Virgin appearently wins gates at DAL

[eolesen]

Oh, please. What exactly is AA fighting? They just want the lease signed at a market rate.

You can try to quote "other US airport laws" all you wish, but under the current laws, there's no legal basis for forcing the slot divestitures at DCA and LGA as well as the gates in LAX and DAL.

 

[WorldTraveler]

and that is exactly the point. there is no loss to AA if the lease is transferred at the same market rates that AA was paying. The loss to AA might come based on the bid that Virgin submitted which is likely well above market rates.

IF AA was paying market rates and assigns it to someone else, there is no loss to AA.

You are exactly right that the legal basis for AA being forced to divest dozens of assets is not clear other than the ethereal right you say the DOJ has to try to balance the competitive playing field - but in which reality that doesn't even exist.

There is no legal basis for the DOJ saying that service to any city should be divided based on whether a carrier is low fare or not.

Whatever AA agreed to doesn't require Dallas or any other airport operator to violate airport access laws and the 2006 agreement which require that new entrants be accommodated.

 

[eolesen]

The point you're missing is that under our system of laws, if it's not explicitly against the law, then it's legal.

You say they're not allowed to, but there's also nothing which expressly prohibits the DOJ from doing what they're doing.

 

[700UW]

Delta isn't a new entrant.

 

[swamt]

Ok WT, I will play your little game.
 
I have never claimed a secret insight of some sort.  We are merely well informed by our company about the issues in our backyard here at DAL,  that's all.  I mean we are here, naturally we will here about the day to day discussions, most starting as rumors then confirmed later.  That was first lie.
 
Then you claim that I have insisted that SWA get the gates--Wrong!  The complete opposite is actually true.  I have always said SWA will have a very tough time getting said gates.  It was only after we recieved the updated info from the meeting yesterday that I said it appears SWA's chances are increasing.  Lie #2.
 
Then you claim that I lobbied heavily for any LCC just to keep Delta out.  Never have I lobbied for LCC's.  I simply have stated and repeated what the DOJ said, that they will go to a LCC.  I also said if a LCC does come in SWA will have a larger fight for the gates.  I also said if Spirit was to come into the fight it would even get tougher. So lie #3,  It was the DOJ that required LCC's to apply.
 
The compatition reasons were exactly why I have said SWA will have a tough time getting the gates, but trust me SWA is not out of the running, as this meeting yesterday has indicated so.  The COD hired an outside company to investigate the better candidate for the gates and it wasn't Delta or JB.  Now the full committee will be meeting to see if they do select SWA, as well as follow all the DOJ's requirements,  and not illegally do anything as they are heavily in discussions with their attorneys then they just might pick SWA, or maybe a compromise one a gate a piece for Delta and VA, you never know.
 
Yes the final decision will tick someone off, could very well trigger suits, but only if there was something done wrong or against some laws.  Pretty sure that will Delta being ticked off no matter what.  The fact that Delta is not even in the running for the gates ticks them off.
 
Both E and 700 has handled the rest of your post above and I won't repeat it...

 

[WorldTraveler]

The point you're missing is that under our system of laws, if it's not explicitly against the law, then it's legal.

You say they're not allowed to, but there's also nothing which expressly prohibits the DOJ from doing what they're doing.

except that the airline deregulation act SPECIFICALLY prohibits the US government or any local or state government from making any decision that inhibits the ability of the free market to decide what level of service and at what price.

The DOJ arbitrarily chose to define DAL and DFW as the same market so as to define that LFCs are disadvantaged but did not use the same definition for NYC and WAS because if they did there could be no argument that WN or Virgin could get preferential access based on WN's BWI hub or B6's JFK hub.

further, there are indeed airport access laws which require federally funded airports to provide access to new entrants. DL is not a new entrant at DAL but it will be if it cannot be accommodated.

swamt,
you have repeatedly tried to argue just like your company is doing that WN is the best choice for further DAL gates. No one in their right mind could honestly believe that any government would give WN even more gates than they already have at DAL and you and WN refuse to acknowledge that the lease that has WN's signature on it REQUIRES them to accommodate new entrants.

you can rely on the DOJ's involvement in the case as justification but it isn't legal and won't stand if it is challenged... and it is indeed all but certain that someone will sue because the whole deal is certain to tick someone off.

And it is far from clear that it will be Delta who will be screwed because the whole deal is based on an agreement with Virgin and AA driven by the DOJ, which is not above the law which it didn't understand.

A city councilman and Virgin both said the study was flawed. And it still doesn't matter what the study says. Airport access rules and WN's 2006 contract require other carriers to be accommodated. WN does not have the ability at this point to decide to negate the very contract that is giving it the right to fly longhaul domestic flights from DAL in the first place.

AA and DL would be more than happy to toss the whole agreement and keep WN in their little box at DAL if WN wants to start carving out parts of the agreement it doesn't like but previously agreed to.

We can keep this up for weeks until it is resolved but it is very, very possible that WN will not be allowed to expand or will be forced to allocate space necessary to accommodate any new entrants including perhaps BOTH Virgin and Delta and anyone else that might want to show up.

 

[swamt]

Both Delta and VA can, could, and very well may be and remain at LF if they are both willing to share gates.  The way it is looking, Delta could very possibly be required to leave DAL LF.  Not saying they will be thrown out, but they may be the fall guy to a process out of their control, just saying...   WT just wait for the results, I still stand behind that VA is the winner, but also still hold out that SWA will prevail in the long run...

 

[WorldTraveler]

again, you refuse to acknowledge that the lease that WN signed REQUIRES it to accommodate new entrants just like every other existing tenant will.

The City of Dallas knew full well that DAL would have no room to grow, would likely have far more demand for gates than space, and that federal regulations require federally funded airports to accommodate new entrants - just as occurs at BWI, BNA, ATL, ORD, etc... The DOJ tried to stick its nose into a subject which it does not understand and will make the long-term situation WORSE for WN than if they had allowed the free market to work, which would have involved Virgin and other carriers adding a half dozen at most flights at a time. now, the DOJ has set the bar for new entrants as 20 flights (2 gates or 10% of the facility) at a time. WN will CONSTANTLY be battling new entrant carriers coming in and demanding their 2 gates while WN will have to accommodate it.


WN will get a piece of the N. Texas market and I am glad they will provide a good challenge to AA. But to allow limited competition is no better than what exists now.

If WN is half as convinced they could win in the marketplace, they wouldn't be pulling down their service in dozens of other markets in order to add service in markets where by law and their own signature, they will face wave after wave of new competition.

It is precisely because of WN's reliance on government aid and protection that it will be hit in the marketplace, where WN in the past ahs been able to win but clearly is a lot less sure of their ability to do so now.

 

[700UW]

Delta isnt a new entrant.
 
When will you realize that?

 

[WorldTraveler]

and you can't get that if DL doesn't get gates and reenters the market, it is indeed a new entrant.

Don't worry. the City of Dallas understands what is going on and what is at stake. So do WN execs. and so does Virgin. that is why David Cush is sitting the way he is in the pic on the Dallas news aviation blog.

If it was the open and shut case you thought it was, the whole thing would have been resolve a long time, DL would have been forced to pull its schedules, and WN wouldn't be trying to lobby to convince Dallas that it deserves the gates.

As much as you want to believe otherwise, the chances are very high that DL will be there along with Virgin and a whole lot of other airlines and the airline that will pay the price for the involvement of so many carriers in the case is Southwest who is required to accommodate new entrant airlines as part of its lease with the City of Dallas.

 

[swamt]

WT, there is no reason for me to acknowledge anything concerning lease agreements.  I never have read any lease agreement between anyone, therefore I cannot comment as I do not know.  Besides that you are still just repeating over and over again, therefore No Comment.
 
I will comment about your last para.  You have the nerve to come on here and claim SWA is using the Gov  for protection and aid.  Really? Are you serious?  This has to be a joke or it just shows ignorance once again.  What the he!! do you think the W/A was that ALL the other airlines signed off on?   All the airlines that left DAL signed an agreement, SWA refused to leave LF,  therefore, all the other airlines "used the Gov for aid and protection"  from SWA---Period!!!

 

[eolesen]

No, Delta is not a new entrant, and will never be considered a new entrant.

You can spin it if you wish, but they've had a presence in North Texas for decades. You yourself have claimed they have a compelling share of the local O&D market for the Metromess.

They've also had years, access to gates, and no lack of opportunity to develop a larger network at DAL, knowing that the walls would come down. They didn't.

They could have easily decided to operate 50 seaters to ORD, LGA, DTW, DCA, and MSP. Instead, they chose to keep it a spoke of ATL and MEM.

As much as you want to call the DAL and DFW markets separate, you'll never be successful in convincing anyone, aside perhaps a few people who don't know any better or understand geography or basic math...

 

[700UW]

He wont ever get it Eric.

DL and its express operators fly into DAL, he cant understand that concept and he is grasping at straws.

 

[WorldTraveler]

if DL is not a new entrant in N. Texas, then Virgin isn't either.

Sorry, but WN and AA went thru this whole exercise with the DOJ with the expectation that they could pick and choose their competition and limit who they didn't want to play.


hope you didn't bill the client too much for that diagram, E, because the division that you think exists is only in your mind and those you support.

There is no logical argument for saying that DFW and DAL are separate markets but saying that LGA vs JFK are, or vice versa.

It wouldn't stand up in a court of law, and might well end up there.

Federal airport laws aren't written that way which is why this will all blow up in AA and WN's faces.

just because you, swamt, don't know the leases that WN signed doesn't mean they don't exist. I bet you also haven't peered into the inside of a human brain during surgery but there are those who do it regularly and know that they see.

A new entrant is a carrier that DOESN'T serve an airport. It has nothing to do with the region or whether they are a low fare carrier.

If DL isn't accommodated to fly to DAL, they will be forced out and become a new entrant.

Anyone else except you, 700, can figure it out.

 

[700UW]

The DOJ said nothing about a new entrant.
 
Does DL or its commuter fly into DAL right now?
 
That would be a yes.
 
Does VX fly into DAL?
 
That would be a no.
 
Is VX a LCC?
 
That would be a yes.
 
Is DL a LCC?
 
That would be a no.
 
Go fight the DOJ and DOT and good luck.
 
And you still havent provided one law that say the DOJ or DOT cant do what has happened?
 
Its been months, where is the legal challenge from DL about DCA and LGA?
 
Keep spewing your pollution, you are wrong, now accept it.