I quite readily admit that things are not looking good for *A with regard to JJ , and I have never said that JJ won't/can't leave *A.

What I have said is that regulatory approval for LAN's takeover of TAM does not automatically equal regulatory approval for TAM to join LAN in OW.

It may happen, it may not, but one does not automatically follow from the other.

LAN and TAM joining forces actually produces fairly limited concerns from a consumer/competition perspective, there is very little overlap ( for obvious reasons I don't like the deal, but in and of itself, I don't believe the takeover is anti-competitive.)

TAM joining OW and ending up allied with AA as well could be viewed very differently from a consumer/competition perspective. When IB is added to the mix as well the combination could certainly be argued to be detrimental to competition and to the consumer and, in my opinion ( yes, I admit that it is opinion) I would expect that any relevant authorities would scrutinise such a move very carefully prior to approving it.

If it is your opinion that after the takeover a subsequent move by JJ to OW will be rubberstamped by any and all relevant authorities without any investigation at all regarding the concentration of market share and the impact on consumers/competition, well that's fine, you are also entitled to your opinion.

I fully expect the LAN takeover of TAM to proceed ( I don't deny that I would prefer it not to, furthermore, I think it was extremely unethical for TAM to have actually gone through with their accession to *A and only 3 months later announce their intention to be taken over by a member of a rival alliance - the deal had clearly been in the making for quite some time and I do not believe that JJ acted in good faith when they joined *A)

I am also not sure what you mean by 'for once' LH ( I assume you actually meant *A) is in a difficult position. *A has been in a difficult position in Latin America for a long time , and I freely admit that too.