In message , at 09:32:48 on Sun, 19 Jun
2016, tim... remarked:

One of the biggest problems with only having two US based airlines at
Heathrow would be a reduced number of places on their side of the
water served by direct flights.

Oops, ignore the other reply :-(

Well if there is no demand for those destinations why do airlines fly
there now?

I'm sure you are aware that US airlines are heavily biassed towards
their traditional hubs, just as Air France flies to the USA mainly from
its Paris hub, and BA from its Heathrow hub.

Reduce the number of airlines and it reduces the number of hubs.

Because if you have little bargaining power you can't insist the
other side agrees with your point of view.

but we don't have little bargaining power, that is the point

What power do you think we have over the FAA?

What does it matter who you are negotiating with if you have the cards

Which cards are those?
--
Roland Perry

wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 21:58:15 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:55:42 -0500
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
Our economy is doing well despite the EU, not because of it.

Say you. How come the vast majority of economists say otherwise?

Vast majority? Looks 50/50 to me. And the ones that do tend to work for large
banks who have a nice cosy arrangement with Brussels.

Looks more like 10:1 to me.
https://mobile.twitter.com/EdConwayS...128001/photo/1

Depends if you mean short term or long term. I don't think anyone is denying
there'll be a blip down immediately afterwards. Then once the panic is over
things should pick up again once the sheep realised the sky hasn't actually
fallen after all. Whether thats a few weeks, months, years who knows.

Well, by 10:1, the economists in that chart said that the *long-run*
projections were worse with Brexit.

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:32:48 on Sun, 19 Jun 2016,
tim... remarked:

One of the biggest problems with only having two US based airlines at
Heathrow would be a reduced number of places on their side of the water
served by direct flights.

Oops, ignore the other reply :-(

Well if there is no demand for those destinations why do airlines fly
there now?

I'm sure you are aware that US airlines are heavily biassed towards their
traditional hubs, just as Air France flies to the USA mainly from its
Paris hub, and BA from its Heathrow hub.

Reduce the number of airlines and it reduces the number of hubs.

Because if you have little bargaining power you can't insist the other
side agrees with your point of view.

but we don't have little bargaining power, that is the point

What power do you think we have over the FAA?

What does it matter who you are negotiating with if you have the cards

Which cards are those?

Jesus Christ!

The limited number of slots at LHR that *everybody* wants.

tim

In article , (tim...)
wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message

-sept
ember.org...
tim... wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 18:38:39 on Fri, 17 Jun
2016, tim... remarked:

The two airlines from our side would undoubtedly be BA and Virgin.
Market closed to any others.

so what, 4 airlines flying to LHR, plus various options options via
other airports looks like enough competition to me

Most people would disagree.

seems to be enough in the "mobile" market

It's our asset we are negotiating away.

But without agreement from both, we could lose much of the asset.

Only if we are stupid negotiators

I believe that you do this sort of thing for a living. I don't
understand why you think we would give it away so easily

Because if you have little bargaining power you can't insist the other
side agrees with your point of view.

but we don't have little bargaining power, that is the point

We have much more as part of the EU than on our own.

Actually we don't as the aims will be whatever the EU wants, not what
the UK wants

The fact that, in this case, they may have been the same is irrelevant

You talk as if the UK wasn't part of the democratic structure of the EU when
it is.

Although lots of people in this debate don't seem to understand it,
democratic decision making doesn't mean you always get your own way.

Most of the present UK government's decisions are ones I fundamentally
disagree with. Democracy means I have a vote but not a veto (which the UK
actually does have on lots of important EU decisions).

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 10:39:54 on Sun, 19 Jun
2016, tim... remarked:

What power do you think we have over the FAA?

What does it matter who you are negotiating with if you have the cards

Which cards are those?

Jesus Christ!

The limited number of slots at LHR that *everybody* wants.

You can still get a stalemate where the USA says "only two of your
airlines allowed", and the worst we can reply is "and only two of
yours", and reallocate the slots to flights to other places.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:39:54 on Sun, 19 Jun
2016, tim... remarked:

What power do you think we have over the FAA?

What does it matter who you are negotiating with if you have the cards

Which cards are those?

Jesus Christ!

The limited number of slots at LHR that *everybody* wants.

You can still get a stalemate where the USA says "only two of your
airlines allowed", and the worst we can reply is "and only two of
yours", and reallocate the slots to flights to other places.

Actually, the US always wanted more airlines to be allowed to fly from LHR
to the US. It was the UK, with two international airlines, that set the cap
at two each.

The US would have preferred either no limit, or at least a cap of four.
Now, after the various US airline mergers, it would probably settle for
three each (ie, AA, Delta and United vs BA, VS and one other UK airline).
But with Open Skies, any US and EU airlines can fly between any US city and
any EU city, which must be better for consumers.

wrote in message
...
In article , (tim...)
wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message

-sept
ember.org...
tim... wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 18:38:39 on Fri, 17 Jun
2016, tim... remarked:

The two airlines from our side would undoubtedly be BA and Virgin.
Market closed to any others.

so what, 4 airlines flying to LHR, plus various options options via
other airports looks like enough competition to me

Most people would disagree.

seems to be enough in the "mobile" market

It's our asset we are negotiating away.

But without agreement from both, we could lose much of the asset.

Only if we are stupid negotiators

I believe that you do this sort of thing for a living. I don't
understand why you think we would give it away so easily

Because if you have little bargaining power you can't insist the
other
side agrees with your point of view.

but we don't have little bargaining power, that is the point

We have much more as part of the EU than on our own.

Actually we don't as the aims will be whatever the EU wants, not what
the UK wants

The fact that, in this case, they may have been the same is irrelevant

You talk as if the UK wasn't part of the democratic structure of the EU
when
it is.

For the purposes of this discussion it isn't as the premise is that we have
left the EU

Although lots of people in this debate don't seem to understand it,
democratic decision making doesn't mean you always get your own way.

I'm not discussing what I want

I'm discussing what HMG could do if we leave.

The issue is purely one of "is HMG capable of this", not do you and I want
it

tim

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 10:39:54 on Sun, 19 Jun 2016,
tim... remarked:

What power do you think we have over the FAA?

What does it matter who you are negotiating with if you have the cards

Which cards are those?

Jesus Christ!

The limited number of slots at LHR that *everybody* wants.

You can still get a stalemate where the USA says "only two of your
airlines allowed", and the worst we can reply is "and only two of yours",

I don't see what's wrong with that

it's what we had before

and reallocate the slots to flights to other places.

You really think the American airlines are going to say "please give us less
slots"?

tim

In message , at 18:10:24 on Sun, 19 Jun
2016, tim... remarked:
You can still get a stalemate where the USA says "only two of your
airlines allowed", and the worst we can reply is "and only two of
yours",

I don't see what's wrong with that

it's what we had before

Less competition, higher fares.

and reallocate the slots to flights to other places.

You really think the American airlines are going to say "please give us
less slots"?

"Fewer slots" perhaps, but their main imperative will be anything which
gives their airlines a bigger slice of the pie.
--
Roland Perry

Not just in this debate! Hence the frequent snivelling
complaint: "they're not listening to me."