csg
Jul 6, 05, 3:07 pm
I came across this AA filing in opposition to the application for antitrust immunity for DL, NW, AF, AZ, and OK. http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf92/338167_web.pdf. While much of the filing is redacted because AA had access to confidential skyteam docs, the very clear implication is that DL and NW have not been straight with their Cincinatti and Memphis constitutents. AA is saying that if these consitutents knew the truth regarding DL and NW's plans, they might not be "such enthusiastic SkyTeam supporters"
I particularly enjoyed footnote 2: "Ironically, the Memphis Parties mistakenly believe that unless the proposed immunity is granted, 'Memphis' very future as a hub would be open to doubt,' which would be 'clearly inimical to the public interest.'" Their use of "ironically" suggests to me that NW plans to shut down Memphis as a hub, that Memphis acknowledges its being shut down is against the public interest, and that this supports AA's opposition to Skyteam antitrust immunity.
Just thought I'd cause some trouble.
I particularly enjoyed footnote 2: "Ironically, the Memphis Parties mistakenly believe that unless the proposed immunity is granted, 'Memphis' very future as a hub would be open to doubt,' which would be 'clearly inimical to the public interest.'" Their use of "ironically" suggests to me that NW plans to shut down Memphis as a hub, that Memphis acknowledges its being shut down is against the public interest, and that this supports AA's opposition to Skyteam antitrust immunity.
Just thought I'd cause some trouble.