Originally Posted by
glofish
True, but this objective did not allow enough units to be sold to get a break-even. Airbus therefore tried to lure operators into believing that it could do just as well in competing with twins on all routes by their sheer pax number, especially by implementing more high revenue pax (you know, the ones that pay Y, get upgraded and drunk at the bar ....)
They are not 'exploring' that. It was Boeing's antithesis to the above since the beginning and most operators apparently made a better assessment of the future than EK and AB.
You may call it lack of foresight, i however call it arrogance when you belittle the competition, like Timmy did when pretending that they were less skilfully managed in not going for the dugong. Just as i call it arrogance when AAR boasted on an interview that EK needed even bigger airframes, because when 'we open the doors, they flock in'.
I’m not an Airbus lover, and I’m actually a career Boeing guy. I was just pointing out that the 380 does some things well, in that niche market. I just think it’s silly when a bunch of professionals all getting paid the same irrespective of type flown, start arguing A vs B. It’s almost like some management trolls deliberately come on here starting that argument to distract from the real issues ;-)
By the way I do agree about the arrogance of AAR and I doubt any pilot of any nationality in EK would defend his actions.