ATL retains world's busiest title

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by AtlantaComment

I wouldnt sell the Turks short. Their geographic advantage is quite similar to the ME3 (aside from the Australian market) but they have one key advantage: population. Dubai and the others are quite tiny while Turkey is nearly the size of Germany and is more populous than France or the UK, so the opportunities for Turkish are quite enormous. While the ME3 are hopelessly dependent on fickle transit traffic, the Turks can rely on a much healthier mix of O&D and transit traffic, particularly as the Turkish economy matures.

Dubai is in a stronger position than Doha or Abu Dhabi as far as O&D goes but still pales in comparison to what Istanbul has to offer especially in the long term. The biggest threats to the ME3 are Turkish, political instability in the region, and a viable Indian carrier capable of siphoning off passengers. Of those threats only TK has really come to pass thus far.

On the surface, it seem that way. Yet, the ME3 are far more profitable (again they dont play on the same field so thats why) and in no danger of outside force. Turkish's long haul network (especially its North American routes) is almost entirely unprofitble (this is something I know via inside information not a link I can post). Turkish is profitable on the whole, but due to its routes in Europe and Central Asia. Emirates on the other hand has an extremely profitable long haul network and since long haul is virtually all they do, it gives them a huge leg up.

I agree that Doha is in a tough position O&D wise. They really depend on connections since Doha is not really a tousit destination. I was there last week and its a nice enough city. The souks are really cool and they do offer camel safaris, but other than that they dont offer much in the way of tourism. Dubai is a totally different animal. They get about 11 million tourist a year. Unlike Las Vegas, its all international.

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by waronxmas

Stability-wise, Dubai doesn't have to worry about war or an overthrow. Their sheikh has done good job of paying people off.

What they really need to be concerned about is that one day the money is going to run out, and it's a lot sooner than they think. When that happens, we'll see a level of abandonment we haven't seen since ancient times in that city.

For anyone who doubts this, just look at Detroit. It once was one of the most beautiful and richest cities in the world. However, when the cash cow of it's economy began to collapse and move to greener pastures, it fell completely apart. Same thing will happen to Dubai once the oil runs out.

Youve confused Dubai with Abu Dhabi. Dubai depends very little on oil. Abu Dhabi is the oil city.

[Robbyb03]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

As a sum of its metro airports...London is busier. In fact, it is the busiest.

Air Traffic Operations and Passenger Count 2013
London-
Gatwick: 234,396 (35,448,590)
Heathrow: 432,636 (72,368,030)
London City: 67,988 (3,379,753)
Luton: 45,071 (9,697,944)
Stansted: 134,732 (17,852,393)
Total= 914,823 (138,746,710)

Atlanta-
ATL: 912,272 (94,430,785)

Chicago-
ORD: 885,386 (66,883,271)
MDW: 256,016 (20,474,552)
Total= 1,141,402 (87,357,823)

New York-
EWR: 524,186 (35,016,236)
HPN: 175,815 (1,541,100)
JFK: 433,934 (50,413,204)
LGA: 455,882 (26,722,183)
Total= 1,589,817 (113,692,723)

Basically the difference between all of London vs Atlanta in passengers is 50 more people per airplane...