Emirates route rumours

31 May 2013

How about ending the month with some Emirates rumours. Well speculation really.

Firstly no 787s for EK and the Airbus A350-10 is still four years away. So expect some new orders at the Dubai AirShow in November - maybe even earlier at Paris.  Another top up order of 30 77Ws at DXB airshow to fill the developing minibus/classic T7 void.

And also a big launch order for the new 77X at above venue - although deliveries into service may not be until 2018.

The A380 will continue to replace the 777s on most flights to Australia and the USA. This requires the longer range, lighter weight HGW A380s to be delivered from March 14. Brisbane is already going A380 and the DXB/BNE/AKL flight and Perth will also move at least one of its flights to the A380 later this year.

Look for the A380 to replace 77s on IAH/LAX/DFW/SFO/IAD.

The 777s can then be deployed on new US expansion to DTW, PHL, BOS, MIA, ATL.
ORD will be the next US destination.

In Latam Rio will go non stop to suit the World cup and Olympics. Double daily is possible.

Buenos Aires will become a stop on the way to Santiago in Chile.

Asia - Bali through SIN as a shuttle. This has been discussed for at least the last year.

China. EK wants more. The authorities are not cooperating. Chengdu would be first. Opening up China would be a flood of new flights - Kunming, Shenzen, Chongqing, Tianjin, Xiamen. Xian would all be possible.

Elsewhere in Asia - Phnom Penh, Yangon and Hanoi must be on the radar. Taipei would probably do well but would require mainland blessing.

In Europe Oslo and Brussels. Stansted would also welcome a daily two class EK 777.
 
Growth is India flights depends of finalising the current bilateral negotiation. Expect more flights and more 777 flights as the A330s ad A340s are phased out.

Russia - Volgograd (Stalingrad).

Canada/Germany - so badly wanted by EK. So little political support. Change will come but slowly. A trickle not a flood.

Africa - new flights will be required as this Continent grows. Abuja, Mogadishu, Mombasa, Yaounde, Kinchasa, Windhoek.

Just guessing! And none of this will happen tomorrow. But EK needs the growth to support its business plans and its hub status.

Watford and Crystal Palace tantalised by Premier League fortunes

27 May 2013 The Guardian

Delirium will overcome the owners of either Watford or Crystal Palace at Wembley on Monday although, even as emotion erupts all around, the victorious could be forgiven for skulking to the back of the royal box to pinch themselves over what is to come. The spreadsheet projections scream mind-boggling numbers, figures to transform. It has become cliched to refer to the Championship play-off final as the richest game in world football, but the reality is both these sides are one calm finish amid the excruciating tension from an influx of at least £140m.

Those are the stakes at the national stadium, a staggering reward inflated by the new £5.5bn television deal that will ensure the team that finishes bottom next season walks away with around £63m. Manchester United claimed "only" £61.4m in winning the title this time around, a sum comprised of £15m in prize money, £33m from the Premier League share and £13.4m in live television engagements. Even relegation guarantees £59m in future parachute payments, to be spread over the next four seasons in tranches of £23m, £18m and two of £9m. Forfeiting the Football League "solidarity money", worth around £2.2m in the Championship, rather pales into insignificance.

Those headline figures draw the focus, the sums to which the Palace manager, Ian Holloway, was referring when failing to contain his enthusiasm ahead of his third play-off final in four years. "Just look at the size of the prize," he said. "The last time I fought for this [with Blackpool against West Ham last year] it was worth £90m. Now it's north of £120m. That's why people are buying Championship clubs and throwing money at it. Look at Cardiff. They've had seven goes, so well done to them this year. But, my God, if they hadn't made it how much would they have owed?"

Yet there are other lavish perks that pursue promotion. The clubs who collide at Wembley are roughly similar in terms of status, stadium potential and turnover, which the most recent accounts put at around £11m for Watford and £15m for Palace. Yet Gianfranco Zola believes success on Monday would lead the Pozzo family to prioritise their English acquisition over their other footballing interests, Udinese and Granada. Should the south London club go up, their four owners would anticipate corporate revenues rising to around £6m per year, and merchandise, advertising and sponsorship beyond £2m. Rolling hoardings cost second-tier clubs around £700,000 to buy, with the onus on the club to sell to prospective advertisers. In the Premier League those same boards are donated free of charge, with the manufacturers paying a further £1m fee to sell advertising themselves. It is a different world.

Then there are increased attendances. Selhurst Park regularly heaved close to its 26,000 capacity the last time Palace graced the top flight, in 2004-05, and increased ticket sales would swell the coffers by an estimated £12m. They already have more than 10,000 season ticket holders for next term courtesy of a late rush of sales in the week since they reached the final. The club's current turnover leaves them ranked around 300th across Europe; promotion could lift revenues closer to £100m, potentially hoisting them to around the 30th highest turnover on the continent.

"There is almost too much at stake," said the co-chairman, Steve Parish. "It's almost like walking into a casino and putting the future of the club on red or black. It's a 50-50 bet with which you might be able to transform your football club. Watford are not in a dissimilar position with us and I'm sure we'll both be looking at the riches and thinking we could probably make that go quite a long way and make a big change to the club."

There is, of course, a financial commitment that comes with promotion before the victors can start strengthening their squad. Players and management staff will be due bonuses for promotion, while former clubs will call in similar fees detailed in the small print of the deals that took players to either south London or Hertfordshire. The former Palace chairman, Simon Jordan, paid bonuses totalling £3m to players and staff in 2004 when Iain Dowie's side gatecrashed the elite, with the manager due a £500,000 one-off payment and receiving a 500% pay rise on a new contract. While lower this time, they would still amount to more than £3m in contractual obligations, with salary increases to follow.

The annual wage bill at Palace currently stands at around £12.5m, a figure that would rise dramatically even before attention turns to bolstering the squad. The money required to make Holloway's side competitive would be significant. "What would a win mean?" asked the Palace manager. "Total joy on Tuesday. Total panic on Wednesday."

The installation of television cabling and formal interview rooms at the stadium, so Sky, BT or foreign broadcasters can transmit smoothly from the arena, will cost around £1m, while the size of the pitch must conform with Uefa regulations. Watford already boast the required dimensions – with a pristine Desso surface – but Palace would have to extend the turf from 100m x 67m to 105m x 68m.

Yet these are niggles, acceptable costs in the context of the increased income that would allow both clubs to speed up plans to redevelop their respective stadiums. Watford's ramshackle East Stand is still condemned, with the owners claiming they will rebuild it in the Premier League. The derelict area between the Rous and Rookery stands will be renovated regardless at a cost of £1m.

Palace hope to tear down Selhurst's Main Stand. "In the current stadium, even if you are just in there over one season, you are looking at probably a £70-80m boost in revenue," added Parish. "If we can't spend half of that to have a good go, and the other half on the infrastructure of the club so that if we did come down we've got an even better chance of staying up the next time, there'd have to be something wrong." The opportunity is tantalising. To the victor, the spoils.

Crystal Palace (4-2-3-1; probable): Speroni; Ward, Delaney, Gabbidon, Moxey; Dikgacoi, Jedinak; Zaha, Garvan, Williams; Wilbraham.

Watford (3-5-2; probable): Almunia; Doyley, Ekstrand, Cassetti; Anya, Abdi, Hogg, Chalobah, Briggs; Deeney, Vydra.

Tim Clark's speech to the Royal Aeronautical Society

Delivered on May 15, 2013 as President of Emirates Airline

Thank you for that introduction; it is a great honour to be here tonight and I appreciate the opportunity to address the Society in London, or as your mayor likes to call it, the “eighth emirate” of the United Arab Emirates.

Yes, it was only a month ago that Boris Johnson visited Dubai and bestowed London as an honorary and apparently seasonal member of the federation, on the grounds that there are many UAE Nationals spending summer holidays in Knightsbridge and Mayfair.

They no doubt give much to the London economy and in the same spirit, if any of you want free tickets for the Emirates Air Line cable car crossing the Thames between Greenwich and the Victoria Docks, see me after the speech – and no, this is not a shameless ploy to boost passenger numbers.

Leaving aside Mr Johnson’s knack for a catchy headline for a moment, his visit to the country where I have been living for many years, is central to what I plan to talk about tonight.

In Dubai the London Mayor spoke of a vision for the future that would keep London competitive with other world capitals and the need for investment in business, infrastructure and property

As you know Mr Johnson took a leading, non-athletic role in the Olympics, which was watched by 4 billion residents of this planet. Lord Coe was right when he said, “When our time came – Britain, we did it right”

And taken together with the Paralympics and the Queen’s Golden Jubilee, in many ways last year was an annus mirabilis for the UK.

However, now that we have had time to wake up from the reverie, the reality is that we haven’t got everything right. I won't say it just yet but you will guess it if I say these hints - Maplin Sands, White Paper on the 2003 Future of Air Transport, the 2006 Eddington Report, Heathwick and finally the giveaway the Estuary project or Boris Island.

Yes, that little problem. For it seems that all of us in this room have been trapped, to varying degrees, in what has become the longest running, real-world episode of Yes Minister - "The airports dilemma", 40 years and counting.

As you all know there is yet another Airports Commission due to report in 2015 and I am reminded of the immortal words of Sir Humphrey Appleby, who survived by living inside the margins of bureaucratic double speak, that the translation for any announcement of a commission is basically:

"This problem is a bloody nuisance, but we hope that by the time the Royal Commission reports, everyone will have forgotten about it or we can find someone else to blame”

I am not a Sir Humphrey character and I have never fancied myself in the image of Jim Hacker. But I, and I am sure many of us, have become most like poor suffering Bernard Woolley, utterly befuddled by a policy process that, so far, prefers to go around in circles like a toy car with a broken front wheel rather than going forward.

Why did I mention Maplin Sands? Why that was the name of yet another royal commission on airport capacity for London – in 1974. The new royal commission isn’t due to release its finding until 2015 – the same year London Heathrow is expected to cede its crown as the world’s largest international airport - to Dubai, as it happens.

So it seems the prognosis for the UK is “round and round we go”, but don’t be fooled

Britain is a great country, and in modern history it was often aviation that led the way, from the Gloster Meteor to the Harrier Jump Jet

And lest anyone think that only the Germans or the Japanese can master large-scale infrastructure projects, let me remind you that the only thing scurrying down the new runways of the bizarrely delayed Berlin Brandenburg Airport these days are rabbits, and the German authorities have even stopped offering an opening date after the third delay.

So at least we can enjoy some good-natured schadenfreude that we are not the only ones who have had a few infrastructure issues

Despite the vexing nature of the airport issues facing the UK, what I’d like to suggest this evening is that aviation will once again lead the way, and infrastructure is the key

I am a Brit. I began my career in 1972 with British Caledonian

But I live in Dubai, a tiny emirate that has done very well for itself despite having no wealth, no oil, and no real advantages to speak of, except for being geographically close to other rich and prosperous nations and critically, the government throwing its policy support towards growth and development

So from the outside looking in, and from the admittedly privileged vantage point of managing a global airline that helped to put the tiny city state of Dubai on the map, I have a perspective to share on how Britain should act to ensure it continues to swim in the fast lane of the global economy

The broad brush strokes are obvious to all. The world is always changing and what is happening right now is truly momentous

We have new relationships being forged between the developed and developing worlds; no longer is the US the first and only trading partner on a country's wish list of export promotion

Everyone wants to create a hub because a hub creates wealth and prosperity.

Hubs are also about brand. And in London, and the Southeast of England more generally, you've most certainly got it. London and the southeast account for the lion's share of UK GDP and both have a massive pull effect for the rest of the world.

Everyone wants to come here, BRICS nations want more connections to London, so do countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America, Asia. Their people want to vacation and work here and English is the primary international language.

What is the first route any new long haul airline wants to fly? London

Britain is a leader in its liberal approach to aviation and airline competition, and these policies have strongly benefitted Emirates. Emirates is the largest full-service foreign airline flying to the UK. It would be easy to think that a large airline’s main business concern in Britain, would be the two hub airports found in London.

These are of course key markets for us, but Emirates’ investment in the UK is also a story about the great service, jobs and strategic sponsorships that we support in the country’s regions and the people who live and do business there. You will have noticed that the UK is increasingly looking to its regions for business and creative inspiration and the same can be said for Emirates from our regional hubs of Birmingham, Glasgow, Manchester and Newcastle. But notwithstanding our own strategies with regard to the UK, the Davies Commission, whether it likes or not, will inevitably focus its attention on London and the Southeast.

And rightly so as this is where the real capacity pressures lie both now and in the future. The fact remains, ladies and gentlemen that all other UK airports operate well below their current capacities. It is a fact that the interplay between the UK, primarily London, and the emerging markets of the world produces a virtuous circle of trade, tourism and investment.

Consider these facts:
 Tourism is a major part of the UK economy. It contributes £115 billion to UK GDP, and provides employment for 2.6 million people – around 9% on both measures.
 The UK enjoyed a record level of spend in 2012 - £18.6 billion was injected into the economy from overseas visitors.
 Every £40,000 spent by overseas visitors to Britain can create a job.
 One in twelve jobs in the UK is currently either directly or indirectly supported by tourism. 44% of people employed in tourism are under 30, compared with an average for the wider economy of 24%. One third of new jobs created between 2009 and 2011 were in tourism.
 The World Economic Forum now considers Britain to be the 5th most competitive visitor economy in the world, up from 7th in 2011.

UK businesses trade 20 times as much with emerging market countries that have a direct flight to the UK, than with those that don’t, according to the Confederation of British Industry.
They also believe the UK could generate as much as £1 billion in trade every year from just one daily flight to the eight fastest growing world destinations, and I think they are right.
Increasingly, travel, trade and tourism is being funnelled between mega hubs. This is why Airbus produces the A380, its wings built in Broughton, and why Emirates has purchased 90 of these doubled-decker aircraft, with 12 scheduled for delivery this year alone.

The flow of people, finance and indeed ideas between mega hubs is like a weather front, with pressure racing from high to low. This is in essence a flight to quality and we are seeing mega hubs develop in each and every region of the globe

The Prime Minister described it aptly last year when he said “we are in a global race today - sink or swim, do or decline”

London, Dubai, Singapore, Hong Kong – these are today’s hubs. Other hubs will grow in Africa and Asia and what will the picture look like in 10, 20, 30 years hence?

The question is an important one. For just as the super tanker needs to start turning several miles early to avoid an iceberg, the UK needs to take action now to avoid the dangers ahead of us.

I know that times are tough. There is great uncertainty in the Eurozone. We may have felt a boost from the Olympics, tourism, but the overall trend is flat-lining. There has been considerable dodgy dealings amongst our banker friends in the UK and Europe over the past 20 years and finally, this has caught up with them. But the International Financial Services system, controls and corporate taxation regimes will be sorted out and the good times will return.

The global economy will grow and demand for travel will accelerate, of that I have no doubt. But when the taps turn back on again, will London miss out? And should the UK start developing other sectors besides financial services, infrastructure will be vital – especially if this includes new and tertiary industries.

What I can tell you from managing the world’s largest airline by international capacity is that traffic patterns are evolving quickly. New trading partners are emerging; some countries that have barricaded themselves from global trade are now embracing it. Look at what is happening in Turkey today.

Countries with an expansionist and engaged view will reap the rewards of the new global economy. Those that don’t, will suffer.

So, what are the consequences of the current in-action about UK’s aviation infrastructure? We might start by looking at the unrealised potential of London Heathrow. If Heathrow was allowed to grow unconstrained by runway usage limits, or night curfews, the annual throughput would be closer to 130 million passengers per annum, not to today’s 70 million.

A lack of infrastructure investment has meant that in 20 years London Heathrow has fallen from first in Europe to fifth in terms of international destinations served.

What is the true cost of this? I couldn't say exactly – it is hard to measure something that hasn’t come, but we know it is helping other European airports to grow their business.

What is Europe's leading airport for emerging market destinations such as China? The answer is Schipol - the same airport that likes to call itself Heathrow’s third runway. Schipol actually has six runways. Will they soon also claim to be Heathrow’s fourth runway?

A long lasting solution must be found – otherwise international airlines will be forced to make strategic long-term solutions on the basis that there may not be any additional capacity in London for at least the next 10-15 years. As an example Britain’s national carrier, British Airways now sees its future expansion not at Heathrow but in the Iberian Peninsula.

Capacity is a must. Would Singapore be a major magnet for travel in Southeast Asia if it had a curfewed runway. Where would Dubai be for that matter, with just one curfewed runway? A pro-growth, expansionist view towards the future is critical. That means action on infrastructure and a check on policies that limit growth, such as the Air Passenger Duty.

The Government obviously understands the power of a favourable tax regime. It continues to cut corporation tax in order to create the most competitive tax regime in the G8 in order to encourage growth and investment.

Yet when we turn to aviation the script appears to have got lost. With the latest rise in air passenger duty announced in the Budget, Britain is now on par with Chad as being the world’s most expensive place to be an airline passenger.

Meanwhile, other countries have scrapped or reduced their taxes on aviation.

In France, airport departure taxes are now ten times lower than in Britain – and this all accessible for Britons with a single ride through the Eurotunnel.

So clearly, something needs to be done, and hinges on building the right infrastructure, and the right pro-growth policies that take the long view towards British prosperity.

What, then, does London Heathrow have going for it?  Heathrow has the synergy and energy of being in such close proximity to London. It is a legacy cluster and one can’t underestimate the importance of this. It enjoys a strong and diverse mix of travel connections, from point to point travel to onward transits to North America and elsewhere in the UK, Ireland and Europe

Gatwick has been trying to share the spoils with Heathrow for decades but the simple fact is that airlines want Heathrow. The average revenue per seat that customers pay to fly out of Heathrow is considerably higher than Gatwick, in fact it is the highest in the UK.

So where does this all take us?

If one accepts that the real capacity problem lies in London and the Southeast then it is there that the focus must lie.

The Estuary project would be an incredible testament to the criticality of aviation to the UK’s economy and if designed and delivered correctly would come to dominate not just London and the UK’s Southeast, but the whole of Europe.

The £50 billion project would be great if funded by foreign investors and built by British companies – a ten year building boom. But after multiple planning enquiries (T5 took 10 years) and the build timeline, we’re looking at 2030 to 2033 at the earliest if we started now, and let’s face it, Heathrow would then have to be closed.

Can we wait that long? – maybe but interim demand and the capacity shortfall must be dealt with now. Can the regions deal with this demand? Partly but the truth is Schipol, Paris, Frankfurt and, dare I say it, Dubai will take up the slack.

So it’s back to Heathrow and Gatwick, I’m afraid. Like it or not, the third runway at LHR is going to have to be built – and not just shorter landing runways.

A second runway at Gatwick should be constructed post 2019, which is the earliest date the planners will allow. In any event, these runways must be completed by 2020 at the latest and for Gatwick, the reinstatement of the Gatwick Express rail connection to Central London at a minimum of fifteen minute intervals is a must, as would be considerable passenger terminal expansion commensurate with its role as a meaningful hub for London.

As for the regional airports I can only point you in the direction of the Heseltine Report published last year which advocated delegation and empowerment to regional bodies, in other words, taking control of their own destinies, and this would include their airports. But empowerment and delegation theories depend on the ability of the regions to pick up the mantle and this invariably requires the emergence of a forceful and charismatic champion who has the means of stitching together the multi-stakeholders into a cohesive economic entity which then powers the regional economy.

Obvious examples of this at city and city state level are Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore, Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum in Dubai, Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg in New York and closer to home, Mayor Johnson in London. There are many other examples.

Finally, ladies and gentlemen, let me conclude by saying that doing nothing in London and the Southeast remains a non-option. You might like to consider that should the 2017 UK referendum on EU membership produce a negative response, the need to get airport infrastructure upgraded and accelerated is doubly compelling driven by the need to grow the direct air links to new markets outside the EU.

Thank you so much for listening.

Thai Lion Air starting up in BKK

22 May 2013

The plan by Lion Air, Indonesia's largest low-cost carrier, to join Thailand's hotly contested airline market is coming to fruition, six years after it was mooted.

The Jakarta-based airline is setting up a subsidiary airline, Thai Lion Air, and has already started recruiting pilots, cabin attendants and ground staff.

Thai Lion Air intends to start its operation strongly with the deployment of up to six single-aisle twin-jet Boeing 737-800s and by using Bangkok's Don Mueang airport as its base, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

Woradej Harnprasert, director-general of the Civil Aviation Department, yesterday confirmed Lion Air is launching a Thai subsidiary, although the department has not yet received an application for air operator's certificate.

The creation of Thai Lion Air comes in the form of joint venture with Thai entities, which are required by law to have a minimum 51% holding.

However, the identities of the entities remain a mystery.

Reports suggest Phuket Airlines, which used to operate scheduled domestic and international flights nearly a decade ago, is an investor.

But Mr Woradej discounted that possibility, saying Phuket Airlines, founded by businessman and former senator Vikrom Aisiri, has been preoccupied with charter services.

Lion Air's entry will intensify Thailand's s highly contested market. It will compete with major players Thai AirAsia and Nok Air and, to a lesser extent, with Orient Thai, which has significantly downsized its scheduled operations over the past two years.

"Lion Air's entry is good for more healthy competition, giving passengers choice," said Mr Woradej, noting that Thai skies are open to airlines as long as they meet regulations.

Thai Lion Air aims to operate flights within Thailand and to neighbouring countries, sources said.

Lion Air has sought to set up a sister carrier in Thailand since 2007. It considered a tie-up with One-Two-Go, the now-defunct budget airline of Orient Thai, or a partnership with a holder of an airline licence in Thailand.

Chief executive Rusdi Kirana in March told reporters the airline was still exploring earlier plans to set up subsidiaries in Australia and Thailand.

The airline reportedly reached a recent accord to acquire 49% of an unnamed Australian company and base six aircraft in that country.

Executives have also said the airline is considering partnerships in Myanmar, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Malaysia and the Philippines to grow its operation, essentially to absorb its huge aircraft capacity.

In February 2012, Lion Air ordered 201 Boeing 737 MAXs and 29 next-generation 737-900ERs worth US$22.4 billion, the biggest single order for the US aircraft maker in its history, measured by the number of planes and the value of the order.

In March, it placed an order for 234 Airbus A320 aircraft worth $24 billion.

Executives have said the company wants to have 1,000 planes in 10 years.

As of last December, Lion Air operated nearly 100 aircraft, mostly Boeing 737-800 and 900 models.

Lion Air recently launched domestic carrier Malindo Air as a joint venture in which it owns a 49% stake and is planning to set up full service carrier Batik Air in Indonesia later this year.

The airline, founded in 2000 with the slogan "We make people fly", has a poor safety record. Its fourth accident in 16 months occurred in April when a Boeing 737-800 crashed into the sea at Bali airport.

Mr Woradej said Thai Lion Air will be regulated by the department's safety standards.

This is a new, farcical low and David Cameron is losing control

18 May 2013 - Geoffrey Howe in the Guardian

Unfortunately, last week's events in the House of Commons have brought the debate on Europe within the Conservative party to a new, almost farcical, low. Having previously opposed the introduction of legislation in this parliament to hold a referendum in the next one, the prime minister suddenly allowed a free vote among backbenchers, with the government abstaining, on the extraordinary basis that the party had no policy on the issue.

Then, once more than 100 backbenchers had voted for such a referendum, he insisted that all Tory MPs, whatever their view, should from now on support the proposal, on a three-line whip, whereas only the day before they could take any position they chose. This saga looks more like the politics of the French Fourth Republic than the serious practice of government and it is especially disappointing and damaging on such an important issue – the place of Britain in Europe and the world.

Sadly, by making it clear in January that he opposes the current terms of UK membership of the EU, the prime minister has opened a Pandora's box politically and seems to be losing control of his party in the process. The ratchet-effect of Euroscepticism has now gone so far that the Conservative leadership is in effect running scared of its own backbenchers, let alone Ukip, having allowed deep anti-Europeanism to infect the very soul of the party. The risk now is that, if it loses the next general election – a far from negligible possibility – the Conservative party will move to a position of simply opposing Britain's continued membership, with or without a referendum.

Archimedes said: "Give me a place on which to stand and lever long enough, and I will move the world." British foreign policy should be about maximising and exploiting the levers we possess – whether through Europe, the transatlantic relationship or the Commonwealth – not breaking them or throwing them away.

In this context, I have yet to meet any significant western political figure from beyond our shores who can understand why Britain would even contemplate leaving the European Union, which is now a key point of leverage for this country in the modern world.

In Washington, Tokyo, Beijing, New Delhi or Moscow, let alone in all other EU national capitals, it seems obvious that the UK needs the union as the platform and vehicle by which to influence events and policy in many spheres. Nowadays, with the possible exception of Germany, a country such as Britain, boasting about 1% of the world's population and 3% of the world's GDP, is unlikely to be able to hold anything like the position of power to which we continue to aspire, unless this is firmly anchored in a strong alliances and, ideally, a credible regional framework. With the decline of Nato, the only such framework available, unless we seek to join the United States, is basically the European Union.

The Americans have always wanted Britain to play a leadership role in a united Europe – from the early 1950s through to today. It has been a constant of US foreign policy that any "special relationship" is not based on nostalgia or some mystical solidarity among the "English-speaking peoples", but on a realpolitik assessment of our capacity to help shape our continent in a modern, outward-looking direction.

Half a century ago, in making Britain's first application, Harold Macmillan understood this very well. He wrote: "If we remain outside the European Community, it seems to me inevitable that the realities of power would compel our American friends to attach increasing weight to the views and interests of the six in Europe, with others who may join them, and to pay less attention to our own. We would find the United States and the community concerting policy together on major issues, with much less incentive than now to secure our agreement or even consult our opinion. To lose influence both in Europe and Washington, as this must mean, would seriously undermine our international position and hence, one must add, our usefulness to the Commonwealth."

Every one of Macmillan's words remains as true and powerful today as in 1962 – except that, first, the six are now the 27; and second, Britain is a much lesser force in world affairs, making the problem he describes more acute.

Last week, President Obama called Britain's membership an "expression of the UK's influence and role in the world". Leaving the union would, by contrast, in my view, be a tragic expression of our shrinking influence and role in the world – and the humbling of our ambitions, already sorely tested by the current crisis, to remain a serious political or economic player on the global stage.

Earlier this year, Obama made it clear that America wants "a strong United Kingdom in a strong European Union", not a weak or isolated UK outside a broken-backed EU. Ironically, his words echoed the "Strong Britain in a Strong Europe" manifesto slogan on which the Conservatives fought the 1994 European elections. Almost two decades later, the Conservative party now needs a US president to tell it what it once had the confidence to proclaim as common sense itself.

Another irony was that the prime minister's main business in Washington was to discuss the launch of negotiations for an EU-US free-trade agreement and single market, officially known as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. It is the EU, not the member states individually, which will negotiate TTIP. If successful, it will create the largest single open economic area in the world, even bigger than Europe's existing single market, and help us set global standards in a world where neither Europe nor even America has that leverage on its own. Where would the UK fit into this, as an independent island, stranded between markets of 450 million and 300 million apiece? Outside the EU, we would have to accept the terms of whatever deal Washington and Brussels decide, with us enjoying no meaningful influence on either side.

This pattern would be repeated across the board internationally. Outside the EU, Britain would have to renegotiate hundreds of existing EU trade, investment and aid deals with countries all around. I find it difficult to imagine the Japanese, South Koreans or Brazilians queuing up to give us a better deal than 26 (soon 27) other European countries, including Germany, can extract as a bloc.

Creating and completing the European single market of 500 million consumers – a major British objective – has already brought significant benefits, too often ignored. They include greater competition, lower prices and a wider choice for consumers. If we push for further progress in liberalising services or digital commerce, these gains can be built on, with British firms well placed to take advantage of the opportunities that result. Much of our inward investment also depends on easy access to the £11tn EU economy. Does anyone think that the UK's revival as a car manufacturing nation is based on the appeal of the British market alone to foreign investors?

Last week has shown that the Conservative party's long, nervous breakdown over Europe continues and what is essentially a Tory problem is now, once again, becoming a national problem. Serious mistakes have been made, but the situation is not irretrievable.

What is needed is a mixture of clear thinking, strong leadership and an overriding concern for the national interest, not party management or advantage. If the Conservative party is losing its head, a heavy responsibility now rests with Labour and the Liberal Democrats to hold their nerve. In the complex and interdependent world we inhabit today, to walk away from the European Union into the unknown would be a very dangerous choice indeed.

Lord Howe was chancellor of the exchequer, foreign secretary and deputy prime minister during the government of Margaret Thatcher

Three years on - a temporary peace

19 May 2013

Anyone who thinks that Thailand's troubles are over is sadly mistaken.

Three years ago today, the military backed government of Abhisit Vejjajiva ordered the army to use all necessary force to end the protests in Bangkok.

At least 98 people died between March and May 2010 and over 2,000 were injured.

Abhisit has a new book (bizarrely called "The Simple Truth" which basically lays all the blame at Thaksin while exonerating his and the Democrat Party's own actions. Published by Post Publishing it is no surprise that the Bangkok Post has a simpering interview with Abhisit today.

Below are a few Reuters pictures from 19 May 2010.

My pictures from the red camp taken ten days earlier are here - this is not a group that was ready for or expecting a military assault.



 

I have seen one argument that Abhisit’s biggest mistake was he didn’t order a containment of the demonstrators 3 years and 6 weeks ago before they took over downtown Bangkok.

But you have to go back further. Abhisit has never been elected by the people. Instead he allowed himself to be appointed and supported by the same people that led the military coup that overthrew Thaksin in 2006. He legitimized the coup government by governing under its (2007) constitution; he boycotted an election (he has never won at the polls) and he and his party became the beneficiary of a military brokered deal. His actions have been the complete antithesis democracy.

Three years on, the Thai government has failed to fulfill its promise to impartially prosecute all those responsible for the 2010 political violence. That is part of the deal that allows Yingluck Shinawatra's government to remain in power.

Worse still amnesty legislation being proposed by leading members of the ruling Pheu Thai Party which would shield perpetrators of the coup, the airport occupation and closure and teh 2010 crackdown from accountability.

A Human Rights Watch May 2011 report, “Descent into Chaos: Thailand’s 2010 Red Shirt Protests and the Government Crackdown,” concluded that excessive and unnecessary force by the Thai army caused many deaths and injuries during the 2010 political confrontations. The high number of casualties – including unarmed demonstrators, volunteer medics and first responders, reporters, photographers, and bystanders – resulted in part from the enforcement of “live fire zones” around the UDD protest sites in Bangkok. The army deployed sharpshooters and snipers.

On September 17, 2012, the Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand presented its final report, which blamed both sides for the 2010 violence but indicated that the security forces were responsible for the majority of deaths and injuries. The commission urged the Yingluck government to “address legal violations by all parties through the justice system, which must be fair and impartial.”

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) had been set up by Abhisit's government. It was anything but independent. It took two years to complete its findings. The commission did not have any members from the Red Shirt movement, and many of their investigators were members or sympathizers of the Democrat Party and the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD), also known as the Yellow Shirts.

The TRC findings was disputed and rejected by the Red Shirt groups, human rights activists along with the Pheu Thai Party, partly because of questionable accountability process and the absence of transparency.


Documents seen by Human Rights Watch make it clear that the Center for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES), established by Abhisit and chaired by then-Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, approved the use of live ammunition to contain and disperse the protests.

But three years on not a single soldier or official has been held accountable for the deaths and injuries that took place during the political confrontations three years ago.

We should not be surprised; five years on from the occupation and closure of Bangkok's airports there has been no trial or successful prosecution.

But all this is just a sideshow. The battle for the future of Thailand is simply in a lull - sadly it is not over. The hatred remains vitriolic on both sides.

EK A380 repairs update

17 May 2013 Source - FlightGlobal

Wing modification work on Emirates' Airbus A380 fleet has begun around two months later than planned due to late arrival of new aircraft.

The repair programme, designed to address wing cracks, will cover 34 Emirates A380s and is due to be completed by the end of next year.

"The modifications were due to begin in mid-March, but the first aircraft only went into modification in early May," says Tim Clark, president of the Dubai-based carrier. "We need to receive the new aircraft to backfill the fleet and maintain the route network when we release A380s for modification. There's been quite a long delay driven by the lateness of delivery of the new aircraft."

Emirates has just received its 32nd A380, which Clark says was around six weeks late, and has three more undergoing the delivery process in Toulouse. Aircraft delivered from next year will be delivered with wings built to a revised wing structure and will not need repairs after delivery. In the interim, new-build A380s with the original wing specification are having repairs undertaken prior to delivery.

Clark says that 34 of its A380s will undergo the repairs over the next 18 months or so, four aircraft at a time. The work was due to take about 20 months and be completed by November 2014. Although the programme has started two months late, Clark hopes that the November target can still be achieved: "We estimated the downtime is eight weeks, but Airbus hopes it will be able to do it in six. So Airbus is relatively optimistic that it can recapture the timeline after this delay at the front end, by shrinking the time it takes to do the job."

Clark says the revisions to the wing incorporate some structural and material changes, including the replacement of composite ribs with metal ones, and has a small weight penalty of around 60kg (132lb). It is a lifetime modification certificated to a flight limit 19,500 cycles, he adds.

The work on the Emirates fleet is being undertaken at four MRO organisations around the world, under an Airbus-managed and funded programme. "It's not our responsibility - Airbus takes the aircraft, modifies, certifies them and brings them back to us," Clark says.

Bangkok confirmed as AirAsia X Thai base

16 May 2013

Kuala Lumpur-based AirAsia X has confirmed that it intends to establish a second base in Bangkok as part of its expansion strategy.

In a revised draft prospectus lodged with Malaysia's Securities Commission ahead of a likely initial public offering, the airline says that in March, it established a company in Thailand with the intention of using it to launch a second base.

"We plan to operate our first new hub outside Kuala Lumpur in Thailand through our newly-established associated company, THAI AAX, to tap into Thailand's well-known leisure market and to leverage on AirAsia's already established short-haul feeder network in Thailand," says the airline.

It adds that the company is currently dormant, and has given no indication when it would be likely to start operations.

AirAsia X also estimates its initial cash commitment to the Thai company to be at $3.3 million, but adds that "depending on the level of operations, further capital contributions may be required in the near future".

It did not say who are the other shareholders in the company, but it may include publicly-listed company Asia Aviation, the parent company of Thai AirAsia.

AirAsia X had stated previously that it sees the best opportunities for expansion coming from markets such as Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines, where AirAsia already has short-haul affiliate carriers that would be able to act as feeders for a long-haul service.

Earlier this year, media reports from Thailand indicated that AirAsia X was planning to start a new base at Bangkok's Don Mueang airport with two Airbus A330-300s in the second half of this year, initially focusing on routes to South Korea and Japan.

The existing Thai Air Asia operations into Don Mueang will be an effective feeder network into the new longer haul operations.

Flightglobal Pro data shows that AirAsia X has a fleet of 12 A330s and two A340-300s and has orders for 17 more A330s and 10 A350-900s

Wonderful, joyous, heart-stopping

12 May 2013 This is the Watford Observer report

Watford are at Wembley and one match away from promotion to the Premier League. The incredible story of how they got there will go down in football folklore.

With the Hornets winning 2-1 and the semi-final locked at 2-2 on aggregate, extra-time looked inevitable when referee Michael Oliver awarded Leicester City a soft penalty. As with the 2-1 defeat to Leeds United that ended Watford’s automatic promotion hopes, it looked like Gianfranco Zola’s men would suffer last-gasp heartbreak again. But what followed in the next 20 seconds was frankly unbelievable.

Manuel Almunia not only saved Anthony Knockaert’s spot-kick but reacted superbly to keep up the follow-up as well. The ball was cleared to the right side of the pitch where Ikechi Anya found Fernando Forestieri, his cross was nodded down by Jonathan Hogg and Troy Deeney blasted it into the net to secure his side’s place in the Championship play-off final where they will play either Crystal Palace or Brighton & Hove Albion on Monday, May 27.

It felt an age ago at the time but the manner in which Watford had got themselves in the position to secure a 3-1 second-leg victory following Thursday's 1-0 defeat should not be overlooked - and in particular the contribution of Matej Vydra.

The Hornets' top scorer had not scored in his previous 13 appearances and there was some surprise that he was chosen to start, and not Fernando Forestieri.

However, the Czech international justified Zola's faith within 15 minutes of the match getting underway, scoring with a sensational left-footed volley from an acute angle on the left side of the area to make the tie level on aggregate.

Within four minutes though, the Foxes were level on the day and had the upper hand again as Dave Nugent got free in the area to head in a corner.

Watford though, continued to plug away and they levelled again on aggregate when Deeney and Vydra combined for the latter to slot the ball beyond Kasper Schmeichel to make it 2-1 with his second of the afternoon.

Extra-time began to look increasingly inevitable though, until the football gods decided to conjure up an astonishing climax to the game that, even now, defies belief.

There were a few surprises as Zola made three changes from Thursday’s first leg at the King Power Stadium.

Most fans were probably expecting Fitz Hall and Forestieri to start but both had to settle for places on the bench as the Hornets boss left his defence unchanged and kept faith with Vydra, despite his goalless run stretching to a 13th match in the 1-0 defeat.

There was no surprise that Deeney returned from his one-match ban to replace Alex Geijo up front, Cristian Battocchio was preferred to Hogg in the midfield engine room and Matthew Briggs came in for Daniel Pudil on the left.

Nigel Pearson decided to leave well alone with his team holding the slender advantage and named an unchanged starting line-up.

There was a change with the officials though, as Phil Dowd, who was meant to be in charge, was replaced by another Premier League referee in Oliver.

The Hornets started confidently, enjoying some good early possession and they nearly enjoyed their first opening in the fourth minute when Marco Cassetti floated a lovely pass over the top looking for Deeney, but Wes Morgan read it and was able to head away from the edge of his own penalty area.

Leicester’s response was to force four corners in succession but the Hornets held strong and so nearly got back on terms in the seventh minute.

Lloyd Doyley side-stepped Lloyd Dyer to bring the ball out of defence before feeding Nathaniel Chalobah, who played it forward to Deeney. He then waited for Vydra to make a run off the shoulder of Ritchie de Laet before slipping a perfectly-weighted pass through the Foxes defence and the Hornets’ 20-goal striker took it first time left-footed but placed his finish agonisingly wide of Schmeichel’s left-hand post.

There wasn’t a lot the Leicester keeper could have done about that shot had it been inside his upright but soon after Schmeichel was having to plunge low to his right to keep out a superbly-struck right-footed drive from Deeney from the edge of the 18-yard box.

However, the Hornets didn’t have long to wait to get back on terms on aggregate when Vydra’s long wait for a goal was ended by a moment of instinctive brilliance.

There didn’t appear to be too much on at first when Cassetti lofted a pass down the inside left channel and into the area but with a defender goal-side and the angle very much against, the Czech international spun and struck a stunning left-footed volley on the turn that gave Schmeichel no chance as it flashed past him to give the Hornets the lead to level up the semi-final.

But parity in the tie was to last just four minutes.

A sliced Cassetti clearance gave Leicester their sixth corner of the match and when the set piece was taken from the left, Nugent pulled away from Doyley at the far post to head down and beyond Almunia to follow up his winner on Thursday with another goal to make it 1-1 and give his side the upper hand again.

It was the striker’s eighth goal in 11 games against the Hornets and soon after the visitors had another opening when Dyer laid the ball across from the left to Knockaert, but he fired over with a first-time effort.

The equaliser didn’t appear to unduly affect Watford though, but they had to wait until the 30th minute for their next effort when Deeney tried to catch Schmeichel out with a shot from 20 yards but the keeper read it and made a catch above his head.

Chris Wood picked up the game’s first yellow card in the 34th minute for playing on after the whistle had blown for offside before Deeney when for an acrobatic finish after Ikechi Anya had stood up a cross from the right side of the area, but the striker’s finish went well wide.

Watford’s domination of possession continued but their next opening didn’t arrive until a minute before the interval when Anya, who clearly had the beating of Jeff Schlupp, nicked the ball past the left-back again before sending over a low cross which Deeney hit first time on the turn but his strike went over.

However, the Hornets had a close call shortly before the half-time whistle when Nugent set Wood away but a marginal offside decision prevented the striker from having a one-on-one opportunity against Almunia.

Zola’s men were soon back on the front foot after the restart, with Anya crossing from the right and the ball was partially headed clear to Cassetti, who powered the rebound high and wide from 25 yards.

Leicester’s first opportunity of the second period came when Almen Abdi was penalised for a foul on Wood around 25 yards out in a central position but Knockaert was unable to make the most of the set piece, curling it a yard or so over Almunia’s goal.

Back came the Hornets though, with Battocchio showing some lovely close footwork on the edge of the box to get away from two opponents before striking a right-footed shot that was deflected narrowly wide of Schmeichel’s right-hand post.

Watford might have had some joy from Abdi’s resultant corner had someone in yellow gambled in the six-yard areas as the ball was allowed to bounce right through the heart of the Foxes’ box.

Instead, the end-to-end nature of the early second-half exchanges continued as de Laet got away from Briggs on the right side of the area before sending over a cross which Wood had to back track to get to. Consequently, his header lacked power and Almunia was able to drop to the floor to make a comfortable save.

But the goal Watford craved so nearly arrived in the 56th minute when Vydra found Briggs on the left. The wing-back side-stepped his man with ease to get into the area before laying the ball across to Vydra, who in turn tapped it to Abdi. His right-footed effort looked destined for the far corner but the slightest of deflections just took it wide.

Pearson made the game’s first change in the 61st minute and it was a repeat of Thursday, with Harry Kane coming on for Wood. Zola rapidly followed suit as Doyley made way for Forestieri.

But within a minute of entering the fray, the Argentine was on the pitch to see his side take the lead as Vydra confirmed he was right back on song.

Watford built from the right with Vydra initially looking like he might feed Forestieri, who was on the left. However, he instead fed Deeney, who returned the ball to Vydra and he slotted it past Schmeichel to make it 2-1 on the day and 2-2 on aggregate.

Danny Drinkwater came on for Dyer before the game had restarted and then Cassetti was booked for a lunging challenge on Kane. However, the substitute’s effort from the resultant free-kick was woeful as it cleared the bar by yards.

Watford were now pouring forward in waves and Battocchio was the next to try his luck, hitting a right-footed drive from the left angle of the area but Schmeichel was able to save it at the second attempt as Deeney closed in.

The Hornets still had to be careful though, and when Nugent was fouled on the edge of the area an even better free-kick opportunity presented itself. But the Leicester striker was unable to get his attempt up and down quickly enough and it went narrowly over the bar.

Kane fired at Almunia soon after as the home side got ragged at the back for a few minutes. But Anya then won a corner and Abdi’s set piece from the right ended with Forestieri hitting a piledriver across goal and wide.

Watford thought they had got the all-important third goal when Deeney slotted the ball through Schmeichel’s legs after he had been released by Vydra but the Rookery’s wild celebrations were cut short by a linesman’s flag.

Forestieri had a shot from outside the area blocked behind for a corner, Cassetti headed the resultant corner down and wide and then Battocchio made way for Hogg with 11 minutes remaining.

The Hornets continued in the ascendency as the game entered the last five minutes of normal time and additional 30 minutes looked an increasing probability. To add to the tension, there was a lengthy delay in the game in the final stages when the outstanding Joel Ekstrand made a superb challenge on the edge of his area but got a kick in the head from Knockaert for his troubles. The Swede needed a quite lengthy spell of treatment, during which the fourth official signalled there would be a minimum of four additional minutes, but he was able to continue.

It was no surprise that more was in fact played and in the sixth minute of additional time it was heart in mouths time when Nugent crossed from the right but Kane wasn’t able to get his shot away. But that was just the prelude for the most incredible spell of drama arguably ever witnessed at Vicarage Road.

It began when Cassetti got the wrong side of Knockaert in the area and as the Hornets defender tried to get back, the Leicester striker went down rather easily but the referee pointed to the spot. It looked like Watford’s promotion dream was over but nobody told Almunia.

Knockaert took responsibility for the penalty but struck it too centrally and the Hornets’ keeper not only saved it with his legs but reacted superbly to block the follow up as well. The ball was hacked clear to the right side of the pitch where Anya ran at Schlupp for one last time before feeding Forestieri. He stood up a cross to the far post, Hogg showed superb awareness to cushion a header down and Deeney powered through to rifle a right-footed shot into the net and send the Hornets to Wembley.

Watford’s goal scorer immediately pulled off his shirt and raced to the Main Stand where the players’ family and friends were sitting before the inevitable pitch invasion ensued.

It took three to four minutes to clear the playing surface before play could restart but all that was left was for Watford to survive one last ball pumped into the area before Oliver blew the whistle for one last time and the celebrations really began.

Watford: Almunia; Doyley (Forestieri 65), Ekstrand, Cassetti; Anya, Abdi, Chalobah, Battocchio (Hogg 79), Briggs; Deeney, Vydra. Not used: Eustace, Hall, Pudil, Bond and Geijo.

Leicester City: Schmeichel; de Laet, Morgan, Keane, Schlupp; James, King; Knockaert, Nugent, Dyer (Drinkwater 66); Wood (Kane 61) Not used: Konchesky, Marshall, Vardy, Logan and Moore.

Bookings: Wood for dissent (34); Cassetti for a foul on Kane (69).

Attendance: 16,142 (2,206 away).

Referee: Michael Oliver.
.
Arabian Business has mega fail on Emirates profit story

12 May 2013

All sorts of problems with this article:

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/emirates-defends-no-staff-bonus-despite-huge-profit-501206.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&message=1

The writer is so confused - the AED 3.1bn profit was announced for 2012/2013 ie: the financial year ended 31 March 2013. Not 2011/12 which should be your comparison year.

I am not sure why you are using figures from 2009/2010; and your figures are wrong here - Group Profit was AED4.2bn of which the airline made AED3.5bn.

AED 3.1 bn in 2012/2013 was the Group profit. The airline made AED 2.3 bn and DNATA AED0.8bn. The US$ figure is wrong in the article: AED3.1bn does not equal $622m.

Then to reinforce the story look at the first half of 2012/2013 where the Group announced a Profit of AED2.1 bn - well on the way to the target of AED 3.5 bn. So the question that you should be asking is what happened in the second half of the year with a profit for the six months that was less than 50% of the first half year.

I am sorry but the error in this article are embarrassing. I have left a comment on the Arabian Business web site - but am sure they will not publish it. At least they could do the decent think and correct the article....which follows:

Emirates defends no staff bonus, despite huge profit

By Courtney Trenwith Sunday, 12 May 2013 2:38 PM

"Emirates Airline has defended its decision not to award staff their annual bonus for the second consecutive year, claiming the 52 percent increase in profits was insufficient.
The Dubai-based carrier – one of the largest in the world by passenger numbers – made AED3.1bn ($622m) profit during 2011-12, which was one of the best results of any comparable international airline.
At the same time, Emirates Group – of which the airline is a subsidiary - posted a 34 percent increase in profits to $845m.
However, the airline said its profit target was not achieved.
While the increase was significant, the profit was still lower than 2009-10 when the airline reached $703m.
Announcing the 2010-11 results last year, it blamed a skyrocketing fuel bill (up 44.4 percent to $6.6bn) for the 72.1 percent slump in profit to $409m.
The below-bar result in2011-12 means bonuses will not be paid to about 60,000 Emirates’ staff, who are generally paid a low base wage that is topped up with benefits such as a flying allowance for cabin crew, free or subsidised housing and significant ticket discounts.
“The Emirates Group provides staff with a bonus based on the group’s financial performance. A profit target is set each year and needs to be met before bonuses are paid,” an Emirates spokesperson said in a statement provided to Arabian Business.
“Although the Emirates Group posted a AED3.1 billion net profit for the 2011/12 financial year, unfortunately, in the face of very challenging economic conditions, our profit target was not reached.
“Therefore, staff, whom we know continue to work very hard, will not receive a bonus on this occasion. They will, however, continue to enjoy the generous benefits package offered to all staff of the Emirates Group.”"

Come on you Horns

12 May 2013

With a big hat tip to BHappy.

Duncan Welbourne. Ken Furphy. Stewart Scullion. Keith Eddy. Terry Garbett. Tom Walley. Barry Endean. Andy Rankin. Ross Jenkins. Alan Garner. Roger Joslyn. Luther Blissett. Steve Sherwood. Graham Taylor. Ian Bolton. Steve Sims. Nigel Callaghan. Kenny Jackett. Wilf Rostron. Les Taylor. John Barnes. Nigel Gibbs. Gary Porter. Tony Coton. John McClelland. George Reilly, Mo Johnston, Glyn Hodges. Paul Wilkinson. Keith Dublin. Andy Hessenthaler. Richard Johnson. Paul Furlong. Colin Foster. Tommy Mooney. Craig Ramage. Kevin Miller. Robert Page. Steve Palmer. Alec Chamberlain. David James. Gifton Noel-Williams. Paul Robinson. Micah Hyde. Peter Kennedy. Ronnie Rosenthal. Tommy Smith. Allan Smart. Nicky Wright. Neil Cox. Heidar Helguson. Marcus Gayle. Gavin Mahon. Ray Lewington. Sean Dyche. Ashley Young. Jay DeMerit. Clarke Carlisle. Ben Foster. Darius Henderson. Marlon King. Malky Mackay. Adrian Mariappa. Tom Cleverley. Danny Graham.

From the Rookery End. Blind, Stupid and Desperate. Look at the Stars. Clap Your Hands, Stamp your Feet. Watford Junction. The Rookery. The High Street. The Rous Stand. Market Street. The Parade. Watford General. Occupation Road. The Main Stand. Elton John. The Scoreboard. Mike Vince. The Vic Road End. The Observer Clock. Z-Cars. Benskins. Iveco. Solvite. Eagle Express. Herald & Post. RCI. Blaupunkt. CTX. Phones4U. Toshiba. Total. Beko. Burrda. The Happy Egg Co. Football Manager. Wembley 84. Away days to Luton. Kaiserslautern 83. Liverpool 70. Anfield 99. Old Trafford 79. Leeds 92. Wembley 99. St Andrews 99. Cardiff 06. Fulham 98. Red Shorts. Black Shorts. Yellow everything.

Marco Cassetti. Almen Abdi. Jonathan Hogg. Matěj Vydra. Fernando Forestieri. Manuel Almunia. Lloyd Doyley. Joel Ekstrand. Christian Battocchio. Jonathan Bond. Fitz Hall. Sean Murray. Ikechi Anya. Troy Deeney. Matthew Briggs. Jack Bonham. Adam Thompson. Steve Beleck. John Eustace. Connor Smith. Daniel Pudil. Lee Hodson. Tommie Hoban. Nathaniel Chalobah. Britt Assombalonga. Nyron Nosworthy. Mark Yeates. Prince Buaben. Craig Forsyth. Neuton. Geoffrey Mujangi Bia. Alex Geijo. Carl Dickinson. Ross Jenkins. Piero Mingoia. Gianfranco Zola. Gino Pozzo. Stephen Heeler. Noel Robson. My dear departed Dad. Harry the Hornet. Everyone, anyone who has been and touched Watford FC. Their mates. Your mates. You. Me.

Us.

Come. On. You. Horns.

David James found at last - in Iceland

12 May 2013

I was wondering where ex Watford and England goalkeeper, artist and writer David James had disappeared to. He has been found. Though it is doubtful that many could name the club that he is now playing for.

MBE David James signed to Icelandic football club ÍBV of Vestmanneyjar (the Westman Islands) in April.

James was capped 53 times by England between 1997 and 2010. He started his career with Watford in 1988 and played with Liverpool, Aston Villa, West Ham, Manchester City and Portsmouth in the PL.

With Portsmouth he won the FA Cup in 2008 along with his friend and Vestmannaeyjar local Hermann Hreiðarsson, now the new ÍBV manager.

IBV finished 3rd in the Icelandic league last year and has won the Icelandic Championship three times, in 1979, 1997 and 1998, and the Cup four times, in 1968, 1972, 1981 and 1998.

The home ground, Hásteinsvöllur, has a capacity of 1,500. The population of Vestmannaeyjar, the 12th largest town in Iceland, is 4,200, ten times less than Welwyn Garden City, in Hertfordshire, where James was born on August 1, 1970.

Combining playing time with the chance to coach alongside former Portsmouth team-mate and IBV boss Hermann Hreidarsson is why he can be found thousands of miles from home on the tiny North Atlantic island. He sees it as the first small step towards management. Not the well-worn path of an ex-keeper coaching keepers, the seldom-travelled route from between the sticks to the top job.

“We’ve got a group of young players, there are older players, but predominantly they are around 21 and there’s a sense of enthusiasm I haven’t seen for a long, long time,” James explained while in Abu Dhabi visiting David Coles, his old Pompey and the current Al Jazira goalkeeping coach.

“A lot of these players are part-time, working on ships. There’s a lot of women’s football out there too; they don’t get paid but spend five days a week training. That sort of commitment and desire for a sport, you think, well, this is a perfect environment to learn as a coach and help a group of players achieve their aspirations.”

And it will give David something and somewhere very different to write about.

The impact of not looking after your staff

12 May 2013

So Emirates did not pay a staff bonus this year. It did not last year either.

The profit share is based on sharing profit in excess of a predefined target. For 2011/12 the target was simply silly.

For 2012/2013 it was a stretch but achievable. At the half year the group was on target. Then something happened in the last six months that left the group well short of target.

It is no great secret that as a privately held company Emirates accounts are not held to the same level of scrutiny as a public company. The reporting requirements are not as onerous. Though the group does publish its annual report.

That said the net profit can be managed and that appears to have happened this year.

The profit target was not met. No token bonus was paid. Yet the Group made close to US$1 billion in net profit.

And staff feel let down. That is clear from everyone that I talk to and from all the comments that I have read. And let down means unmotivated. And let down means why should staff go the extra mile to save costs as the company continually exhorts people to do.

Remember that the majority of Emirates staff are in the front line dealing with customers in the air or on the ground every day. Upset these people and why should they make the extra effort for the airline's passengers? Why should they answer that call bell? Why should they taxi on a single engine etc.

For short term gain Emirates appears  myopic and self serving. As one writer commented "its employees are a balance sheet asset; equally as valuable on the airlines balance sheet as any aircraft, building, computer system or executive lounge. An investment in each is required in order to maximize ROI, efficiency and productivity in a service industry such as aviation."

People have been proud to work for Emirates and to contribute to its success but this decision may have tipped the balance.

And the cost to Emirates will not be in losing upset crew or ground staff or engineers or office team.

It will be pilots uploading an extra tonne of gas every flight; cabin crew not answering call bells; passengers will switch carriers (its the little things that keep frequent flyers), ramp workers dragging their feet and causing every flight to be delayed by 10 minutes every day. Passengers will leave for other airlines if they are always delayed.

A small token would have gone a long way to showing "our employees are still important to us." The words are not enough. 

Emirates results hype

10 May 2013

Emirates Airline hits new heights with 52% rise in profit - The National Abu Dhabi

Emirates airline profits up 34% to Dh3.1 billion - Gulf News (getting it wrong - that was the Emirates Group profit including DNATA)

Emirates' 2012 profit surges amid expansion push - Reuters

Bonanza year for Emirates Airlines - Middle East online

Emirates Airline annual profit jumps 52% to $622 m - The Hindu

Emirates thinks big as profit soars 52pc - The Australian

Emirates reports 52 percent rise in profits as growth of airline outpaces fuel prices - Washington Post

They are all missing the point - see below.