View Single Post
Old 09-18-2009 | 06:02 AM
  #28  
acl65pilot's Avatar
acl65pilot
Happy to be here
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Default

Originally Posted by Sink r8
And who gains from this? We both have big boulders, and little ponds that are easily swamped. I don't want to be in the business of diluting yields for the purpose of determining whose rocks are biggest. I'd rather we stay out of each other's markets as much as possible.

With that being said, Delta was always the first to blink. I'm glad to see we're not allowing poaching without a response, i.e. flights to PHX during the hostile (UsAirways) take-over, and response to SWA in both MDW-MSP and DEN-MSP.



Agreed. We would be OK with proper Haneda access, and if AMR pays a hefty price for JAL.
I agree, and I do not think that DAL and AMR will go to a point of putting themselves in a world of hurt. It will be tit for tat to a limit.

The goal IMHO is access if Open Skies is implemented. We need to realize that if we gain access or get JAL, we will more than likely drop our formal complaint against open skies. That clears the way, so there is some benefit to going with DAL. More than just the AF/KLM/DAL/Alaska/SkyTeam/Olympic codes share/ JV.
Reply