Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
32andBelow
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

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

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:23 pm

The biggest perk for US3 is at the end of a US3 flight I am in Aspen, Hawaii, or Costa Rica and at the end of a ME3 flight I am in Dubai.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8478
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:05 am

m007j wrote:
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.


That is a confirmed list compiled by many frequent flyers, not based on the anecdotal incident.

These small things apparently made the difference for paid premium passengers. Now slowly they are being cut because EK turned the premium product into a commodity and reduced real value thru free upgrades and its own marketing department bought tickets to bloggers. If your premium cabin is filled with free raiders taking videos, writing trip reports, what is the motivation for a revenue passenger? They are not getting any exclusive treatment by paying more. EK should have tightened Skywards program long back and cut down on bloggers.

On you fish SPML comment, it is still an option in J & F, EK only worried about Y passengers health.
Garlic bread became scarce. typo.

If US3 were offering 0 olives and now started offering 1 that is an increase in service offering if EK was offering 10 olives and now 9, it is a reduction.

For Dubai Emarati premium passengers, QR used to offer way superior service at cheaper prices. Now with the so called blockade, that choice is gone. Emirates should worry about their citizens' choices, before offering more to US citizens.
All posts are just opinions.
 
Andre3K
Posts: 361
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 10:11 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:47 am

While I feel for AA and UA, I have no sympathy for Delta. If protectionism is the name of the game, then if you ask me, buying all those A330's and A350's is a slap in the face to the home team Boeing. I think in the end Trump will not mess with EK because an entire 777 line's future depends on it. If Delta want Trump to step in, then they must be willing to pick up the 777 slack as EK would surely throw a bitch fit and cancel the 777's just for spite.
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:48 am

Jayafe wrote:
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.


How can you compete with airliners that are subsidized?
 
sxf24
Posts: 1007
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:16 am

ADrum23 wrote:
Jayafe wrote:
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.


How can you compete with airliners that are subsidized?


How have the US airlines competed against state-owned airlines in Asia and Latin America all these years?
 
User avatar
Super80Fan
Posts: 1622
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:14 am

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:25 am

ADrum23 wrote:
Jayafe wrote:
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.


How can you compete with airliners that are subsidized?


Don't be naive, the US3 get their own version of subsidies. And while you can create the argument EY and QR are, EK is not.
RIP McDonnell Douglas
RIP US Airways
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:58 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
That is a confirmed list compiled by many frequent flyers, not based on the anecdotal incident.

These small things apparently made the difference for paid premium passengers. Now slowly they are being cut because EK turned the premium product into a commodity and reduced real value thru free upgrades and its own marketing department bought tickets to bloggers. If your premium cabin is filled with free raiders taking videos, writing trip reports, what is the motivation for a revenue passenger? They are not getting any exclusive treatment by paying more. EK should have tightened Skywards program long back and cut down on bloggers.

On you fish SPML comment, it is still an option in J & F, EK only worried about Y passengers health.
Garlic bread became scarce. typo.

If US3 were offering 0 olives and now started offering 1 that is an increase in service offering if EK was offering 10 olives and now 9, it is a reduction.

For Dubai Emarati premium passengers, QR used to offer way superior service at cheaper prices. Now with the so called blockade, that choice is gone. Emirates should worry about their citizens' choices, before offering more to US citizens.


But my question is, does it really matter? Do all these cuts actually cause a lot of people to take their business away from EK? The choice is gone for Emiratis, so they are a given. Do all the reductions take enough business traffic away from EK to cause them to lose profit, or does their superiority in Y (and the greater number of travelers) make up for the difference? Isn't their route map and prices good enough to keep them?
Honestly these cuts just seem to add evidence that EK is competing fairly. What does one expect a US airline to do in the same place (and which they DID in the early 2000s)? It seems to have been established that the Emir really wouldn't care about a few millions of loss if the country/ airline got more prestige. So why would a company that doesn't care about losses suddenly decide it wants to cut things, especially in a time of low oil prices? Is this not the perfectly acceptable behavior of a private company operating in an oligarchy/ perfectly competitive market, and not one that is being continuously subsidized? They're certainly not complaining about having to cut things, and they certainly don't see enough of a problem in losing traffic to bring any of these features back.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19303
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:37 am

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.


The US3 are completely free to fly to Qatar and UAE through open skies. They chose not to.
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.
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:29 am

A few really do not understand open skies. Open skies is about opening up the routes to free competition. Not about quotas or being reciprocal, that are old time bilaterals.
If the USA passenger airlines do not use the opportunity to compete on those routes, it is their problem. The cost argument IMO is just an excuse, the US3 have problems in other markets too, for example Scandinavia.
It is anyway a misunderstanding that open skies with the mid eastern countries does not work for USA airlines. The US3 backed out, but the USA integrators flying freight are using the possibilities opened up, with regional hubs in Dubai.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19303
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:46 am

ADrum23 wrote:
How can you compete with airliners that are subsidized?


By offering services that people want?

Or you could just whine about "unfair competition" while banking record profits. :sarcastic:

32andBelow wrote:
The biggest perk for US3 is at the end of a US3 flight I am in Aspen, Hawaii, or Costa Rica and at the end of a ME3 flight I am in Dubai.


Depends which US3 flight you take. You can end up in lots of shitty places after a US3 flight. :wink2:

32andBelow wrote:
at the end of a ME3 flight I am in Dubai.


No, you can be in lots of places that the US3 don't serve. :wave:
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.
 
77H
Posts: 1571
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:11 am

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.


I don't think it's necessarily a matter of the US3 being comfortable ignoring that the CN3 are receiving subsides. The Chinese market is one of the most important markets in commercial aviation. And that market is heavily controlled by the Chinese government. To come out and accuse the CN3 (who are state controlled) and the Chinese government of unfair business practices would be corporate suicide in that market.

Doing so would almost certainly ensure that any hopes of further aligning with the CN3 is out of the question which I believe all 3 US network carriers are trying to do at the moment. Beyond that, It may also make getting favorable slots, or slots at all at any Chinese airport worth serving far more difficult or impossible. The US3 would also probably find they start getting inefficient enroute routings that reduce revenue payload and burn more fuel.

At the end of the day the Middle East in and of itself is not an important market for the US3 as evidenced by their offerings to ME airports. The ME3 are not viewed as vital strategic partners like the CN3 are. My guess is that the US3 feel like they can rock the boat with the ME3 and NAI as there is very little to lose.

Your average American (the US3's primary customer base) probably hasn't the slightest idea of the mudslinging contest going on between the two and it's likely that few outside the US (who are not on a.net) know much more or care. So it is a low risk endeavor for them.

I'm not saying either side is right or wrong here. I do believe that business should be conducted fairly, regardless of where your company is based as commercial aviation is a global industry.

I'm interested to know what organizations like IATA thinks of all this? Reading a little about the organization it sounds like IATA is a little like the commercial aviation equivalent of the UN in a way. Perhaps IATA should have more authorities to investigate accusations of unfair business practices and perhaps even be able to penalize airlines that choose to operate in certain ways deemed not acceptable to a majority of member airlines.

77H
 
77H
Posts: 1571
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:19 am

I think the idea of a UN-style aviation organization is good because it would, at least in theory, be more impartial than a group of airlines lobbying their governments, who intrinsically have biases in favor of the companies based in their countries.

I think an organization like this would be helpful in putting matters like the US3 v ME3 subsidies debate should to rest. Because if the accusations are true, the ME3 should not be allowed to operate as such in a "free market" and if the allegations are false, the US3 should not be allowed to continue to drag the imagine of those companies through the mud.

77H
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:27 am

77H wrote:
...if the allegations are false, the US3 should not be allowed to continue to drag the imagine of those companies through the mud.

77H


I that case US3 would start blaming that organization for not being "fair" (to their interests). They are always happy to have a common discussion forum as long as it agrees with them.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8478
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:48 am

m007j wrote:
But my question is, does it really matter? Do all these cuts actually cause a lot of people to take their business away from EK? The choice is gone for Emiratis, so they are a given. Do all the reductions take enough business traffic away from EK to cause them to lose profit, or does their superiority in Y (and the greater number of travelers) make up for the difference? Isn't their route map and prices good enough to keep them?
Honestly these cuts just seem to add evidence that EK is competing fairly. What does one expect a US airline to do in the same place (and which they DID in the early 2000s)? It seems to have been established that the Emir really wouldn't care about a few millions of loss if the country/ airline got more prestige. So why would a company that doesn't care about losses suddenly decide it wants to cut things, especially in a time of low oil prices? Is this not the perfectly acceptable behavior of a private company operating in an oligarchy/ perfectly competitive market, and not one that is being continuously subsidized? They're certainly not complaining about having to cut things, and they certainly don't see enough of a problem in losing traffic to bring any of these features back.


Definitely premium traffic and yields were tanking prior to Qatar blockade. We have to see latest numbers. A blockade is a double edged sword if EK is able to recapture premium market from four ME countries, QR is going to lower prices in markets and dump capacity. Being truly owned and operated by a state, they have no qualms about it.

When airline operating costs were at their peak (Oil $100/BBL) EK was offering a high level of service and low ticket prices.
When the major component of airline operating cost, ie., Oil at its lowest, EK is cutting service and increasing ticket prices.
Why is this company going in opposite direction?

EK simply following US3 mastered nickle and dime ancillary revenue model.
One guy paid Euros 640(160 x 4 legs) for 4 kg excess cabin baggage penalty on a Euro 600 round trip ticket.
A family of four will pay $400 just for seat selection on all four legs.
All posts are just opinions.
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:54 am

77H wrote:
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.


I don't think it's necessarily a matter of the US3 being comfortable ignoring that the CN3 are receiving subsides. The Chinese market is one of the most important markets in commercial aviation. And that market is heavily controlled by the Chinese government. To come out and accuse the CN3 (who are state controlled) and the Chinese government of unfair business practices would be corporate suicide in that market.

Doing so would almost certainly ensure that any hopes of further aligning with the CN3 is out of the question which I believe all 3 US network carriers are trying to do at the moment. Beyond that, It may also make getting favorable slots, or slots at all at any Chinese airport worth serving far more difficult or impossible. The US3 would also probably find they start getting inefficient enroute routings that reduce revenue payload and burn more fuel.

At the end of the day the Middle East in and of itself is not an important market for the US3 as evidenced by their offerings to ME airports. The ME3 are not viewed as vital strategic partners like the CN3 are. My guess is that the US3 feel like they can rock the boat with the ME3 and NAI as there is very little to lose.

Your average American (the US3's primary customer base) probably hasn't the slightest idea of the mudslinging contest going on between the two and it's likely that few outside the US (who are not on a.net) know much more or care. So it is a low risk endeavor for them.

I'm not saying either side is right or wrong here. I do believe that business should be conducted fairly, regardless of where your company is based as commercial aviation is a global industry.

I'm interested to know what organizations like IATA thinks of all this? Reading a little about the organization it sounds like IATA is a little like the commercial aviation equivalent of the UN in a way. Perhaps IATA should have more authorities to investigate accusations of unfair business practices and perhaps even be able to penalize airlines that choose to operate in certain ways deemed not acceptable to a majority of member airlines.

77H


I think it is just simple hypocrisies. USA corporations have only ever liked free trade as long as that helps them. First the ME3 are not operating and accounting all in the same environment and one should look at their financials and possible subsidies separately. But that does not help the purpose of the US3. Emirates is very unlikely to be subsidized in a big way. Dubai is living rather on commerce, tourism and trade than oil. Emirates should bring in money, as their accounts also shows, rather than spend it. But Emirates is the greatest danger to the US3. By talking about the airlines as a group, the others most likely subsidized, you can use the mud to also smear Emirates.
But I also think, that the US3 can rattle and rant and it will not serve the purpose. There are other things in play. The overall picture is, that the USA has a positive trade balance with the UAE and Qatar. Boeing wants to sell airplanes, UPS and FedEX want to keep their hubs, military equipment producers want to keep selling their products and so on.
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:05 pm

The question becomes why EK feels the need to ratchet up its own rhetoric if it is not being subsidized.

The answer seems to be that the US3 are intensifying their own campaign against the ME3 and because the financials of the ME3 are deteriorating.

Whether the US3 are finally seeing an opening and are taking their campaign public to try to win the hearts and minds of American consumers right as political tensions in the Middle East are casting down in the region is unknown.

What is known is that the ME3 are stepping on each other’s toes and the European carriers that were the ME3’s first easy prey are developing strategies to compete with the ME3.

EK is cutting back on its services and adopting some of the same pricing strategies as other global carriers because the UAE government cannot continue to subsidize them at the levels they once were. Even in the UAE, there comes a point that EK and EY have to become commercially viable on their own. EK is cutting services right at the time the competition is heating up for traffic that flows over the Gulf and as subsidies to carriers in the UAE are reducing.

There was plenty of talk about merging EY and EK because of the obvious efficiencies that could have resulted, but as is so often the case in the UAE, regional politics make it impossible to favor one part of the country over the other.

The US3 probably recognize that all of those things are happening on top of a changed administration and figured it is worth their why to ratchet up the heat. Unlike the ME3, the US3 are very profitable and becoming more so and are also not subsidized – regardless of what anyone thinks happened years ago.

The ME3 issue might resolve itself in part by a failure of the business model of Gulf and Turkish aviation. The US3 undoubtedly wants to make sure that the US doesn’t get dragged into the downfall as the ME3 look for places to redeploy its capacity.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19303
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:13 pm

atl100million wrote:
The question becomes why EK feels the need to ratchet up its own rhetoric if it is not being subsidized.


Why shouldn't they defend themselves against false accusations?

In the court of public opinion, the silent non-defence doesn't win.
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.
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:27 pm

atl100million wrote:
Whether the US3 are finally seeing an opening and are taking their campaign public to try to win the hearts and minds of American consumers right as political tensions in the Middle East are casting down in the region is unknown.

What is known is that the ME3 are stepping on each other’s toes and the European carriers that were the ME3’s first easy prey are developing strategies to compete with the ME3.


2 different approaches, US crying, EU working... ironic :idea:
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:28 pm

atl100million wrote:
The question becomes why EK feels the need to ratchet up its own rhetoric if it is not being subsidized.


I asume that if you are attacked you reply.

atl100million wrote:
The answer seems to be that the US3 are intensifying their own campaign against the ME3 and because the financials of the ME3 are deteriorating.


One not so good year for EK, but still profit. EK has made profits for decades and meanwhile the US3 have moved through bankruptcy to shed debts.

atl100million wrote:
Whether the US3 are finally seeing an opening and are taking their campaign public to try to win the hearts and minds of American consumers right as political tensions in the Middle East are casting down in the region is unknown.


To expand their profits through protectionism.

atl100million wrote:
What is known is that the ME3 are stepping on each other’s toes and the European carriers that were the ME3’s first easy prey are developing strategies to compete with the ME3.


What European airline has been killed by the ME3?

atl100million wrote:
EK is cutting back on its services and adopting some of the same pricing strategies as other global carriers because the UAE government cannot continue to subsidize them at the levels they once were. Even in the UAE, there comes a point that EK and EY have to become commercially viable on their own. EK is cutting services right at the time the competition is heating up for traffic that flows over the Gulf and as subsidies to carriers in the UAE are reducing.


Typical again throwing mud at everybody. Do you have some proof somewhere that EK is subsidized?

atl100million wrote:
There was plenty of talk about merging EY and EK because of the obvious efficiencies that could have resulted, but as is so often the case in the UAE, regional politics make it impossible to favor one part of the country over the other.


I think that talk was here on A.net.

atl100million wrote:
The US3 probably recognize that all of those things are happening on top of a changed administration and figured it is worth their why to ratchet up the heat. Unlike the ME3, the US3 are very profitable and becoming more so and are also not subsidized – regardless of what anyone thinks happened years ago.


But what happened years ago is the basis for what is today. Routes and markets were build and are build with protectionism. Airlines are one of the very few business, were whole markets are protected from international competition. The main money maker for the US3 is the domestic market and that is protected from international competition.

atl100million wrote:
The ME3 issue might resolve itself in part by a failure of the business model of Gulf and Turkish aviation. The US3 undoubtedly wants to make sure that the US doesn’t get dragged into the downfall as the ME3 look for places to redeploy its capacity.


The US3 can always hope that competition goes away. But as the USA market is not the biggest market for the ME3, I assume that some trade action from the USA should not lead to the downfall off the ME3. A trade dispute with the likes of Qatar and UAE will hurt the USA more than those countries, there are few countries that provide such a nice trade surplus for the USA like the UAE and Qatar.
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:35 pm

This is simply a matter of bullies trying to kick off the market a neighbor that potentially avoids them making EVEN MORE money in markets where they cant compete, and spitting to heaven from a position built from protectionism and anti-fair-market policies, where they were artificially raised after several rescues. Such a shame, selfish egocentric US3.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8478
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:49 pm

Jayafe wrote:
This is simply a matter of bullies trying to kick off the market a neighbor that potentially avoids them making EVEN MORE money in markets where they cant compete, and spitting to heaven from a position built from protectionism and anti-fair-market policies, where they were artificially raised after several rescues. Such a shame, selfish egocentric .


That's what UAE did to Qatar.

Have you seen those new QR Q-Suites, way better than same old climb-on-others not-so-flat new EK J. EK doesn't even have money to design and implement new premium cabins?
All posts are just opinions.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1007
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:07 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Jayafe wrote:
This is simply a matter of bullies trying to kick off the market a neighbor that potentially avoids them making EVEN MORE money in markets where they cant compete, and spitting to heaven from a position built from protectionism and anti-fair-market policies, where they were artificially raised after several rescues. Such a shame, selfish egocentric .


That's what UAE did to Qatar.

Have you seen those new QR Q-Suites, way better than same old climb-on-others not-so-flat new EK J. EK doesn't even have money to design and implement new premium cabins?


New EK premium cabins are in work. A bespoke seat takes time to design, certify and build. Expect to see something new for J on the 777X. New F on 777s is here this year.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8478
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:21 pm

sxf24 wrote:
New EK premium cabins are in work. A bespoke seat takes time to design, certify and build. Expect to see something new for J on the 777X. New F on 777s is here this year.


Compare this

Image

with this

Image
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1869
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:29 pm

atl100million wrote:
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.


Frankly it's mind-numbing that you don't know the difference between war and terrorism. That the US then unilaterally declared war on countries which may or may not(*) have actively supported said terrorism is another matter.

(*) evidence points to not
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
airbazar
Posts: 10202
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:47 pm

adamh8297 wrote:
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.

How? I don't see it, for various reasons.
I don't think this type of news is reaching trump supporters. Heck they don't believe in mainstream media how can you expect them to be reading industry news?
Trump is and has always been pro UAE. His beef was but no longer is, with China. He got his naming rights back so China is good now. Delta Airlines has been portrayed as anti-Trump and some of their actions seem to indicate that although they've tried to backtrack on that by removing sponsorship for NY's Public Theatre. Both DL and AA have a significant Airbus order sheet.
 
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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:03 pm

airbazar wrote:
adamh8297 wrote:
airbazar wrote:
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.

How? I don't see it, for various reasons.
I don't think this type of news is reaching trump supporters. Heck they don't believe in mainstream media how can you expect them to be reading industry news?
Trump is and has always been pro UAE. His beef was but no longer is, with China. He got his naming rights back so China is good now. Delta Airlines has been portrayed as anti-Trump and some of their actions seem to indicate that although they've tried to backtrack on that by removing sponsorship for NY's Public Theatre. Both DL and AA have a significant Airbus order sheet.


Separate President Trump (and his actions) from the specific voters themselves and read the facebook comments and look at the people who like the pages for Partnership for Open and Fair Skies and Americans for Fair Skies. These pages are tailored toward getting these people riled up. They have a fair amount of followers but its not spreading like wildfire for sure. I agree with you that its sort of a niche topic not for the average American but that average American has some faulty logic (i.e Arab = Muslim = ISIS) that could be exploited.
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
 
Brickell305
Posts: 1101
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:22 pm

Wow @ a poster trying to insinuate that service by US airlines is better than the ME3. That's laughable on its face. The US3 are the most profitable airlines in the world. If they can't compete against the niche market which the ME3 serves from the US, that speaks significantly more to their own shortcomings and failures than anything to do with the ME3. Step your game up and compete instead of whining to Daddy government to save you from the big, bad ME3.
 
ayoungblood2
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:48 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:03 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.


They're no more a sham than the US3, who have received government aid on numerous occasions and had various mergers approved that ultimately formed an oligopoly with far less options for consumers. As for pulling out of Europe and India, EK is currently the only carrier that services Europe from stateside, and India has never been a profitable market for US carriers, even before the rise of the ME3.
 
winginit
Posts: 3052
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:46 pm

The back and forth mud-slinging regarding whether the ME3, US3, or both are receiving subsidies is pointless. Both have received what could be categorized as government subsidies, and that being the case, the Open Skies agreement should be formally opened for review and renegotiation. The trick here is that the ME3 obviously don't want the agreement opened for review.
 
User avatar
AI126
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:03 am

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

Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:37 pm

winginit wrote:
The back and forth mud-slinging regarding whether the ME3, US3, or both are receiving subsidies is pointless. Both have received what could be categorized as government subsidies, and that being the case, the Open Skies agreement should be formally opened for review and renegotiation. The trick here is that the ME3 obviously don't want the agreement opened for review.


Just like the US3 don't want the EU-US-CA open skies agreement opened for review in regards to Norwegian.

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