Some valid arguments. Everyone wants to save and improve the world. But the other one has to start first ....
It also means good paid, well regulated jobs in the European countries of the competitors are destroyed, companies who are important to the well being of real countries with real rights, real development and a real working local population.
We saw how dearly this was to our companies and politicians during the crisis after 9/11. We don't need EK to destroy jobs, Swissair, Sabena, LTU et al were brilliant examples of SELF destruction. By the way, at that time the public, press and politicians told the furloughed pilots to look after themselves, that there were opportunities out there and they should not burden the social security system. They've done just that, with kids and wife and dog, and now face being told not to fly too much to the former home soil, not to endanger the former colleagues. - Hypocritical.
Regarding buying product: of course boeing/ airbus would expect you to fly their new AC, but it's not really their business. They build and sell. airbus cannot grant landing rights in Germany any more than I could. If I sell you my lawn mower, it doesn't give you the right to cut my grass.
B and AB might only produce and sell. Maybe in your world they do not lobby and influence politics as heavily as possible to do so, but in reality its interwoven to a huge degree. I agree it's the government who acts in their interest by helping sales around the world, but then they help their airline to inhibit these sales competing with them. - Hypocritical.
By the way, both companies are heavily subsidized and therefore the public, via representatives, is so much involved, that the pure "selling" argument is somewhat oblivious. Those subsidies are also never brought up when the West blames the "subsidized ME airlines". I guess it's same, same but different, not - Hypocritical.
Take for instance the sugar trade. We sell Africa (and South America) the processing equipment for sugar cane. At the same time we export heavily subsidized sugar to these countries and destroy their industry (same goes for poultry). There are some embargoes for foreign sugar into some western countries, to protect the own industry, although much less cost effective, saying we must uphold self sufficiency. All bullocks and highly unfair, admitted but no one cares. - Hypocritical as well.
We can turn round and round with arguments and will find enough for both points of view, agreed.
EK/EY will have 28 weekly flights into ZRH/DXB, Swiss 7 into DXB. Swiss however does remakably well, even better than its parent LH. Why? They have restructured and have a very competitive product. They do not count bean for bean and might see their own advantage of better overall connectivity, for the airline and for the economy.
pool