Full Analysis Summary
Proposed El Al penalty
Israel's Competition Authority announced it intends to impose the maximum statutory fine of NIS 121 million on national carrier El Al, accusing the airline of charging excessive and unfair airfares between Oct. 7, 2023 and May 2024.
The airline became a de facto monopoly after many foreign carriers suspended service following the Hamas-led attack.
Regulators say average ticket prices rose roughly 16 percent, ranging from 6–31 percent on major routes depending on destination and class.
They point to El Al's increased market share as justification for their scrutiny.
El Al rejects the findings and says it will contest the charge at a formal hearing.
The proposed penalty is subject to that hearing, and separate civil suits alleging price-gouging are pending.
Commentators note that if the fines are upheld they would be among the largest ever levied against an airline in Israel.
Coverage Differences
Tone and emphasis
COLlive (Western Alternative) emphasizes the market-share jump and precise price-rise figures and frames the action as the regulator alleging excessive fares, while Haaretz (Israeli) stresses the authority’s legal finding after controlling for other factors and notes the fine’s relation to company revenue; i24NEWS (Israeli) highlights the potential scale of the fines and links the story to related incidents, giving a broader, headline-oriented framing. Each source is reporting the same regulatory action but differs in focus: COLlive on numbers, Haaretz on legal justification and procedure, and i24NEWS on scale and related events.
Numeric conversion discrepancy
The three sources present the same shekel fine but differ in the dollar conversion: COLlive gives ~${33} million for NIS 121 million, while Haaretz reports about ${39} million. i24NEWS reports the potential size qualitatively without a dollar figure, leaving an inconsistency in USD-equivalent reporting across outlets.
Airline price and market analysis
The Competition Authority's market analysis as reported varies in level of detail.
COLlive provides concrete market-share figures, saying El Al's share jumped from about 20% pre-October 7 to over 70% within days and remained above 50% in the early months of the war.
It cites average ticket-price rises of roughly 16% (6–31% on major routes).
Haaretz conveys the authority's legal judgment that, after controlling for other factors, increases were significantly high and unjustified given market characteristics.
i24NEWS frames these findings as part of broader scrutiny and potential consequences, noting the fines' possible historic size rather than enumerating route-by-route price changes.
Coverage Differences
Detail vs. legal framing
COLlive (Western Alternative) gives explicit market-share and percentage increases (20% to over 70%, average ticket prices rose roughly 16% with 6–31% on major routes), while Haaretz (Israeli) emphasizes the Competition Authority's legal reasoning—controlling for other factors—without reproducing route-level percentages; i24NEWS (Israeli) prioritizes the potential consequence (large fines) and related incidents more than granular market statistics.
El Al: finances and scrutiny
COLlive reports El Al posted record 2024 revenue of $3.4 billion and a net profit of $545 million.
COLlive also says El Al rejects the Competition Authority’s findings and will contest the charge at a formal hearing.
Haaretz places the proposed 121 million-shekel penalty within statutory limits as the top sanction allowed based on revenue cycles.
Haaretz adds that the fine amounts to roughly 4% of the airline’s profits since the war began and that El Al can present arguments at a hearing and later appeal any final decision.
i24NEWS describes the company as under scrutiny and links the regulatory case to other developments, such as vandalism abroad, suggesting reputational and operational fallout beyond the formal process.
Coverage Differences
Financial framing vs. legal proportion
COLlive (Western Alternative) foregrounds El Al’s reported revenue and profit figures to contextualize the fine, whereas Haaretz (Israeli) frames the fine as a proportion of the airline’s profits since the war (roughly 4%) and as the maximum allowed under law; i24NEWS (Israeli) focuses more on scrutiny and related incidents (vandalism) that may affect public perception.
Proposed fine status
Procedurally, all three sources make clear the proposed fine is not final.
The Competition Authority has announced its intention and the amount is the maximum allowable under law.
El Al will have a hearing to contest the findings and any final decision can be appealed or challenged in court.
Separate civil suits are also pending.
The accounts are consistent on next steps but differ in what they emphasize.
COLlive flags civil suits and notes that any penalty would go to the state.
Haaretz underscores the legal avenues of a hearing and appeal.
i24NEWS notes the broader public and reputational dimensions if fines are sustained.
Coverage Differences
Procedural emphasis vs. ancillary details
All sources agree the fine is proposed and subject to hearing and appeal, but COLlive (Western Alternative) uniquely mentions pending civil suits and states the penalty would go to the state, Haaretz (Israeli) emphasizes the statutory maximum and appeal avenues, and i24NEWS (Israeli) emphasizes the possible larger consequences and related incidents—yielding a consistent procedural picture with differing ancillary focus.
Coverage of El Al fine
Three outlets report the same core facts: the Competition Authority intends to levy a NIS 121 million fine for alleged wartime price gouging, and El Al intends to contest the action.
COLlive (Western Alternative) emphasizes market-share metrics and company profits.
Haaretz (Israeli) frames the move as a legal finding, stressing procedural safeguards and proportionality to revenue.
i24NEWS (Israeli) places the case within wider scrutiny and related incidents that have affected the airline’s reputation.
Readers should note a discrepancy in the reported dollar equivalents for the same shekel amount, and that the fine is proposed rather than final while civil and legal processes continue.
Coverage Differences
Framing and omitted detail
COLlive (Western Alternative) foregrounds specific numeric market data and El Al’s revenue; Haaretz (Israeli) frames the action as a legal finding emphasizing controls and appeals; i24NEWS (Israeli) brings in ancillary incidents (vandalism) and an emphasis on the fines’ historic magnitude. None of the sources contradict the core claim, but they omit different details (e.g., i24NEWS does not provide the market-share percentages COLlive does).