Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AirTran Cancels MKE-DFW  
User currently offlineruuxxv From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 70 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 11699 times:

FL is cancelling MKE-DFW on 3Jan, 2011, less than a year after starting the route.
Changes are loaded into AirTran.com

46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMKE22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1148 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 11572 times:

WN effect on certain cities.. They are huge at DAL, so there wouldn't be a point of keeping DFW open, and as stated they wont..


If Your not pissed, your not trying
User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9700 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 11508 times:

Quoting MKE22 (Reply 1):

AirTran is not cutting citys because of a non-approved merger with WN. Till ANY merger is approved (and IIRC DFW will stay open till SOC) airlines pretty much run as they would without the merger.

Think about it, FL goes cutting a bunch of routes then the Gov. or Shareholders vote the merger down, then your shareholders become pissed. So just like UA/CO, DL/NW, FL and WN will pretty much act as if they aren't merging.
(pretty much being FL wont be starting a new hub or order 500 airplanes.)



yep.
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 11487 times:

I'll bet the DFW Airport Board is talking to WN, again. They would want to keep the Air Trans flights to all the points they fly from DFW (LVS, BWI, ATL, etc.) DAL cannot support that many more flights and DFW can.

I hope WN reopens the old TZ flights DFW-MDW with AirTran equipment.


User currently offlinemrskyguy From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1214 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 11403 times:

Quoting MKE22 (Reply 1):
They are huge at DAL

They are *big* at DAL, and HUGE at HOU. Until the Wright Amendment finally dies in 2 years, DAL's growth is pretty much flat.



"The strength of the turbulence is directly proportional to the temperature of your coffee." -- Gunter's 2nd Law of Air
User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2908 posts, RR: 31
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11301 times:

Dropping this route has nothing to do with the merger - otherwise, it would be dropped along with all the other DFW routes, the OO codeshare, and probably other stuff as well. But FL is keeping all of its other DFW routes for the time being, even resuming the "seasonal" BWI-DFW flights in the spring. This is significant because it is the first MKE route that has altogether failed (although a few were really struggling before being downgraded to OO) and could be indicative of the fact that WN/FL at MKE have reached their peak. Take away some of the LGA/DCA flights (since WN will want those slots for other markets) and the whole op degenerates into half of what it is now..


Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlinetexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4287 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11239 times:

FL will drop all of its DFW routes. The Wright Compromise imposes severe penalties on WN if it starts service from DFW: WN would have to give up some obscene number of gates at DAL if it starts service from DFW. I don't have the text in front of me but will try to find it.

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6789 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11198 times:

Quoting ruuxxv (Thread starter):
FL is cancelling MKE-DFW on 3Jan, 2011

Don't worry, DFW. You are part of a LONG line of places where FL has come in and then went scurrying out soon afterwards.. i think a lot of their cities has felt this sting before..



Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2241 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11129 times:

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 7):
Don't worry, DFW. You are part of a LONG line of places where FL has come in and then went scurrying out soon afterwards.. i think a lot of their cities has felt this sting before..

Trust me, it's neither a). surprising nor b). new to us. Remember when FL flew from DFW to TPA, FLL, LAX, LAS, and MDW? Yeah, those worked out about as well as Legend Airlines. This MKE cut is hardly shocking; in fact, I kind of forgot it even existed, simply because I expected it to be dropped from the radar in no time.



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 11106 times:

Quoting ruuxxv (Thread starter):
FL is cancelling MKE-DFW on 3Jan, 2011, less than a year after starting the route.
Changes are loaded into AirTran.com

Too bad they don't turn it into MKE-ICT-DAL


User currently offlinekingcavalier From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 1314 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 11085 times:

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 9):
Too bad they don't turn it into MKE-ICT-DAL

Kansas doesn't touch Texas so FL would be prohibited from flying DAL to ICT by the Wright Amendment.



Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness
User currently offlineNKOPS From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2699 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 11045 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 3):
I hope WN reopens the old TZ flights DFW-MDW with AirTran equipment

IIRC, WN is not allowed to fly out of DFW until a couple years from now... When/if the merger is approved, FL will have to close DFW altogether when they go on one certificate.



I have no association with Spirit Airlines
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 11030 times:

Quoting kingcavalier (Reply 10):
Kansas doesn't touch Texas so FL would be prohibited from flying DAL to ICT by the Wright Amendment.

I do believe the Shelby Amendment opened up ICT for service to DAL.

http://www.gcmap.com/featured/20101013


User currently offlinekingcavalier From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 1314 posts, RR: 17
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 11019 times:

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 12):
I do believe the Shelby Amendment opened up ICT for service to DAL.

Thanks - I thought it was just Mississippi and his home state of Alabama. Is there anything preventing FL from going to DAL today? I thought the agreement pretty much locked up DAL service to the existing carriers and locked out any new entrants.



Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness
User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3829 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 11003 times:

Looks like FL's MKE-DFW currently operates 2x daily on B717 equipment. AA (Eagle) operates MKE-DFW 5x daily and F9 operates it 3x daily on the E70, so AA and F9 crushed AirTran in the frequency department.

Where will the planes used for MKE-DFW go? I don't know, but maybe FL has some final new cities or routes that could be announced before the WN merger is finalized?

[Edited 2010-11-07 13:52:12]


"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 10989 times:

Quoting kingcavalier (Reply 13):
I thought the agreement pretty much locked up DAL service to the existing carriers and locked out any new entrants.

It is my understanding that if another carrier can negotiate gate space with one of the existing carriers at DAL, they can operate from there. IBut who is going to do that other than WN---?


User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3829 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 10922 times:

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 15):
It is my understanding that if another carrier can negotiate gate space with one of the existing carriers at DAL, they can operate from there. IBut who is going to do that other than WN---?

AA (Eagle) has two unused gates that they lease at DAL. They could theoretically lease them out to other carriers.

However, once the new DAL terminal opens in a few years, AA/Eagle does plan on restarting DAL service from two gates in the new terminal. My bet is that AA will fly to non-DFW hubs (JFK/LGA, ORD, MIA, and LAX) from DAL once Wright is fully repealed on 1/1/2014.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 10884 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 16):
AA (Eagle) has two unused gates that they lease at DAL. They could theoretically lease them out to other carriers.

Yes, they do, and would they want to sub-lease them to anyone else? Why would they want to create another competitor in the metroplex? (Kinda like do you ever expect them to sublease VX a gate or two at ORD?)


User currently offlineruuxxv From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 70 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10810 times:

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 9):
Too bad they don't turn it into MKE-ICT-DAL

Since 2000, MKE-ICT has never been greater than about 11 passengers PDEW.

Chicago-ICT peaked at about 152 passengers PDEW when AirTran flew it and then bailed.
AirTran's MDW-ICT load factors averaged in the low 30% range.

With connections, WN may be able to make a go of ICT-MDW and ICT-DAL, but I'd guess that ICT is one of the cities on AirTran's route map that may not survive long after the merger.

Quoting MKE22 (Reply 1):
WN effect on certain cities.. They are huge at DAL, so there wouldn't be a point of keeping DFW open, and as stated they wont..

BTW, it's a violation of US antitrust law for AirTran and Southwest to coordinate schedules or fares prior to the merger.


User currently offlineridgid727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10756 times:

Quoting ruuxxv (Reply 18):
Since 2000, MKE-ICT has never been greater than about 11 passengers PDEW.

Amarillo-DEN can't board many more than that a day Can they?
and WN operates that route on into DAL.


User currently offlineBlueFlyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4179 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10670 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting texan (Reply 6):
WN would have to give up some obscene number of gates at DAL if it starts service from DFW.
Quoting NKOPS (Reply 11):
IIRC, WN is not allowed to fly out of DFW until a couple years from now

WN is allowed to fly out of DFW today. For every gate they'd lease at DFW, they'd be required to give one up at DAL. The price for WN to bring more competition to DFW is for WN to accept more competition at DAL... Nothing obscene with that.

Quoting kingcavalier (Reply 13):
Is there anything preventing FL from going to DAL today?

On paper, nothing. In the real world, it would be a protracted fight that wouldn't be resolved by the time the merger is completed. If none of the existing tenants are willing to give gate time to a new carrier, it is up to the city, as airport owner/operator, to force one of the existing tenants to accommodate the new entrant, but there's no guarantee that the new tenant will get enough gate time to operate any specific number of flights, or at any specific time of the day. The city is satisfied with the current status quo anyway, and if a new entrant were to ask officially for gate space/time, the city will drag its feet as much as possible, not to mention that whichever tenant the city selects to accommodate the new entrant is likely to sue and argue that another tenant ought to have been selected.



I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlineruuxxv From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 70 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10662 times:

Quoting ridgid727 (Reply 19):
Amarillo-DEN can't board many more than that a day Can they?

AMA-DAL is about 200-300 passengers per day each way. (+60 more to DFW)
AMA-DEN is about 50.

WN already runs 2 of their 3 MKE-MCI flights through to DAL...and MKE-MCI has typically run load factors in the low 60% range. Having said that, only about 10 passengers flew WN MKE-MCI-DAL. WN's one stop MKE-DAL service generated a 30% higher average fare than FL's nonstop MKE-DFW service.

ICT may see WN service (though I think they'll cancel ICT after the merger), but if WN stays in ICT, I'd bet they don't fly ICT-MKE.


User currently offlineLoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3867 posts, RR: 34
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 10575 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 2):
Till ANY merger is approved (and IIRC DFW will stay open till SOC) airlines pretty much run as they would without the merger.

Gary Kelly has already said AirTran at DFW will leave once the deal closes. Once the deal closes, I believe AirTran becomes a subsidiary of Southwest (until the two are fully integrated) and any subsidiary of Southwest cannot serve DFW without Southwest having to give up gates at DAL, regardless of whether the two are on a SOC.

Quoting mrskyguy (Reply 4):
Until the Wright Amendment finally dies in 2 years...,

The 8-year countdown started when President Bush signed the compromise into law on October 13, 2006, so the Wright Amendment won't go away until October 13, 2014 - which is nearly 4 years from now, not 2.

LoneStarMike


User currently offlinekingcavalier From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 1314 posts, RR: 17
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 10531 times:

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 5):
Dropping this route has nothing to do with the merger - otherwise, it would be dropped along with all the other DFW routes, the OO codeshare, and probably other stuff as well. But FL is keeping all of its other DFW routes for the time being, even resuming the "seasonal" BWI-DFW flights in the spring. This is significant because it is the first MKE route that has altogether failed (although a few were really struggling before being downgraded to OO) and could be indicative of the fact that WN/FL at MKE have reached their peak. Take away some of the LGA/DCA flights (since WN will want those slots for other markets) and the whole op degenerates into half of what it is now..

Dan Webb wrote a piece about SkyWest's contribution to FL's LF in MKE. There are some interesting numbers here -
http://boardingarea.com/blogs/thingsinthesky/
MKE - DEN would be 11.9% lower without OO feed. You can see where DFW ranked.



Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness
User currently offlineexFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 10407 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 2):
Till ANY merger is approved (and IIRC DFW will stay open till SOC) airlines pretty much run as they would without the merger.

The requirement that WN give up gates at DAL if it operates at DFW will extend to FL on the date the acquisition is complete, not the SOC date. - it applies to any subsidiary of WN, which is what FL will be between acquisition close date and SOC.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 3):
I'll bet the DFW Airport Board is talking to WN, again. They would want to keep the Air Trans flights to all the points they fly from DFW (LVS, BWI, ATL, etc.) DAL cannot support that many more flights and DFW can.

The "five-party agreement" that imposes the penalties on WN if it operates at DFW (or any airport within 80 miles of DAL) is now enshrined in Federal law (the "Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006"), so any attempt by the DFW board to change the terms would require an act of Congress, and would be vigorously opposed by American.

Quoting ruuxxv (Reply 18):
BTW, it's a violation of US antitrust law for AirTran and Southwest to coordinate schedules or fares prior to the merger.

Theoretically, you're right. As a practical matter, unless someone wants to do an in-depth investigation and find a "smoking gun" (e-mail, minutes of an AirTran management meeting where WN told them to do it, etc.), it'd be very hard to prove, especially if AirTran management acts unilaterally and appears to just be preparing for the merger...right now, they're safe in acting as if the merger will be approved by the stockholders and the Federal Government.

Probably moot anyway, since it appears that the route is not performing well and is being canceled on its own merits (or lack thereof).


25 ruuxxv : DOJ and teams, (fleets, gaggles, covens?) of lawyers will be going through internal emails, documents, phone records, etc at both Southwest and AirTr
26 Cubsrule : Since when does DoJ go through phone records or internal emails for every merger?
27 USAirways787 : I can tell you for a fact our MKE-DFW route has always been an underperformer, the cancellation has zip to do with the buyout. It goes out in the morn
28 SlcDeltaRUmd11 : I do agree this has to do more with DFW/LUV than anything else. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the new WN gives up quite a few of the MKE flights a
29 TVNWZ : No they wont.
30 mfe777 : I flew on this flight a week ago (Monday night). The flight attendant said there were about 40 passengers. It was nice to have so many empty seats aro
31 ridgid727 : whatever for? Is there an anti trust action or an illegality going on?
32 laca773 : I can see AA adding DAL-LGA/DCA/ORD/MIA/LAX with twice daily flights timed for those who want fly home after a days work. Too bad AA doesn't have any
33 USAirways787 : No. AA has enough on their hands with labor and other financial issues. Ordering another aircraft type on top of their already mixed fleet is at best
34 deltal1011man : ah ok, I thought they could fly to DFW till SOC.....but still... hasn't happened, which still makes my point. read above.
35 ckfred : AA will order a 100-seat jet, once it has a new contract with APA. Pilots at AA say that management has been looking at the E190 series and the C-Ser
36 davs5032 : God i hope you're wrong about that...I selfishly would love to see WN at ICT, but it may not be feasible for them. I remember hearing about this, and
37 FlyPNS1 : Not a real surprise. This route is relatively new and likely a big money loser. If FL was remaining independent, they might be willing to keep the rou
38 Post contains links ruuxxv : http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Southw...nd-prnews-1288107703.html?x=0&.v=1 DALLAS, Tex. and ORLANDO, Fla., Nov. 9, 2010 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- S
39 Cubsrule : What is your point? Most mergers this size generate a 2nd Request. There's no news here.
40 ruuxxv : Most mergers do go through a second request. It's standard procedure. The kinds of information DOJ inspects are similar to what was previously descri
41 TVNWZ : ALL mergers examined by DOJ go through a second request.
42 Cubsrule : Can you point me toward a single merger where DoJ examined large volumes of correspondence looking for evidence of pre-merger collusion as a result o
43 ruuxxv : I said DOJ will be looking through internal records of both companies, reasonably large amounts of data, prior to approval of the merger. That seems
44 Cubsrule : To the extent that you implied that DoJ will be looking for (or is very likely to find) evidence of pre-merger collusion, it's incorrect. That's not
45 TVNWZ : Not talking about requirements. There is always a question.
46 Cubsrule : Would you like a list of mergers where there was no second request? For an example in this industry, I'd have to look back, but I don't believe F9/RW
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...
Airtran Plans MKE Growth posted Thu Jan 29 2009 09:21:02 by Rumorboy
OAG: AirTran Starts MKE-SAN + Other Changes posted Thu Dec 25 2008 22:04:33 by Enilria
Airtran Doing MKE-CUN, ZIH posted Thu Nov 13 2008 09:45:17 by Rumorboy
AirTran And MKE Situation? posted Thu Oct 23 2008 12:15:14 by MKE22
AirTran Adds MKE-LGA 3X Daily posted Wed Jan 23 2008 04:31:21 by AirTran737
AirTran Expands MKE, Adds PHX And RSW posted Thu Aug 30 2007 02:59:09 by AirTran737
AirTran Starts MKE-LAS Today posted Tue Jul 10 2007 19:15:59 by AirTran737
Airtran Dropping MDW-DFW, EWR Nonstops posted Thu Nov 30 2006 21:10:49 by Quickmover
Airtran Adds MDW/DFW And MDW/CLT posted Tue May 9 2006 17:08:13 by MaverickM11
Airtran Cancels Plans For Harrisburg. posted Thu Jan 26 2006 21:37:20 by Quickmover