AA wants out of Love Field lease

[Ch. 12]

----------------
On 6/27/2003 10:16:55 AM BDLDFW wrote:

----------------

The WA is only a deal that allows near monopolization of the best routes by AA
----------------
​

Really? WN is free to fly from DFW to compete w/ AA.

----------------​

Can''t we just refer to AA and DFW as the same entity? By "free" you mean "free to attempt to capture gates from an airport that has an enormous interest in meeting any and all needs (i.e. available gates in the event of WN''s desire to enter DFW) of its largest revenue generator...AA"?

 

[JS]

I don't recall a new airline having trouble getting gates at DFW. It's not like Southwest would need 50 gates at DFW. Just a handful of gates results in a Southwest "hub".

The problem has been AA throwing lots of low-priced capacity on the new entrant's routes (e.g., DFW-MCI).


My opinion:

If Southwest is not going to attempt to fly out of DFW, there is no reason to repeal the Wright Amendment.

If Southwest gets some DFW gates and starts flying, and AA goes bananas with the low-priced capacity ($19 to MCI! $24 to MDW! $29 to SEA!), THEN you can repeal the Wright Amendment in the name of sane competition.

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 6/27/2003 1:44:09 PM JS wrote:

My opinion:

If Southwest is not going to attempt to fly out of DFW, there is no reason to repeal the Wright Amendment.

If Southwest gets some DFW gates and starts flying, and AA goes bananas with the low-priced capacity ($19 to MCI! $24 to MDW! $29 to SEA!), THEN you can repeal the Wright Amendment in the name of sane competition.

----------------​

Why shouldn''t "sane competiton" be able to exist out of Love Field, much as it does at Midway in Chicago or Hobby in Houston, or though not in the same city but ceratinly "neighbors" - Oakland at San Francisco?

 

[Ch. 12]

----------------
On 6/27/2003 1:44:09 PM JS wrote:

I don''t recall a new airline having trouble getting gates at DFW. It''s not like Southwest would need 50 gates at DFW. Just a handful of gates results in a Southwest "hub".

The problem has been AA throwing lots of low-priced capacity on the new entrant''s routes (e.g., DFW-MCI).


My opinion:

If Southwest is not going to attempt to fly out of DFW, there is no reason to repeal the Wright Amendment.

If Southwest gets some DFW gates and starts flying, and AA goes bananas with the low-priced capacity ($19 to MCI! $24 to MDW! $29 to SEA!), THEN you can repeal the Wright Amendment in the name of sane competition.

----------------​

Problem is that all significant traffic to and from one of the nation''s largest metro areas is being directed through one facility. One of WNs largest benefits to the airline industry is their ability to go into a city, add capacity, increase overall demand, and alleviate congestion by using alternate facilities. In areas like ATL where there is extremely high traffic but no alternate airport, of course it is impossible to increase overall demand to the city and not create more congestion problems. However, there is absolutely no reason to force them to use DFW when DAL is more convenient to the Dallas metro. The Wright Ammendment was designed solely for the economic viability of AA, the DFW authority, and Braniff (which had problems that the WA couldn''t help) and is actually detrimental to 1) the city of Dallas by limiting accessability by carriers other than AA and 2) Texas air traffic (all significant Dallas area and connecting traffic must go through only one airport.)

What is the value in that? Why force WN to move when that is not what is the best overall solution?

 

[AAmech]

----------------
On 6/27/2003 2:33:39 PM Ch. 12 wrote:

there is absolutely no reason to force them to use DFW when DAL is more convenient to the Dallas metro. The Wright Ammendment was designed solely for the economic viability of AA, the DFW authority, and Braniff (which had problems that the WA couldn''t help) and is actually detrimental to 1) the city of Dallas by limiting accessability by carriers other than AA and 2) Texas air traffic (all significant Dallas area and connecting traffic must go through only one airport.)

What is the value in that? Why force WN to move when that is not what is the best overall solution?​

----------------​

The convenience of DAL is highly overrated! The Legend/AA/Delta experience has proven that. All the hype in the world couldn''t fill those planes no matter how low the price. The way the metro area is growing northward actually makes DFW easier to get to for much of the population. DAL is much quicker to Downtown but as longtime residents know Downtown is a shell of its once vibrant past. Corp HQ''s have been relocating to the burbs for years. Maybe the cities could get together and lift some restrictions and instead slot control the airport to placate the nearby residents who want NOTHING to do with expansion. On the other hand WN is the richest most powerfull airline in the world! Why should the city spend precious funds for their convience when they could just wander over 9 miles take a few gates and fly worldwide if they want?

 

[texflyer]

----------------
On 6/27/2003 3:35:55 PM AAmech wrote:

----------------

On 6/27/2003 2:33:39 PM Ch. 12 wrote:

there is absolutely no reason to force them to use DFW when DAL is more convenient to the Dallas metro.  The Wright Ammendment was designed solely for the economic viability of AA, the DFW authority, and Braniff (which had problems that the WA couldn''t help) and is actually detrimental to 1) the city of Dallas by limiting accessability by carriers other than AA and 2) Texas air traffic (all significant Dallas area and connecting traffic must go through only one airport.)


What is the value in that?  Why force WN to move when that is not what is the best overall solution?​

----------------​

The convenience of DAL is highly overrated!   The Legend/AA/Delta experience has proven that.  All the hype in the world couldn''t fill those planes no matter how low the price.  The way the metro area is growing northward actually makes DFW easier to get to for much of the population.  DAL is much quicker to Downtown but as longtime residents know Downtown is a shell of its once vibrant past.  Corp HQ''s have been relocating to the burbs for years. Maybe the cities could get together and lift some restrictions and instead slot control the airport to placate the nearby residents who want NOTHING to do with expansion.  On the other hand WN is the richest most powerfull airline in the world!  Why should the city spend precious funds for their convience when they could just wander over 9 miles take a few gates and fly worldwide if they want?

----------------​

Finally someone who lives in the DFW area responds with a reasonable post on Love field. Yes Love is minutes from downtown Dallas,but if you live in Ft.Worth,Grapevine,Trophy Club,Plano or Los Calinas,DFW is closer and just as easy to negotiate..

Whats funny is that many here apparently do not watch the Dallas News. You want to start a fight,talk about expansion at Love,and watch the affluent North Dallas Elite come out in groves to the city counsel meetings in protes. They give new meaning to the word NIMBY. One of the reasons that SWA flights have been as MGA stated stagnated. Also,do not think SWA does not enjoy its little monopoly at Love. If any frequent flyer is hard up to fly SWA to the west coast,its not hard to do,the locals know how. For example you fly from DAL-ABQ,then ABQ-LAX. No,the connection is not in the flight schedule,and yes you have to pay point to point,but its not impossible.

 

[AAmech]

----------------
On 6/27/2003 7:46:25 PM texflyer wrote:


Finally someone who lives in the DFW area responds with a reasonable post on Love field. Yes Love is minutes from downtown Dallas,but if you live in Ft.Worth,Grapevine,Trophy Club,Plano or Los Calinas,DFW is closer and just as easy to negotiate..

----------------​

Lets not forget Addison,Coppell, Plano, Frisco, Mckinny, Lewisville, The Colony, and Allen. All areas with exploding populations.
PS. Used to live in Dallas and spent many years working at Love Field and fighting thru traffic to get there. Now in Tulsa.

 

[mga707]

----------------
On 6/27/2003 7:43:28 AM Ch. 12 wrote:


The fact is markets such as JAN, BHM, CRP, and HRL to DAL aren''t sufficient enough to capture WN''s interest and most likely wouldn''t be extremely profitable.

----------------​

I''m not disagreeing, just noting that WN could, if they so wanted, expand a little at DAL, even only taking current markets into consideration.
Actually, I am surprised that they did not add BHM when the Amendment was expanded. Not only is BHM a bigger market than the other three, it is also a market where WN has slowly but steadily expanded its presence.

 

[AAmech]

I''m sure they eventually will but I think the phrase, "There"s Bigger Fish to Fry" applies here!

 

[WXGuesser]

----------------
On 6/27/2003 10:01:03 PM AAmech wrote:

----------------
On 6/27/2003 7:46:25 PM texflyer wrote:


Finally someone who lives in the DFW area responds with a reasonable post on Love field. Yes Love is minutes from downtown Dallas,but if you live in Ft.Worth,Grapevine,Trophy Club,Plano or Los Calinas,DFW is closer and just as easy to negotiate..

----------------​

Lets not forget Addison,Coppell, Plano, Frisco, Mckinny, Lewisville, The Colony, and Allen.  All areas with exploding populations.
PS.  Used to live in Dallas and spent many years working at Love Field and fighting thru traffic to get there. Now in Tulsa.

----------------​

As well as Arlington, Mansfield, Euless, Bedford, Hurst, North Richland Hills, Colleyville, Southlake and ANYWHERE on the Tarrant County side of the Metroplex. They don''t want to have to drive down into the scary area that is around parts of Love Field (North Dallas just outside the urban core ain''t exactly the nicest area these days). Even if you got rid of the Wright Amendment, I still don''t think you would see people from these areas flock to Southwest.

TANSTAAFL

 

[hobbes]

"Even if you got rid of the Wright Amendment, I still don''t think you would see people from these areas flock to Southwest."

As somebody who lives in one of those "bedroom towns" between Dallas and Ft. Worth, I disagree.

Remember, many companies in the Dallas-area use Southwest as their business carrier of choice for travel within the Wright Amendment, despite the fact that it may result in a somewhat longer drive than going to DFW. Why? Because for many of these companies, business travel is often booked less than 7 days in advance, and they can often get significantly lower fares on Southwest than they could if they went to DFW. Imagine how they would celebrate if they could get those significantly lower fares with a short advance purchase for cities outside the Wright Amendment?

I have no doubt that Southwest would have a nice customer base if the WA were dropped.

However, at this point, I don''t see AA as being the main opponent to the WA. They certainly don''t have the money right now to be staging a legal battle against the WA, anyway. I see the city of Ft. Worth as being the main opponent. If I remember this correctly, don''t Ft. Worth and Dallas split some of the revenue and taxes generated from DFW? I think Ft. Worth''s main complaint was that, if DAL were free of the WA, the city of Dallas would not just be getting revenue from DFW, but also DAL as well. I could be completely wrong here, but I remember this once being discussed on the local news.

I also don''t see WN heading into DFW anytime soon. I''m not sure the benefits of starting service out of DFW outweigh the costs incurred. In addition, WN is trying to avoid looking like a vulture given the current state of many airlines, and they would certainly look like a vulture if they went into AA''s stronghold right now. And you could bet a major fare war would ensue. The result is that it would appear as though WN were going for AA''s throat.

Although I think WN would have great success if the WA were lifted, they DO have a nice little niche in the intra-state market. The WA DOES have a benefit to WN, strangely enough: it keeps other carriers from wanting to come into Love Field.

By the way, did anyone hear on the local news that there are some citizens that are pushing for a change to the Wright Amendment: to allow through-ticketing?

 

[Ch. 12]

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 6/30/2003 12:23:19 PM Ch. 12 wrote:



----------------​

Pretty deep thought there CH12...

 

[texflyer]

I don''t see SWA rushing to Washington to get the WA overturned. If they REALLLLY wanted too,SWA could easily do it. They like it the way it is.

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 6/30/2003 3:17:42 PM texflyer wrote:

I don''t see SWA rushing to Washington to get the WA overturned. If they REALLLLY wanted too,SWA could easily do it. They like it the way it is.

----------------​

The story I''ve always heard is that Southwest remains "passionately neutral" on the subject of the Wright Amendment, in accordance with a "gentleman''s agreement" made several years ago.