O.K. your comparing mainline to mainline - that does not present the total picture. Some of the mid to small communities served by Northwest or YX or in which NW is dominant are extremley lucrative think GRB, think DUL , etc, etc. And I know that GRB is served by other carriers but NW is dominant in the market. Why do you think that NW gets its knickers in a twist when YX for instance starts service to DUL? It's because NW makes a lot of money in these captive markets.

Also looking at shared destinations as a one to one comparison also presents only part of the picture. For example GRB is a destination in and of itself, but any entree into GRB also represent a threat to NW's dominance in the Northern Wisconsin and U.P. Markets.


Again, it is not so much about these individual cities as it is the market and customer behavior. Folks in the midwest will drive a distance for a bargain fare. It is also about NW protecting the markets where they have a dominant presence. The goal is to keep an LCC out of the captive markets. I presume that DOJ is not just looking at a city by city comparison but also a more indepth analysis by broader markets.

I agree with you, in the greater marketplace YX is a small player. YX did provide a check to a small degree on NW. So should a 68% market-share by YX/NW be of more concern than a 63% market by, Air Tran for instance? I'd argure absolutely because with the NW/YX/TPG acquisiton there is little competion, whereas in the Air Tran scenario I would expect NW to vigorously compete. Because YX is so small and NW so large YX has little pricing power in MKE. A merged YX/Air Tran would have had the pricing power to compte against NW.

And it is just not about MKE - every city in which YX/NW are present has to be looked at for YX/NW marketshare post acquiition.