Originally Posted by 1flyguy

Hey Mr. Flintstone,

You make it sound like Alaska had no basis for their petition. Let's look at some facts and talk about lawyer "antics."

First, VX is denied their original start-up date by the DOT. Why? Well, the government wasn't real comfortable with their ownership make up. So after a couple of magic changes (on paper) they were eventually allowed to start operations about a year after they had originally planned. Probably Alaska's fault huh?

Next, VX doesn't want to disclose their financial data to the DOT as every other U.S. operator is required to do. The DOT (finally) denies their claim and orders VX to make their financial data public. But wait, VX doesn't feel they should have to because it would be a disadvantage to them due to the fact that competitors could use the data to try to gain market share from them. And even though the DOT gave their ruling once, thanks to those fancy "lawyer antics," VX appeals the DOT's original decision. This gets locked up in the halls of the DOT for another 8 months until they finally deny VX's appeal. Alaska's fault of course.

Next comes some fairly reliable rumors that a couple of VX's investors have cashed in on their investment. Obviously, if true, this would put VX's ownership status into question. Based on those facts Alaska petitioned the DOT to ensure VX was in compliance with U.S. law. The DOT sits on the info for a long period and does nothing. So, Alaska petitions the DOT again, along with a few labor unions, and even a couple of skeptical politicians voiced their concern. Now after a lengthy process the DOT finally comes out and says, "why yes VX is indeed compliant with the U.S. ownership rules." Of course, VX did make some changes just to be sure. Out of curiosity though, why isn't one of the original investors listed in the new ownership structure? You know, the one that the rumors were about. And when did the BOD decide to invest more? I didn't see that anywhere before. Now we find out that the VX employees actually own a stake? Again, I didn't see that listed anywhere previously. I mean, before the DOT's ruling did you know you owned 16.7% of the company? Cool news huh? Congrats.

So you can pretend that it was all "lawyer antics from your friends up north." But I think it is safe to say that the DOT met with the folks from VX behind closed doors and told them they needed to restructure their ownership. The DOT certainly doesn't want to shut anyone down and put more people on the street in this economy and job market. Would Alaska love it if VX had to shut the doors? Absolutely! But they also have a right to make sure that one of their main competitors is playing by the same rules that everyone is required to play by.

I realize that you are an employee of VX and I don't blame you one bit for supporting your company. However, try to be a little realistic. There were some serious questions regarding the ownership of your airline. There is a lot of debate out there on the merits of current U.S. ownership laws. But for right now, it's the law.