Delta loads new DAL flights

[eolesen]

It's even more delusional to argue that the DOJ is trying to push DL out when they already serve the airport.

Nobody's kicking DL out. But it should be clear by now DL's not going to be able to expand to the degree they've published.

Again, the DOJ has no say over how the scarce resource provisions are executed. The City of Dallas ALONE determines that. Not WN, DL, or AA.

The SRP's exist protect the current tenants while providing for reasonable accommodation. Reasonable accommodation doesn't equate to unlimited expansion, however.

DL's existing services will be protected.

All that has ever been in question is how much additional bandwidth they're going to be given. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[WorldTraveler]

that all sounds nice but it isn't in any of the DOJ's legal authority to select carriers based on their perceived ability to lower fares. And you can't argue that they are attempting to increase competition when they specifically said low cost carriers and not carriers that had below x percentage of the N. Texas metroplex which is what they did in the LGA/DCA slot divestiture process. If they had said that, it would have been clear. but in the LGA/DCA case, they made no restrictions about who could bid on gates other than how large they were in the market.

given that Virgin already serves DFW and will simply move a number of flights over to DAL and WN already has more than enough gates to make it impossible to argue that they need the gates to provide needed competition, the DOJ's logic for the asset divestiture doesn't hold a glass of stinky Trinity River water.

DL's existing services MIGHT be protected but until there is assurance that DL can expand as they can at any other airport, DL is not pulling back its schedules.

 

[eolesen]

"...and the wheels on the bus go round & round...."

 

[swamt]

Yea WT, SWA got to the DOJ prior to the merger announcement and talked the DOJ into their current restrictions called out by the DOJ for the merger of AA and US,  Now that is just reaching and grasping out of the air, but classic of you.  Once again the DOJ is not pushing DL out. Their requirements are not for non LCC airlines, therefore, Delta will not receive the 2 gates.  For the mere fact that Delta has been leasing the rights to fly at LF from AA, is just going to end up being a result of the restrictions being applied.  Basically Delta will be the fall guy of the AA and US merger as far as these two gates are concerned.  It has absolutely nothing to do with someone trying to run Delta out of DAL LF, period...

 

[swamt]

Wrong again WT.  The DOJ did in fact make restrictions for the LGA/DCA divestures.  Although they never stopped anyone from bidding, they did in fact say the divestures will be awarded to LCC's, and that is restricting the bidders to who will be awarded the gates.  Do I need to post the quote from the DOJ about how Delta was not a good candidate?
Didn't think so, as others have posted it numerous times already.
 
BTW; VX would not move a number of flights over to DAL from DFW, they have in fact stated they will pull all flights from DFW and move them to DAL, not just a number of them.
 
And I will still stand behind my original statement that Delta's move to put up the flights for sale, with the possibility not to be able to follow thru will bite Delta in the a$$ in the long run.  And nobody out here cares if they haven't pulled the flights as of yet as they are more than likely working on getting other gates at LF, if not, it will end up being a big mess when the bubble pops later down the road, and a lot of pissed off customers flowing over to the SWA flights and who ever wins the 2 gates in question, and we will all thank Delta for that no doubt...

 

[WorldTraveler]

the limitation was to carriers with less than 5% of the slots.

problem for the DOJ and WN is that DL WOULD HAVE qualified to get the gates at DAL under that criteria so they inserted criteria that attempts to force fares down - which the DOJ Is not allowed to do under the airline deregulation act of 1978.

you stand by your statement if you want.... DL could care less. they have a point to make and they are making it.

what is the number of flights that VX has at DFW? if you can put a number on them, then it is real. Nowhere deal I say it would less than what they currently operate....

in contrast, DL intends to ADD TO what it already serves from DFW. No other carrier proposes to serve both airports.... just as DL does from MDW.

WN should be worrying about the labor problems and long security lines at MDW that pi78 off its customers instead of what happens at DL.

 

[eolesen]

You just Love quoting what the DOJ can and can't do under the Deregulation Act...

Keep in mind the intent of the Act was to abolish the CAB, and transfer the few remaining powers over to the DOT.

You might want to also recognize that the AT division of the DOJ may have a much freer hand than you give them credit for (which in itself is a problem, but not one created by the 1978 ADA).

 

[WorldTraveler]

"...and the wheels on the bus go round & round...."

 
 99 bottles of beer on the wall (or milk if you are dealing with kids)....

Yea WT, SWA got to the DOJ prior to the merger announcement and talked the DOJ into their current restrictions called out by the DOJ for the merger of AA and US,  Now that is just reaching and grasping out of the air, but classic of you.  Once again the DOJ is not pushing DL out. Their requirements are not for non LCC airlines, therefore, Delta will not receive the 2 gates.  For the mere fact that Delta has been leasing the rights to fly at LF from AA, is just going to end up being a result of the restrictions being applied.  Basically Delta will be the fall guy of the AA and US merger as far as these two gates are concerned.  It has absolutely nothing to do with someone trying to run Delta out of DAL LF, period...

 
sorry, but DL isn't willing to be the fall guy for the AA/US merger and there is no legal basis that they should be. The gate lease from AA is not the issue; the issue is that the DOJ decided that DL could not bid on those gates and will pick a carrier that either already serves DFW and likely won't really add new growth to the Metroplex as much as move what it has OR it will be WN which already controls a large portion of DAL already.

Either way, it is a farce to argue that the DOJ is promoting competition.

The DOJ accused AA/US of colluding or signaling regarding plans to reduce service and eliminate certain fare products. They made no accusation of any other airline including DL.

To argue that DL should be the fall guy for AA/US' actions is exactly the recipe DL needs to prove that the DOJ has no basis for imposing its order that legacy airlines could not bid on the divested assets. The assumption the DOJ was flawed and led to a flawed order.

 

You just Love quoting what the DOJ can and can't do under the Deregulation Act...

Keep in mind the intent of the Act was to abolish the CAB, and transfer the few remaining powers over to the DOT.

You might want to also recognize that the AT division of the DOJ may have a much freer hand than you give them credit for (which in itself is a problem, but not one created by the 1978 ADA).

wrong... deregulation removed the US government from the position of choosing carriers based on their ability to price and add service in the market and that is the essential issue at stake in the AA/US divestiture order including the DAL gate divestiture.

Antitrust regulation is very much a part of the role of the DOJ - but airline deregulation had nothing to do with it. Antitrust regulation is no different for airlines than from any other industry.

The problem with the DOJ's order is that they chose to say who could and could not serve a market; show me where in other merger cases they have succeeded at reshaping an industry based on a divestiture award. Divestiture requirements as a result of mergers are fairly common; picking and choosing who can and cannot serve a market is the problem and is not supported by any laws that the DOJ are supposed to follow.

DL will continue to push on that issue unless it can gain as much of DAL's assets to serve what it wants.

 

[eolesen]

Seems that DL isn't the one pushing. You are.

Where's the DL press release accusing the DOJ of foul play?

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL hasn't pulled the flights... they are indeed pushing.

I have told you and others repeatedly that DL will exhaust every effort to serve DAL before it decides on any legal action. The fact that the flights are still for sale and a decision regarding the gates hasn't been made says that the parties are still talking.

 

[LD3]

I am sure that DL takes comfort having you as their spokesperson... 

 

[WorldTraveler]

I don't speak for DL... .I just happen to understand them and the industry and am not bashful about sharing my thoughts.

 

[swamt]

Can we just wait for the results instead of repeating and repeating and repeating, over and over and over again???  Let it rest until notification or more information is released...

 

[WorldTraveler]

apparently you don't want to discuss the fact that WN isn't quite the legend in everyone's minds that you think they are?

 

[Kev3188]

Maybe he just doesn't want to read what is essentially the same post over & over & over again? I don't either, and absent any real development in this story, that's all that's being posted...