United Airlines defends partnership against Spirit's allegations

JetBlue and United also addressed what they called Spirit’s "speculation," asserting that their agreement was designed to preserve competition while avoiding regulatory issues similar to those faced by the Northeast Alliance between American Airlines and JetBlue.

The two airlines emphasized that their partnership does not involve revenue sharing or joint network planning. They retain an “economic incentive to compete vigorously on price and service against the other,” urging the DOT to dismiss Spirit’s request as unfounded.

They presented three arguments for dismissal: mischaracterization by Spirit of 'Blue Sky,' non-compliance with DOT precedent, and preserving competition following a merger block under previous administration policies. They noted JetBlue's financial losses since 2020 as a reason for needing 'Blue Sky' approval.

Spirit Airlines has requested an extension of the review period for 'Blue Sky' by another 60 days, suggesting public review of agreements similar to past practices with NEA agreements. It argues that 'Blue Sky' could create anti-competitive incentives akin to those seen in NEA.

Spirit claims that despite JetBlue’s assurances of independence in pricing and network management, United's interests might influence decisions on overlapping routes. The carrier concludes by requesting third-party assessments on 'Blue Sky’s impact.