Travel Coalition Recommends Move to DFW

[AirwAr]

Southwest believes in the one stop. It has made the basketloads of money over the years.

Please do not be offended by the rhetorical questions I am about to ask, but

What are you smoking? Can I have some?

WN believes in 1 stops? Come on. All of the examples you gave us included DAL. What about LAS, MDW, PHX. Where are the "1 stop" cities that are so valuable to WN? If DAL is opened up it will overfly the small cities in a heartbeat. Not that I have a problem with that, but ELP_WN, you need to be realistic. Sure it may continue to serve the small cities, but to use them as a 1 stop strategy? I must say that I'm really dissapointed in your assesment.

 

[KCFlyer]

Please do not be offended by the rhetorical questions I am about to ask, but

What are you smoking? Can I have some?

WN believes in 1 stops? Come on. All of the examples you gave us included DAL. What about LAS, MDW, PHX. Where are the "1 stop" cities that are so valuable to WN? If DAL is opened up it will overfly the small cities in a heartbeat. Not that I have a problem with that, but ELP_WN, you need to be realistic. Sure it may continue to serve the small cities, but to use them as a 1 stop strategy? I must say that I'm really dissapointed in your assesment.

Why not check Southwest's schedule from MCI to DAL. I do believe you'll find a few one stops on them. They could easily overfly OKC...but they don't.

 

[JS]

JS, that is a little bit disingenious.....

But I appreciate you not wanting to let facts get in the way of an agenda.

Federal Law (aka "the Wright Amendment") did not limit or restrict Love Field due to its inability to handle air traffic demands of the region.

The Wright Amendment was put in to place for one reason and one reason only. To limit destinations that Southwest could fly to after the deregulation of the airline industry.

Strangely enough, shortly after Wright became law, a very large airline that now controls 85% of the traffic at DFW moved its corporate headquarters in to Jim Wright's congressional district. But I'm sure that was just a coincidence.

It is true that Love Field can not (today) handle all of the total air travel requirements of the entire region. Then again, I do not think anyone is advocating closing or restricting DFW in favor of a Love Field expansion.

But that isn't why the law was put on the books. Had nothing to do with it. The law went on the books to punish Southwest...for having the audacity to challenge a forced move to DFW that it had not agreed to.

Amon Carter and by extension the entire city of Fort Worth had a serious inferiority complex about Dallas. They tried to get the CAB to force everyone to Greater Southwest and when they failed to do so, GSW became a mounument to civic stupidity.

I can make a pretty good argument that the Wright Amendment is their revenge.

I like to think of the Dallas/Ft Worth area is a bustling, modern metro area with a lot of commerce...one that is at least as "big time" as Houston or Chicago....with designs to be as significant as El Lay, the SF Bay Area, the DC area, NYC, South Florida.

You know. Big time places that can support multiple commercial airports.

So either Dallas/Ft Worth have made the big time and can support multiple commercial airports or they are a little bitty backwater podunky metro area that can only support a single airport.

You cannot have it both ways. If you try to force all the airline service in a Metro Area you end up with Atlanta....and the only thing wrong with Atlanta is they rebuilt it after the Yankees burnt it down.

I'm being disingenuous? I have an agenda? You have got to be kidding! You are the one with an agenda, believing everything Southwest says.

I have no ties to AA or DFW whatsoever, other than a white trash brother-in-law who works for AA, and that actually means I have an "un-agenda". If AA went out of business and he had to pick up trash from the highway, it would serve him right for being a fat bigoted redneck.

I like flying on Southwest, although it's not very often since they don't fly anywhere near GSP. However, their P.R. department w.r.t. the Wright Amenmdent is no different than any other corporation's P.R. department -- spin doctors is all they are, and their statements should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[ELP_WN_Psgr]

I'm being disingenuous? I have an agenda? You have got to be kidding! You are the one with an agenda, believing everything Southwest says.

Well, JS, we can just agree to disagree here....but if you knew me, you would realize that I have a healthy skepticism for anything WN puts out.

I rely on what I know from being around when the Wright Amendment was put in to play. Heck, I was around when Southwest fought both cities, the DFW Airport Board, and Braniff in Judge William Mack Taylor's courtroom.

My bottom line on all this is: if Wright was meant to protect DFW and give it a running start so it didn;t end up like Amon Carter Field aka GSW, it succeeded. It can go away now.

If the reason we're clinging to Wright is to provide some sort of trade protectionism to DFW's largest tenant, it is also time for Wright to go away.

I like American. They're my 2nd favorite carrier. I admire the fact that they've managed to stay afloat without running and hinding behind the bankruptcy court skirt tail.

But what Arpey is doing now is making a mountain out of a molehill. He really isn't worried about Southwest taking passengers away, he is worried (and rightly so) about what will happen to walk up fares hence average fares and yield in markets Southwest can participate in from the greater Dallas area.

If Wright went away tomorrow, and American just ignored it....you would see an equilibrium point achieved and it would look an awful lot like Chicago O'Hare and Chicago Midway.

Of course, that would require American's management to Stop and Think.

 

[mrman]

Nicely stated Piney