Using the masFlight platform, we show that Qatar Airways leads the Middle East’s three super carriers in ontime performance, while Emirates maintains its advantage on network scale and destinations served. This presentation was prepared in partnership with OAG. Presented on 2 October at the OAG-hosted World Route Development Forum in Abu Dhabi, UAE. According to masFlight’s comparative data analysis, Qatar Airways is currently leading the Gulf’s ‘superconnectors’ in ontime performance. However, when it comes to global network footprint and connectivity, Emirates still enjoys a clear advantage. However, Emirates, Qatar and Etihad are all still in the infancy of their network expansion and the competition they present to airline alliances is increasing. The key route expansion opportunities for Gulf carriers are with the United States, overflying European hubs. We can therefore expect to see an accelerating ‘land grab’ by Middle East airlines, especially for neutral airports like Boston’s Logan International, and for US hubs with a European focus, such as Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County, Miami International and Philadelphia International. Regarding the airline alliances, our analysis shows that oneworld needs to add member airlines to compete effectively with Star Alliance and SkyTeam. Star Alliance has by far the greatest network reach, with top coverage across the 1,000 major global markets. In contrast, SkyTeam’s strength is efficiency: its strong, centralised hubs give the alliance great geographic reach through fewer flights that Star. Trailing the pack is oneworld, which while competitive in key cities and market pairs needs new members to increase its coverage globally. masFlight is a leading analytics platform for aviation, combining global flight information with weather, airport, fleet and economic data. At the World Route Development Forum on 1 October 2012, masFlight and OAG, the market leader in airline schedule data, announced a new partnership to jointly develop operations data analysis tools to enable airlines and airports to understand their own and competitors’ operational performance.

1. Unlocking the Power of Aviation Operations Data
Alliance Network Coverage
and Ontime Performance
Routes Presentation
2 October 2012
In partnership with
Joshua Marks
Chief Executive Officer
josh@masflight.com
Mobile. +1 703-994-0000
4833 Rugby Avenue, Suite 301
Bethesda, Maryland 20814 USA
www.masflight.com

2. THREE QUESTIONS
Today I focus on three questions
How broad is alliance coverage of
1
major population and wealth centers?
2 How much overlap is there by Middle East
carriers on key demographic routes?
How does operational performance vary
3 across alliances and ME carriers?

3. R E L AT I V E S C A L E
Daily Departures by Region
Europe Asia
North America
StarAlliance 5,519 StarAlliance 752
StarAlliance 9,667
SkyTeam 3,218 SkyTeam 394
SkyTeam 5,177
oneworld 2,506 oneworld 76
oneworld 3,283 Emirates 57 Middle East Emirates 21
Emirates 8 Qatar 42
SkyTeam 496 Qatar 19
Etihad 27
Qatar 3 Emirates 230 Etihad 9
Qatar 209
Etihad 2
StarAlliance 164
Etihad 115
oneworld 102
Central & South Africa Pacific
America
StarAlliance 735 oneworld 748
StarAlliance 691 SkyTeam 210 StarAlliance 642
SkyTeam 561 oneworld SkyTeam 35
99
oneworld 262 Emirates Emirates 18
27
Emirates 2 Etihad 3
Qatar 25
Qatar 1
Qatar 1 Etihad 8
Etihad -
Daily NONSTOP departures and markets based on OAG schedules week of October 1, 2012
Source: masFlight (www.masflight.com)

4. ALLIANCE DOMINANCE
Alliance dominance in key global markets
Alliance share is percent of total nonstop departures between regions
Region to Region Alliance Share
Far East to Africa 100% Few unaffiliated carriers remain
Australia to Africa 100% on nonstop flights between
India to Africa 100% key global economies
India to North America 100%
Central to South America 92% • Alliances overfly connecting
North America to Far East 91%
hubs in the Middle East, targeting
high yield business traffic
North to South America 88%
Central America to Caribbean 86% • Alliances dominate markets that ME
North America to Europe 85% carriers can’t reach, such as
Europe to Far East 85% US/Canada to Europe, South America
Australia/NZ to Far East 85%
• If your routes overfly the Middle East,
US to Canada 83% and you’re not affiliated with an alliance,
Africa to Asia 80% you have competitive issues!
Intra Central America 79%
Europe to Central America 76%
Schedule sample September 15, 2012
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com)

5. C O M PA R I N G R E A C H
How to compare alliance reach?
We compare the Big 3 on population size, wealth and distance
We designed a method that uses demographics, flight schedules and
routing rules to map global city pairs served by each airline or alliance
Define global reach by viable routings Rules for Building Itineraries
among top 1000 global population centers between City Pairs
1. Take population and regional income No airport transfers permitted
for the 1000 largest global cities No code-shares permitted; regional
affiliate flights permitted
2. Determine 3 closest airports for each
Segment-based sale restrictions only
3. Find bidirectional routings (0-2 stops)
Interline OK only within alliance group
4. Weight by population & wealth
Minimum connect time based on airline
5. Penalize long routings vs. shorter ones data and transit times
6. Combine factors to measure coverage Maximum connection time 5 hours

6. MARKET PRESENCE
Measuring Market Presence
First, we look at where alliances have service today
1. We measure the city pair combinations where service is offered
2. At this stage, we’re not considering which service option is better
Market presence among 1,000 global cities
(No Weighting)
Domestic International All City Pairs
Group 13,998 153,035 167,033
Star Alliance 10,905 115,904 126,809
78% 76% 75.9%
SkyTeam 10,662 97,115 107,777
76% 63% 64.5%
oneworld 4,379 53,162 57,541
31% 35% 34.4%
Emirates 298 8,807 9,105
2% 6% 5.5%
Qatar 27 4,013 4,040
0% 3% 2.4%
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com), OAG global schedules, DoorTrip methods

7. RANKING THE ALLIANCES
So who’s best? We weight routes by quality
Our data set comprises 0, 1 and 2 stop itineraries.
We need to compare them. So we weight itinerary options by:
1. Time and distance for the trip versus the fastest competitor
2. Importance of the route, measured by population and wealth
3. Quality of service, measured by schedule density
We score each group on each route and show results on a scale from 0-100 points
100 points = Best Option Across All 167,000 Markets Analyzed
Type of Route Star Alliance SkyTeam oneworld Emirates Qatar
Domestic &
69.8 56.9 32.5
International
4.3 2.2
Just
70.2 56.7 33.0
International
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com), OAG global schedules, DoorTrip methods

8. C I T Y A N A LY S I S
Alliance coverage from key global cities
Out of 100 potential points per market, based on breadth of service
Star Star
Flights to/from: Oneworld SkyTeam Flights to/from: Oneworld SkyTeam
Alliance Alliance
Atlanta 33.8 78.8 60.2 Moscow 35.6 73.0 69.2
Bangkok 45.3 54.3 77.3 New York/Newark 43.5 63.7 82.7
Barcelona 44.1 65.3 77.8 Paris 38.9 72.9 72.6
Berlin 47.2 59.2 79.2 Philadelphia 43.7 54.2 84.0
Bogota 42.6 45.6 87.4 Rio de Janeiro 46.4 25.7 89.0
Boston 46.9 64.7 78.9 Riyadh 38.1 60.3 64.8
Buenos Aires 59.1 59.9 35.6 Rome 38.4 69.7 74.3
Chicago 47.5 56.0 82.0 San Francisco 41.9 57.6 80.1
Hong Kong 50.5 58.6 61.9 Santiago 55.3 58.9 31.2
Istanbul 27.0 55.1 84.7 Sao Paulo 44.9 38.5 86.2
Jakarta 37.8 66.2 61.4 Seoul 31.4 72.3 70.1
London 52.6 59.7 76.5 Shanghai 35.9 76.4 64.3
Los Angeles 38.0 64.7 78.4 Singapore 41.1 57.3 75.8
Madrid 51.6 64.4 72.7 Sydney 50.7 44.1 65.6
Melbourne 53.3 42.4 50.5 Tel Aviv Yafo 40.5 63.8 75.0
Mexico City 32.9 75.6 67.5 Tokyo 39.5 60.1 77.5
Miami/Ft. Lauderdale 56.0 55.8 70.4 Toronto 40.3 57.2 83.6
Milan 42.3 66.4 78.5 Washington DC 40.9 59.6 81.3
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com), OAG global schedules, DoorTrip methods

9. C O U N T R Y A N A LY S I S
International network strength from each country
Out of 100
oneworld SkyTeam Star
potential points Global reach is still driven by
United States 44.3 59.0 76.8 composition of membership
China 8.7 71.2 64.2
Japan 37.7 56.7 75.2 Reviewing international flights:
Germany 36.7 52.3 84.1
• Star owns key economies
Mexico 42.9 68.2 49.2
India 24.5 21.9 82.9
(US, Germany, Japan)
Russia 29.2 74.8 38.8
• Star also has BRIC traction
United Kingdom 39.8 59.7 67.2
South Korea 26.7 76.0 63.5 • SkyTeam efficiently covers
Brazil 56.1 40.6 77.9
global and regional pairs
France 33.7 78.3 56.4
Canada 32.5 52.0 85.8 • Oneworld depends on key
Italy 28.1 69.3 73.4 members but needs growth
Turkey 9.2 16.8 94.8
Spain 52.5 61.7 67.3 • Most competitive markets:
South Africa 34.7 45.0 78.1 US, UK, Spain, Korea
Australia 56.6 31.0 57.0
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com), OAG global schedules, DoorTrip methods

10. THREE QUESTIONS
Our three questions today
How broad is alliance coverage of
1
major population and wealth centers?
2 How much overlap is there by Middle East
carriers on key demographic routes?
How does operational performance vary
3 across alliances and ME carriers?

11. GULF CARRIER REACH
Emirates and Qatar: Current Routes
Asia & India & Australia, NZ North South
Seats per Day Middle East Europe Africa
Far East Pakistan and Pacific America America
Emirates 73,310 20,072 12,234 12,725 7,870 7,021 2,965 708
Qatar 40,526 8,885 8,674 4,971 4,624 440 1,110 301
Etihad 23,653 5,920 4,537 2,636 1,544 826 829 -
% of Seats 55.8% 14.2% 10.3% 8.3% 5.7% 3.4% 2.0% 0.4%
Sources: masFlight, OAG global schedules (Week of October 1, 2012), gcmap.com

12. REGIONAL COMPETITION
Gulf carriers: threat to alliance players
This table shows the percent of seats offered to each region
where a stopover in Dubai, Abu Dhabi or Doha is an attractive routing
Asia & Middle North India /
Africa Pacific Europe Total
Far East East America Pakistan
AF/KLM 37% 96% 100% None 65% None 100% 16%
British 53% 100% 100% None 72% None 100% 15%
Lufthansa 20% 89% None None 49% None 100% 10%
South African None 100% None 100% None 100% 100% 17%
Based on route circuity of 1.5x or less
• For example, BA LHR-JNB 5,635 mi, EK LHR-DXB-JNB 7,397 mi (1.3x)
• Carriers face real competitive impact on a subset of routes (10-17% of total network)
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com), OAG global schedules, DoorTrip methods

13. NEW MARKET OPPORTUNITIES
What’s next? Best new markets for EK, QR
We looked at un-served cities and ranked them.
The value index measures each opportunity against the best one (100%)
• U.S. is (by far) the largest untapped market for Emirates and Qatar
Emirates Value Index Qatar Value Index
1 Chicago 100% 1 Los Angeles 100%
2 Taipei 78% 2 San Francisco 75%
3 Boston 72% 3 Sydney 57%
4 Detroit 71% 4 Dallas 51%
5 Miami 67% 5 Taipei 49%
6 Atlanta 63% 6 Nagoya 48%
7 Philadelphia 60% 7 Koln Ruhr Area 45%
8 Phoenix 58% 8 Miami 42%
9 Denver 50% 9 Philadelphia 38%
10 Montreal 48% 10 Seattle 38%
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com), OAG global schedules, DoorTrip methods

14. THREE QUESTIONS
Our three questions today
How broad is alliance coverage of
1
major population and wealth centers?
2 How much overlap is there by Middle East
carriers on key demographic routes?
How does operational performance vary
3 across alliances and ME carriers?

15. BEST AND WORST
Best and Worst Routes for Emirates
Summer 2012 (June-August)
Arrival Delays (up to 14 minutes late)
Most delayed routes Most punctual routes
Inbound From Delayed % Inbound From Delayed %
1 IKA (Tehran) 69% 1 PER (Perth) 6%
2 CMN (Casablanca) 68% 2 AMD (Ahmedabad) 6%
3 BCN (Barcelona) 64% 3 LAD (Luanda) 5%
4 BEY (Beirut) 61% 4 BLR (Bangalore) 4%
5 TUN (Tunis) 61% 5 ICN (Seoul) 3%
6 DAR (Dar es Salaam) 61% 6 KIX (Osaka) 3%
7 GVA (Geneva) 58% 7 PEW (Peshawar) 3%
8 DMM (Damman) 57% 8 MED (Madinah) 2%
9 DKR (Dakar) 55% 9 LIS (Lisbon) 2%
10 JED (Jeddah) 53% 10 BNE (Brisbane) 0%
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com)

16. A R R I VA L D I S T R I B U T I O N
Comparing arrival distribution, EK vs. QR
QR builds in more schedule buffer than EK, improving on-time arrival rates
GRAPH OF ARRIVAL VARIANCE INTO HUB (VS SCHEDULE)
Rate per 10,000 arrivals, June through August 2012
300
250
FLIGHTS PER 10,000 ARRIVALS
Average arrival Average arrival
deviation for flights deviation for flights
200
-60 to +60 mins: -60 to +60 mins:
7m 35s early 36 seconds early
150
100
50
-
-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
ARRIVAL TIME VARIANCE (MINUTES) FROM SCHEDULE
Tracked arrivals into Doha (QR) and Dubai (EK) from June 2012 through August 2012,
with arrival variance between -60 minutes and +60 minutes.
SOURCE: masFlight (masflight.com)

17. CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions
Alliance Coverage Gulf Carriers Competition Ontime Performance
1. Regional dominance clearly 1. Competition focused within 1. Few differences among the
depends on composition. 4,000 miles of the Middle major alliances − overall
East where deployment is around the 80% on-time
2. Star Alliance is about scale highly efficient. arrival mark, consistently.
and breadth, giving them
top coverage across the 2. Middle East, Europe, Asia, 2. Wide variation among
1,000 major global markets. India threatened - circuity Middle East carriers, with
via DXB/AUH/DOH is minor. Qatar at the head and
3. Star is present in 76% of Emirates at the tail.
the market pairs among 3. Key economic opportunities
1,000 top global markets are in the United States. 3. Emirates OTP driven by a
scoring 70 out of 100 points different block time
in network coverage. 4. Expect land grab in the U.S. philosophy than Qatar,
to accelerate, particularly for which appears to add block
4. SkyTeam is very efficient neutral cities (BOS) and to time to facilitate customer
- strong, centralized hubs hubs focused on Europe connections at Doha.
give them great reach with today (DTW, MIA, PHL).
fewer flights than Star.