But what are you basing this on? I'm not saying it isn't a possibility but it's also the case that Delta has a lot of reasons to stay right where they are and expand there. If they want a fight, what's to stop the airport authority from giving half Delta's slots to AA? They have all their eggs in the Atlanta basket and are vulnerable. They may have some leverage using payoffs to pols like they did with the fuel tax rebate, but they can't push it too far.
Delta Reveals Only 13 Passengers Used NRA Discount Which Cost Airline $40 Million Tax Break
- Thread starter Tsing Tao
- Start date
But what are you basing this on? I'm not saying it isn't a possibility but it's also the case that Delta has a lot of reasons to stay right where they are and expand there. If they want a fight, what's to stop the airport authority from giving half Delta's slots to AA? They have all their eggs in the Atlanta basket and are vulnerable. They may have some leverage using payoffs to pols like they did with the fuel tax rebate, but they can't push it too far.
I'm sure Delta will do the cost analysis based on their new tax basis, and court other locations (assuming it does not cost them to do otherwise) for tax breaks.
Both sides of the argument acted like fools.
Yeah but in the end Delta lost a big tax break it had bought and paid for. So I'd say they are the fools. And it infuriated a lot of its customers.
Seems like those 13 are the smart one's , why would anyone not take advantage of a discount that any company offers !!!
Lost revenue, how? Are you referring to income tax from jobs that might have come there but now might not?
More on tightening measures and/or negative consequences to Delta for having the subsidies yanked. They'll have to incur some types of austerity measures that may impact revenue, plus whatever stock market blowback from said measures.
In other words, it's fine to pull subsidies, just don't do it in a way that makes the state liable for both subsidies and loss of money as a result.
Whatever the economic ramifications are, why aren't conservatives incensed that a governmental legislative body is explicitly punishing a company for exercising it's free speech?
Did you not read the previous posts? Several of us stated it shouldn't happen and were very much against it.
Also, see here:
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...o-first-amendment.318759/page-16#post-4618229
You mean other than the fact that it isn't explicitly punishing a company and it wasn't because of free speech, but rather an action the company took?