'wrong' Amendment Back In The News

[Ch. 12]

AEA annual meeting in PHL, Jan 7-9. http://www.vanderbilt.edu/AEA/anmt.htm

Roundtrip non stop airfare from AA.com $258 round trip departing jan6, returning jan 10th

Yea, something is broken here and needs fixed.

Virginia Postrell must have a real winner of a boss.

[post="227106"][/post]​

The point isn't what fare somebody can get on AA from DFW to anywhere, but rather...why are other carriers articially restricted from competing with AA out of Dallas? As I've mentioned before, the WA is as blatant an anti-competitive effort as anything. For instance, why not add all of the states that are 2 states away from TX? Instead, we get MS, KS, and AL. Why??? B/c MO, CO, AZ, and TN actually have real demand and we wouldn't be protecting AA and their hundreds of lobbyists if other carriers were allowed to compete in those states. And the arguement that a carrier can go to DFW is baseless. Why should a carrier have to restructure its biz plan and add significantly to its costs to compete in a market?

That's the issued...not whether a $258 r/t can be found on AA.

 

[JS]

And the arguement that a carrier can go to DFW is baseless. Why should a carrier have to restructure its biz plan and add significantly to its costs to compete in a market?

That is way overblown. Southwest does not have to restructure its business plan just to fly out of DFW. Criminy, they fly out of PHL!

There are rules in this country for operating a passenger airline, and you can't just toss them all out on a whim.

If you think Southwest is limited at DAL, what about foreign carriers? They aren't allowed to fly one solitary domestic flight (tag flights on international itineraries excepted). They can't just move to another metro airport; they are totally and completely locked out of the U.S. domestic market. Of course, that wouldn't help Southwest, so we mustn't even consider that.

 

[AAviator]

ch12, what restricts SW from flying DFW-PHL?

 

[Borescope]

Well, in the meantime Sparky, feel free to get in your car and explore our nation's wonderful freeway system.

[post="201214"][/post]​

It would Probably cost just as much to drive BNA to DFW round trip not to mention the time.

 

[Borescope]

ch12, what restricts SW from flying DFW-PHL?

[post="227430"][/post]​

Heck for that matter, what restricts SW from flying DAL-PHL? They always make 5 or 6 stop to get you where your going. They could make a huge hub out of DAL. Just think of all the connecting flights and the number of planes, pilots, rampers, Fa's etc. that they would need. They could fly DAL-Everywhere. :mf_boff:

 

[JS]

Heck for that matter, what restricts SW from flying DAL-PHL? They always make 5 or 6 stop to get you where your going. They could make a huge hub out of DAL. Just think of all the connecting flights and the number of planes, pilots, rampers, Fa's etc. that they would need. They could fly DAL-Everywhere. :mf_boff:

[post="227441"][/post]​

They already do that, as long as you buy two tickets yourself. DAL is a hub in its own right, connecting all the cities within Texas and the surrounding states, with the odd exception of CRP. Even AMA to LBB travel requires a DAL connection.

 

[LoneStarMike]

BTW, ya'll keep mentioning AA's gates at Love forgetting that, according to the lease American signed, can only be used for office space. American got themselves slapped w/an injunction when they tried to hang jetways, in violation of the 'agreement' they signed for the space.

AA renegotiated their lease at Love Field when the Love Field Master Plan was approved. They were allowed to keep the three gates on the east concourse where they had hung the jetways,but the rest of their "office space" on the old East Concourse was torn down and AA was responsible for it's demolition.


March 27, 2001
Dallas Officials Approve Airport Expansion
Dallas (TX) Morning News

"Mar. 27--American Airlines said Monday it planned to begin using three refurbished gates in Love Field's old East Concourse by year's end.

American's use of those gates has been delayed for months because city officials were awaiting completion of a new Love Field master plan before renegotiating a lease.

The plan to expand Love Field into a 32-gate regional airport cruised through a City Council committee Monday, with city officials and area residents complimenting the proposal as a reasonable approach to growth."

http://archives.californiaaviation.org/airport/msg14097.html

The rest of the article talks about the residents around Love Field being relieved
that the proposed master plan called for upgraded air-quality monitors and quotes a Dallas City Council member as being surprised that the residents and city officials reached an agreement on what is needed at Love Field. It also mentions an enviromental impact study which concluded that a 32 gate airport would not pose an environmental threat to the surrounding neighborhoods with regards to air pollution, noise and traffic.

AA did in fact finish refurbishing those three gates and issued a press release in August 2001 that the new gates would open in late September, however AA pulled out of DAL immediately after the September 11th attacks and the gates were never actually used.

From an August, 2003 news roundup on Frequent Flyer:

"Ah, what might have been. American Airlines was all set to open its new gates at Dallas Love Field when terrorists struck on September 11, 2001. Now, the carrier's Love Field days seem at an end. Aviation Daily reports AA has no plans to re-enter DAL, and wants out of its gate lease with the City of Dallas."

http://frequentflyer.oag.com/stories/08202003/southwest.asp

I think the City of Dallas said no to AA's request and I believe AA is still paying the lease on those gates.

LoneStarMike

 

[funguy2]

The point isn't what fare somebody can get on AA from DFW to anywhere, but rather...why are other carriers articially restricted from competing with AA out of Dallas? As I've mentioned before, the WA is as blatant an anti-competitive effort as anything. For instance, why not add all of the states that are 2 states away from TX? Instead, we get MS, KS, and AL. Why??? B/c MO, CO, AZ, and TN actually have real demand and we wouldn't be protecting AA and their hundreds of lobbyists if other carriers were allowed to compete in those states. And the arguement that a carrier can go to DFW is baseless. Why should a carrier have to restructure its biz plan and add significantly to its costs to compete in a market?

That's the issued...not whether a $258 r/t can be found on AA.

[post="227375"][/post]​

Well... it has to do with community/airport operator perogative. As long as the airport is not discriminatory, it can set up whatever rules for commercial air service it wants to. Your argument could apply to LGA and DCA perimeter rules, as well as LGB and SNA slot issues.

The Wright Amendment is only anti-competitive to the extend that LUV (or another LCC) is prohibited from starting major operations from the Dallas area. As far as I can tell, they are not, and in fact, there is a whole DFW terminal waiting for a new tenent.

You can argue that the WA has been anti-competitive in the past, as LUV has ample capacity for an almost immediate increase in air service (assuming the concourses turned offices are turned back into concourses), and that DFW does not (a situation that existed mere months ago...). But this has all changed now.

I agree that free markets should prevail, however, if I was the owner/operator of an airport, and I was not able to run my facility as I saw fit, I would simply close it down. The City of Dallas owns and operates DAL, and it is only responsible to the citizens of Dallas... They have no obligation to cater to the national air system (although their city may be rewarded if they do).

 

[LoneStarMike]

So what makes Love so darn special? Oh....it's "unfair" to be able to fly out of a "more convenient" airport. But a quick look at the 2000 census shows me some interesting numbers. Dallas City proper has a population of 1,121,131 folks, and for the sake of argument, I'll say that Love Field is far more convenient for them. But I haven't lived in Dallas in 20 years...but in that time, I noticed a heckuva lot of development to points north and west of Dallas. That would make DFW far more convenient for them. Here's a little of what I found, population wise:

Arlington - 332,969
Hurst/Euless/Bedford - 129,430
Irving - 191,615
Grapevine - 42,059
Carrollton - 109,576
Lewisville - 77,737
Flower Mound - 50,702
Coppell - 35,958
And last but not least Ft Worth - 534,694

Add them up and it shows that DFW is more convenient to 1,504,740 people. So...dropping the Wright Amendment amount to an "unfair advantage" in what way? More people are closer to the home of AA...Are you saying they'd drive on by DFW on their way to catch a Southwest flight out of Love Field? I can only assume that if that happens, it would mean that AA wouldn't bring their fares to a competitive level in Dallas like they have in Chicago. Do you think AA would do that?

Interesting question. I compared lowest fares and highest fares (including all taxes) on AA versus WN in 5 markets from DAL/DFW to other Wright Amendment cities to see if AA was competitive in the markets, and for most part, they were. While Southwest's roundtrip fares were lower than AA's it wasn't by very much at all.

Then I looked at how many people in these markets were flying into Love Field versus DFW.

Dallas/Ft. Worth - Austin

AA's lowest roundtrip fare DFW - AUS was 98.20. WN's lowest roundtrip fare DAL - AUS was $93.70. AA's highest roundtrip fare DFW - AUS was $212.20. WN's highest roundtrip fare DAL - AUS was 207.70. AA seems pretty competively priced on this route.

During Q1 2004 (latest figures available) there were 1291 daily O&D passengers on this route. Southwest's market share on this route was 77.73 meaning 77.73% of all passengers on this city pair are choosing to fly into Love Field versus DFW.

Dallas - Houston

AA's lowest roundtrip fare DFW - HOU was 93.20. WN's lowest roundtrip fare DAL - HOU was $89.20. AA's highest roundtrip fare DFW - HOU was $203.70. WN's highest roundtrip fare DAL - HOU was 199.20. AA seems pretty competively priced on this route.

During Q1 2004 there were 4118 daily O&D passengers on this route. Southwest's market share on this route was 73.37 meaning 73.37% of all passengers on this city pair are choosing to fly into Love Field versus DFW.

Dallas/Ft. Worth - Little Rock

AA's lowest roundtrip fare DFW - LIT was 108.20. WN's lowest roundtrip fare DAL - LIT was $93.70 AA's highest roundtrip fare DFW - LIT was $218.20. WN's highest roundtrip fare DAL - LIT was 203.70. So it looks like in this particular market, AA is charging approximately $15.00 more per round trip to fly out of DFW versus WN at Love Field -- a slight premium but not really that much.

During Q1 2004 there were 662 daily O&D passengers on this route. Southwest's market share on this route was 71.98 meaning 71.98% of all passengers on this city pair are choosing to fly into Love Field versus DFW.

Dallas/Ft. Worth - New Orleans

AA's lowest roundtrip fare DFW - MSY was 184.20. WN's lowest roundtrip fare DAL - MSY was $173.70. AA's highest roundtrip fare DFW - MSY was $278.20. WN's highest roundtrip fare DAL - MSY was 284.90, but that's for routings which go through HOU and get an extra security fee charge, segment fee charge and passenger facility charge. Southwest's highest roundtrip fare on nonstop DAL-MSY flights is 273.70 Overall, AA seems pretty competively priced on this route.

During Q1 2004 there were 1189 daily O&D passengers on this route. Southwest's market share on this route was 61.29 meaning 61.29% of all passengers on this city pair are choosing to fly into Love Field versus DFW.

Dallas/Ft. Worth - San Antonio

AA's lowest roundtrip fare DFW - SAT was $96.70. WN's lowest roundtrip fare DAL - SAT was $92.20. AA's highest roundtrip fare DFW - SAT was $208.70. WN's highest roundtrip fare DAL - SAT was 204.20. AA seems pretty competively priced on this route.

During Q1 2004 (latest figures available) there were 1738 daily O&D passengers on this route. Southwest's market share on this route was 76.11 meaning 76.11% of all passengers on this city pair are choosing to fly into Love Field versus DFW.

So if DFW is more convenient to more of the total population of the Dallas/Ft. Worth Metroplex and there's only a slight difference in fares out of DAL versus fares out of DFW, why then are so many more people choosing Love Field over DFW? I find it hard to believe that the people who travel these city-pairs who live closer to DFW are choosing to fly out of Love Field instead, simply to save anywhere from $5.00 - $15.00 per roundtrip.

My guess is that the majority of the people flying to the Metroplex are going to Dallas (not Ft. Worth) and the majority of people flying out of the Metroplex are from Dallas (not Ft. Worth) and therefore Love Field is more convenient for the majority of both visitors to the Metroplex and residents of the Metroplex who actually travel by air.

That's always been the case. Dallas has always had more air travelers than Ft. Worth.

In the book From Prairie to Planes, it talks about how in November of 1954 -- a year and a half after Amon Carter Field opened -- it was losing money. To help improve traffic there, Ft. Worth decided to (1) offer to sell a half interest in the airport to the City of Dallas at the original cost to Ft. Worth; (2) change the name of the airport to include Dallas; and (3) explore the possible formation of a joint port authority with representtives from both cities. What was Dallas' response? (Page 84)

Dallas' unnofficial reaction , issued by the Chamber of Commerce, was quick and somewhat contemptuous. Chamber President Crossman and the chairman of the Chamber's aviation committee, Angus C. Wynne, Jr. declared in a joint statement that the offer amounted to an effort by Ft. Worth to bail itself out of financial problems. "What it boils down to is this: Ft. Worth is offering to sell Dallas a detour -- a detour which the air travelers and shippers of Dallas would then have to use." The only thing new in the Ft. Worth letter, they claimed, was the offer to add Dallas' name to the airport. "We have been accused of having civic pride, and Dallas does have civic pride. But we don't think the citizens of Dallas have the kind of civic pride which would lead them to pay $4,000.000 for the right to change the name of another city's airport from 'Greater Fort Worth International Airport, Amon G. Carter Field' to Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, Carter Field" " they said.

In the joint statement, the two men pointed out that Ft. Worth had less than 125,000 originating and terminating air passengers a year compared to Dallas' 750,000. "The inconvenience and unnecessary expense involved in a Dallas passenger's use of the Ft. Worth Airport, multiplied by 750,000, amounts to staggering totals. These are the basic reasons Dallas insists on continuing the use of Love Field."

Having said that, I totally disagree with jimntx who thinks Southwest should have to pay the same landing fees and gate rentals that AA does. AA pays more at DFW than Southwest does at Love Field because DFW is a newer, larger, more modern facility with better amenities (longer runways, more runways, more parking, a fancy new people mover and a new international terminal). Aren't landing fees and gate rentals based more on amenities the airport provides rather than convenieince of location?

LoneStarMike

 

[LoneStarMike]

Is it just Dallas? Other major cities have limits on their secondary airports as well to protect the new airport-DCA, LGA.

[post="205069"][/post]​

The difference is the other airports that have perimeter rules control where you can fly NONSTOP from their airport. If you wanted to travel to a desination outside the perimeter you could still do so one one ticket, you'd just have to make a stop or connection at another city within the perimeter along the way.

Example = LGA has a 1500 mile perimeter. AUS - LGA is slightly over that (1521 miles I think) So I can't fly from AUS - LGA nonstop, but I can get there if I'm willing to make a stop or connection in DFW or ATL or IAH or MEM. And I can purchase it all on one ticket and have my luggage checked all the way to LGA.

At Love Field I can only fly to other cities within the Wright Amendment. If I want to fly to a destination outside the perimeter, I must puchase it as two separate tickets and make a connection at another Wright Amendment City along the way. If I have checked luggage I must reclaim it and recheck it at the intermediate point.

LoneStarMike

 

[LoneStarMike]

Can someone explain to me why, when it comes to wanting to "protect" DFW Airport from competition at other airports, Dallas and Ft. Worth city leaders are only concerned about competition from passenger carriers but not from cargo carriers? Both types of carriers provide revenue for the airport and contribute to its overall financial health.

An article from 2000 about some past Love Field litigation had noted:

The Dallas and Fort Worth city counsels constructed the bond covenants in question in 1968 to ensure that Love Field would no longer be improved and that resources would instead be concentrated on DFW in an attempt to make the airport a fiscally viable air facility.

The covenant says: "Neither the cities nor the board will undertake...any action, implement any policy, or enter into any agreement or contract which by its or their nature would be competitive with or in opposition to the optimum development of the Regional Airport (DFW)."

At the end of January, a judge ruled in favor of changing the situation and allowing airlines to return to Love Field, thereby potentially returning it to its former glory at the expense of DFW, and its bondholders.

The 1968 bond covenants provided part of the original security behind the bonds that built DFW, ensuring the holders that their debt would not lose value because of competition from Love Field.

Link to full story

Well what about the competition from Alliance? Seems like that could cause the bonds to lose some value? Why weren't the bondholders concerned about that?

There was a feature article about the Wright/Shelby Amendments and what part they played in AA's battle with Legend -- written by the Dallas Observer back on October 16, 1997 called

The (W)right to Fly

Although lengthy, it's a good read for someone wanting to get some background info. Regarding the issue of Alliance Airport, here is the relevant quote:

"A close reading of the bond ordinance reveals that, technically, Fort Worth's Alliance Airport violates the bond covenant. Alliance is the main Southwest hub for Federal Express, which is a certificated carrier, according to FAA guidelines. And the covenant specifically protects D/FW airport from competition by certificated carriers at other regional airports--unless otherwise permitted by law or voted for by a majority of the D/FW board.

The board did not vote on Alliance, according to D/FW spokesman Joe Dealey. He argues--incorrectly--that the covenant refers to passenger service.

Meacham Field, where New Mexico-based Mesa Airlines recently began intrastate airline service, may also be a violation of the bond covenants.

Dealey argues that intrastate service is exempt, but nowhere in the covenants does such an exemption exist.

"It is selective enforcement," says McArtor. "Why is what happens west of D/FW is OK, but what happens east of D/FW is troublesome? Dallas has gotten the short end of the stick on a lot of these issues."

The lawsuit also claims that the agreement called for the two cities to close their respective airports, but a copy of the agreement obtained by the Observer says no such thing.

Interestingly, Fort Worth is being represented in the suit by the law firm of Kelly, Hart and Hallman, whose name partner Dee Kelly sits on the board of AMR Corp.

About three weeks after The Dallas Observer ran that feature article, they published another article about Alliance Airport.

November 6, 1997
Hypocritic oath
Minutes of a power brokers' meeting show that Fort Worth is guilty of what it accuses Dallas of doing--breaking an agreement over D/FW airport

Explosive" and "heartbreaking" are what former Dallas City Council member Jerry Bartos calls a secret meeting Fort Worth power brokers held several years ago to discuss strategies in combating Dallas on issues regarding the Wright Amendment.
The meeting's five-page transcript, a copy of which was obtained by the Dallas Observer, shows three Fort Worth former mayors, the head of the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, plus several heads of large corporations and an American Airlines vice president discussing Fort Worth's potential legal exposure from the construction of Alliance Airport.

Alliance arguably is in violation of the 1968 bond agreement that Dallas and Fort Worth entered into in order to build D/FW Airport.

The transcript also indicates that Ray Hutchison, Dallas' bond counsel, advised Fort Worth on their position regarding Alliance Airport--a possible conflict of interest. In addition, the transcript shows that former Dallas Mayor Jack Evans was advising Fort Worth power brokers about potentially privileged Dallas information while the two cities were embroiled in a lawsuit.

The meeting took place in May 1992, shortly after Fort Worth filed a lawsuit against Dallas to prevent Dallas from holding hearings on repealing the Wright Amendment, which limits flights from Love Field to cities within Texas and its four adjoining states. The suit was similar to one Fort Worth filed against Dallas last month after Congress voted to exempt three additional states from the Wright Amendment and to allow unlimited long-distance flights to reconfigured jets with 56 or fewer seats ["The (W)right to fly," October 16].

Both suits claim that any changes to the Wright Amendment violate an agreement the two cities entered into in 1968 to issue bonds for building D/FW Airport. The 1968 bond covenant prevents certificated air service--both passenger and cargo--at Dallas and Fort Worth municipal airports and calls for both cities to do nothing that would impede the growth at D/FW.

But shortly after Fort Worth filed suit against Dallas in 1992, Fort Worth city fathers were highly nervous about Alliance Airport, located north of Fort Worth, which houses Federal Express' Southwest hub. They were worried that Dallas might sue Fort Worth, according to minutes of the May 11, 1992, meeting called by then-Fort Worth Mayor Kay Granger.

According to the minutes, Granger told the group that she had heard that Dallas was going to sue Fort Worth over Alliance. "Through meetings it has become obvious that Dallas sees they have an airport [Love Field] without development," Granger said. "We have development [at Alliance], they do not."

Former Fort Worth Mayor Bayard Friedman agreed, adding that Fort Worth has "taken a lot of risks through time in developing [Alliance]...I cannot conceive that Dallas would file a lawsuit over Alliance. That would be disastrous."

In fact, many Dallas City Council members wanted the city to countersue Fort Worth. Instead, then-Mayor Steve Bartlett retreated. Dallas passed a resolution reaffirming the city's support of the bond ordinance, and Fort Worth withdrew the suit.

"This transcript proves that Fort Worth was scared to death about their exposure on Alliance," says Bartos. "They knew they were in blatant violation of the bond ordinance and they didn't have a waiver from the D/FW board. And what does Mayor Bartlett do? [He] declares unconditional surrender.

Link to full story

Eleven months later, the Dallas Business Journal asks the same thing.

October 9, 1998
Alliance and D/FW: Do they really compete?
Dallas Business Journal

Fort Worth's arguments to the contrary, there's no question in Jeff Fegan's mind that Cow Town's Alliance Airport competes against Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.

"We compete with everything that moves out there," said Fegan, executive director at D/FW.

Fegan made the comments Sept. 31 during a presentation about D/FW that he made to the North Dallas Chamber of Commerce.

His comments were especially interesting in light of the flurry of lawsuits between the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas over expanding passenger service out of Dallas Love Field.

Fort Worth claims that if Big D allows expanded passenger service out of Love, the city will violate the 1968 bond covenants that funded construction of the jointly owned airport.

In the covenants, the two cities agreed to protect D/FW from competition by prohibiting scheduled interstate flights from all other Metroplex airports in their control.

In the meantime, Fort Worth built Alliance Airport, which has already stolen one of D/FW's primary cargo customers.

That contradiction has had residents in Dallas scratching their heads for some time.

So, does "competition" refer only to passenger service, or to cargo service also?

Fort Worth, of course, claims it refers only to passenger service. But experts who helped write the original bond covenants have said "competition" refers to all competition.

Up to now, Fort Worth has been able to sidestep accusations that Alliance competes with D/FW for cargo. But the issue reached the limelight Oct. 1, when startup Legend Airlines Inc. filed a countersuit in Tarrant County State Court against the city of Fort Worth over the topic.

With the Fort Worth lawsuit percolating in Tarrant County for nearly a year, why did Legend wait til now?

Legend CEO and President T. Allan McArtor said he filed on the issue only after coming to the conclusion that Dallas never would.

Link to full story

So whatever became of this lawsuit? Was the matter decided in court? Was it dismissed? Was it dropped? If it was dropped by McArtor, could Southwest file suit against Ft. Worth and use that as bargaining power to get the Wright Amendment repealed?

LoneStarMike

 

[Ch. 12]

That is way overblown. Southwest does not have to restructure its business plan just to fly out of DFW. Criminy, they fly out of PHL!

There are rules in this country for operating a passenger airline, and you can't just toss them all out on a whim.

If you think Southwest is limited at DAL, what about foreign carriers? They aren't allowed to fly one solitary domestic flight (tag flights on international itineraries excepted). They can't just move to another metro airport; they are totally and completely locked out of the U.S. domestic market. Of course, that wouldn't help Southwest, so we mustn't even consider that.

[post="227428"][/post]​

C'mon, JS, you can't really believe your own argument, can you? First, the international gateways are a security issue as well as protection for the entire US airline industry. Furthermore, cabotage is a global rule and no airline can compete in another country on domestic routes. This doesn't protect single airlines...it protects national industry. And my point isn't that WN should be able to violate the WA but rather that the basis of the WA is quite outdated and blatantly protective of AA and DFW...not the industry. Either abolish the WA or permit realistic markets into the "perimeter". How anti-competitive can legislation be? When law is upheld strictly to protect one carrier's fortress hub, that is totally unethical.

 

[Ch. 12]

ch12, what restricts SW from flying DFW-PHL?

[post="227430"][/post]​

Bravo, AAviator. Back to the "change your biz plan and add costs just to avoid the out-dated legislation" argument. You and Funguy say that WN can simply relocate to DFW to serve other markets but I am trying to get you to look at the legislation and how it is not meant to simply be a perimeter rule as in LGA and DCA (or time-of-day issues like SNA). As Lonestarmike points out, you can't even connect from DAL to somewhere else. The point of the legislation is to keep carriers operating out of DAL from competing with AA (and at one point, Braniff...which ironically, AA forced out through loss-leader fares). Again...look at the cities that are within the WA scope and tell me that it is truly a fair "perimeter" rule.

And let's get off the "why can't WN fly DFW-PHL" argument because it's just as easy to say "why can't WN fly DAL-PHL".

 

[JS]

Originally posted by Ch. 12:
When law is upheld strictly to protect one carrier's fortress hub, that is totally unethical.

The point of the legislation is to keep carriers operating out of DAL from competing with AA

This has nothing to do with AA! I realize that AA is in favor of the Wright Amendment (obviously), but that is not the reason the Wright Amendment is here.

DFW was built large enough to serve the entire Metroplex, and if you allow Alliance, Meacham, and most importantly, Love Field, to grow without bound, DFW will face the same fate as Greater Southwest.

 

[jimntx]

but I am trying to get you to look at the legislation and how it is not meant to simply be a perimeter rule as in LGA and DCA (or time-of-day issues like SNA). And let's get off the "why can't WN fly DFW-PHL" argument because it's just as easy to say "why can't WN fly DAL-PHL".

[post="228215"][/post]​

Ch. 12 you are avoiding the obvious reason that popped out to me immediately. There is a very real reason why AL and MS are allowed under the WA, but not TN, CO, and AZ. Repeat after me and say it sloowwwllly...Senator Trent Lott and Senator Richard Shelby. Voters in TN and CO are known to favor those evil Democrats at times, and lord knows you can't keep that John McCain on the reservation. If he would behave himself, maybe there would be another amendment to the WA that would allow your precious "free market competition" to AZ.

WA is not meant to protect AA. It was and is meant to protect DFW (unless a powerful and influential senator wants service to his state). With Ahnuld now in charge in Kahleeforneeah, I'm guessing the next change to the WA will allow flights from DAL to LAX, but only if flown in an aircraft built by any American company starting with a B and painted orange.