Update on DOJ case, they are being very vocal

Subscribe
1  2  3  4 
Page 2 of 4
Go to
"All they need to prove is that this merger is anti-competitive. They have the 1000 1 stop connects via the hhi and dougs e-mails."
The government numbers are skewed and smells of funny math.
Independent research has found these numbers to be much lower and government took advantage of a lot of gray area to get where they did.
Your wanting of this merger to die is oozing everywhere.
Reply
Everyone keeps saying the math is fuzzy but they never say how.

And I don't want it to die, I just dont feel like lying to myself to make me feel better.
Reply
Quote: Everyone keeps saying the math is fuzzy but they never say how.

And I don't want it to die, I just dont feel like lying to myself to make me feel better.
Flaws found in US DOJ lawsuit against American/US Airways merger | Aspire Aviation
Reply
Quote: I take a realist approach to this and don't subscribe to the echo chamber here..
I understand the "expect the worst" - Usairways is the only company that could manage to get rained on inside a building. That said, you do still have to,"Hope for the best." As bad as things are, we have seen worse days and lived through them. I hope that you never experience another 9/11 or even one bankruptcy, let alone two. I mean this in all sincerity, your health will suffer if you don't let just a little ray of sunshine in. So very sorry for the lecture- just wishing you the best, most successful, healthy career as a pilot. (also as far as the math you don't need to see numbers to know that the DOJ is off when they leave out Southwest and JetBlue.)
Reply
Quote: Everyone keeps saying the math is fuzzy but they never say how.

And I don't want it to die, I just dont feel like lying to myself to make me feel better.
The math is fuzzy in several ways. First, the government chose to use one-stop routes. Never been done that way before. Past consistency would have to been to compare non-stop routes only. "Okay" you say. "Times they are a changin'..." The government is changing how they look at these things. Well then, the DoJ failed to use all possible one-stop combinations when using our one-stops. They compared our one-stop monopolies against the rest of the industry's non-stops. Hardly seems fair to me...

The second way is their use of the term "markets." In previous mergers, the DoJ looked at nearby airports when comparing markets. For example, the New York market encompasses EWR, JFK, LGA, and even HPN. Or the MIA market includes FLL. Not this time. They are airport specific, for the first time. So, all of Spirit and JetBlue's FLL-Caribbean flying does not offset the HHI score for AA in MIA. That is idiotic, as they are direct, head-to-head competitors in those markets.

Finally, they are using the 1000 monopolistic markets (based on an HHI score) to demonstrate the need to block the merger. However, they excluded (by their own admission) certain competitors (Spirit, Allegient) from the analysis. Thus, their score is meaningless. They are basing decisions on a flawed score. I would say that is strike three...

Now, you keep saying that you're looking at this from a "realist"perspective. I question that. A realist would say that we have a rock-solid case, the government's actions are incompetent at best (criminal, at worst), and the math the DoJ used to justify their position is flawed. That is the reality of where we are. Does that mean we'll win? Who knows... It certainly appears that often the more convincing lawyer wins, not necessarily the party with the strongest case. Common sense says we will win. But, as we all know, common sense does not always prevail, particularly when dealing with the government. If I "knew" how it would go, I would either buy a ton of the stock, or short it -- and get rich. However, no one knows how it will go until the morning the verdict (decision) is read... I prefer to look at it as "not getting my hopes up again" until the cash is in the bank. But, the evidence certainly does seem to be pointin more towards the gov't bowing out...
Reply
Quote: The math is fuzzy in several ways. First, the government chose to use one-stop routes. Never been done that way before. Past consistency would have to been to compare non-stop routes only. "Okay" you say. "Times they are a changin'..." The government is changing how they look at these things. Well then, the DoJ failed to use all possible one-stop combinations when using our one-stops. They compared our one-stop monopolies against the rest of the industry's non-stops. Hardly seems fair to me...

The second way is their use of the term "markets." In previous mergers, the DoJ looked at nearby airports when comparing markets. For example, the New York market encompasses EWR, JFK, LGA, and even HPN. Or the MIA market includes FLL. Not this time. They are airport specific, for the first time. So, all of Spirit and JetBlue's FLL-Caribbean flying does not offset the HHI score for AA in MIA. That is idiotic, as they are direct, head-to-head competitors in those markets.

Finally, they are using the 1000 monopolistic markets (based on an HHI score) to demonstrate the need to block the merger. However, they excluded (by their own admission) certain competitors (Spirit, Allegient) from the analysis. Thus, their score is meaningless. They are basing decisions on a flawed score. I would say that is strike three...

Now, you keep saying that you're looking at this from a "realist"perspective. I question that. A realist would say that we have a rock-solid case, the government's actions are incompetent at best (criminal, at worst), and the math the DoJ used to justify their position is flawed. That is the reality of where we are. Does that mean we'll win? Who knows... It certainly appears that often the more convincing lawyer wins, not necessarily the party with the strongest case. Common sense says we will win. But, as we all know, common sense does not always prevail, particularly when dealing with the government. If I "knew" how it would go, I would either buy a ton of the stock, or short it -- and get rich. However, no one knows how it will go until the morning the verdict (decision) is read... I prefer to look at it as "not getting my hopes up again" until the cash is in the bank. But, the evidence certainly does seem to be pointin more towards the gov't bowing out...
Good post Andy.I don't know Canoe, but maybe he is a little like me. I straddle the fence between realist and pessimist, never accused of being an optimist.
Reply
Interesting that every person I have met that describes themself as a "realist" appear to be the most miserable people I have ever known.
I can't think of any situation where optimism hurts. What's the worst that can happen? You end up disappointed. So what.
The late John Wooden (Basketball Coach) said:
Things work out the best for those who make the best of the way things work out.
CG
Reply
Quote: Good post Andy.I don't know Canoe, but maybe he is a little like me. I straddle the fence between realist and pessimist, never accused of being an optimist.
I was pretty optimistic before August 13th.
Reply
Quote: Interesting that every person I have met that describes themself as a "realist" appear to be the most miserable people I have ever known.
I can't think of any situation where optimism hurts. What's the worst that can happen? You end up disappointed. So what.
The late John Wooden (Basketball Coach) said:
Things work out the best for those who make the best of the way things work out.
CG
Spend a few decades at US Air and get back to me!

My post was meant to be slightly light hearted, maybe I should have added a smiley.

We are all geared a certain way, with some room for change. Is the person miserable and that makes then realistic, or are they realistic and that makes them miserable? I hope for the best, plan for something less than the worst. Don't have massive weapons and food stores in the basement.

I hope the merger works out, but if any big or long term plans are affected by it I have to assume it won't. I'm about 60-40 that it will, today.
Reply
Quote: I was pretty optimistic before August 13th.
I've seen a lot of mergers come and go so I didn't spend any money on it.

I just don't think the DOJ suit passes the stink test. Of course it's the government, so we know how that goes, but Holder seemed to be changing the tune a little.
Reply
1  2  3  4 
Page 2 of 4
Go to