User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 3934
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:59 am

Before I start this thread, let me make it clear that I don't really have a position on the current Texas battle. As someone who has spent quite a bit of time in Dallas, but lives in NYC, I can't help but ask what I'm sure many people are thinking . . . WHO CARES??

There are two very useable airports in the area and the metroplex is big. At a time when most of the US is dealing with overcrowded airports and skyrocketing delays, is having excess airport capacity and runways a very big deal?? Hell, it's a blessing.

I have heard some arguments for and against a Wright Amendment repeal. It would set DFW back, it would create a conflict between Ft. Worth and Dallas, it would only help Southwest.

In the end, this is an AA and Southwest fight. AA feels that their global hub will be undermined by a closer-in airport. Southwest feels they should be able to serve the country from their hub at Love. All the rest of us are just pawns in a game of big business.

Can't the DFW area operate a multi-airport system such as NY, Chicago, LA, SF, Miami/FLL, DC, London, Paris, Rome, Milan, Tokyo and every other respectably-sized metro area on the face of the planet??

Besides business politics, I just don't see the issue.

PJ
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:03 am

Can't the DFW area operate a multi-airport system such as NY, Chicago, LA, SF, Miami/FLL, DC, London, Paris, Rome, Milan, Tokyo and every other respectably-sized metro area on the face of the planet??

No. Beacause they can't support both now. ->See empty gates at DFW.
 
drerx7
Posts: 4204
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 12:19 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:07 am

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Thread starter):
Can't the DFW area operate a multi-airport system such as NY, Chicago, LA, SF, Miami/FLL, DC, London, Paris, Rome, Milan, Tokyo and every other respectably-sized metro area on the face of the planet??

Don't forget Houston  box 
Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
 
User avatar
aloha73g
Posts: 1845
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 6:30 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:09 am

I read somehwhere that DFW's airlines (AA) get to share in the airport's profits, btu also have to make payments if it loses money. This may be why AA is so opposed to "Setting Love Free."

BTW, I am in favor scrapping it and letting competition do its job.

Aloha!
Aloha Airlines - The Spirit Moves Us. Gone but NEVER Forgotten. Aloha, A Hui Hou!
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:13 am

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Thread starter):
Can't the DFW area operate a multi-airport system such as NY, Chicago, LA, SF, Miami/FLL, DC, London, Paris, Rome, Milan, Tokyo and every other respectably-sized metro area on the face of the planet??

Many of us would love to, but the Wright Amendment is a federal law. It's an issue that's germain to the entire United States, not just North Texas. We can't work it out locally, it must be resolved in Congress. That's why lawmakers in Nevada, Tenn., and Alabama are getting involved.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 1):
No. Beacause they can't support both now. ->See empty gates at DFW.

Big deal... they've been empty for less than 4 months and DFW is in no risk of losing solvency. It's a matter of DFW having to leave their comfort bubble and compete rather than the airport collapsing and losing it's presence as a world-class facility.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:14 am

Also, Love was supposed to be closed after DFW opened. It is close into neighborhoods where DFW was built away from people (though neighborhoods have since sprung up). The land at Love is very valuable, too, no doubt.

The logical solution is to close Love as was the original plan. It would make DFW the airport it should be, and it would lower fares on AA. DFW has plenty of room for WN, and with the volume of flights they would fly, AA couldn't control and dominate take-off slots, etc.

I say call both airlines' bluff. WN wants Wright repealed but doesn't want to move to DFW but wants to convert this "regional" airport into a national one. AA wants Wright kept, but really doesn't want WN at DFW. So, lets get WN to DFW and let the fur fly!! I'd LUV to see that.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
SonOfACaptain
Posts: 1695
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 5:36 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:17 am

The metroplex can operate two airports, however, DFW can't. It is too big because it is suppose to be THE airport for the metroplex. I think they should open up the Wright Amendment, but not right now. Maybe in a few years.

-SOAC
Non Illegitimi Carborundum
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:23 am

Big deal... they've been empty for less than 4 months and DFW is in no risk of losing solvency. It's a matter of DFW having to leave their comfort bubble and compete rather than the airport collapsing and losing it's presence as a world-class facility.

Tell that to the DFW Authority employees collecting unemployment and the bond agencies.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:26 am

Quoting SonOfACaptain (Reply 6):
I think they should open up the Wright Amendment, but not right now. Maybe in a few years.

At the very least, the prohibition on through ticketing sales needs to go immediatly. WN can't even sell a ticket like DAL-HOU-LAS or DAL-LIT-MDW, what's with that?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
AA wants Wright kept, but really doesn't want WN at DFW. So, lets get WN to DFW and let the fur fly!! I'd LUV to see that.

By WN's study done in November of 2004, flying out of DFW would increase opperational cost as much as 25-50% compared to DAL. For an LCC carrier, that can only come out of their yields...
 
SonOfACaptain
Posts: 1695
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 5:36 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:31 am

By WN's study done in November of 2004, flying out of DFW would increase opperational cost as much as 25-50% compared to DAL. For an LCC carrier, that can only come out of their yields...

But they also said they could make a profit at DFW too.

-SOAC
Non Illegitimi Carborundum
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:32 am

By WN's study done in November of 2004

That's a problem right there. Given the airfield expansion opportunity, technology integration planned and the removal of DL any study done would be innnacurate at this point unless it was done in the last few months.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:36 am

Turn that around. Due to WN operating out of a facility that was supposed to be closed down 30 years ago, they are benefitting from lower costs that have helped them grow from nobody to super LCC. Now that they are a big boy, let them deal with big boy problems...

AA's going to lose business too if WN moves to DFW. But ultimately, the region will be stronger.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:42 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 10):
Given the airfield expansion opportunity, technology integration planned and the removal of DL any study done would be innnacurate at this point unless it was done in the last few months.

The study was iniated almost immediatly after (and because) DL announced they would dehub at DFW. And technology improvements?? When was the last time the FAA implemented any airport/opperational improvement project on-time and with expected capability?

I suppose every airport study is invalid after 6 months?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):
Due to WN operating out of a facility that was supposed to be closed down 30 years ago, they are benefitting from lower costs that have helped them grow from nobody to super LCC.

What are you talking about? WN hasn't grown out of DAL since 1981, and have been shrinking their presence in the last few years. DAL is holiding WN back, and they are moving aircraft out of DAL to more lucrative markets.

DAL is dropping rapidly from WN's top stations, and will continue to do so if the Wright Ammendment is not dropped.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:01 am

When was the last time the FAA implemented any airport/opperational improvement project on-time and with expected capability?

The equipment in question is available now and due for install in late 2007. And the kind of study that is valid on these issues cannot be done that quickly. Long term studies done on DFW have revealed that even with DL, the new systems and airport capacity is more than enough to absorb the operations at DAL.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:16 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 13):

The equipment in question is available now and due for install in late 2007

Does it overcome the inherent geograpical realities of DFW airport? Namely the long taxi distances that would throw a wrench into WN's schedueling and turn-around times?
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:30 am

>>>Does it overcome the inherent geograpical realities of DFW airport? Namely the long taxi distances that would throw a wrench into WN's schedueling and turn-around times?

Not only that, but does it consider the increased costs to Southwest of having to hop aircraft back and forth between DFW and DAL for maintenance, or is Southwest supposed to abandon all that expensive infrastructure at DAL and re-create it at DFW?

Yes, yes, I know Braniff (v1.0) use to hop aircraft over after the move to DFW in 1974. During the deregulation years up until 1978 or so, they could pass those costs to consumers. After deregulation, they were less able to, and it was still a cost to their business, which went under in 1982.

This is -not- to say that having to ferry aircraft between DFW and DAL and back is solely what killed Braniff, as there were a wide variety of factors. The point I'm trying to make is that in the post-deregulation world, everything has to make sense as far as costs are concerned. The costs associated with the hangar replacement/ferrying issue is just one of the reasons that Southwest doesn't seem to feel that it makes economic sense to operate at DFW, and it's Southwest's right as a business to make business decisions.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
Tom in NO
Posts: 6725
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 1999 10:10 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:38 am

Quoting Aloha73g (Reply 3):
I read somehwhere that DFW's airlines (AA) get to share in the airport's profits, btu also have to make payments if it loses money.

On the right track, but not quite correct. If the airport makes a profit during a certain year, that profit is then credited back to the airlines (those that have signed leases at the airport) for use during the following year. Conversely, if there is a shortfall during a specific year, that shortfall will be made up by adding it to airlines' charges the following year.

Tom at MSY
"The criminal ineptitude makes you furious"-Bruce Springsteen, after seeing firsthand the damage from Hurricane Katrina
 
Alitalia744
Posts: 3777
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 8:22 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:42 am

still say the hell with Southwest - they wanna fly further from Dallas do it from DFW....
Some see lines, others see between the lines.
 
N77014
Posts: 812
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 7:16 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:43 am

What should really be asked is how the Wright Amendment got passed without violating interstate commerce laws in the first place?
A new life awaits you in the Off-World Colonies...
 
drerx7
Posts: 4204
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 12:19 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:45 am

Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 17):
still say the hell with Southwest - they wanna fly further from Dallas do it from DFW....

I say the hell with Dallas, Ft. Worth, DFW, American, and all the supporters of the Wrong Amendment. Why can't DFW and DAL exist like HOU and IAH?
Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
 
Tom in NO
Posts: 6725
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 1999 10:10 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:49 am

Quoting N77014 (Reply 18):
is how the Wright Amendment got passed without violating interstate commerce laws in the first place?

That has been my argument all along. Not only does the WA hamper airline growth and competition in the DFW metroplex, it's inherently illegal.

Tom at MSY
"The criminal ineptitude makes you furious"-Bruce Springsteen, after seeing firsthand the damage from Hurricane Katrina
 
Alitalia744
Posts: 3777
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 8:22 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:01 am

Quoting Drerx7 (Reply 19):
I say the hell with Dallas, Ft. Worth, DFW, American, and all the supporters of the Wrong Amendment. Why can't DFW and DAL exist like HOU and IAH?

cuz an agreement was made and law signed that saw for the closure of LUV after a while....LUV and WN didn't adhere to that law - therefore let them suffer...
Some see lines, others see between the lines.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:07 am

Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 21):

cuz an agreement was made and law signed that saw for the closure of LUV after a while

LUV is the stockticker for Southwest Airlines ( IATA code: WN )

DAL is the abbreviation for Dallas Love Field Airport
 
MD95
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:27 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:08 am

Dfwrevolution said

Quote:
What are you talking about? WN hasn't grown out of DAL since 1981, and have been shrinking their presence in the last few years. DAL is holiding WN back, and they are moving aircraft out of DAL to more lucrative markets.

Right, if it will continue that way it is not necessary anymore to talk about the Wright Amendment. WN will leave DAL. But if they want to tap North Texas market they have to move to DFW and compete with AAL.
dario
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 3958
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:09 am

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Thread starter):
In the end, this is an AA and Southwest fight.

They are not allowed to fight on a level playing field due to the Wright Amendment, so it is more than that. It is a captivating legal issue.
The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
 
exFATboy
Posts: 1887
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 11:15 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:11 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 4):
Many of us would love to, but the Wright Amendment is a federal law. It's an issue that's germain to the entire United States, not just North Texas. We can't work it out locally, it must be resolved in Congress. That's why lawmakers in Nevada, Tenn., and Alabama are getting involved

Well, actually it's not germain to the entire United States, which is exactly why Wright should be repealed and the people of the Metroplex left to hash the issue out among themselves.

As a New Yorker, it should be none of my business whether Dallas has one airport or two, just as it isn't a Dallasian's (Dallaser? Dallasaleno?) place to tell New York how many airports it needs, and frankly, the perimeter rules at LGA should be repealed exactly on that basis.

But Wright is a Federal law, so it sort of becomes my business.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with airports competing, and thus believe that Wright should be repealed and DAL free to complete with DFW. If DFW's too big and unwieldy, that's its problem. On the other hand, if the people of Dallas decide to close DAL, then WN will just have to suck it up and move to DFW, and it would be none of my business one way or the other.

But as I've been saying all along, this decision should be left to them. And for that to happen, Wright must go. There is absolutely no reason for the Federal Government to regulate DAL...it doesn't regulate HOU, or OAK, or PIE, or Sanford, or...well, you get the picture.
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:15 am

>>>cuz an agreement was made and law signed that saw for the closure of LUV after a while....LUV and WN didn't adhere to that law - therefore let them suffer...

TxAgKuwait wrote the following to someone with similar comments back on 5/29...
---------------------------------------

I guess folks think that if you say the same thing often enough and loud enough and with some conviction, sooner or later people will accept it as true.

Thus I have to drop in and inject a little bit of truth into the previous poster's statement.

Southwest was granted a certificate of public convenience and necessity by the Texas Aeronautics Commission (TAC) in 1967 to commence intrastate operations.

Braniff, Texas International, and Continental dragged them into court where they stayed, in one way or another, until 1971.

Air carriers regulated by the CAB (Civil Aeronautics Board) all signed a committment to move their flight operations from Dallas Love Field to DFW. The signing date, as I recall, was somewhere in the 1968-70 tine frame.

Since it was not regulated by the CAB, nor even engaging in flight operations, Southwest Airlines was never asked nor did it offer to sign the letter stating they would move to DFW.

All this talk about "Herb Kelleher finding a loophole" makes it sound like Southwest employed some shyster lawyer trick to avoid moving to DFW. The real deal is this - the DFW airport board and both cities tried every legal maneuver they could think of to force Southwest to move to DFW. Southwest went to federal district court where Judge William Mack Taylor found that, while the city of Dallas is not required to keep Love Field open, Southwest was entitled to serve Dallas Love Field so long as Love Field remains open as an airport. This verdict was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans and an attempt to appeal it to the Supreme Court was denied, meaning that since the Supreme Court refused to hear or overturn the decision the legal decision is the law of the land.

At one point in time the Dallas City Council attempted to impose a fine on any commercial airliner landing at Love Field. This attempt resulted in the city of Dallas being warned not to risk being found in contempt of court...that efforts of that type were plainly directed at Southwest.

No legal shenanigans or loophole in the law.....the bottom line is that the city of Dallas accepted federal funds to build and improve Love Field over the years...that if they kept it open as an airport, they did not have the right to refuse service to Southwest. Southwest fought for the right/privilege to stay at Love Field. They spent their own money to litigate it.

Fast forward to the Airline Deregulation ACt...1978 as I recall. January 1979 marked the first interstate service by Southwest....Houston to New Orleans with plenty of one stops to Love Field. Jim Wright, Ft Worth CongressmAAn and Corporate BenefAActor of a certain company whose world headquarters is in Tarrant County....attaches the Wright Amendment to some other legislation. As speaker of the house of representatives, Wright is not without some significAAnt clout. At any rate, he manages to push Wright through, and despite questionable constitutionality it becomes the lAAw of the lAAnd. Southwest abided by the law...but it's not exactly like they agreed to anything. It isn't like they could say "we disagree with that POS Wright Amendment, and are going to flagrantly violate it."

At that time....1979....Southwest had maybe 20 aircraft and had 9 or 10 total stations. Challenging the WA in federal court would have been prohibitively expensive...especially since the carrier didn't have delusions of grandeur. I can't think of a single person on the premises at Southwest's General Office who would have predicted that in 2005 they'd carry more domestic passengers than any other airline.

Times change. Circumstances change. Communities evolve. For those folks who say "it's the law...American has based plans and operations upon the Wright Amendment into perpetuity" I would suggest that a lot of plantation owners based their plans on a continuation of slavery into perpetutiy...but abolotion was the right thing to do. So it is with the Wright Amendment - casting it into the dustbin of history is simply the right thing to do. While it might be fun to watch Southwest move operations to DFW and kick American in the groin, the better solution for the city of Dallas is for Southwest to expand its operations at Love Field.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
B744F
Posts: 2927
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 4:52 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:16 am

Isnt it ironic that most of the free-marketeers are actually supporting a law which tries to limit the free market?
 
drerx7
Posts: 4204
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 12:19 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:21 am

Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 25):
Dallasian's (Dallaser? Dallasaleno?)

Its Dallasite.
Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:22 am

Quoting MD95 (Reply 23):
Right, if it will continue that way it is not necessary anymore to talk about the Wright Amendment. WN will leave DAL.

You misunderstand. WN will never leave DAL unless Laura Miller pulls a Megis Field, the probability of which is slim to none. They will, however, trim frequencies between DAL-HOU to free-up aircraft for higher yielding routes out of MDW and the North East. These highly popular routes are WN's bread and butter routes, they will not be abandoned, but they will face cuts when better markets are available.

Quoting MD95 (Reply 23):
But if they want to tap North Texas market they have to move to DFW and compete with AAL.

Or... they can lobby to have the W.A. removed and circumvent the problem of low-yield inter-Texas routes all together, while maintaining a lower cost structure, and without heavily modifying their proven opperational blueprint.
 
ContinentalFan
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:31 am

Quoting Tom in NO (Reply 20):
That has been my argument all along. Not only does the WA hamper airline growth and competition in the DFW metroplex, it's inherently illegal.

Congress has "plenary" powers to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. This includes what you can't do (e.g. Wright Amendment, transporting minors across state lines for prostitution, etc.) as well as what you can do. While the Supreme Court narrowed what Congress can do in the name of "commerce" in the 90s (e.g. banning guns around schools does not have enough to do with "commerce"), clearly, air transport is very relevant to "commerce." An interesting note - the 14th Amendment requires state action for racial discrimination issues, etc.; the federal laws banning discrimination in private workplaces, etc. where no government are involved, are enacted under the Commerce Clause.
 
exFATboy
Posts: 1887
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 11:15 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 6:02 am

Quoting Drerx7 (Reply 28):
Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 25):
Dallasian's (Dallaser? Dallasaleno?)

Its Dallasite.

Thanks!

*notes for future reference*
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 6:09 am

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Thread starter):
Hell, it's a blessing.

Sure is. Solves many a problem.

You are correct that it is a thinly veiled AA vs WN fight and I bet WN wins it for the very reason above-more runways and capacity, less delays. Besides, the Love field people would like some additional revenue/landing fee's I'm sure.
One Nation Under God
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 6:39 am

All this talk about "Herb Kelleher finding a loophole" makes it sound like Southwest employed some shyster lawyer trick to avoid moving to DFW. The real deal is this - the DFW airport board and both cities tried every legal maneuver they could think of to force Southwest to move to DFW. Southwest went to federal district court where Judge William Mack Taylor found that, while the city of Dallas is not required to keep Love Field open, Southwest was entitled to serve Dallas Love Field so long as Love Field remains open as an airport. This verdict was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans and an attempt to appeal it to the Supreme Court was denied, meaning that since the Supreme Court refused to hear or overturn the decision the legal decision is the law of the land.

Actually, the City of Dallas re-niged found a suitor after winning in court. Not really much more to it than that.

Does it overcome the inherent geographical realities of DFW airport? Namely the long taxi distances that would throw a wrench into WN's schedueling and turn-around times?

Have you even looked at the Master Plan?

Isnt it ironic that most of the free-marketeers are actually supporting a law which tries to limit the free market?

As with most your confusing the free market of the carriers with air transportation infrastructure designed to create a free market with greater opportunity for all. There's nothing stopping SWA from moving to DFW, but for everyone else to move to DAL would be impossible. If that was not the plan when conceptualized DFW wouldn't exist. Or did you miss that part? The whole idea of the Wright ammendment was to protect the public investment, the City of Dallas and to a lesser extent SWA have betrayed that trust for 30 years. They made their bed, they can lay in it.

[Edited 2005-06-01 23:53:29]
 
adh214
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 1999 6:07 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:34 am

The Wright Amendment is problematic for cities outside of North Texas because it constrains affordable travel by 7 million North Texans to cities beyond those covered by Wright.

This is particularly problematic for tourist destinations such as California, Florida, Colorado (in winter) and Las Vegas. North Texans pay more to get to these locations. Thus, they have less to spend when they get there or don't go at all.

Andrew
 
texdravid
Posts: 1394
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 3:21 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 12:32 pm

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Thread starter):
AA feels that their global hub will be undermined by a closer-in airport.

Whatever your position on the Wright Amendment, please don't call DFW AA's "global hub".

Global hub should be reserved for airports like JFK, ORD, LHR, etc., not DFW!!
Tort reform now. Throw lawyers in jail later.
 
northwestair
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2001 11:25 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:31 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 8):

At the very least, the prohibition on through ticketing sales needs to go immediatly. WN can't even sell a ticket like DAL-HOU-LAS or DAL-LIT-MDW, what's with that?

I agree with this staement, I think it is stupid that you can't atlease buy a tkt DAL-HOU-LAS or something similar. Don't worry about opening DAL to Non stop flts to MDW or LAX or HPN, just let the citizens of Dallas by a ticket from DAL-LAS via HOU or what ever city they chose to go to.
I don't care who you fly just as long as you fly
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 5:34 pm

Quoting SonOfACaptain (Reply 9):
But they also said they could make a profit at DFW too.

Sure, WN can make a profit anywhere, that doesn't mean they should incurr massive cost to move

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):
Due to WN operating out of a facility that was supposed to be closed down 30 years ago

Actually, WN was operating at DAL well before DFW opened and was never a signatory to the DFW agreement. Since air transport is most definately part of interstate commerce, the state and cities had no right to tell WN to leave. The reasons they could tell other airlines to leave is that they were contractually bound

Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 17):
still say the hell with Southwest - they wanna fly further from Dallas do it from DFW....

Why?

Quoting N77014 (Reply 18):
What should really be asked is how the Wright Amendment got passed without violating interstate commerce laws in the first place?



Quoting Tom in NO (Reply 20):
That has been my argument all along. Not only does the WA hamper airline growth and competition in the DFW metroplex, it's inherently illegal.

The Wright Amendment IS and interstate commerce law. Congress makes interstate commerce laws and this was passed in a Congressional plan. While I agree that the WA is unfair and both anti-consumer and anti-business, it is actually very legal

Quoting Alitalia744 (Reply 21):
cuz an agreement was made and law signed that saw for the closure of LUV after a while....LUV and WN didn't adhere to that law - therefore let them suffer...

The City of Dallas and WN did not violate any law in keeping DAL, not LUV, open. Dallas and Ft. Worth tried to close DAL and WN won in court (they won a similar suit based on Collateral Estoppel against Texas International and other airlines) because they were not signatories to DFW (as said before) meaning there was no contract binding them to move and the cities had no right to regulate interstate commerce actions going on at DAL.

Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 25):
Well, actually it's not germain to the entire United States, which is exactly why Wright should be repealed and the people of the Metroplex left to hash the issue out among themselves.

It doesn't have to be. Airlines substantially effect interstate commerce and these issues are most definately federal power

Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 25):
There is absolutely no reason for the Federal Government to regulate DAL...it doesn't regulate HOU, or OAK, or PIE, or Sanford, or...well, you get the picture.

Sure it does. If Congress wanted to, it could pass a law limiting flights to HOU but they don't

Quoting B744F (Reply 27):
Isnt it ironic that most of the free-marketeers are actually supporting a law which tries to limit the free market?

It is very ironic, though typical of the GOP

Quoting ContinentalFan (Reply 30):
While the Supreme Court narrowed what Congress can do in the name of "commerce" in the 90s (e.g. banning guns around schools does not have enough to do with "commerce"),

Lopez, in 1992, did not really narrow what Congress could do, rather it defined more sharply the rules.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
sccutler
Posts: 5556
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 6:17 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
Also, Love was supposed to be closed after DFW opened.

False. Utter hogwash.

DAL is a vitally important airport without regard to what WN does or does not do. Closing Love Field has never been a viable option.

Wright is solely about protecting AA's monopoly. We in North Texas pay dramatically higher airfares because of it. The North Texas economy suffers because of it.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:36 pm

There's an article in today's 6/2 Fort Worth paper about an -independent- study on the effect of airfare prices with Wright gone...

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/11795673.htm

(Use www.bugmenot.com if you don't want to register,,,)
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
exFATboy
Posts: 1887
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 11:15 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:27 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 37):
Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 25):
There is absolutely no reason for the Federal Government to regulate DAL...it doesn't regulate HOU, or OAK, or PIE, or Sanford, or...well, you get the picture.

Sure it does. If Congress wanted to, it could pass a law limiting flights to HOU but they don't

Ah, but that's my point. Only DAL is regulated on this basis, and there's no justification for this other than blatant protectionism of DFW and AA. Why should DFW be protected when SFO, IAH, TPA, etc. aren't?

I understand the original rationale for Wright. But it's 2005, not 1979.

And yes, air travel affects interstate commerce...so do a lot of things. But Congress doesn't try to micromanage them all.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:19 am

SWA was only allowed to stay at DAL because it was not an intra state airline regulated by the CAB. The city of Dallas let SWA continue to operate out of fear of legal action by SWA and out of spite against Ft Worth.

Times have changed SWA can go and compete anywhere WA or not. The argument that there are several cities with 2 or more airports operating in conjunction with each other is valid only when you consider the circumstances of the metropolitan areas, population size, geographic size and the amount of air traffic present in the locale.

The statement about high airfares in the DFW area because of the WA. This statement is based on what? What do we have to compare it with that is specific to the DFW area? Through out this whole debate neither DFW nor SWA has published the sources that back up their claims. One study done by the Bureau of labor Statistics show the DFW area to be the 27th lowest in fare increases of the top 30 markets in the US in the year 2004. What gives? Anything that suggests that prices will actually fall is pure speculation. Even with the WA gone why would SWA seriously undercut the fares present in the area? I can see 50 or 100 dollar discounts but cutting the fares lower would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The idea that DFW is an AA monopoly and as such is able to artificially inflate fares to and from the airport is bogus also. You mean to tell me that United, NWA, Continental, Delta, Air Tran, US Airways, Alaska, American West and the rest of the domestic airlines flying out of DFW are in collusion with AA to inflate airfares at DFW?
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
PHLBOS
Posts: 6504
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 6:38 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:33 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 41):
The idea that DFW is an AA monopoly and as such is able to artificially inflate fares to and from the airport is bogus also. You mean to tell me that United, NWA, Continental, Delta, Air Tran, US Airways, Alaska, American West and the rest of the domestic airlines flying out of DFW are in collusion with AA to inflate airfares at DFW?

In most of the airlines (DL being the main exception when it had a hub at DFW) you just listed, competition against AA only exists because DFW is a spoke to another carrier's hub (examples: US competes w/AA on its PHL-DFW & CLT-DFW because PHL & CLT are US hubs).

To my knowledge, only FL serves DFW to other cities besides its ATL hub; but most of those routes were only added on to its original ATL-DFW service within the last 2 years. Does Sun Country have any other DFW routes besides MSP-DFW (where it competes directly w/NW & AA)?
"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
 
thegreatchecko
Posts: 689
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 3:34 pm

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:48 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 41):
The argument that there are several cities with 2 or more airports operating in conjunction with each other is valid only when you consider the circumstances of the metropolitan areas, population size, geographic size and the amount of air traffic present in the locale.

Man I didn't know Dallas/Fort Worth was such a small town. I mean, it must be when you compare it to Miami/Fort Lauderdale (MIA, FLL, and yes, sometimes PBI) or even Chicago (ORD, MDW).

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 41):
Even with the WA gone why would SWA seriously undercut the fares present in the area?

Man, Southwest must have kept the prices high in Philly and PIT...oh wait, I forgot, they slashed airfares and traffic dramatically increased. That Southwest Effect the DOT came up with must just be government propaganda....

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 41):
You mean to tell me that United, NWA, Continental, Delta, Air Tran, US Airways, Alaska, American West and the rest of the domestic airlines flying out of DFW are in collusion with AA to inflate airfares at DFW?

No, they just set their prices to the market, they happily take the higher prices. I mean, wouldn't you?

GreatChecko  Yeah sure
"A pilot's plane she is. She will love you if you deserve it, and try to kill you if you don't...She is the Mighty Q400"
 
FlyingTexan
Posts: 2998
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 8:30 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:52 am

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 42):
Does Sun Country have any other DFW routes besides MSP-DFW (where it competes directly w/NW & AA)?

Only Cancun at this time. Today, they applied for DFW to Puerto Vallarta, Cabo, and Cozumel.
"Wouldn't your boss like to fly home nonstop at 4:30 on a Friday afternoon?" -Airline Exec to Congressional Staffer
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 7:12 am

>>>SWA was only allowed to stay at DAL because it was not an intra state airline regulated by the CAB. The city of Dallas let SWA continue to operate out of fear of legal action by SWA and out of spite against Ft Worth.

Where do you folks come up with this nonsense? Geez, do some research on the timeline and get the players right...


>>>The statement about high airfares in the DFW area because of the WA. This statement is based on what?

Well, for one DFW's own recent study release on 5/10. Only that didn't talk about airfares, and it wasn't until 5/27 when the Ft. Worth paper broke the story that the 5/10 release was actually a "summary" and that the complete report did indeed discuss airfares and (oops!) how they'd drop with a Wright repeal. How disingenuous can you get? Mike Boyd has a new column out today that discusses all this, and they have a new Wright Study that will be out later this week...


>>>The idea that DFW is an AA monopoly and as such is able to artificially inflate fares to and from the airport is bogus also.

The idea? Oh, brother...  Yeah sure
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:51 am

I am just as amused at your machinations of the truth to support the SWA cause. You must be employed by SWA.

All of the talk about how much higher fares are at DFW but no one ever presents any data to back up the claim. Sure there was the article in the Fort Worth paper but notice that no figures were published.

Maybe you can produce one of those Studies for us to examine.

While you are at it tell us how AA can monopolize and enforce higher fares with all of the other domestic airlines serving DFW. This I want to hear.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
swadispatcher
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 9:12 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:15 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 46):
Maybe you can produce one of those Studies for us to examine

Mike Boyd's group should answer this question of yours later in the week.
Maintain 2300 until Boiler, cleared for the VOR-A approach, report BATLE inbound..
 
FlyingTexan
Posts: 2998
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 8:30 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:36 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 46):
All of the talk about how much higher fares are at DFW but no one ever presents any data to back up the claim.

I post my own findings:

Quantitative:

All fares are last minute one-ways, commonly called ‘walk-ups’ on bare metal plane.

DFW-MEM $509 for 1.5 hour non-stop
DFW-LIT $110 for 1 hour non-stop (Southwest market)

DFW-TUS $509 for 2+ hour non-stop
DFW-ELP $150 for 1.5 hour non-stop (Southwest market)

DFW-STL $419 for 1.5 hour non-stop
HOU-STL $232 for 2 hour flight (Southwest market)

Contrary to what a.net might tell you, many travelers are forced by business to travel on said fares. I can’t recall the last time I purchased a discount round-trip. My last umpteen purchases on SWA have been one-ways, most of them last minute.

Qualitative:

Ye was in MHT land last month.

The phone rings. Ring, Ring. “Hear ye, here ye, your presence is requested in Dallas!”

Ye think, “Oh, but Dallas is too many dead presidents to travel on last minute. So Ye fly to Will Rogers in OK City and drive.”

But Ye don’t go because Dallas is too much of a hassle. Ye would have stimulated Metroplex’s economy by staying in hotels and whining and dining.

So who loses out here? SWA, Dallas and Ye.

Did you miss that chapter in aviation history titled ”Southwest Effect” ???

Ye cringes when Ye find out the beloved Canyon Blue 737 doesn’t go there. And now you know why.
"Wouldn't your boss like to fly home nonstop at 4:30 on a Friday afternoon?" -Airline Exec to Congressional Staffer
 
milemaster
Posts: 994
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 10:19 am

RE: Love Field . . .who Gives A Rat's *ss?!?

Tue Jun 07, 2005 1:43 pm

Well, if they stay at DAL they can use their existing terminal and keep their cost low.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 787fan8, Aircellist, Fiend, Google Adsense [Bot], khi747, KLDC10, laxman, MEA-707, miaami, mildaiv, qf002, rutankrd, sdtr5zgttg, seatback, StTim, thijs025, United1, Yahoo [Bot] and 254 guests