DL invests in, deepens ties with China Eastern

[topDawg]

 
Got to wonder which airline had the best day in China.  Delta for buying a stake in China Eastern?  Or AA because fears over China's growth led to another drip in oil prices?  
 
I'm going with AA because.....its AA

FIFY
 
and WT is going with DL because its DL
 
We get it. 

 

[LDVAviation]

FIFY
 
and WT is going with DL because its DL
 
We get it. 

 
Just trying to pick a fight?
 
... more of your "world class" education.  I get it.

 

[topDawg]

 
Just trying to pick a fight?
 
... more of your "world class" education.  I get it.

nah i don't do the "win the internet pissing contests" like you and WT do. 
 
I guess with the great education you have they skipped out on humble and class lessons. They teach those kinds of things at UGA. 
 
It is simply amazing how much you and WT have in common. 

 

[eolesen]

Actually, why don't you call the DOT and get back to us, since you made the categorical statement.  Back here in reality, the DOJ is part of the executive branch, and thus empowered merely to interpret statute but not make it, so I'd like to see the statute that prohibits on U.S. carrier with owning an equity stake in another.

There is none, but we know that. DOJ can block mergers on antitrust grounds, but I don't think they can block investments and non-controlling interests.

WN took a minority stake in TZ back in 2004 or so, and nobody blocked it.

So now we have NW owning part of CO, WN owning part of TZ, YV owning part of HP, US owning part of YV, and AA had a minority stake in Reno Air prior to agreeing to buy them.

Seems there is lots of case history of major airlines having minority stakes in their competitors, but not a single example of statutory language prohibiting it.

Reasonable people are free to decide for themselves...

 

[topDawg]

There is none, but we know that. DOJ can block mergers on antitrust grounds, but I don't think they can block investments and non-controlling interests.

WN took a minority stake in TZ back in 2004 or so, and nobody blocked it.

So now we have NW owning part of CO, WN owning part of TZ, YV owning part of HP, US owning part of YV, and AA had a minority stake in Reno Air prior to agreeing to buy them.

Seems there is lots of case history of major airlines having minority stakes in their competitors, but not a single example of statutory language prohibiting it.

Reasonable people are free to decide for themselves...

I don't think Washington would be overly thrilled with say AA buying a part of DL or DL buying a part of UA.......
 
but I don't know what they can really do about it? 

 

[WorldTraveler]

There is none, but we know that. DOJ can block mergers on antitrust grounds, but I don't think they can block investments and non-controlling interests.

WN took a minority stake in TZ back in 2004 or so, and nobody blocked it.

So now we have NW owning part of CO, WN owning part of TZ, YV owning part of HP, US owning part of YV, and AA had a minority stake in Reno Air prior to agreeing to buy them.

Seems there is lots of case history of major airlines having minority stakes in their competitors, but not a single example of statutory language prohibiting it.

Reasonable people are free to decide for themselves...

again, the reason the DOJ HAS BLOCKED investments is that unless there are specific barriers that are put in place to limit control, stock ownership by nature involves control.

That principle is not just airline specific. The SEC requires stock holdings above 5% to be declared.

It is entirely possible for one airline to own more than 5% of another airline but why would anyone want to invest in an airline and not have any control?

and the DOJ is involved in all kinds of cases to try to limit the influence of large carriers so the chances they would allow any of the big 4 to have a controlling interest is slim to none.

 

[700UW]

And yet AA owns 10%  of Mesa and also holds $5.5 million note.

 

[WorldTraveler]

again, legacy/regional relationships have existed for decades and are more as supplier type/vertical ownerships - not unlike DL and the refinery.

There are no current equity ownerships between any large jet operators in the US. if you want to prove they are possible, present a proposal to the DOJ and let us know what they say.

They act on real, not theoretical matchups.

 

[FWAAA]

As usual, lots of made-up nonsense in this thread, most all of it from a single poster.

Meanwhile, back in reality, Gary Leff asks whether this equity investment will finally make Anderson STFU about the subsidized ME3:

http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2015/07/28/maybe-delta-will-shut-up-about-middle-east-subsidies-now-that-they-own-a-stake-in-the-most-subsidized-chinese-airline/

 

[WorldTraveler]

The only thing made up are denials that the DOJ enforces antitrust regulations on a case by case basis and no large jet ownerships between US carriers exist. And DL's ownership stakes in foreign carriers doesn't change whether the ME3 are subsidized but rather that DL has a comprehensive global strategy rooted in the free market.

 

[UPNAWAY]

Today it is reported that China has hacked United's computers so we can essential say DL is hacking United!

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

It's one way Chinese companies can get inside information without spending money to get a seat on the BoD.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Today it is reported that China has hacked United's computers so we can essential say DL is hacking United!

wow... just wow.

no wonder it is impossible to have a logical conversation on here.

 

[WorldTraveler]

oh dear.

they are using the GD words.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/3365565-the-new-delta-aims-for-global-dominance?auth_param=6rl2l:1arica8:9fa16bfbc6f5f71eb76a76f9f9f02c5d&uprof=45

 

[700UW]

DL is not taking over LGA, more misinformation you posted