestic' is the territory over which sovereignty is exercised).
 
Concorde001
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:53 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:56 am

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 24):
So if BA gets free rule to ORD, LAX, MIA, JFK, DEN, PHX, LAS, SAV, ATL, GRR, MSP, BOI, SEA.. wherever.. then why should US airlines have to bow down about getting to go where they want to?

I think you either misunderstood me, or I didn't explain myself very well. IF the US and EU signen an open skies agreement today, in theory any US airline will be allowed to operate in and out from Heathrow - they do NOT have to 'bow down' to anybody. The problem is the slots. Now, I don't think BA should be blamed for that, its the short-termism from our politicians! If Heathrow can get another runway, US airlines will be allowed to buy slots and operate to Heathrow as they wish. You seem to suggest that until a runway is built, BA should be forced to give away a large number of its slots to US airlines!
I'm sorry, but if this issue was the other way round, and lets say for example, UA at ORD was in the same position as BA at LHR, would you be content with UA being stripped of valuable slots? I somehow think not.
As I said earlier, the issue is of increasing capacity at LHR, which can be done, but only with political support!
 
User avatar
USAF336TFS
Posts: 1357
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:09 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 1):
As long as Europe continues to insist on cabotage within the US, it will never happen.

Absolutely true. As much as the Europeans would love to have a controlling intrest in US airlines, Congress will never allow more then 49% and that is probably vey generous, at best. And I would think that the legacy European airlines (AF, LH, BA) would also have to be allowed to be owned by a US company, no?

Thoughts?
336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5498
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:09 am

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 27):
I'm sorry, but if this issue was the other way round, and lets say for example, UA at ORD was in the same position as BA at LHR, would you be content with UA being stripped of valuable slots?

I wouldn't mind cause i don't particularily like UA.. I can understand that is BA's hub.. .they want all the slots if they can get them.. but when you have an aiport such as LHR which is slot restricted and you are trying to propose open skies agreement, you have to be on some good drugs if you think you can get it and not have a good amount of slots available at such a prime location airport.. that's like buying a house on one subdivision, paying full price, and not being allowed to move in until they construct another subdivision.. that ain't gonna happen either
Aiming High and going far..
 
User avatar
ERJ170
Posts: 5498
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 11:15 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:10 am

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 27):
I'm sorry, but if this issue was the other way round, and lets say for example, UA at ORD was in the same position as BA at LHR, would you be content with UA being stripped of valuable slots?

I wouldn't mind cause i don't particularily like UA..

Also, that did happen to UA and AA at ORD.. when the FAA decided it was too busy, they forced UA and AA to decrease their flights, while other airlines were allowed to increase theirs.. same difference..

I can understand that is BA's hub.. .they want all the slots if they can get them.. but when you have an aiport such as LHR which is slot restricted and you are trying to propose open skies agreement, you have to be on some good drugs if you think you can get it and not have a good amount of slots available at such a prime location airport.. that's like buying a house on one subdivision, paying full price, and not being allowed to move in until they construct another subdivision.. that ain't gonna happen either
Aiming High and going far..
 
Concorde001
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:53 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:20 am

You have some vaild point ERJ170.
I am suggesting that penalising BA for a problem which is not of their creation is simply wrong.
I think it needs to be understood that BA, along with likes of VS and BD cannot achieve their full potential, not only because of Bermuda II, but because LHR is slot restricted. VS would love to operate to places like DXB, but simply cannot because they can't get the slots. So, the only way we can resolve this problem is to:
INCREASE CAPACITY AT LHR AS A MATTER OF URGENCY, i.e. Build another runway. Only once that is done, US airlines, in fact any airline will have to work as the market dictates and pay for slots accordingly...BA included.
 
commavia
Posts: 10067
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:22 am

Quoting Beany (Reply 7):
Europe has a far greater population and a bigger combined wealth than the USA.

Check again. The United States, by itself, accounts for about the same amount of air traffic as the entire rest of the world combined. The U.S. commercial aviation market is ENORMOUS, much larger than in Europe. I think that this is largely due to two factors: first, European markets are much closer together, making air travel less efficient, and the fact that alternative transportation sources (namely trains) are much more prevalent there.

As to the "combined wealth" of the EU vs the US, these are direct quotes from a Swedish think tank:

“France, Italy, Great Britain and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual American states.”

“Europe lags behind the USA when comparing GDP per capita and GDP growth rates.”

Quoting Richard28 (Reply 10):
Remember also that Chapter 11 is also considered a subsidy by those outside of the US.

I think that when foreigners call our U.S. bankruptcy process through Chapter 11 a subsidy, that is misleading and false. I do, however, think that the US isway too generous in allowing failing companies to reorganize in bankruptcy and without many obligations or responsibilities.

Quoting TinPusher007 (Reply 12):
Okay, the EU wants cabotage in the US in exchange for access to LHR. Do US carriers have cabotage in the EU?

Well, that is tricky. The EU members states, at least in the field of aviation, do not recognize their own sovereign borders, and instead see the EU as a single aviation market, or, in essence, its own 'aviation country.' The problem, however, is that the US has thus far failed to recognize this sovereign common aviation bloc. I think the US would go a long way in PR and goodwill with the Europeans if it recognized the reality that Europe is now a single aviation market.

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 18):
Cabotage is a non-starter. There is no reason for it.

Not only is there no reason for it, but, as I said earlier, it will never happen. If the EU keeps insisting on cabotage, I hope they enjoy the rights their airlines have now because they will never get anywhere in negotiations with the U.S.

Quoting Shawnnyc (Reply 19):
Why should the US give up rights to fly between European countries in the EU? Those are international routes.

As I said a few points before, they really aren't international anymore. Flights within the EU are now, for all intensive purposes, just like flights from Des Moines to Dallas.
 
commavia
Posts: 10067
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:27 am

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 27):
I'm sorry, but if this issue was the other way round, and lets say for example, UA at ORD was in the same position as BA at LHR, would you be content with UA being stripped of valuable slots?

No, I wouldn't, and that is exactly the point. The British public has to wake up and recognize that while they are sitting around, talking, discussing, holding hearings, issuing reports, producing studies, all about the environmental impact of expanding Heathrow or listening to the NIMBYs complaints from Hounslow, Heathrow is diminishing.

This should not even be a point of discussion, because Heathrow should have at least one more runway under construction as we speak. Heathrow, with 2 runways, now faces stark competition from CDG (4 runways), AMS (4 runways) and FRA (3 runways) and just can't compete.

I just wish the British -- who I love! -- would wake up and realize that they are losing out to the Dutch, French and Germans because a few people's homes may have to be moved.
 
vs25
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:53 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:29 am

From the flying public's perspective it would be great if one could fly from any US airport to any EU airport. This is what we all want... its just how we're going to get there.

Now I don't care about foriegn ownership. Heck, I don't have enough money to buy dinner some nights never mind buy an airline in either the EU or the US.

Cabotage is a different matter... or should I say increased competition. In a true capitalist, free trade world, any airline should be able to fly from any city to any other city, and stop along the way to pick up pax and cargo if they want to. Let the market decide. If there *is* a market for BA or VS to fly LAX-NYC and they think they can make money doing it, then let them try.
Same goes for US carriers in Europe. It may cause over capacity on some routes and eventually some carriers will have to bow out (or go bankrupt) Competition is good - BA and VS are constantly improving their long haul products to be the "better carrier". Survival of the fittest and all that good stuff.

I also think the "Fly US" issue is a non-starter. I don't care who US Govt employees fly with. Its the US Govt's decision. After all, it is US tax $$$ we're talking about her. I certainly wouldn't like the White House telling Tony Blair that he can only fly over to see Bush at the ranch on an AA plane. I think the EU know this and are just using it as another bargaining tool.

Finally, the big one... LHR. Let's face it. Open Skies or no Open Skies getting slots at LHR is like trying to find gold at the end of a rainbow (or chicken's teeth). Until there is another runway there is no solution here that will not annoy someone. I'm more than happy for anyone to start flying to LHR. The more competition on the US routes the better. I don't think BA (or BD) should have to give up slots because US or CO want some. Join the queue, the wining and the dining and trade on the black market like everyone else.

I brought this up some time ago, but I think that the whole slot/fees/gate situation should be re-examined. Scrap the lot and start again. Have an auction for slots at LHR - the right to fly there for 2 years. The market will then decide the price (once you have a slot you shouldn't be charged landing fees though, that would be stupid money grabbing). The slots could then be freely traded on the open market, rather than the behind the scenes stuff going on at the moment. Anything that is scarce has a price.
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:34 am

Give LHR the runway.
 
Concorde001
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:53 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:37 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 32):
I think that when foreigners call our U.S. bankruptcy process through Chapter 11 a subsidy, that is misleading and false.

You must be joking. State aid is being provided to keep airlines afloat. This aid is helping US airlines to have an advantage over, for example, European carriers. Since Sep 11, European carriers have been told, sink or swim, and consequently Sabena and Swissair sunk. European carriers like BA, LH and AF, unlike US carriers have had NO money from the government, they have had to pay for all the new security measures themselves and still have produced profits, with BA looking set to announce profits of nearly 560 MILLION pounds ($about 900,000,000,).
I understand that AZ Alitalia has been given a loan, but it was given grudgingly (with anger from other EU countries) and it is still only a loan which has to be repaid soon, unlike US carriers which I believe do not have repay anything back.
So, if that is not subsidising US carriers, I don't know what is!
 
Concorde001
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:53 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:40 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 33):
I just wish the British -- who I love! -- would wake up and realize that they are losing out to the Dutch, French and Germans because a few people's homes may have to be moved

Amen to that! I couldn't agree more. I was simply saying that penalising BA for a problem not of their creation is wrong!
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:42 am

It's okay Concorde001, because since the European carriers have to do proper business in order to survive, it means that they will provide a better service and get all the patronage.
 
ouboy79
Posts: 4114
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:48 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:10 am

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 27):
I'm sorry, but if this issue was the other way round, and lets say for example, UA at ORD was in the same position as BA at LHR, would you be content with UA being stripped of valuable slots? I somehow think not.
As I said earlier, the issue is of increasing capacity at LHR, which can be done, but only with political support!

You may not remember, but prior to slots being abolished at ORD - UA and AA were indeed stripped of slots to make room for other carriers.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:39 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 32):
Well, that is tricky. The EU members states, at least in the field of aviation, do not recognize their own sovereign borders, and instead see the EU as a single aviation market, or, in essence, its own 'aviation country.' The problem, however, is that the US has thus far failed to recognize this sovereign common aviation bloc. I think the US would go a long way in PR and goodwill with the Europeans if it recognized the reality that Europe is now a single aviation market.


Should the EU countries be able to pick and choose where they are considered a single country and where they can be considered multiple countries? Otherwise they can pick and choose to gain an advantage. They can get more votes in the international bodies like the UN and send more teams to the Olympics.

My suggestion is this: before we give them cabotage rights, let them give their airlines the right to fly routes from any EU nation to the US and other nations, and we'll do the same. Let's break up the fortress international hubs of LH, AF and BA. Let's see competition between majors for multiple routes out of the same city, as we see here in the US. Then we'll know that they have single aviation market and treat it accordingly.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
commavia
Posts: 10067
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:40 am

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 36):
State aid is being provided to keep airlines afloat.

The only aid U.S. carriers got from the U.S. government was after 9/11, when they were reimbursed for the losses resulting from four days of government-imposed no flying. In addition, USAirways got a bridge loan from the government through the ATSB, which I completely disagreed with (then and now). Other than that, the U.S. government has not really helped U.S. airlines. In fact, UA is in bankruptcy today because the U.S. government failed to give them a loan back in December 2003.

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 37):
Amen to that! I couldn't agree more. I was simply saying that penalising BA for a problem not of their creation is wrong!

I do agree, and I am sorry if I didn't make it clear. Punishing any airline for the problems sorrounding LHR is not the right tact to take. The airlines, IMO, are the innocent bistandards of government policies to caught on the micro level and no focusing on the bigger picture (i.e., the UK losing out!)
 
Concorde001
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:53 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:43 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 41):
I do agree, and I am sorry if I didn't make it clear

No worries mate!  Smile
 
copenhagenboy
Posts: 541
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 11:03 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 6:20 am

"In a true capitalist, free trade world, any airline should be able to fly from any city to any other city"

And that is in fact what is happening in the EU, because it is one free market, if I am correct, CZA are going to fly Dublin-Athen

[Edited 2005-04-27 23:20:48]
 
WAH64D
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 6:30 am

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 11):
This is not a government handout as a subsidy would suggest. Following your much so wonderful UK model, are you proud to see Rover go under like it did???? Business must have protections from vile creditors/lenders who sometimes their intentions are for a corporate take overs and wipe competition.

If the EU doesnt have it... maybe they should? Just maybe the UK would still have an Auto industry. This is not about national pride its about people. Their is a human side to every company...

Couldn't agree more!

Quoting Shawnnyc (Reply 19):
If the EU wants to be treated as "one country," then they should be prepared to have one voice and representative on international bodies like the UN security council.

Sorry but this is just a perfect illustration of the insular attitude and total lack of understanding of events outwith the US that is common among Americans. Take it from a British citizen. The majority of us have absolutely no desire whatsoever to live under a European flag or to give up our British pound.
I AM the No-spotalotacus.
 
commavia
Posts: 10067
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 6:35 am

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 44):
Take it from a British citizen. The majority of us have absolutely no desire whatsoever to live under a European flag or to give up our British pound.

And, believe me, as an American without an "insular attitude and total lack of understanding," there is nothing that pains my heart more than the British public even contemplating giving up the pound sterling!

On the issue of the single EU 'common market,' this is one of the biggest areas of disagreement between me and the U.S. government on the 'Open Skies' issue. I am with them on not giving in on cabotage, and on demanding at least some access to LHR, but the U.S. should just preemptively, unilaterally, relinquish any and all rights for U.S. carriers to fly within the EU and recognize the EU as a single country for civil aviation purposes. The EU is the EU, and the single market is the single market, the U.S. government should just accept it.
 
travelin man
Posts: 3203
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:22 am

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 36):
European carriers like BA, LH and AF, unlike US carriers have had NO money from the government, they have had to pay for all the new security measures themselves and still have produced profits, with BA looking set to announce profits of nearly 560 MILLION pounds ($about 900,000,000,).

So BA is set to announce record profits with "NO" money from the government, huh? But having the lion's share of slots at one of the most government-restricted airports does NOT amount to "government money"? Sorry, but that's completely hypocritical.

I think that government control of ownership of the airlines should go away. For God's sake, we didn't bat an eye when Daimler bought Chrysler, and the Brits had Land Rover sold to Ford. What makes the airline industry so special? And please, oh please, don't say "terrorism". That's a ridiculous argument.

However, if my government says my tax dollars should be sent flying US government employees on US airlines, why is there a problem with that? Please do not tell us how to spend our tax dollars.
 
Concorde001
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:53 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:02 am

Quoting Travelin man (Reply 46):
But having the lion's share of slots at one of the most government-restricted airports does NOT amount to "government money"? Sorry, but that's completely hypocritical.

I think that government control of ownership of the airlines should go away.

I think you misunderstand the point.
A) The government owns no part of BA, It was privatised in the 1980s.
b) Heathrow is not restricted by the Government! With routes to the US, Bermuda II exists I agree, but BA, as with VS, UA and AA have only three other competitors on US routes. So BA is as much protected on routes to the US as is AA, UA and VS.
Heathrow is slot restricted...only when that is solved will Heathrow be able to open up.
BA has the most slots at LHR because she has rightly bought them over the years. The government has in NO way barred any other airline, apart from those not in Bermuda II to buying slots at LHR, so you are actually wrong in the claims you make.
 
commavia
Posts: 10067
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:17 am

Quoting Travelin man (Reply 46):
But having the lion's share of slots at one of the most government-restricted airports does NOT amount to "government money"?

No, it doesn't, not in the slightest. The British government does not own, have control over, nor have any oversight of, British Airways, and hasn't since Margaret Thatcher pushed to (and succeeded) privatize the company in 1987.

As to the slots, many airlines control the majority of slots at certain airports, but that doesn't make it a government handout. BA controls somewhere around 40% of the slots at LHR, a paltry amount compared to the share of slots AF controls at CDG or LH controls at FRA, and those are not government handouts either. Now, the EU giving a "bridge loan" to AZ -- that is "government money."
 
IADLHR
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:25 pm

RE: BA Hopeful Of EU/US "Open Skies" Breakthrough

Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:27 am

FRA, AMS,CDG have more than 2 runways and are extremely formidable competition for LHR. The UK government has refused to build a 3rd or 4th runway at LHR and will not go to mixed mode on the existing 2 runways. As a result, slots are not available for more US carriers at LHR.
If that is not government aid for BA and VS, please tell me what is.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos