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

[WorldTraveler]

Except you all miss the point that there was room for DL even after VS was awarded gates, DL published its schedule, and then UA decided 2 weeks before the start of service to expand its schedule, WN is subleasing gates from UA and VS is leasing gates to anyone but DL

Collusion or not all parties have said they can't accommodate DL then do that with other carriers.

I still say that DL isnt interested in taking on Wright and its revisions bit if DL cant get into DAL DL will take on whatever is necessary

It ain't over yet

 

[WeAAsles]

No soup for WT either. DAL to Delta. Well I reckon pardner we're gonna have to run you out of them these parts. Saddle up and get to shufflin.

 

[eolesen]

Except you all miss the point that there was room for DL even after VS was awarded gates, DL published its schedule, and then UA decided 2 weeks before the start of service to expand its schedule, WN is subleasing gates from UA and VS is leasing gates to anyone but DL

Collusion or not all parties have said they can't accommodate DL then do that with other carriers.

I still say that DL isnt interested in taking on Wright and its revisions bit if DL cant get into DAL DL will take on whatever is necessary

It ain't over yet

So, DL isn't interested in taking on Wright, but they'll do whatever is necessary?

Nice loophole you've woven yourself there, Skippy.

You seem to be under the impression that airlines are obligated to set their schedules months in advance.

Newsflash: they're not.

Everyone played by the rules.

 

[WeAAsles]

So, DL isn't interested in taking on Wright, but they'll do whatever is necessary?

Nice loophole you've woven yourself there, Skippy.

You seem to be under the impression that airlines are obligated to set their schedules months in advance.

Newsflash: they're not.

Everyone played by the rules.

Delta could always just fly their passengers into Shreveport, LA and use a Charter bus to get them the rest of the way? It's 188 Miles and would only take an extra 2 hours and 46 minutes. Not too much of an inconvenience.

 

[WeAAsles]

Killeen Texas is only 153 miles but not sure if the airport can handle those larger jets? No if they don't want to fly into DFW it looks like Shreveport is the place to go.

 

[AirLUVer]

 
you've repeatedly said that but DL obviously feels there is legal basis for it seeking access under that term, esp. since DL doesn't even serve DAL at all. if you want to take the thing all the way back, DL was at DAL long before WN was a gnat on Herb's nose.
 
 
 not being able to serve the airport is the standard of access. There isn't another airport in the country which any airline has been told they cannot serve categorically because of their history or type of service they offer (legacy carrier). The DOJ made that decision, complicated an already messy situation, and locked out a carrier by limiting competition.

Further, it is AA who made the decision to merge with US and yet DL is paying the price for AA's merger.

The legal basis of the DOJ's case against the legacy carrier segment was incorrect and DL will fight whatever it has to in order to regain access to DAL.

Plain and simple.

EVERY airport that receives federal dollars must provide access to any carrier that desires to serve it and have a plan to do so.

COD gave lip service and then pulled the rug out from DL.

I can assure you that alone is the issue whether you want to try and make it other things or not.

 
Hey Stupid, what would your ALMIGHTY DELTA would have done if the DOJ had not forced American's divestitures of the DAL gates that they were subleasing?  There was a very high probability that AA would have returned to DAL, Wright had gone away and they would have been out in the cold regardless.
 
Did DL make any good faith monetary offers to compensate the lessors for the gates that they need to use for their schedule.  This could be about money as much as locking out a competitor.  If DL is not adequately paying UA, DL or VX, then of course they are going to get shown the door.

 

[swamt]

Except you all miss the point that there was room for DL even after VS was awarded gates, DL published its schedule, and then UA decided 2 weeks before the start of service to expand its schedule, WN is subleasing gates from UA and VS is leasing gates to anyone but DL

Collusion or not all parties have said they can't accommodate DL then do that with other carriers.

I still say that DL isnt interested in taking on Wright and its revisions bit if DL cant get into DAL DL will take on whatever is necessary

It ain't over yet

You only think there was room for Delta.  Not all carriers released their schedules.  SWA partly released in sections but we all knew there would be no room to share with SWA, which I told you in the very beginning.  I also told you that IF Delta even remains at LF they will have to share a gate with UAL, Virgin or the Express carrier.  Virgin put out a schedule if they were awarded the gates, after being awarded the gates, they later made it stick and added more.  UAL was the only carrier that had not released their schedule yet.  Once they figured out 2 things, 1- what they were gonna do with their 2nd gate and they decided to sub-lease it to SWA (trust me, that gate for SWA was not cheap to sub-lease) and 2-  how much they were gonna expand their new schedules after the W/A goes away.  UAL finally turned their flight schedules over to the COD.  COD reviewed and verified everything, and then the COD notified Delta that there was no room left.  Was UAL late filing of schedule and UAL sub-leasing a gate to SWA illegal?  No it wasn't.  Everybody followed all rules and regs.  
Yes Delta did put out a schedule, BUT, it was an illegal schedule, that Delta was NEVER notified by the COD that they had any part of a gate at LF yet, and they still went out on a limb and sold tickets for flights that were never verified by Delta or the COD.  And now that decision is going to bight Delta in the butt big time.  Pretty sure we all know that Delta was simply applying pressure so the COD would lean towards Delta's favor for the gates, and that all backfired just like I said it would when they did way back then.  One thing in all this fiasco that you and Delta need to think about.  Delta was not a gate owner at LF.  Delta was simply leasing a gate from AA (a gate owner) who then had to divest the gates.  New gate owner, Virgin, then took them over.  The key thing in all of this is Delta has never been a gate owner, if they were an owner of any gates at LF, they would still be at LF.  To assume that they would remain at LF was not a smart move as it was NEVER verified and Delta was NEVER notified that they were going to be able to stay and they still went ahead and sold bogus ghost tickets out of LF, now they have to deal with their decisions.  There was no collusion by any parties to get Delta removed.  DOJ made an order for AA to follow.  COD did it's due diligence to try and find room for Delta.  All 3 of the "gate owners" are using the gates to their fullest post W/A being gone.  It's that simple.  We all know it aint over yet.  So don't try and twist things up later saying that we all did say it was over.  And here are the 2 articles that contend as such:
Good riddance to Wright amendment
 
Notice in this one below that it indicates that Delta "threatens" to take legal action, I think they know they will be wasting their money and they will lose.  If it was a hands down winning case for Delta they would have sued way back when...
Delta threatens legal action against city

 

[robbedagain]

Sorta like they wld file legal challenges in the AA/US merger too bad he cant grasp anything in reality

 

[WorldTraveler]

I said at the time of the merger that DL would do what it had to do to protect its markets; you and others have mocked me for months about DL filing a lawsuit if that is what it takes.

Now that DL has said that is exactly what it would do if it isn't given access to DAL, you would think people like you would get the message that I knew what I was talking about and that DL would not allow one carrier to gain a legally protected access to any market that DL could not match.

You ALL are free to argue all you want that Dl is shut out of DAL but I can assure you that what is happening at DAL and via the Wright Amendment will be vigorously examined via the appropriate legal and competitive standards that every other airport and airline has to abide by.

Telling us what WN did 20 years ago to build its network no the west coast is not at all reflective of what they are doing now or what they have done in their hometown.

We'll see who has the last laugh but I would strongly suggest that those of you who are AArrogant enough to think that Texas is free to make up its own rules about airport access and thumb anyone that doesn't happen to choose by the rules of Texas instead of federal law might be very disappointed in the future.

Feel free to argue. I'm not going to file any lawsuits but you will find that I am a lot more on track with what is going to happen in this case than you would like to think.

 

[Kev3188]

No arguing here; I'm just excited for multiple tows on/off the gate, and the vaunted :15 minute turns...

 

[blue collar]

Seems that WT keeps spinning around trying to find a way to be right. It went from (months ago); 'DL will file a legal challenge', to 'I never said they would DEFINITELY file a legal challenge', to 'they'll do what the have to up to and including a legal challenge' so that he can have the 'I told you so' card. If they do file, I hope they do it in the right court because some here seem to think the Wright Amendment is a local texas thing..

 

[WorldTraveler]

you don't understand the English language or else want to just argue but I have REPEATEDLY said that legal action WOULD come IF DL didn't get access to DAL.

Now that they have told DAL that, what I said months ago is exactly what is taking place.

No, Kev,
multiple tows aren't necessary if the operation is run right and gates are efficiently used.

RJs don't need 60 minute turns and neither does WN but that is the basis DAL gave them. Even with 60 minute turns, DL argues like I have that DAL can handle far more flights than WN loaded at first and even more than what exists for all carriers as currently scheduled.

WN is trying hard to come up with flights to fill the gates but I have a strong feeling that there will be a ruling that will say that WN will have to roll back its schedules to the schedule that existed for UA at least and perhaps WN after the DOJ ruled that Virgin should get gates.

 

[WNMECH]

We'll see who has the last laugh but I would strongly suggest that those of you who are AArrogant enough to think that Texas is free to make up its own rules about airport access and thumb anyone that doesn't happen to choose by the rules of Texas instead of federal law might be very disappointed in the future.
 

Delta never had a sublease agreement with United. We will see if a Judge can force United to sublease to Delta after they already have legally subleased to WN.
It may have been sneaky, but not illegal.
 
 
Texas did not make up its own rules. This is the Federal law that governs Love Field.
 
Read it and weep.
 
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ352/pdf/PLAW-109publ352.pdf
 
 
The COD airport competition plan explains the scarce resource provision and what preferential leases are.

 

[WNMECH]

WN is trying hard to come up with flights to fill the gates but I have a strong feeling that there will be a ruling that will say that WN will have to roll back its schedules to the schedule that existed for UA at least and perhaps WN after the DOJ ruled that Virgin should get gates.

 
WN has enough flights scheduled already to fill 17 gates at Love field to full utilization.
 
You should go to a doctor and get that strong feeling checked out.
You may be ill.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Delta never had a sublease agreement with United. We will see if a Judge can force United to sublease to Delta after they already have legally subleased to WN.
It may have been sneaky, but not illegal.
 
 
Texas did not make up its own rules. This is the Federal law that governs Love Field.
 
Read it and weep.
 
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ352/pdf/PLAW-109publ352.pdf
 
 
The COD airport competition plan explains the scarce resource provision and what preferential leases are.

 
Whether DL had a sublease with UA is immaterial.

The case DL will lodge is that COD failed to provide a means to accommodate new entrant or non-incumbent gateholders.

Saying "we can fit you in for a couple weeks" and then pulling the plug 2 weeks before service is supposed to start won't cut it.

Given that UA, WN, and VX have all subleased space that was what DL was attempting to use to gain access makes it all the more apparent that the COD's provisions had no teeth and they had no intention of enforcing them.

and, I believe you will find that courts will rule that the COD's provisions are meaningless.

and if DAL doesn't provide accommodation for carriers who want to compete, then it is in violation of federal law.

don't argue with me, though.

I somehow doubt COD is going to change its tune now.

The case will likely be in court.  

WN has enough flights scheduled already to fill 17 gates at Love field to full utilization.
 
You should go to a doctor and get that strong feeling checked out.
You may be ill.

the illness is from WN and its fankids who shake at the thought of competition.