Should The Airlines Be Re-regulated? — Civil Aviation Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Should The Airlines Be Re-regulated?

A/c dxer From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 397 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1234 times:

With most of the US airlines losing money sholf the goverment re-regulate the industry. This came up in a discussion in the office and I wanted to get some opinions.

12 replies: All unread, jump to last

Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15999 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1230 times:

Absolutely not. Re-regulation would increase airfares and reduce competition & efficiency in the long term. Only a fully de-regulated market with a bottom-line focus can deliver the best value for the travelling public.

Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.

Delta-flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2676 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1209 times:

Absolutely not II. Further to the Yyz.....

The US practices free enterprise, and an economic downturn is no reason to change that. Regulation is only desirable for new industries that are potentially beneficial in the long-term that would not otherwise be able to enter the marketplace without some protection. That is not the case with airlines, as they are a mature industry. The problem they are facing has more to do with poor management than the poor economy.

Pete

Delta-flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2676 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1209 times:

Absolutely not II. Further to Yyz's post.....

The US practices free enterprise, and an economic downturn is no reason to change that. Regulation is only desirable for new industries that are potentially beneficial in the long-term that would not otherwise be able to enter the marketplace without some protection. That is not the case with airlines, as they are a mature industry. The problem they are facing has more to do with poor management than the poor economy.

Pete

Donder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1206 times:

I agree as much as it is possible with Yyz717.
The 'invisible hand' is saying that there are too many flights in the US market at the moment relative to demand and re-regulation would not make operations more efficient.

Donder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, RR: 23
Reply 5, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1202 times:

This is rather similar to talk of re-nationalising the UK nuclear power(and probabarly overall electricity producing )industries.Just because companies fail,the anti-free market brigade say we should re-nationalise the industry.Like the US aviation market,the main problem is over-supply.

Stratofish From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1019 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1195 times:

Not just the airlines.
Every part and participant of the economy should be (re-) regulated. Only state run companies can save the world from collapsing. It is not a matter of nationalizing it?s a matter of making the economy bearable for all of us.

I realize I represent a minority here, so no use flaming me because you disagree, I know you do... Insane

Btw, fares do not have to rise automatically if recources (those of the state) are allocated thoughtfully. Also I would welcome a law that prohibits ppl with certain incomes to fly at Y fares or nonrev.

rgds
Stratofish

The Metro might be the Sub(optimal)way

Delta-flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2676 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1182 times:

Only state run companies can save the world from collapsing

Stratofish ... it's been tried and failed. The system of state-owned enterprises created shortages and poverty. It may be feasible for extremely poor regions, as it is a good method to distribute poverty, but is not an economic engine that can propel the nations toward properity.

Of course, you are welcome to your opinion.

Pete

Stratofish From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1019 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days ago) and read 1181 times:

Pete, I do not mean planned economy like it was practised in some countries.
I think it is very interesting to see how China will develope with a communist basis and also trying to implement a free market.

To get back to the airlines topic:
You probably heard of the 'open skies' ruling of the eurpean high court. I stronglis dismiss and dispise that ruling because it will cost thousands of jobs and has taken the innocence from airtravel. As for the US: congress should buy a major stake in US Airways and allocate federal money to them. Of course this practise is not limited, they should do the same with UAL and sell the stakes when both are out of trouble and then move on to help the others.

Stratofish

The Metro might be the Sub(optimal)way

Ricfredo From Italy, joined Apr 2000, 29 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days ago) and read 1157 times:

I don't think that a complete deregulation of a market like the airline industry is desirable in the long term.
In fact I think that in the long term many airlines born after a deregulation act will die or will concentrate on few realities.
So many positive effects will fall and vanish year by year.
The best solution consist of a lightly regulated market in wich flag carriers, law cost and private airlines can co-exist.

Riccardo

Ual777contrail From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 7 months 6 days ago) and read 1139 times:

Our government cant get the security straight at our major airports, we don't need them putting their noses in regulating which airline should be allowed to fly which routes. Keep big brother out of it, and off our backs.

ual 777 contrail

Mcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 7 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1101 times:

No, they should not be re-regulated.

Re-regulation would politicize the industry. Airlines would be required to devote resources to certain routes out of political considerations, even if there is no consumer demand to do so. Furthermore, airlines making bad decisions would be propped up to avoid embarrassment to their political benefactors, while new start-ups would be cut off at the knees as soon as they began to pose a threat to any other carrier with a friend strategically placed in a position of power.

GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12735 posts, RR: 79
Reply 12, posted (10 years 7 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1092 times:

Could it be argued that the $ given to US carriers post Sept 11th is a form of regulation?
I'm aware that those were extraordinary events, and I'm not expressing an opinion either way.
But it does illustrate the limitations of political dogma, i.e. a true 'free market' would not allow such a thing.
But then it ain't a perfect world, (ideological types take note).

Top Of Page

Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics: