In the courtroom.
#1031
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 55
It seems the only way at this merger could be saved is if Spirit could show they had serious solvency issues. Like Chapter 11 was imminent or possibly worse. Aside from that, the Judge made his ruling. Highly unlikely that's getting overturned. Honestly, I'm not sure why Spirit's balance sheet wasn't more of a focus in this trial. They're sinking. The ULCC model is struggling. No guarantee they even exist, let alone keep the ULCC model. They seems like that should have been an area of focus during the trial. Kill the merger...even more people will be harmed. I don't think JB has the greatest attorneys.
#1032
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,026
It’s called sample size. You don’t need to question everyone.
#1033
Unfortunately, TC had every chance during his testimony to make this point but chose to, for god knows what reason, say spirit had a path to profitability when there was, in fact, no plan to profitability.
#1034
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,013
It seems the only way at this merger could be saved is if Spirit could show they had serious solvency issues. Like Chapter 11 was imminent or possibly worse. Aside from that, the Judge made his ruling. Highly unlikely that's getting overturned. Honestly, I'm not sure why Spirit's balance sheet wasn't more of a focus in this trial. They're sinking. The ULCC model is struggling. No guarantee they even exist, let alone keep the ULCC model. They seems like that should have been an area of focus during the trial. Kill the merger...even more people will be harmed. I don't think JB has the greatest attorneys.
If I land firm on rwy 32 in BOS, I don’t expect an antitrust lawyer will critique me. 😂
#1035
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 931
So would you say the few pilots Cindy ran into or text etc, between the ruling and now, is a good sample size? You don't need to question everyone but you need a good mix and count in the sample size to make a conclusion. How many commuters vs living-in-base peeps has he/she asked? What's the mix in the sample? Does living in base automatically means the person is ok with how things are and are against the merger? Again, it's opinion based on what Cindy wants to believe, because he/she is against the merger. It's not fact.
Example. How many times when we have a TA to vote on does pilots come on here saying "It seems like majority of the group is voting no" only for that to be wrong? Maybe the sample size is too small? Maybe folks are not being completely honest? Unless there is official data, we are always talking out of our a$$es.
I'm in base and I wasn't against the merger. Different strokes for different hoes......I mean folks.
Example. How many times when we have a TA to vote on does pilots come on here saying "It seems like majority of the group is voting no" only for that to be wrong? Maybe the sample size is too small? Maybe folks are not being completely honest? Unless there is official data, we are always talking out of our a$$es.
I'm in base and I wasn't against the merger. Different strokes for different hoes......I mean folks.
Last edited by Bgood; 01-31-2024 at 08:37 AM.
#1036
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,002
Unless you have a background in antitrust law, how do you know they did a poor job? I know pilots know all, but without being present in the courtroom and/or having any legal experience, I don’t know how you can claim that.
If I land firm on rwy 32 in BOS, I don’t expect an antitrust lawyer will critique me. 😂
If I land firm on rwy 32 in BOS, I don’t expect an antitrust lawyer will critique me. 😂
#1037
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,013
is your cousin one of the attorneys? 😂 I'm saying that because they lost. And they had years to prepare the case. They rested their case early thinking they had just slam dunked it. When they did that, I had a bad feeling. Something else that alarmed me: Andy made a post in here saying he suggested one of our attorneys ask a particular question (I forget what question) and the attorney listened to him...taking advice from some random in the courtroom also seemed concerning 😂. As someone said above, when TC got on the stand and said they had a profitable path forward without JB, that did not help the case either. Why they didn't better prepare their case and their witnesses is beyond me, but here we are. This doesn't equate to a hard landing, it equates to not getting to your destination...in which case, a passenger would be well within reason to question your piloting skills.
JetBlue lost because the Judge had a very myopic view of the Clayton Act. It doesn’t mean the JetBlue lawyers did a bad job. Actually most of the rhetoric I heard was how badly the DOJ was performing in court. I started to believe it too. Not enough to load up on SAVE like some pilots did thinking they knew the DOJ had a bad case, but I gave JetBlue a 50/50 shot. Maybe in the end they simply had an uphill climb trying to convince the judge that removing a ULCC from the market was a good idea like many experts thought.
#1038
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: 190 captain and “Pro-pilot”
Posts: 2,931
Unless you have a background in antitrust law, how do you know they did a poor job? I know pilots know all, but without being present in the courtroom and/or having any legal experience, I don’t know how you can claim that.
If I land firm on rwy 32 in BOS, I don’t expect an antitrust lawyer will critique me. 😂
If I land firm on rwy 32 in BOS, I don’t expect an antitrust lawyer will critique me. 😂
#1039
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,002
One of the antitrust lawyers “listened” to some random person in the courtroom. Well you got me there. How intently was he listening? A lot? A little? Somewhere in between? Did he write it down?
JetBlue lost because the Judge had a very myopic view of the Clayton Act. It doesn’t mean the JetBlue lawyers did a bad job. Actually most of the rhetoric I heard was how badly the DOJ was performing in court. I started to believe it too. Not enough to load up on SAVE like some pilots did thinking they knew the DOJ had a bad case, but I gave JetBlue a 50/50 shot. Maybe in the end they simply had an uphill climb trying to convince the judge that removing a ULCC from the market was a good idea like many experts thought.
JetBlue lost because the Judge had a very myopic view of the Clayton Act. It doesn’t mean the JetBlue lawyers did a bad job. Actually most of the rhetoric I heard was how badly the DOJ was performing in court. I started to believe it too. Not enough to load up on SAVE like some pilots did thinking they knew the DOJ had a bad case, but I gave JetBlue a 50/50 shot. Maybe in the end they simply had an uphill climb trying to convince the judge that removing a ULCC from the market was a good idea like many experts thought.
#1040
Unless you’re a Delter pilot. In that case you’d be considered a hero for miraculously landing on Rwy 32 and you’d chalk it up to your expertise landing on “The Ship”™ when you used to fly F-teens.
Last edited by Flyby1206; 01-31-2024 at 01:41 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post