And DL is not a new entrant, how many times are you going to play that card which isnt true?
Well using your illogical ideas, then every airline should sue Delta and the Port Authority to make DL give other airlines slots and gate space at LGA.
you've repeatedly said that but DL obviously feels there is legal basis for it seeking access under that term, esp. since DL doesn't even serve DAL at all. if you want to take the thing all the way back, DL was at DAL long before WN was a gnat on Herb's nose.
I think this is the ultimate outcome as well. How does one objectively decide what "equal"- or even reasonable- access means, and what if what is decided harms the lease holder?
not being able to serve the airport is the standard of access. There isn't another airport in the country which any airline has been told they cannot serve categorically because of their history or type of service they offer (legacy carrier). The DOJ made that decision, complicated an already messy situation, and locked out a carrier by limiting competition.
DL can and will successfully show that if it the DOJ has to resort to those measures to ensure competition, then it isn't competition at all - and it also isn't legal
Really? Hook-Line-and-sinker, boy I got a big one, LOL...
so you're either lying that you were personally affected or you were.
so which is it? would you rather now say you are lying rather than admit that either you or your father or someone else pretty close worked for DL?
No sir. There is language within the W/A agreement that if any airline does not use the gates to their fullest, then YES, they would have to make room for other airlines within their gates to accomodate them. Now all of LF's airlines owning gates after Oct 13th will in fact use their gates to their fullest and there is no room for Delta to use any gates. End of story. United was going to be the airline to end up sharing the gates with Delta, BUT, United submitted their plan with the COD and now there is no room for Delta. I have said this from the very beginning that Delta will have to share gates with one of the other airlines, and if there was not any room, or gates to be shared they will have to leave LF. NOW it is all coming to light and Delta is just hating this fact. A big fat "ITYS" is in order here...
and accommodation does not allow one carrier to make a cursory effort to accommodate other carriers and then pull the carpet out from other them in order to return to the restricted access they had.
IF DL is right that UA is subleasing gates to WN and has scheduled ground times that exceed DAL's requirements for full gate use at 90 minutes per flight (on an RJ no less), then it will clearly be shown that the COD was negligent in protecting the interests of carriers that wish to serve the airport.
Here's a little tease for WT. Looks like Delta is starting a "threat" campaign to try and remain at LF (not gonna happen folks) her it is:
Delta threatens legal action against city
no, I told you months ago that this was all heading to court if DL couldn't gain access and you all thought it was a big joke.
DL is deadly serious about ensruing it has the right to compete fairly and that other carriers can't hide behind barriers that limit competition.
DL will push this case as far as necessary and I can assure that AA and WN's duopoly will be taken apart faster than a Corvette on I45.
As do I. DL can try to make a case for collusion, but it's much harder to prove than it is to accuse.
Again, quoting from the competition plan out of context is great theater, but it has to be considered in association with the Scarce Resource provisions of the DAL master lease agreements.
There's an escalation process that forces a request for space to be considered, but if you read the PDF I attached earlier, you'll notice that it never goes beyond that point. You'll also notice that it explicitly says a leaseholder has preference -- that means they can't be forced to change their schedule in order to accommodate a new entrant.
Essentially, what UA did with their schedule is not illegal. It's certainly no more illegal than it was for DL to over-schedule LGA in order to create delays for other carriers, or for DL to hoard slots at LGA, JFK or DCA. Or, as already noted, to fly an international route in a non-Open Skies market once every 90 days in order to avoid a dormancy revocation.
In short, everyone's playing by the rules here. DL clearly doesn't like the rules, but that doesn't mean that they will be changed to suit DL anytime soon.
Chest thumping about undoing the Five Party agreement is laughable. Congress can't even pass a budget -- what makes anyone think that the guys from ATL will be able to lobby and successfully unravel a very contentious piece of compromise legislation? If they can't get the Texas delegation to agree to changes, it's safe to say nobody else (except perhaps a few reps from GA and maybe NY) will be willing to step into the mess.
the case isn't about collusion, E.
It is about access. the rules that the COD is playing by aren't the ones they agreed to and even then there are still serious legal questions whether the WA and its amendments violate federal access and competition laws.
DL isn't interested in getting tied up with undoing the WA and its revisions that have allowed WN to gain access to 80% plus of the gates at one airport with no possibility of access for new entrant carriers.
but I can assure you if DL has to go there to gain meaningful access to a major market in the US - and you can characterize DAL any way you want but it is a major market, then the case will head for court.
Further, it is AA who made the decision to merge with US and yet DL is paying the price for AA's merger.
The legal basis of the DOJ's case against the legacy carrier segment was incorrect and DL will fight whatever it has to in order to regain access to DAL.
Plain and simple.
EVERY airport that receives federal dollars must provide access to any carrier that desires to serve it and have a plan to do so.
COD gave lip service and then pulled the rug out from DL.
I can assure you that alone is the issue whether you want to try and make it other things or not.