Breaking News - Wright Amendment Repealed

[canyonblue]

Not saying you are wrong, but I'm just never going to agree with you. We have dealt with this issue for years and this compromise is the only way we will get AA to allow DAL to be a "real" city in our system. Part of the compromise was the reduction of gates, and that would not be equitable to us since we would be the ones still being hampered by legislation if we had to take another hit by losing gates. For us to give up gates would have been a non-starter and SWA would have just given up on the whole challenge, as SWA would have essentially lost on both accounts. Being part of Southwest and understanding the issues of the WA and it's effects on the company and employees probably makes me biased, so I can see other side but will not come to an agreement with them.

 

[JetDude]

...The players at the time were happy with the compromise, ...

I've seen this written here many time regarding the WA. You need to check your facts. SWA was NEVER "happy with the compromise" and went to court to fight it.

 

[Dizel8]

Not saying you are wrong, but I'm just never going to agree

So we agree to disagree, while recognizing that we may not be

 

[canyonblue]

PS. Although no other two airports have the very same issue, one could look at the perimeter rule out of DCA.

I agree, it was there to aid the growth at Dulles. But if they removed the rule and insisted that a major carrier there give away many of it's gates, I would say that would also be just as wrong.

 

[canyonblue]

So we agree to disagree, while recognizing that we may not be

Yes please.

 

[Dizel8]

I agree, it was there to aid the growth at Dulles. But if they removed the rule and insisted that a major carrier there give away many of it's gates, I would say that would also be just as wrong.

Maybe as wrong a eliminating the rule while removing gates?

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

Dizel,

Lots of unfairness and confusion surrounding the Wright Amendment.


First--The Wright amendment came about because DFW did not work out an ironclad deal to force all carriers to move out of Love. There were lawsuits and SWA won them. Then the pro DFW crowd used political clout to ink a Congressional mandate since they couldn't get what they wanted. This compromise is/was the Wright Amendment. Meant to protect DFW bond holders and withstand legal judgment. Not meant to protect any carrier. Saying you support it after it comes into affect doesn't mean you really like it either. You just learn to live with it.


Should JetBlue, Frontier, Airtran, Spirit, UAL, Alaska, DAL, Mexicana, Copa, USA Jet, ATA, Midwest, USAir, NWA or anyone else get one or more of the gates at Love with the new agreement?? Every carrier that wants to be at Love can't be there. There are gate restrictions at a number of major airports. I think SWA would like to operate out of gates they can't get in the New York area. Is JetBlue willing to give some up? Unfairness abounds in that regard.

So how do you pen a compromise here? One way is to look at who currently operates at Love and who has a vested interest in it (hometown favorite AA). Then you factor in the Dallas "afraid of noise" crowd.

But I don't think the compromise is fair. That is what a compromise is, unfair to one or more parties to it.

It would be nice if a perfect compromise could be crafted and equally unfair to all, but I don't see that happening here.

 

[Tejas-Jet]

Yes, the Wright amendment was an odd piece of legislation, but it ended up being part of the deal for SWA to serve LUV. The players at the time were happy with the compromise, that is all but SWA, but then again, at the time they only wanted to serve Texas.

I can see why the Wright amendment was written, to aid AA and Braniff while at the same time fostering (one could say force) growth at DFW. I can also see why it ended up being bad for SWA and why a change was needed

I agree that the Wright (Wrong) Amendment was an odd piece of legislation...but when it came to be in 1979, SWA already had their sights set on serving cities outside of Texas....and had already started service into MSY. Lets remember that Deregulation came about in 1978...and from there any airline could fly to any city and charge any price they wanted on that route.

With SWA's low cost structure and coupled with the fear of having to compete with that cost structure, it was the carriers at DFW that started talking to Congressman Jim Wright about this.

Funny part is that it resulted in those same carriers competing against that cost structure in every city except the DFW area....and now the Customer traveling out of North Texas will reap the same benefit that the remainder of the country has enjoyed for a long time. And the long familiar "Southwest Effect" will also benefit the consumer no matter which airport he/she wants to travel out of in this area.

FYI...some of the talk in the DFW area has some folks unhappy with this final result....seems they wanted the Wright (Wrong) Amendment gone completely with no restrictions.

Tejas

 

[CherryBomb]

I wonder if anyone will occupy the old Legend Airlines gates on the east side of the field...

 

[lowecur]

You people all seem to forget that this little bill still has litigation ramifications. Once that is all out of the way in a few years, then all this point counter point might mean something. Till that day, the fat lady hasn't sung yet.

imp:

 

[Tejas-Jet]

You people all seem to forget that this little bill still has litigation ramifications. Once that is all out of the way in a few years, then all this point counter point might mean something. Till that day, the fat lady hasn't sung yet.

imp:

Well, there have been 3 lawsuits filed already...all by the same party....hasn't stopped anything yet...the Mayors aren't afraid...AA or SWA aren't afraid...the airports aren't afraid...the local neighborhood groups aren't afraid.....and the traveling public seems to be ready for this.

Tejas

 

[luv2fly]

You people all seem to forget that this little bill still has litigation ramifications. Once that is all out of the way in a few years, then all this point counter point might mean something. Till that day, the fat lady hasn't sung yet.

imp:

The passed legislation states that through ticketing will happen immediately, also the legislation has written into it certain protections for DFW, DAL, SWA and AA. pretty much all the players immune to lawsuits. Whoever wants to sue go ahead, in the meantime SWA will continue growing Dallas and selling through tickets!

 

[Capn Butthead]

Dizel,
you mention the perimeter rule at DCA, the funny thing is AA was the first company to fight the perimeter rule because they wanted to start service to DFW. So after not so long of a fight the perimeter rule was given exceptions. AA fought and won to get the "Wright" to fly to dfw from dca. Because of that you have seen more flights added out of DCA ie, as to sea, dl to slc, and hp to phx. Not bashing you just clarifying the point.

So to sum it up aa cant have their cake and eat it too.

 

[lowecur]

Well, there have been 3 lawsuits filed already...all by the same party....hasn't stopped anything yet...the Mayors aren't afraid...AA or SWA aren't afraid...the airports aren't afraid...the local neighborhood groups aren't afraid.....and the traveling public seems to be ready for this.

Tejas

The lawsuits of any meaning will involve the tearing down of gates. Until the city actually gets the demolition going, injunctions are a viable option to pursue.

Interested parties have turned the bill over to attorneys and they will look at it long and hard before filing any lawsuits. The Mayor wants to get the demolition going pronto so as not to afford the attorneys time to prepare a strategy. Look for an injunction request if the bulldozers are brought on site.

If the injunction is denied and the suit thrown out, appeals will be made as far up the ladder as possible. Only then can the defendents feel a sense of security and accomplishment.

imp:

 

[frog_flyer]

Excellent!

Stay off 13L though, ya jackasses!

Jimbo Wright is a polisci prof here at TCU. I'm going to get an SWA t-shirt and go chat with him

 

[lowecur]

This from the "Friends of Love Field," who want the compromise repealed along with any vestige of the WA:

Friends of Love Field, a grassroots organization that has been opposed to the Wright Amendment and the compromise bill said they were happy with how much the bill changed in three weeks.

"We now have a future to look forward to. The fate of Love Field will be decided in the courts by a jury of 12 instead of five to 12 people doing back-room secret negotiations and secret meetings," said William Foster, a spokesman for Love Field. Many critics of the Wright Amendment compromise, including Friends of Love Field, have criticized the agreement because no public meetings were held.

imp:

 

[737tanker]

B.S. In this instance they're tearing down gates to make sure there isn't any room for anyone else.

I wouldn't be to concerned about the provision to tear down gates. I think that Herb and GK agreed to that provision so that SWA could immediately get through ticketing, knowing that some court would remove the provision to tear down gates. If the courts take less than 8 years to remove it then JetBlue, NW, AirTran, and any other airline will be able to fly out of DAL. Just remember if they do it any time within the next 8 years they will have to stop at a city in a current WA state before continuing on to their destination.

 

[pgcfii2002]

Seems to me SWA will be offerring more long distance flights now that this legislation has passed and fewer short haul flights. I would imagine DAL-SAT or DAL-HOU might not have the appeal it once had, with 1-2 hour security screening and a 1 hour flight. I don't think SWA is really too concerned with building more short haul flights within the state of Texas at this point. It will be nice to see them add DAL-New York/LA and other long distance destinations.

 

[737tanker]

Seems to me SWA will be offerring more long distance flights now that this legislation has passed and fewer short haul flights. I would imagine DAL-SAT or DAL-HOU might not have the appeal it once had, with 1-2 hour security screening and a 1 hour flight. I don't think SWA is really too concerned with building more short haul flights within the state of Texas at this point. It will be nice to see them add DAL-New York/LA and other long distance destinations.

While you may see fewer DAL-HOU and DAL-SAT flights you won't see any DAL-BWI or DAL-LAX flights for 8 years. What you will see out of DAL is DAL-MAF-LAS, DAL-ABQ-LAX, DAL-MSY-TPA, DAL-BHM-BWI, and other connections. That is because for the next 8 years all flights to/from DAL must stop at a current WA state.