User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 1:20 pm

Tim Clark has some words to share about the US campaign against Gulf carriers:

Quote:
The US campaign against Gulf carriers is running out of steam as the presidential election looms closer, Emirates president Tim Clark said on Tuesday.

“As far as I can see…remember [the row] started in February 2015 and here we are in the middle of May 2016 [and over that time] we have increased our production into the US; opened Orlando, and we’ve put more and more 380s in to the US,” Clark said.

“So I guess the answer is, well, I don’t think really [the campaign] has succeeded, has it? And as the US administration comes to the back end of its days, I wonder whether they’ve got the appetite to take it on at this stage?”

Emirates plans to keep expanding in the US:

Quote:
“We are looking at American points and are looking at increasing production at existing ones, so we haven’t stopped. We are looking at many US destinations - I am not going to say which ones they are, but we’ve made [our ambitions] quite clear. We’ve got 10 at present and we always said we needed 20.”

On the A380 routes, he said the following:

Quote:
The airline will keep the A380 on its Dubai to Houston route despite the negative impact of the falling oil price, Clark added.

“As you know, we switched it off Dallas and put it on to our Washington service because clearly the oil and gas sector in Texas was suffering.

“At the moment, the Houston operation on the A380 is in good shape – it is not as good as it was but we can’t have it all ways all of the time.”

Source
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/us-ca...failing-emirates-chief-631251.html
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2688
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 1:36 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):
We’ve got 10 at present and we always said we needed 20.

That definitely seems like overkill... They'd have to fly to LAS, PHX, MIA, ATL, PHL, DTW, DEN, EWR, and goodness knows where else to get to 20. SJC? SAN? STL? MSP? BWI? The pickings get thin...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
757usairways
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 8:31 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 1:44 pm

Wonder when the next US destination will be announced, they've been quiet ever since the MCO launch, I would have though they would have announced the next destination by now.
 
YYZflyboy
Posts: 84
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 9:00 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 3:02 pm

Quoting FSDan (Reply 1):

What about AUS? PDX? CLT? SLC? OKC?

The first four are mid-sized cities with a fair amount of disposable income. The last one has a growing immigrant population (particularly from Thailand and Vietnam). BA has a flight to AUS. Delta has some international ops in PDX. CLT is/was a hub for US Airways, SLC is a DL hub. OKC might be a stretch, but with EK's relatively low costs, they can probably take them too.

Could consider MEM too (former NW hub) or CVG (former Delta hub) can also be candidates. A number of Fortune 500 and big manufacturing companies in the Ohio and Tennessee area.
 
chiad
Posts: 1249
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 4:24 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 3:07 pm

Ah great .. he's back! Thank goodness.
And I don't mean Tim.
 
 
ANA787
Posts: 830
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:00 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 3:19 pm

PDX is an obvious choice given that it is a growing AS hub and EK/AS just got closer in partnership.
I can also see ATL, MIA, PHL.
 
travelin man
Posts: 3237
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 3:26 pm

"US campaign"??

Shouldn't that say "campaign by SOME US carriers"?
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6218
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 4:20 pm

My question is this........WHERE are the Gulf carriers getting their feed, FROM the U.S., from? It just looks like it's O&D and that's it (except, maybe, from B6). Looks to me like slim pickings, indeed, unless, of course, your airline is subsidized.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
TWA85
Posts: 352
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:06 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 5:25 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 7):

I think most of the feed is coming from India on the DXB end.

My question is what is EK going to do about South Florida? FLL is where B6 has their primary Latin American hub but I don't think the runways are long enough for larger wide bodies like the 777 and A380. MIA can definitely handle the larger wide bodies but B6 will not be able to provide any Latin American feed. I guess EK could use MIA for O&D and MCO for Latin American feed.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9735
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 5:31 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 7):
My question is this........WHERE are the Gulf carriers getting their feed, FROM the U.S., from? It just looks like it's O&D and that's it (except, maybe, from B6). Looks to me like slim pickings, indeed, unless, of course, your airline is subsidized.

In addition to B6 EK also codeshares with AS. Also keep in mind that a majority of EK's passengers are not stopping at DXB, they are connecting elsewhere (especially India).
 
Armodeen
Posts: 1207
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 5:39 pm

Welcome back Karel!
 
User avatar
thekorean
Posts: 1779
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 9:05 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 5:55 pm

Quoting YYZflyboy (Reply 3):

Just how much demand will there be for SE Asia to those cities?

I can see Europe but EK is not an option for that.

For PDX, does Nike have huge operation in India?

AUS has tech industry so I can see that. CLT banking.
 
AirbusCanada
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:14 am

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 6:06 pm

Quoting thekorean (Reply 11):
Just how much demand will there be for SE Asia to those cities?

I can see Europe but EK is not an option for that.

For PDX, does Nike have huge operation in India?

AUS has tech industry so I can see that. CLT banking.

If you want to fly from US to anywhere East/South of Turkey and West of the Pacific coast in Asia(Korea/Japan/Chines Eastern cost) , ME3+TK is your best option in terms of scheduling and service quality.

Here is the Emirates route map in 2015.

http://www.businesstraveller.asia/fi...News-images/Emirates/Route-map.jpg



[Edited 2016-05-24 11:07:40]

[Edited 2016-05-24 11:08:29]

[Edited 2016-05-24 11:13:01]
 
flyoregon
Posts: 726
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 5:29 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 6:23 pm

I could see PDX happening a couple/few times a week as long as Intel remains a giant in Washington county.
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 6:23 pm

EK serves south Florida through MCO. That's it. MCO can take all the south Florida traffic and also the latin feed b6 provides it at MCO. That's it. Any other South Florida feed flows over JFK and BOS via B6 and will continue to do so.

Quoting TWA85 (Reply 8):

I think most of the feed is coming from India on the DXB end.

My question is what is EK going to do about South Florida? FLL is where B6 has their primary Latin American hub but I don't think the runways are long enough for larger wide bodies like the 777 and A380. MIA can definitely handle the larger wide bodies but B6 will not be able to provide any Latin American feed. I guess EK could use MIA for O&D and MCO for Latin American feed.
 
User avatar
IrishAyes
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:04 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 6:25 pm

I'm still surprised the ME3 hasn't launched DTW yet.
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 6:27 pm

EK has aggressive interline agreements with most US carriers (except AA these days) and can bring traffic from just about any city to their gateway through the use of their interline agreements.
While B6 and AS are the most prominent, they do use interline on UA for example. For example, I'm from Louisville and when I lived in AUH I looked at having my parents come over.
I went to Emirates.com and selected Louisville to Dubai.. and Emirates was willing to sell me a UA flight from Louisville to ORD,then EK from ORD to DXB. And that's what they do all over the place.
In addition, I know many of the people in route planning at EK in Dubai. They say they also get a large number of self connectors to a gateway city. So, for example, their flights from LAX receive a lot of feed from people who purchase their own
Southwest or AA tix to LAX, then switch to LAX and EK.
Point is, EK gets a lot of feed through extensive interline agreements here in the US. Then of course once the flights get to Dubai pax either stay there or most connect onwards.

Quoting mayor (Reply 7):
My question is this........WHERE are the Gulf carriers getting their feed, FROM the U.S., from? It just looks like it's O&D and that's it (except, maybe, from B6). Looks to me like slim pickings, indeed, unless, of course, your airline is subsidized
 
racercoup
Posts: 408
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:48 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 7:18 pm

Timmy boy should be keeping these thoughts to himself. Nobody likes a big mouth.
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 7:53 pm

Why? The majority of the people of Middle Eastern descent in the DTW area are from the Levant region, and it's way more direct to either fly on the nonstop offered on Royal Jordanian or the multiple direct connects over Europe. DXB would represent serious backtracking to get to the places where DXB -area residents travel.

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 15):
I'm still surprised the ME3 hasn't launched DTW yet.
 
aerohottie
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 9:13 pm

Quoting racercoup (Reply 18):
Timmy boy should be keeping these thoughts to himself. Nobody likes a big mouth.

Americans love big mouths, just look at Trump (sic)... Timmy's just pandering to his target audience
What?
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6218
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 11:08 pm

Quoting aerohottie (Reply 21):
Americans love big mouths,

Perhaps why we love the Aussies so much......................  
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3297
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 11:16 pm

I really think that EK should just focus on what it already has, especially given that its capacity expansion has already been a struggle at times.

Whats realistically left? DEN? FLL/MIA?

DEN seems a bit of a stretch as it may be a hub but UA is not a partner airline for EK. It is also not a huge market on its own, so not sure I see a lot of value in that.

FLL/MIA might make sense, especially with B6's hub at the former. The runway constraints though might be a challenge. Not sure that MIA is a serious contender though, but as soon as I question that one I am bound to get a reaction by a few on that one, so I will not go over those reasons again  

Secondary markets like SJC or AUS really don't add up on those type of ULH services. SJC is close to SFO and offers little benefit on such long sectors, and as for AUS there are already 2 Texas EK gateways (DFW, IAH) which have had their struggles in leaner times.
 
johns624
Posts: 2321
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 11:31 pm

Quoting jasoncrh (Reply 20):
The majority of the people of Middle Eastern descent in the DTW area are from the Levant region, and it's way more direct to either fly on the nonstop offered on Royal Jordanian or the multiple direct connects over Europe.

Exactly. The major national ME group in the Detroit area is from Lebanon. The second and third largest groups seem to be Iraqi Chaldeans and Yemenis.
 
panamair
Posts: 4115
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Tue May 24, 2016 11:50 pm

Quoting jasoncrh (Reply 16):
EK has aggressive interline agreements with most US carriers (except AA these days)

UA is the only large US carrier left with an EK interline; DL dropped their EK interline in November 2015.
 
pa747sp
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:41 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 12:49 am

Quoting jasoncrh (Reply 16):
EK has aggressive interline agreements with most US carriers

What makes an interline agreement 'aggressive'?
Nothing seems as good since the VC10.
 
aerohottie
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 1:23 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 20):
Perhaps why we love the Aussies so much......................  

Hahaha... boom!!!  
What?
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 2:22 am

sorry - meant to say that they use them and pursue them aggressively

Quoting pa747sp (Reply 24):

Quoting jasoncrh (Reply 16):
EK has aggressive interline agreements with most US carriers

What makes an interline agreement 'aggressive'?
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6218
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 2:48 am

Quoting jasoncrh (Reply 26):

sorry - meant to say that they use them and pursue them aggressively

Quoting pa747sp (Reply 24):

Quoting jasoncrh (Reply 16):
EK has aggressive interline agreements with most US carriers

What makes an interline agreement 'aggressive'?

As I recall, an "interline" agreement is just that....an agreement whereby an airline agrees to accept baggage, ticketing and cargo from another airline. I think what most of you are thinking of as "interline" agreements should actually be "code sharing" agreements, where one carrier is actually filling seats on your metal. and sharing revenues from the sale of those seats. In the discussion at hand, "code sharing" is rather more beneficial to the carrier trying to fill up their a/c at the hub than a straight interline agreement would be.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
futureorthopod
Posts: 183
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:08 am

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 7:20 am

Quoting aerohottie (Reply 19):
Americans love big mouths, just look at Trump (sic)... Timmy's just pandering to his target audience



Love the generalizations. Not all Americans support that tool.

I suppose all Aussies love bad beer and bad food. #marmiteforthewin
 
User avatar
TheFlyingDisk
Posts: 1904
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:43 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 7:56 am

Quoting YYZflyboy (Reply 3):
The last one has a growing immigrant population (particularly from Thailand and Vietnam).

I would think that from SE Asia it's cheaper to fly transpac rather than transatlantic. I tried routing KUL-JFK and EK's prices are simply ridiculous (and god forbid if you have an interline sector - they charge full price for that which means I'm paying MH F prices for a Y seat on EK!)
I FLY KLM+ALASKA+QATAR+MALAYSIA+AIRASIA+MALINDO
 
xdlx
Posts: 943
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:29 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 11:27 am

Quoting jasoncrh (Reply 16):

They are not filling those A380 with interline feed alone! ..... So forgetabouit!!
 
bennator
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:20 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 12:09 pm

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 29):

I would think that from SE Asia it's cheaper to fly transpac rather than transatlantic. I tried routing KUL-JFK and EK's prices are simply ridiculous (and god forbid if you have an interline sector - they charge full price for that which means I'm paying MH F prices for a Y seat on EK!)

It really depends. From SIN to east coast USA, although trans-pacific is usually cheaper, when I've searched for fares, I've seen EK, EY, QR, (and recently, BA) sometimes having the cheapest fares, or at least very competitive. Flight duration wise, it's the length of connections that seem to affect the time more than anything.
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 12:56 pm

I didn't say they were. They feed with a mix of people boarding at the station and interline feed. It's not exclusively one or the other, it's both.

Quoting xdlx (Reply 30):

They are not filling those A380 with interline feed alone! ..... So forgetabouit!!
 
jasoncrh
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 12:58 pm

Most interline agreements are more advanced than the basic "I'll accept luggage/ etc". EK has interline agremenets with many carriers all around the world. Regardless, they do sell onward connections on UA from SFO/ORD/ etc, anything to help bring more passengers with their flights. They have better interline agreements with B6 - up to the level of codesharing - and would prefer to use those as it's at a lower cost, but have no qualms using UA or whatever to fill up their flights where there is no B6 flying.

Quoting mayor (Reply 27):
As I recall, an "interline" agreement is just that....an agreement whereby an airline agrees to accept baggage, ticketing and cargo from another airline. I think what most of you are thinking of as "interline" agreements should actually be "code sharing" agreements, where one carrier is actually filling seats on your metal. and sharing revenues from the sale of those seats. In the discussion at hand, "code sharing" is rather more beneficial to the carrier trying to fill up their a/c at the hub than a straight interline agreement would be.
 
SKAirbus
Posts: 1542
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:18 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 1:33 pm

Is the US really an issue for EK? I would say that Canada was the issue with its ridiculous protectionism iro Air Canada.

There is already very little competition on the domestic market in Canada meaning fairs are stupidly high. I was in Vancouver last week and friends there said it was often much cheaper to drive over the border to Bellingham or Seattle and fly from there to other Canadian destinations such as YYZ, YUL etc.
Base: BRU
 
AirbusCanada
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:14 am

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 3:39 pm

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 21):
I really think that EK should just focus on what it already has, especially given that its capacity expansion has already been a struggle at times.

The experts has been saying exactly same thing about EK for over 20 years.
 
aerohottie
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Wed May 25, 2016 10:12 pm

Quoting futureorthopod (Reply 28):
Love the generalizations. Not all Americans support that tool.

I suppose all Aussies love bad beer and bad food. #marmiteforthewin

Hahaha I love it!!!.... If he does get voted in, you can always relocate to Australia with a nice EK flight via DXB hehehe
What?
 
pa747sp
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:41 pm

RE: Tim Clark On US Campaign Against Gulf Carriers

Fri May 27, 2016 2:14 am

Quoting jasoncrh (Reply 33):
Most interline agreements are more advanced than the basic "I'll accept luggage/ etc". EK has interline agremenets with many carriers all around the world. Regardless, they do sell onward connections on UA from SFO/ORD/ etc, anything to help bring more passengers with their flights. They have better interline agreements with B6 - up to the level of codesharing - and would prefer to use those as it's at a lower cost, but have no qualms using UA or whatever to fill up their flights where there is no B6 flying.

Agree with above. To clarify, an interline agreement can be cover many areas, and can also be one way. A carrier (A) may agree to have another airline (B) included on its tickets, and therefore pay them for the sector flown, but it may not agree to the opposite, where an the other airline (B) includes the carriers flights on their ticket, and then pays carrier (A). In fact Ek has a number of these.

Interline agreements don't account for much if the two airlines involved do not cooperate on fares. Whilst EK may have interline agreements with US carriers, they may not have special agreements that allow them to include sectors on those airlines on Eks fares. For instance a pax travelling DEL DXB JFK ATL will be faced with a through fare with EK/B6 (even where the JFK ATL sector is on a B6 flight number and not a code share) much lower than an 'add-on' fare with DL which is calculated as DEL JFK plus JFK ATL. Though an interline agreement exists between DL and EK (I think, or has it been terminated?) the effect in the market place is negligible as there's no fare advantage gained with it.

Many domestic carriers do have add-on fares that can only be sold in conjunction with international fares on different carriers. EK for instance can use these fares for journeys involving NZ domestic sectors. However they are still constructed as two fares added together, and lower fares can be found for domestic connections to EK flights from JQ flights because EK has fares that include the JQ domestic sector as part of the fare. Whilst EK has interline agreements with both NZ and JQ, and both NZ and JQ can be said to be 'cooperating' with EK, it is clear that the cooperation, and therefore the effect of the interline agreement, is much more important in the case of EK/JQ than EK/NZ.
Nothing seems as good since the VC10.

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