Reggaebird
Topic Author
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 1999 7:43 am

Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:27 am

Over the last 10 years we've seen the amazing rise of Middle Eastern carriers Emirates, Qatar and, to a lesser extent, Etihad. This will inevitably lead to these carriers joining the ranks of the global super carriers like SQ, BA, LH, AF/KL, etc.

This rise is enabled primaryly by these Middle Eastern carriers' seemingly endless supply of money for new planes, their appetite for groundbreaking services and equipment (e.g., premium cabins, amenities, airport lounges) and their increasing share of the premium travelers' dollars. However, now that they are making clear their global intentions, could we see a backlash driven by the big flag and legacy carriers in the major aviation markets? I wonder if destination countries are going to start restricting landing rights to these carriers to control them.

Any thoughts?
 
Cactus742
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 5:18 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:38 am

Beyond just available capital, there are other factors that have led to the rise of carriers based in the Middle East. As long-range flight has become more viable through large aircraft with longer range, the Middle East is in a nearly perfect global position to be a connecting point between Europe and Asia and Europe and Africa. Carriers based in SE Asia have a similar geographic advantage between the west coast of North America and their hub sities to connect to points in other parts of Asia, such as the Indian subcontinent.

Carriers based in Europe simply cannot match those advantages. While a backlash may be in store, it can't negate the natural advantages that geography has given to the Middle East. SQ, on the other hand, may be better able to retaliate given not only its comparable status as a good global connecting point as well as its in-flight product.
Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:59 am

Quoting Cactus742 (Reply 1):
Carriers based in Europe simply cannot match those advantages.

Based on what parameters...? Certainly not geography.

About the only thing they cannot match are differences in hiring/employee maintenance.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:04 am

Quoting Cactus742 (Reply 1):
As long-range flight has become more viable through large aircraft with longer range, the Middle East is in a nearly perfect global position to be a connecting point between Europe and Asia and Europe and Africa.

No, it isn't. I don't understand this viewpoint. It's out of the way for EU to Asia, and out of the way for Africa to EU.

The reason it is viable is because EK and others are connecting secondary cities in the EU with other destinations, something their flag carriers had been ignoring. For whatever reason, flag carriers have been forcing all pax through their central nation hub, while EK, for example, can connect you directly out of Nice to DXB and then on to India. And they plan to do Nice to Dubai on an A380.

As for Africa, in all honesty, any EU carrier could fly non-stop anywhere in Africa. It's close enough. Dubai is out of the way. But EK is a safe and stable waypoint, so again, they can connect many countries with many secondary locations in the EU. And while there may not be enough traffic to fill a 777 to those EU cities on each africa route, when you pool the routes at both ends, it makes more financial sense (read cheaper flights).

But if there was a viable, stable hub point in Egypt, for example, it would make much more sense.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
DL777LAX
Posts: 489
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:45 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 11:19 am

I guess what EK is doing is routing the passanger in lets say GLA GLA-DXB-SYD, where on BA, that passanger would have to do GLA-LHR-SIN-SYD. One connecton vs. two. EK serves alot of secondary markets in Europe and in India/Middle east. They can take that traveller from VCE to HYD through DXB instead of having to fly VCE-EuroHub-IndianHub-HYD. A passenger in New York used to have to fly through Europe to get to major points in India. Today, they can fly nonstop. However, a connection to a smaller city in India through DEL or BOM isn't as desirable as a connection through DXB.

Its one stop versus. two stops.

EK knows exactly what its doing, making passangers connect once instead of twice.
Blindly following anything is bad, unless of course your blind and your following a guide dog.
 
BAxMAN
Posts: 654
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 7:51 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 11:41 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
For whatever reason, flag carriers have been forcing all pax through their central nation hub, while EK, for example, can connect you directly out of Nice to DXB and then on to India. And they plan to do Nice to Dubai on an A380.

Ok, so using this analogy, what exactly are EK or any of the Middle Eastern carriers doing differently? AF will 'force' an India-bound NCE passenger through CDG, whilst EK is simply 'forcing' the passenger through DXB. Nasty old EK are still forcing you their own 'central nation hub.'

All the guff that is spouted about the likes of EK rescuing the poor old ignored passengers in the 'regions,' the reality is that EK et al are simply providing cities ike NCE just one destination - whether that be DXB, AUH, DOH etc. EK, QR, EY all want to flood London with an endless stream of A380's, whilst the regions will be getting the 1/2x daily leftovers if they are lucky.

The reasons for the success of these new and expanding airlines (and bear in mind that some are hardly profitable so can't really be called a success) are not as simplistic as you make out. There is clearly an enthusiasm in the host countries' governments (a Big Willy type syndrome) to have major flag carrier and world beating hub. European carriers simply can't even bother trying to compete economically as their cost bases for the immediate future and almost certainly longer will be laughably (perhaps exploitingly) low.

You also can't ignore the fact that onboard, they are providing a solid Y product and are doing their utmost to provide a formidable premium product, too.
I need to get laid
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4837
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 11:56 am

Quoting Reggaebird (Thread starter):
I wonder if destination countries are going to start restricting landing rights to these carriers to control them.

You mean 'protectionism'. So much for free trade...  Sad
 
airbuske
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 9:36 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:02 pm

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 4):
EK knows exactly what its doing,

 checkmark 

When I fly home, my trips usually look like this :
DAB-EWR-LHR-NBO (CO/KQ)
DAB-ATL-CDG-NBO (DL/AF/KQ)
MCO-LGW;LHR-NBO (VS)

If I was to fly upto JFK and then use EK to fly JFK-DXB-NBO, I save about 18 hours in total trip time because of poor timing in connections between Europe and East Africa.

EK plans to start flying to MCO and I can't wait for that.

MCO-DXB-NBO would take me 1.5 days as opposed to 2.5 days, and a get a better in flight service!

The geographical location of DXB and other Middle Eastern hubs offers them immense strategical advantages.

However, I still feel that the chances of them suffering from major overcapacity is more than likely!
 
User avatar
yowza
Posts: 4280
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:01 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:05 pm

The short answers is not really. Other carriers will get fed up, some will cry foul, some will fold but aviation ultimately is governed by treaties at the national level so not that much of a backlash can occur because countries will not want to be accused of protectionism. Simple as that. You will see some minor protection such as the Aussies give QF but nothing further.

The location of the gulf is good, very close (short flying time) to huge markets but in my humble opinion the biggest advantages EK and QR have is a lack of unions and raw aggression.

YOWza
 
CitrusCritter
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 10:36 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:30 pm

A better question might be what will happen to these carriers over the long-term as oil money begins to dry up, as a result of the oil drying up. There has been little emphasis in the Middle East in diversifiying the economy outside of the oil sector, and I'm not sure premium airlines really count.
 
scrubbsywg
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:35 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:38 pm

Quoting CitrusCritter (Reply 9):
A better question might be what will happen to these carriers over the long-term as oil money begins to dry up, as a result of the oil drying up. There has been little emphasis in the Middle East in diversifiying the economy outside of the oil sector, and I'm not sure premium airlines really count.

dubai has done extensive work on diversifying its economy away from oil. Oil accounts for something less than 10% of its GDP, and look what airline is based there. Just one example of how some areas of the middle east are diversifying heavily away from oil and petroleum economies.
 
CitrusCritter
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 10:36 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:31 pm

Dubai is definitely taking it seriously, but the rest of the UAE isn't. Abu Dhabi may have less than 10 years oil remaining at current production and certainly economic diversification has not been a major focus in other Middle Eastern countries.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:42 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
No, it isn't. I don't understand this viewpoint. It's out of the way for EU to Asia, and out of the way for Africa to EU.

Depends where in Asia or Africa. Presumbably if they use low CASM aircraft, and combine that with lower costs on shorter segments, they could make up for excess distance flied. But only if the customer is willing to stop over in DXB.

Quoting PM (Reply 6):
You mean 'protectionism'. So much for free trade... Sad

Come on, these ME countries engage in cartel activities to control oil prices, something other than free trade. The pricing delta that results from collusion over production rates is financing the purchases of these planes one way or another. Why not stick it to them where you can? You can't do anything about the price fixing.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4837
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:04 pm

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 12):
Why not stick it to them where you can?

Wouldn't "sticking it to them" mean they'd stop buying scores of American and European aircraft with American and European engines? Who would that hurt?
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:25 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 13):
Wouldn't "sticking it to them" mean they'd stop buying scores of American and European aircraft with American and European engines? Who would that hurt?

Of course poor health of those carriers would lead to reduced sales to them.

I would note that ME carriers will have limited impact on US carriers as geography dictates that there are not many routes that a DXB routing would be competitive.

Anyway, the backlash doesn't have to come only from US or European carriers. And not all European countries care about Airbus.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:53 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
And they plan to do Nice to Dubai on an A380.

I don't think the runway at NCE is long enough for that. Even the 773 they use now has to make a stop in FCO, because it can't take off with a full load nonstop NCE-DXB. Plus the terminal infrastructure at NCE is woefully inadequate for an A380 (also, there isn't the demand to fill it - NCE simply couldn't fill an A380, I don't think).
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3365
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:08 pm

Quoting Reggaebird (Thread starter):
I wonder if destination countries are going to start restricting landing rights to these carriers to control them.

Before Emirates started up in 1980, the Dubai government made the very bold (at the time) move to go for open skies. They announced that DXB would be open to all carriers without restriction. They then founded Emirates and started signing open skies treaties with anyone that would. As Emirates was a two aircraft airline nearly everyone else signed up. Now the rest of the world is paying the price as Emirates has unrestricted access to their markets.
 
Gr8Circle
Posts: 2387
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:04 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
It's out of the way for EU to Asia,

The Middle East IS in Asia....you probably want to refer to the Far East....?  smile 
 
Reggaebird
Topic Author
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 1999 7:43 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:40 am

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 16):
Before Emirates started up in 1980, the Dubai government made the very bold (at the time) move to go for open skies. They announced that DXB would be open to all carriers without restriction. They then founded Emirates and started signing open skies treaties with anyone that would. As Emirates was a two aircraft airline nearly everyone else signed up. Now the rest of the world is paying the price as Emirates has unrestricted access to their markets.

Excellent point as that is not widely known. It is inline with my original question. That is, could countries that have signed open skies agreements with these Middle Eastern nations rescind or renegotiate those agreements?

Reggaebird
 
philzh
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:22 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 1:58 am

Quoting Reggaebird (Reply 19):
Excellent point as that is not widely known.

You may be interested in CHRISBA777ER's fascinating analysis of EK posted here .
 
Reggaebird
Topic Author
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 1999 7:43 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:24 am

Quoting Philzh (Reply 19):
Quoting Reggaebird (Reply 19):
Excellent point as that is not widely known.

You may be interested in CHRISBA777ER's fascinating analysis of EK posted here .

Philzh,

Thanks for the reference link. That was an excellent summary of EK and it's likely strategy. I wonder is Qatar, Etihad, et al, are doing the same?

Reggaebird
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:34 am

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 4):
I guess what EK is doing is routing the passanger in lets say GLA GLA-DXB-SYD, where on BA, that passanger would have to do GLA-LHR-SIN-SYD. One connecton vs. two. EK serves alot of secondary markets in Europe and in India/Middle east.

Suggest you do some research. The "competitive" fares for EK, from places like LHR, FRA offer two connections to OZ. It's through DXB and then SIN or BKK. If you want a one-stop you will pay more to go non-stop from DXB.

DXB is only 7 hours from LHR another 7 to SIN and then 7 more to SYD. A flight from LHR is actually quicker since it's 12-13 hours from LHR and then 7 from SIN.
Fly fast, live slow
 
PlaneHunter
Posts: 6512
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:17 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:52 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
No, it isn't. I don't understand this viewpoint. It's out of the way for EU to Asia, and out of the way for Africa to EU.

The ME is not out of the way for EU-(South East) Asia or EU-Subcontinent traffic. Just compare flying times between a number of destinations.

Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 4):
EK knows exactly what its doing, making passangers connect once instead of twice.

Exactly.

Quoting CitrusCritter (Reply 9):
There has been little emphasis in the Middle East in diversifiying the economy outside of the oil sector, and I'm not sure premium airlines really count.

The UAE and Qatar are indeed very active in diversifying the economy.


PH
Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
 
User avatar
yellowtail
Posts: 3734
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:46 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:14 am

Quoting Airbuske (Reply 7):
When I fly home, my trips usually look like this :
DAB-EWR-LHR-NBO (CO/KQ)
DAB-ATL-CDG-NBO (DL/AF/KQ)

Forgive me, but how did you get to LHR from EWR on CO......maybe it was BA you thik of....CO only goes to LGW at this time....
When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
 
David_itl
Posts: 5970
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:33 am

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 5):
EK, QR, EY all want to flood London with an endless stream of A380's, whilst the regions will be getting the 1/2x daily leftovers if they are lucky.

32.8% of the passengers on the UK-Dubai sector were on those regional flights. Pretty sizeable "leftovers"?!

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 5):
Ok, so using this analogy, what exactly are EK or any of the Middle Eastern carriers doing differently? AF will 'force' an India-bound NCE passenger through CDG, whilst EK is simply 'forcing' the passenger through DXB. Nasty old EK are still forcing you their own 'central nation hub.'

Errr...perhaps EK can offer the India bound NCE pax a one-stop service rather than a 2 stop strategy. Something like the pax flying MAN-Australia have found - only about 20% perfer the two stop strategy offering by BA/QF
 
airbazar
Posts: 6936
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:49 am

Quoting Airbuske (Reply 7):
If I was to fly upto JFK and then use EK to fly JFK-DXB-NBO, I save about 18 hours in total trip time because of poor timing in connections between Europe and East Africa.

 checkmark 
Geographicaly speaking, Europe is far better positioned that the Gulf region is. However, as has been noted, European carriers have long neglected secondary markets and when they do serve those markets, the connections are horrible. Take for example, all the evening departures from Europe to southern Africa or Asia. If you're flying in from Asia/N.America you typically arrive early AM and have to sit around all day to make those connections. If you go via DXB, you don't waste as much time.
 
richardw
Posts: 3137
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 3:17 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:57 am

In the winter EK wins on routes to PER, from GLA, NCL, BHX, MAN and for those passenegers near to LGW, against BA/QF, one connection at DXB is a real advantage.
 
rdwootty
Posts: 689
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 4:28 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:57 am

It is easy for us in the Midlands, we have been abandonded by our contries flag carrier BA as there are no flights to either LHR or LGW from BHX so our Local airline to the Far East with a good connection and a twice daily service is EK . Also it is very convenient to have a seven hour trip followed by a break to stretch, have some good food and also use a proper toilet. I personally would not like a 14/15 hour nonstop flight. So Good old EK and BHX,s local long haul airline. Long may it continue.
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:00 am

Quoting Reggaebird (Thread starter):
However, now that they are making clear their global intentions, could we see a backlash driven by the big flag and legacy carriers in the major aviation markets?

From whom would the backlash come? I'm sure all the gov'ts of nations served by EK et al are thrilled to have the extra visitors and the boost to the economy they bring. Gov'ts do not exist to protect their national airlines, gov'ts exist to boost the economy in the geography they control. Their own airlines are an instrument of that, to make it possible for people and goods to come to the area as easily and in as greater number as possible. Do you think the Aussie gov't care more about Qantas than they do the Australian economy? Will they make it deliberately difficult for people to visit Oz, just to help QF?

Quoting Airbuske (Reply 7):
EK plans to start flying to MCO

REALLY?!

Quoting CitrusCritter (Reply 9):
what will happen to these carriers over the long-term as oil money begins to dry up, as a result of the oil drying up.

I wouldn't worry. Where else is the oil going to come from? You think the world's only major oil producing region will stop pumping fuel and the rest of the world will keep functioning? On WHAT? Good vibes? When the oil in the Middle East "dries up" as you say, everything will grind to a halt. Growing and transporting food will be virtually impossible in the quantities needed to feed 6.5 billion people currently on the planet. We will in all likelihood lose a significant proportion of our populations. No-one will be flying to Thailand for holiday; but definitely walking out of the cities and trying to work out how to grow a carrot and not starve / freeze to death / be killed by gangs. Sorry for such a depressing scenario, but it's true. The entire Alaskan oilfields are good for about 10 days' worth of what the US is currently consuming.

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 15):
I don't think the runway at NCE is long enough for that.

Really?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Philippe Le Pallec
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AlainDurand



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirNikon
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alastair T. Gardiner - WorldAirImages



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Guillaume Bringuier
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vasco Garcia


(I realise one or two photos would have done the job, the conversation after all is about EK, but they are some great photos and you probably need cheering up after my post-oil scenario. Btw really miss UTA, "oo-tee-ah" en Francais.)
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
airbuske
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 9:36 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:02 am

Quoting Yellowtail (Reply 23):

Forgive me, but how did you get to LHR from EWR on CO......maybe it was BA you thik of....CO only goes to LGW at this time....

The current Bermuda II allows only United and American to fly their aircraft into LHR. BAA has allowed CO to codeshare with VS but CO doesn't have the right to exercise route authority i.e. each flight has two flight numbers, one from VS and one CO, but the a/c is always one of Branson's babies.

So even though you are correct, you are not fully correct. But I hope I answered your question.

And as an FYI, with the new open skies agreement between the EU and US, the Bermuda II restrictions will be dropped and CO will most probably be getting slots at LHR and being flights sometime in March 2008.
 
goldorak
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 5:29 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:09 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 15):
I don't think the runway at NCE is long enough for that. Even the 773 they use now has to make a stop in FCO, because it can't take off with a full load nonstop NCE-DXB. Plus the terminal infrastructure at NCE is woefully inadequate for an A380 (also, there isn't the demand to fill it - NCE simply couldn't fill an A380, I don't think).

I know it sounds crazy, but EK is definitely planning DXB-NCE with A380 but the flight is supposed to continue somewhere else in Europe (but can't remember where).
As said already by Cedarjet, there' s no runway issue for the A380 at NCE
 
David_itl
Posts: 5970
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:16 am

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 28):
remember that EK give MAN a grand total of two flights to one destination

BA is offering is 2 destinations. Whoop-de-whoop. I must kiss the feet of all the BA executives for blessing MAN a whopping 2 destinations non-stop. If BA want to ignore the regions, let them. Other airlins won't mind: LH have said 10% of thier pax flying ex-MAN are going business class long-haul . BA don't (or can't or won't) seem to find them....?! Perhaps you and the board of BA have the mindset of that buerk Biddy Baxter?

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 28):
assuming your figures are correct,

Want to dispute the CAA's figures? Do you know how many pax travelled UK regions-DXB?

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 28):
the fact that 67.2% of EK's UK passengers come from LON is indicative that the regions are getting the leftovers.

And by my reckoning LON-DXB has 69% of the flights. Therefore, the UK's regions are performing above their station. As I said...

Quoting David_itl (Reply 24):
Pretty sizeable "leftovers"?!
 
babybus
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 5:07 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:16 am

I doubt there'd be a backlash from pax as the Middle East super carriers will have the most modern aircraft and I guess with the A380, the most spacious aircraft on the market. Pax are looking for value for money vs space and service level.

A government backlash might come in the form of seeking oil backhanders in return for turning a blind eye to stuff. Any extra economic activity at any airport would be greatly welcomed by any government.
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
 
airbuske
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 9:36 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:32 am

Do you think Middle East carriers (especially EK) would see massive gains once Dubai Aerospace starts up due of economies of scale? Both Airbus and Boeing will have huge manufacturing plants there and EK could easily gain a massive advantage over competitors when it comes to a/c purchasing costs by having the Dubai Administration cut some deals with Airbus and/or Boeing. (which could potentially be another battle in the making)
 
BAxMAN
Posts: 654
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 7:51 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:35 am

Quoting David_itl (Reply 32):
BA is offering is 2 destinations. Whoop-de-whoop. I must kiss the feet of all the BA executives for blessing MAN a whopping 2 destinations non-stop. If BA want to ignore the regions, let them. Other airlins won't mind: LH have said 10% of thier pax flying ex-MAN are going business class long-haul . BA don't (or can't or won't) seem to find them....?!

Sure you can kiss my feet. I find that quite flattering. Just tell me when you plan on doing this so I've got Dettol ready for when you've finished.

Anyway, LH provide a similar one-stop service via FRA/MUC that BA offer via LHR/LGW. I am not so anal as to be full of statistics (even if they are the same ones churned out time after time in thread after thread), but I do know that there are quite a few people on those LON shuttles flying in premium cabins. LH (plus other Euro carriers) also offer discounted fares for their ex-EU passengers, so this will skew figures (in purely the same way BA offer discounted premium fares ex-FRA which may skew figures on DEU-LHR services).

However, for the plain and simple MAN-FRA O&D pax, LH have the most horribly archaic and restrictive fares which 'enlightened' BA saw fit to ditch a good 18 months ago (unless you're going to Russia or Ukraine).

Quoting David_itl (Reply 32):
And by my reckoning LON-DXB has 69% of the flights. Therefore, the UK's regions are performing above their station. As I said...

I say those figures are pretty close so, load factor wise, I'd call it fairly even. Unfortunately, I don't think your CAA stats are going to give an indication of what % of UK profit the regions bring for EK (or % of loss for many of EK's regional rivals).


As an aside, I really do hope you're not as angry in real life as you seem to be on t'internet. It's just a frigging airline!


*also remember that even with the closures of regional outstations (which I do think is unwise), BA still has a large number of employees around Manchester, Newcastle and Cardiff.

[Edited 2007-06-29 00:38:02]
I need to get laid
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12423
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:14 am

You may see some backlash as major carriers in the EC, North American and South Asia as well as the national governments they are based at to try to get a 50-50 access to DBX or other Persian Gulf hubs where airlines discussed here are based or pressure upon eventual destination airlines. EK and others offer high quality service and to areas of the world many carriers have chosen to serve. EK and the others of the region have the up front money to start up so no debt, leases, no or virtually no business or airline taxes at their hubs as well as low labor costs as newer and not unionized. That means they can charge less that other established airlines. Also as based in Islam countries they can serve other Islamic and politically sensitive countries as to the EC and the USA with less political hassles that other airlines can.
 
vv701
Posts: 5780
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:44 am

Quoting Airbuske (Reply 7):
DAB-EWR-LHR-NBO (CO/KQ)
DAB-ATL-CDG-NBO (DL/AF/KQ)
MCO-LGW;LHR-NBO (VS)

If I was to fly upto JFK and then use EK to fly JFK-DXB-NBO, I save about 18 hours in total trip time because of poor timing in connections between Europe and East Africa.

EK plans to start flying to MCO and I can't wait for that.

MCO-DXB-NBO would take me 1.5 days as opposed to 2.5 days, and a get a better in flight service!

If elapsed time is important to you as it seems it might be why not:
MCO-LGW BA2036 d. 1720hrs a.0625hrs
LHR-NAI BA065 d. 1020hrs a. 2045hrs
Total elapsed time 20hrs 25mins or less than a day compared to your 1.5 days via DXB.
 
moek2000
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:37 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:45 am

On top of that, Dubai is a growing city with a really nice airport. Connection times are excellent and even if you have a 4-5 hours layover, it goes by really fast! Trust me...
 
OceansWorld
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:00 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:07 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 15):
I don't think the runway at NCE is long enough for that. Even the 773 they use now has to make a stop in FCO, because it can't take off with a full load nonstop NCE-DXB.

I doubt it that the 773 can't make it non stop to DXB from NCE. If the flights use 4R/22L, the runway has a 3119m/ 10234ft take off distance at sea level while the route is about 5000km longs

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 29):

But how many of the aircraft shown on the pirctures you've selected were flying non-stop long-hauls out of NCE ?
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:20 am

Quoting ScrubbsYWG (Reply 10):
dubai has done extensive work on diversifying its economy away from oil. Oil accounts for something less than 10% of its GDP, and look what airline is based there. Just one example of how some areas of the middle east are diversifying heavily away from oil and petroleum economies.

According the the attached site your 10% figure on is a little low. Dubai's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) = 171 billion Dirham (Dhs), non-oil GDP 114 billion Dhs, oil GDP 57 billion Dhs.

http://www.datadubai.com/technical-info/facts/facts-about-dubai/
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 10:12 am

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 28):
the ease of connection, price (influenced by being able to (ab)use imported Pakistanis and Fillipinos for a pittance) and the quality of onboard product.

...ever check fights on EK or EY lately? they are hardly "cheap"...for the "imported Pakistanis" at least, there are carriers which are cheaper than EK......

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 36):
Also as based in Islam countries they can serve other Islamic and politically sensitive countries as to the EC and the USA with less political hassles that other airlines can.

......how many countries are there? One? Two? UA flies to KWI, DL flies to DXB....EK doesn't fly to Israel which is big money for the CO's of the world....

Maybe...one or two other Islamic countries will not see either a European or US-based carrier...
"Up the Irons!"
 
philzh
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:22 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 3:35 pm

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 29):
When the oil in the Middle East "dries up" as you say, everything will grind to a halt. Growing and transporting food will be virtually impossible in the quantities needed to feed 6.5 billion people currently on the planet. (snip) No-one will be flying to Thailand for holiday; but definitely walking out of the cities and trying to work out how to grow a carrot and not starve / freeze to death / be killed by gangs.

Ah, you remind me to start planning for moving to NZ (flying with EK, of course).
I find it depressing to think of how Dubai, of all places, will possibly look like when the Oil "dries up"... and wonder if the residents of Burj Dubai will be very fit citizens indeed from walking up those stairs, carrying water against the 40+ summer heat.

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 29):
The entire Alaskan oilfields are good for about 10 days' worth of what the US is currently consuming.

Are your numbers about the Alaskan oilfields correct? That seems like awfully little oil compared to the political trouble the Bush administration and their oil buddies go through to be able to work the oilfields.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 10:27 pm

Quoting OceansWorld (Reply 38):
I doubt it that the 773 can't make it non stop to DXB from NCE. If the flights use 4R/22L, the runway has a 3119m/ 10234ft take off distance at sea level while the route is about 5000km longs

Maybe it can, but they don't do the flight nonstop - it stops at FCO in both directions, so if it's not an operational restriction then it must be because of light loads. Either way, an A380 on this route is not very likely.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
User avatar
yowza
Posts: 4280
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:01 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:43 pm

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 40):
...ever check fights on EK or EY lately? they are hardly "cheap"...for the "imported Pakistanis" at least, there are carriers which are cheaper than EK......

He's rferring to the labor as being "cheap not the flights.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 40):
......how many countries are there? One? Two? UA flies to KWI, DL flies to DXB....EK doesn't fly to Israel which is big money for the CO's of the world....

Indeed. I wonder if Oman Air or Kuwait Airways are seriously going to try and grow as they are both indicating. I have my doubts.

YOWza
 
airbazar
Posts: 6936
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:19 am

Quoting OceansWorld (Reply 38):
But how many of the aircraft shown on the pirctures you've selected were flying non-stop long-hauls out of NCE ?

NCE-DXB at 2500nm is not a long-haul flight by any stretch of the imagination. You can barely make a case for medium-haul. There are domestic flights in the US operated by A320/737s that are longer than that.

Quoting Philzh (Reply 41):
Are your numbers about the Alaskan oilfields correct? That seems like awfully little oil compared to the political trouble the Bush administration and their oil buddies go through to be able to work the oilfields.

10 days is an exageration of course but it wouldn't last long and that is exactly why the Bush administration are having such a hard time getting the necessary permission to drill there.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:44 am

Quoting YOWza (Reply 43):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 40):
...ever check fights on EK or EY lately? they are hardly "cheap"...for the "imported Pakistanis" at least, there are carriers which are cheaper than EK......

He's rferring to the labor as being "cheap not the flights.

..ok..that is not what it seemed.....as many here incorrectly state that EK sell "cheaper seats" against their competitor..which is incorrect...

Quoting YOWza (Reply 43):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 40):
......how many countries are there? One? Two? UA flies to KWI, DL flies to DXB....EK doesn't fly to Israel which is big money for the CO's of the world....

Indeed. I wonder if Oman Air or Kuwait Airways are seriously going to try and grow as they are both indicating. I have my doubts.

..they may grow a little, but I think they will probably always remain 2nd-tiered carriers compared to the EK's of the world...
"Up the Irons!"
 
User avatar
Ncfc99
Posts: 779
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:42 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Sat Jun 30, 2007 2:29 am

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 21):
Suggest you do some research. The "competitive" fares for EK, from places like LHR, FRA offer two connections to OZ. It's through DXB and then SIN or BKK. If you want a one-stop you will pay more to go non-stop from DXB.

I have flown MAN-DXB-SIN-BNE myself and I wouldn't call the SIN stop a connection (IMHO) as it was a fuel stop that pax could get off the plane if they chose to do so(this was 2.5 years ago though). Can EK pick up pax at SIN on the SIN-BNE leg? I know they picked up a few on the SIN-DXB leg when I was on it.
 
bimmerkid19
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:43 pm

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Sat Jun 30, 2007 4:09 am

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 5):
Nasty



Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 5):
EK

Nasty--- EK? I cant believe you said this! There is no other airline in the world that has as good of a IFE Selection in Economy. Also.. Flying Economy with EK is like flying in F or J on many of these others *national flag carriers" Look at the numerous trip reports online about EK !
Last flights: LH 3738 MUC - ZRH , LH 3749 ZRH - MUC . Upcoming: EK 50 MUC - DXB 3-aug. and EK 322 DXB - ICN 7- Aug.
 
David_itl
Posts: 5970
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:03 am

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 34):
Anyway, LH provide a similar one-stop service via FRA/MUC that BA offer via LHR/LGW

And don't forget their DUS and HAM service. That's them offereing twice as many destinations out of MAN than BA.

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 34):
As an aside, I really do hope you're not as angry in real life as you seem to be on t'internet

Quite mild mannered. Got to be in my line of work where I work for a company which offers loans at extraordinary APRs (i.e. muliple hundreds interest rates!) so got to be calm and collected to entice people to have these deals!
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Backlash Against Middle East Super Carriers?

Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:39 am

Quoting BAxMAN (Reply 5):
Ok, so using this analogy, what exactly are EK or any of the Middle Eastern carriers doing differently

Already answered. One connection instead of two. Better timing of connections. Comes from the destination nations focusing on their national hubs and ignoring their regional airports.

It's not just the middle easter carriers who have taken advantage of this. USA carriers are flying to all sorts of second tier cities in the EU. And if you look at how the hubs are spread around the country, taking the US industry as a whole, it's often 1 stop from anywhere in the USA to most EU cities. But take an EU carrier, and it's two stops.

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 15):
I don't think the runway at NCE is long enough for that. Even the 773 they use now has to make a stop in FCO, because it can't take off with a full load nonstop NCE-DXB. Plus the terminal infrastructure at NCE is woefully inadequate for an A380 (also, there isn't the demand to fill it - NCE simply couldn't fill an A380, I don't think).

NCE is the second largest airport in France and EK has said they will send the A380 there. I don't know the logistics, I just know what they say.

Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 17):
The Middle East IS in Asia....you probably want to refer to the Far East....?

That was implied by the concept of DXB being a connection point to Asia. Correct the person I'm responding to, not me, if you please.

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 22):
The ME is not out of the way for EU-(South East) Asia or EU-Subcontinent traffic. Just compare flying times between a number of destinations.

As opposed to non-stop? It absolutely is for anywhere but southern India, Malaysia and Indonesia, adding 1-2 hours to travel. But what EK does is connect HAM to Peshwar, for example, and will expand even more, so when you factor in connections, the added time isn't much and if they can do it cheaper (via A380s) then most people are willing to spend an extra couple hours to save a lot of money, especially if the airline has good service.

So it's not a matter of where it's located as much as the business plan they are using. If the EU carriers acted as one and connected more major cities in the EU non-stop with more cities in asia and africa, there would be no need for an EK.

Quoting David_itl (Reply 31):
I must kiss the feet of all the BA executives for blessing MAN a whopping 2 destinations non-stop

Kind of sad. I guess EK, SQ, CO, AA, DL, NW, etc. think there is more of a MAN market than BA...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.