Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
dubaiamman243
Topic Author
Posts: 1153
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:34 am

Here is the latest comments by Sir Tim Clark, President of Emirates Airline.

"We have been very clear about the fact that Emirates competes on a commercial basis and does not receive subsidies. Mr. Burnley’s article referred to the Big 3’s self-published and inaccurate report on the finances of Emirates and other competitors without mentioning the 210-page report we submitted to the U.S. government, which completely debunks the Big 3’s baseless claims. He also neglected to refer to our more than 20 years of annual reports, which are audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers, and readily available on our website."

According to Sir Tim, the main reason why the US3 didn't file a complain against Emirates is because the facts don’t support their claims.

"The Big 3 are also happy to take advantage of government-sponsored benefits when it suits them. Some well-documented examples include their $15 billion bailout, the antitrust immunity enjoyed by the Big 3’s joint-venture partners, pension-relief legislation, the grandfathering of airport slots, fuel-tax breaks and various types of support from individual state governments. Does Mr. Burnley – who apparently wants a level playing field for global aviation – think these are strong examples of free-market capitalism?"

"The Big 3 should use their ample means to compete in the current system, versus selectively supporting free trade when they feel it suits them and protectionism when they feel it does not."

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/08/ ... ement.html

Here is my thought: President Donald Trump won't take any action towards Emirates and the other ME2 airlines.
The next airline CEO :crossfingers:
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8358
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:44 am

Trump was slaughtered by the big three with his shuttle. Apparently he bears grudges so probably will favour the foreigners. Norwegian air is an example.
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:16 am

BestWestern wrote:
Trump was slaughtered by the big three with his shuttle. Apparently he bears grudges so probably will favour the foreigners. Norwegian air is an example.


Or he is resisting the protectionist tendencies in the USA airline industry.
 
axiom
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:39 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:23 am

mjoelnir wrote:
BestWestern wrote:
Trump was slaughtered by the big three with his shuttle. Apparently he bears grudges so probably will favour the foreigners. Norwegian air is an example.


Or he is resisting the protectionist tendencies in the USA airline industry.


Or, more likely, he is too aloof to have skin in this game.

I think Tim Clark is probably right to call BS on the US3, even if I favor the labor laws and other conditions that the latter have to comply with.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9448
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:31 am

BestWestern wrote:
Norwegian air is an example.


They were already dragging their feet ... unduly.

Complying with international agreements is not a one sided thing.
We see the same kind of noncompliance with other treaties the
US is bound to.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9758
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:49 am

The ME3 are not the same. While I agree with SirTim on his assessment of EK, the facts fpr QR and EY are different.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2406
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:54 am

BestWestern wrote:
Trump was slaughtered by the big three with his shuttle. Apparently he bears grudges so probably will favour the foreigners. Norwegian air is an example.



None of them operated a shuttle when Trump started. Then Delta got the Pan Am
Shuttle in 1991 but UA and AA never operated a shuttle. More likely he is on Boeing's side to sell more planes
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8358
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:07 am

There is also the case of US airlines turning a blind eye to Chinese subsidies. Delta, with their MU shareholding profits from this too!
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
User avatar
OA940
Posts: 1990
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 6:18 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:13 am

Well, he's not wrong...
A350/CSeries = bae
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8358
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:17 am

seahawk wrote:
The ME3 are not the same. While I agree with SirTim on his assessment of EK, the facts fpr QR and EY are different.


With the wonderful EY losing $1.5bn last year, I have to agree with you here.
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
Armodeen
Posts: 1267
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:28 am

Thanks Sir Tim. Totally captain obvious stuff, but maybe it doesn't seem that way from inside the US?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:28 am

seahawk wrote:
The ME3 are not the same. While I agree with SirTim on his assessment of EK, the facts fpr QR and EY are different.


But that does not make for USA airlines to distinguish between them. The danger is Emirates. And if you want to put out lies you hide them in between facts.

The point is that in the USA the talk is about markets and competition and the action is projectionist.
 
User avatar
AirIndia
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 2:43 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:38 am

mjoelnir wrote:
The danger is Emirates. And if you want to put out lies you hide them in between facts.

The point is that in the USA the talk is about markets and competition and the action is projectionist.


Well put. When you want to malign a nice guy, bad mouth the neighbourhood and pray no one notices the difference.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8465
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:40 am

Here is an example of the Sir not practicing what he preaches.

They hope to go back to a time when they could extract pricing premiums from U.S. consumers while providing a poor product in return.


A lot of Skywards members would say Emirates is doing exactly the same. They have an extensive list of what amenities EK cut in the last couple of years.

In fact, US3 improved their service and added amenities over the same period.
All posts are just opinions.
 
atl100million
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 1:28 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:42 am

dubaiamman243 wrote:
Here is the latest comments by Sir Tim Clark, President of Emirates Airline.

"We have been very clear about the fact that Emirates competes on a commercial basis and does not receive subsidies. Mr. Burnley’s article referred to the Big 3’s self-published and inaccurate report on the finances of Emirates and other competitors without mentioning the 210-page report we submitted to the U.S. government, which completely debunks the Big 3’s baseless claims. He also neglected to refer to our more than 20 years of annual reports, which are audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers, and readily available on our website."

According to Sir Tim, the main reason why the US3 didn't file a complain against Emirates is because the facts don’t support their claims.

"The Big 3 are also happy to take advantage of government-sponsored benefits when it suits them. Some well-documented examples include their $15 billion bailout, the antitrust immunity enjoyed by the Big 3’s joint-venture partners, pension-relief legislation, the grandfathering of airport slots, fuel-tax breaks and various types of support from individual state governments. Does Mr. Burnley – who apparently wants a level playing field for global aviation – think these are strong examples of free-market capitalism?"

"The Big 3 should use their ample means to compete in the current system, versus selectively supporting free trade when they feel it suits them and protectionism when they feel it does not."

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/08/ ... ement.html

Here is my thought: President Donald Trump won't take any action towards Emirates and the other ME2 airlines.



Tim Clark is simply trying to obfuscate the discussion by throwing in a whole lot of issues from the past as well as industry-standard practices in an attempt to deflect from the reality that the ME3 are indeed subsidized including Emirates.

There was no $15 billion bailout of the US airline industry. 9/11 was now 16 years ago and it was the most traumatic shock the US airline industry ever suffered and was no different from what other country’s airline industry suffered when their countries were at war – and were rebuilt following war. Post 9/11, the actual value of government aid to the surviving 3 US legacy airlines and their direct predecessors was nowhere near $15 billion. United was denied a loan and AA and DL never applied for one. It was still 16 years ago. The US3 are talking about what is happening THIS YEAR.

Antitrust immunized joint venture partnerships are standard throughout the global airline industry and the ME3 airlines could engage in them if they had a partner that wanted to partner with the Middle East carriers. No US airline clearly wants to have a joint venture partnership with the ME3 and that is true for other countries as well.

Slots are grandfathered at many airports worldwide. The US is one of the very few countries worldwide where foreign airlines have been given nearly unfettered access to US airlines. Please tell us when an ME3 airline was unable to start service to a US airport due to a lack of slots and then tell us that US airlines were growing at the same time. He can’t because it hasn’t happened.

Jet fuel taxes almost exclusively apply to domestic flights; international flights worldwide are largely exempt from jet fuel taxes. ME3 flights are almost exclusively international. US carriers get nothing any better regarding fuel than any other carrier on international taxes.

In contrast, EK, EY, and QR has never shown that it has paid the full cost of many services and facilities provided to them including the massive airports that have been built almost exclusively for their use. The US carriers have documented accurately the subsidies they claim the ME3 has received and the ME3 HAVE NOT addressed the areas where subsidies occurred or are taking place. Today. Not 16 years ago.

Further, the ME3 are heavily staffed by foreign workers that do not receive anywhere near the salaries that local Emirati people make. That is not exclusively an airline issue but all of the developed Gulf countries have built their countries and continue to run them on the backs of workers that are paid well below the income of local, national workers. That pattern exists in no other developed global aviation market.

And the US3 are absolutely accurate in noting that it isn’t hard for the ME3 to provide more elaborate service when they use cheap, foreign labor and don’t have to pay the full costs such as for airports and aviation services that are provided by the government.

The whining from the ME3 will only grow more intense because their business models are failing in part because European and other Asian countries are fighting back against the destruction of their own airline industries by the ME3, because the Middle East countries are fighting among themselves and harming the Middle East and its airline markets, and because the honeymoon for the ME3 as new airlines is ending as it always does with young, rapidly growing companies. EK itself might have developed the ME3 model but it is now being aggressively challenged by Etihad - in the same country, Qatar - which is clearly not on anywhere close to friendly terms with the UAE, and Turkish - all of them are competing for a piece of global aviation which isn't growing. EK is facing the heat from regional competition and politics and wants to find every reason he can to avoid admitting that EK's own business model is incapable of delivering what it once did.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5092
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:01 pm

I can see Tm's point but it makes no difference, The USA isn't going to be opened up to the ME3 in the way he wants and that's that! If they NEVER flew to the USA it would make no difference. Maybe Tim should have come in with hat in hand rather than they way he did. He screwed up in Atlanta bringing in an A380 and complaining that Delta should give up the gate they were operating from in favor of his A380 Just because it was an A380. He didn't even have the traffic to BRING the A380 , and Delta was supposed to Kiss his Butt?? YGBSM!!
 
User avatar
NZPM
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:46 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:13 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
He screwed up in Atlanta bringing in an A380 and complaining that Delta should give up the gate they were operating from in favor of his A380 Just because it was an A380. He didn't even have the traffic to BRING the A380 , and Delta was supposed to Kiss his Butt?? YGBSM!!


That was QR, not EK.
 
atl100million
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 1:28 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:17 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
I can see Tm's point but it makes no difference, The USA isn't going to be opened up to the ME3 in the way he wants and that's that! If they NEVER flew to the USA it would make no difference. Maybe Tim should have come in with hat in hand rather than they way he did. He screwed up in Atlanta bringing in an A380 and complaining that Delta should give up the gate they were operating from in favor of his A380 Just because it was an A380. He didn't even have the traffic to BRING the A380 , and Delta was supposed to Kiss his Butt?? YGBSM!!


It was Qatar, not Emirates, that came to Atlanta with an A380 within the 30 day period after ATL already made gate assignments and then complained that DL was hogging the gate.

The ME3 all have very open access to the US right now and also have the legal right to fly from Europe to the US. Much of the battle with the ME3 is because the US3 don't want the ME3 to be able to expand their flights from Europe to the US as the ME3's home market performance continues to decline.

As for Trump, this issue is important to the US airlines but it is way too far down the list of priorities esp. when Congress can't even work w/ Trump to get much more important legislation such as health care and taxes fixed.

Supposedly the Trump administration is listening and is apparently sympathetic to the US carrier concerns - and that is very likely part of why the ME3 including Clark are speaking out. If Trump can get ME3 reforms through, he will do it but it is simply not a high enough priority for him. If he does win, he will gain favor with labor unions because the airline industry is heavily unionized, large, and airlines are highly visible companies.
 
scotron11
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:39 pm

EK is the only ME3 carrier that flies Europe to USA. I really do not see what the big deal is against the ME3....there are no complaints from UK against them...and they operate to more UK airports than BA! (Yes Im aware that QR is a shareholder in IAG)

Let's be honest here. I have a choice of all ME3 airlines plus TK, either from EDI or GLA, and my preference would be either one over BA anyday, or for that matter, any US3 carrier.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:43 pm

At the end of the day, each side of this argument are playing a game here to further their own interests.

The hypocrisy is that the US3 seem perfectly comfortable to ignore the subsidies in China and instead point their attention to the ME3. That just doesn't sit right with me.

Given the amount of endless talk from the US3 about the ME3, some kind of rubuttel was always going to come. In the race for hearts and minds, not doing so would be negligent on their behalf.
 
atl100million
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 1:28 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:03 pm

IndianicWorld wrote:
At the end of the day, each side of this argument are playing a game here to further their own interests.

The hypocrisy is that the US3 seem perfectly comfortable to ignore the subsidies in China and instead point their attention to the ME3. That just doesn't sit right with me.

Given the amount of endless talk from the US3 about the ME3, some kind of rubuttel was always going to come. In the race for hearts and minds, not doing so would be negligent on their behalf.


The US -China market is not Open Skies as it is with the UAE and Qatar and the US-China treaty is maxed out in terms of the amount of flights any carrier can add from the US to the largest cities in China.

The US - China treaty does not allow 5th freedom operations by foreign carriers.

The US3 rightly have the ears of their own government. As a carrier that is dependent on filling its planes with US originating passengers, EK and the ME3 will always be at a disadvantage to the US3 in terms of the ability to speak their message.

The issue is whether the ME3 are subsidized today. I have read the arguments from both sides. It is up to Congress and the US administration to decide if the documents presented to them are valid and if action is required.
 
theSFOspotter
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 9:51 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:29 pm

The ME3 are a sham. Government funded so profit isn't main goal setter. Seems to me their main goal is to just screw the US3 into pulling out of some European stops and India all together.
Q-400 A319 A320 B737-300/400/700/800/900ER B757-200/300 B787-8
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15285
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:43 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
In fact, US3 improved their service and added amenities over the same period.


What was it the addition of an olive, an extra peanut, free baggage, idea that works, free drinks, free food ?
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:48 pm

zeke wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
In fact, US3 improved their service and added amenities over the same period.


What was it the addition of an olive, an extra peanut, free baggage, idea that works, free drinks, free food ?


Given my experience flying the US3, any improvement has been minimal at best. They are doing the bare minimum, instead spending 90% of their time complaining.

Although the ME3 are by no means loved by me, I still do see far too much hypocrisy in the way they are talked about. The China example was well responded to by a post above, but it still seems to raise questions about how some play their cards.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8465
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:51 pm

zeke wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
In fact, US3 improved their service and added amenities over the same period.


What was it the addition of an olive, an extra peanut, free baggage, idea that works, free drinks, free food ?


Delta One and United Polaris are superior business class hard products compared to 2-3-2 climb-on-others not-so-flat bed. The re-introduction of TCON free meals.

On the EK side, there is a huge list of service "enhancements" as frequent flier call it affectionately.

There should be some guilt preaching what you are not practicing.
All posts are just opinions.
 
Nicoeddf
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:13 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:06 pm

theSFOspotter wrote:
The ME3 are a sham. Government funded so profit isn't main goal setter. Seems to me their main goal is to just screw the US3 into pulling out of some European stops and India all together.


Yes - in the same line of thinking that climate change is a Chinese invention to cripple the US manufacturing...

atl100million wrote:

9/11 was now 16 years ago and it was the most traumatic shock the US airline industry ever suffered and was no different from what other country’s airline industry suffered when their countries were at war – and were rebuilt following war. Post 9/11, the actual value of government aid to the surviving 3 US legacy airlines and their direct predecessors was nowhere near $15 billion. United was denied a loan and AA and DL never applied for one. It was still 16 years ago. The US3 are talking about what is happening THIS YEAR.


First of all: "when their countries were at war"? The US was not at war after 9/11. Self-proclaimed being in a war to gain domestic support is so far from your idea that this was the same like other countries being in or after a war is so hysterically ridiculous, it pains me I even need to point it out. And no, the industry was NOT rebuilt and wasn't in any NEED to be rebuilt after 9/11. Changes, painful, very painful and a huge dip in the economic circumstance, yes. But after-war-like? Really not.

Second: It very much matters even if it was 16 years ago. It even matters what happened 40 years ago. All the European and US legacies are what they are today partly (big part!) because they were founded and built upon subsidized business environments, be it being a state carrier or living in a regulated air fare environment. Denying that same advantage to later upstarts like EK or you-name-it is simply and deliberately being dishonest.
Well, that does not mean lobbying isn't a valid way of tilting the playing field towards own business interest. But at least respect the history and the underlying Facts.
Enslave yourself to the divine disguised as salvation
that your bought with your sacrifice
Deception justified for your holy design
High on our platform spewing out your crimes
from the altar of god
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1224
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:07 pm

theSFOspotter wrote:
The ME3 are a sham. Government funded so profit isn't main goal setter. Seems to me their main goal is to just screw the US3 into pulling out of some European stops and India all together.


Yeah, it is the world trying to screw the US, you win ;)
 
m007j
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 3:05 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:27 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
zeke wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
In fact, US3 improved their service and added amenities over the same period.


What was it the addition of an olive, an extra peanut, free baggage, idea that works, free drinks, free food ?


Delta One and United Polaris are superior business class hard products compared to 2-3-2 climb-on-others not-so-flat bed. The re-introduction of TCON free meals.

On the EK side, there is a huge list of service "enhancements" as frequent flier call it affectionately.

There should be some guilt preaching what you are not practicing.


What a hugely narrow lens to look at this. Yes, you win in this particular circumstance but you've straight up ignored the entire situation to twist facts to support your assertion. This just sounds like you want someone to finally tell you you were right Can you really even compare a short-haul domestic flight with a ULH intercontinental one? Free meals on transcon, awesome, that's just them finally stepping to a level below EK (comparing the food it isn't even close, and EK gives out a freaking menu in Y). All you get is a slightly wider seat on the US3, and that's more of a reflection on the general traveling population. EK And when it comes to service, compare F/As and customer service staff at both US airports and in the ME and tell me the difference. Yes, EK might have cut some of their perks (which really only bug the FFs, not the many people who only travel a few times a year, which is the bread/butter of the entire industry), but they still remain at a level higher than any of the US airlines internationally and at a lower price point. It's rather ignorant to pop a quick shot like this at EK and confine yourself to such a small issue.
 
User avatar
KTPAFlyer
Posts: 764
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:08 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:50 pm

Nicoeddf wrote:
theSFOspotter wrote:
The ME3 are a sham. Government funded so profit isn't main goal setter. Seems to me their main goal is to just screw the US3 into pulling out of some European stops and India all together.


Yes - in the same line of thinking that climate change is a Chinese invention to cripple the US manufacturing...

atl100million wrote:

9/11 was now 16 years ago and it was the most traumatic shock the US airline industry ever suffered and was no different from what other country’s airline industry suffered when their countries were at war – and were rebuilt following war. Post 9/11, the actual value of government aid to the surviving 3 US legacy airlines and their direct predecessors was nowhere near $15 billion. United was denied a loan and AA and DL never applied for one. It was still 16 years ago. The US3 are talking about what is happening THIS YEAR.


First of all: "when their countries were at war"? The US was not at war after 9/11. Self-proclaimed being in a war to gain domestic support is so far from your idea that this was the same like other countries being in or after a war is so hysterically ridiculous, it pains me I even need to point it out. And no, the industry was NOT rebuilt and wasn't in any NEED to be rebuilt after 9/11. Changes, painful, very painful and a huge dip in the economic circumstance, yes. But after-war-like? Really not.

Second: It very much matters even if it was 16 years ago. It even matters what happened 40 years ago. All the European and US legacies are what they are today partly (big part!) because they were founded and built upon subsidized business environments, be it being a state carrier or living in a regulated air fare environment. Denying that same advantage to later upstarts like EK or you-name-it is simply and deliberately being dishonest.
Well, that does not mean lobbying isn't a valid way of tilting the playing field towards own business interest. But at least respect the history and the underlying Facts.


Agree 100% with every word you said.

The hypocrisy of the US3 is incredible, everyone knows that you have to throw a huge amount of cash at the wall to start any sort of meaningful airline, let alone on any sort of scale and even then a lot of it will go up in flames before you can even get off the ground. It is mind boggling to think that the people in charge of the US3 can somehow be stupid enough to think that you can start an airline without some sort of huge government funding at some level. No question the US3 all had that benefit but they think that only they are entitled to it and when others do the same, it is considered wrong.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8465
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:25 pm

m007j wrote:
What a hugely narrow lens to look at this. Yes, you win in this particular circumstance but you've straight up ignored the entire situation to twist facts to support your assertion. This just sounds like you want someone to finally tell you you were right Can you really even compare a short-haul domestic flight with a ULH intercontinental one? Free meals on transcon, awesome, that's just them finally stepping to a level below EK (comparing the food it isn't even close, and EK gives out a freaking menu in Y). All you get is a slightly wider seat on the US3, and that's more of a reflection on the general traveling population. EK And when it comes to service, compare F/As and customer service staff at both US airports and in the ME and tell me the difference. Yes, EK might have cut some of their perks (which really only bug the FFs, not the many people who only travel a few times a year, which is the bread/butter of the entire industry), but they still remain at a level higher than any of the US airlines internationally and at a lower price point. It's rather ignorant to pop a quick shot like this at EK and confine yourself to such a small issue.


If you plot a graph from the point US3-ME3 fight started, overall US3 improved their service and EK in particular, reduced their service quality. Hence, my don't preach what you won't practice argument. Do what suits your business, don't preach others.

Here are few cuts EK implemented recently
    Added Airport fees for O&D
    Advanced seat selection fees
    Increased cabin baggage weight/size enforcement
    Chauffeur service reduced
    F & J lounges are open to public
    Skywards program is getting tighter
    Free Birthday cake is gone
    Replaced chocolates with some cheap brand
    Champaign bottle price in Y increased
    Blankets for flights shorter than 9hrs??? gone
    Hot towels were replaced with towelette, that also gone after second meal
    Special meal choices reduced (Fish is no longer a SPML)
    Frequently running out of meal options
    Garlic bread, scare
    So called Iranian caviar is Chinese farmed
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1224
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:28 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Here are few cuts EK implemented recently
    Added Airport fees for O&D
    Advanced seat selection fees
    Increased cabin baggage weight/size enforcement
    Chauffeur service reduced
    F & J lounges are open to public
    Skywards program is getting tighter
    Free Birthday cake is gone
    Replaced chocolates with some cheap brand
    Champaign bottle price in Y increased
    Blankets for flights shorter than 9hrs??? gone
    Hot towels were replaced with towelette, that also gone after second meal
    Special meal choices reduced (Fish is no longer a SPML)
    Frequently running out of meal options
    Garlic bread, scare
    So called Iranian caviar is Chinese farmed


This post has to be a joke. Caviar's quality is not as good as it was before :_)
 
Antarius
Posts: 2733
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:38 pm

m007j wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
zeke wrote:

What was it the addition of an olive, an extra peanut, free baggage, idea that works, free drinks, free food ?


Delta One and United Polaris are superior business class hard products compared to 2-3-2 climb-on-others not-so-flat bed. The re-introduction of TCON free meals.

On the EK side, there is a huge list of service "enhancements" as frequent flier call it affectionately.

There should be some guilt preaching what you are not practicing.


What a hugely narrow lens to look at this. Yes, you win in this particular circumstance but you've straight up ignored the entire situation to twist facts to support your assertion. This just sounds like you want someone to finally tell you you were right Can you really even compare a short-haul domestic flight with a ULH intercontinental one? Free meals on transcon, awesome, that's just them finally stepping to a level below EK (comparing the food it isn't even close, and EK gives out a freaking menu in Y). All you get is a slightly wider seat on the US3, and that's more of a reflection on the general traveling population. EK And when it comes to service, compare F/As and customer service staff at both US airports and in the ME and tell me the difference. Yes, EK might have cut some of their perks (which really only bug the FFs, not the many people who only travel a few times a year, which is the bread/butter of the entire industry), but they still remain at a level higher than any of the US airlines internationally and at a lower price point. It's rather ignorant to pop a quick shot like this at EK and confine yourself to such a small issue.


Not to mention that Polaris is on what, 3 aircraft?

If you want to US3 vs ME3 on hard product, at least use American - they have a superior hard product on their 772, 77W and 787, with all aisle access.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
atl100million
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 1:28 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:02 pm

Nicoeddf wrote:
theSFOspotter wrote:
The ME3 are a sham. Government funded so profit isn't main goal setter. Seems to me their main goal is to just screw the US3 into pulling out of some European stops and India all together.


Yes - in the same line of thinking that climate change is a Chinese invention to cripple the US manufacturing...

atl100million wrote:

9/11 was now 16 years ago and it was the most traumatic shock the US airline industry ever suffered and was no different from what other country’s airline industry suffered when their countries were at war – and were rebuilt following war. Post 9/11, the actual value of government aid to the surviving 3 US legacy airlines and their direct predecessors was nowhere near $15 billion. United was denied a loan and AA and DL never applied for one. It was still 16 years ago. The US3 are talking about what is happening THIS YEAR.


First of all: "when their countries were at war"? The US was not at war after 9/11. Self-proclaimed being in a war to gain domestic support is so far from your idea that this was the same like other countries being in or after a war is so hysterically ridiculous, it pains me I even need to point it out. And no, the industry was NOT rebuilt and wasn't in any NEED to be rebuilt after 9/11. Changes, painful, very painful and a huge dip in the economic circumstance, yes. But after-war-like? Really not.

Second: It very much matters even if it was 16 years ago. It even matters what happened 40 years ago. All the European and US legacies are what they are today partly (big part!) because they were founded and built upon subsidized business environments, be it being a state carrier or living in a regulated air fare environment. Denying that same advantage to later upstarts like EK or you-name-it is simply and deliberately being dishonest.
Well, that does not mean lobbying isn't a valid way of tilting the playing field towards own business interest. But at least respect the history and the underlying Facts.


It is mind-numbing to think that anyone who has any understanding of the world or modern world history believes that 1. 9/11 wasn't an act of war and even worse 2. that the US didn't go to war afterward. The US military is still in the Middle East and Central Asia as a direct result of 9/11. How anyone could not realize that is really scary.

And what happened 16 years matters to EK only because they want to either rationalize their ability to accept subsidies.

If they weren't accepting subsidies, they wouldn't even bring up the issue of what the US received because it is a meaningless point. They do more to confirm that they are actually receiving subsidies by talking about what US airlines received than if they simply said "we don't receive subsidies" and talk to every specific item that the US airlines have charged are subsidies.

However, that is precisely why they are talking about what the US carriers received instead of addressing the charges the US carriers raised and then eliminating any further subsidies today.

Global airlines are big business and of course the legacy carriers of the US, Europe and Asia all got head starts. But that didn't happen under Open Skies.

Open Skies exists because governments believe that an open market is the best for consumers - as long as every carrier runs its business on its own and not supported by their government.

No one would have a leg to stand on regarding the ME3 and subsidies if they could no longer expand in the US or Europe - which is exactly where the US and Chinese airlines are right now because all available frequencies to the largest cities in China have been allocated
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:04 pm

Well if it's sooooo bad to have government subsidies, why don't these airlines look at their own domestic routes before even worry about international carriers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_Air_Service
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
winginit
Posts: 3049
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:15 pm

axiom wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
BestWestern wrote:
Trump was slaughtered by the big three with his shuttle. Apparently he bears grudges so probably will favour the foreigners. Norwegian air is an example.


Or he is resisting the protectionist tendencies in the USA airline industry.


Or, more likely, he is too aloof to have skin in this game.


I don't disagree, but let's not also forget that companies like Boeing and FedEx are on the opposite side of this fight when compared to the US3, and plane-building has far more populist appeal than commercial airlines especially these days.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10197
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:25 pm

Armodeen wrote:
Thanks Sir Tim. Totally captain obvious stuff, but maybe it doesn't seem that way from inside the US?

C'mon, i'm not sure the average american is even paying attention to this. I'm still wondering who the audience for this spat is, given that this stuff doesn't typically make the mainstream news. Is it our politicians? Are they that clueless?
 
AirbusCanada
Posts: 647
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:14 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:04 pm

It is mind-numbing to think that anyone who has any understanding of the world or modern world history believes that 1. 9/11 wasn't an act of war and even worse 2. that the US didn't go to war afterward. The US military is still in the Middle East and Central Asia as a direct result of 9/11. How anyone could not realize that is really scary.


By this definition, US military is in war since WWII

9-11 is off-course the worst terrorist attack in the history, period.
But, it was an one time event, planned and executed by no more than a dozen people. After 9-11, they were running form the U.S military and hiding in the caves.

Not exactly type of situation like Vietnam or even the Gulf war I where the U.S needed to deploy a whole army to take down a sizable enemy force.
Last edited by AirbusCanada on Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9448
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:27 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
In fact, US3 improved their service and added amenities over the same period.



But apparently still attacking from below?
Murphy is an optimist
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2238
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:42 pm

I don't buy it for a second.

The debt load EK has at current markets rates would drowned any carrier short of the US Air Force. They are borrowing money from UAE banks for free - That's the subsidy. It's bigger than any government tax break could ever match.

The little old UAE has more widebody aircraft on order than China, India and the USA combined. I would leverage another charge of dumping as well.
 
TigerFlyer
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:56 pm

stl07 wrote:
Well if it's sooooo bad to have government subsidies, why don't these airlines look at their own domestic routes before even worry about international carriers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_Air_Service


Oh, please. The paltry $250m EAS program for tiny rural communities does not compare to the $50B in subsidies received by the ME3. They do not compete in the same relevant market. In truth the us majors would prefer EAS went away as it would concentrate traffic at nearby viable airports with ample jet service.
 
David_itl
Posts: 6419
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:06 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
I don't buy it for a second.

The debt load EK has at current markets rates would drowned any carrier short of the US Air Force. They are borrowing money from UAE banks for free - That's the subsidy. It's bigger than any government tax break could ever match.

The little old UAE has more widebody aircraft on order than China, India and the USA combined. I would leverage another charge of dumping as well.


You got any evidence? It's apparent to people with more than 1 brain cell that the UAE is situated nicely to take traffic flow from west to east. which means that you need high capacity aircraft. If you have 1 bran cell or fewer, then you think it's unfair and must all be subsidised. You want to beat the ME3.... do routes that cut out the need for the stop en-route. And getting passengers to route USA- FRA/MUC/LHR/AMS/CDG - onwards is just the same as routing USA - AUH/DOH/DXB - onwards.

Having the ME3 at MAN hasn't stopped SV, CX, HU or PK expanding at MAN and they are the airlines who would be affected by the ME3.
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3216
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:11 pm

airbazar wrote:
Armodeen wrote:
Thanks Sir Tim. Totally captain obvious stuff, but maybe it doesn't seem that way from inside the US?

C'mon, i'm not sure the average american is even paying attention to this. I'm still wondering who the audience for this spat is, given that this stuff doesn't typically make the mainstream news. Is it our politicians? Are they that clueless?


I think its to get the average Trump voter involved - the one who thinks "they speak Muslim in the desert." That type of voter is more of a customer of G4 than anything most likely.
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN

2019: CX BOS-HKG, WE HKG-HKT, CA HKT-PEK-EWR, B6 EWR-BOS
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1224
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:58 pm

TigerFlyer wrote:
stl07 wrote:
Well if it's sooooo bad to have government subsidies, why don't these airlines look at their own domestic routes before even worry about international carriers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_Air_Service


Oh, please. The paltry $250m EAS program for tiny rural communities does not compare to the $50B in subsidies received by the ME3. They do not compete in the same relevant market. In truth the us majors would prefer EAS went away as it would concentrate traffic at nearby viable airports with ample jet service.


Ok, so now out of a sudden it is not a matter of being subsidised or not, but a matter of the amount. Interesting hypocrisy!!

Let's move backwards a few post to review how much money US3 got from the government when they started, or went for bankruptcy ;)

Seriously, please stop moralising on other with that fake profitable market-pride, it is a shame....
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 4189
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:02 pm

atl100million wrote:
The US military is still in the Middle East and Central Asia as a direct result of 9/11. How anyone could not realize that is really scary.

In Central Asia yes. But not in the Middle East. The US Military is still there because their leaders thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Has nothing to do with 9/11.
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:06 pm

I don't understand the timing of this new round of accusations. isn't EK actually cutting services to the US? Why complain about access now?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19293
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:26 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
I don't buy it for a second.

The debt load EK has at current markets rates would drowned any carrier short of the US Air Force. They are borrowing money from UAE banks for free - That's the subsidy. It's bigger than any government tax break could ever match.

The little old UAE has more widebody aircraft on order than China, India and the USA combined. I would leverage another charge of dumping as well.


You're always very quick to jump all over any ME3-related thread. Supporting evidence for your claims seems strangely much slower in arriving. :scratchchin:
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
m007j
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 3:05 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:20 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
m007j wrote:
What a hugely narrow lens to look at this. Yes, you win in this particular circumstance but you've straight up ignored the entire situation to twist facts to support your assertion. This just sounds like you want someone to finally tell you you were right Can you really even compare a short-haul domestic flight with a ULH intercontinental one? Free meals on transcon, awesome, that's just them finally stepping to a level below EK (comparing the food it isn't even close, and EK gives out a freaking menu in Y). All you get is a slightly wider seat on the US3, and that's more of a reflection on the general traveling population. EK And when it comes to service, compare F/As and customer service staff at both US airports and in the ME and tell me the difference. Yes, EK might have cut some of their perks (which really only bug the FFs, not the many people who only travel a few times a year, which is the bread/butter of the entire industry), but they still remain at a level higher than any of the US airlines internationally and at a lower price point. It's rather ignorant to pop a quick shot like this at EK and confine yourself to such a small issue.


If you plot a graph from the point US3-ME3 fight started, overall US3 improved their service and EK in particular, reduced their service quality. Hence, my don't preach what you won't practice argument. Do what suits your business, don't preach others.

Here are few cuts EK implemented recently
    Added Airport fees for O&D
    Advanced seat selection fees
    Increased cabin baggage weight/size enforcement
    Chauffeur service reduced
    F & J lounges are open to public
    Skywards program is getting tighter
    Free Birthday cake is gone
    Replaced chocolates with some cheap brand
    Champaign bottle price in Y increased
    Blankets for flights shorter than 9hrs??? gone
    Hot towels were replaced with towelette, that also gone after second meal
    Special meal choices reduced (Fish is no longer a SPML)
    Frequently running out of meal options
    Garlic bread, scare
    So called Iranian caviar is Chinese farmed


So let's see:
Seat fees- fair point, but in line with most other airlines
Bag enforcement- this is super hit and miss, some people do it, some just wave you on
Rewards program- isn't this just a fair business practice, closing loopholes? and a birthday cake? really?
Chocolates- again, really? Is it bad enough to really notice the difference?
Blankets are not gone, I just got a solid blanket not 3 months ago DXB-MAA
Also got a solid hot towel on boarding at JFK/IAD-DXB, plus a towelette in the morning
About the fish, could be a health issue (seafood more susceptible to illness)
Running out of meals- this has been explained many times on this board- it's a game of numbers, choosing where you sit can make a difference.
Is the garlic bread the wrong color? Why is it scary?
And again, caviar? Really?

How many people really noticed all this stuff and took their business to the US3? I'm willing to bet that number is super low. Besides, Sir Tim can still point to a whole host of things his airline is better at. All he's doing is that he's complaining that the US3 is pulling some shady stuff with the media and their DC lobbyists to influence the public. Ask Joe Schmoe to tell the difference in a blind test, and he's gonna pick EK every day of the week.
 
ADrum23
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:32 pm

Until the middle eastern governments allow the US3 to fly into their markets, I don't think Mr. Clark should be complaining whatsoever.
 
dubaiamman243
Topic Author
Posts: 1153
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:34 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
Until the middle eastern governments allow the US3 to fly into their markets, I don't think Mr. Clark should be complaining whatsoever.


Well .. Delta and United were flying to DXB.
The next airline CEO :crossfingers:
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1224
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Tim Clark: Americans are being fed a distorted view of the Open Skies agreement

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:36 pm

ADrum23 wrote:
Until the middle eastern governments allow the US3 to fly into their markets, I don't think Mr. Clark should be complaining whatsoever.


Again, less propaganda, more being informed before posting... They tried, they failed, they blame the field.

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