Page 10 of 75 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141516171819202122232460 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 500 of 3748

Thread: Love Field, The Wright Amendment, & SWA

  1. #451
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407
    ^Another piece they left out:

    ...not only is this worst case scenario their figures also depend on the Love Field Master Plan being eliminated. AA only has 3 gates at Love... SW has 14 w/ options on 12-14 more. There is only 32 total gates total. Plus, there will NEVER be more than 2 runways. AA's & DFW's threats to us insult me and should insult everyone in the Dallas area.

  2. #452
    Administrator tamtagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Atlanta - Dallas
    Posts
    13,049
    Quote Originally Posted by St-T
    ...not only is this worst case scenario their figures also depend on the Love Field Master Plan being eliminated.
    Well, in all fairness, if SW is trying to get a federal law reversed, what's to stop them from trying to get a master plan revised? AA would be a seemingly unlikely, but very helpful partener, when the time is right, to allow more traffic at Love. Almost every arguement that SW has against Wright Amendment would apply to Love Field Master Plan limitations.

    Futhermore, one of the primary reasons I'm in favor of opened up Love Field is that there is no mention of financial compensation to the City of Dallas should it's commercial airport be devistated with SW relocation to DFW. I'm also not sure Love Field is the best airport for affordable airfair - the free market which is the foundation for Free Love Field would also say Love Field is the airport which should handle most of Dallas' higher priced business travel.

  3. #453
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407

    Exclamation

    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top bgColor=#ffffff rowSpan=2><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="97%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>
    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="97%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle bgColor=#cccccc>
    </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle>
    </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle bgColor=#cccccc>
    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=4><HR width="97%" color=#cccccc SIZE=1></TD></TR><TR><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD><TD>Posted on Wed, May. 11, 2005</TD><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2>

    Wright Amendment study ignores public

    By Mitchell Schnurman
    Star-Telegram Staff Writer

    <!-- begin body-content -->Dallas/Fort Worth Airport spent $100,000 for a study on repealing the Wright Amendment and ducked the most important question: What's it mean to consumers?

    Under the study's doomsday scenario, D/FW shrinks by a third and traffic at Love Field triples. Obviously, that wouldn't be the best use of public facilities, considering that Love is cramped and D/FW has vast empty spaces and an enormous debt load.

    But maybe it's not a bad trade-off if the rest of us save $500 million a year on airfares.

    The D/FW study doesn't touch this issue, but it's worthy of community debate: Does the public benefit of lifting the Wright Amendment outweigh the disruptions to the two airports?

    In response to a reporter's question, the study's author conceded that airfares would probably decline. Unfortunately, the 42-page report released Tuesday doesn't evaluate consumer gains, ticket prices or the vaunted "Southwest effect." That's when a low-cost carrier enters a market, incumbents match the fares and traffic surges for everyone.

    Many believe that Love Field competition would do exactly that -- spur lower prices at D/FW and more business at both airports. The study looks at four scenarios, and none contemplates a free Love Field boosting D/FW traffic.

    Too far-fetched? How about the crazy idea of Love adding 21 million passengers?

    The study does conclude that repealing the Wright Amendment might lead to fewer D/FW flights to smaller cities such as Green Bay, Wis., and Fort Wayne, Ind. And if American Airlines shrinks its hub, as threatened, there could be less service to Montreal, Seoul, South Korea, and other international cities.

    That may happen, but so what? Airlines make such decisions all the time, presumably to deploy their planes on more lucrative routes.

    There are some bragging rights -- and convenience -- with having a large hub and many nonstop flights to exotic locations. But if the flying public cares more about lower prices, so be it.

    Deregulation was supposed to settle such questions a generation ago. Instead of having bureaucrats or politicians dictate air service, we let the markets rule, and they usually tilt with demand.

    Should we keep the Wright Amendment in place because it helps American Airlines maintain a hub that wouldn't make economic sense otherwise?

    That's not a decision the public ought to make, and it's not the purview of D/FW bureaucrats or local politicians, either.

    Besides, what's so great about the status quo?

    At Tuesday's news conference, local leaders parroted the usual line about D/FW being the area's economic engine. If that's still true, it needs a tuneup.

    Since 1994, air passenger traffic has grown almost 33 percent across the nation, according to the Transportation Department's statistics on originating traffic.

    But D/FW is up just 8 percent by that measure, and that's before Delta pulled 200 flights this year. Love Field passengers declined 13.5 percent over the same period, as flight restrictions prompted Southwest to shrink in its hometown and expand elsewhere.

    Combined, this measure of passenger traffic in the Metroplex rose just 5.4 percent from 1994 to 2004.

    That stinks.

    But that's what happens when you miss the discount revolution, when long-haul fares are almost 40 percent higher than the national average.

    Miami did worse than D/FW, but at least Fort Lauderdale doubled. Together, 40 percent more people flew out of South Florida in 2004 than in 1994.

    Houston's two airports were up a combined 44 percent; Chicago's two airports were up 26 percent. Atlanta was up 53 percent and Phoenix, 50 percent.

    In short, the Metroplex aviation market isn't growing like the rest of the country's. Not even close.

    The best explanation is that we've put a regulatory fence around Southwest at Love Field, and American's dominance at D/FW is so lucrative that it vanquishes any challenger.

    With limited competition, there's been limited growth.

    Would it be ideal if Southwest would move from Love to D/FW, take a bunch of those vacant gates and help pay off the billions in bonds? Sure, but Southwest says D/FW doesn't fit its business model.

    Like most of the industry, it doesn't want to take on a dominant carrier at its fortress hub.

    D/FW officials say that's hogwash, but how do they think Southwest has managed to make a profit every year for three decades?

    So we're at a stalemate. D/FW can't attract much low-cost competition because of American's muscle and Southwest's challenge of the Wright Amendment.

    And Southwest can't offer its low fares beyond seven nearby states.

    Here's an idea for the next study: How much money is the public losing while D/FW is stuck in neutral?

    <!-- end body-content --><!-- begin body-end --><HR class=tagline color=#cccccc SIZE=1>Mitchell Schnurman's column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. (817) 390-7821 schnurman@star-telegram.com

    <!-- end body-end --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
    <HR width="97%" color=#cccccc SIZE=1><CENTER>© 2005 Star-Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
    http://www.dfw.com </CENTER>

  4. #454
    the-young-and-the-bright RobertB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Official Mesquito
    Posts
    6,049
    This weekend, I ended up grabbing an outdated copy of the Tyler Courier-Times--Telegraph (strange how they do their dashes, but I digress). This article was in the May 1 edition. Even in East Texas, where American is leveling their veiled pullout threat at the local airport, there is a large dose of skepticism over the airline's methods, intentions, and future plans for airports in Tyler and Longview.

    Key phrase, to me: "I can't say you would be the first to be cut or the last to be cut." Once again, AA is using the Godfather strategy of threats, intimidation, and back-room politics.

    BOARD SKEPTICAL OF AIRLINE'S BID TO STOP REPEAL OF AMENDMENT
    http://www.tylerpaper.com/site/news....d=226369&rfi=8

    By JACQUE HILBURN, Staff Writer
    April 30, 2005

    American Airlines' efforts to fight the suggested repeal of the Wright Amendment are being met with skepticism from members of Tyler's Airport Advisory Board.

    Dale Morris, American Airlines government affairs representative, shared his company's concerns last week over attempted legislation that would alter the 25-year-old Wright Amendment, a federal law that protects activities at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport by restricting flights in and out of Dallas Love Field.

    Southwest Airlines, based at Love Field, is pushing to change the amendment after Delta Air Lines announced it would vacate 23 gates at DFW and cut more than 200 flights from its daily schedule, officials said.

    Morris, speaking out for American's interests at a board meeting, received little support Thursday from Tyler officials, who quizzed him about claims that American Eagle might reduce service to East Texas if the push to repeal the Wright Amendment is successful.

    The official asked the board to encourage its legislative representatives to oppose the repeal, which would allow Southwest to expand its flight operations - taking business from the cash-strapped American Airlines, which lost $162 million in the first quarter of this year.

    "We would have to move some operations to Love Field to compete," Morris said. "Craft needed to fill the void would come from East Texas. I can't say you would be the first to be cut or the last to be cut. We're just asking for your support - we're a legacy carrier, and this Wright Amendment is a punch to the gut."

    The Wright Amendment was established in 1979 after the Civil Aeronautics Board ordered Dallas and Fort Worth to build a jointly owned airport after it was determined that competing airports were harmful to the public interest.

    DFW opened in 1974, but Love Field was allowed to remain open after Southwest filed a series of lawsuits, opposing relocation to the new DFW facility.

    In response to those suits, the Wright Amendment, named after U.S. Rep. Jim Wright, was created.

    The measure allowed Southwest to stay at Love Field and provide service to limited points in Texas and the four contiguous states.

    Without the amendment, the city of Dallas would have pursued a plan to close Love Field because it was taking business away from the new DFW airport, officials said.

    Twenty-five years later, DFW is no longer a struggling newcomer to the airline industry.

    Southwest Airlines CEO Gary Kelly said it was time for change.

    "DFW, one of the world's largest and most successful airports, is no longer a child," Kelly said in a written statement. "Love is one-fifth its size and limited, by the Master Plan, to 32 gates. DFW has more than 140 gates and hardly needs federal government protection to succeed. If it does, something must be wrong.

    "Most major U.S. cities have multiple airports," Kelly said. "North Texas should be proud, not upset, to have two. Tiny Love is no threat to mighty DFW."

    American officials disagree.

    In his remarks to Tyler officials last week, Morris disagreed with Southwest's position, saying that expanding flights would have a negative impact on American's travel stops, including Tyler Pounds Regional Airport and Longview's East Texas Regional Airport.

    "If allowed to expand, (Tyler) would be less attractive to fly from," Morris said. "We are urging you to support a non-repeal of the Wright Amendment - it's going to hurt us as a company, but it's going to hurt you as a community. Non-repeal is the best option for Tyler."

    He urged the board to ask representatives from its airports, chambers of commerce, mayors, city councils and county commissioners to write letters, urging lawmakers to stop the Wright repeal.

    Morris said American would soon reduce its fees, giving even greater value for East Texas travelers, especially amid soaring fuel costs that are cutting into profits.

    The reduction is necessary to keep up with Southwest, which was able to offer lower fares because it had enough cash reserves to hedge rising costs without passing those expenses on to customers, he said.

    Morris' mention that American was considering a fee reduction at the same time it was seeking political support from East Texas ignited discussions among some Tyler airport board members.

    "I've been reading articles in the paper that Southwest was not interested in operating out of DFW," said board member James Brettell. "Your concern for passengers in Tyler and Longview is tainted a little."

    Brettell said American Airlines had a history of unwillingness to waver from its two-week booking restrictions and its non-refundable ticket purchases; in addition, he said, overbooked flights are commonplace, causing inconvenience to East Texas travelers.

    "I think passengers coming from Tyler and Longview might benefit from a little competition," Brettell said.

    Morris acknowledged American's self-interest, saying: "Are we concerned over our own health and welfare? Absolutely. We see a clear and present threat to us and our passengers."

    Board member Brad Curtis asked why it was necessary for American to move into Love Field at all.

    "We would basically be losing customers to Southwest," Morris said. "There's no more space" at Love Field.

    Southwest accounts for more than 95 percent of all commercial flights at Love Field, making that airport the nation's most single-carrier-dominated facility, officials said.

    Morris said American was concerned it would lose business travelers, who typically pay higher rates in exchange for first-class service.

    Board member Sharon Howell said Southwest managed to stay profitable because it exercised restraint, citing as an example its use of one type of aircraft as opposed to American's 13.

    Amid falling profits, American has since cut employees, reduced plane styles and cut scheduled flights.

    "Southwest made better choices in its business plan," Ms. Howell said. "If you want to level the playing field, you would have to compete on fares and scheduling ... How would you do that? Your business plan doesn't fit."

    Morris acknowledged Southwest's successes, but repeated the potential loss of flight options if American pulls aircraft out of East Texas for relocation to Love Field.

    He said DFW was already affected by a pullout of almost all of Delta Air Lines' scheduled flights. The withdrawal came as DFW was poised to complete a $2 billion expansion.

    Tyler Area Chamber of Commerce president Tom Mullins, a member of the audience, asked why East Texas customers did not seem to be a factor in American's motivation to seek political support.

    "How do the consumers feel?" Mullins asked. "Generally, consumers really like competition - they like low costs and low fares."

    Airport manager Davis Dickson said the board may request future updates from the airline.

    "We want to stay apprised of what's going on," he said. "We are very interested."


    ©Tyler Morning Telegraph 2005
    As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals... Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake. - B. Obama 1/20/09

  5. #455
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407
    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top bgColor=#ffffff rowSpan=2><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="97%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>
    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="97%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle bgColor=#cccccc>
    </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle>
    </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle bgColor=#cccccc>
    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=4><HR width="97%" color=#cccccc SIZE=1></TD></TR><TR><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD><TD>Posted on Wed, May. 18, 2005</TD><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2>

    Airport's supporters exaggerate its impact

    By Mitchell Schnurman
    Star-Telegram Staff Writer

    <!-- begin body-content -->Maybe Dallas/Fort Worth Airport should just declare itself Economic Engine For Life.

    The airport has been claiming to be the source of our prosperity for so long, and so many government officials have parroted the line, that most people accept it as fact.

    Don't buy the hype.

    It's the market -- the people and the companies of North Texas -- that have made D/FW Airport into something special, not the other way around.

    Obviously, the airport and American Airlines' reach make it an important, valuable asset. In its infancy, D/FW represented a genuine breakthrough in cooperation for Fort Worth and Dallas, and it's been a factor in relocations and business expansions that have fueled the region's growth.

    That doesn't mean it should be the tail that wags the dog.

    D/FW's staff and their supporters regularly exaggerate its impact, even calling it the economic engine of North Texas in the airport's annual report. At last week's news conference on the Wright Amendment, D/FW's chief operating officer said the airport is envied around the world and is responsible for more than 260,000 jobs.

    That's 10 times the number of workers at the area's largest employer. What can they possibly be taking credit for?

    We're used to plenty of self-serving promotion these days, but this isn't innocuous puffery.

    By claiming to be our economic driver, D/FW can claim that any challenge to the airport is a challenge to our economy, even to our way of life.

    Complete the chain of thought, and you get: "What's bad for D/FW is bad for North Texas."

    It's not just the D/FW staff making such claims; the mayors say it, and members of Congress, and chamber officials, and economic development folks. So airport executives say that proves that it's true.

    The numbers show otherwise, and we'll get to those later.

    I say the tag line is dangerous because it lets the bureaucracy wrap itself in the flag. Oppose D/FW in the Metroplex, and you might as well be slamming America and apple pie.

    The line has been trotted out for small issues and large. And it's the underpinning of the arguments against lifting the Wright Amendment.

    Two years ago, I wrote a column against a $1 drop-off fee proposed by the airport, because it nicked consumers and did nothing to address the huge debt coming on. In an op-ed piece, airport spokesman Ken Capps defended the move and wrote, "D/FW takes very seriously its role as the economic engine of North Texas."

    Well, in that case, let's not derail the economy.

    Of much greater consequence is the debate over the Wright Amendment. D/FW paid $100,000 for a study that documents all that it could lose if the law is repealed, from passenger traffic moving to Love Field to fewer connecting flights at D/FW.

    But it doesn't say anything about what the region might gain from lower fares and more direct service.

    To me, that's the big question: What we gain versus what we lose.

    Maybe that assessment is unnecessary if you accept that D/FW is the economic engine. Under that thinking, if the engine sputters, the whole region stumbles.

    That's what Jeff Wentworth, the former Fort Worth city councilman who's now airport board chairman, said at the news conference.

    "It is very clear that any repeal of the Wright Amendment severely weakens our No. 1 economic engine to the detriment of all of North Texas," Wentworth said, reading from a script.

    He also called D/FW "the region's most treasured, most economically vital asset."

    Isn't this public infrastructure we're talking about? It's not Texas Instruments, Lockheed Martin, Alcon Labs, the convention and tourism business or a university system.

    In my mind, D/FW is more like our network of highways and rail lines or the electric grid. When you talk about economic engines, I think of the auto industry in Michigan, Silicon Valley in California or Wall Street in New York.

    In the Metroplex, consider defense manufacturing, the oil industry, electronics and logistics -- all of which were creating jobs around here well before D/FW opened.

    And if D/FW is our engine today, how come our economy did just fine in the past decade, and the airport's numbers look like it's 1995?

    D/FW has had a tough go of it, with 9-11, American Airlines' problems and the closing of Delta's hub. It projects 55 million passengers this year, which would be less than it handled a decade ago. Cargo and flight totals are also lower than in 1995.

    In an interview Tuesday, D/FW Chief Executive Jeff Fegan said the numbers within the numbers are stronger. There's more local traffic within the total and more heavy-duty shipments in the cargo category, he said, and both add more value to the economy.

    Fine, but over the same time, Metroplex jobs grew by 17 percent, the population by more than a quarter, and building permits surged.

    I'll buy that D/FW contributes a lot, but the No. 1 economic engine in the region? I told Fegan that I don't see it that way.

    "If you want to say the world is flat ..." Fegan said.

    Any other members of the Flat Earth Society out there?

    <!-- end body-content --><!-- begin body-end --><HR class=tagline color=#cccccc SIZE=1>Mitchell Schnurman's column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. (817) 390-7821 schnurman@star-telegram.com

    <!-- end body-end --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


    <HR width="97%" color=#cccccc SIZE=1><CENTER>© 2005 Star-Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
    http://www.dfw.com </CENTER>

  6. #456
    Land and hold short Route Pack Six's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denton County
    Posts
    248
    I had the opportunity to attend the Southwest Annual Shareholder's meeting this morning at the corporate headquarters at DAL. While discussion of the Wright Amendment was surprisingly subdued, everyone was encouraged to contact their local Congressional delegation and weigh in on their opinion of the Wright Amendment. CEO Gary Kelly basically told the media at a press conference after the meeting that the moral ground is there, what was needed was someone to sponsor a bill repealing the legislation.

    Herb Kelleher (who smoked what I counted to be around 4-5 cigarettes while he spoke) pointed out that when Southwest inaugurated service to PHL (Philadelphia International Airport), Southwest had 14 daily flights with the plan to add as demand dictated. Just one year later, Southwest was operating 46 daily flights out of PHL and passenger numbers at the airport as a whole were at record highs. The Philadelphia Inquirer did some research and found that the arrival of Southwest to PHL saved Philadelphia consumers approximately $11 billion in air fare expenditures and it stimulated the local economy with increased tourism, business, as well as increasing the funds for capital improvements at PHL.

    Herb pointed out that the repeal of the Wright Amendment will be good for ALL of North Texas and not just Dallas (as I've discovered with considerable dismay some on a counterpart forum feel....). The shareholders were then showed at the end of the meeting a series of commercials for Southwest that air in other markets that aren't constrained by the Wright Amendment to illustrate the price savings in air fares.

  7. #457
    Administrator gc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    8,575
    ^ The flight attendant this morning mentioned contacting our local congressman/woman about supporting the Wright Amendment.
    “We shape our Cities, thereafter they shape us.”

  8. #458
    Supertall Skyscraper Member texman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Texas State University
    Posts
    2,570
    Quote Originally Posted by gc
    ^ The flight attendant this morning mentioned contacting our local congressman/woman about supporting the Wright Amendment.
    Supporting the wright amendment? You must mean opposing or you were flying on AA.
    "And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed."-"Farewell to Penn Station," New York Times Editorial, October 30, 1963

  9. #459
    LH Copycat Columbus Civil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    LH
    Posts
    5,588
    Just give me some peanuts, bitch.
    Dallas uber alles

  10. #460
    Land and hold short Route Pack Six's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denton County
    Posts
    248
    Not to go off tangent here, but one of my friends is a male flight attendant with Southwest (a retread of sorts, he used to be with Ozark, then TWA, then USAirways and then saw which direction USAirways was headed) and he always gets the smarta*s comment from a passenger regularly:

    "Do your nuts taste salty or sweet?"

    We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.

  11. #461
    LH Copycat Columbus Civil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    LH
    Posts
    5,588
    People really ask that??

    I've only had one cute flight attendant ever and I wouldnt even have asked that heh.
    Dallas uber alles

  12. #462
    Land and hold short Route Pack Six's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denton County
    Posts
    248
    This was released April 4 by the Boyd Group, a well-known aviation consulting firm:

    Monday April 4, 2005

    Dallas Love:
    Forecast: Wright Amendment Repeal

    Proponents claim that without the Wright Amendment, DFW International Airport will become a giant concrete ghost town, or worse. Opponents of the quarter-century-old legislation seem to claim that its elimination will result in huge increases in traffic for the entire Metroplex.

    Time for some independent review. Neither side is entirely correct.


    We're not just talking - we've analyzed the situation based on traffic, markets, and fare stimulation.The current Airports:USA DAL forecast is shown above. Three scenarios are indicated, low, baseline, and high.

    The high forecast reflects the results of a 2006 repeal of the Wright Amendment. In a best case situation, enplanements would increase rapidly by between 21% and 26% within 18 months as WN entered long-haul markets. After that, however, the market for WN opportunities will be essentially exhausted, and DAL would return to moderate rates of growth.

    In any case, a repeal of the Wright Amendment would result in DAL initially increasing to slightly less than 4 million annual enplanements. Compare and contrast that to DFW's 29 million enplanements - and that assumes no traffic stimulation at DFW resulting from WN lowering fares in key long-haul markets.

    Strategically and tactically, American Airlines is correct in opposing repeal of the Wright Amendment. That's just good business, and AA management is being paid to look out for the best interests of their company. That means keeping Southwest from expanding at Love. But from a wider perspective, the Wright Amendment is today nothing more than anti-consumer legislation, the need for which evaporated years ago.

    It should go away.

    Background


    To start, any Wright Amendment repeal would have a lot less impact on Love than some imagine. And it wouldn't draw huge numbers of passengers away from DFW. In fact, when the dust settles, the net result would be lower fares that would increase enplanements at DFW.

    Let's also state clearly who's on the upside of any repeal. The main airline beneficiary would be Southwest. Other airlines would have limited interest in entering a congested, small airport - DAL - that doesn't access the entire region.

    But let's get real. Love Field is a secondary airport - it serves just part of the D/FW Metroplex. DFW International serves the entire region. If the Wright Amendment were junked, no airline in its right mind would move its entire operation from DFW to Love. No major airline seeking entry to the D/FW market would choose DAL over DFW. The strongest growth in the Metroplex, by the way, is in the Alliance/Northwest quadrant, which Love, by virtue of its location, simply does not access.

    That brings up the second issue. DAL is a comparatively tiny facility. It can't really be expanded to any material degree. American Airlines' threat to move a large hub operation to Love is sheer chest-beating, and flat-out not possible. There isn't the room to shove any huge number of new gates into Love. More importantly, there isn't any money to do it, even if there were room. The City of Dallas doesn't have the scratch to build dozens of new gates, not to mention the corollary support facilities, such as parking garages. AA right now is wrestling with fuel prices and huge losses, so it isn't likely to spend its own cash and credit to build stuff at DAL, either. Besides, an AA DAL hub would be duplicative, not additive, to the AA hub at DFW. So, bank on it - an American hub at DAL isn't going to happen.

    Third, the posturing from American claiming that the majority of its frequent fliers live nearer to DAL, and would thereby eschew use of DFW, doesn't hold water. From downtown Dallas, or even from the east side of the Metroplex, it's a relatively short drive to DFW, and given road congestion in the area around Love, getting to DFW may not be much, if any, longer than the trip to Love. (Assuming you can find a parking spot at Love, that is.)

    So, what would happen if the Wright Amendment were removed? Not as much as either side claims.

    Result One: Southwest would initiate service to key - but limited - long-haul destinations, such as LAX, BWI, SEA, and LAS. They would indeed lower fares and would also represent more competition in regional flow markets such as MAF, LBB, and AMA.

    Result Two: American at DFW would match WN fares, causing stimulation in traffic at DFW as well as at DAL.

    But under no scenario would DFW end up losing traffic, and under no scenario would Love become a juggernaut competitor to its colleague airport to the west.

  13. #463
    Administrator gc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    8,575
    Quote Originally Posted by texman
    Supporting the wright amendment? You must mean opposing or you were flying on AA.
    You are correct. Support of repealing the Wright Amendment
    “We shape our Cities, thereafter they shape us.”

  14. #464
    Land and hold short Route Pack Six's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denton County
    Posts
    248
    ...and be sure to remind everyone in Fort Worth, those who work for American, and those who work for DFW that they won't get screwed in the process.

    Well, maybe American might hurt, but that's from their own doing and their own piss-poor decision making skills in the executive suite. Crandall's gotta be blowing a gasket or two with what Uncle Don and Cousin Gerard have done so far with the airline.

  15. #465
    Lakewooder Lakewooder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Lakewood - Junius Heights
    Posts
    5,439
    N. Dallas Chamber: Phase out Wright

    04:05 PM CDT on Thursday, May 19, 2005

    By ERIC TORBENSON and ROBERT DODGE / The Dallas Morning News

    The influential North Dallas Chamber of Commerce called Thursday for a gradual phase-out over 2 to 5 years of the Wright amendment, which restricts airlines serving Dallas Love Field to short-haul routes.

    Also Online North Dallas Chamber statement



    The group also will seek immediate lifting of "through ticketing" restrictions, which force passengers traveling to distant states to purchase two separate tickets and to check-in their luggage twice.

    Dallas-based Southwest Airlines Co. wants to offer non-stop flights around the country from the airport.

    Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, American Airlines Inc. and the Love Field Citizens Action Committee, a neighborhood group, all vigorously oppose any changes to the law.

    The chamber, which hasn't previously taken a formal stance on the 25-year-old Wright amendment, formed its position after meeting with representatives from various sides of the contentious issue.

    <!-- image starts here --><!-- click icon starts here --> <!-- click icon ends here --> File Photo
    Flights from Dallas Love Field are limited to short-haul routes under the Wright amendment.

    <!-- image ends here -->

    The civic group has always been interested in transportation issues, said chamber member Steve Joiner, who led the effort to examine the Wright issue.

    The chamber's position has the interest of North Texas' congressional delegation.

    Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, wants to see a comprehensive regional study on how lifting the Wright amendment would affect the area, her spokesman said.

    "Senator Hutchison appreciates the Chamber’s hard work and will carefully study their findings. However, in the Chamber’s own report, they state that the financial implications of repealing the amendment may have significant near-term implications. That is exactly what Sen. Hutchison wants to avoid."

    Similarly, Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Dallas, wants to avoid any economic damage if the law is changed.

    "He wants to listen to all sides and make sure we go down a path that does not kill the goose that laid the golden egg," said Guy Harrison, Mr. Sessions' chief of staff. "He's willing to look at changes in the Wright amendment, but he wants to do it the right way."

    At Southwest's annual meeting Wednesday, chief executive Gary Kelly said "we'll continue to bring the fight" on the Wright amendment, but he said there is no sponsored bill in Congress.

    "That's our focus right now," he said.

    Staff writers Eric Torbenson reported from Dallas and Robert Dodge reported from Washington.



    E-mail etorbenson@dallasnews.com and rdodge@dallasnews.com

  16. #466
    Lakewooder Lakewooder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Lakewood - Junius Heights
    Posts
    5,439
    Wright Amendment Debate Gaining Steam

    American Could Again Operate From Love Field



    <TEXT id=txt_posted>POSTED:</TEXT> 10:32 am CDT May 19, 2005
    <TEXT id=txt_updated>UPDATED:</TEXT> 5:37 pm CDT May 19, 2005


    <!--startindex-->FORT WORTH, Texas -- The fight over flights from Dallas' Love Field is reaching new heights as talk about repealing the 31-year-old Wright Amendment increases.

    Four years ago, American Airlines flew about a dozen regional flights a day out of Love Field. Those flights were canceled after Sept. 11, 2001. The airline said that if the Wright Amendment were to be repealed that they would again have operations from Dallas' other airport.

    The Wright Amendment only allows flights between Love Field and airports in Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Mississippi and Alabama. Repealing that amendment would allow airlines to fly to any U.S. airport. <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

    <TABLE cellSpacing=10 cellPadding=0 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=140 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=sidebarHeader bgColor=#0033cc colSpan=3>FeedRoom</TD></TR><TR><TD width=140 bgColor=#000000 colSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD width=1 bgColor=#000000 rowSpan=3></TD><TD vAlign=top width=138 bgColor=#f0f7ff>
    Amendment Again Causing Debate </TD><TD width=1 bgColor=#000000 rowSpan=3></TD></TR><TR><TD width=140 bgColor=#000000></TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle width=140 bgColor=#0033cc height=25></TD></TR><TR><TD width=140 bgColor=#000000 colSpan=3></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


    "If the Wright Amendment were repealed, I have said we will take a portion of our operation and move it to Love Field," said AMR's CEO Gerard Arpey.

    American also said that if it moves some operations to Love, the airline would seek more gates and would nearly double the 130 flights a day now departing from the airport.

    The airport is allowed only 250 flights a day from its 32 gates, according to its master plan.

    "The master plan was put into effect to protect Fort Worth, D/FW and the big airlines there ... namely American. So to threaten to sue to get rid of something that's protecting you seems a little strange," said Ed Stewart, Southwest Airlines.

    Neighbors around the airport are opposed to more flights arriving and departing the airport.

    "Imagine the traffic, the noise, the pollution. Everything will be taxed to its limits and we can't stand that," said neighbor Rudy Longoria.

    Even without the lawsuit surrounding the Wright Amendment, the airport has room to add another 120 flights a day. On Thursday, the Dallas Chamber of Commerce will join the debate on the amendment.<!--stopindex-->
    Copyright 2005 by nbc5i.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  17. #467
    Administrator tamtagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Atlanta - Dallas
    Posts
    13,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Lakewooder
    Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, wants to see a comprehensive regional study on how lifting the Wright amendment would affect the area, her spokesman said.

    "Senator Hutchison appreciates the Chamber’s hard work and will carefully study their findings. However, in the Chamber’s own report, they state that the financial implications of repealing the amendment may have significant near-term implications. That is exactly what Sen. Hutchison wants to avoid."

    Similarly, Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Dallas, wants to avoid any economic damage if the law is changed.

    "He wants to listen to all sides and make sure we go down a path that does not kill the goose that laid the golden egg," said Guy Harrison, Mr. Sessions' chief of staff. "He's willing to look at changes in the Wright amendment, but he wants to do it the right way."
    Hutchison and Sessions are following protocol with due diligence exercises, a good thing. Included in any comprehensive study must be a summary outlining DFW and Love Field dampened volume increases during the 1990's caused by the incongruous regulation - comparable airports across the country uniformly realized dramatic increases, while DFW and Love volume (combined) was modest. The North Texas region will continue anemic air-commerce growth being the only multi-airport region with regulatory restrictions.

    While the Wright Amendment provided a rope of safety during the initial decade of DFW's existance, it has become a competitive noose for that goose. The entire scope of profitablly operating an air carrier has changed since the very specific intentions of the Wright Amnd were made into law. The business environment is different and the regulations are outdated.

    --consider how much larger AA could have become if DFW volume growth had matched the country's other big airports;
    --consider the loss of convention/trade show bookings into DFW resulting from 10-20% higher airfare into the region;
    --consider the impact to relocations to central Dallas job centers (the real economic engine of North Texas) potentially resulting from prohibative yearly travel budgets;
    --consider the boost to AA's legacy carrier profits should Love Field resume service between the country's other primary business districts;
    --probablly plenty more along those lines, but you see where it's going.....
    Last edited by tamtagon; 19 May 2005 at 09:46 PM.

  18. #468
    Land and hold short Route Pack Six's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denton County
    Posts
    248
    "If the Wright Amendment were repealed, I have said we will take a portion of our operation and move it to Love Field," said AMR's CEO Gerard Arpey.

    American also said that if it moves some operations to Love, the airline would seek more gates and would nearly double the 130 flights a day now departing from the airport.

    The airport is allowed only 250 flights a day from its 32 gates, according to its master plan.
    Arpey's an idiot who clearly hasn't set foot over at Dallas Love Field, but then I'm not surprised as he was groomed by Uncle Don to take over the airline someday. This is from a friend of mine who does a lot of history work for the Frontiers of Flight Museum at Love Field:

    As I have mentioned before, where does AA plan to find these "gates"?

    Southwest has rule (in a great twist of irony) over the OLD American Concourse (The green concourse) which has only eleven gates available for Southwest at the moment (Gate 1 could be reopened providing an additional gate).

    Southwest also took over the old Braniff/Delta Terminal (The Yellow Concourse) in the late 90s, renovated the old gates (which were still in 1974 Delta Colours) and built an employee university. BUT, this could be turned back into viable gates in the long run for Southwest.

    Continental has control of two gates in the the old Braniff "Terminal of The Future." These two gates are the exact same gates they operated out of in the 1960s, and never relinquished control of them.

    American has two operational gates in the Braniff TOF, but in a move of sheer stupidity, tore down the rest of the Braniff TOF which they had renovated in 1999 (for $1 million) which could have provided them at least six more gates. But now, it's just an empty tarmac.

    And, again, The "Legend" Terminal is not for lease at any price according to former Braniff exec. J. Mitchell who tried to secure them for "Patriot Air" a few years ago.

    And you can bet Ed Acker "ain't" going to tear down any of Associated Air Center.

    Harding Lawrence was no saint, but he told several people at Braniff in 1970 that if Southwest ever got off the ground, there would be no stopping them.
    He also predicted that the "end game" would leave 3-4 "legacy" carriers standing (this was back in 1978 folks). Ok, he was wrong about Braniff, but correct on the points above.

  19. #469
    All Purpose Moderator warlock55's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Downtown Dallas
    Posts
    1,054
    Here's a personal anecdote that shows just how insidious the DFW Airport people are...

    Friday I was at an Urban Management Assistants of North Texas conference. The topic was innovative new revenue sources, and as it turned out, DFW's procurement director was there to speak about the airport's marketing agreement with Pepsi. Not far into his presentation he gets a quesion about the revenue agreement with the airlines that use the airport, so he answers that and goes into its history, which segues into the history of the airport, and then the Wright Amendment. Very smooth. At first he was pretty factual, but then he went into his "personal opinion" and DFW's most recent study. At that point I raised my hand and said that my Dad happened to work at Southwest, and if he wanted to get into a debate about the Amendment, that was fine with me, but otherwise he should get back on topic, which he then did. I wasn't about to let him get away with presenting only one side of the debate to all these management people from local cities.

    Sheesh!
    Consumers are not [the same as] citizens, and when a system pretends that they are, peculiar and even perverse things happen to decision making and democracy... - Benjamin Barber

  20. #470
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407
    ^You go, girl! Get 'em!

  21. #471
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407

    Exclamation Hot Off The Press!!!!!


    <!-- vstory begin -->Legislators to seek Wright amendment repeal

    04:55 PM CDT on Wednesday, May 25, 2005

    By ERIC TORBENSON / The Dallas Morning News

    Two Texas Republican Congressmen will introduce legislation to repeal the Wright amendment on Thursday, according to their Washington, D.C. representatives.

    Also Online Tracking the Wright amendment



    Rep. Sam Johnson of Dallas and Jeb Hensarling of district five in Texas will introduce The Right to Fly Act that would immediately repeal the 25-year-old federal law that restricts flights from Dallas Love Field to the adjoining states of Texas.

    The two Congressmen intend to hold a press conference Thursday in Washington, D.C., to discuss the bill. Southwest Airlines Co. started a campaign to get the law repealed in November, and the bill would be the first introduced to change the federal restrictions.

    Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and American Airlines have both vigorously opposed any changes to the Wright law.

    "We continue to believe that North Texas communities made the correct decision to establish DFW as the aviation gateway for the region," said American Airlines spokesman Tim Wagner in Fort Worth. "The wisdom of that decision has been born out over the past 32 years by the unprecedented growth of the entire region."

    More details to come.

    <!-- vstory end --><HR>Online at: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/052505dnbuswright.2ad0d8c09.html

  22. #472
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    DALLAS, TEXAS
    Posts
    234
    HOORAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!! If this goes through. Southwest Airlines must have really added some pressure.

  23. #473
    The Urban Pragmatist Mballar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Brooklyn
    Posts
    3,953
    Bill will seek Wright amendment's end
    N. Texas congressmen: Restrictions hurt fliers; D/FW says move risky

    11:16 PM CDT on Wednesday, May 25, 2005


    By ROBERT DODGE / The Dallas Morning News

    WASHINGTON – Two North Texas congressmen plan to introduce legislation in the House today that will fully repeal Wright amendment flight restrictions at Dallas Love Field.

    Republican Reps. Jeb Hensarling of Dallas and Sam Johnson of Plano have scheduled a news conference in Washington this morning to announce their bill, which was already drawing criticism Wednesday from Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and American Airlines.

    "The Right to Fly Act would immediately repeal the 26-year-old ban on flights between Love Field and most destinations outside Texas," the congressmen said in their announcement. "If passed, consumers would see lower fares as a result of increased competition between air carriers."

    Although the proposal would simply lift the Wright amendment restrictions enacted in 1979 to protect D/FW Airport, Mr. Johnson indicated a willingness to add provisions if it would help build support among House colleagues.

    The proposed legislation is the latest development in a building movement ignited last fall by Dallas-based Southwest Airlines, which wants the law repealed so it can fly between its home airport and destinations around the country.

    And it comes with the surprising sponsorship of two Dallas-area lawmakers who otherwise would see American and D/FW as important constituents. American and D/FW have vigorously opposed allowing long-haul flights from Love Field.

    Underscoring the regional loyalties at play, the four House members who represent Tarrant County – Republicans Kay Granger of Fort Worth, Joe Barton of Ennis, Kenny Marchant of Coppell and Michael Burgess of Flower Mound – scheduled their own news conference for this afternoon to show their support for keeping the Wright amendment.

    Mr. Johnson said he and his Dallas colleague have been talking about introducing the bill for a couple of years, and that Mr. Hensarling asked him to jointly sponsor the proposal.

    A recent string of newspaper editorials and a report last week by the North Dallas Chamber of Commerce urging repeal of the Wright amendment "nudged us over the edge," Mr. Johnson said.

    "It is not about one airline or one city. It is about helping our constituents," he said. "For a long time, I have thought the restrictions on Love Field have outlived their usefulness, and I think people ought to have the freedom to fly wherever they want and whenever they want."

    "I will keep flying American," Mr. Johnson said. "They are the way to go when it comes to getting to Washington. But that does not mean they should restrict another operation."

    Mr. Hensarling declined to be interviewed but in a prepared statement said: "I believe it is right to repeal the Wright amendment. I believe it is wrong for Congress to be in the business of protecting one airport from another. Competition has always proven to be the consumer's best friend."

    D/FW said the proposed legislation could hurt the region's economy.

    "Obviously, we're very disappointed that two congressmen are going to put at risk the economic engine of North Texas and the jobs of more than 250,000 men and women that are tied to this airport, to benefit one company," said Jeff Fegan, D/FW's chief executive.

    "Southwest Airlines could have the best of both worlds and fly out of Love Field and D/FW today without an act of Congress," he added.

    Tim Wagner, a spokesman for Fort Worth-based American, said: "We continue to believe that North Texas communities made the correct decision to establish D/FW as the aviation gateway for the region. The wisdom of that decision has been borne out over the past 32 years by the unprecedented growth of the entire region."

    But the news was enthusiastically received at Southwest.

    "We applaud the tremendous leadership and vision of these two congressmen who have tapped into the true will of the people," said Southwest spokesman Ed Stewart. "We are elated."

    Mr. Johnson and Mr. Hensarling will face an uphill battle to get their proposal scheduled for action in the House Transportation Committee and in the full House.

    Southwest has engaged in a vigorous campaign to educate lawmakers about its desire to repeal the amendment.

    But its efforts have been matched by similar lobbying by American and D/FW.

    Moreover, Republican leaders and other House members see the Wright amendment as a local fight and will be reluctant to wade into a spat that has split the Texas congressional delegation.

    "It will take a little bit of leverage to get it out of the Transportation Committee," Mr. Johnson said.

    Southwest chairman Herb Kelleher has suggested a bill might get some political lift if it also included a repeal of the perimeter limiting flights at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Washington, D.C.

    "I have thought about that," said Mr. Johnson, noting such a provision might also draw the influential support of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who wants to lift the restrictions at Reagan National.

    Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., has indicated he is working on a bill to repeal the Love Field restrictions.

    Spokesman Jack Finn said the senator, who wants to boost air traffic to Las Vegas and Reno, has not worked with Mr. Hensarling or Mr. Johnson.

    But he said with the controversy over judicial nominations out of the way, the senator could refocus on issues such as the Wright amendment.

    "We will now re-engage in other things, and this quite possibly could be one of them," Mr. Finn said.

    Staff writers Eric Torbenson, Suzanne Marta and Dave Levinthal in Dallas and Todd J. Gillman in Washington contributed to this report.

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

  24. #474
    Administrator tamtagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Atlanta - Dallas
    Posts
    13,049
    Obviously, we're very disappointed that two congressmen are going to put at risk the economic engine of North Texas and the jobs of more than 250,000 men and women that are tied to this airport, to benefit one company," said Jeff Fegan, D/FW's chief executive.
    So, it's better to maintain a regulation which puts the entire Metroplex travel industry at a competitive disadvantage to other popular destinations? The benefits to American Airlines are above reproach? Does D/FW's chief executive ever show concern for those in the Metroplex who buy plane tickets?

    Tim Wagner, a spokesman for Fort Worth-based American, said: "We continue to believe that North Texas communities made the correct decision to establish D/FW as the aviation gateway for the region. The wisdom of that decision has been borne out over the past 32 years by the unprecedented growth of the entire region."
    Is AA now saying that D/FW airport is the reason for 32 years of unprecedented growth in the Metroplex? The wisdom of the decision allowed the airport to become one of the busiest in the world, but now, in a changed market place, the decision is misguided. The only reason to forget about repealing the Wright amendment would come from closure of Love Field (not all together such a terrible thing).

    Moreover, Republican leaders and other House members see the Wright amendment as a local fight and will be reluctant to wade into a spat that has split the Texas congressional delegation.
    If that's the case, then put it to the vote of Metroplex residents.

  25. #475
    The Urban Pragmatist Mballar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Brooklyn
    Posts
    3,953
    Quote Originally Posted by tamtagon
    Does D/FW's chief executive ever show concern for those in the Metroplex who buy plane tickets?
    He doesn't get paid six figures to do that!
    A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool because he has to say something. - Plato

  26. #476
    the-young-and-the-bright RobertB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Official Mesquito
    Posts
    6,049
    The second article says "Jeb Hensarling of Dallas", but us out in the sticks like to lay claim to him. At least, I am now officially proud to say he's my Congressman.

    For perspective, here's the description of the district from Hensarling's web site. I didn't realize just how much of Dallas was included!
    The Fifth District of Texas is one of the most unique congressional districts in the United States. It comprises the perfect combination of urban, suburban and rural communities that are home to some of the friendliest people in Texas.

    The Fifth District takes in Dallas neighborhoods such as Lake Highlands, Lakewood, and White Rock Lake. Much of East Dallas and a significant portion of Garland are located within the Fifth District, as well as all of Mesquite, Seagoville and Sunnyvale.

    The Dallas County portion of the Fifth District is also home to the beautiful White Rock Lake, some of the finest schools in Texas, and thousands of special events like the annual Mesquite Championship Rodeo.

    The Fifth District is also home to an expanse of six rural counties that sweep through East Texas. These counties include: Kaufman, Henderson, Anderson, Van Zandt, Wood and Cherokee counties.

    These rural areas and small towns are home to events like the Canton First Monday Trade Days, hundreds of cow-calf operations, thousands of small businesses and some of the richest history that Texas has to offer.
    As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals... Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake. - B. Obama 1/20/09

  27. #477
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    832
    Quote Originally Posted by warlock55
    At that point I raised my hand and said that my Dad happened to work at Southwest, and if he wanted to get into a debate about the Amendment, that was fine with me, but otherwise he should get back on topic, which he then did. I wasn't about to let him get away with presenting only one side of the debate to all these management people from local cities.

    Sheesh!
    Way to go!!

  28. #478
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    832
    Quote Originally Posted by tamtagon
    Well, in all fairness, if SW is trying to get a federal law reversed, what's to stop them from trying to get a master plan revised? AA would be a seemingly unlikely, but very helpful partener, when the time is right, to allow more traffic at Love. Almost every arguement that SW has against Wright Amendment would apply to Love Field Master Plan limitations.

    Futhermore, one of the primary reasons I'm in favor of opened up Love Field is that there is no mention of financial compensation to the City of Dallas should it's commercial airport be devistated with SW relocation to DFW. I'm also not sure Love Field is the best airport for affordable airfair - the free market which is the foundation for Free Love Field would also say Love Field is the airport which should handle most of Dallas' higher priced business travel.
    As for the FUD tactics being used by DFW Airport and AA, here is the quote about it from Southwest Airlines:

    "Southwest Airlines does not have a formal response to DFW's recent study because there isn't any 'new' news in DFW's report. History and experience has shown us that the repeal of the Wright Amendment and consequently, the Southwest Effect will expand air service and reduce fares at both airports. Dallas Love Field is simply a mini-mart compared to DFW's mega-mall and we do not plan to grow our Love Field operations into a hub. (In fact, Southwest Airlines does not operate a hub and spoke system, we fly point-to-point.) The possibility of another carrier turning Love Field Airport into a hub is baseless under the Master Plan which ensures that Love Field will remain 20 percent the size of DFW. The capacity at Love does not exist and the Master Plan was designed to end unjustified complaints that Love Field might become a serious threat to DFW. Again, our intentions have never been to turn Love Field into a full-fledge hub, we simply want to provide better service from our home airport."

    http://www.setlovefree.com

  29. #479
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by Route Pack Six
    Arpey's an idiot who clearly hasn't set foot over at Dallas Love Field, but then I'm not surprised as he was groomed by Uncle Don to take over the airline someday. This is from a friend of mine who does a lot of history work for the Frontiers of Flight Museum at Love Field:
    Quote:

    As I have mentioned before, where does AA plan to find these "gates"?

    Southwest has rule (in a great twist of irony) over the OLD American Concourse (The green concourse) which has only eleven gates available for Southwest at the moment (Gate 1 could be reopened providing an additional gate).


    Actually, Southwest controls 14 gates in that concourse. Gates 1-15 (there's no Gate 13.) Additionally, there was at one time a Gate 1A accross from the current Gate 1, but it was turned into a customer service/kid's play area years ago.

    Southwest also took over the old Braniff/Delta Terminal (The Yellow Concourse) in the late 90s, renovated the old gates (which were still in 1974 Delta Colours) and built an employee university. BUT, this could be turned back into viable gates in the long run for Southwest.

    This is true, but it would only give Southwest an additional 7 gates to the 14 they have now according to the Love Field Master Plan. I believe the gates at the end of that concourse are blocked by a Southwest Airlines provisioning station and I don't think Southwest is planning to tear that down and relocate it.

    Note: most articles I've read say that the master plan calls for 6 Gates in the North (Old Yellow) Concourse, but on dallaslove-field.com it says 7. I think 7 is correct. You'd have 14 (West Concourse) 7 (North Concourse) 5 (East Concourse - 2 CO and 3 AA) and 6 at Legend's old terminal. 14+7+5+6=32

    What's interesting is that all of Southwest's leases on these two concourses expire on December 16, 2006. I don't know if Love Field could reassign some of those gates to other carriers after those leases expire.

    Continental has control of two gates in the the old Braniff "Terminal of The Future." These two gates are the exact same gates they operated out of in the 1960s, and never relinquished control of them.

    To clarify a bit, Continental's gates are in what was the Red Concourse when Love Field opened in 1958. I believe they were originally ground level gates and then later, Continental added a second level and hung jetways. After Continental moved to DFW, they maintained the lease on those gates and in the late 1990's when Continental Express came back to Love Field and planned service to Houston Inter-Continental and Cleveland, they renovated the area and since the service they were providing was with regional jets, which were smaller than the mainline jets they used in Love Field's heyday, they were able to squeeze in a third jetway. If they went back to using mainlne jets, they'd probably only have room for two jetways.

    Now remember, AA and Ft. Worth and DFW sued Continental when they tried to return to Love Field, saying that Continental had signed the 1969 agreement with all the other airlines (except Southwest, who wasn't in existence yet) to move ALL operations to DFW and for Continental Express to return to Love Field violated that agreement.

    The courts, however, ruled that Continental Express and Continental Airlines were two separate companies and since CoEx was not a party to the 1969 agreement, they were permitted to operate out of Love Field as long as they followed the restrictions of the Wright Amendment.

    They flew regional jets (less than 57 seats) to Cleveland and also to IAH. And since CoEx's originating flights out of Dallas to Houston are on regional jets, CoEx passengers can legally connect in Houston (even to a mainline Continental flight) without having to buy a separate ticket and reclaiming/rechecking luggage in Houston. Since Southwest only flies mainline jets, they can't offer the same one-ticket connections out of Hobby.

    American has two operational gates in the Braniff TOF,

    They have three gates total, but last time I was through Love Field I noticed they only had jetways at two of the three.

    but in a move of sheer stupidity, tore down the rest of the Braniff TOF which they had renovated in 1999 (for $1 million) which could have provided them at least six more gates. But now, it's just an empty tarmac.

    That was part of the agreement between AA, Southwest and Love Field when the master plan was being designed.

    If you remember, AA had leased Braniff's TOF for office space and their lease agreement with Love Field prohibited them from using the area for gates. When Legend finally won the right to fly from Love Field, AA renovated part of their space back to three gates in violation of their lease agreement. Dallas told them to cease and desist. In response, AA hung jetways. Dallas threatened to sue.

    In the end the Cty of Dallas and Love Field agreed to let AA keep the three gates they had refurbished, and in return, AA paid for the demolition of the rest of the concourse. Southwest agreed to build (and pay for) a new cargo facility on the site of those demolished gates.

    Source

    I sent the following e-mail to the City of Dallas through the Dallas Love Field website on February 11, 2005:

    I am a frequent traveler into Love Field.
    *
    I have a couple of questions regarding the Love Field Master with regards to the progess of Phase 1.*

    As I understand it, Phase 1 includes:
    *
    1. Open three East Concourse gates.
    *
    2. Demolish remainder of East Concourse.
    *
    3. Construct new cargo building.
    *
    4. Demolish existing cargo building.
    *
    5. Develop Commercial Vehicle Lot for taxi pick-ups and all buses and vans.
    *
    6. Add a new pedestrian bridge from the garage to the current main terminal
    area and remove the existing bridge.
    *
    7. Close and reconstruct the lower level curb front road.
    *
    8. Reconfigure lanes at the arrivals area to a final two-curb arrangement, except with temporary connections from the upper level road.
    *
    I believe items 1, 2 and 6 have been completed. Did Southwest Airlines ever start construction of their new cargo facility? And what is the status and timeline projection for the rest of the work to be done in Phase 1?
    *
    Thank you for any information you might be able to provide me.


    I received the following response from a Terry Mitchell with the City of Dallas Department of Aviation on February 16, 2005.

    In response to your questions relating to the Dallas Love Field Master Plan, the following responses are provided.
    *
    Items One through Five are included in Phase One of the Master Plan.* Item One was complete at the time the Master Plan was published. *Item Two is complete. *Item Three
    (SW cargo facility) will be completed by June of 2006. *Item Four cannot be done until Item Three is complete. *Item Five cannot be done until Item Four is complete.

    *However, due to security considerations, it is highly unlikely that a commercial vehicle lot will be constructed at the recommended location.
    *
    Items six through eight are included in the Future Phase of the Master Plan.* The Future Phase will only be entered into when demand warrants.* NOTE:* I need to correct your Item Six.* The new pedestrian bridge, recommended in the Future Phase of the Master Plan, is in addition to the two existing bridges connecting the parking garages to the terminal building.


    I haven't seen anything that looks like a construction site over there, so I don't think Southwest has started the cargo facility yet.

    And, again, The "Legend" Terminal is not for lease at any price according to former Braniff exec. J. Mitchell who tried to secure them for "Patriot Air" a few years ago.

    That doesn't surprise me at all. Does anyone remember the "Dogfight over Dallas" article that ran in D Magazine back in 2000? It's archived off of D Magazine's website, but you can still view the article via the internet archives. (Note: each page is archived separately.)

    Page 1

    Page 2

    Page 3

    Page 4

    Page 5

    Note on page 5 where it talks about the East Concourse and Legend's Terminal, it says:

    The subject of the East Concourse still makes McArtor and Leadbetter irate.

    Legend had obtained an option for Braniff's leasehold on the East Concourse, closed to commercial passenger traffic since 1974. But after the City of Dallas insisted that legally it could be used only for offices, Legend let the option go. A week later they learned that AMR had paid a premium for the lease. AMR spokesman Al Becker insisted the deal had nothing to do with American Airlines; another AMR affiliate simply needed office space. McArtor and Leadbetter believed American had snatched it off the market to keep Legend out.

    American began renovating the space. In August 1998, American Eagle began flying from Love to Austin out of a Continental Express gate. The Austin flights were rarely more than 40 percent full, and the company spent millions on construction as required by the lease. Both moves were costly. But the company gained a toehold and sent a message to other carriers: Stay out!

    Legend was forced to build a $21 million private terminal and parking garage on the Lemmon Avenue side of Love on land controlled by Dalfort Aviation. Grandfathered under an 1955 legal argument, the leasehold was allowed up to six gates for commercial air traffic. For the investors, it seemed a safe real estate play. If Legend failed, the gates can be used for increasingly popular commuter flights by so-called regional jets.

    American even tried to block the construction. After the Staubach Company made a pitch to develop Legend's terminal, they abruptly pulled out. "American told them they'd lose the Sabre contract at Solana," says Scott McArtor. "We had to start all over."


    The Staubach Company is owned by former Dallas Cowboys quarterback Roger Staubach.

    Fast forwad to December 2, 2000 when Legend, ceased operations. They filed for bankruptcy a short time later and were liquidated in the spring of 2001. Guess who was named to AA's Board of Directors in the summer of 2001? Roger Staubach. And the Staubach Company is the current leasing agent for Legend's Terminal, or at least it was the last time I heard. The City of Dallas/Love Field is the leasing agent for the gates in the main terminal. The reason the City of Dallas is not the leasing agent for Legend's terminal is because the land on which it was built was not owned by the City of Dallas, but rather was private property which abutted airport property. That, and the fact that the City of Dallas didn't have any financial role in it's construction. Tha's why it was always referred to as Legend's "private" terminal.

    Since Roger Staubach sits on the board of directors at AA and since his company is the leasing agent for that terminal, I seriously doubt those gates will ever be leased to an AA competitor.

    And that brings up another interesting point. In the Love Field Master Plan it states:

    If in the future the Lemmon Avenue Terminal is no longer used for air
    carrier gates, the City will allow up to six additional gates to be placed
    in the Main Terminal.


    Well, the terminal still has the gates, but they're no longer used and haven't been for 4 years.

    So instead of having 32 gates split between two terminals on opposite sides of the airport, all 32 gates could be in the Main Terminal. Theoretically, AA could build those six additional gates to go with the three it already has for a total of nine gates in the Main Terminal. It wouldn't be enough for a full-fledged hub, but they could have a pretty good "focus city" operation with 70-80 departures per day.

    Just some food for thought.

    LoneStarMike

  30. #480
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407
    ^Thanks, Mike.

    What are your thoughts on the repeal? When do you think it will occur?

  31. #481
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407

    Booooooo!!!!

    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top bgColor=#ffffff rowSpan=2><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="97%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>
    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="97%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle bgColor=#cccccc>
    </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle>
    </TD></TR><TR><TD align=middle bgColor=#cccccc>
    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=4><HR width="97%" color=#cccccc SIZE=1></TD></TR><TR><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD><TD>Posted on Fri, May. 27, 2005</TD><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2>

    The wrong flight path


    Star-Telegram

    <!-- begin body-content -->That two Dallas-area congressmen have decided to file legislation that would end flight restrictions at Dallas Love Field is both disappointing and dangerous. It is, sad to say, not surprising.

    Efforts to serve North Texas with efficient and convenient air travel, although clearly a cornerstone of the regional economy, have wobbled precariously between stability and uncertainty for decades.

    Stability in relatively recent years has relied heavily on the Love Field restrictions, but officials of Dallas-based Southwest Airlines have decided that this is the time to change that.

    Reps. Sam Johnson of Plano and Jeb Hensarling of Dallas say that eliminating restrictions on long-haul flights, allowing Southwest to use its Love Field base to compete more directly against American Airlines and other carriers that operate more freely at Dallas/Fort Worth Airport, would benefit North Texas and drive down airfares.

    Their praise of the economic benefits of competition is, of course, well taken. Their path toward it is not.

    Fortunately, other North Texans in Congress recognize that. Reps. Kay Granger of Fort Worth, Joe Barton of Ennis, Michael Burgess of Flower Mound and Kenny Marchant of Coppell all say that they will continue to support the Love Field restrictions, enacted under a 1979 federal law known as the Wright Amendment.

    Southwest officials are fully aware, as are Granger, Barton, Burgess and Marchant, that the Dallas airline can compete freely on long-haul flights at any time by flying them from D/FW.

    They know that Southwest would be welcomed at D/FW with open arms.

    They also know that because population distribution still puts so much of the North Texas flying public closer to Love Field, opening that airport to long-haul flights would shift a significant number of D/FW flights and the carriers that operate them to Dallas.

    That would be a devastating financial blow to D/FW, which has just spent $2.8 billion on its largest expansion and modernization effort since it opened in 1974.

    Johnson and Hensarling are headed in the wrong direction; Congress should not follow.

    The desirable principle of enhancing competitive air travel in North Texas, and the interests of the region's considerable aviation investments, would be better served if Southwest were to operate at D/FW.

    <!-- end body-content --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


    <HR width="97%" color=#cccccc SIZE=1><CENTER>© 2005 Star-Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
    http://www.dfw.com </CENTER>

  32. #482
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407
    Free-falling fares
    A study predicts that fares from North Texas could drop

    dramatically if the Wright Amendment is repealed. Fares could

    also drop if new discount airlines begin service at D/FW, even if the

    amendment stays in place. The study identified destinations most

    likely to be served nonstop by either Southwest or a low-fare

    airline that begins service at D/FW.
    Amendment kept, but new

    Wright Amendment repealed low-fare airlines serve DFW

    Current New New New

    Destination D/FW fare* Southwest fare average fare average fare
    n
    Birmingham, Ala. $143 $89 $89 N/A

    n
    Nashville, Tenn. $190 $90 $90 N/A

    n
    Chicago $160 $96 $109 $125

    n
    Phoenix $171 $98 $98 N/A

    n
    Tampa, Fla. $141 $100 $105 $109

    n
    Orlando, Fla. $116 $102 $108 $107

    n
    Salt Lake City $166 $102 $122 N/A

    n
    Las Vegas $109 $104 $104 $106

    n
    Raleigh-Durham, N.C. $151 $104 $118 N/A

    n
    Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

    Miami
    $155 $106 $130 $133

    STAR-TELEGRAM

    All fares are one-way

    *As of the second quarter of 2004, the most recent data available

    SOURCE: Potential Airport Impacts - Repeal of Wright Amendment, Statistical Annex -

    SH&E Consultancy
    n
    San Diego $175 $108 $116 N/A

    n
    Ontario $170 $108 $123 N/A

    n
    Baltimore-

    Washington
    $179 $109 $131 $121

    n
    Los Angeles $168 $110 $125 $129

    n
    Philadelphia $201 $112 $129 $137

    n
    Sacramento, Calif. $185 $116 $134 N/A

    n
    San Jose, Calif. $219 $116 $139 N/A

    n
    Oakland-

    San Francisco $186 $117 $127 $134

    n
    Boston-

    Providence, R.I.
    $182 $120 $98 $132

    n
    St. Louis $133 $88 $88 N/A

    n
    Kansas City, Mo. $155 $84 $84 N/A

    n
    Jacksonville, Fla. $158 N/A N/A $100

    n
    Atlanta $121 N/A N/A $105

    n
    New York City $228 N/A N/A $143

    n
    Denver $132 N/A N/A $107

    n
    Minneapolis $168 N/A N/A $130

    n
    Pittsburgh $171 N/A N/A $123

    Free-falling fares
    A study predicts that North Texas airfares will drop if the Wright

    Amendment is repealed. Fares could also drop if new discount airlines

    begin service at D/FW, even if the amendment stays. The study identified

    destinations most likely to be served nonstop by Southwest or any lowfare

    airline that begins service at D/FW.
    If Wright New service,

    Amendment is repealed no repeal

    Current New New New

    Destination D/FW fare* Southwest fare average fare average fare

  33. #483
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407
    (from NY Times)

    Bill Would Lift Dallas Limit on Southwest Air

    By MICHELINE MAYNARD
    Published: May 27, 2005
    Two Texas congressmen introduced legislation yesterday that would help
    Southwest Airlines by repealing the Wright Amendment, which limits where
    the company can fly from its home airport, Love Field in Dallas.

    Southwest has complained for years about the rules in the 26-year-old
    Wright Amendment, which governs the states that airlines can serve from
    Love Field. But until now, it had not pursued a legal battle over the
    restrictions.

    The Congressional battle will pit Southwest, the nation's largest low-fare
    airline and the sixth biggest over all, against American Airlines, the
    country's biggest airline.

    The Wright Amendment, named for former House Speaker Jim Wright of Texas,
    was passed in 1979 as part of an effort to generate business at
    Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, which is American's home airport.
    Delta Air Lines recently dismantled its hub there, cutting its daily
    flights 90 percent and giving American, part of the AMR Corporation, more
    dominance at the airport.

    Under the amendment, airlines can fly from Love Field, which opened in
    1917, only to cities in Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico,
    Mississippi and Alabama. Love Field is the only airport in the country
    with such extensive restrictions, despite the deregulation of the airline
    industry in 1978.

    Yesterday, the two representatives, Sam Johnson of Plano, Tex., and Jeb
    Hensarling of Dallas, both Republicans, introduced the Right to Fly Act,
    which would immediately repeal the Wright Amendment. Mr. Johnson said the
    amendment had "outlived its usefulness," an argument bolstered yesterday
    by Southwest's chairman, Herbert D. Kelleher.

    Mr. Kelleher noted that while Southwest is the biggest airline operating
    within California and Florida, it could not serve either state from Love
    Field.

    When Southwest started service in Pittsburgh this month, its chief
    executive, Gary C. Kelly, could not fly directly home on his airline and
    had to take a competitor's flight. The airline also cannot fly to its
    major airports, including Chicago Midway and Baltimore-Washington
    International, from Love Field.

    Speaking in a conference call, Mr. Kelleher said the battle was more than
    a quarrel between Southwest and American. "People throughout the country
    would save bucketfuls of money if Southwest could fly to more states out
    of Love Field," he said.

    But Dan Garton, an executive vice president of American, termed
    Southwest's actions "selfish intentions," saying the airline was "roaming
    the halls of Congress seeking special favors."

    In a statement issued by American, Mr. Garton also said yesterday, "If
    Southwest were sincere about growing and competing, they would be flying
    from DFW Airport - and they wouldn't need an act of Congress."

    American is one of a number of airlines seeking relief from Congress that
    would allow them to stretch out more than $20 billion in delinquent
    pension obligations over the next 25 years. American plans to send
    planeloads of employees to Capitol Hill next month to meet with lawmakers.
    Southwest has not joined the airlines' effort, although it does not oppose
    the proposed legislation.

    Even before the legislation to repeal the Wright Amendment was introduced
    yesterday, both airlines had started intense Washington lobbying efforts
    to explain their views. Each has retained outside lobbyists focused on the
    issue, while Southwest has created a Web site, www.setlovefree.com,
    intended to explain its side of the issue.

    The amendment has set off a lively debate in the Dallas area, where
    American has accused Southwest of potentially endangering the local
    environment, since it would add flights from Love Field if the amendment
    was overturned.

    Yesterday, the director of the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, Jeff Fegan, said
    Southwest was putting the jobs of people in the area at risk and expressed
    disappointment at the introduction of the bill.

    Given the uproar over Southwest's efforts, some industry officials have
    suggested that Southwest might step back after it realized how difficult
    it would be to overturn the amendment. But Mr. Kelleher stressed yesterday
    that the airline was serious.

    "We're in it to the end," he said. "This is not a trial balloon."

  34. #484
    Supertall Skyscraper Member texman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Texas State University
    Posts
    2,570
    We should all contact our congress men and women.
    "And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed."-"Farewell to Penn Station," New York Times Editorial, October 30, 1963

  35. #485
    Mile-High Skyscraper Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    6,031
    ^Amen to that.

  36. #486
    Lakewooder Lakewooder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Lakewood - Junius Heights
    Posts
    5,439
    Don't forget Muse Air was also at Love Field in the 1980s.

  37. #487
    Land and hold short Route Pack Six's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denton County
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by LoneStarMike
    So instead of having 32 gates split between two terminals on opposite sides of the airport, all 32 gates could be in the Main Terminal. Theoretically, AA could build those six additional gates to go with the three it already has for a total of nine gates in the Main Terminal. It wouldn't be enough for a full-fledged hub, but they could have a pretty good "focus city" operation with 70-80 departures per day.
    I was informed by a friend whose wife works at American that Arpey circulated a letter to the employees that in the event of a repeal of the Wright Amendment, he would shift a portion of American's operations to Love Field. But isn't that detracting from the so-called "economic integrity" of DFW? Can we then expect to see the City of Fort Worth and DFW then sue American to keep them at DFW? I think not.

    Most analysts agree that American opening up expanded operations at Love Field will be a tremendous revenue loss for the airline. But it seems that the suits at AMR HQ are hell-bent on keeping Southwest in check.

    And that's a dangerous game to play. Southwest has remained quiet about the Wright Amendment for 30+ years and now suddenly comes out for its repeal. What's different? The marketplace, for one thing. American right now lacks the financial resources with the legacy carriers taking it in the nuts with $50+/barrel oil. And Southwest's growth and popularity have seemed to earn it some political capital in its own right as well. Considering how many states have busy Southwest "focus cities", I would be surprised if the economic benefits aren't lost upon the elected representatives in those locations.

    In a statement issued by American, Mr. Garton also said yesterday, "If
    Southwest were sincere about growing and competing, they would be flying
    from DFW Airport - and they wouldn't need an act of Congress."
    There are a variety of reasons that Southwest won't fly to DFW- the big reason is the split in operations as evidenced by their closure of ops at Houston Intercontinental in favor of Houston Hobby. But the size of DFW really cuts into their turnaround time criteria and there's a common phenomenon that several friends who are ATC guys told me about that takes place at DFW- the "slow taxi".

    Most commonly done by American, a "slow taxi" is when a flight crew slows down their taxi speed when a competitor is behind them in a subtle attempt to delay them. The problem of "slow taxi" got so problematic at Chicago O'Hare that there's a de facto "penalty box" where the tower will order the offending aircraft out of the line-up to sit in "time out". As far as I know, there's no "penalty box" at DFW, though the folks I've talked to who work ATC have wanted one.

    The distances between runways to terminal at DFW, though, are tremendous. When you make a business plan of economizing costs, the fuel spent on taxying is tremendous. At sprawling airports like DFW, ORD, or DEN, a 737-300 can use as much as 600 lbs of fuel taxying from engine start to takeoff. At smaller airports like Hobby or Love, the same plane will use in some instances only a sixth of that.

    That's about 90 gallons of Jet-A. Suppose you're buying Jet-A for $2 a gallon, so that is about $180 in fuel just for taxing to the runway. Now suppose on average an aircraft will do what 6 flights a day - so that is $1,080 a day in money spent from taxying. Now let's say an aircraft is in service 300 days a year so that is about $325,000 a year in savings! Take a carrier like Southwest that can put this on 200 of their aircraft and that is $65 million a year in savings. Now that is something worth looking at- and those frequencies are awfully conservative for Southwest which has some of the highest aircraft utilization rates in the industry.

    So there are some definite operational reasons DFW is out of the running for now.
    Last edited by Route Pack Six; 27 May 2005 at 11:54 PM.

  38. #488
    Low-Rise Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by Route Pack Six
    I was informed by a friend whose wife works at American that Arpey circulated a letter to the employees that in the event of a repeal of the Wright Amendment, he would shift a portion of American's operations to Love Field. But isn't that detracting from the so-called "economic integrity" of DFW?
    At first glace it would seem to be a hypocritical statement by AA considering their past comments about wanting to protect DFW, but I think it truly would depend on how big of a "portion" of their DFW operations got moved to Love Field. I can't imagine it being more than 10%.

    If AA were able to get nine gates in the scenario I described above, and if they could run an average of 9 departures per gate, that would be a total of 81 departures per day or slightly less than 10% of the 850 deparures per day they currently have at DFW. DFW might suffer in the short term, but the lower fares would increase demand at both airports and DFW would most likely gain those departures back, either from AA or other carriers.

    Southwest issued a press release earlier this month on the one year anniversary of launching service into Philadelphia

    Southwest Airlines Celebrates One Year in Philadelphia

    It gave some interesting statistics, but the one that jumped out at me was this one:

    In the third quarter of 2004, the average one-way fare between Philadelphia and Chicago Midway fell 46 percent, while traffic increased by 137 percent. In addition, the average one-way fare between Philadelphia and Chicago O'Hare (an airport that Southwest Airlines does not serve) fell 44 percent, while traffic increased by 28 percent, showing that Southwest Airlines' arrival in new markets benefits sister airports and other airlines.

    I think the same effect would happen at DFW if the Wright Amendment were repealed.

    Can we then expect to see the City of Fort Worth and DFW then sue American to keep them at DFW? I think not.

    I wouldn't put anything past the City of Fort Worth or DFW Airport, but you're probably right. I can't see Ft. Worth suing their largest employer.

    Most analysts agree that American opening up expanded operations at Love Field will be a tremendous revenue loss for the airline. But it seems that the suits at AMR HQ are hell-bent on keeping Southwest in check.

    I'm not so sure I agree. I think AA could carve out a niche for itself at Love Field by serving cities and/or airports Southwest doesn't serve. Let AA serve Boston from Love Field while Southwest serves Providence and Manchester. Let AA serve Chicago O'Hare while Southwest serves Midway. Let AA serve New York's Laguardia and Kennedy airports while Southwest serves Islip. Let AA serve San Francisco, while Southwest serves Oakland. Let AA serve Washington National and Dulles while Southwest serves BWI. Let AA serve Miami, while Southwest serves Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm Beach. Let AA or other carriers serve Atlanta and Memphis and Minneapolis and Cincinatti and Denver and other cities Southwest doesn't serve. With lower fares, there should be enough traffic for everyone.

    And that's a dangerous game to play. Southwest has remained quiet about the Wright Amendment for 30+ years and now suddenly comes out for its repeal. What's different? The marketplace, for one thing. American right now lacks the financial resources with the legacy carriers taking it in the nuts with $50+/barrel oil. And Southwest's growth and popularity have seemed to earn it some political capital in its own right as well.

    All true, but I think the real catalyst for Southwest's sudden change of heart is that 9-11 and increased security hassles affected short haul traffic the most as more people chose to drive those shorter distances rather than fly as they may have done in the past. Southwest was able to adjust it's business model at all the other airports it serves by balancing out the short haul flights with more long haul flights, but of course, they can't do that out of Love Field.

    Considering how many states have busy Southwest "focus cities", I would be surprised if the economic benefits aren't lost upon the elected representatives in those locations.

    I agree - the economic benefits of repealing the Wright Amendment are not lost on representatives in other cities. This editorial from the New Hampshire Union Leader is a good example.

    Editorials - May 27, 2005
    Set Southwest free:
    Kill the Wright Amendment

    SOUTHWEST AIRLINES is largely responsible for making Manchester Airport the travel destination it is today. So says Airport Director Kevin Dillon, and he ought to know. Now New Hampshire can pay the airline back for all the tourism and business dollars it has brought here, and for the low-fare flights it has offered Granite State travelers, by supporting the repeal of an unfair, anti-competitive law that was written expressly to harm Southwest.

    The law is called the Wright Amendment. It was written in 1979 by Jim Wright, then the House majority leader, who was later to resign as speaker of the House amid an ethics scandal. Wright was born in Fort Worth, Texas, and represented that city in Congress. The law, which was passed as an amendment to a must-pass bill, banned any commercial airline from flying from Love Field in Dallas to any airport outside of a seven-state region surrounding Texas. At the time, Southwest Airlines was beginning interstate operations — from Love Field. The upstart airline threatened American Airlines, based next door at the Dallas-Fort Worth airport.

    Chris Williams, vice president of economic development and advocacy at the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce, is from Amarillo, Texas. By prohibiting a direct flight from Manchester to Love Field, the Wright Amendment costs Williams hundreds of dollars a year. He told us he'd love to take a direct Southwest flight to Dallas, but can't because of the law. Williams, like more than half of New Hampshire's population, is not a native Granite Stater. The Wright Amendment costs him and numerous other New Hampshire residents thousands of dollars by closing the North Texas market, which would provide connections to the entire American West if the law allowed, to New Hampshire's most popular airline.

    Granite Staters are lucky that Texan Jim Wright came up with that protectionist law. It easily could have been Bostonian Tip O'Neil. Imagine if federal law prevented flights from Manchester to any destination outside New England. We would consider that outrageous. The Wright Amendment is no less an outrage, and it must be repealed.

    Senators Judd Gregg and John Sununu should help their home state, and travelers throughout America, by co-sponsoring legislation to repeal the amendment, which is nothing but brute protectionism for the world's largest commercial airline — American Airlines.

    Southwest has done a lot for New Hampshire. We should return the favor and support repealing this unjustifiable and economically harmful law.


    Link

    I think the Wright Amendment will be repealed this time around, but it could take awhile.

    LoneStarMike

  39. #489
    Supertall Skyscraper Member texman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Texas State University
    Posts
    2,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Route Pack Six
    Most commonly done by American, a "slow taxi" is when a flight crew slows down their taxi speed when a competitor is behind them in a subtle attempt to delay them. The problem of "slow taxi" got so problematic at Chicago O'Hare that there's a de facto "penalty box" where the tower will order the offending aircraft out of the line-up to sit in "time out". As far as I know, there's no "penalty box" at DFW, though the folks I've talked to who work ATC have wanted one.
    Well, With AA controlling the Airport, a penalty box is a no-no. I've never heard of anything like that before. Sounds like something old Crandell would emphasize.
    "And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed."-"Farewell to Penn Station," New York Times Editorial, October 30, 1963

  40. #490
    Administrator tamtagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Atlanta - Dallas
    Posts
    13,049
    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont....f897e4da.html

    Wright sides split on traffic limits

    08:52 AM CDT on Monday, May 30, 2005

    By ERIC TORBENSON / The Dallas Morning News

    With no Wright amendment, Dallas Love Field would get busier, louder and more congested.

    FILE 2002/AP
    A master plan in place since 2001 sets caps for Dallas Love Field at 250 daily commercial flights and 32 gates. Just how much is about to be a central question in the growing debate over whether to repeal the law.

    A master plan in place since 2001 sets caps for the airport of 250 daily commercial flights and 32 gates. The document was signed by the airlines serving the airport, the city of Dallas and neighborhood groups.

    But with a bill introduced Thursday in Congress to lift restrictions that limit the airport to serving mostly short commercial flights, each side in the Wright debate has developed its own take on the master plan.

    Those who want to keep the Wright amendment say the master plan isn't valid without the restrictions in place.

    They cite a document, called the consensus agreement, which contains dozens of signatures and states in its text that the plan "assumes" the Wright law stays in place.

    American Airlines Inc., Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and the neighborhood associations representing residents near Love Field say growth would bust through the current master plan limits – a concern that's reason enough to keep the Wright law in place.

    American has vowed to move some flights from D/FW to Love Field if the Wright law is lifted to retain some of its best passengers who live closer to the city airport.

    "If there's no Wright amendment, that 32-gate limit won't hold," said Pat White, co-chair of the Love Field Citizens Action Committee. "When you change the assumptions, you change the conclusions."

    The other side, including Southwest Airlines Co. and Love Field, say the document remains in force regardless of what happens to the Wright amendment.

    "I don't know what the legal grounds would be to compel the city of Dallas to build more gates" than the 32 set out in the master plan, said Herb Kelleher, chairman of Southwest, by far the dominant carrier at Love Field.

    The low-fare carrier supports the plan and intends to live by its restrictions, he said.

    Love Field flew 5.9 million passengers in 2004, a figure that could double without the Wright amendment, several consultants have said.

    A study commissioned by D/FW suggests that in a worst-case outcome for D/FW, Love Field passenger traffic would triple.

    D/FW is expected to have 59 million passengers this year.

    Dallas owns Love Field, and its aviation director, Kenneth Gwyn, said the plan isn't going to change short of City Council intervention in a process that includes approval from federal aviation regulators.

    "I'm not a lawyer, but I'm not aware of how" it can be challenged, he said recently.

    The 250 flight limit assumed that airline growth at Love Field would feature regional jets of 50 seats or less, but the plan does not specify the type of aircraft that can fly from Love Field.

    Planes with fewer than 56 seats can skirt the Wright limits. For example, Delta Air Lines Inc. flew regional jets between Love Field and Atlanta until June 2003.

    Love Field has 25 gates that can be used today. Six of them, used by the defunct Legend Airlines, would require some refurbishment to bring back into service.

    The city razed one concourse in 2002 as part of the master plan deal.

    American has three gates, which it doesn't use. Continental Airlines Inc. has two gates. Southwest has 14.

    Some of the gates are on "use it or lose it" status, meaning that if an airline doesn't use the gates often enough they could be given to rival carriers.

    Love Field's traffic figures have declined since the September 2001 terrorist attacks, and Southwest is down to 117 daily flights from a peak of 145 in the 1990s.

    "That's why we wanted to do something for Love Field," Mr. Kelleher said.

    The fear of a Love Field gone wild will be the focus of American's publicity campaign as the airline fights the Wright bill, said Dan Garton, executive vice president of marketing.

    "This would be clearly bad for the environment," he said, noting that more flights would add considerable noise and air pollution to homes near Love Field.

    American will use all legal means to get necessary space at Love Field, he said.

    "American has plans in place for almost any outcome," Mr. Garton said, though the carrier hopes the bill fails and it won't have to split its North Texas operations.

    Staff writer Suzanne Marta contributed to this report.

    E-mail etorbenson@dallasnews.com


    --------------------------------------------------
    It's hard for me to believe this quote:

    "I don't know what the legal grounds would be to compel the city of Dallas to build more gates" than the 32 set out in the master plan, said Herb Kelleher, chairman of Southwest, by far the dominant carrier at Love Field.

    If Wright is removed, and consumer demand to use Love Field exceeds the 32 gate/250 daily flight limits, you can bet SW will want a master plan revision.

  41. #491
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    832
    Quote Originally Posted by tamtagon
    It's hard for me to believe this quote:

    "I don't know what the legal grounds would be to compel the city of Dallas to build more gates" than the 32 set out in the master plan, said Herb Kelleher, chairman of Southwest, by far the dominant carrier at Love Field.

    If Wright is removed, and consumer demand to use Love Field exceeds the 32 gate/250 daily flight limits, you can bet SW will want a master plan revision.
    Are you saying that Herb Kelleher really does know legal grounds to compel the city of Dallas to build more gates than the 32 set out in the master plan?

    Current SWA depatures are said to be 114/day or 46% of the current cap.
    How long do you think it would take to develop "profitable routes" to max out the cap?

  42. #492
    Administrator tamtagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Atlanta - Dallas
    Posts
    13,049
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasPlus
    Are you saying that Herb Kelleher really does know legal grounds to compel the city of Dallas to build more gates than the 32 set out in the master plan?
    No, I dont think he really needs to bother with compelling legal reasons for the city to change the master plan. Without destination regulation, Love Field transactions would more than double the value of commerce at the city's airport, and that is enough to compel the city to study the effects of allowing more than 250 daily flights. Sometime down the unregulated road the current master plan will be questioned, especially if mechanical and technological improvements successfully reduce noise, air and water pollution.

    Current SWA depatures are said to be 114/day or 46% of the current cap.
    How long do you think it would take to develop "profitable routes" to max out the cap?
    I couldnt even guess, but my impression is that demand exists to exceed the 250 daily departure cap. How long would it take to get "official" approval for a handful of new flights between Love Field and each of NYC, Washington D.C., Miami, Chicago and Los Angeles?

    Just guessing, but there is probablly as much consumer demand from each restricted area specifically for Southwest's product into Love Field as to equal more than 10% of the current volume between DFW and each of those regulated destinations necessary to max out Love's Fields capacity.
    Last edited by tamtagon; 31 May 2005 at 02:30 AM.

  43. #493
    In the O.R. Geaux Tigers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Shreveport Rock City
    Posts
    1,712
    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD><TD>Posted on Thu, Jun. 02, 2005</TD><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2>

    Dollar figure is put on repeal of Wright

    By Bob Cox
    Star-Telegram Staff Writer

    <!-- begin body-content -->Southwest Airlines would gain millions in profits from repeal of the Wright Amendment, an independent financial analyst has calculated, while rival American Airlines would take a hit.

    But the added competition should not be catastrophic for American, the analyst said in a recent report.

    The Wright Amendment, which limits long-haul flights from Love Field in Dallas, has been under an attack led by Southwest.

    Roger King, an analyst with CreditSights in New York, said that if the amendment were repealed tomorrow, Southwest would probably gain about 2 million passengers annually and $278 million in revenue.

    American would probably lose 1 million passengers and about $250 million in revenue because of the increased competition from Southwest, the report said.

    American would be forced to reduce some fares on its most important and profitable routes to compete with low-fare Southwest, King said.

    But King said American should still enjoy a revenue premium -- higher overall revenues per passenger -- on key routes out of Dallas/Fort Worth Airport. He based his projections on what has happened in Houston, where Southwest competes with Continental Airlines from separate airports.

    Repeal of the Wright Amendment "would not be a disaster" for American, but "it would exacerbate the inexorable downward pressure on systemwide yields," the report said.

    The report, prepared in April, is circulating in financial circles. While many analysts have speculated about the effects of repealing the Wright Amendment, King's study is the first to quantify the financial effect on American and Southwest.

    American's response

    Tim Wagner, a spokesman for American, said Wednesday that King's conclusions were "all speculation at this point."

    He also said King's report did not examine what might happen if Southwest began long-haul service from D/FW instead of Love Field, a move that could be made even with the amendment intact.

    Kevin Cox, D/FW's chief operating officer, said the study is flawed because it assumes that American would keep its flights at D/FW, rather than moving many to Love Field.

    "If his assumption is American will not move to Love Field, I give it zero credence," Cox said. "We believe American will move a significant number of flights to Love Field, and they will move a significant number of passengers."

    The Wright Amendment debate was refueled last week when two North Texas lawmakers introduced a bill in Congress to repeal the federal law, which was enacted in 1979.

    The amendment restricts flights from Love Field to states adjacent to Texas. It was later changed to add Kansas, Mississippi and Alabama.

    American is now the dominant carrier for long-distance flights from the region. Southwest, meanwhile, is the dominant carrier at Love Field. Southwest has refused to operate at D/FW, saying the busy airport is too congested to fit its business model, which depends on fast turnaround times for aircraft.

    American has said the financial hit from removing the amendment would be substantial and has threatened to shift a large number of flights from D/FW to Love Field if the restrictions are lifted.

    D/FW officials have long argued against lifting the amendment, which was written to protect D/FW when it was a young airport. A recent study commissioned by the airport predicted that lifting the rule would cost the airport 21 million passengers annually and set it back 20 years.

    King's report did not address the effect on the airports but focused instead on the airlines.

    Southwest would "take some business from American, but it won't be anything to write home about," King said in an interview.

    CreditSights has offices in New York and London. The company doesn't sell stocks or bonds. It provides financial analysis directly to investors, one of several such companies to emerge in the wake of Enron and other corporate scandals.

    Ed Stewart, Southwest's spokesman, said it appeared to be a valid study and agreed that the Houston comparison was a good one. He added that Southwest officials believe that lower fares would result in American gaining passengers, not losing them.

    King does not claim his five-page report is an exhaustive look at the changes that would result from repeal of the amendment. He based his study on publicly available Transportation Department passenger and revenue data.

    Competition in Houston

    He looked to Houston, where Southwest flies out of Hobby Airport and Continental dominates George Bush Intercontinental Airport, to project what would happen in the Dallas-Fort Worth market.

    Continental and Southwest have co-existed profitably for years in Houston, King said. Continental still enjoys higher revenue per passenger on its flights than Southwest.

    King said the Wright Amendment, by restricting competition, results in higher fares for flights out of D/FW. Transportation Department figures show American's revenues in 16 of the top 23 markets it serves out of D/FW average 24.62 cents per passenger per mile. On the rest of its routes, where it faces more competition, American averages 11.61 cents.

    King estimates that American's revenue premium would drop 16 percent, or 4 cents, to about 20 cents per passenger per mile, without the amendment in place.

    A loss of 1 million passengers by American would represent less than 2 percent of the 55 million passengers that use D/FW. That is a far smaller decline than projected in the recent report commissioned by the airport.

    That study predicted that the airport could lose up to 204 daily flights and 21 million passengers because American would shift flights out of D/FW to Love Field.

    King says he can't foresee that happening.

    "It wouldn't be smart," he said. "They'd have to charge the same fares as Southwest. They would be committing suicide."

    But Cox of D/FW said that assumption ignores the competitive history of the U.S. airline business. Major carriers traditionally respond to new competition by aggressively adding flights and slashing fares.

    D/FW Airport officials say that if American shifts flights to Love Field, it would seriously impair the airport's finances and damage the North Texas economy.

    The airport's study also predicted that competition from Southwest would result in a sharp decline in average airfares paid by D/FW travelers, and that fares would decline even without repeal if more discount airlines come to D/FW.

    Staff Writer Trebor Banstetter Contributed to This Report.

    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
    By the power of greyskull!

  44. #494
    In the O.R. Geaux Tigers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Shreveport Rock City
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by Geaux Tigers
    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD><TD></TD><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2>That study predicted that the airport could lose up to 204 daily flights and 21 million passengers because American would shift flights out of D/FW to Love Field.


    King says he can't foresee that happening.

    "It wouldn't be smart," he said. "They'd have to charge the same fares as Southwest. They would be committing suicide."

    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
    I completely agree with this logic. I mean, the whole idea that AA is going to shift "a significant number" of flights over to Love Field just to compete with SWA is ridiculous! AA has what, 6 gates, at Love? Exactly how many flights and passengers does Cox think this is going to set back DFW? It would be a smarter move for AA to slap a high price tag on those gates and sell them to SWA.

    Continental doesn't compete with Southwest at Hobby. American and United don't compete with Southwest at Midway. Why in the world does American now want to compete directly with Southwest at Love when they never wanted them at DFW to begin with?
    By the power of greyskull!

  45. #495
    -
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Back to Lakewood
    Posts
    3,407
    SCARE TACTICS!!!

    AA loves them.

  46. #496
    High-Rise Member TexasPlus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bedford, Texas
    Posts
    832
    Quote Originally Posted by Geaux Tigers
    <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD><TD>Posted on Thu, Jun. 02, 2005</TD><TD width=15 rowSpan=7></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2></TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2>

    Dollar figure is put on repeal of Wright

    By Bob Cox
    Star-Telegram Staff Writer

    <!-- begin body-content -->Southwest Airlines would gain millions in profits from repeal of the Wright Amendment, an independent financial analyst has calculated, while rival American Airlines would take a hit.

    But the added competition should not be catastrophic for American, the analyst said in a recent report.

    The Wright Amendment, which limits long-haul flights from Love Field in Dallas, has been under an attack led by Southwest.

    Roger King, an analyst with CreditSights in New York, said that if the amendment were repealed tomorrow, Southwest would probably gain about 2 million passengers annually and $278 million in revenue.
    </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
    SWA gaining 2,000,000 passengers/year at Love would translate to about 58 new flights a day, based on 70% load factors 365 days a year. If you assume a 25% passenger shift to new direct flights in cases where it now takes 1 or 2 additional flights, this brings it to 72 new SWA flights/day. Hard to figure how many of the current 114 flights/day they would drop because of the passenger shift. Lets WAG it at half of the 25% passenger shift or 15 flights/day. This would be a net gain of 57 flights/day bringing the total SWA per day flight count to 171.

    With the cap of 250, other airlines would have a shot at 79 flights a day.

    All in all quite workable, and certainly not the death of DFW or AA. It would save the traveling public many millions of dollars in reduced air fares, and stimulate the North Texas economy.

    Disclaimer: All the above figures are a SWAG.

    Note: SWAG = Scientific Wild A$$ed Guess

  47. #497
    The Urban Pragmatist Mballar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Brooklyn
    Posts
    3,953
    Quote Originally Posted by St-T
    SCARE TACTICS!!!

    AA loves them.
    Unfortunately for AA, the more scare tactics they use the more they loose credibility among decisionmakers in Washington. These men and women are not stupid. That's part of the reason why I think Southwest has basically been in the drivers seat on the debate over Wright's repeal.
    A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool because he has to say something. - Plato

  48. #498
    Land and hold short Route Pack Six's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denton County
    Posts
    248
    American would probably lose 1 million passengers and about $250 million in revenue because of the increased competition from Southwest, the report said.

    American would be forced to reduce some fares on its most important and profitable routes to compete with low-fare Southwest, King said.
    Welcome to free-market economics and one of the reasons the Civil Aeronautics Board was dissolved. This is a double-edged sword for American- they can claim they will incur financial losses, but that will also leave them open to the argument that they are benefiting from the protectionist legislation.

    That's not something the travelling public here in the DFW will take lightly- what person wouldn't want lower fares? Ever study thus far has shown that to be the case and that's just free-market principles at work. If American fears the competition and the hit to their yields, then they can go cry the consumer a river to the strains fo violin music. The consumer's concern is getting value for their money and thus far that's been a lower price on air fares.

  49. #499
    Land and hold short Route Pack Six's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Denton County
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by LoneStarMike
    I'm not so sure I agree. I think AA could carve out a niche for itself at Love Field by serving cities and/or airports Southwest doesn't serve. Let AA serve Boston from Love Field while Southwest serves Providence and Manchester. Let AA serve Chicago O'Hare while Southwest serves Midway. Let AA serve New York's Laguardia and Kennedy airports while Southwest serves Islip. Let AA serve San Francisco, while Southwest serves Oakland. Let AA serve Washington National and Dulles while Southwest serves BWI. Let AA serve Miami, while Southwest serves Ft. Lauderdale and West Palm Beach. Let AA or other carriers serve Atlanta and Memphis and Minneapolis and Cincinatti and Denver and other cities Southwest doesn't serve. With lower fares, there should be enough traffic for everyone.
    Good points and interesting scenario for DAL. American could make a nice niche for itself serving airports where Southwest isn't. That could conceivably divert business traffic from DFW, but then it's still going in American's piggy bank nonetheless.

    I suspect that long haul routes out of DAL by Southwest will be to select destinations and focus on O&D (origin & destination) traffic before expanding to capture connecting traffic.

  50. #500
    Member bigtex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southlake
    Posts
    46
    Scare tactics - maybe.

    But, I remember flying a great little airline called Legend that American was hell-bent on stopping. If they would go through that much trouble to kill an airline with a handful of planes, I can only imagine what kind of tricks they will pull to stop SWA.

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
  •