Qatar Airlines

[mont royal]

The multilateral policies on all aviation matters reside within Iata. There certainly doesn`t seem to be a consensus that the 3 major Gulf carriers are engaged in what could be defined legally as `unfair competition`.

In fact, one of the Gulf spokespersons has calculated that the USA government over the past decade has subsidized US airlines to the tune of $70 billion. Even the head of British Airways doesn`t agree according to the following statement issued after a recent Iata meeting:

`Willie Walsh, chief executive of British Airways parent company IAG, however, disagrees – saying he has seen no evidence of unfair subsidy. He said: “I don’t support the view being expressed by the US carriers. It’s a move back to protectionism which the industry could do without. If this gathered momentum, it would be negative for the industry and the consumer if it could threaten Open Skies and that would concern me.”

 

The legal mechanism for determining whether or not Canadian carriers would suffer from unfair competition is within Iata. The Canadian government should respond to request by the Gulf carriers to service Canada as they would with any other request. They should not just have an automatic reflex to agree to support the lobbying efforts of Canadian carriers to implement protectionist measures.

 

Then, if they want, the Canadian carriers can take their legal concerns to where they belong; Iata. If Iata agrees with them, then the problem will be solved.

[YUL]

Then, if they want, the Canadian carriers can take their legal concerns to where they belong; Iata. If Iata agrees with them, then the problem will be solved.

 

Well, no real need to do so. Our bilateral agreements approach ensures that only win - win flights are gradually authorised.

 

We'll let the Americans investigate those subsidies, and then piggy back afterward...

[caribb]

The demand from Canada to Dubai or Canada to Doha is finite. The Gulf carriers though make the bulk of their business transferring passengers beond their hubs. That's the difference. THe Canadian gov't determines flights based primarily on O & D travel numbers it would seem and for that they are treating the Gulf carriers like every other carrier.

[acpnc]

Même dans les ententes de libre-échange, il y a des règles à respecter. Alors les politiques de ciel ouvert se doivent elles aussi d'être équitables entre les différents concurrents, sinon on obtient tout le contraire de ce qui est souhaitable. Dans le cas qui nous intéresse, la stratégie que tentent d'implanter les 3 transporteurs majeurs du Golfe, deviendrait en quelque sorte, si elle réussit, une 5ème priorité déguisée. Puisque leur objectif inavoué est de transporter ultimement le voyageur dans un pays tiers, en les leurrant au passage par des prix irréalistes.

 

Comme ces derniers voient bien sûr la fin de l'eldorado pétrolier dans quelques décennies, au plus tard. Ils cherchent donc à miser leur riche capital dans un des rares domaines où la croissance demeure phénoménale. Ils laissent donc entrevoir la possibilité de forcer éventuellement le marché des vols internationaux, par une concurrence qui m'apparait potentiellement déloyale.

 

Aucune démocratie n'a les moyens de se battre à armes égales, face à des pétromonarchies richissimes et totalitaires qui n'ont qu'un seul langage, celui de l'argent. Ces dernières ont dans les faits la capacité de déstabiliser complètement et durablement les lois du marché. Habituées au monopole du pétrole, elles n'hésiteront certainement pas à s'approprier le public voyageur et à siphonner les forces vives du marché à leur seul avantage.

 

Alors ne soyons pas naïfs, derrière ces supposés compétiteurs dans une politique de ciel ouvert, se cachent de sérieux prédateurs.

[ERJ-Boy]

Je ne suis pas d'accord... Si ces transporteurs sont capables de transporter plus facilement et pour moins cher les gens d'un point à l'autre, pourquoi on devrait les empêcher? Je tiens à signaler que le but d'Air Canada avec le super hub de Toronto est le même que celui de ces compagnies qui désirent connecter les gens par leur hub, tout comme c'Est le but des grandes compagnies européennes...

 

Ouvrons notre ciel au reste du monde... Le marché agira tout seul... En plus, le moyen orient est le pire endroit pour connecter quand on part de l'Amérique du nord...

[ERJ-Boy]

The canadian government's role isn't to help canadian carriers make gains. Air Canada should be able to compete with the ME3, and if not, well that's just too bad. Liberalizing movements between two countries actually helps create synergy and economic growth, it's been proven numerous times. And frankly I don't really mind seeing an Emirates tail in YUL (I fly Qatar and Oneworld).

[LaRonde]

Qatar is downgauging Montreal from 777-300 to 777-200 next summer - not a good sign.

 

I wouldn't necessarily see this as a bad sign.

When they initially started the route back in 2011, the 777-200 was used.

 

Also,I am not aware whether or not this change is permanent or temporary.However, if it is temporary, it could be simply an aircraft change

to allow the retrofit of all the economy seats on all of their 777-300.

Similarly to Air Canada which is replacing the 777-300 by the 787-9 on the YUL-CDG route in the next few weeks.

[Alexcaban]

Just check the website now and its back to the 777-300 for the summer.

 

I think someone just made a mistake when loading in the aircraft.

[caribb]

Just check the website now and its back to the 777-300 for the summer.

 

I think someone just made a mistake when loading in the aircraft.

 

Good news.. it would be nice to see them send the A350 here though.. just to switch things up and give us something new to look at :-)

[thenoflyzone]

They need the B777-200LR to start DOH-AKL. EK just announced a non stop, (longest in the world by distance, btw) after QR hinted they would start it.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/travel/2016/jan/27/qatar-airways-worlds-longest-direct-flight-doha-auckland-santiago

Modifié 30 janvier 2016 par thenoflyzone