Page 7 of 18 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718 LastLast
Results 301 to 350 of 895

Thread: DFW wants to be the premier airport in the global marketplace

  1. #301
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasPlus
    That is a nice theory, however if you look at the full figures on the listed website, you will see that the carrier with the second largest number of passanger (7.4 million vs 7.8 million) is near the top of the lists very often. So the numbers do not support your theory. In 2004 they carried more pasangers than any other US airline and stayed way up on the lists. On several ocasions they were number one on the list in all three areas. So all it means if they have more flights and carry more people they simply have to work harder to excel. It can be done, few have the will to even try.
    Dude Im talking about total flights international and domestic and even at that the so called "airline" you speak of makes only one of the list from my source. Re-check your stats or get on the same page as I am. My theory is not incorrect as I see it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_airlines

    My Source is the IATA via wikipedia what is yours again?

  2. #302
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by LakeHighlands
    These airlines are all publicly traded companies, and as such you or anyone else can freely access their information from their annual reports. If you look at their annual reports you will find all the information you need to see that CO far outperforms the other Legaciy carriers. The balance sheet contains much of the information you need.



    Unfortunately in the airline industry this is not necessary true. It is a very complex industry that relies on a multitude of factors. You are talking about revenue passenger miles (RPM) flown. An airline can fly a ton of passenger miles and be a total failure.

    The airlines depend on many things to make a profit. First airlines have fixed or sunk cost--means that the airplane is going to cost them so many dollars per flight and the airline has to fill so many seats to recoup cost. It flies regardless if seats are filled or not and cost is the one constant.

    It is all about yield management/revenue management for the Legacy carriers. This is the way the airlines set ticket prices and eventually make money or in all these airlines cases lose the least amount of money. This is a very complex program that the airlines use. Yield management programs function is best described as a stochastic, non-linear, mixed-integer mathematical program that requires data such as passenger demand pattern, cancellations, cargo load, available seats, group reservations, and other estimates.

    Some other things airlines must consider are
    ASM- Available Seat Miles
    Cost per ASM
    Operating Revenue per ASM (RPM)
    Load Factor
    Fuel Hedges
    Yield

    These are just the basics.

    An Example:

    Let’s take AA for example since they are the World’s biggest airline. This means they have a lot of ASM. (Should Fly more people)
    Lets also add WN (Southwest) and CO to this example. All 3 airlines have 100 seats in their planes and fly between the same cities on this 500 mile route.

    (Using larger number with greater variance than in reality to make the example easier to understand. 15C stands for Cent.)

    AA does 10 flights between the two cites, the most. It has the most available seat miles (ASM) on this route, so it can fly the most passengers. (Each airline uses revenue management to figure out what its break even point is on each flight.) Say AA figurers it needs a 90% load factor to break even on this route. AA the world’s largest airlines flies 840 people on this route.

    Second part of the problem:
    AA being a Legacy carrier with HIGH COST has a high cost per ASM on this flight 15C (Using random numbers).

    CO is also on the same route, but flies 3 flight because they do not need to be the worlds largest and fly so many flights/people. CO is a legacy carrier and has a high Cost per ASM but less than AA at 13C. Its break even load factor is 79%. CO only flies 240 people on this route

    Second part of the problem:
    CO also charges more for an average fare than AA because CO has a better product, less flights, (or understands rev management better) it is able to ask a premium.

    Now WN (Southwest). WN is new to this route and only has 2 flights. Because of WN low cost they figure they only need a 55% load factor to break even. WN fly less than CO and AA with only 130 people on this route.

    Second Part of the problem:
    WN being the savvy airline that they are has a Cost per ASM of 7.5C and charge a low fares.

    Who made the most money?

    Any guesses?

    Has to be AA, right, I mean they flew the most people? 840 people!
    First you need to find the available seat miles (ASM).
    "Available seat miles" represents the number of seats available for passengers multiplied by the number of miles the seats are flown.
    AA
    (100 seats x 10 flights) = 1000
    1000 seats x 500 miles = 500,000 is the ASM for AA

    Next you need to find the Revenue Passenger Miles RPM.
    "Revenue passenger miles" represents the number of miles flown by revenue passengers.
    840 passengers x 500 miles = 420,000 RPM

    Next you need to know what you load factor was.
    "Load factor" represents the percentage of aircraft seating capacity that is actually utilized (revenue passenger miles divided by available passenger miles)
    420,000RPM/500,000ASM= .84 or 84% load factor for AA

    I’ll do CO and WN real quick
    CO
    100 seats x 3 flights = 300 seats
    300seats x 500 miles = 150,000 ASM
    240 people x 500 miles = 120,000RPM
    120,000RPM/150,000ASM = .80 or 80% load factor

    WN
    100 seats x 2 flights = 200 seats
    200 seats x 500 miles = 100,000 ASM
    130 people x 500 miles = 65,000 ASM
    65,000RPM/100,000ASM = .65 or 65% load factor

    Who flew the most people?

    AA of course with 10 flights 840 people and a load factor of 84%.

    Who made the most money?

    First glance you might want to say AA with an average load factor of 84% and 10 flights. Sure beats CO 3 flights with an 80% load factor and WN 2 flights with a 65% load factor. In reality WN made the most money on the route. WN break even was only 55%. CO made some money with a 79% break even load factor but AA lost money because it needs a 90% break even load factor only has 84%, but they flew the most people.

    Second part:
    Let’s say we did not have the load factors but knew the operating revenue per ASM on this route after the flights took place.
    AA Operating Revenue per ASM was 12C.
    CO Operating Revenue per ASM was 13.5C.
    WN Operating Revenue per ASM was 9.8C.

    Now, who made the most money?

    It’s not CO, which had the highest operating revenue per ASM, and it wasn’t AA. It was WN. WN with operating revenue of 9.8C beat both CO and AA who both had higher Operating revenue per ASM. Why?

    You have to look at Cost per ASM. AA was15C so at an operating revenue per ASM of 12C they were losing money. (LOTS). CO cost per ASM was 13C, but their operating revenue was 13.5C. They made money on the route but not at much as WN.

    WN cost per ASM was only 7.5C, but their operating revenue was 9.8C. Even thought they have lower operating revenue per ASM than AA and CO, WN operating revenue was considerable higher than their low Cost per ASM of 7.5C. WN can have lower revenue per ASM than CO, and AA, and still make money because their Cost per ASM is much less. This is why WN can charge lower fares and still make money while the Legacies like CO, AA will bleed if they keep fares at the level. No matter what the Legacies do they will never get their cost as low WN!


    At the end of the day, you can fly more people than any other airline, but are losing massive amounts of money. What did you prove? Nothing. Just because you have fly a lot of people doesn’t mean jack. If the numbers are not working out, at the end of the day all you can claim is “I fly the most people and am the world’s biggest airline but lose a lot of money and have pissed off shareholders.

    When you are a publicly held company shareholder value means a lot.


    Let’s look at some real numbers AA vs. CO for 2003. Numbers came from their annual reports, links below. (I used 2003, because I could not find AA total passenger for 2004).

    AA
    Passengers flown 88,241
    Operating Revenue (Passengers) $14,332,000,000
    Available Seat Miles 165,209,000
    Revenue Passengers Mile 120,328,000
    Load Factor 72.8
    Cost per ASM 10.15 cent
    Passenger revenue per ASM 8.67 cent

    CO
    Passengers Flown 40,613

    Operating Revenue (Passengers) $8,984,000,000
    Available Seat Miles 78,385,000
    Revenue Passengers Mile 59,165,000
    Load Factor 75.5
    Cost per ASM 9.36 cent
    Passenger revenue per ASM 8.73 cent

    Just by looking at these numbers I don’t need to see the “Net Income/Loss” to tell you both of these airlines lost money. I can also tell you CO did better than AA.

    AA sure flew more people than CO (over twice as much) a whooping 47,628 more.
    AA did not make twice as much in revenue. Take operating passenger rev/ by total passengers CO rate is $221,209.96 and AA is 162,418.83. If AA was at CO rate with 88,241 passengers AA would be looking at close to 19 billion in Operating passenger revenue.

    Also AA load factor is less than CO, fly less people per plane. AA cost per ASM is much higher than CO.

    Even with a higher cost AA passenger revenue per ASM is lower than CO. CO is losing less money that AA. A lot less!

    That year CO made a net profit of $38 million while AA lost $1,228 BILLION!!

    Something AA, UAL, DAL, NW, need to come to grip with is that they are not low cost carriers. Thy have high cost and need to charger higher fares to make money. Look at the losses below. WN can charge lower fares and make money because they have low cost. CO chose to go a different route. It cost are almost as high as all the Legacies, but they chose to take the high road and offer all services and charge for it. They are doing better that the others legacies.




    Here is a look at the operating and net losses for the Legacy Carries from 2001-2004.

    Information came from Annual Reports
    AMR-American
    http://www.aa.com/content/images/amr...corp2004ar.pdf
    CAL-Continental
    http://www.continental.com/company/i...al_ar_2004.pdf
    DAL-Delta
    http://delta.m7z.net/delta/delta/pdf...eltaAR2004.pdf
    NWAC- Northwest
    http://library.corporate-ir.net/libr...2/NWAC_10K.pdf
    UAL-United
    http://library.corporate-ir.net/libr...LCORPDE10K.pdf
    US Air
    http://www.usairways.com/about/inves...004_report.doc



    If you look at this information ONE airline stands out from the rest. Out of all four years CO was the only airline to post operating income for two of the four years.
    CO also had a net income of 38 million in 2003.


    So how did the world’s biggest airline do? (Passengers miles flown)

    Over four years AA lost $7,262,000,000 BILLION Dollars

    2nd largest US Airline United lost $9,886,000,000 Billion Dollars

    Delta lost $8,459,000,000 Billion Dollars

    Northwest Airlines Lost $1,835,000,000 Billion Dollars

    CO 5th largest US Airline lost $871,000,000 MILLION Dollars

    US Airways lost $6,183,000,000 Billion Dollars

    With the exception of AA, and CO, all of the other airlines filed Chapter 11 Bankruptcy within the time frame.

    All of the airlines in a desperate move to save money cut back on all services, except CO. All of them stopped food, some removed pillows, blankets, charge for pretzels, drinks, got rid of in-flight reading material, and cut and cut and cut.

    These are all Legacy Carries. But wait, CO did not do any of that. Yet, CO is performing better than the rest of the Legacies while offering a FULL Service. The airline refused to “damage its image”. CO spent a lot of time building up their image of Legacy Carrier and had no plans on giving that up.

    Has it help CO?

    Well their financial performance agrees with them. Something that is very important is employee moral. CO told their employees that they will not cut this and that and will not be like the other airlines. It worked. CO kept up its image, its employees are happy and the carrier is doing better than the other Legacies. CO has been voted one of Fortune 100 best companies to work for 6 years in a row and the only airline to do it. Look at the Annual Reports. The airlines are trying to save every penny they can and are producing plain annual reports, while CO produced a vivid regular color report.

    Even though CO and the aviation industry are going through a hard time CO tried their best to insure employees and passenger that it will maintain the highest level of service in which both have become accustomed to.

    You see CO know who they are, who their customers are and what they want to be. They want to be a Full Fare Legacy Carrier. At the present point in time, they are the only ones left. As times eventually get better in the airline industry, CO has already position itself as the top Legacy carrier. It is the “highest end” Legacy carrier in the US. CO will be able to attract the higher fare paying passengers thru its service and therefore make more money.

    CO has their niche and will greatly prosper in the long run for setting themselves apart from the rest. The airline industry and retail industry follow the same format; you have to set yourself apart from you competition. CO has a premium product, hands down; all the awards and high remarks prove that. With a premium product comes a premium price. As things get better CO will have its passengers and the others will be left to fight over the rest.

    The legacy carriers have got to figure out how to get their cost lowered or increse revenue. If they don't they will end up like Pan Am, Eastern, and Braniff.

    Performance




    I never said CO was cheap, if you want cheap no frills then CO might not be for you.

    A quick search on fares from Dallas to various cities on 1/18/2005 to 1/25/2005.
    For CO fares from DAL I used their website www.continental.com. I tried to use AA website to get fares, but couldn’t figure out how to get the lowest price or any price for that matter to show up. For AA I went to www.expedia.com and while there got CO fares from DFW. These are the cheapest fares flown only on AA or CO. Yellow lowest between AA and CO, Blue highest between AA and CO.



    If you every want to find out anything about the airline/aviation industry and have some time, go to Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Library in Daytona Beach, Fl. If something was written about the aviation industry you will find it there. They have every kind of report imaginable about the airlines and aviation. In addition to that, I was lucky to have had some great discussions with Dr. John Wensveen. He is one of the brightest people I know. He is also 1 of 5 people in the world to have a PhD in the Field of Aviation Business Administration.
    Lakehighlands:

    You have blown me away with all that. Thanks for that info! I never realized how Continental performed better and the way you compared the operations makes perfect sense. AA has tons of flights but they end up loosing money while CO has less flights and either breaks even or makes money. Very interesting. I would love to see pre-9-11 numbers. I am very interested in the avaiation industry especially the way airlines and airports work. DFW airport's problems are a big deal to me and I hope the upper managment and our leaders can solve this Wright issue so our world class airport can flourish with new service from new airlines and passenger growth instead of decline. DFW is too good an airport to not have high growth and new carriers entering the market. Airlines pulling service while they are growing elsewhere is not a good sign. Hopefully the problem can be solved soon.

    Chris
    Last edited by FortWorthGuy; 11 January 2006 at 09:42 AM.

  3. #303
    High-Rise Member AndyIvey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lakewood Heights
    Posts
    705
    Maybe we're guaging the success of DFW with the wrong numbers. Do we care how many people land here? I care about how many leave the airport and spend money. I believe connecting flights are considered in a lot of the figures shown here. The taxes for those passengers are great, but does that compare with someone that leaves the airport and spends money in the area?

  4. #304
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    898
    Quote Originally Posted by LakeHighlands

    If you look at this information ONE airline stands out from the rest. Out of all four years CO was the only airline to post operating income for two of the four years.
    CO also had a net income of 38 million in 2003.


    So how did the world’s biggest airline do? (Passengers miles flown)

    Over four years AA lost $7,262,000,000 BILLION Dollars

    2nd largest US Airline United lost $9,886,000,000 Billion Dollars

    Delta lost $8,459,000,000 Billion Dollars

    Northwest Airlines Lost $1,835,000,000 Billion Dollars

    CO 5th largest US Airline lost $871,000,000 MILLION Dollars

    US Airways lost $6,183,000,000 Billion Dollars

    With the exception of AA, and CO, all of the other airlines filed Chapter 11 Bankruptcy within the time frame.
    To put things in prospective. Caulks Flying Service Was the first US airline, they started flying in 1919.

    The US airline industry has lost more money in the four years between 9/11/2001 and 2005, than all of the US Airlines total profits in the 82 years between 1919 and 2001. Only one US airline has made money every quarter of every year during the last 32 years.

  5. #305
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    You are right TexasPlus and that airline is Southwest and they do offer a great product but we need Legacy carriers because WN cannot take you everywhere and all over the world. That is the main point I am trying to make. They are great but they do not have near as large a network as AA, Delta or Continental. Southwest is one of the reasons air travel is growing throughout the US. They make it possible for more people to fly because they compete with legacy carriers with low pricing and good service WN limited at Love is the reason DFW is not growing and attracting new service. Who would want to service a market that is not growing or dominated by one huge carrier operation (AA)? The prices here are too high and Im surprised the traffic is as high as it is now. Chicago and Houston are prime examples that multiple airports can co-exist. Most major cities have more than one regional airport. Once Wright goes away new carriers will expand, start service and passengers will fill the gates at Love and DFW. Texas and DFW for that matter is at a huge advantage as far as location (4 hours flight time to every major city on this continent) is concerned. That is why AA, Continental and WN are based here except WN cannot put its advantage to use here because of Wright.

  6. #306
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    898
    Quote Originally Posted by FortWorthGuy
    You are right TexasPlus and that airline is Southwest and they do offer a great product but we need Legacy carriers because WN cannot take you everywhere and all over the world. That is the main point I am trying to make. They are great but they do not have near as large a network as AA, Delta or Continental.
    I agree we need international carriers. However the "need" for carriers that try to do everything (IE too much) is doubtful. It has resulted in a bunch of at best mediocre airlines. Airlines that just barely make it from paycheck to bailout loan, or bankruptcy to bankruptcy. The very best results shown above is CO with a 50% failure rate over the last four years.

    I much prefer a company (in any industry) that does a few things really well at a low cost, than a company that tries to do everything, and does it in mediocre or poor way at a higher price.

  7. #307
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    898
    Quote Originally Posted by FortWorthGuy
    My Source is the IATA via wikipedia what is yours again?
    The Department of Transport (DOT) http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/reports/index.htm

    BTW your source say this:

    Southwest Airlines, Inc. NYSE: LUV, based in Dallas, Texas, is an airline in the United States. It is the third-largest airline in world, as measured in number of passengers carried, and the largest with destinations exclusively in the United States. It is known as a "discount airline" compared to its domestic rivals and has been profitable every year since 1973.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwest_Airlines
    Last edited by TexasPlus; 11 January 2006 at 12:31 PM.

  8. #308
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    We are not on the same page. Thats the problem.
    It is the third-largest airline in world, as measured in number of passengers carried, and the largest with destinations exclusively in the United States
    If you look at the page I provided it list the top (domestic and international) airlines in the world. You are speaking about the domestic market. There are many ways to determine the worlds largest airline. WN appears on one list on my link. I don't disagree that it is the third largest by passenger volume in the world. I know that.

    I have read that it goes AA, United, Delta, Continental then Southwest. Who is right? It depends on what you go by and who you ask. Just like determining the worlds busiest airport. Is it by passengers flown or by movements or operations (take offs-and landings).

    Im not trying to argue with you. I think we are not on the same wave length though. I agreee with everything you say about Southwest service and their effect on air service in America. I wish they would eventually tap into the International market but that might not ever happen. Who knows..........?

    What do you think?

  9. #309
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,800
    Quote Originally Posted by honestruerealman
    The average income when every citizen in Dallas is taken into acount is $75,225? That is astounding! Look, I'm just arguing that the DFW airport is a fallen institution primarily because of the leadership in Dallas. Just talk to other people in a chatroom about Dallas and you will see that there is a perception that the place is a desert, has conservatives who hate liberals and is still a bastion for racist, redneck cowboys. Political leaders in Atlanta realize how important unity is when attracting business and that is why they got UPS and Dallas didn't. However, you are right when you say that the city of Dallas is growing, but I think that is because people have always wanted to live close to downtown and whites have realized that even minorities are trying to outrun crime and poor schools. I actually think that the commuter rail is something which is Austinish. It makes Dallas more of an intimate city. It has been like bypass surgery to the city, opening up the other transportation arteries into downtown. I also think that the museum-like train stations are a classic and something unique to Dallas. But sorry, I can't go against my gut feeling and what I know to be true. Dallas is the rotten core in the barrel which is the DFW area.
    And most people here, along with most airline analysts, would disagree with you. DFW is struggling because of AA's monopoly and the restulting overall high fares from DFW. Dallas is not rotting, and racism, I would warrant, is far more of a problem in Arlington (or particularly Atlanta!) than it is in dallas. I live in New York, and up here, people tend to think of Dallas as a far more open minded city than Atlanta, Houston, or other typical sunbelt cities. Dallas, Miami and Austin are the cities most people up here would consider the 'most moderate, least die-hard conservative' cities in the south. I don't know if that's true, but that is what I have generally found the perception to be.

    I think its funny that you think the light and commuter rail are "austin-ish" when Austin is just now, ten years later, looking at finally getting a commuter rail line.

    The one thing I will concede to you is that the Dallas convention traffic has already rotted. That probably does have a major effect on traffic to the area.

  10. #310
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    Didnt they just complete a massive expansion to the Dallas Conv Center? Dallas is losing out to more leisure destinations like Las Vegas and resorts like Gaylord in Grapevine that is virtually next door to DFW. I read an article about it. Perhaps I can find it and start a new topic.

  11. #311
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    898
    Quote Originally Posted by FortWorthGuy
    I wish they would eventually tap into the International market but that might not ever happen. Who knows..........?

    What do you think?
    From what I have read, SWA is lobbied hard every year by over 200 domestic cites to serve them. So far only 62 markets have the characteristics that meet the SWA business/costs model.

    It looks like SWA is adding 2 or 3 markets each year to their point to point service model. When you add in all the additional burdens/costs/requirements it takes any airline to operate into other countries, I doubt that SWA will choose to grow internationally when there are still many domestic markets for them to grow into.

    On the other hand, SWA and ATA are pleased with the code share arrangement they have. It has added many millions of dollars of revenue to both airlines with little additional costs. ATA does operate to a few international cities. Looking at both carriers websites, I see you can currently book a flight from many SWA cities to HNL and OGG (almost international in scope of airline operations). Future expanded code share might be a way for SWA to "effectively" grow internationally.

  12. #312
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    6,566
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasPlus
    It looks like SWA is adding 2 or 3 markets each year to their point to point service model. When you add in all the additional burdens/costs/requirements it takes any airline to operate into other countries, I doubt that SWA will choose to grow internationally when there are still many domestic markets for them to grow into.
    I heard the CFO say in an interview that they plan on adding international routes within five years.

  13. #313
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    898
    Quote Originally Posted by Tnekster
    I heard the CFO say in an interview that they plan on adding international routes within five years.
    Intersting. I googled the heck out of this, but can't find anything at all on it. Any idea where I can find out more info, or at least the full quote?

  14. #314
    Administrator gc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    8,580
    Virgin America looking at D/FW Airport
    Margaret Allen - Staff Writer
    http://dallas.bizjournals.com/dallas...ml?t=printable

    British entrepreneur Richard Branson's splashy, U.S. startup Virgin America has named Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport as one of 35 markets it may serve if allowed to begin operating. Virgin named D/FW in its Dec. 9 filing with the U.S. Department of Transportation. The DOT determines Virgin's ownership fitness, citizenship and airworthiness, said Stacy Geagan, a spokeswoman for Virgin. The airline also notified D/FW Airport that it may be seeking gates if allowed to start service.

    San Francisco-based Virgin is majority owned by investment group VAI Partners L.L.C., which in November supplied the airline with $177.3 million in financing. A minority interest is held by the U.K.-based Virgin Group companies, which is headed by Branson and includes Virgin Atlantic Airways, according to Virgin America's Web site. Geagan said Virgin is considering D/FW and the 34 other potential markets because the carrier considers them underserved by low-fare carriers. Virgin hopes to offer low-fare service competitive with the handful of other low-fare U.S. carriers.

    Of the 20 airlines now flying out of D/FW, six are low-cost carriers. D/FW has been laboring in recent years to expand its share of low-cost carriers. Fort Worth-based American Airlines Inc. offers some 80 percent of D/FW's flights, which has long had a reputation for high average fares. Legacy carriers Continental Airlines Inc. (NYSE: CAL), based in Houston, Atlanta-based Delta Air Lines Inc., Fort Worth-based American (NYSE: AMR) and Elk Grove Township, Ill.-based United Airlines have all filed objections to Virgin's application with the DOT, Geagan said.

    Because of that, the original DOT deadline to rule on the application has been extended, but Virgin hasn't been informed of the exact date, she said. The hope is to launch service this year, Geagan said. A D/FW spokesman confirmed that D/FW Airport plans Thursday to file a letter with the DOT supporting Virgin's application to start domestic passenger service. "We can confirm that the letter is going to be filed tomorrow in support of Virgin America opening up service as a low-cost carrier in the United States and hopefully, of course, becoming one of our low-cost carriers," said Brian Murnahan, an airport spokesman.

    Web site: www.virginamerica.com

    mallen@bizjournals.com | 214-706-7119
    “We shape our Cities, thereafter they shape us.”

  15. #315
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,417
    I love a good Virgin!

    j/k--Virgin would be awesome!!! ...I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

  16. #316
    In the O.R. Geaux Tigers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Shreveport Rock City
    Posts
    1,711
    ^ I remember reading a thread on this on the Airliners.net forum. It looks like Virgin America will be based out of San Fransico (for some strange reason), but most of the forumers were suggesting it would make more sense for this new airline to take advantage of DFW's offer on the former Delta gates in Terminal E. At the very least, other forumers were suggesting Virgin America will probably make DFW some sort of focus city with more than just a daily flight or two to SFO.

    I think that a Richard Branson backed discount airline could take on AA and give them a run!!
    By the power of greyskull!

  17. #317
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,800
    DFW should really be making friends with Branson. With Virgin Galactic poised to transform the way we look at space forever, DFW could become one of the nation's first air- and space-ports. A thrilling time to live in... I really hope DFW is paying attention and starting whatever wheels need to be turned in motion.

  18. #318
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,800
    well just did some more research... looks like, initially at least, the world's first (and for a few years perhaps only?) privitized spaceport will be in New Mexico. Maybe DFW will be allowed to handle some connecting flights to the Spaceport, though. http://www.virgingalactic.com/en/news.asp

  19. #319
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    6,566
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasPlus
    Intersting. I googled the heck out of this, but can't find anything at all on it. Any idea where I can find out more info, or at least the full quote?
    It was on the news one night, probably at least a month ago but don't remember an exact date. It was Gary Kelly, I guess he is the CEO now not CFO.

  20. #320
    honestruerealman
    Guest

    Atlanta is ahead of Dallas in political sophistication

    Quote Originally Posted by msutton
    And most people here, along with most airline analysts, would disagree with you. DFW is struggling because of AA's monopoly and the restulting overall high fares from DFW. Dallas is not rotting, and racism, I would warrant, is far more of a problem in Arlington (or particularly Atlanta!) than it is in dallas. I live in New York, and up here, people tend to think of Dallas as a far more open minded city than Atlanta, Houston, or other typical sunbelt cities. Dallas, Miami and Austin are the cities most people up here would consider the 'most moderate, least die-hard conservative' cities in the south. I don't know if that's true, but that is what I have generally found the perception to be.

    I think its funny that you think the light and commuter rail are "austin-ish" when Austin is just now, ten years later, looking at finally getting a commuter rail line.

    The one thing I will concede to you is that the Dallas convention traffic has already rotted. That probably does have a major effect on traffic to the area.
    Okay. Let us use Atlanta as the best example. Atlanta has Delta and how has Delta been doing lately? Not good. Horrible in fact. But Atlanta's airport has far surpassed that of DFWs. And UPS chose Atlanta because of its sophisticated political leadership. There might not be real racial harmony in that city, but they certainly do act like there is and that is what they have figured out. The real question to this whole topic is why has DFW's traffic dropped off when compared to that of Atlanta and Chicago and I feel that it is because of the bickering by Dallas politicians. Not the corruption at DFW. That has always been there. I think word gets out when leaders in the Dallas proper start airing their dirty laundry to the national and international news and that causes a black mark on the whole metropolitan area. People do indeed think that racism still exists in the city. The Black Panthers started up again in Dallas for cripes sake. Did you happen to notice the desert scene in north Dallas at the beginning of the X-file movie? Most people are shocked when you tell them that the area surrounding Dallas isn't a wasteland like that. They laugh when you tell them that the city is surrounded by lakes. I know that I am not wrong about this. You never hear leaders in Fort Worth or in some of the other smaller suburbs airing their dirty political laundry in public, like leaders do in Dallas. You are definately in denial on this matter. I am not saying that the city is not a great one. I am saying that it isn't near as great as it used to be and that it has a serious problem right now that could scare off all these wealthy people moving in and around downtown, unless certain issues are addressed. On the matter of the commuter rail in Dallas feeling like it is something that should be in Austin? To me Austin has always been more intimate and defined than Dallas, but the commuter rail kind of sews the city together. It is a smashing success in my opinion and people in Austin should feel jeolous of it.
    Last edited by honestruerealman; 11 January 2006 at 11:35 PM. Reason: I need to add something about Austin and do a little cleaning up.

  21. #321
    Administrator tamtagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Atlanta - Dallas
    Posts
    13,976
    Quote Originally Posted by honestruerealman
    But Atlanta's airport has far surpassed that of DFWs. And UPS chose Atlanta because of its sophisticated political leadership. There might not be real racial harmony in that city, but they certainly do act like there is and that is what they have figured out.

    The real question to this whole topic is why has DFW's traffic dropped off when compared to that of Atlanta and Chicago and I feel that it is because of the bickering by Dallas politicians.
    Okay, my opinion is that you are way off base with regard to political leadership in Atlanta and Georgia. The current mayor of Atlanta is praised repeatedly for being the one who finally has cleaned up the rampant corruption of the past 5 decades in city government. Shirley Franklin is pretty sophisticated in her political approach - something of an open book policy, but it's only been four years. Previous mayors and high ranking city/county officials regularly struggling to stay out of jail. Think about the problems Tom DeLay is having; that's the kind of touble Atlanta and Georgia politicians get into.

    Racial harmony in the Dirty South? My impression is that racial harmony in the Atlanta Metro area is, um, very out of tune. Compared to DFW and Southern California, I've encountered far more bigots in the Atlanta area.

    I think DFW has underperformed because American Airlines ticket prices are too high. Which examples of screwy Dallas politics are you considering which have had such an impact on the plain ticket buying public? Like, people in Dallas dont really follow local politics, why would anyone anywhere else in the country pay attention?

  22. #322
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,800
    Well, I know that I am not wrong on my statements either. Obviously we know different people.

    Atlanta's airport does not suffer from AA's underhanded tactics for fighting competitors. It is doing better because it has been more diversified than DFW. AA is what is killing DFW (the "double-edged sword" as FortWorthGuy calls it). Atlanta with sophisticated political leadership? You're mention of it is the first I've heard of it. So, no, it is obviously not something the public at large knows about. The politics of other cities are not generally the nature of national news, because frankly, who cares? In New York, I couldn't give a rat's ass about the local leadership in Seatle, Atlanta, Houston, or whatnot. The only reason that I know anything about Dallas' leadership is my familial connection to the city. Maybe students of governance or politics are well versed on other, distant city's municiple leaders, but I somehow doubt that some chap in London decided to fly to Atlanta instead of DFW because he thinks that Atlanta has "sophistocated political leadership" and Dallas does not.

    As for racism, again, I've never gotten the impression that it exists more in Dallas than anywhere else, nor that anyone else I've known here in the northeast feels that it is even as bad as "most of the south." We get criticized for our connections to Bush more than anything else. Out of curiosity, where do you live?

    I was unaware that the bickering of Dallas city council members was made national news, as living here in NYC I've yet to hear or read anything on the subject thats not been posted on this messageboard. Yet, there have been several major stories by national newspapers highlighting the city's progress. You can search the forums for any of these, or if you like, I can dig out the links myself. If you have some major stories on the bickering of Dallas politicians or whatnot, I'd love to read those too.

  23. #323
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Uptown
    Posts
    1,348
    Virgin America looking at D/FW Airport
    Margaret Allen
    Staff Writer
    British entrepreneur Richard Branson's splashy, U.S. startup Virgin America has named Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport as one of 35 markets it may serve if allowed to begin operating.

    Virgin named D/FW in its Dec. 9 filing with the U.S. Department of Transportation. The DOT determines Virgin's ownership fitness, citizenship and airworthiness, said Stacy Geagan, a spokeswoman for Virgin. The airline also notified D/FW Airport that it may be seeking gates if allowed to start service.

    San Francisco-based Virgin is majority owned by investment group VAI Partners L.L.C., which in November supplied the airline with $177.3 million in financing. A minority interest is held by the U.K.-based Virgin Group companies, which is headed by Branson and includes Virgin Atlantic Airways, according to Virgin America's Web site.

    Geagan said Virgin is considering D/FW and the 34 other potential markets because the carrier considers them underserved by low-fare carriers. Virgin hopes to offer low-fare service competitive with the handful of other low-fare U.S. carriers.

    Of the 20 airlines now flying out of D/FW, six are low-cost carriers. D/FW has been laboring in recent years to expand its share of low-cost carriers. Fort Worth-based American Airlines Inc. offers some 80 percent of D/FW's flights, which has long had a reputation for high average fares.

    Legacy carriers Continental Airlines Inc. (NYSE: CAL), based in Houston, Atlanta-based Delta Air Lines Inc., Fort Worth-based American (NYSE: AMR) and Elk Grove Township, Ill.-based United Airlines have all filed objections to Virgin's application with the DOT, Geagan said.

    Because of that, the original DOT deadline to rule on the application has been extended, but Virgin hasn't been informed of the exact date, she said. The hope is to launch service this year, Geagan said.

    A D/FW spokesman confirmed that D/FW Airport plans Thursday to file a letter with the DOT supporting Virgin's application to start domestic passenger service.

    "We can confirm that the letter is going to be filed tomorrow in support of Virgin America opening up service as a low-cost carrier in the United States and hopefully, of course, becoming one of our low-cost carriers," said Brian Murnahan, an airport spokesman.

    Web site: www.virginamerica.com

  24. #324
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    Some of us are wandering off subject. Atlanta vs Dallas politics has nothing to do with DFW. I have stated many times what needs to happen at DFW and change is well on its way courtesy of Southwest Airlines.

    Set Love Free! Get rid of the Wright Amendment and both Love and DFW will flourish!

  25. #325
    Mid-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Addison
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally Posted by slfunk
    Legacy carriers Continental Airlines Inc. (NYSE: CAL), based in Houston, Atlanta-based Delta Air Lines Inc., Fort Worth-based American (NYSE: AMR) and Elk Grove Township, Ill.-based United Airlines have all filed objections to Virgin's application with the DOT, Geagan said. [/url]
    Is their objection that they are losing money, providing poor service and don't want any competition?

    Someone here must know, what is the basis for objecting?
    Last edited by JaeTex; 12 January 2006 at 12:38 PM.

  26. #326
    In the O.R. Geaux Tigers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Shreveport Rock City
    Posts
    1,711
    Quote Originally Posted by JaeTex
    Is their objection that they are losing money, providing poor service and don't want any competition?
    Yeap. I'm sure all (especially United) will say something like they don't want another airline taking up space at the already cramped and usually fogged in San Fransico Int'l airport, but I think it's mostly the legacy airlines REALLY don't need another LCC starting up operations right now.
    By the power of greyskull!

  27. #327
    honestruerealman
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by tamtagon
    Okay, my opinion is that you are way off base with regard to political leadership in Atlanta and Georgia. The current mayor of Atlanta is praised repeatedly for being the one who finally has cleaned up the rampant corruption of the past 5 decades in city government. Shirley Franklin is pretty sophisticated in her political approach - something of an open book policy, but it's only been four years. Previous mayors and high ranking city/county officials regularly struggling to stay out of jail. Think about the problems Tom DeLay is having; that's the kind of touble Atlanta and Georgia politicians get into.

    Racial harmony in the Dirty South? My impression is that racial harmony in the Atlanta Metro area is, um, very out of tune. Compared to DFW and Southern California, I've encountered far more bigots in the Atlanta area.

    I think DFW has underperformed because American Airlines ticket prices are too high. Which examples of screwy Dallas politics are you considering which have had such an impact on the plain ticket buying public? Like, people in Dallas dont really follow local politics, why would anyone anywhere else in the country pay attention?
    It is important to pay attention when the political leaders in the Dallas city proper criticize the city irresponsibly, because companies might be thinking about moving to the area. That means jobs and money for the citizens in the metropolitan area. That is why it is important for the city of Dallas to put forth its best image, in that it is the prime flagship for the area. Anyway, I'm finished with the topic. Reading above, I do find it interesting that while Atlanta's airport is far and away busier than DFW airport, the vast majority of the airlines servicing it seem to be operating in the red. One has to wonder if the spoke system where people fly to one airport and then transfer, isn't dying as a concept. Certainly Southwest Airlines doesn't believe in the concept. Perhaps a smaller, less busy DFW airport, in regards to passenger traffic, would be better for the Dallas Fort Worth area over the long run? How does Dallas benefit when people get off one plane for a few hours and then get on another one? If airport management has been mistaken about the airports future and it is in the cards for DFW to shrink, they should admit to it now and go ahead and bite the bullet. Unlike passenger traffic, freight traffic is good for the people who live in the DFW area and it is expanding tremendously. If the airport actually shrinks in the future and a passenger terminal isn't needed, perhaps it could be converted into a mall?

  28. #328
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by JaeTex
    Is their objection that they are losing money, providing poor service and don't want any competition?

    Someone here must know, what is the basis for objecting?
    I believe the basis is foreign ownership concerns... although Virgin America would technically be majority owned by US investors, the other airlines are questioning the financing and what level of control Branson would have over it.

  29. #329
    The Urban Pragmatist Mballar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Brooklyn
    Posts
    3,953
    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....637f7555.html

    D/FW expects decreased revenue

    12:40 PM CST on Thursday, February 2, 2006

    By SUZANNE MARTA / The Dallas Morning News

    Cutbacks by American Airlines Inc. and other carriers and higher energy costs will cause revenue at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport to be $35 million to $39 million, or about 6 percent, less than projected, airport officials said Thursday morning.

    The new financial projections reflect changes made during the airport’s first fiscal quarter, which ended in December.

    Driving the projected shortfall are recent schedule reductions.

    In December, Fort Worth-based American announced it would cut 31 daily flights from its schedule in order to shift 16 daily flights to Dallas Love Field, where it will compete directly with Southwest Airlines Co.

    Those cuts, along with reductions in service by ATA Airlines Inc., AirTran Airways Inc. and Northwest Airlines Inc., will cause landing fee revenue — which, at 33 percent, is the airport's largest revenue source — to be $20.2 million less than expected.

    Airport staff hopes to cut that shortfall by applying $21.25 million in savings from bond refinancing, tightening budgets where possible and possibly deferring some projects.

    If the gap between the new revenue projections and expenses can't be closed, the airport's signature airlines would have to cover any shortfall through landing fees or a payment at the end of the year.

    E-mail smarta@dallasnews.com
    A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool because he has to say something. - Plato

  30. #330
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,417
    DFW Airport should stop wasting time& MONEY on the Wright Amendment and focus their energy on adding new carriers that can help pay the bills. I wonder how much $$$ they have spent on the "PR Campaign" against Wright.

  31. #331
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by St-T
    DFW Airport should stop wasting time& MONEY on the Wright Amendment and focus their energy on adding new carriers that can help pay the bills. I wonder how much $$$ they have spent on the "PR Campaign" against Wright.
    You don't think they are agressively trying to lure carriers to the airport? Trust me they are. Two things keep carriers away: AA and the Wright fight. The way I see it Wright will be gone in a few years or it will go away one state at a time. Wright has allowed AA to establish their fortress at DFW and gain so much control over DFW. This is the reason why DFW is not flourishing like it should be. We need a carrier to compete fiercely with AA at DFW. Delta has AirTran to deal with at Hartsfield and AA has United to deal with at Ohare and WN at Midway. I think AA's market share should be around 70% then we would see substantial growth at DFW.

  32. #332
    The Urban Pragmatist Mballar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Brooklyn
    Posts
    3,953
    D/FW may have to tap carriers' wallets

    Airport projects shortfall, and tenants are required to chip in

    12:00 AM CST on Friday, February 3, 2006

    By SUZANNE MARTA / The Dallas Morning News

    American Airlines Inc. and other carriers may have to kick in more money to cover expenses at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport because of a projected revenue shortfall, officials said Thursday.

    The lighter revenue, expected to be as much as $39 million below expectations, or 6 percent, is largely the result of airlines cutting back their schedules at D/FW.

    The deficit also reflects American's later-than-expected move into D/FW's new international terminal, as well as higher energy costs for the airport.

    American is by far the largest carrier at D/FW, accounting for 86 percent of passenger traffic.

    But the carrier is relocating some of its service to Dallas Love Field to compete directly against Southwest Airlines Co. American also has temporarily canceled some flights to lower fuel expenses.

    Those cuts, along with reductions in service by ATA Airlines Inc., AirTran Airways Inc. and Northwest Airlines Inc., will cause landing fee revenue to be $20.2 million less than expected.

    Landing fees account for 33 percent of D/FW's revenue – the airport's largest revenue source.

    D/FW, like most large airports, has a residual financial structure that requires the main tenant airlines to cover any expenses not covered by revenue.

    At smaller airports, including Love Field, the burden of paying for expenses falls to the airport owner, such as a city or county board. Love has also faced a shortfall in the last several years.

    Airports nationwide are coping with financial strain from their key tenants, said Alan Sbarra, an aviation consultant in San Francisco.

    "The legacy carriers are pulling back flights," he said. "Most of the growth is happening at secondary airports because that's where most of the low-cost carriers are."

    Airport staff members couldn't recall if the airport has ever had to go to carriers for a significant cash infusion to cover expenses. Officials said they hope they can eliminate the shortfall by Sept. 30, when D/FW's fiscal year ends.

    The airport has already identified $21.25 million in savings related to bond refinancing that could be applied against expenses, said Jeff Fegan, D/FW's chief executive.

    Budgets would be tightened where possible, and some capital projects may be deferred. Another option might be to raise landing fees, a move that would require airline approval.

    Layoffs are not being considered. "We don't have a lot of people just sitting around," Mr. Fegan said. "Those reductions were all made after 2001."

    For much of D/FW's history, the so-called signatory airlines have received an annual refund check.

    Even after the 9/11 attacks, which caused a dramatic decline in revenue, D/FW was able to slash its costs and offer carriers a $2.8 million refund. Last year, the airport refunded $12.8 million.

    An extra bill at the end of the year would be a "speed bump" for American, but "we're confident [D/FW] will be able to manage its budget given the current situation," said spokesman Tim Wagner.

    E-mail smarta@dallasnews.com
    A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool because he has to say something. - Plato

  33. #333
    Some guy
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    In the downtown freeway loop
    Posts
    4,418
    So DFW made their bed with AA and now they are feeling the pain that comes with it. I feel no pain for them.

  34. #334
    Skyscraper Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Uptown
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by AndyIvey
    Maybe we're guaging the success of DFW with the wrong numbers. Do we care how many people land here? I care about how many leave the airport and spend money. I believe connecting flights are considered in a lot of the figures shown here. The taxes for those passengers are great, but does that compare with someone that leaves the airport and spends money in the area?
    How much tax revenue does North Texas get for each connecting passenger? I'm guessing it is close to zero.

    Besides the sales tax from a magazine purchased at one of (insert name of politically connected crony here: ) Rep. E.B. Johnson's newsstands, what other taxes do we collect?

  35. #335
    Mid-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Grapevine, TX
    Posts
    278
    Quote Originally Posted by F4shionablecHa0s
    Taxes are collected any time a passenger lands or takes off at an airport, including connections. You could also factor in the money DFW airport itself makes, which makes things like terminal D and the skytrain possible, which means more air service, which means a better economy.
    Yeah connecting passengers provide alot of benefit besides landing fees. They spend money at the shops and restaurants inside the airport too. So that of course provides lots of support for those local business owners. Or think of the job I did to push wheelchairs for connecting passengers who gave me tips, and therefore I spent that money in the local area.

    Chris

    PS: I couldn't find who said AA did not make a profit in the 3rd quarter of '05. That's incorrect. AA made a profit of almost $60 million where as CO also made a $100 million profit during that quarter.

  36. #336
    Skyscraper Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Uptown
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by F4shionablecHa0s
    Taxes are collected any time a passenger lands or takes off at an airport, including connections.
    Could you be more specific? I'm unaware of any taxes (other than Passenger Facility Charges... PFCs... which can only be used for specific airport projects) that are charged based on passenger landings and takeoffs.


    Quote Originally Posted by F4shionablecHa0s
    You could also factor in the money DFW airport itself makes, which makes things like terminal D and the skytrain possible, which means more air service, which means a better economy.
    Airports are prohibited by federal law from acting as profit making entities. The way DFW is operated, excess revenues are returned to users (primarily American Airlines). Terminal D and the Skytrain were financed by massive airport borrowings (none of which are guaranteed by taxpayers, fortunately). At a cost of $1.7 billion (nearly $70 million per gate) Terminal D is looking more and more like a white elephant, the southern portion is nearly completely empty... with all retail tenants either struggling or failing.

    It's hard to see how a massive, wasteful expenditure in an extravagant, under-utilized facility is good for the DFW economy. It's certainly not good for local businesses like LaDuni (which has already exited the facility after months of heavy losses).

  37. #337
    Skyscraper Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Uptown
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by saxman66
    Yeah connecting passengers provide alot of benefit besides landing fees. They spend money at the shops and restaurants inside the airport too. So that of course provides lots of support for those local business owners. Or think of the job I did to push wheelchairs for connecting passengers who gave me tips, and therefore I spent that money in the local area.
    The typical spend per connecting passenger is well under $4.00... compare that to the hundreds (or thousands) of dollars a passenger who actually stays for a visit spends. Many of these passengers are currently priced out of the market due to DFW's high airfares.

    Also, to reiterate, neither American Airlines nor DFW Airport contribute a dime to the operations of the Dallas city government.

  38. #338
    High-Rise Member AndyIvey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lakewood Heights
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by UptownDallas
    The typical spend per connecting passenger is well under $4.00... compare that to the hundreds (or thousands) of dollars a passenger who actually stays for a visit spends.
    Bingo! That is why I feel that the number of connecting passengers has nothing to do with an airport’s success. Only those that leave the property have any impact on the local economy.

  39. #339
    Mid-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Grapevine, TX
    Posts
    278
    Quote Originally Posted by AndyIvey
    Bingo! That is why I feel that the number of connecting passengers has nothing to do with an airport’s success. Only those that leave the property have any impact on the local economy.
    I'm not sure where you get this idea. Over 60% of passengers at DFW are connections. When you charge each of them a $4.50 PFC how can it not be of any benefit to the airport. For all of those passengers you need employees whom all live in the DFW area.

    The typical spend per connecting passenger is well under $4.00... compare that to the hundreds (or thousands) of dollars a passenger who actually stays for a visit spends. Many of these passengers are currently priced out of the market due to DFW's high airfares.
    I'm not sure where you got this number. Even it was $4, just from the fact of using the airport provides benefit no matter how indirectly it is.

    Ten's of thousands of jobs at the airport are here because of the vast number of connections (including my past jobs) So to say there is no econimic benefit as rather short-sighted.

    Chris

  40. #340
    High-Rise Member AndyIvey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lakewood Heights
    Posts
    705
    I'm interested in how many nonresidents get off the plane, leave the airport, and come to Dallas. I'll accept that this does not take into account the jobs created by connecting flights. I will also accept that the marketign efforts of the area have a lot to do with that number... maybe more than the quality of DFW. However, I do not like using a raw passenger count as a measure of success.

  41. #341
    Skyscraper Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Uptown
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by saxman66
    I'm not sure where you get this idea. Over 60% of passengers at DFW are connections. When you charge each of them a $4.50 PFC how can it not be of any benefit to the airport. For all of those passengers you need employees whom all live in the DFW area.
    All the PFC does is fund the infrastructure that connecting passengers require. The Metroplex beyond the airport perimeter receives zero benefit.



    Quote Originally Posted by saxman66
    I'm not sure where you got this number. Even it was $4, just from the fact of using the airport provides benefit no matter how indirectly it is.

    Ten's of thousands of jobs at the airport are here because of the vast number of connections (including my past jobs) So to say there is no econimic benefit as rather short-sighted.
    I'm not saying there is no benefit, just that the benefit is not that great. If you want some additional perspective, talk to the folks in Nashville or Raleigh/Durham. In both places, you'll find that American pulling it's hub out generated tremendous economic growth as fares plummeted and local O&D travel skyrocketed.

  42. #342
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by UptownDallas
    It's hard to see how a massive, wasteful expenditure in an extravagant, under-utilized facility is good for the DFW economy. It's certainly not good for local businesses like LaDuni (which has already exited the facility after months of heavy losses).
    Things will get better for DFW. I think in a couple of years DFW will be flourishing again. By then Wright should be gone and we should have more international carriers operating out of Terminal D. AA's one world partners Cathay Pacific & Quantas are my picks to start service in the near future because of their close ties to AA. The One world alliance met at DFW recently for their meeting and I am sure they got a good look at the facilities DFW has to offer.
    Last edited by FortWorthGuy; 07 February 2006 at 04:26 PM.

  43. #343
    Skyscraper Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Uptown
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by FortWorthGuy
    Things will get better for DFW. I think in a couple of years DFW will be flourishing again. By then Wright should be gone and we should have more international carriers operating out of Terminal D. AA's one world partners Cathay Pacific & Quantas are my picks to start service in the near future because of their close ties to AA. The One world alliance met at DFW recently for their meeting and I am sure they got a good look at the facilities DFW has to offer.
    As it stands, however, we're presently looking at 13 vacant gates built at a total cost of $845 million and foreign carriers have been leaving DFW while building up their presence elsewhere in the U.S.

    I'm surprised this hasn't become a major scandal. Think of what the Metroplex could have done with $845 million!

  44. #344
    Mile-High Skyscraper Member rantanamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    6,618
    at least we see how people would really feel if there were too many highways and lanes.

  45. #345
    Mid-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Grapevine, TX
    Posts
    278
    Quote Originally Posted by UptownDallas
    All the PFC does is fund the infrastructure that connecting passengers require. The Metroplex beyond the airport perimeter receives zero benefit.




    I'm not saying there is no benefit, just that the benefit is not that great. If you want some additional perspective, talk to the folks in Nashville or Raleigh/Durham. In both places, you'll find that American pulling it's hub out generated tremendous economic growth as fares plummeted and local O&D travel skyrocketed.
    Are saying AA should totally dehub DFW, so it'll lower fares and create more O&D's? Nashville has lost total passengers from 2000 to 2004. Yes, Southwest has really built up Nashville as well.

    But connecting passengers have HUGE benefit to us. How does a PFC not benefit the region? Anything that adds infrustructure to the airport sounds beneficial to the local economy to me. Thats another reason why we here in the area can have 12 or 14 flights a day to LAX or one flight every hour or less to Chicago. Those connecting passengers give us more choice of times and more non-stop destinations. Think of all the airline employees who are based here, that get paid by these connecting passengers, and therefore the money gets spent in our area.

    Yeah I'm sure it was a big scandal....to have 13 empty gates...right

  46. #346
    Some guy
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    In the downtown freeway loop
    Posts
    4,418
    Nashville may have lost passengers, but they have more people who stay and contribute to the local economy via tourism along with buisness because of the lower fares by AA's de-hubbing. When interviewed, they said they were fearful that they would lose a lot by de-hubbing, but showed economic data that showed how their economy benefited because of AA's exit.

  47. #347
    In the O.R. Geaux Tigers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Shreveport Rock City
    Posts
    1,711
    Quote Originally Posted by FoUTASportscaster
    Nashville may have lost passengers, but they have more people who stay and contribute to the local economy via tourism along with buisness because of the lower fares by AA's de-hubbing. When interviewed, they said they were fearful that they would lose a lot by de-hubbing, but showed economic data that showed how their economy benefited because of AA's exit.
    I understand lower fares due to increased competition...simple economics. However, the suggestion that AA pull up stakes and dehub DFW is ridiculous. Our local economy benefits too much from all the AA employees that only have jobs due to AA's mega hub at DFW.
    By the power of greyskull!

  48. #348
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by FoUTASportscaster
    Nashville may have lost passengers, but they have more people who stay and contribute to the local economy via tourism along with buisness because of the lower fares by AA's de-hubbing. When interviewed, they said they were fearful that they would lose a lot by de-hubbing, but showed economic data that showed how their economy benefited because of AA's exit.
    DFW has more O&D passengers than Nashville. AA will not dehub at DFW but any reductions by AA at DFW will intice other carriers to pick up the slack. DFW is experiencing growth in international passengers. I expect a few foreign carriers to begin service within the next few years.

  49. #349
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,417
    One thing no one has mentioned... DFW is where AA makes the most $$$.

  50. #350
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by St-T
    One thing no one has mentioned... DFW is where AA makes the most $$$.
    Probably because everybody already knows that. Its funny how they make so much money here yet they dont have a "megahub" like ATL is for Delta. Does anyone know how many flights/day AA operates out of O'Hare?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •