Search

Notices

Merger getting blocked

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-25-2023 | 03:36 PM
  #211  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by avi8orco
This is done…They’re just throwing random $hit now to see if it sticks. What does it matter if it’s BS that they have no idea what they’re talking about, they’re politicians, SOP.
These are not politicians, this is a private anti-trust group as I understand it. Read the plaintiff list!
Reply
Old 08-25-2023 | 04:27 PM
  #212  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Default

Could it be they “forgot” to redact the headline making sentences is because the palintiff
know their case is weak and this is last minute Hail Mary tactics to create buzz that crappy internet journalists run with?
Reply
Old 08-25-2023 | 05:07 PM
  #213  
Line Holder
 
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 358
Likes: 13
From: NYC Based 320 CA
Default

Originally Posted by Desdi
These are not politicians, this is a private anti-trust group as I understand it. Read the plaintiff list!
Private plaintiffs’ counsel failed to properly redact certain information which, taken out of context, creates a completely inaccurate picture of the facts. We are confident that our merger with Spirit will give a much-needed boost to airline competition in the U.S. and result in more low fares and higher-quality service for customers. We look forward to laying out all of the evidence to support our case this October.”


Update 2: JetBlue shares an additional statement,
Unfortunately, following a filing error by the legal team for a group of consumers that has filed a baseless lawsuit, we are in a position where we need to correct the record.

To be very clear, the claims reported by several media outlets did not reflect facts set out in JetBlue documents. Private plaintiffs represented by the merger class action lawyer, Alioto, in a the court filing laying out their arguments opposing our motion for summary judgment, incorrectly redacted sections of text so that it could be read by cutting and pasting into a new document. As we attempted to clarify yesterday, it is important to understand that the redacted text was content written and produced by Alioto in their own court filing, not redactions to JetBlue internal documents. These redactions were in text where Alioto had outlined, in their own words, their argument to the court, and essentially represents the plaintiff’s “spin” on confidential evidence they have reviewed. It’s no surprise a class action attorney would mispresent the facts in a brief to the court to preserve their case.

The factual evidence, when presented in a full and complete picture, will demonstrate that JetBlue intends for the merger with Spirit to increase competition and help lower fares across the board while also bringing JetBlue’s high-quality and much-loved experience to millions more travels.
Reply
Old 08-25-2023 | 05:17 PM
  #214  
RemoveB4flght's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Desdi
These are not politicians, this is a private anti-trust group as I understand it. Read the plaintiff list!
You are correct sir, a quick googling of the plaintiffs shows most of them are travel agents and have been plaintiffs in several other lawsuits, including against the AA/US air merger.
Reply
Old 08-25-2023 | 05:29 PM
  #215  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by JayRalstonSmith
Private plaintiffs’ counsel failed to properly redact certain information which, taken out of context, creates a completely inaccurate picture of the facts. We are confident that our merger with Spirit will give a much-needed boost to airline competition in the U.S. and result in more low fares and higher-quality service for customers. We look forward to laying out all of the evidence to support our case this October.”


Update 2: JetBlue shares an additional statement,
Unfortunately, following a filing error by the legal team for a group of consumers that has filed a baseless lawsuit, we are in a position where we need to correct the record.

To be very clear, the claims reported by several media outlets did not reflect facts set out in JetBlue documents. Private plaintiffs represented by the merger class action lawyer, Alioto, in a the court filing laying out their arguments opposing our motion for summary judgment, incorrectly redacted sections of text so that it could be read by cutting and pasting into a new document. As we attempted to clarify yesterday, it is important to understand that the redacted text was content written and produced by Alioto in their own court filing, not redactions to JetBlue internal documents. These redactions were in text where Alioto had outlined, in their own words, their argument to the court, and essentially represents the plaintiff’s “spin” on confidential evidence they have reviewed. It’s no surprise a class action attorney would mispresent the facts in a brief to the court to preserve their case.

The factual evidence, when presented in a full and complete picture, will demonstrate that JetBlue intends for the merger with Spirit to increase competition and help lower fares across the board while also bringing JetBlue’s high-quality and much-loved experience to millions more travels.
I was correcting a previous poster confusing this lawsuit with the DOJ Anti Trust suit against B6…. What’s your point with you copy pasting narritive? All I said is these are not politicians.
Reply
Old 08-27-2023 | 12:06 AM
  #216  
off weekends (if Reserve)
 
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 1,205
Likes: 121
Default

Originally Posted by RemoveB4flght

Biden called out “junk fees” in his address and has called on the house to create legislation against them to protect the consumer, yet his DOJ is working to block a merger which would eliminate most of these fees in the new larger JetBlue.
YES! This why the initial DOJ block has never made sense to me. The Spirit business model of “junk fees” is almost exclusively based upon exploiting the Poor akin to a For- profit -University, the narrative of this DOJ is that it’s some kind of Salvation Army.

Yet it is the current Washington so I’m not suprised, just disappointed
Reply
Old 08-28-2023 | 08:58 AM
  #217  
That/It/Thang
 
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 3,502
Likes: 370
Default

Originally Posted by 11atsomto
YES! This why the initial DOJ block has never made sense to me. The Spirit business model of “junk fees” is almost exclusively based upon exploiting the Poor akin to a For- profit -University, the narrative of this DOJ is that it’s some kind of Salvation Army.

Yet it is the current Washington so I’m not suprised, just disappointed
Reminds me how politicians scream about how we need access to ULCC airfare, and then the same politicians will fight to guarantee specific seat pitch on flights. How do you think prices get cheaper, more seats, less room.
Reply
Old 08-29-2023 | 05:52 PM
  #218  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 2,250
Likes: 109
Default

Originally Posted by 11atsomto
YES! This why the initial DOJ block has never made sense to me. The Spirit business model of “junk fees” is almost exclusively based upon exploiting the Poor akin to a For- profit -University, the narrative of this DOJ is that it’s some kind of Salvation Army.

Yet it is the current Washington so I’m not suprised, just disappointed
"REAL" reason DC doesn't like "junk fees"

Fare = FED TAX

Fees = NO TAX
Reply
Old 09-01-2023 | 04:50 AM
  #219  
Line Holder
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 320
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by nene
"REAL" reason DC doesn't like "junk fees"

Fare = FED TAX

Fees = NO TAX

Interesting argument.... I hadn't thought of that one.

But in this argument, wouldn't they be more in favor of Jetblue than leaving spirit solo?
Reply
Old 09-01-2023 | 05:21 AM
  #220  
RemoveB4flght's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by embraerjetpilot
Interesting argument.... I hadn't thought of that one.

But in this argument, wouldn't they be more in favor of Jetblue than leaving spirit solo?
Larger, stronger companies that can afford more pro business lobbyists are more of a threat than potential lost tax revenue, not to mention larger strong unions that historically have not be pro big government…
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Ferd149
Mergers and Acquisitions
117
11-08-2023 07:41 AM
cactiboss
American
35
09-03-2013 06:27 AM
APC225
United
92
12-22-2012 04:29 AM
BigGuns
Mergers and Acquisitions
50
04-19-2008 05:22 AM
RedBaron007
Regional
30
04-04-2007 09:16 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices