Get 40% Off
🚨 Volatile Markets? Find Hidden Gems for Serious Outperformance
Find Stocks Now

US judge blocks JetBlue from acquiring Spirit Airlines

Published 01/16/2024, 01:09 PM
Updated 01/16/2024, 11:20 PM
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Airplane model is placed on displayed Spirit Airlines and jetBlue Airways logos in this illustration taken, June 21, 2022. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustrations/File Photo

By Nate Raymond, David Shepardson and Rajesh Kumar Singh

BOSTON (Reuters) -A federal judge on Tuesday blocked JetBlue Airways (NASDAQ:JBLU)' planned $3.8-billion acquisition of ultra-low-cost carrier Spirit Airlines (NYSE:SAVE) after agreeing with the U.S. Department of Justice that the deal was anticompetitive and would harm ticket buyers.

JetBlue's lawyers had called the case a "misguided" challenge to a merger of the nation's sixth- and seventh- largest airlines, which combined would control 10.2% of a domestic market dominated by four larger airlines.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge William Young in Boston marked a victory for the White House in its efforts to prevent further concentration of the U.S. airline industry and raises questions about the viability of another recently proposed deal, Alaska Air (NYSE:ALK)'s acquisition of Hawaiian Airlines.

President Joe Biden, who has made boosting airline competition a top priority, called the ruling "a victory for consumers everywhere who want lower prices and more choices."

The ruling finding the deal violated U.S. antitrust law also called into question Spirit's future. The ultra-low-cost carrier has struggled to turn a profit amid a run-up in operating costs and persistent supply chain problems.

Spirit's shares closed down about 47% on Tuesday after the ruling, while JetBlue shares ended about 5% higher.

Young said that while a combined JetBlue-Spirit would likely place "stronger competitive pressure" on larger carriers that dominate the domestic airline market, "the consumers that rely on Spirit's unique, low-price model would likely be harmed."

He said the deal would eliminate Spirit's low fares and its ability to put pressure on other higher-priced airlines, including JetBlue, to cut prices. Rivals on average cut prices 7% to 11% when Spirit enters a market, he said.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

"The government has demonstrated that consumers value Spirit flights as a unique, economical product option," Young wrote. "The removal of Spirit as an option for consumers, therefore, would constitute a cognizable harm."

The airlines can appeal the ruling. In a joint statement, JetBlue and Spirit said they were evaluating "next steps as part of the legal process."

In a note to employees on Tuesday, JetBlue CEO Robin Hayes and chief operating officer Joanna Geraghty added, "One way or another, be assured: JetBlue has a bright future.

"If we need to move forward without Spirit, we will invigorate our standalone organic plan, continuing to fight for more market share and win customers from the big airlines."

They said "conditions remain difficult for smaller airlines like ours. We need everyone’s support to get back to profitability."

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland called the ruling "a victory for tens of millions of travelers who would have faced higher fares and fewer choices had the proposed merger between JetBlue and Spirit been allowed to move forward."

While Young ruled in the Justice Department's favor, he did not go as far as the government had asked and broadly bar any combination of the two companies, saying he was only going to block the deal "as it currently stands."

The judge, who had questioned whether further asset divestitures could make the deal work, said, "The courthouse doors remain open, should the defendant airlines decide to try again."

Some investors and analysts had expressed concerns in the past that Spirit's troubles could hurt JetBlue after the merger. Some analysts had also suggested JetBlue renegotiate the deal, citing the fall in Spirit's share price even before Tuesday's ruling.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

The Justice Department, along with Democratic state attorney generals from six states, had said that allowing JetBlue to absorb its no-frills, budget rival Spirit would "extinguish a vital source of low-cost competitive disruption along more than 375 routes," causing nearly $1 billion of net harm a year to consumers.

The four larger U.S. carriers - United Airlines, American Airlines (NASDAQ:AAL), Delta Air Lines (NYSE:DAL) and Southwest Airlines (NYSE:LUV) - control 80% of the market after a series of airline mergers the federal government blessed.

Spirit was the first U.S. domestic carrier to allow passengers to pick the features of flights they pay for, such as checked bags and food and drink service. Its model has pushed competing airlines to slash prices, the Justice Department said.

JetBlue is a higher-cost airline than Spirit. But it has historically maintained a low-cost model compared with larger airlines and been able to similarly pressure larger airlines to reduce prices when it launches a new route.

The New York-based airline had sought to tackle U.S. regulators' concerns by agreeing to divest gates and slots at key airports in New York City; Boston; Newark, New Jersey; and Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

The Justice Department's case is part of a broader push by the Biden administration to aggressively step up antitrust enforcement, an initiative that has had mixed court results.

JetBlue was already the focus of one of its earlier cases, with a different Boston judge, Leo Sorokin, in May siding with the government in finding that JetBlue's U.S. Northeast partnership with American Airlines violated antitrust law.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

JetBlue subsequently decided to terminate the alliance. American Airlines is appealing Sorokin's decision.

Latest comments

Sounds like a certain judge wants to be paid under the table to change his mind.. or was paid by another airline to make the call
I disagree. We need checks and balances. Especially in airlines, banks oil companies,food and grocery companies. Without the competition they gouge the consumers. I am a registered republican but strongly support this ruling.
Makes no sense. As a Democrat this sort of meddeling serves absolutely zero purpose and may impact the vaibility of these businesses and ultimately safety. Things like this is why normally rational people vote Republican.
Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.