Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA/US To Make Concession To US DOJ  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26022 posts, RR: 50
Posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 21169 times:

Reportedly, AA and US Airways are about to hold meetings with the US DOJ where they will offer antitrust concessions.

It believed the concessions will focus on concerns over the combined positions of the carriers at Washington Reagan National.

Meetings with DOJ comes on heels of the airlines offering to vacate pair of LHR slots to allow competitors to launch PHL service.

One person familiar of the meetings dubbed the talks as "the end game", that could shape the details of the world's largest airline merger.


AMR, US Airways Offer Antitrust Concessions
http://goo.gl/NkQSvY

=


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
110 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejustplanenutz From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 546 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 20899 times:

Swap 10-12 slots at DCA for a like number at JFK with B6 and call it day!

User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5296 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 20056 times:

Here's my question about the LHR slots. Who wants to start service on PHL-LHR? I know that Delta was ramping up service in MIA, but I think they wound up codeshare with Virgin Atlantic.

But, considering how close JFK is, why would Delta have any interest.

This makes even less sense for UA, with EWR and and IAD also quite close.

Besides its hub at PHL, the route made sense for US, since a number of European members of Star serve LHR. Virgin Atlantic doesn't belong to a hub. So would this route really make sense for them?


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7488 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 20031 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 3):
So would this route really make sense for them?

I suspect its not about the route but appearing to give something up, better to give up something that you can easily kill the competiton versus something of true value.
Now if the politicians and the airports would allow the slots to be used for any airport pair with the same time slot...............


User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2821 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 19976 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting ckfred (Reply 3):
Here's my question about the LHR slots. Who wants to start service on PHL-LHR? I know that Delta was ramping up service in MIA, but I think they wound up codeshare with Virgin Atlantic.

I could see someone grabbing the route. I agree that UA is probably out, but I could see DL taking them. Is it a pair as in two roundtrips or just one? Perhaps a VS/DL pair of flights if there really are two.
Pat



All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 876 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 19954 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 3):
Besides its hub at PHL, the route made sense for US, since a number of European members of Star serve LHR.

Given that the Star traffic is likely to dry up maybe it makes less sense for US/AA to continue their A333 to LHR which may be why they are seemingly willing to surrender the slot to a rival to keep the EU happy.

Any residual US traffic that doesn't need an onward connection with Star could potentially be absorbed if the BA68 were to be upguaged from a 3 class 767 to a high density 3 class 772 - it does after all leave PHL only 45 minutes after the current US flight, so no great inconvenience to the traveller.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8456 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 19765 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 5):
Given that the Star traffic is likely to dry up maybe it makes less sense for US/AA to continue their A333 to LHR which may be why they are seemingly willing to surrender the slot to a rival to keep the EU happy

US/AA will continue to fly to LHR from PHL, its the major USair hub, the slot used may not be the current one US uses. Any one thinking that the new AA will Not fly fro PHL to LHR should re-evaluate that thought. Now its very possible the new AA will give up a slot or two at LHR to smooth over the UA and DL concerns. The old AA and BA have an ocean of LHR slots, one wil be found for AA to fly to LHR from PHL along with existing BA service. This will not be an only BA flown route, if that were to happen then AA could tell BA to stop flying to DFW and give that route to AA.


User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3811 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 19648 times:

I have a hunch that any slots divested at DCA will go to WN, which has been screaming that they need more DCA slots as of late. There is precedent: look at the UA/CO merger... the party that got all the divested EWR slots was WN.

PHL-LHR seems like a logical fit for either DL or VS (maybe even a mix).

I also expect US to divest their leases for three T2 gates at ORD to NK in exchange for AA getting NK's two gates on T3 Concourse L (isn't at least one widebody-capable?) so more oneworld partners, BA in particular, can move departures to T3. NK is gate-constrained at ORD and could combine the three US gates with the City's unused Gate E8 for four gates total. As for domestic AA flights at ORD: AA's gates at T3 have enough slack to pick up all US flights and handle a major expansion at the same time.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11837 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 19529 times:

No shocking news here - precisely as expected. It was obvious AA/US were going to have to give something up - no matter how much Parker and Horton didn't think they should have to. I (and others) thought their arguments were reasonable - but of course it seems obvious they'll ultimately have to divest at least some slots.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 2):
Here's my question about the LHR slots. Who wants to start service on PHL-LHR? I know that Delta was ramping up service in MIA, but I think they wound up codeshare with Virgin Atlantic.

But, considering how close JFK is, why would Delta have any interest.

Delta/Virgin seems to me to be the only plausible alternative, but even there, I, too, question how well they might do in the market. I certainly don't think they could support more than a 763. But honestly, even that seems somewhat like a stretch to me given how much stronger AA/BA will be at both ends of the route.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 7):
I have a hunch that any slots divested at DCA will go to WN, which has been screaming that they need more DCA slots as of late. There is precedent: look at the UA/CO merger... the party that got all the divested EWR slots was WN.

True. It is likely Southwest will be a big recipient - although I find that ironic considering that Southwest itself is now such a massive airline and hardly in need of much competitive help. Plus, it's also somewhat notable that DCA is likely to lose nonstop service in some small-/medium-sized and/or limited-entry markets in order to gain more 737s to Florida.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 7):
I also expect US to divest their leases for three T2 gates at ORD to NK in exchange for AA getting NK's two gates on T3 Concourse L (isn't at least one widebody-capable?) so more oneworld partners, BA in particular, can move departures to T3. NK is gate-constrained at ORD and could combine the three US gates with the City's unused Gate E8 for four gates total. As for domestic AA flights at ORD: AA's gates at T3 have enough slack to pick up all US flights and handle a major expansion at the same time.

  

It would be great for AA and its JV partners to be able to consolidate international departures in T3.


User currently offlinejustplanenutz From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 546 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 19454 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):

So, if given the choice, who would AA rather divest DCA slots to-WN or B6? Gotta be B6 because WN would wind up flying DCA-DAL on a bunch of them as soon as Wright goes away.


User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3598 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 19378 times:

B6 won't swap anything.

They'll get slots in DCA without doing anything but showing up to the table.

Its a different game now


User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2151 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 19280 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 3):
I suspect its not about the route but appearing to give something up, better to give up something that you can easily kill the competiton versus something of true value.

Like the CO/UA merger, it looks like US/AA is proposing a solution up front instead of waiting to see what the government forces on them. If their proposal is reasonable, and addresses specific competition issues, it will be hard to justify more significant divestitures.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 7):

I have a hunch that any slots divested at DCA will go to WN, which has been screaming that they need more DCA slots as of late.

I think US would try to guide the slots where they want them, much like UA did with the EWR divestitures, but I do not think they want WN to have them. If they go to bid, it will be interesting to see if WN is finally willing to pay for the slots.

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 1):
Swap 10-12 slots at DCA for a like number at JFK with B6 and call it day!

That is a very interesting suggestion.


User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1101 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 18866 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 10):
B6 won't swap anything.

They'll get slots in DCA without doing anything but showing up to the table.

Its a different game now

If JetBlue wants all the slots for itself, it will work out a swap or long term lease with AA before there is even the possibility of an auction.

If JetBlue can content itself with a few slots, it will just show up at the table.

Whatever the case, it will have to pay for the slots.


User currently offlineJoePatroni707 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 493 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 18843 times:

I am some what surprised that JFK (NYC) was not mentioned. Although US did give up some slots earlier at LGA, the combined AA/US will be a big force at JFK/LGA...

User currently offlineusflyer msp From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2161 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 18719 times:

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Reply 13):
I am some what surprised that JFK (NYC) was not mentioned. Although US did give up some slots earlier at LGA, the combined AA/US will be a big force at JFK/LGA...

...yet still significantly smaller than DL, which is why NYC slots are not an issue in this merger...


User currently offlineMah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33194 posts, RR: 71
Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 18724 times:

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Reply 13):
I am some what surprised that JFK (NYC) was not mentioned. Although US did give up some slots earlier at LGA, the combined AA/US will be a big force at JFK/LGA...

Since the combined carrier will only be 2nd at LGA and 3rd at JFK (in other words, nothing changes from AA's current position), there is no conditions under which slots can be taken away from it whatsoever. It keeps every slot.



a.
User currently offline727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6559 posts, RR: 20
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 18685 times:

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 9):
So, if given the choice, who would AA rather divest DCA slots to-WN or B6? Gotta be B6 because WN would wind up flying DCA-DAL on a bunch of them as soon as Wright goes away.

If that is the case, AA should work out a deal and just sell the slots to B6



Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3428 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 18001 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 7):
I have a hunch that any slots divested at DCA will go to WN
Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
True. It is likely Southwest will be a big recipient - although I find that ironic considering that Southwest itself is now such a massive airline and hardly in need of much competitive help.

I was watching Doug Parker talking to a government committee on C-SPAN in the middle of the night, a few weeks back. It does not sound like US/AA is going to loose much. He told them flat out, US/AA will drop smaller city service first if they are forced to divest DCA slots, which was hard news to hear for a representative from VT, whose one and only non-stop home is on US, and she is a committee representative.

If forced to divest, the slots will not be just directed to one carrier, it sure sounded like there would be a quasi-lottery system to dole them out. According to the committee, if they are not forced to divest, the combined US/AA will have 70% of the total slots at DCA when they merge. That is a big monopoly on one of the most in demand airports in the country.

The committee is aware US considers it a connecting hub, they did not seem terribly alarmed about the situation. They had aviation experts, and numerous others to give their opinion, some who had spoken when UA and CO merged.

But whatever it takes to get this merger approved, is what it seems US/AA are willing to do. There were big differences in the number of city pairings that would be effected by the merger. US says 17 city pairs (only non-stop markets) the committee has 100s of them, but most were connecting markets.



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlineTWA902fly From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 3129 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 16884 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
I certainly don't think they could support more than a 763. But honestly, even that seems somewhat like a stretch to me given how much stronger AA/BA will be at both ends of the route.

DL does have transatlantic configured 757s... maybe that'd do fine on PHL-LHR?

'902



life wasn't worth the balance, or the crumpled paper it was written on
User currently offlinealfa164 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 556 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 16574 times:

I suspect DL would be very interested in the slots, but not necessarily to fly PHL-LHR. If AA/US divests itself of the LHR slots (I don't believe PHL is slot-controlled, so that side is irrelevant), it could use them to open SLC-LHR - or some other surprise departure city.

User currently offlineMIflyer12 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 1185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 16564 times:

Quoting TWA902fly (Reply 18):

DL does have transatlantic configured 757s... maybe that'd do fine on PHL-LHR?

DL does have some TATL config 757s but they also have high J and low J configs of 767-300ER that would allow them to respond to J:Y mix. DL/VS may not regard PHL as a must-have market irrespective of slots coming available opportunistically.


User currently offlineusflyer msp From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2161 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 16449 times:

Quoting MIflyer12 (Reply 20):
DL/VS may not regard PHL as a must-have market irrespective of slots coming available opportunistically.

I concur. DL is only able to make PHL-CDG work with a summer-only 75L flight, despite the connecting potential with AF. I highly doubt they would be able to make PHL-LHR work. VS' relatively small LHR footprint means most traffic would have be local PHL and LHR traffic; a market segment DL is not well positioned to be competitive in...


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11837 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 15510 times:

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 17):
It does not sound like US/AA is going to loose much.

I agree. I just don't see the justification for regulators to confiscate a large pool of slots from AA solely on the basis of a high market share overall. That was obviously meaningless in the case of UA/CO at EWR. On a market level, AA/US only overlap in two markets out of DCA. I expect the two carriers will not have to give up more than 20 slot pairs - I actually expect even less.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 17):
If forced to divest, the slots will not be just directed to one carrier, it sure sounded like there would be a quasi-lottery system to dole them out.

We'll see. Divested slots at LGA were forced into a blind auction system in blocks of slot pairs, but divested slots at EWR were directed to a specific recipient.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 17):
The committee is aware US considers it a connecting hub, they did not seem terribly alarmed about the situation.

Politicians are politicians. In addition to generally being idiots, they have their own agendas which are different than regulators'. Politicians quickly grasp the potential for negative fallout if small markets they represent do, in fact, lose air service to DCA as a result of AA being forced to give up slots there. Nonetheless, it is not really politicians' call. A very large group of them wrote a letter to regulators urging them to go easy on AA/US. We'll see if it was effective. But it is still the executive branch that makes the ruling.

Quoting TWA902fly (Reply 18):
DL does have transatlantic configured 757s... maybe that'd do fine on PHL-LHR?

I think Delta wanted to keep all LHR flying on at least 767s.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 19):
I suspect DL would be very interested in the slots, but not necessarily to fly PHL-LHR.

Well then, if recent history is an guide, these concessions would probably be far less useful to them. The PHL-LHR concessions AA/US have agreed to with the EU are likely just like those AA/BA made a few years back - they appear to be route-specific. What Delta might be able to get away with down the road is being able to use one of these confiscated AA/US PHL-LHR slot pairs to fly PHL-JFK-LHR. Not sure - it will all depend on how the language is written.


User currently offlineAAplat4life From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 198 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 15288 times:

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 19):
I suspect DL would be very interested in the slots, but not necessarily to fly PHL-LHR. If AA/US divests itself of the LHR slots (I don't believe PHL is slot-controlled, so that side is irrelevant), it could use them to open SLC-LHR - or some other surprise departure city.

Somewhere I read that the will be a four year commitment for the new carrier to operate PHL-LHR. After four years, it could fly to LHR from another U.S. city.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 7):
I also expect US to divest their leases for three T2 gates at ORD to NK in exchange for AA getting NK's two gates on T3 Concourse L (isn't at least one widebody-capable?) so more oneworld partners, BA in particular, can move departures to T3. NK is gate-constrained at ORD and could combine the three US gates with the City's unused Gate E8 for four gates total. As for domestic AA flights at ORD: AA's gates at T3 have enough slack to pick up all US flights and handle a major expansion at the same time.

Since the US air gates in T2 are leased from UA, we'll have to see what influence the latter will use. AA is very tight at T3 and its unwillingness to pounce on its lease options at the L concourse when Delta moved out was shortsighted. Still I do think that it could easily handle the US routes into ORD, which are PHL, PHX and CLT (not surprisingly US has stood back from the Chicago-DCA market). I see the new AA management eliminating RJs on these routes (PHL and CLT on AA) and MD80s (PHL and PHX, where AA has apparently dropped the 738 in favor of the gas guzzler MD80) and turning them into near hourly service of about 10 flights a day each.


User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3811 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 15039 times:

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 23):
AA is very tight at T3 and its unwillingness to pounce on its lease options at the L concourse when Delta moved out was shortsighted.

AA did want to exercise their Concourse L lease options to improve their international operations, but the Chicago Department of Aviation wouldn't let AA get the gates. The CDA wanted the gates to go to new (VX) or limited-access (B6, NK) carriers, which is what happened in the end (though AA got one of the six gates as a consolation prize).

Blame the CDA, not AA.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
25 panamair : True due to the J flat-bed seating requirement for LHR, but the 75Es will get flat beds starting in 2014....
26 apodino : Somebody aptly pointed out in an article that AA had PHL-LHR authority years ago after buying TWA's LHR authorities...but they never flew it. Granted
27 aacun : Says who that AA didnt fly the route? i worked it a couple of times as a six day trip from Miami thru London back to Phillie and reverse.it was on a
28 Indy : Come on DOJ... say no. This goes beyond an airport or two. Allowing this merger further increases what is becoming a very uncompetitive environment na
29 HPRamper : So make US and AA pay the price for what DL and UA did? I don't think that's quite fair. If you have a problem with the merger environment, make UA a
30 Indy : Oh I would love to make them undo those mergers. But because mistakes were made in the past by allowing those mergers doesn't mean the DOJ is obligat
31 Post contains images Deltal1011man : Thats the only way. Adding a dot to the LHR hub. agreed. meh and they should be giving up any damn LHR or DCA or any other slots. (and should have mo
32 Mah4546 : AA flew PHLLHR with its own metal in the 1990s. No EWR slots were divested. UA sold its slots before DOJ got involved, AA needs to trade DCA slots fo
33 OC2DC : I'm confused about the LHR slots that they might have to give up. If I counted correctly, I believe UA has more flights to LHR than AA. 18 for UA comp
34 MIflyer12 : That shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the competitive analysis criteria for industry mergers set out by the FTC and used by the DOJ. In fact,
35 LAXintl : The EU concern has to do with power of the AA-BA JV, and the loss of competition to PHL. AA/BA will become the sole carriers on the route once US is
36 silentbob : Actually, no EWR slots were completely divested. UA leased them to WN. I do agree that they need to present it as a done deal before the government m
37 OC2DC : DL is the sole carrier on LHR-MSP/DTW and yet they are able to continue with VS without being scrutinized...
38 nutsaboutplanes : It most certainly is. By allowing 6 airlines to merge in the past, the DOJ/DOT allowed the market to change. By not allowing AA and US to merge, they
39 Post contains images RyanairGuru : I agree in principle, and personally think that the divesture is really harsh, but I guess the difference is that VS don't fly to MSP and DTW. Theref
40 jumpjets : As I understand it AA handed over its BOS-LHR rotation to BA, so I guess where economic sense dictates this could happen on other routes - I don't kn
41 jfk777 : LHR to DFW is 1 BA 744 and 3 AA 777/767 daily, its AA's main hub. Its doubtful US depends much on Star for PHL to LHR since US has flown to PHL to LG
42 Post contains images commavia : Exactly. AA handed BOS-LHR to BA for the same reason BA handed MAN-JFK to AA. It was a non-core, non-hub market for one carrier and could be served m
43 jfklganyc : UA handed over every single EWR slot. Not a minor concession at COs most important hub. A slot controlled airport where one carrier owned 60% of the
44 usflyer msp : Not quite the same. UA/CO had 100% overlap on their routes from EWR while US/AA only compete on two routes at DCA. They will probably only have to di
45 commavia : Okay, but the comparison that since UA gave up every one of their EWR slots so AA should/will be forced to do the same at DCA misses a critical point
46 FlyPNS1 : That's not regulators decision to make. Regulators are supposed to ensure that there is fair competition and access to public facilities. And honestl
47 Post contains images msp747 : NK had slots at DCA, but abandoned them and moved its operation up to BWI. They won't have any interest in acquiring those slots We could argue all d
48 Post contains links LAXintl : In fairness they made some money from the asset. Southwest bought 4 slots. Southwest Buys Spirit DCA Slots (by LAXintl Jul 3 2012 in Civil Aviation)
49 SESGDL : I keep seeing this same argument. This would then apply to every merger down the road as well. What happens if AA/DL or UA/AA or UA/DL try to merge?
50 jfklganyc : You cant compare the actual number of slots...you need to compare percentages. CO used to have around 60% of slots at EWR, and I would bet the combin
51 ckfred : I might be wrong, but I was under the assumption, when AA bought all of TWA's authority to London (except for ORD, which it had previously purchased)
52 silentbob : I will guarantee that the the threats to block the US-UA merger will be used in favor of the US-AA merger. "Last time we wanted to merge, you defined
53 jfk777 : TWA did sell USair BWI and PHL routes to LGW because AA couldn't buy them from TWA back in 1991. TWA sold AA Boston, LAX and JFK plus a separate deal
54 D L X : Can someone help me out here with the status quo? Other than US and BA, who flies PHL-LHR?
55 Indy : Sure they can argue it. And they would win because a judge can easily see there has to be an end to this at some point. A judge realizes that if he/s
56 STT757 : AA got their MIA-London route authority from CO in 1990 (not PA), CO took over MIA-LGW from Eastern in 1986 and operated the route until 1990 when th
57 OA412 : They're the only two.
58 usairways85 : Post merger, I'd like to see PHL-LHR at US: 333, 763 BA: 772, 773 ...for a total of 4 flts/day
59 Deltal1011man : because nothing changed. also, DL/VS are a good bit smaller than BA/AA at LHR. Its the same idea in NYC and why AA shouldn't have to give up any NYC
60 D L X : So why would USand AA give up its authority to fly LHR-PHL 1x daily, and cede all the LHR traffic to partner BA? I would think that BA would give up
61 jumpjets : I imagine that as BA is not a party to the AA-US merger the regulators have no jurisdiction to force BA to give up one of its LHR-PHL rotations. At a
62 jfk777 : All that is true but where did Eastern, Continental, or Delta fly to LHR from Miami at the time. AA was lucky because Delta couldn't fly Miami to LHR
63 Byrdluvs747 : I don't understand why people here expect our nations capital to be treated the same as DAL, MCO, and FLL. I don't see the value of eliminating region
64 RyanairGuru : Good question, as I said up-thread, I think it is a poorly thought through decision I'm certainly no expert, but I'm inclined to agree: this would be
65 airliner371 : If you actually look at the way WN operates from major business cities like DCA you will realize they aren't flying "Disney runs," in fact they are e
66 IADCA : That's pretty much it, with the exception that the addition of US to the AA/BA JV antitrust immunity setup also has to be approved, at least implicit
67 cjpmaestro : Quoting D L X (Reply 60): So why would USand AA give up its authority to fly LHR-PHL 1x daily, and cede all the LHR traffic to partner BA? I would thi
68 STT757 : They bought the rights to fly to London from Miami first from CO, at the time AA didn't have LHR rights so they had to fly to LGW. When they purchase
69 Post contains links VV701 : The AA/BA JV is "metal neutral" with shared revenue and costs. So if any changes in metal occur it will only be because the one operator has a lower
70 Post contains images Flighty : The only problem on PHL-LHR is that there were 2 competitors before (US and BA) and now it will be a monopoly (AA and BA, which are one company). Jus
71 a380787 : Because you want to fly to places where want to go, not where politicians want to go. No point supporting EMB-120 service to middle-of-nowhere-ville
72 jfklganyc : You make an excellent point. However, slot controlled airports are all about politics. Long story short, you can not have one airline with more than
73 ckfred : I read in either the WSJ or the Chicago Tribune that the average fare paid in the U.S. during Q1 of 2013has increased by $1, relative to Q1 of 2012.
74 D L X : So, would you say that LGA should only have flights to DCA, LAX, SFO, IAH, ATL, MIA, and ORD? Because surely those would be the most lucrative routes
75 Post contains images Flighty : Is a 50-seater full of Americans more important than a 150 seater full of Americans? The answer is no.
76 Indy : Let me ask you this. If US and AA are allowed to merge then what happens if some day down the road DL and UA decide they need to merge to be competit
77 JoePatroni707 : Dont think that will happen, this is likely the last of the "big" mergers. DL and UA are well aware that their merger would never stand a chance IF t
78 D L X : That's a poor value judgment. It is not true that passengers wanting to go to New York or Orlando are inherently more important than passengers wanti
79 Post contains images HPRamper : Then DL and UA will be doing something terribly wrong, since with AA and US merging the big three will be roughly on par with one another size-wise.
80 Flytravel : I think B6 could be effective in connecting markets in the NE where it already services like SYR, BUF, ROC, PWM to DCA and then it'd have additional
81 apodino : Post Merger, we will have three Global Airlines that are US based, AA, UA, and DL. There will be slightly less competition company wise after the merg
82 msp747 : But obviously AA/US wouldn't see it that way, since those smaller cities would be the cities that lose service. Remember, it would not be the Feds wh
83 ckfred : This is probably the last merger, because UA/DL would be twice the size of AA, and there would be no other large airline to merge with AA.
84 D L X : Well, of course! If you only have the option of serving one, you serve the bigger one. But if you have the option of serving two, you don't serve the
85 Post contains images FlyPNS1 : But we know that's not true. Instead of applying for new slots for OKC, US could have easily just taken one of their frequencies from DCA-PHL (or DCA
86 D L X : Bull. We know that it IS true because US flies to 45 smaller markets from DCA. Don't cherry pick OKC.
87 Deltal1011man : no line. Its a free market or it isn't. If DL/UA/AA want to merge and bring B6/AS and HA to the table too.....good for them, great for the stock pric
88 usairways85 : DCA-PHL is an interesting one. With dozens of busses and trains between DC and Philly there can't be that much O&D on DCA-PHL. None of us have th
89 ckfred : But, here's the $64,000 question. If DOJ decides to nix the merger, as it did with AT&T buying T-Mobile, then what happens to the merger? If I rem
90 MIflyer12 : The DOJ doesn't nix a merger. It indicates it's ready to go to court to prevent a merger - and here's the important part - as presented. That leaves
91 HPRamper : I don't exactly recall the reason AT&T/T-Mobile was disallowed. I thought they would still be smaller than Verizon after the merger. I think US w
92 ORDBOSEWR : Which the DOJ has and lost in the past. So it is not ideal to have the DOJ challenge a merger, but if the companies want to fight they can. It does t
93 IADCA : A lot of whether they fight or not is dictated by the antitrust-risk provisions and breakup fee in the deal itself. Generally, if you see companies d
94 Indy : Fortunately for all of us that really isn't the case. An absolutely free market would be a complete disaster. No regulations. No consumer protections
95 RWA380 : They won't end up denying US/AA merger, because any divestiture or route reduction that any government entity wants, AA/US is ready to provide. After
96 superjeff : This is political. We're talking DCA here, not DTW, CVG, MSP, etc. Personally, I think deregulation was a bad mistake in 1978, but we're stuck with i
97 justplanenutz : I think his point is that PMAA will have other/better options to connect DCA pax than US currently does, so RJ flights to PHL will not be needed. To
98 ckfred : I know that DOJ can't nix a merger, but going ahead and closing a merger while dealing with an anti-trust suit is an expensive, time consuming, and r
99 Flighty : False, there would be one left. 1 bank, 1 airline. 1 telephone company. You've heard of Carlos Slim? Mexican billionaire who has a telecom monopoly.
100 Post contains links LAXintl : No surprise. EU says OK to AA-US merger with condition LHR-PHL slots are made available to competitors along with requirement for AA/BA JV to offer "f
101 Mercure1 : I wonder what EU means by requirement that AA enter into "special feed traffic agreements" with any new entrant airline on Heathrow - PHL route.
102 commavia : Likely similar to the conditions placed on AA/BA - they have to give competitors in those markets favorable interline access and I believe access to
103 MIflyer12 : You still don't get it. The DOJ isn't constrained by prior mergers, as you assert, but by the decade-old DOJ/FTC horizontal merger guidelines. It act
104 OC2DC : So the new AA won't be flying PHL-LHR at all? That seems pretty strange considering AA connects LHR to all of its current hubs...
105 commavia : No. AA-BA will still be offering a robust PHL-LHR schedule. In fact, I suspect the joint AA-BA PHL-LHR schedule will increase, not decrease, post-mer
106 Flighty : Sure, I can see that reading of it. Really can. Our only dispute is over how the remedy would be built up. I maintain it would fall on all parties. Y
107 Post contains links LAXintl : And sounds like proposed concession To US DOJ were not enough. AMR-US Airways Deal Blocked by U.S. in Antitrust Suit http://www.bloomberg.com/news/201
108 Post contains links LAXintl : Here is formal DOJ notice; http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/August/13-at-909.html =
109 D L X : There is an ongoing thread on this topic.
110 nycdave : I was thinking perhaps MT or BY might want to take a shot at expanding beyond the beach/disney getaway market to the US, and try something NYC-DC "ur
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...
Will AA/US Move Their TLV Flights From PHL To JFK. posted Mon May 20 2013 21:44:39 by staralliance85
AA US Merger. Impact To CDN Airports posted Sun May 19 2013 22:07:31 by NOWINYOW
If AA/US Merge What Happens To UA Codeshare posted Mon Apr 1 2013 01:32:59 by B377
AA/US To Hold Official Talks Next Tues (10/30) posted Thu Oct 25 2012 14:13:02 by nwcoflyer
Will AA/US Fly To HKG Anytime Soon? posted Wed Jun 27 2012 00:59:03 by United Airline
US Air Has To Make "dramatic Changes" - Parker posted Wed Apr 16 2008 15:01:02 by LAXintl
PHL- Best US Airport To Make A "Connection"! posted Wed Dec 5 2007 05:12:10 by OzarkD9S
US Presidential Plane To Make Historic Russia Flyo posted Thu Feb 21 2002 17:27:09 by Swake
AA CEO To Make Merger Decision Soon posted Thu Jan 3 2013 19:44:14 by allegiantflyer
Delta To Carry More US Mail posted Thu Jul 26 2012 11:58:51 by KarlB737