/
has
s©»«rac!s So
eomplei©
PP
m
aslsa
. . WMS TffiMT "CQNSPIBMCY"?
Tuie charges of the Antitrust suit against the Alaska Steamship Company are predicated on
the apparent belief that because we have provided complete service to all parts of the Territory
of Alaska we have been guilty of a conspiracy to monopolize!
For many years The Alaska Line has carried the slogan “Serving All Alaska” because
that has been considered to be a foremost recommendation of our service.
We have striven to provide complete facilities for handling passengers, freight, refrigera
tion and the variety of other requirements of our customers throughout the Territory of Alaska.
The efforts we have put forth now return to condemn us in the language of the Antitrust
lawyers:
“None of the water carriers with which defendants
(Alaska Steamship Company) have competed in the Ahska *
trade during this period have been able to offer all of the
services desired or required by shippers. Shippers patronizing
defendants’ competitors in the Alaska trade have been re
quired also to patronize the defendants in order to obtain
ail of the services which they desired or required.”
Why have others been unable to render this necessary full-scale service?
The answer is that complete water transportation service to all parts of Alaska is made
possible only through adequate financial investment, through providing necessary ships and
facilities and through the determination to do the job. In the past twenty years no other com
pany has been willing to commit itself to these requirements.
The Alaska Steamship Company has provided the finances, the ships and facilities and
has devoted itself to serving all Alaska. That is why ONLY the Alaska Steamship Company has
offered “all of the services desired or required by shippers.”
N __ '
ALASKA STEAMSHIP COMPANY
Serving All Alaska