Editing Virgin Atlantic (section)

===Competition===
{{cite check|section|date=September 2015}}
[[File:Airbus A340-311, Virgin Atlantic Airways AN0062857.jpg|thumb|[[Airbus A340#A340-300|Airbus A340-300]] landing at [[Kai Tak Airport]], displaying the "No Way BA/AA" livery]]
[[File:Virgin Atlantic A340-300 G-VHOL LHR 2003-6-12.png|thumb|[[Airbus A340#A340-300|Airbus A340-300]] at [[London Heathrow Airport]] in 2003, displaying "4 Engines 4 Longhaul" slogan]]
In 1991, Virgin Atlantic was given permission to operate from Heathrow following the abolition of the London Air Traffic Distribution Rules (TDRs), which had governed the distribution of traffic between Heathrow and Gatwick airports since 1978, primarily to bolster the profitability of Gatwick. Airlines without an international scheduled service from Heathrow prior to 1 April 1977 were obliged to operate from Gatwick. However, airlines that did not already operate at Heathrow were still able to begin domestic scheduled services there provided BAA, which then ran both Heathrow and Gatwick on behalf of the UK government, and the [[Secretary of State for Transport]], granted permission.{{Citation needed|date=May 2023}}

The [[Civil Aviation Authority (United Kingdom)|Civil Aviation Authority]] also transferred two pairs of unused [[landing slot]]s that British Airways held at Tokyo's [[Narita International Airport|Narita Airport]] to Virgin Atlantic, allowing it to increase frequency between Heathrow and Tokyo from four to six weekly round trips, making it easier to compete against British Airways. The then-chairman of BA, [[John King, Baron King of Wartnaby|Lord King]], called the CAA's decision, which the government had endorsed, "a confiscation of his company's property".<ref>{{cite web |title=Operation of the UK Traffic Distribution Rules in relation to all-cargo services at London Heathrow Airport |publisher=BAA Heathrow |url=http://www.acl-uk.org/UserFiles/File/BAA%20TDR%20consultation%20paper%20_LHR.pdf |access-date=12 February 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090226202154/http://www.acl-uk.org/UserFiles/File/BAA%20TDR%20consultation%20paper%20_LHR.pdf |archive-date=26 February 2009 |url-status=dead |df=dmy-all }}</ref>

In the year to October 1993, Virgin Atlantic declared a loss of £9.3 million. The decision to abolish the London TDRs and to let Virgin Atlantic operate at Heathrow, in competition with British Airways, became the trigger for BA's so-called [[Dirty Tricks (British Airways scandal)|"dirty tricks" campaign]] against the company. During 1993, BA's [[public relations]] director, [[David Burnside]], published an article in ''BA News'', British Airways' internal magazine, which argued that Branson's protests against British Airways were a publicity stunt. Branson sued British Airways for libel, using the services of [[George Carman]] [[Queen's Counsel|QC]]. BA settled out of court when its lawyers discovered the lengths to which the company had gone in trying to kill off Virgin Atlantic. British Airways had to pay a legal bill of up to £3&nbsp;million, damages to Branson of £500,000, and a further £110,000 to his airline. Branson reportedly donated the proceeds from the case to Virgin Atlantic staff.<ref>{{cite news |title=Row over dirty tricks led to decade of hostilities |author=Lee Glendinning |url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2007/aug/02/theairlineindustry.britishairways |newspaper=The Guardian |date=2 August 2007 |access-date=24 October 2014}}</ref><ref>Elkins, Kathleen. [https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/03/richard-bransons-airline-won-945000-and-it-all-went-to-employees.html "When Richard Branson's airline won $945,000 from a lawsuit, he gave it all to his employees."] ''[[CNBC]]'', 4 August 2017.</ref>

During the late 1990s, Virgin Atlantic jets were painted with "No Way BA/AA" as a declaration of its opposition to the attempted merger between British Airways and [[American Airlines]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Virgin Atlantic, British airways to do battle over Las Vegas |author= Velotta, Richard N. |url= http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/may/21/virgin-atlantic-british-airways-do-battle-over-las/ |newspaper=Las Vegas Sun |date=21 May 2012 |access-date=3 August 2013}}</ref> In 1997, following British Airways' announcement that it was to remove the [[Union Flag]] from its tailfins in favour of [[British Airways ethnic liveries|world images]], Virgin Atlantic introduced a Union Flag design on the [[wingtip device#Winglet|winglets]] of its aircraft and changed the red dress on the ''Scarlet Lady'' on the nose of aircraft to the union flag with the tag line "Britain's [[Flag Carrier]]". This was a tongue-in-cheek challenge to BA's traditional role as the UK's flag carrier.<ref>{{cite news |title= Virgin's battle of Britain with BA |url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/362876.stm |work=BBC News |date=7 June 1999 |access-date=30 November 2011}}</ref>

In June 2006, US and UK competition authorities investigated alleged [[price fixing]] between Virgin Atlantic and British Airways over passenger fuel surcharges.<ref>{{cite news |title=Virgin tip-off 'led to BA probe' |url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5109014.stm |work=BBC News |date=23 June 2006 |access-date=30 November 2011}}</ref> In August 2007, BA was fined £271&nbsp;million by the UK [[Office of Fair Trading]] (OFT) and the US&nbsp;[[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]].<ref>{{cite news |title=US judge upholds BA's $300m fine |url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6959725.stm |work=BBC News |date=23 August 2007 |access-date=30 November 2011}}</ref> However, the Chief Executive of Virgin Atlantic, Steve Ridgway, was forced to admit that the company had been a party to the agreement, had been aware of the price-fixing and had taken no steps whatsoever to stop the price-fixing.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Virgin boss caught up in BA price-fixing case |newspaper=The Daily Telegraph |location= London |url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/5820700/Virgin-boss-caught-up-in-BA-price-fixing-case.html |first=Alistair |last=Osborne |access-date=15 July 2009 |date=14 July 2009}}</ref> The company escaped a similar fine to that levied on British Airways only by virtue of the immunity it had earlier negotiated with the regulators.

In April 2010, a tip-off from [[Cathay Pacific]] led to an [[Office of Fair Trading]] (OFT) investigation of alleged price-fixing between Virgin Atlantic and [[Cathay Pacific]] on flights to Hong Kong between 2002 and 2006. Cathay Pacific received immunity from prosecution for reporting the alleged offence. A maximum fine, if found guilty, was 10% of turnover, which, based on the £2.5&nbsp;billion in sales for the year to February 2009, would have been £250&nbsp;million.<ref>{{Cite news |url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/7621250/Virgin-Atlantic-accused-of-fixing-Hong-Kong-flight-prices.html |work=The Daily Telegraph |location=London |title=Virgin Atlantic accused of fixing Hong Kong flight prices |first=Alistair |last=Osborne |date=22 April 2010 |access-date=27 May 2010}}</ref> At the time, the OFT stressed that it should not be assumed that the parties involved had broken the law.<ref>{{cite news |author= Wearden, Graeme |url= https://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/apr/22/virgin-atlantic-cathay-pacific-oft |title=OFT accuses Virgin Atlantic and Cathay Pacific of price-fixing |newspaper=The Guardian |location=London |date=22 April 2010 |access-date=1 August 2013}}</ref> The OFT cleared both airlines in December 2012, concluding there were "no grounds for action".<ref>{{cite news |title=Virgin Atlantic, Cathay Pacific Cleared in U.K. Price-Fix Probe |author1=Larson, Erik |author2=Lundgren, Kari |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-14/virgin-atlantic-cleared-with-cathay-in-u-k-price-fix-probe-1-.html |newspaper=Bloomberg |location=New York |date=14 December 2012 |access-date=1 August 2013}}</ref>