Fail. There is no reason this discussion needs to get into compare/contrast with another codeshare. I can only guess at Slow's intention in bringing up AE, but it strikes me as the first step in establishing the notion that if we have/had a codeshare that endures/endured, and if there is no difference with the RAH codeshare, then wouldn't precedent suggest the RAH agreement is also OK?

If nothing else, you're now set up to argue two different points with Slow.

I honestly don't know whether the RAH code violates our scope clause or not, but I'd like that case to be judged on its' own merits.