AAG announces changes at DCA and LGA

[eolesen]

there is nothing in any statute of the US government that permits them to choose what carriers can and cannot serve the public good based on prices which a carrier can charge.

This is where you're not reading the fine print... You're way too caught up on the whole fare model thing...

It's never been about fares. It's been about preventing a oligopoly situation from developing any further than it already has by past inaction at the DOJ & DOT.

DOT can base it on any number of factors other than fares, and be entirely within their rights to do so. The introduction of the act tasks them with "placing maximum reliance on competition in providing air transportation services" and "the avoidance of unreasonable industry concentration which would tend to allow one or more air carriers to unreasonably increase prices, reduce services, or exclude competition."

Specifically, by looking at both the macro and micro levels of competition, DOT would be justified to restrain DL and UA from participating in the redistribution of scarce assets from AA at the various airports.

 

did you have your Jack Daniels before or after you came up with that interpretation, counselor?

Are you claiming E is an alcoholic, or that he just posts while drunk?

Tread lightly...

Indeed. One might easily interpret WT's statement as libelous, since it's not an opinion, it's intended to cause malice, and would easily be interpreted as a statement of fact by a reasonable person as opposed to satire.

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

The point I was trying to make is, when DCA-OMA is left with no service at all, and LGA-MSP becomes a monopoly for DL, how can the DOJ possibly have any credibility in their endeavors to "promote competition"? It's laughable.

-astra

 

[WorldTraveler]

DOJ didn't tell AA to no longer serve MSP and ATL. In fact, AA has broad choices to drop and add routes as they see fit.

DOJ doesn't have any more right to create or prevent from being created an oligopoly based on the expected market shares they want to see at DCA... and that is exactly what they are doing by choosing who can and cannot serve specific airports.

I'm happy to wait and see how the results come but I think the DOJ's notion of being able to create a competitive environment to their liking is and will be vigorously challenged. And the division of powers in the US government permits a party to ensure that the executive branch (DOJ) acts in manners consistent with the laws that Congress created.

there's no libel in pointing out the logical flaws in your arguments. If you did them while dry, then it would be even more troubling.

 

[Kev3188]

 

...there's no libel in pointing out the logical flaws in your arguments.

True, but that's separate from your inference of alcoholism...

If you did them while dry, then it would be even more troubling.

...And again...

 

[700UW]

So WT,

Where is the law that says what the DOJ and DOT are doing saying they cant?

 

[WorldTraveler]

I inferred nothing about alcoholism. If you inferred it, then the logic flaw is in your mind.

The rule of law requires that actions be established as legal in order to be done, not the other way around.

It is incumbent on the DOJ to show where it has the right to carve up market share based on its design and with certain fare levels as a goal.

They don't have that authority.

It is up to you to show they are permitted to do that.

It doesn't exist.

But hey, I don't expect someone who has misused the term "pension" for years and now picks out one compensation statistic to the exclusion of others that are more relevant to get it.

good thing is that the ruling won't be made by you.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

does anybody else find it ironic / sad / hysterical / whatever, that there really doesn't seem to be a peep coming out of either DL or UA corporate offices about the LGA and DCA slot divestiture?  on the other hand, some posters (WT + spectator   ) have got their panties in a bunch ... ... ...

 

[700UW]

You are the one claiming the DOJ doesnt have the authority, now prove it.
 
You have been asked 10 times and yet no factual information has been provided.
 
So you know more than the lawyers who get paid to make those decisions and enforce the law?

 

[eolesen]

I inferred nothing about alcoholism. If you inferred it, then the logic flaw is in your mind.

You inferred that I was under the influence, which is equally libelous. It's a statement you can't back up, nor is it true, and based on past behavior and statements of intent to inflict harm on my professional reputation, it's pretty clear that you acted with malice.

 

[WorldTraveler]

there is no malice, E.

I am pointing out the logical flaws in your arguments. If you perceived that you were being called an alcoholic, then your perception is flawed.

frugal,

I'm here to tell you what is going on behind the press releases.

looks like a few people there are the ones who've got their panties in a wad. I'm enjoying watching them squirm.

 

[700UW]

How is saying he was under the influence of Jack Daniels, pointing out a flaw?
 
Its an attack on his character, that isnt acting like a christian.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I've never heard of Jack Danies.
 

How is saying he was under the influence of Jack Danies, pointing out a flaw?
 
Its an attack on his character, that isnt acting like a christian.

It's
isn't
Christian

wind up

 

[ChockJockey]

Its an attack on his character, that isnt acting like a christian.

 
Seeing a speck in our brother's eye, are we?

 

[MetalMover]

does anybody else find it ironic / sad / hysterical / whatever, that there really doesn't seem to be a peep coming out of either DL or UA corporate offices about the LGA and DCA slot divestiture?  on the other hand, some posters (WT + spectator   ) have got their panties in a bunch ... ... ...

Oh, don't you worry, WT and the DL execs are in their bunkers planning their next move.

 

[WorldTraveler]

they did manage to outsmart Parker with the DCA/LGA slot swap.

I wasn't involved but I saw it coming and narrated as such on here.