Arion640
Posts: 2917
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:19 am

usdcaguy wrote:
I've flown EK in economy and was largely underwhelmed. I remember asking someone for some water, and they gave me the tiniest cup. Largely insufficient for flying the number of hours their itineraries require. They are not particularly cheap in business, and even in economy from the US, they are higher than many others. EK didn't so much as bring better service and fares into the US as they did siphon off passengers from the US3 and their European counterparts. The arrival of QR and EY dumped even more unnecessary capacity into the market. Though their load factors are now fine (QR and EY seemed to struggle with this for a while), the ME3 make it harder for other carriers to make a premium and pay their employees good wages. I'm not saying that they are subsidized to an extent that exceeds what the US government gives carriers in terms of airport infrastructure and services, but they do get things like subsidized loans, etc. from their governments that make it possible for them to expand. Meanwhile, the US3 have been incredibly slow to expand to the Middle East, Africa and the Indian subcontinent because of the ME3 (ME4 if you count TK). Open skies sound wonderful until they hurt one of your own.


I love the ME3. Fantastic product. Fantastic fares. Good for the consumer.
1973-2020
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2899
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:18 pm

xwb777 wrote:
Sheikh Ahmed Bin Saeed Al Maktoum, Emirates Group Chairman, has expressed his thoughts on the many cities that Emirates wants to operate to but is facing rejection from their respective countries.

According to the Chairman, some countries are denying access to the carrier because the local carrier is strong and influencing or facing opposition from the local government.

An example where the Government is opposing Emirates entry would be Germany, where Emirates is only entitled to serve four cities. Emirates have been clear that they would like to fly to Berlin.
Does the Germany-UAE allow charters?
If yes, then EK could set up “seasonal” thrice weekly DXB-SXF charters thru the year.

An Example about where the local airline is strong would be Mexico. Emirates will be launching daily flights to Mexico City via Barcelona. Aero Mexico has filed a legal case against Emirates access to the city but Emirates has won the case.

Quote: “ That was a tough one. I mean the Mexicans they've been after us for the last five years. They're very keen,” Sheikh Ahmed said”
The major issue with Mexico (read AM) and EK was the BCN stop. Had EK chosen other European (Spanish) airport not-flown by AM , the Mexicans (read AM) wouldn’t have filled legal case against EK.

Emirates has also faced opposition in Nigeria, where the chairman of Airline operators of Nigeria, has saif that the government should restrict Emirates access to the country in order to protect the national carrier “Air Peace”
Protect the airline routes to points beyond DXB? Flying Nigeria - Western Europe on EK is a detour.

I think that the countries that are protecting their airlines is doing so because they want to preserve their airline’s market share against Emirates. Your thoughts?

Link: https://www.arabianbusiness.com/transpo ... any-cities

Be assured that EK isn’r facing Israeli rejection from flying, DXB-TLV, in that case it’s UAE who doesn’t dare to start the flghts.

Airlines (not governments) have to be creative on their medium/long haul competition with EK (and QR, EY, TK).
If the local airlines offer a good product on their P2P routes, those will most of the time the flights chosen by the market, not the connections via DXB.
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
User avatar
DL747400
Posts: 861
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 3:29 pm

KingOrGod wrote:


Typical EK arrogance. There is no way that EK is going to stop serving one of the four German cities they fly to and switch service to Berlin. They are simply wanting the German government to open up a fifth German city. EK is never happy, always wanting more subsidies. There is no way in hell that Germany should offer EK anything.
From First to Worst: The history of Airliners.net.

All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:14 pm

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
TObound wrote:
Buffalomatt1027 wrote:

Ek should try to fly to Buffalo and bus up the passengers to Toronto. Its being done right now in Seattle to Vancouver. Which Seattle to Vancouver drive time is about double what it would take for a bus to from Buffalo to Toronto. So if Emirates was really that desperate to get more flights that are closer to Toronto. It is doable.


There's simply no profitability in doing that. They'd have to open a new station, with zero airline feed (they have Westjet in Toronto), and get pax through US Customs (no small feat given the current administration). How many passengers would put up with all that to literally save a handful of dollars on a flight? The Canadians who go to Buffalo do that predominantly to access cheaper flights to destinations in the US. Even the passengers who want to depart from there to take international connections at major hubs are rare.

CHRISBA35X wrote:
YVR, YYC, TLV, BER, MEX, BOG, HNL. Struggling to see many more places they don't already serve that they would want to.


China.


I think Jet blue does ....... But hey! The busing from Seattle to Vancouver works. Why cant BUF - TOR by bus work? And its not about a cheaper flight, its EK trying to get more flights in the Toronto area due to slot restriction.


And Air France/KLM and Lufthansa run a single daily coach bus from Ottawa to Montreal so passengers can catch flights out of YUL, without a feeder partner to cover the 200km from Ottawa to YUL. However, it's inside the same country and they are seeking to supplement existing traffic. That coach bus brings a max of 50 pax. It's bonus feed.

Seeking to fill most of a 350+ seat aircraft with passengers bussed in from a city in another country, 180 km away, is a whole different ball game. Running 6+ coach buses to Toronto daily is not exactly cheap. And that would come on top of all the costs of opening a new station, as opposed to simply leveraging off existing infrastructure at YYZ. And they'd have to absorb all those costs while still offering a discount over fares out of YYZ, to compensate for the inconvenience. All that while also losing a ton of higher revenue J and F pax. A recipe for some disastrous yields. Why would they bother with that, when there are much juicier lower hanging fruit elsewhere. They aren't so desperate that a second service to Toronto is a must.
 
migair54
Posts: 2433
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:24 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:42 pm

CHRISBA35X wrote:
YVR, YYC, TLV, BER, MEX, BOG, HNL. Struggling to see many more places they don't already serve that they would want to.


I don´t think you´ll ever see HNL in EK network for pax operation, I think EK skycargo fly to HNL 1 or 2 times a week.. I think Montreal could get a daily EK flight also, China is also not allowing EK to add some of the major cities like Chengdu, Chongquin, Kunming, even more access to Beijing, maybe now EK could add Daxing to the network.
BOG could happen in the future via Europe or via some other destination like PTY. BOG elevation make it impossible to operates non stop to Dubai.
India right now could get few more flights or even open up the current restrictions impose in some cases, like COK, COK was an A330 destination, right now is a B777 however EK can´t sell all the seats in the plane, only the seat that match the A330 configuration because the India-UAE agreement does not allow any extra seat to be allocated in the quota. I think UAE and India are in talks to increase the seat allocation in the near future.

In the case of Canada it´s not fair for Westjet, EK has an agreement with Westjet, so blocking EK to have more slots to protect Air Canada is quite unfair competition for Westjet, they could be selling more seat with EK and getting more EK transit pax via Vancouver or Calgary. Flights, AC and EK, from YYZ to DXB are always full so business is quite good for both.

Arion640 wrote:
So Etihad and Air Arabia don’t count then?

Spicejet, an Indian Airline, is setting up a new carrier in the UAE, so add one more, Etihad and Air Arabia are also adding a new low cost airline in Abu Dhabi, FlyDubai also is there.

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
Ek should try to fly to Buffalo and bus up the passengers to Toronto. Its being done right now in Seattle to Vancouver. Which Seattle to Vancouver drive time is about double what it would take for a bus to from Buffalo to Toronto. So if Emirates was really that desperate to get more flights that are closer to Toronto. It is doable.

Don´t want to disrespect Buffalo, but Buffalo is not even close to Seattle in terms of pax and cargo.

usdcaguy wrote:
I've flown EK in economy and was largely underwhelmed. I remember asking someone for some water, and they gave me the tiniest cup. Largely insufficient for flying the number of hours their itineraries require.

Water, Sodas, juices, coffee and tea with different snacks like chocolates, chips,pretzels, multigrain bars and fruits are available during the whole flight in any of the galleys, specially the one at the back, I have never had any problems in business or economy to find any drink or some snacks during any flight with EK.

usdcaguy wrote:
the ME3 make it harder for other carriers to make a premium and pay their employees good wages


I have few friends flying for different regional airlines in the USA, and you should know how much do they make, specially FO and Cabin crew, it´s a joke of salary, and that´s not because of the ME3, but because of the US3, regional airlines work only for US3 and no competence from ME3 exist in that market, we should not blame always the ME3 for all the things not working well in the USA aviation industry.

Most of the state owned airlines get help from government, SA does all the time, SV, El Al, Aerolineas Argentinas, Aeroflot, Thai, Malaysian, Vietnam Airlines, Philippine Airlines, all the Chinese Airlines... They all fly to USA, or they used to fly.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4083
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 4:43 pm

DL747400 wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:


Typical EK arrogance. There is no way that EK is going to stop serving one of the four German cities they fly to and switch service to Berlin. They are simply wanting the German government to open up a fifth German city. EK is never happy, always wanting more subsidies. There is no way in hell that Germany should offer EK anything.


Why not??

A lot of Germans consumers stand to gain a lot. Especially since LH does not appear to be particulary interested into long haul from Berlin . . .

Should the German governemt protect the interests of one airline or millions of consumers?
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 6:22 pm

PW100 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:


Typical EK arrogance. There is no way that EK is going to stop serving one of the four German cities they fly to and switch service to Berlin. They are simply wanting the German government to open up a fifth German city. EK is never happy, always wanting more subsidies. There is no way in hell that Germany should offer EK anything.


Why not??

A lot of Germans consumers stand to gain a lot. Especially since LH does not appear to be particulary interested into long haul from Berlin . . .

Should the German governemt protect the interests of one airline or millions of consumers?


How do you feel about letting cheap textiles made in Bangladesh and Southeast Asia flood your fashion retailers? How do you feel about the Chinese dumping steel in developed markets?

Governments have a certain responsibility to protect workers. And as recent political events are showing, the public is fed up with the idea of unfettered trade that seems to only benefit elites while driving wages to the bottom for the rest. The idea that the developing world gets to trade solely on cheap wages is increasingly intolerable to Western citizens. Especially not when there are options.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4083
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:30 pm

TObound wrote:
PW100 wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
Typical EK arrogance. There is no way that EK is going to stop serving one of the four German cities they fly to and switch service to Berlin. They are simply wanting the German government to open up a fifth German city. EK is never happy, always wanting more subsidies. There is no way in hell that Germany should offer EK anything.

Why not??
A lot of Germans consumers stand to gain a lot. Especially since LH does not appear to be particulary interested into long haul from Berlin . . .
Should the German governemt protect the interests of one airline or millions of consumers?

How do you feel about letting cheap textiles made in Bangladesh and Southeast Asia flood your fashion retailers? How do you feel about the Chinese dumping steel in developed markets?

Governments have a certain responsibility to protect workers. And as recent political events are showing, the public is fed up with the idea of unfettered trade that seems to only benefit elites while driving wages to the bottom for the rest. The idea that the developing world gets to trade solely on cheap wages is increasingly intolerable to Western citizens. Especially not when there are options.


I'm in doubt that subject poster had that in mind when when (s)he wrote about "typical EK arrogance" to which I replied.

However your point is well taken, and subscribed by me as well (although comparing EK labour standards to Bangladesh and Southeast Asia worker standards is strtching things quite a bit).

You further support my point that these decisions should not stop at by looking at home carrier position only.

But then again, apart from these considerations, wouldn't it be great if a(n important) portion of Germans consumer travel bill is picked up by a foreign government (in reaction to poster's claim of subsidies) . . .
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
vadodara
Posts: 1131
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 7:45 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 7:42 pm

Nicoeddf wrote:
vadodara wrote:
If EK was willing to stay with secondary cities, perhaps there would have been less resistance.

BER is an extreme example where LH does not want to serve but will prevent EK from expanding.


Does not want to serve? LH flies like 10 dailies to FRA and then another 10 dailies to MUC to connect with all off the world on own metal and onwards via partners.

As EK wouldn't offer BER-HKG, but rather BER-DXB-HKG, the people of Berlin have plenty choices of one-stops to all of the world via a dozen carriers.

As someone else said: if you don't have anything to offer in negotiations, how can you expect to gain anything? Arguably, they are already plenty well of in most parts of the world...


Perhaps not BER-XYZ-HKG but BER-DXB-Entebbe that LH would not serve.

The German consumer, I am sure, would appreciate other choices.
 
Etheereal
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:44 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 9:08 pm

chidino wrote:
Emirates is arguing a dead horse. History shows that people will fly direct whenever possible. Once aircraft can tie together any city pair, the need for Dubai disappears.

Wrong, there are "plenty" of people, as some posters have said here several times, they dont want to fly more than 10 hours in an aircraft at once. And its even worse if its done in a "narrowbody".
 
chidino
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:36 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 9:40 pm

Etheereal wrote:
chidino wrote:
Emirates is arguing a dead horse. History shows that people will fly direct whenever possible. Once aircraft can tie together any city pair, the need for Dubai disappears.

Wrong, there are "plenty" of people, as some posters have said here several times, they dont want to fly more than 10 hours in an aircraft at once. And its even worse if its done in a "narrowbody".


Apparently, you work in A380 marketing. Really? How is that reflected in sales? I challenge you to come up with a single route where people choose to waste time sitting in any layover city. And every time range grows on aircraft, the necessity for layover cities disappears. I'd like to think otherwise -- I like good airlines -- but the public won't pay/buy it.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 9:47 pm

PW100 wrote:
However your point is well taken, and subscribed by me as well (although comparing EK labour standards to Bangladesh and Southeast Asia worker standards is strtching things quite a bit).


Wasn't necessarily saying that EK has Bangladeshi or Southeast Asia labour standards. But their standards are certainly not close to western norms, especially for cabin crew. And especially for women. I can't even imagine anything close to stories like this at LH:

https://www.traveller.com.au/qatar-airw ... cies-34gaz

https://donotflyemirates.wordpress.com/ ... -abortion/

So what would LH's costs (and profits) be if they were allowed to similarly abuse labour and employ female cabin crew as eye candy?

PW100 wrote:
You further support my point that these decisions should not stop at by looking at home carrier position only.

But then again, apart from these considerations, wouldn't it be great if a(n important) portion of Germans consumer travel bill is picked up by a foreign government (in reaction to poster's claim of subsidies) . . .


As long as the offset is considered, in that this outsourcing costs Germany well-paying jobs which impacts the social and economic well being of its citizens and increases the burden on the welfare state.

Look at any survey of Millennials and the demands are the same across borders. There's a backlash coming. The likelihood that this demographic, which will be absolutely dominating elections in most Western democracies beyond 2025 will happily tolerate a suppression of labour standards and pay to facilitate foreign businesses is going to be low. The Middle East 3 had better refocus on all that Asia to Africa practices. Places where their practices won't raise too much concern.
 
moa999
Posts: 804
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:28 pm

But why isn't LH flying from Berlin now?

The Government is heavily on debt and needs as many tourists as it can get, not having the business base of many other German cities
 
jfk777
Posts: 7247
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 11:09 pm

OGLOBAL wrote:
usdcaguy wrote:
I've flown EK in economy and was largely underwhelmed. I remember asking someone for some water, and they gave me the tiniest cup. Largely insufficient for flying the number of hours their itineraries require. They are not particularly cheap in business, and even in economy from the US, they are higher than many others. EK didn't so much as bring better service and fares into the US as they did siphon off passengers from the US3 and their European counterparts. The arrival of QR and EY dumped even more unnecessary capacity into the market. Though their load factors are now fine (QR and EY seemed to struggle with this for a while), the ME3 make it harder for other carriers to make a premium and pay their employees good wages. I'm not saying that they are subsidized to an extent that exceeds what the US government gives carriers in terms of airport infrastructure and services, but they do get things like subsidized loans, etc. from their governments that make it possible for them to expand. Meanwhile, the US3 have been incredibly slow to expand to the Middle East, Africa and the Indian subcontinent because of the ME3 (ME4 if you count TK). Open skies sound wonderful until they hurt one of your own.



the same could be said about Delta and PANAM with their scissor hubs in Asia right ? oh wait but if it's a US company it's fine . double standards.


The USA is not Canada where EK flies only to Toronto, Emirates flies to both coast of the USA. Plus Chicago, DFW and Houston, some are flown multiple times daily with A380's. Emirates is a much bigger "threat" to the EU3 then the US3, the US3's main Atlantic, Pacific and Latin American routes are no where near Dubai. While much get written about the US3 and India, that market is flown mostly by the US3's alliance partners, besides a pair of United flights from Newark to Mumbai and Delhi no other US3 services are flown.
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 5515
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Thu Nov 28, 2019 11:43 pm

moa999 wrote:

But why isn't LH flying from Berlin now?


Waiting for BER to open? :banghead:
"True, I talk of dreams,
Which are the children of an idle brain." -Mercutio
 
J343
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:40 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 12:09 am

migair54 wrote:
CHRISBA35X wrote:
YVR, YYC, TLV, BER, MEX, BOG, HNL. Struggling to see many more places they don't already serve that they would want to.


I don´t think you´ll ever see HNL in EK network for pax operation, I think EK skycargo fly to HNL 1 or 2 times a week.. I think Montreal could get a daily EK flight also, China is also not allowing EK to add some of the major cities like Chengdu, Chongquin, Kunming, even more access to Beijing, maybe now EK could add Daxing to the network.
BOG could happen in the future via Europe or via some other destination like PTY. BOG elevation make it impossible to operates non stop to Dubai.
India right now could get few more flights or even open up the current restrictions impose in some cases, like COK, COK was an A330 destination, right now is a B777 however EK can´t sell all the seats in the plane, only the seat that match the A330 configuration because the India-UAE agreement does not allow any extra seat to be allocated in the quota. I think UAE and India are in talks to increase the seat allocation in the near future.

In the case of Canada it´s not fair for Westjet, EK has an agreement with Westjet, so blocking EK to have more slots to protect Air Canada is quite unfair competition for Westjet, they could be selling more seat with EK and getting more EK transit pax via Vancouver or Calgary. Flights, AC and EK, from YYZ to DXB are always full so business is quite good for both.

Arion640 wrote:
So Etihad and Air Arabia don’t count then?

Spicejet, an Indian Airline, is setting up a new carrier in the UAE, so add one more, Etihad and Air Arabia are also adding a new low cost airline in Abu Dhabi, FlyDubai also is there.

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
Ek should try to fly to Buffalo and bus up the passengers to Toronto. Its being done right now in Seattle to Vancouver. Which Seattle to Vancouver drive time is about double what it would take for a bus to from Buffalo to Toronto. So if Emirates was really that desperate to get more flights that are closer to Toronto. It is doable.

Don´t want to disrespect Buffalo, but Buffalo is not even close to Seattle in terms of pax and cargo.

usdcaguy wrote:
I've flown EK in economy and was largely underwhelmed. I remember asking someone for some water, and they gave me the tiniest cup. Largely insufficient for flying the number of hours their itineraries require.

Water, Sodas, juices, coffee and tea with different snacks like chocolates, chips,pretzels, multigrain bars and fruits are available during the whole flight in any of the galleys, specially the one at the back, I have never had any problems in business or economy to find any drink or some snacks during any flight with EK.

usdcaguy wrote:
the ME3 make it harder for other carriers to make a premium and pay their employees good wages


I have few friends flying for different regional airlines in the USA, and you should know how much do they make, specially FO and Cabin crew, it´s a joke of salary, and that´s not because of the ME3, but because of the US3, regional airlines work only for US3 and no competence from ME3 exist in that market, we should not blame always the ME3 for all the things not working well in the USA aviation industry.

Most of the state owned airlines get help from government, SA does all the time, SV, El Al, Aerolineas Argentinas, Aeroflot, Thai, Malaysian, Vietnam Airlines, Philippine Airlines, all the Chinese Airlines... They all fly to USA, or they used to fly.



Philippine Airlines is not a state owned airline. They get a lot of help from the Philippine government. The ME3 wanted to increase frequencies to MNL. If I'm not mistaken, both QR and EK serve MNL 17x weekly using high density Y 77Ws and EY does 14x weekly- having flown out of MNL several times T1 and T3, EK and QR are almost always overbooked. You'll often hear announcements asking passengers to change flights in exchange of something which is usually money off their next trip or a one time use business class access. CX on the other hand is the largest internation carrier serving the Philippines based on frequencies and passenger numbers. They serve MNL up to 7x daily and often use a mixture of the highest density B777, A350, A350K, B77W and A330. Again, they are almost always full- though not overbooked.

The Philippine government have stated that the only way they could get more frequency is to serve other destinations in the Philippines. QR got its extra frequency by adding CRK using the B788 and they recently started DVO- they haven't added anymore to MNL, in fact CEB would have been a wiser option. EK on the other hand added a triangular route- DXB-CEB-CRK-DXB, i am not sure if their MNL frequency increased. Philippine Airlines and Cebu Pacific try to compete against the ME3 and CX and SQ. Out of curiosty i compared prices for DXB-MNL flights and EK and CX are always the cheapest option with a far superior product than PR.

On the other hand, BA and the UK should learn from Germany by restricting EK in adding more flights to the UK.
 
Buffalomatt1027
Posts: 433
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 4:02 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:07 am

TObound wrote:
Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
TObound wrote:

There's simply no profitability in doing that. They'd have to open a new station, with zero airline feed (they have Westjet in Toronto), and get pax through US Customs (no small feat given the current administration). How many passengers would put up with all that to literally save a handful of dollars on a flight? The Canadians who go to Buffalo do that predominantly to access cheaper flights to destinations in the US. Even the passengers who want to depart from there to take international connections at major hubs are rare.



China.


I think Jet blue does ....... But hey! The busing from Seattle to Vancouver works. Why cant BUF - TOR by bus work? And its not about a cheaper flight, its EK trying to get more flights in the Toronto area due to slot restriction.


And Air France/KLM and Lufthansa run a single daily coach bus from Ottawa to Montreal so passengers can catch flights out of YUL, without a feeder partner to cover the 200km from Ottawa to YUL. However, it's inside the same country and they are seeking to supplement existing traffic. That coach bus brings a max of 50 pax. It's bonus feed.

Seeking to fill most of a 350+ seat aircraft with passengers bussed in from a city in another country, 180 km away, is a whole different ball game. Running 6+ coach buses to Toronto daily is not exactly cheap. And that would come on top of all the costs of opening a new station, as opposed to simply leveraging off existing infrastructure at YYZ. And they'd have to absorb all those costs while still offering a discount over fares out of YYZ, to compensate for the inconvenience. All that while also losing a ton of higher revenue J and F pax. A recipe for some disastrous yields. Why would they bother with that, when there are much juicier lower hanging fruit elsewhere. They aren't so desperate that a second service to Toronto is a must.


I was just mentioning other ways EK could grow and work around Canadian restrictions. It can be done ...... i am not saying it will. Its possible though.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:14 am

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
TObound wrote:
Buffalomatt1027 wrote:

I think Jet blue does ....... But hey! The busing from Seattle to Vancouver works. Why cant BUF - TOR by bus work? And its not about a cheaper flight, its EK trying to get more flights in the Toronto area due to slot restriction.


And Air France/KLM and Lufthansa run a single daily coach bus from Ottawa to Montreal so passengers can catch flights out of YUL, without a feeder partner to cover the 200km from Ottawa to YUL. However, it's inside the same country and they are seeking to supplement existing traffic. That coach bus brings a max of 50 pax. It's bonus feed.

Seeking to fill most of a 350+ seat aircraft with passengers bussed in from a city in another country, 180 km away, is a whole different ball game. Running 6+ coach buses to Toronto daily is not exactly cheap. And that would come on top of all the costs of opening a new station, as opposed to simply leveraging off existing infrastructure at YYZ. And they'd have to absorb all those costs while still offering a discount over fares out of YYZ, to compensate for the inconvenience. All that while also losing a ton of higher revenue J and F pax. A recipe for some disastrous yields. Why would they bother with that, when there are much juicier lower hanging fruit elsewhere. They aren't so desperate that a second service to Toronto is a must.


I was just mentioning other ways EK could grow and work around Canadian restrictions. It can be done ...... i am not saying it will. Its possible though.


I mean if EK is going to foot the bill for connections, why bother with BUF? Subsidized WS or B6 to connect them through BOS or JFK.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1918
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:27 am

TObound wrote:
PW100 wrote:

Why not??

A lot of Germans consumers stand to gain a lot. Especially since LH does not appear to be particulary interested into long haul from Berlin . . .

Should the German governemt protect the interests of one airline or millions of consumers?


How do you feel about letting cheap textiles made in Bangladesh and Southeast Asia flood your fashion retailers? How do you feel about the Chinese dumping steel in developed markets?

Governments have a certain responsibility to protect workers. And as recent political events are showing, the public is fed up with the idea of unfettered trade that seems to only benefit elites while driving wages to the bottom for the rest. The idea that the developing world gets to trade solely on cheap wages is increasingly intolerable to Western citizens. Especially not when there are options.


How do you feel about AC sourcing it’s”blankets” from China? Did you worry about Canadian textile companies? Or Aveos (I seem to recall something about El Salvador)? Let’s save the crocodile tears for a less incredulous crowd, shall we.

For clarity of message, theres a reason Canada didn’t restrict sales of iPhones to support the now nearly defunct BB/RIM. The rest of the low wage/elite populist hot air doesn’t count for much either. The same folk who’re up in arms about low wages would positively riot if they couldn’t afford TVs or smartphones if the government restricted imports to support local manufacturers.

Canada already provides unfettered access to DY, which allegedly has even lower employment standards than whatever you associate “third-world” with these days. And then there’s actual “third world” airlines like AI and CA that happily distort markets with their subsidies and have even worse employment policies. Perhaps I’m being harsh - they generally keep their aircraft cleaner than “first world” AC, which seems to have adopted a decidedly third world approach to cabin cleanliness in recent years. You know, the kind of consumer-unfriendly behaviour associated with captive markets.

The reality - as evident in the Competition Bureau’s scathing critique of Canadian telecoms recently - is that competition is generally a good thing. No ones talking about unfettered access, but this current charade of 5 weekly is such a joke it’s been criticized by the Governments own review of its air policy.

Stands to reason that daily flights to a handful of big Canadian cities won’t kill AC. Let’s face it - we import 250,000-300,000 immigrants a year. If all of them fly home once a year, that’s at least an additional 170 pax per day in 4 cities or 700 additional pax in one city. It’s not like demand isn’t going to keep increasing. Theres really no consumer-friendly reason for restricting service in these circumstances.

More competition has other benefits too. It might motivate AC to improve its objectively bottom-of-the-barrel Y long haul products to DL or QF or NZ or even LH or even AI. The current combination of low cabin upkeep, absurd pax to washroom ratios, and miserly catering is impressively bad. Canadians stand to benefit from just about any improvement - even the ones who still end up flying AC.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1299
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 5:03 am

J343 wrote:
On the other hand, BA and the UK should learn from Germany by restricting EK in adding more flights to the UK.

Your views are the complete opposite to UK exporters and tourism ventures leveraging off ME3 access to Glasgow, Birmingham, Newcastle, Manchester, and Gatwick, and other centres lobbying for them to add their city.
 
User avatar
Jawaiiansky66
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 12:03 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 2:50 pm

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
TObound wrote:
Buffalomatt1027 wrote:

Ek should try to fly to Buffalo and bus up the passengers to Toronto. Its being done right now in Seattle to Vancouver. Which Seattle to Vancouver drive time is about double what it would take for a bus to from Buffalo to Toronto. So if Emirates was really that desperate to get more flights that are closer to Toronto. It is doable.


There's simply no profitability in doing that. They'd have to open a new station, with zero airline feed (they have Westjet in Toronto), and get pax through US Customs (no small feat given the current administration). How many passengers would put up with all that to literally save a handful of dollars on a flight? The Canadians who go to Buffalo do that predominantly to access cheaper flights to destinations in the US. Even the passengers who want to depart from there to take international connections at major hubs are rare.

CHRISBA35X wrote:
YVR, YYC, TLV, BER, MEX, BOG, HNL. Struggling to see many more places they don't already serve that they would want to.


China.


I think Jet blue does ....... But hey! The busing from Seattle to Vancouver works. Why cant BUF - TOR by bus work? And its not about a cheaper flight, its EK trying to get more flights in the Toronto area due to slot restriction.



I live in Vancouver and the LONG bus ride to Seattle (with the aggressive US customs), plus dealing with SEA airport TSA and the line-ups...forget it. Its a lot of trouble for the glory of flying Emirates. if Turkish comes into YVR, i will just fly them and transfer that their great new Istanbul hub - or fly to YYZ and take Emirates from there.
 
Nicoeddf
Posts: 960
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:13 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 3:49 pm

vadodara wrote:
Nicoeddf wrote:
vadodara wrote:
If EK was willing to stay with secondary cities, perhaps there would have been less resistance.

BER is an extreme example where LH does not want to serve but will prevent EK from expanding.


Does not want to serve? LH flies like 10 dailies to FRA and then another 10 dailies to MUC to connect with all off the world on own metal and onwards via partners.

As EK wouldn't offer BER-HKG, but rather BER-DXB-HKG, the people of Berlin have plenty choices of one-stops to all of the world via a dozen carriers.

As someone else said: if you don't have anything to offer in negotiations, how can you expect to gain anything? Arguably, they are already plenty well of in most parts of the world...


Perhaps not BER-XYZ-HKG but BER-DXB-Entebbe that LH would not serve.

The German consumer, I am sure, would appreciate other choices.


The Customer has plenty choice, even to Entebbe via Turkish or Qatar. Not sure many more choices necessary.

And all this doesn't change the fact, that Dubai hasn't much more on offer.
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
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 5:06 pm

ElPistolero wrote:
...


Save the righteous indignation. We aren't talking about Canada here. If we were, you'd be wrong: I support some expansion for EK in Canada. My post was in response to Germany. Given the massive amount of access that EK has there, arguing that they are getting screwed over not being allowed a fifth market is pretty ridiculous.

Also, your argument is a ridiculous strawman. I never suggested what AC does is right. Their outsourcing is extremely offensive and if our politicians had any testicular fortitude they'd be called out. Protectionism at essence is a social contract that implies corporate responsibility to contribute to the home nation's social and economic structures. In Canada, the corporate elites seem to have forgotten this and enjoy protection while shipping jobs overseas. I expect a lot of such practices will face scrutiny as millennials grow their share of the electorate in Canada. I am sincere in my belief that I think a lot of politicians vastly underestimate the anger that younger generations have, against this version of crony capitalism run amok.
 
Buffalomatt1027
Posts: 433
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 4:02 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 7:39 pm

Jawaiiansky66 wrote:
Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
TObound wrote:

There's simply no profitability in doing that. They'd have to open a new station, with zero airline feed (they have Westjet in Toronto), and get pax through US Customs (no small feat given the current administration). How many passengers would put up with all that to literally save a handful of dollars on a flight? The Canadians who go to Buffalo do that predominantly to access cheaper flights to destinations in the US. Even the passengers who want to depart from there to take international connections at major hubs are rare.



China.


I think Jet blue does ....... But hey! The busing from Seattle to Vancouver works. Why cant BUF - TOR by bus work? And its not about a cheaper flight, its EK trying to get more flights in the Toronto area due to slot restriction.



I live in Vancouver and the LONG bus ride to Seattle (with the aggressive US customs), plus dealing with SEA airport TSA and the line-ups...forget it. Its a lot of trouble for the glory of flying Emirates. if Turkish comes into YVR, i will just fly them and transfer that their great new Istanbul hub - or fly to YYZ and take Emirates from there.


But people still do it ..... the point of this thread was to talk about Emirates being denied "many cities" and I provided an idea on how to work around Canadian restrictions.
 
moa999
Posts: 804
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Fri Nov 29, 2019 11:11 pm

smartplane wrote:
Glasgow, Birmingham, Newcastle, Manchester, and Gatwick, and other centres lobbying for them to add their city.

And for residents of those cities who now have one stop access too far more destinations than BA or VS provide via London.
 
vadodara
Posts: 1131
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 7:45 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sat Nov 30, 2019 4:47 am

Nicoeddf wrote:
The Customer has plenty choice, even to Entebbe via Turkish or Qatar. Not sure many more choices necessary.

And all this doesn't change the fact, that Dubai hasn't much more on offer.


This is similar to the US-UK argument circa Bermuda2 treaty. Other than LHR, UK really has nothing meaningful to offer. Yet US pursued open-free skies to the benefit of both the countries.

I imagine Dubai could make a similar case against German cars.
 
AntonioMartin
Posts: 575
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:58 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sat Nov 30, 2019 11:06 am

CHRISBA35X wrote:
AntonioMartin wrote:
CHRISBA35X wrote:
YVR, YYC, TLV, BER, MEX, BOG, HNL. Struggling to see many more places they don't already serve that they would want to.

PHX


DTW or PHL over PHX surely?

Probably...even Denver beats us to new airlines all the time..(surprised SLC doesn't...one day even Flagstaff will! :lol: )
 
Nicoeddf
Posts: 960
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:13 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sat Nov 30, 2019 11:50 am

vadodara wrote:
Nicoeddf wrote:
The Customer has plenty choice, even to Entebbe via Turkish or Qatar. Not sure many more choices necessary.

And all this doesn't change the fact, that Dubai hasn't much more on offer.


This is similar to the US-UK argument circa Bermuda2 treaty. Other than LHR, UK really has nothing meaningful to offer. Yet US pursued open-free skies to the benefit of both the countries.

I imagine Dubai could make a similar case against German cars.


Umm, what?

The UK has nothing to offer but LHR? Apart from the 40million people living not in greater London? And all their business?

German cars? Not sure a German car maker has much to loose in Dubai.

Look, I am all for fair trade opportunities. Fair trade however doesn't mean unrestricted access to everything while offering, well, a little.
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
 
Sokes
Posts: 794
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sat Nov 30, 2019 12:52 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
International free trade - in services as well as goods - is negotiated, not a right. It sounds like he has a problem with failures by his government to attain the free access he wants. :)


And in a feudal society the ruler rules because god wishes so and all land belongs to the king.
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1918
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sat Nov 30, 2019 2:17 pm

TObound wrote:

Save the righteous indignation. We aren't talking about Canada here. If we were, you'd be wrong: I support some expansion for EK in Canada. My post was in response to Germany. Given the massive amount of access that EK has there, arguing that they are getting screwed over not being allowed a fifth market is pretty ridiculous.

Also, your argument is a ridiculous strawman. I never suggested what AC does is right. Their outsourcing is extremely offensive and if our politicians had any testicular fortitude they'd be called out. Protectionism at essence is a social contract that implies corporate responsibility to contribute to the home nation's social and economic structures. In Canada, the corporate elites seem to have forgotten this and enjoy protection while shipping jobs overseas. I expect a lot of such practices will face scrutiny as millennials grow their share of the electorate in Canada. I am sincere in my belief that I think a lot of politicians vastly underestimate the anger that younger generations have, against this version of crony capitalism run amok.


Well, we agree that status quo capitalism has lost its way in many countries, Canada included, but is stifling competition the answer? Take a look at the protected sectors in Canada - banking, telecoms, even aviation. They’re all characterized by mediocrity, overpriced product and - most obviously - an emphasis on shareholder returns.

The end result is an inverted concept of income redistribution, where the people who can least afford to pay more, end up paying more than they would in similarly wealthy countries, while companies report record profits, and the “elites”, as you call them, walk away with a pretty penny from what can only be described as straight up rent seeking. I would suggest that that is a bigger problem than jobs being shipped out. It’s easy to focus on jobs lost, but what about the flip side of government intervention placing market / pricing power in the hands of suppliers? This undoubtedly has a far greater affect on the economy than a few thousand jobs in a country of 35 million.

I don’t fly EK. But I recognize that EK is, at its core, a disruptor. That’s why “crony capitalists” at AC and LH hate it. It disrupts anti-competitive JVs by giving consumers actual choice (not different coloured tails at the same prices)and better value-for-money. Now we probably disagree on what that means for younger folk, but I really haven’t seen younger generations oppose disrupters like Lyft and Uber despite the economic impact on taxi companies. I think they rather support more competition to keep prices in check and get better products.
Last edited by ElPistolero on Sat Nov 30, 2019 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1918
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sat Nov 30, 2019 2:25 pm

Nicoeddf wrote:
vadodara wrote:
Nicoeddf wrote:
The Customer has plenty choice, even to Entebbe via Turkish or Qatar. Not sure many more choices necessary.

And all this doesn't change the fact, that Dubai hasn't much more on offer.


This is similar to the US-UK argument circa Bermuda2 treaty. Other than LHR, UK really has nothing meaningful to offer. Yet US pursued open-free skies to the benefit of both the countries.

I imagine Dubai could make a similar case against German cars.


Umm, what?

The UK has nothing to offer but LHR? Apart from the 40million people living not in greater London? And all their business?

German cars? Not sure a German car maker has much to loose in Dubai.

Look, I am all for fair trade opportunities. Fair trade however doesn't mean unrestricted access to everything while offering, well, a little.


Errr, not to put too fine a point on it, but what you’re describing isn’t “fair trade”. It does, however, sound a lot like mercantilism. That was all the rage in the 17th century, until a Scotsman wrote a book about it.

It’s quite possibly the worst system for a high exporter of manufactured goods like Germany. If every country adopted that posture towards Germany, it would be lights out at a lot of factories.
 
CaliguyNYC
Posts: 1191
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:27 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sat Nov 30, 2019 3:11 pm

FatCat wrote:
I'm sorry but a Gvt that closes the slots / limits the capacity of a given Airline to protect the Country's Airlines is worse that a Gvt owning / helping / funding an Airline.
We're living in a Capitalist World - what the heck.


Last I checked the DXB govt refused to grant India slots at DXB at good times but still demanded more seats for EK to fly to india during those good times. DXB and free market, right. IF South Asia in general wasn’t such closed economies for so long, DXB would be a shadow of what it is.
 
Sokes
Posts: 794
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sat Nov 30, 2019 5:16 pm

TObound wrote:
Governments have a certain responsibility to protect workers. And as recent political events are showing, the public is fed up with the idea of unfettered trade that seems to only benefit elites while driving wages to the bottom for the rest. The idea that the developing world gets to trade solely on cheap wages is increasingly intolerable to Western citizens. Especially not when there are options.


In capitalism there is always change. I remember as an adolescent in Germany TV maker Grundig had to close down because of competition from Asia. And Germany isn't known for balance of trade deficits.
However if a country has chronic trade deficit workers' lives become really too insecure. A factory job lost in TV is no problem if another, higher paid job is created in a factory that exports something. The question is if one should close borders or if one should address trade imbalances?
Of all countries does Germany with huge trade surplus and empty job market have to protect the job of a stewardess?
Why not let some woman of a poor country who has no chance for a decent life in her own country get the opportunity?

Keynes's Bancor is I believe the right solution. It is not related to the chronic deficit spending the political left desires. Countries would have to pay a fine/ interest on debt as well as on savings. However at that time the world owed money to the US and the US tended to have trade surplus. At Bretton Woods the Americans argued that they didn't win WW2 to submit to a bunch of bankers.
Bancor = International Clearing Union was a political and not an academic project. Keynes changed his proposals several times for diplomatic reasons. However these later proposals don't make much sense any more. Make sure you read the original proposal.
For the main idea: p.22-24 "II-The provisions of the plan": http://imsreform.imf.org/reserve/pdf/keynesplan.pdf

Contradicting evidence:
I believe some former third world countries industrialized in boom/ bust cycles flushed with foreign credit.
China went a different way:
Chinese ruling classes were willing only for joint ventures, not for 100% foreign direct investment. "Give me 51% share in exchange for political connections." Industrial countries' companies agreed only because Chinese workers worked for wages extreme below their productivity. In other words: trade surplus. While unjust, who would argue that the average Chinese today isn't better off than 30 years back?
Could the Chinese have escaped poverty without balance of trade surplus messing up the economies of countries who competed at the same technological level as the Chinese?
The cake grew huge. Even though some countries' cake piece got smaller. Some groups in some countries definitely suffered.

Nevertheless: The cake doesn't have a fixed size and every country or class shouldn't need to fight for a bigger share. As Ludwig Erhard says:
The trick is to make the cake bigger, then everybody should be able to get a bigger piece. Or nearly so. If people vote for idiotic policies one can't help it.

I believe good politics can be judged by how close it comes to Erhard's ideal.

I doubt without the Dollar being the reserve currency the US could finance it's global policeman job. I believe "subsidiary alliance" would be a good substitute. The princes in India had to pay to the British Indian government for maintenance of troops in their territory. No prince could attack another, everybody was save.
Or nearly so. Churchill warned early that Britain has to spend more for defense. That wasn't popular. When the troops were finally needed because of threat of Japanese invasion Britain had shifted these troops to the African and other war theaters.
Being unprepared, Britain had to extract enormous amount of wealth from India during WW2. To prevent a rebellion of troublesome Bengalis Churchill starved 2-3 million Bengalis to death. Churchill's fault or liberal's fault? Funny that France and not India is considered a victor of WW2.
At the same time I doubt US allies today would be willing to pay for adventures of "project for the new American century" type. Everybody profits as long as liberals and "US exceptionalists" keep each other in balance.
Or do hegemons who become peaceful stop to function as they are supposed to in the sense that liberals gain too much weight?

Am I off topic or does it all relate to the question if Emirates should get more landing rights?
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
nethkt
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2001 10:27 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:57 am

moa999 wrote:
nethkt wrote:
Welcome to Thailand! Bangkok 6-7 flights daily (mostly 380), Phuket 2 daily in winter and even 3rd on some days!
It is not so free-trade world as ones wish after all.
Think the Thai Govt is happy for all the tourism $s that come from allowing other airlines to fly in.

Thai loses enough money as it is, that it can't afford to expand.


AOT and THAI are enemy. AOT would welcome any airlines that coming in with all the money and extra personal-perks they could get.
If they really co-operate together, like AOT claiming no more slots and misc (all those non-sense) restrictions, THAI would be in a much better positions.
I really believe in monopoly.
Let's just blame it on yields.
 
VTCIE
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:10 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sun Dec 01, 2019 4:25 pm

nethkt wrote:
moa999 wrote:
nethkt wrote:
Welcome to Thailand! Bangkok 6-7 flights daily (mostly 380), Phuket 2 daily in winter and even 3rd on some days!
It is not so free-trade world as ones wish after all.

Think the Thai Govt is happy for all the tourism $s that come from allowing other airlines to fly in.

Thai loses enough money as it is, that it can't afford to expand.

AOT and THAI are enemy. AOT would welcome any airlines that coming in with all the money and extra personal-perks they could get.
If they really co-operate together, like AOT claiming no more slots and misc (all those non-sense) restrictions, THAI would be in a much better positions.
I really believe in monopoly.

Talking of Thailand specifically, the royal people sitting in Bangkok seem to have been far more friendly to QR than EK, let alone EY which is a shadow of the other two. QR serves as many as five Thai airports, of which two, UTP and KBV, are not run by AOT. Like EK, QR offers multiple dailies to BKK and HKT, including the A380 to BKK. QR also serves CNX.

In general, as far as Southeast Asia is concerned, bilaterals notwithstanding, the general logic for QR is to serve as many destinations as possible because it has the A350s and 787s that EK does not. Hence CNX (TH), DAD (VN), LGK (MY), PEN (MY) and DVO (PH). It has the planes to launch BWN (Brunei) or CXR (Nha Trang, Vietnam) and similar destinations. However QR is yet to fly to TPE.

However QR has not had much luck in Indonesia, as it is confined to CGK and DPS like EK (and EY which never served DPS), and its KNO route has never got off the ground, let alone SUB, BDO and other cities.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4083
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sun Dec 01, 2019 5:19 pm

TObound wrote:
ElPistolero wrote:
...


Save the righteous indignation. We aren't talking about Canada here. If we were, you'd be wrong: I support some expansion for EK in Canada. My post was in response to Germany. Given the massive amount of access that EK has there, arguing that they are getting screwed over not being allowed a fifth market is pretty ridiculous.


Why should EK be not allowed to operate BER, when the LH is not willing to operate to Asia/Africa from Berlin? Surely that can not be in the interest of a signifcant part of the population?
While theoratically EK could move the HAM flight to BER, but then the same argument applies to HAM and where back to square one . . .
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
User avatar
DLHAM
Posts: 415
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 1:10 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:01 pm

PW100 wrote:
While theoratically EK could move the HAM flight to BER, but then the same argument applies to HAM and where back to square one . . .


This would be more than stupid. Emirates invested a lot of money in HAM, built an excellent reputation over the last 14 years and has very few competition. Also, they make good money in HAM, who knows if they would in Berlin?

I highly doubt that they would cancel any of the 4 german cities for Berlin. They just want to draw attention to the whole Berlin thing, which is not silly.
My Instagram Account: Instagram
 
migair54
Posts: 2433
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:24 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:23 pm

VTCIE wrote:
nethkt wrote:
moa999 wrote:
Think the Thai Govt is happy for all the tourism $s that come from allowing other airlines to fly in.

Thai loses enough money as it is, that it can't afford to expand.

AOT and THAI are enemy. AOT would welcome any airlines that coming in with all the money and extra personal-perks they could get.
If they really co-operate together, like AOT claiming no more slots and misc (all those non-sense) restrictions, THAI would be in a much better positions.
I really believe in monopoly.

Talking of Thailand specifically, the royal people sitting in Bangkok seem to have been far more friendly to QR than EK, let alone EY which is a shadow of the other two. QR serves as many as five Thai airports, of which two, UTP and KBV, are not run by AOT. Like EK, QR offers multiple dailies to BKK and HKT, including the A380 to BKK. QR also serves CNX.

In general, as far as Southeast Asia is concerned, bilaterals notwithstanding, the general logic for QR is to serve as many destinations as possible because it has the A350s and 787s that EK does not. Hence CNX (TH), DAD (VN), LGK (MY), PEN (MY) and DVO (PH). It has the planes to launch BWN (Brunei) or CXR (Nha Trang, Vietnam) and similar destinations. However QR is yet to fly to TPE.

However QR has not had much luck in Indonesia, as it is confined to CGK and DPS like EK (and EY which never served DPS), and its KNO route has never got off the ground, let alone SUB, BDO and other cities.

QR is making record loses in the last years, so maybe that huge expansion is not that good after all, operating to some of that places is quite expensive, and QR really need to get good consistent loads and big yields to get the business right ans some of the destinations mentioned above are quite seasonal and with not big yields, it's somehow similar to the Chinese airlines, opening routes and adding freqs but making a horrible business because they can make any money in most of them.

CaliguyNYC wrote:
Last I checked the DXB govt refused to grant India slots at DXB at good times but still demanded more seats for EK to fly to india during those good times. DXB and free market, right. IF South Asia in general wasn’t such closed economies for so long, DXB would be a shadow of what it is.

DXB is full and even the bilateral between India and UAE is also full, so I don't know if they can really open any new flight, even if they can't get DXB they could try DWC or SHJ, even EK has to swap flights around to get new flights.

Nicoeddf wrote:
The UK has nothing to offer but LHR? Apart from the 40million people living not in greater London? And all their business?


BHX, MAN, EDI, GLA are big markets, and in the near future with the new A321's and B737MAX more flights across the Atlantic are easier and less costly, so we may see some new flights between the UK and USA-Canada.
 
Planetalk
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:24 am

There seem to be a surprising number of people here who are in favour of restricting the free market and interventionist government policy to reduce consumer choice and protect domestic industry. Damn socialists!

Amazing how easily people swallow and regurgitate propaganda without having the slightest idea if it's actually true or not.

I wonder how many jobs Emirates supports in the US buying all those planes out of interest?

An awful lot of hypocrisy here.
 
Planetalk
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:31 am

chidino wrote:
Etheereal wrote:
chidino wrote:
Emirates is arguing a dead horse. History shows that people will fly direct whenever possible. Once aircraft can tie together any city pair, the need for Dubai disappears.

Wrong, there are "plenty" of people, as some posters have said here several times, they dont want to fly more than 10 hours in an aircraft at once. And its even worse if its done in a "narrowbody".


Apparently, you work in A380 marketing. Really? How is that reflected in sales? I challenge you to come up with a single route where people choose to waste time sitting in any layover city. And every time range grows on aircraft, the necessity for layover cities disappears. I'd like to think otherwise -- I like good airlines -- but the public won't pay/buy it.


Did you actually just ask to name a single route where people waste time in layover cities? You're denying the existence.of connections if there is a direct alternative? OK...Have a look at Europe to pretty much anywhere in Asia. How is it reflected in sales? Well how many widebodies have Boeing sold to Emirates?

And yes, plenty of people will take two shorter flights over a longer one. Best not to assume everyone is like you.
 
Sokes
Posts: 794
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:19 am

nethkt wrote:
moa999 wrote:

Think the Thai Govt is happy for all the tourism $s that come from allowing other airlines to fly in.

Thai loses enough money as it is, that it can't afford to expand.



AOT and THAI are enemy. AOT would welcome any airlines that coming in with all the money and extra personal-perks they could get.
If they really co-operate together, like AOT claiming no more slots and misc (all those non-sense) restrictions, THAI would be in a much better positions.
I really believe in monopoly.



My first reaction was sarcasm: so did Rockefeller.
However aviation may or may not be close to a technical monopoly, so your opinion has merit.
If a city pair has only 150 passengers per direction and day it's a technical monopoly. If it's 400 passengers per day competition is possible, but economy of scale may speak for a monopoly. If these 400 people are split on two flights business traveler will prefer them to be handled by one airline. Again a monopoly.

Next question: who should handle that monopoly? If we consider the economy of scale argument Emirates is the right candidate.
Not so important Thai cities could get superb connectivity to Europe, Afrika and US East coast. And wouldn't it be great for Thai tourism?
If Thai politicians offered Emirates a monopoly, Emirates in exchange would probably be happy to oblige itself to cheap rates.
That may also be a nice concept for Italy.

However such government decisions always have huge scope for corruption. Alternatively Thailand/ Italy could auction the monopoly rights among the gulf carriers. That also doesn't work as the winner could simply charge anything afterwards.
Maybe one could auction the monopoly rights this way: whoever offers the lowest RASM gets the monopoly right.
But if one airline which offers 50 connections offers a little lower rate than another airline which offers 80 connections?
And what to do if an airline with smaller planes has little higher prices, but is willing to connect more Thai cities to it's hub?
Turkish may argue to split the monopoly in two, as their swarm of narrowbodies offers a lot of connections Gulf carriers don't. They are also geographically better placed for US East coast flights. 9h 15min from Bangkok, Turkish may indeed be better than any Gulf carrier. But if Emirates would offer cheaper prices?

Well, you are the one who suggests monopoly. Can you expand?


VTCIE wrote:

In general, as far as Southeast Asia is concerned, bilaterals notwithstanding, the general logic for QR is to serve as many destinations as possible because it has the A350s and 787s that EK does not. Hence CNX (TH), DAD (VN), LGK (MY), PEN (MY) and DVO (PH). It has the planes to launch BWN (Brunei) or CXR (Nha Trang, Vietnam) and similar destinations. However QR is yet to fly to TPE.



Thank you. That fits to the monopoly discussion.


migair54 wrote:

QR is making record loses in the last years, so maybe that huge expansion is not that good after all, operating to some of that places is quite expensive, and QR really need to get good consistent loads and big yields to get the business right ans some of the destinations mentioned above are quite seasonal and with not big yields, it's somehow similar to the Chinese airlines, opening routes and adding freqs but making a horrible business because they can make any money in most of them.



We speak mostly of A350s, B777-300ERs and B787-8s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_Air ... rent_fleet

How comes Qatar doesn't beat Emirates? Aren't these the twins which are supposed to bury the A380?


Planetalk wrote:
There seem to be a surprising number of people here who are in favour of restricting the free market and interventionist government policy to reduce consumer choice and protect domestic industry. Damn socialists!



I have some beautiful music:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAw0Ri4FSdM
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9324
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:58 am

DLHAM wrote:
PW100 wrote:
While theoratically EK could move the HAM flight to BER, but then the same argument applies to HAM and where back to square one . . .


This would be more than stupid. Emirates invested a lot of money in HAM, built an excellent reputation over the last 14 years and has very few competition. Also, they make good money in HAM, who knows if they would in Berlin?

I highly doubt that they would cancel any of the 4 german cities for Berlin. They just want to draw attention to the whole Berlin thing, which is not silly.


All EK needs are unlimited, including 5th freedom, traffic rights in Germany. let them not only fly Germany-DXB, let them fly from Germany to wherever they wish. This would be great for the consumer.
 
User avatar
afterburner
Posts: 1425
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:38 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 7:00 am

chidino wrote:
Etheereal wrote:
chidino wrote:
Emirates is arguing a dead horse. History shows that people will fly direct whenever possible. Once aircraft can tie together any city pair, the need for Dubai disappears.

Wrong, there are "plenty" of people, as some posters have said here several times, they dont want to fly more than 10 hours in an aircraft at once. And its even worse if its done in a "narrowbody".


Apparently, you work in A380 marketing. Really? How is that reflected in sales? I challenge you to come up with a single route where people choose to waste time sitting in any layover city. And every time range grows on aircraft, the necessity for layover cities disappears. I'd like to think otherwise -- I like good airlines -- but the public won't pay/buy it.

It's not that there are specific routes that people prefer connecting rather than direct flights. You're right that people choose direct flights whenever possible. However, for many people, it's not possible for them to pay higher price of direct flights. For them the only possibility to fly is to choose the cheaper fares. This applies usually to migrant workers, backpacking travellers, and students studying abroad. For them, their money is more restricted than their time. Personally, I also prefer two shorter flights than a very long one since with my current financial situation I can only fly economy.
 
Sokes
Posts: 794
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 11:12 am

seahawk wrote:
All EK needs are unlimited, including 5th freedom, traffic rights in Germany. let them not only fly Germany-DXB, let them fly from Germany to wherever they wish. This would be great for the consumer.


I have to phone my member of parliament and tell him that next time he books a flight he has to ask me for permission first.
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2899
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 2:20 pm

So Canada and Germany won't allow EK more frequencies / destinations?
So EK won't try to get around the UAE-Canada/Germany bilaterals trying to check if "scheduled charters" between those countries and DXB are allowed under those agreements and dare to offer that kind of service to solve in a way or another EK wish to increase destinations / frequencies.
Then what about Canada and Germany finally giving up and allowing EK to increase destinations and frequencies but exclusively from DWC?
Lets see if EK craving for Berlin makes it fly DWC-SXF.
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
Etheereal
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:44 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:16 pm

Idk why people think im an Airbus representative .. and even an A380 salesman at all . Like come on .. All im saying is that there are people that wont stand for more than 10 hours in a plane at once. And having sometimes direct flights cost much more than a connection "somewhere".
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18946
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:57 pm

Etheereal wrote:
All im saying is that there are people that wont stand for more than 10 hours in a plane at once. And having sometimes direct flights cost much more than a connection "somewhere".

Premium passengers prefer the direct flight. That is why connections must discount. I get, we have a group here who likes to connect, but business people want to get home ASAO. That means the quickest flight.

Without those passengers that pay a high premium, flights are tough to make profitable. Look at EK's poor profits for years. EK is late to adapting to a good quantity of their premium passengers are now bypassing their hub.

With today's smaller and more efficient aircraft make the A380 uncompetitive in volume. Without volume to drive economics of scale, no aircraft is profitable.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1918
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:20 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Etheereal wrote:
All im saying is that there are people that wont stand for more than 10 hours in a plane at once. And having sometimes direct flights cost much more than a connection "somewhere".

Premium passengers prefer the direct flight. That is why connections must discount. I get, we have a group here who likes to connect, but business people want to get home ASAO. That means the quickest flight.

Without those passengers that pay a high premium, flights are tough to make profitable. Look at EK's poor profits for years. EK is late to adapting to a good quantity of their premium passengers are now bypassing their hub.

With today's smaller and more efficient aircraft make the A380 uncompetitive in volume. Without volume to drive economics of scale, no aircraft is profitable.

Lightsaber


That’s true, but there’s a huge quantity of non-premium pax who also presumably matter to the bottom line. I recall EK’s early appeal being based on providing an above average Y product alongside a very ordinary J product. Has that model really gotten outmoded?

ULH Y these days are a lot worse than before. That takes a lot of shine out of the convenience. India-N America Y traffic, for example, still tends to be based on price because the convenience of the non-stop is offset by some of the worst Y products out there (AI, UA, AC). Its why LH has such a strong grip on sixth freedom traffic from India.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4083
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 5:09 pm

DLHAM wrote:
PW100 wrote:
While theoratically EK could move the HAM flight to BER, but then the same argument applies to HAM and where back to square one . . .


This would be more than stupid. Emirates invested a lot of money in HAM, built an excellent reputation over the last 14 years and has very few competition. Also, they make good money in HAM, who knows if they would in Berlin?

I highly doubt that they would cancel any of the 4 german cities for Berlin. They just want to draw attention to the whole Berlin thing, which is not silly.


Fully agree. I don't get why EK should be denied from operating into BER, when LH has shown to have no interest at all in operating to Asia or Africa from BER.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18946
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Sheikh Ahmed: Emirates still denied access to 'many cities'

Mon Dec 02, 2019 7:18 pm

ElPistolero wrote:

That’s true, but there’s a huge quantity of non-premium pax who also presumably matter to the bottom line. I recall EK’s early appeal being based on providing an above average Y product alongside a very ordinary J product. Has that model really gotten outmoded?

The issue is the model depended upon a large number of J passengers who weren't the top premium who had no choice to select a direct flight.

Take MEL-PER-LHR
For PER passengers, there is a direct flight where, going from memory, they fill half the aircraft. About a quarter are MEL-PER-LHR who prefer not switching planes (at least for one leg). The remaining quarter are connecting passengers that I assume a good fraction had to double hub before.

So why EK had a model, the volume of higher paying J dropped. They competition wised up to the less premium J and ET and TK entered that game and reduced EK's yields below long term viable.

So EK must reduce costs. The 779 will help. So will the A359 and 787. It also means EK stops chasing unviable sales.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.

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