David_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7259 posts, RR: 14 Reply 1, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1885 times:
The official BA press release:
In response to the US Department of Transportation’s regulatory conditions for the proposed alliance between British Airways and American Airlines Rod Eddington, British Airways’ Chief Executive and Don Carty, Chairman and Chief Executive, American Airlines, said:
"We will not do this deal at this price. We made it clear from the start that we would not conclude the deal if the regulatory price was too high. Regrettably this has proved to be the case.
"It is a disappointment for both airlines, shareholders, and for the many staff who have worked extremely hard to ensure that the deal would be a real success for the flying public.
"The conditions laid down by the US government do not make sense for either company. We will not acquiesce to unrealistic, and in our view, unnecessary demands. For us, the price is just not right.
"We simply sought to have the same commercial advantages and deliver the same consumer benefits that rival airline alliances and their passengers already enjoy. Consumers will now be denied the substantial range of benefits that would have arisen from a closer alliance between our two great airlines."
American Airlines remains British Airways’ partner of choice across the Atlantic. Both airlines pledged to continue to develop the bilateral relationships within the oneworld™ alliance, the grouping is as strong as ever and oneworld is still a central plank of the alliance strategy.
British Airways and American Airlines will continue to give passengers access to each other’s networks and will endeavour to deliver as much of the customer proposition as they can within the existing legal boundaries.
747firstclass From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1815 times:
My guess would be that, in an ideal situtation, that somehow the UK govt. guaranteed the slots for an openskies agreement and than BA and AA would not have to give up slots. In previous testimoney before cnogress executives of the various US carriers, they have said that neither BA or AA would have to give up slots if everyone was guaranteed slots. With time running out fast for the UK, perhaps discussions like that are going on behind the scenes. The reality is that the subject of slots at LHR is not going to go away and a future administration might even be tougher. It really is a mess driven by some very, arrogant, out of touch egos.
Arsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 21 Reply 3, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1804 times:
So what happens now then?. Open skies talks are due in washington on monday, is that gonna be any success?. As far as i'm concerned, i dont see how new airlines can get access to LHR without AA/BA giving up slots.
747firstclass From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1785 times:
It is my understanding that the openskies talks have been canceled. There is talk that in the US Congress there will soon be legislation be introduced that will cancel the Bermuda II agreement. It should pass very easily and that will force the UK to negotiate a new agreement. Should be interesting.
2cn From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 648 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1740 times:
Arsenal@LHR- actually, it is looking good for them. They have what they want- AA/BA in check.. with out them giving up 200 slots, which is what DOT has required, AA/BA will not get approval, which is as good as getting slots in LHR right now.
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1718 times:
From the sounds of it, the UK will not be negotiating any further with the US. Why? Read this week's Economist!!
The arguments ranged from any benefits being dubious, to the whole agreement being unacceptably in America's favour.
Let's not start a UK v US war please, I can see one bubbling already, as each nationality will begin to accuse the other's government of being 'arrogant' etc. etc.......let's keep the quality of the conversation good....
Greenjet From Ireland, joined Aug 2001, 934 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1656 times:
Even if the UK and US agree to Open Skies it won't last that long as an EU-US agreement is not far away. Then there'll be the possibility of airlines from 14 other European nations looking to operate transatlantic from LHR....
Capt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1582 times:
Taken from an article in the Financial Times...
'Negotiators were set to meet on Monday in Washington to work out details of a new "open skies" deal but the UK Foreign Office phoned US State Department officials on Friday night to tell them British negotiators would not make the trip.
"Ministers have told their US counterparts that we hope to re-engage with them soon," the Foreign Office said.'
Blink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5455 posts, RR: 19 Reply 17, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1544 times:
The US government pisses me off.
I can't stand George Bush one bit(Gore in 4!).
I still can't see why Congress refuses to see that AA and BA want a level playing field, and congress should have had them give up the maximum they were willing to give up. That way, everyone is happy. US carriers and BMI get LHR access, and AA and BA get to work together.
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
747firstclass From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1541 times:
Please dont forget that they AA/BA had a better deal from Bush than they had from Clinton. Who knows at what future time and future administration, even this deal may look good. This issue will not go away until there is guaranteed access for all US carriers at LHR. EXACTLY as there is at FRA,FCO,CDG,AMS, etc. etc. etc. Until somone at BA and the UK govt. understands this, there will be no alliance with BA and a US carrier.PERIOD
2cn From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 648 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1528 times:
Blink182- sorry, but the terms DOT was asking were not that big of a thing- 16 or 17 flights a day to be disperesed between three US airlines.. wow, thats unfair to AA/BA (note sarcasim). They actually got off easy with the request, especialy with both of them combined would have over 60% of the flights on this route... THAT is not a level playing field for anyone.
DL Widget Head From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2062 posts, RR: 5 Reply 21, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1515 times:
My guess is that BA will opt for "plan B" and shop other US airlines with which to form an allaince such as US, or NW/CO. I think NW/CO/KL might look good to them right now and the "Wings" alliance might finally get off the ground (pardon the pun). Sorry AA, but I think you're about to be jilted; just business really.
DL Widget Head From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2062 posts, RR: 5 Reply 23, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1505 times:
I'm sure DL and AF would welcome that prospect but realistically, I think it would encounter the same problems that AA-BA did. SkyTeam is just too strong of an Atlantic alliance already. Adding the number one European airline to the mix would simply overwhelm regulators on both sides of the pond. No, a DL/AF/BA allaince is simply not doable. That narrows the field of players down to US, and NW/CO. My guess is a NW/CO link-up. I bet their (NW, CO) stock price spikes on monday.
Greenjet From Ireland, joined Aug 2001, 934 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1492 times:
Arsenal@LHR - with EU-US Open Skies any EU (or US) airline can operate out of any EU airport to the US. In theory. It all depends on slots and the airlines themselves. At least with EU Open Skies it will mean the end of idiotic rules such as the Shannon Stopover.
25 RayChuang: I think once a USA-EU Open Skies agreement is signed (which could happen within 18 months) expect a major scramble by AA, CO, DL, NW, UA and US on the
26 747firstclass: There is such bad blood between US and BA from the failed alliance back in the 90s that I dont see that alliance going anywhere. US has also batteled
27 AA767400: yes widget head, keep dreaming. BA with either CO,NW OR DL. not going to happen any time soon.
28 Eg777er: 747firstclass, you won't see open skies until the US relaxes rules on foriegn carriers operating in the US market. Why should the UK concede it's most
29 Ladevale: Here is a prediction for you: With all of UA's troubles, look for Lufthansa to ditch them and link up with American. Who would have thunk it, American
30 747firstclass: Possible but unlikely, it would cost much too much for LH to do that. In the alliance agreement there are all kinds of very heavy financial penaltieet
31 DCA-ROCguy: Good for the US Department of Transportation! The DOT is no longer the lap dog for big airlines that it was during the 1980's. IF AA and BA don't want
32 DCA-ROCguy: Good for the US Department of Transportation! The DOT is no longer the lap dog for big airlines that it was during the 1980's. IF AA and BA don't want
33 DL Widget Head: AA767400, if you read my earlier post you would have noted that I don't think a BA/DL link is viable. Given NW/CO's close relationship with KL and BA/
34 Go Canada!: qantas in star alliance, yeah i can really see BA allowing that to ahppen, espeically when Ba has a huge say on the qantas baord, regardless of the re
35 Klwright69: I think the folks at BA and AA must be on some powerful drugs if they really think they wouldn't have to give up any slots to get their alliance appro
36 Aamd11: I hope that if openskies does go through, that BA and AA do not lose any slots. Also i hope open skies doesnt go through now amyway. How come the Pric
37 747firstclass: But with the expansion possibilities at AMS, FRA and CDG and the ability of other airlines to codesahre from the US, look for a big drop off in BAs co
38 2cn: the americans are hyporcrites, its ok for delta and air france and its ok for lufthansa-united-bmi and klm-northwest, but AA/BA oh no, thats far to di
39 747firstclass: 2cn I am glad somone else is getting frustrated with this LHR slot business too. They are not comparing apples and oranges at all. BMI has had slots a
40 2cn: 747firstclass- didn't know BMI was asked to give up slots.. and I'm also glad I'm not the only one who realized/knew this about BMI... Its funny how s
41 DL Widget Head: The days of LHR being such an important transfer hub are waning. Soon, due to British intransigence, airports on the continent such as CDG, FRA, and A
42 Lj: Both sides are not 100% right. The USA is wrong in not applying full open skies (thus also open skies on domestic flights and furtheremore increase th
43 2cn: Lj- openskies talks were to be started this past Friday, but because BA/AA turned down the proposed terms from DOT, the talks were called off.. or at
44 Kaitak: I really am surprised that a normally cynical media just accepts this as read: "AA/BA off" - just because the US DOT lays down conditions! Come on! Th
45 747firstclass: Kaitak, I hope so. But must admit if that was the case, why did things get so bad and apparently AA/BA got blindsided. A friend thinks the DOT came ou
46 Arsenal@LHR: I agree with Kaitak. Intervention from the highest level (Blair/Bush) could do the trick. Both sides lose out if there is no kind of deal which benefi
47 Go Canada!: perhaps i didnt make myself clear, nowhere in the dOT press release does it mention extra slots being gievn to bmi nor does the dOT judgement allow fo
48 Go Canada!: and another thing, the american carriers already fly to london gatwick which is approx the same difference in time to get to london city centre, they
49 747firstclass: Please everyone keep in mind that BA CAN NOT BUY KLM becasue of the openskies that the Netherlands has with the US. The US anti trust immunity states
50 2cn: Kaitak- AA/BA themselves have said it is off.. not just the media. Go Canada! posted.. perhaps i didnt make myself clear, nowhere in the dOT press rel
51 FlyVS007: The US - "land of the free" - tries to stipulate exactly what (ahem American) airlines are allowed that freedom. It will be interesting to see what ha
52 2cn: I have a correction to make in a post I made... bmi might fly to america but as far as i was aware they dont do heathrow to new york and i dont see an
53 Fxra: Forgive me if I'm misinformed, but the Bermuda II not only restricts the airlines with access to the LHR from the US, but also the cities served?? If
54 Artsyman: FXRA wrote And please forgive my ignorance.. whats so great about LHR anyways?? I've flown into LGW before and it didn't seem so horrible, but i wasn'
55 FlyVS007: Heathrow is the gateway to the world. And the 747 capital of the world - not that that makes any difference ;o) As for ease of travelling, I really pr
56 Go Canada!: yes but that wont happen because it one rule for america and another for the uk. why shouldnt american give up slots at nw york if ba has to give up s
57 WunalaDreaming: Virgin Express flying around the us is what Senor Branson wants... that is why his has an ad campaign 'One rule for US and another rule for us.' Says
58 747firstclass: Plese, please everyone remember yet one more time, that there is not an airport in the US that is slot restricted like LHR. Any airlines operating fro
59 2cn: Or to be the arrogant US government, lets start regulating BA to flying into MDW but not ORD, SNA but not LAX, OAK but not SFO, or maybe DAL instead o
60 David_itl: BA,AA, BD, CO etc already have the freedom to fly from the rest of Britain to the US. Admittedly, it's a bit of an imbalance seeing that the only Bri
61 Go Canada!: there is nothing wrong in american carriers flying to gatwick or mancester. as stated before, it seems like the argument is this, ba should give slots
62 2cn: there is nothing wrong in american carriers flying to gatwick or mancester. No there isnt.. but what is wrong with them flying to Heathrow as well? as
63 DCA-ROCguy: Just wanted to say you've explained very well why the USA case in this matter is correct, and BA-AA's case is wrong. The US Dept. of Transportation is