Virgin appearently wins gates at DAL

[eolesen]

So far, WN has yet to confirm its own schedules which tells me they are a whole lot less certain of what they will operate and who they will have to compete with than you think.

There's little doubt at WN on what they'll operate. We all know it just frosts you that they haven't told you yet...

Sorry, but it looks like you'll have to clutch at the pearls for another three weeks before you see an answer.

WN's schedule for October to January officially opens for sale on May 19th.

They keep a minimum of 120 days and a maximum of 180 days of inventory out for sale. That's part of their efficiency for, well, forever. It used to be a hard limit from their Reservations system, and now they recognize that they get better yields and have more flexibility to adapt by not pushing out a 300 day schedule like the other network carriers do.

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL entered BK 8 1/2 years ago and emerged in the shortest total time in BK of any of the existing legacy carriers, followed by NW, so it is hard to argue that DL has done much wrong from BK until today.

Even before then, DL's errors were made more than 10 years ago which is an eternity in the airline industry.

this is what a professional industry analyst is saying

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/04/28/delta-air-lines-inc-keeps-dominating.aspx

No pearl clutching by me.

It is just noteworthy that WN's 2nd list of cities if they won the additional 2 gates would have included a host of other airline hubs including PHL, DTW, MSP, and SFO that they weren't going to serve if there was a chance another legacy airline would have been in those markets - but if the legacy carrier on the other end of those routes was serving it, WN wouldn't be interested - and that is precisely WN's desire to avoid rather than embrace competition that has marked the way they have done business and the way they want to operate at DAL.

The DOJ incorrectly came to conclusions about the legacy carrier of the industry and then made even more flawed recommendations based on their flawed understanding of the industry - garbage in/garbage out - but it was really driven by the political influence of carriers like WN that can't compete with the legacy carriers, they know it, and they are running for cover and a privileged position from the very government that they lauded for 30 years in allowing them to run roughshod over the legacy carriers.

IN reality, it is the legacy carriers led by DL who are capable of fighting back and carriers like WN don't want to fight in the marketplace on an equal basis.

DL will demonstrate that it can and will take on whatever competitive challenges it needs to do and it really doesn't care if WN ends up as scrap on the cutting room floor in the process.

since you reference the statement of a Dallas city councilman, here is his comment

“This is bad. Bad, bad, bad. Keep in mind that council has no legal right to weigh in on who gets the gates. I know that from our own lawyer, and I know that all my colleagues got the same analysis from him. So what could possibly be the point of hiring a consultant to tell us to put our thumb on the scale for Southwest? (more on this tomorrow at the briefing, but this study is deeply flawed)

“Who in her right mind would want to be seen as picking the winner between Southwest and Virgin? Especially when we’re precluded by our contract with AA from meddling in this decision at all? We’re missing a fantastic opportunity to shut up and let the market work.”

“Technically, I could approve the assignment (or sublease),” Gonzalez wrote, as quoted by Kingston. “However, there is considerable attention on the matter, high probability of litigation, and many implications for love field, the traveling public, and the general community. For those reasons, I am seeking the advice of the council as to how to proceed.”

apparently I am not the only one who sees the legal problems here. Apparnently a Dallas city councilman is smarter than the DOJ - or else the DOJ, in typical Washington fashion doesn't care.

 

[robbedagain]

why yes they did ld3   in fact dl had well over 100 flights a day  but in the end  they cut dfw  just like they cut cvg mem mco etc.     but that's the failure wt fails to acknowledge.      swamt  that article sure is quite interesting  the low fare war is gonna be interesting to see btwn wn and va

 

[WorldTraveler]

no robbed, I have never failed to acknowledge that DL pulled down its HUBS at DFW, CVG, and MEM but I have repeatedly said - and you have failed to acknowledge - that DL has redeployed the assets from the connecting traffic that those hubs to other more profitable uses and also that DL has retained its presence in the local market in each of those hubs.

DL gave up about 3% of its share at DFW after closing its hub - but remained the #2 revenue carrier behind AA - but more than doubled its size in NYC, including jumping well over AA.

You don't want to acknowledge that.

I have acknowledged AA's explanation that AA closed BNA and RDU to redeploy assets to MIA.

I have also said that US got out of its highly competitive hubs like BWI and LAS and its high cost PIT hub in order to concentrate on hubs like PHL and CLT where it has done extraordinarily well.

You don't want to admit that I have presented a balanced understanding of the industry.

I don't even have a problem that WN has closed 18 cities other than to note that they are doing the exact same thing that the network airlines have done - and WN had to know those cities wouldn't work when they bought FL yet they said nothing.

you fail to realize that the fare war is not just between WN and Virgin but also between every carrier that serves N. Texas - of which AA is by far the largest.

TO somehow think that AA won't be dramatically impacted by what happens at DAL is simply naïve.

You and other AAers want to try to talk about DL losing to cover for the fact that it is AA that will face by far the biggest hit on revenues as a result of WHOEVER adds service at DAL solely because AA's dominance of the longhaul domestic market from N. Texas is coming to an end.

 

[robbedagain]

AA will continue to dominate N TX even with WN and UA being right behind and VX next up   But it was proven to you a while back that NK has a significant share of the market  more so than DL    but that's for a different thread
 
as for the DAL  gates  the fact is most of us has acknowledge and GRASP what the reality of the situation set forth by the US GOVT   You on the other hand has failed miserably to accept the fact DL did not get the 2 gates  bec one they are not an LCC and 2 they are not a new entrant to the market    Each time it was explained in full detail you change it around to fit your narritives..   We saw right thru it

 

[eolesen]

It's not worth rehashing. WT's dug into his position, and since there's nothing new to comment on, there's really not much point wasting your electrons...

 

[SharoninSAT]

Sharon,
you must be getting as desperate as your little mechanic coworker.
 

 
desperate? Nope WT, just passing the news along...

 

[700UW]

Guess someone forgot DL had a hub in MCO and also closed a maintenance hangar in TPA.

 

[eolesen]

Looks like we will have at least another week of speculation from WT.

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2014/04/committee-kicks-love-field-gate-issue-to-full-dallas-city-council.html/

 

[WorldTraveler]

just confirms that the City of Dallas knows the multitude of legal issues surrounding the decision that they will make and are not going to be suckered into being left out to dry by the DOJ that will be nowhere near when it all blows up.
 
Good for the city of Dallas.
 
And it also goes to show that DL is indeed actively involved in making its point that the best solution for all of Dallas is for the gates to return to city control.  
 
also goes to show that the City of Dallas is not near as beholden to WN's interests as swamt would make us believe they are.  

 

[WorldTraveler]

also goes to show how many people on here have no clue about how business actually works and expect it all to be a preferential party.
 
Government that is well run - as the City of Dallas has shown it is in this situation and in complete contrast to the DOJ - leaves the market to operate freely and is reluctant to interject itself into affairs that are outside of its responsibility.
 
Business works on the basis of fair and open competition, smoething that the city of Dallas knows should be allowed to take place, even if WN and AA and their supporters here have managed to convince the DOJ that the marketplace should be skewed.
 
yes, E, you will keep hearing from me.
 
And every one one of the nitwits who wants to put another negative vote next to what I write will result in yet another post.
 
You'd think that some people here would have realized by now that the more negative votes I get, the more aggressive and frequent my responses  become. 
 
Apparently there are a lot of people who not only wear their emotions on their shirtsleeves but also aren't real smart on the uptake.  

 

[WorldTraveler]

and to think that this thread was started by a gloating WN mechanic who thought he was appearently (sic) ready to sew up the case for good.


apparently his multitude of intelligence sources have been more than just a little bit inaccurate.

(we can lock this thread any time now).

 

[eolesen]

(we can lock this thread any time now).

As if anyone believes you would remain silent on the issue?...

While they tick off the boxes on the "blame avoidance assessment checklist" down at City Hall, it is becoming a little clearer that the Airport folks will ultimately decide what happens, and the Council is simply acting the way that city councils do everywhere:

1) make lots of noise on a local issue, regardless if you really have any power to influence the outcome
2) get some positive press for appearing to do something
3A) rest assured that there won't be any lasting backlash when things don't work out, because someone else will get all the blame
3B) take as much credit as you can if things do work out, even though the same decision would have been reached with or without your bloviating

Based on some comments out of AA, it sounds more and more as though what will happen is the City will approve a sublease of AA's gates to Virgin.

What the City turned down earlier in the month was an straightforward transfer of the lease from AA to VX.

Since AA has been able to execute subleases in the past (to both DL and Seaport), there's precedence that the City shouldn't be able to deny another sublease (even if it means canceling out previous subleases, which is apparently AA's prerogative if those are on a month to month basis).

Alternative #1 is that since AA has a valid long term lease, the City would need to buy AA out of their lease in order to convert the gates to common use.

Alternative #2 is that the city drags things out, nobody will get to use them, and AA sues the city in the amount of whatever value they could have gotten from VX for the sublease plus damages

Alternative #3 is AA holding their ground, and nobody gets to use the gates. DL sues everyone in sight, and spends more in legal fees and management time than what AA is ultimately paying in rent for unused space...

I don't think the City will want to buy AA out, nor do I think they'll drag out approval beyond August.

Prediction... the sublease will be begrudgingly approved, and VX will launch as planned.

 

[swamt]

No, no, no WT.  This thread does not need to be locked.  You are in fact trying to do what I have done (correctly I remind you) in other threads when YOU have taken the topics completely out of content.
 
Now, you are correct, I started this thread, and now, I have to address just how I started this thread.  It appears now that the title of this thread has changed slightly.  Maybe now the title should read as Appearently VA has not won gates at LF.  The final decision is on the city of Dallas as I have said from the very beginning, and as long as they (COD) follows the DOJ's requirements, and regulations for the award of said gates, then they will be awarded.  However, the COD will award said gates to the best candidate for future results for the COD, the airport, as well as the community, and local employment of more employees.   Also, the city manager did not want to make the sole decision on his own today at the first meeting.  And yes, as you state, this is in part due to the possible future lawsuits that could very well be brought on by the final decision.  They will readdress this issue throughout the week and rehash it all on May 7th as a group to assist the city managers decision.  During this said delay, I am sure and very positive that the 3 airlines involved will put in their 2 cents worth with the COD as to why they each deserve the 2 gates.  As long as their final decision is compiled and completed without any future suits, AND, the best selected candidate for the COD, as well as the flying public, and the airport, as well as others then the winner will be chosen.  With all this said, I still think that SWA just got a boost in their favor, as the COD did not just cave to the DOJ's offer to give the said gates to VA.  We all know now that Delta is out of the equation for the gates at LF, and this is per the DOJ as well as the COD.  SWA still has a chance, VA still has a chance, but the winner will be the one that will produce the best results all around for the COD, the airport, the local economy, the local businesses, local employment, and by all means the tax revenues generated by more employees gained by a local employer.   The fight is on folks, and it appears that SWA is gaining traction.  We will all see what happens on May 7th.  Could go either way at this point, and this is what is killing WT because it will not go in Delta's favor at all.  Mark this quote folks, it will come up later when Delta may, I said may, WT, have to leave LF all together.  Enjoy the future news releases as we move closure to the final results.
BTW WT, I had this info today early afternoon.  Carry on sir, carry on...

 

[WorldTraveler]

you have info but you have no conclusion because one hasn't been made.

you have acted for months as if you have some secret insight into what is going on but you don't.

You have also insisted that WN should get the gates, and then if WN can't you have lobbied heavily for any LCC just to keep DL out.

Your last statement above reinforces the goal which you have had - even though you seem to be perfectly capable of using the conditional in your statements; you should give robbed and 700 lessons about the use of the same conditional that you and I have been used.

problem with your theories repeatedly is that you repeatedly have failed to admit that there is no way that WN would get access to anymore of DAL's gates based on competition principles which everyone except you can see.

You also have failed to acknowledge that there is a clause in WN's lease at DAL and part of the 2006 agreement which does indeed say that WN and any other operator at DAL will (that is not a conditional verb) have to give up gates to accommodate a new entrant if no one volunteers to do so.

what you and E don't want to admit is that the DOJ's AA-US merger divestiture agreement is completely contrary to other US airport laws. The DOJ decided to too in its own access requirements based on low cost or legacy but that definition exists nowhere else in US access laws but is contrary to the airline deregulation act. When there is a conflict between something that happens today, you don't throw out older laws and precedent in order to accommodate something that is made today and which can't be supported by its own legal precedent other than when the industry was regulated. The original laws will stand.

THAT is precisely why DL undoubtedly (but I don't know for certain since the ocntents of the letters have not been released) told the Dallas City Council that the legal basis for the DOJ's order to segregate access to DAL based on low fare carriers is not justified by the airline deregulation act and airport access laws in the US.

Dallas will tick off someone with their decision; that is a given. The question is if whatever party that is ticked off is ticked off enough to sue.

The real loser in all of this will be WN who may well find out that it cannot publish its schedules until the legal process is terminated or all carriers that want to fly are allowed to do so. It is very likely that the case will be forced into the federal court system if access to DAL in any way is handled differently than it is for any other airport.

As much as the AA fan club wants to argue that AA wants to see DL not get in and for low fare carriers in there, it is very, very possible that both AA and DL are happy to litigate the case for the sole purpose of preventing WN from expanding at DAL by pushing against each other legally.

AA and DL might be fighting against each other legally on the issue but the real target is WN's expansion and to a lesser extent Virgin America.