View Single Post
Old Apr 26, 16, 1:59 pm
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Alexandria, Longboat Key
Programs: Amtrak Select, AA AAdvantage, UA MileagePlus, DL SkyMiles, B6 TrueBlue
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by mnbp View Post
The problem with Longboat's argument is that it considers half of the equation. The US gets to allocate 5 routes, and Japan gets to allocate 5 routes. DOT will consider the effect of the Japanese route allocations when making their decision, since both UA and AA have anti-trust-immunized joint venture (ATI JV) partnerships with Japanese carriers holding 5 route authorities.
I am considering AA/JAL and UA/NH's JVs. This is why I highly doubt UA receives EWR-HND among other reasons. DL is deliberately making this a political ploy by applying for a route that they plan to axe if it is not approved in MSP-HND. DL COULD have avoided making this process political by applying for JFK-HND. Better than a 50/50 chance DOT would have approved all three routes. But they didn't. DL is basically daring DOT to reject MSP-HND so they can use that as an excuse to further cut NRT in ending MSP-NRT. If DOT were to approve of UA SFO-HND, AA DFW-HND and LAX-HND, and DL LAX-HND and ATL-HND, with HAL staying as is with HNL-HND the breakdown would be Star receives five total slots, including four day time slots to the US assuming NH keeps HNL-HND night time. OW would receive four day time slots to the US and DL, as the sole representative of SkyTeam would receive two. I find it very hard to believe MSP-HND somehow gives greater benefit to the traveling business public than DFW-HND as DFW traffic to Japan is leaps and bounds greater than MSP. MSP alone would be unable to support any Trans Pacific flight if it weren't for DL having their second/third largest hub there (depending on how you characterise the size of a hub either by seats or flights per day).
Longboater is offline