mike734

I already addressed that. The corporate officers responsible should be held accountable.

Led Zep

Are UPS or FedEx just "airlines"? No. UPS for example is a fully integrated, transportation conglomerate. In other words, UPS and FedEx aren't just simply cargo airlines. Each has a dedicated product/service and a very large integrated transportation network that is fully vested worldwide to satisfy specific needs of the customer base. It would be different if either of them were competing strictly for heavy-lift type cargo, such as is seen on the ad-hoc and ACMI side of the industry. Both companies are not only giants domestically, but also on the worldwide stage.

So if Brand X from China wants to carry heavy freight from one U.S. airport to another, it will not affect us the same way that it would an ACMI or ad-hoc cargo airline.

Led Zep

....Noted.

WhizWheel

The formation of the go! operation from the get-go was a violation of the law backed up by a huge judgement in court for HAL in regards to illegally obtaining HAL pricing info. Now in addition Aloha is bringing an anti-trust lawsuit against go! which, correct me if I'm wrong lawdogs, being an anti-trust suit any judgement is in treble meaning any monitary judgement levied is tripled in anti-trust cases. Now, to try and just sweep this all aside by saying that the flying public is still choosing them and folks are still seeking employment from them is EXACTLY what scumbags like JO like to see and count on to continue their rape of the good people in Hawaii and the airline industry as a whole. Its a very foolish vision.

Led Zep

Sorry if you misinterpreted my response as trying to sweep this all on the sidelines, that was far from my intent. I was specifically pointing out that the consumer is still choosing to use go!, and people are still seeking them for employment. I also noted in a previous post that I would not purchase the services of Mesa, I would be willing to pay more on another carrier. But that is another topic for another day.

I have also noted on several occasions that businesses need to play by the rules. If they can't play nice in the sandbox, then yes, they do deserve the penalty bestowed upon them by breaking the law.

captjns

http://consumerist.com/373995/aloha-...eases-to-exist

I hope the guys and gals are able to find employment during these turbulent times. Good luck to all of them.

SaltyDog

It was illegal (thus unhealthy) competition as per the court decisions already on the Go operation. Mesa broke existing law, no further regulation needed. Didn't want you to think I was silent. I was busy being an ethical, law abiding capitalist <g>

the King

"This press release contains various forward-looking statements that are based on management's beliefs, as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to management. Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable; it can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to have been correct. Such statements are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those anticipated, estimated, projected or expected."

That statement is so fitting for a company that exists purely to spite others and ruin many for the gain of a few. I don't look at many press releases, but I've never seen a statement quite like that.

mike734

I also mentioned oversight being as necessary as regulation.

757Driver

Nope,

Air LA around twenty years ago.