Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA  
User currently offlinesdexplorer00 From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 156 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10577 times:

Southwest Airlines Co. (LUV) and other carriers objected to Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL)’s efforts to expand at New York’s LaGuardia airport through a proposed swap of takeoff and landing slots with US Airways Group Inc. (LCC)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...ew-york-slot-trade.html?cmpid=yhoo

38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10569 times:

Isn't this a little too late as the swap has already been approved by everyone that has a say??


What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10523 times:

Has it? I sure hope so. If it's past the point....why bother crying about it now? Is there anything that can stop this slot swap, and if so, what is it?


Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlineairtran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3708 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10509 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Boo hoo WN. You should have gone to LGA earlier.


Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10442 times:

Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 2):
Has it?

The DOT approved the deal pending DL & US giving it the go ahead (what the DOT outlined this time is much more in line with what US/DL was willing to do as a compromise). Next thing is the silent auction. Not sure when that will happen.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5797 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10442 times:

Quoting airtran737 (Reply 3):
Boo hoo WN. You should have gone to LGA earlier.

Didn't you read the article? It wasn't just them.

While Southwest was the headline, JetBlue and Virgin America also filed objections, as well as "the Airports Council International trade group" (whoever they are).

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1445 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10384 times:

This is expected.

It's all part of the tug of war in any business. Would you expect any competition to just roll over?

If US and DL are on the same page, things won't change.

If they are not on the same page, expect some more drama.



Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10352 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 5):
While Southwest was the headline, JetBlue and Virgin America also filed objections, as well as "the Airports Council International trade group" (whoever they are).

Yeah, and AA, UA/CO supported DL and US in their lawsuit from the beginning because what the DOT and FAA! (I don't even know why they were involved) was trying to do would have set a bad precedent.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinetexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4287 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 10004 times:

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 1):
Isn't this a little too late as the swap has already been approved by everyone that has a say??
Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 4):
The DOT approved the deal pending DL & US giving it the go ahead (what the DOT outlined this time is much more in line with what US/DL was willing to do as a compromise). Next thing is the silent auction. Not sure when that will happen.

Not quite. DOT issued notice on July 28, 2011 soliciting comments on a "petition for waiver" for the proposed slot swap. Comments were due by August 29. The DOT will now consider the comments before deciding to grant the petition for waiver.

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlinecatiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3094 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9974 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 5):
"the Airports Council International trade group"

They represent the local, regional and state governing bodies that own and operate commercial airports in the United States and Canada.


User currently offlineFutureUScapt From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 765 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9974 times:

Hmm, funny that B6 was OK with the first revision to the slot swap that entailed their receiving of 5 slots at DCA. Kind of tough to take any dissenting opinion from them seriously based on that.

User currently offlinecatiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3094 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9945 times:

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 10):
Hmm, funny that B6 was OK with the first revision to the slot swap that entailed their receiving of 5 slots at DCA. Kind of tough to take any dissenting opinion from them seriously based on that.

Wouldn't you be for a deal that you originally benefited from, and then opposed to it once the terms of the deal were changed in a way that was not in your favor? It's not disingenuous.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3640 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 9394 times:

Knowing southwest it was all for show so later they can use it as an example of why they should be allowed to do something. They are usually the best at politics im sure they had a reason behind publicly objecting to something thats already been approved.

No one needs to worry we will see many WN and Delta battles in the future this is nothing more than politics if i had to guess.


User currently offlineburnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7565 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 9392 times:

Notice how its just the "low cost" carriers whining?


"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
User currently offlinecubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23306 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 9242 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 12):
They are usually the best at politics im sure they had a reason behind publicly objecting to something thats already been approved.

You lost me. Didn't WN file a comment within the comment period? And if so, how is the second part of your statement true?



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineElevated From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 297 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 9162 times:

Quoting burnsie28 (Reply 13):
Notice how its just the "low cost" carriers whining?

Yes, lets just have Delta run the show and control almost half the slots because the "low cost" carries shake things up with a competitive edge and/or product into the market. So terrible for them calling them out and objecting.


User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4151 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8363 times:

Quoting Elevated (Reply 15):
Yes, lets just have Delta run the show and control almost half the slots because the "low cost" carries shake things up with a competitive edge and/or product into the market. So terrible for them calling them out and objecting.

Jealous they didn't come up with the idea instead of DL and US. Complaints are to be expected from any airline that doesn't stand to benefit.


User currently offlinesmoot4208 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1322 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8234 times:

Quoting texan (Reply 8):
Not quite. DOT issued notice on July 28, 2011 soliciting comments on a "petition for waiver" for the proposed slot swap. Comments were due by August 29. The DOT will now consider the comments before deciding to grant the petition for waiver.

I believe the DOT has 30 days to make their final decision. If the DOT's recent actions such us granting both DL and AA dormancy on their HND slots (even when UA was willing to serve EWR-HND), I don't see the DOT changing their ruling. As it stands now, WN or B6 stands to benefit at both airports as I believe the slots have to be auctioned off in pairs of 8. With 8 flights, either airline could run a LGA-BOS shuttle. I'm not really sure why WN is objecting to this as they have the most money and can easily bid to win the pair at DCA and one pair at LGA. If the slot swap doesn't go through; they will get nothing.....ever. The DOT also worked with DL and US on a new agreement so I would find it hard to believe they would change what they require as necessary just because WN/B6 complained.

As for Virgin America?....Please...they may not even be in business when the slots finally get auctioned off. Why don't they spend their money and time on lobbying congress to change the perimeter rule before they complain on the DOT's ruling that has zero barring on them anyways.


User currently offlinetexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4287 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8155 times:

Quoting smoot4208 (Reply 17):
I'm not really sure why WN is objecting to this as they have the most money and can easily bid to win the pair at DCA and one pair at LGA.

I haven't fully read WN's submissions, but from one of the first sentences they seem to be objecting to DOT's approval of what WN calls the same plan but with less divesting as being anticompetitive. WN's filing is 86 pages long, so it's sure to have some kind of detailed info. I'll try to get around to reading it at some point this week.

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8011 times:

Quoting texan (Reply 18):
I haven't fully read WN's submissions, but from one of the first sentences they seem to be objecting to DOT's approval of what WN calls the same plan but with less divesting as being anticompetitive. WN's filing is 86 pages long, so it's sure to have some kind of detailed info. I'll try to get around to reading it at some point this week.

Nothing against WN most of that stuff can and should be used as toilet tissue. Again, this is nothing against WN. I've read many a legal documents from other airlines such as DL/AA or whomever and it's usually a whole bunch of nothing; saying the same thing over and over in legal lingo.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineFutureUScapt From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 765 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 7708 times:

Quoting catiii (Reply 11):
Wouldn't you be for a deal that you originally benefited from, and then opposed to it once the terms of the deal were changed in a way that was not in your favor? It's not disingenuous.

Yes, the 10 year old in me would think of it that way. Then reality would set in: that I agreed that 5 additional slots appropriated to LCCs was acceptable at one point but now 8 is insufficient. The regulatory bodies will likely refute it on that basis, among other reasons.

B6 could actually gain more slots through this proposal, though the DOT has proposed giving them all to one carrier so it would be far from a sure bet that B6 would be the victor. In fact, I'm surprised that small LCCs (F9, NK, SY, and VX) aren't arguing for a different proposal as the current one basically ensures they will not gain new/additional DCA access since none of those carriers would desire 8 flights.

Quoting texan (Reply 18):
I haven't fully read WN's submissions, but from one of the first sentences they seem to be objecting to DOT's approval of what WN calls the same plan but with less divesting as being anti-competitive. WN's filing is 86 pages long, so it's sure to have some kind of detailed info. I'll try to get around to reading it at some point this week.
Quoting Elevated (Reply 15):
Yes, lets just have Delta run the show and control almost half the slots because the "low cost" carries shake things up with a competitive edge and/or product into the market. So terrible for them calling them out and objecting.

WN also thought the original divestiture amount was insufficient as well. The DOT/DOJ didn't consider their earlier objection and indeed moved in the opposite direction of what WN wanted, given the changes in the competitive landscape over the last two years. I suspect WN will have to be content with the current divestiture plan, which may still give them potential for a meaningful expansion at DCA and/or LGA.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25698 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 7636 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 20):
In fact, I'm surprised that small LCCs (F9, NK, SY, and VX) aren't arguing for a different proposal as the current one basically ensures they will not gain new/additional DCA access since none of those carriers would desire 8 flights.

I don't know about the others, but I'm sure Frontier would be happy to have eight additional DCA flights. The airline has spent a considerable amount of time persuading the DOT to consider the Frontier-held DCA slots separately from the Republic-held DCA slots, and the DOT has agreed to consider Frontier as a limited incumbent for the auction.

It may be meaningless, of course, because if money wins the auction then Southwest would easily outbid Frontier - or just about anyone - but I don't know if it is all about money.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineFutureUScapt From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 765 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 7480 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 21):
I don't know about the others, but I'm sure Frontier would be happy to have eight additional DCA flights. The airline has spent a considerable amount of time persuading the DOT to consider the Frontier-held DCA slots separately from the Republic-held DCA slots, and the DOT has agreed to consider Frontier as a limited incumbent for the auction.

It may be meaningless, of course, because if money wins the auction then Southwest would easily outbid Frontier - or just about anyone - but I don't know if it is all about money.

Do you think there is a viable opportunity for 8x more F9 flights at DCA given the fact they will have to justify paying for them like you say (i.e. not AIR21 slots)? Personally, I'm skeptical - I can certainly see 1-2x more to MCI, maybe 1x to DSM, and perhaps another 1x to DEN in the event the perimeter bill is revised but beyond that I'm having a tough time coming up with possibilities that I think would be worth paying for. What are your thoughts on where they should consider?

Edit: I suppose with DL leaving IND-DCA that 2x IND service could be a possibility as well. I guess that gets near the ballpark of 8, though I still think it's a bit of a stretch.

[Edited 2011-08-30 23:21:25]

User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25698 posts, RR: 85
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7301 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 22):
Do you think there is a viable opportunity for 8x more F9 flights at DCA given the fact they will have to justify paying for them like you say (i.e. not AIR21 slots)?

At the right price, sure, but, as I say, I think Southwest would easily outbid Frontier.

If not, I would guess several of Frontier's mid-western cities - or cities that have no (or little) service to DCA, we know the DOT likes those.

And what does Delta do when it surrenders the 42 slot pairs to US? Presumably it may drop some of its more marginal cities, or reduce them, those with only RJ service perhaps. Then comes the question of where US would add.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineSeeTheWorld From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1325 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5053 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 21):
I don't know about the others, but I'm sure Frontier would be happy to have eight additional DCA flights.

I'm sorry, but I don't think Frontier could profitably operate eight additional DCA slots nor do I think they are in any financial position to purchase them ... Not going to happen, nor should it ...


25 HPRamper : It's DCA...one of the most desirable airports to service in the entire country. I think just about ANY airline could profitably operate there, and to
26 FlyASAGuy2005 : Yes. DL is keeping the ones that are used to operate SLC.
27 Post contains links and images mariner : Frontier has filed, and is arguing the process: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2010-0109-0134 Click on the pdf icon. mariner
28 ScottB : The beyond-perimeter flights are using slot exemptions, not slots, and the slot exemptions may not be sold or transferred (which is why AA was unable
29 FlyASAGuy2005 : How/when did the exemptions come about? How did they determain eligibility?
30 FutureUScapt : Interesting to note they that are opposed to the DOT's proposal to give all 8 pairs to one carrier like I thought they might be.
31 Post contains images mariner : Sure. As Frontier points out, it means that all the available slots at DCA go to a single carrier. It is possible that the the two blocks of slots at
32 SeeTheWorld : An Frontier doesn't want all 8 at DCA going to one carrier because 1) it can't use eight profitably under the perimeter rule (I don't care whether you
33 SeeTheWorld : And Frontier doesn't want all 8 at DCA going to one carrier because 1) it can't use eight profitably under the perimeter rule (I don't care whether yo
34 mariner : Each to their own - I don't know it to be true. I think it is more likely that Frontier doesn't want to expend the amount of capital that would be ne
35 ScottB : The first six pairs of beyond-perimeter slot exemptions were created as part of the AIR-21 legislation back in 1999, while the second six pairs were
36 LHCVG : True. That WN will almost surely outbid F9 is a fact. That F9 doesn't have, or at least can't make, plans that would allow them to utilize the DCA sl
37 bobnwa : What is this a poker game or a duel? Both DL and WN will do what is best financially for their respective companies.
38 FlyASAGuy2005 : Thanks! Sadly, it seems like a little bit of both at times.
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...
SWA 737-700 Scheduled To Be At LGA.. posted Sun Jun 13 2004 09:06:20 by OPNLguy
UA To Move In To US Terminal At LGA? posted Wed Oct 20 2010 10:26:49 by washingtonian
Bill Proposed To Loosen Perimeter Rule At DCA posted Fri Mar 14 2008 12:35:09 by D L X
How Was UA Able To Add Flights At Lga? posted Mon Jun 12 2000 20:10:56 by ORD
Spirit Takes On The Legacies At LGA posted Fri Aug 26 2011 04:21:58 by bjorn14
Soon To Be Virgin Atlantic At SFB? posted Wed Aug 17 2011 15:43:57 by SFBdude
Lufthansa To Build Satellite T2 At MUC posted Thu Dec 23 2010 04:31:36 by B6A322
Parallel Runways At LGA? posted Tue Nov 9 2010 08:24:42 by nycdave
AA To Test Self Boarding At JFK posted Thu Oct 28 2010 08:56:46 by qqflyboy
Near Collision E145 And Dash At LGA posted Tue Oct 19 2010 14:13:51 by oswegobag