Dual-hub would work if the UAE was a bigger country and the 2 hubs were in separated by large distances, in the case of DWC and AUH this wouldn't work. Thus, have DWC function as a super hub; AUH focus on Regional O/D plus token long haul routes (basically a Haneda).

Also, once DWC is up and running, will DXB cease to exist ? If not, it can serve the same function as AUH

neomax wrote:

Spokesmen from both Emirates and Etihad have officially denied this.

So we have a deal next week

Sorry I could not resist. Of course, they deny this, doesn't matter if it is true or not. For me it makes quite a bit of sense. But what will happen to the investments of EY in other airlines?

flyjay123 wrote:

avier wrote:

They should also acquire Air Arabia then and rebrand the four merged carriers - EK EY FZ G9 - into one as UAE : United Airlines of Emirates.

Pan Emirates

Maybe Pan Em

When the CS100/300 can be named A220, then well I can see a EK and EY merger happening.

They can merge Flydubai into Etihad, then move Etihad airbus fleet to Emirates.

So you will have a new Etihad with all former Flydubai aircraft and B777 doings essential long hauls in AUH and then Emirates have all of DXB.

Once new Dubai airport opens, both airlines can move all long haul into the new airport while maintain AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA.

chonetsao wrote:

They can merge Flydubai into Etihad, then move Etihad airbus fleet to Emirates.

So you will have a new Etihad with all former Flydubai aircraft and B777 doings essential long hauls in AUH and then Emirates have all of DXB.

Once new Dubai airport opens, both airlines can move all long haul into the new airport while maintain AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA.

AUH is freaking enormous for a "LCY or LGA" style airport. LCY can barely handle an A319, while AUH is designed for A380's in desert heat. Using AUH as anything other than the megahub it was built to be would be a waste of time and money of incredulous proportions.

neomax wrote:

chonetsao wrote:

They can merge Flydubai into Etihad, then move Etihad airbus fleet to Emirates.

So you will have a new Etihad with all former Flydubai aircraft and B777 doings essential long hauls in AUH and then Emirates have all of DXB.

Once new Dubai airport opens, both airlines can move all long haul into the new airport while maintain AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA.

AUH is freaking enormous for a "LCY or LGA" style airport. LCY can barely handle an A319, while AUH is designed for A380's in desert heat. Using AUH as anything other than the megahub it was built to be would be a waste of time and money of incredulous proportions.

I don't want to be unkind to you. My original text says [AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA]. Yes even DXB is too big to be an airport in the size of LCY or LGA. But here I mean concept rather than size.

chonetsao wrote:

neomax wrote:

chonetsao wrote:

They can merge Flydubai into Etihad, then move Etihad airbus fleet to Emirates.

So you will have a new Etihad with all former Flydubai aircraft and B777 doings essential long hauls in AUH and then Emirates have all of DXB.

Once new Dubai airport opens, both airlines can move all long haul into the new airport while maintain AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA.

AUH is freaking enormous for a "LCY or LGA" style airport. LCY can barely handle an A319, while AUH is designed for A380's in desert heat. Using AUH as anything other than the megahub it was built to be would be a waste of time and money of incredulous proportions.

I don't want to be unkind to you. My original text says [AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA]. Yes even DXB is too big to be an airport in the size of LCY or LGA. But here I mean concept rather than size.

In that case, it's probably more like LHR/LGW or JFK/EWR than LCY/LGA.

chonetsao wrote:

They can merge Flydubai into Etihad, then move Etihad airbus fleet to Emirates.

So you will have a new Etihad with all former Flydubai aircraft and B777 doings essential long hauls in AUH and then Emirates have all of DXB.

Once new Dubai airport opens, both airlines can move all long haul into the new airport while maintain AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA.

FlyDubai connects some smaller markets to DXB to connect to Emirates. It won't do to move all the narrow body ops to DXB and AUH when DWC opens.

neomax wrote:

chonetsao wrote:

They can merge Flydubai into Etihad, then move Etihad airbus fleet to Emirates.

So you will have a new Etihad with all former Flydubai aircraft and B777 doings essential long hauls in AUH and then Emirates have all of DXB.

Once new Dubai airport opens, both airlines can move all long haul into the new airport while maintain AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA.

AUH is freaking enormous for a "LCY or LGA" style airport. LCY can barely handle an A319, while AUH is designed for A380's in desert heat. Using AUH as anything other than the megahub it was built to be would be a waste of time and money of incredulous proportions.

Ok but using EY as a vehicle for ~$2bn losses/yr is also a huge waste of money. AUH expenditures are mostly sunk at this point; prospective EY losses are not. Abu Dhabi's owners can digest a useless terminal easier than a hemorrhaging superconnector.

flyingclrs727 wrote:

chonetsao wrote:

They can merge Flydubai into Etihad, then move Etihad airbus fleet to Emirates.

So you will have a new Etihad with all former Flydubai aircraft and B777 doings essential long hauls in AUH and then Emirates have all of DXB.

Once new Dubai airport opens, both airlines can move all long haul into the new airport while maintain AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA.

FlyDubai connects some smaller markets to DXB to connect to Emirates. It won't do to move all the narrow body ops to DXB and AUH when DWC opens.

Obviously the issue is cost of losing small links at DXB versus benefit of more frequency/capacity to large links at DXB. IMJ EK is limited by frequency/capacity at many of its largest points and would see huge benefit from adding to its network EY flights to big cities in Australia/India/Singapore/Indonesia.

Plus if the small links can be served with acceptable degaradation from AUH instead of DXB then the tradeoff is even clearer. That's likely to be true, as connectivity from small links is less likely to face more attractive competition absent a DXB option.

AirbusA322 wrote:

Biggest headwind is this 150+ very costly aircraft on order that it doesn’t want, and can’t cancel.

Are you referring to the 150+ very costly order of EY or EK?

Matt6461 wrote:

flyingclrs727 wrote:

chonetsao wrote:

They can merge Flydubai into Etihad, then move Etihad airbus fleet to Emirates.

So you will have a new Etihad with all former Flydubai aircraft and B777 doings essential long hauls in AUH and then Emirates have all of DXB.

Once new Dubai airport opens, both airlines can move all long haul into the new airport while maintain AUH as a relief hub with most narrow body aircrafts and DXB as a city airport like LCY or LGA.

FlyDubai connects some smaller markets to DXB to connect to Emirates. It won't do to move all the narrow body ops to DXB and AUH when DWC opens.

Obviously the issue is cost of losing small links at DXB versus benefit of more frequency/capacity to large links at DXB. IMJ EK is limited by frequency/capacity at many of its largest points and would see huge benefit from adding to its network EY flights to big cities in Australia/India/Singapore/Indonesia.

Plus if the small links can be served with acceptable degaradation from AUH instead of DXB then the tradeoff is even clearer. That's likely to be true, as connectivity from small links is less likely to face more attractive competition absent a DXB option.

DWC is supposed to have 5 4500 meter runways. There will be plenty of slots for for all airlines. There would be no need to split operations.

TSA125 wrote:

AirbusA322 wrote:

Biggest headwind is this 150+ very costly aircraft on order that it doesn’t want, and can’t cancel.

Are you referring to the 150+ very costly order of EY or EK?

There are obvious synergies from EK/EY frequencies that could make EY's orders more useful to a combined airline than the status quo.

This is true whether it's only a matter of upgauging the DXB hub operation to bigger destinations and/or building additional hub waves from DXB. Working together these airlines can offer more value and/or better prices to counter competition.

avier wrote:

They should also acquire Air Arabia then and rebrand the four merged carriers - EK EY FZ G9 - into one as UAE : United Airlines of Emirates.

Etihad means "Union".

I don't see why EY has to necessarily survive or merge as an airline. They can wrap up Etihad and fund the development of DWC and links from Abu Dhabi and Dubai to the airport. And that would give them some share, while Dubai moves EK to DWC and retains ownership of EK.

An EK with a fully built out DWC and high speed rail links to Abu Dhabi, Dubai and other Emirates would be a very strong proposition.

Emirates gets 787 earlier and might get A321neo, A350 too from EY order! Wicked! Combined order stands at now 380 new aircraft!

Am sceptical this will happen but if it does there may be a few shareholdings in airlines up for sale.

And would be very interested in the competition regulator's views in a range of jurisdictions.

They can probably rename DWC to something like UAE to make it sound better for people at Abu Dhabi

UAEflyer wrote:

Totally rubbish and will not happen

https://gulfnews.com/business/aviation/ ... -1.2280734

Never say never. This is not an easy feast, but I would not be surprised if something comes out of it (i.e. closer cooperation than it is).
Both airlines have officially denied this, but sources (leaks) stated that the talks are ongoing.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... iddle-east

Etihad is not doing well so it's either die or shrink. the question is how many duplicate routes will EK slash if the agreement will be done?

If this does happen, I hope they have a nice combined livery and not the bland United/Continental nonsense.

EY has not done well and lost a lot of money on investments in failing airlines. But we don't know the status of their current network particularly load factors and yields. While we know there is obviously a significant loss on investment we don't know the full picture in terms of the likely viability of the airline going forward. I imagine they are keeping this information quite confidential at present as they complete their restructure plan.

TSA125 wrote:

AirbusA322 wrote:

Biggest headwind is this 150+ very costly aircraft on order that it doesn’t want, and can’t cancel.

Are you referring to the 150+ very costly order of EY or EK?

Hahahaha sums this deal up in a nutshell lol

neomax wrote:

TSA125 wrote:

AirbusA322 wrote:

Biggest headwind is this 150+ very costly aircraft on order that it doesn’t want, and can’t cancel.

Are you referring to the 150+ very costly order of EY or EK?

Hahahaha sums this deal up in a nutshell lol

This feels like Highlander, there shall only be one.

AUH may get scaled down to the way of SHJ, DAM or LCY. It is unfortunate this is the way things are turning out but money talks. As for EK+FZ, I can't see them running dual ops so its either DXB or DWC for them. A massive redundancy exercise is looming...I wish the staffs and contracting firms under EY all the best. Hopefully AB and Boeing will take the order cancellations well.

Something I just noticed is that at EDI airport EY is leaving on Sept. 30 where EK begins on Oct. 1st. Is this a very small sign of merger?

jsteeves3 wrote:

Something I just noticed is that at EDI airport EY is leaving on Sept. 30 where EK begins on Oct. 1st. Is this a very small sign of merger?

No, the start dates were announced months ago. Also EK did a similar thing at GRU in 2017, when they upgraded the route to an A380 the same day EY dropped the route.

The beginning of the solution would be to acknowledge that AUH cannot match DXB as a superhub and that opening destinations right and left with huge planes just to focus on connections does not make sense for them. Leave volume to EK and focus on the significant O&D that AUH also has. Right size capacity and adjust schedules to compete not with Emirates but with other airlines serving AUH. Increase yields to/from India choosing the right mix of O&D and connecting passengers to certain (not all) destinations. If some network connections are still possible, then codeshare with EK, to offer passengers more options (A passenger could fly LHR-DXB-BKK but return BKK-AUH-LHR with no penalities or fare increase).