The buy/sell slot rules in the US are premised on the simple proposition that the market is better at determining the efficient use of a scarce resource than is an administrative or bureaucratic entity. Competition rules, however, are a different matter and properly the province of governments.
To suggest that BA should be compensated for reducing competition through an alliance with its biggest competitor stands your example of TWA and Pan Am on its head. While those carriers were allowed to sell their London routes to other US carriers, the British government demanded and received compensation for BA on the basis that the sale increased competition by replacing weaker US carriers with stronger ones.
BA is now proposing it should be allowed to reduce competition and again be compensated for having produced the opposite result. In our view neither case made or makes the case for compensation. The one consistency is BA's demand to be paid for having to compete.
Cyril D Murphy
VP international affairs
United Airlines, Chicago, IL
[The Pan Am and TWA comparison was made by a BA official and attributed to him - Ed]
Source: Airline Business
