04-22-2017, 12:01 PM
I don't see anything inherently wrong with regulation preventing over-competition on routes. If too many operators try to run a route, you can end up with the split business meaning that neither is able to operate at a profit.
The real problem I see here is that the regulations as currently designed are all about rent seeking. It seems that once you own a route, you own it, forever. There is no mechanism for a bad player to have their license revoked for a route, so long as defend it, and (I assume) occasionally run a bus.
I suspect that Greyhound has seen the Airporter pull out of offering scheduled service, and so has decided to move in and lay claim to the route in advance of making an application. At the hearing, the airporter may object that they hold the license, but Greyhound will point out that they're not using it, and Greyhound is already offering a replacement service.
The real problem I see here is that the regulations as currently designed are all about rent seeking. It seems that once you own a route, you own it, forever. There is no mechanism for a bad player to have their license revoked for a route, so long as defend it, and (I assume) occasionally run a bus.
I suspect that Greyhound has seen the Airporter pull out of offering scheduled service, and so has decided to move in and lay claim to the route in advance of making an application. At the hearing, the airporter may object that they hold the license, but Greyhound will point out that they're not using it, and Greyhound is already offering a replacement service.