UA transfers its two DAL (Love Field) gates to Southwest; Is DL out?
- Thread starter FWAAA
- Start date
- Status
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #287
Kevin posted the summary but if you even closely read into the document WN is trying to argue that it doesn't have to accommodate DL because it is using all of its space, but the DOT specifically said that the City has to accommodate any carrier (not just DL) but doesn't have to disrupt schedules.
WN did NOT publish its schedules for the two gates it acquired until after it obtained them and has repeatedly added flights hoping that it could push DL out.
the DOT has said and a court will have no difficulty in finding that WN has repeatedly filled up its own schedule in an attempt to push DL out when the DOT made it clear that WN's exemption comes if its gates are full at the time a request is made.
I can't blame WN for trying to argue that DL has no interest in the outcome but such an argument is so incredibly ridiculous WN looks stupid just for even writing it. To argue that WN was free to load up its gates which were far from full at the time that DL sought accommodation, which was before the WA ever ended and before WN even announced its own post-Wright schedule is a mockery of everthing that has been written regarding airport access.
and those who are even half interested in the debate should read the DOT's Dec 17 letter which is reproduced in full.
it says EXACTLY a number of the things I have repeatedly said which is that DAL and the 5 party agreement DOES NOT supersede federal airport access and competition reguirements.
It also says that once a carrier is accommodated, it is the DOT"s position that they should be able to continue to maintain the level of service they have operated from the date of the accommodation and lease space at reasonable rates.
The Secretary of Transportation is responsible for enforcing US airport competition requirements so it is mighty hard to argue that the letter is a one off letter from a low level staffer who didn't act fully with the knowledge and direction of her boss.
there is also an extensive list of US airport actions which have met federal airport access and competition requirements.
WN can make all the noise they want but it looks very much like DL will be operating at DAL for a long time to come and whatever WN spent on gates doesn't exempt them as the largest tenant from being forced to accommodate DL, esp. since the DOJ specifically ruled that the 2 gates that VX operates are theirs.
the best WN can hope for is that VX fails, DL gets their gates and WN can have the other 18 gates.
WN did NOT publish its schedules for the two gates it acquired until after it obtained them and has repeatedly added flights hoping that it could push DL out.
the DOT has said and a court will have no difficulty in finding that WN has repeatedly filled up its own schedule in an attempt to push DL out when the DOT made it clear that WN's exemption comes if its gates are full at the time a request is made.
I can't blame WN for trying to argue that DL has no interest in the outcome but such an argument is so incredibly ridiculous WN looks stupid just for even writing it. To argue that WN was free to load up its gates which were far from full at the time that DL sought accommodation, which was before the WA ever ended and before WN even announced its own post-Wright schedule is a mockery of everthing that has been written regarding airport access.
and those who are even half interested in the debate should read the DOT's Dec 17 letter which is reproduced in full.
it says EXACTLY a number of the things I have repeatedly said which is that DAL and the 5 party agreement DOES NOT supersede federal airport access and competition reguirements.
It also says that once a carrier is accommodated, it is the DOT"s position that they should be able to continue to maintain the level of service they have operated from the date of the accommodation and lease space at reasonable rates.
The Secretary of Transportation is responsible for enforcing US airport competition requirements so it is mighty hard to argue that the letter is a one off letter from a low level staffer who didn't act fully with the knowledge and direction of her boss.
there is also an extensive list of US airport actions which have met federal airport access and competition requirements.
WN can make all the noise they want but it looks very much like DL will be operating at DAL for a long time to come and whatever WN spent on gates doesn't exempt them as the largest tenant from being forced to accommodate DL, esp. since the DOJ specifically ruled that the 2 gates that VX operates are theirs.
the best WN can hope for is that VX fails, DL gets their gates and WN can have the other 18 gates.
Yes they did. Here's a break down of the filings...Hope777 said:
Southwest doesn’t want Delta interfering in legal fight ...
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #290
of course WN wants the competition eliminated and silenced in the courtroom just as it does at the airport... because WN's success falls apart if it has to actually compete with anyone.
WN is just a Texas size bully that doesn't fare well against DL.... that has been proven in market after market after market.
WN will be accommodating DL at DAL for years to come.
so sorry that your expectations of how well those gates would be used to add new WN flights won't happen because DL decided to stand up to the Texas sized bully.
WN is just a Texas size bully that doesn't fare well against DL.... that has been proven in market after market after market.
WN will be accommodating DL at DAL for years to come.
so sorry that your expectations of how well those gates would be used to add new WN flights won't happen because DL decided to stand up to the Texas sized bully.
SWA does not just want the competition gone from DAL Love Field. SWA just wants the gates to run full flight schedules out of. SWA is not afraid of competition as you are always trying to say. All the prior years at Love Field more than proves this. AA was here for years, UAL was here for years, and Delta has been there for years.
I see you continue to blab without knowing what you are talking about and continuing to show your moron colors again. SWA is not the ones that will accommodate Delta. It will be the COD (owner of airport) who will or will not accommodate Delta. Then they will direct which gate Delta shall share with, could be any airline at DAL. By the time all this gets ironed out pretty sure it won't be one of SWA's gates in the end. At any rate Delta will be restricted to only 5 flights out of DAL as that is exactly where they were at the time. Delta looking forward to adding more flights at DAL? Now that is funny. Can't happen (unless) they open the cap on the number of gates, this is the only way it will happen.
Again you show your stupidity. SWA has very well grown DAL flights. From 116 flights a day to 156, and soon to be a total of 180 before the end of 2015. SWA has added more flights in the Dallas local market than any other carrier period. Delta wouldn't be able to grow to what it once was here in the Dallas markets. The local passengers all remember quite well how Delta treated them all back in the 2000's when they ran away from AA as well as others at DFW by removing more than 225 flights at DFW international. Hacking all those jobs in the Dallas area, uprooting their employees yet again, and all the jobs Delta employees were forced to leave after upwards of 20-24 year employees walked away from. Delta is done in the Dallas market as far as getting support from the public. Delta wouldn't have a chance to grow any larger than the 5 flights they currently have out of DAL just going to ATL. They have already tried this once before remember? They should be at 20 flights per day out of DAL now, right? Remember? Where are all those flights WT? To this day you have never answered that question, as you continue to run from it just like Delta did from Dallas market. Delta was sooooo set on getting those gates before, just as they are set on staying at DAL. C'mon you can admit it, Delta was wrong before, what makes you think they are not wrong again? We wait for the announcement...
I see you continue to blab without knowing what you are talking about and continuing to show your moron colors again. SWA is not the ones that will accommodate Delta. It will be the COD (owner of airport) who will or will not accommodate Delta. Then they will direct which gate Delta shall share with, could be any airline at DAL. By the time all this gets ironed out pretty sure it won't be one of SWA's gates in the end. At any rate Delta will be restricted to only 5 flights out of DAL as that is exactly where they were at the time. Delta looking forward to adding more flights at DAL? Now that is funny. Can't happen (unless) they open the cap on the number of gates, this is the only way it will happen.
Again you show your stupidity. SWA has very well grown DAL flights. From 116 flights a day to 156, and soon to be a total of 180 before the end of 2015. SWA has added more flights in the Dallas local market than any other carrier period. Delta wouldn't be able to grow to what it once was here in the Dallas markets. The local passengers all remember quite well how Delta treated them all back in the 2000's when they ran away from AA as well as others at DFW by removing more than 225 flights at DFW international. Hacking all those jobs in the Dallas area, uprooting their employees yet again, and all the jobs Delta employees were forced to leave after upwards of 20-24 year employees walked away from. Delta is done in the Dallas market as far as getting support from the public. Delta wouldn't have a chance to grow any larger than the 5 flights they currently have out of DAL just going to ATL. They have already tried this once before remember? They should be at 20 flights per day out of DAL now, right? Remember? Where are all those flights WT? To this day you have never answered that question, as you continue to run from it just like Delta did from Dallas market. Delta was sooooo set on getting those gates before, just as they are set on staying at DAL. C'mon you can admit it, Delta was wrong before, what makes you think they are not wrong again? We wait for the announcement...
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #292
well, yes, WN is afraid of competition because they have left markets that have far more gates and larger markets to go hide in markets where it can dominate the market.
WN's financial success comes solely because it dominates its markets and not because it is really the carrier of choice against any carrier that enters the market.
no, local passengers really don't have this vengeance for a lifetime mindset that afflicts a few mechanics regardless of where they get their paycheck.
DL has never had the chance to operate the schedule from DAL it wants to.... and you know it.
DL doesn't want to run a hub in N. Texas. It does want to continue to grow its presence in the top markets
arguing about what DL isn't doing while WN hogs the gates is the complete antithesis of blocking free and open competition.
and if you want to know where all of those planes have gone that used to serve the DFW HUB, DL has deployed them to bulk up its NYC and ATL schedules.
you do realize that less 10 years ago, DL was the #3 airline in NYC - the largest market in the US. And now based on local passengers, DL is the largest airline in NYC.
and DL has added more capacity to ATL than what it had at CVG at its peak as a hub.
and with both of those moves, DL has displaced AA from its position in NYC and WN decided to take its toys and leave FL's presence in ATL as a presence of its former self.
so, argue all you want about WN's willingness to compete but the evidence speaks otherwise.
and the evidence also heavily supports that DL has done a very good job of building its presence in markets where it competes with N. Texas airlines.
... which explains precisely why they both want to do all they can to put up every barrier they can to prevent DL from competing with them.
WN's financial success comes solely because it dominates its markets and not because it is really the carrier of choice against any carrier that enters the market.
no, local passengers really don't have this vengeance for a lifetime mindset that afflicts a few mechanics regardless of where they get their paycheck.
DL has never had the chance to operate the schedule from DAL it wants to.... and you know it.
DL doesn't want to run a hub in N. Texas. It does want to continue to grow its presence in the top markets
arguing about what DL isn't doing while WN hogs the gates is the complete antithesis of blocking free and open competition.
and if you want to know where all of those planes have gone that used to serve the DFW HUB, DL has deployed them to bulk up its NYC and ATL schedules.
you do realize that less 10 years ago, DL was the #3 airline in NYC - the largest market in the US. And now based on local passengers, DL is the largest airline in NYC.
and DL has added more capacity to ATL than what it had at CVG at its peak as a hub.
and with both of those moves, DL has displaced AA from its position in NYC and WN decided to take its toys and leave FL's presence in ATL as a presence of its former self.
so, argue all you want about WN's willingness to compete but the evidence speaks otherwise.
and the evidence also heavily supports that DL has done a very good job of building its presence in markets where it competes with N. Texas airlines.
... which explains precisely why they both want to do all they can to put up every barrier they can to prevent DL from competing with them.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #295
no, it's not more... it's the same article you posted on the WN forum.
and to summarize, WN has no legal protection for operating above 16 gates at DAL.
given that UA has decided to leave DAL, AA can't serve DAL as part of the merger agreement with the DOJ, and VX might not make it based on indications of what it is taking to get passengers on their flights, DL might be the only airline left that wants to serve DAL.
based on US antitrust laws, WN might be told in a US courtroom that there is no basis for WN operating more than 16 gates and any other carrier - which might be just DL - might be given free reign to whatever gates are at DAL above the 16 gates which WN had at the time WA restrictions were lifted.
and to summarize, WN has no legal protection for operating above 16 gates at DAL.
given that UA has decided to leave DAL, AA can't serve DAL as part of the merger agreement with the DOJ, and VX might not make it based on indications of what it is taking to get passengers on their flights, DL might be the only airline left that wants to serve DAL.
based on US antitrust laws, WN might be told in a US courtroom that there is no basis for WN operating more than 16 gates and any other carrier - which might be just DL - might be given free reign to whatever gates are at DAL above the 16 gates which WN had at the time WA restrictions were lifted.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #297
meto,
the best comparison is that WN has said that it is getting 90% load factors on its routes and DOT data verifies that.
in contrast is that VX has offered (perhaps still is) companion ticketing programs. If VX was seeing anywhere near the demand that WN is seeing, they wouldn't need to be offering these types of ticket promotions.
DOT average fare data for the 4th quarter of 2014 (when the Wright Amendment restrictions were lifted at DAL) should be available in about one month.
the best comparison is that WN has said that it is getting 90% load factors on its routes and DOT data verifies that.
in contrast is that VX has offered (perhaps still is) companion ticketing programs. If VX was seeing anywhere near the demand that WN is seeing, they wouldn't need to be offering these types of ticket promotions.
DOT average fare data for the 4th quarter of 2014 (when the Wright Amendment restrictions were lifted at DAL) should be available in about one month.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #299
it's simply amazing that some don't realize that US antitrust laws were not set aside as part of the 5 party agreement and the end of the WA restrictions.
WN has legal protection to operate 16 gates at DAL - the amount of gates it had at the time the 5 party agreement was signed; anything above that is not protected from US antitrust laws.
WN has legal protection to operate 16 gates at DAL - the amount of gates it had at the time the 5 party agreement was signed; anything above that is not protected from US antitrust laws.
- Status
