SWA now getting involved with slot (s) possibilities

[swamt]

No wt I have not... accrding to wsj front page n continue pg A-6 the merger by Most Anti trust and Airline experts is considered a victory.. now if u scroll to the pilots threadnin the usairways forum usa320 has put out a nbr of newspapers n news links but not of them seem to agree w ur assessment scndly I dont count on pay raises from the donkeys at us... n third what will u be like if n when the judge approves the deal early dec?

It'll get worse and worse.  He's already fell off the ledge. After the final announcement in Dec. he will free-fall for some time then, finally hit his bottom...

 

[swamt]

Here's a good article explaining a little better why Delta and United will not win any bids they might submit. But it does seem to crack the door open with a possibility of Delta might get the chance to throw bids out for DAL Love Field. Happy reading all:-

Why the DOJ Wants to Clip Delta's Wings

By Adam Levine-Weinberg | More Articles
November 17, 2013 | Comments (0)


Delta Air Lines (NYSE: DAL ) isn't very happy with the Department of Justice right now. The DOJ is requiring AMR (NASDAQOTH: AAMRQ ) and US Airways (NYSE: LCC ) to give up slots and/or gates at seven different airports around the country as part of their merger. Most notably, they must divest slots covering 44 round-trip flights at Reagan Airport near Washington, D.C.



AMR and US Airways need to give up slots and gates in order to merge (Photo: AMR)

Delta would love to bid for slots at Reagan Airport, as well as some of the other gate space becoming available. However, the DOJ seems intent on limiting the sales to low-cost carriers, in an attempt to boost competition. That leaves Delta out in the cold.

Delta has been very vocal about its belief that it should be allowed to bid on an equal footing with low-cost carriers. However, its protests are unlikely to succeed. More than anything else, the DOJ is worried about the growing oligopoly of "The Big Three": American, Delta, and United Continental (NYSE: UAL ) . Transferring slots within that oligopoly would not solve the problem.

Delta's demands

After the merger settlement was announced on Tuesday, Delta put out a press release saying that it looked forward to bidding for the slots that would be divested, particularly at Reagan Airport . As it became more clear that the DOJ wasn't interested in bids from legacy carriers, Delta put out a second, more combative press release on Wednesday.



The DOJ doesn't want to let Delta buy slots at Reagan Airport (Photo: Delta Air Lines)

This time, Delta stated that it wanted to bid for gates at Love Field in Dallas as well as slots at Reagan Airport. The company also noted that it would be able to serve small- and medium-sized cities from Reagan Airport, as it operates smaller regional aircraft, unlike the low cost carriers . These cities might otherwise lose service to Reagan Airport when American makes the necessary flight cuts there.

On Thursday, Delta was at it again, with a press release announcing new service at Love Field that will start next October, when restrictions on long-haul flights will be lifted. Delta plans to add 18 daily nonstops, including enhanced service to Atlanta, and new service to New York, Detroit, Minneapolis/St. Paul, and Los Angeles. There's just one catch: Delta will need to bid for and win access to the gates American is giving up !

Nice try, but no luck
On Thursday, a senior official in the DOJ's antitrust division threw cold water on the idea that Delta and United could qualify to bid for slots and gates. DOJ lawyers think that the legacy carriers are already tacitly "coordinating" when it comes to setting fares, fees, and schedules. By contrast, the low-cost carriers have shown more of an inclination to compete in those respects.

Residents of the small cities that could lose direct service to Reagan Airport may want Delta to come in and restore that service. However, by definition, those would be routes where Delta would face no competition -- and in turn, Delta would not be using those slots to compete with American. (Thus, you could see why American might be eager to sell slots to Delta, if given the opportunity.)

By contrast, a low-cost carrier like Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV ) would be likely to add flights to larger cities that have no competition today. Dallas, Cleveland, Charlotte, and Hartford are some of the larger metro areas where a single legacy carrier has a monopoly on service to Reagan Airport. Stiffer competition on high-traffic routes like these is what regulators are really hoping for.

Delta has a better shot at getting a spot at the table for the Love Field gates. There, it plans to serve high-traffic routes, where it would compete against American's flights from nearby Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport (and possibly Southwest flights from Love Field).

Still, with the exception of Los Angeles, Delta already flies from Dallas-Fort Worth to all the cities it listed for its Love Field expansion. So while a Delta Love Field expansion would give travelers a new option, it wouldn't increase the number of airlines flying from the Dallas-Fort Worth area to Atlanta, Detroit, New York, or Minneapolis.

Foolish conclusion

Delta is doing everything in its power to get a seat at the table as American and US Airways dispose of assets to satisfy regulatory concerns. However, the DOJ seems dead set on ensuring that the assets up for sale go to low cost carriers.

The DOJ's stubbornness is understandable: after all, one of its complaints has been that the legacy carriers are tacitly coordinating to avoid sparking fare wars. Since the DOJ's mandate is to protect consumer interests, it makes sense to get slots and gates into the hands of the airlines that will compete most vigorously. Right now, only low cost carriers fit the bill.


Sharon if you want to post more articles reflecting the same, be my guest, matter fact I would encourage you to, and we won't bite your head off. LOL

 

[robbedagain]

Thanks swamt now u may have given ur buddy wt more ways to say dl wins no matter what

 

[FWAAA]

I've posted a few times lately in different places that AA's two gates at DAL is a difficult situation.   

The compromise agreement that reduced DAL from 32 gates to 20 is the root cause of the problem.    From an antitrust perspective, government leaders in Dallas, Fort Worth and the federal government should have never signed off on giving WN 80% of the gates at that airport.   The new terminal is nice - far nicer than the ancient old terminals, but it should have been built to the original plan of 32 gates, of which WN would have had 16, or half, or WN should have been limited to 10 gates with the other 10 gates available on a common use basis for all other airlines.    WN would have probably preferred to have 16, so the terminal should have been built with at least 32 gates.   
 
Obviously,  DFW airport would not be very happy with that result, but consumers would benefit from greater competition at DAL and the DFW Metroplex.   Southwest would not have liked looking at 16 other gates it could not use, but again, consumers would benefit from UA, AA, B6, VX,  NK and others using those other 16 gates.    

 

[Kev3188]

BTW, do you realize that the Attorney General himself is fighting a judge's ruling that allows the US House of Representatives to proceed with changes of contempt of Congress regarding a documents request for the Fast and Furious gun-running program?
 
DO you realize that scores of lawmakers from the President's own party say that his requirement that insurance companies re-enroll participants who lost their policies due to ObamaCare is not legal and are pushing their own rewrite of the law?.

 

I mean an airline industry case is small potatoes compared to the gun running scandal the Justice dept. is trying to fend off.

Fast & Furious? Obamacare?

Hunh.

Coulda sworn I was in the WN forum, and not the Water Cooler.

 

[swamt]

FWAAA,   You can thank AA for the reduction of the number of gates from 32 to 20 total, they pushed that hard during nego's as they were very concerned about SWA's growth potential (after W/A) with more gates.  Remember at one time that SWA was taking Love Field to 250 flts a day.  AA (as well as DFW) was scared of this potential and so the number of flts were contained, as well as international flts from LF.
 
Your correct, of course SWA wanted more gates at LF.  And they would have loved for it to have been built up to the original 32 gates, but the agreement pulled all that to a halt. 
 
I am still not positive that DL or UA will get the LF gates, or any of the other 2 gates at other airports.  I have posted an article quoting one of the US officials stating that "DL and UA more than likely will not get ANY of the divested slots in the agreement for the AA US merger."  That tells me that it includes the 2 gates at DAL, LA, BOS, Miami, and Chicago.  However, maybe, just maybe, the official was referring to the slot controlled airports only.  Not sure yet, we will know more as the details get ironed out, but looking at the way Delta is whining about it I believe they are taking it the same as I am, that they will not be awarded any of the slots that come available during the divestures.   Even though Dl is now gonna be moves to the number 3 slot, they are still one of the legacies that more than likely will not get any slots... 

 

[robbedagain]

Kev ur right ur in here the swa forum but we know wt all too well

 

[WorldTraveler]

No wt I have not... accrding to wsj front page n continue pg A-6 the merger by Most Anti trust and Airline experts is considered a victory.. now if u scroll to the pilots threadnin the usairways forum usa320 has put out a nbr of newspapers n news links but not of them seem to agree w ur assessment scndly I dont count on pay raises from the donkeys at us... n third what will u be like if n when the judge approves the deal early dec?

Robbed,
I am glad you are well read but you clearly shape your opinions by what you read … and you don’t necessarily get a full perspective if you think that there has been no criticism of the DOJ in this settlement and how they failed to achieve what they set out to do when they filed suit.

They are injecting enormous amount of competition into the slot controlled airports on the east coast, esp. where new AA/US will have the highest percentage of seats.

As much as you and others want to argue that AA/US got off easy, the simple fact is that 44 mainline jets the size of what B6 and WN operate amounts to over 6000 seats or half of the number of seats that US mainline and Express currently operates from DCA. That is an enormous capacity increase and it will be heavily concentrated in the biggest markets because B6 and WN don’t fly small jets such as RJs.

Add in the capacity that is coming at DAL, and the AA system has enormous new competitive pressures coming online in less than one year’s time. No other airline in the US has ever faced that kind of increase in capacity by competitors in such a short period of time, esp. in the largest and most profitable cities on its network.
AA fans might want to hold onto their sigh of relief until about the middle of 2015 when it might become a little more clear how well AA has handled all of this new competition.

The media isn’t talking about that because they don’t understand the economics of the airline industry. They also are weighing success or failure against a yardstick of whether the DOJ completely blocked the merger which is what it said it set out to do.

Against that yardstick, I suppose AA/US look great but tell me again when any other airline has had to divest so many assets in so many choice locations as AA/US will be doing?

I've posted a few times lately in different places that AA's two gates at DAL is a difficult situation.
The compromise agreement that reduced DAL from 32 gates to 20 is the root cause of the problem. From an antitrust perspective, government leaders in Dallas, Fort Worth and the federal government should have never signed off on giving WN 80% of the gates at that airport. The new terminal is nice - far nicer than the ancient old terminals, but it should have been built to the original plan of 32 gates, of which WN would have had 16, or half, or WN should have been limited to 10 gates with the other 10 gates available on a common use basis for all other airlines. WN would have probably preferred to have 16, so the terminal should have been built with at least 32 gates.

Obviously, DFW airport would not be very happy with that result, but consumers would benefit from greater competition at DAL and the DFW Metroplex. Southwest would not have liked looking at 16 other gates it could not use, but again, consumers would benefit from UA, AA, B6, VX, NK and others using those other 16 gates.

Very sensible post and perspective, FWAAA. The whole WA is a decades long legal disaster but let’s remember that WN started it when they fought to operate from an airport that was intended to be closed to commercial airline service. WN has pushed over decades to operate from there and they have had a lot of barriers put around them at the behest of AA who is protecting its hub at DFW. The limited number of gates is a real issue that limits growth but communities have the right to limit the size of airports and do not have to build a facility large enough to accommodate all possible demand.

DAL is not exempt from the same federal laws for other airports that require access to carriers that want to serve that airport and WN faces the very real risk that it could be forced to give up gates or accommodate other carriers if DAL repeatedly faces requests for access by new carriers that cannot be accommodated….

DL will be allowed to bid- they just won't win any of the LGA or DCA slots.
And for the off topic comment- I haven't heard that the President is 'requiring' ins companies to make the junk plans available again, just that he is allowing them to be covered under the ACA- so it removes the ins companies excuse that they can't offer the plans anymore.

Multiple sources seem to be saying the same thing so there may well be truth that DL is winning on access to Love Field. Their arguments are a lot stronger there than at DCA. DAL is already controlled by a “low fare carrier” and not allowing DL to bid on the gates would result in them being forced to leave. I don’t know of any case in antitrust law where the remedy for one carrier in an antitrust suit has resulted in the loss of access to a market by another carrier, and that is an enormous legal challenge that none of the parties that want the merger to go thru is willing to face.
In addition, the issue of kicking out a legacy carrier in a market not only dominated by one carrier but by a carrier that is being given preferential access in other parts of the settlement case raise significant legal issues.
It is also certain that if DL was forced out and couldn’t bid on gates, it would immediately pursue access under laws which require airports to develop plans to accommodate new entrants. WN’s ability to use DAL could be hampered since they aren’t using the facility to its max now and are in no more of a position to argue that they have plans to use every gate while denying DL the right to do the same.
The issue of allowing the DOT to pick a carrier for the DAL gates based on where they fly from DAL would be stopped in court as well. Deregulation prohibits the government from interfering with route selection or allocating assets based on an expected or desired economic benefit. For those who want to claim that is what happens with Air 21 slots to increase access at DCA, those are added slots specifically so the government is not accused of reallocating slots based on commercial and not safety reasons.

It is far less risky for all involved to just allow DL to bid on DAL gates, they will likely win, and from a strategic standpoint, DL’s access to DAL is far more important than gaining more slots at DCA.
The real loser in the settlement will be small and medium sized cities. Even though AA/US is being forced to use regional carrier slots for regional flights and is apparently being required to not use RJs in the top markets from DCA, it is certain that some cities will lose nonstop service to DCA. Bidding on slots will automatically make it not viable to use slots that were won in a bidding process for RJ flights when the economic value of those slots will be set by carriers who want to use them for mainline service.
As much as I have made the point and others seem to be having a terribly time grasping it, DL has consistently stated that it intended to acquire slots to serve small and medium size cities, not to grow its presence in large cities from DCA.

DL is the 2nd largest carrier at DCA now with about 15% of seats for all carriers and will very likely remain #2 even after the slot deal. If B6 acquires a significantly large percentage of slots and uses 320s or 321s, they could surpass DL but if WN and B6 split the slot pie and if both use an average aircraft size for their fleet, B6 will end up with about the number of seats as DL while WN will be about 70% of the size of DL. It is also very likely that DL will adjust its own schedule including adding capacity using its existing slots and could reallocate some slots to add service in new markets.

The real loser in this very well could be not just the small cities but UA. A glut of seats at DCA could put tremendous pressure on UA’s IAD operation since average fares at IAD are lower than DCA. A glut of seats at DCA will allow prices to fall at DCA, bringing a lot of traffic into DCA. In fact, infrastructure at DCA will be significantly strained by the addition of capacity by all carriers.

Of course WN's BWI operation could also take a hit from a lot more low fare seats from DCA as well. I guess they are big enough to know what to do when that happens.

Fast & Furious? Obamacare?
Coulda sworn I was in the WN forum, and not the Water Cooler.

Provides the context for a government that has regularly implemented programs which are not compatible with or against the law.

As for the comments from the DOJ that legacy carriers collude among themselves while low fare carriers increase competition, that is a generalization that would never stand up in a court of law in applied law.
There are ample examples of low fare carriers charging higher fares and receiving higher average revenues than legacy carriers – and the overall theme is that low cost carriers and legacy carriers price at higher levels based on how susceptible they are to competition.

The very basis of ensuring the strongest competitors into WN into Love Field is because WN will push fares up based on their dominance of the market – at least as soon as they move as much of the market from AA at DFW to WN at DAL as they can.

The greatest impact on AA will come from WN pushing as many 738s thru DCA as they can since WN's operation is much more network focused than B6's which is more point to point focus... so I will rejoice the bigger the planes that WN uses on as many routes as possible from DCA.

 

[robbedagain]

I have a pretty good perspective view. Of course u not once raised a stink when it came to dl/nw merged ua n co merged nor when fl n wn came together u have not been in the airline industy in yrs but I gotta tell you that I for one was not a fan of this merger but then again im one of countless employees who have no say in the merger but given that dp is a nbrs type man I would not be surprised if he had even better people w financial knowledge to help him n tom horton pull the merger off you keep raven about how no other airline had to give up sooo much..... you just seem to be sooo arrogant that us/aa cant merge bec neither bring much to table but aa would provide us w latin america n we have expanded european and lit asia and we all knw ur poems about that given dl is king of conquering the world

 

[WorldTraveler]

robbed,

First of all, can you help us out and at least use punctuation if not capitalization or put spaces between your sentences.

I get the pride you have in this transaction and what it represents and what it means in terms of potential movement for you and your company.

I am taking none of that from you. The merger means you are going to have to work to unlock the full potential of the merger. I have repeatedly acknowledged that Parker has done that will US -just that US is backed into a corner strategically because of its small size and that it has pulled back from so many large and competitive markets.

I have also fully acknowledged that AA has enormous revenue generating capacity. As much as I harp on Asia and other weaknesses, I am fully aware and have acknowledged that AA generates very strong revenues in key markets, including Latin America.

If AA and US can make this merger work and unlock all of the potential of it, then your future and those of your peers from both AA and US will be a whole lot stronger and I slight you nothing if that happens.

And as much as swamt's shorts are all twisted right now, I have affirmed to him multiple times that I think WN is a very well run company, has succeeded very well in the marketplace, and will continue to do so, esp. because of the opportunities that will arise because of the changes to the WA.

But the airline industry is intensely competitive and I represent probably the most competitive person on this forum. You have to WIN the right to become profitable IN THE MARKETPLACE and all that represents for you.

The SOLE reason why I have been as outspoken as I have is because the settlement agreement for the AA/US merger is significantly different from any other merger or asset sale.

There were no divestitures in the DL/NW or WN/FL mergers.

IN the UA/CO merger, UA divested the assets directly to WN. I don't know if the DOJ said that the 18 slots had to go and UA just did it.

In the DL/US slot swap, the deal took two years to obtain approval, far longer than any merger. In the end 16 slot pairs were divested at LGA from what DL gained and 8 slot pairs from US at DCA. The key thing here is that there were clear criteria that were published as to who could qualify for the slots and every carrier that qualified was given the right to bid.

Indications are that the DOJ DID tell AA/US before the suit was filed by the DOJ that they wanted big divestitures.

We don't know what else the DOJ was asking for but again AA/US is giving up AA's entire slot portfolio at DCA plus 12 LGA slots. No other merger involved giving up slots in an airport where the merged carrier would be #2.

What I have complained about is the lack of very clear guidelines from the DOJ as to who could qualify to get the slots - which is exactly what they did with the DL-US slot swap.

They also did not make any judgments between low fare carriers.

If the DOJ had done with AA/US what they did for DL - in terms of procedures - this forum would have had hundreds fewer posts over the past 4 or 5 days.

Does that make sense to you, robbed?

I am not against you, the merger, or anything else.

I am FOR transparency, aggressive and open competition, and a balanced and level playing field.

And for the record, DL never said or so far as I can tell expected that it would gain any slots at DCA OTHER THAN to small/medium cities that would lose service.

The DAL gate issue is about the fact that DL already serves that airport and there are serious questions involved if DL is forced to leave an airport because of AA/US' settlement agreement and the fact that DAL is already heavily served by a low fare carrier.

The chances are very high that DL and UA will both remain at DAL and that there might be other carriers with an interest in serving the airport.

I will leave the question of how that will be handled if B6 and other carriers decide they want to fly to DAL as well.

But again, robbed, I am not against you or any airline other than in the same competitive vein that I hope you show in how you do your job day in and day out.

 

[robbedagain]

Ok wt thanks for clearing the air.. I think w the new replacement planes both aa and us are getting it would not shock me to see new cities adding even if its seasonal.. as for my punctuation ill try my best its a lot different on my tab given that my computer crashed for good after 5 plus yrs w the computer

 

[swamt]

Ok wt thanks for clearing the air.. I think w the new replacement planes both aa and us are getting it would not shock me to see new cities adding even if its seasonal.. as for my punctuation ill try my best its a lot different on my tab given that my computer crashed for good after 5 plus yrs w the computer

Don't worry about your punc and spelling. When people have to resort to slamming for abrieviating and speling when we all live in a texting world that is full of all kinds of misspelled, short hand, and no puncuations, just tell him to get over it. He has now come full circle just as Overspeed has done when all he's got is to pick on someone for typing and spelling and puncs...

 

[swamt]

Here's another article explaining the bidding and who might get picked.  Although they seem to be pretty harsh on Delta for some particular reason, and really seem to favor SW and JB a lot. Pretty good article, and explanation:-
 

Share on emailEmail Share on printPrint 8
 

Recs

0




Why the DOJ Wants to Clip Delta's Wings
By Adam Levine-Weinberg

 

| More Articles | Save For Later
November 17, 2013 | Comments (3)

Delta Air Lines (NYSE: DAL  ) isn't very happy with the Department of Justice right now. The DOJ is requiring AMR (NASDAQOTH: AAMRQ  ) and US Airways (NYSE: LCC  ) to give up slots and/or gates at seven different airports around the country as part of their merger. Most notably, they must divest slots covering 44 round-trip flights at Reagan Airport near Washington, D.C.
 
AMR and US Airways need to give up slots and gates in order to merge (Photo: AMR)
Delta would love to bid for slots at Reagan Airport, as well as some of the other gate space becoming available. However, the DOJ seems intent on limiting the sales to low-cost carriers, in an attempt to boost competition. That leaves Delta out in the cold.
Delta has been very vocal about its belief that it should be allowed to bid on an equal footing with low-cost carriers. However, its protests are unlikely to succeed. More than anything else, the DOJ is worried about the growing oligopoly of "The Big Three": American, Delta, and United Continental (NYSE: UAL  ) . Transferring slots within that oligopoly would not solve the problem.
Delta's demands
After the merger settlement was announced on Tuesday, Delta put out a press release saying that it looked forward to bidding for the slots that would be divested, particularly at Reagan Airport . As it became more clear that the DOJ wasn't interested in bids from legacy carriers, Delta put out a second, more combative press release on Wednesday.
 
The DOJ doesn't want to let Delta buy slots at Reagan Airport (Photo: Delta Air Lines)
This time, Delta stated that it wanted to bid for gates at Love Field in Dallas as well as slots at Reagan Airport. The company also noted that it would be able to serve small- and medium-sized cities from Reagan Airport, as it operates smaller regional aircraft, unlike the low cost carriers . These cities might otherwise lose service to Reagan Airport when American makes the necessary flight cuts there.
On Thursday, Delta was at it again, with a press release announcing new service at Love Field that will start next October, when restrictions on long-haul flights will be lifted. Delta plans to add 18 daily nonstops, including enhanced service to Atlanta, and new service to New York, Detroit, Minneapolis/St. Paul, and Los Angeles. There's just one catch: Delta will need to bid for and win access to the gates American is giving up !
Nice try, but no luck
On Thursday, a senior official in the DOJ's antitrust division threw cold water on the idea that Delta and United could qualify to bid for slots and gates. DOJ lawyers think that the legacy carriers are already tacitly "coordinating" when it comes to setting fares, fees, and schedules. By contrast, the low-cost carriers have shown more of an inclination to compete in those respects.
Residents of the small cities that could lose direct service to Reagan Airport may want Delta to come in and restore that service. However, by definition, those would be routes where Delta would face no competition -- and in turn, Delta would not be using those slots to compete with American. (Thus, you could see why American might be eager to sell slots to Delta, if given the opportunity.)
By contrast, a low-cost carrier like Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV  ) would be likely to add flights to larger cities that have no competition today. Dallas, Cleveland, Charlotte, and Hartford are some of the larger metro areas where a single legacy carrier has a monopoly on service to Reagan Airport. Stiffer competition on high-traffic routes like these is what regulators are really hoping for.
Delta has a better shot at getting a spot at the table for the Love Field gates. There, it plans to serve high-traffic routes, where it would compete against American's flights from nearby Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport (and possibly Southwest flights from Love Field).
Still, with the exception of Los Angeles, Delta already flies from Dallas-Fort Worth to all the cities it listed for its Love Field expansion. So while a Delta Love Field expansion would give travelers a new option, it wouldn't increase the number of airlines flying from the Dallas-Fort Worth area to Atlanta, Detroit, New York, or Minneapolis.
Foolish conclusion
Delta is doing everything in its power to get a seat at the table as American and US Airways dispose of assets to satisfy regulatory concerns. However, the DOJ seems dead set on ensuring that the assets up for sale go to low cost carriers.
The DOJ's stubbornness is understandable: after all, one of its complaints has been that the legacy carriers are tacitly coordinating to avoid sparking fare wars. Since the DOJ's mandate is to protect consumer interests, it makes sense to get slots and gates into the hands of the airlines that will compete most vigorously. Right now, only low cost carriers fit the bill.

 
It's also well known that Southwest will not nickel and dime their customers to death. 
Bags fly free with Southwest.  We all have heard of bag fees that end up being the same or more than a persons ticket to get them to their point "B" location.   This, among several other reasons, is more than likely why the legacy carriers will not receive any of the benefits of the divested slots from American Airlines and US.

 

[WorldTraveler]

How incredibly hypocritical of you to decide to take up the cause of the widows and orphans while summarily tossing hand grenades out of your car.

robbed is a big boy. He got the message. And he does post comments relevant to the topic which is more than some mechanic in Texas.

you and about a dozen other people have posted the same article in the last few hours.

Do you think you could add a little critical thinking of your own or do you just post articles?

 

[Kev3188]

Don't worry about your punc and spelling. When people have to resort to slamming for abrieviating and speling when we all live in a texting world that is full of all kinds of misspelled, short hand, and no puncuations, just tell him to get over it. He has now come full circle just as Overspeed has done when all he's got is to pick on someone for typing and spelling and puncs...

Exactly. Don't forget fat thumbs & autocorrect.