Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
UPlog wrote::sarcastic:
Its all the same talking points - more consumer choice, lower fares, traffic stimulation, etc.
Seems to me in my experience these JVs actually reduce choice, reduce price options, and squeeze out non-aligned carriers
golfingboy wrote:Interesting - would the UK regulators have competition concerns if Norwegian either shrinks significantly (particularly TATL ops) or goes under?
I'd think they would require considerable slot divestures at LHR for ATI approval. I believe EI has around 20 slot pairs at LHR which is a decent chunk.
jomur wrote:golfingboy wrote:Interesting - would the UK regulators have competition concerns if Norwegian either shrinks significantly (particularly TATL ops) or goes under?
I'd think they would require considerable slot divestures at LHR for ATI approval. I believe EI has around 20 slot pairs at LHR which is a decent chunk.
Why? EI only uses the LHR slots to go to DUB... remove them and the price LHR to DUB goes up or disappear all together. Passengers mainly who connect with EI don't connect via LHR they do it via DUB from thier local airport... I would say they are completely different markets.
Eirules wrote:EI have deep codeshare arrangements with both B6 and UA via their US hubs. Surely these will have to end in place of AA connections at LAX, ORD & MIA
Galwayman wrote:Hope it gets refused , transatlantic airfares ex Dublin are great value compared to London - this anti competitive nonsense is just a way to rip off passengers yet again
UPlog wrote:in my experience these JVs actually reduce choice, reduce price options, and squeeze out non-aligned carriers
ClassicLover wrote:Actually, I am just reading the document and it says -
"The JBA, which provides Aer Lingus freedom to price independently and
codeshare with non-JBA carriers, will not only ensure that Aer Lingus’ value-carrier model is
preserved but will expand its reach. "
The link is here https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOT-OST-2008-0252-3427
GCT64 wrote:JBAs benefit the airlines by allowing collusion and price fixing (they never mention that in the PR).
As a pax, I'm more interested in EI being brought into One World. It's frustrating flying on EI (owned by IAG), with BA (also owned by IAG) FF status and yet not getting any lounge access etc.
Andy33 wrote:jomur wrote:golfingboy wrote:Interesting - would the UK regulators have competition concerns if Norwegian either shrinks significantly (particularly TATL ops) or goes under?
I'd think they would require considerable slot divestures at LHR for ATI approval. I believe EI has around 20 slot pairs at LHR which is a decent chunk.
Why? EI only uses the LHR slots to go to DUB... remove them and the price LHR to DUB goes up or disappear all together. Passengers mainly who connect with EI don't connect via LHR they do it via DUB from thier local airport... I would say they are completely different markets.
Not only that, but at the time that IAG took over Aer Lingus, the regulators made a condition that all the Aer Lingus LHR slots must continue to be used for UK-Ireland flights because there were fears in Ireland that they might otherwise be stripped out and used on other more lucrative services.
Galwayman wrote:Hope it gets refused , transatlantic airfares ex Dublin are great value compared to London - this anti competitive nonsense is just a way to rip off passengers yet again
ClassicLover wrote:Eirules wrote:EI have deep codeshare arrangements with both B6 and UA via their US hubs. Surely these will have to end in place of AA connections at LAX, ORD & MIA
I'm curious about this as well.
From what I understand, EI have been dragging their feet on entering the agreement, and I'd love to know why.Galwayman wrote:Hope it gets refused , transatlantic airfares ex Dublin are great value compared to London - this anti competitive nonsense is just a way to rip off passengers yet again
This has nothing to do with the joint venture. It has everything to do with the UK's Air Passenger Duty.
I can book a flight on BA from Dublin to Washington DC via London and it is cheaper than buying the London to Washington DC on its own. This is solely due to the APD.
UPlog wrote:in my experience these JVs actually reduce choice, reduce price options, and squeeze out non-aligned carriers
LAX772LR wrote:Anecdotal perception isn't equivalent to fact.
MSPNWA wrote:economic theory isn't valid in the case of JVs? Is that the latest stake you want to die on?
jumbojet wrote:Guaranteed B6 is already crying and writing a letter to the DOJ, similar to the one they wrote for the DL/VA/KE/AF tie-up.
Soon there will be no one left for B6 to dance with.
GCT64 wrote:As a pax, I'm more interested in EI being brought into One World. It's frustrating flying on EI (owned by IAG), with BA (also owned by IAG) FF status and yet not getting any lounge access etc.
Galwayman wrote:Is there a facility to email the DOT to object to this anticompetitive nonsense?
Cunard wrote:Galwayman wrote:Is there a facility to email the DOT to object to this anticompetitive nonsense?
No there is not a facility for you to object to the DOT by personal email but you can always write them a nice little letter of complaint showing your total disdain for this ''anticompetitive nonsense''.
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
USA
I'm sure that the DOT would love to personally hear from you and read your letter of complaint!
Good luck and do keep us informed won't you with any response that you might get back from the DOT we all wait in anticipation
vinniewinnie wrote:Absolutely not true! The reason that London -DC direct is more expensive is that it is direct, and people will pay more for that privilege! This is a yield issue, not an APD issue!
golfingboy wrote:Less of a need to offer as many flights between LHR and DUB between both carriers. Both of them do depend on some level of connecting traffic on both ends (LON and Ireland markets) but if EI is added to the JBA then BA doesn’t need to compete as much for Ireland customers and EI doesn’t need to compete as much for LON customers as they will start “sharing” those customers.
While EI has to continue to operate their Ireland flights (DUB/CRK/BHD/SNN) there are no parameters requiring that BA continues to maintain their LCY/LHR frequencies into the Ireland market.
If this JBA approved with no concessions in place, I’d expect to see less LON-Ireland frequencies on the BA side. Also, in reading between the lines I’d expect to see higher fares for certain nonstop LON-US routes as the more cost conscious customers get funneled through DUB on EI. I am assuming this is at least something that might concern the UK regulators.
msycajun wrote:Cunard wrote:Galwayman wrote:Is there a facility to email the DOT to object to this anticompetitive nonsense?
No there is not a facility for you to object to the DOT by personal email but you can always write them a nice little letter of complaint showing your total disdain for this ''anticompetitive nonsense''.
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
USA
I'm sure that the DOT would love to personally hear from you and read your letter of complaint!
Good luck and do keep us informed won't you with any response that you might get back from the DOT we all wait in anticipation
You can comment directly to the DOT here: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0252-3427
No email or letter required
jfklganyc wrote:The end of EI at T5 JFK?
AA had a ghost town PAAlace that needs to
be filled
BOS also sees EI at the B6 terminal.
Id imagine that would change.
Just doesnt make sense to continue
ClassicLover wrote:GCT64 wrote:
It also points to the fact that Aer Lingus codeshare with UA out of two of the Aer Lingus US destinations and with JetBlue out of one. A total of three out of 12 Aer Lingus US destinations. It shows the map where AA will allow EI to codeshare on them out of all 12 destinations, with some out of Dublin for AA into Europe.