sdexplorer00
Topic Author
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:27 am

SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:51 pm

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

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...ew-york-slot-trade.html?cmpid=yhoo
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:54 pm

Isn't this a little too late as the swap has already been approved by everyone that has a say??
What gets measured gets done.
 
rwy04lga
Posts: 1976
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:21 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Tue Aug 30, 2011 9:59 pm

Has it? I sure hope so. If it's past the point....why bother crying about it now? Is there anything that can stop this slot swap, and if so, what is it?
Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
 
airtran737
Posts: 3222
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:47 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:01 pm

Boo hoo WN. You should have gone to LGA earlier.
Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:07 pm

Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 2):
Has it?

The DOT approved the deal pending DL & US giving it the go ahead (what the DOT outlined this time is much more in line with what US/DL was willing to do as a compromise). Next thing is the silent auction. Not sure when that will happen.
What gets measured gets done.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6079
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:07 pm

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

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

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

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
peanuts
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:17 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:12 pm

This is expected.

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

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

If they are not on the same page, expect some more drama.
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:15 pm

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

Yeah, and AA, UA/CO supported DL and US in their lawsuit from the beginning because what the DOT and FAA! (I don't even know why they were involved) was trying to do would have set a bad precedent.
What gets measured gets done.
 
texan
Posts: 4060
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 12:03 am

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

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

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
catiii
Posts: 2393
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 12:06 am

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

They represent the local, regional and state governing bodies that own and operate commercial airports in the United States and Canada.
 
FutureUScapt
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:39 pm

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 12:06 am

Hmm, funny that B6 was OK with the first revision to the slot swap that entailed their receiving of 5 slots at DCA. Kind of tough to take any dissenting opinion from them seriously based on that.
 
catiii
Posts: 2393
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 12:09 am

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

Wouldn't you be for a deal that you originally benefited from, and then opposed to it once the terms of the deal were changed in a way that was not in your favor? It's not disingenuous.
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 3278
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 2:02 am

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

No one needs to worry we will see many WN and Delta battles in the future this is nothing more than politics if i had to guess.
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5040
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 2:03 am

Notice how its just the "low cost" carriers whining?
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11508
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 2:13 am

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

You lost me. Didn't WN file a comment within the comment period? And if so, how is the second part of your statement true?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
Elevated
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 6:52 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 2:18 am

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

Yes, lets just have Delta run the show and control almost half the slots because the "low cost" carries shake things up with a competitive edge and/or product into the market. So terrible for them calling them out and objecting.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4602
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:32 am

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

Jealous they didn't come up with the idea instead of DL and US. Complaints are to be expected from any airline that doesn't stand to benefit.
 
smoot4208
Posts: 595
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 4:39 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:46 am

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

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

As for Virgin America?....Please...they may not even be in business when the slots finally get auctioned off. Why don't they spend their money and time on lobbying congress to change the perimeter rule before they complain on the DOT's ruling that has zero barring on them anyways.
 
texan
Posts: 4060
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:55 am

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

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

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 4:11 am

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

Nothing against WN most of that stuff can and should be used as toilet tissue. Again, this is nothing against WN. I've read many a legal documents from other airlines such as DL/AA or whomever and it's usually a whole bunch of nothing; saying the same thing over and over in legal lingo.
What gets measured gets done.
 
FutureUScapt
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:39 pm

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:05 am

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

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

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

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

WN also thought the original divestiture amount was insufficient as well. The DOT/DOJ didn't consider their earlier objection and indeed moved in the opposite direction of what WN wanted, given the changes in the competitive landscape over the last two years. I suspect WN will have to be content with the current divestiture plan, which may still give them potential for a meaningful expansion at DCA and/or LGA.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18252
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:18 am

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

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

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

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
FutureUScapt
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:39 pm

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:49 am

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

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

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

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

[Edited 2011-08-30 23:21:25]
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18252
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:35 am

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

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

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

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

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
SeeTheWorld
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:46 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 4:37 pm

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

I'm sorry, but I don't think Frontier could profitably operate eight additional DCA slots nor do I think they are in any financial position to purchase them ... Not going to happen, nor should it ...
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4602
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:27 pm

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 24):
I'm sorry, but I don't think Frontier could profitably operate eight additional DCA slots nor do I think they are in any financial position to purchase them ... Not going to happen, nor should it ...

It's DCA...one of the most desirable airports to service in the entire country. I think just about ANY airline could profitably operate there, and to almost any decently-sized market.

Are these slots to be divested at DCA subject to the perimeter rule?
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:22 pm

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 25):
Are these slots to be divested at DCA subject to the perimeter rule?

Yes. DL is keeping the ones that are used to operate SLC.
What gets measured gets done.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18252
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:45 pm

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

Frontier has filed, and is arguing the process:

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2010-0109-0134

Click on the pdf icon.  

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
ScottB
Posts: 5450
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 9:49 pm

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 26):
DL is keeping the ones that are used to operate SLC.

The beyond-perimeter flights are using slot exemptions, not slots, and the slot exemptions may not be sold or transferred (which is why AA was unable to keep the DCA-LAX exemptions in the TWA asset purchase).

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 1):
Isn't this a little too late as the swap has already been approved by everyone that has a say??

DoT asked for public comment to be submitted by a certain deadline. They and the other objectors have that as an opportunity to plead their case as to why the transaction should not proceed or why the proposed remedies are inadequate. As the admonition goes: "Speak now or forever hold your peace."
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Wed Aug 31, 2011 10:27 pm

Quoting ScottB (Reply 28):

How/when did the exemptions come about? How did they determain eligibility?
What gets measured gets done.
 
FutureUScapt
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:39 pm

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:48 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 27):
Frontier has filed, and is arguing the process:

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2010-0109-0134

Click on the pdf icon.

Interesting to note they that are opposed to the DOT's proposal to give all 8 pairs to one carrier like I thought they might be.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18252
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:10 am

Quoting FutureUScapt (Reply 30):
Interesting to note they that are opposed to the DOT's proposal to give all 8 pairs to one carrier like I thought they might be.

Sure. As Frontier points out, it means that all the available slots at DCA go to a single carrier. It is possible that the the two blocks of slots at LGA could go to that same single carrier as well if highest bid is the sole arbiter.

All's fair in love and airline wars? Absolutely. I'm not sure that the smaller fry should simply roll over and play dead, though, without having a bit of a yell about it.  

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
SeeTheWorld
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:46 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:01 pm

An Frontier doesn't want all 8 at DCA going to one carrier because 1) it can't use eight profitably under the perimeter rule (I don't care whether you believe it or not, it's true) and 2) they will be outbidded anyway .... it's a moot point for Frontier .. they wouldn't bring anything new to the DCA table anyway ... Southwest will get them and Southwest will use them well.
 
SeeTheWorld
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:46 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:02 pm

And Frontier doesn't want all 8 at DCA going to one carrier because 1) it can't use eight profitably under the perimeter rule (I don't care whether you believe it or not, it's true) and 2) they will be outbidded anyway .... it's a moot point for Frontier .. they wouldn't bring anything new to the DCA table anyway ... Southwest will get them and Southwest will use them well.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18252
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:15 pm

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 32):
An Frontier doesn't want all 8 at DCA going to one carrier because 1) it can't use eight profitably under the perimeter rule (I don't care whether you believe it or not, it's true)

Each to their own - I don't know it to be true.

I think it is more likely that Frontier doesn't want to expend the amount of capital that would be necessary to outbid Southwest.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 32):
2) they will be outbidded anyway

I think I said that in my first post on this, and have been saying it ever since. As long as highest bid is the arbiter, then yes, Southwest can outbid just about anyone.

If - and it is only "if" - the DOT decides that highest bid is not the sole arbiter, then things could change.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
ScottB
Posts: 5450
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:23 pm

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 29):
How/when did the exemptions come about? How did they determain eligibility?

The first six pairs of beyond-perimeter slot exemptions were created as part of the AIR-21 legislation back in 1999, while the second six pairs were created by the Vision 100 legislation in 2003. (And, incidentally, AIR-21 and Vision 100 also created within-perimeter exemptions.) The airlines had to apply for the exemptions, and the criteria for selection included hub access, low-cost competition, limited incumbents, etc.

The DCA slots which Frontier lost to Sun Country were actually Midwest slots; they legally couldn't be transferred to Frontier or Republic because Midwest had ceased to exist as an air carrier.
 
lhcvg
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 2:53 pm

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:32 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 34):
Each to their own - I don't know it to be true.

I think it is more likely that Frontier doesn't want to expend the amount of capital that would be necessary to outbid Southwest.

True. That WN will almost surely outbid F9 is a fact. That F9 doesn't have, or at least can't make, plans that would allow them to utilize the DCA slots profitably were they to get them through whatever means, is an opinion unless someone has inside info from F9.
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4471
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:35 pm

Quoting Elevated (Reply 15):
So terrible for them calling them out and objecting.

What is this a poker game or a duel? Both DL and WN will do what is best financially for their respective companies.
 
FlyASAGuy2005
Posts: 3965
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:55 am

RE: SWA Objects To Delta’s Proposed Divesting At LGA

Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:49 pm

Quoting ScottB (Reply 35):
The first six pairs of beyond-perimeter slot exemptions were created as part of the AIR-21 legislation back in 1999, while the second six pairs were created by the Vision 100 legislation in 2003. (And, incidentally, AIR-21 and Vision 100 also created within-perimeter exemptions.) The airlines had to apply for the exemptions, and the criteria for selection included hub access, low-cost competition, limited incumbents, etc.

Thanks!

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 37):
What is this a poker game or a duel?

Sadly, it seems like a little bit of both at times.
What gets measured gets done.