Emirates Cuts Flights to US

airzona11 · Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:04 pm

Has this caused a drop in EK flights to the UK?

TransGlobalGold wrote:

Unless another court over-turns the revised ban. it's going to stick. If 45 had his way, the only people entering the United States would be privileged white people.

I think you are reading the wrong travel ban. Or did I misread it?

pompos · Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:25 pm

airzona11 wrote:
Has this caused a drop in EK flights to the UK?

Why should they drop? UK's laptop ban doesn't apply to UAE.

winginit · Thu Apr 20, 2017 11:10 pm

Pe@rson wrote:
Rather sensible to (temporarily) reduce capacity to help maintain if not increase unit revenue and load factor.

The interesting follow up will be where we see this capacity re-deployed. All these new widebodies need to be kept flying in order to get paid off - you can't just park them without continued financial bleeding.

pa747sp · Thu Apr 20, 2017 11:20 pm

pa747sp wrote:
So this will mean a lot of spare capacity in the short term. Do you think they will redeploy it elsewhere, perhaps by opening new routes, or will they take the hit and park the aircraft?

EK has already said that they will be redeploying the aircraft elsewhere - see post 28.[/quote]

I don't see anything in post 28 about EK deployment of aircraft - just copies of emails sent to the industry about rebooking pax affected.

mcogator · Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:05 am

jfklganyc wrote:
mcogator wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
Wow a ton of people don't want to visit Dubai? Shocker.

The world isn't US centric. Dubai was the 4th most visited city in the world last year by the international traveler, with 2.5 million more international visitors than NYC.

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/the-10-most-visited-cities-around-the-world-in-2016-a7487791.html

Do you understand that list?

Those are international visitors only. Not total visitors.

It is why island cities and developing countries with one major city have huge "international" stays....all their tourism comes from outside their borders.

Get a source with "total" tourism numbers to make your point about Dubai being the most visited city.

For instance, NY jumps to 50 million visitors...much larger tourist draw than say Dubai.

You quoted my post which stated "international" twice on the two points...

The population of the US is 50% more than the entire population of the Middle East. There aren't any visa requirements, language barriers, etc for any American to visit NY. Heck, Orlando has 66 million(2015) visitors a year, the most in the US. My exact point was proving that "people don't want to visit Dubai", and "Dubai is crashing" as totally incorrect assumptions based on EK cutting frequency to a number of US cities.

DXB traffic up 8.8% in February 2017
http://www.tradearabia.com/news/TTN_322537.html

DXB traffic up 9.7% in January 2017, surpassing 8 million pax for the first time
http://gulfnews.com/business/aviation/passenger-traffic-at-dxb-jumps-10-to-8m-1.1986700

My point: World isn't US centric. EK cuts frequency to US doesn't mean EK is going under and Dubai will turn into an empty desert wasteland.

David_itl · Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:00 am

pompos wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
Has this caused a drop in EK flights to the UK?

Why should they drop? UK's laptop ban doesn't apply to UAE.

BHX is reported to be going from 3 daily to 2 daily effective 1st September.

alfa164 · Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:09 am

DDR wrote:
Ah klm617 you never fail to disappoint. Some of the cities that EK added were questionable at best. Also, the US3 are not run out of greed. Do you even understand how capitalism works? How is making a profit greed? My 401 (retirement) is largely tied to my airlines financial success. Them being profitable helps me and millions of other people. Please do some research before making false posts.

If he/she/it had to do research, we wouldn't ejjoy such "entertaining" posts here. Every website needs its resident village idiot...

KarelXWB · Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:44 am

winginit wrote:
The interesting follow up will be where we see this capacity re-deployed. All these new widebodies need to be kept flying in order to get paid off - you can't just park them without continued financial bleeding.

pa747sp wrote:
So this will mean a lot of spare capacity in the short term. Do you think they will redeploy it elsewhere, perhaps by opening new routes, or will they take the hit and park the aircraft?

Emirates will shift aircraft to destinations in Malaysia, Oceania and Africa

DJWM · Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:53 am

Emirates will shift aircraft to destinations in Malaysia, Oceania and Africa

The airliners might be redeployed to markets ranging from countries in the Pacific to Africa and Europe, he said.

Pellegrine · Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:33 am

Pretty pathetic prejudiced protectionism by the current US government, it won't last. I have to laugh at some of my fellow US members posting snarky messages saying EK is crashing down.

It seems like a temporary adjustment in light of the current political climate. Airlines have to do this all the time.

dtw2hyd · Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:59 am

So daily double B77W to Port Vila.

Good to know they are getting redeployed somewhere else on earth.
What about 6xA380s and 12xB77Ws joining the fleet this year.
What about B773s supposed to have returned to lessor.

Send someone to Embry-Riddle or Eastern Michigan now, they will have better planning skills in two years.

dubaiamman243 · Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:17 am

From Bloomberg article:

" Emirates has no plans to suspend any U.S. routes, Clark said. The flight reductions are temporary, and new aircraft it’s receiving this year will still be assigned to the affected cities when “things restore themselves to some kind of equilibrium” in the market. Emirates will continue to consider potential orders at U.S. planemaker Boeing Co., as well as European competitor Airbus SE, as it looks at narrow-body aircraft."

jomur · Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:46 am

Don't all airlines periodically make changes to their flights and still survive? Seems a bit quick to say Emirates is going to fall apart due to a few strategic route changes that every airline do as part of due diligence of normal operating procedures...

klm617 · Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:10 pm

DDR wrote:
Ah klm617 you never fail to disappoint. Some of the cities that EK added were questionable at best. Also, the US3 are not run out of greed. Do you even understand how capitalism works? How is making a profit greed? My 401 (retirement) is largely tied to my airlines financial success. Them being profitable helps me and millions of other people. Please do some research before making false posts.

That argument is some lame tell me how many foreign made electronics you own or the foreign car you drive because it's affordable and what about those people who work in those industries and their 401Ks. Why should airlines be any different that bring a much more affordable option to the market place and a better quality product and what about all the maintenance done on the cheap overseas. So it's OK for the airline to chose overseas vendors because it's cheaper but they want to consumer to not benefit from that choice. Kind of reminds me of Lee Iacocca telling everyone to but his American cars while getting the components from cheap overseas vendors. You been brainwashed well by the establishment that want's you to believe greed is good as long as it turns a profit.

Bricktop · Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:38 pm

Pellegrine wrote:
Pretty pathetic prejudiced protectionism by the current US government, it won't last. I have to laugh at some of my fellow US members posting snarky messages saying EK is crashing down.

It seems like a temporary adjustment in light of the current political climate. Airlines have to do this all the time.

Excellent alliteration, Pellegrine!

dtw2hyd · Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:43 pm

Any decision by an airline is commercial decision. Calling it a commercial decision doesn't give more credence to management.

Boiler plate run-of-the-mill airline strategies/statements (though conveniently used by PR/fans) will not fit into a business model based on largest blunders committed in the industry.

Sure other airlines do adjust routes seasonally, but they don't have 100s of WBs on order and taking delivery of 2+ WBs every month.

Premium yields and loads were way down long before Trump was voted in. Straight from horse's mouth. Pilots were not quitting because of Trump's travel/electronics ban.

Flightsimboy · Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:00 pm

PerfectGriffin wrote:
. In a few weeks you will hear about EY and QR cutting frequencies to the US. EK is always the first of the ME3 to react and make changes, and the other two follow.

Will keep an eye out for your bold statement above. You say in a few weeks, correct, just as the peak summer season is to roll in.

olle · Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:43 pm

How will this in the end effect ME3 purchases of Boeing planes?

If ME3 is so political as described here can Trump administration have any effect?

chrisnh · Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:09 pm

I appreciate the knowledge here on this forum. I pretty much rapidly concluded that since Boston was carrying more passengers on a daily basis than a single 77W could carry, the new single flight would likely end up being an A380. But I was simply considering people and not freight. And it seems as though the A380 is NOT all things to all markets and that the 77W is really a better plane in some situations. So, I learned something. Thank you. As for Logan with its brand-new A380 gates, wow...what an embarrassment. Of course, it was a different competitive landscape when that project was drawn up and funded.

AvroLanc · Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:18 pm

Guessing all carriers will be suffering as people in general think twice about where to spend their vacation/money. My guess is tourism will be down from Europe and the middle east during the current US administration. Will be interesting to see load factors over the next year.

Taco2sDay · Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:28 am

alfa164 wrote:
DDR wrote:
Ah klm617 you never fail to disappoint. Some of the cities that EK added were questionable at best. Also, the US3 are not run out of greed. Do you even understand how capitalism works? How is making a profit greed? My 401 (retirement) is largely tied to my airlines financial success. Them being profitable helps me and millions of other people. Please do some research before making false posts.

If he/she/it had to do research, we wouldn't ejjoy such "entertaining" posts here. Every website needs its resident village idiot...

Thanks for making me laugh! Some of these "entertaining" comments make a bad day turn humorous!

lightsaber · Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:12 am

mcogator wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
mcogator wrote:

The world isn't US centric. Dubai was the 4th most visited city in the world last year by the international traveler, with 2.5 million more international visitors than NYC.

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/the-10-most-visited-cities-around-the-world-in-2016-a7487791.html

Do you understand that list?

Those are international visitors only. Not total visitors.

It is why island cities and developing countries with one major city have huge "international" stays....all their tourism comes from outside their borders.

Get a source with "total" tourism numbers to make your point about Dubai being the most visited city.

For instance, NY jumps to 50 million visitors...much larger tourist draw than say Dubai.

You quoted my post which stated "international" twice on the two points...

The population of the US is 50% more than the entire population of the Middle East. There aren't any visa requirements, language barriers, etc for any American to visit NY. Heck, Orlando has 66 million(2015) visitors a year, the most in the US. My exact point was proving that "people don't want to visit Dubai", and "Dubai is crashing" as totally incorrect assumptions based on EK cutting frequency to a number of US cities.

DXB traffic up 8.8% in February 2017
http://www.tradearabia.com/news/TTN_322537.html

DXB traffic up 9.7% in January 2017, surpassing 8 million pax for the first time
http://gulfnews.com/business/aviation/passenger-traffic-at-dxb-jumps-10-to-8m-1.1986700

My point: World isn't US centric. EK cuts frequency to US doesn't mean EK is going under and Dubai will turn into an empty desert wasteland.

8 million in a month?!? What airports hit that besides ATL? Does PEK, LHR, or HND hit 8 million in a month?

I didn't realize DXB was growing that quick this year.

Lightsaber

KarelXWB · Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:03 am

CAPA has a good read story on the cut back:

Emirates has multiple reasons for cutting back on US capacity

To give the discussion some perspective:

The reduction seems significant but needs to be placed in perspective. While Emirates is cutting flights, some flights were only recently introduced (the second Los Angeles service in Jul-2016) and there have been other recent additions that will remain (Newark in Mar-2017). The sum of the changes means that from Jul-2017 Emirates in the US will be back to its size at Nov-2016.

That doesn't sound like the sky is falling.

The article gives several reasons why EK needs to (temporary) cut back flights to the US. Flight travel restrictions have been mentioned already, Qatar Airways would be another reason:

Qatar Airways USA growth: Qatar Airways is one factor in the increased competition. Qatar Airways expanded rapidly in the US.

In an 11 month period from Nov-2015 to Sep-2016, Qatar Airways grew its North American presence by 60% in terms of frequencies and 66% for seat capacity. From 2015 to Jul-2017, Emirates will have added 1.3 daily flights in North America (reflecting announced reductions), Etihad no flights, Turkish 2.1 flights, and Qatar 4.3 flights.

Indian carriers are also a factor. I suggest reading the entire article.

anshabhi · Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:56 am

link to article: https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... ity-340326

dtw2hyd · Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:49 am

Different perspective.

Apparently Qatar increasing capacity and Etihad maintaining at current levels to US.

https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2017/04/2 ... wn-making/

http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/bre ... ng-demand/

emiratesdriver · Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:05 pm

https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/emirates-has-multiple-reasons-for-cutting-back-on-us-capacity-340326

A couple of key quotes for me..

It is a good talking point to blame unhelpful policies for a 19% cut in capacity and reduction in visitors and economic benefit to the US. The service reduction could add pressure on the policies. Blaming a capacity cut on overcapacity will not receive the same attention.

Along with shock horror

But Emirates will be challenged to redeploy the capacity, and that adds to existing excess frames. Emirates is already accelerating the retirement of older aircraft. The result will surely be the parking of some aircraft and reduced utilisation of others.

All in all a fair analysis of what is effectively the last 6 months of EK ops, with of course a clear understanding of the realities of utilisation of airframes. Never let it be said I'm pushing an agenda.

IrishAyes · Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:20 pm

I think the CAPA article did a great job of explaining how, in so many words, the laptop/electronics ban gave Emirates an easier, "out" to explain the capacity reductions to the U.S., although the logic behind the move has existed for a much longer period of time.

Simply put, there is no way that EK should be flying 2x daily to SEA, BOS and LAX in spite of whatever codeshare opportunities exist at those locations with AS/B6.

MoKa777 · Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:59 pm

I agree with most of what CAPA is saying.

There is a ton of over-capacity in the US market from EK and QR. EY appears more sensible and TK has a huge home market and millions of narrow bodies plying the EU skies to justify it's presence in the US.

The problem now is the frames that this reduction frees up. Between them, these reductions could free up ±7 frames. That is a lot. I believe many, if not most, of EK's non-open-skies rights have already been mostly used by now.

Also, when you have a 500-seat A380 on 1, 2, 3, etc. daily flights to a particular destination, it is hard to justify putting another 350/500-seat aircraft 777 or A380 into the mix...

EK needs to work-out and give up the fizzy drinks. Too much fat and bloat.

I love them but no. Just no...

dtw2hyd · Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:27 pm

It is interesting CAPA penned such an analysis on Emirates, unthinkable going back couple of years. CAPA grew up on Emirates. They even had a guy on Twitter drooling over every move they made.

BHXRunway15 · Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:19 pm

EK @ BHX.

Apologise the delay in replying but I have been away and I realise this thread is primarily about EK's US flights.

Some perspective of the Emirates BHX - DXB route. When it was last running at twice daily load factors were often high 80's to low 90's other than of course the low season of May and June. The third service was added on 1/8/2015 (EK41/2) on a three class 77W compared to the two class aircraft on EK37/38/39/40 and all was well to start with especially as it was the main UK holiday time. The intention from the start I believe was to increase the capacity to two class 428 seat 77W on EK41/2 in December15/January 16 and this happened.

Loads on EK41/2 were variable from August 2015 until March 2016 when a spanner was thrown into the works by Qatar when they started Doha and Emirates rather than leave their services alone they responded by adding the A380 to EK39/40, when capacity wise there was little justification but I suppose they felt they needed to respond to the Qatar threat.

During May 16, June 16, September 16, EK41/2 saw the first of some adhoc cancellations and many more downgrades to the three class 77W. Finally in November 2016 EK41/2 was cancelled for the whole month and it was announced that the A380 would swap to EK37/8 from EK39/40 in January 2017, which was not a surprise as percentage wise it has always been hinted EK37/8 was often sold out throughout the year or at least performed better than 150 pax often seen in May and June on EK39/40.

Since the A380 swap to EK37 things picked up dramatically and in February 67742 passengers used the service at an average of 403 per flight which was a record for the three services (August 2016 saw 70426 pax but on more flights of course as 31 days). However once again EK41/2 has been cancelled from the second week of May until June and now it has been removed completely from September 2017 but to my surprise EK39/40 has not been upgraded to the 380 as yet.

Like in the first instance when there appeared little commercial justification for the A380 to be placed on EK39 there is little to see why EK have taken such a drastic step in removing EK41/2 without adding some capacity to EK39/40 although there is time for this to happen.

In conclusion it is clear that going from nil to 360 to 428 seats on EK41/2 in such a short space of time was ambitious but things were not helped in April 2016 when the 615 seat A380 was added to the following service in the guise of EK39/40. However it seemed that by moving the A380 to the ever-popular EK37/38 was a very good move as loads evened out across the three services but alas it appears it has not saved EK41/2.

The other factor is that EK42 meets a bank that is not as strong as the banks the other two flights meet and a couple of the destinations/countries can be reached direct (ISB/DEL) by using AI/PK as then there is also competition from QR and TK as well. In other words too much capacity too soon.

MoKa777 · Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:30 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
It is interesting CAPA penned such an analysis on Emirates, unthinkable going back couple of years. CAPA grew up on Emirates. They even had a guy on Twitter drooling over every move they made.

I have come to realise and understand that you do not like EK and the ME3 in general.

However, if they make a good business/commercial decision then credit should be given where it is due.

I am against bias in any direction and I am for good, sound decisions being made irrespective of who makes said decision.

EK took many huge risks based on thorough research and came out on top for the most part.

EK also took many huge risks that did not translate to success. Some of these decisions could have been ego driven or heavily misguided.

Either way, they have succeeded and they have failed in the time they have existed so far.

747megatop · Tue Apr 25, 2017 9:02 pm

mcogator wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
mcogator wrote:
My point: World isn't US centric. EK cuts frequency to US doesn't mean EK is going under and Dubai will turn into an empty desert wasteland.

EK international traffic is to a large extent; centric to these flows

Top two important ones for EK i would imagine
-> OZ/NZ - Europe centric
-> South Asia - USA centric

And remaining traffic flows like
-> Africa - East Asia/China/South Asia
-> Africa - Europe
-> South East Asia - Europe
-> South America - South Asia/East Asia/Middle East

Now, your statement of world isn't US centric may be true to a certain extent; to a large extent though EK's world is US, Europe, Australia and India centric (in that exact order in my opinion) as their most significant source/destination markets with a very small % of the traffic being O&D traffic. So, policy changes in the US (or for that matter Europe & Australia) will definitely significantly hurt EK. Will they shut down? NO. Will Dubai be a desert wasteland? NO. Just that EK will be reduced to a shadow of what it is today and will not be on an endless shopping spree of aircraft and will not be flying whale jets. The vulnerability of EK (and ME3 in general) is the over dependence on connecting traffic.

747megatop · Tue Apr 25, 2017 9:10 pm

IrishAyes wrote:
Simply put, there is no way that EK should be flying 2x daily to SEA, BOS and LAX in spite of whatever codeshare opportunities exist at those locations with AS/B6.

No way they should be flying twice daily on A 380s. I think that is the key. Twice daily on a smaller capacity twin jets like B787/A350? Maybe; that way they can offer a better mix of frequency.

747megatop · Tue Apr 25, 2017 9:10 pm

KTPAFlyer wrote:
usxguy wrote:
t If I was one of those people, then that would indeed be a horrible ordeal.

Which would make me switch to BA/LH/AF/UA/AI/SQ depending where i am flying if i was one of those people.

747megatop · Tue Apr 25, 2017 9:17 pm

emiratesdriver wrote:
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/emirates-has-multiple-reasons-for-cutting-back-on-us-capacity-340326

A couple of key quotes for me..

It is a good talking point to blame unhelpful policies for a 19% cut in capacity and reduction in visitors and economic benefit to the US. The service reduction could add pressure on the policies. Blaming a capacity cut on overcapacity will not receive the same attention.

Along with shock horror

But Emirates will be challenged to redeploy the capacity, and that adds to existing excess frames. Emirates is already accelerating the retirement of older aircraft. The result will surely be the parking of some aircraft and reduced utilisation of others.

All in all a fair analysis of what is effectively the last 6 months of EK ops, with of course a clear understanding of the realities of utilisation of airframes. Never let it be said I'm pushing an agenda.

Which makes me ask the question if it hasn't been already asked (haven't read through all the replies on this thread); what does it mean for the future of large capacity aircraft like the A 380 and 777-9 with EK? EK might be thinking that it is too much of a risk to have too many large capacity aircraft since it is overly dependent on connecting traffic and aviation policy changes of the respective governments. EK doesn't seem to have very many options to juggle around excess airframe capacity lying around.

MoKa777 · Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:14 pm

747megatop wrote:
emiratesdriver wrote:
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/emirates-has-multiple-reasons-for-cutting-back-on-us-capacity-340326

A couple of key quotes for me..

It is a good talking point to blame unhelpful policies for a 19% cut in capacity and reduction in visitors and economic benefit to the US. The service reduction could add pressure on the policies. Blaming a capacity cut on overcapacity will not receive the same attention.

Along with shock horror

But Emirates will be challenged to redeploy the capacity, and that adds to existing excess frames. Emirates is already accelerating the retirement of older aircraft. The result will surely be the parking of some aircraft and reduced utilisation of others.

All in all a fair analysis of what is effectively the last 6 months of EK ops, with of course a clear understanding of the realities of utilisation of airframes. Never let it be said I'm pushing an agenda.

Which makes me ask the question if it hasn't been already asked (haven't read through all the replies on this thread); what does it mean for the future of large capacity aircraft like the A 380 and 777-9 with EK? EK might be thinking that it is too much of a risk to have too many large capacity aircraft since it is overly dependent on connecting traffic and aviation policy changes of the respective governments. EK doesn't seem to have very many options to juggle around excess airframe capacity lying around.

^ This. +1

dtw2hyd · Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:37 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
It is interesting CAPA penned such an analysis on Emirates, unthinkable going back couple of years. CAPA grew up on Emirates. They even had a guy on Twitter drooling over every move they made.

I have come to realise and understand that you do not like EK and the ME3 in general.

However, if they make a good business/commercial decision then credit should be given where it is due.

I am against bias in any direction and I am for good, sound decisions being made irrespective of who makes said decision.

EK took many huge risks based on thorough research and came out on top for the most part.

EK also took many huge risks that did not translate to success. Some of these decisions could have been ego driven or heavily misguided.

Either way, they have succeeded and they have failed in the time they have existed so far.

Emirates at its core is a PR company with airline ops as trivial non-core. Management thinks they can achieve anything thru PR and marketing.

If you pay enough money (or give freebies) to aviation analysts/rating agencies/bloggers/image management companies/travel agents/media reporters, they will continue to write good things, irrespective of what management does and where airline is headed. Later they can always claim "we didn't see this coming".

Strategic missteps they took will cause irreparable damage. The only hope was Mueller, he was pushed out or left knowing it is too difficult to fix.

My rub, Boeing subscribed to these fantasies and going to cause major issues to US aviation industry.

lightsaber · Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:23 am

KarelXWB wrote:
CAPA has a good read story on the cut back:

Emirates has multiple reasons for cutting back on US capacity

To give the discussion some perspective:

The reduction seems significant but needs to be placed in perspective. While Emirates is cutting flights, some flights were only recently introduced (the second Los Angeles service in Jul-2016) and there have been other recent additions that will remain (Newark in Mar-2017). The sum of the changes means that from Jul-2017 Emirates in the US will be back to its size at Nov-2016.

That doesn't sound like the sky is falling.

The article gives several reasons why EK needs to (temporary) cut back flights to the US. Flight travel restrictions have been mentioned already, Qatar Airways would be another reason:

Qatar Airways USA growth: Qatar Airways is one factor in the increased competition. Qatar Airways expanded rapidly in the US.

In an 11 month period from Nov-2015 to Sep-2016, Qatar Airways grew its North American presence by 60% in terms of frequencies and 66% for seat capacity. From 2015 to Jul-2017, Emirates will have added 1.3 daily flights in North America (reflecting announced reductions), Etihad no flights, Turkish 2.1 flights, and Qatar 4.3 flights.

Indian carriers are also a factor. I suggest reading the entire article.

Facinating link, thank you.

The chart slopes show the culprit, QR.

EK has dropped capacity by 19%. Not a sky is falling moment, but showing they have to control costs prior to their annual statement.

I recommend everyone read that CAPA link.

If EK is to be hurt, it is hub competition and hub bypass. The link notes they expect a profit in the current year, much better than some of the competition.

Lightsaber

AirIndia · Wed Apr 26, 2017 6:00 am

747megatop wrote:
IrishAyes wrote:
Simply put, there is no way that EK should be flying 2x daily to SEA, BOS and LAX in spite of whatever codeshare opportunities exist at those locations with AS/B6.

No way they should be flying twice daily on A 380s. I think that is the key. Twice daily on a smaller capacity twin jets like B787/A350? Maybe; that way they can offer a better mix of frequency.

Well there will be a decision on that by Nov 2017 at the Dubai Air Show.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/business/av ... 5/no-title

Sheikh Ahmed said Emirates fleet expansion will continue as planned and it would be receiving 27 new aircraft next year. The airline has not yet taken a decision on choosing between Airbus 350 and Boeing 787 for its fleet expansion.

"We are evaluating and will announce the final decision at the Dubai Airshow."

MoKa777 · Wed Apr 26, 2017 9:41 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
MoKa777 wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
It is interesting CAPA penned such an analysis on Emirates, unthinkable going back couple of years. CAPA grew up on Emirates. They even had a guy on Twitter drooling over every move they made.

I have come to realise and understand that you do not like EK and the ME3 in general.

However, if they make a good business/commercial decision then credit should be given where it is due.

I am against bias in any direction and I am for good, sound decisions being made irrespective of who makes said decision.

EK took many huge risks based on thorough research and came out on top for the most part.

EK also took many huge risks that did not translate to success. Some of these decisions could have been ego driven or heavily misguided.

Either way, they have succeeded and they have failed in the time they have existed so far.

Emirates at its core is a PR company with airline ops as trivial non-core. Management thinks they can achieve anything thru PR and marketing.

If you pay enough money (or give freebies) to aviation analysts/rating agencies/bloggers/image management companies/travel agents/media reporters, they will continue to write good things, irrespective of what management does and where airline is headed. Later they can always claim "we didn't see this coming".

Strategic missteps they took will cause irreparable damage. The only hope was Mueller, he was pushed out or left knowing it is too difficult to fix.

My rub, Boeing subscribed to these fantasies and going to cause major issues to US aviation industry.

In this day and age you cannot blame any company for having PR at it's core and as one of it's biggest expenses.

Branding and image is more important to most people than quality or value for money.

Look at Apple and Samsung who manage to be the biggest mobile phone makers despite the fact that their devices are more likely to bend out of shape and/or catch fire than the more modest competition whose devices don't suffer these problems.

Why? PR, branding, image...

EK might have 10-abreast Y aboard their 777s and subpar J compared to many competitors but they also focus on the whole travel/flying experience.

Their IFE and dining is above most of the competition and the options they offer in their network are almost second to none.

Most of what they have done has worked, so far...

I agree they have taken a few missteps that will affect them tremendously in future and will affect Airbus and Boeing as well.

EK over bought aircraft. Not just that but they over bought aircraft that are too big and expensive. They have very little flexibility in their fleet. For an airline that tries to keep frequencies to a minimum of 7-weekly, having your two aircraft options be 350/420 seats or 520/650 seats must be a planning and revenue nightmare.

I do trust, however, that they will adjust and restructure themselves into something more efficient and sensible. This slight fall from grace was just caused by a very costly mistake to make but it will be a good lesson to learn.

EY is more willing to understand their limits and reign themselves in as far as I can see.

The one to be even more worried about is QR. They are blindly expanding like rabbits in heat (LOL) and don't have any of the commercial advantages that EK had. They will also reach a peak and the tumble down on the other side will be even worse than what EK is experiencing.

Boeing may suffer quite a bit with EK and the 777X. The programme will not be doomed if EK reduces commitments but 100 is always better that 50.

Same with Airbus and the A380. The biggest problem with the A380 programme, though, is it's almost total reliance on EK going forward. Boeing still has a number of other airlines to fall back on for the 777X but EK will leave Airbus with a 747-8 problem once they realise that they have bought a hundred too many whales.

About the PR part again, PR is the tool that puts bums in seats for the airline ops which is the focus of Emirates AIRLINE. To assume that airline ops are trivial and PR more important is naive. What do they spend more money on every year? Ad campaigns or aircraft leasing, maintenance and crew?

Also, what proof do you have that people or organisations who can be critical of the airline are being paid off or given freebies? If there is undisputed, undeniable proof for this then EK is a despicable company that does not deserve my or anyone else's hard-earned money. If not, then...

I am grateful for airlines like EK. I may not agree with all the decisions they take but they have led to airlines like Ethiopian Airlines trying very hard to undercut them. When you live in Africa, like me, you can really appreciate something like that.

You probably don't agree with anything I have said but that's cool...

dtw2hyd · Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:05 am

MoKa777 wrote:
I do trust, however, that they will adjust and restructure themselves into something more efficient and sensible. This slight fall from grace was just caused by a very costly mistake to make but it will be a good lesson to learn. .

They will continue to use (again) PR without doing anything sensible. They should have cancelled VLAs few years back.

They day after news about cuts to 25 weekly flights to a ULH destination, Dubai desk plants a story claiming these will be deployed somewhere else on earth. 7-9 planes 91hrs-117hrs additional flying hours/day at 13hr/day avg utilization rate. Who are they trying to fool?

Inconsistent product is another major issue. If A380s and B77Ws(sans bar/shower) cabins are configured same way, they don't need to send multiple A380s. Because they over publicized A380, no one wants the B77W as their primary choice. EK's own fault.

MoKa777 wrote:
The one to be even more worried about is QR. They are blindly expanding like rabbits in heat (LOL) and don't have any of the commercial advantages that EK had. They will also reach a peak and the tumble down on the other side will be even worse than what EK is experiencing.

This is just another EK's talking point repeated over and over again on internet.
Sure QR can open lot more destinations with right size aircraft.

QR can send a A320 with a monthly lease of $350K but for EK to open it has to send minimum a B777 at $1.2Million a month or even worst $1.9 Million/month A380.

IMHO, increase in values/lease payments are actually a bad sign of lessors demanding more for VLAs.

How many SLB deals EK closed last year?

MoKa777 wrote:
About the PR part again, PR is the tool that puts bums in seats for the airline ops which is the focus of Emirates AIRLINE. To assume that airline ops are trivial and PR more important is naive. What do they spend more money on every year? Ad campaigns or aircraft leasing, maintenance and crew?

PR may be bringing Y passengers, but it is not filling premium cabins (or) worst filling with bloggers and reward travel. Double whammy.

Their PR spending ranges between $1.7B to $3.2B, depends on who you believe.
Their entire fleet lease will be $2.5Billion a year.

Is there any other airline spending $1.7B on PR???

emiratesdriver · Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:58 am

The entire organisation is effectively a mafia of one description or another, anyone with any experience of the place will tell you about the Indian mafia running IT, the Australians in the flightcrew training, the British in upper management etc.
English
Managed
Indian
Run
Australian
Trained
Expats
Screwed

Questions? Please direct them to our corporate comms team who also write the i house company publication "Safa" which we call Pravda for short.

MoKa777 · Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:09 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
MoKa777 wrote:
I do trust, however, that they will adjust and restructure themselves into something more efficient and sensible. This slight fall from grace was just caused by a very costly mistake to make but it will be a good lesson to learn. .

They will continue to use (again) PR without doing anything sensible. They should have cancelled VLAs few years back.

They day after news about cuts to 25 weekly flights to a ULH destination, Dubai desk plants a story claiming these will be deployed somewhere else on earth. 7-9 planes 91hrs-117hrs additional flying hours/day at 13hr/day avg utilization rate. Who are they trying to fool?

Inconsistent product is another major issue. If A380s and B77Ws(sans bar/shower) cabins are configured same way, they don't need to send multiple A380s. Because they over publicized A380, no one wants the B77W as their primary choice. EK's own fault.

MoKa777 wrote:
The one to be even more worried about is QR. They are blindly expanding like rabbits in heat (LOL) and don't have any of the commercial advantages that EK had. They will also reach a peak and the tumble down on the other side will be even worse than what EK is experiencing.

This is just another EK's talking point repeated over and over again on internet.
Sure QR can open lot more destinations with right size aircraft.

QR can send a A320 with a monthly lease of $350K but for EK to open it has to send minimum a B777 at $1.2Million a month or even worst $1.9 Million/month A380.

IMHO, increase in values/lease payments are actually a bad sign of lessors demanding more for VLAs.

How many SLB deals EK closed last year?

MoKa777 wrote:
About the PR part again, PR is the tool that puts bums in seats for the airline ops which is the focus of Emirates AIRLINE. To assume that airline ops are trivial and PR more important is naive. What do they spend more money on every year? Ad campaigns or aircraft leasing, maintenance and crew?

PR may be bringing Y passengers, but it is not filling premium cabins (or) worst filling with bloggers and reward travel. Double whammy.

Their PR spending ranges between $1.7B to $3.2B, depends on who you believe.
Their entire fleet lease will be $2.5Billion a year.

Is there any other airline spending $1.7B on PR???

Yes, they should have cancelled most of their VLAs years ago. I agree. Like I said, too many gigantic, expensive aircraft. Almost no flexibility.

About the 7-9 aircraft surplus now that the reductions to the US are being made, you will see - 13-14 replies up thread and my first reply on this particular thread - I made reference to just that. Those are a lot of frames and almost nowhere to put them. Governments, like in Kenya, are becoming less friendly towards EK.

Yes, there exists a problem of inconsistent hard-product on their aircraft. However, EK are not conning anyone. When they advertise the luxurious privileges aboard the A380, they do not lead the consumer to wrongly believe these features are available on their other aircraft. It focuses on the A380 alone. Also, there are hardly last-minute aircraft changes with inferior products because there are enough frames to pick up slack if anything goes awry.

Yes, I agree about QR having smaller, more right-sized aircraft. My comment was more about the super quick expansion by adding aircraft of all sizes even faster than EK did. QR may have a number of these smaller, right-sized aircraft but they also have an order book of 80 A350s and 60 777Xs. QR also has waaaay less O&D to pull from.

I also agree that lease cost are a major factor. I alluded to this in another reply when I said EK has too many large and EXPENSIVE aircraft on their books and it is all a VERY COSTLY mistake.

$1.7 billion on PR is a lot. $3.2 billion is even worse. Again it comes back to my comment of EK making a very costly mistake and learning a good lesson the hard way. Their aircraft are huge. The smallest aircraft in EK's fleet is the size of the largest aircraft in many other airlines' fleets. In order to make money one has to spend money. Simple. If anyone comes to South Africa where I live, he/she will likely fly domestically on an airline that comes first to mind. The one that comes first to mind is the one that is most visible and most vocal.

Why are O'Leary and Al Bakr always talking rubbish to the media? Free PR. EK, however, has chosen a different and more costly method of PR.

EK is doing what businesses do. Businesses sometimes make costly mistakes while knowing better and sometimes they make unintentional triumphs. I don't see why it should bring out resentment and condemnation.

dtw2hyd · Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:32 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
.. I don't see why it should bring out resentment and condemnation.

There is no other airline owner in the world supported management in every aspect like Dubai did. Financial resources, negotiating worldwide BASAs, creating dedicated infrastructure, creating lax regulatory environment, you name it they served on a plate. It is any airline CEO's dream come true.

All management need to do is pick right type aircraft, right destinations and treat employees well. Management failed in all three areas.

They can spend $1.7B on PR, but every month they have to come up with different way to screw employees, by "enhancing" their benefits or perks. Don't tell me every airline is doing it.

Pelly · Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:48 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
Yes, I agree about QR having smaller, more right-sized aircraft. My comment was more about the super quick expansion by adding aircraft of all sizes even faster than EK did. QR may have a number of these smaller, right-sized aircraft but they also have an order book of 80 A350s and 60 777Xs. QR also has waaaay less O&D to pull from.

This discussion would be much more useful if people did some research. Just a quick look at the numbers (might be off by 1-3 aircraft) the following passenger aircraft entered service with EK, QR and EY in their latest financial year:

EK (35)
19x A380
16x 77W

QR (11)
1x A380
6x A350
3x 788
1x 77W

EY (10)
3x A380
7x 789

In absolute terms EK took on significantly more aircraft and in relative terms EY took on more aircraft than QR did in the last financial year. Sure QR's deliveries will ramp up in 2018/2019 but they are also in the process of retiring more than 40 aircraft in that period as well as re-allocating others to other ventures.

MoKa777 · Wed Apr 26, 2017 12:53 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
MoKa777 wrote:
.. I don't see why it should bring out resentment and condemnation.

There is no other airline owner in the world supported management in every aspect like Dubai did. Financial resources, negotiating worldwide BASAs, creating dedicated infrastructure, creating lax regulatory environment, you name it they served on a plate. It is any airline CEO's dream come true.

All management need to do is pick right type aircraft, right destinations and treat employees well. Management failed in all three areas.

They can spend $1.7B on PR, but every month they have to come up with different way to screw employees, by "enhancing" their benefits or perks. Don't tell me every airline is doing it.

Why is it a problem that a government sees the tremendous benefits of an airline instead of stifling it's progress?

Management has done a pretty good job for the most part. Right now they are in the dumps and they should have seen it coming, as we all did, but they did many things right and took advantage of the pro-aviation environment in which they exist.

From everything I have heard so far, EK is one of the best employers in the region. Their staff are well-paid, living in a desirable city and working for a prestigious company. People here in SA covet positions with EK but would most likely stay away from QR. EY is rated even more highly than EK.

Dubai is the sin city of the Middle East so employees are hardly living heavily restricted lives.

If one is not happy with the work conditions to which they will be subjected then they should not take the job.

gsg013 · Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:28 pm

What about the fact that EK is short on Crew's to fly the planes and have parked many? Maybe this is a good excuse to reduce the flights that are less "Profitable" for them?

dtw2hyd · Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:37 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
Why is it a problem that a government sees the tremendous benefits of an airline instead of stifling it's progress? .

My point was owners did all the heavy lifting, any other airline management would not have misused such great opportunity.

MoKa777 wrote:
Management has done a pretty good job for the most part. Right now they are in the dumps and they should have seen it coming, as we all did, but they did many things right and took advantage of the pro-aviation environment in which they exist. .

Name few right things, management did without using what owner created? Owner created pro-aviation environment, it is not a management achievement.

All they did is buy PR services, so there won't be any bad news or bad posts in forum treads.
They tried to dump capacity and hope all others will go away.

Lets look at current headwinds.
QR eating into premium traffic
China 6 with $1B/yr legal route subsidies will shadow ME3 and dump traffic through non-stops.
AI taking back India-USA traffic
9W/DL is going to offer lot more one-stop options
India 6 have complete hold on Dubai-India O&D market.
DY/WOW will make 5th freedom worthless
Saudi/Kuwait are taking back regional traffic

MoKa777 wrote:
If one is not happy with the work conditions to which they will be subjected then they should not take the job.

You are subscribing or repeating standard talking point.
You have to be way better than other countries/airlines to attract talent, particularly type rated, experienced pilots.

emiratesdriver · Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:20 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
If one is not happy with the work conditions to which they will be subjected then they should not take the job.

You are subscribing or repeating standard talking point.
You have to be way better than other countries/airlines to attract talent, particularly type rated, experienced pilots.

Good luck dtw, as you know most on here are those closet airline manager wannabes who view pilots in the usual way.. e.g. Lazy, over paid, under worked and worst of all a bunch of whining primadonas.
What they fail to recognise is that an airline can operate with little or no management hierarchy, it can't however operate with little or no pilots, engineers, cabin staff, ground handlers etc etc.

MoKa777 · Wed Apr 26, 2017 3:08 pm

I guess we all just have to agree to disagree.

What you don't seem to see "dtw2hyd" is that I agree with almost everything you are saying.

The point I have been trying to make is that things are not clear-cut, black and white. There is always a grey area where things are neither "this" nor "that" but some franken-option in-between.

EK was handed a pro-aviation environment on a silver (rather, gold) platter and did use to to the fullest.

Every single airline has reached a point in it's life cycle where things go south and everything needs to re-evaluated and adjusted. EK had ambitions of epic proportions so the trough they fall into will be just as epic.

However, like every other airline before, they will also recover. Big, difficult decisions will need to be taken and situations like the one with the US will give them a good, easy excuse to change things.

Also, every business will be the best until competitors rise with sufficient knowledge of how to compete and a leaner structure. 20 to 30 years from now, these competitors will likely fall victim to the same circumstances as EK is now.

We could likely go on debating for ages. I will stop it here.

Again, I meant no disrespect to anyone here (especially if you don't agree with me) and I agreed with most of what you said "dtw2hyd" so it is best to cut it short here.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net