[PUBLI C VERSION ] BEFOR E TH E DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

WASHINGTON , D.C . Join t Applicatio n o f AMERICA N AIRLINES , INC . BRITIS H AIRWAY S PL C FINNAI R OYJ IBERI A LiNEA S AEREA S D E ESPANA , S.A . ROYA L JORDANIA N AIRLINE S unde r4 9 U.S.C . § § 4130 8 an d 4130 9 fo r approva l ofan d antitrus t immunit yfo r allianc e agreemen t Docke t DOT-OST-2008-025 2

SUPPLEMENTA L COMMENT S O F VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAY S Communication s wit h respect t o thi s documen t shoul d b e directe d to : Jil l Brad y Genera l Counse l VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAYS , LTD . Th e Office , Mano rRoya l Crawley , Wes t Susse xRH1 0 9N U Unite d Kingdo m Anit a M
. Mosne r Soph yChe n HOLLAN D & KNIGH TLL P 209 9 Pennsylvani a Avenu e NW , Suit e 10 0 Washington , D C 20006-680 1 Phone : (202)419-260 4 Fax : (202 ) 955-556 4 Email : anita.mosner@hklaw.co m Email : sophy.chen@hklaw.co m Attorney s fo r VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAY S LTD . Date : January11 , 201 0[PUBLI C VERSION ] BEFOR E TH E DEPARTMEN TO F TRANSPORTATIO N

WASHINGTON , D.C . Join t Applicatio n o f AMERICA N AIRLINES , INC . BRITIS H AIRWAY S PL C FINNAI R OYJ IBERI A LINEA S AEREA S D E ESPANA , S.A . ROYA L JORDANIA N AIRLINE S unde r4 9 U.S.C . § § 4130 8 an d 4130 9 fo r approva l o fan d antitrus t immunit yfo r allianc e agreemen t Docke t DOT-OST-2008-025 2

SUPPLEMENTA L COMMENT S O F VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAY S O n Decembe r21 , 2009 , th e U.S
. Departmen t o fJustic e ("DOJ" ) file d comments 1 i n thi s docke t concernin g th e Join t Applicants ' reques t fo rapprova l o fan d antitrus t immunit y("ATI" ) fo rthei rvariou s allianc e activities
. I n thos e comments , DO J expresse d stron g concern s abou t th e potentia l impact o fth e propose d allianc e o n consumer s an d fare s i n relevan t markets
. Pursuan t t o th e Department' s Decembe r22 , 2009 , Order, 2 Virgi n Atlanti ci s filin g thes e Supplemental Comments
. Virgi n Atlanti cagree s wit h th e concern s DO J ha s raise d abou t th e competitiv e an d consume rharm s th e propose d link-u p woul d caus e i fth e Departmen t wer e t o gran t ATI
. DO J considere d a t lengt h th e competitiv e structur e o fth e U.S.-Londo n Heathro w marke t an d determine d tha t collaboratio n betwee n America n an d BAo n fiv e o fthei rsi x U.S.-Londo n Heathro wroutes , th e mos t significan t transatlanti croutes , woul d threate n

1 Comment

s o fth e Departmen t o

fJustice , Docke

t OST-2008-0252 (Dec
. 21 , 2009 ) ("DO J Comments")
. 2 Orde r2009-12-16 , Docket s OST-2008-0252 an d OST-2002-1386 1 (Dec
. 22 , 2009 ) (settin g th e deadlin e fo rsupplementa l comment s a t Januar y11 , 2010 , to respon d to late-file d pleadings)
.[PUBLI C VERSION ] considerabl e har m t o consumers. 3 DO J als o foun d tha t potentia l competitiv e entry woul d b e unlikel yt o mitigat e thi s threat. 4 Virgi n Atlanti ci s supportiv e o fDOJ' s comment s an d particularl yconcur s wit h th e observation s mad e abou t constraint s o n acces s t o Heathrow
. DO J see s th e risks o f consume rhar m threatene d byth e allianc e an d recommend s tha t th e Departmen t impos e stric t condition s t o protec t competition
. Virgi n Atlanti curge s th e Departmen t t o den yth e applicatio n outright
. However , i fth e Departmen t wer e t o decid e t o approv e th e Join t Applicatio n (despit e th e clea ran d significan t competitiv e har m thi s allianc e woul d cause) , the n Virgi n Atlanti cwoul d urg e th e Departmen t t o impos e condition s i n additio n t o th e slo t divestiture s an d carve-out s tha t DO J recommend s i n orde rt o reinstat e effectiv e competition
. Thes e condition s shoul d include , amon g othe rthings , prohibitin g th e Join t Applicant s fro m withdrawin g fro m existin g interlin e agreement s wit h non-oneworl d carrier s an d requirin g Join t Applicant s t o offe rcompetin g carrier s interlin e prorate s a t thei rhu b airport s tha t ar e n o les s favorabl e tha n thos e the ycharg e t o eac h other. 5 I . DO J HA S CONCLUDE D CORRECTL YTHA TAT I WOUL D SIGNIFICANTL Y HAR M COMPETITION , AN D THATENTR YA THEATHRO WWOUL D NO TB E SUFFICIEN TT O PREVEN TTHES E EFFECTS . Lik e Virgi n Atlantic , DO J ha s conclude d tha t a gran t o fAT I t o th e Join t Applicant s i n thi s particula rcas e woul d inflic t significan t competitiv e harm s upo n consumers . Specifically , DO J expresse d concer n abou t a los s o fcompetitio n i n fiv e ofth e si xU.S. - Londo n Heathro wmarket s i n whic h America n an d BAcompet e agains t eac h othe ro n a

3 See DO J Comments , at 9-17 . 4 See id., at 17-22 . 5 Se e Answe ro fVirgi n Atlanti cAirways , Docke t OST-2008-025 2 (Ma y18 , 2009 ) ("Virgi n Atlanti c Answer") , at 82 .[PUBLI C VERSION ] nonsto p basis. 6 DO J observe d tha t one-sto p service s d o no t pos e competitiv e disciplin e o n nonsto p U.S.-Londo n Heathro wservices. 7 Virgi n Atlanti cals o concur s wit h DOJ' s comment s concernin g entryconstraint s a t Londo n Heathro wan d especiall ywit h DOJ' s findin g tha t tha t sufficien t entryint o th e relevan t market s here—especiall yentrya t Heathro w("th e mos t attractiv e Londo n airport")—i s unlikely. 8 Whil e ther e ar e a numbe ro freason s wh yentryi s unlikel yi n man y ofth e overla p market s serve d byAAan d BA—suc h a s th e existenc e o ffortres s hub s o n bot h end s o fth e route— a ke yan d overridin g facto rbehin d th e difficult yo fentrya t Heathro wi s th e scarcit yo fslot s there. 9 DO J foun d tha t "[e]ntrya t Heathro wwoul d b e difficult" 1 0 becaus e slot s ar e availabl e onl yo n th e secondarymarket. 1 1 Moreover , t o th e verylimite d exten t tha t slot s ar e eve n available , the yar e availabl e onl youtsid e o fpea k hour s an d therefor e ar e no t suitabl e fo rus e fo rservice s fro m th e Unite d States. 1 2 DO J ha s reviewe d th e assertion s advance d b yth e Join t Applicant s tha t ne wentryha s occurre d a t Londo n Heathro wsinc e th e conclusio n o fth e EU-U.S. ope n skie s dea l an d tha t furthe rne wentryi s bot h possibl e an d likely , an d ha s correctl ydiscounte d thos e assertions , notin g tha t th e vas t majorit yo f th e "new " service s toute d b yth e Join t Applicant s wer e i n fac t switche s o fexistin g

6 See DO J Comments , at 7-9 . Se e als o Virgi n Atlanti cAnswer , at 39-58 . 7 See DO J Comments , a t 9-10 . 8 See id., at 18 . 9 See id., a t 18-22 . I n thi s way , thi s proceedin g involve s th e same , i fno t exacerbated , proble m a s th e 200 1 AA/B Aproceeding , i n whic h th e Departmen t ordere d slo t divestiture s t o addres s th e entryproblem
. See

Orde r2002-1-12 , Docke t No
. OST-2001-1102 9 (Jan
. 25 , 2002 ) ("Entr yint o Heathro wairport i s constraine d bylandin g an d take-of flimitation s ('slots' ) an d byfacilit y limitations
. Th e evidenc e befor e u s indicate s tha t i t wil l b e difficul t fo rothe rcarrier s t o obtai n slot s an d facilitie s t o begi n o rexpan d U.S.-Heathro wservic e i n th e short run , eithe rthroug h th e slo t allocatio n proces s o rfro m cod e share/allianc e partners , withou t divestiture.")
. 1 0 DO J Comments , at 20 . 1 1 Id., a t 20-21 . 1 2 Id. Virgi n Atlanti cnote d thi s proble m a s well
. Se e Virgi n Atlanti cAnswer , at 21-31 .[PUBLI C VERSION ] service s fro m Gatwic k t o Heathrow. 1 3 I n addition , DO J note d tha t "ther e ar e n o example s o ftrul yne wentryint o Heathro wfro m whic h t o infe rtha t entryi s likel yt o preven t competitiv e har m wer e Applicant s t o implemen t thei ragreements." 1 4 I n a simila rvein , man yo fDOJ' s observation s abou t th e fac t tha t carrier s s o quickl ymove d thei rservice s awa yfro m Gatwic k t o Heathro wsupport Virgi n Atlantic' s vie wtha t Heathro wi s a separat e relevan t market. 1 5 DO J observe d tha t ther e ar e a wealt h o fconnectin g service s a t Heathro wtha t ar e no t availabl e a t Gatwic k an d tha t consumer s plac e a hig h valu e o n thes e connectin g options. 1 6 Indeed , DO J foun d tha t man ycorporat e trave l manager s prefe ra carrie rtha t provide s servic e t o Londo n Heathro wrathe rtha n othe rLondo n airports—eve n whe n thei rcompanie s wer e indifferen t amon g th e Londo n airport s fo rloca l U.S.-Londo n travelers—becaus e Heathro woffer s bette rconnectin g opportunities. 1 7 Du e t o th e competitiv e an d consume rhar m threatene d b yth e alliance—an d a lac k ofcredibl e competitiv e entry—Virgi n Atlanti cstrongl yurge s th e Departmen t t o den y th e applicatio n outright
. Virgi n Atlanti curge s DO Tt o conside rcarefull yan d giv e grea t weigh t t o a recen t statemen t mad e byBritis h Airway s tha t undermine s completel yth e Join t Applicants ' clai m abou t acces s t o Londo n Heathro wan d th e "fluidity " o fth e slo t marke t there. 1 8 Indeed , a recen t statemen t mad e byth e Chie fExecutiv e o fBAhimsel frefute s th e claim s tha t slot s a t Heathro wca n b e readil yobtained
. Durin g a conferenc e cal l wit h

1 3 DO J Comments , at 22 . 1 4 Id. 1 5 See id., a t 18-1 9 ("Applicants ' document s |" ) (citation s omitted) ; Virgi n Atlanti c Answer , a t 12-19 . 1 6 See DO J Comments , a t 18-19 . 1 7 Id. 1 8 See "Britis h Airway s Walsh : Heathro wFull , Mor e Slot s Eyed, " Wal l Stree t Journa l (Nov
. 13 , 2009) , at http://online.wsi.com/article/BT-CO-20091113-709704.html
.[PUBLI C VERSION ]

financia l analyst s abou t th e propose d merge rbetwee n Britis h Airway s an d Iberia , Willi e Wals h claime d tha t on e o fth e ke yrationale s fo rth e dea l wa s th e abilit yo fth e allianc e t o expan d a t Madrid
. A s Mr
. Wals h said , "It' s wel l recognize d tha t Heathro wi s full , bu t Madri d ha s capacity." 1 9 Acknowledgin g hi s ow n desir e fo rslot s a t Heathro w(an d thei r extrem e scarcity) , Mr
. Wals h als o stated ; "I fLufthans a i s lookin g t o dispos e o fbmi , the n w e ar e definitel yinterested." 2 0 Althoug h th e Join t Applicant s hav e mad e numerou s claim s i n thi s cas e abou t th e abilit yo fothe rairline s t o launc h competitiv e servic e a t Heathrow , mone ytalks
. Britis h Airways ' commentaryt o th e financia l communit yshoul d b e accorde d greate revidentiaryweigh t tha n th e wid e arra yo fself-servin g statement s mad e i n thi s docket. 2 1 II . DO J HA S CONCLUDE D CORRECTL YTHA TJOIN TAPPLICANT S HAV E OVERSTATE D TH E POTENTIA L BENEFIT S O F ATI . DO J ha s conclude d tha t Join t Applicant s hav e overstate d th e magnitud e an d valu e o fth e passenge rbenefit s t o b e derive d fro m AT I i n thi s case, 2 2 a conclusio n Virgi n Atlanti cshares 2 3 an d supports . Th e Join t Applicant s assert tha t passenger s wil l benefi t fro m a n expansio n o fcapacit yo froute s covere d bythei rJoin t Venture , bu t expansio n i s no t amon g th e Join t Applicants ' objective s fo rseekin g ATI
. Contraryt o th e Join t Applicants ' assertions , Virgi n Atlanti cha s describe d befor e BA' s announce d plan s t o manag e capacit ydownward s an d reduc e it s short-hau l aircraf t fleet. 2 4

1 9 Id. 2 0 Id. 2 1 Virgi n Atlanti cals o wishe s to correc t a press accoun t submitte d b yth e Join t Applicants , whic h appear s to impl ytha

t Virgi n Atlanti cha

s decline d to bi d o n slots a t Heathro whel d b ybmi
. See "bm i Struggle s to Ge

t Sal e o fLandin g Slots Of

fth e Ground, " Th e Time s (Nov
. 12 , 2009) , a t http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industr ysectors/transport/article6913220.ece
. Virgi n Atlanti cha

s no t bee n approache d o raske d to submi t a n offe rfo rth e slots tha t allegedl yar

e fo rsale
. T

o tha t extent , th e new

s reports submitte d b

yth e Join t Applicants ar

e erroneous . 2 2 See DO J Comments , a

t 22-28 . 2 3 Se e Virgi n Atlanti cAnswer , a t 68-76 . 2 4 See Answe ro

fVirgi n Atlanti cAirways , Docke t OST-2008-0252 (Se p 17 , 2009) , a t 5 .[PUBLI C VERSION ] I n addition , DO J ha s recognize d capacit yconstraint s a t Londo n Heathro wtha t limi t th e abilit yt o expan d service
. Unles s AA/B Aca n obtai n mor e Heathro wslot s (whic h clearl yar e no t available) , the ywil l b e unabl e t o expan d thei rrang e o fconnectin g opportunitie s withou t havin g t o mak e trade-off s betwee n short-hau l spok e frequencie s an d route s an d long-hau l trun k frequencie s an d routes . Therefore , Londo n Heathro w capacit yconstraints , rathe rtha n lac k ofATI , ar e th e primarybarrie rt o expansio n o fth e Join t Applicants ' servic e offerings
. Moreover , th e Join t Applicant s hav e claime d tha t certai n ne wnonsto p service s woul d no t b e introduce d i n th e absenc e o fimmunity , bu t nevertheles s hav e introduce d suc h service s i n th e pas t severa l months. 2 5 Mor e importantly , Join t Applicant s tou t additiona l connectin g servic e a s a benefi t ofthi s propose d alliance ,

|. 2 6 Also , Join t Applicants ' assertio n i s undermine d byth e recognize d capacit yconstraint s a t Londo n Heathro wan d BA' s ow n flee t plans. 2 7 Clearly , especiall y i n ligh t ofth e significan t competitiv e har m tha t woul d resul t fro m thi s propose d tie-up , AT I woul d no t produc e sufficien t consume rbenefit s t o overcom e thi s problem
. Fo rthi s reaso n a s well , Virgi n Atlanti curge s th e Departmen t t o den yth e application
. III . TH E IMPOSITIO N O F CONDITION S UPO N APPROVA L WOUL D NO T REMED YTH E COMPETITIV E HAR M CAUSE D BYTH E ALLIANCE . Virgi n Atlanti cagree s wit h DOJ' s concern s abou t th e grav e competitiv e har m tha t woul d resul t i fth e Departmen t wer e t o gran t AT I t o th e Join t Applicants
. However , Virgi n Atlanti cdoe s no t believ e tha t placin g condition s o n an ygran t o fimmunit ya s a mean s of

2 5 See Virgi n Atlanti cAnswer , a t 6 9 (notin g tha

t America n introduce d service betwee n Dallas/Ft
. Wort h an d Madri d o n Ma y4 , 2009 , i n th e absenc

e o fimmunity)
. 2 6 2 7 See DO J Comments , a

t 24-25 . See Note 24 .[PUBLI C VERSION ] mitigatin g th e substantia l risk s woul d b e effective
. I t i s fo rthi s reaso n tha t Virgi n Atlanti c urge s th e Departmen t t o den yth e applicatio n outright
. I fth e Departmen t wer e t o decid e t o approv e th e applicatio n despit e th e significan t concern s raise d b yDO J an d othe rpartie s t o thi s proceeding , the n th e Departmen t shoul d impos e stron g condition s upo n th e gran t o fimmunity , includin g condition s abov e an d beyon d thos e recommende d b yDOJ. 2 8 A s identifie d b yDOJ , th e abilit yt o acces s connectin g traffi ci s a significan t barrie rt o entry . A s such , th e Departmen t shoul d prohibi t th e Join t Applicant s fro m withdrawin g fro m existin g interlin e agreement s wit h non-oneworl d carriers , an d shoul d requir e th e Join t Applicant s t o offe r competin g carrier s interlin e prorate s a t thei rhu b airport s tha t ar e n o les s favorabl e tha n thos e the ycharg e t o eac h other. 2 9 I n addition , slot s mad e availabl e fo rcompetitiv e service—whethe runencumbere d o rearmarked—shoul d b e mad e availabl e a t n o cos t t o th e recipient
. Thi s i s consisten t wit h th e Department' s Sho wCaus e Orde ri n th e 200 1 AA/B AAT I proceeding. 3 0 Also , the yshoul d b e mad e availabl e a t suitabl e time s fo rtransatlanti cservice. 3 1 DOJ' s comment s mak e th e critica l poin t tha t frequenc yan d tim e o fda yar e importan t factor s i n

2 8 Se e Virgi n Atlanti cAnswer , at 82 , fo rdiscussio n o fth e ineffectivenes s o fslo t remedie s alon e fo raddressin g competitiv e distortion s associate d wit h ATI
. 2 9 Se e id. 3 0 See Orde r2002-1-12 . Virgi n Atlanti cnote s tha t thi s i s establishe d practic e i n th e Europea n Union , wher e th e Europea n Commissio n ha s ordere d slo t divestment s withou t compensatio n t o th e divestin g airline
. See, e.g., Ai rFrance/KLM , COMP/M.328 0 (Fe b 11 , 2004) ; Lufthansa/Swiss , M.377 0 (Jul y4 , 2005) ; Ai rFrance/Alitalia , COMP/38.284/D 2 (Apr
. 7 , 2004)
. I n addition , BAwoul d rea p windfall profit s i fi t wer e compensate d fo rdiveste d slot s (a s i t receive d a majorit yo fit s Londo n Heathro wslot s at n o cost)
. Moreover , t o requir e a recipien t t o pa yfo rslot s woul d rende r slo t remedie s ineffective , a s tha t woul d onl yincreas e th e cos t o fentryfo rth e entrant . Instea d o f encouragin g entryo rexpansio n o fexistin g competition , thi s coul d resul t i n reducing competitio n rathe rtha n remedyin g th e significan t anticompetitiv e effect s o fth e alliance
. 3 1 Throughou t Orde r2002-1-12 , th e Departmen t use d th e characterizatio n "useabl e slots " t o mak e clea rtha t th e diveste d slot s woul d hav e t o enabl e othe rairline s t o effectivel yreplac e th e competitio n los t du e t o th e AA/B Atie-up
.[PUBLI C VERSION ]

th e succes s o fcompetitiv e service. 3 2 Divestiture s o fbadly-time d slot s wil l no t provid e opportunitie s fo rth e recipient s t o mak e sufficien t entrytha t wil l disciplin e th e Join t Applicant s i n th e relevan t markets. 3 3 Whil e DO J focuse d o n ne wentryi n it s comments 34 , i t i s essentia l t o not e tha t bot h incumben t an d ne wentran t carrier s shoul d b e eligibl e t o receiv e diveste d slots
. This , too , i s consisten t wit h th e Department' s Sho wCaus e Orde ri n th e 200 1 AA/B AAT I proceeding. 3 5 A s DO J recognized , entryneed s t o b e "timely , likely , an d sufficien t i n magnitude , characte ran d scope" 3 6 i n orde rt o preven t advers e effect s fro m a los s o f competition 3 7 an d "entrybya ne wcompetito rtha t wil l obtai n a smal l marke t shar e i s unlikel yt o b e sufficient." 3 8 A s such , entryo fa smal l carrie rwit h a smal l marke t shar e ma yno t b e bes t place d t o mitigat e th e los s o fcompetitio n pose d b yth e alliance
. Fo r example , Virgi n Atlanti cha s note d tha t AA/B Ao n a combine d basi s woul d operat e almos t a n hourl y"shuttle " servic e betwee n JF Kan d Londo n Heathrow , a frequenc yn o competito rcoul d eve rhop e t o compet e with
. Whil e Virgi n Atlanti cquestion s whethe rth e los s o fcompetitio n i n th e JFK-Londo n Heathro wmarke t ca n b e remedied , th e Departmen t simpl ymus t bea ri n min d DOJ' s comment s abou t th e importanc e o f frequenc yo fservic e i n certai n ke yU.S.-Londo n Heathro wmarkets. 3 9 Fo rthi s reason , th e numbe ro fdiveste d slot s mus t b e sufficien t t o permi t competitor s t o compet e effectivel ywit h th e servic e an d schedul e provide d byth e Join t Applicants
. Onl yi n thi s

32 See DO J Comments , a

t 1 3 ("Frequency , a

s wel l a s tim e o fday , ca n be a n importan t drive rfo r corporate contrac

t selection s an d fo rindividua l business passengers." ) an d 2 1 ("[Tjim e o fda yi s importan t fo rarrival s fro m th e Unite d States...")
. 33 See id., a t 1 4 n.4 1 (discussin g th e optima l timin g o fA Aan d BA' s Heathrow-boun d departure s fro m Ne wYork a s compare d to flights operate d b yDelta an d Continental)
. 3 4 See id., a t 30-31 . 3 5 See Orde r2002-1-12 . 3 6 DO J Comments , a

t 17 . 3 7 See id. 3 8 Id. 3 9 See id., a t 13 .[PUBLI C VERSION ]

wa yca n th e Departmen t preven t th e los s o fcompetitio n tha t DO J an d Virgi n Atlanti c hav e identifie d wil l occu ri fth e Departmen t approve s th e application
. A s Virgi n Atlanti cha s argue d i n thi s Docke t (an d a s DO J ha s apparentl yagreed) , th e propose d allianc e threaten s har m fo rconsumer s an d threaten s t o severel ydistort (i f no t obliterate ) competitio n i n th e U.S.-Londo n Heathro wmarket
. Indeed , America n itsel f ha s argue d tha t alliance s betwee n tw o entrenche d competitor s ca n pos e competitiv e threat s tha t canno t b e effectivel yremedied
. To m Horton , American' s CFO , ha s said : "Yieldin g slot s a t Narit a doe s no t remed yth e regulatoryproble m [tha t a Delta-Japa n Airline s link-u p woul d pose ] becaus e th e rea l issu e i s tha t competitor s coul d not practicall ycontes t th e dominanc e o fSkyTea m an d Star
. W e thin k DO Ti s als o unlikel y t o accep t marke t 'carve-outs ' a s a remedy , a s the yundermin e a tru e join t ventur e an d ther e i s n o evidenc e the yprotect consumers." 4 0 American' s comment s ar e particularl ydamnin g because , whe n compare d t o th e AA-B Acombine , a Delta-JA L allianc e woul d involv e fewe roverla p route s (onl ythre e U.S
. mainland-Japa n overla p route s versu s si xU.S.-Londo n Heathro wroute s fo rAA-BA ) an d lowe rmarke t share s (60 % versu s u p t o 100 % fo rAA-BA)
. oneworld' s vehemenc e i n it s oppositio n t o a Delta-JA Ltie-u p (e.g. , "I fJA Lwer e t o conside rjoinin g anothe r alliance, i n thi s cas e SkyTeam , i t woul d rais e intractabl e competitio n issue s an d fac e sever e regulatoryoppositio n i n th e U S becaus e o fth e stranglehol d thi s combinatio n woul d hol d o n Japan-US Atravel , wit h mor e tha n 6 0 percen t o fth e market." 41 ) serve s t o underscor e th e hypocris yo fit s clai m tha t th e AA/B Acombin e doe s no t threaten competitio n i n th e U.S.-Londo n Heathro wmarket
. Indee d (an d althoug h Virgi n Atlanti c
4 0 "To m Horto n Argue s American' s Case i n th e Tu g o fWa rfo rJapa n Airlines, " Dallas Mornin g New s (Dec
. 2 , 2009) , a

t http://aviationbloq.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/12/tom-horton-arques americans-ca.html
. 4 1 "oneworld' s 'Tota l Valu e Proposition ' Makes I t B yFa rth e Bes

t Alliance fo rJapa n Airlines, " P R Newswir e (Dec
. 2 , 2009) , a

t http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/oneworlds-total-value proposition-makes-it-bv-far-the-best-alliance-for-iapan-airlines-78383682.html
.[PUBLI C VERSION ]

take s n o positio n o n JA L an d it s prospectiv e allianc e partners) , th e fac t i s tha t acces s t o Toky o Narit a i s indee d expecte d t o improv e followin g th e recen t opening o fa n extensio n t o it s secon d runway . I n addition , ne wopportunitie s fo rinternationa l ai rservice s a t Toky o Haned a Airport wil l becom e availabl e whe n it s fourt h runwa yopen s late rthi s year . I n contrast , growt h a t Heathro wwil l no t likel yoccu rbefor e 2020 . IV . CONCLUSIO N Fo rth e reason s se t fort h i n DOJ' s comment s an d elsewher e i n th e record , Virgi n Atlanti crespectfull yurge s th e Departmen t t o den yth e application
. I n th e alternative , Virgi n Atlanti crequest s tha t th e Departmen t impos e toug h remedies—thos e recommende d byVirgi n Atlanti ci n additio n t o DOJ' s recommendations—sufficien t t o counterac t th e significan t competitiv e har m tha t Join t Applicant s wil l caus e i fthe yar e permitte d t o operat e wit h antitrus t immunity
.

Anit a M
. Mosne r Soph yChe n HOLLAN D & KNIGH TLL P 209 9 Pennsylvani a Avenu e NW , Suit e 10 0 Washington , D C 20006-680 1 Phone:(202)419-260 4 Fax : (202 ) 955-556 4 Email : anita.mosner@hklaw.com Email : sophy.chen@hklaw.co m Attorney s fo r VIRGI N ATLANTI C AIRWAY S LTD .



### 1 0[PUBLI C VERSION ] CERTIFICAT E O F SERVIC E I hereb ycertifytha t I hav e thi s dat e serve d th e foregoin g documen t o n th e person s identifie d belo wb ycausin g a cop yt o b e sen t byelectroni cmail
. anbird@fedex.co m andrew.forman@cwt.co m aserranzana@geclaw.co m benjamin.slocum@usairways.co m bill@mietuslaw.co m bkeiner@crowell.co m blabow@omm.co m bob.kneisley@wnco.co m bruce.rabinovitz@wilmerhale.co m byerlyjr@state.go v carl.nelson@aa.co m cdonley@ssd.co m cgosain@steptoe.co m cjsimpson@zsrlaw.co m cwilson@omm.co m david.heffernan@wilmerhale.co m dfisher@kelleydrye.co m dhainbach@ggh-airlaw.co m diarmuid.ryan@hammonds.co m dkirstein@yklaw.co m donna.kooperstein@usdoj.gov dvaughan@kelleydrye.co m dwight.moore@ustranscom.mi l ebailey@wileyrein.co m efaberman@wileyrein.co m gmurphy@crowell.co m howard_kass@usairways.co m james.garzia@apgnet.co m jashetaylor@gibsondunn.co m jeff.ogar@aa.co m jeffrey.manley@united.co m jennifer.trock@pillsburylaw.co m jhill@dlalaw.co m jill.ptacek@usdoj.go v jim.ballough@faa.go v jrichardson@johnlrichardson.co m julie.oettinger@united.co m jyoung@yklaw.co m karine.faden@freshfields.co m kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.co m konstantinos.adamantopoulos@hammonds.co m kquinn@pillsburylaw.co m lachter@starpower.ne t leslie.abbott@wnco.co m lhalloway@crowell.co m libowd@sullcrom.co m mamaila@airfrance.f r mchopra@jamhoff.co m mcmillin@woa.co m mgerchick@gerchickmurphy.co m mgoldman@sgbdc.co m mholland@condonlaw.co m mroller@rollerbauer.co m mrosia@crowell.co m msinick@ssd.co m npeterson@wileyrein.co m paul.jasinski@ba.co m paul.yde@freshfields.co m peter.irvine@dot.go v pmurphy@gerchickmurphy.co m pmurphy@lopmurphy.co m prrizzi@hhlaw.co m pruden@asta.or g rbkeiner@crowell.co m rclayman@geclaw.co m recohn@hhlaw.co m rick.rule@cwt.co m robert.land@jetblue.co m rsilverberg@sgbdc.com russell.bailey@alpa.or g sametta.c.barnett@delta.co m sami.sarelius@finnair.f i sascha.vanderbellen@delta.co m scott.mcclain@delta.co m sllunsford@fedex.co m thomas.bolling@coair.co m tmuris@omm.co m todd.homan@dot.go v wkaras@steptoe.co m

Jennife rM
. Nowa k January11,201 0 #906500 7 v 7