Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
PlaneHunter
Posts: 6538
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:17 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:04 am

Quoting TKV (Reply 12):
To connect non stop the majority of such city pairs, only planes of the size and range of the B788 are suitable. Today, some of them only could be connected by larger aircrafts, other, by A330 size ones, where there is not enough availability and also,. many airlines do not make such connections in order not to syphon market from the now only shortlived B744 and A346 trunk lines. All this woill change !

Changes will happen, but it's absolutely unrealistic to assume the large number of EK's destinations will get nonstops to any part of the world so that hubs become obsolete. BHX, GLA, HAM or CMN may get nonstops to BKK, SIN or BOM - but what about pairs between all these secondary destinations?

Quoting TKV (Reply 12):
And this is not only a technical issue. There are many reasons why hubs were acceptable in the past but now not more, the congestion of the big airports and the security problems being the main !!

That's just a question of infrastructure and airport management. MUC for example is an excellent hub - and it's not the O&D traffic which keeps it growing massively.

Quoting TKV (Reply 12):
And I must add: I do not think that the European and US manager of these airlines were not aware of the huge risks !! But they were, as it was not their money at risk, willing to ignore or downplay these, and so allow them to manage these gigantic projects. Under normal conditions, the investors task would have been to make the final assessment of such risks, but here the owners were immensily wealthy persons or families and even if with experience in traditional business, little savvy in such a complicated one as large airlines. Sorry for being so blunt, but basing on my own experience with oil related fortunes (or states), this is my opinion.
But of course, they surly are not happy risking to loose their money, and progressively are gaining experience, so that YES: they, the owners, could as you say slowly wake up !

There may be bad examples in the region, but I wouldn't underestimate the local rulers' own ability to see and evaluate the risks. Dubai's rulers have turned an oil-dependant spot into an oil-independant major business and tourist destination. Other rulers in other countries, some of them even richer, have not been able to turn the economy around. All that tells a lot about Dubai and its ambitions.

Quoting TKV (Reply 18):
Because a careful look on the map says the contrary. Being "between" does not suffice, it must
be without increasing substantially the distance flown if used as a hub !!

Most customers don't care if the fare is attractive, the service is good or connecting is convenient. Interestingly, EK and QR are quite popular in Germany for flights to China or South Africa - despite the fact that people have to spend some more hours in the air.

Quoting TKV (Reply 18):
No doubt if other things are equal, but not dominantly if it implies extending even more already uncomfortably long flying and lay-over times. And what tells you that they are or will be the best ??

If I can choose between a one-hour + 13-hour connection or a eight-hour + eight-hour connection, I'd choose the second in most cases. I'm sure many travelers would agree, especially those not flying Business or First.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 19):
Absolutely. They have no use for 50 VLA of any type. Perhaps 10, maybe 15, but 50?

We shouldn't forget how quickly EK spread their 40+ B773s across its network - they seat between 364 and 434 pax, similar to what certain airlines seat on their B747s. EK has been able to fill these birds, so the next step is closer than it may appear at first sight.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 19):
You could have said the same thing about New York City on September 10, 2001. The WTC was not destroyed by local people, they came from abroad. The same thing can happen to the Burj al Arab or one of the other UAE landmarks. The entire UAE is playing a dangerous game with the fundamentalists by catering to the western tourist. Not that I am opposed to it, but the fundamentalists are. They want a purified Islamic Caliphate.

The main target was the United States - you can't compare that to the UAE.

Quoting AirKorea (Reply 27):
Dubai is too hot to be a HUB.

How's it possible then for EK to operate a hub with some 100 widebodies?  eyebrow 

Quoting AirKorea (Reply 27):
EK with over 100 new palnes on order will be in trouble when some factors like oil price flucturation, political unstability in arab, and maybe plane crash occur.

Oil price fluctuations affect the whole industry, political unrest in the region is not new and a plane crash (for whatever reason) usually doesn't mean the end for a major carrier.

Quoting Star_world (Reply 29):
Overall, TKV and Poitin and several others are missing some significant points in their analysis of EK. It's easy to argue that somebody like AF could operate CDG-BKK and therefore why would anyone want to fly through DXB, but when will AF start operating long-haul flights from NCE? When will LH offer direct flights to Asia from HAM, CGN, TXL, etc? This is where EK have had some major success already - in connecting not just the largest cities, but the next tier also.

Exactly - connecting the secondary markets is what EK is doing perfectly. A new, more capable aircraft type won't touch that strength anytime soon.

Quoting AirKorea (Reply 31):
Is EK innovative, admirable, and lucrative airliner? Their cabin crew with no smile and full of compalint on face and ignorance of how to demonstrate safety guide just make me feel that EK is strong on HW, but poor on software.

I have seen many proefessional EK F/As who even smiled, and some who didn't - just like on many other carriers.

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 40):
They may be westernized in your mind but the fact that they DO fall in the middle east is a point not to be taken lightly. They may be a fine destination for business but they are not going to be a destination for western tourism.

That may be a concern for many Americans, but not for most Europeans. And please note that Dubai already IS a popular tourist destination for people around the world.

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 40):
There are too many better places to go in this world and they would be last on my list. And to connect through there will not be taken lightly by tourists from western countries. Not if there are other routes that would bypass that area.

What you say contradicts the development of EK and DXB over the past 10-20 years.

Quoting TKV (Reply 43):
Contrary to what an other poster says, the social inequalities in Dubai are most important (even acknowledged by the sheikh - as commented on this Forum a few weeks ago, who promised address them - make worse by a glaring "new rich" exhibitionism, which obviously incenses the popular class.

Can you support that with sources?

Quoting Poitin (Reply 44):
However, there are about 800 787s on order and maybe 250 350s, which are smaller and better suited for the secondary markets such as you list. While AF is not flying NCE to BKK this year, they very well may start in the next several years with either a 787 or 350.

Of course, NCE-BKK may appear on the route map in a few years. But what about NCE-KUL, NCE-KHI or NCE-TRV?

Quoting Poitin (Reply 44):
All of a sudden, EK's "market edge" will simply evaporate and people will fly over DBX much like they now fly over SNN and ANC which at one time were important refueling stops.

That will indeed happen as soon as all these secondary and markets will be connected nonstop and Dubai will be swallowed up by the ocean...  Yeah sure


PH
Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26559
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic

Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:07 am

Quoting Adicool (Reply 14):

Okay, I really don't know how the VISA regulations are for transit pax in DXB, but I know that it has become fairly inconvenient for Latin Americans to travel to Europe via USA bc of their new VISA regulation for transit.

Under a new US law, Brazilians will no longer need visas to connect in the United States, as well as Argentines, Urguayans, and nine other nationalities. However, Brazil and others must adopt machine readable passports and some other provisions before Brazilians become transfer visa-exempt.

One thing I recently noticed...Emirates is going on a global "road show" showing off their product at their new destinations. The road show will visit Emirates' new destinations, such as Houston, Sao Paulo, Toronto, Newcastle, Ahmedabad, and, for whatever reason, Miami.
a.
 
TKV
Topic Author
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:59 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:09 am

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 46):
When I started reading the thread this sentence really stood up to me, something I do not agree with especially after EK's superb expansion in the past years. But let me put my ideas to the test here:

I will repeat here, sounding like a scratched record, that I am not trying to say that EK has no market, nor that they cannot significantly grow. Only that they are exaggerating their forecasts.

The next point is, as also already stated, that extrapolating past successes under changed conditions is a receipe for failure. An example of such could be PANAM ! Many great great companies, succesful for many years, are gone just because they did so !! And the worst scenario possible happens when companies, emboldened by oast success, loose the sense of proportion, aided by easy money !!

You are assuming that EK, to compensate other disadvantages, will be succesful by being cheaper. But Dubai is a high cost area.

Factually, and your post shows so, EK was clever (or lucky, peobably both!) enough to open a new market in the right time, was very succesful, between other because regionally they had little effective competition: look at QR, recently a still small airline. And Etihad, Kuwait, Saudia at all were not examples of good companies.
Especially, consider India. In the past years, Air India was struggling, Kingfisher began to built up, Jet, the same.
Now, especially QR, Etihad and the Indians are coming in with blasting guns, not to speak of SIA. The Indians with the advantage of very low costs and highly trained personnel, not needing expatriates.

You are telling that the Far East, South Africa, US and other I included in my examples were not targeted by EK. I do not think that this a fact, but lets assume so for the sake of argument.

So, as you say, the market will be essentially the traffic from Dubai and UAE (competing with Etihad) to the Near East, Europe, India/Pakistan, southwester Australia. True, they will be able to ensure a good chunk of such, but with an extremely severe competition of all the European Airlines, Arabian and Indian airlines which past lack of effectivity cannot be extrapolated, SIA, Qantas, Virgin Australia, etc. etc.

But this, added to the hub activity between these airports, very restricted by the competition of direct flights, is by far not large enough to justify the growth forecast of EK. And you can be completely sure that the competing airlines will not allow a significant price advantage for EK. Assuming otherwise is, I am sorry to say, wishful thinking.

cordially

TKV
 
TKV
Topic Author
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:59 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:26 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 48):
Why do people still bring up Kingfisher? It is not serving anywhere but India for the time being. Stick to what you can backup with fact and try to stay away from the maybes. It makes the conversation so much more valid and to the point.

We are speaking of the next 20 years.!

Strange people these Kingfisher: they bought (from AIRBUS !!) A330, A340-500, A350-800 and A 380,
for intraindian traffic ???

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 48):
TKV, your posts are become more senseless as the day moves on. How do you see PAN AM and Emirates in the same light

Not so different (nor senseless!) !! You seem not to know PANAM's hystory. The overexpanded at the wrong time with B747s !

TKV
 
Emirates773ER
Posts: 1325
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 9:10 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:28 am

Quoting TKV (Reply 55):
TKV

What you are trying to say is that EK is taking to much of a risk for them to manage, something which could be true depending on the circumstances. Comparing EK to PAN is not logical at this point, two different airlines in two different geographical areas cannot perform in a similar manner. Ek is willing to take the risk and use their trade mark into luring potential future customers something which all big established businesses do, at this present moment there are quite a few hundred heads in EK thinking and improving EK's future, hopefully they have thought about everything you have mentioned in this thread.

I find EK's plan of increasing capacity to be based on the predictions about loyal customer base they have, I am travelling on them out of LHR coming saturday and from the hoops I had to skip to get a seat I can tell you that their customers are doing just that.
The Truth is Out There ---- Face It!!!!!
 
David_itl
Posts: 6451
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:24 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 23):
Hong Kong, New York, London, Frankfurt, Sydney, Paris, and so forth have the demand to serve Dubai with an A380. Why is it so hard for people to imagine and to see that there is a very strong demand for not only Dubai, but the product that Emirates is offering that is routing via Dubai?

not only will the "major" cities see EK A380s, it has been alleged that they are in discussions for 2 daily A380 services into MAN from 2012, which sort of implies that there will be a daily A380 service in 2 or 3 years time: June 2006 saw them average 306 passengers per flight ex MAN (70% loads based on them operating 77WHDs on all their services); the number of passengers in June 2006 rose by over 25% compared to June 2005 (when it was daily 77WHD and daily A330HD).
 
FLYGUY767
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:27 am

Quoting TKV (Reply 56):
Not so different (nor senseless!) !! You seem not to know PANAM's hystory. The overexpanded at the wrong time with B747s !

Pan Am was not the fault of the 747, it was the fault of deregulation and the fault of to weak of a domestic network.. Adding to that Pan Am 103 was the nail in the coffin..

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI
 
TKV
Topic Author
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:59 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:41 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 59):
Pan Am was not the fault of the 747, it was the fault of deregulation and the fault of to weak of a domestic network.. Adding to that Pan Am 103 was the nail in the coffin..

Not the fault of the B747 itself, but of the resulting oversupply. cobined with the factors you cite, See Wikipedia:

Quote:
The 1973 energy crisis significantly impacted Pan Am's operational costs. In addition to high fuel prices, low demand for air travel and an oversupply in the international air travel market (partly caused by federal route awards to other airlines, such as the Transpacific Route Case) reduced the number of passengers Pan Am carried, as well as its profit margins. Like other major airlines Pan Am had invested in a large fleet of new 747s with the expectation that demand for air travel would continue to rise, which was not always the case.

In certain sense, there are interesting parallels with EK and the A380, but obviously only some !!

TKV
 
gbfra
Posts: 427
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 5:50 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:45 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 50):
But they are ordered by airlines with large fleets of other planes, or big plans for fleets of other planes. So if the market goes down, do you think they will dump other planes but keep the VLAs? Hardly...

Fair enough, but the question is which airlines would be bound to suffer first from a weaker market.
Most (not all) customers of the A380 appear to be in good shape.
I could imagine that a lot of weaker airlines would be in trouble first.
The fundamental things apply as time goes by
 
TKV
Topic Author
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:59 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:53 am

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 57):
What you are trying to say is that EK is taking to much of a risk for them to manage, something which could be true depending on the circumstances. Comparing EK to PAN is not logical at this point, two different airlines....

I you read my reply 60 you will see the similitude, but of course, this is not to be overestimated.

Again: you are extrapolating todays situation to the future.
Please consider that I am not trying to introduce a negative perception of Dubai's future. Just to the contrary,
if you assume for a moment that I am right (only for a moment, beg you!!  Smile ) to consider my arguments would avoid huge losses to country and airline !!

TKV
 
AEROFAN
Posts: 1873
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 9:47 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:24 am

I too have wondered about EK'S strategy. And if they are planning to create a super hub as someone has pointed out then leave me out. Their current hub system is bad enough already. Talk about going thru a fish market with rude and indifferent people.....

Could only get me to go thru there again if the price offerred is substantially better than anyone's else.
“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.” ~Harlan Ellison~
 
astuteman
Posts: 7368
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:34 am

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 53):
Quoting Azhobo (Reply 40):
They may be westernized in your mind but the fact that they DO fall in the middle east is a point not to be taken lightly. They may be a fine destination for business but they are not going to be a destination for western tourism.

That may be a concern for many Americans, but not for most Europeans

There's always a risk of assessing the whole world by using a local measurement.......  Smile

Quoting TKV (Reply 62):
Please consider that I am not trying to introduce a negative perception of Dubai's future



Quoting TKV (Thread starter):
Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

OK, I've considered that.
What were you trying to do?

Regards
 
Emirates773ER
Posts: 1325
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 9:10 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:03 am

Quoting TKV (Reply 62):
Please consider that I am not trying to introduce a negative perception of Dubai's future. Just to the contrary,
if you assume for a moment that I am right (only for a moment, beg you!! ) to consider my arguments would avoid huge losses to country and airline !!

The problem in considering your argument are the facts you have proposed, based on them the only opinion I can come out to is negative. The suggestion I and many others made on this subject should also be considered, I ask you to look at our argument in a unbiased way and make you comments.
The Truth is Out There ---- Face It!!!!!
 
philzh
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:22 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic

Tue Aug 14, 2007 7:34 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 48):
We have proven to him time and time again what he claims as fact is nothing more than a bunch of assumptions.

 rotfl 
Who could you be speaking of, I wonder... same style, same punctuation with multiple exclamation points and question marks, bold text, obviously native german speaker, and highly sceptical of absolutely everything EK and (this is just my guess) Airbus... yes, I do have a suspicion.

The PanAm theme was brought up in one of the many other EK/Airbus-related discussions where some member(s) -- the "s" is here for PC reasons -- freely vented their somewhat paranoid and often repetitive opinions, IIRC.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 50):
If they truly think they can use a lot of big planes, then 25-30 748I and 20-25 A380 seems more reasonable.

50 748i and zero A380 would be even more reasonable, of course.
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 7:57 am

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 11):
the United States to Australia and South East Asia..

WHAT?!?!?! I don't think so!!!! You want someone from the USA to travel to South East Asia via Dubai or from the USA to Australia via Dubai?  laughing   no   laughing   no   laughing   no 
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:32 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 52):
I have to disagree with that to a certain extent. The "beauty" of EK's "centralised" hub is that it can take many secondary hubs and connect them to many cities.

Here are some examples of how DXB connects NCE to other locations in the world...

Except why would you want to stop or change planes in DXB if you can do it direct, particularly NCE to BKK. It is a 9200 km trip, which is in easy range of the 787 and 350. And that is the example where the plane would actually go fairly near to DXB. Other locations, such as all of China and Japan, Korea, and Africa, you would have to also go out of your way. Why? Makes no sense.

While it is clear that not every two cities will be paired with direct flights, the number of them will go up dramatically over the next few years as the 787 and 350 come available. That will make a stop in DXB for such pairs about as attractive as stopping at SNN for a JFK to LHR, CDG or FRA trip, which use to be needed in 707 days.

Times change, and with it old ideas go away. DXB will have to survive on DO traffic, which it will have. But the transit traffic will go away fairly fast. Just go visit SNN or ANC today. ANC is still a freighter refueling point, but there is virtually no passenger traffic. SNN gets even less freighter traffic, and mostly US military to Iraq.

As for the smaller cities that most people never heard of, you will find that there are several ways of getting there from other airports. This means that EK has to compete harder and harder for smaller and smaller markets as the city pairs increase. Not a good business model.

If the UAE heats up politically, which it can over night, nobody will use it for transit.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic

Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:02 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 68):

Except why would you want to stop or change planes in DXB if you can do it direct, particularly NCE to BKK.

.....NCE-BKK was only one example..there are tens of other secondary cities which won't have the "numbers" to make nonstop connections....

Quoting Poitin (Reply 68):
While it is clear that not every two cities will be paired with direct flights, the number of them will go up dramatically over the next few years as the 787 and 350 come available.

....while the B787 and A350 will certainly open route pairs, it won't open vast amounts of secondary cities-many will still need to go via a "centralised hub", also, many cities which right now are considered "tertiary" will be growing into secondary cities but which will still not have the "numbers" to make it into nonstop flights.....thus again, the need for a "centralised hub" such as DXB.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 68):
Just go visit SNN or ANC today. ANC is still a freighter refueling point, but there is virtually no passenger traffic. SNN gets even less freighter traffic, and mostly US military to Iraq.

....however the range difference of the planes which were able to fly over ANC and SNN were immense over the previous generation of planes. The -200LR and A345 could basically fly almost (if not more actually) the same distances as the B787's and A350's...granted not as good as cost/seat but more than capable.
"Up the Irons!"
 
GBan
Posts: 488
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 5:10 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:52 am

Quoting Philzh (Reply 66):
Who could you be speaking of, I wonder... same style, same punctuation with multiple exclamation points and question marks, bold text, obviously native german speaker, and highly sceptical of absolutely everything EK and (this is just my guess) Airbus... yes, I do have a suspicion.

Probably second life finally has come to reality...
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic

Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:26 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 69):
Except why would you want to stop or change planes in DXB if you can do it direct, particularly NCE to BKK.

.....NCE-BKK was only one example..there are tens of other secondary cities which won't have the "numbers" to make nonstop connections....

Yes, but as the city pairs develop the traffic numbers, then direct flights will happen. It is what happened in the US over the last 50 or so years. Now it is happening internationally. The big issue is the number of pax needed to fill the airplane per day is lower because the airplanes are smaller.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 69):
..while the B787 and A350 will certainly open route pairs, it won't open vast amounts of secondary cities-many will still need to go via a "centralised hub", also, many cities which right now are considered "tertiary" will be growing into secondary cities but which will still not have the "numbers" to make it into nonstop flights.....thus again, the need for a "centralised hub" such as DXB.

Yes, but as the the size of cities with direct pairs increase, which is happening with the 340, 777, 767 and 330, then the market numbers for the remaining cities grows smaller and smaller. In other words, the 747s and 380 are picking the lowest hanging fruit. The 777 and 340 the branches above. The 767 and 330, the branches above those. Now the 787 and 350 will start cleaning out branches above that with direct flights, leaving a large number of very small markets for the centralized hubs to fight over. And I might add you will see more and more "centralized hubs" One will be Moscow. Another New Delhi. And Bangkok will be one too because it is in range of all of Asia and most of Europe.

Dubai will have a lot of competition for the "centralized hub" market as you call it.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 69):
Quoting Poitin (Reply 68):
Just go visit SNN or ANC today. ANC is still a freighter refueling point, but there is virtually no passenger traffic. SNN gets even less freighter traffic, and mostly US military to Iraq.

....however the range difference of the planes which were able to fly over ANC and SNN were immense over the previous generation of planes. The -200LR and A345 could basically fly almost (if not more actually) the same distances as the B787's and A350's...granted not as good as cost/seat but more than capable.

I was talking back in the 1950s when the 707 had a range of 3500 miles with a reasonable load. Remember that the 747-100 had a range of 6,100 statue miles and that was why so many people bought it. It was during the 1960s that SNN fell off the map because the later model 707s and DC-8 had the range to go direct. ANC had a longer life because its distances were greater. But eventually the SFO NRT route became non-stop.

As for modern aircraft, the issue there is how many people they need to carry. The 350 and 787 are smaller but have great range. That opens new smaller markets to direct to direct.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
11Bravo
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:54 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:35 am

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 46):
Political risk in dubai is negligible, I have been to the most rural areas of UAE and have seen enough fundamentalist (not terrorists). None that I know of were against what the Sheikh is doing because they are in some way connected to this massive expansion, most have put and made a lot of money in the business boom that is taking place and are not willing to part with success yet.

I think you're wrong about that. The history of the Middle East since WWII is a fine example of the consequences of autocratic government. The political system in place in the UAE will affect the long-term viability of EK just as similar systems have prevented sustained economic growth elsewhere in the region.

There is no long-term political stability or economic predictability without an underlying system that provides a framework based on the Rule-of-Law rather than the Rule-of-Men. You're only as good as your current King, Sheikh, or Dictator.

At some point EK will pay the price for existing in such a system. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.
WhaleJets Rule!
 
antskip
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:17 pm

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 72):
The history of the Middle East since WWII is a fine example of the consequences of autocratic government.

There are of course many other sources of the present state of Mid-East politics, not the least being the extraordinary degree of intervention in the region by external powers such a few European countries and the USA. I am not convinced that bagging the politics of the UAE is appropriate for this forum, any more than a discussion of the American invasion of Iraq or the Israeli/European appropriation of Palestinian land would be.

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 72):
There is no long-term political stability or economic predictability without an underlying system that provides a framework based on the Rule-of-Law rather than the Rule-of-Men.

The UAE does have a Rule-of-Law.

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 72):
ou're only as good as your current King, Sheikh, or Dictator.

The USA is not immune to such problems. The present American Presidential system is part-democratic, part - based on, in European terms at least, an anachronistic idea of a King-like central figure deciding policy largely on their own initiative, and above common law (however they are appointed).

My feeling is to respect other countries enough to allow those who actually live there to improve their political systems from within - whether it be the UAE, the USA or Australia.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:54 pm

Quoting Poitin (Reply 71):

Yes, but as the city pairs develop the traffic numbers, then direct flights will happen. It is what happened in the US over the last 50 or so years. Now it is happening internationally. The big issue is the number of pax needed to fill the airplane per day is lower because the airplanes are smaller.

...that might be true, but when does "then" occur? 3 years from now? 15 years from now? We don't know..right now, EK has assessed the situation to the best of its capabilities and has decided this is the best course of action. What is the "critical" amount of numbers which will warrant a nonstop NCE-BKK flight? A few hundred probably.

Right now, from the article it mentioned above which I referenced, bookings are going ahead of plan. Seems like this has been the norm lately with EK.

Again, as an example, as recently as summer of 2004, EK started their nonstop JFK-DXB-JFK route with their A345. When I flew on the route (which started 6 weeks prior), the plane was 1/3-1/2 filled. Within 2 1/2 years, they send
2x10-accross B773ER's and 1 A345 via HAM...who would have thought? NCL, BHX as well as other routes are doing well.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 71):
In other words, the 747s and 380 are picking the lowest hanging fruit.

.....how many "low hanging fruits" are there? Clark, Flanagan and Makhtoum aren't dumb, especially Clark..I'm sure they have made a bloody 'ell of a deal with both Boeing and Airbus....if the market doesn't pan out, I wouldn't be surprised if they have some very convenient "walk-away" plans in their contracts....

Quoting Poitin (Reply 71):

As for modern aircraft, the issue there is how many people they need to carry. The 350 and 787 are smaller but have great range. That opens new smaller markets to direct to direct.

....I've always stated the day we see and efficient B737 or A320 type plane which can economically carry 130 pax from say IND-LHR or NCE-NRT, then look out..as that will certainly put an end to the rapid expansion...

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 72):
It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.

......we don't know "when" is... Wink
"Up the Irons!"
 
philzh
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:22 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic

Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:34 pm

Quoting Poitin (Reply 71):
Yes, but as the city pairs develop the traffic numbers, then direct flights will happen.

That's certainly what Airbus and Boeing are hoping for, because there will be need for huge numbers of aircraft to connect all those primary and secondary cities directly with each other, compared with where one can fly to via (for example) DXB. It'll be interesting to watch it unfold, see who will fly from where, and also see where that leaves EK, SQ and the likes.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 71):
In other words, the 747s and 380 are picking the lowest hanging fruit. The 777 and 340 the branches above. The 767 and 330, the branches above those. Now the 787 and 350 will start cleaning out branches above that with direct flights

Aren't the 787 and 350 rather large to be picking those fruits? They are not that much smaller than the really big toys (747/8 and 380). I always thought that the city-to-city direct flight market will or would need smaller but long-range aircraft; I'm doubting that city pairs like ZRH to PER or CHC will be able to fill a 787, let alone a 350.
 
ekgold
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:30 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:56 pm

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 40):
They may be westernized in your mind but the fact that they DO fall in the middle east is a point not to be taken lightly. They may be a fine destination for business but they are not going to be a destination for western tourism. There are too many better places to go in this world and they would be last on my list. And to connect through there will not be taken lightly by tourists from western countries. Not if there are other routes that would bypass that area.

i have lived in Dubai for the past 7 years and the middle east for 8 years so can certainly attest to:

The liberalisation (i dont like the term westernisation) of the UAE by a race of people and especially the leaders, that are a very tolerant and friendly towards all visitors.

It becoming a fine destination for Business given the economic infrastructure that the Government is supporting. Hotel bookings for our business guests are becoming frustratingly difficult and will continue so, notwithstanding the thousands of hotel rooms coming on line over the next few years.

It becoming a fine destination for western tourism given the quality and standards of the hotels and tourist amenities. Even in the mid 40 deg c temps here at the moment, the hotel pools are flooded with pale skin tourists of western origin.

There are definitely other places to go in this world, however, until you have visited the UAE, you have no basis for comment about it being the last place on your list.

My regular experience of departing from and arriving into Dubai airport amongst 000's of people per day defintely shows that it is a popular hub/transit stop.
 
AirNZ
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:03 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic

Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:06 pm

Quoting SkyyMaster (Reply 2):
Finally! Some other a.netter's who agree with what I have been stating for months. I really do believe EK (and other ambitious Persian Gulf based carriers) are going to wind up with a huge glut of capacity on their hands one day. With all the talk about versions of the 787 and 350 that will eventually do 10,000 miles nonstop, the need for a stop over at a hub in the region would be seriously degraded.

But the fact that you have been stating it for months still doesn't give it foolproof validity. Why do you talk so much of a NEED for a stopover? Yes, of course there are tech stops on the Europe-Aus/NZ route for obvious reasons but you seem to blatantly ignore the fact that many people also WANT to stop over for a multitude of reasons, including the desire for a two-centre type holiday. Just because the A350 or B787 can fly further does not negate any any such demand.

Quoting SkyyMaster (Reply 2):
I'll also point out again, political unrest could easily negate the desire of pax to want to fly to or transfer at airports in this region. I think they have way too many planes on order.

What political unrest in Dubai would that be that you seem very keen to point out, or are you obviously trying to confuse this with the Middle East in general to voice another theoretical point? Over many years I haven't yet seen any decline in desire from pax to to either fly to, or transfer in, any airport in the Emirates so what are you basing this 'decision' on?
With respect, you may think what you wish but happily EK seem to entirely disagree with you.
Flown:F27/TU134/Viscount/Trident/BAC111/727/737/747/757/767/777/300/310/320/321/330/340/DC9/DC10/Dash8/Shorts330/BAe146
 
AirNZ
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:03 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:09 pm

Quoting SkyyMaster (Reply 2):
If I can theoretically fly from Heathrow to Sydney nonstop on say BA or QF, why would I choose a layover/change of planes in Dubai that would add a couple of extra hours to my trip time? People will argue 20+ hours is too long for a nonstop, etc. That's b.s. Same with other arguments that have been presented about DXB being the destination of the future

Why are you consistently dealing in theory as if it were fact.....you can't fly from LHR-SYD non-stop so, on that premise, you can also make any theoretical flight you like? Even if you could your choice is entirely your own so how would I, or anyone else, know what you'd do or indeed why would it matter? Why exactly is it BS..............just because you say so? If you want to spend 20+ hours in an aircraft that's entirely up to yourself, and feel entirely free to do so. I personally have no intention of ever doing so, nor do a great many people, so kindly don't claim something is BS just because it's not your preference! Why also is Dubai as a destination of the future also BS just because you say so? You seem to have a perchant for dictating to others what they should or shouldn't do based entirely on your own preferences. I seriously doubt you've ever visited Dubai, and might I suggest you perhaps should before 'deciding' such nonsense.
Flown:F27/TU134/Viscount/Trident/BAC111/727/737/747/757/767/777/300/310/320/321/330/340/DC9/DC10/Dash8/Shorts330/BAe146
 
AirNZ
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:03 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:30 pm

Quoting TKV (Reply 18):
this being my point !!

With respect, I've yet to ascertain what actually you're talking about, much less what point you are trying to make!

Quoting TKV (Reply 18):
I have supported in detail why IMO they are not the perfect location you claim, but of course, I also said that this is not always so.
You say the contrary, without supporting it with any rebuttal.



Quoting TKV (Reply 18):
Because a careful look on the map says the contrary. Being "between" does not suffice, it must
be without increasing substantially the distance flown if used as a hub !!
And also, because these affirmation is not supported by other facts.

On the contrary, this is your opinion and which you seem to put forward as irrefutable fact.....am I missing here that the Emirate of Dubai and EK obviously didn't consult you before deciding that they actually were perfectly placed to carry out their own strategy?

Quoting TKV (Reply 18):
All info you need to assess a market from an pax point of view you find on Internet. together with a long marketing experience.

Are you serious or joking? Are you seriously basing every argument or point you're making entirely on internet usage, and which is the image I'm getting? If you are actually serious then Oh dear! how did airlines evolve before the internet and, since then, they must have vast teams just combing the internet to decide route strategies.

Quoting TKV (Reply 18):
MO, Boeing in this case should have not accepted such huge order, unless ironclad guarantees of complettion were available, as if there were doubts (again iIMO) that EK could use them all, the danger of a large cancellation could proof very disturbing for the manufacturer.

Yep, finally decided.......you definitely can't be serious!
Flown:F27/TU134/Viscount/Trident/BAC111/727/737/747/757/767/777/300/310/320/321/330/340/DC9/DC10/Dash8/Shorts330/BAe146
 
User avatar
Ncfc99
Posts: 786
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:42 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Wed Aug 15, 2007 7:58 am

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 6):
Most city pairs connected by EK could be flown nonstop even today - though, people connect through DXB. I say it again: It's an almost ridiculous belief on a.net that secondary gateways will see a boost of nonstops just because a new model enters the market.

 checkmark   checkmark 

Ok. I will use MAN and LHR as my examples, just because they are in my country. In the future when EK have 50 A380 in service I will assume all flights to MAN and LHR will be using A380s. Thats 2 flights to MAN (about 1200-1300 seats) 5 flights to LHR (3000-3500 seats). Once these people get to DXB they will then either stay in Dubai for a holiday or carry on with their journey. I will assume all of them are connecting to other flights. There are lots of destinations beyond DXB that these pax will be going to, they are not all going to the same place. That means from the pax from the MAN planes, average 20-30 from each plane will be going to each destination(probably less on average), the same from the LHR planes. So total per day 40-60 per day from MAN per destination and 100-150 per day from LHR to each destination.
I have writen the above section to try to high light why the B787 and A350 will NOT destroy hub operations. Using the 788, at a seat capacity of 210-250 point to point will not work for most destinations. From MAN you can roughly assume that there are between 100-150 pax per day per long haul destination(this figure includes any other long haul carriers serving the same destinations as EK via their own hub) To offer non-stop point to point service to alot of destinations from LHR the frequency will have to drop to maintain good load factors. And from MAN it will have to drop to about 1-2 per week. The only way around this problem is to fly via a hub. Weather the hub that you choose to use is LHR, DXB, AMS, FRA, CDG is up to the customer but will be influenced by price, on board product etc. The 787 and 350 will open up a whole new wave of point to point services, but to say ut will kill hubs is just ridiculous. This is why i beleive Ek and their 50 a380 are very safe and is likely just the start of the plan. I would prefer to fly point to point on as many flights that I will take as possible, but it will be governed by price, who I am flying with(my children), where I am going, how much time I have to get there. A few extra hours making a stop at a hub some where along the way is my prefered option when I am flying 14 hours plus.
All of the above is my opinion and I have based it on my limited knowledge of how I see the business. Please do not bash me but try to guide me in the right direction if I am way off. I am only a intested enthusiast afterall.

Quoting TKV (Reply 12):
California obviously is more attractive as a pass-by vacation place as Dubai !!

That is your opinion. I can get a direct flight to DXB from my local airport. o get to California I have to connect through a hub somewhere. HHMMMMMMMMMMM, There is a point in there somwhere.

Quoting Wsp (Reply 16):
gigantic worldwide point-to-point wet dream that I keep reading about on a.net?

 bouncy   Big grin  Big grin

Quoting TKV (Reply 18):
IMO, Boeing in this case should have not accepted such huge order

Oh dear. Press release by boeing, We will not be accepting any orders for more than 10 frames from now on, just incase.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 44):
Wrong. We are not missing the "significant point" at all. At this time, about the only way to do a really long distance Long Haul is on a 747 or maybe a 777 or 340. There aren't that many around. However, there are about 800 787s on order and maybe 250 350s, which are smaller and better suited for the secondary markets such as you list. While AF is not flying NCE to BKK this year, they very well may start in the next several years with either a 787 or 350.

But they are still to big for a secondary market to alot of destinations IMHO.
 
azhobo
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:52 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:47 am

Quoting EKGOLD (Reply 76):
There are definitely other places to go in this world, however, until you have visited the UAE, you have no basis for comment about it being the last place on your list.

OK near bottom of the list. Iran and North Korea are at the bottom.

So why do you go to UAE? What is there that is so distinctive to want to draw tourists there that you cant find any where else? You are right, I have never been there, but I dont need to go there to have a basis for placing them near the bottom of my list. Remember perception is everything for the unenlightened.

I dont need incessant heat. I live in Arizona. And my understanding it is more miserable there compared to our hottest summers. But I could be thinking of Saudi.

Cool hotels? You can find them anywhere. If i want glitter and gold, i can go to Vegas.

Culture? Egypt, Israel, and Iraq would be more interesting then UAE on this aspect in the middle east. But would not feel safe touring there either.

Please enlighten me, some say i have an open mind?

HOBO
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic

Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:35 pm

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 81):
OK near bottom of the list. Iran and North Korea are at the bottom.

So why do you go to UAE? What is there that is so distinctive to want to draw tourists there that you cant find any where else? You are right, I have never been there, but I dont need to go there to have a basis for placing them near the bottom of my list. Remember perception is everything for the unenlightened.

I dont need incessant heat. I live in Arizona. And my understanding it is more miserable there compared to our hottest summers. But I could be thinking of Saudi.

Cool hotels? You can find them anywhere. If i want glitter and gold, i can go to Vegas.

Culture? Egypt, Israel, and Iraq would be more interesting then UAE on this aspect in the middle east. But would not feel safe touring there either.

Please enlighten me, some say i have an open mind?

Dubai is a tourist hot-spot now. Your question whether or not Dubai will develop into a tourist destination misses the point.

Dubai has been overflowing with Russian tourists already ten years ago, and the Western Europeans have caught up in the meantime. They have lovely sandy beaches at warm temperatures in the winter (main) season combined with an extremely low crime rate.
 
philzh
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:22 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic

Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:50 pm

Quoting Wsp (Reply 83):
Dubai has been overflowing with Russian tourists already ten years ago, and the Western Europeans have caught up in the meantime. They have lovely sandy beaches at warm temperatures in the winter (main) season combined with an extremely low crime rate.

Plus it's a quite out-of-this-world experience to see the incredible building going on there. The sheer scale of things boggles the mind.
I'm very much looking forward to go to Dubai again -- it felt like being on Mars (especially compared to biking on the NZ west coast... about as different an experience as there can be). And I'll certainly fly EK again: great company, very nice product IMHO.

Oh, and on the theads subject (from the Emirates may order 747-8 thread):

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 185):
Emirates' fleet reached 102 at the end of March, including nine freighters, while its current order book for 107 new aircraft is worth approximately $30 billion.

http://archive.gulfnews.com/business/Aviation/10146643.html


I for one hope they do add 10 748 and 100 A350XWB to this at Dubai Airshow in November  eyepopping 
 
ekgold
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:30 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:27 pm

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 81):
OK near bottom of the list. Iran and North Korea are at the bottom.

So why do you go to UAE? What is there that is so distinctive to want to draw tourists there that you cant find any where else? You are right, I have never been there, but I dont need to go there to have a basis for placing them near the bottom of my list. Remember perception is everything for the unenlightened.

I dont need incessant heat. I live in Arizona. And my understanding it is more miserable there compared to our hottest summers. But I could be thinking of Saudi.

Cool hotels? You can find them anywhere. If i want glitter and gold, i can go to Vegas.

Culture? Egypt, Israel, and Iraq would be more interesting then UAE on this aspect in the middle east. But would not feel safe touring there either.

Please enlighten me, some say i have an open mind?

HOBO

You seem to have formed your opinion (perception) from the confines of the cozy home in the US and from the no doubt cutting edge news coverage of Fox News in this part of the world (dont flame me, I get the Fox News service here in Dubai, so have a basis for my opinion on and lack of respect for it..)

You are only thinking of the US when you think of why tourists are flocking here. The market for Tourists here is not US citizens. It is a mixture of European (East and West), Middle Eastern, Africa and Asia. Europeans are especially attracted by the almost guaranteed sunshine for their holiday, which makes a change for most of their lives in most of Europe, especially Britain. On top of that they get affordable luxury (relatively speaking) and incredible service levels at the higher end of the market.

The heat is not as bad as you are led to believe.. the months of July and August are really oppressive when combined with the humidity. June and September are warm but not oppressive. The rest of the year is almost idyllic if you like your days filled with sunshine with moderate temperatures. Houses, hotels and shopping malls are built for the heat. I only run the Aircon in the house for the few months when the heat is at its highest, otherwise its almost perfect temps.

I am sure there are plenty of "cool hotels" around the world, and i have seen my fair share of cities and hotels around the world. Vegas does have some great places. The hotels and amenities in Dubai rate highly in my experience around the world.

Yes, you are right that culture is not high on the attraction list here. But people that come to Dubai dont come here for it. They come for the beach holiday from the areas i discussed above. You do not see dubai promoting culture as its backbone. They portray a luxurious and modern experience by crystal blue waters or picturesque golden sand dunes. However, there is an interesting history of Dubai with its pearling and trading history going back many years. The Dubai Museum is in fact a very interesting place to visit and wander through.

I understand that your perception gained from other sources does not allow you to feel safe touring in the region. I had a perception about NY City growing up and watching tv shows, news bulletins etc. Especially the Subway which was portrayed as simply an entry point to a cemetary. My first trip to NYC had me wary but after visiting it, especially Manhattan, it is one of my favourite destinations on eartht. And riding the Subway is a great experience which i now do regulalry when in NYC.

Funny how perceptions and reality can be 2 different things. That could be said for a lot of the traffic posted on this forum.....
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5050
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Wed Aug 15, 2007 6:23 pm

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 81):
Please enlighten me

The question here is not really whether you would go there, it's whether lots of tourists would go there. And the simple fact is, Western tourists are already vacationing in Dubai, and they're doing it in great, and rapidly increasing numbers.

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 40):
they are not going to be a destination for western tourism.

You're right. They aren't 'going to be' one.

They already are.
 
Paddy
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:03 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Wed Aug 15, 2007 10:02 pm

Ptcflyer hit the nail on the head with his post. EK, just like the UAE, is banking on the growth of Dubai as a destination. I think their superhub concept is only part of it. I don't know of any succesful hubs that don't have healthy O&D to back them up. With their current growth plans, EK simply has to be betting on massive O&D growth in the near future. Either way, when (not if) the UAE's oil economy goes to shite some day, there better be a robust alternative economy in place. From what I've read, EK is not a sustainable business unless the UAE is a sustainable business. The whole place looks like an insane speculation bubble to me, but only time will tell. It's fascinating though, I'd certainly love to go check it out.
 
FLYGUY767
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:26 pm

RE: Are EK's Expansion Plans (and Other) Realistic?

Thu Aug 16, 2007 7:33 am

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 81):
So why do you go to UAE? What is there that is so distinctive to want to draw tourists there that you cant find any where else? You are right, I have never been there, but I dont need to go there to have a basis for placing them near the bottom of my list. Remember perception is everything for the unenlightened

There are plenty of places to go and visit in the UAE, I would not try to draw the UAE as a place to go with no sights or purpose. That is totally lost in the reality that from your statement you have not realized. Your list is of little to use to anyone on this forum with the exception of yourself who makes claims that there is nothing to see in the UAE, the heat is so much worse in Dubai, and your insistence that "cool" hotels and glitter and gold are best left to Las Vegas. Since as you state above you are unenlightened, spend less time on Airliners.net and do some research before you post things that make yourself look like a fool.

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 81):
I dont need incessant heat. I live in Arizona. And my understanding it is more miserable there compared to our hottest summers. But I could be thinking of Saudi.

The heat in Arizona and the heat in Dubai are different kinds of heat. Trust me I am here in the heat of Dubai on summer holiday and I have lived in Scottsdale, I currently call New York City home. I understand both, I would take Dubai any day. The scenery is so much more epic here in Dubai than Phoenix, or Arizona in general. However it is a matter of perception, that I would argue your statements lack knowledge of the meaning.

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 81):
Cool hotels? You can find them anywhere. If i want glitter and gold, i can go to Vegas.

Comparing the Venetian to Burj will get you nowhere. There is more "real" money in Dubai than in Las Vegas. Las Vegas, is facing a boom much as Dubai is facing a boom. However the boom in Dubai is not faced on one sector as the boom in Las Vegas is based upon. Dubai is financial, tourist, media, industry. Las Vegas can only claim gambling, tourism, and very loosely industry.

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 81):
Culture? Egypt, Israel, and Iraq would be more interesting then UAE on this aspect in the middle east. But would not feel safe touring there either.

Comments like this are supposed to add something to the forum? The above is nothing more than personal opinion and is not fact based..

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 81):
Please enlighten me, some say i have an open mind?

Your posts are solid proof you do not..

-JD
Summer Trip 2007: DEN HAAG>DUBAI>LONDON>VERONA>COSTA SMERALDA>CAPRI

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