yes, WN DID grant DL the right to add eight more flights.
The agreement that was reached between the parties after the judge had the first word did not come because of WN's sudden desire to be a great corporate citizen.
WN agreed to not only allow DL to remain at DAL - in complete disagreement with their plan just hours earlier to push DL out of DAL - as well as to allow DL to add flights because the judge clearly told WN and DAL that they were flat out wrong.
You can cling to the errant notion that DL doesn't have the right to add flights in a feeble attempt to avoid admitting once again that you don't know what you are talking about with the DAL case but when multiple parties, including me, said that WN does not have the legal protection to operate above 16 gates at DAL, there was space at DAL for DL operate not only its flights to ATL but also additional flights to other DL hubs, and that the DOT was and is dead serious that DAL will not receive federal funds if it does not provide access to DL, it is obvious that WN was given a severe back hand by the judge and WN and DAL had no choice but to capitulate.
This case has wasted pages and pages of bandwidth on this site because a handful of people who know absolutely nothing about airport law have tried to argue that property rights is the superseding principle when it is clear that if that were the case, WN could have succeeded in kicking DL out of DAL years ago.
Property law is subservient to airport access laws which enhance competition by ensuring that carriers cannot dominate the real estate at an airport to the exclusion of competition.
WN made a strategic mistake in acquiring real estate and then announcing their schedule not once with their 16 gates but also with the 2 additional gates it acquired from DL; in contrast, DL knew the laws that apply and made its request which was clearly affirmed by the judge given that the gate space that WN is now magically willing to provide matches what was in DL's accommodation request.
DL was pi78sed at WN's arrogance at walking into DCA and LGA and getting access to gates and slots that were not available to DL, and to the DOJ and AA/US for asserting that DL would not operate from DAL.
It is highly likely that there will be no room for AA at DAL when their operating ban there is lifted and there is no evidence that AA has had any conversations with the DOJ or been given any indication that it could return to DAL. If it did and property rights were the issue, AA certainly wouldn't be returning with just 4 flights. And given that AA has made no formal accommodation request and DAL is now full, there is no space.
Given that there is no example of any airline having a lease at an airport which they did not serve for years at a time and then they came back and pushed existing carriers out, it is merely an unrealistic dream for AA to think it will ever come back to DAL unless DAL is expanded which will also require more gates for competitors besides WN as well as eliminate the highly uncompetitive requirement that WN give up gates to serve DFW.
VX will give up some of its gate space because it cannot afford to operate money-losing flights in order to hoard gates.
Next time, all of those parties that were so certain that they would keep DL out of DAL and allow WN to expand would do well to know the law and operate within it; DL knew the law, knew what it had to do to gain access to DAL and operate a similar service structure to its hubs as it does from MDW, and WN will be looking at DL jets at DAL, inclduing the 717s that WN couldn't figure out how to use in WN's network, for years to come.
The Wright Amendment and all of the efforts that AA and WN have used to gain an edge against each other have been used against both of them by a non-Texas airline and in complete compliance with federal requirements which ensures that DL will be at DAL in a robust form for years to come.
whether you can accept it or not, that is the essence of what has happened and will happen at DAL.
