5 ms·

>it’s on the aviation industry to rethink its policies on how airlines can keep their airport slots without causing further damage to the planet With insane re

>it’s on the aviation industry to rethink its policies on how airlines can keep their airport slots without causing further damage to the planet With insane regulations, like those that forced airlines to schedule tens of thousands of empty flights to keep their airport slots during Covid? No, it’s on regulators, not on the industry >Lufthansa said it ran 18,000 empty flights in the winter of 2021-2022 to ensure it didn’t lose lucrative deals that gave its planes spots at major airports.

lwhi 3y ago
> According to The National, German airline Lufthansa said it ran 18,000 empty flights in the winter of 2021-2022 to ensure it didn’t lose lucrative deals that gave its planes spots at major airports. This is scandalous.
- phantom784 3y ago
  The airlines should be allowed to pay a fee equivalent to the cost of running the flight (or slightly less), rather than having to actually fly an empty plane.
  - chii 3y ago
    But then competitors would say that they would've paid a higher fee, in order to take those slots. So in the end, there would be some bidding, and the cost of those slots would increase to their actual value, which removes the worth of those slots. It "solves" the problem, but the airline who currently own the slot do not like this solution.
    - YurgenJurgensen 3y ago
      If the competitor thought they could actually fill the flights, they could probably offer slightly less. Passengers probably represent a net profit for airports, so an airline sitting on slots and not using them represents an opportunity cost.
Retric 3y ago
The 80/20 use-it-or-lose-it rule was relaxed in March 2020 in the US. Various countries handled things differently. Airports and airlines are different industries. The Airports very much want companies to give up slots if they’re not going to fly those routes. As such these regulations are more a compromise between groups than something external.
runarberg 3y ago
I agree this is on regulators, but you are still victimizing the exploiter. Nobody forced the airline to do this, rather they found this loophole and decided to exploit it. It is entirely their fault as the primary actor. Of course you can also blame regulators for not being thorough enough (but honestly I would rather blame a lack of carbon pricing here)
- rhaps0dy 3y ago
  The price of flights to Melbourne has to be very high to make it profitable to also fly to Adelaide with <10% seats. You could say the people really demanded it. I agree that this loophole should be closed, but maybe the way to close it is to just allow flights? I don't have a strong take, the original regulation must have been put into place for some reason; but it has a very real cost (which the passengers are happy to pony up for).
- gruez 3y ago
  >but honestly I would rather blame a lack of carbon pricing here Why? Even if there was a carbon tax, and the carbon tax fully covered the cost of the the carbon emissions, the regulation in question is still actively harmful. It's encouraging resources to be used for no useful purpose, no different than regulation that encourages people to dig holes only to have them be filled back.
flandish 3y ago
> deals This is the problem. Capitalism will always choose “deals” and profit over important priorities like the environment and worker pay, safety, and lives. I say, instead of less regulation, we nationalize all airline industry. Pull profit out of the equation.
- ajmurmann 3y ago
  Or we could tax carbon and internalized the negative externality. If you think that without capitalism we suddenly would take care of the environment, compare the destruction of the environment in communist countries to capitalist ones. Soviet Russia had a "nuclear lake" they just dumped nuclear waste into, Bitterfeld in the GDR was known for having it's creeks discolored from the chemicals dumped into them, the amount of smoke coming out of old, massive rural Chinese factories is hard to imagine if you haven't seen it; The Trabant spewed out orders of magnitude more exhausted than any western car. The problem isn't capitalism, but resource constraints.
  - esotericimpl 3y ago
    [dead]
- fallingknife 3y ago
  You want to solve the problem of stupid rules and procedures that result in massive inefficiency by putting government bureaucrats in charge?
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > instead of less regulation, we nationalize all airline industry Qatar is state owned.
- ExoticPearTree 3y ago
  > I say, instead of less regulation, we nationalize all airline industry. Pull profit out of the equation. What you are proposing is for travelers to receive crappy service, no recourse for when the government employees don't feel like working and so on. Why on earth would you want this?

lwhi 3y ago

> According to The National, German airline Lufthansa said it ran 18,000 empty flights in the winter of 2021-2022 to ensure it didn’t lose lucrative deals that gave its planes spots at major airports. This is scandalous.

phantom784 3y ago
The airlines should be allowed to pay a fee equivalent to the cost of running the flight (or slightly less), rather than having to actually fly an empty plane.
- chii 3y ago
  But then competitors would say that they would've paid a higher fee, in order to take those slots. So in the end, there would be some bidding, and the cost of those slots would increase to their actual value, which removes the worth of those slots. It "solves" the problem, but the airline who currently own the slot do not like this solution.
  - YurgenJurgensen 3y ago
    If the competitor thought they could actually fill the flights, they could probably offer slightly less. Passengers probably represent a net profit for airports, so an airline sitting on slots and not using them represents an opportunity cost.

Retric 3y ago

The 80/20 use-it-or-lose-it rule was relaxed in March 2020 in the US. Various countries handled things differently. Airports and airlines are different industries. The Airports very much want companies to give up slots if they’re not going to fly those routes. As such these regulations are more a compromise between groups than something external.

runarberg 3y ago

I agree this is on regulators, but you are still victimizing the exploiter. Nobody forced the airline to do this, rather they found this loophole and decided to exploit it. It is entirely their fault as the primary actor. Of course you can also blame regulators for not being thorough enough (but honestly I would rather blame a lack of carbon pricing here)

rhaps0dy 3y ago
The price of flights to Melbourne has to be very high to make it profitable to also fly to Adelaide with <10% seats. You could say the people really demanded it. I agree that this loophole should be closed, but maybe the way to close it is to just allow flights? I don't have a strong take, the original regulation must have been put into place for some reason; but it has a very real cost (which the passengers are happy to pony up for).
gruez 3y ago
>but honestly I would rather blame a lack of carbon pricing here Why? Even if there was a carbon tax, and the carbon tax fully covered the cost of the the carbon emissions, the regulation in question is still actively harmful. It's encouraging resources to be used for no useful purpose, no different than regulation that encourages people to dig holes only to have them be filled back.

flandish 3y ago

> deals This is the problem. Capitalism will always choose “deals” and profit over important priorities like the environment and worker pay, safety, and lives. I say, instead of less regulation, we nationalize all airline industry. Pull profit out of the equation.

ajmurmann 3y ago
Or we could tax carbon and internalized the negative externality. If you think that without capitalism we suddenly would take care of the environment, compare the destruction of the environment in communist countries to capitalist ones. Soviet Russia had a "nuclear lake" they just dumped nuclear waste into, Bitterfeld in the GDR was known for having it's creeks discolored from the chemicals dumped into them, the amount of smoke coming out of old, massive rural Chinese factories is hard to imagine if you haven't seen it; The Trabant spewed out orders of magnitude more exhausted than any western car. The problem isn't capitalism, but resource constraints.
- esotericimpl 3y ago
  [dead]
fallingknife 3y ago
You want to solve the problem of stupid rules and procedures that result in massive inefficiency by putting government bureaucrats in charge?
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> instead of less regulation, we nationalize all airline industry Qatar is state owned.
ExoticPearTree 3y ago
> I say, instead of less regulation, we nationalize all airline industry. Pull profit out of the equation. What you are proposing is for travelers to receive crappy service, no recourse for when the government employees don't feel like working and so on. Why on earth would you want this?