DOT votes against modified Delta-USAirways swap agreement - socialism???

[johnsonrod]

Is this a true story? I can't believe I am the first to post this story. It's not a surprise when you think about it. Given that MOST OF YOU people voted for pro-union Barry Obama and his socialist agenda, this is what you get... Simple as that. This was a great agreement with several happy parties - capitalism at work. People were optimistic.

But no - LaHood cancelled the new agreement (modified proposal) between the various parties. Next time, consider how your vote could impact your career - SOCIALSM S#CKS and mediocrity becomes the norm... Nobody wins. Everyone stays mediocre. Deficits climb. The Federal Government grows and regulations grow in influence. Taxes are raised on everyone - including the Middle Class. Incentives to work hard and strive for success diminish. People reduce their discretionary spending (buying fewer airplane tickets). Thanks Obama. Think before you vote next time. See the news story below:



Delta 'disappointed' in DOT slot swap decision, will review options
May 4, 2010

Delta expressed disappointment in Tuesday’s announcement by the U.S. Department of Transportation that it would not agree to Delta’s revised proposal to trade slots with US Airways and several other carriers at New York’s LaGuardia Airport and Reagan National Airport.

“We are disappointed in the DOT’s announcement that it will reject our modified proposal with US Airways, JetBlue Airways, AirTran Airways, WestJet and Spirit Airlines for a slot transaction at New York’s LaGuardia Airport and Reagan National Airport as it would ensure that several low-cost carriers would have access to these airports as requested by the DOT,” Delta said in a statement Tuesday. “We are reviewing our options.”

Under Delta and US Airways’ original proposal, US Airways would have transferred 125 operating slot pairs to Delta at LGA, and Delta would have transferred 42 operating slot pairs to US Airways at DCA. US Airways also would have gained access to São Paulo, Brazil, and Tokyo-Narita.

The airlines modified the plan in March after government regulators said some slots should be divested to bring in more competition. Under the revised proposal, Delta agreed to transfer up to five slots each to AirTran, Spirit and WestJet at LGA, while US Airways agreed to transfer five slots at DCA.

 

[FlyinPiker]

just adding to the above post

There is a lot being "missed out on" when it comes to the consumers "best interest" as shown below. I think we have a good case. Also not mentioned above is Airways and DAL have already said they are taking this to the Court of Appeals.


As previously outlined by Delta and US Airways, the airlines' proposed transaction would add flights to a number of cities from both the New York and Washington, D.C. markets.


I n New York, Delta will add or preserve service to dozens of small- and medium-sized communities while adding service in a number of markets not currently served by US Airways. The airline would also begin a multimillion dollar construction program at LaGuardia to connect the existing Delta and US Airways terminals. Delta has estimated that the transaction will generate as many as 7,000 new jobs in the New York City area driven by the construction of new facilities and the addition of service.


In Washington, D.C., US Airways will add 15 new, daily destinations to its schedule, including eight routes that currently have no daily nonstop service to Reagan National on any airline. US Airways plans to fly to all of the destinations that Delta decides to discontinue as a result of this transaction. The airline also will significantly expand its use of larger dual-class jets by nearly 50 percent at Reagan National.

 

[johnsonrod]

This is a clear example of socialism at work. The various parties were happy with the modified agreement. This looked very doable and there were many potential benefits to the flying public with new destinations served, etc.

I am afraid capitalism is slowing dying under this Administration... And no, Palin certainly ain't the answer. We need someone who is not a blatant supporter of European capitalism like Obama.

 

[densoo]

Given that MOST OF YOU people voted for pro-union Barry Obama and his socialist agenda, this is what you get... Simple as that.

Don't believe in the free market? We had a vote. The last guy's party was thrown out on its ear--by a people free to choose.

 

[slaquer5]

Don't believe in the free market?

Not in this case, they want to sell to someone that posses no threat .

 

[Dan Roman]

It appears to me Delta doesn't want the slots to go out on the freemarket. They want Government protection on what they do with them. If you want a freemarket, let them go to the highest bidder, period. That's capitalism.

 

[LawReview]

It appears to me Delta doesn't want the slots to go out on the freemarket. They want Government protection on what they do with them. If you want a freemarket, let them go to the highest bidder, period. That's capitalism.

That missed the point that their Delta's slots now. They're not looking for Govenment protection on what they do with them. They want to sell them to a willing buyer whom they choose. Actually that's captialism.

 

[hockeypilot44]

It appears to me Delta doesn't want the slots to go out on the freemarket. They want Government protection on what they do with them. If you want a freemarket, let them go to the highest bidder, period. That's capitalism.

Delta doesn't want to sell slots to anyone. They just want to trade slots with US Airways. It already went to the highest bidder. Delta and US Airways. How do you think they ended up with the slots to begin with?

 

[johnsonrod]

That missed the point that their Delta's slots now. They're not looking for Govenment protection on what they do with them. They want to sell them to a willing buyer whom they choose. Actually that's captialism.

That's the point. Delta and USAirways own their slots. They want to trade their slots. They were told no and then they actually modified their agreement to include other willing parties. This included airlines new to certain airports (i.e., JetBlue to DCA - a new competitor in that market!!!!).

But Barry, Lahood and their anti-competitive puppet masters decided that the Feds needed to get involved in everyone's business and make decisions because obviously the Feds know best... The Feds should control the markets and how people make decisions about assets (slots) THEY ALREADY OWN. What happened to deregulation????? Seriously, I hope Obama supporters start to wake up and see how our society is becoming more French every day.

Competition is what has made America strong and this example of Government intervention should be a wake-up call. The public would have benefitted from this arrangement too with many new city-pairs out of both LGA and DCA. Too bad it probably won't happen now if it doesn't make economic sense to Delta and USAirways... Thanks Obama (the Euorpean Socialists are clapping for you!!!!). Think before you vote next time.

 

[puddlejumper101]

I think this was a non-issue until SWA filed a complaint. Let's face it, it's no secret who they (DAL and USAIRWAYS) wanted out of DCA and LGA. I do believe SWA found legal ground to stand on (don't ask me what it is, I am not an attorney), and found the loophole. Don't hate the player, hate the game. More competition, that sounds like Capitalism to me. Bags fly free out of DCA also : )

 

[johnsonrod]

I think this was a non-issue until SWA filed a complaint. Let's face it, it's no secret who they (DAL and USAIRWAYS) wanted out of DCA and LGA. I do believe SWA found legal ground to stand on (don't ask me what it is, I am not an attorney), and found the loophole. Don't hate the player, hate the game. More competition, that sounds like Capitalism to me. Bags fly free out of DCA also : )

What? You're not an attorney but you believe SWA found solid legal ground to stand on? Hmmmm. Next time you want to sell your house, the Feds should jump in and stop you if your neighbor disagrees and wants first dibs. Get it? Think about it...

Just because SWA wants access to DCA doesn't mean that an agreement among 6-7 willing airlines should be negated. SWA got long-awaited access to LGA. SWA should also get access to DFW if gates are available and it should be able to fly pax out of DAL to California and other states (overturning the stupid Wright Ammendment). That doesn't mean they should be able to stop a legal transaction (asset swap) that would also benefit numerous new entrants (and the public).

The Government shouldn't be involved in a transaction of this nature - PERIOD. The Government doesn't always know best - even though Obama believes he knows what's best for everyone. People forget that new players were being added to these markets (JB in DCA and Westjet in LGA). Competition was increasing in a slot-controlled environment. New nonstop city pairs were being added out of DCA that would have benefitted the public. The public would have more choice and an agreement was worked out that satisfied the various parties.

Thanks Obama for reducing public access to nonstop flights that previously had not existed. You are the most articulate Socialist we have ever seen and all union-supporters should thank you every day for your great work at increasing mediocrity across our land... Merci!!!!!!

 

[puddlejumper101]

I don't know who is responsible, but what I do know is if SWA had not made a stink about it, we would not be having this conversation. Plus, those slots as far as I know are rented not owned. Two tennants agreed to the deal, but the landlord still had the final say. The landlord decided to let all tenants and potential tenants bid for the rental of the slots. All of this because there was a potential tenant that wanted in and whined about it.

 

[GuppyWN]

Divesting the slots will only SLIGHTLY reduce the monopoly that occurs in LGA and DCA.

If you think 15 pairs of slots is going to be a game changer - you're just whining to be whining. Southwest will get a foot in the door IF and ONLY IF we win the blind bid.

We're not the only airline in the US that wants these slots but I'd be lying if I didn't admit that seeing you spooled up about Canyon Blue Thunder in LGA didn't make me smile.

Gup

 

[tzskipper]

I don't know who is responsible, but what I do know is if SWA had not made a stink about it, we would not be having this conversation. Plus, those slots as far as I know are rented not owned. Two tennants agreed to the deal, but the landlord still had the final say. The landlord decided to let all tenants and potential tenants bid for the rental of the slots. All of this because there was a potential tenant that wanted in and whined about it.

I believe you are correct. For reference, this is the specific reason that SWA had to purchase ATA (in order to acquire the LGA slots that ATA controlled). If you do a search, I am sure there is an opinion written by the FAA concerning the disposition of LGA slots and who owns them. Without the actual purchase of the airline, the slots would have reverted back to the government. In other words, the slots were not an "asset" that ATA could sell.

Skipper

 

[asadonkey]

This is a perfect example of how socialism will always be the biggest threat to liberty and capitalism.

 

[Saluki Dawg]

What is Socialist about a blind auction where the highest bidder gets the slots. That's Capitalism at it's finest, and if I was a DL or US Shareholder I would insist that these two Airlines get the highest price they could get on the OPEN market.

 

[General Lee]

Not in this case, they want to sell to someone that posses no threat .

When you OWN something you actually bought, do you HAVE to give it to the highest bidder? I just don't think so. You may want to, but you certainly don't have to. That is the difference, and LaHood is also from Chicago, and I think you guys might have a base there? Cawinkidink? Yeah.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

What is Socialist about a blind auction where the highest bidder gets the slots. That's Capitalism at it's finest, and if I was a DL or US Shareholder I would insist that these two Airlines get the highest price they could get on the OPEN market.

Did CAL have a blind auction buying extra Heathrow slots? Um, nope. Do you have a blind auction selling your house? Probably, it was way too expensive and the bank took it back..... Quit being so cocky.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Raoul Duke]

hopefully both Delta and Airways will show the DOT what happens when they try to manufacture a desired outcome and simply lock the slots up indefinately - or even better agree to a marketing deal that sidesteps the DOT approval process. I have no doubt that Delta and Airways can out lawyer the DOT.

 

[DASHDRIVER]

I think that the people who are throwing the word socialism around on this thread should stop listening to Beck, and Limbaugh and pick up a book and read what socialism actually means. You may not like what the government is doing, fine. I don't agree with all of it either. But its not Socialism, and we are not a true democracy or a pure Capitalist state. We never have been. At best we are a Democratically elected Social Republic. We've been that way since day one. Seriously, stop watching Fox News and pick up a history book. Preferably one not published by Ruport Murdock.

I think most of the people who are the most angry at Obama and the government are venting it in the wrong direction or don't understand what is going on and how we got here. Obama didn't set up the rules for deregulating the airlines. He also has not influenced the way the anti-trust laws have been writen for 100 years. He also has no significant apointments put into the DOT since his election.

I don't even know why I am bothering to say this. In the next post somone is just going to acuse me of trying to take there guns, or call me a nazi or something and completely miss my point.

 

[DustyBottoms]

I think that the people who are throwing the word socialism around on this thread should stop listening to Beck, and Limbaugh and pick up a book and read what socialism actually means. You may not like what the government is doing, fine. I don't agree with all of it either. But its not Socialism, and we are not a true democracy or a pure Capitalist state. We never have been. At best we are a Democratically elected Social Republic. We've been that way since day one. Seriously, stop watching Fox News and pick up a history book. Preferably one not published by Ruport Murdock.

I don't even know why I am bothering to say this. In the next post somone is just going to acuse me of trying to take there guns, or call me a nazi or something and completely miss my point.

I give up, what is the definition of Socialism in the minds of the enlightened? If someone try's to tell me that socialism means something other than a contrast to Capitalism, then I become skeptical. This actually reminds me of a quote by Nikita Khrushchev, a leader of the Soviet Union during the Cold War: "We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."

I wouldn't call you a Nazi, either. I would consider the Nazis a fascist group, and a group who was actually against socialism. Don't let their name (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei) fool you. And don't let me read your history books.

Back to topic: I'm not sure what the DOT's definition of anti-competitive is. Maybe they read the same books and watch the same TV shows that DASHDRIVER does? If losing tens of billions of dollars over the last decade, while trying to stay alive in this business isn't cut-throat enough, then I don't know what is. I'm not too sure how we are going to attract bright, successful and innovative people and businesses to come to this country (or stay here) if they are told how much money they are allowed to make... if any at all.

...not to trying to be a stick in the mud, but this country is going downhill.

 

[9rj9]

Whats so bad about Socialism ? Your Union is pure Socialism, if it was capitalism then the 100 hour wonders from riddle would be allowed to replace a 777 captain as long as he flew for cheaper. A seniority list is socialism, why not compete for seniority by efficiency or vsi at touchdown ?
Delta nor US Air paid one cent for those slots, they were awarded to them in a very socialist move during a bankruptcy of eastern/TWA and others. When you spew about some slot swap and know nothing about how the airlines originally got them I assume your freaking trailer trash watching FOX news again.

 

[RedDogC130]

Whats so bad about Socialism ? Your Union is pure Socialism, if it was capitalism then the 100 hour wonders from riddle would be allowed to replace a 777 captain as long as he flew for cheaper. A seniority list is socialism, why not compete for seniority by efficiency or vsi at touchdown ?
Delta nor US Air paid one cent for those slots, they were awarded to them in a very socialist move during a bankruptcy of eastern/TWA and others. When you spew about some slot swap and know nothing about how the airlines originally got them I assume your freaking trailer trash watching FOX news again.

uh oh....someone brought in history........here we go...good work if it is true...I am too lazy to look it up. Will take u at your word until someone posts something that counters it then I will call u a damn liar and flame baiter....until then...u are up 1

 

[waveflyer]

Socialism does not equal regulated capitalism.

Both regulation and transfer of wealth are a REQUIREMENT Of capitalism. Without these, capitalism will ALWAYS devolve into feudalism where the winners that used to be the most efficient will be replaced by those with the biggest guns.

The federal govt has always retained the right, under the constitution, to regulate commerce. And appropriate&balanced regulation has been what has allowed america to prosper.

You want a totally unregulated market- go start a business in Somalia. See how you do. Over-regulation is something to guard against- but please remember that so is UNDER-regulation. Not agreeing on where that line between over and under regulated is NOT socialist. Only an idiot would offer that it is

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

i think that the people who are throwing the word socialism around on this thread should stop listening to beck, and limbaugh and pick up a book and read what socialism actually means. You may not like what the government is doing, fine. I don't agree with all of it either. . .

Thank you!

 

[FlyinPiker]

Not in this case, they want to sell to someone that posses no threat .

What is Socialist about a blind auction where the highest bidder gets the slots. That's Capitalism at it's finest, and if I was a DL or US Shareholder I would insist that these two Airlines get the highest price they could get on the OPEN market.

A lot of people are missing the point. This is not really so much as a sell as it is a "swap".

Swapping allows you to get something you might not have been able to otherwise which is also in the best interest of the shareholders. They don't want to get rid of these slots, but if they can be traded for better ones then why not?

Now as to whether they have the right to chose who they pass them off to....that's a whole other story.I actually believe the DOT/FAA does have the right to say "use them or lose them", but the problem is the precedent that has already been set by allowing other airlines to "swap" things that they don't effectively own (CAL/AAI).

Granting the AAI slots to CAL for use at EWR clearly was not in the best interest of the consumer. The package that is being offered up by Airways/DAL not only comes with significant benefits to both airlines, but also significant benefits to the consumer. This is not guaranteed if the slots go to auction.

The DOT/FAA is going to have to find another excuse other than "we are looking out for the consumer" to back their ruling. They obviously didn't mind giving CAL even more of a monopoly verses making them "tweak" things if they wanted the deal approved.

 

[Redmeat]

All you guys that are screaming socialism...you want pure capitalism in this industry?

How about no government intervention whatsoever in the industry?

What if every swingin-dick billionaire with a few bucks in his pocket could come in with a bunch of leased airbuses (read:free), pay their pilots $30,000 a year and take over ALL the routes. Charge $9 for a ticket.

Sound familiar?

And there will still be a line of shiny 'big jet' kids willing to fly cause $30,000 a year is twice as much money as they ever made in their 'flight-school' college.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[FlyinPiker]

§ 93.221 Transfer of slots.

http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title14/14-2.0.1.3.11.html#14:2.0.1.3.11.13.9.7

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this subpart, effective April 1, 1986, slots may be bought, sold or leased for any consideration and any time period and they may be traded in any combination for slots at the same airport or any other high density traffic airport. Transfers, including leases, shall comply with the following conditions:

(1) Requests for confirmation must be submitted in writing to Slot Administration Office, AGC–230, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591, in a format to be prescribed by the Administrator.....

(2) The slot transferred must come from the transferor's then-current FAA-approved base.

(3) Written evidence of each transferor's consent to the transfer must be provided to the FAA.

(4) The recipient of a transferred slot may not use the slot until written confirmation has been received from the FAA.

(5)(i) Until a slot obtained by a new entrant or limited incumbent carrier in a lottery held under §93.225 after June 1, 1991, has been used by the carrier that obtained it for a continuous 24-month period after the lottery in accordance with §93.227(a), that slot may be transferred only by trade for one or more slots at the same airport or to other new entrant or limited incumbent carriers under §93.221(a)(5)(iii). This transfer restriction shall apply to the same extent to any slot or slots acquired by trading the slot obtained in a lottery. To remove the transfer restriction, documentation of 24 months' continuous use must be submitted to the FAA Office of the Chief Counsel.

(6) The Office of the Secretary of Transportation must determine that the transfer will not be injurious to the essential air service program.


Injurious= harmful, hurtful, or detrimental. I hardly see how the deal we (DAL) put together is injurious. I don't care what you call it capitalism, socialism, whatever....it's total bull and I'm glad we are challenging it.

 

[johnsonrod]

How about too much Government control? I thought this industry was deregulated at one point? Not if Obama and Lahood (who looks like a Mafia gangster) have their way.

The biggest problem I have with this is that Lahood disagreed with the modified agreement. I can see how the Feds would want to stop the original agreement just between Delta and USAirways. But DL and US had modified the agreement and brought in many other airlines - including two entrants to the markets (JB and Westjet). This is just too much Government intervention.

I guess you Obama lovers get what you paid for...

 

[chase]

Some good points on both sides of the argument. Understand completely why DAL/LCC want to control who they wish to compete against. Other low cost carriers that control less than 5% of pax traffic vs one (SWA) that has 15% is a solid reason to limit the exposure.

Every airline would like to choose who it can compete against. What should the gov. do in such situations?

The DOT has spoken and DAL/LCC always has the option to nix the entire deal and stay with status quo. If that is better than the alternative and not good for the shareholders, then go for it.

Lets recall the US Gov gave out $15B to the airlines in 2002 after 9/11....some would argue that capitalism wouldn't have allowed that to happen.

"The measure gives the nation's airlines $5 billion in immediate cash assistance and $10 billion in loan guarantees in an effort to keep several major carriers from collapsing. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, R-Ill., was the only senator to vote against the bill." http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/21/rec.congress.airline.deal/

The two airlinles involved have both gone through bankruptcy.

Some would argue that true capitalism would have had the companies dissolve since they were unsuccessful in the competitive market place. Bankruptcy laws, most would agree I believe, have some very anti-captialistic elements to it (making businesses repay money to bankrupt companies up to 90 days after being paid is just one example that led many other companies into bankruptcy...I'm just saying...)

It is obvious what DAL/LCC want to do....increase profits and improve their efficiency while at the same time limiting their exposure to more competition. Is that the free market system?

It is not black and white and the courts, as is often the case, will make the call and with SWA (Herb) arguing on the side of more competition, that is a side that most people can understand and get behind. I'm not saying SWA should get all of the slots but the DOT obviously feels a blind auction is better than what was proposed as an alternative by DAL/LCC.

No offense directed toward others at DAL, LCC or others who have different opinions.