Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LH/UA , NW/KL Get The Go-ahead , Not BA/AA!  
User currently offlineAir Malta From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2614 posts, RR: 1
Posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3548 times:

I read an article about the proposed ties between KLM and Northwest and Lufthansa and UAL getting approval and antitrust immunity... The AA/BA alliance was said unlikely to get the go-ahead. What the hell is going with BA???!!!! Everytime BA wants to tie up with another airline (AA or LX), regulators come up with those bloody investigations and concerns about anticompetitive ties... and when KL, LH , SK or AF want the same deals they get it... Well correct if I'm wrong or stupid:
how many German , French, Scandinavian or Dutch intercontinental airlines are there to compete with the likes of LH,AF,SK or KL!!! The UK have VS and BD...
Do France, Germany, Holland or Scandinavia have strong secondary national carriers apart from the big boys... No, the UK have VS, UK, BD, BE not counting the no frills... UA/LH have the monopoly on the US-German routes, AF/DL on the F-US, KL/NW on the Dutch and SK on the Scabndinavian-US market... Only the UK has all of the big US carriers serving its airports : US, UA, DL, NW, CO and AA ... so enough is enough....

Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlinePadcrasher From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3525 times:

I guess they feel control of LHR slots is the issue. BA and the UK know what the price is for gaining anti-trust immunity and they choose to go with the status quo. This may be the right choice, but as far as exit US goes BA is getting pummeled by Skyteam and Star.

User currently offlineTs-ior From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 3731 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3501 times:

May be in the case of the AA/BA alliance,they took into consideration the "monopol" of BA on the Europe-America flights and so they judge that it doesn't need another partner on this sector !!!

User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13756 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3493 times:

The €uropean Commission has said that it is to close a probe into the activites of the Star Alliance.

"The parties have, in order to meet our competition concerns on some routes, proposed certain remedies, " said Michael Tscherny, spokesman for EU Competition Commissioner Mario Monti.

"On this basis, we intend to publish a notice in the Commission Journal very soon, announcing the intention of the Commission to close the pending investigation".

The interested parties would have a month to comment (What is there to say?)

More information at the Forbes.com website

Information gathered from the above hyperlinked webpage. Full information can be viewed by clicking the above hyperlink.

Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6919 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3484 times:

Air Malta
A couple things wrong with your argument.

You say that UA/LH have a monopoly on US-Germany flights. NW,CO,US,AA,DL all fly this route to any airport they choose in Germany.

The same is true between the US and France, The Netherlands, and Scandanavia. The US carriers can fly between the US and any airport they want in those countries.

CO, NW, DL, and US can't fly between the US and any airport they want to in the UK.

That's the difference. If the UK would open up Heathrow like the other airports in Europe, BA and AA would have their agreement approved in short order.

User currently offlineCLL777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3481 times:

There is one thing that is important. Germany and the Netherlands both are members to the EU, and while it may seem insignificant, the EU really wants the UK in their union. If BA and AA are in alliance there will be an anti-competitive issue at LHR, however as was pointed out the same situation applies to both AMS and FRA. If the UK entered the EU, there maybe a definite change in the attitude of the current people who oppose any alliance to help BA.

User currently offlineLarspl From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 474 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3474 times:

cll777 the last time i checked uk is part of the eu, they just didn't go with the €


User currently offlineCopenhagenboy From Denmark, joined Sep 2001, 600 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3451 times:

Maybe I forgot my history, but is UK not a member of the EU?
I think the problem with LHR is that BA will not give away any slots. UA/SK/LH did that!!

User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 18
Reply 8, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3409 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Just to clear it up, the UK is in the EU.

In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineAamd11 From UK - Wales, joined Nov 2001, 1068 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3402 times:

if you ask me, its all because LHR is the Hub for Europe beyond a doubt, with something like 45% of US-Europe traffic passing through the UK, which means London accounts for a huge chunk on its own.
the EU doesnt like the idea of the Brits having the superior gateway, it may not be the best in terms of transfers, and its very overcrowded at times, but lets face it, EVERYONE wants to fly into Heathrow [DL,CO,NW would all like access], and it just wont take it until the infrastructure is changed.
I think as a temporary solution, make it THREE carriers per country in BII, let bmi serve LHR-US routes, and find the carrier in the states who is willing to lump the biggest ammount for the rights to the route, DL for example.
and then when LHR is ready and can take more flights/movements/pax then we allow full OpenSkies between the two countries.

just my opinion which some of you will flame me for, but hey whats an opinion if there is nobody to disagree with you?!

A^A MD-11

User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (13 years 10 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3358 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A good post AAmd-11, LHR does actually need more competition over the atlantic (more airlines). Even economy fares can reach nearly $1000 in the summer season!!

In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineLeo From China, joined exactly 10 years ago today! , 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (13 years 10 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3301 times:


Sorry but your arguments are false, the true situation is very different and luckily very well understood by the European Commission.

The UK has no ''Open Skies'' wit the USA, while Germany, Holland & Scandinavia DO !!

# This means that all USA carriers can operate their aircraft, as well as codeshare into any airport in LH,KL,SK territory. THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE IN THE UK, where London airports are strictly regulated, not even codeshares are allowed. As a result London-USA air fares are MUCH higher than in continental Europe. Life for BA, Virgin and the USA carriers is much cozier at the London airports.

# Therefore BA experiences much less competition on the transatlantic than LH,KL,SK. Particularly as on top of the US carrier operations, the LH,KL,SK carriers also suffer intense hub competition from each other and BA. While BA does much less.


Very few pax fly LHR-FRA-NYC as it is much longer.

Hopefully this info helps.

User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8360 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (13 years 10 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3290 times:

I think to sum it up, the reason why nobody wants an AA/BA alliance comes down to this: they would have too much control over flights between the USA and LHR.

I think if the British are willing to scrap Bermuda II in favor of a true Open Skies agreement then they will allow the AA/BA alliance since there will be true competition on this route between AA, BA, BD, CO, DL, NW, UA, US, and VS.

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...
UA+LH Vs NW+KL Business Class posted Sun May 9 2004 05:23:30 by Ghsweusa
When Will The UA Express 120's Get The New Paint? posted Fri May 12 2006 04:03:57 by FL370
Why AC Get's The EMB170 And Not The CRJ700/900? posted Tue Sep 13 2005 15:25:44 by CV990
Retired UA/NW 757's In The Desert? posted Mon Sep 6 2004 19:55:26 by UnitedTristar
Will Jetblue Get The Go For NAS? posted Sun Aug 29 2004 17:07:42 by Jetblue15
Did NW Ever Get The Approval To Fly DSM-DCA? posted Mon Jul 19 2004 05:38:28 by Iowaman
Why Did AF Get The B773 And Not The A346? posted Sat Apr 17 2004 00:14:17 by Sjoerd
PIA Fleet Replacement Plan - Given The Go Ahead posted Wed Feb 6 2002 15:45:24 by GF-A330
AA Gives The Go Ahead: Will Start FLL-CCS posted Wed Dec 26 2001 02:59:12 by Mah4546
Who Will Get The Top Job At BA? posted Tue Mar 28 2000 15:28:55 by VH-BZF