KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 13, 2006 8:13 am

Wright Deal Draws More Foes

Two Links Available:

Courtesy: Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...ies/071306dnbuswright.709e745.html

Courtesy: WFAA-TV
http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dw...ies/071306dnbuswright.709e745.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy: KTVT-TV

North Texas Governments Fuel Wright Opposition
http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_193073802.html

Video Report:

http://cbs11tv.com/video/?id=11290@ktvt.dayport.com
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:03 am

Courtesy: Dallas Business Journal

Group Protests Wright Compromise

http://biz.yahoo.com/bizj/060712/1313959.html?.v=3
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 13, 2006 11:28 am

Isn't ironic that Congressman Johnson is angry that Dallas and Fort Worth make a decision that affects the airports in Collin County when he co-sponsored the Bill that started this whole mess that affects the airports in Dallas and Tarrant County? Attn: Pot Calling Kettle Black! Pot Calling Kettle Black!
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:02 pm

The WA "compromise" was a sell out by WN and AA. This just means everyone gets screwed evenly, for another 8 years.

The one and only bright light is if Congress does not go along with the deal worked out by Fort Worth, Dallas, DFW, AA, and WN, by 31 December 2006, the whole deal is off.

I hope my confidence in the do nothing Congress is justified.
 
texan
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:12 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 2):
Isn't ironic that Congressman Johnson is angry that Dallas and Fort Worth make a decision that affects the airports in Collin County when he co-sponsored the Bill that started this whole mess that affects the airports in Dallas and Tarrant County?

Cj,

Rep. Johnson also has a large number of constituents in Dallas County. See, in Congress, districts run across county lines unlike the very narrow focus of your baseless arguments. Johnson's district runs into Richardson, which is in Dallas County

He is representing all of his constituents, even though he is not representing your specific views. But he doesn't have to answer to you.

It is a valid concern for him because there has been talk of turning TKI (McKinney/Colling County Airport) into a commercial airport in the future. And he is being consistent in his views, arguing for the freedom for airlines to fly where they would like to fly. Hmmm...freedom to make a profit. Sounds like a good business plan and a winner for both the airlines and local airports! Again and again you are proven to not know what you are talking about. Better luck next time.

Texan

Edit: Here's a map of Texas' 3rd District just in case you were curious. This way maybe someone won't be able to prove you incorrect again so quickly. By the way, three airports in Congressman Johnson's district have been closed already. He doesn't want to see a potentially high growth area and airport (TKI) severely restricted, nor does he want to inconvenience some of his constituents in Dallas County by closing DAL.

[Edited 2006-07-13 05:18:39]
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
texan
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:02 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 2):
Isn't ironic that Congressman Johnson is angry that Dallas and Fort Worth make a decision that affects the airports in Collin County when he co-sponsored the Bill that started this whole mess that affects the airports in Dallas and Tarrant County?

And actually, I believe it was Representative Wright from Fort Worth who "started this whole mess that affects the airports in Dallas and Tarrant County." See, he introduced this amendment that initially tried to completely shut down DAL and...well, you know the rest.

And you see, Congressmen and women are upset because the cities and airlines are trying to go behind Congress' back to pass something that they don't want and is not in the best interests of their constituents. For many Congressmen and women now, the best interests of their constituents lie in opening up DAL to more flights. This includes the Congresspeople wishing to receive donations from various large airlines in New York, Tennessee, Michigan, Minnesota, and Arizona. And since this agreement was reached between the two airlines and the two city councils, Congressmen and women have finally started looking and saying, "Man, that sounds extremely anti-competitive. Since we are capitalists here, wouldn't it make sense to allow more competition and allow the partially free market to decide which airlines thrive?"

So there is some of the reasoning behind it.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:33 pm

Quoting Texan (Reply 4):
Cj,

Rep. Johnson also has a large number of constituents in Dallas County. See, in Congress, districts run across county lines unlike the very narrow focus of your baseless arguments. Johnson's district runs into Richardson, which is in Dallas County

He is representing all of his constituents, even though he is not representing your specific views. But he doesn't have to answer to you.

It is a valid concern for him because there has been talk of turning TKI (McKinney/Colling County Airport) into a commercial airport in the future. And he is being consistent in his views, arguing for the freedom for airlines to fly where they would like to fly. Hmmm...freedom to make a profit. Sounds like a good business plan and a winner for both the airlines and local airports! Again and again you are proven to not know what you are talking about. Better luck next time.

Texan

Edit: Here's a map of Texas' 3rd District just in case you were curious. This way maybe someone won't be able to prove you incorrect again so quickly. By the way, three airports in Congressman Johnson's district have been closed already. He doesn't want to see a potentially high growth area and airport (TKI) severely restricted, nor does he want to inconvenience some of his constituents in Dallas County by closing DAL.

Pay attention here Texan, you said Dallas County not the City of Dallas. Richardson/Plano/McKinney/Allen is not Dallas. That was the point I was making. Why make waves for one City then stand back and cry Crocodile tears when your actions back fire on your own City? You are right he does not have to answer to me anymore than he answers to you. However I do vote and do contribute to campaigns. I also volunteer time to candidates I believe in. Needless to say neither Hensarling nor Johnson will get my money or time this election and Hensarling can kiss my vote good bye for what that is worth.

Maybe the good Congressman should read the agreement first. It only says that the Cities of Dallas and Ft Worth will look after their interests first. No where does it say that airlines cannot serve other airports in the 80 mile radius from Love Field only that if WN or AA do they will be forced to give up a capacity advantage at Love Field. How does that hamper efforts to create a commercial airport at TKI? He has more to fear from the Nimby’s in the growth areas near the airport than any agreement made by Dallas and Ft Worth to actively seek to promote new airlines service at DFW.

Quoting Texan (Reply 5):
And you see, Congressmen and women are upset because the cities and airlines are trying to go behind Congress' back to pass something that they don't want and is not in the best interests of their constituents. For many Congressmen and women now, the best interests of their constituents lie in opening up DAL to more flights. This includes the Congresspeople wishing to receive donations from various large airlines in New York, Tennessee, Michigan, Minnesota, and Arizona. And since this agreement was reached between the two airlines and the two city councils, Congressmen and women have finally started looking and saying, "Man, that sounds extremely anti-competitive. Since we are capitalists here, wouldn't it make sense to allow more competition and allow the partially free market to decide which airlines thrive?"

So there is some of the reasoning behind it.

What is in the best interest of the cities is local control of airports and the right for the cities to decide what is the best option for the use of those airports. Try not to forget the goal of this whole miss adventure was to end the conditions that prevented competition in this market in the first place. If Dallas had not lost control of Love Field by government (Judicial Branch)interference this Wright issue would have never existed.

[Edited 2006-07-13 06:48:44]

[Edited 2006-07-13 06:49:40]
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
texan
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 13, 2006 10:44 pm

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 6):
Pay attention here Texan, you said Dallas County not the City of Dallas. Richardson/Plano/McKinney/Allen is not Dallas. That was the point I was making. Why make waves for one City then stand back and cry Crocodile tears when your actions back fire on your own City?

You stated Dallas and Tarrant Counties, not the cities. I was responding to the information you posted.

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 6):
What is in the best interest of the cities is local control of airports and the right for the cities to decide what is the best option for the use of those airports. Try not to forget the goal of this whole miss adventure was to end the conditions that prevented competition in this market in the first place.

So the goal was to permanently open up DAL to all comers? Or to limit DFW to cities in TX, AR, OK, NM, LA, KS, AL, MS, MO?  Silly

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 14, 2006 4:12 am

Courtesy: KTVT-TV

Lawmakers Say Local Deal Trumps Wright Amendment

Video Report:

http://cbs11tv.com/video/?id=11301@ktvt.dayport.com
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Fri Jul 14, 2006 5:16 am

Quoting Texan (Reply 7):
So the goal was to permanently open up DAL to all comers? Or to limit DFW to cities in TX, AR, OK, NM, LA, KS, AL, MS, MO?

No smart guy, the goal has always been to facilitate growth at DFW airport.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
TripleP
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:06 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 14, 2006 5:45 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 9):
...the goal has always been to facilitate growth at DFW airport.

An unrestricted DAL will facilitate growth at DFW - and lots of it.
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:52 am

Later Update Courtesy: KTVT-TV

Wright Agreement Moving Forward In Washington

Video Report:

http://cbs11tv.com/video/?id=11319@ktvt.dayport.com
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:02 am

I think they can amend the new compromise to allow a phase out of the Wright Restrictions, something like allowing 4-5 States a year to be added to DAL with all 50 States available in 8 years.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sun Jul 16, 2006 1:03 am

McKinney Muddies Wright Deal

Two links available:

Courtesy: Dallas Morning News

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...ies/071506dnbuswright.17a5f30.html

Courtesy: WFAA-TV

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dw...ies/071506dnbuswright.17a5f30.html
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:04 am

 
N908AW
Posts: 863
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:05 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:14 am

Great.
Congrats to Texas and other various politicians for removing even more competition.

I guess I'll go celebrate by putting up an Iron Curtain around Dallas.
'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:35 am

The folks that have the Legend terminal have just reportedly filed a suit against all 5 parties in the compromise, asking for triple damages and attorney fees...
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: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:55 am

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 16):
The folks that have the Legend terminal have just reportedly filed a suit against all 5 parties in the compromise, asking for triple damages and attorney fees...

Are you happy about this or what?

Legend terminal owners file Wright lawsuitBy TREBOR BANSTETTER
STAR-TELEGRAM STAFF WRITER
DALLAS -- The owners of the Legend Airlines terminal filed suit against the cities of Fort Worth and Dallas; American Airlines, Southwest Airlines and the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport board Monday afternoon, alleging that the local compromise on the Wright Amendment violates anti-trust laws.

Love Terminal Partners, which owns the vacant terminal on Lemmon Avenue at Love Field, filed the suit in federal court in Dallas late Monday afternoon. It charges that the Wright compromise, forged by the cities, the airlines and D/FW airport last month, is “a blatant violation of the federal antitrust laws.”

The suit also claims that the deal destroyed the value of the terminal, which the group had been negotiating to sell to Pinnacle Airlines for $100 million.

“The scheme protects and enhances the monopoly power of each of the participants,” the suit states. “The agreement is an anti-competitive deal that was put together in a back room to eliminate competition and protect two select carriers.”

The Wright Amendment is a 1979 federal law that restricts service from Dallas Love Field airport to Texas and adjacent states. Southwest, which is based at Love, began lobbying Congress in 2004 to have the law repealed.

American, which operates a hub at nearby D/FW Airport, fought the repeal efforts.

Last month, the mayors of Fort Worth and Dallas and the two airlines, as well as officials from D/FW, agreed to a compromise that would eliminate the geographic restrictions after eight years.

The agreement would also reduce the number of gates at Love from 32 to 20. Dallas Mayor Laura Miller said the city would seize the Legend terminal and tear it down in order to eliminate its six gates.

The agreement must be approved by Congress before it can take effect.

The suit asks the federal court to halt the cities from enforcing the agreement and asks for damages from both American and Southwest. It also asks for triple damages from both airlines and court and attorneys fees.

The suit is the latest obstacle to hit the Wright proposal, which was the subject of Congressional hearings last week. Discount carrier JetBlue Airways has also raised anti-trust concerns and charged that the deal blocks other airlines from accessing Love Field.

And officials with several North Texas communities have complained that some tenets of the agreement could prevent smaller airports from getting commercial airline service in the future.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:15 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 17):

Are you happy about this or what?

Just passing along a news item...
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:32 am

This is what I am gathering from this whole Wright thing...

Yes, it limits competition in Dallas by holding WN to a more or less regional carrier out of DAL, serving adjacent states (plus STL and MCI).

It is a rather formidable effort to try and get LCCs into DFW and bring competition to that airport. AA, on the other hand, uses the Wright Amendment to its advantage. It looks at it as essentially keeping DFW to itself pretty much, given that WN, nor any other airline, for that matter, even wants to go near DFW, not even with a 79ft pole. AA and the airport authority have made it a rather hostile environment for any LCC or any other new carrier, for that matter, to come in and offer service to some of the markets out of DFW. I suppose that is also why there aren't many foreign carriers serving the airport either, as AA has essentially monopolized the international markets out of DFW???

Not sure, this is all just my assumption of all of this. Is it accurate, goofy? Am I nuts for thinking of it this way? (be honest  Wink)
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
iowaman
Posts: 3878
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 2:29 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:12 pm

I don't understand. Just repeal the damn amendment period and get it over with.
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1563
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:23 pm

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 20):
I don't understand. Just repeal the damn amendment period and get it over with.

Yes! before it can become any more of a mess that it is already. The D/FW area is starting to look foolish to the rest of the country.
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
mtnwest1979
Posts: 1793
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 4:23 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:40 pm

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 21):
The D/FW area is starting to look foolish to the rest of the country.

Starting?!?!? They just need some other 'project' to fight over.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:20 am

Wright Plan Advances In Both Houses

Two Links:

Courtesy: Dallas Morning News

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...2006dnbuswrightupdate.1895bd9.html

Courtesy: WFAA-TV

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dw.../wfaa060719_wz_wright.19c2ce1.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wright Compromise Bill - PDF File

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont.../dws/img/07-06/0720housewright.pdf
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:52 am

FYI, for those interested in reading the filing for the lawsuit here is the link for you to pull it down, the file is PDF.

http://www.dallasblogs.com/dallas-bl...uit-to-block-wright-agreement.html
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:38 am

Courtesy: Fort Worth Star Telegram

Congressional Panels Approve Wright Amendment Compromise

http://www.airportbusiness.com/artic.../article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=7256
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:56 pm

Courtesy: WFAA-TV

Hutchison Chides JetBlue On Wright

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dw...ies/072206dnbuswright.15a39e7.html
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sun Jul 23, 2006 1:23 am

Courtesy: KTVT-TV

Wright Amendment Deal Hits Roadblock

http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_202144058.html
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sun Jul 23, 2006 9:41 am

Quoting TripleP (Reply 10):
An unrestricted DAL will facilitate growth at DFW - and lots of it.

Would you care to explain that?

I am thinking that airlines, especially LCCs will consider DAL as well as DFW... AA and WN will do just fine at their airports, and DFW and DAL will get a lot of additional traffic due to the lifting of W.A.

Airlines will come in, and competition will go up.

And, fyi, I am not a "kool-aid" drinker...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sun Jul 23, 2006 11:17 pm

Courtesy: Forbes

Congress Stymies Kelly's Southwest Re Wright

http://www.forbes.com/2006/07/21/luv...tofacescan07.html?partner=yahootix
 
TripleP
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:06 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sun Jul 23, 2006 11:50 pm

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 28):
...DFW and DAL will get a lot of additional traffic due to the lifting of W.A.

Yep.

Contrary to the pro-Wright anti-competitionists on a.net, airlines not currently serving (or underserving due to AA's heavy hands) the metroplex will be more inclined to ramp up services once Love Field (if it ever does) becomes unrestricted.

Extortive walk-up fares to LGA, LAX, SFO/OAK, CHI, etc will be dramatically reduced.

Government regulation of safety is fine. Its regulation of the marketplace is burdensome to consumers and businesses.
 
MalpensaSFO
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:17 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sun Jul 23, 2006 11:55 pm

Quoting TripleP (Reply 30):
Extortive walk-up fares to LGA, LAX, SFO/OAK, CHI, etc will be dramatically reduced.

Buh.Bye AA... Hello WN...

This whole damn case has to do with PROTECTIONISM of American Airlines and is making the whole state of Texas look like a donkeys behind..

Quoting TripleP (Reply 30):
Government regulation of safety is fine. Its regulation of the marketplace is burdensome to consumers and businesses.

As we know America is a free market place only when cash is given to the right man in D.C.  wink 
TO FLY IS TO SERVE
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:50 am

Quoting TripleP (Reply 30):
Contrary to the pro-Wright anti-competitionists on a.net, airlines not currently serving (or underserving due to AA's heavy hands) the metroplex will be more inclined to ramp up services once Love Field (if it ever does) becomes unrestricted.

Right, it's called "choice!!!" People can CHOOSE between the two airports. They won't have to pay an arm and a leg with AA at DFW if they don't want to when flying from Dallas to Chicago, LA, SFO(OAK), BWI, PHL, JFK... By the way, I am not just talking about AA and WN here. JetBlue wants to serve Dallas and they don't want a thing to do with DFW. Heck, if Wright is lifted, and much of AA's oppression at DFW lifted, maybe B6 and other LCCs will consider DFW over DAL. Right now, AA has made DFW something for other carriers to avoid like the plague.

Quoting TripleP (Reply 30):
Extortive walk-up fares to LGA, LAX, SFO/OAK, CHI, etc will be dramatically reduced.

Government regulation of safety is fine. Its regulation of the marketplace is burdensome to consumers and businesses.

Amen to that!  Smile
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Wed Jul 26, 2006 4:31 am

Courtesy: KTVT-TV

Justice Dept. Says Wright Deal Would Be Illegal

http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_206134840.html

Courtesy: Dallas Morning News

Wright Deal Challenged

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...ies/072606dnbuswright.148a88d.html

[Edited 2006-07-25 21:51:09]
 
texan
Posts: 4059
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:30 am

Quoting KarlB737 (Reply 33):

WN will still likely follow the agreement, however. The main thing they are saying is that, as a public airport, it cannot monopolize itself and restrict competition to the extent that this agreement does. WN will still live up to their agreement, but the DOJ's ruling would allow Pinnacle and jetBlue, along with any other airline that wanted to, to move in, although technically, signatory carriers to the DFW charter (CO, AA, DL, UA, US) CANNOT operate out of DAL or they will be in violation of their agreement with DFW. Their regional affiliates are exempt (hence why CO is still flying to DAL as ExpressJet), but they are still technically bound by the agreement from 1978. Of course, with AA already operating out of DAL and the DFW Airport Board turning a blind eye, the Board would have to make exceptions for all carriers at this point or face multiple expensive lawsuits.

How is WN going to be capped at 16 gates (this question is specifically for those who hate the idea of Wright being repealed)? Simple. The city still owns the rest of the airport and controls the space. They are still going to abide by some general terms of the agreement, including not leasing any more space to WN outside of the 20 gates originally agreed upon by the parties. Same for AA. Since CO did not accept the agreement, nor were they involved in the process, their situation should be different.

Texan

edited: brain fart

[Edited 2006-07-25 22:31:33]
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
travelin man
Posts: 3198
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:51 am

How can anyone here think that crafting an "agreement" between two Texas-based airlines that will effectively give them almost TOTAL control over the gates at an airport (if you include another TX-based airline, CO, it is TOTAL control) would be legal, or something to be happy about?

Hell yes B6, NW, and any other carrier out there should be crying foul! Artificially reducing gates and giving de facto control to local airlines -- hmmm... do you think MAYBE that might be a violation of anti-trust laws?

I sure as hell hope so!
 
DCA-ROCguy
Posts: 3890
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:35 am

Good for the Department of Justice! It was apparent to me quickly that the "Wright Deal" is a anticompetitive backroom attempt by the immediate parties to divvy up a controverisal situation to their own limited mutual benefit. I'm glad Justice agrees that it is has antitrust issues. Whether this memo will help stop the deal remains to be seen, but we can certainly hope that it will. DOJ should come out in outright opposition to the deal, and politely decline Sen. Hutchison's request to stay neutral.

The Federal government should not have been involved in Love Field to begin with in 1979, and it should not be involved now. Complete, total repeal of the Wright Amendment, without any "gate caps" or other attempts to limit competition, is the proper course of action. If that involves chipping state by state, fine. But in the meantime the backroom "deal" should be rejected by Congress.

Jim
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
 
KarlB737
Topic Author
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:58 am

Courtesy: KTVT-TV

Justice Dept. Memo Could Stall Wright Amendment

Video Report:

http://cbs11tv.com/video/?id=11564@ktvt.dayport.com
 
RAPCON
Posts: 651
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:20 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:19 pm

Well....rather late than never, the Washington Post has to give it's two-cents of worthless chump change commentary on the Wright Amendment's hiccups:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2006/07/27/AR2006072701809.html
MODS CAN'T STOP ME....THEY CAN ONLY HOPE TO CONTAIN ME!!!
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:38 pm

Quoting DCA-ROCguy (Reply 36):
Good for the Department of Justice! It was apparent to me quickly that the "Wright Deal" is a anticompetitive backroom attempt by the immediate parties to divvy up a controverisal situation to their own limited mutual benefit. I'm glad Justice agrees that it is has antitrust issues. Whether this memo will help stop the deal remains to be seen, but we can certainly hope that it will. DOJ should come out in outright opposition to the deal, and politely decline Sen. Hutchison's request to stay neutral.

The Federal government should not have been involved in Love Field to begin with in 1979, and it should not be involved now. Complete, total repeal of the Wright Amendment, without any "gate caps" or other attempts to limit competition, is the proper course of action. If that involves chipping state by state, fine. But in the meantime the backroom "deal" should be rejected by Congress.

Reported in the Dallas Morning News that the instigators of the LoverTerminal Partners lawsuit lobbied the DOJ for intervention.

Limit of Love Field gates concerns House panel

Committee to address antitrust question on airport deal


11:08 PM CDT on Thursday, July 27, 2006

By ROBERT DODGE and SUDEEP REDDY / The Dallas Morning News


http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...ries/072806dnbuswright.f53c4b.html


Objections to the gate limit originated in Dallas. They have been raised on Capitol Hill by two Washington lobbying firms hired by a Dallas law firm representing Love Terminal Partners – the company that owns the six-gate terminal formerly used by now-defunct Legend Airlines.
"We are trying to relay some of the information and concerns about the anti-competitive aspects of the agreement," said Joel Johnson, a partner in the Washington lobbying firm of Glover Park Group.
Glover Park Group and Bartlett & Bendall were both hired by the Dallas law firm of Bickel & Brewer. The law firm is representing Love Terminal in a lawsuit challenging the local agreement to repeal the Wright amendment in eight years and bring long-haul flights to Love Field.
The plan calls for the city of Dallas to demolish the old Legend Airlines terminal, making it impossible for the Love Terminal group to sell or lease its gates to another airline.
"Of course we are trying to join the debate in every way we can," said Bill Brewer, a principal of the law firm that bears his name.

Quoting RAPCON (Reply 38):
Well....rather late than never, the Washington Post has to give it's two-cents of worthless chump change commentary on the Wright Amendment's hiccups:

Love the last two statements of the article you reference. Too Funny!

"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," spokesman Ed Stewart explained to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Funny. That's almost word for word what American used to say in defending the Wright amendment against criticism from Southwest.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:53 pm

Our local police here in the Bahamas have this saying, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"

This whole thing started because of that, the little line in the original DFW creation documents which said "if possible" to the closure of Love Field.
WN started service and as they say, the rest is history. Hopefully, this time,
they will consult more lawyers to prevent a Wright II in 2014 when Wright I goes away.
 
FAT5DEP
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:26 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Fri Jul 28, 2006 11:40 pm

If the goal has always been to facilitate growth at DFW airport and since its inception, DFW has grown drastically, why is the Wright Amendment still needed?
Oh, that I had wings like a dove! I would fly away and be at rest.
 
TripleP
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:06 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sat Jul 29, 2006 12:32 am

Quoting FAT5DEP (Reply 41):
why is the Wright Amendment still needed?

Its still "needed" so American can preserve its stranglehold on last minute travelers who fly to non-Wright permitted cities. Otherwise, DFW is perfectly self-sufficent (of course that's not taking into account DFW's questionable and somewhat fiscally inept leadership which is bed with Sen Kay Bailey (and hubby), pasty-faced Rep Joe Barton, American Airlines, Ft. Worth, et al.)

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 39):
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," spokesman Ed Stewart explained to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Conversely, any city/region that has multiple commercial airports should be allowed to employ their assets as they see fit - free of meddling from gov't agencies and back room, back scratching, underhand deals designed to stiffle competition. (other than safety)
 
LoneStarMike
Posts: 2802
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2000 1:02 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:03 am

Quoting Texan reply 34:

. . . although technically, signatory carriers to the DFW charter (CO, AA, DL, UA, US) CANNOT operate out of DAL or they will be in violation of their agreement with DFW. Their regional affiliates are exempt (hence why CO is still flying to DAL as ExpressJet), but they are still technically bound by the agreement from 1978.

That's not true. In 1998 the Department of Transportation ruled that a use agreement that violated federal law is invalid and legally unenforeceable.

DOT's 1998 ruling

Scroll down to :

ISSUE FOUR: ENFORCEABILITY OF DFW USE AGREEMENT
RESTRICTIONS BARRING LOVE FIELD SERVICE

Since Fort Worth and Dallas do not have the power to prohibit interstate service at Love Field, the cities' Bond Ordinance cannot stop airlines from using Love Field for interstate service.

If the Bond Ordinance or a DFW use agreement does prohibit a signatory airline's use of a competing airport, the prohibition would be invalid. The DFW Board may not restrict an airline from using a competing airport.

That's why the DFW Board has turned a "blind eye" to AA's operations at Love Field.

LoneStarMike

 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:20 am

Quoting FAT5DEP (Reply 41):
If the goal has always been to facilitate growth at DFW airport and since its inception, DFW has grown drastically, why is the Wright Amendment still needed?

It is still needed because DFW Airport is central to the ability of the DFW area to grow and prosper. The Wright Amendment does not stifle the ability of airlines that choose to compete at DFW. The Wright Amendment was put into place at the behest the cities that built DFW to protect the investment in that airport; there is still a need to protect that investment now.

Quoting TripleP (Reply 42):
Conversely, any city/region that has multiple commercial airports should be allowed to employ their assets as they see fit - free of meddling from gov't agencies and back room, back scratching, underhand deals designed to stiffle competition. (other than safety)

It is ironic how you say that any city/region that has multiple commercial airports should be allowed to employ their assets as they see fit. Gee that was the purpose behind the passage of the Wright Amendment. If you cannot block air service at your airport then at least you should be able to limit operations at the airport.

The compromise agreement does not stifle competition. There are plenty of airport infrastructures available here to handle the airlines that want to serve Dallas and Ft. Worth even with the limits placed on gates at DAL.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
TripleP
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:06 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sat Jul 29, 2006 4:07 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 44):
It is ironic how you say that any city/region that has multiple commercial airports should be allowed to employ their assets as they see fit.

Finish the thought CJ..."free of meddling from gov't agencies and back room, back scratching, underhand deals designed to stiffle competition." Free of government meddling means there is no need for a Wright Amendment. Let the market decide.

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 44):
Gee that was the purpose behind the passage of the Wright Amendment.

No, its purpose was stop Southwest Airlines in its tracks.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6020
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sat Jul 29, 2006 4:44 am

Also remember that "competition" is not just between airlines. It is also between airports and the WA does stifle open competition between airports.
The only way to have a strong and sustainable industry is through competition and it should be encouraged.

Two cents....

Tug
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
cjpark
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:46 am

RE: A New Twist On The Wright Amendment Debate

Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:01 am

Quoting TripleP (Reply 45):
Finish the thought CJ..."free of meddling from gov't agencies and back room, back scratching, underhand deals designed to stiffle competition." Free of government meddling means there is no need for a Wright Amendment. Let the market decide.

What part of Cities should have local control of airports and the ability to decide usage of those airports do you not understand?

Quoting TripleP (Reply 45):
No, its purpose was stop Southwest Airlines in its tracks.

Whatever? You are welcome to you own delusions.
"Any airline that wants to serve the [region] can go to DFW today and fly anywhere they want," WN spokesman Ed Stewart
 
Flight209
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 8:07 am

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:45 am

Quoting Cjpark (Reply 44):
Quoting TripleP (Reply 42):
Conversely, any city/region that has multiple commercial airports should be allowed to employ their assets as they see fit - free of meddling from gov't agencies and back room, back scratching, underhand deals designed to stiffle competition. (other than safety)

It is ironic how you say that any city/region that has multiple commercial airports should be allowed to employ their assets as they see fit. Gee that was the purpose behind the passage of the Wright Amendment. If you cannot block air service at your airport then at least you should be able to limit operations at the airport.

What Cjpark at least seems to be referring to is a series of federal court decisions made in the mid-1970s -- before Congress passed the Wright Amendment -- that forced the City of Dallas (and, by association, the City of Fort Worth) to keep letting airlines serve DAL as long as DAL was an airport. Frankly, I think that these rulings are a blatant abuse of power (as in "legislating from the bench") by the federal judiciary and a glaring infringement on the Dallas and Fort Worth governments' right under the U.S. Constitution's Tenth Amendment to decide (a) what kind of air traffic may use DAL and (b) how DAL and DFW are to co-exist. Also, unless I'm mistaken, no other owner of an airport in the United States has ever been forced by the federal court system to make the airport available to airlines in order for the airport to stay open.

Quoting TripleP (Reply 45):
Free of government meddling means there is no need for a Wright Amendment. Let the market decide.

Freedom from government meddling means also that the federal courts mind their own business, respect the Tenth Amendment, and let the City of Dallas, as sole owner of DAL and majority owner of DFW, limit or even ban airline service to and from DAL without having to close the airport completely. If TripleP or any other anti-Wrighter really wants to let the market decide, he or she would share my demand that any further loosening, let alone repeal, of Wright be accompanied by a full restoration of the Dallas city government's right to decide what kind of air traffic may serve DAL. After all, doesn't the market include the owner of an airport every bit as much as it does an airline serving the airport or a person flying to or from the airport?

Quoting TripleP (Reply 45):
No, its purpose was stop Southwest Airlines in its tracks.

I had that opinion about Wright for a long time. However, as I've researched the chain of events that led to Wright's enactment, I now think that the motive was more likely just retaliation by Dallas and Fort Worth for the federal courts' robbing them of the freedom to shift all airline traffic from all of their respective municipal airports to DFW and to make DAL a strictly general-aviation facility. It seems to me that the two cities were thinking, "Since the federal courts won't let us keep airlines out of DAL, let's get Congress to make the airport as unappealing to airlines as possible."

Simply put, I think that it's patently unfair and hypocritical for the federal government to force a "right" to airline use of an airport upon the airport's owner, then turn around and let airlines fly between that airport and anywhere they please with any aircraft that the airport can accommodate -- which is what will happen if Wright is repealed but those federal court rulings on airline service at DAL stay in effect. If that isn't a recipe for corporate welfare, then I don't know what is.

[Edited 2006-07-29 17:52:16]
I may question your opinion, but I'll never question your right to it.
 
atrude777
Posts: 4258
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

RE: Wright Washington DC Hearings Update

Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:07 am

Quoting TripleP (Reply 45):
No, its purpose was stop Southwest Airlines in its tracks.

Not really. Southwest was the only airline serving out of DAL that would be affected, so it seems Southwest was the main target, but its true course was to try and limit or stop all service into/out of DAL beyond the said states they put up. However only SWA was affected at the time, and any future airline who wished to serve DAL.

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!

Who is online