Before the Us Department Of

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Before the Us Department Of BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. __________________________________________ ) Application of ) ) Virgin Atlantic Airways, Ltd. ) Delta Air Lines, Inc. ) Société Air France ) Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. ) Docket DOT-OST-2013-0068 Alitalia Compagnia Aerea Italiana S.P.A. ) ) Under 49 U.S.C. §§ 41308 and 41309 ) for approval of and antitrust immunity ) for Alliance Agreements ) __________________________________________) MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AND SUR-REPLY OF JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION Communications with respect to this document should be sent to: Robert C. Land Senior Vice President, Government Affairs and Associate General Counsel Adam L. Schless Director Aircraft Transactions and International Counsel JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION 1212 New York Avenue, N.W. Suite 1212 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 715-2565 [email protected] [email protected] December 17, 2018 BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. __________________________________________ ) Application of ) ) Virgin Atlantic Airways, Ltd. ) Delta Air Lines, Inc. ) Société Air France ) Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. ) Docket DOT-OST-2013-0068 Alitalia Compagnia Aerea Italiana S.P.A. ) ) Under 49 U.S.C. §§ 41308 and 41309 ) for approval of and antitrust immunity ) for Alliance Agreements ) __________________________________________) MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AND SUR-REPLY OF JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION “Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the Department has a regulatory obligation to consistently apply its precedents and evidentiary standards” in ATI proceedings. -Answer of Delta Air Lines, Inc.” at 22, November 26, 2008.1 JetBlue wholeheartedly agrees with Delta that the APA requires the Department to treat this antitrust immunity (ATI) application in a manner that is consistent with past precedent.2 JetBlue does not, however, agree with the Joint Applicants’ attempts to minimize what is at stake in this proceeding, nor with their request that the Department completely ignore precedent, rush to declare the record substantially complete, and issue a decision granting ATI, all in the absence of a complete and up-to-date evidentiary record. The Joint Applicants self-describe their application 1 Docket DOT-OST-2008-0234. 2 Common names for airlines are used herein. JetBlue hereby moves for leave to file this sur-reply to the Joint Answer of Delta, Air France-KLM and Virgin Atlantic. Good cause exists for the Department to accept JetBlue’s sur-reply in the interest of ensuring that a full and accurate record is established that will allow the Department to properly adjudicate this matter. JetBlue’s request for leave to file and sur-reply is timely filed pursuant 14 C.F.R. § 302.6(d). as an innocuous attempt to close a “small seam”3 between existing grants of ATI that they assert needs further global immunization from the antitrust laws, an action the Department recently characterized as a “discretionary grant of extraordinary relief from the antitrust laws” (emphasis added).4 But the Joint Applicants’ attempts to frame their significant request for global immunity as a piece of cloth with a seam that needs repair wholly fails, and should be rejected. Immunization from the antitrust laws is not an administrative formality. It is a significant and serious matter, particularly where, as here, an unrestricted grant of immunity has long-lasting potential to result in reduced competition and consumer harm. I. DESPITE THEIR ASSERTIONS TO THE CONTRARY, THE JOINT APPLICANTS’ ATI REQUEST RAISES BONA FIDE CONCERNS REGARDING AIRPORT ACCESS CONSTRAINTS AT MAJOR EUROPEAN AIRPORTS The Joint Applicants assert that Delta-Virgin Atlantic together currently control 5% of London Heathrow Airport (LHR) slot holdings and that Air France-KLM control an additional 3% of slot holdings at LHR. If the Department grants ATI, the combined joint venture would, by their own admission, control 8% of LHR slot holdings. But the Department should not be swayed by the Joint Applicants’ attempts to minimize the impact an ATI grant would have on competition at LHR, especially for new entrant carriers, as a grant of immunity would allow Delta and Virgin Atlantic to increase the size of their LHR slot portfolio by a staggering 60% once Air France- KLM’s slots become an integral component of the conglomerate joint venture. Air France and KLM do not operate transatlantic service at LHR on their own metal and would likely face different 3 “Joint Answer to Motion of JetBlue” at 1. 4 DOT Order 2016-11-2 at 27. 2 financial incentives, in the context of the new joint venture, to transfer their slots to Delta and Virgin Atlantic.5 The Joint Applicants willfully ignore, or deem wholly unimportant, that the Department currently has no mechanism in this proceeding to examine how LHR slot dynamics exist today and have changed since previous ATI grants. This is particularly important given the drastic changes in the marketplace that JetBlue previously described in its November 27, 2018 motion, and can only be remedied by a thorough and fulsome production of a complete and up-to-date evidentiary record. In an attempt to distract from the fact that an ATI grant would increase Delta and Virgin Atlantic’s slot holdings, the Joint Applicants assert that IAG has increased the percentage of slots they control at LHR from 45% in 2010 to over 60% today. When oneworld carriers sought ATI in 2008 while controlling 45% of LHR slots, both the Department and European Commission had significant enough competition concerns to impose a slot remedy in order to protect competition in the market and to guard against consumer harm.6 A decade later, any further increase in slot concentration at LHR, by the Joint Applicants or by IAG, further exacerbates these prima facie competition concerns and should be reviewed and remedied in the same fashion. JetBlue fully supports a comprehensive Departmental review of the oneworld joint venture when the current joint Department-European Commission slot-remedies expire in 2020.7 5 The parties also make no mention of what percentage of the transatlantic United States-Europe market is or would be controlled by the conglomerate mega-joint venture. An ATI grant would further increase concentration in the broad transatlantic United States-Europe market, which is almost 90% controlled by three tri-oligopolistic immunized alliances. 6 See DOT Orders 2010-2-8 and 2010-7-8. 7 JetBlue notes that American recently indicated that it does not oppose periodic review of ATI grants. In the ongoing American-Qantas ATI proceeding, American stated earlier this month that it “would not oppose a Department review 3 However, it is the Joint Applicants, not the oneworld carriers, that are seeking expanded ATI in this proceeding, and the actions of the oneworld carriers since their ATI grant does not obviate the need for the Department to examine the competitive impact of this ATI request on the marketplace given present circumstances. Nonetheless, JetBlue agrees that oneworld’s slot holdings are relevant and should be examined in the context of this ATI proceeding. The Joint Applicants’ assertion about the increase in slot concentration at LHR from 45% in 2010 to over 60% today, with now nearly 10% of slots controlled by the Joint Applicants themselves, is relevant and is precisely the reason why the Department must build a complete evidentiary record in this proceeding. Such an action would allow the Department to establish a meaningful real time snapshot of the competitive environment that exists today, and to properly evaluate how the proposed ATI grant would impact competition, consumers and new entrant carriers. This record can and should examine the slot and commercial changes that have occurred since the Department last performed a competitive analysis and granted immunity, and examine how past slot remedies at LHR have been used so that the Department can reach a determination as to whether the original purpose of those slot remedies has been achieved or frustrated.8 The Joint Applicants also conspicuously fail to mention the percentage of slots they control at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport (CDG) and Amsterdam Airport Schiphol (AMS). This information is particularly relevant in this ATI proceeding as AMS, like LHR, is a completely of the Proposed JBA after five years…any review of ATI by the Department should be no sooner than five years after implementation…the Parties would not be opposed to such a review, assuming the Department applied the requirement fairly across all future grants of ATI and not only for the Proposed JBA.” See “Joint Reply of American Airlines, Inc. and Qantas Airways Limited”, December 4, 2018, Docket DOT-OST-2018-0030. 8 The 2013 ATI grant to Delta and Virgin Atlantic expressly stated that previous slot remedies were a major factor in the Department’s competitive analysis. See DOT Orders 2013-8-21 and 2013-9-14. 4 saturated airport with no new slots available.9 Should the Department issue an evidence request, JetBlue urges it to request specific information regarding slot holdings at AMS and CDG, in addition to LHR, London Gatwick Airport (LGW) and any other European airport potentially impacted by an ATI grant in this proceeding. II. NEW ISSUES HAVE ARISEN THAT WARRANT THE DEPARTMENT’S CONSIDERATION AND FURTHER SUPPORT THE NEED FOR A COMPLETE EVIDENTIARY RECORD IN THIS PROCEEDING There are additional reasons for the Department to proceed with caution in this proceeding, which very recently presented themselves and have the potential to further affect the competitive landscape at LHR. First, British carrier Flybe, itself the recipient of competition remedy slots at LHR, has indicated that it is seeking to sell itself to either Virgin Atlantic or IAG. In addition to remedy slots at LHR, Flybe also holds significant slot holdings at CDG and AMS. Flybe’s acquisition, by either IAG or Virgin Atlantic, would have significant effects on competition at slot- controlled airports like LHR and AMS where no new slots are available, and further deter the introduction of competitive services from new entrant carriers.
Recommended publications
  • IATA CLEARING HOUSE PAGE 1 of 21 2021-09-08 14:22 EST Member List Report
    IATA CLEARING HOUSE PAGE 1 OF 21 2021-09-08 14:22 EST Member List Report AGREEMENT : Standard PERIOD: P01 September 2021 MEMBER CODE MEMBER NAME ZONE STATUS CATEGORY XB-B72 "INTERAVIA" LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY B Live Associate Member FV-195 "ROSSIYA AIRLINES" JSC D Live IATA Airline 2I-681 21 AIR LLC C Live ACH XD-A39 617436 BC LTD DBA FREIGHTLINK EXPRESS C Live ACH 4O-837 ABC AEROLINEAS S.A. DE C.V. B Suspended Non-IATA Airline M3-549 ABSA - AEROLINHAS BRASILEIRAS S.A. C Live ACH XB-B11 ACCELYA AMERICA B Live Associate Member XB-B81 ACCELYA FRANCE S.A.S D Live Associate Member XB-B05 ACCELYA MIDDLE EAST FZE B Live Associate Member XB-B40 ACCELYA SOLUTIONS AMERICAS INC B Live Associate Member XB-B52 ACCELYA SOLUTIONS INDIA LTD. D Live Associate Member XB-B28 ACCELYA SOLUTIONS UK LIMITED A Live Associate Member XB-B70 ACCELYA UK LIMITED A Live Associate Member XB-B86 ACCELYA WORLD, S.L.U D Live Associate Member 9B-450 ACCESRAIL AND PARTNER RAILWAYS D Live Associate Member XB-280 ACCOUNTING CENTRE OF CHINA AVIATION B Live Associate Member XB-M30 ACNA D Live Associate Member XB-B31 ADB SAFEGATE AIRPORT SYSTEMS UK LTD. A Live Associate Member JP-165 ADRIA AIRWAYS D.O.O. D Suspended Non-IATA Airline A3-390 AEGEAN AIRLINES S.A. D Live IATA Airline KH-687 AEKO KULA LLC C Live ACH EI-053 AER LINGUS LIMITED B Live IATA Airline XB-B74 AERCAP HOLDINGS NV B Live Associate Member 7T-144 AERO EXPRESS DEL ECUADOR - TRANS AM B Live Non-IATA Airline XB-B13 AERO INDUSTRIAL SALES COMPANY B Live Associate Member P5-845 AERO REPUBLICA S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Voluntary Carbon Offsetting 44 1-3%
    FACT SHEET #11 / NOVEMBER 2020 VOLUNTARY CARBON OFFSETTING A number of airlines already offer voluntary carbon offsetting for passengers, how do they work? Each flight produces carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and whilst there are a lot of things being done by airlines to reduce the fuel use and CO2 emissions, often passengers would like to know how they can help lower the CO2 footprint of their travel. Voluntary carbon offsetting is one option available to passengers, either through an airline programme directly, or a third-party offset provider. What are offsets? 44 A large number of corporate travellers The name ‘offset’ can cover a variety of sources of CO2 reduction. It is a way to compensate for CO2 being produced airlines offer and individual in one area, by helping to fund a project which reduces CO2 in voluntary carbon passengers will another area. offsetting offset through third- programmes to party providers: we For example, if a passenger’s flight produces 2 tonnes of passengers. have no visibility CO2, they can choose to help fund a project which provides renewable energy to replace 2 tonnes of fossil fuel-related Half of the world’s 20 on the uptake of CO2 production. largest airlines offer offsets through these offsetting. sources. This is an offset, or a ‘carbon credit’. Most credits / offsets are in units of one tonne of CO2 and they can be generated by a range of different programmes around the world, in renewable energy, forestry and eventually they may be available in carbon capture, using technology to literally draw CO2 out of the 1-3% atmosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • DHL and Leipzig Now Lead ATM Stats 3 European Airline Operations in April According to Eurocontrol
    Issue 56 Monday 20 April 2020 www.anker-report.com Contents C-19 wipes out 95% of April air traffic; 1 C-19 wipes out 95% of April air traffic; DHL and Leipzig now lead movements statistics in Europe. DHL and Leipzig now lead ATM stats 3 European airline operations in April according to Eurocontrol. The coronavirus pandemic has managed in the space of a According to the airline’s website, Avinor has temporarily month to reduce European air passenger travel from roughly its closed nine Norwegian airports to commercial traffic and 4 Alitalia rescued (yet again) by Italian normal level (at the beginning of March) to being virtually non- Widerøe has identified alternatives for all of them, with bus government; most international existent (at the end of March). Aircraft movement figures from transport provided to get the passengers to their required routes from Rome face intense Eurocontrol show the rapid decrease in operations during the destination. competition; dominant at Milan LIN. month. By the end of the month, flights were down around Ryanair still connecting Ireland and the UK 5 Round-up of over 300 new routes 90%, but many of those still operating were either pure cargo flights (from the likes of DHL and FedEx), or all-cargo flights Ryanair’s current operating network comprises 13 routes from from over 60 airlines that were being operated by scheduled airlines. Ireland, eight of which are to the UK (from Dublin to supposed to have launched during Birmingham, Bristol, Edinburgh, Glasgow, London LGW, London the last five weeks involving Leipzig/Halle is now Europe’s busiest airport STN and Manchester as well as Cork to London STN).
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Statements Bulletin
    Finnair Group financial statement bulletin 1 January–31 December 2016 Comparable full-year operating result more than doubled year on year; positive in Q4 October–December 2016 Revenue increased by 0.4% year-on-year to 569.9 million euros (567.7)*. Excluding the sold travel agencies, revenue growth was 1.2% Available seat kilometres (ASK) grew by 3.5%. Comparable operating result was 1.6 million euros (0.8). Operating result was 18.2 million euros (85.0). The items affecting comparability were mainly related to foreign exchange gains. Comparable EBITDAR was 59.4 million euros (59.5). Net cash flow from operating activities totalled 30.5 million euros (7.1), and net cash flow from investing activities amounted to -264.7 million euros (-7.8).** Unit revenue (RASK) decreased by 3.0% year-on-year.*** Unit cost (CASK) decreased by 3.2% and unit cost at constant currency excluding fuel decreased by 1.6% year-on-year. Ancillary and retail revenue per passenger grew by 10.3% year-on-year to 12.2 euros. Earnings per share were 0.08 euros (0.44). January–December 2016 Revenue increased by 2.8% year-on-year to 2,316.8 million euros (2,254.5) with 6.5% ASK growth. Excluding the sold travel agencies, revenue growth was 3.2%. Comparable operating result was 55.2 million euros (23.7). Operating result was 116.2 million euros (121.7) including the sales gain on one Airbus A350 widebody aircraft (two were sold and leased back in 2015). Comparable EBITDAR was 270.4 million euros (231.2).
    [Show full text]
  • Global Aviation Monitor (GAM)
    Institute of Air Transport and Airport Research Global Aviation Monitor (GAM) Analysis and Short Term Outlook of Global, European and German Air Transport June 2018 Institute of Air Transport and Global Aviation Monitor (GAM) Airport Research June 2018 Main Results of Global Air Transport Supply Analysis and Outlook Background: Covers about 3,500 airports worldwide Covers about 850 airlines worldwide Air transport supply of 2017: More than 37 M flights (non-stop) worldwide, new record value Busiest month so far in 2018: June with 3.3 M flights Air traffic increases slowly since April 2013 Forecasting methodology: Time series analysis The mean absolute forecast error over a twelve month period typically lies in a range of between 0.5 and 1.5 percentage points for a forecast horizon of 1, 2 & 3 months. Analysis: July 2017 – June 2018 Global History: About 5 % growth per year before financial crisis 2008/2009, then a rapid decline of more than 9 % between February 2008 and February 2009, followed by a rather slow recovery until 2011 (7.2 % increase between February 2009 and February 2011). Since 2011, the number of flights grows only very slowly; stagnation between September 2012 and March 2013, small growth rates since April 2013; growth rates of around 3 % since March 2015, 3.0 %- 6.3 % between December 2015 and June 2018 March 2018: 3.3 M flights supplied (+5.1 %) Airports: Heterogeneous development of no. of flights offered; strong growth e.g. at Jakarta and Frankfurt (10 % and more) Airlines: Heterogeneous development of no. of flights offered; strong growth e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Chair's Office CAA Non-Executive Board Members: Mr Graham Ward
    Chair’s Office CAA Non-Executive Board Members: Mr Graham Ward CBE Ms Katherine Corich BY E-MAIL Alan Hudson, Simon Edel, Joanne Robinson and Lucy Winterbourne Joint Administrators of Flybe Ltd (In Administration) Ernst & Young LLP 1 More London Place London SE1 2AF 9 March 2021 Dear Joint Administrators, 1. Decision 01/2021 by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in relation to the Consumer & Markets Group (CMG)’s proposal to revoke the Operating and Route Licences of Flybe Limited (Flybe) 1. We refer to the CMG notice dated 19 January 2021 (CMG Proposal) containing its proposal to revoke Flybe’s operating licence (OL) OL/A/16 and route licences (RLs) C/27 and S/27. 2. The hearing in relation to Flybe’s request for a review took place on 26 February 2021. The hearing was not able to be held in person because of the COVID-19 pandemic and, therefore, took place using remote video-conferencing software. The hearing lasted from 11.00am until around 3.30pm and both Flybe and CMG had the opportunity to make submissions and present evidence. 3. The CAA Panel is comprised of Mr Graham Ward CBE (Chair) and Ms Katherine Corich, both appointed by the Secretary of State for Transport as Non-Executive Members of the Board of the CAA. 1.1 The questions to be decided by the Panel 4. The principal questions to be decided by the Panel are, in the light of the evidence and the relevant law: Civil Aviation Authority 11 Westferry Circus, London E14 4HD www.caa.co.uk a.
    [Show full text]
  • Aiming for Inclusive Growth Venue: Apex Grassmarket Hotel, Edinburgh, 20 – 21 September 2016
    ENAT NTOs’ Learning Event. Aiming for Inclusive Growth Venue: Apex Grassmarket Hotel, Edinburgh, 20 – 21 September 2016 PRACTICAL INFORMATION FOR PARTICIPANTS Hotel Booking The ENAT NTOs’ Learning Event will take place at: Apex Grassmarket Hotel (4-star) 31-35 Grassmarket, Edinburgh, EH1 2HS Scotland, UK Telephone +44 (0)131 441 0421 Website: http://www.apexhotels.co.uk Central Reservations: (+44) 0800 049 8000 Participants are kindly requested to make their own accommodation arrangements directly with the hotel. Book before 9th August to obtain the Preferential Booking Rate: A limited number of rooms are held for 19th and 20th September 2016 (two nights). When booking, please refer to booking code: ATC 2009. 20 rooms are on hold. • £135 single occupancy • £145 double occupancy Alternative hotel (located in Leith) For a cheaper alternative hotel, we suggest: Holiday Inn Express (3-star) Britannia Way, Ocean Drive, Leith, Edinburgh EH6 6JJ, United Kingdom Telephone +44 871 902 1610 Find competitive room rates at the hotel website: http://www.expressedinburgh.co.uk/ From Holiday Inn Express a taxi to the city centre (Apex Grassmarket Hotel, 3.2 miles), costs £10 and takes about 15 to 20 minutes. ENAT NTOs’ Learning Event, Edinburgh 2016. Practical Information 1 www.accessibletourism.org Evening Dinner, 20 September We encourage all participants to join the evening dinner at Apex Grassmarket Hotel on Tuesday 20th September at 7.30 p.m. Cost £25.00, per person, to be paid to the hotel. Dietary needs will be catered for on request. Set menu
    [Show full text]
  • Flight Guide
    Flight Guide Glasgow Glasgow Edinburgh Prestwick Destination Carrier(s) 15 min to City Centre 45 min to City Centre 55 min to City Centre Daily Other Daily Other Daily Other Abu Dhabi Etihad • Alicante easyJet / Ryanair / Thomson / Jet2.com / Thomas Cook • • • Almeria Thomas Cook / Jet2.com • • Amsterdam KLM / easyJet • • Antalya Thomas Cook / Thomson / Jet2.com • • Athens easyJet / Aegean • Aquaba Thomson • Ryanair / Jet2.com / Barrhead Travel / British Airways / Barcelona Airport • • • Vueling Airlines / Norwegian Barra Flybe • Basel/Mulhouse easyJet • Belfast City Flybe • • Belfast International easyJet • • Benbecula Flybe • Berlin Schoenefeld easyJet / Ryanair • • Bergen Flybe / Loganair • Bergerac Flybe • Beziers Ryanair • Bilbao easyJet • Birmingham International Flybe • • Bodrum easyJet / Jet2.com • • Bologna Ryanair • Bordeaux Ryanair / easyJet • • Bradley (Hartford, Connecticut) Norweagian • Bratislava Ryanair • Bremen Ryanair • Bridgetown Thomson • Bristol easyJet • • Brussels (Charleroi) Ryanair • • Brussels National Brussels Airlines • Bucharest Wizz Air, Blue Air • Budapest Jet2.com / Wizz Air / Ryanair • • Burgas BH Air • • Bydgoszcz Ryanair • Calgary Air Transat • Campbeltown Flybe • Cancun Thomas Cook / Thomson • • Carcassone Ryanair • • Cardiff CityJet / Flybe • • Cayo Coco Thomas Cook • Chambery Thomson / British Airways / Jet2.com • • Chania Ryanair • Chicago United Airlines • Cologne (Bonn) Eurowings • Copenhagen Norwegian Air / easyJet / SAS / Ryanair • Corfu Thomson / Ryanair / Thomas Cook / Jet2.com • • • Glasgow
    [Show full text]
  • Report 2012 FINNAIR 2012 / KEY FIGURES / CEO’S REVIEW / STRATEGY / BOARD of DIRECTORS’ REPORT / FINANCIAL STATEMENTS / GOVERNANCE
    Financial report 2012 FINNAIR 2012 / KEY FIGURES / CEO’S REVIEW / STRATEGY / BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ REPORT / FINANCIAL STATEMENTS / GOVERNANCE Financial report 2012 Contents Finnair in 2012 1 Key figures 2 CEO’s review 4 Strategy 5 Board of Directors’ Report 7 Finnair fleet 10 Shares and shareholders 14 Financial indicators 2008–2012 18 Calculation of key indicators 19 IFRS Financial Statements, 1 January–31 December 2012 19 Auditor's Report 47 Business risks 48 Corporate Governance Statement 2012 49 Finnair Plc Remuneration Statement 2012 56 Board of Directors 61 Executive Board 62 Information for the shareholders 63 Contact information 64 Photos: Asian strategy and Partnerships on page 2 by Tim Bird. Other photos by Finnair. 1 / 64 FINNAIR 2012 / KEY FIGURES / CEO’S REVIEW / STRATEGY / BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ REPORT / FINANCIAL STATEMENTS / GOVERNANCE Finnair’s year 2012 fleet investments of coming years still require significant Code of Conduct profitability improvements, and for this reason Finnair Finnair revised its Code of Conduct in 2012 and will organise launched an additional cost-reduction program of 60 related training for staff during 2013. Top management's million euros in October 2012. special bonuses and the CEO's housing transaction sparked a lively discussion both in the media and inside Finnair on ethical business behaviour. Return to profitability Safe and punctual airline Finnair was one of the top companies in its industry in Finnair improved its operational quality and was one of terms of unit revenue development, and its cost-reduc- the top airlines in the world measured by all operational tion program brought results. The return to profitability indicators.
    [Show full text]
  • Flybe and ATR Sign Global Maintenance Agreement
    Flybe and ATR sign Global Maintenance Agreement Toulouse, 14 October 2015 – Europe’s largest regional airline, operating domestic and regional routes for Scandinavian Airlines (SAS), signed an exclusive 6-year Global Maintenance Agreement with ATR for five ATR 72-600 aircraft. Flybe’s first brand new ATR entered service last month. The airline will incorporate four other new 70-seat ATR 72-600s into the SAS network between 2016 and 2017. Under the contract, ATR will provide Flybe with a comprehensive technical support of its ATR 72- 600 aircraft. The spectrum of services covers a complete management of spare parts inventory on lease at airline’s premises, propellers maintenance and availability, repair and overhaul of LRUs (Line Replaceable Units), including landing gear and fuel nozzles. The airline will benefit from a quick access to a comprehensive pool supply offering up-front exchanges and timely spares availability. ATR will ensure continued on time delivery of all spare parts directly to Flybe’s main base. The Global Maintenance agreement will help Flybe ease maintenance costs and tasks, while providing accurate timely service and the expertise and knowledge from the aircraft manufacturer. “The Global Maintenance agreement will help Flybe ease maintenance costs and tasks, while providing accurate timely service as well as the expertise and knowledge direct from ATR. We are delighted to be extending our partnership so early into the relationship, and it bodes well for a positive future together,” said Luke Farajallah, Flybe Chief Operations Officer. “We thank Flybe for the trust they have placed in ATR, and we are fully committed in providing our expert support to ensure operational performance of Flybe’s ATR 72-600 aircraft,” shared Tom Anderson, Senior Vice President Commercial and Customer Support of ATR.
    [Show full text]
  • Press Information Kit August ’19
    Press Information Kit August ’19 About Virgin Atlantic Since it was founded in 1984, Virgin Atlantic Airways has become one of the world’s leading airlines serving the world’s major cities. Virgin Atlantic is the quintessential Virgin story. It has every ingredient: the small newcomer taking on the giant and complacent establishment, the people’s champion introducing better service and lower costs for passengers with a reputation for quality and innovative product development. Virgin Atlantic was developed as an offshoot of Richard Branson’s Virgin Group, which was better known at the time in the world of pop and rock music. In early 1984, Branson was contacted by an Anglo-US lawyer called Randolph Fields with a proposal for involvement in a new airline. Recognising that, like the music business, aviation was a consumer led industry, and tired of the conveyor belt attitude to passengers, Branson decided it was time for Virgin to diversify. His fellow directors thought he was mad – particularly when he announced the new airline would begin operating in just over three months. On 22 June 1984 Virgin’s inaugural flight to Newark took place, a flight filled with friends, celebrities and the media. The airline’s aim was simple: “To provide the highest quality innovative service at excellent value for money for all classes of air travellers”. Hugely popular, Virgin Atlantic has won top business, consumer and trade awards from around the world. The airline has pioneered a range of innovations setting new standards of service. Despite Virgin Atlantic’s growth the service still remains customer driven with an emphasis on value for money, quality, fun and innovation.
    [Show full text]
  • Case M1450J Proposed Acquisition of Flybe Group Plc and Its Trading
    Case M1450J Proposed acquisition of Flybe Group Plc and its trading subsidiaries, Flybe Ltd and Flybe.com Ltd by Connect Airways Ltd ______________ _____________ Decision Document No: CICRA 19/09 Date: 27 February 2019 Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority 2nd Floor Salisbury House, 1-9 Union Street, St Helier, Jersey, JE2 3RF Tel 01534 514990, Fax 01534 514991 Web: www.cicra.je 1 Summary 1. Connect Airways Ltd (Connect Airways ) proposes to acquire control of Flybe Group, including its subsidiaries, Flybe Ltd and Flybe.com Ltd ( Flybe ), which operates air routes into and from Jersey. 2. The transaction has been notified to the Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority ( JCRA ) for approval pursuant to Article 21 of the Competition (Jersey) Law 2005 (the 2005 Law ). 3. The JCRA has determined that the proposed acquisition will not lead to a substantial lessening of competition in any relevant market and hereby approves the notified transaction. The Notified Transaction 4. On 11 February 2019, the Channel Islands Competition and Regulatory Authorities 1 (CICRA ) received a joint application from Connect Airways’ shareholders for the proposed acquisition of the entire issued and to be issued share capital of Flybe, which will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Connect Airways. 5. CICRA registered the application on its website with a deadline for comments of 25 February 2019. One submission was received. The Parties 6. Flybe Group is a UK regional airline, incorporated in England and Wales with registered number 01373432. The shares of Flybe Group are listed on the London Stock Exchange. Flybe Ltd is incorporated in England and Wales, with registered number 02769768.
    [Show full text]