Info79

https://www.telegraaf.nl/financieel/1958248590/klm-vreest-vrije-val-mogelijk-1000-vluchten-minder-naar-vs

Will KLM lose slots in the USA? What do you think?
Do you think the Dutch government will waive the capacity limit if the pressure from the USA increases?
What happens if KLM has to give up 1000 flights between the US and EU? Can this be compensated by other routes?

Questions upon questions

Fabo.sk

I'm still not sure how in this day and age, a private company with minority government ownership, can be punished for actions of a national government and a separate company.

view

This is an interesting one and the Americans seem to want to play hardball.

At the end of the day, KLM will be one of the main losers here and ulimately the customers. KLM may recoup some of the loss in higher fares if there are flight restrictions, but as a transfer hub they would lose a lof of traffic to CDG, BRU, FRA, MUC, LHR etc.

Perhaps this plays exactly into what the Dutch government wants, with even more reductions being implemented than they have imposed so far?

mfkne

We're talking about the United States here.

ovacikar

I'm still not sure how in this day and age, a European government decides to violate the terms of an international treaty they are part of, by taking away Jetblue's existing slots .

etiene

You must have accidentally posted before including the text which guarantees an airline slots at a capacity restricted airport.

mlin32

Not happening. The US just likes to play hardball when it's convenient and protects its own lobbyists (aren't they are champions of free markets ?), but there's no guarantee an airline can get new slots at a capacity restricted airport.

HadesNL

The only winner is Delta,
they can take over KLM's passengers with destination USA
and aren't most Delta flights also KLM codeshares so ..... nothing all to worrysome

steveholt

DL and KL are in a joint venture.

TravellingChris

The issue is the fact that the capacity restrictions are resulting in multiple carriers being booted entirely from Schiphol. Although European carriers like hometown KLM, Easyjet and others will have to reduce flights, they will still have large operations at the airport. JetBlue (and the other 23 airlines on the Dutch list) will have nothing. That's what the American side objects to.

The Dutch wouldn't be happy if mandated capacity restrictions at, say, Jack Kennedy resulted in KLM losing all its slots while Delta kept most of its transatlantic routes from the same airport. They would consider that unfair. So why should the American side go along with restrictions that unfairly disadvantage a U.S. carrier on transatlantic routes?

TravellingChris

JetBlue isn't asking for new slots. They're losing the ones they had already.

TravellingChris

Happens all the time.

Look at trade agreements. Canada and Mexico had a dispute with the United States over Country of Origin (COOL) labeling on food, which they felt unfairly disadvantaged their products in the U.S. market and was a violation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (now the USMCA). So Canada hit the U.S. with punitive duties on a variety of products, including whiskey. These products and the companies that made them had nothing to do with the original dispute but were calculated to punish the states represented by senators and members of Congress who supported COOL. It worked, and the U.S. backed down.

EricVdb

The Dutch government doesn't care. The responsible mp already said he knows the reduction might lead to potential loss of KLM flights and he is OK with it.

The government seems hellbend on destroying aviation in this country and KLM especially.

etiene

I get the issue, and I don’t actually think airlines should be booted out wholesale. However, when quoting treaty and claiming that it’s being broken one should be careful to quote text that actually addresses the issue - Open Skies does not to my knowledge guarantee slots to any airline who wants to operate a route, that’s an entirely different process.

YVR Cockroach

Don't forget the softwood lumber tariffs that have been levied on Canadian lumber imports into the U.S. since before the original Canada-U.S. free trade agreement of the mid-late '80s. Canada wins tribunal rulings which the U.S. congress ignores (I like to apply "American Exceptionalism").

Canada challenging U.S. softwood tariffs under the new NAFTA agreement | CBC News

It takes a country not in thrall of the U.S. to stand up against it.