Virgin appearently wins gates at DAL

[Kev3188]

Virgin says they've come to terms with American and the DOJ, and is now going to start selling tickets. (note to DL, that's how the process is supposed to work...)

Wait, you mean just barreling in, public posturing, and a good dose of hubris isn't always a recipe for success?

Imagine that!

 

[WorldTraveler]

Duh, of course they are strong to their fortress hubs.
 
Just as every other carrier is on their hub routes.
 
They arent winning the market share and not even close, they are behind the New AA and even NK.

you do realize that the industry norm is that the carrier with the strongest hub usually wins the highest amount of revenue in competitive markets between hubs?

ie... AA has always had the stronger share of LGA-ORD compared to UA because AA has hubs on two ends while is the dominant carrier on ORD-DEN.

Unless you'd like to tell me that SLC, DTW, and MSP are larger and stronger hubs than AA at DFW, then it is an exception to the rule that DL is the largest revenue carrier in those markets.

And, Kev, given that DL was told months ago that they wouldn't qualify for the gates and/or slots, they had a choice but just to leave and get kicked out of DAL or stay and try to get what they can. DL decided to stay and fight - and it still isn't certain that DL won't get at least some of what they want.

Virgin's schedule has no flights departing before 7 a.m. while WN's current schedule has few flights at that hour and DL's proposed schedule had ATL and DTW flights that early. There are also holes in the VX schedule where DL could indeed operate. It is still very likely that DL can and will be accommodated.

Again, all they have to do is operate 300 or more seats/day from DAL and they are no worse off than where they are right now. Anything above that is gravy.

And any DL presence is something of a hindrance to WN's ability to dominate any routes that DL also chooses to fly plus they are routes that AA cannot fly.

 

[700UW]

WT,
 
How do you have time to post?
 
Arent you hunkered down with DL and the lawyers, I mean you said they are going to have a legal challenge over LGA, didnt happen,another legal challenge over DCA didnt happened and now DAL.
 
Three Strikes, YER OUT!

 

[WorldTraveler]

you and robbed apparently don't get the use of the conditional verbs..... funny that you are just as convinced that AA is going to start a LAX-Asia gateway as you are that DL is going to file suit.


BTW, it was just ONE suit, if it were to happen.

The whole slot and gate situation is not fully fleshed out... WN hasn't even published their schedules.

And above all, you can't seem to grasp (yes, I did) that it is AA, not DL, that is having to divest assets. AA is losing the ENTIRETY of its premerger DCA slot portfolio that was the size of what DL had. AA has no option to serve DAL at all.

WN is setting up a large longhaul domestic operation in AA's backyard.

DL is losing nothing other than perhaps potential growth opportunity.

As much as you and robbed and others fail to grasp what is actually happening (and maybe your mudslinging is just na attempt to try and not have to deal with the reality of what is happening to AA), then we can have a discussion.

AA is losing REAL ASSETS and gaining real competitors in its key markets. DL is losing nothing that it currently holds.

If DL fails to even hold onto 300 seats a day from DAL, then you can crow about DL's losses - which are comparable to 2 mainline flights for AA.

You are out for your incessante inability to grasp the business issues at stake here.

I wanna know when WN will release its schedule and fares.

swamt?

 

[700UW]

I have never stated AA will use LAX to Asia.
 
Stop with the lies again.
 
Nice deflection, you stated numerous times that DL will use a legal challenge, your words not mine.
 
So where is the legal challenge?
 
And AA still topped Delta on profits in the 1st quarter.

 

[swamt]

WT,  No Delta has no mainline A/C at LF.  They are RJ's.  Some have Delta on them and some do not which tells me they are contracted out.
 
I need to correct something else you said.  This IS all about the two gates.  This started because of these 2 gates and you know it.  As usual when you are proven wrong you change your mind or ideas to reflect the factual outcome.  I have all along said Delta will not get the two gates, since day one of announced LF gates to be divested by AA.  You have been arguing that Delta would get the gates, which changed to, should get gates, which changed to Delta will remain at LF after I told you the only way Delta will remain at LF is IF they worked out an agreement to lease one or both the other 2 gates owned by EJ.   Looks like E has posted the info we were all looking for, thx E, and it is pretty much a done deal set aside until City of Dallas approves it all on Mon morn.   Now, the other stuff you have been saying or indicating, that Delta will sue if they don't get those 2 gates so let us all know when they file for that.
 
$79 fares to start with by VA to SF, LA, CHI, LGA, and DCA.  Wonder what SWA will start the ticket prices at?  Will we see the legendary free bottle of whiskey come back?  All I know is SWA will come up with something...

 

[swamt]

WT I have no idea when SWA will post their flights.
 
And did you indicate that VA and DL might be sharing a gate?  Just as I told you they could from the very beginning?
The city of Dallas better not allow this.  Delta is to great of an airline to share a gate at LF aren't they?  Looks to me if Delta wants to stay at LF they will have to share a gate doesn't it?    C'mon WT, you can do it, make that first step to recovery and just admit Delta loss the battle for the 2 gates at LF.
And YES I too have read where you said DL will sue over gate divesture awards if Delta was not one of the winners of said divested gates at DAL, DCA and LGA.  Once again this is probably one of your attempts to twist things around after the fact, nice try, won't work.
Now let's move on to other news, as Delta is either leaving LF or sharing a gate with someone, rather it be VA or UAL and EJ is still to be seen...

 

[WorldTraveler]

of course the RJs are contracted out.. all CRJ and ERJ flying is contracted out by US airlines and those are the only two commercial aircraft that meet the seating requirements established by the, hello, Wright Amendment that is the catalyst of this whole discussion.

You do realize that E specifically noted that DAL does not offer EXCLUSIVE leases to ANYONE, including WN. It is just as likely that DL's flights - whatever they may be - will be at gates which WN thinks are theirs.

I know the whole int'l situation is totally foreign to you and WN but WN won't have exclusive gates at any foreign airport, including all of that int'l growth you think will right the ship. DL has been working within that reality for decades now. WN will figure out that you use CUTE equipment, haul your airline specific signs and supplies to the gate, work the flight, and then haul it all back away 60-90 minutes later.

If WN can come up with 16 flights to launch at 6 a.m and keep it going every 45 minutes all day long, then they might win in convincing DAL that they cannot accommodate anyone but that is simply not going to happen.

and I am completely willing to admit that DL isn't going to get two exclusive or even preferential gates at DAL. But the issue, as much as you can't grasp it, is that DL's focus, just like WN's at LGA and DCA is about being able to serve the market, not about whether they will or will not have clear title to the gates.

and, once again, before you go touting that DL has lost, you might want to wait and see what DL actually is able to operate. As has been noted, the threshold for showing that DL is able to maintain at least the same number of seats it currently has is pretty low - just 3 717 flights per day or even 2 M80/320 flights. The DOJ and DAL are not going to force a potential lawsuit over two to three flights/day.

Further, I have repeatedly said, and UA's earnings report yesterday validated that they are in absolutely no shape to grow their presence at DAL and it is likely their gates plus a little space from VX and WN that might well allow DL to operate a lot more of its proposed schedule than you want to admit.

What is clear is that WN will get absolutely no use of any gates beyond the 16 it has as long as any carrier wants any access to DAL and that the chances are real high that you are going to have to a look at a DL painted if not operated aircraft sitting at a gate that you want to believe is just for WN.

If a bottle of liquor and $79 fares are what it takes for WN to get passengers flying on them instead of VX, then that is the price WN will have to offer.

VX' presence at DAL is at best an irritation for WN and at worst a true competitor that will significantly limit WN's ability to dominate some of the largest markets that WN otherwise might start.

BTW, when is WN going to start working on getting the WA revised again to allow WN to start DFW int'l service or better yet DAL int'l service? You've told us that was coming. You also told us that you were certain that WN would get the gates because WN really needed them. So, WN isn't getting everything it wanted, right?

 

[Kev3188]

 
 

And, Kev, given that DL was told months ago that they wouldn't qualify for the gates and/or slots, they had a choice but just to leave and get kicked out of DAL or stay and try to get what they can. DL decided to stay and fight - and it still isn't certain that DL won't get at least some of what they want.

(snip)

...Again, all they have to do is operate 300 or more seats/day from DAL and they are no worse off than where they are right now. Anything above that is gravy.

Yeah, I know. Didja miss this from me earlier?

Lost in one of the 718 DAL-related threads, WT tossed out the idea of 3 717's/day exDAL for Delta. IMO, that's probably pretty close to what the end run will look like. Obviously a step up in capacity from the 2-3 CRJ's we use now, but nowhere near the "posturing" schedule DL threw out there a few months ago.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I did notice, sir, and appreciate that you remembered.

My point is to connect that observation of as few as 3 mainline flights with the very low bar that DAL and the DOJ would have to provide DL in order to take any wind of any POSSIBLE lawsuit - which some here seem to think I am saying is a certainty.

If DL really gets use majority use of the 2nd UA gate, they could easily upgrade the flights they do operate to mainline flights which might put the number of seats close to what DL was proposing but with fewer flights. DL's preference is undoubtedly to offer as many flights in as many markets as possible but can certainly rearrange what it operates based on the gate availability it gets, whether that be at gates which are preferentially used by any number of other airlines including WN.

E has been rather pragmatic in this discussion for months in noting that the chances that WN would end up with exclusive right to "their" gates is minimal and that a spirit of compromise is more likely than not.

 

[swamt]

There you go again WT.  Twisting around the verbiage again.  Never have I ever said anything about titles to gates, nor have I ever said SWA owns any gates, they simply use them.  You took what I said which is that "if Delta wants to stay at LF they will have to work out a lease agreement for one of the other two gates, or they will have to share a gate"   The fact that I said this from day one as well as that Delta will not get the divested gates clearly just passed your memory.  As usual you turn a statement into a multiple hundred word twisted phases to cover the fact you were wrong all along.  C'mon man you can do it.  Take a deep breath.  Clear your head and throat and then speak.
But who knows, it's still not finalized as of yet.  COD still needs to sign off on it, but I see nothing stopping them from approving it...

 

[WorldTraveler]

just admit that WN has no exclusive leases to any gates.

got it?

 

[eolesen]

Gee, thanks for partially getting what I said, but try not to selectively quote out of context..

Preferential leases started replacing exclusive leases about 20 years ago, but the differences on how they're used are minimal.

Got it?...

Specifically, Dallas has already said preferential leaseholders wouldn't have to reduce schedules to accommodate a new entrant.

Got that, too?...

It's less clear if they'd be prevented from expanding under normal circumstances, but I suspect they're going to be given a lot more leeway with regard to the October schedules.

WN has historically opened up their schedules for sale on a shorter window than other airlines do, and I doubt they'll be punished for that. It's obvious they know what the proposed DAL schedule will be for October, and they've likely already informed the City of those plans under a non-disclosure basis.

There's little point in rehashing all the previous 2,572 posts dedicated to the access discussion.

Perhaps everyone could actually try to stick with the new information for a change?...

 

[swamt]

WT you also have failed to remember I have always said if it came down to SWA and VA for the gates VA would more than likely get them.  But of course I would rather SWA get them.  I already knew and admitted SWA would have a rough time getting those gates if another LCC came into the picture, once VA came into the game, I knew SWA's chances were minimal, but I also knew SWA would work their arsses off trying to obtain said gates.  Just admit it WT, you were wrong, Delta loss the bid for the gates AND we still haven't seen any lawsuits from Delta yet,  Hmmmm...

 

[eolesen]

My father told me to never argue with a woman when you know she's wrong.

Just sayin'....