dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 5,866
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
Seriously, did you read what I wrote? How does the UK banning electronics on its own carriers give ME carriers a disadvantage?
Well, that's one way to compete against Emirates I suppose...
- Thread starter deonb
- Start date
Seriously, did you read what I wrote? How does the UK banning electronics on its own carriers give ME carriers a disadvantage?
denverpilot
Tied Down
I've found that to be quite untrue. Negotiation works fine over video. The final meeting to sign usually has to be in person, but more often than not, if the product doesn't suck or isn't marginal utility for the price, decision makers just cut a PO after a conference call these days. Usually with performance terms.
Note carefully that there's LOT of marginally valued products out there. You'll be on a plane working hard to sell those. Every week.
It ain't hard to figure out the top brands and buy them in the Information Age. It's really rare I go into a sales pitch not knowing more about the company's products, services, and customer complaints as well as praises, than the sales person who demanded an in person meeting knows. What they know is how to whip out the
company credit card and take me and the others on my side of the table and the sales engineer (who I know lied about half of the time) out to dinner at a steak house. We decided before they ever walked in the door.
The largest IT purchases we made in the last three years were simply to hand over a credit card number to a cloud vendor and start setting up our stuff. We don't buy server hardware anymore. We knew the numbers a year out before we started. Three hours with a spreadsheet.
I'm sure we would enjoy the old school steak dinner if we needed a company jet. LOL. We'd still know what we were going to buy long before the pretty people with company polo shirts and matching khakis walked in the front door though, unless they decided to offer an in-person discount.
The number one way to get an Information Age range manager not to buy your product? Tell them you don't give pricing anytime except in person. Okay then, bye. You're off the list. Got vendors who'll quote me in email. No time for your BS. Really. Unless your product is literally taking the world by storm and you play goofy in person games, I'll be ordering from your competitors. It's unlikely your product is that good if I don't see people saying so online, unsolicited, and places your marketing staff probably don't know exist.
My dad's world was in person sales. My world that's a waste of my time and makes my company slower to become more efficient and get things done. Because if we play along, one of our competitors already bought the tech and is beating us with it.
NoHeat
En-Route
Why did the UK take action differently from the US?
If they both share the same good intelligence, wouldn't the US and UK come to the same conclusion and apply their ban to the same flights?
I'm guessing it's not particularly good intelligence, but they took action anyway, with targets that are halfway random.
mtuomi
En-Route
You won't make a good deal in Asia unless you are there in person, doesn't matter if you're buying or selling. For everyday one-off ebay type stuff, sure no problem. But if you're trying to find a supplier, you have to be there in person (or you'll pay much more for it).
Europe/USA work much more efficiently, but Asia is very much a "be there" place. India is the same. But I said majority of people, and that's where they are.
In Asia, the culture is such that the deals are always finished (not just signed) after hours (usually in a bar), you just cannot have that with remote presence. This won't change anytime soon.
mtuomi
En-Route
UK didn't ban the ME3, US did.
I'm sorry but you really have no clue how the ME carriers work.
BA doesn't have connecting traffic via those hubs, so banning electronics won't really hurt BA whose traffic is mainly p2p - people will fly no matter what because they have no real choice, same limitations everywhere (unless connecting via Europe but that's a price-driven market and not very interesting for BA). But it will hurt ME carriers ALOT because now LHR-DOH/DXB/AUH-Asia/Africa is not possible for a vast majority of business travelers, so BA LHR-Asia/Africa is the only option left. (well obviously European/Asian airlines are still available, but this cuts a massive amount of capacity between these regions).
Same thing with US carriers except that US carriers don't fly direct to those destinations.
I fly US-EU via IST almost monthly, this means I will get WAY worse service for a lot more money because this route is no longer an option for me.
mtuomi
En-Route
Luggage going to cabin isn't screened as well for explosives as luggage going to the hold. It's pretty easy to get a laptop full of explosives to an airplane if it's in your carryon luggage. Priority is for sharp objects, firearms and other items that you can use to harm other passengers. TSA has a huge 5% success rate in detecting these items
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,731
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
Regional airlines will give you a pilot job over the phone! Who needs face 2 face amma right!? LOL #airlinetravelsux
mtuomi
En-Route
deonb
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,266
- Display Name
Display name:
deonb
+1000
If you're on the selling side of anything substantial, there's no chance of a deal happening if you don't meet in person.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Luckily I have zero business interests where I need anything supplied by Asia. And it doesn't really apply to the thread anyway, considering Asian carriers aren't under the ban.
I'll let you know if I need anything from the Middle East. Probably not. I got out of the crude oil biz a loooong assed time ago.
mtuomi
En-Route
This ban has a large effect on UK-Asia travel.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 5,866
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
I know how they work. The question wasn't meant for you. But you answered it so touché to you.
You people can conjecture all day that there is a conspiracy between the US and UK to economically disadvantage ME carriers but that does not mean it is true.
mtuomi
En-Route
UK has nothing to do with the ME3, that ban is US only.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Not the US ban that started the thread. The U.K. does what they like, and I have no opinion on their decisions nor influence. I wouldn't say I don't care, but it's down there pretty low on the rather long cares list.
I bet it's all the Russians fault, whatever it is. That's popular to say again. Why not? All statists need someone to be the global boogeyman. Different one each month. Russians it is! The press says so, must be true.
mtuomi
En-Route
"How does the UK banning electronics on its own carriers give ME carriers a disadvantage?"
Answer is: UK didn't ban them. Only reason US banned those is protectionism.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 5,866
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
You do not seem to be following the line of discussion. The UK banned electronic devices on flights from Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia regardless of airline. Why?
That assertion is unsubstantiated conjecture.
mtuomi
En-Route
Well, maybe we should read again how things went?
"I've found that to be quite untrue."
That was your response when I said "Because majority of world's population will not negotiate a deal if it's not in person."
Myself and another poster, who obviously have more experience about international trade than you do, tried to point out that videoconferencing might work in Europe and US, but majority(key word) of world's population will not negotiate meaningful deals using it. So your original point was moot. Any regulations that restrict competition in airline travel need to be investigated fully, and an ambiguous ban such as this one wasn't rolled out in an open manner.
I believe it was you who wrote a 500-line essay that was not relevant to my post you replied to or to the OP, which is what you are now complaining about.
mtuomi
En-Route
So you don't know what ME3 is? TK is the only airline whose business model is harmed by the UK ban.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 5,866
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
Again, your reading comprehension is a fail. I want to know why the UK implemented an electronics ban.
mtuomi
En-Route
You really don't get it, do you? UK obviously has different intelligence data than the US, because the ban is not the same.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 5,866
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
To summarize, you assert:
- that the UK has a legitimate security reason for banning electronics from certain countries, and
- that the only reason the US could possibly ban electronics from certain countries is economic protectionism.
mtuomi
En-Route
No, I'm agreeing with the common countries, but I would love to know why US added 3 developed countries UK didn't, on their list. And those 3 countries happen to be very important hubs for airline travel, with no US airline presence, and those 3 countries have airlines US airlines constantly complain about.
This is obviously shared intel, because two allies apply the restrictions at the same time. But why US added the 3 countries UK didn't smells very much like protectionism.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 5,866
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
According to you, you already know. Did you forget?
UK also banned some countries that the US didn't.
mtuomi
En-Route
What countries UK banned that have airline links to the US that US didn't?
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 5,866
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
Trump doesn't care, he apparently has business ties with companies in countries served by the ME3. He changed the subject and focused on airport infrastructure and ATC.
mtuomi
En-Route
This obviously didn't come from Trump level. But knowing the illegal practices US airlines are happy to do to protect their interests, I wouldn't be surprised if this was airline-induced restriction. This just passes the duck test so well.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 5,866
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
So I guess we've come full circle. US airlines just so happen to "induce" a government restriction on flights from certain foreign countries to protect their financial interests ... and this so happens to exactly coincide with the UK government imposing similar security restrictions on a similar (but not identical) set of countries.
mtuomi
En-Route
Yes. Nothing explains the ME3, but US airline interests. Very convenient way to slap that restriction on. If it quacks like a duck...
deonb
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,266
- Display Name
Display name:
deonb
It must be duck season. There's just nothing about this that passes muster.
The UAE has better checkin security than anything I've seen in the U.S. and Europe. It's also redundant - there are both UAE checkpoints, and US security checkpoints for US-bound flights, complete with real life Americans staffing it.
There is no device you can get on board in DXB that you can't get twice as easy on board a US airline departing from CDG. And there has been about 10 times the number of terrorist attacks in France than in the UAE, with 100s of times the fatalities.
Since the UAE is literally the country in the world that has the MOST to lose if their flag-bearing carrier gets attacked, they are pretty diligent about this stuff. Anybody who even smells like a terrorist is locked up or worse, and they've got an islamic terrorist organization watchlist that is bigger than ours.
So the only possible reason for this ban to extend to EK, is IF you had a specific credible thread coming from the UAE - and for that to be the case it would pretty much have to be a thread of state sponsorship. And if THAT was the case then the UK would have for sure banned EK as well.
Quack. Quack...
RJM62
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2007
- Messages
- 13,157
- Location
- Upstate New York
- Display Name
Display name:
Geek on the Hill
deonb
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,266
- Display Name
Display name:
deonb
"Phones and medical devices are not affected."
Because nobody in that world is overweight and sleeping with a CPAP machine.
TheTraveler
Line Up and Wait
I just wish I could carry my water bottle with me, filled. It's hit and miss, some have relaxed it a bit, but that is one that has certainly never made sense to me.
Yep. Too much theft by TSA and baggage handlers. I'd have to ship it FedEx or UPS or it wouldn't be going it that scenario.
NoHeat
En-Route
Ship your personal effects by FedEx or UPS within the US, and they will promptly show up where you expected them.
Ship them that way to another country, and you'll likely have an entirely different experience. They will go through that country's customs for freight, which is set up for dealing with commercial goods for sale. Ship a hundred cartons of new shirts or new computers for sale, and they'll know how to deal with them, but ship one carton with your personal clothes or personal computer and nobody will have a clue what to do. I spent the better part of a day trying to deal with this situation with customs in Munich Germany. I had shipped personal effects by one of the big package carriers. I had to go to the freight areas of customs at the Munich airport to deal with it. You can't image how frustrating it can be, unless you've tried it.
Everything works much better when you check personal effects in your baggage. The customs you'll deal with, as you get off a passenger airliner, is geared for exactly what you're doing, not for something entirely different.
ARFlyer
En-Route
Most likely not long. However, it won't be a ban from having them. I bet it will be a 100% hand inspection and a power test just to **** people off. Just to show that the TSA "controls" them!
denverpilot
Tied Down
Majority is questionable, but anyway... the point was, and still is, that if airlines become more obnoxious to deal with than a video call, the world will adapt. Already there for most domestic travel and business. Worst possible way to spend a day and unnecessary.
If various places want to be luddites, and pretend they need in person meetings, fine by me. Their competitors will eventually crush them by being more efficient not doing it.
TheTraveler
Line Up and Wait
I can clearly see the point, and I believe in some situations and industries, the video conference, FaceTime, and other options have really taken root. We use it often for various things. But, it does not replace things that we absolutely have to be on location for.
-You cannot hologram yourself into a tradeshow, conference, or event which is significant enough to the industry that your presence is really required if you wish to consider yourself/company/products part of the industry.
-The products we manufacture require in-person demonstrations and training not only from us, the manufacturer, it is required by the end user. The amount that can be done online (such as YouTube) is limited.
-With international distributors around the world, they have to be visited for multiple reasons. Just a conversation about business? Video, phone call, whatever. But annual or bi-annual meetings on location are pretty important.
So while in some instances I do agree with your view, in our industry, if we were not present at for the above, it would be devastating to the business. Simple meetings are no big deal, even serious ones regarding large contracts, tenders, etc. There are just so many things out there we still need to be present for.
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
Perhaps you're right. Perhaps the others in this thread are right. Fact is that to a lot of people this administration has lost credibility by some of the claims it has made and the posture it has taken on some issues. Also noted is that the court cases have just started with respect to the immigration/visa restrictions executive order.
Note that I am not promoting one view or the other, just putting it out there that a number of good reasons exist for people to suspect the motives of this order.
On its surface, it also raises other questions. The Pan Am 103 incident was traced to a device in the cargo hold. Most new laptops use Lithium batteries, which are a known fire/explosion risk.... So much so that there are rules limiting the ability to check same.
Point is that we really don't know, and I'd hate to see us obstensively reduce one risk while increasing another. I can see why people might be suspicious of this ban. The fact that both the UK and Canada have also implemented the ban reduces the suspicions, but neither France nor Germany have adopted it (and France has a real problem with radical terrorism at the moment). And given the classified nature of the information, we will never know. No one in this thread can conclusively state one way to the other at this point.
denverpilot
Tied Down
It's an interesting side topic for sure.
We used to hear all of those thoughts in telecom and IT, too. Especially conventions or tradeshows. Some of them just won't die, but they're generally worthless unless they include one of two things anymore... training opportunities (fading - that is done remotely now too) and vacation destinations with a tax write off. COMDEX is a good example. It's been dead for decades. You used to really have to go. Literally no one needs to anymore.
Some (usually those on well funded expense reports) think those style conferences are still "necessary" but you dig down and find out they're just eating fancy dinners on the company dime and the cost of the booth, the gear, a fleet of people to set it up and man it, the silly union folks to bolt it together on site and power it, and all of that, rarely pays off in a sale that covers it all. It works for new consumer goods because it gives the press somewhere to go.
I don't know what you make but maybe the in person demo. I don't know. It's really rare I can't figure out what a product does from its YT videos or the company website. Very rare.
I also get the concept of showing up in person to freak out a vendor but I can usually tell when they're screwing up from afar long before the visit. And they carefully stage who you'll be seeing and what you'll be seeing when you arrive anyway. Have seen that dog and pony show before. The boards they screwed up won't be sitting in a big pile being reworked when you arrive. They'll be hidden in a closet or the back dumpster. Haha.
Once they start lying to you or not answering direct questions on the phone, the relationship won't be fixed on site. Especially if they recommend you come out for a little steak and wine to discuss it. LOL.
Which leads to the other important thing. Never be single-sourced. If you are, know it's a significant risk. Always. Companies change priorities on a whim. You might have been the invoice that made their nut and kept them alive for years and you just took a back seat to a whale. You can tell when you see it happening. An on site usually doesn't confirm it or deny it.