Southwest, American Fight Heats Up On Love Field

Delta JFK wrote:

Welfare ... Nonsense.... The welfare comes in the form of landing fees that Wn pays at Dal....Fee's that WN cried about when they were being increased from nothing per pound to nothing plus per pound....How can you have competition between AA or any other carrier and WN when the fees at DFW are 10 times greater then that of DAL...The boys in Washington are still playing the airline regulation games .........And what about the fact that WN controlls the slots at DAL.....Wake up WN is not the Savior of the industry.....Always remember..........Someone else is paying for the service in the form of , Noise , congestion , lack of revenue from the DAL fees..........WN another Walmart .......PS ... I don't work for American Airlines

Delta JFK wrote:

Welfare ... Nonsense.... The welfare comes in the form of landing fees that Wn pays at Dal....Fee's that WN cried about when they were being increased from nothing per pound to nothing plus per pound....How can you have competition between AA or any other carrier and WN when the fees at DFW are 10 times greater then that of DAL...The boys in Washington are still playing the airline regulation games .........And what about the fact that WN controlls the slots at DAL.....Wake up WN is not the Savior of the industry.....Always remember..........Someone else is paying for the service in the form of , Noise , congestion , lack of revenue from the DAL fees..........WN another Walmart .......PS ... I don't work for American Airlines

Delta JFK wrote:

WN another Walmart .......PS ... I don't work for American Airlines

Musician wrote:

<quoted text>
As you probably know, an airport is restricted by Federal law from making too much money. DAL has way more cash than it does debt, and the only reason it has any substantial debt is that it decided to take advantage of low interest rates when it built its new parking garage. Even so, they are at near break-even with their current landing fees.
It is not DAL's fault that DFW has a notoriously bad runway design and resulting long taxi times that, along with questionable management and extremely high debt, make its fees some of the highest in the nation.
You are right that Washington is still playing the regulation game. That's why Wright must be repealed as soon as possible. Then, the market will decide which routes and services are profitable and which are not. Everyone ... DAL, DFW, AA, WN ... will be busier and will have the opportunity to create more revenues and more jobs for the North Texas economy.
WN is not the savior for North Texas, but competition could be. And don't bother saying "WN could move to DFW TODAY!" The Dallas Mayor has said "Love Field is here to stay" and Southwest has said "we ain't movin'."

AAer wrote:

When you have a strong mayor form of government in Dallas...the mayor's off off the cuff, non-thinking comments will be taken more seriously. As it stands she is one (equal) vote among the city council members. Using her comment as the authoritative voice, is irresponsible. Well, wait a minute, she did say publicly she was annoyed with Gary Kelly for HIS irresponsible comments he made at the North Texas Chamber of Commerce this week. Maybe I take it back.
<quoted text>

the other pilot wrote:

The irony in this whole conversation is that the O/D traffic coming out of DAL has been progressively declining over the years. Why?

the other pilot wrote:

To ensure competitiveness and profitability, LUV could be forced to move to DFW regardless of the Wright Amendment. In that case, good for LUV, bad for AA.

Corl wrote:

<quoted text>
The analysis I've read by independent researchers is that O/D traffic is declining from Love Field because the short-haul routes have become easier to drive than fly.(Thanks to the TSA's heavy-hand, no one is afraid to fly, they're just afraid to go to the airport!) The logical business move for Southwest is exactly what they're doing - persue options allowing long haul flights.
<quoted text>
Southwest will never be "forced" to move to DFW.(Remember they CHOSE to stay at Love when every other airline CHOSE to go to DFW! It's not myth, it's fact!) While DFW claims it is the Metroplex's major airport, it is not the ONLY airport capable of handling airline operations. Imagine their chagrin when SWA, if ousted from Love, chooses Denton, or Collin Co., or Lancaster, or even Alliance for their new metroplex home base! None of these airports are subject to Wright or even the 1968 Regional Airport Concurrent Bond Ordinance (although Allliance's construction was dubiously legal at best). Perhaps even the old Dallas NAS could rise from the ashes as a new commercial airport?(Yes, some infrastructure would be needed at most of the airports I mentioned. But never say never!)

Corl wrote:

<quoted text>
And your point is what? Over 80 million people shopped at WAL-SWA last year so obviously your comment is a compliment!
PS, I DO work for SWA!:)

Delta JFK wrote:

<quoted text>Relly...How many mom and pop stores suffered , how many years of their blood was lost when Big Brother WalMart stepped in...How many communities are fighting to keep Walmart out ? This is AT&T in another form and Standard Oil in another form ....Didn't we kind of break them up? You call that progress..It's Standard OIl and AT&T all over again.......

Flying all night wrote:

<quoted text>
Its also Home Depot and many other successful companies. I'll try to make this short.
When I worked for Home Depot ,years back, it was a family. And every Sunday everyone would get together and talk about the mom and pop, the Home Base's, the Lumber Cities, and others around our region. Talks were about what could we do to get those customers that shopped at our competitors. It came down to customer service, prices, and stock. So we pushed those three, especially the customer service and we closed down many of the stores around the area. We gave our customers a better product and a warmer place to shop. So who's the bad guy the better company or the stores that lacked something? Due to Home Depot a revolution was started that changed home improvement and handware stores. It created better prices and competition, Lowe's. When dinosaurs and bad run companies go out of business better ones always come to fill those spots. It brings better prices to customers and better service.
In the airline business you have the same thing happening but a little different. Southwest is a better carrier with strong management. And thier not the only good carrier out there. Difference is the government is afraid to let that change happen. Too many airlines were saved by 9/11 that were already losing money that are now being supported by the government. AA is a dinosaur that has had handouts for way too long. Delta is another one, Song anyone? How about US Airways? Are they trying to match the National Debt? America West. Did they sit down while smoking a joint when they decided to merge with US Air? Wait thats right thier broke...maybe they borrowed that joint.
Again way too many of these badly run businesses need to close shop. So don't bring up Walmart or Southwest or any other success story just because your company is way way past its prime. Let the new dogs come in so the customer can get a better price and some better service. Government fed companies like yours just makes makes the whole industry stale.

Flying all night wrote:

<quoted text>
Difference is the government is afraid to let that change happen. Too many airlines were saved by 9/11 that were already losing money that are now being supported by the government. AA is a dinosaur that has had handouts for way too long. Delta is another one, Song anyone? How about US Airways? Are they trying to match the National Debt? America West. Did they sit down while smoking a joint when they decided to merge with US Air? Wait thats right thier broke...maybe they borrowed that joint.
Again way too many of these badly run businesses need to close shop. So don't bring up Walmart or Southwest or any other success story just because your company is way way past its prime. Let the new dogs come in so the customer can get a better price and some better service. Government fed companies like yours just makes makes the whole industry stale.

the other pilot wrote:

<quoted text>
You might want to check your facts before you make sweeping, generalized arguments that have no merit.
AA is not getting "propped up" by the government. In fact quite the opposite. AA, unlike the former US Airways, United, Delta, and Northwest, has not declared bankruptcy nor have they defaulted their pension payments to the PBGC. In fact, they are a rare example of a legacy airline actually doing things the way an airline should: running a good, efficient business. The analysts agree and all say that AMR will do very well in the future.
The only "propping up" the government has done for the airlines has been through the PBGC. The government charges enormous taxes on jet fuel and the airline ticket tax. If anyone is propping up anybody, its the airline subsidizing the government. Or shall I say all the employees that have given up so much.

IT4LUV wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay, now I just have to laugh. AA is "propped up" by the high fares that it continues to charge in the Dallas/Fort Worth market, due to the lack of Dallas-direct flights from Love Field. If the government isn't propping up D/FW Airport and AA by the WRIGHT AMENDMENT, then I don't know what a "prop" is. AA knows that if the Wright Amendment goes away, AA will have to price their flights more competitively out of Dallas. Just look what happened to the DAL-STL fares after Missouri was exempted from the Wright Amendment. Figures released today also show a 43% increase in DAL-STL traffice since 2005, and those direct flights have only been available since mid December 2005!!!! Let's get a grip, people. Repeal the federal law, and let the cities regulate the local airports as they see fit. There is no other airport in the country with such restrictions as Love Field.(With the exception of the Washington DC airport that was restricted after 911 due to terrorism issues-- but guess what-- they've already lifted some of those restrictions, because it was inconvenient for Congresspeople to travel to BWI!!!).

AAer wrote:

LUV 'em or they leave you!
<quoted text>

AAer wrote:

So, is WN being "propped" up by outrageously low landing fees charged at DAL then??? You could make the argument that with Wright in place, there has been no need to expand/improve DAL because you can't.(it looks like a smelly old bus terminal) That has kept landing fees down, and therfore kept WN "propped" up.
Following the laughable increase the city of Dallas put in this past year, WN indicated that they would not tolerate any further increases. What will happen when some actual improvements are made to the airport (after Wright is repealed) and WN (being the largest airline at DAL) has to foot the largest portiono of bill.(FYI: just like AA does today at DFW) Well....they'll threaten to leave and take their HDQ to PHX. That's real dedication to the city of Dallas. They'll LUV you...but only under their terms!! LUV 'em or they leave you!
<quoted text>