Looks Like AA wants back into Love Field

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

the issue is whether an airline can lease its gates out at an airport, return years later after the airport is completely full, and force out other carriers that have maintained service.

 
Well, if one follows your very own legal theories, the airport will be forced to accommodate AA as a new entrant (possibly forcing DL to give up flights/space ... ... ...)

 

[700UW]

Where are the eight flights that you stated the Judge ordered WN and COD to let DL fly?

 

[WorldTraveler]

Well, if one follows your very own legal theories, the airport will be forced to accommodate AA as a new entrant (possibly forcing DL to give up flights/space ... ... ...)

AA didn't operate from DAL from the period before the WA opened DAL to longhaul flights until now, so no, AA can't claim the same rights that DL can.
 
 

Where are the eight flights that you stated the Judge ordered WN and COD to let DL fly?

where is the LAX-HND service that AA is supposed to take over because DL has withdrawn SEA-HND?

DL wasn't obligated - but rather allowed - to start additional flights from DAL.

I would strongly bet that DL is waiting for a final ruling before announcing anything. Let's remember that WN has made public statement about DL's ability to serve DAL at all which very well could have affected DL's bookings on ATL-DAL. DL doesn't want to repeat that even if WN is found to be making statements that could harm DL and for which WN could be liable. DL just wants to serve DAL and all of the indications thus far is that they will be given the right to do so, not only for their existing ATL flights but for other markets as well.

 

[700UW]

Translation, opps WT got caught out there again.

There is no permission from anyone to let DL add eight flights.
 
You got caught again.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

AA didn't operate from DAL from the period before the WA opened DAL to longhaul flights until now, so no, AA can't claim the same rights that DL can.
 

 
Henceforth AA would qualify as a new entrant.
 
spin away!

 

[WorldTraveler]

Translation, opps WT got caught out there again.
There is no permission from anyone to let DL add eight flights.
 
You got caught again.

yes there is. You can't accept that DL is not OBLIGATED to add flights but it can.

What will you say when DL does add additional flights besides ATL and DL becomes the 3rd carrier at DAL on a long-term basis?

and let's see what the court says but the DOT has made it clear that airport access laws are there to protect competition, not allow carriers to hold onto gates that they cannot or do not use. AA cannot serve DAL because of the DOJ merger agreement. By the time AA can add flights again, the chances are very high that DAL will be completely full.

and as to the question of why AA should serve DAL, they have the opportunity to serve MDW but do not. DL is pursuing the same strategy in DFW/DAL that they use from MDW/ORD where DL serves ATL, DTW, MSP, and SLC from both airports - and has the highest average fares and market share for the region to those cities.

AA has not pursued that strategy and neither has UA or WN, each of which operate hubs in both cities.

 

[700UW]

yes there is. You can't accept that DL is not OBLIGATED to add flights but it can.

What will you say when DL does add additional flights besides ATL and DL becomes the 3rd carrier at DAL on a long-term basis?

and let's see what the court says but the DOT has made it clear that airport access laws are there to protect competition, not allow carriers to hold onto gates that they cannot or do not use. AA cannot serve DAL because of the DOJ merger agreement. By the time AA can add flights again, the chances are very high that DAL will be completely full.

and as to the question of why AA should serve DAL, they have the opportunity to serve MDW but do not. DL is pursuing the same strategy in DFW/DAL that they use from MDW/ORD where DL serves ATL, DTW, MSP, and SLC from both airports - and has the highest average fares and market share for the region to those cities.

AA has not pursued that strategy and neither has UA or WN, each of which operate hubs in both cities.

How many times are you going to repeat this lie?
 
No one from the Judge, WN or the COD has granted DL the right to have the eight additional flights.

For over a month, you have been asked to provide proof, I have provided proof they havent been given any right to add those flights, for once, put up or shut up.
 
Do you actually think posters are stupid and will believe your misinformation without once iota of factual proof?

 

[Kev3188]

yes there is. You can't accept that DL is not OBLIGATED to add flights but it can.

But it won't....

Being able to and thinking its a good idea are 2 separate concepts.

I simply can't see DL risking it's operational reliabilty to squish "up to 8" more departures into an already severely constrained space...

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

What will you say when DL does add additional flights besides ATL and DL becomes the 3rd carrier at DAL on a long-term basis?

 
i can't speak for others, but I will say that DL is doomed! (According to the theory that the #3 carrier in any market is doomed).
 

and let's see what the court says but the DOT has made it clear that airport access laws are there to protect competition,

So when/if AA wants back in, as a new entrant, it will have to be accommodated -afterall, a new entrant to DAL increases competition, which according to you is what the DOT wants.
 
Please do spin away!

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL doesn't have to risk its operational reliability if a judge says that DL has to be provided access to DAL on a long term basis.

The whole basis for DL being able to remain at DAL is because DL met the LETTER OF THE LAW to gain access to DAL and to remain there.

And if a judge rules that is the case, they will remain there and WN, who added dozens of flights after DL announced its schedule, will have to pull back its schedule to the point to ensure that DL has unfettered access to the gates the judge orders DL must have.

but let's face it, Kev. you suggested that DL could probably take its assets elsewhere. you and others have been dead wrong about the DAL issue since it raised. at least you are willing to be consistently wrong. and you aren't alone. Thankfully, DL has people running the company who know their business far better than you do - even though you never hesitate to tell us how much DL's success is due to labor.

DL's success at DAL is because they knew the rules, played by them, and will stay at an airport that has important strategic value and where DAL IS the best use for those assets.

 

[700UW]

Where's those eight flights?

Where is proof the judge ordered WN and DAL to grant them?

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Where's those eight flights?

Where is proof the judge ordered WN and DAL to grant them?

 
lol, it's like clubbing baby seals ... ... ...
 

 

[WorldTraveler]

And where is the evidence that AA's want to get back in DAL is anything more than an Internet fantasy?

 

[Kev3188]

Maybe they're just trying to use the same "letter of the law" as DL to get back in.

Can't win if you don't play, right?

 

[WorldTraveler]

Absolutely
Just wondering which letter AA intends to use
The other carrier that is involved in the case made it clear which letter it is basing irs claim upon