Branson wants to try and sway Dallas for DAL gates

[eolesen]

While I still believe Virgin will get the gates, there has been NO public statement made by them that disqualifies WN from getting these two gates.

There has been a defacto public statement -- AA stated that the only name forwarded to them by the DOJ as an acceptable party to negotiate with was VX.

I'm not going to waste any time digging for a link, but it's out there in the last (now locked due to the ongoing pissing contest) thread about VX getting the gates.

It's also referenced about two weeks ago on Terry Maxon's blog, which is the only objective source you're going to find on the topic.

There are a few on the Dallas City Council who would prefer to see WN get the gates, but it will all come down to the City Manager to make a decision, not the Council.

 

[WNMECH]

There has been a defacto public statement -- AA stated that the only name forwarded to them by the DOJ as an acceptable party to negotiate with was VX.

I'm not going to waste any time digging for a link, but it's out there in the last (now locked due to the ongoing pissing contest) thread about VX getting the gates.

It's also referenced about two weeks ago on Terry Maxon's blog, which is the only objective source you're going to find on the topic.

There are a few on the Dallas City Council who would prefer to see WN get the gates, but it will all come down to the City Manager to make a decision, not the Council.

 
As I have said, that is a statement made by AA, Not the DOJ and has not been verified by any public statements from the DOJ.
A link to what AA says is worthless in proving that WN would not be accepted by the DOJ if they are given the gates by the Dallas City Manager.
 
AA says what is in its best interest, not always the complete and accurate truth. I do not doubt that the DOJ finds VX acceptable, I question that they are the ONLY airline in the country that is acceptable.

 

[WNMECH]

The DOJ specifically said that Virgin America was the only airline that met the qualifications to gain the gates.

 

 
Prove it.
There is no public statement from the DOJ claiming that.

 

[eolesen]

AA says what is in its best interest, not always the complete and accurate truth. I do not doubt that the DOJ finds VX acceptable, I question that they are the ONLY airline in the country that is acceptable.

How exactly is it in AA's best interest to mislead people here?... They care less about who gets the gates than they do about making sure the process is completed to the DOJ's satisfaction.

Say what you will, but there aren't too many corporate executives who would misrepresent information like this to the degree you're suggesting. Especially when it could impact other publicly traded companies...

You can submit a FOIA request to the DOJ if you wish. They usually don't disclose a whole lot proactively, though.

 

[700UW]

DL isnt a new entrant, how many times are you going to post misinformation?

 

[Kev3188]

 
HOW WIFE-SWAP GAME RUINED MY MARRIAGE; NO VIRGIN: TYCOON'S SHOCKING SEX REVELATION IN NEW BOOK.

Lol. Awesome.
 
 

 

[eolesen]

DL isnt a new entrant, how many times are you going to post misinformation?

Agree... I decided to go to the source on this one... The Wendall Ford Aviation Act. That's where new entrant became a buzzword...
 

NEW ENTRANT AIR CARRIER.—The term ‘new entrant air carrier’ means an air carrier that has been providing air transportation according to a published schedule for less than 5 years, including any person that has received authority from the Secretary to provide air transportation but is not providing air transportation

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-106hr1000enr/pdf/BILLS-106hr1000enr.pdf

The more accurate term would probably be "limited incumbent" with regard to DL, but even there, they might not qualify being the second largest of the four carriers at the airport.

The only real qualification for "limited incumbent" has been used with regard to DCA and LGA slots, and specifically refers to airlines with fewer than 20 slots at those airports (4%).

Adjusted to fit the current context of departures at DAL, that would be any airline with fewer than 4 flights per day..

By that measure, DL isn't a limited incumbent, either.

 

[WNMECH]

How exactly is it in AA's best interest to mislead people here?... They care less about who gets the gates than they do about making sure the process is completed to the DOJ's satisfaction.

Say what you will, but there aren't too many corporate executives who would misrepresent information like this to the degree you're suggesting. Especially when it could impact other publicly traded companies...

You can submit a FOIA request to the DOJ if you wish. They usually don't disclose a whole lot proactively, though.

 It is AA best interest to send Virgin away from DFW, have them boxed in at DAL and to keep WN from getting two more gates. You may read their statements about a one name list as fact while it is clearly out of context. 
 We have no public corroboration or any statement at all from the DOJ to bolster these claims from American and Virgin. 
 
Why?
 
Can it be that it is not as cut and dried to the DOJ as WT, AA and  VX claim?
I am not claiming AA or VX shaded the truth enough to be harmful or illegal. They may have only said the parts that were helpful to them, as I would expect them to. Heck when Virgin flew in and claimed victory, we had a whole weekend of press repeating the talking points that they had won the gates. Was it in Virgins and AA best interest to mislead people into thinking this was all over?
Then came the real story, the gates have not been won and the Dallas city manager will decide.
 
Without a statement from the DOJ, I will not be the one assuming that everything AA and VX have said about it is the complete story and 100% accurate.
 
It would be equally stupid to file a foia request for something that will be settled in the next couple days or weeks.

 

[eolesen]

OK, continue to be paranoid if you wish...

I'll take AA's word that VX was indeed the only party that the DOJ found acceptable for AA to engage into discussions with.

If that wasn't actually the case, I'm pretty certain someone would have refuted that quickly, just as multiple sources refuted the statement that VX getting the gates was a done deal.

Oh, and the City Manager always has been the person who would ultimately make the decision of allowing a lease transfer or a sublease. Routine matters like this have never been a matter for the Clowncil to debate.

 

[WNMECH]

Its not paranoid to question the word of the two companies that tried to end run the process and announce victory on the Friday before a Monday report was to be unveiled showing WN as the clear best choice to receive the gates.  Although I do concede that it was brilliant and I give it a 90% chance to succeed.
 
To believe AA and VX completely after that attempt is naive at best.

 

[swamt]

Where is the proof that SWA was restricted from participating in the bids and or winning said gates.  Not by the DOJ as WNMECH has reported.  Show the proof or STFU!!!  It is in fact Delta that was tagged as the "not a valid candidate for the 2 LF gates...   NOT SWA folks...

 

[WorldTraveler]

you poor folks at WN. You feel SO slighted to find out that the DOJ isn't really going to give you 90% of the gates at an airport? Really?

Funny that you claim that on the basis of the enforcement of antitrust laws, WN should get access to DCA and LGA based on your underprivileged status but on the basis of the same antitrust laws you can't grasp that WN isn't ever going to be allowed to gain more gates at an airport where it already has 80% when there are other carriers standing in line to get any.

The DOJ may not have thought thru the whole ramifications of what would happen but they aren't totally clueless.

WN doesn't meet the requirements to get any more gates and they won't get any as long as there are other airlines that want into DAL.
The question is how many gates WN will have to use to accommodate other carriers that want to get in..... you might be surprised to find out that those 16 gates which you told us for months would never be used by other airlines really will be.

DL isnt a new entrant, how many times are you going to post misinformation?

you also can't seem to grasp that new entrant based on airport access laws doesn't mean whether a carrier has EVER served an airport but whether it does at the time it seeks access.

If DL has no lease, and no one has yet to tell them or DAL that DL has any gates, then DL is a new entrant.

We can keep going on this until Oct 2014 but DL will be at Love Field and won't be just accepting the scraps in the schedule that other carriers don't want.

Virgin can show up if it wants to and it doesn't need to pay AA anything for the privilege.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Problem is that airport access laws require US airports to accommodate new entrants

I am honestly not sure why it is so difficult to understand that if DL does not gain the two gates it has no access and then indeed is a new entrant.

Ironically if AA or WN or the city gave DL enough gates to operate the same number of flights as they have today DL would not be a new entrant.

But because the DOJ said access to DAL comes in groups of flights for two gates DL has every right to ask to be accommodated as a new entrant.
DL cannot be without a gate lease And ineligible to
petition as a new entrant.

 
DL is not a new entrant.
 
Its really astounding that someone like you that on one hand boasts to have so much knowledge about airlines and gloats about grasping the nuances of commercial aviation would now stoop to making up / fabricating definitions.
 
BTW:  it wasn't too long ago that you were bloviating about how for years DL is winning in the NTX market despite dismatling their DFW hub, and now, all of a sudden DL is a new entrant.  I'm almost curious to read how you're going to spin this - it will certainly make good humor.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I'm not sure how hard it is for you or anyone else to realize that the minute DL loses its lease, it has to suspend service from DAL. It then the very next day has the right to reenter DAL as a new entrant because the term new entrant has nothing to do with any history an airline has ever had at an airport but whether it serves it at the time it makes its request for service there.

Don't worry, though, WN management gets it. Nowhere have they said that they deserve to get the gates above all other airlines that are requesting access because they absolutely realize that they signed the 2006 agreement specifically saying that if the tenant airlines of DAL did not accommodate new entrant airlines on their own, DAL would decide on its own how they would be accommodated.

Nowhere in US airport access laws or the 2006 agreement is there any possibility of telling an airline that serves DAL but has no means to do so that they cannot serve the airport. None. They all will be accommodated and whatever price anyone wants to pay for access to the two gates doesn't change the fact that new entrant airlines have to be accommodated.

DL, without a lease or common use gates from the city becomes unable to serve the market. That is precisely why they are encouraging the city to convert the gates to common use. It is also possible that the City could tell Virgin that it won't honor the DOJ's request to transfer the lease to Virgin, the two gates become common use and then DL and Virgin have to split those two gates even while United sits on an unused gate which may or may not be used - but likely will be used by someone.

What is guaranteed to not happen is that Virgin gets two gates while DL gets no access or that Virgin has two gates worth of flying while DL is forced to squeeze into whatever space the other carriers don't want. If the market had worked on its own, that could have happened. Because the DOJ got involved in setting the level of new entrant, DL is just as capable of arguing it should have the same level of access as Virgin.

It is also guaranteed that WN will get use of no other gates as long as there are carriers that even want into DAL. And that list will grow as soon as it becomes apparent how successful DAL longhaul domestic flying will be.

as for DL's position in N. Texas, it is the only carrier at DAL flying to ATL so there is no comparison of its revenue performance relative to other carriers there.
However, it is absolutely true that DL's average fare relative to other carriers in the DFW market is higher than it ever was when DL had a hub there. DL now has a higher average fare than AA in total for the local DFW market, second only to UA which has longer haul flights to/from DFW than DL but DL also has higher average fares as a group to its hubs of ATL, DTW, MSP, and SLC. DL is within a few percent of AA's average fare on DFW-LGA where DL has 20% of the local market share in one of AA's top markets.

At MDW and HOU, DL has the highest revenue share in the combined MDW/ORD and IAH/HOU market on the routes that DL serves since DL serves the market from both airports or their share is high enough that they get a premium in markets like Houston and Chicago to SLC even though they serve the market from only one of the two airports in that city.

It is precisely because AA and WN both know that DL is fully capable of finding the premium revenue in a market and getting it on DL jets that those two airlines don't want DL to compete.

Problem is that US airport access laws do not allow any US airport to shut out any carrier that wants to serve the airport and DAL specifically incorporated those provisions into the 2006 agreement.

 

[robbedagain]

Are u real sure AA does not fly DFW to ATL. Id look at that one. Bec I do know AA serves ATL