Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
EU Objects To AA-BA-IB ATI  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24805 posts, RR: 46
Posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 8634 times:

Another fly in the ointment.

In the best case probably delay the process into 2010, instead of a hoped for approval in the coming months.

Quote:
BA, American Receive EU 'Statement of Objections

European competition officials have voiced concern about plans by British Airways, AMR Corp.'s American Airlines and Spain's Iberia to intensify their cooperation on trans-Atlantic routes.

The European Commission delivered its first volley Thursday with a so-called statement of objections that includes a focus on routes where the three carriers have a large share of premium passengers, according to a person familiar with the situation.
The commission's confidential initial assessment on oneworld's application comes as U.S. regulators near completion of their own review, with a decision expected by Oct. 31.

Issuance of a statement of objections caught some industry watchers by surprise, as the airlines were expected to try and broker a solution in private.

Full story
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1254...8957441.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
99 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32600 posts, RR: 72
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 8519 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
Another fly in the ointment.

In the best case probably delay the process into 2010, instead of a hoped for approval in the coming months.

I really don't see this as a major delay. It's the typical process.

Good thing Air Europa is launching daily Miami-Madrid flights.



a.
User currently offlineCrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 768 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 8398 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
I really don't see this as a major delay. It's the typical process.

Agreed.

If they're concerned enough about hub to hub routes LHR - New York, DFW, BOS, MIA and MAD - ORD, MIA that the are going to block ATI for AA/BA/IB then the EU is going to have to do something about the premium customer grabs on routes like CDG/AMS- New York, ATL, DTW, MSP, JFK, BOS and FRA- New York, BOS, ORD, IAD, LAX.

And how many ORD-MIA flights are there between AA/BA/IB? ... Exactly 1x daily on IB. Why not express the same concern about SLC-CDG on DL (LOL)?


User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9289 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 8268 times:



Quoting CrAAzy (Reply 2):
Why not express the same concern about SLC-CDG on DL (LOL)?

IIRC it was started after the JV was aproved.

Quoting CrAAzy (Reply 2):
And how many ORD-MIA flights are there between AA/BA/IB? ... Exactly 1x daily on IB

IB does MIA-ORD? just joking I assume you mean ORD-MAD?

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
I really don't see this as a major delay.

hope not.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
It's the typical process.

did the EU Object to the *A JV or the Sky JV? I can't remember. Also what does this mean? If the EU says no is that the final word or?



yep.
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 8241 times:



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 3):
If the EU says no is that the final word or?

If the EU says no, then yes, it's the final word, but remember this is not the final verdict of the EU, just the initial statement of objections, after which the applicants can explain to the EU where they have it wrong and possibly offer remedies in case they fail to convince the EU of their point of view...

STAR and Skyteam went through a similar process, but it is a fact the EU has become much stricter on anybody teaming up as of lately and is no longer only taking care of the current situation, but also estimating the likely impact any alliance will have on the easy at which future competitors can step in later.

The revised attitude of the EU came in the wake of the economic crisis and the lessons learnt from it: earlier this year for instance, LH for instance ran into some serious and totally unexpected troubles during the take-over process of SN, for the simple reason the 2 airlines would have a monopoly on.... you'd haven't guessed it: the routes from Brussels to Germany! The EU even blocked the take-over for almost half a year over this relatively minor issue, so BA/IB/AA better take this objection from the EU serious, or the EU might block their project indefinitevely.

in short: don't mess with the EU, its the most powerful economic block out there and its decisions have global implications....


User currently offlineAIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2486 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8195 times:

If AA/BA/IB do not get ATI, then A* ATI and SKYTeam ATI has to be cancelled. You have to be fair. A* has a far bigger monopoly not only on transatlantic flights but all over the world. This is just BS.


Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8162 times:



Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 5):
A* has a far bigger monopoly not only on transatlantic flights but all over the world. This is just BS.

STAR may be far bigger indeed, but do they have more monopolistic transatlantic routes?

Contrary to the US regularor, the EU doesn't look so much at the size of the deal, but it hates it when it sees the only 2 competitors on many routes work closely together, thus effectively taking out whatever is left of the competition and thus free choice for the consumer and I think this is where the problem will be with this deal.


User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8541 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8039 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 3):
did the EU Object to the *A JV or the Sky JV? I can't remember.

The EU is still investigating both


http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/...-eu-eu-airline-cartel_6959044.html

...Parallel investigations into other airline alliances are still under way, they said....

...The EU is also investigating the Star Alliance run by Lufthansa, Continental, United and Air Canada as well as SkyTeam which combines Air France/KLM and Delta/Northwest....



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7958 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 1):
I really don't see this as a major delay. It's the typical process.

It is not a standard review despite what you have tried to say for years.
There are genuine concerns regarding competition in oneworld and they are the same concerns that have been there for years. The fact that those issues remain unaddressed is precisely why oneworld is not moving forward despite the cries from people here that oneworld is "entitled" to obtain the same ATI status as Skyteam and Star.
AA and BA have put together a flawed alliance for ATI, plain and simple.


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32600 posts, RR: 72
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7948 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):

STAR may be far bigger indeed, but do they have more monopolistic transatlantic routes?

Yes, both Star and Skyteam do, especially from FRA, MUC, CDG and AMS.

Standard review for ATI. Nothing to be worried about. IIRC, EC had similar concerns with CO/UA. The EC's "statement of rejections" is just as much a hinderance (i.e. zero) as the DOJ's concerns.

It really scares certain members of the forum that AA and BA will soon have ATI, to the point where they remain in complete denial about the fact.

[Edited 2009-10-02 02:48:05]


a.
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 7911 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 9):
Yes, both Star and Skyteam do, especially from FRA, MUC, CDG and AMS.

They both have monopolistic routes at their hubs for sure, but predominantly to secondary places; oneworld is the only alliance holding so many monopolistic prime routes though.

AA and BA have had a problem for years already and AA plus IB is a real problem on anything south of MIA-MAD.

I think the EU will not easily approve this, some serious concessions will have to be made first, so BA and AA better don't take this lightly....


User currently offlineAIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2486 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7819 times:

I had a look at the situation at FRA and picked some US destinations and you can clearly see that STAR is in a more monopolistic situation at FRA than One World at LHR/

FRA-JFK : STAR + 1 daily DL --- LHR-JFK : OneWorld + KU + VS +DL
FRA-EWR : STAR Monopoly --- LHR-EWR : OneWorld + VS + CO
FRA-LAX: STAR Monopoly --- LHR-LAX : OneWorld + NZ + VS + UA
FRA-SFO: STAR Monopoly --- LHR-SFO : OneWorld + VS + UA
FRA-MIA: STAR Monopoly --- LHR-MIA : OneWorld + VS
FRA-IAH: STAR Monopoly --- LHR-IAH : OneWorld + CO
FRA-IAD: STAR Monopoly --- LHR-IAD : One World + UA and soon VS
FRA-ATL: STAR + 1 daily DL --- LHR-ATL : OneWorld + DL
FRA-BOS: STAR Monopoly --- LHR-BOS : OneWorld + VS
FRA-DFW: STAR + 1 daily AA ---LHR-DFW : OneWorld Monopoly
FRA-MCO: STAR Monopoly --- LGW-MC0 : OneWorld + VS

So oneWorld has the monopoly on only one route out of LHR (to DFW)... Come on there isn't a place much more competitive than the UK and LHR and the London Area.



Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7797 times:

The issue for oneworld is not pure control of routes but the ability of other carriers to pose a competitive challenge. US airlines can easily get slots to other airports in Europe at reasonable market rates but that CANNOT be said about LHR, despite what some people want to assert.

The issue for Star is simply size and density in central Europe. Whenever any company or group of allied companies control such a large part of the market, there will be objections. Star's problems can be fixed but oneworld's cannot.

When authorities on both sides of the Atlantic recognize that AA/BA has huge monopolistic abilities NOT ONLY based on its massive stranglehold of the largest air travel market in the world but also based on the inability of other carriers to mount a significant competitive threat says that AA/BA cannot ever be approved as it has been proposed.

There is a saying that if a dozen people tell you that you are drunk, believe them and lay down before you do harm to yourself. The fact that AA/BA continue to pursue this alliance when it is so clear it will not be approved as is proves why AA and BA both are slipping further behind strategically.


User currently offlineDavehammer From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7781 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 12):
Star's problems can be fixed but oneworld's cannot.

How? By forcing them to divest themselves of slots/ routes?

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 12):
The issue for oneworld is not pure control of routes but the ability of other carriers to pose a competitive challenge. US airlines can easily get slots to other airports in Europe at reasonable market rates but that CANNOT be said about LHR, despite what some people want to assert.

Yet despite this - airlines still continue to pay the high rates because they think it's worth it compared to the lower rates at LGW. And despite the supposed barriers to competition there is more competition on virtually all routes from LHR than there is from any other European hub. That's just the nature of the market - either approve AA/BA/IB and let the three compete or shelve them all.


User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7733 times:



Quoting Davehammer (Reply 13):
How? By forcing them to divest themselves of slots/ routes?

or limiting ATI on those routes/regions... slots are fairly accessible in Germany so the issue is less slot related as market concentration.

Quoting Davehammer (Reply 13):
Yet despite this - airlines still continue to pay the high rates because they think it's worth it compared to the lower rates at LGW.

they actually don't. The only real slot purchases came from CO and US and only CO was willing to pay the tens of millions of dollars that the market is demanding for prime transatlantic slots -the ones AA and BA possess in abundance.

There is no significant amount of slot availability at LHR for any price; the market is small and virtually none of the available slots are for TATL routes. The standard for approving ATI is that competitors must be able to mount a competitive defense in the market; that does not exist at LHR.


User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4336 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7715 times:

The oneworld carriers will ultimately prevail in their ATI application -- the objections lay the groundwork for what will ultimately become some route-specific carveouts.

And I'd suggest that posters would find it helpful to search Wikipedia to learn more about antitrust law generally. I think many here are operating off of some misguided assumptions as to what antitrust regulators consider in connection with proposed arrangements such as multilateral airline alliances.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineBlackwidow From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7708 times:



Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 5):
This is just BS.

Well Said!! - I Agree...


User currently offlineDavehammer From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 7686 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 14):
they actually don't. The only real slot purchases came from CO and US and only CO was willing to pay the tens of millions of dollars that the market is demanding for prime transatlantic slots -the ones AA and BA possess in abundance.

Then if they don't think it's worth it why not stay at LGW and have the slots that they want?


User currently offlineBAStew From Australia, joined Sep 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7647 times:

BA seems to consdier it part of the 'standard EU process'.

A message to staff today:

START: The European Commission has followed standard procedure and assessed British Airways' planned transatlantic joint business with American Airlines and Iberia.

The agreement requires approval from the Commission as well as the US Department of Transportation, and this week the Commission followed procedure by issuing a 'statement of objections'.

The Commission’s initial assessment comes as US regulators near completion of their own review, with a decision expected by October 31.

A BA spokesman said: "We have received the EU’s statement of objections and look forward to the opportunity to address and overcome the EU’s concerns, especially given the substantial benefits for consumers that would result from our transatlantic joint business. The EU's thorough review of our plans and supporting evidence was anticipated and is similar to its continuing review of the Star and Skyteam alliances, which already have anti trust immunity from the US Department of Transportation.

"We believe the quickest way to robust competition and more travel choices for consumers is to ensure that all three global airline alliances can compete on an equal footing. Our joint business would benefit millions of customers with greater access to discounted fares, more convenient connections and better access to a global network of more than 500 destinations.

"It would also allow oneworld to compete on a level playing field with the Star and Skyteam alliances, which have larger and increasing shares of transatlantic traffic and have been granted antitrust immunity. Today, these alliances carry more traffic out of the UK regions to the US than oneworld does. We merely want the same legal status to enable us to strengthen real competition for the benefit of consumers." END


User currently offlineVC10 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1406 posts, RR: 16
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7639 times:

What I do not understand is that Open Skies was agreed to so as to allow BA to form an alliance , but now that is not enough. BA is not the largest airline in Europe, but by giving up slots it is being asked to become even smaller , whilst two other European airlines are given freedom to enlarge. Is it BA's fault that there are so few slots at Heathrow, no it is BAA for not expanding Heathrow
If all these airlines want to operate from LHR why is LH not rushing to use all those BMI slots it now owns.

littlevc10


User currently offlineBAStew From Australia, joined Sep 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7596 times:

There has been no mention of anyone giving up any slots.

The EU was obliged to issue a statement of objections, mainly down to VS's compaints.

It may delay it a little, but I reckon it will pass sooner than later.


User currently offlineWoof From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7567 times:

I believe it stems from an long standing, underlying hatred of the British by many in power in the rest of Europe. One heck of a sweeping generalisation I know, but it can be seen in many other areas too.

For any football fans out there (or soccer if you think you can pick up the ball in FOOTball  Smile ), I still take great joy in remembering the look on Michel Platini's (the head of football in Europe) face during the 2008 Champions League final. The pinnacle of world club football contested by two British clubs.

A British carrier with an advantage at Britains main airport. We can't have that now can we. All we need is to set aside some UK taxpayers money to create a fund so that non-British companies can come for a free lunch.


User currently offlineAIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2486 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7520 times:



Quoting Woof (Reply 21):

A British carrier with an advantage at Britains main airport. We can't have that now can we. All we need is to set aside some UK taxpayers money to create a fund so that non-British companies can come for a free lunch.

Sad but true... And I have to add that even the British themselves are hating Britishness... Look at how BA, BD, VS, FR and U2 are bashing and hindering each... Look at how Britain is not willing to expand LHR, LGW or STN making it loosing ground to continental hubs. BA, VS and BD will all loose at the end. BD is already a step away from becoming Lufthansa GrossBritanian and VS will at some point fold. BA will be bought by EK or EY! But who cares. Surely not the British!



Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
User currently offlineWoof From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7492 times:



Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 22):
Surely not the British!

Some of us still do, but I feel I'm in the minority.


User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 7497 times:



Quoting Avek00 (Reply 15):
The oneworld carriers will ultimately prevail in their ATI application -- the objections lay the groundwork for what will ultimately become some route-specific carveouts.

And that is what many have said needed to be done all along... but if you carve out NYC, ORD, and DFW from the alliance or limit its ATI in those markets, that is a big chunk of the alliance that is not there.
I agree that is what it will take but AA/BA have apparently not reached the point that they are willing to do that.

Quoting Davehammer (Reply 17):


Then if they don't think it's worth it why not stay at LGW and have the slots that they want?

The don't refers to that they aren't buying slots....they see value in an LHR operation but not at the size that is necessary to effectively compete against AA/BA... unless they can buy enough slots even if they don't want them, there is no basis for ATI. That is not a multilateral airline alliance regulation; that is an approach the US DOJ has consistently taken in ATI cases.

Quoting VC10 (Reply 19):

What I do not understand is that Open Skies was agreed to so as to allow BA to form an alliance

But there were objections all along to the control BA had at LHR and the lack of new slots. It was actually the British who caved in and agreed to Open Skies because it provides more access to the US market for continental Europe carriers. It also gives BA and other British carriers the opportunity to fly from the continent nonstop to the US. ATI at LHR is only part of what Open Skies accomplished.. from BA's perspective it is the biggest, though.

Quoting Woof (Reply 21):

I believe it stems from an long standing, underlying hatred of the British by many in power in the rest of Europe. One heck of a sweeping generalisation I know, but it can be seen in many other areas too.

But if it is that big of an impediment, then why did the UK join the EU?


25 Woof : Now there's a £64,000,000 question, soon to be a EUR64,000,000 question as it's worth more.
26 Fleet Service : They're still miffed about the UK staying with the pound.
27 AAExecPlat : @WorldTraveler. Your blind hatred of all things AA clouds your judgement. The only real competitive advantage that AA/BA have is at LHR. In relation t
28 AIR MALTA : If I were AA/BA, I wouldn't do that... BA has been painfully gathering slots those last years in order to better its LHR hub. Now BA has moved some L
29 Incitatus : That would be fine as long as competitors that take over those slots are obligated to fly them. For example, if BA gives up five pairs of slots at LH
30 WorldTraveler : that's what the request has been for years... if that were to occur, there is no doubt the process would sail through very quickly. There is no blind
31 Cubsrule : Isn't it a concern to the EU competition folks, though, that the other two alliances are already immunized? Certainly, that has been a concern - from
32 EI564 : Given the fact that LH has access to a huge number of slots, its hard to imagine there is a serious lack of competition in LHR. If LH is concerned bu
33 MogandoCI : not just "give up a few slots" the whole issue AA/BA faces is that they control *prime* lucrative slots that are most ideal for TATL business traveler
34 Cubsrule : That's funny. CO DID open EWR-LHR CO DID open CLE-LHR CO DID open IAH-LHR DL DID open CVG-LHR DL DID open ATL-LHR DL DID open JFK-LHR AF DID open LAX
35 Incitatus : If you forgot to mention Virgin, do we assume you do not know well the subject?
36 Jetlanta : Actually, AA is still far bigger than DL in NYC in terms of revenue share. The trends are moving Delta's way (especially once the LGA deal is done),
37 AIR MALTA : Not AA/BA's problem anyway. BA should not be restrictedi any way because LHR is slot restricted. And AF, LH, KL, DL, NW, UA, US can all start their o
38 Woof : No, because it doesn't affect me too much here in my isolated cocoon and I'm not aware of anything else that would lead me to the same conclusion as
39 Theginge : But as has been said here unfortunatly this is partly the fault of inept British Governments over the years not expanding LHR to keep up with demand.
40 A342 : Except FRA, MUC and IIRC STR. The recession has improved the situation, but it is only a question of when slots at these airports will become scarce
41 WorldTraveler : And BA could give up its short haul frequencies to competitors to ensure there is an adequate supply of supplies to ensure longhaul competition, but
42 VC10 : Now if your figures are correct then is it BA fault that the competition fail to compete by operating smaller aircraft on the route. As they have one
43 Cubsrule : If there is "virtually no availability," where did DL find the slots to start all its LHR service?
44 Theginge : I know that it has been pointed out that there is a certain time which is preferable for certain transatlantic routes but there is no such thing as a
45 AirNZ : Is that a fact now? I'd advise you to thoroughly check on that! Please enlighten me how they do that when they haven't even had their A380's delivere
46 Ckfred : The problem is that the EU is looking strictly at traffic hub to hub. They don't take into account that secondary cities in the U.S. and Europe have m
47 CrAAzy : And AA's BOS-CDG service has shrunken to 1 daily seasonal flight on a 757 since Skyteam got ATI.
48 DFWEagle : You fail to take into account Virgin Atlantic, the largest LHR-NYC competitor besides BA/AA.
49 Sbworcs : Are you privvy to the discussions and can vouch that this is definite or is it another of your guesses?
50 Viscount724 : You are overlooking that no Star Alliance carrier operates JFK-LHR, one of the world's largest longhaul markets. Yes, CO operates EWR-LHR but many pa
51 AIR MALTA : And where is OneWorld in the FRA-JFK market?? Where is OneWorld in AMS-JFK market? If STAR is not in LHR-JFK market it is their own fault. UA was the
52 MogandoCI : yea, and how much did CO pay for their slots ? and your UA assessment is not accurate because UA already had LHR access long time ago. prime slots bei
53 Cubsrule : OK, remove UA and add NW to DTW and MSP if you like . . . same difference. Which of Delta's two JFK-LHR flights operates at a "junk time slot?"
54 AIR MALTA : May be it is because DL's service is so bad that nobody wants to fly them... I am fed up with this discussion!!!! pfff
55 BAStew : A perfect example of the ludicracy of the belief that LHR's runways are paved with gold. If there are SO many high yield passengers at LHR and the ai
56 RIX : - that's why BA should just give them up? In its home airport? Load of BS it is. Hope this "EU concern" is just a routine part of process, if not "ju
57 PRAirbus : Unfair! AA/BA/IB deserve the same treatment as LH/UAL, DL/KL/AF...
58 Dano1977 : Can i ask a question? What gives the EU the right to object to this 3 way ATI deal? As far as i'm concerned, the only authority to object to this deal
59 Ikramerica : Just to be clear, EWR is not a market. NYC is the market. There is no requirement to have redundancy at JFK and EWR for competition to exist. Of cour
60 WorldTraveler : interesting that DL is the dominant TATL airline at STR. its alliance partners.. .and there is no assumption that they have to give up their intra-Eu
61 Viscount724 : Yes, AI is now operating some YYZ-India flights via LHR. They previously operated by BHX. I assume they're using LHR slots for the YYZ flights that w
62 AirNz : A fair enough point as far as it goes in theory, yes. However, how does your explanation 'explain' why airlines are queuing up hand over fist to acce
63 VV701 : Star Alliance has a very significant presence at LHR. All of its slots are available for use on any route the Alliance decides are in its members' be
64 Warren84 : The British and Spanish governments gave them the right when they joined the then EC in 1972 and 1986 respectively - European law is supreme to the n
65 WorldTraveler : Well actually they aren't queuing up. All carriers that wanted access have a token presence... but the assumption that they don't want more access do
66 Cubsrule : But Skyteam, at least, WAS able to respond. Wasn't LHR-LAX a response? So what should AA/BA do? Give Star MORE slots that, according to you, they don
67 NYCAdvantage : I guess that by giving some slot, they mean put some of them for sale, I wonder, How many and How much and which alliance will have to buy it or airl
68 WorldTraveler : The expectation that some people have here that Skyteam and Star carriers should collectively pool their slots so they can compete w/ AA/BA is flat o
69 David_itl : and the fact that BA has mananged to attract slots from airlines over the years by paying for them seems to have gone above your head? Every slot wil
70 WorldTraveler : The standard is what is available NOW and for prices that are suitable for TATL operations. BA has been able to negotiate some rather significant dea
71 David_itl : Why should it be down specifically to them? Back in 1990/1991, there was a whole host of airlines that up sticks and moved from LGW to LHR. If airlin
72 AirNz : Sorry, but you are talking absolute nonsense. Why should it be up to BA/AA/IB to provide any such mechanism? There is no MUST about it. If airlines w
73 Par13del : Well they could just as easily smiled by saying the best of the worlds non-British players playing for two British clubs Would this not be the best w
74 Cubsrule : ...and CO and US both bought slots at prices suitable for TATL operations; heck, UA might be selling - they are blowing a frequency on BRU this winte
75 AIR MALTA : So if BA and IB should relase slots for competitors to enter the Spain-LHR market and then BA/MA should relase slots in order to let LH serve BUD-LHR
76 NYCAdvantage : I do not think this BA nor AA fault, it was more of a British Government business model back then which obligated them to buy slots just to survive, S
77 VV701 : Then if we are to have a level playing field there MUST be no requirement for onworld to have to give up their intra-European slots in order to fly T
78 Avek00 : That's not true. LHR slots are not managed or controlled on an alliance-wide basis.
79 Incitatus : Interesting - Are you also going to come out against the US-DL deal because it creates a situation where other airlines cannot "challenge" DL at La G
80 LJ : That is correct. The EU doesn´t take into account the fact that one could buy slots or making an intra-European slot a TATL slot. You may not like i
81 AirNZ : No, I was not objecting at all to anything the EU decides. What I was pointing out to WT is his repeated insistance that AA/BA/IB MUST provide the me
82 PRAirbus : I'd say, close LHR again and take away CO/DL, etc slots and authorities, restrict LHR and you'll see how AA/BA/IB will get approved. CDG is dominated
83 PRAirbus : Wonder what will AA do if this ATI doesn't get approved. I think AA "rested on its laurels" too long hoping for this to take shape and they will be le
84 Cubsrule : But the trouble, as I said before, is that what EU competition regulators are doing is, in effect, protecting Star and Skyteam from Oneworld. That's
85 Post contains links VV701 : If this wrong assertion was correct then there are no DL flights into LHR! Go to the site of the slot coordinator at LHR, Airport Coordination Ltd (A
86 Byrdluvs747 : I believe plan B for AA/BA should be to just totally dominate any US-LHR-Europe routes. Then continue that strategy on US-Spain-Europe routes. Hopeful
87 WorldTraveler : Yes, it is the British government's fault for not providing the infrastructure necessary to adapt to the current aviation marketplace. But AA and BA
88 Davehammer : I don't get the idea of funneling traffic through other European hubs as an alternative to LHR. Yes there's more space there but an awful lot of thos
89 Burkhard : In the end, OneWorld will have to give one or two LHR slots if a competitor wants them within a year, that's it.
90 Incitatus : Who establishes the acceptable threshold..... is that you? The reason why DL cannot break into LHR is not slots. You are just looking for an excuse t
91 Cubsrule : Huh? So if they are not cooperating with US, they are STEALING the slots from US? What are these "well-established" guidelines? Certainly, there is n
92 PRAirbus : LHR's restrictions, bureaucracy and infrastructure constraints only hurts London in the long run. If the airlines cannot grow and expand; especially T
93 WorldTraveler : because if connections is all that is sought, then it makes sense to use the LHR slots most efficiently which is for local traffic. It's basic econom
94 Cubsrule : I don't understand. AF challenged BA on LHR-LAX (presumably the TATL route on which they thought they had the best shot). They failed. How does that
95 Incitatus : Access to full airports will always be an issue. That does not prevent competition. At LHR BA/AA compete strongly with Virgin and United. The reason
96 Sbworcs : I thought that the EU were looking into ALL airline alliances not just the Oneworld one?
97 AirNz : Sorry, but can you explain your logic regarding that to me carefully? You state that, as a fact no other carrier will "be able to compete against DL
98 VV701 : And this was but one of the many new TATL routes from LHR started in the last couple of years. The others have included: AC's flight to YEG CO'S flig
99 Mikey72 : This really is a no brainer. Take Skyteam - the worlds largest airline in DL and the largest airline in Europe in AF/KL operating transatlantic flight
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...
AA/BA/IB Agreement? posted Tue Nov 25 2008 19:35:33 by Willyj
Russia Threatens To Ban BA, IB, 4U... posted Tue Mar 27 2007 11:55:52 by ZakHH
EU Commission Launches Investigation BA/AA/IB Link posted Fri Aug 29 2008 01:01:18 by OA260
How Will ATI Impact AA/BA Trans-Atlantic Balance? posted Tue Jul 21 2009 08:30:58 by Ssides
BA Expects ATI To Be Approved By This Summer posted Thu Feb 12 2009 16:00:50 by LAXdude1023
Branson To Spend Millions To Block AA/BA Deal posted Fri Sep 12 2008 03:08:16 by UAL777UK
BA, IB & AA Seal Alliance? posted Thu Aug 14 2008 05:34:20 by Scbriml
BA To Bid For IB posted Sun Nov 4 2007 02:46:10 by FLVILLA
AA Applies For ATI With IB, MA, RJ, AY posted Tue Jul 24 2007 16:06:55 by BigGSFO
US Airways Objects To BA LHR-U.S. Request posted Thu May 24 2007 22:24:50 by Vega