Looks Like AA wants back into Love Field

[eolesen]

AA is the leaseholder on the VX gates.

Correct, and they're still a Signatory Leaseholder. That means they have rights on their own leasehold that neither DOT or COD can infringeupon, just as WN has on their 16 gate leasehold.

The only area open for interpretation is the gates which are subleased, and whether or not the language in the Scarce Resource Provision which protects signatory carriers carries over to WN's sublease or VX's sublease.

My guess is WN's accommodation of DL up until now has been on the assumption that the SRP's protections don't apply on a sub lease to the same degree they do on a primary lease.

Government agencies can seize property under very limited circumstances, but trying to invoke eminent domain for Love Field would make for a very interesting day or two in court.

Either way, I don't see AA, UA or WN's rights as primary leaseholders being abrogated.

AA can kick out VX when their lease expires (I'm assuming it doesn't run in perpetuity). The way VX's financials at DAL appear to be, I suspect VX would be willing to renegotiate the terms, and AA would have first dibs on that assuming DOJ gave them relief.

UA can presumably do the same with WN, assuming their sublease was for a term shorter than UA's remaining lease.

 

[Hope777]

FORT WORTH, Texas, March 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --American Airlines has signed a 17-year lease at Dallas Love Field that extends the airline's commitment to 2028.
 
This is from the Company Newsroom a few years ago, so the gates are AA's for another 13 years and I'm sure VX sublease is not that long.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

FORT WORTH, Texas, March 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --American Airlines has signed a 17-year lease at Dallas Love Field that extends the airline's commitment to 2028.
 
This is from the Company Newsroom a few years ago, so the gates are AA's for another 13 years and I'm sure VX sublease is not that long.

Some have suggested that VX's existence may not be that long either

 

[WorldTraveler]

FORT WORTH, Texas, March 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --American Airlines has signed a 17-year lease at Dallas Love Field that extends the airline's commitment to 2028.
 
This is from the Company Newsroom a few years ago, so the gates are AA's for another 13 years and I'm sure VX sublease is not that long.

and the DOT"s regulations still are in effect and are being decided as part of the lawsuit involving DL and the City of Dallas.

The DOT has never allowed a carrier to hold gates at an airport without operating them when other carriers want to start service and I can't think of a single instance where a carrier has held a lease, not operated flights, but then returned to a full airport and kicked other carriers out - which is exactly what the DOT's airport access regulations are intended to prevent.

let me know if you know of any other instances where a carrier has succeeded at doing what you think AA will do when it can return to DAL.

before AA returns, the lawsuit regarding DAL will be settled and it is very likely that DL will remain and DAL will be more than full for years to come regardless of what VX does.

 

[robbedagain]

Holy Cow  -11 for one post!
 
I would not be shocked if AA were to go back to DAL  however I am not sure why due to their mega hub at DFW   and even if they were to go back to DAL where would they fly to?

 

[Kev3188]

Correct, and they're still a Signatory Leaseholder. That means they have rights on their own leasehold that neither DOT or COD can infringeupon, just as WN has on their 16 gate leasehold.The only area open for interpretation is the gates which are subleased, and whether or not the language in the Scarce Resource Provision which protects signatory carriers carries over to WN's sublease or VX's sublease.My guess is WN's accommodation of DL up until now has been on the assumption that the SRP's protections don't apply on a sub lease to the same degree they do on a primary lease.Government agencies can seize property under very limited circumstances, but trying to invoke eminent domain for Love Field would make for a very interesting day or two in court.Either way, I don't see AA, UA or WN's rights as primary leaseholders being abrogated.AA can kick out VX when their lease expires (I'm assuming it doesn't run in perpetuity). The way VX's financials at DAL appear to be, I suspect VX would be willing to renegotiate the terms, and AA would have first dibs on that assuming DOJ gave them relief.UA can presumably do the same with WN, assuming their sublease was for a term shorter than UA's remaining lease.

There you go trying to bring some rational thought into things...

 

[WorldTraveler]

You and E can hope what he wrote is rational but it is logic that is not supported by DOT regulations which are specifically designed to enhance competition AND his theory has never been proven to be true in real life.

I have asked and will do so again for an example of ANY carrier that has held a lease at an airport, not operated there for as long as 10 years, returned and expected other carriers to leave.

Now factor in an airport like DAL that is currently FULL to the previously stated goal of 10 flights/gate and the chances that any carrier will add service years from now are slim to none.

The DOT has yet to file with the federal court in the DAL/DL/DOT case but I can absolutely assure you that the DOT will vigorously argue that if any carrier is allowed to hold gates and not use them, it will be one of the most uncompetitive events that could happen to the US airline industry.

DL could do the same thing in ATL, AA could do it at DFW or ORD... etc

The DOT's regulations are specifically intended to prevent carriers from dominating airport leases while pushing other carriers out.

It is possible that a judge could throw the DOT's whole mechanism for enhancing competition out and require another mechanism but that is highly unlikely.

Further, the regulations that are requiring WN to accommodate DL even on a short-term basis existed before WN ever filed its post Wright schedule at DAL. DL filed for accommodation under those regulations. it is not even certain that DL could be kicked out on the basis of rules that are changed AFTER DL's accommodation request.

as much as you and others may hate to admit it, the DAL case will likely be yet one more issue which I have taken one direction from practically everyone on the board and the outcome so far and likely in the future will be as I have stated it will be. I can't blame people for trying to defend their positions but given that they are based on flawed logic, including that property rights solely govern airport leases, it will not be a surprise that a lot of people will be wrong on the DAL issue

 

[700UW]

A DOT regulation does supersede Federal Law.

 

[WorldTraveler]

thank you, judge.

now we'll let a real one decide the case.

If you'd like to give him/her your opinion, I'm sure there is a process you can use to provide input.

IN the meantime, DL will remain at DAL and WN, not VX will have to figure out how to work around DL's presence.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

A DOT regulation does supersede Federal Law.

You mean it does "not" supersede federal law.

 

[Hope777]

Yes WN must figure out a way for it to work.  AA on the other hand,just keeps getting a check from VIrgin America....  Nice

 

[700UW]

You mean it does "not" supersede federal law.

Yes thanks

 

[WorldTraveler]

Yes WN must figure out a way for it to work.  AA on the other hand,just keeps getting a check from VIrgin America....  Nice

AA doesn't get anything more than what it paid if it operated from DAL and what it pays in lease payments. Subleases have to be at market rates.

 

[Kev3188]

There's also no risk, or tying up of equipment, either...

 

[WorldTraveler]

risk of what? AA signed an agreement with the DAL that it CANNOT serve DAL for 10 years. They gave up the risk as part of the merger agreement.

And the risk is that they cannot defend their top markets from not only WN but also from VX and DL.

again, if the DAL/DFW dynamic works anything like MDW/ORD - and that dynamic is demonstrating that it is far stronger than between MDW/ORD - AA will lose share in the markets that are served either from DAL or from both, which is what DL intends to do and is the only airline that can - unless VX decides to add back service at DFW in addition to DAL.

the cost of the airport lease is chickenfeed compared to the market revenue that is at stake.