Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Kelleher Vs. Crandall On The Wright Amendment  
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2639 times:

Edit: [If it asks you for registration, try bugmenot.com]

Herb's take on things...

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...ies/031805dnedikelleher.55d10.html


Crandall's take on things...

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...ies/031805dnedicrandall.55c82.html

[Edited 2005-03-23 05:18:23]

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 977 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2621 times:

Gahh... registration required. Oh well, I recieved the print edition and can dig it out  Wink

User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 977 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2616 times:

I gravitate toward Herb's reasoning for several reasons:

First, the motives for the Wright Ammendment were political not economic. DFW airport contended with congestion in it's early years, dispelling fears that airlines would not accept it. DFW is now one of the top three airports world-wide

Second, the economic implications for WN are grossley unfair. All of WN's aircraft are taxed in Dallas County, yet WN faces stiff restrictions from DAL.

Third, American has fought perimeter rules in the past (of course, when they served their interest)

Fourth, fares outside of competition of the Wright/Shelby states are woefully uncompetitive

Fifth, by American Airlines' own experience at FLL/MIA, facing a competitor airport forced them to trim opperations and lower fares... which ultimatly boosted traffic and revenue for AA


User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2606 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
Gahh... registration required. Oh well, I recieved the print edition and can dig it out

Use bugmenot.com to get into the article without registering. Not too long ago the userid for the dallas morning news was "dallamorningnewssucks"


User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2588 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 2):
I gravitate toward Herb's reasoning for several reasons:

Similarly, I gravitate away from Crandall's...  Wink He mentions (yet again) SWA's monopoly (97%, IIRC) at Love, but is rather disingenuous in that he fails to mention that were the WA repealed, SWA would have far -less- than that 97% share, since AA (and some other airlines) would now have flights there at Love. With only a max of 32 potential gates, there's only so many flights Love is capable of. But then again, AA has been sAAbre-rattling their belief (erroneous) that should the WA gets knocked down that so too does the Love Field Master Plan with the 32-gate limit.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 977 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2581 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 4):
With only a max of 32 potential gates, there's only so many flights Love is capable of.

More specifically... WN is limited to 24 I believe. They already own 14 with immediate rights to an additional 6


User currently offlineFlyingTexan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2575 times:

Crandall: “Southwest's newfound desire to fly anywhere it wishes from Love Field and its continued monopoly at Love Field.”

Southwest is by far the dominant carrier at Love, but talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

Herb: “Also, as Al Casey, then CEO of American Airlines, recounts in his memoirs, American moved in 1979 solely to get much cheaper headquarters space in Fort Worth due to a tax-free bond deal.”

I also really like another thing Herb said – WN's services are restricted but their taxes are not.

Thank you for posting both links.

Quoting Goingboeing (Reply 3):
Not too long ago the userid for the dallas morning news was "dallamorningnewssucks"

Lol boeing!


User currently offlineCoa764 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 328 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2574 times:

You would think AAl could coexist with SWA like CAL does in Houston. I say repeal the thing and let the chips fall. Meaning if SWA, AAL, TRS or whomever wants to operate from one or both airports then so be it. That said SWA might just get some unwanted completion at Love that, as of now, they don't really have.


Please oh please Mr Moderator Nazi, dont delete my thread.
User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6818 posts, RR: 34
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2460 times:

Time for this political crutch to be revoked, IMHO.

It's nonsense. Wright Amendment needs to go.

And I would tend to think that WN will have the lobby power now to be able to stand toe to toe with AA in this regard.


User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4506 posts, RR: 33
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2428 times:

I don't have time today to dissect the articles in detail. In short, Herb is right, Crandall is wrong. It's time for free competition in the Metroplex, and daily, continuous, low fares to destinations outside the WA perimeter. AA lives with Midway just fine, and as Herb noted AA was quite happy to push for DCA perimeter exemptions. The Wrong Amendment should be repealed, now.

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offlineJsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2037 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2408 times:

I saw both of these last week as well.

While I'm 100 percent in favor of repealing the amendment, I did think that Crandall presented a better-written piece with more coherent arguments. Kelleher's piece wasn't particularly well-written, IMHO.

Regardless of writing style, I think we have a better chance of seeing Wright repealed this time around than at any other point in its 25-year history. Southwest is really leveraging its position as America's most profitable and sought-after airline, and it really looks like things may go their way this time around.

There's no danger of DFW failing anymore, like there may have been in 1974. It's unfortunately that Delta pulled their hub right as the airport is getting ready to open its new terminal and train system, but DFW will pull through. DFW already survived the loss of the Braniff hub in 1982 - and yes, Terminal 2W was underutilized for a years. Terminal E will eventually fill back up.

The Dallas Morning News has really pushed this time around for repeal. It's nice to see, especially since the News is pretty notorious for coddling big DFW-area businesses like American.


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...
Cast Your Vote On The Wright Amendment posted Wed Jul 6 2005 01:56:23 by Barney Captain
A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate posted Wed Jun 22 2005 02:14:10 by OPNLguy
Lamar Muse On The Wright Amendment posted Sun Apr 10 2005 08:05:08 by OPNLguy
Question On The Wright-Shelby Amendment posted Thu Jul 29 2004 00:41:38 by WestIndian425
SQ Vs AC On The LAX-SYD Route posted Sat Mar 4 2006 04:32:55 by AC330
What's The Deal With The Wright Amendment? posted Tue Jan 31 2006 20:48:13 by MrPhoo
American Puts Out Report On The Wrong Amendment posted Mon Oct 10 2005 19:33:24 by KarlB737
WN Working Around The Wright Amendment posted Thu Sep 1 2005 01:28:33 by JayDavis
George Will And The Wright Amendment posted Sun Jun 5 2005 07:00:58 by Texdravid
What Exactly Is The Wright Amendment? posted Wed Jun 28 2000 00:58:37 by Skihigh2002