B75/76 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 It seems there is more business at stake than just the interests of AC and the Star Alliance. Greater trade inevitably requires improved transportation links. It likely won't happen during these meetings but a new bilateral seems inevitable. http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/uae-landing-rights-in-canada-still-at-issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 More landing rights as it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runaway Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 They seem to have a burning desire to fly here. Why is that?And the way they treated and punted our armed forces over in U.A.E.? Immature knee-jerk reaction that embarrassed Canada.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/uae-banishes-canada-from-base-blocks-mackay-from-its-airspace/article1752151/And they still have the nerve to come here and again try to negotiate some bilateral agreement. Shouldn't even be talking to U.A.E. about this now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 Nothing is going to happen any time soon. Not with the Conservatives.First off, for better or worse, Harper never changes his mind and never forgives anyone who crosses him. Ever. No seriously. Ever.Secondly, I've been saying for some time that the UAE will get more landing rights when Air Canada gets some of its 787s. In my mind, the issues are linked because Air Canada will gain the ability with the 787 to serve south Asian markets like Mumbai or Delhi on a non-stop, cost-effective basis (assuming the 787 meets its long-range performance specs). Those are the same markets the Gulf carriers target, and Air Canada has not had a cost-effective means of accessing such long-distance markets on a year-round basis. (You can make money flying to India with a 349-seat 777-300ER in high season, but that's only four months of the year.) This dispute might not have happened had Boeing delivered the 787 in 2010 as per the original contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homerun Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 The point to point demand for Canada to the UAE is currently over served. When the demand grows from the present 60 people per day to a level that can fill a wide body, perhaps this issue can be revisited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
internet Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Wonder if the Aussies regret granting such liberal access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B75/76 Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 The point to point demand for Canada to the UAE is currently over served. When the demand grows from the present 60 people per day to a level that can fill a wide body, perhaps this issue can be revisited.Wow! Really? Only 60 people are getting on that A380? Then I wonder why all the concern about EK having more flights. Surely 60 pax a day could not have a negative impact on AC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pictues Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 That is 60 passengers just going to Dubai not how many we people fly on the A380 as most are flying go India and other destinations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 That is 60 passengers just going to Dubai not how many we people fly on the A380 as most are flying go India and other destinationsThe same as Air Canada's flights to Frankfurt. 80% of the load is travelling to anywhere but Frankfurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FA@AC Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 The same as Air Canada's flights to Frankfurt. 80% of the load is travelling to anywhere but Frankfurt.That becomes relevant to the debate over landing rights for EK in Canada when a Canadian carrier has a codeshare/revenue sharing agreement with EK or a different UAE carrier for flights beyond DXB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B75/76 Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 That becomes relevant to the debate over landing rights for EK in Canada when a Canadian carrier has a codeshare/revenue sharing agreement with EK or a different UAE carrier for flights beyond DXB.So it is a requirement for all foreign carriers operating to/from Canada to code/revenue share with a Canadian carrier? Why is that? Is that the case now with BA, AF, KLM, CX etc?Does the agreement EK has with WJ satisfy? If not, why? LH has flights beyond FRA to India and Africa so EK would only be offering an alternative to consumers. This is generally considered a good thing, no?Why can't AC operate to DXB and connect with their own code share partners like Jet? Dubai certainly wouldn't restrict them from doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FA@AC Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Why can't AC operate to DXB and connect with their own code share partners like Jet? Dubai certainly wouldn't restrict them from doing so.Off the top of my head, AC has to pay for the fuel it uses, and it has to pay for its aircraft. We aren't quite sure whether EK pays for either.The UAE kicked our military out of its territory and imposed a high visa fee on Canadians just because Canada wouldn't immediately agree to grant EK landing rights for hourly A-380 flights from YUL YYZ YWG YYC YEG and YVR to DXB and for 4 X daily A-380 service to DXB from every other Canadian city with a population of more than 200. I'm not sure they wouldn't restrict AC from connecting with Jet or anyone else at Dubai.If you ran AC, what aircraft in the current fleet would you use on the lucrative YYZ-DXB route for all those connections to Jet Airways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B75/76 Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 Off the top of my head, AC has to pay for the fuel it uses, and it has to pay for its aircraft. We aren't quite sure whether EK pays for either....If you ran AC, what aircraft in the current fleet would you use on the lucrative YYZ-DXB route for all those connections to Jet Airways?When you say 'we' I assume you mean 'you'? Whether AC has the right a/c, the desire or plain willingness to run the route is not really relevant, is it? It has much more to do with what the Star Alliance route structure is and whether it would be complimentary or not. It is not in the alliance's interest to split the sub-continent and African traffic they now run through FRA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FA@AC Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 It is not in the alliance's interest to split the sub-continent and African traffic they now run through FRA.I guess the Star Alliance carriers have a different view. They use a number of hubs other than FRA, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B75/76 Posted March 9, 2012 Author Share Posted March 9, 2012 ... They use a number of hubs other than FRA, btw.I am aware of that. It just highlights the hypocrisy of the of the kind of objection as stated below.The point to point demand for Canada to the UAE is currently over served. When the demand grows from the present 60 people per day to a level that can fill a wide body, perhaps this issue can be revisited.While utilizing multiple hubs to funnel traffic is good business for AC and LH et al, it is somehow considered unreasonable and unfair for another airline such as EK to employ the same strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alt* Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 The point to point demand for Canada to the UAE is currently over served. When the demand grows from the present 60 people per day to a level that can fill a wide body, perhaps this issue can be revisited.Sorry but have to disagree with you there, I have to fly to JFK in order to get back to YYZ since the loads are always full. Personally, I think that the Canadian government should ban these MF's from operating into Canada altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homerun Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 The loads are full but it is not point to point traffic, which is what I specifically referred to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B75/76 Posted March 11, 2012 Author Share Posted March 11, 2012 The loads are full but it is not point to point traffic, which is what I specifically referred to.Is it correct then to infer from your post that all airlines should only provide point to point service? Or is it just a condition you would wish to see applied to select airlines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homerun Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 The claim being made in the press is that there is a demand going unserved for travel between Canada and Dubai. I'm merely pointing out that it is not the case.Let's see some honest lobbying, that you want the extra flights to connect Canada to a boatload of other Countries by connecting the pax through Dubai. Don't mislead the uninformed public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alt* Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 The loads are full but it is not point to point traffic, which is what I specifically referred to.I guess I misread your post, I stand corrected. You are correct in your statement, "it is not point to point traffic" most traffic is coming from India and Pakistan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Specs Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 "Aviation was made a strategic industry in Dubai 20 years ago. In Europe it is not strategic and it is not important for politicians to win elections. That is why airline lobbying is not heard, investments are blocked, taxes are increasing and as a result airlines do not have modern fleets and then they save money on products."I was waiting for somebody over there to say that. As a strategic industry, isn't that justification enough for the Canadian government to look after the interests of Canada and it's citizens? A threat to it's airline industry requires intervention. Enough with the self serving disingenuous free trade arguments the Emirati and their mercenarial hirelings espouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiburon Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I was waiting for somebody over there to say that. As a strategic industry, isn't that justification enough for the Canadian government to look after the interests of Canada and it's citizens? A threat to it's airline industry requires intervention. Enough with the self serving disingenuous free trade arguments the Emirati and their mercenarial hirelings espouse.You mean "Air Canada's Interests" don't you?This little nugget slipped out last week,"Air Canada came to us during the ... global [economic] crisis, and asked specifically for government assistance in a number of areas because of the dangers shutting down the airline would represent to the Canadian economy," Harper said. "I'll be darned if we will now sit by and let the airline shut itself down.Read more: http://www.timescolo...l#ixzz1ovEsxeQKDoes Westjet, Porter, Transat, Canjet get special government assistance too?The self serving disingenuous arguments currently being thrown around are coming from Air Canada. The continuing attempts to loot taxpayers should be obvious now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Everyone has a self interest here, so let's avoid the over the wall finger pointing on both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Specs Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Nope. Specifically did not mention AC.Aviation has a direct impact on the ongoing strategic interests of the country. The Emirates Airlines spokesman said exactly that same thing re his country's aviation policies. .And as Emirates is to the UAE, so is AC to Canada as the minister said herself on the weekend, "AC is a unique circumstance". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thebean Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Classic line:"We do not lose time in discussion with alliances, which are not very clear for the customer to understand. They say 'we offer you seamless travel' but in the end they offer seamless trouble," said Antinori, who joined Emirates as executive vice president, passenger sales worldwide, in September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.