tcfc424
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 11:56 am

Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sat Aug 27, 2005 3:44 pm

Okay so my Roman Numerals aren't in order, but I overheard a conversation today that might shed some light of the Wright Amendment issue. Rest assured, My sources are pretty solid, though I cannot reveal them. (I know everyone wants a CNN link, including myself, but trust me on this)

First of all, the Wright amendment is but a small pawn in a global commerce world. The sooner we realize this, the sooner we will be in a position t remove the restriction. Everyone believes AA is the main funder of the opposition...rest assured there is MUCH MORE money involved.

I am going to list the facts that I know.

1) DFW is bleeding red ink. Their financing, their cost structure, etc, is completely turned upside down. DFW has a great asset to market, however they are not doing what it takes. Bottom line is they are losing money and they are doing so at an astounding rate...READ: Terminal D.

2) Love Field is not ging to be the next DFW. The master plan calls for a total of 32 gates, of which WN occupies about half. While we look at WN's operation, we should look at the fact that if the remaining gates are FULLY UTILIZED they would represent a 25% reduction in traffic at DFW. (This does not represent any increases in traffic that we know would occur of WN and AA got into a bidding war). This assumes that each gate is fully utilized and that each carrier operates a full schedule out of DAL.

3) While cargo flights are not subject to the terms of the Wright Agreement, they are carefully monitoring negotioations. Why you ask??? DFW's cost structure is out of whack, they need every dime they can muster. Because of this, FTW Alliance has come on board for a repeal because they are slated to receive a new China Airlines flight and facility. They are looking at potential revenue while DFW is standing to lose some. (I'm sorry, I am not up to date on China's DFW movements).

The gentleman I had in my vehicle today (FTW Alliance associated) said the Wright Amendment's end was the writing on the wall. AA prepare yourself, a battle is looming and your dollars are not enough. It is a much bigger deal than AA and WN...it is truly GLOBAL!!!!

This conversation cracked me up because I have been for the repeal of of the Wright Amendment based on an AA-WN fight. I never considered a major loss in cargo operations from DFW.

I have been pro lifting the Wright Amendment for a while and still jump on that wagon. I realize now though, that it would affect more than DAL.

Relationships have become more than a bottle of wine and a nice set of 18 holes. These days, you have to be able to persuade Joe Blow to commit to a facility that will handle the needs you have, be they passnger, freight, or a combination. AA and WN are playing second fiddle to the likes of Korea and China, and everyone but AA has realized that.

In my OPINION, AA remains strong at DFW. WN remains strong at DAL. Cargo moves to Alliance. Another airline TBD moves into DFW and picks up excess capacity left bt the DL pullout (I hope CO)
 
FlewGSW
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:45 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sat Aug 27, 2005 10:35 pm

Good stuff. THANKS!

I just see it differently based upon the circles I get my information from.

The point about DAL master plan is the biggest problem. Because it is just a plan. Montreal's plan for YUL at the time YMX was opened did not project that YUL would end up larger and handling 100% of flights with YMX empty as of November 2004.

If Wright is eliminated, then every airline will relocate to DAL because it is closer to more businesses and center of population. And the tax payer will have invested, by force from the feds, in a project that folks did not have the stomach to see through. UGH!

Party hard.
 
stirling
Posts: 3897
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 2:00 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sat Aug 27, 2005 11:44 pm

Quoting TCFC424 (Thread starter):
FTW Alliance has come on board for a repeal because they are slated to receive a new China Airlines flight and facility. They are looking at potential revenue while DFW is standing to lose some.

Is Alliance bound by the Wright Amendment?
Those existing cargo flights....where are they going and are they restricted as to their tonnage and destination?

Wondering....
What is the cost per passenger at DFW compared to DAL?
Delete this User
 
N908AW
Posts: 863
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 12:54 am

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 1):
The point about DAL master plan is the biggest problem. Because it is just a plan. Montreal's plan for YUL at the time YMX was opened did not project that YUL would end up larger and handling 100% of flights with YMX empty as of November 2004.

Of course, keep in mind the SIZE of both DFW and DAL...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v317/N908AW/MAP1.gif
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v317/N908AW/map2.gif

DAL simply could not handle "every airline" relocating to DAL. Don't believe for a second they could expand, in a downtown atmosphere where land values are off the scale.
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
FlewGSW
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:45 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 6:57 am

That's what they thought in Montreal too. YUL was just too small, boxed in, etc.

And then they expanded YUL.

Yep, there is a mess of land to the west of DAL that could be seized. If they do if for football stadiums, they'll do it for an airport.
 
ont 737
Posts: 606
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2001 10:19 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:47 am

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 4):
Yep, there is a mess of land to the west of DAL that could be seized. If they do if for football stadiums, they'll do it for an airport.

How ironic.... demolish WN's headquaters and MX hangers on the west side of the airport to expand Love Field.
 
N908AW
Posts: 863
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 8:11 am

Didn't know they'd make half a million people move like that.
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
thecamel67
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 3:12 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 11:35 am

Quoting TCFC424 (Thread starter):
1) DFW is bleeding red ink. Their financing, their cost structure, etc, is completely turned upside down. DFW has a great asset to market, however they are not doing what it takes. Bottom line is they are losing money and they are doing so at an astounding rate...READ: Terminal D.

Right on the money. They had a chance to delay the project after 9/11 but the spin they put on is that they were "brave" enough to continue. I cannot believe that they did not see the handwriting on the wall re: DL's pull down and out. Just about everyone else in the industry did but they kept on and now we have to pay.

Quoting TCFC424 (Thread starter):
2) Love Field is not going to be the next DFW. The master plan calls for a total of 32 gates, of which WN occupies about half. While we look at WN's operation, we should look at the fact that if the remaining gates are FULLY UTILIZED they would represent a 25% reduction in traffic at DFW. (This does not represent any increases in traffic that we know would occur of WN and AA got into a bidding war). This assumes that each gate is fully utilized and that each carrier operates a full schedule out of DAL.

I don't think you will ever see it get to this level. Maybe I am just naive. As the metroplex continues to grow, DAL becomes less convenient for the majority of the population. AA will move a number of flights there initially and then realize that it is more cost efficient to compete matching fares out of DFW. I for one would continue to use DFW over DAL (more convenient) and AA over WN (AAdvantage).

Quoting TCFC424 (Thread starter):
FTW Alliance has come on board for a repeal because they are slated to receive a new China Airlines flight and facility.

Has Alliance come out publicly? I hadn't seen this one yet. They are correct, as DFW continues down a slippery slope, AFW becomes more attractive. Also, look to TKI to continue to make improvements for the ultimate goal of carrier service as well.

Quoting TCFC424 (Thread starter):
In my OPINION, AA remains strong at DFW. WN remains strong at DAL. Cargo moves to Alliance. Another airline TBD moves into DFW and picks up excess capacity left by the DL pullout (I hope CO)

I agree with everything except your last point. The reason for the DL pullout was there was no excess capacity, if anything there was overcapacity. Yes, you have seen AA expand Eagle into those markets in the SE that no longer have good East to West connections using DL and a few other odds and ends but that has been it. If there were the additional revenue opportunity, AA would have jumped all over it.

Also, no matter what anyone says above, DAL will never be physically expanded beyone its existing boundaries. You think the Wright Amendment is a can of worms...
 
N908AW
Posts: 863
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 11:48 am

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 4):
That's what they thought in Montreal too. YUL was just too small, boxed in, etc.

And then they expanded YUL.

Oh yeah. This isn't Canada.

Are the airlines at HOU, closer to downtown? No, they're all at IAH.
Are the airlines at MDW, closer to downtown? No they're all at ORD.
Usually, with the possible exception of WN, airlines will go for infrastructure and proven demand over secondary, closer-to-town airports.
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
nosedive
Posts: 2176
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 2:18 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:20 pm

Quoting N908AW (Reply 8):
Are the airlines at MDW, closer to downtown? No they're all at ORD.Usually, with the possible exception of WN, airlines will go for infrastructure and proven demand over secondary, closer-to-town airports.

That's why MDW sees service from NW, DL, UA- gotta love ted, CO, F9, and FL, plus regionals... not to mention TZ and WN  sarcastic 
 
UALdispatch
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 1:07 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:26 pm

It amazes me on how the Wrong amendment has managed to stay in place all these years. Must be nice for A/A to have that kind of pull in Texas. I wonder what would happen if SW played hardball and threatened to move its operations unless the Wrong amendment was repealed? Of course SW wouldn't do such a thing but makes for an interesting what-if???
FLY UNITED AIRLINES AND THE FRIENDLY SKIES
 
N908AW
Posts: 863
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 11:12 pm

Quoting Nosedive (Reply 9):
That's why MDW sees service from NW, DL, UA- gotta love ted, CO, F9, and FL, plus regionals... not to mention TZ and WN sarcastic

Ok, sorry.
Are the airlines at HOU, closer to downtown? No, the majority is all at IAH.
Are the airlines at MDW, closer to downtown? No, the majority is all at ORD.
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
FlewGSW
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:45 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Sun Aug 28, 2005 11:36 pm

Ya know, WN can fly anytime they want from DAL to any airport in the world they want to, RIGHT NOW!

WN cannot do it with their current fleet of 737s with the current seating configuration, but they CAN do it now!

So if WN wants to fly to LAX, FLL, RDU, OAK and all those other airports, they don't need to change the law, they just need to change the seating configuration on their current fleet or get another fleet of airplanes.

See where I'm going with this is?
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1563
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:17 am

FlewGSW......."See where I'm going with this is?"

Ah.......... No. Enlighten me.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
texan
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:27 am

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 4):
Yep, there is a mess of land to the west of DAL that could be seized. If they do if for football stadiums, they'll do it for an airport.

The problem isn't the land right at the airport. Yes, they could demolish some of the housing to the west of the airport, but that would put the flight path too close to downtown Dallas and it's skyscrapers, meaning the runway could never be used.

Quoting Stirling (Reply 2):
Is Alliance bound by the Wright Amendment?
Those existing cargo flights....where are they going and are they restricted as to their tonnage and destination?

AFW nor FTW are bound by the Wrong Amendment, just DAL. FedEx has a cargo hub operation at AFW.

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 13):
FlewGSW......."See where I'm going with this is?"

Ah.......... No. Enlighten me.

He is suggesting WN buy regional jets and fly them everywhere. The Wrong Amendment states that planes with 56 seats or less are not subject to the other aspects of the Amendment.
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
georgiabill
Posts: 744
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:27 am

If the Wright Amendment is over turned, and SWA can use their 737's anywhere in the 48 states they choose to serve. How will it affect operations in HOU, BNA and MDW?
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:35 am

Quoting Georgiabill (Reply 15):
If the Wright Amendment is over turned, and SWA can use their 737's anywhere in the 48 states they choose to serve. How will it affect operations in HOU, BNA and MDW?

I wouldn't think all that much.

With repeal, I don't think you're going to see get to be anywhere near as big as someplace like LAS (just over 200 daily flights). Assuming the Love Field Master Plan's 250 daily flight limit are in effect, Southwest might have 130-140 of them, and would you would probably see are a few non-stops to cities now outside the Wright footprint, and lots of thru-plane service, i.e. DAL-TUL-STL, etc.

I think the talk here of wiping out houses/buildings on the west side of Love is meaningless.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1563
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:54 am

Quoting Texan (Reply 14):
Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 13):FlewGSW......."See where I'm going with this is?"

Ah.......... No. Enlighten me.
He is suggesting WN buy regional jets and fly them everywhere. The Wrong Amendment states that planes with 56 seats or less are not subject to the other aspects of the Amendment.

Yeah, I know about the 56 seat rule and didn't think that was where he was going. I figure it's obvious SWA isn't interested in buying money losing airplanes that don't fit their needs. Is the suggestion 56 seat versions of the 737? Great way to lose money, AAL proved that at Dallas Love against Legend

Guess I still need enlightenment.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:36 am

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 12):
Ya know, WN can fly anytime they want from DAL to any airport in the world they want to, RIGHT NOW!

WN cannot do it with their current fleet of 737s with the current seating configuration, but they CAN do it now

They will lose money flying only 56 seats on all their B-737 operations from DAL.

Quoting Texan (Reply 14):
AFW nor FTW are bound by the Wrong Amendment, just DAL. FedEx has a cargo hub operation at AFW.

That is correct.

The WA is going to be repealed. Most of Congress will address this. The Texas Congressional deligation is not enough to stop this, nether is AA or DFW. It will be a package deal that includes lifting the limitations on LGA and DCA, as well as DAL. It is, as someone already said a national and global issue, not just local North Texas interest.

Cargo operations at AFW will not have a big effect on cargo operations at DFW. That is because UPS has their SW hub at DFW, and is thinking of international cargo to/from DFW.

WN will not move to DFW, period. As soon as the DFW Airport Board realizeses this, the better they are. The only gates available at DFW are the former 22 DL gates. No one is going to take the "offer" DFW has on the table for these gates, as there is direct compitition from AA, because 70% of the seats must fly to airports already served from DFW.

The DFW Board does not have the leadership ability to re-fill these vacant gates, as long as they let AA pull on their puppet strings.

A new proposal is needed for the vacant gates. If not, they will remain empty.

When the WA is repealed, what the political leadership of the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas really need to do is disband the DFW Airport Board and replace it with a true regional port authority, like the PANYNJ, or MASSPORT.
Then bring DFW, FTW, AFW, DAL, ADS, Arlington, Grand Perie, and Redbird all under the same Port Authority.

But, like I said, that will take leadership. Something the entire DFW Metroplex does not have.

No one is talking about this, as the DFW Airport Board wants to keep their high paying jobs. Jeff Fagan, the CEO of DFW makes $250,000 per year, plus bounuses and perks. An equivilent pay in say NYC or BOS would be over $500K per year, plus bounuses and perks.

DFW Airport is bleeding red, and they cannot stop it as long as DFW is AA's lapdog.
 
FlewGSW
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:45 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 8:32 am

1. Wright is only about commercial scheduled passenger traffic, not cargo. Which is a thorn in the side of Dallas when Fort Worth built Alliance as a maintenance/cargo/general aviation airport for one rich local family (He ran for president of the USA).
2. Wright affects FTW commercial scheduled passenger flights too, not just DAL. (See Mesa Airlines and Fort Worth Airlines attempts to serve FTW in the past 25 years.)
3. WN could purchase 56 seat RJs today. Other airlines have and they are making money. Why is WN so special that they have to use +56 seat airplanes? Because such airplanes don't fit into their business plan? Paaaaleaseeeee! I'd like for 777 and A-340s to fly into LGA DCA MDW, but they don't. I'd like to fly into SNA after midnight, and leave DCA prior to 6am, but I can't. And DAL doesn't allow planes with more than 56 seats to fly beyond 7 states (of which only 4 have non-stop service from DAL).
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 5:20 pm

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 19):
2. Wright affects FTW commercial scheduled passenger flights too, not just DAL. (See Mesa Airlines and Fort Worth Airlines attempts to serve FTW in the past 25 years.)

Mesa has failed in both of their attempts in the last 15 years. The latest (in 1999) was flying CRJs between FTW, SAN, and HOB. Even though the had less than 56 seats and could have flown to any US airport, from FTW, they never offered the service. Why? because the market isn't enough to support commerical air travel from FTW.

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 19):
3. WN could purchase 56 seat RJs today. Other airlines have and they are making money. Why is WN so special that they have to use +56 seat airplanes? Because such airplanes don't fit into their business plan?

Seems to me you answered your own question, that is why WN doesn't fly airplanes with 56 seats or less.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 18):
WN will not move to DFW, period. As soon as the DFW Airport Board realizeses this, the better they are. The only gates available at DFW are the former 22 DL gates. No one is going to take the "offer" DFW has on the table for these gates, as there is direct compitition from AA, because 70% of the seats must fly to airports already served from DFW.

The DFW Board does not have the leadership ability to re-fill these vacant gates, as long as they let AA pull on their puppet strings.

A new proposal is needed for the vacant gates. If not, they will remain empty.

Before the DL de-hubbing at DFW, DFW Officials never paid any attention to DAL or WN. The empty DL gates at DFW are the heart of the problem, and AA's strangle hold on controlling the airfares from DFW.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 18):
When the WA is repealed, what the political leadership of the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas really need to do is disband the DFW Airport Board and replace it with a true regional port authority, like the PANYNJ, or MASSPORT.
Then bring DFW, FTW, AFW, DAL, ADS, Arlington, Grand Perie, and Redbird all under the same Port Authority.

But, like I said, that will take leadership. Something the entire DFW Metroplex does not have.

This, and repealing the Wright Amendment is the simplest solution. Not trying to force WN to move their operations to DFW's empty gates.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Mon Aug 29, 2005 10:37 pm

Quoting TCFC424 (Thread starter):
Okay so my Roman Numerals aren't in order, but I overheard a conversation today that might shed some light of the Wright Amendment issue. Rest assured, My sources are pretty solid, though I cannot reveal them. (I know everyone wants a CNN link, including myself, but trust me on this)

First of all, the Wright amendment is but a small pawn in a global commerce world. The sooner we realize this, the sooner we will be in a position t remove the restriction. Everyone believes AA is the main funder of the opposition...rest assured there is MUCH MORE money involved.

Finally someone realizes there is much more at stake here besides Granny getting to Vegas on a cheap fare. Yes the multinational corporations that depend upon fast, direct freight services to and from the DFW market to the rest of the world have a huge stake in the maintenance of DFW. Defeating the effort to repeal the WA fits their business plans.

Do any of you think the multinational corporations except Boeing give a care about WN or where it flies from in North Texas? Especially since WN does not interline and does not directly support the movement of international commerce whether it is freight or passengers.

Quoting Texan (Reply 14):
The problem isn't the land right at the airport. Yes, they could demolish some of the housing to the west of the airport, but that would put the flight path too close to downtown Dallas and it's skyscrapers, meaning the runway could never be used.



If you are landing from the South you fly over downtown. Getting Dallas taxpayers to fund any expansion at DAL will be the problem.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 18):
When the WA is repealed, what the political leadership of the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas really need to do is disband the DFW Airport Board and replace it with a true regional port authority, like the PANYNJ, or MASSPORT.
Then bring DFW, FTW, AFW, DAL, ADS, Arlington, Grand Perie, and Redbird all under the same Port Authority.

But, like I said, that will take leadership. Something the entire DFW Metroplex does not have.

I like the idea of the Regional Port Authority. If the WA is repealed and the lawsuits start flying back and forth a Regional Port Authority might be the only way out of the court room. The Port Authority could make all things equal like landing fees, gate rentals and ensure that no airline has a cost competitive advantage from serving one airport or another.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
typhaerion
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:27 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Tue Aug 30, 2005 3:15 am

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 19):
Why is WN so special that they have to use +56 seat airplanes?

I would say that this is the most ignorant comment I have seen here yet. WN doesn't use 56 seat a/c because they operate an all 737 fleet period. And there are now 56 seat or less 737 without retrofits. It has nothing to do with other being able to make money with the RJs. This is the same reason that WN doesn't use 767s, or A340s, or Il-96s for that matter. It isn't that they are bad aircraft. It is that they are not common with the rest of their fleet.

WNs cost structure is the way it is right now cause they have kept things simple.

Now, as to the rest of this enlightening thread, I want to thank you TCFC424 for the great info. Very interesting that this has moved into a much larger arena then we all originally wanted to believe. And despite your condescension, CJ, you too were among us who believed a more narrow scope in the beginning.

I think that it is very true about the empty gates being most of the problem. If DFW is in the red, they have surely got to be the wound. The problem is, as has been stated before, there is too much capacity out there. And not just in the DFW region, but all over the US. Those gates will remain empty regardless. And DFW will bleed some more. Sad though, the design and plan for that airport was so sound. To see it mismanaged like this is a real shame.
For some, the sky is the limit. For us, it is only the beginning... -- Jack Hunt
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Tue Aug 30, 2005 3:53 am

Quoting Typhaerion (Reply 22):
Now, as to the rest of this enlightening thread, I want to thank you TCFC424 for the great info. Very interesting that this has moved into a much larger arena then we all originally wanted to believe. And despite your condescension, CJ, you too were among us who believed a more narrow scope in the beginning.

Sorry, but I have always maintained that this issue is broader than the brush WN has used to paint the issue. Go back and re read my posts and you will see my comments.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
FlewGSW
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:45 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:55 am

Typhaerion, you missed my point.

I do not expect WN to convert 737s to 56 seats like Legend did with DC-9s and AA did with F-100s.

But the rules of the sand box (DAL) say 56 is the limit outside Texas + 7 states.

So I say again, why does WN think that they are so special that they cannot play by the rules, which they agreed to, like all the other airlines?

The answer is fuel, and the hedge contracts that WN has that will expire next year. In 2006 the current fuel cost advantage WN has, and a very smart gamble and business decision it turned out to be, will be reduced. I really don't blame WN for attempting to come up with other business ideas to keep a cost advantage, like BFI. But eliminating WR is in my opinion not the right move.

And DFW airport board has stated publicly that they would build WN their own new terminal, anywhere on the property, with access to specific runways.

So WN could have a terminal built right off Texas 183 (Airport Freeway) close to the former Delta hanger. WN does not have to build a new terminal on International Parkway.
 
sccutler
Posts: 5568
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Tue Aug 30, 2005 1:53 pm

Free and fair competition.

No Wright Amendment. The only chance north Texas has.

Lower walk-up fares. AA *could* make the discussion irrelevant; match WN's maximum fare base today, match fare rules, allow walkup business travel on reasonable terms. Never happen.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Tue Aug 30, 2005 7:42 pm

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 24):
And DFW airport board has stated publicly that they would build WN their own new terminal, anywhere on the property, with access to specific runways.

Yes, they have said that. What they did not say is where they could come up with the money. A new terminal and ramp will cost $1B-$2B, depending on how nice they want to make it.  scratchchin 

If the DFW Airport Board builds a new terminal just for WN, do you think AA is just going to sit in the junk called Terminals A & C? No, they will demand new terminals, too.  hissyfit 

What about CO? UA? NW? Or any of the other airlines currently at DFW, but not using Terminal D (except for TZ, who might move into the WN Terminal {Terminal F?}).  headache 

That was a very stupid thing for the Board to say.  scared 
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Tue Aug 30, 2005 9:48 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 18):
No one is talking about this, as the DFW Airport Board wants to keep their high paying jobs. Jeff Fagan, the CEO of DFW makes $250,000 per year, plus bounuses and perks. An equivilent pay in say NYC or BOS would be over $500K per year, plus bounuses and perks.

Man do you have some misconceptions about airport management salaries.
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:28 am

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 25):
Free and fair competition.

Hello SC.

We all ready have the components in place for Free and Fair competition here in North Texas.

The only thing the situation lacks is commitment to Free and Fair competition by one airline.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 1:04 am

You're just a bag of goodies today:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 20):
Mesa has failed in both of their attempts in the last 15 years. The latest (in 1999) was flying CRJs between FTW, SAN, and HOB. Even though the had less than 56 seats and could have flown to any US airport, from FTW, they never offered the service. Why? because the market isn't enough to support commerical air travel from FTW.

RJ's are rarely profitable on routes between large hub cities because of yield depression. The cost structure isn't there. Typically they are used for large hub to large hub feeder service at a loss.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 20):
Before the DL de-hubbing at DFW, DFW Officials never paid any attention to DAL or WN. The empty DL gates at DFW are the heart of the problem, and AA's strangle hold on controlling the airfares from DFW.

That's a load. They didn't have to say anything until the company with aircraft painted with a box of crayola's started raising a stink.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 20):
This, and repealing the Wright Amendment is the simplest solution. Not trying to force WN to move their operations to DFW's empty gates.

Simplest for WN but not the rest of the industry.
 
apodino
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 1:50 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 18):

No one is talking about this, as the DFW Airport Board wants to keep their high paying jobs. Jeff Fagan, the CEO of DFW makes $250,000 per year, plus bounuses and perks. An equivilent pay in say NYC or BOS would be over $500K per year, plus bounuses and perks.

Wait a minute. Your own statement says that Fagan makes less than someone at either Massport or PANYNJ seems to think that the DFW airport board isn't that high paying.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 29):
Simplest for WN but not the rest of the industry.

I totally disagree. Do you realize what will happen if American actually gets some competetion and becomes vulerable? Other airlines will smell blood and start beefing up DFW, and there is still a great offer on the table for someone to Hub the airport. Since WN will not move with or without the wright amendment, this is the only chance that airlines will have to actually compete at DFW. Some people have said that airlines already compete at DFW. I disagree. When you have airlines flying to only hub airports (UA to just ORD, IAD, etc. NW to MEM, DTW, MSP, CO to EWR, IAH, and CLE, US to PHL and CLT, etc.) thats not exactly competition, its merely these carriers protecting their turf, and providing service where they are strong. True competetion would mean that airlines would provide service to cities other than the hubs, much like some airlines do in BOS.

And which is more economical, wasting money on new runways at DFW from an airport that throws money away, utilizing existing runways to increase capacity, at ZERO extra cost to the taxpayer. Tom DeLay of all people even said that himself.

I am going to make a bold prediction. I predict that if WN cannot get wright repealed and they further have to downsize DAL, they will pack up, and build a new terminal at AFW, and begin offering unrestricted service from there, which of course, there is no federal law prohibiting them from doing so.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 1:54 am

Quoting Apodino (Reply 30):
Wait a minute. Your own statement says that Fagan makes less than someone at either Massport or PANYNJ seems to think that the DFW airport board isn't that high paying.

Neither of them make that much. The highest paid guy is at LAX and he doesn't make $250K base, he made $265K with bonuses with a base of $225K. No one makes anywhere near $500K he's pulling that out of his ass.

[Edited 2005-08-30 19:05:05]
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:05 am

Quoting Apodino (Reply 30):
I am going to make a bold prediction. I predict that if WN cannot get wright repealed and they further have to downsize DAL, they will pack up, and build a new terminal at AFW, and begin offering unrestricted service from there, which of course, there is no federal law prohibiting them from doing so.

I don't think so. AFW is too far away from WN's core customers. Besides they would have to move to Collin or Denton Counties to escape the reach of the DFW regional airport board and even then any city that offered to host WN would risk massive litigation.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
kanebear
Posts: 852
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 12:06 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:40 am

Repealing the Wright Amendment won't make a dent in AA's day. WN doesn't have the ability to run enough flights out of DAL to do much to AA and maintain their bread and butter shuttle schedules. The only difference will be that it'll make it easier to get from DAL elsewhere in the WN system and you won't need two separate tickets anymore. Remember something. WN doesn't want to erode their OWN yields. They're not going to flood DAL with seats once the WA is lifted. They'll add destinations wherever the traffic is warranted and that'll be that. People that prefer AA will still fly AA and WN will go on doing what it does.
 
apodino
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:45 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 32):
Besides they would have to move to Collin or Denton Counties to escape the reach of the DFW regional airport board and even then any city that offered to host WN would risk massive litigation.

There is no question that there would be litigation, the question is does it have any legal basis. As far as I am concerned, and I am no legal expert, but it seems to me since Alliance is open as an airport, and given prior rulings on Love Field (as long as its open for an airport, you must allow commercial airlines to serve it), I don't see how any litigation would stop WN. And the wright amendment only applies to DAL.

You also raise a question about the WN core constituency and that is a valid case. I think the WN core constituency is the traveller looking for low fares, not necessarily the high yield business traveler. If the fare is low, the people will drive for it. Much like PVD and MHT for BOS.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 31):

Neither of them make that much. The highest paid guy is at LAX and he doesn't make $250K base, he made $265K with bonuses with a base of $225K. No one makes anywhere near $500K he's pulling that out of his ass.

I don't disagree with that, but when you factor in things like the Booze cruise, it can add up.
 
apodino
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:56 am

Quoting Kanebear (Reply 33):
Repealing the Wright Amendment won't make a dent in AA's day. WN doesn't have the ability to run enough flights out of DAL to do much to AA and maintain their bread and butter shuttle schedules. The only difference will be that it'll make it easier to get from DAL elsewhere in the WN system and you won't need two separate tickets anymore. Remember something. WN doesn't want to erode their OWN yields. They're not going to flood DAL with seats once the WA is lifted. They'll add destinations wherever the traffic is warranted and that'll be that

While I agree they won't flood DAL with seats I disagree with the rest of your post. Since WN will be able to sell tickets anywhere they fly out of DAL, it is logical to conclude that with the cutthroat mentality at American, and with the maximum WN fare capped at $299 one way, American would be forced to lower prices to compete, which will affect their yields. One more carrier building up DFW in addition to that, and American loses much of their pricing power in DFW. Thats why AA is fighting this thing so hard. Their yields in many markets will erode, which is unfortunate since the airline actually has turned around and become profitable, but its part of being in a capalist society. And WN is not an airline that cares a lot about yields, all they care about is whether the route produces red ink, or black ink.
 
nealcg
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 1:16 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:04 am



Apodino__There is no question that there would be litigation, the question is does it have any legal basis. As far as I am concerned, and I am no legal expert, but it seems to me since Alliance is open as an airport, and given prior rulings on Love Field (as long as its open for an airport, you must allow commercial airlines to serve it), I don't see how any litigation would stop WN. And the wright amendment only applies to DAL.


Alliance is moot because it is seriously BFE. The drive there would take longer than most of the flights.
REMEMBER...NO MATTER WHERE YOU GO...THERE YOU ARE !!
 
N908AW
Posts: 863
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:18 am

Quoting FlewGSW (Reply 24):

So I say again, why does WN think that they are so special that they cannot play by the rules, which they agreed to, like all the other airlines?

WN probably saw in 1979 that they were up against a brick wall. As they say on Rocko's Modern Life, "You can't fight City Hall!"
NOW, they have sufficient legislature support to fight to repeal it. WN wants to play by the rules, that's why they're going through all the trouble to change the rule that has unconstitutionally bounded DAL so much.

Quoting Nealcg (Reply 36):

Alliance is moot because it is seriously BFE. The drive there would take longer than most of the flights.

What about Meacham?  scratchchin 
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
kanebear
Posts: 852
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 12:06 am

RE: Wright Amendment Part Xxxivx

Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:23 am

Quoting Apodino (Reply 35):
While I agree they won't flood DAL with seats I disagree with the rest of your post. Since WN will be able to sell tickets anywhere they fly out of DAL, it is logical to conclude that with the cutthroat mentality at American, and with the maximum WN fare capped at $299 one way, American would be forced to lower prices to compete, which will affect their yields. One more carrier building up DFW in addition to that, and American loses much of their pricing power in DFW. Thats why AA is fighting this thing so hard. Their yields in many markets will erode, which is unfortunate since the airline actually has turned around and become profitable, but its part of being in a capalist society. And WN is not an airline that cares a lot about yields, all they care about is whether the route produces red ink, or black ink.

I don't understand why people can't accept the fact that WN and AA CAN co-exist and prosper and that they compete in quite a few places already. DAL ain't the only place in the US served by both airlines.

On ex-WN DAL ops; WN already DOES sell tickets for destinations beyond the Wright Amendment out of DAL. Just ask anyone that flies 'em and originates there. The difference is, they sell a separate DAL-HOU ticket from the onward HOU-XXX ticket. The cost is often nominal ($40 or less). They'll even check your luggage all the way through. For Rapid Rewards tickets they'll happily send you outside the WA area. Those aren't governed by the Wright Amendment as they're not sold (by WN anyway).

As for WN not caring about yields... you're absolutely wrong. If WN didn't care about yields they would sell all seats on all flights at one price. They don't. They do yield management just as any other airline does and probably do a better job of it. How do you think they make a route profitable? They certainly don't set fares by throwing darts at a board.

AA is fighting this because they want to keep as much of an advantage as they can. I don't blame them for fighting the repeal. Still, when it comes down to it, WN just doesn't go a lot of the places AA does. I'd like to see you get to GRU on WN. How about YYZ? Or even SJU? Sorry, not happening. In the grand scheme of things, AA may feel a blip from this but not much more. IMO, most of the folks who would switch to WN already have.

For the most part they simply serve different missions. WN is a great shuttle and makes getting around Texas a snap. On a larger scale, they do a fab job of getting you to popular destinations at a reasonably low price. AA is a full service airline with a global network that serves many secondary and prime urban destinations WN doesn't. One cannot replace the other.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot], Apprentice, B737900ER, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], blacksoviet, CXfirst, DeltaRules, DiamondFlyer, fly2lax, FlyBoy747, Google Adsense [Bot], gregn21, guppyflyer, Hamlet69, heavymetal, hkcanadaexpat, krsw757, LGAviation, PacificBeach, panampreflight, SAAFNAV, SeaDoo, WDHFlyBoy and 272 guests