Eroded? If you happen to reside near your profile's location, you'll find you have no less than ten MEPs from five different parties representing you in Brussels and Strasbourg. If anything, your right to democracy at a European level is probably over-capacity :D

Don't forget that it was "faceless bureaucrats" who listened to BMA's appeal (and granted it) when they the CAA originally denied them access to LHR...

Let's imagine for a hypothetical second that the EC decides to give the deal the thumbs down (they won't) and BA doesn't get the bmi slots. How exactly does that impair the ability of airlines based in (for example) CDG, AMS, FRA or MUC to continue to develop links (facilitating trade) with developing economies?

Cyrano - to play devil's advocate there is the argument that better to have 3 strong (and roughly equally balanced in terms of strengths and weaknesses) airline groups in Europe instead of 2 strong and 1 middle ranking, and leave the rest of the market to airlines based outside Europe.

I think Lufthansa's German based operation is probably good fir the UK economy because it keeps BA on their toes and also flies routes to Asia that BA could never do simply because of the possibility of extra connecting feed from France and Switzerland into Frankfurt. Equally, BA is good for the German economy because of the additional transatlantic connectivity BA provide at Heathrow.
Furthermore, BA's flights to Shanghai prevent Lufthansa getting too greedy, while LH's flights to Chicago prevent BA upping the prices too much.

Not only does this increase competition making European airlines more efficient, but it also increases overall non-stop long haul connectivity from European airports instead of involving routings involving long diversions via the Middle East (London-Chengdu via Abu Dhabi anyone ?). More than once I've decided not to go on a trip because having to take a non-direct set of flights at cr*ppy times meant it just wasn't worth the effort and hassle involved.

BA swallowing bmi is bad for passengers flying from LHR on some mid-haul routes, but overall I reckon it's a good thing for European connectivity and keeping trade in Europe from leaking to the UAE / Qatar.

A friend at BA tells me that we (regional) are to be included in the Mainline sale now. Where does this leave Granite?

"But the EC are looking into the BMI deal to ensure fair competition, or "free trade". Why be so Daily Mail about it?"

The UK regulator (that is democratically accountable) was satisfied with this deal that involves UK airlines at an UK airport (as well as two UK subsidiary airlines elsewhere in the UK) and a considerable number of UK jobs. Why should the non-democratic EC (and forget the idea that MEPs could ever really hold the EC to account!) be allowed to scupper such a UK deal? (Don't other countries in the EU have even bigger slot holdings and 'monopolies' at their main hubs?) And if being supportive of UK jobs is "so Daily Mail", then maybe I should start reading the Daily Mail!!!!

Between a rock and a hard place?:D

Sorry Trossie, but it is a very Daily Mail anti-Europe attitude.

Years ago people would bang on about "bendy cucumbers" as reason to oppose European integration. Now we've latched on to "undemocratic".

When did you vote in members of the OFT?

Why are you happy to see a fully elected European Parliament as less democratic than the British government (completely unelected, unaccountable upper chamber and the head of state being born to be Queen)?


The OFT didn't say they saw no problem with the BMI / IAG deal, quite the contrary, they said they had very serious concerns about monopolies on certain routes, but felt that the European authorities were better placed to consider the whole of the deal, what with BMI/IAG being pan European.

The percentage slot allocation at Heathrow is not what is being looked into here. Lufthansa, Air France and KLM all have higher percentage slot ownership at their hubs. What is unique about the BMI/IAG merger is that IAG will have a monopoly on certain routes and with the slot constraints at Heathrow, no competitors are likely to come forward. Charles de Gaul, Schipol and Frankfurt are not at capacity, so anyone who wants to can move in and operate any routes that the dominant incumbent operates.

The EC has to make a judgement between the rights of the consumer who will lose out when monopolies are created, and the rights of BMI's staff who shouldn't have to loose their livelihoods.

We all hope and expect a sensible compromise; IAG being forced to cede slots to a competitor to allow them to operate on the routes that would otherwise become a monopoly.

"When did you vote in members of the OFT?" -- The OFT are accountable to the MP that represents me.

The European Parliament is a joke: just look at the way that the UK public view it compared with the 'collaborationist' way that all other member countries view it... (and look at how their favourite currency is in constant threat of collapse...).

Let's simplify this: if Swiss was being sold by LH, would the (unelected!) EC have any say? NO! So why should the UK's OFT have to bow down on this matter to their 'lords and masters' in Brussels?

Sod the EC, the OFT should stop passing the buck and say yes to UK jobs!!!

(Now don't get me onto this EU farce of FTLs, when the UK actually has best and should not be cow-towing to the EU but insisting that the UK's sterling standards are maintained!)

I'm getting more tempted to start reading the Daily Mail!!!!!

Worse... to be dumped within seconds of the take-over: BA have absolutely NO interest in 'regional' flying. Hopefully this is a 'brinkmanship' move by Granite: waiting for IAG to dump 'regional' and buy them for a quid!

I don't think this is brinkmanship on behalf of granite. If they are deliberately trying to delay the purchase then they are playing a dangerous game with staff/consumer confidence and loyalty to regional. I think they've made their best bid and it wasn't good enough. Just my guess.

Also, what are the legalities of IAG dumping regional when(if) they end up owning them. Guess they could still sell them to Granite, but if that were feasible surely LH would have already done it. Otherwise it's into BA, another buyer or redundancy packages??

This is turning out to be a long month.

Sad to say (Otherwise it's into BA, another buyer or redundancy packages??) but 'redundancy packages'...

But then, if Granite are playing 'brinkmanship', maybe the odd million or so 'balances out' the staff/customer confidence, but it does stink somewhat... Hopefully they have a great big smell of roses available if they do take over!!

Regional does not fit into IAG's plans in any shape or form.Only the bidders know the real on-going losses and possible profits that can be derived from any takeover of anything within the BMI group.

Switzerland is not in the EU, therefore would the EU competition authority would not hold any sway surely if Swiss were to be sold. Maybe Austrian would have been a better comparitor for your anti EU rant.

Latest news on the competition issues from the FT:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5b22a660-7442-11e1-9951-00144feab49a.html#axzz1pvyQrEUJ

Intersting routes the EC is focussing on......not surprising about EDI and ABZ, (but not MAN) and RUH and CAI, which have home country carriers competing against BA.

It's becoming a blinking contest......but my money is now on approval on 30th.

That link is no use unless you subscribe to the FT I'm afraid.

@Trossie, think of it like a swan: what you see on the surface hides the activity below :ok:

It mentions IAG giving up an additional 4 slot pairs in addition to the 10 already on the table. So IAG will give away 14 slot pairs, thereby securing 56 slot pairs. Any less than that, then it makes the merger unlikely due to the cost of acquiring BMI.

Several of these I am guessing would be the current duplicate routes - EDI, ABZ, CAI and Saudi. It does mean there would be an excess of pilots coming to BA. I wonder how that will be managed?

"Switzerland is not in the EU, therefore would the EU competition authority would not hold any sway surely if Swiss were to be sold. Maybe Austrian would have been a better comparitor for your anti EU rant."

Aren't the Swiss lucky? (Or sensible!) They are able to agree to a deal involving Swiss companies in Switzerland that would consider Swiss jobs.

The Swiss therefore have a distinct advantage over the Austrians.

Wouldn't all those bmi staff be a lot happier if the UK could make the same decisions without foreign interference?

If that is an "anti EU rant" then surely there are a lot of bmi (and other UK) crews who would feel it is justified?

i doubt it would affect the crews at all. bmi is already operating under crewed for those slots.

As a member of the EEA, if a Swiss carrier was operating routes inside the EU then they too would be subject to EC investigation. The difference is that the UK at least has some political representation in the EC/EU, whereas the Swiss don't .

It makes me wonder how long this charade can continue before either DLH or IAG decide it isn't worth the effort anymore. Wonder what the next step will be if there is no clear decision on the 30th?