The Emirates Advantage… Not just subsidies
#221
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
You're right… part of Chapter 11 allowed the airline to use its employees as a subsidy, by allowing it to reject current collective bargaining agreements and forcing pay/benefit cuts. It's also allowed them to cash in on the insurance and leave pensions underfunded by billions, again at your expense.
All this happened before Etihad was even formed.
I'm truly sorry for those who lost big on pay and retirement plans, but this is a cat fight between several large companies. I have no emotional stake in these arguments, my loyalties are to whoever is signing my paychecks.
I get that you see ME3 encroachment on US markets as potential threat to your welfare as an employee, however empirical evidence would show your largest threat being those in your corporate offices shielded by golden parachutes.
All this happened before Etihad was even formed.
I'm truly sorry for those who lost big on pay and retirement plans, but this is a cat fight between several large companies. I have no emotional stake in these arguments, my loyalties are to whoever is signing my paychecks.
I get that you see ME3 encroachment on US markets as potential threat to your welfare as an employee, however empirical evidence would show your largest threat being those in your corporate offices shielded by golden parachutes.
#222
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code is NOT a government subsidy. What IT IS is a mechanism that is not available in the rest of the world for a company to reorganize on backs of its shareholders, creditors and employees. The practical application of that is that it has allowed U.S. companies to reduce operating costs. In much of the rest of the world, similar reorganization is not available and they must either trudge on or liquidate. I believe that the ability to have something short of liquidation is enlightened BUT IT DOES uneven the competitive playing field from the perspective of companies that have to compete with that.
Not all of the White Paper or the accompanying 1000 page report dealt with subsidies. They also used examples of relationships, mechanisms and infrastructure that caused an "uneven" playing field in their opinion. I think the point is that it works both ways and the US3 are not the only aggrieved parties.
Where direct subsidies can be proved, by all means do something as an agreement was signed that precluded them but given the anti-trust immunity that the major U.S. carriers have for their alliances and the consolidation that has been allowed at the expense of consumers, I can't help but see some similarities with the behavior of the large U.S. companies in the late 19th and early 20th century. The US3 have gotten almost everything they have asked for and now they want more.
Not all of the White Paper or the accompanying 1000 page report dealt with subsidies. They also used examples of relationships, mechanisms and infrastructure that caused an "uneven" playing field in their opinion. I think the point is that it works both ways and the US3 are not the only aggrieved parties.
Where direct subsidies can be proved, by all means do something as an agreement was signed that precluded them but given the anti-trust immunity that the major U.S. carriers have for their alliances and the consolidation that has been allowed at the expense of consumers, I can't help but see some similarities with the behavior of the large U.S. companies in the late 19th and early 20th century. The US3 have gotten almost everything they have asked for and now they want more.
But no system comes even close to having the State being willing to back-stop any loss or difficulty, because the state is the owner of the airline. Hedge loss? No problem? Losing money on routes? No problem.
Nothing is a problem, really, when the state, the airline, and the owner are undistinguishable from one another. If they really want to inject restructuring into the discussion, the ME3 look foolish trying to equate the CH11 system to subsidies, when their own airline have the ultimate downside protection.
#223
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 238
Changing the subject from subsidies.
The ME3 are gutting the European carriers except for the European's flights to the U.S.
But it looks to me like the ME3 carriers will soon run out of routes that will have much effect on U.S. carriers. Even if they fly from every U.S. city to their Gulf hubs they will only poach the traffic out of the US to the middle east and southeast asia. Those Gulf hubs can't touch the U.S. traffic to Europe, South America, Japan, China, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Eventually it seems they are going to sink under the weight of all those huge aircraft orders.
JMHO
Hook
The ME3 are gutting the European carriers except for the European's flights to the U.S.
But it looks to me like the ME3 carriers will soon run out of routes that will have much effect on U.S. carriers. Even if they fly from every U.S. city to their Gulf hubs they will only poach the traffic out of the US to the middle east and southeast asia. Those Gulf hubs can't touch the U.S. traffic to Europe, South America, Japan, China, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Eventually it seems they are going to sink under the weight of all those huge aircraft orders.
JMHO
Hook
#224
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Changing the subject from subsidies.
The ME3 are gutting the European carriers except for the European's flights to the U.S.
But it looks to me like the ME3 carriers will soon run out of routes that will have much effect on U.S. carriers. Even if they fly from every U.S. city to their Gulf hubs they will only poach the traffic out of the US to the middle east and southeast asia. Those Gulf hubs can't touch the U.S. traffic to Europe, South America, Japan, China, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Eventually it seems they are going to sink under the weight of all those huge aircraft orders.
JMHO
Hook
The ME3 are gutting the European carriers except for the European's flights to the U.S.
But it looks to me like the ME3 carriers will soon run out of routes that will have much effect on U.S. carriers. Even if they fly from every U.S. city to their Gulf hubs they will only poach the traffic out of the US to the middle east and southeast asia. Those Gulf hubs can't touch the U.S. traffic to Europe, South America, Japan, China, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Eventually it seems they are going to sink under the weight of all those huge aircraft orders.
JMHO
Hook
#225
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,133
Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code is NOT a government subsidy. What IT IS is a mechanism that is not available in the rest of the world for a company to reorganize on backs of its shareholders, creditors and employees. The practical application of that is that it has allowed U.S. companies to reduce operating costs. In much of the rest of the world, similar reorganization is not available and they must either trudge on or liquidate. I believe that the ability to have something short of liquidation is enlightened BUT IT DOES uneven the competitive playing field from the perspective of companies that have to compete with that.
Not all of the White Paper or the accompanying 1000 page report dealt with subsidies. They also used examples of relationships, mechanisms and infrastructure that caused an "uneven" playing field in their opinion. I think the point is that it works both ways and the US3 are not the only aggrieved parties.
Where direct subsidies can be proved, by all means do something as an agreement was signed that precluded them but given the anti-trust immunity that the major U.S. carriers have for their alliances and the consolidation that has been allowed at the expense of consumers, I can't help but see some similarities with the behavior of the large U.S. companies in the late 19th and early 20th century. The US3 have gotten almost everything they have asked for and now they want more.
Not all of the White Paper or the accompanying 1000 page report dealt with subsidies. They also used examples of relationships, mechanisms and infrastructure that caused an "uneven" playing field in their opinion. I think the point is that it works both ways and the US3 are not the only aggrieved parties.
Where direct subsidies can be proved, by all means do something as an agreement was signed that precluded them but given the anti-trust immunity that the major U.S. carriers have for their alliances and the consolidation that has been allowed at the expense of consumers, I can't help but see some similarities with the behavior of the large U.S. companies in the late 19th and early 20th century. The US3 have gotten almost everything they have asked for and now they want more.
#226
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,133
Changing the subject from subsidies.
The ME3 are gutting the European carriers except for the European's flights to the U.S.
But it looks to me like the ME3 carriers will soon run out of routes that will have much effect on U.S. carriers. Even if they fly from every U.S. city to their Gulf hubs they will only poach the traffic out of the US to the middle east and southeast asia. Those Gulf hubs can't touch the U.S. traffic to Europe, South America, Japan, China, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Eventually it seems they are going to sink under the weight of all those huge aircraft orders.
JMHO
Hook
The ME3 are gutting the European carriers except for the European's flights to the U.S.
But it looks to me like the ME3 carriers will soon run out of routes that will have much effect on U.S. carriers. Even if they fly from every U.S. city to their Gulf hubs they will only poach the traffic out of the US to the middle east and southeast asia. Those Gulf hubs can't touch the U.S. traffic to Europe, South America, Japan, China, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Eventually it seems they are going to sink under the weight of all those huge aircraft orders.
JMHO
Hook
#227
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Hopefully they go under, but with endless government money that is doubtful.
#228
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Nothing bigger bribes won't solve.
#229
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 474
Changing the subject from subsidies.
The ME3 are gutting the European carriers except for the European's flights to the U.S.
But it looks to me like the ME3 carriers will soon run out of routes that will have much effect on U.S. carriers. Even if they fly from every U.S. city to their Gulf hubs they will only poach the traffic out of the US to the middle east and southeast asia. Those Gulf hubs can't touch the U.S. traffic to Europe, South America, Japan, China, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Eventually it seems they are going to sink under the weight of all those huge aircraft orders.
JMHO
Hook
The ME3 are gutting the European carriers except for the European's flights to the U.S.
But it looks to me like the ME3 carriers will soon run out of routes that will have much effect on U.S. carriers. Even if they fly from every U.S. city to their Gulf hubs they will only poach the traffic out of the US to the middle east and southeast asia. Those Gulf hubs can't touch the U.S. traffic to Europe, South America, Japan, China, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I have answered all calls to action and agree they are unfairly subsidized. I work for Delta and am ****ed we have pulled out of India. But are they really a major threat to U.S. carriers? I honestly don't see the U.S. negotiating new agreements that allow them to fly from countries other than their own to the U.S. (i.e. Milan to JFK) And I don't see passengers preferring the ME carriers so much they would add 10 to 12 hours of connection/flight time to their trip to Europe.
Eventually it seems they are going to sink under the weight of all those huge aircraft orders.
JMHO
Hook
http://www.openandfairskies.com/wp-c...-Traffic-1.pdf
Take a read and see if you change your mind about the damage these highly subsidized ME airlines are causing and could cause US airlines.
I totally got a boner when they started talking about regression analysis in the paper I linked above. Was that wrong?
The Etihad paper was.....well....lame for the same reasons mentioned above. The US government handed 36 Billion bucks to the US airlines when they went through restructuring? I must have missed that one. The US Government gave the US airlines 30 Billion through the PBGC program? The PBGC program isn't even funded by the US governement. Does the Risk Advisory Group, who wrote the analysis for Etihad, even have access to Google? Wait. Probably not since the government in the countries in question get to choose what their "loyal subjects" see and not see on the internet and in the media. The poor guys at Risk Advisory probably tried to Google "PBGC" and got a handsome picture and bio of one the sheikhs instead.
#230
You all are welcome to ignore all opinions that do not conform to your own. The US Airline RJ-pilot-chapter-11-subsidy issue is real. Dont throw stones when you live in a glass house Mr. DAL/UAL/AA.
Wake me up when the RJ industry is dead, and I'll reconsider. Until then enjoy the ME3 and reaping what you sow.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post