(sound of crickets chirping......)
Here is a list of those groups, Cities, Airport and Port Authorities, Chambers of Commerce and Civic groups that support keeping the Wright Amendment in place.
Barkley Regional Airport Authority
Bloomington Normal Airport Authority
Burlington Regional Airport
Chatanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
Columbia Metropolitan Airport
Dane County, Wisconsin Airport Authority
Decatur Airport (Decatur, Illinois)
Dubuque Regional Airport
The Eastern Iowa Airport
Evansville-Vanderburgh Airport Authority District
Fort Dodge Regional Airport
Fort Wayne-Allen County Airport Authority
Greater Peoria Regional Airport
Kalamazoo/Battle Creek International Airport
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Airport Board
Marion (Williamson) County Regional Airport
Mason City Regional Airport
Mathis Field/San Angelo's Regional Airport
Metropolitan Knoxville Airport Authority
Richland-Lexington Airport Commission
Sioux Gateway Airport
Springfield Airport Authority Board of Commissioners
Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority
Willard Airport/Champaign-Urbana Airport Authority
Williamson County Airport Authority
Chambers of Commerce
African American Chamber of Commerce
American Indian Chamber of Commerce
Arlington Chamber of Commerce
Bentonville/Bella Vista Chamber of Commerce
Bettendorf, Iowa Chamber of Commerce
Blount County, Tenn. Chamber of Commerce
Charleston, South Carolina Metro Chamber of Commerce
Chatanooga, Tennessee Area Chamber of Commerce
Dallas Black Chamber of Commerce
Davenport One, Iowa Chamber of Commerce
Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce
Fort Worth Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Fort Worth Metropolitan Black Chamber of Commerce
Greater Dallas Asian American Chamber of Commerce
Greater Dallas Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Greater Fort Walton Beach, Florida Chamber of Commerce
Greater Fort Wayne Chamber of Commerce
Greater Irving-Las Colinas Chamber of Commerce
Greater Southwest Louisiana Black Chamber of Commerce
Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce
Hurst-Euless-Bedford (HEB) Chamber of Commerce
Illinois Quad City Chamber of Commerce
Kalamazoo Regional Chamber of Commerce
Lawton Fort Sill, Oklahoma Chamber of Commerce and Industry
National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
North Texas Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender Chamber of Commerce
Northeast Tarrant Chamber of Commerce
Rochester Minnesota Area Chamber of Commerce
Tyler Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
U.S. Pan Asian American Chamber of Commerce
City Boards of Directors
City of Texarkana, Arkansas
City of Abilene, Texas
City of Arlington, Texas
City of Chatanooga, Tennessee
City of College Station, Texas
City of East Moline, Illinois
City of Euless, Texas
City of Fort Worth, Texas
City of Hurst, Texas
City of Irving, Texas
City of Killeen, Texas
City of Laredo, Texas
City of Mansfield, Texas
City of Moline, Illinois
City of Monroe, Louisiana
City of Richland Hills, Texas
City of Rochester, Minnesota
City of Rock Island
City of San Angelo, Texas
City of Southlake, Texas
City of Texarkana, Texas
City of University Park, Texas
City of Waco, Texas
Marquette County, Michigan Board of Commissioners
Rock Island, Illinois County Board
Town of Highland Park, Texas
Economic Development and Civic Agencies
American Airlines Federal Credit Union
Hurst-Euless-Bedford (HEB) Economic Development Foundation
Korean Society of Dallas and Korean Association of Fort Worth (English)
Korean Society of Dallas and Korean Association of Fort Worth (Korean)
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)
Metroport Cities Partnership
North Texas Commission
Tarrant County Commissioners Court
Tarrant County Mayors' Council
Tarrant Regional Transportation Coalition
Last edited by PuddinHead; 06 September 2006 at 04:19 PM.
(sound of crickets chirping......)
Had a chance to visit with two airport directors from small town airports that are only served by small regional connection airlines like American Eagle, United Express and so on. Both of these airport directors refused to sign on to the list at the top of the thread supporting the Wright Amendment for AA. They both were threatened by AA lobyist in their offices. In one case, the airport sought his Senators backing in case AA followed through with the threats. It's no myth that AA through various lobyist and its puppet, DFW management, coerced many if not all of the groups listed at the top to support its Wright position or face the loss of service, reduced service, political damage, loss of funds for the airports.
I really dont understand the sky-is-falling scenerio AA/American Eagle presented to the smaller regional markets. In these markets, each potential Southwest service reduction is an opportunity for American Eagle expansion feeding the AA hub at DFW. Unless SW completely abandons a particular market, ticket prices will remain competitive. Potentially, SW will cede regional marketshare to gain domestic marketshare at Love Field.
The work for the smaller regional airports will be to keep service from both SW and AEagle.
^Exactly. The whole "we'll cut service to compete" mantra just isn't correct. If service is cut it will be because the planes are needed elsewhere (and little Embraer E135s will not be competiting against Southwest's 737s) or because they're unprofitable.
If you think about it, it could make sense for AA/Eagle to INCREASE service to those smaller markets that are within driving distance to DAL to prevent those people from simply driving to Dallas to fly elsewhere.
Originally Posted by grantbostonAnother thing to consider is that, with the Wright Amendment repealed, yet hard caps remaining on Southwest's gate allocation, Southwest will likely have to pull service from shorter, less-profitable routes to make room for more profitable long-haul service.
The communities I expect to be particularly impacted would be:
with Houston, Austin and San Antonio all experiencing limited cutbacks in frequency.
Originally Posted by tamtagon
Take a good close look at the route map for Southwest and then compare it with the route map for AA. If you actually think that the repeal of the Wright Amendment would benefit a city like San Angelo, TX or Hobbs, New Mexico or even Monroe or Shreveport cities that Southwest does not serve and there is about a snowballs chance in hell that they would consider service to such small markets you should think again.
Point is and AA made it well was that Southwest does not serve your market and you will not gain anything by supporting the effort to repeal the WA.
Love Field Resident,
Would you care to name names and airports or are you spinning wool again?
Like any good Texan, I have been hoping Southwest would build up El Paso as the Love Field leap-frog gateway to West Coast markets. Considering the growth potential of El Paso, it would be a smart move for any airline to establish a strong presence there.Originally Posted by UptownDallas
I don't see why AA feels the need to threaten small cities and towns that supported Wright repeal. If they're going to pull planes from those markets to "compete against Southwest" what good would it do to pull an RJ from some little place? Where is that plane going to go to "compete"?Originally Posted by PuddinHead
Must be the same "AAmerican Logic" used when they announced cancellation of service to a South American city because Missouri was added to the Wright Perimeter last year.Originally Posted by grantboston
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
Originally Posted by grantboston
Probably for the same reason that Southwest held out the carrot of promised service to states and areas that will never see a Southwest Plane.
Nothing more than just a means to gain support for your side of the argument.
Oh Dear, it looks like I turned off my "Smoke Blowing, Filter" too soon on this site.Originally Posted by PuddinHead
This looks like just another one of your many drive by smoke grenade tossing's. But just in case, this time you did not make this up, please supply us with some actual proof.
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
Is he STILL here?
I preferred the crickets chirping, personally, but that's just me.......
So which is worse a threat that does not materialize or a promise that is a lie?
At the risk of dignifying your post with a response, I offer the following for you!Originally Posted by PuddinHead
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool because he has to say something. - Plato
Originally Posted by Mballar
Great correlation between the two! Point is that for WN folks to belittle AA for their tactics in fighting the effort to repeal the WA is sort of like the pot calling the kettle black.
Both sides stretched the truth to aid their positions.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadFirst of all, I'm unclear as to who these "WN folks" are... to whom are your referring?
Speaking for myself and most of my friends who have attempted to involve ourselves in this battle (pretty hard when elected leaders can't be bothered to show up at legitimate neighborhood rallys featuring over 100 legitimate Love Field neighborhood residents- rather than paid shills), we opposed WN at the end of the day.
Now, getting back to your specific allegation, that WN stretched the truth... where's the beef, here? You have, so far, dodged the request that you back up your complaint with specific support.
In contrast, I have no doubt that the members of this forum can point to numerous lies, half-truths, distortions spewed out by American Airlines and its paid allies.
First of all considering the number of Southwest employees and retirees involved in the so called legitimate neighborhood groups that you speak of created doubt as to their legitimacy. At least with the Stop-and-Think group efforts you knew they were a paid lobbyist group. What is funny about the situation is which group was taken seriously by our elected officials. Stop-and-Think was taken seriously by our leaders because they got local people to express their concerns over the effect of an unrestricted Love Field on their neighborhoods. You know concerns about noise, pollution and traffic are things that we all could relate to. Unlike the groups like the FOLF who wanted us to believe that they actually thought that the ill effects of an unrestricted Love Field would be good for their area. Common sense reigned.
Now as you say getting back to my specific allegation that WN stretched the truth well letís start with the biggest lie.
Itís about low fares.
In the end it was not about low fares, it was about maintaining a monopoly at one airport.
Ahhhh, the sound of crickets chirping........
Did someone pass gas?
If you tell a lie often enough some people will believe your lie. Your lies might work among the ill-informed, however here we know you for what you are.Originally Posted by PuddinHead
Proof, we asked for Proof of your allegations and all we get is yet another fabrication. I say you are a liar, prove me wrong with actual proof of the last three lies you told in this forum, and I will apologize.
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
Originally Posted by TexasPlus
To be frank I don't care what you or any one else in this forum think of me or my opinions. There is nothing I have to do to prove my statement. Look at what finally happened.
Did Southwest hold out for unlimited competition to drive fare prices down?
Anybody want to tell us what they held out for?
To all those people who bought into the Southwest story well I am sorry but we all get lied to sometimes.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadYet you've chosen to post here in this forum over and over and over again... fascinating!
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadNo, just as we can all choose to ignore you, due to your deserved reputation for dissminating false and/or misleading information
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadIt appears that American Airlines induced Southwest Airlines to participate in a cartel... the likes of which havent't been seen anywhere else in the U.S. since the passage of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadCorrect.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadThey didn't "hold out" for anything. They fought a strong battle to bring deregulation and free markets to North Texas in the face of brutal opposition from American Airlines. At the end of the day, American came up with the idea of giving Southwest "a taste," figuring that Southwest might be induced to participating in a monopolistic price-gouging scheme in which both airlines would each be allowed to "have a go" at consumers, with virtually no threat of outside competition or prosecution by the federal government.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadIt's not a story... I've described what happened above. Southwest will still be allowed to deliver low airfares to North Texas, just in a smaller scope that what they desired. Other low cost carriers have been effectively banned... but this was done at the behest of American Airlines not Southwest.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadWhy? Shouldn't Southwest employees be allowed to participate in their neighborhood organizations?
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadAt least with the others, they were legitimate organizations that took no money from any airline.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadSurely you jest. Stop-and-Think was viewed as the propaganda arm of American Airlines, nothing more. So, yes, leaders took them seriously, but only to the extent they took American Airlines' bullying, arm-twisting, threats, lies, and huge expenditures on lobbying campaigns, political contributions, etc. seriously.
Political leaders chose to ignore public opinion since it was "an inconvenient truth" which conflicted with what American Airlines was pushing them to do.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadAbsolutely. And FOLF had legitimate, proven techniques which are used everyday to address these same issues at other, similarly situated airports throughout the U.S. which they felt should be examined.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadYet FOLF was against an unrestricted Love Field. You and your friends at American Airlines seem unable to carry on even a basic conversation without resorting to lies and half-truths... it's as if it's in the water over there at Amon Carter Blvd. in Fort Worth.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadThe raw political power of a large corporation reigned via a series of back-room deals, the details of which have been kept secret from the public.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadAre you seriously going to argue that American Airlines prices airfares lower than Southwest, absent meaningful competitive pressure?
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadWell, it was actually about maintaining a monopoly at two airports... but this was American Airlines' ingenious idea, not Southwest's.
Bless your heart you really want to believe that donít you. If the region and many failed airlines could not force Southwest to fly from the chosen airport how in the world can you expect American Airlines to make Southwest do anything.Originally Posted by UptownDallas
What battle was there to fight?Originally Posted by UptownDallas
What part of the deregulation of airlines and open market competition was all ready in existence in this area do you not understand?
There were all ready an options available from day one that allowed Southwest the ability to fly long distance from this market from either airport. Unfortunately for Southwest people were smart enough to realize this was just an effort by one company to obtain special conditions suitable to its operations or business plan at the expense of our Region, Cities and neighborhoods.
People like me, we wrote to Congress and we donated to organizations like Stop-and-Think to make sure our voice was heard. We worked to see that DFW would be protected and Love Field would be restricted. If you want to place the onus completely on American Airlines go ahead but understand one thing if there was no public resistance to Southwestís plans for Love Field the Wright Amendment would have been gone along time ago.
Your scheming to believe that American Airlines and even Southwest Airlines or the Cities of Dallas and Ft Worth came up with a scheme to allow an air transportation cartel is amazing. I have to admit that the end around that Southwest pulled to wind up sole owner of Love Field is brilliant. Not only do they get their own airport but they also get to keep other airlines out and the have convinced people like you that they are innocent of being duplicitous in their actions.
Am I happy about the result of the compromise, no! I would preferred the status quo and an eventual move to DFW by Southwest.
Sure it is a story, sort of a fairy tale, Southwest the victim, Southwest was not allowed to fly where it wanted to by the big mean American Airlines. Just remember this American Airlines has never enjoyed a legal or legislated monopoly at DFW in the same way that Southwest had under the Wright Amendment and now under the compromise. DFW has not discouraged LLC airlines at DFW and American has only offered competition. Southwest on the other hand is now able to hide behind gate restrictions to prevent other airlines from moving to Dallas Love Field. Did you ever notice how there is no gate restrictions at DFW. I wonder why that is? Do you care to tell us or are you going to spout another conspiracy theory?Originally Posted by UptownDallas
No one says that they cannot. Only that when employees participate in said organizations no matter how hard you try to separate them from their company they still represent Southwest Airlines. Even if the so called charter of the group prohibited them from holding places of leadership within the group if the majority of your supporters are Southwest you cannot honestly say you are not receiving support from the company.Originally Posted by UptownDallas
There is no doubt that Stop-and-Think was a paid organization. However I will always doubt that FOLF was not connected to Southwest Airlines or the Love Field Terminal Partners Group.Originally Posted by UptownDallas
Originally Posted by UptownDallas
That is your opinion and probably only shared with your Southwest supporters. Thankfully your opinion was not shared by the rest of the community and region.
Except that the goals of FOLF were not realistic. How do you say with a straight face say that an area all ready depressed by the airport would be better off with more airport detritus and that the purpose of your group is to promote damaging your environment even more for the benefit of lower fares? How do you expect community leaders to take a group like that seriously.Originally Posted by UptownDallas
Originally Posted by UptownDallas
We supported full repeal for national flights to and from Dallas Love Field Airport. We want open skies, more competition and the lowest fares.
Our organization is for a stronger Love Field community. We support full repeal, consumer choices and a free market system that keeps prices from rising out of control.
The two statements above are from the FOLF website. Sorry but saying the group wanted a restricted Love Field and the statements above do not agree with each other.
Now tell me which truth made you the angriest?
When your opponents reminded you that there was all ready a free market in place at DFW?
Or this one;
Southwest airlines can all ready fly long distance in this market today?
If you think there was wrong doing on the part of the Cities of Dallas and Ft Worth bring suit against them and prove they violated the open meetings laws. But keep in mind Southwest was writing as many checks in Washington as American.Originally Posted by UptownDallas
Nope I never said that. Only thing that I was saying there was that Southwest fed you all with this BS line about it being about low fares when it turned out to be about maintaining their presence at Love Field above all else.Originally Posted by UptownDallas
Originally Posted by UptownDallas
Wrong again, American Airlines wanted the restrictions in place to force Southwest to move to DFW in order to fly long distance routes. You all always want to forget Southwest won itís monopoly at Love Field in Court and with the original Wright Amendment whereas American won its supposed monopoly at DFW in the free market place. You know that thing called competition. American competes. Why in the world would American give their competitor an advantage?
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadWhat the heck are you talking about?
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadWhat I understand is that after the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was passed... DFW Airport and a bunch of its cronies leaned on the corrupt, discredited former Speaker of the House to secretly insert language into an appropriations bill which would have forced Southwest out of business by effectively repealing a portion of the Deregulation Act as it applied to North Texas.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadUnder the Airline Deregulation Act, airlines, rather than bureaucrats, central planners, conflicted politicians, etc., were granted the unfettered right to choose when and where they wanted to fly, based on free market principles.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadAgain, it was the DFW Airport Board and its cronies not Southwest, who obtained the "special condition" exemption from the Airline Deregulation Act known as the Wright Amendment.
I saw first hand hundreds of neighborhood residents lobby for repeal of this stupid law; thousands more wrote their elected representatives demanding relief from this costly racket.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadThe politicians could care less what you or I think... all they cared about was the political power, money and willingness to use brute force and brass knuckle tactics by American Airlines.
The "carrot" is AA's demonstrated willingness to channel huge amounts of cash and perks to politicians willing to go their way.
The "stick" is AA's demonstrated attempts to crush those who stand in its way (witness what they did to Joe Barton who used to be pro-repeal and now appears to have a live electrical wire stuck up his rear, with the "energize" button located at Amon Carter Blvd.).
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadAt a later date, I'm happy to walk you point by point through some of the lesser known and most insidious parts of the agreement which are virtually indefensible.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadOnce again PuddinHead, you've resorted to outright lies and fabrications. The preceding statement isn't even remotely true.
If one wants to discuss "owning" an airport, then AA's position and power at DFW Airport, documented in the airport's governing documents, resembles an "ownership" position much more closely. (Ever notice the AA Federal Credit Union ATMs in the Delta Airlines' portion of the airport?
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadWell, unfortunately for you, you're not in charge of the region's aviation policy
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadThe preceding is nonsensical... not worthy of reply.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadWhat would you call the requirement that these LCCs subsidize American's extremely costly SkyTrain and international terminal?
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadI don't like the restrictions, either (although they benefit American Airlines and Continental, as well and really serve to cap the amount of LCC presence in the North Texas market.... AA is the real beneficiary of this.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadThere shouldn't be gate restrictions at any airport in the U.S.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadThe majority of supporters of Friends of Love Field are local residents and business owners not Southwest employees. Indeed, Friends of Love Field was against the compromise which Southwest supported.
Originally Posted by PuddinHeadAfter spending as much time around American Airlines as you do, PuddinHead, I have no doubt you can't imagine that public citizens would actually get involved in this debate unless they were "gettin' paid."
Believe it or not, they just acted out of a desire to fight for what is right.
Last edited by UptownDallas; 02 November 2006 at 11:39 AM.
How many moons fill the heavens at night in that little world you have created for yourself?
Are you still here?
I don't know what you said since I blockyou, but everything he said is on the money. Somehow you are making this out to be an AA v SWA deal, when it's not. This about free markets, which AA wants to block. It about free markets when AA does everything they can to squash competition, then try to be so innocent when they rape and pillage consumers pocketbooks.
Those of us rallied behind SWA because we thought they were in it for the cause, when in actuality, like AA, they were in it for themselves.
We still believe in free markets and that Love, like the rest of America, shouldn't be shackled by federal law.
Last edited by FoUTASportscaster; 02 November 2006 at 06:11 PM.
ipe: ipe:ipe: ipe:Originally Posted by PuddinHead
"Those of us rallied behind SWA because we thought they were in it for the cause, when in actuality, like AA, they were in it for themselves"
Sportscaster, regardless of who SWA was in it for, AA's fares have come tumbling down to most U.S. cities from DFW. There is a major fare war going on that began the day Bush signed the new bill into law. The Wright Compromise wasn't perfect, but it is bringing serious relief to area travelers.
But AA's fares haven't gone down everywhere, like they would had other carriers been able to go to Love. Most won't go to DFW.
Do you like paying 1,200 for a flight? You still do know in some places because SWA doesn't go there.
Is it better, yes, but why don't we just do it right the first time? Seems like the better way to go.
Question, does anyone like the fact that Dallas has the only airpoirt in the nation and one of the few in the world that is still regulated? The only one belongs right here, meaning free market principles don't reign supreme in Dallas like they do in the thousands of cities and other 49 states in America. Seems wrong to me, but it's okay because we are protecting two carriers and prices have fallen.
Lots of other airports are slot controlled. For instance, another American hub, Chicago's O'Hare airport has limitations of number of flights (landing slots) due to its size and construction. Airports in LA and DC are the same way.Originally Posted by FoUTASportscaster
And just a few questions: when was the last time you flew anywhere? And, when was the last time you paid "$1200" to fly there?
No, it's supposed to be like this:
Originally Posted by columbiasooner
Originally Posted by grantbostonAll the examples you cite are due to congestion and a need to allocate runway capacity.
That problem does not exist at Love Field.
Originally Posted by grantbostonOur company regularly has to pay over $1,400 to send folks to New York. It's a real problem which Wright II not only ignores, but appears to cement into place.
Making Dallas the single most expensive major U.S. city to travel to from New York for the forseeable future is a pretty bad deal.
(Edited to note: I thought I would check Monday's New York-Dallas fares, just to reinforce the point. Imagine my surprise when I saw AA at $258 round-trip! Haven't seen that in awhile. Not sure what's going on, but I hope it lasts. I have to admit I've been surprised at how far AA has lowered its fares... it will be interesting to see how this ends up when the initial fare wars settle down.)
Last edited by UptownDallas; 03 November 2006 at 04:12 PM.
The slot restrictions at ORD have the effect of rationing flights to carriers. For example, jetBlue recently petitioned (and won) the right to add 4 daily flghts to the airport. AA and UA complained because they gave up flights to reduce capacity when runway construction began. It's a different type of regulation, to be sure, but I never said it wasn't. To say that Love Field is the only "regulated" airport in the country simply isn't true.
Also, I would contend that Wright II doesn't cement high fares into place. Of the three carriers at Love Field, 2 of them fly to NYC from DFW. The largest carrier at Love doesn't service NYC (and no, Long Island doesn't count). jetBlue is the only other carrier who could bring viable new service to NYC and Boston. They're free to do that at DAL or DFW whenever they would like.
Also, I flew home just yesterday on AA from Boston and paid $258 to do so. That fare has been around for about 3 weeks now. From Boston, Delta even had a $195RT (!!!!!) fare for a week or so. I don't buy last minute tickets, but if you're willing to buy in advance those markets are typically competitively priced.
Fine, its the only regulated airport by federal law from Congress. Make ya fell better?Originally Posted by grantboston
And has been said a time or two, AA pretty much makes new service at DFW non-existent. SWA was free to do so, but never will. If they won't move their full operation there, who would start new service that is far more easy to be shot down by AA?Also, I would contend that Wright II doesn't cement high fares into place. Of the three carriers at Love Field, 2 of them fly to NYC from DFW. The largest carrier at Love doesn't service NYC (and no, Long Island doesn't count). jetBlue is the only other carrier who could bring viable new service to NYC and Boston. They're free to do that at DAL or DFW whenever they would like.
I suspect that some flights are being lowered by AA as a publicity move. The routes with little competition will likely go back up in '07. That is just my belief, based on AA's past unethical behavior.Also, I flew home just yesterday on AA from Boston and paid $258 to do so. That fare has been around for about 3 weeks now. From Boston, Delta even had a $195RT (!!!!!) fare for a week or so. I don't buy last minute tickets, but if you're willing to buy in advance those markets are typically competitively priced.
I am the last one to ever defend AA and their business practices. However every legacy airline has hundreds, if not thousands of price changes every single day of the week. The LCC's change as well just not as much or often. Most of it has to do with supply and demand, the competitions fares, seasonal, special events, world events, and a thousand other things. Every airline has an entire department who's job is to set prices that fill seats. Some do it better than others. I don't know what business your in, but in the airline industry, prices change...a lot.Originally Posted by FoUTASportscaster
"Liberalism: Moochers Electing Looters to Steal from Producers."
I don't understand why you would expect any business to lay down to make its competitor's job any easier. Southwest won't do it, AA won't do it. This isn't a DFW/AA issue, it's a business issue. Ask any business analyst or manager in the airline industry and you'll learn that the entire industry is one of the most difficult and cutthroat there is. There isn't a magic bullet to fixing this in the Dallas market.Originally Posted by FoUTASportscaster
As TexasStar said, fares change...a lot. There are dozens of different fare classes. On each flight there is a finite number of tickets in each class sold in what are called "fare buckets." Once the entire bucket has been sold, the lowest price is whatever is left. There are some cheap tickets, some mid-priced tickets, and some expensive tickets. That's true for every airline. The only questions are: how much will each fare class cost and how many tickets in each class will be in each fare bucket?I suspect that some flights are being lowered by AA as a publicity move. The routes with little competition will likely go back up in '07. That is just my belief, based on AA's past unethical behavior.
As we've seen, the prices since Wright II have been lower. I doubt the number in the cheap buckets have increased since airlines like to make money. Since, you know, they're a for profit business.
I'm not saying they should roll over. That's bad for buisness. I'm saying because they do that, DFW won't see new service because AA kills it. What's best for the cement plants or TXU's new coal plants isn't always best for all of us.Originally Posted by grantboston
Our best hope was Love, but now a federal law says it can only have 20 gates, thereby killing that chance. So what will happen will be that growth won't happen, or will go somewhere else, like in Collin County, which has already sapped so much else from the central city.
Again, this compromise is better than the old status quo, but instead of doing right the first time, the way it should have been done, we got a gain, but not the best gain. It goes back to market forces versus government regulation. I'd rather have a market selection rather than one the government says I should have.
It does not matter that the Southwest effect will come from 16 gates at Love Field, what matters is that it comes. Even with complete repeal of Wright Amendment and no Love Field gate limit, Southwest would not have brought lower price options to every domestic destination AA serve from DFW - other LCCs would have filled in the lower price option to cover virtually every domestic destination from North Texas.Originally Posted by FoUTASportscaster
As far as the 20 gate dealio goes, I'm glad there is volume control at Love Field. I want to be able to use Love Field to/from anywhere in the country, but I do not want 400+ flights a day at Love Field. With the 20 gate maximum, the passenger volume at Love Field will probably match the limits of the Love Field Master Plan. I think it's a mistake that a Federal Law determines the volume of Love Field - it should be controled by the City of Dallas through the Love Field Master Plan - but I think the limits should exist.
With Southwest bringing competition to 40-60% of American's DFW destination, AA will no longer be able to overwhelm new comers at DFW.
You'll find me saying this. This should NOT be federal law. Love is the only airport in the deregulated airline industry in the country that is regulated by FEDERAL law. That is not free market. That is governmen interference at its finest. And on top of it, the law calls for the City of Dallas to spend its own money to demolish a private terminal.Originally Posted by tamtagon
Anyone like that bond package? We are voting for it because we live in a city where spending public money doesn't go to street maintenance or flood protection, but rather seizing private property for demolition. That's a good use of my tax dollars. I am so proud to be a citizen. Either the city is lieing when they say they can't pay for basic maintenance, or there is a seperate eminant domain department that has funding, but they want to do this as quickly as possible. BTW, that terminal would have been bought by now by a subsidiary of Northwest and be put to use if not now, then really soon. But, like the city has said numerous times before, we don't want the increase in tax revenue or the economic benefit of an airport to the nearby office districts, like that small one downtown. BTW, even with the caps, we still won't see the level of activity that was the max in the Master Plan, the one the neighborhood agreed upon in the late '90's.
Bottomline is simple, the City has some leaders who benefit financially from DFW somehow, as chronicled on many occasions in the novel of a thread on this topic. It was in their best interest and the best interest of a citizens group founded and funded by AA to limit Dallas. We were told the neighborhood wanted it, but that is not true, as residents of that neighborhood have said on this board.
We have a better situation than before, but not what it could have been. The entire airline industry from coast-to-coast had months to get ready for deregulation, but somehow DFW and AA need 8 years. This entire thing is fishy.
Yes AA still will. The Southwest Effect says nothing about new service. It lowers prices across the board which therefore stimulates passenger traffic. Both of those are good, but AA still has a dominant monopoly at one of the busiest airports in the world. Delta couldn't compete against them there. Who else would be able to? Yes prices are lower, but AA won't cede its own turf. They will do what they have done, case in point with Air Tran, and that's flood the route, not just competing route, but entire times and nearby destinations too, with lower prices, forcing the other carrier to retreat. There is no one with the financial fortitude to take on AA at DFW with new service. The only one would be SWA moving their entire operation there, and they were afraid to because they know what will happen. As SWA's Herd Kheller said, they don't exactly welcomeyou with milk and cookies.With Southwest bringing competition to 40-60% of American's DFW destination, AA will no longer be able to overwhelm new comers at DFW.
The best alternative for the public is gone, for now, until someone wants to challenge the ruling. The anti-trust exemptions was removed, so someone will eventually and then AA will have to pay more money to get someone else on their side, like they did the politicians this time around and like they did on the original Wright Amendment in '79. But sooner or later, this will fall again. Then the City will have to pay for new terminals that they bulldozed once. Maybe they will do it with bond money, since it isn't an eminent domain case.
^I agree with you on the issue of using tax dollars to seize the Legend terminal. It's criminal, it's wasteful and it's wrong. To me, the number of gates at Love isn't as important as the number of flights. I feel that the agreement should have put a cap on the total number of daily flights and left all the gates there unaffected. It didn't happen, so it's water under the bridge.
Again, I won't disagree that AA is a tough competitor. Just as much, if not moreso than anyone else in the industry. But, that's how this business works. It's the model for the entire industry. Moreover, this is the inevitable friction in the LCC model and the reason why it's starting to fail. The easy, not so strong and uncompetitive routes have been picked dry by Southwest, jetBlue, etc. They're starting to run into each other an into the larger carriers. Profits are harder to come by (just look at the last quarter's earnings for all the LCC carriers and compare them to the big boys).
You're right, it isn't perfect. But the world (especially the imperfect Airline world) don't exist in a perfect capitalistic and competitive system. Even if we removed all regulations around DAL there would still be competitive issues based on the size and capabilities of the individual players in the system.
That'd be fine because the free market is making the decision, not the federal government after recieving payments from AA so AA's wants are now the only federal law restricting any airport in the nation. AA wanted that law for one reason and one reason only, to squash competition on its turf. They can't do that if anyone is over at Love. That is anti-capitalistic and more socialist or communist.Originally Posted by grantboston
Originally Posted by FoUTASportscasterAgreed, the only "business model" which has been at work here goes something like this:
1) Due to the competition-restricting impacts of the Wright Amendment, American Airlines garners approximately $300 - $400 million in top-line revenue per year;
2) In an attempt to maintain the status quo regulatory regime, it can afford to reinvest a significant amount (both directly as well as indirectly via the DFW Airport Board), say in the tens of millions of dollars in "protection payments" doled out as follows:
- direct political contributions to key politicians;
- support of causes favored by key politicians;
- indirect political contributions via the following channels:
- overpayments to lawfirms, who in turn direct their partners to channel political contributions to key targets;
- overpayments to minority contractors (who are exempt from competitive bidding requirements at DFW) who are then "persuaded" to direct support to key legislators; and
- generous charitable contributions to certain not-for-profit organizations, the quid pro quo being that the boards of directors of said organizations, typically the local rich and powerful, also reinforce support for the same targeted politicians.
In other words, this isn't a business model, it's simply an insiders' game of mutual back-scratching.
You know, every single one of these have one thing in common:Originally Posted by PuddinHead
Their side got p0wned.
Really?Originally Posted by UrbanLandscape
No full repeal and 8 more years of limitations. Seems like the repeal folks got sold out by their great saviour of the skys.
So who really got owned? Or soldout may be the best way to describe the current resolution. Wright supporters? Hardly, we still have limits on the airport and by limiting the number of gates we can limit the airlines operating from Love Field.
You poor soul. Limits on marketing and selling tickets have been completely removed, limits on destination from Love Field will be completely removed in 7 years and change. Just what exactly did the AA crowd get to keep? Limits on gates. That's got about a 10 year life and then that will be gone as well. Love Field is getting a completely new terminal that will be head and shoulders better than what DFW has to offer. Love will also get a DART stop making it even more accessible. Love Field will be the prefferred airport much in the same way LaGuardia is in NY and Reagan is in D.C. Once the new nonstop flights start the airport will be so popular that there will be overwhelming support to amend the law yet again to remove the 20 gate cap and then Love will expand to 40 gates.Originally Posted by PuddinHead
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)