Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
American Airlines Responds Ensign Bill  
User currently offlineJunction From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 766 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1508 times:

Some interesting points in this release.
Would restrictions on terminal growth at DAL also need to be lifted in order to allow competition after repleal of the Wright?

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050719/datu048.html?.v=12

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1491 times:

Quoting Junction (Thread starter):
Would restrictions on terminal growth at DAL also need to be lifted in order to allow competition after repleal of the Wright?

Depends upon the number of carriers needing gates and the airport competition plan for DAL.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12450 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1464 times:

Interesting first line to the article, right above the title:

Press Release Source: American Airlines, Inc



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineJunction From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1464 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 1):
Depends upon the number of carriers needing gates and the airport competition plan for DAL.

I don’t think there is any space right now for any additional carriers at DAL, is there? Apparently it’s illegal to expand the facility to make room for anyone else to come in.


User currently offlineFlyingTexan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1461 times:

American’s spin doctor:

"The bill is misnamed -- it should be called the Southwest Airlines Right to Fly Act."

Although the intent of WA can be argued all day, many view it as the "American Airlines Care & Feeding Act" as a thank you from Jim Wright for moving corporate HQ to his home turf.

  

[Edited 2005-07-19 23:46:43]

User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1443 times:

Quoting Junction (Reply 3):
I don’t think there is any space right now for any additional carriers at DAL, is there? Apparently it’s illegal to expand the facility to make room for anyone else to come in.

If airlines wanted in and no gates were available, SWA would be forced to give up gates to accomodate service.


User currently offlineNASBWI From Bahamas, joined Feb 2005, 1311 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1440 times:

Looking at it one way, I can understand the DFW gang's gripe (and this coincides with the other thread about the proposed repeal). The original agreement was that DAL would've been closed entirely, and DFW would've been a replacement. As it is now, DFW has enough space (at least 20 available gates) for WN to operate freely. However, there are certain factors that WN has to consider, especially when operating from a busy airport. Congestion comes to mind with regard to the operations of AA. After all, WN chose OAK over SFO due to congestion. Could the fact that DFW is a 'fortress' hub for AA be one of the reasons why they are reluctant to make the move? Another is the cost to operate from DFW relative to DAL. I have seen it mentioned that the costs of operating from DFW are ridiculous in comparison.

In WN's favor, however, think of it this way: they've succeeded in keeping business at DAL thriving. That says a lot for an airport that was originally slated to be either destroyed or relegated to general aviation traffic. If they are deciding to keep the airport open for commercial traffic (albeit regulated), and WN (and other carriers) have a choice, why should they choose DFW if DAL works for them? It's all well and good to have one major gateway to two major cities, but if the idea is to eliminate any other entrant, then why not go the extra mile? Let's get the South Florida area to dispose of FLL or PBI, Southern California to relieve LGB, BUR, and ONT of their commercial services so that LAX can be one happy family of airline competition? Granted, LAX and MIA don't have much space to grow, and DFW does. However, it's essentially the same concept. Previous agreements notwithstanding, if there is business to be had from operating out of DAL, then by all means, expand upon it! That's my two cents. Cheers,

George



Fierce, Fabulous, and Flawless ;)
User currently offlineJunction From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 766 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1433 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 5):
SWA would be forced to give up gates to accomodate service

That's what I thought. Does WN really want to do this?


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1409 times:

Quoting NASBWI (Reply 6):
The original agreement was that DAL would've been closed entirely, and DFW would've been a replacement.

To commercial traffic only, not GA.

Quoting NASBWI (Reply 6):
However, there are certain factors that WN has to consider, especially when operating from a busy airport. Congestion comes to mind with regard to the operations of AA.

Actually DFW would be more efficient without commercial traffic at DAL. I can think of a few SWA airports that woudl be less efficient than DFW namely Seattle, Midway and Philadelphia in terms of Taxi and Hold times.


User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4480 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1365 times:

American is running scared.

User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4263 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1357 times:

Hold on, the taxi time at Midway is not much since the taxi is roughly a half mile from the terminal to either 22R or 31C. In fact, its less than this often. Yeah there might be a bit of a wait, but its not as long as anything I have dealt with at DFW.

The taxi time in DFW is hard to compare based on terminal locations. Terminals A and B have the quickest departure taxi times in a south operation, which it seems is more common in DFW (At least when I have been there) Terminal E has the longest taxi time in this configuration. And don't even get me started on landing aircraft.

Philadelphia is a much more delay proned airport than DFW and its less efficient obviously. Sea is as well with a bad runway configuration. FLL has become very congested as well. But I can't buy that there are longer taxi and hold times at Midway, especially since its terminal is among the closest in the country to the active runways.


User currently offlineBlsbls99 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1312 times:

How is it that United and American are content at O'Hare with Southwest and ATA at Midway, yet DFW and Love are so much different?


319 320 313 722 732 733 735 73G 738 739 742 752 763 772 CRJ D9S ERJ EMB L10 M88 M90 SF3 AT4
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4480 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1287 times:

Quoting Blsbls99 (Reply 11):
yet DFW and Love are so much different?

Politics and money, basically. AA definitely has its hand in the pockets of some north texas politicians and AA does generate a lot of revenue for DFW and the area in general. Because of WA DFW and AA have managed to nearly monopolize the market and charge fees and fares well above what is necessary.

A repeal of WA would suddenly make it so that those excessive fees and fares would suddenly look at lot less attractive to potential customers and competitors looking at coming into the Dallas area, which means that business to DFW and AA could begin to decline, at least somewhat. The airport and the airline do not want this to happen, it would be too much for them to lower their fees and fares to something more reasonable in competition with WN, and so they are fighting this ferociously.

In ORD you have a situation where there is some pretty intense, but fair, competition going on. In dallas you have a situation in which fair competion is being stifled by an anti-competitive pork-barrel amendment to an unrelated bill in order to line the pockets of DFW and American Airlines. Wright is wrong and DFW and AA know it, but if it is repelealed they cannot continue to rip off the public and the companies that choose to operate into and out of it.


User currently offlineWorkbench From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1225 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 5):
If airlines wanted in and no gates were available, SWA would be forced to give up gates to accomodate service.

I dont think so. Those are already WN gates, I dont think the federal government can force them to give them up. The article in yahoo states that there is no provision for WN to give up any gates/facilities.

I think that this response is hillarious. AA complains about WN having a monopoly at DAL. What the heck does AA have at DFW? What a bunch of crAAP


User currently offlineSHUPirate1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 17
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1182 times:

Quoting Workbench (Reply 13):
I dont think so. Those are already WN gates, I dont think the federal government can force them to give them up.

Can somebody please tell me whether Southwest owns the gates outright, or whether they just own the lease on the gates? (yes, there is a difference)



Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1105 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 10):
Hold on, the taxi time at Midway is not much since the taxi is roughly a half mile from the terminal to either 22R or 31C. In fact, its less than this often. Yeah there might be a bit of a wait, but its not as long as anything I have dealt with at DFW.

Try it in weather.

Quoting Workbench (Reply 13):
I dont think so. Those are already WN gates, I dont think the federal government can force them to give them up. The article in yahoo states that there is no provision for WN to give up any gates/facilities.

They absolutely can. Who you gonna believe... Yahoo or this???

http://www.faa.gov/arp/publications/...s/aip/AIPHandbook/5100_38Bchg2.pdf

And yes, DAL is covered.

Quoting SHUPirate1 (Reply 14):
Can somebody please tell me whether Southwest owns the gates outright, or whether they just own the lease on the gates? (yes, there is a difference)

No, they do not and are not permitted to own them due to the airport receiving Federal Funding, and there is no difference anymore. Airports own it all. The can have an airline financially back a project for a pre-negotiated rent rate/terms but the airport is still the owner with ultimate control over the facility. The reasoning behind this change is to prevent airlines from controlling/preventing a new entrants ability to expand.

Quoting Workbench (Reply 13):
I think that this response is hillarious. AA complains about WN having a monopoly at DAL. What the heck does AA have at DFW?

It's called a hub and lease agreements. DFW has 20 some odd empty gates so there's no need for AA, or any other DFW carrier to surrender gates. What's your point?

[Edited 2005-07-20 07:06:02]

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...
Why Did American Airlines Stop GLA - ORD Service? posted Tue Dec 5 2006 13:28:23 by 8herveg
Inside American Airlines - Again posted Sat Nov 25 2006 01:43:45 by Usnseallt82
Potential American Airlines 787 Livery Dilemma posted Sat Oct 28 2006 21:03:29 by Hrhf1
American Airlines 727 At PHL Vintage Shot posted Sun Oct 22 2006 21:36:33 by Matt D
American Airlines And New Planes? posted Sat Oct 21 2006 17:04:51 by TacSupport1
Inside American Airlines posted Tue Oct 17 2006 19:05:47 by Etops1
American Airlines In Michigan posted Tue Oct 17 2006 17:54:35 by JetBlueGuy2006
CNBC: American Airlines: A Week In The Life posted Wed Oct 4 2006 16:27:39 by Sunnyb
AA: The Future Of American Airlines posted Sun Oct 1 2006 19:52:50 by CHIFLYGUY
American Airlines B757 MIA-MAR Diverted To AUA posted Fri Sep 29 2006 01:04:17 by Luisde8cd