traderjake
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 5,669
- 9,308
MetalMover said:
He's so busy celebrating he responded in 2 minutes.
AAG announces changes at DCA and LGA
- Thread starter lpbrian
- Start date
He's so busy celebrating he responded in 2 minutes.
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
LMAO!traderjake said:
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
LoL
or may be VX will go dca-ATL-sfo
or may be VX will go dca-ATL-sfo
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #184
you can HOPE VX starts service into a DL hub but remember that DL is the only legacy airline that has had a long-standing low fare carrier hub alongside one of DL's own - and that hub (or focus city for those that don't call them hubs) is smaller than it was in the past
Doesn't change that WN also flies ATL to the west coast, UA is jumping in, and AA probably well as well... which not only makes it harder for yet another carrier to establish itself but also removes any ability for other carriers to "punish" DL for adding service into those carriers' key markets.
I still get a kick out of those who celebrate that DL is being kept out of these markets when the low fare carriers have lower costs than DL which will result in a bigger impact to AA than what DL could do.
The sheer amount of new competition that AA will gain over the next year in its key markets is unprecedented in the history of the US airline industry and will have an enormous impact on AA and its finances. Those who don't believe it will see in the near future.
Doesn't change that WN also flies ATL to the west coast, UA is jumping in, and AA probably well as well... which not only makes it harder for yet another carrier to establish itself but also removes any ability for other carriers to "punish" DL for adding service into those carriers' key markets.
I still get a kick out of those who celebrate that DL is being kept out of these markets when the low fare carriers have lower costs than DL which will result in a bigger impact to AA than what DL could do.
The sheer amount of new competition that AA will gain over the next year in its key markets is unprecedented in the history of the US airline industry and will have an enormous impact on AA and its finances. Those who don't believe it will see in the near future.
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
Many of us recall you claiming DL would challenge any awards that did not include them and how they would prevail.WorldTraveler said:
By the way, NOSTRADUMUS,,,can you give us the next winning POWERBALL numbers since you can predict the future?
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
may be this will help wt
so where is this delta legal challenge delta would file against the doj
so where is this delta legal challenge delta would file against the doj
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #187
I'm still waiting for you to show me a quote where I said "DL will ... " and not "DL might or could...."
You won't find it because I never said without condition that "DL will file a lawsuit..."
there is a difference between what I said and what you want to believe I said (or wrote).
And it still doesn't change that everything is not changed and the bigger win will be in the marketplace.
Those who continue to believe that these slot divestitures and new competition in key AA markets as well as the fall of the Wright Amendment will have no effect on AA are quite simply living in a dream land.
You won't find it because I never said without condition that "DL will file a lawsuit..."
there is a difference between what I said and what you want to believe I said (or wrote).
And it still doesn't change that everything is not changed and the bigger win will be in the marketplace.
Those who continue to believe that these slot divestitures and new competition in key AA markets as well as the fall of the Wright Amendment will have no effect on AA are quite simply living in a dream land.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
boy wt youre real famous at deflection.. you said back in nov that delta would file a legal challenge yet you cannot answer the simple question. it has been pointed out to you numerous times apparently in your case delta can no wrong but no other airlines can do no right
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #189
never said DL can do no wrong... I have repeatedly said that DL is able to win in the marketplace because of its financial strength which is directly related to the premium that customers are willing to pay DL compared to what other carriers gain.
I have also never said that a legal challenge is a given but that it is a real possibility if DL cannot achieve what it wants. If this process was such a slam dunk, why has it now taken over 3 months and no resolution has been reached?
DL, WN, and UA didn't give up scores of slots at the nation's top airports plus a bunch of gates in order to get their mergers approved. There was a reason why the DOJ required it even with AA/US' participation in the discussions and it is because so many of AA/US' hubs/key markets have limited competition compared to DL, UA, and WN. When the evidence is in that the asset divestiture process had no effect on new AA, then you can celebrate. For now, history is very much on the side of significant impact to AA via new competition - which is exactly what the DOJ wants...
those who have spent so much time trying to argue otherwise on here might want to remember the whole process and not focus just on the most recent newsclip
BTW, DL's average fare for the cities it currently serves from SLC compared to what it was when the hub was closed has increased at more than twice the rate that AA's have over the same period.
Further, one source is reporting that DL is adding AUS-LAX service on the 717... that is a market where DL has virtually no share but AA and WN does. DL is currently the only one of the big 4 that hasn't served the market; UA is in there with CR7 service.
Those who are so certain that DL's fortunes will rise and fall on the DAL gate outcome might want to stay tuned.
This also brings the 717 to the west coast and the now competitive LAX market for DL... it is certain that DL won't keep just 2 flights/day there.
I have also never said that a legal challenge is a given but that it is a real possibility if DL cannot achieve what it wants. If this process was such a slam dunk, why has it now taken over 3 months and no resolution has been reached?
DL, WN, and UA didn't give up scores of slots at the nation's top airports plus a bunch of gates in order to get their mergers approved. There was a reason why the DOJ required it even with AA/US' participation in the discussions and it is because so many of AA/US' hubs/key markets have limited competition compared to DL, UA, and WN. When the evidence is in that the asset divestiture process had no effect on new AA, then you can celebrate. For now, history is very much on the side of significant impact to AA via new competition - which is exactly what the DOJ wants...
those who have spent so much time trying to argue otherwise on here might want to remember the whole process and not focus just on the most recent newsclip
BTW, DL's average fare for the cities it currently serves from SLC compared to what it was when the hub was closed has increased at more than twice the rate that AA's have over the same period.
Further, one source is reporting that DL is adding AUS-LAX service on the 717... that is a market where DL has virtually no share but AA and WN does. DL is currently the only one of the big 4 that hasn't served the market; UA is in there with CR7 service.
Those who are so certain that DL's fortunes will rise and fall on the DAL gate outcome might want to stay tuned.
This also brings the 717 to the west coast and the now competitive LAX market for DL... it is certain that DL won't keep just 2 flights/day there.
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Oct 29, 2003
- 2,931
- 3,341
IIRC, you were lecturing all of us here about the anti-competitive unlawful unjust and unauthorized action the DoJ took in settling the AA-US lawsuit, and furthermore, you were quite certain, based on your legal expertise, that there will be lawsuits.WorldTraveler said:
Fast-forward 2 months and now you're squirming and saying that you only stated that DL "could", that there is a "possibility", etc. etc. etc.
You're pathetic!
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #191
no, I NEVER said DL definitely would file any lawsuit. I said they could. There is a difference.
The issue is not really about a lawsuit.
What you and others really is to prove that I am wrong about the whole competitive landscape and your hope that DL will fail at succeeding at its strategic objectives.
I've never said DL would take out AA or that AA can't succeed. I have repeatedly said that DL has been successful in pushing into key markets in which other carriers are currently larger than DL - and that is what they will continue to do.
The issue is not really about a lawsuit.
What you and others really is to prove that I am wrong about the whole competitive landscape and your hope that DL will fail at succeeding at its strategic objectives.
I've never said DL would take out AA or that AA can't succeed. I have repeatedly said that DL has been successful in pushing into key markets in which other carriers are currently larger than DL - and that is what they will continue to do.
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Oct 29, 2003
- 2,931
- 3,341
WorldTraveler said:
Has spectator hacked your account?
The fact remains, you were relentless in lecturing us how unlawful the DoJ-AAUS settlement, particularly the asset divestiture aspect is.
Furthermore, you were adamant in accepting the fact the DoJ has authority to do this.
You went on and on and on and on pontificating the legal merits of DLs soon-to-be-filed lawsuit.
So far, you were wrong.
Even now, you can't accept this, hence the qualifying statement that really, you only said there is a possibility - all the while ignoring the volumes of legal drivel you spewed on these pages.
Pathetic!
Now you're deflecting and trying to start / change the conversation into your analysis of the competitive landscape. Ha!
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #193
No, I said that the legal basis for what the DOJ did with the AA-US divestiture process is questionable because the DOJ is attempting to reshape the industry based on its desire to see low fare carriers maintain a larger share, particularly in the NE slot controlled airports.
I continue to believe that the DOJ does not have the legal right to pick winners and losers in any industry based on their desire to affect pricing in a deregulated industry, which the US domestic airline industry is.
They can try to maximize the number of competitors in a market and the number of seats which LFCs tend to do with each slot by using larger aircraft on average (no regional jets except for B6's 100 seat E190s).
Even if all of that is true, it completely argues against telling DL they can't serve DAL and instead give the gates to WN. There is absolutely no basis for arguing that the DOJ's goal is to increase competition at LGA and DCA and then turn around and limit it at DAL. No basis whatsoever for the logic that is being pushed.
That still doesn't mean that DL will file lawsuit nor does it mean they won't. The process is not over. And even if DL walks away with nothing, they may consider that the political cost of suing the DOJ is too high based on future issues that might arise with the government. As much as you want to argue otherwise, DL has managed to maintain decent relationships with the government as evidenced in part by winning a number of route cases including HND that others said DL shouldn't win.
Further, it is possible - and very likely - that there will be small and medium sized communities that end up w/ a loss of service after the slot divestiture is completed and DL might very well succeed at having new slots created at DCA to restore that service - with DL and UA being the only two that are given the potential to bid. Hard to say, but the story is far from finished and the idea that the legislators that will lose service are just going to sit back anymore than DL will over time is more than stretch.
Finally, the real purpose of all of these slots and gates is to win in the marketplace. If DL has a plan B that allows them to do that, then that is the real answer, not how many slots or gates any carrier accumulates. It is also very likely that DL will turn its competitive attention to other key markets or to restructure its own DCA operations as well as those in the cities with gate divestitures to achieve its strategic goals.
I'm not ruling anything in or out but there have been way too many people who have tried to prove that I said DL would definitely file suit when I never said that. The real measurement is what happens in the months and years after the divestiture process and in the markets that are involved.
I continue to believe that the DOJ does not have the legal right to pick winners and losers in any industry based on their desire to affect pricing in a deregulated industry, which the US domestic airline industry is.
They can try to maximize the number of competitors in a market and the number of seats which LFCs tend to do with each slot by using larger aircraft on average (no regional jets except for B6's 100 seat E190s).
Even if all of that is true, it completely argues against telling DL they can't serve DAL and instead give the gates to WN. There is absolutely no basis for arguing that the DOJ's goal is to increase competition at LGA and DCA and then turn around and limit it at DAL. No basis whatsoever for the logic that is being pushed.
That still doesn't mean that DL will file lawsuit nor does it mean they won't. The process is not over. And even if DL walks away with nothing, they may consider that the political cost of suing the DOJ is too high based on future issues that might arise with the government. As much as you want to argue otherwise, DL has managed to maintain decent relationships with the government as evidenced in part by winning a number of route cases including HND that others said DL shouldn't win.
Further, it is possible - and very likely - that there will be small and medium sized communities that end up w/ a loss of service after the slot divestiture is completed and DL might very well succeed at having new slots created at DCA to restore that service - with DL and UA being the only two that are given the potential to bid. Hard to say, but the story is far from finished and the idea that the legislators that will lose service are just going to sit back anymore than DL will over time is more than stretch.
Finally, the real purpose of all of these slots and gates is to win in the marketplace. If DL has a plan B that allows them to do that, then that is the real answer, not how many slots or gates any carrier accumulates. It is also very likely that DL will turn its competitive attention to other key markets or to restructure its own DCA operations as well as those in the cities with gate divestitures to achieve its strategic goals.
I'm not ruling anything in or out but there have been way too many people who have tried to prove that I said DL would definitely file suit when I never said that. The real measurement is what happens in the months and years after the divestiture process and in the markets that are involved.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
so far delta has walked away with nothing.... and it keeps going n going n going
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #195
no, Delta has not walked away. If they were throwing in the towel, they would pull their schedules from DAL which is the minimum that is at stake here. The schedules are still there.
When DL pulls those DAL schedules and does nothing further with DCA, then your statement might be right... but that hasn't happened.
Maybe it will... but many here believed from the beginning that AA/US would orchestrate a carve up of their assets between low fare carriers that would not interfere with AA's key markets and that hasn't happened.
DL's success in pulling high value traffic away from AA in numerous markets and in putting WN into a smaller and smaller box at ATL and other key DL markets is why neither AA or WN want to see DL gain anything.
If the next several years play out like the last several for both AA or WN vs. DL, there is still alot of history to be written in DL's favor.
When DL pulls those DAL schedules and does nothing further with DCA, then your statement might be right... but that hasn't happened.
Maybe it will... but many here believed from the beginning that AA/US would orchestrate a carve up of their assets between low fare carriers that would not interfere with AA's key markets and that hasn't happened.
DL's success in pulling high value traffic away from AA in numerous markets and in putting WN into a smaller and smaller box at ATL and other key DL markets is why neither AA or WN want to see DL gain anything.
If the next several years play out like the last several for both AA or WN vs. DL, there is still alot of history to be written in DL's favor.
Similar threads
