According to the article, the deal was signed today. The 2 main points:
- No further "planned" 5th freedom for EK &EY
- EK &EY to allow voluntary access to financial reports

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 603009002/

Seems like a fair deal all around. If both parties are happy it’s a good start for moving forward.

Sounds good. Maybe, USA flagged carriers can return to the Gulf. We will see.

Bald1983 wrote:

Sounds good. Maybe, USA flagged carriers can return to the Gulf. We will see.

I doubt that will happen, at least in the near term. On the surface, it doesn't look like this deal does anything that would cause the US3 to come back to DXB or anywhere else in the region.

sadiqutp wrote:

According to the article, the deal was signed today. The 2 main points:
- No further "planned" 5th freedom for EK &EY
- EK &EY to allow voluntary access to financial reports

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 603009002/

"Under the deal and side letter, the Emiratis do not explicitly promise never to add more such routes, but simply indicate none are planned."
That means absolutely nothing. That will change at some point. The open skies bilateral allows for 5th freedom and unless that agreement is changed there is nothing preventing the UAE carriers from operating 5th freedom flights. They will provide access to their financial reports to shut up the U.S. carriers and they launch more 5th freedom routes. That's my prediction.

Copy of previous Qatar agreement.

Certainly far from what US3 wanted, but its likely just about as much as any US government would do considering the importance of maintaining relations with the ME3 nations.

Here we go again, USA bullying it’s competition in international trade .....

So basically, Emirates can and will continue to expand capacity to the US, however, they won't do this through 5th freedoms until such a time that they chose to, which they'll like delay until a more favorable administration is power in the US.

Galwayman wrote:

Here we go again, USA bullying it’s competition in international trade .....

Clearly. Woke take my man.

If this is what the US3 are settling for, in my opinion, their screams were much ado about nothing. The 5th freedoms may have been the threat all along then.

It's ok, ME3 will buy airlines in Europe and compete with US3 across the Atlantic.

berari wrote:

It's ok, ME3 will buy airlines in Europe and compete with US3 across the Atlantic.

Well that hasn't been a huge success thus far, if we look at the examples of Air Berlin or Alitalia. But I suppose Air France might become a good candidate

Access to the financial statements ends EY and QR growth via investments. Notice no EK in my comment.

It is time to end government subsidies. Aviation is a mature market. I'm ok with turboprop flights being subsidized to small airports, but that is the limit.

Lightsaber

If a country wants to subsidize its air carriers, why shouldn't it? In the US, airlines have proven that only a small minority are capable of handling themselves financially (and this is not surprising, given that air travel is the least efficient way of moving payloads). If a country values air travel, it only makes sense to have a federally-run program which doesn't occasionally go bankrupt. If you're worried about waste, see preceding comment - air travel is inherently wasteful.

This is a poor deal for the US3.
A huge win for EK and EY. Financial reportings show nothing of the underlining subsidies such as fuel purchase cost, government-purchased travel.
The US should have reduced bilateral flights to 5 per day. That is more than plenty for the small nation that is the UAE.

747-600X wrote:

If a country wants to subsidize its air carriers, why shouldn't it? In the US, airlines have proven that only a small minority are capable of handling themselves financially (and this is not surprising, given that air travel is the least efficient way of moving payloads). If a country values air travel, it only makes sense to have a federally-run program which doesn't occasionally go bankrupt. If you're worried about waste, see preceding comment - air travel is inherently wasteful.

On the face of it, what you suggest is sensible. In fact many countries still do this as they own the carriers.

However, since the Seventies especially things have changed. It means that Governments becoming involved in airlines is no longer regarded as a smart move. State carriers tend to become bloated and badly managed by placemen or political nominees. The services might run well but the bloat and mismanagement means profits turn into regular, constant losses.

There are also a ton of other lesser reasons why State involvement doesn't work, such as allegations of espionage (remember KAL007) right through to where does civil service pay end and airline payscales kick in?

Airlines are just too complex and rapidly changing to run in the public sector if they are large international concerns.

Waterbomber wrote:

This is a poor deal for the US3.
A huge win for EK and EY. Financial reportings show nothing of the underlining subsidies such as fuel purchase cost, government-purchased travel.
The US should have reduced bilateral flights to 5 per day. That is more than plenty for the small nation that is the UAE.

Please remember the goal is not to help very large corporations. The goal is to help consumers.

747-600X wrote:

If a country wants to subsidize its air carriers, why shouldn't it? In the US, airlines have proven that only a small minority are capable of handling themselves financially (and this is not surprising, given that air travel is the least efficient way of moving payloads). If a country values air travel, it only makes sense to have a federally-run program which doesn't occasionally go bankrupt. If you're worried about waste, see preceding comment - air travel is inherently wasteful.

Do you feel this way about most industries? Cars and banking are more important to most people than air travel. Would you nationalize them, or is air travel unique in some way?

Waterbomber wrote:

This is a poor deal for the US3.
A huge win for EK and EY. Financial reportings show nothing of the underlining subsidies such as fuel purchase cost, government-purchased travel.
The US should have reduced bilateral flights to 5 per day. That is more than plenty for the small nation that is the UAE.

If Trump decided to break another treaty, maybe. However, I have a sneaking suspicion he won't do anything to any of the airlines from the Gulf States.

Waterbomber wrote:

This is a poor deal for the US3.
A huge win for EK and EY. Financial reportings show nothing of the underlining subsidies such as fuel purchase cost, government-purchased travel.
The US should have reduced bilateral flights to 5 per day. That is more than plenty for the small nation that is the UAE.

I think details will be released on Monday, it appears almost in line with the Qatar agreement.

Based on various news outlet reports

1) No subsidized infrastructure. EK and EY have to pay for their own infrastructure.
2) Financial disclosure of arm length transactions with other government-owned entities.
3) Follow international accounting standards
4) Allow external audit of books
5) Agreement progress review in a year with US representatives.

My sense is that Saudi/UAE have enormous clout on American foreign policy. I would suspect that the ME3 have benefited greatly from their air service arrangement while the U.S. got what in return? Billions of military armament sales/massive Boeing civilian aircraft sales/collusion on oil prices etc.
The US of A won big time on this in terms of the big picture as far as I can tell. The most amazing thing is that the U.S. doesn't even need the Saudi/UAE petro products anymore. The Sunni middle east must have a massive overall trade deficit with the US but the White House only talks about all the "worst deals ever" in other parts of the world. Funny eh? Distract everybody and collude with the Saudi princes. Nice.

Galwayman wrote:

Here we go again, USA bullying it’s competition in international trade .....

They want to fly to the USA? Then pony up! Don't act like you've got the rights as you DON'T!
The EU might not say or do anything, But! Where do you think the US3 GOT their information??

SonomaFlyer wrote:

Waterbomber wrote:

This is a poor deal for the US3.
A huge win for EK and EY. Financial reportings show nothing of the underlining subsidies such as fuel purchase cost, government-purchased travel.
The US should have reduced bilateral flights to 5 per day. That is more than plenty for the small nation that is the UAE.

If Trump decided to break another treaty, maybe. However, I have a sneaking suspicion he won't do anything to any of the airlines from the Gulf States.

Trump didn’t break any treaty. Assuming you’re referencing Paris or Iran. There were no treaties to be broken. Congress didn’t ratify, therefore, no treaty. So let’s start calling things what they are from now on. This administration is going to be pro consumer and pro competition in this regard. On top of that, the biggest whiner (Delta) hasn’t done themselves any favors in regards to aircraft procurement. As long as EK and EY are putting their earnings back into the American economy by procuring American Aircraft, Trump will see no reason to limit their potential to keep growing and keep buying more American Aircraft. Super simplistic view. But it makes sense from a point of view. Making sense from a point of view in extremely simplistic fashion is the theme of this administration.

QXAS wrote:

SonomaFlyer wrote:

Waterbomber wrote:

This is a poor deal for the US3.
A huge win for EK and EY. Financial reportings show nothing of the underlining subsidies such as fuel purchase cost, government-purchased travel.
The US should have reduced bilateral flights to 5 per day. That is more than plenty for the small nation that is the UAE.

If Trump decided to break another treaty, maybe. However, I have a sneaking suspicion he won't do anything to any of the airlines from the Gulf States.

Trump didn’t break any treaty. Assuming you’re referencing Paris or Iran. There were no treaties to be broken. Congress didn’t ratify, therefore, no treaty. So let’s start calling things what they are from now on. This administration is going to be pro consumer and pro competition in this regard. On top of that, the biggest whiner (Delta) hasn’t done themselves any favors in regards to aircraft procurement. As long as EK and EY are putting their earnings back into the American economy by procuring American Aircraft, Trump will see no reason to limit their potential to keep growing and keep buying more American Aircraft. Super simplistic view. But it makes sense from a point of view. Making sense from a point of view in extremely simplistic fashion is the theme of this administration.

By that same logic, the US should be best friends with Iran. Mega aircraft orders there.
I think that there is more to it than the goverments being friends in business.
It's highly abnormal that a nation of 2 million have gotten the worldwide access that they got.
I like to call it unmarked envelopes exchanging hands, be it directly or through corporations with stakes in the UAE.

Waterbomber wrote:

QXAS wrote:

SonomaFlyer wrote:

If Trump decided to break another treaty, maybe. However, I have a sneaking suspicion he won't do anything to any of the airlines from the Gulf States.

Trump didn’t break any treaty. Assuming you’re referencing Paris or Iran. There were no treaties to be broken. Congress didn’t ratify, therefore, no treaty. So let’s start calling things what they are from now on. This administration is going to be pro consumer and pro competition in this regard. On top of that, the biggest whiner (Delta) hasn’t done themselves any favors in regards to aircraft procurement. As long as EK and EY are putting their earnings back into the American economy by procuring American Aircraft, Trump will see no reason to limit their potential to keep growing and keep buying more American Aircraft. Super simplistic view. But it makes sense from a point of view. Making sense from a point of view in extremely simplistic fashion is the theme of this administration.

By that same logic, the US should be best friends with Iran. Mega aircraft orders there.
I think that there is more to it than the goverments being friends in business.
It's highly abnormal that a nation of 2 million have gotten the worldwide access that they got.
I like to call it unmarked envelopes exchanging hands, be it directly or through corporations with stakes in the UAE.

Slow down on the conspiracy theories.

The original air service agreements between the US and the UAE were signed in 1999 and 2002, according to the State Department.
https://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ata/u/ae/

Emirates didn't start flying to the U.S. until 2004.

As a point of reference, the U.S. also has open skies agreements with Paraguay, Mali, Maldives, Madagascar, Thailand, Uruguay, and Gabon (among others)--all signed in a two year period from 2004 to 2006.
https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tra/61923.htm

The agreement with the UAE wasn't that unusual given the American trend of promoting fewer barriers to international trade and commerce, at least until this current administration. The argument about corruption and foreign influence as the main drivers of the UAE open skies agreement doesn't fly (pardon the pun) when you look at the agreement in the context of other commercial agreements the U.S. signed during that time.

All this new deal provides to the US3 is greater transparency and access to the ME3's financial documents and accounting practices. The primary reason why this now became an issue is that all of the US3 have transatlantic joint ventures with European partners, and now have a financial stake in the threats that the ME3 poses to their European counterparts.

strfyr51 wrote:

Galwayman wrote:

Here we go again, USA bullying it’s competition in international trade .....

They want to fly to the USA? Then pony up! Don't act like you've got the rights as you DON'T!
The EU might not say or do anything, But! Where do you think the US3 GOT their information??

Except that the ME3 did have the rights to fly fifth-freedom flights to the US from points in Europe. If they didn't have the rights, then EK could have never started flying to the US from Athens or Milan. EK acted fully in accordance with the governing documents and complied with the law. It's not EK's problem that no US carrier took advantage of reciprocal rights to fly from Europe to the UAE.

The issue is that at the time the US-UAE open skies deal was signed (in 2002), EK wasn't flying to the U.S., and few anticipated how fast and how quickly they would grow (and how much of a threat they posed to the JVs signed by US carriers with European partners).

Like others have said, this agreement is largely fluff until fifth-freedom reciprocity between the US and the UAE is formally abolished.

QXAS wrote:

This administration is going to be pro consumer and pro competition in this regard.

Depends on what kind of service they provided Ivanka and her 300+ contingent.

QXAS wrote:

On top of that, the biggest whiner (Delta) hasn’t done themselves any favors in regards to aircraft procurement. .

Delta sued every one. Boeing, EXIM, Air India, Norwegian(may be thru ALPA). Every one prevailed against Delta. Why are ME3 worried?

QXAS wrote:

As long as EK and EY are putting their earnings back into the American economy by procuring American Aircraft, Trump will see no reason to limit their potential to keep growing and keep buying more American Aircraft. Super simplistic view. But it makes sense from a point of view. Making sense from a point of view in extremely simplistic fashion is the theme of this administration.

Last year EK's Americas revenue was $3.3 Billion. That is paid by Americans or foreigners visiting Americas. Not their earnings per say, it could be others.

us330 wrote:

EK acted fully in accordance with the governing documents and complied with the law. It's not EK's problem that no US carrier took advantage of reciprocal rights to fly from Europe to the UAE.

We will know when external auditors audit EK's books. Is it a well-run numbers airline or well-done numbers airline? US still not amending open-skies, it is a voluntary freeze of fifth freedom by UAE until question related to account are clear.

SonomaFlyer wrote:

Waterbomber wrote:

This is a poor deal for the US3.
A huge win for EK and EY. Financial reportings show nothing of the underlining subsidies such as fuel purchase cost, government-purchased travel.
The US should have reduced bilateral flights to 5 per day. That is more than plenty for the small nation that is the UAE.

If Trump decided to break another treaty, maybe. However, I have a sneaking suspicion he won't do anything to any of the airlines from the Gulf States.

Come on now. Trump can't "break" a treaty. if there is a bi-lateral in effect, it IS a treaty and has been ratified. This is quite different from an "Executive Order" that can be easily abrogated.

airbazar wrote:

sadiqutp wrote:

According to the article, the deal was signed today. The 2 main points:
- No further "planned" 5th freedom for EK &EY
- EK &EY to allow voluntary access to financial reports

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 603009002/

"Under the deal and side letter, the Emiratis do not explicitly promise never to add more such routes, but simply indicate none are planned."
That means absolutely nothing. That will change at some point. The open skies bilateral allows for 5th freedom and unless that agreement is changed there is nothing preventing the UAE carriers from operating 5th freedom flights. They will provide access to their financial reports to shut up the U.S. carriers and they launch more 5th freedom routes. That's my prediction.

They already were very transparent with their financials, and their own release confirms nothing will change with release of their financials. Etihad has been much more closed with its financials.

EK also said in a statement that the agreement does not in any way restrict their route development plans.

I haven't see a response from Delta on any of this.

dtw2hyd wrote:

We will know when external auditors audit EK's books. Is it a well-run numbers airline or well-done numbers airline? US still not amending open-skies, it is a voluntary freeze of fifth freedom by UAE until question related to account are clear.

LOL. Emirates has always had external auditors. Even back in 2016 before this started, they used external auditors.

Price Waterhouse Statement
https://cdn.ek.aero/downloads/ek/pdfs/r ... t_2017.pdf

Our opinion
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial position of Emirates and its subsidiaries (together
referred to as “Emirates”) as at 31 March 2017, and its consolidated financial
performance and its consolidated cash flows for the year then ended in accordance
with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”).
What we have audited
Emirates’ consolidated financial statements comprise:
● the consolidated income statement for the year ended 31 March 2017;
● the consolidated statement of comprehensive income for the year ended 31 March 2017;
● the consolidated statement of financial position as at 31 March 2017;
● the consolidated statement of changes in equity for the year ended 31 March 2017;
● the consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended 31 March 2017; and
● the notes to the consolidated financial statements, which include a summary of
significant accounting policies.
Basis for opinion
We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing
(“ISAs”). Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the
Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the consolidated financial statements section
of our report.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to
provide a basis for our opinion.
Independence
We are independent of Emirates in accordance with the International Ethics Standards
Board for Accountants’ Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (“IESBA Code”)
and the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the consolidated
financial statements in the United Arab Emirates. We have fulfilled our other ethical
responsibilities in accordance with these requirements and the IESBA Code.
Our audit approach
Overview
As part of designing our audit, we determined materiality and assessed the risks of
material misstatement in the consolidated financial statements. In particular, we
considered where management made subjective judgements; for example, in respect
of significant accounting estimates that involved making assumptions and considering
future events that are inherently uncertain. As in all of our audits, we also addressed
the risk of management override of internal controls, including amongst other matters
consideration of whether there was evidence of bias that represented a risk of material
misstatement due to fraud.
The areas, in our professional judgement, that are of most significance to the audit (‘Key
audit matters’) and where we focused most audit effort during the year were:
Key Audit Matters ● Timing of recognition and accuracy of passenger and cargo
revenue
● Accounting for the ‘Skywards’ frequent flyer programme
● Lease classification and the related lease accounting
● Accounting for aircraft return conditions
We tailored the scope of our audit in order to perform sufficient work to enable us to
provide an opinion on the consolidated financial statements as a whole, taking into
account the structure of Emirates, the accounting processes and controls, and the
industry in which Emirates operates.

QXAS wrote:

This administration is going to be pro consumer and pro competition in this regard.

If this administration is pro competition why have they continued to approve joint ventures? They just remove competition from the market by legalizing cartels.

enilria wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

We will know when external auditors audit EK's books. Is it a well-run numbers airline or well-done numbers airline? US still not amending open-skies, it is a voluntary freeze of fifth freedom by UAE until question related to account are clear.

LOL. Emirates has always had external auditors. Even back in 2016 before this started, they used external auditors.

PwC PJSC Dubai is technically not an external auditor, their regulator(SEC equivalent if any) is again Dubai ruler who is also the owner of Emirates Group.

So conflict of interest written allover.

To legitimately certify EK's financial statements per IFRS standards, they need a true external auditor. Could be PwC LLP(UK) or PwC LLP(USA) to protect corporate confidentiality. Same auditing company under better regulator sans conflict of interest. Shouldn't be a problem correct, rather than US Treasury or FBI auditing their books.

dtw2hyd wrote:

enilria wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

We will know when external auditors audit EK's books. Is it a well-run numbers airline or well-done numbers airline? US still not amending open-skies, it is a voluntary freeze of fifth freedom by UAE until question related to account are clear.

LOL. Emirates has always had external auditors. Even back in 2016 before this started, they used external auditors.

PwC PJSC Dubai is technically not an external auditor, their regulator(SEC equivalent if any) is again Dubai ruler who is also the owner of Emirates Group.

So conflict of interest written allover.

To legitimately certify EK's financial statements per IFRS standards, they need a true external auditor. Could be PwC LLP(UK) or PwC LLP(USA) to protect corporate confidentiality. Same auditing company under better regulator sans conflict of interest. Shouldn't be a problem correct, rather than US Treasury or FBI auditing their books.

Huh? They are a British company stating they meet IFRS standards. So now you are saying that AA/DL/UA get to pick the auditor? Pricewaterhouse Coopers is well respected. Whatever you are hoping will happen, will not happen. This agreement meant nothing except face-saving for the U.S. carriers.

The FBI auditing their books? Uh huh. Sure...

enilria wrote:

Huh? They are a British company stating they meet IFRS standards. So now you are saying that AA/DL/UA get to pick the auditor? Pricewaterhouse Coopers is well respected. Whatever you are hoping will happen, will not happen. This agreement meant nothing except face-saving for the U.S. carriers.

PwC is a British brand. PwC PJSC(Dubai) is a Dubai registered company working for Dubai ruler.

Like the local BP gas station actually is Joe Papa LLC doing business as BP localville..

While happily milking British brand's reputation, PwC LLP (UK) auditing/reviewing books shouldn't be an issue, correct. Not a US entity, not picked by US3 or US government. An amicable third party

The FBI auditing their books? Uh huh. Sure...

They do have a white collar crimes unit, good at reviewing well-cooked books.

Waterbomber wrote:

By that same logic, the US should be best friends with Iran. Mega aircraft orders there.
I think that there is more to it than the goverments being friends in business.
It's highly abnormal that a nation of 2 million have gotten the worldwide access that they got.
I like to call it unmarked envelopes exchanging hands, be it directly or through corporations with stakes in the UAE.

Fact check: the UAE has a population of 9.5 million, although just under 3 million are actually Emirati

They have become the de facto trading post of the Gulf, both DXB and AUH are considered major financial centers as well now. I am under no illusions about how business is done over there, but it's not 'unusual' that they have access to the entire world via air - HKG and SIN are pretty similar in this regard. There is very little happening economically between the individual emirates - DXB and AUH deal with the world instead.

enilria wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

enilria wrote:

LOL. Emirates has always had external auditors. Even back in 2016 before this started, they used external auditors.

PwC PJSC Dubai is technically not an external auditor, their regulator(SEC equivalent if any) is again Dubai ruler who is also the owner of Emirates Group.

So conflict of interest written allover.

To legitimately certify EK's financial statements per IFRS standards, they need a true external auditor. Could be PwC LLP(UK) or PwC LLP(USA) to protect corporate confidentiality. Same auditing company under better regulator sans conflict of interest. Shouldn't be a problem correct, rather than US Treasury or FBI auditing their books.

Huh? They are a British company stating they meet IFRS standards. So now you are saying that AA/DL/UA get to pick the auditor? Pricewaterhouse Coopers is well respected. Whatever you are hoping will happen, will not happen. This agreement meant nothing except face-saving for the U.S. carriers.

The FBI auditing their books? Uh huh. Sure...

Well respected for being corrupt. Just google "PWC scandal"
Financial auditors get perks too, you know.
I doubt that external auditors can get to the bottom of the subsidies. You need to be able to look at bank account statements and follow the money flows in order to see where the money is coming from and where it's going.
The government of Dubai can book first class tickets that go no show on each flight. That's a way of subsidising that wouldn't show up on the books.
Pretty easy to do, leaves no trace. Change the names on the bookings randomly and you'll be fine.

Let’s hope the Chinese govt subsidized carriers who are in the global alliances with the US3 - are forced to display arms length practices.

Good now EK can at least get on with it's business of expanding into North America as it's growth was so rudely interrupted by the cry baby US3.

I wonder what impact this will have on DTW

I am sure a lesser of several hundred frames of the ME3 would be very interested in real financials vs show boating. They hate being on the wrong end of a BK

sadiqutp wrote:

According to the article, the deal was signed today. The 2 main points:
- No further "planned" 5th freedom for EK &EY
- EK &EY to allow voluntary access to financial reports

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 603009002/

Why are they calling it "a deal", as it is "a record of discussion" based on the news story? Frankly, it seems that this is just to save face of the US3.

So will US airlines agree to use IFRS rather than US GAAP, and never to use Chapter 11 (ch11 effectively being a state subsidy)

klm617 wrote:

Good now EK can at least get on with it's business of expanding into North America as it's growth was so rudely interrupted by the cry baby US3.

They won’t even reinstate the second daily flights at BOS and SEA, never mind ‘growing.’ Their boastful CEO said the pulled services would return, and of course they haven’t. They have the most awkward and unbalanced fleet makeup thanks to missing the 787 gold rush that now finds them with too many gargantuan planes and not enough crew to fly them...not to mention not enough markets to match all that metal (much of which is sitting idle).

Waterbomber wrote:

enilria wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

PwC PJSC Dubai is technically not an external auditor, their regulator(SEC equivalent if any) is again Dubai ruler who is also the owner of Emirates Group.

So conflict of interest written allover.

To legitimately certify EK's financial statements per IFRS standards, they need a true external auditor. Could be PwC LLP(UK) or PwC LLP(USA) to protect corporate confidentiality. Same auditing company under better regulator sans conflict of interest. Shouldn't be a problem correct, rather than US Treasury or FBI auditing their books.

Huh? They are a British company stating they meet IFRS standards. So now you are saying that AA/DL/UA get to pick the auditor? Pricewaterhouse Coopers is well respected. Whatever you are hoping will happen, will not happen. This agreement meant nothing except face-saving for the U.S. carriers.

The FBI auditing their books? Uh huh. Sure...

Well respected for being corrupt. Just google "PWC scandal"
Financial auditors get perks too, you know.
I doubt that external auditors can get to the bottom of the subsidies. You need to be able to look at bank account statements and follow the money flows in order to see where the money is coming from and where it's going.
The government of Dubai can book first class tickets that go no show on each flight. That's a way of subsidising that wouldn't show up on the books.
Pretty easy to do, leaves no trace. Change the names on the bookings randomly and you'll be fine.

What's interesting about conspiracy whack jobs like this is that despite audit after audit showing EK to be literally a better run machine than any of the US3, they're still convinced, from their arm chairs, that they have all the answers.

Apart from what is probably just racism or xenophobia, exactly what is it that you, and apparently nobody else on earth, seem to have that show "irregularities"?
Literally every point you've made not only has nothing to back it up, but is so far beyond ridiculous that even DL haven't argued them... Seriously man, "ghost" F reservations from the gov't?

I wish you knew how claims like that looked to normal people.

Formally announced.

https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2018/05/282072.htm

US side also reiterates support for the 2002 open-skies agreement with UAE which continues to benefit consumers.

US govt also affirms that EK just like US airlines has long issued financial reports along internationally recognized account standards that aid with transparency, and that Etihad intends to do so once it completes a restructuring.

Seems like EK, EY threw some crumbs to the US3 to enable them to claim some sort of victory and save face while ending this ridiculous waste of time and effort from all sides.

The end result seems like a total defeat for the US3 though, hmm?