Spirit diminishing QOL fact or rumor
10-14-2023 | 09:24 PM
#271
On Reserve
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
The governments biggest argument is based on a selection of routes cherry picked from q3 2021 to q1 2022. The government will attempt to define a market, to argue a section 7 violation (almost the entirety of the basis for the case), through the selection of 51 routes Spirit and JetBlue compete directly on, of which 6 don’t even exist anymore.
The government has attempted to block previous mergers, United and Continental specifically, on the same basis but were shot down as you need to look at the market (read airline route structure) in its entirety and can’t focus on just one specific snapshot of the entire route structure. It’s also been argued that air lines are ever changing in nature and cannot be so narrowly defined into a specific market as they are constantly in motion and always changing. Therefore, it’s hard to argue a section 7 violation due to the nature of an airline being in constant change and adapting its flying to market changes over time.
I think it’s going to be a nail biter, but I wouldn’t call it a long shot. I really think the government case is extremely weak and this has a better chance of passing than we all may have been lead to believe by Elizabeth Warren.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...s-corporation/
The government has attempted to block previous mergers, United and Continental specifically, on the same basis but were shot down as you need to look at the market (read airline route structure) in its entirety and can’t focus on just one specific snapshot of the entire route structure. It’s also been argued that air lines are ever changing in nature and cannot be so narrowly defined into a specific market as they are constantly in motion and always changing. Therefore, it’s hard to argue a section 7 violation due to the nature of an airline being in constant change and adapting its flying to market changes over time.
I think it’s going to be a nail biter, but I wouldn’t call it a long shot. I really think the government case is extremely weak and this has a better chance of passing than we all may have been lead to believe by Elizabeth Warren.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...s-corporation/
10-15-2023 | 04:20 AM
#272
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 368
Likes: 4
The governments biggest argument is based on a selection of routes cherry picked from q3 2021 to q1 2022. The government will attempt to define a market, to argue a section 7 violation (almost the entirety of the basis for the case), through the selection of 51 routes Spirit and JetBlue compete directly on, of which 6 don’t even exist anymore.
The government has attempted to block previous mergers, United and Continental specifically, on the same basis but were shot down as you need to look at the market (read airline route structure) in its entirety and can’t focus on just one specific snapshot of the entire route structure. It’s also been argued that air lines are ever changing in nature and cannot be so narrowly defined into a specific market as they are constantly in motion and always changing. Therefore, it’s hard to argue a section 7 violation due to the nature of an airline being in constant change and adapting its flying to market changes over time.
I think it’s going to be a nail biter, but I wouldn’t call it a long shot. I really think the government case is extremely weak and this has a better chance of passing than we all may have been lead to believe by Elizabeth Warren.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...s-corporation/
The government has attempted to block previous mergers, United and Continental specifically, on the same basis but were shot down as you need to look at the market (read airline route structure) in its entirety and can’t focus on just one specific snapshot of the entire route structure. It’s also been argued that air lines are ever changing in nature and cannot be so narrowly defined into a specific market as they are constantly in motion and always changing. Therefore, it’s hard to argue a section 7 violation due to the nature of an airline being in constant change and adapting its flying to market changes over time.
I think it’s going to be a nail biter, but I wouldn’t call it a long shot. I really think the government case is extremely weak and this has a better chance of passing than we all may have been lead to believe by Elizabeth Warren.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...s-corporation/
10-15-2023 | 08:12 PM
#273
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 1,226
Likes: 29
From: baller, shot caller
I know that you know this, but it should still be stated that any VIL LOA will likely happen if and ONLY if we get to the point where we have tons of CAs sitting around on reserve. And since they operate purely from a reactionary standpoint, before they offer 50 hours of pay they will first ask for voluntary unpaid leave just like during COVID times.
10-15-2023 | 08:34 PM
#274
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2022
Posts: 1,372
Likes: 141
And that’s the truth. Ted and Gang have zero incentive to make a profit and attrition isn’t an issue now that we hire CFIs and we have planes being grounded. Sadly our best opportunity at any “gains” prior to a merger approval will be a VIL LOA like JBLU.
What’s interesting, and nobody talks about, is NK could be back into section 6 negotiations as early as years end and I do believe the NK MEC needs to be getting ready for that as well. The assumption it’s going to be a JCBA isn’t guaranteed, not by a long shot.
What’s interesting, and nobody talks about, is NK could be back into section 6 negotiations as early as years end and I do believe the NK MEC needs to be getting ready for that as well. The assumption it’s going to be a JCBA isn’t guaranteed, not by a long shot.
10-16-2023 | 02:15 AM
#275
Banned
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
If we go into section 6 negotiations the company will stonewall us for two years just like they always do. During that two year period they will file for bankruptcy or announce a frontier merger. Neither of which have is making any contractual gains for probably 5-8yr imo.
10-16-2023 | 05:02 AM
#276
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 33
If we go into section 6 negotiations the company will stonewall us for two years just like they always do. During that two year period they will file for bankruptcy or announce a frontier merger. Neither of which have is making any contractual gains for probably 5-8yr imo.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
