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


Ho provato un MAD-TUN-FCO sul sito Tunisair e il sistema non me lo permette.
 
belumosi ha detto:
E' così anche all'interno della UE. L'esempio che hai postato (collegamento USA con le isole dipendenti in Asia/Oceania) è un caso limite, che per evidenti ragioni geografiche meriterebbe una deroga.
Clicca per espandere...

E' un caso limite fino ad un certo punto. Il DOT ha dato una multa di 750.000 dollari nel 2002 ad OZ per avere emesso biglietti in violazioni di questa regola: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/...cque@pd.state.gov0.9141504.html#axzz3X4Marf2y E non so se KE abbia mai avuto problemi per i voli su GUM. Per dire l'assurdo: GUM ha un volo diretto originante dagli USA, quello di UA da HNL, oltre a quello da SPN; SPN ha solo quello da GUM.

Adesso mi aspetto che le varie associazioni "spontanee" di campioni del liberismo, da ultimo novelli protettori dei diritti inalienabili delle assistenti di volo basate negli Emirati, si mettano a fare pressioni sul DOT per concedere la deroga che, come giustamente dici tu, merita per evidenti ragioni geografiche. Ma temo proprio che non sarà mosso un dito.

Non ho niente a favore delle ME3 ma doppiopesismo ed ipocrisia mi sono veramente indigesti.
 
Ho fatto il supplemento di ricerca: anche KE è stata multata da DOT 65.000 dollari per aver trasportato tra gennaio 2001 e maggio 2002 più di un centinaio di passeggeri dalla madrepatria USA a GUM e SPN. (Per i più giovani: negli Stati che posseggono colonie, si distingue tra madrepatria e possedimenti coloniali.) il provvedimento è il DOT Consent Order 2002-10-29 / OST 2002-12273 del 23 ottobre 2002, disponibile sul sito DOT.

La cosa interessante è che si discute (e, di fatto, si applica) la cabotage rule anche rispetto a ROR che è in una Stato indipendente: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5248873
 
US government to review Gulf carrier subsidy claims; establishes forum for comment
Apr 11, 2015

The US is reviewing a report that alleges Emirates Airline, Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways receive billions of dollars of state subsidies. The government has also established an open forum where information and views on the issue can be submitted.
The review and forum, announced by the Obama administration Friday, follow a campaign by three US carriers, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines, to address their concerns that the Gulf carriers bring unfair competition to the US, threaten American jobs, and distort the global aviation market.
The US carriers commissioned a 55-page report that alleges their Gulf rivals have benefited from more than $40 billion of subsidies from their UAE and Qatar state owners. They also say these subsidies contravene the conditions of Open Skies agreements between the US, UAE and Qatar.
The US Departments of Commerce, State and Transportation are conducting the review of those allegations, the White House said Friday. It added that the claims “are of significant interest to stakeholders and all three federal agencies. The US government takes seriously the concerns raised in the report and is interested in receiving insights and feedback from stakeholders before any decisions are made regarding what action, if any, should be taken.”
The US government move comes after months of a building campaign by the three US major carriers and which has gained traction since March when they released their report. Their allegations have met with strong criticism from all three Gulf airlines, which each refute the subsidy claims and question the motives of the US carriers,
Abu Dhabi-based Etihad issued a statement Friday welcoming the government review. “We hope that no one will pre-empt this process or prejudge its outcome,” the carrier said.
“Etihad Airways is committed to setting the record straight regarding these unsubstantiated allegations. However, so far the US airlines have failed to provide the complete details and data supporting these claims to Etihad Airways. Only with all of this information available to us can we provide a full response.”
Newly-formed, Washington-based lobbying organization Americans for Fair Skies also welcomed the review.
“This is an important first step towards restoring fairness to our skies and stopping the largest trade violation in history,” the organization said.
“There will certainly be a diversity of opinions on this matter, but one thing we should all agree on is the freedom to have this dialogue with our government and for our government to have formal consultations with the UAE and Qatar.”
Information and views can be submitted to the US government forum via the www.regulations.gov website.


http://m.atwonline.com/open-skies/u...rier-subsidy-claims-establishes-forum-comment
 
Ambasciatore EAU nel Regno Unito: "Le compagnie americane sono gelose"

UAE ambassador says 'jealousy' behind airline dispute

20 April 2015 at 07.55 GMT

The UAE ambassador to UK said "jealousy" behind the dispute between US carriers and Gulf airlines over $42 billion in alleged government subsidies.
AA, Delta and United have called on the US government to renegotiate the US open skies agreement with the Gulf states to limit the access of Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airways to the US, claiming the carriers have benefited from state aid.
Abdulrahman Ghanem Almutaiwee told the Sunday Times: "This is a sort of jealousy more than economic issues, because they could not imagine such newly established airlines would take a lot of their market shares. Because of the deficiencies they have, they could not compete."

Emirates announced a £6-billion-plus order for Rolls Royce engines for 50 A380 aircraft, rejecting a counter bid by US companies, but Almutaiwee said: "Thjs has nothing to do with warning the Americans."
International Airlines Group quit the Association of European Airlines (AEA) last week over the row.

The British Airways and Iberia parent company said its airlines had pulled out because of a difference of opinion with other members of the Brussels-based trade body.
IAG, which is partly owned by Qatar Airways, told Reuters: "We believe global liberalisation of our industry is fundamental to our future growth and we are not willing to compromise on this fundamental matter.”
Etihad Airways president and chief executive James Hogan also highlighted growing resistance by “protectionist competitors” in Europe to European Commission transport commissioner Violeta Bulc last week.
travelweekly
Clicca per espandere...

 
CAPA hosts major US-Gulf airline debate; Emirates, Etihad, American, Delta, FedEx, pilots, tourism
CAPA will host the largest and most complete public debate on the US-Gulf airlines confrontation, including the major proponents in a moderated discussion over two hours.

The debate, part of CAPA's Americas Aviation Summit in Las Vegas on 27/28 April, will span 2 hours, under the expert guidance of leading US aviation lawyer, Pillsburys' Kenneth P Quinn.

American and Delta, along with United, have launched a major broadside at the Gulf airlines - Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airways - alleging they are unfairly subsidised and seeking restrictions on open skies access. Not all US airlines support the attacks. FedEx, a major beneficiary of the US' open skies policies and the world's largest airline, opposes inroads into the policy. Emirates and Etihad likewise refute the allegations and US and world tourism bodies support the value of the Gulf airlines in improving consumer and business access.

Moderator: Pillsbury, Partner and Head Aviation, Aerospace and Transportation Practice, Kenneth P. Quinn

Panellists:
  • American Airlines, Senior VP Government Affairs, Will Ris
  • Americans for Fair Skies, President, Lee Moak
  • Delta Air Lines, Executive VP & Chief Legal Officer, Ben Hirst
  • Emirates, President and CEO, Sir Tim Clark
  • Etihad Airways, General Counsel and EVP Legal, Jim Callaghan
  • FedEx, Senior VP and General Counsel, Rush O’Keefe
  • US Travel Association, President & CEO, Roger Dow
  • World Travel and Tourism Council, President & CEO, David Scowsill

Full agenda: https://www.capaevents.com/ehome/index.php?eventid=111147&tabid=247734&
http://centreforaviation.com/analys...ad-american-delta-fedex-pilots-tourism-220150
 
Un prezzo dell'intervista su atw con Tim Clark

Interview — Emirates Airline President Tim Clark

Emirates Airline, along with Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways, has found itself in the crosshairs of a campaign by American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines, which say the Gulf carriers are supported by more than $40 billion of state subsidies and are not compliant with their countries’ Open Skies agreements with the US. Tim Clark, president of Dubai-based Emirates, is hitting back.

What is your response to the report commissioned by American, Delta and United that alleges Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airways are receiving billions of dollars of state subsidies?

I think when any group or entity makes allegations, the least they can do is put that complaint in front of [those being accused] and invite a response. I don’t know in my aviation career or in any other walk of life where this kind of thing happens without that fairness. I’m surprised it’s been allowed to get as far as it has, without the carriers in question being invited to give a response. We have always been great advocates of fair competition. When somebody says we want fair competition, we at Emirates say ‘bring it on.’

Why do you think the three US carriers are doing this now?

That’s a mystery to me. And why they are doing it at this kind of level? It is disturbing. Suddenly, they burst on the scene and say ‘this is the truth.’ That’s not the way to behave. I understand it took two years to create this report. Who paid for this? The shareholders? How can you say this is the truth without allowing the balance of opinion or a response to come into play? All this strikes me as extraordinary. We’re reasonable people; we do not go out of our way to take down other carriers. We try to add value to the consumer proposition.

Do you think this dispute could lead to a change in the Open Skies agreements the US has with the UAE and Qatar?

I can think of 40 destinations that the US carriers do not serve and where we take business because American carriers don’t fly to those places. What is wrong with that? I would ask the US carriers why they don’t serve those places and what is their international long-haul philosophy? This is grossly unfair. Should the Open Skies agreements be closed down? That would be madness because they have done the US an enormous amount of economic good.

Explain the basis on which Emirates was started and how it operates.

I’ve been here since the beginning. We were given a clean sheet of paper and a $10 million check. We built this airline with blood, sweat and tears and faced enormous difficulties and took big risks. Emirates is profitable, cash positive, has built a formidable balance. Emirates does not receive subsidies. We will prove that. We have produced our financials since the early 1990s, and our competitors have had full and free access to those. Our business model wasn’t unique; what was unique was the geographical location of our [Dubai] hub.
Clicca per espandere...
 
Che noia. Questa diatriba fomentata dalle americane e' tutta aria fritta e rasenta il ridicolo...
 
Molte testate finanziarie Americane danno abbastanza risalto alla battaglia delle U.S. Carriers contro le G3, per gli eventuali grossi risvolti in termini economici su questo business..

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-airlines-claim-to-document-subsidies-at-gulf-rivals-1429573165

Da notare molti passaggi interessanti:


"...Delta hired investigators to dig into their financial histories. The three U.S. carriers say their gumshoes discovered about a year ago that they could request and obtain copies of financial statements for the three from corporate registry offices in some countries where the Gulf airlines operate. The investigators, which the airlines wouldn't name, searched in nearly 30 jurisdictions, assembling their dossier mostly from documents filed in the U.K., Singapore, Australia, India, Belgium and Ireland, said Jill Zuckman, spokeswoman for the U.S. airlines' coalition, called Partnership for Open & Fair Skies...."

"...In Etihad's 2013 annual report, for example, KPMG LLP said it audited the accounts on a going-concern basis " notwithstanding the fact that the group had accumulated losses of $3.76 billion" as of December 2013. KPMG said it had prepared the 2013 statements based on approval of $3.5 billion in additional shareholder funding in 2014 by Abu Dhabi's ruling body. The U.S. carriers, citing at least nine years of Etihad financial statements, claim such shareholder funding was part of $17 billion in state subsidies provided to Etihad since 2004..."

etc. etc., more info al link sopra per l'articolo.
 
Da notare anche alcuni commenti non da poco dei lettori. Per esempio:

"Instead of chasing the subsidy game, I suggest the CEOs of the Big-3 airlines put on casual clothing, buy economy class transatlantic trips on their own airlines as well as on those Middle East Big-3. Let them experience seating, inflight entertainment, politeness of cabin attendants, the food and complimentary alcoholic beverages. The comparative experience perhaps may give them the answer for success of Etihad, Emirates and Qatar. Airfare on these Middle East airlines are not necessarily cheaper than the price charged by the U.S Big-3; often its is higher. But the customers willingly pay the higher price for decent travel experience."

Diciamo che probabilmente il WSJ ha una base di lettori mediamente un po' piu' qualificata di chi posta i commenti sui nostri quotidiani in Italia... ;)
 
Dr Gio ha detto:
Da notare anche alcuni commenti non da poco dei lettori. Per esempio:

"Instead of chasing the subsidy game, I suggest the CEOs of the Big-3 airlines put on casual clothing, buy economy class transatlantic trips on their own airlines as well as on those Middle East Big-3. Let them experience seating, inflight entertainment, politeness of cabin attendants, the food and complimentary alcoholic beverages. The comparative experience perhaps may give them the answer for success of Etihad, Emirates and Qatar. Airfare on these Middle East airlines are not necessarily cheaper than the price charged by the U.S Big-3; often its is higher. But the customers willingly pay the higher price for decent travel experience."

Diciamo che probabilmente il WSJ ha una base di lettori mediamente un po' piu' qualificata di chi posta i commenti sui nostri quotidiani in Italia... ;)
Clicca per espandere...

non sono d'accordo, sorry, e mi spiace davvero continui a prevalere l'idea che le US3 se ne fottano del cliente mettendo denari nei depositi di Paperon de Paperoni; incredibile, infatti, che non si veda il nesso tra risorse economiche infinite e servizi offerti al cliente. Eppurele due cose sono direttamente proporzionali!
Ma davvero pensi che se avessero le stesse possibilita' economiche le US3, come tante altre, BA inclusa che anche fa la perbenista, non comprerebbero aerei nuovi ogni giorno, li allestissero con poltrone di visone, dessero da mangiare a tutti caviale e bere champagne senza limiti, magari vedendosi anche Sambenedettese-Acireale in diretta????
 
East End Ave ha detto:
non sono d'accordo, sorry, e mi spiace davvero continui a prevalere l'idea che le US3 se ne fottano del cliente mettendo denari nei depositi di Paperon de Paperoni; incredibile, infatti, che non si veda il nesso tra risorse economiche infinite e servizi offerti al cliente. Eppurele due cose sono direttamente proporzionali!
Ma davvero pensi che se avessero le stesse possibilita' economiche le US3, come tante altre, BA inclusa che anche fa la perbenista, non comprerebbero aerei nuovi ogni giorno, li allestissero con poltrone di visone, dessero da mangiare a tutti caviale e bere champagne senza limiti, magari vedendosi anche Sambenedettese-Acireale in diretta????
Clicca per espandere...

Probabilmente no.

Come detto nelle pagine precedenti, nonostante ci siano sempre aerei di mezzo, americane e arabe sono compagnie completamente differenti: le prime sono aziende finalizzate a produrre utili per i loro azionisti, riducendo quanto più possibile i costi e aumentando quanto più possibile i ricavi; alle arabe, invece, interessa sì che i ricavi coprano i costi, ma non frega nulla dell'utile. Quelle che qui si continuano a chiamare risorse illimitate sono quindi gli utili, che in america sono indisponibili perchè finiscono (giustamente) nel portafogli degli azionisti, mentre nel Golfo vengono re-investiti per andare a definire lo stato dell'arte dell'aviazione commerciale contemporanea.
Per assurdo, se domani qualcuno se ne uscisse con un piano industriale che, al netto dei costi di riconversione, dimostrasse come sarebbe più conveniente produrre caciotte di capra anziché far volare aerei, molti aereoporti a stelle e strisce diventerebbero pascoli; dall'altra parte, invece, questo non accadrebbe perchè l'interesse non sta nel rendere profittevoli gli aerei ma nel far diventare il medio-oriente il baricentro del trasporto globale.

Coerentemente con questo modello generale, se le americane potessero abbattere i costi (ricevendo kerosene in regalo e sfruttando il personale a mo' di servitù della gleba) continuerebbero a non migliorare il servizio oltre il livello di sufficienza minima, scegliendo invece di aumentare gli utili. E se oggi fosse anche solo minimamente accettabile fare volare i 767 in configurazione anni '80 al posto di 777 e 787, probabilmente voleremmo ancora con i primi.
Il fatto, infatti, che il servizio made in US sia migliorato negli ultimi anni non è dovuto a filantropia, ma al fatto che gli arabi hanno cambiato le regole del gioco, e oggi non ci si può più permettere di mandare in giro fuori dagli USA i catorci di un tempo.

A mio personalissimo avviso, tutto il resto è sofismo.
 
Ultima modifica:
East End Ave ha detto:
incredibile, infatti, che non si veda il nesso tra risorse economiche infinite e servizi offerti al cliente. Eppurele due cose sono direttamente proporzionali!
Clicca per espandere...

Per certi versi hai ragione: eppure non capisco come mai, spesso e volentieri, il personale di DAL, AAL, UAL sia disattento, scortese e poco professionale. Non c'è bisogno di andare fino al Golfo Persico per trovare di meglio in Jetblue e Virgin America, Alaska Airlines e Southwest. Colpa delle risorse illimitate di Etihad?

Osservo il sistema UAL/AAL/DAL, lo confronto con EK, e non posso far a meno di notare come le americane facciano il meno possibile per avvicinare Emirates sul fronte delle economie di scala: EK, per risparmiare, pratica economie di scala atroci, mentre UAL/AAL/DAL, per risparmiare, sono riuscite solo a inventarsi il giochino dei regional operati da Republic, Skywest e compagnia, con piloti pagati mille lire al mese e assistenti di volo che fra poco si mettono a fare la questua a bordo. Riempire di regional dei city pair come NYC-BOS congestiona gli aeroporti e blocca la crescita (e la concorrenza). Per un periodo UAL operava cinque (5!) EWR-LHR al giorno coi 757 - roba da antimanuale dell'economia di scala.
 
Devi accedere o registrarti per rispondere qui.


Top Bottom