Originally Posted by
Justinroundtheworld
1) 'De-facto shells'? Where did you cite that from?
2) They never 'pretend' to be locally-managed. It's a JOINT VENTURE.
3) What's wrong inviting foreign airlines to base in HK? Protect sovereignty? Are you suggesting HK should be a closed market? In that case no 'foreign' planes should fly in HK. Do you prefer a monopoly market with homogenous product and services?
Emirates flies HKG-BKK. Why do you think they are allowed to do so? Cathy operates their own flights between New York and Vancouver. How would you explain that?
In the UK, BAA (British Airport Authority) had to sell off some of the UK inland airports to foreign operators - from Spain for instance - as Competition Commission rules BAA is too monopoly. The idea - or theory - is to introduce competition to make things more efficient. Selling 'country asset' is debatable but that makes it a true open market. What you are suggesting is North Korea is a good economy model
Hong Kong is clearly not a closed market. Foreign carriers can apply to fly to HKG and utilize the slots available under the respective air services agreements. Jetstar can utilize its other Asian subsidiaries to open HKG routes. This is not an issue of closing the market to competition at all.
Foreign carriers are welcome to fly to HKG but utilize the rights of the respective foreign country and not those destined for Hong Kong carriers. This separation is to ensure a fair market and level playing field. An Australian carrier, for example, uses the rights destined for Australian carriers and not those for Hong Kong carriers.
This is also not a 5th freedom question either. Jetstar has not applied 5th freedoms so comparing to the likes of EK, ET and AI who do 5th freedoms from HKG to elsewhere within Asia is entirely irrelevant. In fact, these 5th freedoms show how open HKG is to foreign competitors.