Y'all are missing the point on the lawsuit, folks....
It has nothing to do with AA pulling out of markets, it has to do with the lack of competition that could evolve.
The Texas decision is interesting, in that I didn't think any of those markets would face losing service, and keeping the HDQ in FTW was the plan all along. Heck, Parker's already moved from what we're hearing, right?...
What Texas failed to do was get any assurances that fares weren't going to rise, or that frequencies would be cut below the current rate. The only references I've seen say "daily service" which could be anywhere from one nonstop per day to a round-robin that hits a couple of cities once a day... Maybe there's more meat to the actual agreement than what's been made public...
That said, there's nothing enforceable in this type of an agreement, nor is there any obvious recourse.
If AA pulls a DL and kills off service post-merger, the State can't undo the merger. They have no financial guarantees, they have nothing to really hold AA accountable. They can make a stink about AA going back on their word, but it won't stop AA from saying "sorry, there isn't enough demand" if they happen to raise fares to somewhere between "OMG" and "highway robbery"...
Maybe the State wanted to make nice with AA before WN pulls out of all those inside-the-perimeter markets that they are likely to gut when they need gate space over at DAL post-Wright? Or maybe they're pretty certain the merger will be undone on the issues in other places, and now they have political cover to say that it wasn't their fault?...
In a rare agreement with WT, don't ever try to apply logic to a political decision.
