Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Airways / American Settle Anti-Trust Suit (Part 2)  
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 11693 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Dear members,

Please feel free to continue your posting in part 2, which was started after part 1 was archived due to its length. Part 1 can be found here:

US Airways / American Settle Anti-Trust Suit (Part 1) (by stlgph Nov 12 2013 in Civil Aviation)


Please stay within the forum rules-and regulations. Enjoy the forums!


Regards,

SA7700


When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
72 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 778 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 11580 times:

It would be interesting to know what the new AA's market share will be in cities across the system (i.e. CVG, SDF, RIC etc..) Is that info available yet?

User currently offlinePanAmPaul From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 11533 times:

Going back to a question in Part 1 of this thread, I have to puzzle about the fact that Justice says it got everything it wanted.

This is underscored by what Justice announced, such as

Quote:
William Baer, assistant attorney general for the antitrust division, told reporters on Tuesday that the settlement as a “game changer” and “opens up the marketplace as never before,” adding that it would “disrupt today’s cozy arrangements” among the nation’s largest airlines. It will also give consumers “more competitive” fares and greater choice when planning air travel. The divestitures, he noted, are the largest ever in an airline merger.

In the same article, Doug Parker is quoted as saying that the stipulations are "pretty modest." So how can Justice even begin to make this claim - or is it just trying to save face?

From DOJ: American-US Airways Settlement to Lead to Lower Fares and More Choice for Consumers

....


User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2155 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 11432 times:

Quoting PanAmPaul (Reply 2):
In the same article, Doug Parker is quoted as saying that the stipulations are "pretty modest." So how can Justice even begin to make this claim - or is it just trying to save face?

Both sides are trying to save face. It's certainly more than US/AA wanted to give up in DCA, but it also does little to address the HHI issues that the DoJ used as a major tenet of their case. In short, neither side got what they wanted and gave up more than they thought they should.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23229 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 11339 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 3):
It's certainly more than US/AA wanted to give up in DCA, but it also does little to address the HHI issues that the DoJ used as a major tenet of their case.

It doesn't address much of anything. Gate access does nothing for HHI, and maintaining historical service levels actually WORSENS the HHI problem.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinePanAmPaul From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 11177 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 3):
In short, neither side got what they wanted and gave up more than they thought they should.

I am not convinced that Doug Parker at US thinks so. His comments seemed very smug, while the DOJ comments were very business like.


User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7554 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 11129 times:

Quote from the previous thread regarding PHL:

PHL - Given that most of the domestic carriers not US or AA are in D and E, makes me wonder where any gate they give up here would go? What I do expect is that domestic flights that currently operate on AA from A East will be moved to B and C, and then they have access to the AA gates which could be used for international arrivals as well. So they gain int'l capable gates in this.

I mentioned this in one of the earlier lawsuit threads; PHL isn't busting at the seams for gate-space anymore and US is presently using some of their A gates for domestic routes (one can get the gate info. from http://www.phl.org and see for themselves). Since all PHL's AA routes only serve their hubs (DFW, MIA & ORD) and have redundant service w/US; those flights will likely be the first ones eliminated.

Additionally, the Director of the DOA, Mark Gale while he supports the AA/US merger, he is on record wanting more international service out of PHL regardless of which carrier flies them. Should push come to shove and AA/US is indeed hogging some of those A-East/West gates for their domestic routes; Gale may have something to say about that when it comes time for those gate leases to be renewed. One needs to remember that the days of 30-year gate leases are gone; all the remaining gate leases of that term length expired a few years ago.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5297 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 11118 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 3):
Both sides are trying to save face. It's certainly more than US/AA wanted to give up in DCA, but it also does little to address the HHI issues that the DoJ used as a major tenet of their case. In short, neither side got what they wanted and gave up more than they thought they should.

One thing that I learned while practicing law is that if both parties feel like they gave up too much to settle, then the settlement is probably fair. It might even be close to what a verdict would have been at trial.

If AA/US gave up more slots at DCA and LGA than it really felt was reasonable, and if DOJ believes that the settlement still left some competition issues unresolved, then the outcome is probably as good as can be expected, short of one side or the other getting a complete win at trial.

But, I'm still curious as to one thing. I just read this morning's Chicago Tribune, and it claims that AA/US have to give up 2 gates on Concourse L at ORD. To me, that makes no sense, US has gates E7, F8, and F10. At some point, US is going to vacate those gates, as operations merge with AA in Terminal 3.

If I'm not mistaken, on L Virgin America has one gate, Jet Blue has one gate, and Spirit has two gates. So, if Spirit moved to the US gates in Terminal 2, it would have a 3rd gate, while Virgin and Jet Blue could each add a gate on L.


User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 778 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 11114 times:

It would also be interesting to know what the DOJ's original proposal was, and how the negotiations went behind the scenes. We have to assume that the DOJ asked for more than what was finally agreed upon.

User currently offlinenutsaboutplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 510 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10948 times:

Toward the end of the previous thread, there were questions about US Airways being able o broker deals for slots which may include JFK slots from B6. I want to be clear that ALL slots are not eligible but a portion of them are. I do not know the exact numbers but am 100% certain that some may be brokered by current holder (US Airways).


American Airlines, US Airways, Alaska Airlines, Northwest Airlines, America West Airlines, USAFR
User currently offlineLittleFokker From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 351 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10944 times:

I apologize if this was brought up in an earlier merger thread already, but at DFW, I believe US uses 4 gates at E. Can US's traffic be merged successfully into A, B, and C, or will AA need to use E?


"Toughest wind I ever played in....straight down!" - W. C. Fields
User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 778 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10870 times:

Quoting LittleFokker (Reply 10):
I apologize if this was brought up in an earlier merger thread already, but at DFW, I believe US uses 4 gates at E. Can US's traffic be merged successfully into A, B, and C, or will AA need to use E?

DFW will be like many markets where there will be right-sizing of frequency. AA already operates 9 flights to PHX and 6 each to CLT and PHL. There's probably no need for too much additional capacity between DFW and PHX/CLT/PHL.

So DFW should be able to absorb US' flights...same said for ORD, MIA & JFK.


User currently offlineadam42185 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 416 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10766 times:

I wonder what the reasoning behind requiring US/AA to give up 2 gates at BOS was, considering the #1 carrier out of BOS is B6 anyways...? To allow more room for UA at Terminal B perhaps?

User currently offlineuser444555 From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 356 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10668 times:

Quoting LittleFokker (Reply 10):

I apologize if this was brought up in an earlier merger thread already, but at DFW, I believe US uses 4 gates at E. Can US's traffic be merged successfully into A, B, and C, or will AA need to use E?

There should be enough room at A, C, and D. AA has spare gates on C and possibly A they do not regularly use that could be used on a full time basis. I think more AA dedicated gates in the D terminal might open up once the new international AE gates open up in Terminal B (soon to have customs connections to D). AE uses about 2 or 3 gates in D. AA will probably need some more D gates anyway with the new HKG and PVG service next year.

As someone else mentioned, not all current flights may be flown later. I would not expect them to be cut in half, but there might be a reduction.


User currently offlineuser444555 From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 356 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10623 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 7):
But, I'm still curious as to one thing. I just read this morning's Chicago Tribune, and it claims that AA/US have to give up 2 gates on Concourse L at ORD. To me, that makes no sense, US has gates E7, F8, and F10. At some point, US is going to vacate those gates, as operations merge with AA in Terminal 3.

If I'm not mistaken, on L Virgin America has one gate, Jet Blue has one gate, and Spirit has two gates. So, if Spirit moved to the US gates in Terminal 2, it would have a 3rd gate, while Virgin and Jet Blue could each add a gate on L.

It would seem to make more sense for AA to keep the L gates, but maybe this was a way for the DOJ to get even more gates out of AA/US. I doubt they will keep the F gates, but they might and let AE use them. AE is mostly in terminal G but they spill over into H. I think it would be more convenient for pax and the lcc's if one of them moved and got an extra gate, and let AA keep more in L. I wonder what the reasoning behind this is, or if AA can find a work around with the DOJ if B6, VX, or NK said they wanted to move.


User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10564 times:

Quoting LittleFokker (Reply 10):
I apologize if this was brought up in an earlier merger thread already, but at DFW, I believe US uses 4 gates at E. Can US's traffic be merged successfully into A, B, and C, or will AA need to use E?

Although the entire airport is linked on the secure side by SkyLink, I don't expect that US will hang on to the E gates post merger. In fact, since DFW is in the middle of the TRIP project, moving US out will allow the contractors to finish E on an accelerated timeline since there will be no airlines displaced when the project gets to the high E gates.

Quoting adam42185 (Reply 12):
I wonder what the reasoning behind requiring US/AA to give up 2 gates at BOS was, considering the #1 carrier out of BOS is B6 anyways...? To allow more room for UA at Terminal B perhaps?

Merger or not, UA was always going to get a certain number of gates. I don't think Massport will allow UA to get them unless they use them (Gate Squatting in Terminal C is part of why they have to run a split operation now, since the gates they had that would have been used post merger, ended up being taken back and given to B6. What I think may be happening here is Massport is trying to get even more gate space for B6, which is why in an earlier thread I suggested WN may be moving. WN only need about 3 or 4 gates in BOS, and given where B6 is, I don't see WN trying to grow BOS much beyond what they already have. Terminal B would be a perfect fit for them becuase B37 will be linked on the secure side now to the rest of the B gates. So WN gets 37 and the two gates being vacated by AA. VX stays at 38. AC stays at 1-3, and then AA and UA can figure out how to divy the remaining gates up.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 7):

But, I'm still curious as to one thing. I just read this morning's Chicago Tribune, and it claims that AA/US have to give up 2 gates on Concourse L at ORD. To me, that makes no sense, US has gates E7, F8, and F10. At some point, US is going to vacate those gates, as operations merge with AA in Terminal 3.

Somebody mentioned this in an earlier thread. I wonder if there is some shoddy reporting going on here. Obviously E7, F8, and F10 are going away. Delta will probably get E7. The question is who gets F8 and F10?

Quoting ckfred (Reply 7):
If I'm not mistaken, on L Virgin America has one gate, Jet Blue has one gate, and Spirit has two gates. So, if Spirit moved to the US gates in Terminal 2, it would have a 3rd gate, while Virgin and Jet Blue could each add a gate on L

Virgin isn't going to need an additional gate for a long time, unless they decide to add some sort of eastern hub, which I don't see anytime soon. Ditto with B6 but in reverse. NK would really be the carrier interested in growing in ORD. There is a ton of counter space in T2 though that goes unused. and it will increase after the merger. Assuming that AA is not going to gain real estate in L from an airline moving to T2, what one scenario could be would be for both VX and B6 to move to T2, one gaining F8, and one F10. Then DL would gain E7. NK would then be able to gain two gates in L, for a total of 4 gates. T2 certainly has the counter space for both B6 and VX.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4389 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10348 times:

Quoting PanAmPaul (Reply 2):

In the same article, Doug Parker is quoted as saying that the stipulations are "pretty modest." So how can Justice even begin to make this claim - or is it just trying to save face?

From DOJ: American-US Airways Settlement to Lead to Lower Fares and More Choice for Consumers

This is the same mentality that believed that DL would keep MEM mainline flights and not reduce it to a focus city, so I don't see how they can say that with any authority or conviction unless they are stupid. It is basic economics and marketing; fewer suppliers means higher prices, it is not difficult to see that. Three years is a blink of an eye when you are merging two large companies. Now I don't believe in governments messing about in private business and they should just let the consumer have the final say on the price and the products and services offered by the supplier. They will ultimately determine if this new company is going to fly, pun intended.

[Edited 2013-11-13 10:21:13]


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineIndy From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 4581 posts, RR: 18
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 10081 times:

This is a very dark day for the American consumer. The DOJ completely failed to do its job. Consumers will look back on this moment as one of the biggest mistakes in commercial aviation. The government should have drawn the line in the sand and blocked this merger. This merger was nothing more than an anti-competitive move. Using the logic of others on here we must now allow DL and UA to merge because US and AA were allowed to merge.

Bad. Very bad. Higher fares or poorer quality service coming to an airport near you.



Indy = Indianapolis and not Independence Air
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3812 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 9995 times:

Quoting Indy (Reply 17):
Using the logic of others on here we must now allow DL and UA to merge because US and AA were allowed to merge.

The goal of AA/US was to level the playing field by bringing AA up to par with DL and UA.

There will be no DL/UA merger like you think. With AA/US, all three remaining legacies plus WN are now at critical mass needed for sustainable profitability.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlineSouthernDC9 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 449 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9942 times:

So I fancy myself quite the airline geek and DCA is "my" airport (I can walk there from my place) so I really thought I knew the whole slot thing, but I was not aware of the "commuter slot" distinction (if I'm understanding it correctly) - and AA seems to be saying that's the bulk of what they will have to give up... So would WN (or JetBlue or NK or Allegiant) be unable to bid on any such slots since they don't have the correct planes? Or could WN fly a 737 on a "commuter" slot?

And would Allegiant seriously try to go after any of the DCA slots? With their set up wouldn't their market basically be elementary/middle/high school tour groups flying to DC? Would AA/US want Allegiant to come in because the threat of their taking away business traffic would be minimal?



What does AA/US merger mean for CLT/JFK/PHX/North America/Southern Hemisphere/God's Plan for the Universe
User currently offlineaaexecplat From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 636 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9878 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 18):
The goal of AA/US was to level the playing field by bringing AA up to par with DL and UA.

There will be no DL/UA merger like you think. With AA/US, all three remaining legacies plus WN are now at critical mass needed for sustainable profitability.

That is crazy talk. There is no even playing field. As soon as one of those three makes another acquisition (AS or HA), is it open season again? Just for fairness' sake? The playing field was just fine. AA and Us had been doing better as standalone companies than the merged UA. Quite a bit better as a matter of fact. Size alone does not equate profitability. Again, something that the quarterly earnings reports of AS and HA make quite clear. The only think this merger does is to increase prices, slash capacity and jobs, and increase the barrier of entry for new airlines.

It is patently absurd to think this merger was about stimulating fair competition in any way...


User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2155 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9878 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 7):
One thing that I learned while practicing law is that if both parties feel like they gave up too much to settle, then the settlement is probably fair. It might even be close to what a verdict would have been at trial.

I tend to agree with the idea that it's fair for the same reasoning.

Quoting PanAmPaul (Reply 5):
I am not convinced that Doug Parker at US thinks so. His comments seemed very smug, while the DOJ comments were very business like.

Parker has to confidently state that it will not have a negative impact on the merged operation, anything else is unacceptable to shareholders. Reading anything more into that is more a matter of having a predisposition towards liking or hating someone or their company.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 18):
The goal of AA/US was to level the playing field by bringing AA up to par with DL and UA.

You will have four airlines with 15-20% market share, that seems pretty fair.


User currently offlineVC10DC10 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 1037 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9834 times:

Quoting SouthernDC9 (Reply 19):
So I fancy myself quite the airline geek and DCA is "my" airport (I can walk there from my place) so I really thought I knew the whole slot thing, but I was not aware of the "commuter slot" distinction (if I'm understanding it correctly) - and AA seems to be saying that's the bulk of what they will have to give up... So would WN (or JetBlue or NK or Allegiant) be unable to bid on any such slots since they don't have the correct planes? Or could WN fly a 737 on a "commuter" slot?

My understanding is that "commuter" slots can only be used by aircraft with a certain number of seats (76 maximum, I believe). However, it is also my understanding that AA/US has committed to retaining all of its commuter slots at DCA and will only be selling conventional air carrier slots.


User currently offlinePanAmPaul From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9757 times:

Quoting aaexecplat (Reply 20):
There is no even playing field. As soon as one of those three makes another acquisition (AS or HA), is it open season again? Just for fairness' sake? The playing field was just fine. AA and Us had been doing better as standalone companies than the merged UA. Quite a bit better as a matter of fact. Size alone does not equate profitability. Again, something that the quarterly earnings reports of AS and HA make quite clear. The only think this merger does is to increase prices, slash capacity and jobs, and increase the barrier of entry for new airlines.

To put it more succintctly, there will NEVER truly be a level playing field. This is esp. important to consider as airlines partner instead of merge and as airlines such as Etihad and Emirates invest in airlines around the world.


User currently offlineMah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33195 posts, RR: 71
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 9666 times:

Phoenix doesn't have three years after all:

In fact, it may be much shorter than three years. The settlement allows the New American to break its promise to maintain service levels at its hubs and cancel those flights to smaller cities if it feels that there has been a material adverse change, "in demand, the competitive environment, or New American's cost to comply." This so-called MAC clause is extremely vague and can be triggered at the sole discretion of management. So say oil prices go above $100 a barrel -- that could possibly be a trigger as it impacts the "cost to comply." Say Southwest starts a new route to Phoenix -- that could constitute a change in the "competitive environment" of the entire hub.

Source: http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/...13/usairways-american-merger-fail/



a.
25 FWAERJ : Even after AA/US is closed, the airline industry in the US will be far fairer than the cellphone/mobile industry in the US, another industry that get
26 hivue : DOJ originally wanted no merger at all. They did not get that. However, once the administration got involved, what DOJ wanted changed to bending with
27 ripcordd : Indy, are you worried that you might have to actually pay the airline what it costs them to fly plus a profit to get from point a to point b? These m
28 par13del : According to who, the investors at each or the government agencies who allowed the consolidation and elimination of competition? What does fair have
29 aaexecplat : It never did. This was clear from the get go. If DOJ had extracted an ironclad guarantee, the merger would have been called off. This merger only mak
30 PanAmPaul : This is an excellent analogy and I believe it continues in looking at the disruption T-Mobile is trying to cause with its "uncarrier" programs, inclu
31 crAAzy : I'm not sure that all this discussion is about with US/AA at DFW. It has already been stated in previous posts several times before that US is moving
32 brilondon : This is a great statement and so true, they will be integrated into the AA system and you won't know after all said and done where they will be locat
33 RWA380 : I thought the LCCs like B6 and WN were going to get first shot at everything? Really, did the government get out of the business of telling airlines
34 AAplat4life : The government needed a legal basis for blocking the merger. This is not Putin's Russia, and our judicial system still acts with some degree of auton
35 Flytravel : Frontier and Sun Country fly into MDW. Frontier goes directly against WN on DEN-MDW and Sun Country against WN on MSP-MDW. Frontier also has MDW-TTN/
36 Post contains links ripcordd : I don't think the airlines asking for donations they just want to be paid what it costs plus a little profit. Read this and tell me what you think yo
37 brilondon : Is there room and would that work with the F9 business model?
38 user444555 : Someone asked the question, and I answered it. I am assuming they had not read the previous threads, but my response was to a previous question.[Edit
39 user444555 : Someone wanted to know about DFW and asked the question. Several other airports have been discussed in this thread and I don't see why asking about D
40 Post contains images USAirALB : From the Charlotte Observer:
41 ckfred : Except there was a distinct chance that DOJ would lose at trial. Then, AA and US could have kept every gate and every slot. Lawyers settle cases, bec
42 Post contains links michman : Exactly how was the Bush DOJ responsible for allowing UA-CO merger?? Or Southwest and Airtran for that matter?
43 Post contains links user444555 : http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...-get-dallas-love-field-gates.html/ DL wants AA's Love Field gates to fly to major cities. I think AA would rath
44 airliner371 : Once the construction is done, all the gates will be in one concourse.
45 Post contains images commavia : As already mentioned, yes, the present US schedule could pretty easily fit into AA's existing A/C/D operation. In the interim, US will apparently mov
46 AirCalSNA : By not filing suit to stop the mergers ... which should have been done.
47 airliner371 : Obama was in place for the 2010/2011 mergers of UA/CO and WN/FL.
48 Post contains links PanAmPaul : It looks like things at US are now moving ahead as planned (although perhaps a few months later). US will leave *A on March 1 and join OW a month late
49 Post contains links user444555 : http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...y-to-discuss-antitrust-trial.html/ There is a hearing going on this afternoon at the bankruptcy court regarding
50 chepos : Alioto and Cook sued DL/NWA and UA/CO to try and stop their merger, I can't remember if they sued to stop WN/FL as well. They seem to enjoy having th
51 rampart : It looks to me like the investment and service is mostly on the front end of the plane, the business and first class and with the associated airport
52 Post contains links user444555 : http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...ys-antitrust-hearing-we-hear.html/ Here is a summary of the hearing today. The lawyers opposing the merger are
53 Post contains links user444555 : http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...ays-american-airlines-merger.html/ They lawyers filed a request for a temporary restraining order today. I thou
54 Post contains links usflyguy : Headline: "Lawmakers want to let all airlines compete for slots and gates, not just low-cost carriers" http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...s-not-ju
55 airliner371 : In my opinion, DL and UA should be able to apply but LCCs should be given first priority and any leftover slots available should go to the legacies.
56 user444555 : I agree. Nothing against DL but I don't see how making the largest carrier at LGA bigger will help competition there. I don't see a problem with DL b
57 HPRamper : I think any qualified airline should be able to bid and their applications all evaluated on their overall merit. Just because it's an LCC doesn't nec
58 Cubsrule : What's a "bigger positive?" LFCs are likely to provide more seats and more ASMs. Legacies may provide more destinations, though DL is unlikely to ser
59 HPRamper : Lower fares to a market already served with plenty of seats I don't see as a big positive. Completely speculating of course. High vs. low fares, new
60 Cubsrule : I think that's a fair list. Let's examine who has the advantage for each one: Fares: LFCs, unquestionably. Destinations: Not clear. There is some pot
61 airliner371 : Here is the problem with this argument... Is DL actually gonna add new destinations or are they going to add small cities already served like DSM, SY
62 Cubsrule : But if we are honest, WN is likely to use a lot of DCA slots for HOU/MDW/BNA/STL, all of which are served.
63 Post contains images airliner371 : MDW is not served... . But seriously, STL and HOU are already served so depending on how many flights they get, WN can add service to OKC, MSY, etc..
64 Post contains links miaami : Should be a big day for AA and US http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...y-soon-merge-with-us-airways.html/
65 Post contains links Sooner787 : Judge says he might have decision today.... http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...-us-airways-case-maybe-today.html/
66 Post contains links user444555 : http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...s-merger-and-bankruptcy-plan.html/ Judge Lane to rule tomorrow. I hope it finally ends tomorrow.
67 BDL757 : I agree! Just let them get on with it already. The majority of the employees seem to be for the merger so for their sake I hope this is all resolved
68 DCA-ROCguy : This article = propaganda piece for "Airlines for America," formerly known as the Air Transport Association, that is, the industry trade group of leg
69 user444555 : The legacies have all been through bankruptcy at some point. I don't understand your criticism of their profits for a service that is a lot more disc
70 chepos : Based on what happened yesterday in court the judge was less than sympathetic towards Alioto. I hope that we can close this chapter by tomorrow and ge
71 EA CO AS : I see; so who is the arbiter of what a "reasonable" profit margin is? Do you complain about companies like Intel or Apple having margins in the 20-30
72 Post contains links SA7700 : As reports are coming in that the AA/US merger has been approved, this thread will be locked for further discussion. The merger thread is available he
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...
U.S. Anti Trust Suit: AMR/LCC - Part 6 posted Thu Oct 24 2013 03:36:41 by SA7700
U.S. Anti Trust Suit: AMR/LCC - Part 5 posted Tue Sep 10 2013 13:11:55 by SA7700
U.S. Anti Trust Suit: AMR/LCC - Part IV posted Fri Aug 23 2013 20:02:18 by avek00
U.S. Anti Trust Suit: AMR/LCC - Part III posted Fri Aug 16 2013 14:01:35 by iowaman
U.S. Anti Trust Suit: AMR/LCC - Part II posted Tue Aug 13 2013 17:08:41 by LipeGIG
Here It Comes -- U.S. Anti Trust Suit: AMR/LCC posted Tue Aug 13 2013 07:15:57 by stlgph
US Airways, American Trator? posted Tue May 2 2000 05:07:57 by Rocket Roger
Us Airways/american Eagle Codeshare Approved posted Sun Feb 13 2000 18:37:54 by Erau
New American/US Airways Fleet? posted Tue Nov 12 2013 19:33:30 by CX747
It's Official: American And US Airways To Merge posted Thu Feb 14 2013 03:36:45 by Mainland