You believe what ever you want to believe. SWA will always take the lower cost smaller airports over the larger more congested ones if they have the choice, been doing it this way for ever. And trust me it has everything to do with the cost...topDawg said:
FAA approves move by Atlanta-area airport opposed by Delta
- Thread starter Hope777
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
BHM WAS WN's ATL airport for years... at the rate WN is going, BHM might end up larger than WN again. did I hear that ATL-BDL bites the dust soon?
FIFY
jimntx
Veteran
Actually, from what I can find, the landing fee at DFW is almost 50% higher than the latest figure I can find for DAL. I can't find a for sure rate for DAL since it was raised to $2/1000 pounds in 2011. At DFW the 2014 rate is $2.82/1000 lbs for "signatory" (whatever the heck that means) airlines. Non-signatory (ditto) airlines pay 125% of the signatory rate.topDawg said:
Also, I don't believe that one can say that WN "ran" to another airport at Dallas or Chicago. WN always operated from DAL and MDW. They didn't run from DFW or ORD. AFAIK, they never served either airport. IIRC, WN did not exist when the 5PartyAgreement was signed to close DAL to commercial passenger traffic when DFW opened. And, as they started with flying only from Dallas to Houston and back, they saw no need for their passengers to have to troop out to the boonies to get a low fare. Just as DAL is 20 miles closer to downtown Dallas than DFW, HOU has the same advantage over IAH. IAH is within a couple of miles of the northern Harris County line, and Harris County is a large county. They did at one time have flights from IAH to DAL as well as from HOU, but north Houston passengers just didn't seem interested in flying WN; so, everything got consolidated at HOU.
One of the things I have always admired about WN is they have no problem admitting that something is not working and needs to be changed or eliminated. They start flights from Point A to Point B--particularly if some other airline has dropped that route and there is no longer service at all (which seems rather smart to me if you're trying something as an experiment). If after a time the route is not carrying its own weight financially, WN terminates the route and calls it quits. Would that we all could have that much corporate humility. AA lost a lot of money on ORD-DEL before they were willing to admit the route was not working. It's fine and shows some corporate gutsiness to say "There's no LBB-LHR service. Let's see if we can make it work with a 773." It shows corporate stupidity if you are still running the route 2 years later and you've never had more than 50 people on any one flight.
I just worked a flight from DFW to HOU last week. I was amazed at how nice the terminal is now. It was very dated when I first saw it in 1969. It looked like a 1930's bus station.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
I hate to break it to you, jimbo, but a whole lot of airlines figured out how to exit unprofitable markets long before WN started spewing pollutants int the skies over N. America.
jimntx
Veteran
jcw, note that I do not respond to WT. If you just ignore him, maybe he'll go away.
Note to WT: Please feel free to be as condescending as you wish. It implies that you have made a serious error. You have evidently mistaken me for someone who gives a crap what you think. WWJD.
Note to WT: Please feel free to be as condescending as you wish. It implies that you have made a serious error. You have evidently mistaken me for someone who gives a crap what you think. WWJD.
eolesen
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2003
- Messages
- 15,959
- Reaction score
- 9,374
re: DFW landing fees... yes, they now have higher published fees than DAL.
When they embarked on Terminal D, the natural gas wells on the airport were just starting to produce and gas prices were in the $12/mcf range. That in turn reduced fees for the tenant airlines.
Then gas dropped to $3/mcf... and DFW still had all that new terminal improvements to pay for... so landing fees went back up.
When they embarked on Terminal D, the natural gas wells on the airport were just starting to produce and gas prices were in the $12/mcf range. That in turn reduced fees for the tenant airlines.
Then gas dropped to $3/mcf... and DFW still had all that new terminal improvements to pay for... so landing fees went back up.
Thank you. But I was going to make him do his own homework. Not to mention the time and taxi fuel it takes to get around at DFW compared to DAL LF, plus the idle time waiting for a take off slot at DFW. It all adds up to "COST" to operate flights between the two airports...eolesen said:
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
you need to spend some time perusing old airline timetables. EVERY airline has had strategic changes that involved ditching markets that didn't work.
WN certainly does it - they are doing it again in large measure in ATL. but WN certainly didn't invent or even perfect the process.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
yeah..so does AA... their Latin system is down by 5% in traffic and ASMs.... DL now flies 60% of the ASMs to Latin America that AA does. UA also is in double digit growth mode to Latin America.
apparently other carriers are finding revenues where AA can't. so AA cuts.
apparently other carriers are finding revenues where AA can't. so AA cuts.
