A new lawsuit has been filed by a well-known San Francisco attorney to attempt to block the acquisition of Hawaii Airlines by Alaska Airlines. This is not the first such suit, and it may also not be the last. But what stands out, in part, is that this law firm also filed a similar suit wherein JetBlue was subsequently blocked in its attempt to acquire Spirit Airlines.
The lawsuit spawned by Joseph M. Alioto Jr. challenges Alaska Airlines’ proposed acquisition of Hawaiian Airlines, a move already under scrutiny by the U.S. Department of Justice.
This legal action is being driven by a group of passengers. The lawsuit emerges in parallel with federal regulatory activities regarding the merger proposal.
Alaska Airlines still intends to acquire Hawaiian Airlines for $1.9 billion, as was announced in December, in a transaction that would significantly impact Hawaii’s airline dynamics. The significant combined market share of the combined airline could have some impact on reduced competition and potentially lead to higher prices.
Advertisement
Whether or not that would evolve, however, remains to be seen. There are other major competitors larger than the combined Hawaiian/Alaska that are highly involved in Hawaii flights, including both Southwest Airlines and United Airlines.
The lawsuit, not yet seen by Beat of Hawaii, claims that the merger would unduly change market dynamics, thereby harming consumers. It seeks judicial intervention to stop the merger initially via a preliminary injunction.
Alioto Law Firm is a name familiar in Hawaii airline news.
The same San Francisco-based law firm previously filed a lawsuit to stop the successful merger of Alaska Airlines and Virgin America. That 2017 suit was said to have been on behalf of 40+ passengers who had similar claims to those allegedly opposing the Alaska/Hawaiian deal.
That Alioto suit included similar language regarding the “proposed elimination of Virgin America by the Defendant Alaska Airlines constitutes a substantial threat of injury to the Plaintiffs because the acquisition may have the effect substantially to lessen competition and tend to create a monopoly in various markets…” Alioto also said that prior merger would have reduced flights to smaller markets, resulting in higher airfares.
More recently, Alioto filed suit against the proposed merger between JetBlue and Spirit Airlines that subsequently failed. That case document is attached below. Alioto is known for these suits attempting to block airline mergers on behalf of passengers and to prevent price-fixing.
Advertisement
Please share your thoughts on the proposed acquisition of Hawaiian Airlines by Alaska Airlines and this latest twist.
JUNEAU, Alaska (KTUU) – The Supreme Court of Alaska will be taking up the case of the State of Alaska, Division of Elections v. Daniel J. Sullivan, Jr.
The oral arguments will be held Monday at 10 a.m. via Zoom, according to an order and opening notice.
The document also specifies that a decision is expected to be made before noon on Tuesday.
According to documents from the Division of Elections, the state must start printing ballots at noon on the same day.
Advertisement
This comes after an Anchorage Superior Court Judge ordered Dan J. Sullivan on to the ballot Friday.
See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com
A new home under construction in Potter Valley in Anchorage. (Loren Holmes / ADN)
This June, two very different offers reach Alaska families, and both amount to the same thing: $10,000. The difference is everything.
Bill Walker, running for governor, would hand every eligible Alaskan a one-time $10,000 check and then end the Permanent Fund dividend for good. Ask one question: Where does his $10,000 come from?
It comes from the Permanent Fund, the people’s own money and the savings Alaskans built for their children. Walker would spend that endowment once to pay Alaskans to give up the yearly dividend forever.
Think about what that does. It cancels the annual check that gives a family a reason to keep an Alaska address and replaces it with a single payout. You hand people their own savings, call it a gift and cut the tie that held them here in the same motion. It is the oldest mistake in governing money: raid what you have saved to buy a moment’s applause and call the spending generosity.
Advertisement
A plan that spends the people’s savings to send the people away is not bold. It is foolish.
Now consider the other $10,000. Through Alaska Housing Finance Corp., the state offers families up to $10,000 to build a new, energy-efficient home. AHFC raids nothing. It earns its own way. Over the years, it has returned more than $2 billion to the state treasury, and it spends some of that income the way any good business does: to win a customer.
Here, the customer is an Alaskan who wants to own a home, put down roots and stay.
That is the oldest sound move in business: Invest a little of what you earn to bring in someone who stays. The homeowner remains, the community gains a family and the corporation keeps earning. The money spent comes back. A plan that puts earnings to work to bring people home is not charity. It is clever.
Same amount. Opposite source. Opposite wisdom. One spends savings; the other spends earnings. One pays Alaskans to leave; the other pays them to stay. One empties the state; the other fills it.
Advertisement
This Homeownership Month, the choice is the size of a single check, and the whole question is where the check comes from and what it asks of you. Ten thousand dollars of your own fund, to wave you goodbye. Or $10,000, earned and reinvested, to help you stay and build.
Evan Swensen is the publisher of Publication Consultants in Anchorage and the author of “What’s the Money For: A Permanent Fund Mortgage Proposal.”
• • •
The Anchorage Daily News welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.
