Dfw Vs Love

[mrman]

Enclosed is a portion of an article from the Dallas Business Journal I found of interest

Dallas Business Journal SWA
Mention
February 7, 2005
Love flights outperform D/FW's, study says
Southwest Airlines more efficient than American, study finds
By Margaret Allen

Dallas Love Field beats Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport hands
down, according to a new report from transportation consultant Unisys
R2A.

While Love Field carriers may have fewer seats going to the cities they
serve, they almost always exceed their expected share of passenger
revenue, said the report. Southwest Airlines Co. is the monopoly carrier
at Love. American Airlines Inc. is the sole hub carrier at D/FW. "In
essence, (Southwest) is doing more with their resources than D/FW," said
Ron Kuhlmann, vice president at Unisys.

REMAINDER DELETED - POST THE LINK PLEASE.

 

[JS]

I must be missing something. If WN flights have a lower load factor and the tickets are sold at lower fares, how can Love Field's share of revenue be greater than its share of available seat miles?

 

[mweiss]

One significant factor is the O&D relationship. AA uses DFW for connections far more often than does WN at DAL.

 

[JS]

Yes, but I thought the numbers had already been adjusted to exclude connections.

 

[mweiss]

How on earth do you draw a differentiation between nonstop available seats and connecting available seats? Occupied seats are one thing, but available seats? I don't think so.

 

[funguy2]

How on earth do you draw a differentiation between nonstop available seats and connecting available seats? Occupied seats are one thing, but available seats? I don't think so.

[post="246701"][/post]​

You don't...

The comparison was between Nonstop Available Seats and Local O&D passengers revenue. It sounds like Unisys assumes all O&D passengers to be nonstop... Maybe true, maybe not... since LUV could concievably offer one-stop service to ABQ.

Generally, Unisys is pretty thorough and objective in its analysis... Although this sounds less so. DAL, by its restrictions, is basically forced to be a high O&D airport. Also, there is no accounting for the fact that DFW and DAL airports have no say in the airline's pricing of tickets to and from their airport, so to say DFW makes poorer use of its resources seems misleading to me.

Also, the report says that DAL has less seats to the competing markets than DFW, but all three example markets show DAL had MORE seats to the comptetive markets.

I am left wondering if Unisys did a poor job, or if the author of the article misinterpreted things. It seems like a good reason to go read the Unisys report and see what their assumptions and calculations were...

Currently, in my mind, the two airports have a complementary relationship for the MetroPlex region... DAL handles short-haul traffic, DFW handles long-haul... Kind of like LGA and JFK or DCA and IAD. If the Wright Amendment changes, so will the complimentary nature of the relationship.

 

[mweiss]

Then again, the Los Angeles metropolitan area seems to have no difficulty supporting five airports (LAX, BUR, ONT, LGB, and SNA), none of which have destination restrictions, aside from issues associated with customs facilities. Sure, LAX gets the bulk of the long-haul business, as one would expect DFW to maintain without Wright.

 

[sfb]

I took a look at the actual R2A Scorecard on which the article was based, and, of course, the article introduces its own errors. In eight of the thirteen markets where DAL and DFW both have non-stop service, fewer total seats are offered from DAL. However, when adjusting available seats to exclude those used by connecting passengers, DAL offers more seats to all airports save IAH.

 

[lpbrian]

I find the findings confusing and totally pointless. Like comparing apples to oranges.

 

[mrman]

Wonder how the following effects the figures. Most flight through DAL (as with most WN flights) are continuations and are already half full as you board. So in reality the 737 has about 70 available seats vs 132 available seats

 

[funguy2]

sfb - Thanks for the link... I looked and couldn't find it.

mweiss - I agree... How do you eliminate available connecting seats? If AA could sell all its seats on a nonstop basis, it would.

Again, there is no accounting for equalizing a hub operation to a point-to-point operation. Its apples and orages, as lpbrian noted.

 

[BoeingBoy]

funguy,

Try this link:

Scorecards

The report cited is the latest in a series of four (so far) on airport hubs. You might want to scan the 1st one since it gives a little more on some of the methods used.

Jim