SWA now getting involved with slot (s) possibilities

[robbedagain]

Id expect wn n b6 will pay a lit more but not too much more for slots at dca but I do think its quite possible to see spirit vx and may be west jet bidding for dca and possibly vx bidding for dal

 

[WNMECH]

However, I do think WN has got to be aware that their ability to succeed at DAL is highly dependent on them being able to use the few scarce gates that are there.

They may have underestimated demand for access to the airport by other airlines or they may have bull-dozed as hard and fast as they could hoping no one would notice. Either way, there are certainly issues regarding airport access by competitors that are unique to DAL that could create problems if they aren't address.

Are you serious?

You think WN WANTED to be restricted to 16 total gates in the 80 mile circle that surrounds Love Field (which includes DFW, Meacham and Alliance Airports)?

SWA bulldozed gates so they could be stuck with 16?
Yeah, right.

This part of the deal was agreed to because WN believes it is the minimum number of gates they will need to serve the area and it was a compromise to get long haul flights out of Love.
This whole deal was agreed to by all five parties and voted into law by congress.
If you think Delta has any chance of forcing WN to control less than these 16 gates, then you obviously don't know as much as you pretend to.
There were more lawyers on all sides of this deal than could shake a stick at, and this change in the Wright Amendment will not be charged to where WN has less than 16 gates.

Wanna bet on it?

I don't care how political you think delta is.
They would need a majority of the senate and congress plus the presidents signature to get that changed.
And I guarantee it well withhold a legal challenge.

 

[WorldTraveler]

take a deep breath, WNMech.

I am fully aware that WN has been fighting for the right to freely use DAL's facilities the way every other airport allows airlines to do.... and which WN should have not only at DAL but also at DFW - but so should every other have access to DAL as the market demands as well.

Bulldoze here refers to pushing their agenda forward, not physically destroying gates which is apparently what you perceived me to say.

I am simply going to bet that there are federal laws about access to airports by competitors and WN will be hard-pressed to argue that every other competitor that might show up has to fit in the four gates at DAL which WN doesn't operate from.

Even swamt believes (and I believe accurately) that DAL might be forced to implement some common use gates to accommodate additional demand - exactly a system that is used around the world and in the US to ensure that the maximum number of airlines can use the relatively few number of gates that exist.

I will bet you that DL will be flying from DAL to cities outside the perimeter when the WA restrictions fall/change. Up for it?

BTW, with more and more US airports imposing size restrictions on the facilities, there will be more and more "gate wars" at key airports.

Most of the US legacy carriers are well familiar with how the game is played because they live within it dozens of times per day around the world - and in many of their largest markets here in the US.

 

[WNMECH]

take a deep breath, WNMech.

I am fully aware that WN has been fighting for the right to freely use DAL's facilities the way every other airport allows airlines to do.... and which WN should have not only at DAL but also at DFW - but so should every other have access to DAL as the market demands as well.

Bulldoze here refers to pushing their agenda forward, not physically destroying gates which is apparently what you perceived me to say.

Delta of corse will have access at Love but wn will still control 16.

Wanna bet?

By the way, common use language is already in the law passed to change the Wright Amendment.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and if that happens, then I doubt if anybody will object.

what is the common use language in the Wright bill? Glad to hear it is there since it is someone industry standard and perhaps that is why swamt said what he did.... at the heart of it, you two both do seem to understand the business of aviation fairly well.

DL has already informed the world of its flight plans, including adding LAX service which DL hasn't flown from the Metroplex for a decade so anyone else who wants to jump in the race now is playing catchup.

I'm also not sure who else is willing to take on WN.... remember B6 and WN are bidding on the same assets at DCA and LGA while UA's costs are way too high to successfully compete beyond a few shuttle flights to IAH and none of the rest of the industry has the financial strength to win against WN.

So, yes, I do think that DAL will end up with WN controlling the gates it has and DL ending up with the two it says it wants... plus whatever UA does - which doesn't currently require 2 gates.

 

[WNMECH]

and if that happens, then I doubt if anybody will object.

what is the common use language in the Wright bill? Glad to hear it is there since it is someone industry standard and perhaps that is why swamt said what he did.... at the heart of it, you two both do seem to understand the business of aviation fairly well.

DL has already informed the world of its flight plans, including adding LAX service which DL hasn't flown from the Metroplex for a decade so anyone else who wants to jump in the race now is playing catchup.

I'm also not sure who else is willing to take on WN.... remember B6 and WN are bidding on the same assets at DCA and LGA while UA's costs are way too high to successfully compete beyond a few shuttle flights to IAH and none of the rest of the industry has the financial strength to win against WN.

So, yes, I do think that DAL will end up with WN controlling the gates it has and DL ending up with the two it says it wants... plus whatever UA does - which doesn't currently require 2 gates.

I really didn't want to get into it this deep but I will tell you what I understand about the Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006.
I am no lawyer.
The act refers to the scarce resource provision of the existing Love Field leases.
This comes from here:

http://www.dallas-lovefield.com/pdf/CompetitionPlan.pdf

It does explain that if other airlines want to enter Love Field, then they will be accommodated.
It also details the process to try and get gate space. However it has been explained to me that if the gates being used by the leassees are being used to their full capacity, then the new airlines will be encouraged to look to DFW.

And even though the Sensenbrenner amendment to the Wright Amendment Reform Act removed the anti-trust protection in the original agreement,
I still believe SWA would withstand a legal challenge, and retain the rights to all 16 of their gates.

And I will bet on it.

Again, I am not a lawyer and will keep my day job. But parts of the Wright Amendment Reform Act were upheld in this case:

https://www.casetext.com/case/love-terminal-partners-v-city-of-dallas-tex/

 

[WNMECH]

I can't find all the common use language but IIRC, if a carrier returns gates to the city, they can be leased to new entrants or converted to common use. Where then SWA could use them if no one else were to use them to full capacity.

The Wright Amendment Reform Act is here:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-120/pdf/STATUTE-120-Pg2011.pdf

 

[WNMECH]

Just as a correction, the Sensenbrenner amendment passed the house but apparently did not make it out of senate in a compromise.
Sensenbrenner then urged a no vote on the final bill due to his concerns on anti-trust issues. It passed anyway.
This actually strengthens the law against challenge.

I am not a lawyer.

 

[WorldTraveler]

thanks for your response and again I think you have a grasp of the issues far, far more than most of the airline supporters on this board.
 
enforcement of antitrust law is entrusted to the DOJ which can very well be sued.
 
The simple fact is that DL wants to serve DAL to its hubs and key markets which include NYC and LAX.  IF they are allowed to do that, then I doubt if DL is likely to offer any complaint.
 
Absent that, there is a whole lot of the WA and WN's operation there that could be at risk.  
 
I tend to think that WN isn't willing to risk a risky legal process and DL will be accommodated to provide service to DL as it desires.

 

[swamt]

take a deep breath, WNMech.

I am fully aware that WN has been fighting for the right to freely use DAL's facilities the way every other airport allows airlines to do.... and which WN should have not only at DAL but also at DFW - but so should every other have access to DAL as the market demands as well.

Bulldoze here refers to pushing their agenda forward, not physically destroying gates which is apparently what you perceived me to say.

I am simply going to bet that there are federal laws about access to airports by competitors and WN will be hard-pressed to argue that every other competitor that might show up has to fit in the four gates at DAL which WN doesn't operate from.

Even swamt believes (and I believe accurately) that DAL might be forced to implement some common use gates to accommodate additional demand - exactly a system that is used around the world and in the US to ensure that the maximum number of airlines can use the relatively few number of gates that exist.

I will bet you that DL will be flying from DAL to cities outside the perimeter when the WA restrictions fall/change. Up for it?

BTW, with more and more US airports imposing size restrictions on the facilities, there will be more and more "gate wars" at key airports.

Most of the US legacy carriers are well familiar with how the game is played because they live within it dozens of times per day around the world - and in many of their largest markets here in the US.

Wait a minute WT. When I mentioned the shared gates, it does not include shared gates with SWA. It will be shared gates between the other airlines. WN is 100% correct, SWA will not operate less than the 16 gates provided for them to use, NOR will they (SWA) share any gates they use. Just wanted to make that clear.

 

[WorldTraveler]

as long as there is sufficient space to accommodate other carriers that want to serve DAL, that shouldn't be a problem. But given that WN controls a far higher percentage of gates at DAL than most other airlines control at other airports, it is far from clear that WN has the right to stake out 80% of the airport's gates and tell the rest of everyone else to fit in the remaining 4.

IN reality, I doubt that UA will try to go up against WN other than the few flights down to IAH that they presently operate and which don't compete against WN. AA can't. Most other low fare carriers don't have the financial strength to fight it out with WN for a position in a market that WN has long been waiting to serve to its full potential.

We can talk about what actually will take place if there is significantly more demand for gates than there is supply.

Other than DL, I'm not sure who else really intends to significantly grow its presence at DAL. And I'm not sure that anyone else is willing to take on the legal challenge if it comes to that.

As I've said multiple times before, I fully expect that DL will serve DAL in its largest key markets while WN will push the facility to the max and will wildly succeed at establishing DAL as a viable alternative to AA's massive DFW hub.

 

[700UW]

Remember when VX wanted to serve ORD and there was no gate space available at the time, and there was nothing the DOJ nor the DOT did about it.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I believe VX does serve ORD now; UA went nuclear with additional capacity so VX' entrance does evoke memories. Can you refresh us how their entrance to ORD came about?

 

[700UW]

The airline first announced its intent to serve ORD in 2008, but its plans were delayed due to gate availability. With the leadership provided by the City of Chicago and ORD Airport Commissioner Rosemarie S. Andolino, the carrier reached an agreement to occupy gate space at ORD’s Concourse L. In line with its sleek, tech-forward aircraft cabins, Virgin America’s new L3 gate offers stylish and sustainable design as well as connectivity, with power outlets and wireless induction chargers near all gate seating. In addition to power outlets near every seat onboard its aircraft, Virgin America was the first carrier to offer fleetwide WiFi. The airline’s investment in new aircraft and use of best practices on the ground and in the air, make its fleet up to 25 percent more fuel and carbon efficient than the average flying in the U.S. Virgin America has invested in its new L3 gate to meet and exceed ORD’s already high specifications for environmental efficiency.

 
It took three years for VX to serve ORD, service started in 2011.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Yes it took awhile, but they did eventually get in. Can you refresh us how that happened?

Seems to me, but I may have forgotten, that VX' entry was possible because of the DL/NW merger and a gate reshuffling that took place after it.

The point is that ORD was a known problem for new carrier access but access was gained eventually.