Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Passengers Sue To Block DL+NW Merger  
User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 6
Posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4055 times:

http://twincities.bizjournals.com/tw.../2008/06/16/daily29.html?ana=yfcpc

I have never heard of this happening in the past. I don't give it much credibility, but it is an interesting move.

16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4055 times:



Quoting BigGSFO (Thread starter):
I have never heard of this happening in the past. I don't give it much credibility, but it is an interesting move.

Ive heard of worse than this..back in 1999 or so some nut from California tried to sue UA and force them to move their HDQ to CA. Reason is that CA is the largest single source of UA revenue


User currently offlineRL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4643 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4042 times:

If the folks in MSP arent complaining about their EXISTING monopoly, then these folks in SFO dont have a leg to stand on. What mades it even more rediculous is neither DL nor NW have a sizeable SFO operation.


Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlineFFlyerWorld From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 335 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4029 times:

Who knows what these freaks are thinking? It may be a bunch of competitor airline backers trying to slow down the eventual merger. I don't see where it has much merit -if any- at all!

User currently offlineAlitalia744 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 4741 posts, RR: 45
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4009 times:

non-issue.


filler



Some see lines, others see between the lines.
User currently offlineFlynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4009 times:



Quoting BigGSFO (Thread starter):
I have never heard of this happening in the past. I don't give it much credibility, but it is an interesting move.

You failed to mention that this is 28 individuals, not much of a group.

They claim that a 24% domestic market share is a monopoly. They need to take a basic math course, re-evaluate their claims, and then re-evaluate their lawsuit.

It doesn't stand a chance.

24% does NOT equal monopoly, even in San Francisco (where the group is based).

Now, if UAL Corp. goes under, that 24% will no doubt go higher.


User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3991 times:



Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 2):
If the folks in MSP arent complaining about their EXISTING monopoly, then these folks in SFO dont have a leg to stand on. What mades it even more rediculous is neither DL nor NW have a sizeable SFO operation.

no where does it say that the people suing are from SFO. They are filing there likely because they want it to be heard in front of the 9th circut, the most leftwing and most overturned court in the USA


User currently offlineFlynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3929 times:



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 6):

 Yeah sure They're filing it probably because they're getting decent compensation from Congressman Oberstar. Hell, he's probably footing the bill for the legal fees associated with this bunk lawsuit.


User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3916 times:



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 6):
no where does it say that the people suing are from SFO. They are filing there likely because they want it to be heard in front of the 9th circut, the most leftwing and most overturned court in the USA

Wrong. The case would be heard by a Federal district court (district courts are the trial level courts within the federal judiciary). Only if they lost could they appeal the ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.


User currently offlineBrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4098 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3799 times:

Why oh why are these things always from California. There must be something in the air out there that causes their brains to go haywire.  scratchchin 


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineB6FA4ever From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 816 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3737 times:



Quoting Brilondon (Reply 9):
Why oh why are these things always from California. There must be something in the air out there that causes their brains to go haywire.

well it is the Bay Area... *puff puff* pass it on!  drunk   bigthumbsup  (i swear there use to be a "smoking" smiley *LOL*)


User currently offlineDelta763 From United States of America, joined May 2008, 287 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3649 times:

This group of "passengers" is more likely an attempt at astroturfing by either UAL or Oberstar or some organization with a bigger stake in this than "passengers."

I mean... how much does this merger really affect the people of San Francisco?


User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3563 times:



Quoting Delta763 (Reply 11):
I mean... how much does this merger really affect the people of San Francisco?

Minimal. I tend to agree with several posts above - the suit was filed in SF for political reasons. The left-of-center court up here is most likely to hear the arguments vs. squashing it immediately.

I do not think this case has any merit. And as a resident of the Bay Area I wish our courts could stand a little more to the center at times. I think it is waste of federal funds to even conduct a hearing.


User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6434 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3563 times:



Quoting Delta763 (Reply 11):
I mean... how much does this merger really affect the people of San Francisco?



Nowhere in the article does it say the passengers are from San Francisco. It just says the suit was filed in SFO. Big difference.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21457 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2802 times:



Quoting Pope (Reply 8):
Wrong. The case would be heard by a Federal district court (district courts are the trial level courts within the federal judiciary). Only if they lost could they appeal the ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

He is not "wrong" in any way. The reason you file in SFO is you expect to lose and then be heard in front of the 9th Circuit. It's no mystery. The district courts are more of a crapshoot, but the circuits are more predictable.

There are different districts you file different suits in because a smart lawyer knows the tendencies of the federal appeals court in that circuit. If you are interested in "progressive" constitutional interpretations, you file in the Bay Area.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineYWG747 From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 251 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2783 times:

They are wasting their time and effort.
The merger will do nothing but be a good thing for the industry as a whole.


User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2823 posts, RR: 42
Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2687 times:



Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 2):
If the folks in MSP arent complaining about their EXISTING monopoly, then these folks in SFO dont have a leg to stand on. What mades it even more rediculous is neither DL nor NW have a sizeable SFO operation.

As someone else noted, the reason they are filing in SFO is to take advantage of the most left wing courts in the country. Pure and simple.

(The person who objected above failed to note that they will be in the 9th district, both as a federal and the inevitable appeal).


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
How Does DL/NW Merger Affect Airlink Pilots? posted Wed Apr 30 2008 20:37:58 by AgentXE1225
Official DL/NW Merger: Fleets & Routes (Part 2) posted Thu Apr 17 2008 18:13:23 by Moderators
Official DL/NW Merger: Impact On Fleets & Routes posted Tue Apr 15 2008 00:02:53 by Moderators
Official DL/NW Merger: Impact On Airports posted Mon Apr 14 2008 22:42:07 by Moderators
Official DL/NW Merger: Impact On Alliances posted Mon Apr 14 2008 22:41:22 by Moderators
Official DL/NW Merger: Impact On Regionals posted Mon Apr 14 2008 22:39:31 by Moderators
Official DL/NW Merger: Impact On Employees posted Mon Apr 14 2008 22:38:23 by Moderators
DL-NW Merger Like AF-KL: What It Might Look Like posted Mon Mar 31 2008 20:23:16 by DL767captain
DL/NW Merger - Another Union Opposes posted Tue Feb 26 2008 05:29:25 by Deltadude
DL/NW Merger Effects On GRB,TVC,MBS, Etc...? posted Sun Feb 17 2008 20:43:19 by Maiznblu_757