City of Dallas tells Delta it can no longer fly out of Love Field
- Thread starter Kev3188
- Start date
- Status
jimntx
Veteran
Well, maybe not AirLUVer, but some of the most expensive residential real estate in the United States is in the glide paths to DAL. NIMBY "requests" in Texas do get answered in the affirmative when there's lots of money involved (or potentially involved in hiring a Dallas downtown law firm).
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #409
and any change to the way DAL is run with respect to capacity would require rewriting the 5 party agreement.
I can assure you that WN doesn't want to touch it.
DL will keep its flights to ATL.
I can assure you that WN doesn't want to touch it.
DL will keep its flights to ATL.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #411
please define temporarily.
you thought DL would be gone a long time ago and they are still going.
you thought DL would be gone a long time ago and they are still going.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #413
you have it backwards.
DL's ability to stay at DAL is not based on a sublease from WN but instead on the law that DL believes DAL is agreeing.
we've listened to weeks and weeks of "WN is doing it because they are generous"
hogwash
WN acted based on the very real fear they have that DL will file a lawsuit and/or escalate the issue such that DAL is forced to create common use gates which would end up taking gate space away from each of the current leaseholders.
WN acted solely to try to keep what they have gained at DAL from going down the tubes.
DL is just as capable of filing suit and pushing for legal reforms that will ensure DL gets what it wants anytime DL's ability to serve DAL is threatened.
DL appears to be content to serve just 5 flights/day.
WN as the largest operator and DAL would be incredibly foolish to force a legal issue over less than half of what the one gate at DAL could accommodate.
DL's ability to stay at DAL is not based on a sublease from WN but instead on the law that DL believes DAL is agreeing.
we've listened to weeks and weeks of "WN is doing it because they are generous"
hogwash
WN acted based on the very real fear they have that DL will file a lawsuit and/or escalate the issue such that DAL is forced to create common use gates which would end up taking gate space away from each of the current leaseholders.
WN acted solely to try to keep what they have gained at DAL from going down the tubes.
DL is just as capable of filing suit and pushing for legal reforms that will ensure DL gets what it wants anytime DL's ability to serve DAL is threatened.
DL appears to be content to serve just 5 flights/day.
WN as the largest operator and DAL would be incredibly foolish to force a legal issue over less than half of what the one gate at DAL could accommodate.
If WN was acting in fear of a lawsuit damaging their near monopoly at DAL, then it would have been a longer term sublease that THREE (3) months.
Again, as has been explained to you ad nausium, per the scarce provision act of the Love Field Plan: if any airline requests access to DAL; then any airlines not fully utilizing their gates will have to accommodate the non lease holding airline.
WN is not fully utilizing their gates until after January 6, so they must accomodate DL until then. At that point DL will need to find another lessor or lessors to see if they can squeeze some more gate time from them. DL could remain after the 6th, but it might mean they will be operating out of a different gate for each flight.
Again, as has been explained to you ad nausium, per the scarce provision act of the Love Field Plan: if any airline requests access to DAL; then any airlines not fully utilizing their gates will have to accommodate the non lease holding airline.
WN is not fully utilizing their gates until after January 6, so they must accomodate DL until then. At that point DL will need to find another lessor or lessors to see if they can squeeze some more gate time from them. DL could remain after the 6th, but it might mean they will be operating out of a different gate for each flight.
You know exactly what it means. Dl is temp leasing one gate (half the gates they wanted) from SWA until 1-6-15. On this date SWA will start more new flights to California and start using the gate. Unless DL sues and wins they will be asked to leave LF again. However, I say it would be the perfect timing for Delta and SWA to work together and get the number of gates limitation lifted to help out Delta in staying at LF. As of now Delta is only flying 5 routes out of LF. Do you not remember all of those flights Delta listed that they would be flying out of LF post W/A? Where are they WT? Delta was affected big time by the post W/A. And yes they are very lucky to still be here. They would not be here if it were not for the graciousness of SWA to help them out and lease a gate to them on a temporary basis. And you know very well that Delta's plans as far as flights are concerned, are very different from what they originally planed to do out of LF post W/A. Now we will all wait and see what will happen post 1-6-15. Delta may very well have to leave LF come 1-6-15. The only way they will stay is IF someone continues to lease to them or Delta gets COD to add gates or UAL share a gate...WorldTraveler said:
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #416
WN is offering a sublease to DL because WN wants DAL to solve the problem; and let's be clear it is DAL's problem, not WN's.
problem is that UA has completely ignored the provisions of using its gates properly and everyone expected that it would be UA that should accommodate DL. UA said no and WN had no choice but to step up to the plate.
WN won't be sued if DL files suit. It will be DAL.
But WN is smart enough to know that it is absolutely in their interest to keep anything from going to court. and WN is undoubtedly pushing on DAL to force UA and VX to do their share in accommodating DL. and in UA's case to repsect the requirements regarding gate usage.
problem is that UA has completely ignored the provisions of using its gates properly and everyone expected that it would be UA that should accommodate DL. UA said no and WN had no choice but to step up to the plate.
WN won't be sued if DL files suit. It will be DAL.
But WN is smart enough to know that it is absolutely in their interest to keep anything from going to court. and WN is undoubtedly pushing on DAL to force UA and VX to do their share in accommodating DL. and in UA's case to repsect the requirements regarding gate usage.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #418
did I ever say that WN would be?
I've said repeatedly that this is DAL's problem, not WN's.
the reason why DL is only operating flights to ATL is because the DOJ threw its support beyond VX while DAL chose not to convert the two AA gates to common use.
the problem still exists that DAL has to accommodate other carriers. DAL thought UA would be the one to handle that role but they said no - and I can't say I blame them.
the problem is that DAL must have a plan to accommodate non-incumbent gate holders, and even if it doesn't legally exist, even DAL left an opening that they would provide common use gates if it became a requirement across the nation. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that DAL is highly at risk because it is one of the few large airports in the country without common use gates.
I've said repeatedly that this is DAL's problem, not WN's.
the reason why DL is only operating flights to ATL is because the DOJ threw its support beyond VX while DAL chose not to convert the two AA gates to common use.
the problem still exists that DAL has to accommodate other carriers. DAL thought UA would be the one to handle that role but they said no - and I can't say I blame them.
the problem is that DAL must have a plan to accommodate non-incumbent gate holders, and even if it doesn't legally exist, even DAL left an opening that they would provide common use gates if it became a requirement across the nation. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that DAL is highly at risk because it is one of the few large airports in the country without common use gates.
BULL!!!!! You have been repeatedly insinuating in earlier posts that WN is shaking in their boots and because of this fear that they are accommodating DL at DAL.WorldTraveler said:
Repeatedly others have told you that this is not the case, and that DL is being accommodating by WN because they are the ONLY airline at DAL to have excess capacity at this time. Per the scarce resource provision of the Love Field agreement, DL is being accommodated. This is only until the lease holding airlines have a full schedule which will not allow DL to have access to gates at DAL, starting with the January 6th 2015 schedule change.
A rumor on this and other online forums, is that UA did not get a satisfactory sublease from DL. They had not built their schedule up yet to force DL off of their surplus gate time, so they subleased their excess gate space to WN. Which does not really need the extra gate space at this time. Due to this new sublease, UA probably told the COD that they had no room for DL. The airport authority probably did not do due diligence to verify there was no flex in everyone's schedule, and issued the eviction notice. DL threatened lawsuit, Dallas City Council got up in arms, and WN was found to CURRENTLY have excess gate time, of which is now being used by DL.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #420
and if UA is asking for extortionary rates from DL because they have excess capacity, then DL is very much in a position to push the legal option.
the whole point of common use gates is to ensure that non-incumbent carriers pay market rates, not something way above market which questions the viability of the flights.
and, it is still rumor.
I have not said WN is shaking in its boots. I have said, and will continue to say that WN has far more to lose if DL pushes the case into court or seeks to impose changes at the national level that would force DAL to have common use gates, something DL urged DAL to provide even though DAL refused even though common use gates are the norm at US airports.
UA also is not using even its expanded schedule according to DAL's requirements of 60 minutes per flight.
I can absolutely assure you that DL would have absolutely no problem in arguing that a top 30 airport in the US on par with TPA or PDX is acting far outside of airport access and antitrust laws if it only had 3 carriers.
all leaseholding carriers at DAL would be affected but WN by its size would be effected the most.
I doubt that DL will have to take the case to court because it is obviously that DAL and WN as the largest tenant would be forced to accommodate DL and other carriers eventually.
if they haven't already, all carriers at DAL are undoubtedly huddling to figure out how to keep this from blowing up and losing what has been developed so far.
DL will be able to operate at DAL
the whole point of common use gates is to ensure that non-incumbent carriers pay market rates, not something way above market which questions the viability of the flights.
and, it is still rumor.
I have not said WN is shaking in its boots. I have said, and will continue to say that WN has far more to lose if DL pushes the case into court or seeks to impose changes at the national level that would force DAL to have common use gates, something DL urged DAL to provide even though DAL refused even though common use gates are the norm at US airports.
UA also is not using even its expanded schedule according to DAL's requirements of 60 minutes per flight.
I can absolutely assure you that DL would have absolutely no problem in arguing that a top 30 airport in the US on par with TPA or PDX is acting far outside of airport access and antitrust laws if it only had 3 carriers.
all leaseholding carriers at DAL would be affected but WN by its size would be effected the most.
I doubt that DL will have to take the case to court because it is obviously that DAL and WN as the largest tenant would be forced to accommodate DL and other carriers eventually.
if they haven't already, all carriers at DAL are undoubtedly huddling to figure out how to keep this from blowing up and losing what has been developed so far.
DL will be able to operate at DAL
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
