Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2351 times:
Other US carriers responded by increasing and adjusting schedules to their respective hub cities, AirTran was planning to turn DFW into a focus city but that never materialized, and, of course, AA responded by adding capacity at DFW.....but no one airline really replaced DL when they closed down their DFW hub operation as there simply wasn't a need. The airline route system in the United States did just fine with one less hub, and DL redeployed their assets and retired some airplanes after it closed down DFW.....the elimination of DL's DFW hub was a good thing for DL and the industry in general.
DFW (like most major airports) is always hoping to attract new airlines.....next summer, for example, KL plans to launch services on the DFW-AMS route.
Its highly unlikely that another airline will set up a hub or focus city at DFW......going head to head with AA at DFW is a very dangerous game.....but DFW would very much like to attract more international carriers (airlines from Asia, Australia, Europe and Central/South America have all been discussed at one time or another) but, thus far, DFW has not fared very well. DFW is a tough place to be if you are not a OneWorld member or in some type of alliance with AA and I think that limits DFW appeal to overseas carriers. the new KL flight is a step in the right direction and its going to be very interesting to see how it works out (do consider that KL's ""other half"", better known as AF, dropped service to DFW a few years ago.)
Gsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2348 times:
Not really. CO, F9, NWA, UA and US have a few more flights to their hubs but that is about it. AA runs the place and has the clout to made the airport do what is best for AA regardless of what is best for DFW and the flying public.
ATL probably doesn't fare much better with DL, except flying DL is generally a much better experience than flying AA.
SLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4211 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2318 times:
Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 1): no one airline really replaced DL when they closed down their DFW hub operation as there simply wasn't a need. The airline route system in the United States did just fine with one less hub, and DL redeployed their assets and retired some airplanes after it closed down DFW.....the elimination of DL's DFW hub was a good thing for DL and the industry in general.
Many additional mainline routes to the southeastern U.S. came to SLC as a result of DL dumping DFW as a hub. TPA, FLL, RDU, MIA (both for a time), as well as connection service to Texas: AUS, SAT were all made possible by this move. Also some mainline routes via SLC to other eastern seaboard airports were increased. As of January 2008, DL now only serves ATL (9x daily mainline-MD88, 738), SLC (4x=2 mainline 2 connection), CVG (4x=all connection), JFK (1x=connection), BOS (1x connection--S5), EWR (1x mainline 6 per week except Saturdays) from DFW (Did I miss any?). Probably as far as passengers go, SLC was the biggest beneficiary of DL's demise in big-D. Probably the other factor that many will point out is WN being in DAL also contributes to competition in the current Wright Amendment region.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
SkyyMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2262 times:
It's not likely any domestic airline will have much of a presence out of DFW other than to other hub/focus cities. We see how well Airtran did in their attempt to make it a focus city. No airline would be dumb enough to take on the 800 pound gorilla AA has become there. As stated above, AA's biggest competition in the Metroplex is and will always be Southwest. There will be schedule adjustments when DAL is fully opened, but under the current agreement, neither carrier is really going to get much of a leg up on the other, which is exactly what they both wanted.
Super80DFW From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 1714 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2166 times:
Its funny to think that 4 out of 5 Concourses at DFW have AA as an occupant. Also that 3 out of 5 concourses are completely occupied by AA (with the execption of like 3 UA gates in B). I hope no domestic airline is stupid enough to try and have a focus city or hub at DFW because that is a waste of gates, fuel, planes, and employees because DFW is AA town, no airline can compete with AA at DFW. I could see an airline maybe TRYING to start DFW service to another hub, but it is sure risky.
"Things change, friends leave, life doesn't stop for anybody." -- EAT'EM UP EAT'EM UP KSU!!
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 13454 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2139 times:
Quoting 787EWR (Thread starter): When Delta downsized their operation at DFW, were there any airlines, other than American, that expanded their presence?
Not really. Nobody was that stupid.
Besides, most of the markets Delta dropped from DFW were already plenty served nonstop by AA, and then some. In every single market where AA and Delta overlapped, with the exception of Delta hubs in Atlanta, Cincinnati and Salt Lake City, AA was by far the dominant carrier. After the Delta pullout, AA's capacity plus a few more flights was more than enough to pick up the slack in most places, plus the huge growth AA/Eagle did in the southeast picked up a huge amount of the traffic Delta dropped that they used to flow over DFW to the west.
Quoting 787EWR (Thread starter): DFW is a huge airport, so does anyone know if they are planning to attract any other airlines?
They're trying, but they no there is little chance of too much domestic competition for AA because, as others have said, it would just be a stupid waste of money and resources for said airline. AirTran came in all confident and cocky, I remember Leonard saying, "when we add markets, we don't drop them, we stick with them, and we win," or something to that effect, regarding DFW. They had, at one point, nonstops to ATL, plus BWI, MCO, LAX and LAS. All are now gone save the flights to ATL plus 1 or 2 each to BWI and MCO. There was just no way they could compete with AA - on price, frequent flyer penetration, frequency, or anything else.
On the other hand, DFW's main focus now isn't on attracting domestic carriers but rather international ones, plus new international routes, and I think they will have far more success in that regard going forward. KLM just announced DFW-AMS. I don't think QANTAS DFW-SYD is at all out of the question over the next 2-3 years, nor is Aer Lingus to Dublin, Iberia or AA to Madrid, and maybe even a few others. It will take a lot of focus and effort, and isn't going to happen overnight, but as I said, I don't think it's impossible.
Once their exclusive-use agreement with the airport expires - I believe in 2009 or 2010 - the airport will probably force United to move out of B and make B all-Eagle which, as you say, it already pretty much is save a few United gates. The only reason United is still there anyway is because they sunk a few million into a new Red Carpet Club right under the SkyLink station just before the Delta pull-out and ensuing terminal/airline shake-up that ultimately saw Eagle consolidate operations in B.
There is, of course, plenty of room for United in B, as they don't really need more than 3-4 contact gates, and some overnight parking positions to RON planes, of which the E ramp has plenty. If you ask me, though, United was dumb, at least if the whole "DFW is going force them to move" line of thinking: they are now going to be moving into E (in, say 2-3 years) after other airlines have already snapped up all the prime gate space - near the SkyLink stops, etc. But they'll be just fine.
TCFC424 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 538 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2115 times:
Not only does AA have most of the routes well covered, there are additional things AA has that others don't. #1, they have landing/takeoff priority, and from what I have seen, can do just anout anything they want on anyone's ramp. It's like the wild wild west out there. I was in training for two weeks and had heart attacks just about every day. Pushing a 757 back and seeing an Eagle ramper hauling ass in their tugs right behind! The cops turn the other way. Bringing a plane in, they drive between the marshaller and the aircraft! It's pure madness! (Good place to learn though) You become very quick and adept at identifying hazards before they become a hazard...because they will!
DFW belongs to AA, they own the place, and they know it. Anyone would be stupid to challenge at this point. If AA's financial future were in question, however....
787EWR From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 205 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1985 times:
Quoting TCFC424 (Reply 8): DFW belongs to AA, they own the place, and they know it. Anyone would be stupid to challenge at this point. If AA's financial future were in question, however....
Thank you all for your response.
Can I assume that since AA realistically owns most of the traffic, is DFW going to be like CVG? Dominated by one airline with absolute control of fares. Other than international, I would think that will drive people to DAL and Southwest.
Gsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1955 times:
Quoting 787EWR (Reply 9): Can I assume that since AA realistically owns most of the traffic, is DFW going to be like CVG? Dominated by one airline with absolute control of fares. Other than international, I would think that will drive people to DAL and Southwest.
Not really. Ft. Worth and Mid-Cities people really do not favor passing DFW and going to DAL. In addition, the gate sapce at DAL, while used mostly for WN, is limited by design due to the NIMBY's. Also, as bad as AA's service is, WN's cattle car operations really are a turn-off. Most business travel will stay at DFW.
RFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7868 posts, RR: 32
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1880 times:
If you live near DAL or on the east side of the metroplex and are headed to a destination with only one stop/ change on WN - DAL is a good bet. But it is a small crowded airport with a long security line.
But since the WN cattle car loading is kind of gone - that should help.
It's going to be years before DAL has real long distance flights - and the limit on total number of gates will probably prevent any new airlines from making a big presence.
If you want connections to a non-WN city - DAL won't work for you.
If you live anywhere else in the metroplex and are headed to any of the cites served by AA/AE which are not served by WN - DFW is the only choice. That's the value for international travelers with DFW - the connections to almost everywhere.
AA and WN only really compete directly on a very few routes - but neither wants to be in the same major hub with the other where passengers can interchange to the other airline. The DFW - DAL arrangement works very well to keep each strong with it's own market focus.
ModernArt From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 363 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1864 times:
Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 3): as well as connection service to Texas: AUS, SAT were all made possible by this move.
A minor correction. Both Austin and San Antonio had n/s service since the Western era to SLC. Delta was still using M90s at both airports to SLC in the post 9-11 era, but now uses the Connection service you mention.