AA, DL e UA protestano contro vettori Qatar & UAE per concorrenza sleale


James Hogan


Today I had the privilege of addressing the US Chamber of Commerce Foundation’s 14th Annual Aviation Summit in Washington, D.C.

This was a key speaking engagement, given that Etihad Airways and other Gulf carriers are facing criticism in a campaign conducted by some US airlines.
It was an opportunity to restore some balance into the argument with an important audience of senior aviation figures.
In my address, I called for reasoned debate based upon facts and outlined the dangers of taking action that could restrict competitive choice for millions of US and international air travellers in markets which the US airlines have chosen not to serve.
I also laid out the key facts behind Etihad Airways’ growth and our competitive strategy.
We remain one of the newest national airlines anywhere in the world and everything we have created – product, operations and infrastructure – has been from new.
As a growing airline, we have faced established competitors in every market we have entered since we began operations in 2003.
These have been airlines with firmly established brand identities, infrastructure, sales and marketing processes, and customer bases. In many cases, these airlines were historically gifted incredible infrastructure such as airports, terminals, slots, and landing rights over many decades.
We have never complained about this. Rather, we have relished the opportunity to compete. You have played an incredible part in this journey as we have had to work harder and smarter to make our airline the globally recognised brand that it is today.
As you have heard me say before, our geographic position at the world’s crossroads has certainly helped. This, coupled with today’s modern aircraft technology, has ideally positioned us to capitalise on many new and emerging markets.
You have also heard me stress many times before the importance of safe and secure operations, accompanied by remarkable customer service. If there is any ‘secret’ behind our growth and success, then quite frankly it is the incredible customer service you deliver on modern new aircraft with world-leading products at competitive prices.
Gulf carriers have also been challenged about a lack of transparency in their businesses and I was keen to address this head-on today.
At Etihad Airways, we very clearly and publicly set a timetable to break even within a decade of being formed and we beat that target, delivering a net profit in each of the last three years.
It is surprisingly hard to find financial information about the first one, or even two, decades of national airlines around the world so to receive criticism for lack of transparency in our formative years is both untrue and unfair.
There has also been a great deal of speculation and accusation regarding our funding. We are a national airline owned by its government - as many global airlines are.
We have been clear that we received equity investment and shareholder loans and these have been supplemented by US $10.5 billion in loans from international financial institutions.
However, let us also be clear that our shareholder the Government of Abu Dhabi - like any rational shareholder in the world - expects a return. As we grow and flourish, even greater returns will be expected in the future.
I was also keen to emphasise today that we are a friend of the United States. Not only are the bonds between it and the UAE incredibly strong, but we are major customers of important corporations that include Boeing, GE, and Sabre. We deal with and support many other American strategic partners, for example, with Atlas on developing and improving global cargo operations, as well as financial institutions, tourist boards, and airports.
In fact, our commitment to the US economy supports more than 200,000 jobs. Equally, Etihad Airways delivered 180,000 travellers onto the networks of US airlines in 2014, and 50,000 in the first two months of 2015.
I believe our position in the United States – as with any destination we operate to – is all about consumer choice. Customers choose to fly Etihad Airways because we offer a great product, with outstanding service, on the routes they want, at competitive prices.
I have no doubt that US airlines – many of which do not even compete directly with us on many routes - will continue to make noises about ourselves and fellow Gulf carriers.
As with today’s speech, our business will continue to address that and respond with a reasoned, pro-competition debate and I will make sure you remain informed of any important developments.
 
Questa di Hogan mi sembra una risposta ben articolata.
Oltretutto, a margine, mi sembra che menzioni un punto importante "we delivered a net profit in each of the last three years", cosa che spesso anche qui veniva questionata.
 
"....let us also be clear that our shareholder the Government of Abu Dhabi - like any rational shareholder in the world - expects a return. As we grow and flourish, even greater returns will be expected in the future....."

....di EXPECTS e di WILL BE EXPECTED e' lastricato il mondo dell'aviazione....
 
"....let us also be clear that our shareholder the Government of Abu Dhabi - like any rational shareholder in the world - expects a return. As we grow and flourish, even greater returns will be expected in the future....."

....di EXPECTS e di WILL BE EXPECTED e' lastricato il mondo dell'aviazione....

E certo, come il modo dell'aviazione e' lastricato di chapter 11 bankruptcy filings...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_bankruptcies_in_the_United_States#Chapter_11
 
Invece di schiamazzare tanto, se proprio ci tengono, perche' gli USA non rivedono i bilaterali in senso protezionistico?

Infatti, se non ho capito male, è proprio a questo che stanno mirando le americane per mezzo di questo can can.

Va bene che la fonte e' quella che e', pero' sembra un bell'attacco di Al-Baker ad Anderson (CEO Delta):
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/af...ys-boss-accuses-Delta-flying-crap-planes.html

Al-Baker ha la delicatezza di Ivan Drago in Rocky IV.
 
Anderson ha lanciato l'esca con la storia degli arabi dell'11/9 e le M3 stanno abboccando, soprattutto EK e QR. E' evidente che l'obiettivo è fare abbastanza chiasso da costringere il governo ad intervenire in senso restrittivo.
Quanto ai sussidi, è scontato che avere un azionista con potere assoluto e disponibilità illimitate, è un benefit ben maggiore rispetto a poter usare il chapter 11, ma dover rispondere a fisco, dipendenti, sindacati, azionisti, politici e opinione pubblica.
Guardata in modo asettico, si potrebbe semplicemente sostenere che ognuno sta facendo la battaglia con i mezzi di cui dispone.
 
Quanto ai sussidi, è scontato che avere un azionista con potere assoluto e disponibilità illimitate, è un benefit ben maggiore rispetto a poter usare il chapter 11, ma dover rispondere a fisco, dipendenti, sindacati, azionisti, politici e opinione pubblica.

Vallo a spiegare a Efato & Co. , una battaglia persa per pregiudizio e non per obiettivita'....
 
Intanto, ben diversamente dall'Italia e dall'italico modus operandi, qualcosa gia' si muove:

WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) - The Obama administration has asked U.S. airlines for more information on their claims that Gulf carriers have received market-distorting subsidies, marking its first written response to U.S. airlines' lobbying effort, Reuters has learned.

The administration asked U.S. airline representatives about 20 questions in writing last week about their method in determining the subsidy allegations and about the market harm they say Gulf carriers have caused them, according to a person familiar with the matter.
 
Vallo a spiegare a Efato & Co. , una battaglia persa per pregiudizio e non per obiettivita'....

o magari una battaglia su interessi personali.

Non vorrei sbagliare ma credo di ricordare che tu lavori per UAL... e allora parliamo di UAL & chapter 11, il piu' costoso della storia dell'aviazione US. Le stime parlano di circa 21-28 miliardi di dollari di benefici che UAL ha ottenuto dal Chapter 11 nel periodo 2002-2006. Nel frattempo il suo CEO durante la ristrutturazione (e riquotazione in borsa) si e' portato a casa $15M in azioni ($400M al top management) . Azione altamente filantropica considerando che allo stesso tempo i creditori beccavano 20c per dollaro (se fortunati), dipendenti licenziati a migliaia, salari tagliati con percentuali a doppia cifra (30-40), e il pension fund azzerato (ricorda che a United e' stato permesso il default sui 4 fondi pensione che aveva per un valore di circa 3.2 miliardi di $) .


ma de che stamo a parla.....
 
http://www.usatoday.com/story/today...ubsidies-us-chamber-aviation-summit/24844191/

Emirates, Etihad rebut U.S. airlines' charge

WASHINGTON — Executives of Emirates and Etihad airlines on Tuesday disputed the complaints of U.S. airlines that their Persian Gulf carriers get unfair subsidies from their governments.
Tim Clark, CEO of Emirates, and James Hogan, CEO of Etihad, each said they would rebut the charges one-by-one from a 55-page report that the three largest U.S. airlines submitted to the departments of Transportation and State.
Clark called recent meetings with officials from both departments "very constructive," but he didn't provide details about his rebuttal or its timing during a news conference at the National Press Club.
"The allegations are incorrect," said Clark, who suggested that U.S. critics would owe the Gulf carriers an apology after the disputes are resolved. "The forum will be a line-by-line response to the report."
Hogan acknowledged at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce aviation summit that Etihad got equity investment and shareholder loans from its owner, the United Arab Emirates. But he said Etihad started from scratch in 2003 needing to buy planes, develop airport access and build up customers — and he denied getting free fuel or ground handling, as had been rumored in the past.
"Etihad is a David that has been facing Goliaths since 2003 when we started," Hogan told hundreds of industry representatives. "In conclusion, we shouldn't attack what we do not understand."
In an interview with USA TODAY, Hogan suggested the dispute is one in which U.S. and European airlines are trying to protect market share. But he said Etihad is engaged in fair business competition.
"We believe competition is good. We believe we act fairly," Hogan told USA TODAY. "We believe we're a responsible business partner for the U.S."
Clark's and Hogan's comments came two weeks after the three largest U.S. airlines and their unions held a news conference urging the government to reopen negotiations with Persian Gulf countries over airline service.
American, Delta and United airlines contend that Etihad, Emirates and Qatar airlines have received $42 billion in subsidies since 2004, which the Gulf carriers deny.
The U.S. carriers contend that subsidies such as interest-free government loans, cheaper access to airports and services such as fuel and ground handling make it impossible to compete for lucrative international travelers.
"We believe there is now overwhelming evidence that the governments of Qatar and the UAE are violating the aviation trade agreements between the U.S. and those countries by providing enormous subsidies to Qatar Airways, Emirates Airline and Qatar Airways — subsidies in amounts that are unprecedented in the history of international trade," Doug Parker, CEO of American Airlines, told the Chamber summit.
 
o magari una battaglia su interessi personali.

Non vorrei sbagliare ma credo di ricordare che tu lavori per UAL... e allora parliamo di UAL & chapter 11, il piu' costoso della storia dell'aviazione US. Le stime parlano di circa 21-28 miliardi di dollari di benefici che UAL ha ottenuto dal Chapter 11 nel periodo 2002-2006. Nel frattempo il suo CEO durante la ristrutturazione (e riquotazione in borsa) si e' portato a casa $15M in azioni ($400M al top management) . Azione altamente filantropica considerando che allo stesso tempo i creditori beccavano 20c per dollaro (se fortunati), dipendenti licenziati a migliaia, salari tagliati con percentuali a doppia cifra (30-40), e il pension fund azzerato (ricorda che a United e' stato permesso il default sui 4 fondi pensione che aveva per un valore di circa 3.2 miliardi di $) .


ma de che stamo a parla.....

Qui si chiama a coppe e tu rispondi a bastoni; peraltro il 2002, anno successivo al 2001 (9/11....tante volte non tenessi il conto), era 13 anni fa; diversi scenari e diverso panorama aeronautico, PER TUTTI.

Si continua a parlare di questioni ben diverse, ovvero di una politica federale USA che interessa le grandi aziende in difficolta', affinche' siano protette nel periodo di crisi in modo che si possano ristrutturare nelle dimensioni e nei costi, propri del momento storico attinente. Questa azione, approvata nel piano da una corte, prelude poi al reinserimento dell'azienda nel mercato, con tutti i suoi oneri ma anche con nuove opportunità' di sviluppo e di possibilità' di reimpiego, vedi proprio DL e UA, ma anche ultimamente AA.
Quindi uno strumento di rilancio e di sostegno, non un sussidio fine a se' stesso e volto unicamente all'imposizione della propria azienda (statale, come nel caso di EY) sul mercato, ma non seguendo le regole del mercato stesso!

dici bene, ma de che stamo a parla'.....
 
o magari una battaglia su interessi personali.

Non vorrei sbagliare ma credo di ricordare che tu lavori per UAL... e allora parliamo di UAL & chapter 11, il piu' costoso della storia dell'aviazione US. Le stime parlano di circa 21-28 miliardi di dollari di benefici che UAL ha ottenuto dal Chapter 11 nel periodo 2002-2006. Nel frattempo il suo CEO durante la ristrutturazione (e riquotazione in borsa) si e' portato a casa $15M in azioni ($400M al top management) . Azione altamente filantropica considerando che allo stesso tempo i creditori beccavano 20c per dollaro (se fortunati), dipendenti licenziati a migliaia, salari tagliati con percentuali a doppia cifra (30-40), e il pension fund azzerato (ricorda che a United e' stato permesso il default sui 4 fondi pensione che aveva per un valore di circa 3.2 miliardi di $) .


ma de che stamo a parla.....

Quanto agli interessi personali non ti rispondo, accusa offensiva e gratuita che denota una discreta maleducazione
 
come al solito, buttata in caciara... io quando ho parlato di interessi personali non parlavo certamente di te ma parlavo di DL, AA, UA.
View attachment 6666

invece tu, senza conoscermi, hai detto che io ho dei pregiudizi

chi e' il maleducato?