In the courtroom.
01-21-2024, 08:37 AM
#931
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,920
I think he would have, overlapping doesn’t mean competing.
Delta can have more than 1 flight a day from ATL-DTW, if doesn’t mean each departure competes with the prior one.
Spirit and frontier can each have 200 seats on a market that supports 400 seats a day and it looks like competition, but it isn’t.
Delta can have more than 1 flight a day from ATL-DTW, if doesn’t mean each departure competes with the prior one.
Spirit and frontier can each have 200 seats on a market that supports 400 seats a day and it looks like competition, but it isn’t.
One airline, two flights a day can charge more per seat than two airlines, two flights a day. The single airline two flights a day controls all the direct seats, and can price accordingly. The two airlines, two flights have to consider each other's pricing, or their are customers who don't have loyalty on one airline, and will go the others flights to save money, even if the flight times are different.
Market share is a common consideration in antitrust.
01-21-2024, 12:14 PM
#932
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,023
I think he would have, overlapping doesn’t mean competing.
Delta can have more than 1 flight a day from ATL-DTW, if doesn’t mean each departure competes with the prior one.
Spirit and frontier can each have 200 seats on a market that supports 400 seats a day and it looks like competition, but it isn’t.
Delta can have more than 1 flight a day from ATL-DTW, if doesn’t mean each departure competes with the prior one.
Spirit and frontier can each have 200 seats on a market that supports 400 seats a day and it looks like competition, but it isn’t.
I think maybe you're getting at the idea that ULCCs stimulate demand for air travel that previously didn't exist? Maybe the price constraints inherent in that type of inelastic demand prevent any ULCC from raising prices, whether they represent 1% or 100% of the airline market on a certain route. They're not really competing with each other, they're competing with buses, staycations, etc. So monopolistic market shares in the ULCC segment may not raise regulatory concerns, since they are not accompanied by the monopolistic pricing power that anti-trust laws are meant to prevent. Pure speculation on my part, but seems like an interesting theory.
01-22-2024, 08:42 AM
#933
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Posts: 36
Can a new administration drop this lawsuit ?
Let say this lawsuit is is still in the appeal process and a new administration comes in, can the new adminsitration and the new DOJ, DOT etc choose to drop the case altogether? Or is it too late for that and this judgement is forever ?
Thanks
Thanks
01-22-2024, 08:49 AM
#934
SDQ Base Chief
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 320 CA
Posts: 5,667
I think the damage is done. Judge has ruled. Now it is all about overturning that ruling through the appeals court process. New administration wouldnt be able to do anything.
01-22-2024, 08:53 AM
#935
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 3,233
not sure how you came up with your math on that one…
01-22-2024, 10:37 AM
#936
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2017
Position: NK CA
Posts: 840
01-22-2024, 06:00 PM
#937
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: Back in right seat
Posts: 208
It's a bad deal for Jblu pilots and a terrible deal for the company. We all dodged a bullet with the judges decision ... the company would have spent years trying to recover finances. As it is, a standalone Jblu will probably be profitable in 2024. With the Spirit albatross it would have been years.
I totally disagree with our MEC for pushing to lobby the politicians to support the merger. The union was "neutral" on the merger until some fools got the idea that we should get on board ... just to get some more bases etc etc.
it was a bad deal, let's move on.
01-22-2024, 07:08 PM
#938
off weekends (if Reserve)
Joined APC: May 2023
Posts: 354
why are the Jblu guys hoping for this merger to go through?
It's a bad deal for Jblu pilots and a terrible deal for the company. We all dodged a bullet with the judges decision ... the company would have spent years trying to recover finances. As it is, a standalone Jblu will probably be profitable in 2024. With the Spirit albatross it would have been years.
I totally disagree with our MEC for pushing to lobby the politicians to support the merger. The union was "neutral" on the merger until some fools got the idea that we should get on board ... just to get some more bases etc etc.
it was a bad deal, let's move on.
It's a bad deal for Jblu pilots and a terrible deal for the company. We all dodged a bullet with the judges decision ... the company would have spent years trying to recover finances. As it is, a standalone Jblu will probably be profitable in 2024. With the Spirit albatross it would have been years.
I totally disagree with our MEC for pushing to lobby the politicians to support the merger. The union was "neutral" on the merger until some fools got the idea that we should get on board ... just to get some more bases etc etc.
it was a bad deal, let's move on.
Which sort of is another diagnostic altogether of tachysuckia from B6 upper management post pandemic. Whether you think it was a good deal or not what's significant is THEY thought it was, so that level of suck should make you nervous.
01-23-2024, 04:47 AM
#939
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2022
Position: FO
Posts: 132
why are the Jblu guys hoping for this merger to go through?
It's a bad deal for Jblu pilots and a terrible deal for the company. We all dodged a bullet with the judges decision ... the company would have spent years trying to recover finances. As it is, a standalone Jblu will probably be profitable in 2024. With the Spirit albatross it would have been years.
I totally disagree with our MEC for pushing to lobby the politicians to support the merger. The union was "neutral" on the merger until some fools got the idea that we should get on board ... just to get some more bases etc etc.
it was a bad deal, let's move on.
It's a bad deal for Jblu pilots and a terrible deal for the company. We all dodged a bullet with the judges decision ... the company would have spent years trying to recover finances. As it is, a standalone Jblu will probably be profitable in 2024. With the Spirit albatross it would have been years.
I totally disagree with our MEC for pushing to lobby the politicians to support the merger. The union was "neutral" on the merger until some fools got the idea that we should get on board ... just to get some more bases etc etc.
it was a bad deal, let's move on.
I've been wondering about this myself. Debt loads really hurt a company's agility. I am cautiously optimistic.
01-23-2024, 04:57 AM
#940
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 932
why are the Jblu guys hoping for this merger to go through?
It's a bad deal for Jblu pilots and a terrible deal for the company. We all dodged a bullet with the judges decision ... the company would have spent years trying to recover finances. As it is, a standalone Jblu will probably be profitable in 2024. With the Spirit albatross it would have been years.
bases etc etc.
it was a bad deal, let's move on.
It's a bad deal for Jblu pilots and a terrible deal for the company. We all dodged a bullet with the judges decision ... the company would have spent years trying to recover finances. As it is, a standalone Jblu will probably be profitable in 2024. With the Spirit albatross it would have been years.
bases etc etc.
it was a bad deal, let's move on.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
