Dutch Govt Blocks ME3 Expansion At AMS

northwestEWR · Thu May 21, 2015 11:59 pm

I love the Dutch. BRAVO!

KLM and Schiphol are among the largest employers in the Netherlands. By protecting KLM and Schiphol, the Dutch are protecting their country's jobs. The rest of the EU and the US need to follow.

strfyr51 · Fri May 22, 2015 12:13 am

I think since the information came from the EU, They were waiting until the "reactionary" Americans. Got their "Hackles" up
and started a "fuss" (which they did) and Now they're reacting to put the ME3 in their "Place" (something they didn't have the Stones to do on their own) This is going to get Uglier than it already has before it's over. But in the end? There WILL be Peace.

Gasman · Fri May 22, 2015 12:20 am

Quoting Richard28 (Reply 12):
Total rubbish.

KLM do not own those passengers, they have to compete for their custom - since when does an airline ever own its customers??

The issue is "unfair subsidies", and therefore, not a level playing field.

As a big KLM fan myself, I believe they can easily compete with the ME3 on their own merit; - but competition needs to be fair.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 8):
Ah, a single minister wants something to happen. Good luck.

Oh, it'll happen. Politically this is a golden egg.

YYZAMS · Fri May 22, 2015 12:57 am

Quoting btblue (Reply 10):
Well done. If only more countries had the brass to say no.

Doesn't Canada also restrict the ME3 from growth/expansion?

I also think that some people on here are only looking at passenger flights the ME3 have to AMS and not counting the cargo flights which probably a good reason for the restriction.

hz747300 · Fri May 22, 2015 1:13 am

KLM probably should flyer smaller equipment to secondary cities in India, and then launch an Australia tag onto one of its routes to Asia. Otherwise, the argument exists that the passengers EK/EY/QR are flying are not well served.

I'm all for freedom, but I think it has to have its limits. The biggest one for me was the time when SQ wanted the rights to fly from Australia to the US. That makes no sense, and those rights should not be granted. The ME3 flying to their hub and connecting passengers onward, that's a different story.

But what do I know... I'm flying EK tonight from HKG to BKK for the long weekend.

TeamintheSky · Fri May 22, 2015 1:14 am

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 43):
Airlines for instance have, regulated by bilaterals, the freedom not to pay taxes on revenues earned in foreign countries.

Very nice points, PanHAM. Most don't realize that governments not only offered Open Skies to the ME3, but also offer some form of reciprocal exemption to the carriers, exempting them from income taxation on international traffic (if ownership qualifies and several other regulations).

Again, be as mad as you want about the ME3, at the end of the day, just like tax avoidance, the government completely permits it.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 43):
The EU will regulate that very soon and the US is OK with having the EU taking that frreedom away because they haven't seen hardly a penny either because the dutch and Irish companies are owned offshore.

A minor point, but while the EU is aggressively targeting these type structures, the OECD's BEPS project will likely result in the largest changes to bi-lateral tax treaties that permit this type of structuring currently.

ElanusNotatus · Fri May 22, 2015 1:17 am

Quoting golfradio (Reply 47):
, let them set up local subsidiaries like Virgin and JetStar.

And then we find even that isn't acceptable because of ownership restrictions. The simple fact is that when bilaterals were originally negotiated they benefitted Euro carriers because no-one foresaw the growth of Gulf aviation. It was easy to talk of equal traffic rights when one party had no airline to speak of. No complaints then, but now the shoe is on the other foot....

lijnden · Fri May 22, 2015 1:30 am

AMS is also a major Delta hub. Restricting the ME3 is a strategic win for them.

northwestEWR · Fri May 22, 2015 1:43 am

Quoting lijnden (Reply 57):
AMS is also a major Delta hub. Restricting the ME3 is a strategic win for them.

This is not just KLM's doing. I promise you Delta is/was involved too.

billreid · Fri May 22, 2015 3:35 am

Quoting enilria (Reply 16):
Also, Netherlands geography as a hub within Europe is questionable since it is not centrally located. It is better positioned as an international hub, just like DXB.

Not expected from a Canadian!
The most densely populated area in Europe BAR NONE!
Within 350 miles live 160 million residents. Within 160 miles live 36 million people.
Not sure how you come up with not in the middle of Europe. AMS has a larger population catchment than YYZ, YUL, YVR, YYC ........... the entire Canada!
Holland coverage 17 million!
Belgium overlap 11 million
Ruhr overlap 14 million

Yes its not the geographic centre, that would be Prague. But it is absolutely the population centre!!!

golfradio · Fri May 22, 2015 4:36 am

Quoting ElanusNotatus (Reply 56):
And then we find even that isn't acceptable because of ownership

No one's going to stop them from taking 49% in a domestic airline. Like EY and Air Berlin, invest in a local airline, hire locals, hire local companies for services, pay taxes and then fly double hourly A380s to Timbuktu from every city. No one's going to call foul. Free market at it's best.

Quoting ElanusNotatus (Reply 56):
The simple fact is that when bilaterals were originally negotiated they benefitted Euro carriers because no-one foresaw the growth of Gulf aviation. It was easy to talk of equal traffic rights when one party had no airline to speak of. No complaints then, but now the shoe is on the other foot....

Yet in those decades, there never was a time when those airlines caused the local airlines to fail. Take India for instance, where since 2004, EK has bribed it's way to untenable rights at the detriment of Indian airlines. Open skies work , when both sides play fair; North America and Europe being a case in point. But it's never going to work with the rapacious ME3 airlines.

BestWestern · Fri May 22, 2015 4:48 am

Quoting golfradio (Reply 60):

Wow. Proof of the bribery claims please.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 50):

Freedom of transport creates jobs. Look at Ryanair which has transformed the European aviation market and linked regional backwaters to the global economic centres in the way nobody else has done.

northwestEWR · Fri May 22, 2015 4:52 am

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 61):
Freedom of transport creates jobs. Look at Ryanair which has transformed the European aviation market and linked regional backwaters to the global economic centres in the way nobody else has done.

The ME3 taking KLM's market share will not create Dutch jobs and that's what's important to the Dutch politicians and their people.

BestWestern · Fri May 22, 2015 4:58 am

And KLM taking market share from the UK is fine?

EK growing in Amsterdam will create jobs in the greater economy in the same way that KL operating to Xiamen city creates jobs in Xiamen.

Increased access = Increased trade = increased wealth = more jobs.

northwestEWR · Fri May 22, 2015 5:07 am

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 63):
EK growing in Amsterdam will create jobs in the greater economy in the same way that KL operating to Xiamen city creates jobs in Xiamen.

That doesn't help the folks who'd lose their job if KLM had to downsize due to increased ME3 competition.

People in Amsterdam care about their own jobs and jobs in the Netherlands, not jobs in Xiamen or Dubai.

Semaex · Fri May 22, 2015 7:53 am

Quoting golfradio (Reply 47):
ME3 want more access, let them set up local subsidiaries like Virgin and JetStar.

Darwin, Alitalia, Air Berlin.... it's happening! Don't be surpised one day...

Quoting billreid (Reply 59):
Quoting enilria (Reply 16):Also, Netherlands geography as a hub within Europe is questionable since it is not centrally located. It is better positioned as an international hub, just like DXB.
Within 350 miles live 160 million residents. Within 160 miles live 36 million people.

Would you really take a flight from MXP to WAW via AMS? From BCN to VIE? From LHR to HEL?
There are hubs, and then there are hubs. Just my opinion.

Ncfc99 · Fri May 22, 2015 9:00 am

Quoting dubaiamman243 (Thread starter):
“I want, together with my European colleagues, to take a tougher approach to the rise of airlines in the Middle East if there is talk of unfair competition

Maybe she should look into the talk before she takes a tougher stance.

Quoting polot (Reply 3):
stealing traffic that use to be flown by KL.

No airline 'owns' traffic.

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 6):
More than enough for them to serve AMS.

And you base that statement on?????

Quoting btblue (Reply 10):
subsidised fuel? No?

Can you show where you got this information from?

Quoting Thomaas (Reply 35):
Most of KL's connecting traffic actually ends in Europe, which is a single market as far as I know. Much different than EK that has a very small local market.

In 2012, 57m people used DXB with about 55% O&D. AMS in 2013 had 52m people use it with about the same 55%O&D. The DXB local market is bigger than AMS and growing faster.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/04/daily-chart-0

Also, in the IAG paper discussed on here recently, they state that EK generates traffic. It may take some pax from KLM but not all of EK's pax would have flown KLM, or even flown at all, if EK where not there.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 62):
The ME3 taking KLM's market share will not create Dutch jobs and that's what's important to the Dutch politicians and their people.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 64):
That doesn't help the folks who'd lose their job if KLM had to downsize due to increased ME3 competition.

People in Amsterdam care about their own jobs and jobs in the Netherlands, not jobs in Xiamen or Dubai.

Ecconomic growth stimulated by more airlines services will generate growth of the job market. Some jobs will go but will be replaced by others, net job numbers will rise.

jeffreyklm · Fri May 22, 2015 10:02 am

Quoting lhrlocal (Reply 17):
There's another thread on here at the moment stating how well the Dubai route is doing for AF/KL

AF/KL: Dubai Is "Working Pretty Well" (?) (by enilria May 18 2015 in Civil Aviation)

LHRlocal

Please remind that this is not the problem for KLM. EK does not offer competitive fares on the AMS-DXB route comapared to KL/AF. And also the Dutch market is relatively small (In terms of passenger numbers for KLM).

Also fares of KLM when originating at AMS are sky-high for the ICA network. Therefore it is always cheaper to avoid KLM (If you are ofcourse willing to take a connection flight).

ME3 are cutting KLM off short at the root of the network by serving the airports in Europe that are spokes of KLM (MAN, LHR, OSL, ARN, CPH, HAM etc.).

So rather than ''stealing'' passengers at AMS, they're stealing passengers from other airports that are spokes of KLM.

Therefore the blocking of ME3 at AMS does not have that much influence on the problem of KLM. It's at the roots of the network where the real issues are.

mariner · Fri May 22, 2015 10:07 am

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 62):
The ME3 taking KLM's market share will not create Dutch jobs and that's what's important to the Dutch politicians and their people.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 64):
That doesn't help the folks who'd lose their job if KLM had to downsize due to increased ME3 competition.

People in Amsterdam care about their own jobs and jobs in the Netherlands, not jobs in Xiamen or Dubai.

Then why can't the "junior minister" be honest and call this move what it is. It isn't about subsidies or competition (I don't know what "unfair" competition is).

It is a jobs protection program.

mariner

par13del · Fri May 22, 2015 10:20 am

Quoting golfradio (Reply 60):
Yet in those decades, there never was a time when those airlines caused the local airlines to fail.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 61):
Wow. Proof of the bribery claims please.

During those times, airlines were government created, owned and operated, so competition from other country airlines was the norm and losses written off by the tax payor.
Now under privatization, other methods have to be found to subsidize one's local industry, unfortunately, a number of nations are small and their political and government structures are not as complicated thus their attempts to continue subsidies is too transparent.

HALtheAI · Fri May 22, 2015 10:41 am

Quoting golfradio (Reply 47):
I hope the Dutch learn a thing or two from the Canadian and keep these parasites on a tight leash.

I don't want to name names lest I offend anyone, but there's this country near where I live. Police death squads roaming the streets. O.K. Corral-style biker shootouts. Everyone armed to the teeth. Absolute warzone this place. Lots of airlines with cheap fares though. Five million Canadians annually are forced to brave the dangerous journey to an airport there just to find an affordable flight. All thanks to the extortionate fares charged by Air Canada. The only parasites are AC and their lackeys in Ottawa who sharply restrict foreign competition.

seahawk · Fri May 22, 2015 11:05 am

Again the government does not care about the customer. If nobody wants to fly the ME3 the slots won´t hurt KLM and if people want to fly with the ME3, the people deserve that right. The EU needs to remove all restrictions for the ME3. May they be free to fly as often as they like and to wherever they like, hopefully also doing business on the NA routes.

Ncfc99 · Fri May 22, 2015 11:24 am

Quoting jeffreyklm (Reply 67):
So rather than ''stealing'' passengers at AMS, they're stealing passengers from other airports that are spokes of KLM.

So a foreign airline stealing passengers from BA is OK, but EK stimulating growth and winning passengers from another foreign airline isn't. Passengers do not BELONG to an airline, hence they cannot be STOLEN.

Talk about double standards.

jeffreyklm · Fri May 22, 2015 11:52 am

Quoting ncfc99 (Reply 72):
Quoting jeffreyklm (Reply 67):
So rather than ''stealing'' passengers at AMS, they're stealing passengers from other airports that are spokes of KLM.

So a foreign airline stealing passengers from BA is OK, but EK stimulating growth and winning passengers from another foreign airline isn't. Passengers do not BELONG to an airline, hence they cannot be STOLEN.

Talk about double standards.

I agree. That's why I said ''stealing''. (note the quotation marks

)

Don't let my username confuse you. I am very objective about this matter.

I was just mentioning the real problem for KLM. And I think instead of banning them, that the EU carriers should have a reality check and start gearing up and improve their services / fares to start competing instead of only complaining about this free market they use with so much pleasure but moreover start more collaboration with ME3 parties like they so thoroughly do on the transatlantic market with US carriers.

Pick a partner, gear up and join the race.

mjoelnir · Fri May 22, 2015 12:11 pm

IMO the dutch "minister" voiced an opinion. New EU Open Sky agreements are not done on the level of the single EU governments but by the EU Executive. There are negotiations between the EU and the UAE about an EU wide agreement replacing the single agreements between EU countries and the UAE.

factsonly · Fri May 22, 2015 12:41 pm

Quoting ncfc99 (Reply 72):
So a foreign airline stealing passengers from BA is OK, but EK stimulating growth and winning passengers from another foreign airline isn't. Passengers do not BELONG to an airline, hence they cannot be STOLEN.

Talk about double standards.

Sorry, my humble apologies, but this is clearly off the mark and missing the point!

The issue is much more subtle than you present it.

The EU is a single market with a 'Level Playing Field' for BA, KL, LH, SK, OS, AF, AZ, etc.etc.etc. These airlines are all subject to the same 'Transport policy' with only small national variations in VAT, social costs and taxes.

As stated several times - what this issue is all about - is that Brussels is re-negotiating the EU - UAE Bilateral as the EU feels the ME3 carriers may NOT be on a 'Level Playing Field' with the EU carriers. For the time being - and only until the issue is satisfactorily clarified - will EU Transport Ministers take the temporary decision not to increase the ME3 traffic rights into the EU, as the Dutch have just announced.

So nothing is permanent and nothing is definite, and there are certainly no double standards. It is all about ensuring fair markets. If there are doubts, it is perfectly honourable to double check a policy. In our competitive world it is not wrong to look for potential imbalances and adjust public policy when deemed necessary.

No less, no more.

q120 · Fri May 22, 2015 12:49 pm

Quoting HALtheAI (Reply 70):
I don't want to name names lest I offend anyone, but there's this country near where I live. Police death squads roaming the streets. O.K. Corral-style biker shootouts. Everyone armed to the teeth. Absolute warzone this place. Lots of airlines with cheap fares though. Five million Canadians annually are forced to brave the dangerous journey to an airport there just to find an affordable flight. All thanks to the extortionate fares charged by Air Canada. The only parasites are AC and their lackeys in Ottawa who sharply restrict foreign competition.

yeah its so dangerous there that 319 million people prefer to live there. We have 35 million and many leave this great place to live in that so called "war zone".

mjoelnir · Fri May 22, 2015 1:20 pm

Quoting factsonly (Reply 75):
As stated several times - what this issue is all about - is that Brussels is re-negotiating the EU - UAE Bilateral as the EU feels the ME3 carriers may NOT be on a 'Level Playing Field' with the EU carriers. For the time being - and only until the issue is satisfactorily clarified - will EU Transport Ministers take the temporary decision not to increase the ME3 traffic rights into the EU, as the Dutch have just announced.

The Eu is not re-negotiating the EU - UAE Bilateral, there is no such thing as it is. There are single country bilaterals with the UAE and it is the program in the EU to replace single country bilaterals with one EU wide bilateral.
So the EU is negotiating a bilateral between the EU and the UAE to replace the single country bilaterals.
No re-negotiating because....
Several airlines and single persons in different EU Governments are voicing opinions to influence the negotiations.
IMO the whole outlook on trade between the EU and UAE will play a role in this negotiations including for example the interest of the whole aviation industries, consumer interest and so on.
Here on A.net we hear mainly about the interest of certain airlines, with solid blinkers for the interest of other groups.

tommy1808 · Fri May 22, 2015 1:43 pm

Quoting ElanusNotatus (Reply 56):
. The simple fact is that when bilaterals were originally negotiated they benefitted Euro carriers because no-one foresaw the growth of Gulf aviation.

That is an urban legend, it was a win-win situation since they wanted to have the connectivity. Purpose of the agreements was sufficient supply for the demand between each of the two countries and to cover their, the UAEs, demand for onward flying where applicable.

Quoting golfradio (Reply 60):
No one's going to stop them from taking 49% in a domestic airline. Like EY and Air Berlin,

their share in AB is below 30% and that is as far as they can take it before the LBA revokes their AOC. Hence EY has been creative to infuse money into AB. There is no law saying 50% minus one share, it says factual control.
In the US they would also be limited to 25% iirc.

Best regards
Thomas

jacobin777 · Fri May 22, 2015 2:09 pm

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 46):
Quoting jacobin777 (Reply 44):
They will all setup shop in some other country which offers tax advantages

won't help their EU business.

best regards
Thomas

No but will help those other countries and corporation and given how poorly Europe has been doing (at least Greece, etc.), maybe its a good thing.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 50):
I love the Dutch. BRAVO!

KLM and Schiphol are among the largest employers in the Netherlands. By protecting KLM and Schiphol, the Dutch are protecting their country's jobs. The rest of the EU and the US need to follow.

Its been shown time and time again that jobs are created not lost when trade, travel, etc. is increased, improved, etc.

While these links are-U.S.A.-based, it does prove that trade/travel increases jobs. Many of these facts/concepts apply to other countries as well.

https://www.ustravel.org/news/travel-means-jobs-toolkit

https://www.ustravel.org/news/press-releases/travel-industry-creates-81000-jobs-2012

http://eastonaviation.com/corporate-...avel-creates-jobs-economic-growth/

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 62):
Quoting BestWestern (Reply 61):
Freedom of transport creates jobs. Look at Ryanair which has transformed the European aviation market and linked regional backwaters to the global economic centres in the way nobody else has done.

The ME3 taking KLM's market share will not create Dutch jobs and that's what's important to the Dutch politicians and their people.

Who says it won't create Dutch jobs? Please provide proof.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 63):
And KLM taking market share from the UK is fine?

EK growing in Amsterdam will create jobs in the greater economy in the same way that KL operating to Xiamen city creates jobs in Xiamen.

Increased access = Increased trade = increased wealth = more jobs.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 64):
Quoting BestWestern (Reply 63):
EK growing in Amsterdam will create jobs in the greater economy in the same way that KL operating to Xiamen city creates jobs in Xiamen.

That doesn't help the folks who'd lose their job if KLM had to downsize due to increased ME3 competition.

People in Amsterdam care about their own jobs and jobs in the Netherlands, not jobs in Xiamen or Dubai.

Proof please.

More links about the importance of travel/tourism and jobs (global effects)

http://www.wttc.org/press-room/press...ow-faster-than-the-global-economy/

http://www.wttc.org/press-room/press...al-travel-tourism-talent-shortage/

PanHAM · Fri May 22, 2015 2:15 pm

Quoting golfradio (Reply 47):
ME3 want more access, let them set up local subsidiaries like Virgin and JetStar. I hope the Dutch learn a thing or two from the Canadian and keep these parasites on a tight leash

They can do that, but the EU based carrier would Need to be controlled by EU citizens at over 50%, see reply 78. Now where would the Money come from that cannot come from the ME? How Independent would Management be? It is a matter of traffic rights as well.

Quoting billreid (Reply 59):
Yes its not the geographic centre, that would be Prague. But it is absolutely the population centre!!!

Geo- and demographic centres of the EU are near FRA, some 50 km east of here. Making FRA the best "natural hub" for the EU

A remark to "passengers owned", no, passengers are free in their choices of course, but the countries main carrier has set up an infrastruture for the benefit of the local Business, not only operating cherry picking routes but a complete Network. They have to sustain that Network and the pilferage by the ME3 makes that increasingly difficult#

PanHAM · Fri May 22, 2015 2:28 pm

Quoting jacobin777 (Reply 79):
Its been shown time and time again that jobs are created not lost when trade, travel, etc. is increased, improved, etc.

Yes, but the ME3 create just a few Jobs for their sales Teams, some Administration Jobs and may be some local Jobs for cargo and pax handling. The bi-laterals allowthem to take the revenues to the ME without paying taxes. There is only little compnesation, te markets there are not large enough for LH, KL etc.

Another remark to the "Virin" USA and Australia example. These are rather a Franchise style of Operation using the Name. Management is US resp. Austraian in majority, making it local carriers as the law requires.
Any foregner could set up shop selling carpets or textiles in Germny and an own it 100$, however he hs to tax the full amount here as well and has to treat his employees accdg t local las.

It wold be interestin to see who woud be willing to set up an Emmirates or Qatar Franchise in Europe and run the carrier fullylocally financed and pay a royalty for usin the Name. I am afraid it ould not be very sucessful.

mjoelnir · Fri May 22, 2015 2:38 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 81):
Yes, but the ME3 create just a few Jobs for their sales Teams, some Administration Jobs and may be some local Jobs for cargo and pax handling. The bi-laterals allowthem to take the revenues to the ME without paying taxes. There is only little compnesation, te markets there are not large enough for LH, KL etc.

But they are creating jobs in the EU and also the Netherlands themselves by buying Airbus frames.

The countries or Areas complaining the most, USA and EU have the biggest advantage in the aviation industry, Airbus and Boeing selling heaps of frames to the ME3.

Ncfc99 · Fri May 22, 2015 2:54 pm

Quoting jeffreyklm (Reply 73):

Apologies, I understand where you are coming from, and I think we are more or less in agreement.

Quoting factsonly (Reply 75):
Quoting ncfc99 (Reply 72):
So a foreign airline stealing passengers from BA is OK, but EK stimulating growth and winning passengers from another foreign airline isn't. Passengers do not BELONG to an airline, hence they cannot be STOLEN.

Talk about double standards.

Sorry, my humble apologies, but this is clearly off the mark and missing the point!

The issue is much more subtle than you present it.

The EU is a single market with a 'Level Playing Field' for BA, KL, LH, SK, OS, AF, AZ, etc.etc.etc. These airlines are all subject to the same 'Transport policy' with only small national variations in VAT, social costs and taxes.

As stated several times - what this issue is all about - is that Brussels is re-negotiating the EU - UAE Bilateral as the EU feels the ME3 carriers may NOT be on a 'Level Playing Field' with the EU carriers. For the time being - and only until the issue is satisfactorily clarified - will EU Transport Ministers take the temporary decision not to increase the ME3 traffic rights into the EU, as the Dutch have just announced.

So nothing is permanent and nothing is definite, and there are certainly no double standards. It is all about ensuring fair markets. If there are doubts, it is perfectly honourable to double check a policy. In our competitive world it is not wrong to look for potential imbalances and adjust public policy when deemed necessary.

Aren't the bilaterals still negotiated with each country within the EU. The statement that 'the EU feels the ME3 carriers may NOT be on a 'level playing field' seems a rather sweeping statement. There may be people and countries that think this way, but to make it seem the EU has this policy is at this moment clearly off the mark and missing the point.

The phrase 'innocent until proven guilty' should apply IMHO regarding restricting new traffic rights.

Thomaas · Fri May 22, 2015 3:06 pm

Quoting jacobin777 (Reply 79):
Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 46):
Quoting jacobin777 (Reply 44):
They will all setup shop in some other country which offers tax advantages

won't help their EU business.

best regards
Thomas

No but will help those other countries and corporation and given how poorly Europe has been doing (at least Greece, etc.), maybe its a good thing.

Yet standards of living in Western Europe are the highest in the world.

Quoting jacobin777 (Reply 79):
Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 50):
I love the Dutch. BRAVO!

KLM and Schiphol are among the largest employers in the Netherlands. By protecting KLM and Schiphol, the Dutch are protecting their country's jobs. The rest of the EU and the US need to follow.

Its been shown time and time again that jobs are created not lost when trade, travel, etc. is increased, improved, etc.

EK creates very few jobs at its outstations when it goes beyond a flight a day to DXB. Tourist won't magically discover AMS because EK offers 10x daily flights. In fact, EK's presence alienates smaller players that offer direct links to AMS such as MH, KQ, SQ, GA and RJ. Having direct links to destinations across the world is much more important for the economic vibrancy of the region than it is to have multiple daily flights to DXB. No one would benefit from having fewer non-stop options and needed to transit through a Middle Eastern hub to fly East.

PanHAM · Fri May 22, 2015 3:10 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 82):
But they are creating jobs in the EU and also the Netherlands themselves by buying Airbus frames.

That bis comparing apples with peaches. We are creating Jobs in the UAE and Qatar by buying oil and gas. I could argue that, without thew ME3, Airbus would sell more A380 to other countries, like Australia, Singapore, LH etc. LH has cancelled 3 x A380 purchases because they simply cannot fill them at reasonable rates to places like BKK. One LH A380 creates 400 highly qualified Jobs at FRA and that for the Duration of up to 20 years. One A380 creates billions of Revenue during that time while a 380 sold to EK generates may be 200 or 250 miliion and a few millions p.a. in spares.
.

jacobin777 · Fri May 22, 2015 3:43 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 81):
Quoting jacobin777 (Reply 79):
Its been shown time and time again that jobs are created not lost when trade, travel, etc. is increased, improved, etc.

Yes, but the ME3 create just a few Jobs for their sales Teams, some Administration Jobs and may be some local Jobs for cargo and pax handling. The bi-laterals allowthem to take the revenues to the ME without paying taxes. There is only little compnesation, te markets there are not large enough for LH, KL etc.

As the links I provided, its not just the creation of airline jobs but how it affects tourism as well as investments, etc.

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 82):

But they are creating jobs in the EU and also the Netherlands themselves by buying Airbus frames.

Quoting Thomaas (Reply 84):

Yet standards of living in Western Europe are the highest in the world.

Yet standards of living in other countries are catching up (maybe not in % but at least in total numbers).

Quoting Thomaas (Reply 84):
EK creates very few jobs at its outstations when it goes beyond a flight a day to DXB. Tourist won't magically discover AMS because EK offers 10x daily flights. In fact, EK's presence alienates smaller players that offer direct links to AMS such as MH, KQ, SQ, GA and RJ. Having direct links to destinations across the world is much more important for the economic vibrancy of the region than it is to have multiple daily flights to DXB. No one would benefit from having fewer non-stop options and needed to transit through a Middle Eastern hub to fly East.

When prices are low enough, there is certainly new demand and I wouldn't be surprised if EK is indeed stimulating demand-just like WN in the USofA and FR/EZ in Europe.

No one is talking about "fare dumping" either. IIRC, the govt.(or courts) of Germany made sure EK isn't allowed to do that.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 85):
We are creating Jobs in the UAE and Qatar by buying oil and gas.

Sure, its a "quid pro quo" and many of those jobs are white collar jobs done by Europeans, Americans, etc. Also, one has to look at aviation in terms of total bilateral between countries. IMHO aviation is just one part of many items.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 85):
I could argue that, without thew ME3, Airbus would sell more A380 to other countries, like Australia, Singapore, LH etc. LH has cancelled 3 x A380 purchases because they simply cannot fill them at reasonable rates to places like BKK

Maybe LH has a problem filling planes to BKK due to other factors. Also, it really hasn't been seen that other carriers would "pick up the slack" if an A380 isn't sold to EK. We don't know that as a fact. What we do know as a fact is that EK is willing to purchase 100's of A380's.

seahawk · Fri May 22, 2015 4:28 pm

It just sounds a bit pointless to me when EU politicians try to protect the European carriers from the evil Me3, but on the other hand are very unwilling to improve the infrastructure to allow the local carriers growth. Add some the taxes some countries have or had to make flying even more expensive + add all the service charges you have to pay and I dare say politicians are making the live of the European carriers harder than the ME3 ever will.

mjoelnir · Fri May 22, 2015 5:41 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 85):
Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 82):
But they are creating jobs in the EU and also the Netherlands themselves by buying Airbus frames.

That bis comparing apples with peaches. We are creating Jobs in the UAE and Qatar by buying oil and gas. I could argue that, without thew ME3, Airbus would sell more A380 to other countries, like Australia, Singapore, LH etc. LH has cancelled 3 x A380 purchases because they simply cannot fill them at reasonable rates to places like BKK. One LH A380 creates 400 highly qualified Jobs at FRA and that for the Duration of up to 20 years. One A380 creates billions of Revenue during that time while a 380 sold to EK generates may be 200 or 250 miliion and a few millions p.a. in spares.

But the trade is there, and it is not only A380. Air Arabia bought A320 for example, the government of the UAE buys A330MTTR.
One can not look at airlines in isolation. One has to look at the whole picture of trade in services and goods.

northwestEWR · Fri May 22, 2015 5:49 pm

Quoting Thomaas (Reply 84):
EK creates very few jobs at its outstations when it goes beyond a flight a day to DXB. Tourist won't magically discover AMS because EK offers 10x daily flights. In fact, EK's presence alienates smaller players that offer direct links to AMS such as MH, KQ, SQ, GA and RJ. Having direct links to destinations across the world is much more important for the economic vibrancy of the region than it is to have multiple daily flights to DXB. No one would benefit from having fewer non-stop options and needed to transit through a Middle Eastern hub to fly East.

Anyone willing to give up their job at KLM or Schiphol for the possibility of increased net jobs from the ME3 expansion? I doubt it.

AABB777 · Fri May 22, 2015 7:48 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 82):

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 81):
Yes, but the ME3 create just a few Jobs for their sales Teams, some Administration Jobs and may be some local Jobs for cargo and pax handling. The bi-laterals allowthem to take the revenues to the ME without paying taxes. There is only little compnesation, te markets there are not large enough for LH, KL etc.

But they are creating jobs in the EU and also the Netherlands themselves by buying Airbus frames.

The countries or Areas complaining the most, USA and EU have the biggest advantage in the aviation industry, Airbus and Boeing selling heaps of frames to the ME3.

In the US the claim of the ME3 costing Americans jobs is false and is a baseless claim by US3 and their coalition. The ME3's aircraft purchases (and engine purchases, among others) support U.S. jobs at companies such as Boeing, GE, Gulfsteam, and more. Employment generated in the U.S. aerospace industry by ME3 service to the USA far outweighs the groundless employment losses alleged by AA/UA/DL. Additionally the more the ME3 expand in the U.S. the more local employees they hire, such as airport staff, sales staff, and more.

dhr · Fri May 22, 2015 9:00 pm

It seems this is a concerted effort by the * Alliance & Sky team lobbying the US and the EU governments to get rid of a couple of competitors for them since they can't economically compete with their high cost structures. Imagine the ramifications if governments went along with such outrageous policies, but in other industries. That means that consumers can only purchase local products and services.

This isn't about subsidies, its a targeted attack on consumer rights.

thekorean · Fri May 22, 2015 9:15 pm

Quoting dhr (Reply 91):

Just so you know these corporations are ran by citizens who have equal rights to government protection as the consumers...

US airlins provide jobs to US citizens.

So it might benefit the country more if the US3 was faring well.

dhr · Fri May 22, 2015 9:28 pm

Quoting thekorean (Reply 92):
US airlins provide jobs to US citizens.

So it might benefit the country more if the US3 was faring well.

Well they would fair better if the the US government pulled the licences of all but one airline, so you could have a single company in every industry instead of multiple companies competing against each other. Then consumers can pay $2,000 to fly JFK-IAD, imagine the profits!

Apple makes their iPhones in China, where are the US jobs in that?

747megatop · Fri May 22, 2015 9:39 pm

Quoting YTZ (Reply 15):
I question how effective this will be in protecting KLM-AF.

Probably the dutch are trying to set an example and rally the EU as a whole agains the ME3.

747megatop · Fri May 22, 2015 9:43 pm

Quoting ASA (Reply 13):
- just asking.

More important questions are why is EU not complaining about SQ (Majorly Govt Owned) & AI(100% subidised and govt owned)? Wait....they are not much of a threat & competition (to the EU3) compared to the ME3

.

GSP psgr · Fri May 22, 2015 9:53 pm

Think one of the ME3 could make a daily operation into RTM work like TK have done?

BestWestern · Fri May 22, 2015 11:30 pm

For the last eight years I have attained Platinum level on KL flying blue. My last three trips to Europe were on Etihad, not for the price but because the service and service standards are far higher than on KL, not to mention the hard product.

KL is usually the cheapest a J class ex HK to Europe - but the perceived quality of service is in the toilet (I disagree). In June EK and EY are more expensive than AY, LH, AF and KL.

PanHAM · Sat May 23, 2015 6:02 am

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 88):
But the trade is there, and it is not only A380. Air Arabia bought A320 for example, the government of the UAE buys A330MTTR.
One can not look at airlines in isolation. One has to look at the whole picture of trade in services and goods.

No. There is no government interfered trade-off and the German or the French government wouldn't do their main carriers a favor if there was. The A380, 320 or the Military vrsions compete on the market. It would be a bad deal for the European part if there would be any trade Offs in the form of traffic rights.. IMHO it would even be illegal and LH could sue the government. Fact is, the Dutch has restricted the ME3, Germany does not renegotiate the bilateral at this time and if, they would rather restrict traffic rights than extend.
The ME3 should be more than happy with what they have because it allows them more or less unrestricted Services to 4 destinations in Germany. I doubt that they would the same again in a new bilateral.

Quoting GSP psgr (Reply 96):
Think one of the ME3 could make a daily operation into RTM work like TK have done?

The runway is too short at RTM and , not knowing the Dutch/UAE bilateral, if (I doubt theat) they can operate to 2 Airports in NL, they'd rather chose Eindhoven.

Quoting dhr (Reply 93):
Well they would fair better if the the US government pulled the licences of all but one airline, so you could have a single company in every industry instead of multiple companies competing against each other. Then consumers can pay $2,000 to fly JFK-IAD, imagine the profits!

Apple makes their iPhones in China, where are the US jobs in that?

The US government cannot Close companies as Long as they are financially stable and follow the laws in their daily operations, The US are ruled by the law and not by governments. But a single Airline would not make a Profit, rather would lose Money as they would become inefficient without competition. The international part of that carrier would not have a Chance against the foreign Airlines exeecising the bilaterals.

Last, I am always suprised to see how many do not udnerstand the differences between Service industries and manufacturing. Apple has the high paying Jobs in the US and farms out the low paying to China. What do you think how much an iPhone would cost if it was manufactured in California or even in South carolina?

dubaiamman243 · Sat May 23, 2015 7:07 pm

Emirates, Etihad unaware of any restrictions on operations at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam

http://www.thenational.ae/business/a...s-at-schiphol-airport-in-amsterdam

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net