City of Dallas tells Delta it can no longer fly out of Love Field

[swamt]

I gotta back WT on this one. He never said SWA would be shaking in their boots at LF. I believe you are confusing ATL with DAL. If anything WT has said AA will be the most affected by the W/A.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

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 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.
 

 
You keep on parroting the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over, hoping that if you say it often enough it turns out to be true or that nobody will challenge/correct you.
Here are the 2013 numbers for US airport passenger boardings.
#1.  ATL with 45.3 million enplanements
#10.  PHX with 19.5 million enplanements
Hmmm DAL isn't in the top 10, 'ya know, the 'few large airports in the country' ............
Where oh where could DAL rank?
#28.  TPA with 8.2 million enplanements
#30.  PDX with 7.5 million enplanements
Does that mean that DAL is #29?
Nope.
DAL comes in at #44 with just over 4 million enplanements
PDX and TPA it is not.
 
BTW:  it's interesting that when on the AA board in the LAX-LHR thread you just stated that traffic matters, but on the DL board in this thread apparently traffic does not matter. 
 
It's as if you had a certain narrative you were trying to peddle.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and you can't see to grasp that concepts that
1. passenger boardings don't reflect a carrier's share of the LOCAL market. you will only find that information in the DOT's O&D survey.
2. the Wright Amendment was JUST changed a few weeks ago. Passenger boardings even at DAL won't be available for months.
3. For future looking trends of size, schedule data IS a pretty reliable barometer. Unless you want to go on record as saying that WN won't fill their planes to the same percentage at DAL as they have done in the past, then there are literally thousands of more seats that will be filled.

in fact, between Sept 2014 (the last full month before the WA domestic restrictions fell) and Nov 2014, the number of seats on all carriers from DAL went from less than 16,000 per day to over 22,000 per day. that's a 42% increase in seats in just two months.

the narrative is factual and it is verifiable.

DAL is becoming a major competitive airport to DFW. WN has enough seats in the markets it will serve from DAL to take half of the LOCAL traffic that AA currently carries from DFW in those same markets.

The DAL/DFW market will simply not grow by the amount of seats that WN will add; WN will steal passengers from AA just as they have done in practically every other market that WN operates from DAL competitive with AA from DFW.

To deny the impact that DAL in general and WN in specific will have on AA is simply living with your head in the ground.

and the buildout of DAL isn't even finished

and it also doesn't involve just WN.

it is precisely because DL realizes what is happening that DL said they will be at DAL to the maximum extent possible to DL hubs.

 

[eolesen]

Just let it go, folks. It's not worth the time, and lost its entertainment value six months ago.

 

[WorldTraveler]

of course it's not entertaining any more since less than 6 months from now we will see how much market share WN is gaining and it won't have to be an $49 fares.

we can let it go but I can assure we'll discuss the data that shows WN's gains at AA's cost... and WN will undoubtedly have a lot more to say even before then by their earnings call in January 2015.

 

[AirLUVer]

WN, quite frankly, woke up and realized the enormous risk they face if DL decides to escalate it.This was always NOT a question of right or wrong but who was going to blink first.You can't tell me or anyone in any court that the 30th busiest airport in the US can only accommodate 3 jet carriers and one of them can occupy 80% of the gates.WN wisely decided to give DL is 6 little flights or face a legal challenge that could cost a whole lot more.WN is aggressive but it is run by sharp people who know when it is worth fighting and when it is not.and DL is equally aggressive, also run by sharp people who when it is worth fighting and when it is worth keep fighting.WN didn't do this because they are friendly but solely because they knew they risked far too much at the hands of an angry DL.as I said and to the great chagrin of a couple WN mechanics, DL will be at DAL post Wright.

I believe that the above post is one of the many that he accused WN of being afraid of a losing "at the Hands of an angry DL".

 

[WorldTraveler]

your interpretation is grossly flawed, mostly because you inserted your thoughts into what was said.

nowhere did I say

...WN of being afraid of a losing "at the Hands of an angry DL".

 

[AirLUVer]

your interpretation is grossly flawed, mostly because you inserted your thoughts into what was said.

nowhere did I say

 

how is a direct quote from your post on October 8th  grossly flawed, at most i used the phrase "afraid of losing" versus WN didn't do this because they are friendly but solely because they knew they risked far too much.  

 

[WorldTraveler]

because you pieced together something that you made up with what I actually aid.

I said that WN risks losing a lot if the case goes to court - all over between 500 and 600 seats/day or 5-6 flights/day. at best 1/2 of a gate's worth of usage at DAL.

it simply is not worth WN or DAL allowing the case to go to court for the very small request that DL is making.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

in fact, between Sept 2014 (the last full month before the WA domestic restrictions fell) and Nov 2014, the number of seats on all carriers from DAL went from less than 16,000 per day to over 22,000 per day. that's a 42% increase in seats in just two months.
 

Even when you assume that with the demise of the WA that enplanements at DAL increase by 50%, that still wouldn't place DAL in the top 30 (it would be somewhere between larger than HOU but smaller than STL). 
 
Spin away.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I'm talking about the airport as a whole, not just WN.

and even if you are talking about STL, there isn't a city that serves as a hub/major focus city for WN that anyone could justifiably argue should be limited to only 3 carriers.

there simply is no defense - whether actually what exists legally today or under potential legal changes - for an airport that will serve as much of the US as DAL will with as many seats as it will to be limited to 3 carriers, one of which will control 80% of the gates.

 

[AirLUVer]

because you pieced together something that you made up with what I actually aid.

I said that WN risks losing a lot if the case goes to court - all over between 500 and 600 seats/day or 5-6 flights/day. at best 1/2 of a gate's worth of usage at DAL.

it simply is not worth WN or DAL allowing the case to go to court for the very small request that DL is making.

I quoted your full post.  Then because you denied saying that,  I pulled an excerpt from the same quote.  And still you deny that you said it  Can you say hypocrite, or maybe just LIER.
 
Own your statements, or don't make them, or acknowledge when you are wrong. If you did, you might actually see some improvements in your rating.

 

[WorldTraveler]

you may have quoted the entire post but then you turned around and quoted part of my post and inserted your own subject - which I did not say.

it doesn't matter what you think you said.

swamt and I have gone around many times but even he recognizes what I said and didn't say.

I gotta back WT on this one. He never said SWA would be shaking in their boots at LF. I believe you are confusing ATL with DAL. If anything WT has said AA will be the most affected by the W/A.

we can argue the subject until Jan 7 but I still believe that date will come and go and DL will still be there.

when that changes, let me know.

 

[AirLUVer]

I used a euphemism to paraphrase you, and I found that quote which proved swamy and you wrong.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and your paraphrase is incorrect.

It is my belief that DL will be at DAL and that if there isn't an existing legal requirement for DL to be accommodated, there is no shortage of people in Congress who would easily see the anticompetitive and collusionary nature of the way DAL operates.

I don't believe that either DAL or WN as the largest tenant is willing to take that risk.

that doesn't mean they are in fear of DL.

it does mean they recognize the reality of the situation and they can be pragmatic enough to work within it.