Monday, November 27, 2017

Serbia and UAE discuss Air Serbia's future


The President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vućić, and the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, who is also the defacto ruler of the United Arab Emirates, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, have met in the Emirati capital to discuss, among other things, Etihad AIrways' future involvement in Air Serbia. In a statement, the President's office said the two sides "reviewed the expansion and diversification of the partnership, as well as its continuation". Etihad holds a 49% stake in Air Serbia as part of a five year investment and management agreement, which runs until January 1, 2019. The meeting is seen as the latest sign of Etihad's commitment to the partnership. Earlier this month, the airline said it would retain its remaining stakes in foreign carriers after divesting from Air Berlin, Alitalia and Darwin Airline. Talks between Mr Vučić and Mr Al Nahyan were attended by representatives from various UAE companies with investments in Serbia, although Etihad was not present at the meeting.

The Serbian Prime Minister, Ana Brnabić, said earlier that the Emirati carrier would retain its 49% stake in Air Serbia, despite the ongoing cost cutting measures taking place at both companies. Ms Brnabić noted that the bond between the two remains strong and that, "The government has seen strong returns on its investment in Air Serbia. Air Serbia has a professional management, as all companies should. It is currently seeking out ways for the airline to operate more effectively on the market. This is good for Serbia, its people and the government. It is important for Air Serbia to be profitable and for it to constantly improve its results, which it has done year after year. Air Serbia is very important for the country".

In the coming period, the Serbian carrier is expected to roll out a buy-on-board product on short-haul flights, completing its transition into a hybrid carrier. The airline has also said it is considering introducing its second long haul service next year, which government sources have confirmed to be Toronto. However, the carrier is believed to be leaning against the move. Transport Canada, which regulates aviation matters in the country, has told EX-YU Aviation News that there are no bureaucratic obstacles to for the service launch, despite both countries previously claiming that an Air Transport Agreement is being renegotiated. "Canada concluded its first Air Transport Agreement with Serbia in December 2006. No further talks have taken place since that time. The agreement is being applied administratively, meaning the rights set out in the agreement are available to air carriers now, pending its ratification". It added, "Although the agreement allows for direct services, none are being operated. Our priority at this time is ratification of the Air Transport Agreement. We are aware that Air Serbia may be interested in serving the Canada - Serbia market", Transport Canada said.

Another development linked to the partnership between the two carriers, which is expected to unravel next year, is the delivery of ten Airbus A320neo aircraft to Air Serbia. As part of an Etihad order for 117 Airbus aircraft in 2013, Air Serbia is set to take on the first neo jets in the second half of 2018. However, this is now increasingly unlikely with the airline content with its existing capacity. A previous deposit payment made by JAT Yugoslav Airlines for eight A319 aircraft in 1998 has been credited against the pre-delivery payment for these jets.

154 comments:

  1. Shame about Toronto. Would have been a good addition to the network.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is a smart decision in my opinion. It would be crazy that you are cutting costs on one hand and introducing a new TATL route which would put huge pressure on your finances.

      Delete
    2. Ono sto ne kapirate je da ne pravi TATL gubitke u AS vec prepune kancelarije i pregusta mreza letova u Evropi. Mogu da lete bar jos deset gradova sa sadasnjom flotom 3 ili 4 puta nedeljno. Sve sto nema potencijal za transfer treba skresati na 3 do 4 leta nedeljno.

      Delete
    3. +1 agree with last anon

      Delete
    4. It doesn't say they won't fly the route but that it is unlikely at this point. Who knows how things could change in a few months. This is Air Serbia after all.

      Delete
    5. ^I wouldn't hold my breath.

      Delete
    6. Like I said below if JU was serious about introducing flights to Toronto, assuming they would start in June, they would have started ticket sales by now.

      Delete
    7. Vucic can go to Canada, do some begging and promising and selling family silver, perhaps Air Canada can be bribed to do regular service to Belgrade?

      Delete
    8. He should have invited a Canadian construction company to the airport concession tender :)

      Delete
    9. It never ceases to amaze me where people come up with this crap ... nowhere did the airline confirm that it was going to launch flights to Toronto or anywhere else for that matter .... give it a rest people

      Delete
    10. Take it easy Jackie, we are just speculating.

      Delete
  2. I know it's early but does anyone know what they are planning in terms of frequencies and destinations next summer? Fleetwise too?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think anything new is being planned. Similar summer like this year. Someone said here last week that they are finally retiring the B737s next summer so don't know what they will use to perform charters.

      Delete
    2. With the current seat configuration the A319s are perfect for charter flights. No need for the B737s.

      Delete
    3. With the current decision making there is no need for Dane. It will be cheaper anyway.

      Delete
    4. But that would mean they would either have to get an additional A319 or drop some frequencies right?

      Delete
    5. I also doubt they will get rid of the B733 next year.

      Delete
    6. Didn't their head of flight operations say they had a few more years in them?

      Delete
    7. From what I heard AND and ANJ are almost done.

      Delete
    8. But what will they replace them with?

      Delete
    9. That would mean they would have to reduce charter operations and scheduled operations. They operated charters with 3 B737 this summer.

      Delete
    10. If they make simmilar cuts like they made this winter, they will have a spare plane or even two
      http://www.exyuaviation.com/2017/09/winter-201718-air-serbia.html

      Delete
    11. And how much life is in ATR 72? Are there plans for replacing them with newer?

      Delete
    12. @DanijelNovember 27, 2017 at 12:57 PM

      Ancient, when dinosaurs roamed Earth.
      Not a chance on replacement, Air Serbia is losing money left, right and center.

      Alen posted something about it on Tango blog.

      Delete
  3. The way things are going I hope EY does leave. They have proved as ineffective leaders in every single airline they bought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m guessing you hoped will come through. 4 weeks Toronto looking positive and now not. I thought Air Serbia was profitable? Obviously not. Today EY is seemingly committed to the partnership. Let’s see how discussions progress. I’m not sure what benefits JU contribute tonEY or vice versa

      Delete
    2. An airline introducing radical cost cutting measures 3 years into its life is not a well managed airline.

      Delete
    3. That speaks more about the cadre they have pinched from around the world.

      Delete
    4. Air Serbia jas a new CFO. We will see how that works out.

      Delete
    5. The CFO came from Alitalia so I am not keeping my hopes high.

      Delete
    6. He he Alitalia. Vratite odmah Dinkica sve mu je oprosteno.

      Delete
  4. Funnily enough, Icelandair's CEO said in an interview that their plan to fight competition is to improve their overall product. The opposite of what Air Serbia seems to be doing.

    In the end, there are no winners in the race to the bottom.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What does Iceland and Icelandair have to do with Air Serbia and this article? How random ...

      Delete
    2. Both are small airlines operating out of small markets while being surrounded by much larger and more aggressive players.
      Both need to figure out a way to remain relevant in those market realities.

      That is why Icelandair is not irrelevant when it comes to Air Serbia which should start copying what they are doing. After all, FI is an airline that is based in a country whose population is smaller than that of Novi Beograd... despite all of that they manage to profitably operate a fleet of 26 B757 and 4 B767.

      Delete
    3. It's like a lot of his comments - not only random, but also very opiniated

      Delete
    4. You are more than welcome to present actual arguments against what I said above. :)

      Delete
    5. Sorry, but I wouldnt dare to compare Iceland to any country in the Balkans, especially not Serbia. Two different cultures, mentalities, business models and most importantly, Iceland is an island 1k km away from mainland Europe where the only way to get off the island as to fly.

      Delete
    6. Iceland is home to some 340.000 people while KEF handles almost seven million passengers. In addition to that, both Icelandair and WOW have made it clear that their primary business goal is to carry transfer passengers, not locals, thus the whole argument of Iceland being an island in the middle of nowhere becomes irrelevant.

      Just because a country is poor or underdeveloped doesn't mean it can't have a strong and well-run national airline. If we were to follow your logic then there was no need for Air Serbia in the first place. Jat was just fine for a Balkan country like Serbia.

      Delete
    7. Aman kakve ima veze što je Island ostrvo. Tom logikom kako to da autobuska karta do Pariza kosta 140 jura iako leti Wizz koji je često jeftiniji?
      Problem je u tom što ASL nema viziju i što ide u pogrešnom smeru. Prave istu grešku kao i AB.

      Delete
    8. along the lines with Nemjee's last argument:

      Ethiopean Airlines also comes from one of the worlds poorest countries and yet its Africa's leading carrier (and is also well connected to Europe, China and the US) + was one of the first carriers to take delivery of Dreamliners and has now also 6 A350s.

      I guess, the most important thing is to have a clear vision

      Delete
    9. Iceland have perfect location for transfer flights to US and Canada and thats it's main focus. They have such geographical position that they can reach most of the Europe and big parts of US and Canada even with regional jets . Iceland and Serbia are two totally different markets and I can't see how they can be compared in any way.

      Delete
    10. Both Serbia and Iceland have a good geographical location. Just like Iceland can act as a bridge between Europe and North America so can Serbia between Europe and the Middle East, the rest of Asia and Africa.

      Local markets are irrelevant here. We are talking about a business principle.

      Delete
    11. "However, the carrier is believed to be leaning against the move. "

      So what are they not against? Having their a/c parked? OMG.

      Delete
    12. Turkey and UAE have better positions for connecting Europe and Asia and they have already bigger airports and airlines than Serbia. On that market already exists extremely strong competition.

      On the other hand Ethiopian Airlines is using situation that there is no real competition on market they are serving. Africa is poor but there is enough demand for one such airline.

      Delete
    13. Ako niste znali, Zemlja je ipak okrugla

      Delete
    14. @10:24 - So basically they should do nothing?

      Delete
    15. @10:31 They are doing something. They already have market and they now trying to make more money on that market. Expansion of the fleet and routes will wait for some time until there is enough money to invest in new planes and new routes.

      Delete
    16. Still don't think some major blunders have occured?

      Delete
    17. Prosto tvoje poredjenje nema nikakvog smisla, Island ima jedinstvenu poziciju da moze leteti sa uskotrupnim avionima do Amerike i Evrope. Sa novim uskotrupnim avionima Ameri otvaraju i to trziste.

      Delete
    18. I Er Srbija moze sa uskotrupnim da leti od Irske do Irana.

      Delete
    19. Ethiopia has over 100 million people :D

      Delete
    20. @AnonymousNovember 27, 2017 at 10:26 AM

      Flat earthers would dispute that suggestion.

      Delete
    21. Out of those 100 million, 98 million live on a Dollar per day.

      Delete
    22. Zato imaju mocnu avio kompaniju kakvu smrdljivi exYuovci ne mogu ni da zamisle, a kamo li da priuste.

      Delete
    23. Ali ja zelim takvu kompaniju!

      Delete
    24. They're a bunch of idiots. Airlines have been growing left and right and most of Air Serbia's competitors have doubled their size in the last 4 years. LO has become a serious player, PS received 5 new 738 last year and is supposed to receive 10 (ten) new aircraft next year including 4 777. Ukraine isn't exactly Switzerland either, levels of life have fallen to rock bottom yet they somehow manage to grow. What's their secret?

      Home market is next to irrelevant in the airline business. Geo-location is. I'm sick and tired of hearing those excuses to such an extent that sometimes i think death is better than living in coma and draining other's ressources.

      https://youtu.be/6y0Gq70_2Ns

      Delete
  5. "Hybrid Carrier" - So it is a bit of all but nothing specific. No meat- no fish

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Similar to Adria.

      Delete
    2. Raspad kao u Adriji, sta tu ima nejasno?

      Delete
    3. The question is has the hybrid product really helped that much and saved them money?

      Delete
    4. Da li ti mislis da dobar snack umesto gnjecavih sendvica moze da ubije avio kompaniju? Takve gluposti prodaju "menjadjeri".

      Delete
    5. Similar to Lufthansa or British Airways. They all have hand luggage only fares and BA have buy-on-board service for short flights.

      Delete
    6. Air Serbia's quality of service has gone down in all segments.

      Delete
    7. That's what usually happens when you cut costs.

      Delete
  6. Another confirmation that Etihad isn't pulling out of JU unlike what some predicted here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You believe everything in this article. Read between the lines and wake up!!!

      Delete
    2. ^ You have been saying the same thing for the past year and here we are still.

      Delete
    3. one thing i dont want to believe in is that line that says Air Serbia is leaning against YYZ

      Delete
    4. I'm sorry to say YYZ BEG but if they were planning to start flights to Toronto in say June 2018 they would have started ticket sales by now or at least filed for a permit. They filed for US permit in early November in 2015.

      Delete
    5. @10:17 - of course they're leaning against, new route means more work which they're simply not too fond of.

      Delete
    6. Why did they mention that they are doing studies for second long haul flight in the first place?

      Delete
    7. BEG concession tender is still on and government wants to benefit the environment stimulated since 2013, because once the stimulation (EY investment in JU, long-haulish flights etc.) ends, BEG will face the reality. And the reality doesn't look like lucrative investment conditions.

      Delete
    8. AS delegacija je bila u Torontu prosle nedelje. Koliko se muže čuti ovde u centrali AS je tražila dva leta nedeljno (utorak i petak). Zanimljiva informacija je da su od tehnike tražili kompaniju koja radi rojs rojs motore, zanima me da li neko zna da li se na 330 menjaju motori iduće godine?

      Delete
    9. Zar ti nisi rekao da ne radis u JU. Sada ispade da si u centrali...

      Delete
    10. rojs rojs :D :D :D

      vi flaj tu amerika

      Delete
    11. 330 Njujork pun ko' oko :) Uuups, ne, 68 pax, jel' tako ono bese?

      Delete
    12. 62 :D ali zvanicna partijska retorika je bila da je pun sleteo u PHL :D

      Delete
    13. Za razliku od vas koji se praviti englezi a pravite katastrofalne gramatičke greške ja ću rađe i dalje na srpskom i naravno da je rojs rojs. Da ja radim u centralnoj zgradi i zovemo je centrala :). Jesi pogledao popunjenost u Decembru i januaru? Naravno da nosi jel to malo boli ljubomoro moja:)

      Delete
    14. Hot Lane, jednostavno nemoj da se blamiras care. Mi te volimo ovako i onako.

      Delete
    15. Ja sam mislio da se piše rols rojs, ili Rolls-Royce. Možda grešim.

      Delete
    16. Ma ne, što zna Vuk Karađić? Kakav rols rojs? Rojs rojs. I točka. I erbajs isto, to zvuči više balkanski. I Pojing, to je svakako bolje nego Bojing! Pojing ovce!

      Pa Hot Line je stručnjak, tko smo mi da mu išta prigovorimo. Stoga od danas je rojs rojs. A onaj drugi se sigurno zove Brent ili Drent.

      Delete
    17. zasto ljude ovde komentarisu load factor JU 500/501 a sami jadni ne mogu da plate kartu do Podgorice u jednom smeru.. alo smirite se. i nehejtujte.

      Delete
  7. Mmmm! Buy on board?

    For cheapest ticket LHR-BEG-LHR being 250eur + I wont think twice going via MUC, FRA, ZRH...

    PS Congrats to JU keeping the monopoly...

    (And no, W6 does not work for me...)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Prices will hopefully be reduced as they wind down their service. But they can't have the same fare as Wizz. They do fly to Heathrow after all.

      Delete
    2. Serbia saw 17% more British tourists this year. I guess most of them flew on W6.

      As for LHR, nothing is preventing BA from launching flights.

      Delete
    3. Easy or Ryan would really make the difference.
      Someone said that most of JU's passengers to LHR are p2p anyway.
      These two can launch 2-3 flights per week. Fri, Sun and Wed would be perfect

      Delete
  8. Serbian government should quietly look around if someone is willing to take EY's stake and return the airline back to the path of growth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And someone who can sustain that growth with a profit.

      Delete
    2. Maybe Hainan (the Chinese) would be interested.

      Delete
    3. And what if Etihad is not interested in giving up its stake in Air Serbia which they seem to confirm month after month. They have a sweet deal.

      Delete
    4. They will never be more interested then now when they are recording billions in losses.

      Delete
    5. Hainan's interest will depend on airport concession.

      Delete
  9. Are foreign airline exploiting the current issues at Air Serbia (frequency reduction, service downgrade) by introducing more flights?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Several actually.
      Lot increased BEG.
      Atlasjet launched IST.
      Swiss adding two more frequencies next year.
      LH MUC second flight is mostly on the A319.
      RO added another flight this winter.
      Transavia is doubling its flights from Feb.

      Delete
    2. Good news for passengers though I'm guessing it is cutting into JU's market share.

      Delete
    3. Partly yes but I think the market is also getting bigger.

      Delete
    4. There is also more competition and choice on the Prague route with Hainan introducing 2 weekly flights and Air Serbia keeping its 10 weekly flights.

      Delete
    5. And let's not forget Flydubai and Qatar who have increased frequencies, which I believe is a direct result of JU ending Abu Dhabi.

      Delete
  10. Regarding Serbia-Canada ATA I doubt the Canadian ambassador would lie about renegotiating the agreement but Transport Canada says no talks have taken place. Anyone know more about this? What's the deal?

    ReplyDelete
  11. A320neos not arriving is the biggest disappointment. In the end Serbia's 23 million $ deposit will have been used to pay Etihad's pre-delivery payment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It will be just one of the many things Serbia has given as a gift to Etihad.

      Delete
    2. Carefull now, you wil be called haters by the company trolls for saying the obvious!

      Delete
    3. Wan't this PDP paid by Milosevic's FRY back in 1998 for an order of 10 aircraft which they renegged on ? That being the case, my guess is that this money was swallowed by Airbus as a non-refundable deposit since they didn't go forward with the order - as is usually the case. Rarely does such a deposit sit as a holding deposit for 15 yrs !!!

      In any event, even if by some miracle Airbus decided to refund this money, it would need to go back to whoever paid the deposit. Since FRY no longer exists, it would surely need to be disbursed between those who constituted the country of FRY - no ??

      Delete
    4. At that time IT was serbia and Montenegro.

      Delete
    5. This 23 million is, by contract, in Etihad account till all bill for A320neo would be paid. What last cent of that bill will be paid, then Air Serbia will get this money. Nothing before that. If Air Serbia will not take those A320 money will go to Etihad.

      Delete
    6. Sp they don't lose anything that they already had ... Money was lost back in 1998, so better that Etihad gets it than those French who in the end, went ahead and bombed us ...

      Delete
  12. Etihad is clueless with what to do with Air Serbia.

    ReplyDelete
  13. So what next for Air Serbia? No new routes, no new planes, no service enhancements... Doesn't look good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. More cost cutting.

      Delete
    2. And the funniest thing in all of this that Air Serbia claims to be 900,000 EUR profit. LOL!

      Delete
    3. It's not what Air Serbia claims, their accounts were independently audited by KPMG according to IFRS accounting standards ... hence, there's little room for any of us to interpret anything other than what has been reported by KPMG

      Delete
    4. I just don't get how government subsidy is classified as Income from Operations.

      Delete
    5. There's no subsidy at all ... it is debt write-off and if you ask anyone with even basic accounting knowledge, they will tell you debt forgiveness (in this case, amortisation of the old JAT debt), it is a P&L item that comes back as income ...

      Pretty simple actually ...

      Delete
    6. Debt forgiveness is just 280 million out of 520 million that was given to company in last 4 years.

      KPMG? Woow... Just like Enron, Worldcom, Olympus, Leman Brothers, and just few weeks ago Agrokor. They all had huge, well known KPMG like institutions with reputation for positive audit. But in those cases it was about multi-billion EUR not little few millions like in Air Serbia. So, don't give me those bullshits with audit.

      Delete
    7. Enron wasn't KPMG, it was Arthur Andersen and Enron scandal caused it to go out of business, that was deserved. If you have a problem with audit in general, you then have a problem with legally required accounting practice all over the globe. Go ahead and try to remove audit legal requirement in EU & US or try to sue KPMG if you have any proof to back up your conspiracy theories. Can't wait to hear if you succeeded!

      Delete
    8. Typical answer of someone who most likely works for ASL. Whoever works in the private sector knows that these financial results can be fixed so as to show what's needed.

      ASL could have easily written off some things, issued some invoices and voila... there we go.

      There is a reason why the government and Dane never speak of 'operational' profit or loss.

      Delete
    9. Even if they were operationally profitable, you would be the first to say that the result was "fixed", "rigged", "setup" etc etc ... for some people, like you, it doesn't matter what JU does, because it will always be wrong, bad, problematic etc etc ....

      Delete
  14. U Srbiji u drzavnim kompanijama postoji mnogo veci broj zaposljenih od ekonomske opravdanosti.
    Kompanije sluze za socijalno udomljavanje. Umesto za razvoj, efikasnost, efikasnost. Za trziste i profit. Da ne pominjem administraciju, birokratiju... koliko zaposljenih radi u Er Srbiji?. Koliki broj sedista ima u floti?.
    Verujem da ce Er Srbija se ovoga puta osloboditi svih vrsta balasta i rasipanja ulozenog u neefikasnost. Konkurencija milosti nema. Porezki obaveznici su zavrsili da placaju nesposobne u biznisu. Politicari su prvenstveno odgovorni. Oni su ti koji zavlace ruke u dzep onima koji placaju porez. Za "vise interese"? Bullshit.
    Kao bezkrajno fan Er Srbije, verujem u preobrazaj za buducnost. Kao i za aerodrom Nikola Tesla. Moram pomenuti i Kraljevacki Aerodrom Morava.
    Radovan.
    Kraljevo

    ReplyDelete
  15. Interesting times coming for Air Serbia. I think they will weather this crisis but we will see.

    ReplyDelete
  16. They have disappointed a lot of high expectations. For years they sold us the story that they are a best in class European airline, only to end up with a pay on board product, putting slimline seats, removing dedicated business seating, and slipping down on all service levels. On board wi-fi can't be used as a substitute for all of that and I've heard from more and more people that it doesn't work at all.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Of course Etihad will not leave. They probably never found a dumber part owner who will pay for everything while Etihad takes the little piece that makes some money.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Any plans to serve INI?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nulla dies sine INI

      Delete
    2. btw ot: INI reached 300'000 passengers today

      Delete
    3. Wow... that means we are looking at 330.000 passengers this year!

      Delete
  19. "The meeting is seen as the latest sign of Etihad's commitment to the partnership."

    By whom exactly is it seen as such?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By rational people. If Etihad says it is commited to the partnership, if the Serbian PM says Etihad is commited to the partnership and now the Serbian President says they "reviewed the expansion and diversification of the partnership, as well as its continuation" what more do you want? For the Sheikh to come to you personally and inform you?

      Delete
    2. Why this animosity?

      I am rational and I tend to trust neither Etihad nor our dear leaders. The objective of my comment was to try to ask EX-YU to be a bit more cautious and critical in writing, and not tend to use standard journalistic phrases where they don't necessarily fit.

      Delete
    3. How does it not fit if all shareholders have said they are commited to the deal? In my oppinion the statement fits.

      Delete
    4. If you say that a matter 'is seen' a certain way, it means there is a broad consensus in the general public. Otherwise you have to specify by whom it is seen as such.

      Now, the point here is not to nag about grammar. All I want is to say that it would be very interesting in this case to analyze the situation more broadly, because there are evidently different opinions in the general public about the Etihad-Air Serbia relationship.

      Of course, in the Balkan context this would mean getting political, and I don't know if EX-YU is willing to do that. But if not, if they just want to report widely available facts, then they should at least be impeccable on the grammar :)

      Delete
  20. is it possible that serbian government wants EY to take part of financing JU since it doesn't want alone to carry and subsidize ~40mil€ JU loss each year?

    we all know that EY-JU partnership has little meaning at this moment, but the cost of subsidizing JU loss is carried by serbian taxpayers, so i don't see arabs would be particularly keen to exit

    ReplyDelete
  21. Is it just me or ..?

    "The meeting is seen as the latest sign of Etihad's commitment to the partnership... although Etihad was not present at the meeting."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cont.
      Great committment?

      couldn't even send someone to represent Etihad at the meeting 15min away from HQ.

      Delete
    2. What it says is that neither EY nor JU have much say in this ... it gets agreed and sorted at the highest levels. Both airlines are govt owned, so what the owners want, the owners get - simple as that

      Delete
    3. Anon at 3.14pm - your comment shows what little understanding you have in these matters. NOBODY from Etihad EVER partakes in meetings with HH Sheik Mohd, no matter who is in question. His Royal Court implements agreements made at his level.....

      Delete
    4. so why were there representatives of other companies?

      Delete
    5. Thanks, Petar !
      Too many shoot from the hip' on this site.

      Delete
    6. How do you know Peter ... you were there to bear witness ??

      Delete
    7. I know because it f*cking says so:

      "Talks between Mr Vučić and Mr Al Nahyan were attended by REPRESENTATIVES FROM VARIOUS UAE COMPANIES with investments in Serbia, although Etihad was not present at the meeting"

      Delete
    8. If people only read the article...

      Another gunslinger

      Delete
    9. Peter - you only know what you have read in the above article - no more and no less. The author of the article was himself not present at the meeting either, so they are also reporting this 2nd or 3rd hand...

      So in truth, what is written/reported is simply that - an unsubstantiated report.

      Just because it is reported here on ex-yu, does not make it a fact. Many things have been reported here - no doubt in good faith - that have often turned out not to be true.

      Delete
    10. Admin - why do you keep deleting my comments ? What is it that offends - my rebuttal of Peter's comments or my statement that your reports are not always factual ?

      The censorship intrigues me ...

      Delete
    11. Your comment was marked as spam by the system, which removes comments automatically without my knowledge if it deems them as such. I have retrieved the comment, the one where you use more appropriate language, rather than the other one where you are swearing. You are entitled to your own oppinions and you are neither forced to visit nor read reports you don't find factual.

      Delete
    12. Thx for the clarification. Ofcourse, your website, your rules - i have no issue with that. That said, you should be consistent in applying your own rules, erstwhile you be accused of being a hypocrite. Why is it ok for Peter Celik to use swear words and for his comment to remain intact ? The fact that he has omitted a single letter from his choice word, makes no difference, as the intent is clear, yet the double standard you show is glaringly obvious.

      Delete
    13. I will repeat again, neither of your comments were deleted, they were removed automatically by the system, which for some reason recognised them as spam (why, I don't know, it does that with normal comments from time to timr). I have no control over that other than to retrieve the comment when it is brought to my attention, as is outlined in the comments guidelines. Since you posted two comments which were more or less the same, I chose to retrieve the latter with more suitable language. I don't always read every single comment immidiately as there is an avarage of 200 of them each work day, 50 of which are ad spams and I have only now read Peter's comment.

      As for the conspiricy and intent you are way off on that one. 99% of all comments posted by readers get published so there is no intent to guide a discussion and neither do I take sides. The comments are not representative of the opinions of this site. As I have explained here in the past, this is a one man show, meaning everything on this site is run single-handedly so I don't get involved in the comments other then trying to read them when time permits.

      I have no issue with criticism. As I have said, you are very much entitled to your oppinions and your feedback will be taken on board.

      Delete
    14. well, learn the rules in order to know how to break them. guess my wording didn't get pulled by the software since i used "*"

      btw at least alabbar attended the meeting :o

      Delete
    15. Good for you Peter ... your way to skirt around the rules is ingenious. Again, no issue with anything you wrote. I respect your opinion and your right to express it.

      My issue is not even with Admin deleting any comment he chooses to delete - either system initiated or via his intervention. It is his blog so he can do whatever he chooses without having to justify it to anyone.

      BUT, once he gives his position on something - as he did with me in stating that he didn't reinstate my comment due to my use of swear a word, while simultaneously allowing your post to remain for exactly the same infringement, is hypocrytical.

      I apprec how onerous it must be as a 1 man show, but don't state a position and justify not reinstating the post while allowing someone else's to remain.

      Other than that, all is good in the world - long live free speech/expression !!!

      Delete
  22. Sve u svemu od dobrog starta ostade otprilike isto sto je bio i sam JAT...tj. problem za drzavu. Ne razumem rukovodstvo kompanije koje je slepo propustilo sansu za dalji razvoj i umesto toga misli da ce sve resiti rezanjem troskova i smanjenjem saobracaja. To je samo mali deo jednacine, potreban je veci prihod na prvom mestu.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nije potreban veci prihod nego da se sklone stotine parazita zaposlenih preko veze u centrali AS. Posto tog sklanjanja nece biti, AS ce da zivotari do svoje propasti, bas kao i bivsi Jat Airways.

      Delete

EX-YU Aviation News does not tolerate insults, excessive swearing, racist, homophobic or any other chauvinist remarks or provocative posts with the intention of creating further arguments. A full list of comment guidelines can be found here. Thank you for your cooperation.