Emirates vs. the rest : Der Spiegel Online

[Desert Rat]

The Emirates flight to Hong Kong makes a stop in Bangkok.

[andorra-airport]

The Emirates flight to Hong Kong makes a stop in Bangkok.

Funny you say this, I will take that flight soon. But no, they have direct flights, but often more expensive.

[tsv]

Out of interest what would be your pick for the best airport in Europe?

For me personally I would say Amsterdam and Helsinki. Worst are London (Heathrow + Luton) and the airports in Rome.

Well we can find some common grond there. HEL is much better than average. I was slighlty annoyed that they needed to view my passport 3 times but they explained because I was going to SVO they had to be doubly sure all was ok. Whatever. But otherwise HEL was impressive. No argument LHR is the worst in Europe, completely appalling. CDG not great either. CPH and MAD I found satisfactory, not been to FCO or AMS.

Cheers

[1V1]

The reality is that many routes successfully operated by EK are working solely out of the cheer volume of small amounts of transit passengers EK is able to put together.

The reality is EK is only able to attract sufficient volume from Europe by dumping tickets on the market.

EK may pretent to be a profitable venture, but it has been demonstrated several times already by international studies that if would EK be based in the EU, US or in fact in any industrialized country, it would have been out of business long time already due to massive losses unless it would increase its yield (and thus ticket prices) by at least 30%, something which is simply impossible because then they lose their competitive advantage.

As such reality is EK is an airline from lalaland, not living in reality: only the complete lack of any fiscal obligations towards its employees or its local government can make an EK style airline thrive, or do you really think it is a pure coincidence the only EK clones are to be found in cash spoiled Abu Dhabi and Qatar?

Don't buy all the blabla about DXB, DOH or AUH being so exceptionally centrally located in the world: DXB is just as centrally located as any other place along the axis from LHR to SYD really: ATH is just as conveniently located globally for instance.

EK is not just another airline that tries to build a self-sustainable network based on both O&D as well as transfer traffic, it is an airline aimed only at the transfer market and it can only do so successfully because of the completely crazy fiscal regime it operates under with the full help of its government given massive state aid; EK must be contained to its current form in the EU, just as it is prevented from expanding in Canada; it is the only way to make sure the playing field is leveled.

Not very nice Toli.

EK attracts pax with their service, their ICE system (hundreds of movies and the latest ones, on your own screen) and their worldwide network. The service on board of most American and European carriers became let's say "basic" and the passengers noticed it also.

Maybe this says enoughhttp://www.travelandleisure.com/article ... airlines/3

Dubai needs the airline and is very pro aviation, something Belgium is not at all. Can you blame them for that? Look what happened to aviation in Belgium.

rgds

[earthman]

Yes while all airlines seem to think people are willing to pay more to get less, airlines like EK offer more for less. Except maybe for the 10 abreast 777, but who doesn't do that these days.

[regi]

Except maybe for the 10 abreast 777, but who doesn't do that these days.

Thai ?

[sn-remember]

There is on a.net a topic running : "can BEG develop into a wwhub "à la DXB" ?
It made me smile ...
Indeed it's a recurrent question raised here and there : "can XYZ become a DXB-like hub"?
On 2nd thoughts it might not be as stupid question as it looks as it raises the question as to why DXB developped like it did.
I'll try to summarize what is obvious to many:
1. tons of money to invest in aviation related business (airline+infrastructure)
2. business friendly environment (low taxes, low wages, no unions etc ...)
3. good enough location (meaning not only located on important trunk routes but also being inside the "12 hr reach". The latter being often overlooked)
4. lower fuel price ? (I'm not sure but seems probable)
5. extremely generous grant of ww traffic rights despite a local market which amounts to the needs of barely 1 million people.
6 last but not least and also often overlooked: they try to offer an attractive place beyond the airport/airline stuff (like "cheap" 5 star hotels, beach, sun yr round, interesting market place, lots of business opportunities and fairs ongoing, international environment etc..)
So who can pretend to compete ?
BEG ?? LOL
Of course those we know already are the true contenders : AUH and DOH.
The other gulf stations are out.
We know that EY chronically is in the red. Eventually there will probably merge with EK, making it 2 mega players in the Gulf region: EK and QR.
But TK are often mentioned as developing a "similar" business plan. I don't think they will ever play as globally as EK ambitions to. But they will try at least to fill a void in the NEast since the downsizing of OA and ME. But TK have more ambitions than just NEast void filling. They certainly meet most of the 6 points I mentioned rgding EK but fail on points 1 and mainly 3) But they have a very strong point 6 and they can add a strong O/D market.
Who else can pretend to step into the global market "à la EK/DXB" ?
DEL is trying ... they indeed meet some of the 6 features I summarized, and they add (like IST) a strong O/D market. But points 1,4,5,6 are not met.
And then there is DME or SMO whatever they decide to develop as a wwhub (if any)
My personal opinion is that while Moscow offers a tremendous potential, as long as they remain soooooooooo business unfriendly, there is not the slightest chance to see them compete among the world business leaders, be it aviation related or not. This IMHO will not change any time soon given the political framework in place.
Like Tolipanebas and many others care to stress, I am "surprised" by the rapid uprise of EK, QR and EY. Indeed their business model is dependant on the deep pockets and power of the ruling monarchy but also on the unbelievable generosity of the Indian and Western (OZ included) political authorities granting them traffic rights which are not in scale wih the true market they represent (point 5) . The "free market" paradigm is just that, a paradigm. It is still in the implementation phase within the EU although it was probably the main objective for creating the common market. On the global scale, different bodies try to regulate the legitimate protectionist conflicts that arise between parties involved (G.20, EU/US economic summits etc ..)
.. but I know it's sort of taboo topic to the many EK advocates brandishing the "free market flag" .. So be it, "mondialisme" is at work, but stupidity also ...It's self shooting, my opinion.
I back the Canadian political decision to limit the CA/UAE traffic rights to 1 daily each which is already quite a generous agreement given the O/D market requirement (and given the Canadians don't even make use of their right)

[1V1]

There is on a.net a topic running : "can BEG develop into a wwhub "à la DXB" ?
It made me smile ...
Indeed it's a recurrent question raised here and there : "can XYZ become a DXB-like hub"?
On 2nd thoughts it might not be as stupid question as it looks as it raises the question as to why DXB developped like it did.
I'll try to summarize what is obvious to many:
1. tons of money to invest in aviation related business (airline+infrastructure)
2. business friendly environment (low taxes, low wages, no unions etc ...)
3. good enough location (meaning not only located on important trunk routes but also being inside the "12 hr reach". The latter being often overlooked)
4. lower fuel price ? (I'm not sure but seems probable)
5. extremely generous grant of ww traffic rights despite a local market which amounts to the needs of barely 1 million people.
6 last but not least and also often overlooked: they try to offer an attractive place beyond the airport/airline stuff (like "cheap" 5 star hotels, beach, sun yr round, interesting market place, lots of business opportunities and fairs ongoing, international environment etc..)
So who can pretend to compete ?
BEG ?? LOL
Of course those we know already are the true contenders : AUH and DOH.
The other gulf stations are out.
We know that EY chronically is in the red. Eventually there will probably merge with EK, making it 2 mega players in the Gulf region: EK and QR.
But TK are often mentioned as developing a "similar" business plan. I don't think they will ever play as globally as EK ambitions to. But they will try at least to fill a void in the NEast since the downsizing of OA and ME in favour of the Gulf players. But TK have more ambitions than just NEast void filling. They certainly meet most of the 6 points I mentioned rgding EK but fail on points 1 and mainly 3) But they have a very strong point 6 and they can add a strong O/D market.
Who else can pretend to step into the global market "à la EK" ?
DEL is trying ... they indeed meet some of the 6 features I summarized, and they add (like IST) a strong O/D market. But points 1,4,5,6 are not met.
And then there is DME or SMO whatever they decide to develop as a wwhub (if any)
My personal opinion is that while Moscow offers a tremendous potential, as long as they remain soooooooooo business unfriendly, there is not the slightest chance to see them compete among the world business leaders, be it aviation related or not. This IMHO will not change any time soon given the political framework in place.
Like Tolipanebas and many others care to stress, I am "surprised" by the rapid uprise of EK, QR and EY. Indeed their business model is dependant on the deep pockets and power of the ruling monarchy but also on the unbelievable generosity of the Indian and Western (OZ included) political authorities granting them traffic rights which are not in scale wih the true market they represent (point 5) . The "free market" paradigm is just that, a paradigm. It is still in the implementation phase within the EU although it was probably the main objective for creating the common market. On the global scale, different bodies try to regulate the legitimate protectionist conflicts that arise between parties involved (G.20, EU/US economic summits etc ..)
.. but I know it's sort of taboo topic to the many EK defenders brandishing the "free market flag" .. So be it, "mondialisme" is at work, but stupidity also ...It's self shooting, my opinion.
I back the Canadian political decision to limit the CA/UAE traffic rights to 1 daily each which is already quite a generous agreement given the O/D market requirement (and given the Canadians don't even make use of their right)

Some errors you made,

1.Point 4, wrong
2.QR and EY are no mega players. They're copying the EK model but losing money.
3.EK's business model is certainly not depending upon "the deep pockets and power of the ruling monarchy". It's just good management in an aviation friendly environment.
4.Let's not forget that in the end it's the passenger who decides if an airline is successful or not.
5.Canada is indeed not very cooperative. That's why Seattle (close to Vancouver) is a new destination.
http://m.gulfnews.com/business/aviation ... r-1.880374

I wonder why some of the pilots being very critical about EK on this forum turned up in DXB for an interview lately But hey they all say the same, "don't tell anybody yet".

[sn-remember]

Errors ?

1.Point 4 was a question ... You still fail to give me definite evidence that I am wrong (but I clearly stated I might be wrong on this point).
2. I never mentioned EY was or would become a mega player (pls read me again) AND I clearly mentioned they are "chronically in the red" (pls read me again)
However I stated QR might be poised to grow as a major player. I didn't comment about their profitability bcs I don't know of any reliable source, do you ? According to Al Baker, the airline has made a net profit in six of the past 14 years, including the past financial year.
But as I mention (point 1,2,4?,5) what the meaning of nice financial sheets when they are not playing the same rules as others ?
3. I should have said the SUCCESS OF THEIR VENTURE is depending upon the deep pockets and power of the ruling monarchy. I don't want to comment on the quality of their mgt and coherence of their business plan bcs it's a no-brainer.
4. No comment
5. As everybody knows Canada perceives higher taxes than the US do, making some Canadians lure towards US hubs when possible (like SEA for the Vancouver metro residents or DTW for people around Toronto). It doesn't alter the validity of my point. Which is (in cas you would misread again) that O/D traffic between Canada and UAE is more than well covered with 2 daily frequencies (actually 1 daily is more than enough) !

So next time pls read more carefully before posting ?
Rgds

[1V1]

Errors ?

1.Point 4 was a question ... You still fail to give me definite evidence that I am wrong (but I clearly stated I might be wrong on this point).
2. I never mentioned EY was or would become a mega player (pls read me again) AND I clearly mentioned they are "chronically in the red" (pls read me again)
However I stated QR might be poised to grow as a major player. I didn't comment about their profitability bcs I don't know of any reliable source, do you ? According to Al Baker, the airline has made a net profit in six of the past 14 years, including the past financial year.
But as I mention (point 1,2,4?,5) what the meaning of nice financial sheets when they are not playing the same rules as others ?
3. I should have said the SUCCESS OF THEIR VENTURE is depending upon the deep pockets and power of the ruling monarchy. I don't want to comment on the quality of their mgt and coherence of their business plan bcs it's a no-brainer.
4. No comment
5. As everybody knows Canada perceives higher taxes than the US do, making some Canadians lure towards US hubs when possible (like SEA for the Vancouver metro residents or DTW for people around Toronto). It doesn't alter the validity of my point. Which is (in cas you would misread again) that O/D traffic between Canada and UAE is more than well covered with 2 daily frequencies (actually 1 daily is more than enough) !

So next time pls read more carefully before posting ?
Rgds

1.The fact we tanker at some out stations?
2.A few months ago a nice article about the gulf carriers was published in an economic newspaper. Can't find it though. Stated why QR would always be the little brother of EK. (With the figures.)
3.It's the opposite. Dubai (the ruling monarchy) needs EK. Without the airline Dubai would not be on the map.
5.Vancouver and Toronto, 3354km in between and one daily flight to Toronto would do (BTW it's only 3/week)? Seattle was chosen as a destination because Vancouver was not (yet) authorized by the Canadians, not because of taxes.

Please accept my apologies if this is not in line with your previous post, I've read it carefully though.

best regards

[sn-remember]

I agree QR is set to remain a smaller player than EK (not too difficult to guess I presume ..)
SEA can indeed drain some Vancouver traffic (distance 200 kms +) but it's more than that.
It's home to many ww businesses, very active business center and a considerable Indian subcontinent allochtons concentration. A bit like Vancouver.
It's only 3/wk to YYZ bcs EY serve the other 4/w.

[1V1]

I agree QR is set to remain a smaller player than EK (not too difficult to guess I presume ..)
SEA can indeed drain some Vancouver traffic (distance 200 kms +) but it's more than that.
It's home to many ww businesses, very active business center and a considerable Indian subcontinent allochtons concentration. A bit like Vancouver.
It's only 3/wk to YYZ bcs EY serve the other 4/w.

It's only 3/week because the Canadian authorities did not allow a daily flight. EK would love to get a daily. And it would be full.

Don't forget Seattle is Boeing town also. And the rumor is we've extra B777's coming. (announcement at the airshow)

More to come: Dallas, Chicago, Atlanta, Washington,...

[DeltaWiskey]

Don't forget Seattle is Boeing town also. And the rumor is we've extra B777's coming. (announcement at the airshow)

What is your 'source' for this? I also think EK will order more, so any info is welcome. (but most articles i have read are orders for more A380)

I don't think Seattle will drain that much attraction from Vancouver, who is going to drive 2.5-3 hours, going through border control, just to fly Emirates?

On another topic, I don't see how Etihad en Emirates could be merged, I think they will always be separate airlines (as long they are owned by the respective ruling families). Etihad was launched as a billboard for Abu Dhabi, and is still losing money each year...

QR is going to be smaller than Emirates for the time being, probably "forever". They fly smaller aircraft and don't have so much on order. They might join an alliance in the future, something Emirates certainly isn't considering (atm).

[1V1]

Don't forget Seattle is Boeing town also. And the rumor is we've extra B777's coming. (announcement at the airshow)

What is your 'source' for this? I also think EK will order more, so any info is welcome. (but most articles i have read are orders for more A380)

I don't think Seattle will drain that much attraction from Vancouver, who is going to drive 2.5-3 hours, going through border control, just to fly Emirates?

On another topic, I don't see how Etihad en Emirates could be merged, I think they will always be separate airlines (as long they are owned by the respective ruling families). Etihad was launched as a billboard for Abu Dhabi, and is still losing money each year...

QR is going to be smaller than Emirates for the time being, probably "forever". They fly smaller aircraft and don't have so much on order. They might join an alliance in the future, something Emirates certainly isn't considering (atm).

How do you want me to give you a source for a rumor? Let's call it flightdeck rumors

Every EK flight has a huge amount of pax with connecting flights, I guess there will also be people flying from Vancouver to Seattle and vice versa to continue with EK.

For those who are interested in EK's plans there's this interview of Tim Clark. http://www.flightglobal.com/page/interv ... interview/

[sn-remember]

Thank you for the reading !
T. Clark doesn't say a lot ..
They expect continued growth (that we know) and from everywhere .. OZ going to 12 daily, is a given (good bye QF).
Doubling the nr of Chinese destinations (from current 4 to 8) is imo less obvious to achieve .. I don't see the Chinese letting their market go like the Ozzies and British did (not mentioning the EU).
He hopes still more cake in India and the EU but as amply discussed on this thread, it's hardly imaginable..
And he hopes to 'crack the US nut shell' .. Good luck to them

I also share the opinion that EK will eventually fly the A380 on most of (if not all) current EU routes.
Yes a fleet of 100+ A380s coupled with 100+ 77Ws does significantly impact the East-West market flow. Add to this the 100+ EY and QR fleet, that adds up to something like 400+ long range w/bs from the Gulf in the near future.
It can and it does change the game for the 3 global EU players, like it does in the FE, OZ and India.
You know how many long range w/bs are cumulatively operated by all Indian carriers ? I don't think the Chinese would favour that.

It's true that predators were/are the rule on the global market. But never on that scale before. I also favour some sort of competition and market openness but not to the point of closing my own business.
And never in the past was any airline granted so generous traffic rights (KL were really struggling with only 2 or 3 wkly flights on some routes although they requested far more, going non-stop and using the 747 to compensate).
Illustration ? Lets take the SA market ? EK have 3 flights to JNB, 1 to DUR and 2 to cpt. QR have 1 to jnb making it a total of 7 w:b (mixture of 77W and A388). Compare with the other usual predators SI,CX and TG making a total of 4 dailies (3 to jnb and 1 to cpt). Meanwhile, SAA have just a cxion to HKG (not mentioning BOM they don't even succeed to make daily, offering 9W an avenue) ... AND meanwhile the SA authorities limit MH to a few frequencies during the week to "protect their flag carrier" .. Ridiculous ! Why not state the obvious ? SAA are finished Eastwards ... canibalised by EK, period.
Same applies in Australia.
If you let them do, same could apply in UK, they already lost a big chunk to them, they "love" EK so much !! .. the EU might follow suit.

[1V1]

Thank you for the reading !
T. Clark doesn't say a lot ..
They expect continued growth (that we know) and from everywhere .. OZ going to 12 daily, is a given (good bye QF).
Doubling the nr of Chinese destinations (from current 4 to 8) is imo less obvious to achieve .. I don't see the Chinese letting their market go like the Ozzies and British did (not mentioning the EU).
He hopes still more cake in India and the EU but as amply discussed on this thread, it's hardly imaginable..
And he hopes to 'crack the US nut shell' .. Good luck to them

I also share the opinion that EK will eventually fly the A380 on most of (if not all) current EU routes.
Yes a fleet of 100+ A380s coupled with 100+ 77Ws does significantly impact the East-West market flow. Add to this the 100+ EY and QR fleet, that adds up to something like 400+ long range w/bs from the Gulf in the near future.
It can and it does change the game for the 3 global EU players, like it does in the FE, OZ and India.
You know how many long range w/bs are cumulatively operated by all Indian carriers ? I don't think the Chinese would favour that.

It's true that predators were/are the rule on the global market. But never on that scale before. I also favour some sort of competition and market openness but not to the point of closing my own business.
And never in the past was any airline granted so generous traffic rights (KL was really struggling with 1 or 2 wkly flights on some routes although they requested far more, using the 747 to compensate).
Illustration ? Lets take the SA market ? EK have 3 flights to JNB, 1 to DUR and 2 to cpt. QR have 1 to jnb making it a total of 7 w:b (mixture of 77W and A388). Compare with the other usual predators SI,CX and TG making a total of 4 dailies (3 to jnb and 1 to cpt). Meanwhile, SAA have just a cxion to HKG (not mentioning BOM they don't even succeed to make daily, offering 9W an avenue) ... AND meanwhile the SA authorities limit MH to a few frequencies during the week to "protect their flag carrier" .. Ridiculous ! Why not state the obvious ? SAA are finished Eastwards ... canibalised by EK, period.
Same applies in Australia.
If you let them do, same could apply in UK, they already lost a big chunk to them, they "love" EK so much !! .. the EU might follow suit.

Offer service and win the pax back instead of complaining.

[Air Key West]

Why can EK do what it does ? In short, because they have a fantastic geographical location on the world map + the support of the Dubai leaders + a good product.
QF and SA will become minor players in comparison to Gulf carriers because Australia and South Africa don't enjoy the favorable geographical location which the Gulf carriers have and which enable them to develop their hubs.

Probably only Europe has a fairly similar favorable geographical position on the planet, but in Europe there is no political backing for the airline sector, although this sector could create thousands of jobs which the EU needs and which are now being created elsewhere.

Instead of encouraging the airline sector, France applies an additional tax to premium tickets and the future Belgian government is likely to do the same. The Dutch introduced, then abolished an air ticket tax. Germany has its own air ticket tax and if an airport wants to extand it takes years because of environmentalists' opposition. The latter may be a good thing, but don't blame countries in the desert to take advantage of something which looked like a disadvantage. In the UK there will be no additinal runway for LHR.

In addition, Gulf carriers, and especially EK, are able to develop also because people buy their tickets (and EK tickets are not always the cheapest). EK has a product which people (not necessarily me) like and consequently buy. So, they manage to even fill their A380s.

Major European carriers could take on airlines like EK provided they improve their products and service and provided they can count on the support of European leaders, which is not going to happen (see future tax on CO2 emissions). So, inevitably the next aviation decades will be for the ME carriers.

If one puts up all the hurdles Europe is creating for the aviation industry, it will not be able to develop. Is this what we, as aviation fans, want ?

[regi]

yes...but...
The geography of Dubai, Doha and Abu Dhabi is favourable for West-East connections.
But that is the case when you work with the major hub strategy, and if airlines need to refuel somewhere.

Boeing countered the A380 idea by saying that future travel would much more be point to point and we saw the birth of the 787.

As you say, the next decade is for the ME carriers. But when the long range 787 + A350 will come into action for point to point travel, there is no more need to do a detour along the Gulfstates.
I think that when those new medium wide bodies will come in large quantities, we will see a new price war.

The UK has been the major target for Emirates, no doubt about that. Emirates took a chunk out of the connection to Australia and New Zealand. The victims were the national carriers of those countries.

Not yet for the moment, but I think that some people think about a different way of travelling between the UK and down under. Non stop, higher speed. Accidentally, it is interesting also for the connection between Australia and the USA non-stop.
But again, not yet. Sonic Cruiser Mk-2?

[sn-remember]

Actually, EY flies also to JNB, making it 8 rotations between the Gulf and SAfrica ...
I don't think the coming A350, B787 will change the game dramatically ...
The A350 is too big and the B787, more similar to the A332, could modestly help bypass the big hubs. I think the B787 will be used to maximalize existing hubs, possibly help creating new ones that were not considered bcs deemed too costly .. ? (bcn,man,waw,ber ?)
Indeed what lacks in Europe is a powerfull lobby for the airline business.

[cnc]

As you say, the next decade is for the ME carriers. But when the long range 787 + A350 will come into action for point to point travel, there is no more need to do a detour along the Gulfstates.
I think that when those new medium wide bodies will come in large quantities, we will see a new price war.

the A350 isn't designed for ultra longhaul. besides neither pax nor airlines like ultra longhaul flights. while the 787 could change this (the 777-200LR and A340-500 could too btw) the airlines decided otherwise.