Etihad Airlines LOOSES 2 Billion Dollars

I want to see how much of that is from it's ownership of Alitalia & Air Berlin.

But even ignoring that...


Etihad carrier 17.4 million passengers that year (2015).

So a $2.06 billion loss works out to be a cost of $118 per passenger. Are we implying that if US long-haul ticket prices go up by $118 on average, US airlines would have Etihad's level of service?

Mmm... Where do I sign up? Twice!


Government subsidies is not the reason the US airlines is being beaten by the ME3.
 
Last edited:
Still waging a jihad against ME airlines Art?

Here's something to consider: Instead of demanding other carriers drop their level of service to match Delta or any of the other US carriers why don't you and your fellow employees work with your company to bring your service up to an acceptable level with the flying public?

The US "legacy" airlines have all the ambiance of the old Aeroflot of the USSR days and service to boot. The problem is not the ME airlines Art, the US ones need to take a hard look at what they have become.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Still waging a jihad against ME airlines Art?

Here's something to consider: Instead of demanding other carriers drop their level of service to match Delta or any of the other US carriers why don't you and your fellow employees work with your company to bring your service up to an acceptable level with the flying public?

The US "legacy" airlines have all the ambiance of the old Aeroflot of the USSR days and service to boot. The problem is not the ME airlines Art, the US ones need to take a hard look at what they have become.
Click to expand...

That's a great idea ! I personally would love that. 747-8's and A380s with twenty rows of seats removed for piano bars and showers. Now, how do we get the government to pay for it like they do ?
 
deonb said:
I want to see how much of that is from it's ownership of Alitalia & Air Berlin.

But even ignoring that...


Etihad carrier 17.4 million passengers that year (2015).

So a $2.06 billion loss works out to be a cost of $118 per passenger. Are we implying that if US long-haul ticket prices go up by $118 on average, US airlines would have Etihad's level of service?

Mmm... Where do I sign up? Twice!


Government subsidies is not the reason the US airlines is being beaten by the ME3.
Click to expand...

Well considering that Delta alone hauled 179 million passengers that same year, over TEN TIMES as many - you do the math !!! I think you'll come out with something near 21BILLION ! So, ah yeah I think $118 bucks would do it.

Oh, ok, so I guess all we need is one of their CEO's because our business school graduates are just totally incompetent ? Their CEO's know some kind of secret magic that NO ONE in the USA can figure out ?
 
Last edited:
Doc Holliday said:
Still waging a jihad against ME airlines Art?

Here's something to consider: Instead of demanding other carriers drop their level of service to match Delta or any of the other US carriers why don't you and your fellow employees work with your company to bring your service up to an acceptable level with the flying public?

The US "legacy" airlines have all the ambiance of the old Aeroflot of the USSR days and service to boot. The problem is not the ME airlines Art, the US ones need to take a hard look at what they have become.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but they don't hold a candle (yet) to the wonderful Aeroflot body-odor scent and the tremendous rattle of loose cabin parts and pieces on takeoff and landing. It was a sensory delight.
 
Etihad's competition is not Delta, it is Emirates, Saudia, Qatar, and to some extent, Virgin. All but Virgin are gov-subsidized. Delta/United cannot hope to compete against them for the "Super-Elite" passenger, considering that most of the SE's on this side of the planet are using Gulfstreams, not commercial carriers.

The majors lost the SE's in the late 90's to the fractional/on-demands, and they are not coming back, especially in the age of TSA.
 
FlyingElvii said:
Etihad's competition is not Delta, it is Emirates, Saudia, Qatar, and to some extent, Virgin. All but Virgin are gov-subsidized. Delta/United cannot hope to compete against them for the "Super-Elite" passenger, considering that most of the SE's on this side of the planet are using Gulfstreams, not commercial carriers.

The majors lost the SE's in the late 90's to the fractional/on-demands, and they are not coming back, especially in the age of TSA.
Click to expand...
Which is a big part of the reason airlines want to control ATC - if you can't beat 'em with service, erect barriers through regulation.

The international airline ownership equation is much more complicated than you mention, as described by Gary Leff in this article: http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea...-china-eastern-buy-air-france-cant-even-keep/

And don't think that US airlines are operating without subsidy - things like EAS, tax subsidies related to plant location, local contributions to certain airlines to increase or keep service, airline security (TSA), and plenty of other items represent subsidies to US carriers. The government has also provided subsidies and guarantees to airplane manufacturers - look at the history of the L-1011, for example, a type that Delta operated extensively over the years (L1011 was subsidized by the UK government for the engines and by the US government through loan guarantees.
 
Spirit definitely didn't have a good quarter. Their Q2 results were negative along with this statement.

IMG_1874.JPG
 
wsuffa said:
Which is a big part of the reason airlines want to control ATC - if you can't beat 'em with service, erect barriers through regulation.

The international airline ownership equation is much more complicated than you mention, as described by Gary Leff in this article: http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea...-china-eastern-buy-air-france-cant-even-keep/

And don't think that US airlines are operating without subsidy - things like EAS, tax subsidies related to plant location, local contributions to certain airlines to increase or keep service, airline security (TSA), and plenty of other items represent subsidies to US carriers. The government has also provided subsidies and guarantees to airplane manufacturers - look at the history of the L-1011, for example, a type that Delta operated extensively over the years (L1011 was subsidized by the UK government for the engines and by the US government through loan guarantees.
Click to expand...
Oh, I understand all of that.
My point was that the majors lost the highest paying passengers in the 90's, and that they are gone forever now, unless regulation/pilot shortage destroys the light jet industry. Drive past Teterboro on any given Monday/Friday and count the number of Limos/Black Cars picking up and dropping off. That is where Delta's Super-elites went.
It is also one of the reasons they started DPJ.
 
FlyingElvii said:
Oh, I understand all of that.
My point was that the majors lost the highest paying passengers in the 90's, and that they are gone forever now, unless regulation/pilot shortage destroys the light jet industry. Drive past Teterboro on any given Monday/Friday and count the number of Limos/Black Cars picking up and dropping off. That is where Delta's Super-elites went.
It is also one of the reasons they started DPJ.
Click to expand...
Agree. And I admit to having been one of those passengers back in corporate life.

I would go private again in a heartbeat given the domestic carrier's treatment of passengers (even the high-value ones), the TSA, sense of entitlement the carrier's seem to have when they are only marginally better than a city bus.
 
So they lost money. The Shieks, Emirs, whatever run them as a hobby using petrodollars, AKA, Monopoly Money.

Cheers
 
Art VanDelay said:
Despite being given a 1.7 billion dollar subsidie by its government ;

https://aviationvoice.com/etihad-lo...ned_in_the_aviation_world&utm_term=2017-07-29
Click to expand...

This article is PR by U.S. airlines and the U.S. pilots union. The so-called Fair Skies partnership. Lobbying spin if you want to be charitable. Propaganda, if you want to be more critical.

Accounting is not a trivial thing for a business as complicated as an airline. Etihad publishes audited financial statements, as do U.S. airlines, and Etihad's are audited by Deloitte, which is a big firm. Etihad uses an international accounting standard, and not the GAAP standard that is peculiar to the U.S., so there is no easy way to compare a profit or loss reported by Etihad to those reported by U.S. carriers.

The Fair Skies partnership has a vested interest in bashing Etihad, so they can pay their "forensic auditors" to come to whatever conclusion they please. It's all just propaganda, until proven otherwise.
 
NoHeat said:
This article is PR by U.S. airlines and the U.S. pilots union. The so-called Fair Skies partnership. Lobbying spin if you want to be charitable. Propaganda, if you want to be more critical.

Accounting is not a trivial thing for a business as complicated as an airline. Etihad publishes audited financial statements, as do U.S. airlines, and Etihad's are audited by Deloitte, which is a big firm. Etihad uses an international accounting standard, and not the GAAP standard that is peculiar to the U.S., so there is no easy way to compare a profit or loss reported by Etihad to those reported by U.S. carriers.

The Fair Skies partnership has a vested interest in bashing Etihad, so they can pay their "forensic auditors" to come to whatever conclusion they please. It's all just propaganda, until proven otherwise.
Click to expand...

"The Partnership for Open & Fair Skies is a coalition composed of American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines, along with the Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l, the Allied Pilots Association, the Airline Division of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, the Communications Workers of America and the Southwest Airlines Pilots’ Association."

What a shock they come up to this "conclusion" with their "forensic auditors".

I wonder what value they would put to the US airlines using the most valuable subsidy ever, chapter 11...
 
NoHeat said:
This article is PR by U.S. airlines and the U.S. pilots union. The so-called Fair Skies partnership. Lobbying spin if you want to be charitable. Propaganda, if you want to be more critical.

Accounting is not a trivial thing for a business as complicated as an airline. Etihad publishes audited financial statements, as do U.S. airlines, and Etihad's are audited by Deloitte, which is a big firm. Etihad uses an international accounting standard, and not the GAAP standard that is peculiar to the U.S., so there is no easy way to compare a profit or loss reported by Etihad to those reported by U.S. carriers.

The Fair Skies partnership has a vested interest in bashing Etihad, so they can pay their "forensic auditors" to come to whatever conclusion they please. It's all just propaganda, until proven otherwise.
Click to expand...

I would LOVE with all my heart to see one of the ME carriers CEO's come over here and take over one of our major carriers and see how they do for just one year with the same rules and challenges that our CEO's have.
 
Art VanDelay said:
I would LOVE with all my heart to see one of the ME carriers CEO's come over here and take over one of our major carriers and see how they do for just one year with the same rules and challenges that our CEO's have.
Click to expand...
I see job postings fairly often from the ME3 looking for US executives to come and staff their airlines. Pretty nice pay, too.
 
Lindberg said:
AMR had something like $11 billion in accumulated losses when it filed bankruptcy.
Click to expand...
The "govmit" is always there to bail out our air lines. Lawyers and airline executives make out big time when this happens.most all of our majors have gone bottoms up at one time or another . The postal act of 1925 is what gave the airlines their first big subsidy and kept them going. Same with banks, same with railroads when it comes to taxpayers money.Same with most decent airports in the U.S who receive "govmit" money either state, federal or both.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
The "govmit" is always there to bail out our air lines. Lawyers and airline executives make out big time when this happens.most all of our majors have gone bottoms up at one time or another . The postal act of 1925 is what gave the airlines their first big subsidy and kept them going. Same with banks, same with railroads when it comes to taxpayers money.Same with most decent airports in the U.S who receive "govmit" money either state, federal or both.
Click to expand...

I assume you live off the grid on a private road, never use the USPS, don't use local services (police, fire, library, schools), don't have a GPS, would never use a bridge if you could swim across, etc? Otherwise, you're just beeyotching about someone receiving a different subsidy than the one(s) you use.
 
kyleb said:
I assume you live off the grid on a private road, never use the USPS, don't use local services (police, fire, library, schools), don't have a GPS, would never use a bridge if you could swim across, etc? Otherwise, you're just beeyotching about someone receiving a different subsidy than the one(s) you use.
Click to expand...
Silly anology . Makes no sense.
 
Art VanDelay said:
I would LOVE with all my heart to see one of the ME carriers CEO's come over here and take over one of our major carriers and see how they do for just one year with the same rules and challenges that our CEO's have.
Click to expand...

You mean come over here and do things like actually have the airplanes cleaned properly, inside and out? Or maybe set reasonable standards for flight attendants instead of the overweight grandmothers with a chip on their shoulder? Or maybe serving actual real food unlike the crap the US airlines pass off as catering?

Or maybe actually provide seating that will fit actual size passengers? Or have customer service agents that act like they really care about the well being of their passengers?
 
Jimmy cooper said:
The "govmit" is always there to bail out our air lines. Lawyers and airline executives make out big time when this happens.most all of our majors have gone bottoms up at one time or another . The postal act of 1925 is what gave the airlines their first big subsidy and kept them going. Same with banks, same with railroads when it comes to taxpayers money.Same with most decent airports in the U.S who receive "govmit" money either state, federal or both.
Click to expand...
Yeah, let's not forget the biggest subsidies of all - agricultural.
 
Doc Holliday said:
You mean come over here and do things like actually have the airplanes cleaned properly, inside and out? Or maybe set reasonable standards for flight attendants instead of the overweight grandmothers with a chip on their shoulder? Or maybe serving actual real food unlike the crap the US airlines pass off as catering?

Or maybe actually provide seating that will fit actual size passengers? Or have customer service agents that act like they really care about the well being of their passengers?
Click to expand...

I guess you just don't get it - all of that costs money. When you do NOT need to turn a profit you can spend crazy amounts of money on those items and you can put as much space between seats as you want. As for the flight attendant issue its the whole political correctness thing in this country. You can't not hire someone in this country because they're too ugly or too old or too fat. You think we want to hire and or keep around surly grandmothers and sweet boys ????
 
wsuffa said:
I see job postings fairly often from the ME3 looking for US executives to come and staff their airlines. Pretty nice pay, too.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you don't really see us asking for any of their guys do you ? Wonder why that would be ?
 
Art VanDelay said:
Yeah, you don't really see us asking for any of their guys do you ? Wonder why that would be ?
Click to expand...
Partly because they're hiring and growing and our folks are cutting staff. Still. Growing companies need folks.

Besides, our immigration laws discourage that kind of hiring behavior, regardless of how knowledgeable and good the folks are. And why would we want folks from, say BA, which seems hell-bent on self-destruction.
 
Art VanDelay said:
I guess you just don't get it - all of that costs money. When you do NOT need to turn a profit you can spend crazy amounts of money on those items and you can put as much space between seats as you want. As for the flight attendant issue its the whole political correctness thing in this country. You can't not hire someone in this country because they're too ugly or too old or too fat. You think we want to hire and or keep around surly grandmothers and sweet boys ????
Click to expand...

I get it, it's your company and employees such as yourself that doesn't get it.

You keep blaming government subsidies for your competitions advantages, which frankly isn't the real problem. Again you feel threatened by these airlines on international routes. They are offering a better service than your airline is willing to offer at most times the same price if not cheaper.

The analogy of your flight attendants has more to do with their bad attitudes and lack of customer service. Your company could fix that if they wanted, they simply choose not too. And much of that goes back to your companies culture of "take it or leave it". It permeates through the whole company and now what you have is essentially barely a step above riding a bus.

Apparently you don't even look at your aircraft. They are filthy inside and out. Your company doesn't want to spend the money to keep them clean, yet your executives will hand out bonuses upon bonuses this year for coming in under budget.

And don't even start about the sad attempt your company makes at catering. Again, they buy the cheapest crap they can find and hand out bonuses to the people in charge of it to keep the prices low.

It's not subsidies, it's your companies attitude toward the market. Look at what you are promoting, you want a foreign airline to drop their level of service to match your companies crap service in hopes of getting some of their passengers.

Sorry, as most customers have discovered in the international market, if you want superior service you don't fly on a US legacy carrier.

You are drinking the Kool Aid being put out by your management to blame the boogey man when the reality is your management created the problem to begin with.
 
Doc Holliday said:
I get it, it's your company and employees such as yourself that doesn't get it.

You keep blaming government subsidies for your competitions advantages, which frankly isn't the real problem. Again you feel threatened by these airlines on international routes. They are offering a better service than your airline is willing to offer at most times the same price if not cheaper.

The analogy of your flight attendants has more to do with their bad attitudes and lack of customer service. Your company could fix that if they wanted, they simply choose not too. And much of that goes back to your companies culture of "take it or leave it". It permeates through the whole company and now what you have is essentially barely a step above riding a bus.

Apparently you don't even look at your aircraft. They are filthy inside and out. Your company doesn't want to spend the money to keep them clean, yet your executives will hand out bonuses upon bonuses this year for coming in under budget.

And don't even start about the sad attempt your company makes at catering. Again, they buy the cheapest crap they can find and hand out bonuses to the people in charge of it to keep the prices low.

It's not subsidies, it's your companies attitude toward the market. Look at what you are promoting, you want a foreign airline to drop their level of service to match your companies crap service in hopes of getting some of their passengers.

Sorry, as most customers have discovered in the international market, if you want superior service you don't fly on a US legacy carrier.

You are drinking the Kool Aid being put out by your management to blame the boogey man when the reality is your management created the problem to begin with.
Click to expand...

Again you can't seem to understand the way the business operates !!!
Aircraft cleaners are CONTRACTORS they are NOT part of the airline. They will very likely do any level of cleaning you want FOR A PRICE ! We can only afford to spend X amount on that cleaning because we have to make this thing called a PROFIT.

CATERING - also a CONTRACTOR not part of the airline. You want the lobster and filet mignon in coach ? That costs MONEY, money that comes out of the bottom line.

FLIGHT ATTENDANTS - Don't even get me started on them ! The ME carriers hire flight attendants for 2 to 3 year contracts - that's it. Those contracts almost NEVER get renewed. Can you imagine how many lawsuits we would have if we were to even word the ads for flight attendant positions like they do ???? Furthermore the vast majority of their flight attendants are hired from Eastern European countries with abysmal employment rates. Attractive young women from these countries typically have two life choices ; become a flight attendant for Ali BaBa for awhile or move to either Brussels, London or Amsterdam and become a prostitute - many of whom have university degrees !

As a proud Part 121 pilot do you think I like how crappy our airlines are compared to theirs ? NOT ONE F7CKING BIT !!!! Truthfully I am enormously embarrassed by the astronomical amounts of money they are able to spend in order to look better then us. What happened to the days when American industry and businesses were world leaders at everything ? The middle eastern carriers clearly want to spend what ever amount of money it takes to dominate the skies and we all know they have deeper pockets than ANY American business. Why should they just stop with airlines ?
 
Art VanDelay said:
Again you can't seem to understand the way the business operates !!!
Aircraft cleaners are CONTRACTORS they are NOT part of the airline. They will very likely do any level of cleaning you want FOR A PRICE ! We can only afford to spend X amount on that cleaning because we have to make this thing called a PROFIT.

CATERING - also a CONTRACTOR not part of the airline. You want the lobster and filet mignon in coach ? That costs MONEY, money that comes out of the bottom line.

FLIGHT ATTENDANTS - Don't even get me started on them ! The ME carriers hire flight attendants for 2 to 3 year contracts - that's it. Those contracts almost NEVER get renewed. Can you imagine how many lawsuits we would have if we were to even word the ads for flight attendant positions like they do ???? Furthermore the vast majority of their flight attendants are hired from Eastern European countries with abysmal employment rates. Attractive young women from these countries typically have two life choices ; become a flight attendant for Ali BaBa for awhile or move to either Brussels, London or Amsterdam and become a prostitute - many of whom have university degrees !

As a proud Part 121 pilot do you think I like how crappy our airlines are compared to theirs ? NOT ONE F7CKING BIT !!!! Truthfully I am enormously embarrassed by the astronomical amounts of money they are able to spend in order to look better then us. What happened to the days when American industry and businesses were world leaders at everything ? The middle eastern carriers clearly want to spend what ever amount of money it takes to dominate the skies and we all know they have deeper pockets than ANY American business. Why should they just stop with airlines ?
Click to expand...

Thanks for finally admitting it's your company that is mishandling their money and are ultimately responsible for your lousy service. I'm sure your executive group will be handing out bonuses in the $$$$millions to each other for their "cost savings" at the expense of customer service.

It's the culture of "take it or leave it" that has left the US carriers at such a disadvantage. The foreign carriers want that business and are willing to do what they must in order to get it.

And they're doing a good job.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Thanks for finally admitting it's your company that is mishandling their money and are ultimately responsible for your lousy service. I'm sure your executive group will be handing out bonuses in the $$$$millions to each other for their "cost savings" at the expense of customer service.

It's the culture of "take it or leave it" that has left the US carriers at such a disadvantage. The foreign carriers want that business and are willing to do what they must in order to get it.

And they're doing a good job.
Click to expand...
What ?
You think Emirates management is low paid ? Their management is doing the same thing - just from a comparatively bottomless well.
 
Art VanDelay said:
What ?
You think Emirates management is low paid ?
Click to expand...

Show me where I said Emirates has low paid management?

Art VanDelay said:
Their management is doing the same thing - just from a comparatively bottomless well.
Click to expand...

So? At least their management is concerned about customer service, something your airline could give a crap less about.

So what's your solution? You've been waging this jihad against the ME3 airlines. Do you want them to be shut out of US airspace? Landing rights taken away in the US? You seem intent on them lowering their service to the crap level of your airline, how do you expect that to happen?

What would make you happy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top