Don't Blame Dallas For Love Field Being Open ...

[corl737]

corl737, you can spin the Love field situation all you want, but the City of DALLAS is the ONE responsible for this Wright Amendment mess. Love Field should have been closed the day DFW opened. When I mean closed,I mean runways ripped up and the terminals demolished just like Denver's Stapleton and Austin's Mueller. The City of DALLAS failed to live up to it's end of the bargain period!

Do you feel that none of the airports itemized in the 1968 Regional Airport Concurrent Bond Ordinance should still physically exist, not just Love Field (and obviously GSIA)? There was never any intention within the 1968 Ordinance nor any agreements since for any airport to be closed to all air traffic. I don't think Fort Worth has any taste for closing its 100,000 operation-per-year, close-in-and-convenient Meacham Field!

If you really want to point fingers, why don't you aim them in the direction of Alfred Kahn, the CAB administrator who penned the concept of Airline Deregulation? That's when the days of operating in an utopian industry ended for the Legacy carriers. (Gee, existing laws can be changed? What a concept!)

Your statement above also brings the question, why did Fort Worth build Alliance to siphon off DFW's cargo traffic? Until Fort Worth closes Alliance to that commercial traffic it will be hard for them to get sympathy for closing Love in the name of supporting DFW. (Read this Dallas Business Journal editorial regarding the business community's take on Alliance.)

It seems that you have a real grudge against the city of Dallas. I've never lived in Dallas nor ever intend to but I do think that they're being unfairly portrayed as the evil villian in this whole process.

 

[Ch. 12]

As in the United States Bankruptcy Code?

Yeah...it's what comes after chapter 11 😛

corl737, you can spin the Love field situation all you want, but the City of DALLAS is the ONE responsible for this Wright Amendment mess. Love Field should have been closed the day DFW opened. When I mean closed,I mean runways ripped up and the terminals demolished just like Denver's Stapleton and Austin's Mueller. The City of DALLAS failed to live up to it's end of the bargain period!

And Bill Buckner should have had his glove closer to the ground to get the final out and let the Red Sox win the Series back in 87 but we cannot change what has happened. We are dealing with a situation in the present...not the past...that is how it is due to whatever has happened over the years. Now the chance is to look at it based on PRESENT circumstances and determine what is right (wright?) or wrong. Again...forget the PAST. It is inconsequential now. That was decided by a bunch of crooked politicians in the PAST. Now let's see what today's crooked politicians can do with this debate 😀

 

[eolesen]

Your statement above also brings the question, why did Fort Worth build Alliance to siphon off DFW's cargo traffic?

Red herring.... I don't have the link to the actual statistics anymore, but in 2004, DFW handled many times over as much cargo as AFW did. Despite its AFW sort facility, even FDX routes the majority of its metroplex originating/terminating freight to DFW.

You also have to recognize that Alliance wasn't built to compete with DFW -- it was built to anchor an industrial park offering the capability of having freight brought in by truck, rail, and/or air to attract manufacturers and distribution centers for major retailers. So far, that's still its main purpose. They don't even have a passenger terminal, aside from a FBO's or two which serve corporate jets.

Perhaps the real answer is for Congress to put all of the airports open to commercial traffic (AFW, DFW, FTW, DAL) under one managing body, much like the Port Authority manages all four major airports in the NYC area (including Teterboro), how MWAA manages both airports in the DC area, and how Chicago manages ORD, MDW, and CGX when it was still open for commercial service.

If the states of NY and NJ can cooperate on how their airports are run, there's no reason that Fort Worth and Dallas shouldn't be able to.

 

[Ch. 12]

Perhaps the real answer is for Congress to put all of the airports open to commercial traffic (AFW, DFW, FTW, DAL) under one managing body, much like the Port Authority manages all four major airports in the NYC area (including Teterboro), how MWAA manages both airports in the DC area, and how Chicago manages ORD, MDW, and CGX when it was still open for commercial service.

If the states of NY and NJ can cooperate on how their airports are run, there's no reason that Fort Worth and Dallas shouldn't be able to.

I COMPLETELY agree. I think that is the best way to do this...there really doesn't need to be competition between airport authorities in the same locale. I would have to say, though, it would have to be a NEW authority...not DFW taking over the other airports. They have proven that they cannot be objective about the Metroplex service growth. I would welcome a completely new group, perhaps with balanced representation from all airports, to see over the conglomorate's day to day operations.

 

[eolesen]

There may be a few individual players without credibility at this point, but I disagree that there needs to be a new governing body. Certainly, Kevin Cox and Laura Miller have lost an equal amount of credibility over the years, but that doesn't mean that you have to scrap the existing structure.

DFW is already jointly operated by Dallas, Fort Worth, Grapevine, and Irving. If you put AFW, FTW and DAL under the DFW Board and modify it's charter so that the board has to be consistent in how future growth at all four airports is handled, you might actually see fewer accusations of favoritism. For example, it's common belief that DFW is really just AMR's puppet, and that Laura Miller and the Dallas city council are on SWA payroll. How often do you really see the Port Authority doing things just for CO or B6? Rarely. And that's mainly because the carriers know that the Port can't and won't play favorites, so they don't bother pushing the issue.

The single largest benefit of being under a single authority is that from the airport's point of view, it doesn't matter whether the money used to pay off expansion is actually earned at the airport where the money is spent. The downside is that the airlines lose some bargaining power when it comes to playing one airport off the other for negotiating rents or landing fees.

 

[corl737]

Red herring.... I don't have the link to the actual statistics anymore, but in 2004, DFW handled many times over as much cargo as AFW did. Despite its AFW sort facility, even FDX routes the majority of its metroplex originating/terminating freight to DFW.

I'm not disputing that DFW has more air cargo traffic. I am reemphasizing that the buildup of Alliance is contrary to the argument steming from the original agreements stating the cities were to be prohibited from promoting any services that competed with DFW. By allowing Alliance to exist in any capacity that diverts funds from DFW leads to the rationalization that Love Field should be allowed to exist unrestricted as well.

You also have to recognize that Alliance wasn't built to compete with DFW ...

Regardless of its stated purpose, it is taking air cargo business away from DFW.

Perhaps the real answer is for Congress to put all of the airports open to commercial traffic (AFW, DFW, FTW, DAL) under one managing body ...

I like the concept, but where do you draw the line regarding which airports should be included? DFW, Love, Meacham, and Alliance are obvious candidates. Should we also include the other airports in the area that could support at least regional jet traffic -- including the 100-seat Emb-190 such as Arlington, Ft Worth Spinks, Dallas Executive, Addison, Denton, Mesquite, and Collin Co. Regional, just to name a few?

I'm afraid that this is just one big ugly mess that will take time to resolve and won't go away easily. Federal intervention, though probably initially put in place with good intentions, has only made the incubation period longer for ill-willed attitudes to fester. Get rid of the Federal laws imposed by Congress and have the FAA install guidelines that provide for limited local control over airports, including the ability to enforce airport master plans. In this way, every metroplex in the nation gets the same play book, not just a special document for North Texas.

I'm sure my utopian plan has many, many flaws, too, so I'm not expecting instant agreement from anyone, myself included!

 

[eolesen]

Regardless of its stated purpose, [AFW] is taking air cargo business away from DFW.

Instead, I'd argue that AFW actually generates business for DFW, since the folks who work and conduct business there still have to fly in/out of DFW.

Had AFW not been built, the lack of access to a rail mainline and lack of real estate with which to build a yard like BNSF has would have resulted in those businesses being located in another city where access to truck/rail/air was an option.

 

[mrman]

corl737, you can spin the Love field situation all you want, but the City of DALLAS is the ONE responsible for this Wright Amendment mess. Love Field should have been closed the day DFW opened. When I mean closed,I mean runways ripped up and the terminals demolished just like Denver's Stapleton and Austin's Mueller. The City of DALLAS failed to live up to it's end of the bargain period!

Using this logic Alliance should never have been built

Red herring.... I don't have the link to the actual statistics anymore, but in 2004, DFW handled many times over as much cargo as AFW did. Despite its AFW sort facility, even FDX routes the majority of its metroplex originating/terminating freight to DFW.

You also have to recognize that Alliance wasn't built to compete with DFW -- it was built to anchor an industrial park offering the capability of having freight brought in by truck, rail, and/or air to attract manufacturers and distribution centers for major retailers. So far, that's still its main purpose. They don't even have a passenger terminal, aside from a FBO's or two which serve corporate jets.

Perhaps the real answer is for Congress to put all of the airports open to commercial traffic (AFW, DFW, FTW, DAL) under one managing body, much like the Port Authority manages all four major airports in the NYC area (including Teterboro), how MWAA manages both airports in the DC area, and how Chicago manages ORD, MDW, and CGX when it was still open for commercial service.

If the states of NY and NJ can cooperate on how their airports are run, there's no reason that Fort Worth and Dallas shouldn't be able to.

Why, let the airports compete. Will lower fees for all airlines and help keep costs under control

 

[CruelSummer]

Using this logic Alliance should never have been built
Why, let the airports compete. Will lower fees for all airlines and help keep costs under control

Airline competition brings down costs for consumers...airport competition doesn't, from what I understand. Having to compete against each other at multiple airports is much more costly for airlines, which then passes the costs on to the people buying the tickets... Repealing Wright could actually end up increasing the price of flights in the long run...

 

[mrman]

Airline competition brings down costs for consumers...airport competition doesn't, from what I understand. Having to compete against each other at multiple airports is much more costly for airlines, which then passes the costs on to the people buying the tickets... Repealing Wright could actually end up increasing the price of flights in the long run...

If airports compete, rent, landing fees will be reduced. As long as WN top walkup fare is $299, and more competition is created, consumer prices will be reduced in the long run

 

[Ch. 12]

Airline competition brings down costs for consumers...airport competition doesn't, from what I understand. Having to compete against each other at multiple airports is much more costly for airlines, which then passes the costs on to the people buying the tickets... Repealing Wright could actually end up increasing the price of flights in the long run...

You are only subsribing to the AA arguement that they would have to move large numbers of flights. But if you look at what they do in similar situations...MDW, for example, they don't have much of anything. All that they have out of MDW is a schedule to DFW and two oddball flights to DEN. Why would Dallas be any different? It is the propoganda that the PR machine at AMR feeds the public but their actions counter their suggestions.

 

[corl737]

Instead, I'd argue that AFW actually generates business for DFW, since the folks who work and conduct business there still have to fly in/out of DFW.

Read this 1998 article in the Dallas Business Journal, Alliance and DFW: Do they really compete? Obviously DFW believed Alliance is a competitor.

If your theory has proven correct (and I understand your point and agree with its premise) then it provides an example of how DFW's self-centered desires to maintain the status quo may be contrary to its own long-term benefits.

 

[CruelSummer]

You are only subsribing to the AA arguement that they would have to move large numbers of flights. But if you look at what they do in similar situations...MDW, for example, they don't have much of anything. All that they have out of MDW is a schedule to DFW and two oddball flights to DEN. Why would Dallas be any different? It is the propoganda that the PR machine at AMR feeds the public but their actions counter their suggestions.

If AA does move flights, then yes, it will reduce the # of potential routes, probably driving up costs for consumers on the remaining DFW flights. And I do think that if Wright is repealed, AA will move flights...I think it would have to in order to compete...

Is Chicago really a good comparison to the Dallas market? Seems like a significantly larger air traffic market to me.

 

[I'mRayFlyMe]

And Bill Buckner should have had his glove closer to the ground to get the final out and let the Red Sox win the Series back in 87 but we cannot change what has happened. We are dealing with a situation in the present...not the past...that is how it is due to whatever has happened over the years. Now the chance is to look at it based on PRESENT circumstances and determine what is right (wright?) or wrong. Again...forget the PAST. It is inconsequential now. That was decided by a bunch of crooked politicians in the PAST. Now let's see what today's crooked politicians can do with this debate 😀

Excellent analogy, Ch. 12. 😀 One minor correction though... it was the 1986 World Series where Buckner made his legendary error; the 1987 Series was won by the Minnesota Twins.