Originally Posted by buzzpat

Oh, and Keenster, you can see both your side of the coin AND ours? Some of us think your stuff was stupid. There you go. There's our side of the coin.

Over.

Originally Posted by buzzpat

Oh, and Keenster, you can see both your side of the coin AND ours? Some of us think your stuff was stupid. There you go. There's our side of the coin.

Over.

Originally Posted by TANSTAAFL

Reducing the presence of US airlines at Tokyo's Narita Airport is a key issue behind the Japanese government’s reported preference for a Japan Airlines-Delta tie-up.

An air treaty between Japan and the US that was signed more than 50 years ago could be behind the Japanese government's reported preference for Japan Airlines (JAL) to switch alliances and join Delta Air Lines in Skyteam.

"The [Japanese] government is deeply concerned with the open sky policy between Japan and the US," said Hajime Tozaki, professor of transport at Tokyo-based Waseda University's organisation of Asian studies. "The [former] air transport treaty between the US and Japan has been unfair. The main issue for the government is to reduce the share of slots at Narita Airport held by US airlines."

Ever since the 1952 Civil Air Transport Agreement between Japan and the US, two American carriers have been able to fly via Japan into Asia. This provision, created when aircraft could fly far shorter ranges than they can today, gave US airlines a highly sought after right that few countries grant carriers from other nations. Today, despite the vast improvements in aircraft technology, Delta and United Airlines still hold these rights and, combined with other US carriers, control a third of the available take-off and landing slots at Japan's busiest international gateway, Narita Airport near Tokyo.

The open skies agreement between Japan and the US that was announced this past December will not change the existing "beyond rights" or slot allotments. What it will allow is for unlimited air services between Japan and the US by any airline of either country as long as they can acquire the necessary slots.

JAL is currently part of the Oneworld alliance with American Airlines. Since last fall, American and Delta have offered the Japanese carrier competing bids for its allegiance, including equity investments and cash for staying or joining their respective alliance. A decision is expected this month and could come as soon as today.

Tozaki said that if the government were to push JAL to align with Delta, it would likely ask that the US carrier relinquish some of its Narita slots and rights to fly beyond Japan into Asia. However, Delta would be in a good position to receive new international slots at Tokyo's Haneda International Airport, which is closer to downtown than Narita, as a symbol of the airport's new "international" status, he continued.

Aligning with Delta could be both good and bad for JAL and Japan. "If Delta wins in this race, the balance between the three alliances will be lost," said Tozaki. "The choice [of airlines] for the Japanese people will be reduced." He said JAL, which reportedly will drop at least 34 routes as part of its bankruptcy restructuring, could be asked to cut trans-Pacific services to the US -- one of Japan's largest international markets -- and to beef up services to Asia.

Makoto Murayama, a senior analyst at Nomura in Tokyo, agrees with Tozaki that slots and rights to fly beyond Japan could be one reason for the government's preference for Delta and Skyteam, but said it is unlikely to be the only reason. "A Delta-JAL alliance would have the largest share of trans-Pacific traffic," he said. "By joining Delta, JAL would receive more traffic and [hopefully] recover faster."

American currently has slots for 35 flights per week (or five daily flights) at Narita Airport, but no rights to fly beyond the airport into Japan. If JAL were to stay in the Oneworld alliance with American, the Japanese government would have no leverage to reduce the number of slots US carriers have at its main airport.

What has not come up in the discussions about the Japanese government's decision-making process is whether or not JAL and its future alliance partner would be able to receive antitrust immunity for flights between the US and Japan. This issue has been hotly debated in the US press and argued about by both American and Delta, but in Japan it appears to have taken a back seat to reviving the country's flag carrier and to reducing the hub operations of US carriers at Narita Airport.

The government of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama is gambling considerable political capital on JAL. By allowing the airline to enter into bankruptcy last month, it is letting one of Japan Inc's largest and best known brands risk insolvency. Minister of transport Seiji Maehara has been quoted as saying that the government is not trying to find a solution for the airline, but with so much on the line for the four-month old administration, JAL's return to profitability is almost a must for the government.

"The Japanese government injected taxpayer money [into JAL]," said Murayama. "They can't afford for them to fail again."

The final decision of whether JAL stays in Oneworld with American or switches to Skyteam with Delta will ultimately be made by the airline's management and the Enterprise Turnaround Initiative Corporation (ETIC), which is acting as trustee of the airline while it operates under bankruptcy protection. The opinion of the airline's new chief executive, Kazuo Inamori, who officially starts today, is unknown, but he is reported to agree with the bureaucrats at Japan's ministry of land, infrastructure, transport and tourism in preferring Delta's offer.

JAL's current management reportedly prefers to stay part of Oneworld. This preference could be due to any number of reasons, including a Japanese disinclination for sudden change and the cost that switching alliances would place on the bankrupt airline. A switch to Skyteam would mean changing everything from its reservation system to rebranding its aircraft.

"Senior management's predilection to remain with Oneworld has been over-ridden by the government and the investors providing financing," said Peter Harbison, executive chairman of the Centre for Asia-Pacific Aviation. "The creditors and owners of JAL should not be making calls on the airline's operational future."

However, asked what airline he thought JAL should form an alliance with, Harbison said he preferred Delta.

Of course, it's not over until the fat lady sings, or in JAL's case, until Inamori and the ETIC decides. Sources say American and Delta met with Inamori this past Thursday in Tokyo to discuss their respective alliance offers. Now, after a fierce, several month-long bidding war in the midst of an industry-wide slump, all the parties can do is sit back and wait for the Tokyo bureaucrats to make their decision.

© Haymarket Media Limited. All rights reserved.

Originally Posted by Gnewt

Oh come on Buzz. You're better than that. What the hell is going on with this place? We're all better than this!

I'll offer up a compromise. N guys will quit bi-chin about how bad the the DAL stuff is when the S guys admit how bad the DAL stuff is. Deal?

Originally Posted by Schwanker

Thanks for posting. Interesting article. It did state the new Open Skies will not eliminate the 5th Freedom rights--contrary to what others have been stating. Apparently, this is providing significant leverage for Delta in these negotiations.

Originally Posted by NuGuy

That, along with a DALPA that is seemingly complicit in facilitating the company line, yea, I can kinda see where some guys are getting a bit testy.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

Slow,

Where in the heck did you get any of this out of my post?! I have NEVER said anything of the sort.

Denny

Originally Posted by Sink r8

Ferd,

First, I think Keenster made the point earlier about this frustration, and I think we get it. I don't doubt it's irritating to you, when you promote what you think is a good idea, and you feel you're not listened to. So, I think it's fair that we should carefully listen, and try to work together to flesh out what truly was better, and use that as part of our Section 6 stuff. If nothing else, it would be basic respect. One "mea culpa" on us.

Second, I would respectfully point out that "better" is subjective. Maybe we're thick, and we don't understand everything, you know because we think with a Southern drawl and all, but not everything you guys are promoting sounds as enthralling to us as it does to you. If we give you the courtesy of truly weighing everything, can you agree that we won't always come to the same conclusion?

Third, part of the problem is that we definitely all want things to be better, and we are all focused on our Section 6. One of my concerns is that we're actually going to be expanding capital to do things the way people are comfortable with, versus doing things that make my family more comfortable. Things like money and time off.

Fourth, some of the lack of motivation you might sense from the South side comes a philosphical problem with some of your arguments. There is a bit of a problem when nearly 90% of the North guys voted for the JCBA, and now ask why it's not better.

But still, I agree that we can cut through the fog a little bit, and that there are many things that we haven't considered for Section 6, and many no-cost, or low-cost items, or even best practice items, that we should pursue.

In doing so, one thing that would help, is if the rethoric was turned down a little bit. For example, I'd like less lectures on Northern Mythology. I'm tired of hearing about a land, divided along a linguistic barrier, north of which strong muscular Norsemen rule. Wise and powerful, they spend most of the day showing off their cobra tattoos, and contemplate their numerous war trophies. Favorite among them are the bleached skulls of poor management saps, out of which they drink hydromel.

Evidently, the South part is inhabited by retarded double-breasted Girl Scouts, who spend their time earning badges in Perfect Attendance, Bending Over, and are selling cookies to try to win a trip to Stockholm. To get the t-shirt. The syndrome, they already have. Unfortunately, these Girl Scouts have stomachs too delicate for hydromel, being accustomed mostly to the taste of grape Cool-Aid and executive sperm.

Another area in which the lectures are a little tiresome is Airline Management. For example, how many times will it "revealed" to us that management is not our friend? I was, you know, a little suspicious during bankrupcty, but the light truly came on when dozens of North pilots revealed to us all about, you know, our CEO. You can only imagine how flabbergasted I was to hear that Anderson might lie to us. So, thank you for the revelations. I'll try to do well on the exam, but I hope we're done after that.

The Legal curriculum is also getting a little tiresome, and maybe a little misguided. For the record, an internet pseudonym is not a cloaking device. And a person on your team that points out that you're actually volunteering for hostage duty is not a "hostile witness", or a management lackey. Here is an instance where you too could learn a lot form a dummy.

Finally, the Union Etiquette class needs to go. I'm sick of cyber-brave people telling others things here they wouldn't dare saying in person. I'm tired of the insinuation that we are towing management's line, just because we don't think anger and tanturms are actual strategies. Truth be told, we are all around about the same kind of people. I guess you guys chant fearsome insults before you go to battle, and I guess we have "Go D-A-L-P-A!" cheers, but still we're mostly the same kind of people. The only true difference has been in the environment we worked under, and the strategies we implemented to adapt. The last time we had a similar set of circumstance was in bankruptcy. I read both T/A's that resulted, and they're not exactly leading me to sign up for another semester of Northern Mythology.

So I'll agree to do a better job listening to any idea that can help improve our mutual situation. In return, I would like to be treated with a modicum of respect. You're not alone in being disgusted. And that's because there is much typing, so many lectures, but so little listening and reading going on here lately. It only gets better when people on both sides try to make it better.

Respecfully,

Sink r8.

Originally Posted by slowplay

Just as a reminder, you ran for office at a North base. Your point of view didn't carry the day among North pilots....so apparently the South pilots that have disagreed with you here see circumstances similarly to your brothers.

Another pilot on here regularly ran for a position at a South base. His point of view didn't carry the day among South pilots. Yet there's a huge disparity in the way the two of you present arguments and reasoning. The other guy has developed quite a following here. You....? One would think with your scientific background that you'd try to construct an argument based on something other than "feelings."

The 330 guy had it right. We're all the same company now. You can keep turning your knives inwards and damage all of us. Or you can choose to find constructive engagement. I hope you choose well.