Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26208 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2581 times:
Quoting Skyteam10001 (Reply 2): Since English is not my first language, I am not sure I understand fully the legal jargon they use, but I am assuming the decision they took on June 10 was to agree with what AFKL is offering ?
That's basically how I read it but they haven't made a final decision yet. It says they're "considering" the AF-KL offer re the slots but they don't seem to have any major concerns.
I assume the EU competition authority also has to approve the merger. Does anyone know the status of that?
Vfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 4118 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2459 times:
My understanding is that they want to have an actual competitor on the route rather than just the prospect of some competition. Not sure how this can be guaranteed unless BACF is interested in ramping up frequency. I mean the OFT or AFKL cannot force someone onto the route just to have some real competition for AFKL.
Add to that the fact that other than BACF and AFKL, the number of potential airlines willing to operate on the route is somewhat limited. Unless bmi or flybe make a return to LCY, I have difficulties identifying someone who might want to take the risk of a standalone LCY-AMS operation (realistically, LCY nowadays is a three airline airport: AF (+ KL/VG), BA and LH (+LX etc.). Probably bmi would be best suited given their existing LHR-AMS service and the sizeable Star Alliance operation at LCY. But the problem is that if KLM sticks to the VLM formula, it will be very difficult to lure passengers away from the incumbents.