Delta mounts legal challenge to Emirates

CFIT

Gimme your money
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Posts
821
Total Time
1:51pm
Easy guys, this seems to be a pretty big deal.

As soon as the General pulls his finger out of his butt, he can let us all know exactly how this will play out.
 

8sugarsugar

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Posts
306
Total Time
+
and further news, Delta has hired General Lee as their lawyer. A copy of his opening argument is below.

"Riiiiiight, Emirates wants to fly more 5th freedom, will never ever happen. Enjoy that! Have fun in Dakar! riiiiight. Enjoy that profit share! You will be raped in Dubai! I make more money you! Birmingham to Kansas City, riiiight! Enjoy that!"

The judge was throughly confused on what point General Lee was trying to make.
 
Last edited:

Noserider76

Teahupoo
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Posts
789
Total Time
150+
Pretty biased article. Many issues involved and worthy of a fight for DL and all Western carriers in my opinion. Is it right for a company to be "competitive" using ultra low wage third country nationals? Another state sponsoring the hoped for demise of local carriers? The end result would be to destroy the standard of living of the home country employees as their airlines try to compete with a state sponsored entity that uses low priced employees for various areas of the world.

Luckily the US carriers are profitable, the US is getting ready to turn off the Mideast oil spigot, and US carriers should soak up many of the world's available qualified pilots. A couple years ago this may have turned out differently when the US carriers were on their backs.
 

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Total Time
A lot
I think these snippets in an article by Adam Weinberg of M?tley Fool better describes the actual situation:



"A geographical problem

Emirates, Qatar Airways, and Etihad Airways have exploited favorable geography to drive lots of connecting traffic through their hubs. For travelers heading between Europe (or even South America) and Asia or Australia, the Persian Gulf region is a reasonably convenient connection point.

Emirates has taken this strategy to its logical extreme: It operates only wide-body aircraft, and its fleet skews toward the very largest wide bodies on the market. These big planes are typically the cheapest to operate on a per-seat basis, which allows Emirates to offer lower prices to attract more customers. Since Emirates has a single mega-hub in Dubai, it can fill these seats with passengers traveling on to many different final destinations.

By contrast, for travelers going from the U.S. to Europe, East Asia, or Latin America (i.e., all of the top international destinations), the Persian Gulf is thousands of miles out of the way. India and the Middle East are two of the few destinations for which Dubai, Doha, and Abu Dhabi are sensible connection points.

As a result, the Gulf carriers' business models don't work well in the United States. Few travelers heading from New York to Shanghai will be interested in going 3,500 miles out of the way to Dubai. Moreover, the additional flying distance would increase costs. The Gulf carriers can still fly to a handful of the top U.S. metro areas, but they need to manage supply based on the comparatively limited demand for travel between the U.S. and the Middle East/South Asia."



However, Emirates has characterized the New York-Milan route as a "one-off" thing. Indeed, that route is somewhat unusual, because while Milan is a large business market, it is underserved because of Alitalia's decision to locate its main hub in Rome instead. This created an opening for Emirates to fill a very large plane (a Boeing 777-300ER) without relying on the connecting volume of its Dubai hub.

By contrast, for high-volume routes such as New York-London, New York-Paris, Chicago-London, or Los Angeles-Tokyo, the U.S. carriers and their international partners will be much harder to unseat.

AMR has joint ventures with British Airways and Japan Airlines; Delta Air Lines has joint ventures with Air France and Virgin Atlantic; United Continental has joint ventures with Lufthansa and ANA. For most major routes, at least one of these joint ventures benefits from hubs on either end, allowing frequent service. Emirates would have more trouble breaking into these well-supplied markets.


On the other hand, for lower-volume routes (especially to Europe), U.S. carriers use smaller aircraft such as the Boeing 757 or 767. The 757 typically seats fewer than 200 passengers in an international configuration, whereas most of Emirates' planes have 300 to 500 seats. If a carrier like United can only fill a 757 for an international flight, despite having a large hub at Newark Airport to generate passenger "feed," Emirates doesn't have a prayer of filling a much larger 777.

Foolish bottom line

Emirates -- and its regional rivals Qatar Airways and Etihad Airways -- is clearly looking to expand. After two huge orders last week, Emirates has 385 widebody planes on order, worth as much as $166 billion at list prices. Emirates is already the largest airline in the world by international traffic, and it is clearly on pace to become the largest by overall traffic within the next decade.

Fortunately, the U.S. carriers can hide behind favorable geography and strong U.S. hubs. While Emirates and the other Gulf carriers are well positioned to steal traffic from European and Asian competitors, their hubs cannot offer reasonable connections for most international routes to and from the United States. There are also very few routes like New York-Milan, where Gulf carriers could feasibly compete "away from home."

The top European and Asian airlines need to gear up for a costly battle with Emirates, Qatar Airways, and Etihad Airways. Otherwise, they could lose a large part of their high-value international business traffic. However, for the U.S. legacy carriers -- Delta, United, and American -- this threat is overblown."




There is no doubt we have to watch the big three, and protect flying rights. Canada and several European nations limit the Gulf carriers, because nothing they offer can possibly help the other countries. The Gulf Carriers want opens skies for a connection hub, primarily because not enough people want to actually travel to those hot, sweltering wastelands. Sure, DXB is pretty modern, but most of the O&D passengers who want to stay there are laborers from India and Asia to build growing infrastructure to try to make that hotbed feel inhabitable. The Gulf carriers use someone's bank credit (can't order $50 billion in planes without a co-signer) to try to get access to airports, and threaten to take orders away if nothing is granted. Well, go buy Anantovs! Good luck with that!


Bye Bye---General Lee
 

jonjuan

Honey Ryder
Joined
Feb 26, 2004
Posts
4,155
Total Time
3,000+
That's not debating, el private lee. That's copying and pasting, something which you seem to be good at doing. 25,000 posts by the end of '14? Methinks so.
 

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Total Time
A lot
Pretty biased article. Many issues involved and worthy of a fight for DL and all Western carriers in my opinion. Is it right for a company to be "competitive" using ultra low wage third country nationals? Another state sponsoring the hoped for demise of local carriers? The end result would be to destroy the standard of living of the home country employees as their airlines try to compete with a state sponsored entity that uses low priced employees for various areas of the world.

Luckily the US carriers are profitable, the US is getting ready to turn off the Mideast oil spigot, and US carriers should soak up many of the world's available qualified pilots. A couple years ago this may have turned out differently when the US carriers were on their backs.
Well said. OPEC is not as powerful as they used to be, and their fear of losing influence is showing. Australia just hit a huge oil find too, larger than the amount of oil in Saudi. Oil dependence on the ME is waning.


Bye Bye---General Lee
 

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Total Time
A lot
That's not debating, el private lee. That's copying and pasting, something which you seem to be good at doing. 25,000 posts by the end of '14? Methinks so.
I guess you didn't read my last paragraph. Oh wait, you can't read anyway. Absolutely zero of your posts have contributed anything to this board. Not surprised....


Bye Bye---General Lee
 

fareview

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Posts
444
Total Time
10k+
All interesting points.

Dubai has no oil.

One of the issue for countries that have open skies with EK - is that with the large countries that don't (Canada, Germany & India) - it induces EK to put their rapidly expanding fleet into existing markets. Whereas YVR, YYZ, YYC & YUL would be more attractive to Emirates in the near term than ORD, MIA & ATL by closing out the UAE it actually results in massive expansion in the US, UK & Oz markets.

ie The US majors are funding Air Canada's protectionism....and Open Skies with the US is here to stay because of massive Boeing orders.

If the US wants a level playing field they need to chat to their Northern neighbors.

fv
 
Last edited:

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Total Time
A lot
All interesting points.

Dubai has no oil.

One of the issue for countries that have open skies with EK - is that with the large countries that don't (Canada, Germany & India) - it induces EK to put their rapidly expanding fleet into existing markets. Whereas YVR, YYZ, YYC & YUL would be more attractive to Emirates in the near term than ORD, MIA & ATL by closing out the UAE it actually results in massive expansion in the US, UK & Oz markets.

ie The US majors are funding Air Canada's protectionism....and Open Skies with the US is here to stay because of massive Boeing orders.

If the US wants a level playing field they need to chat to their Northern neighbors.

fv
Open skies with the US means finding the correct city pairs, and it looks like DL and UAL will be contesting anything that isn't fair in their eyes, like the Italian 5th freedom rights. And just because you buy big planes from Boeing, doesn't mean you will get everything you want. EK can always change to Anatonov 124s if they want. As the article I posted stated, many smaller European markets to the US are flown by UAL 757s to EWR, because that is about the biggest plane that can make money on those city pairs. If EK can do it with 777-300ERs, that would be amazing.

It is also amazing that EK still orders A380s when France and Germany restrict the number of cities EK can go to. Why don't they dump the 380 orders? Antonovs are waiting to be built for EK I bet....



Bye Bye---General Lee
 

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Total Time
A lot
Double pay for qualified pilots? Probably. In India $15K per month is a lot of money. Maybe not in NYC, but in India, yes. I don't think many AAL or UAL 777 Capts based in NYC or EWR would leave their current jobs to take the Jet Etihad jobs. Nope. There will eventually be a global fight for pilots. There will be poaching from different airlines, and with 15,000 retiring from the big 3 here in the States, many expats flying overseas may think about coming back home. With that many retiring, getting on early in the wave will look very attractive to anyone.


Bye Bye---General Lee
 

Golden Falcon

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Posts
659
Total Time
21000+
$13,000 a month to fly a 777 as a CA international and probably gone 20 days? I make that as FO in 15 days flying to LBB in a corndog .

I wish more people were aware of that....and a lifestyle to boot....
 

Golden Falcon

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Posts
659
Total Time
21000+
The poo hasn't hit the fan with the 380's just yet...bear in mind Emirates as of now doesn't operate aircraft any older than 12-15yrs max...and the early 380's are hitting their half-life as we speak...all these greedy lessors who jumped on the chance to lease 380's to EK might just find themselves holding a large ramp full of white whales...expensive ones at that...remember half of all 380's ordered are for EK...and with western countries finally beginning to tap their own (very large) oil reserves...things might become very different here...
 
Last edited:

boxjockey

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 10, 2003
Posts
446
Total Time
7000+
Pretty biased article. Many issues involved and worthy of a fight for DL and all Western carriers in my opinion. Is it right for a company to be "competitive" using ultra low wage third country nationals? Another state sponsoring the hoped for demise of local carriers? The end result would be to destroy the standard of living of the home country employees as their airlines try to compete with a state sponsored entity that uses low priced employees for various areas of the world.

Luckily the US carriers are profitable, the US is getting ready to turn off the Mideast oil spigot, and US carriers should soak up many of the world's available qualified pilots. A couple years ago this may have turned out differently when the US carriers were on their backs.
MWHHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!! So wait, other US companies don't us these people either? Where does Delta do a lot of their MX? In Hong Kong at HAECO? Yeah, they sure cost as much as engineers and mechanics in the US!!! Gravy!!!

box
 

fareview

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Posts
444
Total Time
10k+
The Shale boom will benefit everyone. Rising tides...

Again, Dubai has no oil.

fv
 

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Total Time
A lot
MWHHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!! So wait, other US companies don't us these people either? Where does Delta do a lot of their MX? In Hong Kong at HAECO? Yeah, they sure cost as much as engineers and mechanics in the US!!! Gravy!!!

box
Box,

DL uses their own facilities most of the time. There may be some outside work, but DL does heavy MX work for a lot of other companies as well. The huge MX hanger in ATL always has a few interesting other paint schemes in there.



Bye Bye---General Lee
 

Varmint

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Posts
551
Total Time
14000
Is it right for a company to be "competitive" using ultra low wage third country nationals?
Emirates pays the going wage in the US and every other country they fly to as do all US carriers.

I am sure Delta or United don't fly to Dubai and offer to pay the ground staff 5 times the going wage because you or anyone else thinks that it's the right thing to do. The same thing occurs in India and most of Asia and Africa.
 

Mercyful Fate

Get yo purple drank on yo
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Posts
2,487
Total Time
A lot
Delta has 88 717's coming...everyone's argument is invalid.
 
Top