kq747 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

BOS and SEA were way over served to begin with. You guys act like BOS-DXB is this huge market and can fill an A380 most of those were connection passengers from the JetBlue partnership and if they thought BOS needed the extra capacity they wouldn't have cut one flight so no no A380 to BOS.

The load factors for two 77W were definitely lower after the second flight was launched but replacing one 77W with an A380 as the sole flight is only 95Y, 34J, 6F or 135 extra seats vs 354 seats on a second 77W which to me seems perfectly viable.

Time will tell but I disagree.

lightsaber wrote:

EK is numbers run. They have been backpedaling on aircraft for what, 15 months? Differals of the A380...

And where has the ramp up in DWC spending gone? It is past due to ramp up construction for 2025...


Could it be low oil has impacted so many EK customers that they feel it?

I can only imagine how bad it is at the non-number run competition. EK will survive and thrive. It is a question of when.

Lightsaber

What does a numbers run airline mean? How do they operationally differ from a "non-number run" airline?

EK's explanation for the capacity adjustments are an attempt to hide the truth that they have over saturated the market with capacity that wasn't necessary. In my opinion EK's approach to growth here in the US was not sustainable especially when QR and EY were in the process of expanding as well. The ME3 were all fighting over the same passengers and they fueled their expansion by offering these incredibly cheap fares on flights from the US to Middle East and India. Now the market is completely over saturated and EK will have to rethink their US strategy.
I honestly believe EY and QR are in a better position to weather a downturn in travel to the US because they have the flexibility in the fleets to better match capacity to demand while EK has the 77W / L and the A380. There are some markets that probably don't need that much capacity and an A359 or a 789 might be a better fit.

B747forever wrote:

What does a numbers run airline mean? How do they operationally differ from a "non-number run" airline?

It means that despite the seemingly endless, unproven claims that they are massively subsidised, don't need to make a profit and are a plaything of an oil-rich Sheikh, they are in fact a well run airline driven by making a profit. If a route is not sufficiently profitable, they'll drop it or reduce it.

This of course disproves the whole "they don't need to make a profit" garbage, but still people spout it. Go figure.

MAH4546 wrote:

clrd4t8koff wrote:

To see FLL (Miami area) get cut so soon after launch is pretty telling about demand to S. Fla from the ME/India/sub-continent. Having EK reduce services to 5x weekly, as well as Turkish not too long ago announced reduced services.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... operation/

You realize what is going in Turkey right? Even Boston saw a cut to only 4w during off-peak winter (MIA-IST peaks in winter).

It's not really surprising that younger, less established routes like FLL and MCO see the cuts. The load factors EK have to Orlando and Lauderdale prove the market is there.

I would argue if the market was there they could support a daily flight, especially given they're both large B6 stations. Even with connections they can't maintain daily, doesn't really say strong market to me.

avgeektravelinc wrote:

This is a commercial decision in response to weakened travel demand to US. The recent actions taken by the US government relating to the issuance of entry visas, heightened security vetting, and restrictions on electronic devices in aircraft cabins, have had a direct impact on consumer interest and demand for air travel into the US. Over the past three months, we have seen a significant deterioration in the booking profiles on all our US routes, across all travel segments. Emirates has therefore responded as any profit-oriented enterprise would, and we will redeploy capacity to serve demand on other routes on our global network.

Very, very carefully chosen language. It seems clear from the wording above that Emirates is walking a bit of a tightrope here. Emirates is going out of its way to emphasize that it is a "profit-oriented enterprise" - so as not to essentially validate the US3's claim that it isn't. But on the flip side, Emirates also seems to be emphasizing that these are simply prudent, commercial decisions and not intended for political effect - lest it risks an equally-politically-motivated response from the U.S. government (outright renouncing or restricting the U.S.-UAE Open Skies) that would be far more imperiling to its business in the U.S.

Ultimately, I tend to agree that while heightened security and carry-on restrictions, and general mood and sentiment, may well be having an effect, this is also likely, indeed a "commercial decision" based on the fact that the market has, indeed, become somewhat saturated. Whether any of us agree with it or not, the point oft-repeated by the US3 that the actual local market between the U.S. and UAE is rather small is, really, undeniable. Emirates obviously relies heavily on connecting traffic to fill its aircraft, and in an increasingly-competitive environment, I don't doubt that it's getting harder and harder to profitably do so.

klm617 wrote:

clrd4t8koff wrote:

To see FLL (Miami area) get cut so soon after launch is pretty telling about demand to S. Fla from the ME/India/sub-continent. Having EK reduce services to 5x weekly, as well as Turkish not too long ago announced reduced services.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... operation/

Remember FLL-DXB has a lot to do with the JetBlue connections. Maybe that isn't working out as well as planned.

This stood out to me also. I don't think it's the EK/B6 partnership as others have pointed out that BOS is heavily supported by B6 connections. My sense is that even with connections @ FLL it's a weak route. If the S. Fla market was so good then why doesn't EK move to MIA and use a 77W or A380?

jayunited wrote:

EK's explanation for the capacity adjustments are an attempt to hide the truth that they have over saturated the market with capacity that wasn't necessary. In my opinion EK's approach to growth here in the US was not sustainable especially when QR and EY were in the process of expanding as well. The ME3 were all fighting over the same passengers and they fueled their expansion by offering these incredibly cheap fares on flights from the US to Middle East and India. Now the market is completely over saturated and EK will have to rethink their US strategy.
I honestly believe EY and QR are in a better position to weather a downturn in travel to the US because they have the flexibility in the fleets to better match capacity to demand while EK has the 77W / L and the A380. There are some markets that probably don't need that much capacity and an A359 or a 789 might be a better fit.

Yup and imagine if AI ever got it's act together. My dad had go go to NAG recently so chose QR and flew ORD-DOH-NAG. For lots of reasons he would've preferred AI but their connectivity and schedules to secondary cities still sucks. But no doubt he would've preferred to go ORD-DEL-NAG on AI if it wasn't such a PITA. I know my post has nothing to do with EK but just trying to illustrate that the ME3 aren't going to grow forever.

B747forever wrote:

What does a numbers run airline mean? How do they operationally differ from a "non-number run" airline?

If your auditor name rhymes with bloopers, it is a numbers company.

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

Adipocere wrote:

The contrived "laptop ban" seems to be paying off.

LOL yup. Cue the unfounded boogeyman! Reduced air service to the US by those job-stealing 'foreign' airlines is all part of the plan to Make America Great Again.

Review of the H-1B visa allotments which if passed should impact the number of migrant Indian tech workers...
The JV with Jet/DL/Virgin making the cash cow of Indian passengers via Dubai no longer a given...

I look forward to seeing how this will pan out.

kq747 wrote:

klm617 wrote:

BOS and SEA were way over served to begin with. You guys act like BOS-DXB is this huge market and can fill an A380 most of those were connection passengers from the JetBlue partnership and if they thought BOS needed the extra capacity they wouldn't have cut one flight so no no A380 to BOS.

The load factors for two 77W were definitely lower after the second flight was launched but replacing one 77W with an A380 as the sole flight is only 95Y, 34J, 6F or 135 extra seats vs 354 seats on a second 77W which to me seems perfectly viable.

the actual factors have varied quite a bit, but on average the 2 flights were bringing in 500+ a day, and as others have said too many for a single flight (EK's 380's normally carry 489 and 517) while it was double daily there was no reason for them to flip a 77W to the Whale, that would just have been dumping capacity on the route and i completely agree would be unnecessary. With the suspension it maybe they do bring the 380 in and it covers them, but they will lose some traffic at certain times that's for sure. However if they do that, it will be highly unlikely the 2nd route will come back any time soon as then you are back to the capacity dumping scenario. Sure they could switch it back to a 77W and revert to how it is now, and I am pretty sure EK wanted that 2nd flight for B6 connection possibilities due to the early morning arrival in BOS. But if the demand ain't there, it ain't there. and it's not the first time the morning flight has been suspended. I just think this suspension will be a bit longer than the previous one.

As i've seen before, having essentially a 2 aircraft type longhaul strategy is now showing it's problems, and having a 788 or 789 or 332 option might have proven very useful.

In my opinion, EK can blame the US, but then why aren't other Gulf carriers (who are impacted with the same travel restriction) affected? Sounds like EK is looking for a scapegoat.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39640473

"However Etihad, its smaller Abu Dhabi-based rival, said it had not seen a significant change in demand for travel to the US in recent weeks. The airline flies to six US cities."

lightsaber wrote:

Agreed. There are much bigger forces. I bet the data shows a much longer term decline. Heck, data I saw in a thread here on a.net showed starting in last August wasn't so good.

But the global economy shows signs of growth. We just have an over-sold widebody situation concentrated in the middle East and China.

This too shall pass. We'll go from too many widebodies to too few over say 5 years. But I will not enjoy those 5 years... Sigh...

Lightsaber

I've been enjoying the J class fares and will Sigh right along with you.

klm617 wrote:

BOS and SEA were way over served to begin with. You guys act like BOS-DXB is this huge market and can fill an A380 most of those were connection passengers from the JetBlue partnership and if they thought BOS needed the extra capacity they wouldn't have cut one flight so no no A380 to BOS.

The only way EK turns two 77Ws into one 77W in Boston without missing a beat is if both flights were operating at 50% loads or worse...and they weren't. They were in the high 60s to high 80s. So you do the math: they need more than a 77W in Boston if the plan is one flight per day. Ergo, the A380.

chrisnh wrote:

whywhyzee wrote:

chrisnh wrote:

I think this means the A380 for Boston.

From a cut in service you extrapolate to it must mean they are bringing the A380? I believe there is a difference between wanting something and thinking something might actually happen. (Not saying it won't, but this definitely doesn't make it look very likely.)

It's very easy to extrapolate this. The two daily 777s on the Boston route are carrying far too many people for only one of them to handle. What's the solution if not the A380?

Post #38 said, regarding BOS:

Our daily B777 service on EK 237/238 is not affected.

So no A380 is in the immediate future.

I wonder how long it will take for Boeing to advise President Trump that actions have consequences?

If the ME3 are unwelcome in the USA, the first in line to be hurt are Boeing and GE whose sales contracts for 777-9 etc will be easier to cancel by force majeure or whatever break clause comes handy.

haynflyer wrote:

In my opinion, EK can blame the US, but then why aren't other Gulf carriers (who are impacted with the same travel restriction) affected? Sounds like EK is looking for a scapegoat.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39640473

"However Etihad, its smaller Abu Dhabi-based rival, said it had not seen a significant change in demand for travel to the US in recent weeks. The airline flies to six US cities."

Without wanting to stir the subsidy pot for the X000th time on this forum, I'll say that while I think EK did a very effective job rebutting the US3's claims of billions of dollars in government subsidies, EY and QR did far less of an effective job to the point where I genuinely would put those two carriers in the category of airlines who are virtually marketing arms for their respective cities with little regard for profitability at least with their services to the US. I'd guess that EY and QR are impacted, but they're simply losing more money than they were compared to EK, who is seeing their profits dwindle.

Egerton wrote:

I wonder how long it will take for Boeing to advise President Trump that actions have consequences?

If the ME3 are unwelcome in the USA, the first in line to be hurt are Boeing and GE whose sales contracts for 777-9 etc will be easier to cancel by force majeure or whatever break clause comes handy.

At the same time, you'll have the US3 in Trump's other ear praising the moves. Granted, companies like Boeing and GE are far more prone to populist sympathies than large airlines - especially these days.

The LAX reduction is a stinger in terms of symbolism. Amazing what one relatively small policy change can do!!

Egerton wrote:

I wonder how long it will take for Boeing to advise President Trump that actions have consequences?

If the ME3 are unwelcome in the USA, the first in line to be hurt are Boeing and GE whose sales contracts for 777-9 etc will be easier to cancel by force majeure or whatever break clause comes handy.

As if the US doesn't have the 3 largest airlines in the world itself.

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

It is for most in the US. I agree with you it's due mainly due to the location US the US to the world. So that most Americans don't see Dubai has vacation destination. It's so far out of most travel routes from the US. I Like the Link and was surprised to see Malaysia on the list and to see Thai Land at number one.

avi8 wrote:

Reducing BOS, SEA and LAX to one daily will free up quite a few aircraft. I wonder what they will do with the spare capacity. Maybe use it to their advantage to accelerate the retrofit of a new cabin?

For sure it will help HR and the crewing issue.

haynflyer wrote:

In my opinion, EK can blame the US, but then why aren't other Gulf carriers (who are impacted with the same travel restriction) affected? Sounds like EK is looking for a scapegoat.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39640473

"However Etihad, its smaller Abu Dhabi-based rival, said it had not seen a significant change in demand for travel to the US in recent weeks. The airline flies to six US cities."

this. EK is bleeding cash

granted, QR and EY probably take much larger subsidies/fuel benefits, but both of those airlines partner strongly with AA (a far larger carrier than B6 or AS) which I think grants them a much wider customer base. EK can deny it all they want, but having no legacy partner in the US is hurting them. even in the EU, they lack a BA like QR has, or how Etihad has AB, AZ, and a newer agreement with LH. they're either going to need to forge better partnerships, or they really will be stuck flying what they have themselves with little help.

SE Asia/South Pacific is the one area EK doesn't seem to struggle at all, since they have MH and QF as partners, as well as their own strong network.

It might be the case that the by now well understood low oil situation will result in the ME3 retaining their existing 777 aeroplanes for an ultimate 30 year life. Then factor in a (possible?) more general slowing of the rate of increase in passenger demand. These two issues with the existing USA non free trade policies might add up to bigger trouble for Boeing/GE than hitherto was considered possible let alone likely.

It is not clear to me that the US3 will benefit from the already visible resistance to go on holiday in the USA when there is plenty of spare hotel capacity in more welcoming alternatives. Free trade has advantages many of us have taken for granted, but now?

It still is crazy to see a EK jet in FLL.
By the way, TK cut some US routes and might cut a bit deeper. I have no specifics, but first quarter TK numbers are out and North America is down 18%.
We might see TK to follow EK and cut more into BOS and ATL to start with.

Varsity1 wrote:

As if the US doesn't have the 3 largest airlines in the world itself.

How many of those very expensive 77Xs do the US3 currently have on order?

EK Makes me nervous. Why so many 77W and 388?????
That's one of the reasons they aren't better. Also I never understood why all the flights are at least 1 daily!

I'm sure MCO, for example, would work better with just 4 Weekly B77W instead of 1 daily

Its very funny folks here say EK is well and role model and QR/EY are badly run.

Look at the capacity deployed by ME3 to USA first nine months of 2016, while Obama was president, cannot blame Trump.

EK - 74% PLF - 1,000,000 empty seats.
QR - 82% PLF - 278,000 empty seats.
EY - 80%?? PLF - 290,000 empty seats.

We don't know how bad was 2016 Q4 and 2017 Q1.

In my opinion QR and EY have few advantages in a down market.
1) Flexible fleet.
2) Capacity discipline
3) Relatively better treated and motivated work force.
4) Owners with relatively more money. Not dependent on neighbors income,savings and investment habits.

Its strange that they cut the 2 daily destinations all the way down to 1 daily, which is 50% less. Has it become that Bad? They could have cut to 10 weekly for example.

DLHAM wrote:

Its strange that they cut the 2 daily destinations all the way down to 1 daily, which is 50% less. Has it become that Bad? They could have cut to 10 weekly for example.

They can't, that's why EK makes me so nervous. There's any destination in EK network served less than Daily, or for example 10 weekly, 8 weekly, 5 weekly

B747forever wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

EK is numbers run. They have been backpedaling on aircraft for what, 15 months? Differals of the A380...

And where has the ramp up in DWC spending gone? It is past due to ramp up construction for 2025...


Could it be low oil has impacted so many EK customers that they feel it?

I can only imagine how bad it is at the non-number run competition. EK will survive and thrive. It is a question of when.

Lightsaber

What does a numbers run airline mean? How do they operationally differ from a "non-number run" airline?

Numbers run is like Home Depot. You mine all the data for customer purchasing trends. You identify early preference changes in food, beverage, and travel patterns.

A numbers run company already has a plan for a downturn. Starbucks coffee shops are the extreme example, they will alter shifts of workers off micro-trends. For example, a surge of us buying coffee immediately triggered the algorithm to note there was a conference in town.

All airlines will give a route time to establish itself, such as DXB-FLL or DXB-MCO. In this case EK identified a trend and had already suspended some service.

Non-number run companies are personality run and often find themselves expanding when they should reduce expenses or having no choice but to cut service when the market is starting a recovery.

EK is *not* sitting on massive orders unless you count the far in the future 779. Compare to QR and EY. Yes, for only the second time (first was the start of the last downturn), EK is not leaning forward for growth.

DWC progress is stalled (little investment). AUH is mid expansion with a new DOH serving QR... Only a past due concourse expanding DXB...

EK has cut faster than QR or EY (neither of which act numbers run).

Look at EK's annual reports. They do not report buzzwords, they note the trends that guide their decisions.

Most airlines are stuck with far larger near term orders.

Lightsaber

jayunited wrote:

EK's explanation for the capacity adjustments are an attempt to hide the truth that they have over saturated the market with capacity that wasn't necessary. In my opinion EK's approach to growth here in the US was not sustainable especially when QR and EY were in the process of expanding as well. The ME3 were all fighting over the same passengers and they fueled their expansion by offering these incredibly cheap fares on flights from the US to Middle East and India. Now the market is completely over saturated and EK will have to rethink their US strategy.
I honestly believe EY and QR are in a better position to weather a downturn in travel to the US because they have the flexibility in the fleets to better match capacity to demand while EK has the 77W / L and the A380. There are some markets that probably don't need that much capacity and an A359 or a 789 might be a better fit.

This. EK seemed to think it could flood a market with flights, run other airlines off the route, and dominate with huge numbers of seats going everywhere there was a runway longer than 7,000 feet. They failed because some passengers remain dedicated to their long-term relationships with domestic airlines; because there wasn't enough fare difference to attract defectors; and because some people didn't want to go so far out of their way to destinations that EK might have wanted to take them to.

Simply put, too many seats + not enough butts-in-seats = reckoning.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Its very funny folks here say EK is well and role model and QR/EY are badly run.
Look at the capacity deployed by ME3 to USA first nine months of 2016, while Obama was president, cannot blame Trump.
EK - 74% PLF - 1,000,000 empty seats.
QR - 82% PLF - 278,000 empty seats.
EY - 80%?? PLF - 290,000 empty seats.
We don't know how bad was 2016 Q4 and 2017 Q1.
In my opinion QR and EY have few advantages in a down market.
1) Flexible fleet.
2) Capacity discipline
3) Relatively better treated and motivated work force.
4) Owners with relatively more money. Not dependent on neighbors income,savings and investment habits.

QR and EY seem determined to operate as profitable airlines. EK wanted to be a prolific airline. That is the same attitude that brought airlines in the past (I am thinking of Braniff, in particular) to ruin.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Its very funny folks here say EK is well and role model and QR/EY are badly run.

Look at the capacity deployed by ME3 to USA first nine months of 2016, while Obama was president, cannot blame Trump.

EK - 74% PLF - 1,000,000 empty seats.
QR - 82% PLF - 278,000 empty seats.
EY - 80%?? PLF - 290,000 empty seats.

We don't know how bad was 2016 Q4 and 2017 Q1.

In my opinion QR and EY have few advantages in a down market.
1) Flexible fleet.
2) Capacity discipline
3) Relatively better treated and motivated work force.
4) Owners with relatively more money. Not dependent on neighbors income,savings and investment habits.

QR has 121 near term widebody orders vs. 70 for Emirates. While both have 777X orders, the market will have recovered by 2020.

The market was oversupplied. QR and EY did far better in their US airline partnerships.

But look at the lack of annual reports from QR and EY. Heck, QR had gaps in their equity infusion data.

The owners are selling oil for less than their city-state operating costs. So one reason they aren't numbers run is they have years of funds to burn through. But look at EY's equity partner losses, they have burned through too much cash.

EY and QR will be in worse shape. Their Australian partnership will dampen other drops.

What EK needs is a partner in India. If they could entice Indigo...

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

QR has 121 near term widebody orders vs. 70 for Emirates. While both have 777X orders, the market will have recovered by 2020.

The market was oversupplied. QR and EY did far better in their US airline partnerships.

But look at the lack of annual reports from QR and EY. Heck, QR had gaps in their equity infusion data.

The owners are selling oil for less than their city-state operating costs. So one reason they aren't numbers run is they have years of funds to burn through. But look at EY's equity partner losses, they have burned through too much cash.

EY and QR will be in worse shape. Their Australian partnership will dampen other drops.

What EK needs is a partner in India. If they could entice Indigo...

Lightsaber

Hope your are right on 2020 recovery. EK will be loaded with 140+ A380s and 150+ B77Ws.

QR has 30x A330/A340s averaging 11 years. So it can replace those with A350s/B789s
B789 deferrals shouldn't be a problem for Boeing because they will be picked up by other customers.
IMHO, latest QR order for 10 x B77W is to help Boeing maintain B77W production rate. QR has to stay with the schedule.
Continue to take B737 MAX

The way I see it 10xB77Ws, 30xA350s and 50xB737 MAX should be easy for QR without adding much capacity and keep both A&B happy.

Lets look at EK.
Can Boeing cut B77W production rate further. No. It is looking for anyone to buy B77Ws to maintain production rate.
Can Airbus cut A380 production rate further. No. Tom Enders will be happy to consolidate production and shutdown the line sooner.

While EK may have less number of near term orders, there is no opportunity to defer any further without killing those programs. It has to take those over next 3 years adding to the glut.

lightsaber wrote:

B747forever wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

EK is numbers run. They have been backpedaling on aircraft for what, 15 months? Differals of the A380...

And where has the ramp up in DWC spending gone? It is past due to ramp up construction for 2025...


Could it be low oil has impacted so many EK customers that they feel it?

I can only imagine how bad it is at the non-number run competition. EK will survive and thrive. It is a question of when.

Lightsaber

What does a numbers run airline mean? How do they operationally differ from a "non-number run" airline?

Numbers run is like Home Depot. You mine all the data for customer purchasing trends. You identify early preference changes in food, beverage, and travel patterns.

A numbers run company already has a plan for a downturn. Starbucks coffee shops are the extreme example, they will alter shifts of workers off micro-trends. For example, a surge of us buying coffee immediately triggered the algorithm to note there was a conference in town.

All airlines will give a route time to establish itself, such as DXB-FLL or DXB-MCO. In this case EK identified a trend and had already suspended some service.

Non-number run companies are personality run and often find themselves expanding when they should reduce expenses or having no choice but to cut service when the market is starting a recovery.

Lightsaber

Thanks for the explanation!

klm617 wrote:

BOS and SEA were way over served to begin with. You guys act like BOS-DXB is this huge market and can fill an A380 most of those were connection passengers from the JetBlue partnership and if they thought BOS needed the extra capacity they wouldn't have cut one flight so no no A380 to BOS.

Where are you getting that most of the people flying on DXB-BOS-DXB are simply connecting through BOS? No one said BOS-DXB is a large market. Most of the passengers on the flights are going BOS-DXB-BOM/DEL/BLR/MAA/KHI among other places.

You guys are over reacting. I highly doubt QR and EY aren't facing the same problems, the only difference being that EK cares about profits whilst they other two don't. 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.

flyenthu wrote:

The LAX reduction is a stinger in terms of symbolism. Amazing what one relatively small policy change can do!!

The second LAX flight was a failure from the beginning, long before Trump. It was started with an A380 and couldn't even manage a 50% load factor. Downgraded to a B77W a few months later, and still struggled. I'm sure the policy changes affected loads but that's not the only reason.

DLHAM wrote:

Its strange that they cut the 2 daily destinations all the way down to 1 daily, which is 50% less. Has it become that Bad? They could have cut to 10 weekly for example.

If the post above yours is correct it's been over serviced.

Maybe they will have to kick people off when they oversell flights?

We all know that EK's fleet doesn't have the balancing effect of a smaller 787-ish plane. But what happened with that order they had...and then cancelled?

This doesn't surprise me. Many of these routes probably couldn't stand to lose even a small percentage of their J class pax. This is not EK being money conscious (its way too quick for that). These were clearly routes that were already hurting and after the ban are probably bleeding. You can't just use load factors if fares are forced very low. Plus the ME3 use ethnic consolidators that will discount heavily and never show up on the internet searches. EK probably cross subsides routes as well. So you can't always tell what's really profitable. Add to all of this AI actually delivering reasonably reliable nonstops/one stops (and STAR) plus 9W's relatively new DL alliance, all these are clearly having an effect. I know Ek serves more routes than just US-India, but India is definitely the backbone of their US service (both in Y and J). All you have to do is watch for the number of Asian Veg meal requests.

If Seattle was doing just OK it seems like there would be a transition from two a day to one a day plus an another 3 or 4 a week.

chrisnh wrote:

klm617 wrote:

BOS and SEA were way over served to begin with. You guys act like BOS-DXB is this huge market and can fill an A380 most of those were connection passengers from the JetBlue partnership and if they thought BOS needed the extra capacity they wouldn't have cut one flight so no no A380 to BOS.

The only way EK turns two 77Ws into one 77W in Boston without missing a beat is if both flights were operating at 50% loads or worse...and they weren't. They were in the high 60s to high 80s. So you do the math: they need more than a 77W in Boston if the plan is one flight per day. Ergo, the A380.

You missed the point. If 33% of that traffic or more was B6 connections some can go through JFK and fill those planes more. So even if you were filling 130% of a single 77W, you can divert some to JFK and still get 95% LF on a single BOS.

I have taken the SEA flights 3-4 times over the last one year and the flights were always full or definitely greater than 80-90%, and this was true on weekday departures too. In fact, the early morning arrival flight into SEA used to fill up earlier than the afternoon arrival one. On weekends, the morning departure flight would also fill up faster than the evening one. A bit surprised that they cut one flight to SEA.

Also surprised that the cuts are coming during summer, the peak travel season of US. People used to book tickets to India from SEA at least 4-3 months in advance as fares would go north of $2000 from mid-June to early Sept. I could understand this if cuts were starting from say Sept 1st or so, but cutting during July bang in middle of busy summer season, that's strange.

This just doesn't seem like much of a cut. If you want to find out about cuts, ask the US3. Day of week, time of day and frequency changes happen all the time. For us to expect that the ME3 won't try to do the same is folly. The US3 have been making profits by controlling capacity, and it does not surprise me to see EK try its hand at it.

blrsea wrote:

I have taken the SEA flights 3-4 times over the last one year and the flights were always full or definitely greater than 80-90%, and this was true on weekday departures too. In fact, the early morning arrival flight into SEA used to fill up earlier than the afternoon arrival one. On weekends, the morning departure flight would also fill up faster than the evening one. A bit surprised that they cut one flight to SEA.

Also surprised that the cuts are coming during summer, the peak travel season of US. People used to book tickets to India from SEA at least 4-3 months in advance as fares would go north of $2000 from mid-June to early Sept. I could understand this if cuts were starting from say Sept 1st or so, but cutting during July bang in middle of busy summer season, that's strange.

Obviously, seat mappers aren't the most accurate way to gauge capacity but check out Emirates two daily flights to SEA for next week. Both flights are totally and completely wide open in all classes, all week. But I guess, since business flyers cant work on planes anymore with their own laptops, they just aren't going to fly to business meetings I am sorry, but that is the lamest excuse ever given by the ME3.

dtw2hyd wrote:

.

In my opinion QR and EY have few advantages in a down market.
1) Flexible fleet.
2) Capacity discipline
3) Relatively better treated and motivated work force.
4) Owners with relatively more money. Not dependent on neighbors income,savings and investment habits.

You left out the biggest advantage, government subsidies.

http://www.businessinsider.com/american ... icy-2017-4

In a statement, the Partnership for Open and Fair Skies — the lobbying organization that speaks on behalf of American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and United Airlines — said it was "laughable" that Emirates would refer to itself as a profit-oriented enterprise

.