Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA To Build Love Field Hub If WA Repealed...  
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 7032 times:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...tories/021905dnbusarpey.3ae20.html

Use http:///www.bugmenot.com if needed; this article's way too long to effectively summarize...

[Edited 2005-02-19 07:13:46]

62 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13529 posts, RR: 100
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 6967 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Mr. Arpey said he views Love Field's master plan, which limits expansion at the airport, as "invalid" without the Wright amendment in place.

Holy cow batman! AA is going to play hardball! In the article, Southwest denies this position.

Had the airline known in 1998 that the Wright amendment might be altered, Mr. Arpey said, it would not have participated in the $2.7 billion capital improvement project that has created Terminal D and the SkyLink passenger shuttle system at D/FW. Probably very true.

Folks. We're looking at a long legal battle for DAL and the Wright Amendment.

I hope its repealed. What I do have a problem with is WN owning a majority of the allowed gates. If the WA is appealed, gates MUST be made available to other airlines even if its just so AA can play hardball. Dallas should not be forced to trade one monopoly for another. Let the free market reign (and pass the popcorn).

Lightsaber.



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 6940 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (reply 1):
If the WA is appealed, gates MUST be made available to other airlines even if its just so AA can play hardball.


Bullshit, isn't AA the carrier that pitched a holy fit when WN entered teh scene and pretty much caused the Wright Amendement to be enacted. I say let 'em lay in their own bed . . . if they want more gates at DAL let them bloody well compete for them with everyone else.

WN is a proven winner and now AA sees they may have a little competition on their hands with this LLC (who happens to dominate in many areas). To bad AA.


User currently offlineCasInterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4792 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 6939 times:

Wright Amendement = A federal law for a city/state issue. Repeal it and let Texas deal with it.


Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13529 posts, RR: 100
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 6891 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

ANCFlyer
Bullshit, isn't AA the carrier that pitched a holy fit when WN entered teh scene and pretty much caused the Wright Amendement to be enacted. I say let 'em lay in their own bed . . . if they want more gates at DAL let them bloody well compete for them with everyone else. mature reply...

Why are you ok with the master plan limiting the airport to the gates WN already owns? As I said, I have a problem with them trading one monopoly for another instead of doing the right thing (instead of the Wright thing?).  Big grin WN signed the master plan limiting DAL to 32 gates (Where WN owns all but two of the allowed expansion) and only THEN changes their position on the WA. Sorry... I'll call a spade a spade. There will be no gate compitition. WN already owns them. Your reply makes as much sense as saying that all air service must now be at DFW but no more gates can be built thus locking in AA's position.

I want the WA repealed, but not for one company's benefit. There should be airport compitition within a large city and airline compitition within the airports. WN is a big company, they can play by the rules that allow compitition.


Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineLono From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1337 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 6854 times:

The repeal of the WA will mean DFW/DAL will fight over a ever growing smaller piece of the pie... DAL should have been closed when DFW opened... now the motroplex will suffer if AA and WN get into a pissing match.... WN will lose this one for sure... AA has the muscle and the FF program that will hurt WN... bout time I say... put WN in their place... It will be interesting to see these Texas carriers beat the hell out of each other... AA will win this one and WN will take a major step back... but DFW will suffer big time... I say "Are you ready to rumble...."... AA is a monster and WN will get slammed... Good riddance to WN... bring it on.... time to play airline!!!


Wally Bird Ruled the Skys!
User currently offlineSWALoveField From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 179 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 6833 times:

WN has proven over and over and over that they will prevail. When the WA forced them into flying only short-haul, they made it their business plan and is now the most successful airline while legacies struggle.

WN will win this one as well. If the WA is repealed, WN will win. If it isn't repealed they will keep making money while AA loses millions and billions of dollars.

Just because you are big (AA) doesn't mean you will win. David will beat Goliath.

Regards,

Robb
Dallas, TX

"You can't spell win without WN"


User currently offlineTexdravid From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 1 week ago) and read 6813 times:

There are good and bad repercussions with the repeal of the Wright Amendment.

Good: Cheaper flights from the DFW area. Competition to AA's monopoly to distant cities.

Bad: More crowding at an already crowded Love Field. Noise around the Love Field area. Most importantly to DFW(the airport) fans like me....DFW will suffer right when a new terminal opens.

Maybe the status quo isn't so bad is it?



Tort reform now. Throw lawyers in jail later.
User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6759 times:

The reality is that the Metroplex continues to grow at a rate usually exceeding the national averages.
Most growth, not all of it, but a good chunk of it is on the Eastern side, Dallas and Collin Counties.
Think about this, In 2040, DFW will be as big as NYC is now, 11 million people.
Will one and a half airports be able to handle this population surge?
No.
Wright will be appealed, some day, it's only a matter of time.



Delete this User
User currently offlineAzoresLover From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 759 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6683 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Lono (reply 5):
put WN in their place


Why?

For having a business plan that works?
For being profitable during their whole 30+ years of existence?
For bringing affordable air travel to the general population?
For having a corporate culture that works?
For maintaining profitability and no employee layoffs right through post 9/11?
For being a continually admired company in various business publications?

Competition, change, survival of the fittest, it's all part of the American economy.

I'm not an industry worker or an insider, just an enthusiast who loves to fly, so I recognize that I don't know all the "facts and figures" that other more knowledgeable people here would have. But my personal feeling is, they've been successful in their chosen business plan, and like them or not, they should be admired for that aspect at least.

My personal flying preference...I'll take WN on short hops, and I've always enjoyed the experience...BUT...for longer hops, anything longer than about 2 hours, I still prefer to fly a legacy, and I always do. I've always liked AA, and will continue to fly them, among other legacies. But as an outsider to the industry, I tend to be sort of amused at reading the passionate arguments on both sides of the WA issue.

My feeling? Eventually the WA will be repealed.



Those who want to do something will find a way; those who don't will find an excuse.
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6528 times:

Another article from the Fort Worth paper:

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/business/10942637.htm

AA seems to be running a "FUD" campaign, i.e. create "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" about the effects of WA repeal.

As an example, there is no doubt that AA would have some flights at Love were the WA to be repealed, but trumpeting it as a "hub" sounds as if it's intended to conjure up the image (to Love-area residents) that AA is moving the whole DFW operation to Love, which they're obviously not.

As another example, AA is also now trying to link WA repeal with the Love Master Plan and its 32-gate limit. The prospect of more flights than a 32-gate Love could provide further reinforces the first example above, and telegraphs the fact that there will be court battles to come over the Love Master Plan should the WA be repealed. Mayor Laura Miller says AA is wrong in its assertion, but she also sits on the DFW Board, so this should get really interesting...

The conclusion they (AA) seem to want everyone to reach is that it would just be simplier and more convenient for everyone to leave things just the way they are..(and oh by the way, folks will still pay higher airfares at DFW).

I expect to start seeing stories any day now that attempt to bring "safety" into the issue, i.e. Love is some killer death-trap accident-waiting-to-happen airport. Of course, if the WA is repealed, AA will still want to operate here...  Insane

[Edited 2005-02-19 15:39:01]

User currently offlineJsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2074 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6474 times:

More posturing from American. They're so scared of competition it's almost funny.

After all, American operates from both O'Hare and Midway with little effect on its Chicago market share. I certainly don't hear them complaining about Fort Lauderdale sucking away their MIA passengers - in fact, they've been steadily building up FLL. The Dallas/Fort Worth market has been their 'golden goose' for the past five years (ever since Delta started watering down its DFW hub) and they're too lazy to come up with a new business model that doesn't involve gouging North Texas passengers.

While Southwest has been out perfecting the art of making money and pleasing passengers, American has only gotten adept at whining. Perhaps they should focus on something new for a change. And this comes from a loyal American flier.


User currently offlineAA717driver From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1566 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6461 times:

Pssst. Psssst. Hey, AA, this isn't Legacy Airlines you're going after.

Typical heavy-handed tactics by AA. "Well, we'll just run you out of business if you don't stay out of OUR neighborhood." Right. I'm sure Jim Parker is shaking in his boots...TC



FL450, M.85
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6445 times:

>>>I'm sure Jim Parker is shaking in his boots...TC

Actually, Jim Parker is out by the pool, since he retired. Gary Kelly took his place, and was the one who announced the change in WA position back in November 2004. In any event, Gary wouldn't shake in his boots either...  Big grin

That was "Legend" at Love...

[Edited 2005-02-19 16:11:24]

User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26795 posts, RR: 75
Reply 14, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6411 times:

>What I do have a problem with is WN owning a majority of the allowed gates.<

Well, if you are "letting the free market reign" you should have no problem with that.

?If the WA is appealed, gates MUST be made available to other airlines even if its just so AA can play hardball.<

Why? So AA can lose again like they did at LGB?


>Dallas should not be forced to trade one monopoly for another. Let the free market reign<

In free markets, monopolies are allowed. Then again, WN does not have a monopoly on service to the Metroplex. They have plenty of competition from AA and all the other carriers at DFW as well as COex at DAL.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4593 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6383 times:

Quoting CasInterest (reply 3):
Wright Amendement = A federal law for a city/state issue. Repeal it and let Texas deal with it.


I agree! That needs to be the first thing to happen.


User currently offlineAlb222 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6330 times:

AA will do whatever they can to keep the Wright Amendment. Their cost structure etc. cannot compete with WN.
However in the end I do believe the Wright Amendment will go. Look out for some fireworks.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26795 posts, RR: 75
Reply 17, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6296 times:

>Wright Amendement = A federal law for a city/state issue. Repeal it and let Texas deal with it.<

Except that air traffic is controlled by the federal government and anything regarding air travel and airports is a federal issue. Also, the sponser of the bill was a local representative.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineCLEfan From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 299 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6228 times:

Quoting N1120A (reply 17):
>Wright Amendement = A federal law for a city/state issue. Repeal it and let Texas deal with it.<

Except that air traffic is controlled by the federal government and anything regarding air travel and airports is a federal issue. Also, the sponser of the bill was a local representative.


To expand on this, air travel is considered part of interstate commerce, which Congress can regulate persuant to the commerce clause, Article 1, Section 8 of the Consititution.


User currently offlineIncitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 4068 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6147 times:

Quoting N1120A (reply 14):
>Dallas should not be forced to trade one monopoly for another. Let the free market reign<

In free markets, monopolies are allowed.



There is no such thing as unregulated free market. Government regulation is all around us at all levels. Lots of US towns don't even allow people to fence their lots with a 3-ft tall fence. So how many planes land in an urban airport is a government matter, though W.A. is not in the right stance.



Stop pop up ads
User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4528 posts, RR: 34
Reply 20, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6066 times:

Thanks Jsnww81 for providing context. American is well familiar with operating at multiple airports within a region. Arpey's statements in the article are outright hysterical, and embarrassing. AA would probably settle on running a few flights to key markets from Love, like they do at MDW, and get on with life.

The idea that there would be a stampede of other carriers from DFW to Love is ludicrous. Several posters have noted in other threads that DFW is much more centrally located within the Metroplex than is Love. Downtown Dallas isn't all the business action in the region, either.

The bottom line is that AA wants to keep charging artificially high fares at DFW, and gouging Metroplex travelers (and those of us who go there). AA can shove it. It's time for broad-scale airfare accountability in the Metroplex, by the carrier best positioned to provide it--at the low-cost, uncongested airport where they operate now.

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4593 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5783 times:

Quoting CLEfan (reply 18):
To expand on this, air travel is considered part of interstate commerce, which Congress can regulate persuant to the commerce clause, Article 1, Section 8 of the Consititution.


True, but choosing not to regulate (i.e. repeal the Wright Amendment) is something within the power of Congress, too.


User currently offlineCasInterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4792 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5707 times:

Quoting CLEfan (reply 18):
To expand on this, air travel is considered part of interstate commerce, which Congress can regulate persuant to the commerce clause, Article 1, Section 8 of the Consititution.



Yes, but when it all comes down to it, the only ones really concerned with keeping the wright amendment in place, are
1. DFW,
2. AA,
3. Politicians in the DFW metro area.

This issue is not about interstate commerce, but about protecting a local investment, and a monopoly



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4593 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5664 times:

Well put, CasInterest, which is why it should be repealed and the locals should be left to deal with the situation.

User currently offlineOuboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4616 posts, RR: 23
Reply 24, posted (9 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5685 times:

Should it happen? Sure you can throw the doors open and see what happens...but will it really benefit anyone? Not really. Idealy they should embark on a slow run down of the WA. They did it last time by getting rid of the restrictions on various airports. My idea...

Eliminate all restrictions on seat numbers and distance out of Love. HOWEVER. For the first 3 years of this plan...airlines may only expand or offer new services not currently offered to cities that hold the "Non-Hub Primary" classification by the FAA. This opens up cities such as SGF, MOB, TOL, FWA, ROA, DAB, etc to service. The next step over the following 3-5 years will be opening routes to airports classified as "Small Hub Primary" classification - this brings in airports the size of OKC, BHM, ROC, RIC, SYR, DSM, etc. The next step over the next 2-3 years would be "Medium Hub Primary" airports the size of PDX, MEM, CLE, MCI, IND, etc. Then finally "Large Hub Primary" airports which are your ATL, ORD, LAX, PHX, etc over the final 5 years. Why do it this way? In ensures both airlines won't get into a complete pissing match over the mutual destruction of both companies, but will also benefit smaller communities that may be hurt by a weaker DFW hub.

Lets be honest...Southwest may reach a good chunk of the nation, but that doesn't help the cities they ignore while surrounding airports see great growth. This step process really should have been one used when various airports were de-slotted...and how DCA and LGA should be handled now.

Reregulation? Not sure I would go that far...but it would at least maintain order to keep anyone from going too insane.


25 Wjcandee : AA used the same scare tactic years ago when this came up before. Crandall said, "We've got the complexes all ready to go," or something similar. IMO,
26 Ckfred : If I remember my histroy correctly, the federal government didn't want to spend money to help build DFW while still handing out money for Meacham and
27 ConcordeBoy : ...this statement comes off as rather silly, considering that it's immediately followed by:
28 TxAgKuwait : Justice will prevail and the WA will go. Other airlines will not stampede to Love Field.....for one, it just won't hold the traffic. if they do, South
29 Post contains images DfwRevolution : AA already has three gates, and WN can take no more than 24 gates in accordance with the Love Field Master Plan of 2001. Hey Dill... WN has 14 gates
30 OPNLguy : Is it just me, or is what you're proposing in the 1st paragraph the opposite of your example in the 2nd paragraph? People are already doing that toda
31 Okie : I am surprised that CO has not weighed in on the issue of the WA I know COex operates DAL-IAH and CO has not had anything to say or have been intervie
32 DfwRevolution : North Texas isn't much of a focus area for CO. They only have 3 gates at DFW and 2 gates at DAL, with flights connecting to CO hubs only.... the W.A.
33 TxAgKuwait : I've said it before but it bears repeating. The last thing on earth AA should want is WN at DFW. If Wright is repealed, and Southwest is allowed to do
34 Brons2 : This can already be done on WN. The biggest fallacy of all the tooth-gnashing that is going on is that the idea that AA will have a huge expansion at
35 AAgent : It is clear that there are passionate arguments both for and against the repeal of the Wright Amendment. However, it would appear that American Airlin
36 DfwRevolution : Suuuuree... AA and WN squared off in the 90s over intra-Texas traffic, and AA had their asses handed to them. And AA has taken the first step of piss
37 Post contains images 2H4 : Never underestimate the stupidity of traditional airline management. 2H4
38 Blsbls99 : What was the real purpose of the WA? And hasn't it served it's purpose by now? Wasn't MDW at one point an under-utilized airfield once O'Hare opened?
39 Post contains images Lightsaber : DfwRevolution (reply 29): I didn't know about the limit of 24 (out of 32) limit for WN. I must retract my previous objections. Thanks! All I needed wa
40 Texan : First off, the Master Plan, the one made by the City of Dallas Aviation Division, will not be subject to the repeal of the Wright Amendment. If the ci
41 LoneStarMike : Secondly, WN does not own all the gates at DAL. WN has half of the remaining gates (16 currently in use, 16 available); the other half belong to AA, a
42 Post contains images Texan : LoneStarMike My apologies! Guess that's what I get for using the DMN as my source on that info Texan
43 Tu154 : Of course they are. Could AA ever think up something on their own??? They always have to have their hand..........or in this case, wings, in everythin
44 Post contains links and images RogerThat : Hey all you Southwest people: Where does DAL rank on Southwest's biggest station list? I seem to remember reading on here that PHX, LAS, BWI and possi
45 Incitatus : The city of Dallas is only 20% of the metropolitan area - the 20% with the most crime and the worst schools. If American has "stymied" air traffic, h
46 Ckfred : For those of you knocking the idea of allowing one-stop service out of DAL, claiming that you can do it, my understanding is that WN can't check bags
47 Post contains links and images DfwRevolution : DAL has dropped significantly on the list. For that matter, WN's two largest cities are in the North East http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/press/fa
48 TxAgKuwait : >>You are correct that AA pilots observe the FAA speed limit on the ground, while WN pilots try to see how fast they can taxi. WN pilots are paid for
49 Incitatus : When was deregulation again? Should we pull Braniff into the discussion of repealing the W.A. as well? NOWADAYS the average price that American charg
50 DfwRevolution : When was deregulation again? 1978. From which point, air fares have dropped, except at DFW. NOWADAYS the average price that American charges per mile
51 Aa777flyer : I highly doubt my former employer would be able to have any type of significant operation at DAL if the WA is repealed. WN controlls 99.9% of the gate
52 DfwRevolution : Currently, WN opperates from 44% (14/32) of DAL gates. If they expand to the 6 gates owned but do not use, they control 62% (20/32) of the gates. The
53 Post contains links OPNLguy : A related Sunday article following up how AA's cutting BNA airfares may backfire... http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/business/10948741.htm
54 LH423 : Which cities? LH423
55 Post contains images Texan : Incitatus, the money is in Dallas: North Dallas, East Dallas, Highland Park, and University Park. Big money, big business in these areas. The Dallas C
56 DfwRevolution : Reread my post.. MDW and BWI will surpass the current top WN cities in the next year or so. The current top cities are as listed.
57 SPREE34 : AA can't be serious about any of the statements made lately. Although, with them reducing fares at the request of Tennessee polititians vs market reas
58 Ckfred : TxAgKuwait: I think the speed limit for taxiing is either 15 or 20 mph. Having flown AA, as well as other carriers, I've never thought that AA pilots
59 N200WN : For those of you knocking the idea of allowing one-stop service out of DAL, claiming that you can do it, my understanding is that WN can't check bags
60 Brons2 : this is correct, and while it is somewhat bothersome, it's not a problem if you go carryon only.
61 N200WN : Quote: For those of you knocking the idea of allowing one-stop service out of DAL, claiming that you can do it, my understanding is that WN can't chec
62 SWALoveField : I fly out of DAL 3 or 4 weeks a month on WN. You DO NOT have to claim bags in OKC, or TUL, or HOU and re-check them to go on to MDW or STL or MCI. Reg
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Shanghai Hongqiao Airport To Build Biz Jet Hub posted Mon Oct 9 2006 13:44:15 by Carnoc
AA Gates @ Dallas Love Field? posted Thu Apr 13 2006 19:53:44 by MaartenV
AA To Restructure, Expand MIA Hub posted Wed Jan 21 2004 19:39:41 by MAH4546
AA: Support Of Wright Continues To Build In The Heartland posted Fri May 19 2006 04:46:11 by MrSTL
AA's Arpey "consider Closing Love Field" posted Thu May 5 2005 05:57:33 by SWALoveField
MIA - Life As A Hub If AA Ever Left? posted Mon Dec 13 2004 16:25:15 by N62NA
AA To Expand MIA Hub posted Tue Mar 23 2004 07:37:58 by DB777
Air Force One To Love Field Today? posted Wed Oct 29 2003 18:03:44 by JayDavis
AA Wants Out Of Love Field Lease posted Thu Jun 26 2003 06:14:07 by LoneStarMike
AA To Start A Hub At Jfk? posted Mon Sep 9 2002 04:14:16 by Jcxp15