Mayor's Agreement on Wright

[PRINCESS KIDAGAKASH]

yep,maybe they'll eliminate Wright completely and immediately.

Or they could eliminate federal funding for Love field forcing Dallas to shut Love down. Which should have happened in 1975. You never will know what will happen in the halls of congress.

 

[KCFlyer]

Or they could eliminate federal funding for Love field forcing Dallas to shut Love down. Which should have happened in 1975. You never will know what will happen in the halls of congress.

No, you sure don't. On the other hand...if they eliminate federal funding, perhaps the fiscal responsiblity of the Dallas city fathers might take it over...seeings how, despite what many folks who are pro WA think, Love Field provides a LOT of revenue for the city of Dallas. I am sure that Dallas City fathers would hate to see a lot of that revenue shift over to Grapevine/Irving and Dallas County leaders would try to keep much of that revenue out of Tarrant County.

 

[luver41]

I don't expect Congress to mess with the Mayors' agreement very much. Since the deal expires on Dec. 31, that's not a whole lot of time for them to mess with it since they have a lot of recesses between now and the end of the year.


In large measure it was the threat of unfettered Congressional action that brought all the parties together, especially WN and AA. When a legislative body starts screwing with stuff, you need to make sure the sheep are locked up. That's what the local folks in Texas were trying to avoid. Both Southwest and AA traded uncertainty for a better shot at certainty.

The big carrott is the immediate repeal of through-ticketing. IMHO that was a huge win for Southwest and what they wanted most.

Just looking at the route map, I see Albuquerque and St. Louis as the cities most likely to benefit from the removal of the ban on through ticketing.

 

[KCFlyer]

Just looking at the route map, I see Albuquerque and St. Louis as the cities most likely to benefit from the removal of the ban on through ticketing.

I'd have to put Kansas City in that list as well.

 

[jimntx]

No, you sure don't. On the other hand...if they eliminate federal funding, perhaps the fiscal responsiblity of the Dallas city fathers might take it over...seeings how, despite what many folks who are pro WA think, Love Field provides a LOT of revenue for the city of Dallas. I am sure that Dallas City fathers would hate to see a lot of that revenue shift over to Grapevine/Irving and Dallas County leaders would try to keep much of that revenue out of Tarrant County.

And, is THAT why S&P and Moody's downgraded the Love Field bonds to almost junk status earlier this year? It was after that little event that it came to light that the City of Dallas had only been charging SWA $0.15/1000 lbs landing weight for years! At DFW the landing fees for all airlines are $4.94/1000 lbs.

Yeah, when your bringing in LOTS of revenue from an enterprise, that's when the bond rating agencies always downgrade the applicable bonds.

 

[KCFlyer]

And, is THAT why S&P and Moody's downgraded the Love Field bonds to almost junk status earlier this year? It was after that little event that it came to light that the City of Dallas had only been charging SWA $0.15/1000 lbs landing weight for years! At DFW the landing fees for all airlines are $4.94/1000 lbs.

Yeah, when your bringing in LOTS of revenue from an enterprise, that's when the bond rating agencies always downgrade the applicable bonds.

So Jim...closing Love field would have NO impact on revenues in Dallas? I'm not talking about from the airport. I'm talking about businesses that SERVE the airport and who serve customers of the airport. I'm talking about every business BUT Love field. Closing that airport wouldn't have ANY negative impact on Dallas? Where will all those GA flights go to...Addison is already bursting at the seams. Where will the maintenance be done on the GA planes...won't airports in that area see a decline, seeing how the airport isn't there? What should they do...build a skating rink to offset the loss of a bunch of money to the county that is chock full of great places for GA planes....Tarrant?

 

[jimntx]

Did I say a word about GA? Could you please quote the exact wording where I said Love Field should be closed completely? Even though, the original agreement between the cities was to close each local airport to commercial aviation.

But, you didn't mention the ancillary business either. Your quote which I highlighted said, "despite what many folks who are pro WA think, Love Field provides a LOT of revenue for the city of Dallas."

I was just commenting about Love Field bonds being downgraded because the city of Dallas had negative cash flow from Love Field due to the fact that they had been charging SWA the same landing fees for 15 or 20 years. The rest of the world experienced some inflation during that period.

But then, being from Birmingham, Al originally, I'm still waiting for the nonstop service from Love to BHM that Herb held his breath and pouted over until he got his next to last amendment to the WA. In fact, so is Mississippi. I wonder if Sen. Lott will write the next amendment also?

 

[mga707]

Hey, if Herb and Gerry can live with this Love agreement, can't you two get along as well?
I'd just be so glad to finally have this thing settled and done with.

 

[ELP_WN_Psgr]

the City of Dallas had only been charging SWA $0.15/1000 lbs landing weight for years! At DFW the landing fees for all airlines are $4.94/1000 lbs.

Well, let's see, if I remember correctly, the landing fee was 55 cents per 1000, rather than 15 cents per thousand.

And I did not see anyone shedding a tear when Southwest was paying 5 cents per thousand and, in one fell swoop, had that increased to 55 cents (a 1000% increase) shortly after most of the other airlines vacated Love Field.

Granted, 55 cents is a good deal in this day and age, but landing fees of that magnitude are not unheard of at other airports.

It all depends on the infrastructure and what is being paid for. Love Field is a nice functional facility, but it lacks the panache of DFW with its modern international terminals with real art and stuff.

Gotta love that real art, not to be confused with genuine faux art. But I digress.

Jim, bottom line here is if you want to paint a picture, at least try to get the facts straight.

 

[KCFlyer]

But, you didn't mention the ancillary business either. Your quote which I highlighted said, "despite what many folks who are pro WA think, Love Field provides a LOT of revenue for the city of Dallas."

My apologies for assuming that anyone would understand that one big thing can draw revenue from several little things. I mean, the Grand Canyon in and of itself does not generate any revenue for Arizona, but because it's there, it DOES generate a heckuva lot of money for the state. And my response (which you initially responded to) was to this quote:

Or they could eliminate federal funding for Love field forcing Dallas to shut Love down.

And if THAT were the case, there most certainly would be a decrease in revenues to the city of Dallas. YOu agree?

 

[jimntx]

Well, let's see, if I remember correctly, the landing fee was 55 cents per 1000, rather than 15 cents per thousand.

Jim, bottom line here is if you want to paint a picture, at least try to get the facts straight.

Well, I did get one thing wrong. I kept typing $0.15 when I should have been typing $0.35. The landing fees have been $0.35/1000 lbs for the last 20 years. When the City Council raised the fee all the way to $0.55/1000 lbs in February, 2006, it was raising the fee back to what it was over 20 years ago.

From CBS-11 in Dallas...
“If we have an airport losing money, why on earth do we have among the lowest landing fees in the country? That doesn't make sense to me at all,â€￾ said Angela Hunt, Dallas City Councilwoman.

The landing fees at Love Field have been 35 cents per thousand pounds for nearly 20 years.

City administrators have proposed raising them to what they were before... 55 cents.

Complete Story, CBS11.com, February 21, 2006

Bottom line, maybe YOU are the one who needs to get your facts straight. SWA was paying $0.35/1000 lbs until just a few months ago. When the little secret agreement between the city and SWA was discovered by the public, that is when it was raised to 55 cents. And, at the time SWA tried the "we're going to take our marbles and quit playing in Dallas if you raise the fees" gambit. Didn't work.

In any case, SWA pays approximately 1/10 what the airlines at DFW have to pay. And, don't give me the baloney about the facilities being so much better at DFW. The end point of THAT argument is well then SWA is subjecting its passengers to substandard facilities just to keep it's little arrangement with the city.

My apologies for assuming that anyone would understand that one big thing can draw revenue from several little things. I mean, the Grand Canyon in and of itself does not generate any revenue for Arizona, but because it's there, it DOES generate a heckuva lot of money for the state. And my response (which you initially responded to) was to this quote:

And if THAT were the case, there most certainly would be a decrease in revenues to the city of Dallas. YOu agree?

No, your post which I responded to did not mention anything other than LOVE FIELD revenue generation. Besides what's surrounding Love Field other than a few FBOs on the airport itself are discount gas stations and taquerias. Oh, wait, I forgot the vet clinic and the used car lots. All those depend deeply on Love Field and generate billions in revenue for the Dallas economy.

To be fair, I also forgot to mention the "adult" bookstores and the rent-by-the-hour motels in the neighborhood.

 

[SharoninSAT]

Or they could eliminate federal funding for Love field forcing Dallas to shut Love down. Which should have happened in 1975. You never will know what will happen in the halls of congress.

true,anything can happen but I don't believe Love will be shut down and for now WN wins the prize and AA wins the compromise and the public wins the peace.We will see how it goes once it gets to Congress...

 

[KCFlyer]

To be fair, I also forgot to mention the "adult" bookstores and the rent-by-the-hour motels in the neighborhood.

Excellent point...if Love is closed, who in their right mind is going to want to invest hundreds of millions of dollars to have these neighbors?

 

[jimntx]

Excellent point...if Love is closed, who in their right mind is going to want to invest hundreds of millions of dollars to have these neighbors?

As close as Love Field is to downtown, if there were going to be millions of dollars invested in this neighborhood, it would have already happened. Beside that, Love Field came first. So, can we say that Love Field and SWA attracted the adult bookstores and cheap motels over the years?

The big investment money in Dallas right now is at Victory Square/Plaza/whatever. Major condos, retail, office space going up next to the AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER.

 

[KCFlyer]

As close as Love Field is to downtown, if there were going to be millions of dollars invested in this neighborhood, it would have already happened. Beside that, Love Field came first. So, can we say that Love Field and SWA attracted the adult bookstores and cheap motels over the years?

The big investment money in Dallas right now is at Victory Square/Plaza/whatever. Major condos, retail, office space going up next to the AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER.

How much did AA pay for the naming rights for that center, and has that it generated enough income to pay for itself? Don't know how old you are, but the Love Field/Harry Hines area was pretty seedy even before Southwest started flying. So one could argue that the legacy airlines attracted those?