Southwest Eyes Dfw

[JS]

SWA can base the 20 737-800s they will buy from ATA out of DFW. Offer flights to IAH 5, HOU 5, LAX 3, SAN 3, LAS 3, PHX 4, OAK 3, MDW 5, BNA 2, MCO 3, TPA 3, BWI 5, SEA 2, STL 3, FLL 2, PHL 3. Maybe a few others. Just my thoughts......

[post="188241"][/post]​

I agree except for IAH and HOU. Southwest doesn't need a connecting DFW hub, just an O&D hub.

For those who don't like the idea of a DFW hub, here is a hypothetical question. Suppose you had to choose one of the following two:

1) set up a long range DFW hub and nothing else changes
or
2) Wright Amendment and bond agreements are shredded and AA floods DAL with flights to keep Southwest from taking all of AA's long haul traffic

Which one would you choose? While #2 isn't guaranteed, going with #1 ensures that the Wright Amendment will be around much longer, thus allowing Southwest to keep their virtual monopoly on short haul Dallas service.

 

[DFWFSC]

1. LUV buying ATA's 737-800 leases is just a rumor, not a done deal.
2. LUV has plenty of aircraft of its own for a DFW operation, including deliveries and potential reorganization.
3. DFW Airport will likely be offering great deals on gates, since they are building new facilities for AA + DAL's terminal... DFW is just about to go from slightly gate constrained to wide-open (remember AirTran's fight for 4 gates in Terminal B last year...)

[post="188504"][/post]​

I agree that WN and or Spirirt,JetBlue,Indy, or whoever may just be sitting back and waiting for the DFW airport board to panic and start offering huge incentives for anybody willing to add a hub or a major build up at DFW. DFW stated it may loose up to 25-30 million a year on revenue from DL's pulldown. DFW still has to pay for the new "D" terminal opening next year.

 

[coolflyingfool]

I agree except for IAH and HOU. Southwest doesn't need a connecting DFW hub, just an O&D hub.

For those who don't like the idea of a DFW hub, here is a hypothetical question. Suppose you had to choose one of the following two:

1) set up a long range DFW hub and nothing else changes
or
2) Wright Amendment and bond agreements are shredded and AA floods DAL with flights to keep Southwest from taking all of AA's long haul traffic

Which one would you choose? While #2 isn't guaranteed, going with #1 ensures that the Wright Amendment will be around much longer, thus allowing Southwest to keep their virtual monopoly on short haul Dallas service.

[post="188522"][/post]​

I was thinking not so much a connection point for DFW as much as offering a complete shuttle service between Houston and Dallas. There would be DAL to both IAH & HOU as well as DFW to both IAH & HOU. This would give SWA a real hold on the business traffic on those routes. But SWA could also offer more diect service such as IAH-DFW-OAK or HOU-DFW-SEA and that would possibly help SWA pick up more loyal customers in Houston. Just my thoughts........

 

[funguy2]

I was thinking not so much a connection point for DFW as much as offering a complete shuttle service between Houston and Dallas. There would be DAL to both IAH & HOU as well as DFW to both IAH & HOU. This would give SWA a real hold on the business traffic on those routes. But SWA could also offer more diect service such as IAH-DFW-OAK or HOU-DFW-SEA and that would possibly help SWA pick up more loyal customers in Houston. Just my thoughts........

[post="188641"][/post]​

If the demand is there for Southwest service from Houston to Seattle or Oakland... they will fly it nonstop... And they already fly nonstop from HOU to many of the destinations on your list of recommended service from DFW. While connections from HOU/IAH would be a possibility, they would not make or break the service. The service would need to survive on the basis of local traffic.

Furthermore, currently, LUV only flies IAH-DAL. which means its IAH service is essentially limited by the Wright Amendment as well, or folks have to connect at DAL, and then connect AGAIN to go to places outside the perimeter. Therefore, this idea about adding IAH-DFW for the beyond connections means LUV would take on AA and CAL at the same time, which I would say is a dumb move. Part of why Hitler lost WW2 was because he was fighting on too many fronts. LUV won't make this mistake.

 

[mga707]

If the demand is there for Southwest service from Houston to Seattle or Oakland... they will fly it nonstop...

[post="188779"][/post]​

HOU-OAK nonstop service started this week (on Monday). One daily RT.

 

[chase]

IAH just doubled our landing fees...highest in the system. UPS is rumored to have bought some property at the airfield north of IAH to build a facility there to handle their aircraft. SWA wouldn't follow, just simply pull out....loads are abysmal and in the day & age of Kelly where everything is up for review it would surprise me to see us pull out of IAH after many years of others asking the same thing.

chase

HOU-OAK nonstop service started this week (on Monday). One daily RT.

[post="189324"][/post]​

 

[TheLazarusman]

Was I blind or did I not see Kelly or some other rep from WN say on the local news that they were taking a serious look at DFW?

 

[jimntx]

UPS is rumored to have bought some property at the airfield north of IAH to build a facility there to handle their aircraft. chase

[post="189380"][/post]​

And, what airfield would that be? I've owned a home across 1960 from the IAH property for almost 30 years and a condo in Dallas. I drive between the two often. As far as I know, the only airfield north of IAH that is big enough to take jets is called Love Field. :huh:

 

[Ch. 12]

I agree except for IAH and HOU. Southwest doesn't need a connecting DFW hub, just an O&D hub.

For those who don't like the idea of a DFW hub, here is a hypothetical question. Suppose you had to choose one of the following two:

1) set up a long range DFW hub and nothing else changes
or
2) Wright Amendment and bond agreements are shredded and AA floods DAL with flights to keep Southwest from taking all of AA's long haul traffic

Which one would you choose? While #2 isn't guaranteed, going with #1 ensures that the Wright Amendment will be around much longer, thus allowing Southwest to keep their virtual monopoly on short haul Dallas service.

[post="188522"][/post]​

I tend to think that #1 would do quite the opposite of ensuring the WA's longevity. In fact, I think that the interesting development would be that AMR would all of a sudden do a 180 degree change in stance and lobby for the repeal of the WA. And believe me, this will happen if WN goes into DFW. Wright now (sorry...had to have the pun), AMR is the only thing keeping the WA afloat b/c historically WN has been limited out of Dallas by it. WN's biz plan has been to use the "reliever" airport with no intent of venturing to the more costly DFW but now that they are re-thinking their biz plan (due to more incentives at DFW), AMR will most definitely re-think their legal stance.

 

[sfb]

As far as I know, the only airfield north of IAH that is big enough to take jets is called Love Field.

Well ya know CXO in Conroe has a 6000-foot (x150) runway while DWH in Tomball has a 7000-foot runway (though it's only 100 feet wide). Considering what operates at SNA, you could put jets into CXO if there were demand or terminal facilities... But I think the idea was that UPS might have bought land on the north side of IAH...

In fact, I think that the interesting development would be that AMR would all of a sudden do a 180 degree change in stance and lobby for the repeal of the WA. And believe me, this will happen if WN goes into DFW.

Actually, I have to disagree, primarily because AA has nothing to gain and much to lose from a Wright-Shelby Amendment repeal. Right now, WN controls most of the gates at the main Love Field terminal either as actual gates or office space. They actively use about 14 gates with another half-dozen or so for offices/training. Continental Express has two gates, while AA now has three restricted to use as "office space" with the East Concourse having been demolished two years ago. There are six gates at the former Legend terminal, and the DAL master plan limits the total number of gates to 32.

So, if the W-SA were to be repealed, AA would have three gates in the main terminal and possibly six at the Legend Terminal (but you wouldn't want to run an operation split between the two). While one might argue that Southwest would have to give up some of its gates on demand, I suspect it's likely that they would move quickly to add service so as to meet the use requirements of their leases. AA would still have a far more limited number of gates at DAL for some sort of hypothetical long-haul service when compared to what WN could probably muster. And more service at DAL would make its costs even more competitive when compared to DFW, especially if AA reduced its DFW operation somewhat to move resources to DAL. AA cannot become competitive at DAL simply because there is not enough space -- and you can bet that Dallas is in WN's pocket just as assuredly as Fort Worth is in AA's.

 

[jimntx]

Well ya know CXO in Conroe has a 6000-foot (x150) runway while DWH in Tomball has a 7000-foot runway (though it's only 100 feet wide). Considering what operates at SNA, you could put jets into CXO if there were demand or terminal facilities... But I think the idea was that UPS might have bought land on the north side of IAH...

[post="189518"][/post]​

What Chase wrote was "UPS is rumored to have bought some property at the airfield north of IAH {emphasis mine} to build a facility there to handle their aircraft."

Aside from the fact that UPS has a new facility in the new cargo/mail staging area in the NE corner of IAH, they fly some DC-10s into IAH today. Could those use a 6000 ft runway? Also, if you fight the outbound traffic to get a UPS truck to Conroe, you might as well drive that truck the rest of the way to Dallas. That bottleneck between The Woodlands and Conroe where the freeway goes from 5 lanes down to 2 makes me lose my religion every time.

As far as Tomball, have you seen the development out that way? You would be guaranteed that your trucks are stuck in traffic burning expensive fuel a lot of the time.

On the north side of IAH (which is where my house is) you have a fully developed subdivision from 1960 all the way up to Spring Creek about 1.5 miles north. On the other side of the creek is a very exclusive golf club. That would be some expensive property to buy now. In fact, there are new homes being built in Foxwood right now on the last bit of undeveloped land at the back near the creek.

 

[sfb]

Also, if you fight the outbound traffic to get a UPS truck to Conroe, you might as well drive that truck the rest of the way to Dallas. That bottleneck between The Woodlands and Conroe where the freeway goes from 5 lanes down to 2 makes me lose my religion every time.

As far as Tomball, have you seen the development out that way? You would be guaranteed that your trucks are stuck in traffic burning expensive fuel a lot of the time.

Funny you should say that, since I was in the metropolitan Tomball region this weekend visiting the parental units, and I have to agree that the development in the area over the last 10 or 15 years is just astounding. Even if/when the Compaq Freeway gets extended out and around to bypass Tomball (again), the traffic is going to be nuts.

No, I can't imagine UPS trying to put any facility at those airports -- I'm just saying the airfields exist to take jets. No need to, though, since IAH is far from fully built-out.