Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Close Love Field

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
mach zero said:
Lowely,
They are not going to close Love Field. WN is not going to move to DFW. This is not even a worthwhile discussion and your posted article is political posturing by Tarrant county. You might as well consider the Star Telegram as being owned by Tarrant County.
Just trying to stir discussion Zero. They will have to do something at DFW and soon. My guess is they will offer LUV these enticements. If not, they will elect Richard Daley, and he will close DAL.

[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]D/FW facing AA dilemma[/font]
Big carrier a huge obstacle to much-needed low-cost rivals


By Margaret Allen
Dallas Business Journal
Updated: 7:00 p.m. ET Dec. 12, 2004

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport desperately wants a low-cost carrier to fill the 24 gates that will be vacated there next month, when Delta Air Lines Co. shutters its D/FW hub.

But good luck with that happening, industry analysts say. The big reasons: American Airlines Inc. (NYSE: AMR) and, to a lesser degree, Southwest Airlines Co.

Any carrier entering North Texas will be treading on the highly protected home turf of D/FW behemoth and fortress carrier American, which will have nearly 90% of the airport's flights once Delta is gone. And Southwest -- the undisputed King Kong of the low-cost segment -- has a hammerlock on the close-in regional routes allowed from Dallas Love Field.

Even so, it's critical that D/FW fill the vacant gates as quickly as possible. That's because Delta's pullback will open up about one-sixth of the airport's 137 total gates, and reduce the airport's total departures by more than 21%. The pullback will also slash D/FW's 2005 passenger volume by 10%, and cut the airport's estimated annual revenue by $35 million.

Ironically it all means that American -- which has a reputation for aggressively defending its turf -- is likely to scare off any potential low-fare carriers from taking the Delta gates, said airline analyst Jim Corridore, an equity analyst with New York-based ratings agency Standard & Poor's.

"With competition being brutal, it would be very difficult for a low-cost carrier to come in," said Corridore. "American Airlines is going to defend D/FW at all costs. American Airlines will price its fares below break-even, forcing another airline to match them, and gobble up losses."

Dallas is an especially competitive market, added Alan Sbarra, vice president with California-based Unisys R2A Transportation & Management Consultants.

"You have a dominant legacy carrier there, American Airlines, and they're going to defend their turf," said Sbarra. "A low-cost carrier can't come in and just pick off market share. What existing low-cost carrier would want to go in there and face that kind of competition?"

Only Southwest (NYSE: LUV), JetBlue Airways (Nasdaq: JBLU) and AirTran Airways (NYSE: AAI) would be likely to do so, say analysts including Boston-based Kevin Neels, director of the transportation practice at consulting firm Charles River Associates Inc.

But even those carriers are unrealistic candidates, Neels indicated.

"American Airlines has owned D/FW for a long time and you have to expect that if someone comes in, American is going to do something serious," said Neels. "The low-cost carriers tend to look for a place where they don't have to pick a fight."

Low fares more popular Currently, 10% of all the passenger fares for trips starting from and ending at D/FW are low-cost, according to Max Wells, chairman of the D/FW Airport board and chairman of Dallas-based The Oaks Bank & Trust Co. Two years ago, that number was just 3.5%. "So it's gone like a rocket and is growing," he said.

D/FW now has five low-cost carriers operating there. Besides AirTran, with 13 flights, there's ATA Airlines, with seven flights; America West Airlines, with 10 flights; Frontier Airlines Inc. with five flights; and Sun Country Airlines, also with five flights.

Southwest has already spurned D/FW's invitation to take Delta's gates, saying it wants instead to expand at Love.

And the low-cost carrier has once again set off an airline turf war in North Texas by saying it wants to roll back the long-standing, existing federal legislation that restricts long-haul flights from Love.

D/FW Airport officials say that kind of talk cost them a strong low-cost prospect that was recently close to signing on the dotted line for Delta's gates.

A JetBlue spokesman said the prospect wasn't JetBlue, and an America West spokesman said it wasn't America West. Meanwhile, Orlando, Fla.-based AirTran, which already has four gates at D/FW, declined to say whether the D/FW officials were talking about AirTrain or not.

But the discounter is comfortable with the level of service it currently has at D/FW, said Kevin Healy, AirTran's vice president of planning and sales. Just now, the airline clearly has other fish to fry.

AirTran is currently absorbed with a hoped-for acquisition of bankrupt ATA's assets, which would allow AirTran to expand in Chicago, the nation's second-largest airline market, at Chicago Midway Airport.

As for Frontier, the low-cost, Denver-based carrier already has a growing hub at Denver International Airport. And it's now in a huge market-share war with bankrupt United Airlines (OTC: UALAQ), the Colorado airport's increasingly shaky fortress carrier.

Similarly, D/FW shouldn't hold its breath waiting for New York-based JetBlue. That airline would like to come to Dallas at some point, said Todd Burke, a spokesman, but nothing's been accelerated as a result of Delta's departure, and nothing's going to happen anytime in 2005.

'Scary' competition Of all the low-cost carriers, only AirTran has experience staring into the mouth of the beast at D/FW.

Healy acknowledged it's "scary" going up against Fort Worth-based American.

From D/FW, AirTran offers discounted fares to Atlanta, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Orlando and, soon, Fort Lauderdale, Fla. American has matched the discounter's fares on all routes.

For example, American added flights not only to Los Angeles International Airport, but also to that area's four nearby airports.

"For every one seat we offer, American offers 26 at discount prices," Healy said. "They match all of our fares, and all of our fare rules. ...We tend to bring out the best in our competitors. But that makes it tough."

The good news for consumers is that D/FW fares on those competitive routes have dropped by half, while passenger traffic has doubled, Healy said.

That kind of aggressive pricing might cripple a smaller carrier. But Healy said AirTran is big enough to withstand it.
 
Last edited:
For example, American added flights not only to Los Angeles International Airport, but also to that area's four nearby airports.
Did I just read something about four nearby airports? If I figure correctly, the LA basin has five airports for ten million peeps,or two million peeps per airport. If the DFW airport board were to get their way, the Fort Worth-Dallas metroplex would be down to one airport for four million people.

I wonder if the reporter who wrote story even realized the irony.

enigma

 
enigma said:

Did I just read something about four nearby airports? If I figure correctly, the LA basin has five airports for ten million peeps,or two million peeps per airport. If the DFW airport board were to get their way, the Fort Worth-Dallas metroplex would be down to one airport for four million people.

I wonder if the reporter who wrote story even realized the irony.

enigma

Enigma:

LAX is the 800lb gorilla. The other airports all pale in comparison. Not a good example. Now if you want to compare Newark, JFK, LGA, or ORD & MDW, that would be valid.
 
lowecur said:
Enigma:

LAX is the 800lb gorilla. The other airports all pale in comparison. Not a good comparison.
OK my friend. You've got a lot of time. Can you come up with a percentage breakdown of the business done by the LA area commercial airports and also of the metroplex?

Respectfully, unless you are a metroplex resident, you'll have a hard time understanding the political BS that goes around here every day. I'll guarantee you that fares will rise if DFW airport gets a monopoly on scheduled service.

enigma
 
enigma said:
OK my friend. You've got a lot of time. Can you come up with a percentage breakdown of the business done by the LA area commercial airports and also of the metroplex? For what? Are you saying any of those airports even come close to LAX? Just off the top of my head, I believe Ontario has about 3M enplanements, Burbank has maybe 2M. The other commerical airport I believe is Long Beach, and that is rather insignificant.

Respectfully, unless you are a metroplex resident, you'll have a hard time understanding the political BS that goes around here every day. I'm sure there is plenty of political BS, but that happens in any metro area with two large cities. I'll guarantee you that fares will rise if DFW airport gets a monopoly on scheduled service. Not if you bring SWA into the frey. Just think of all those other destinations that SWA would be able to match up against AMR. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if Gary Kelly brought up the WA as leverage to get the lease and landing fees he wants at DFW. Afterall, he was in discussions with them until the WA was brought up. He's an excellent negotiator.:)

enigma
.....
 
lowecur said:
lowecur, you note that Gary Kelly is an excellent negotiator. I have no doubt about that. Otherwise I'd not be trying to quit my present job in order to join his team. However, we're really not talking about SWA here; we're talking about the DFW airport. Once DFW gets a monopoly of runways in the metromess, I'll guarantee that costs will go up.

It may be that LUV will close, and that SWA will move to DFW airport. But being at DFW goes against most every tenent of the SWA business plan as I know it. PHL would be an example of them breaking their own mold, so anything is possible, but PHL was home to an airline with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. DFW is not the same, so it is my feeling that LUV is safe for now.

I still would like to see how much of the total basin market goes to LAX, and how much of the metroplex traffic goes to DFW.

With all of that said, SWA at DFW would be a boon for me and my present commute.

regards,
enigma
 
enigma said:
lowecur, you note that Gary Kelly is an excellent negotiator. I have no doubt about that. Otherwise I'd not be trying to quit my present job in order to join his team. However, we're really not talking about SWA here; we're talking about the DFW airport. Once DFW gets a monopoly of runways in the metromess, I'll guarantee that costs will go up. I assume you mean to the airlines. If Southwest, Jetblue, AirTran, and other LCCs gobble up the new gates at DFW, you can bet airfares will bottom out. AMR will have no pricing power at all competing against all these LCCs, and will need to become more efficient.

It may be that DAL will close, and that SWA will move to DFW airport. But being at DFW goes against most every tenent of the SWA business plan as I know it. DFW and AMR are both very inefficient at the moment. Not just DFW, but all the hub airports need to force replacement of 4-10 flts per day on rjs to these small to mid sized markets, and replace them with 2 to 4 flts per day on mainline. Eagle and UAX run 6 flts each a day from SYR to ORD. What a complicated mess at ORD when they each could be flying two mainlines a day, Ibid for ROC, ALB, and BUF. PHL would be an example of them breaking their own mold, so anything is possible, but PHL was home to an airline with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. DFW is not the same, so it is my feeling that LUV is safe for now. Get the majority of rj's out of the airport, build the perimeter taxiways, reduce gate/landing fees, and watch the airport turn into all it was supposed to be 25 years ago.

I still would like to see how much of the total basin market goes to LAX, and how much of the metroplex traffic goes to DFW.

With all of that said, SWA at DFW would be a boon for me and my present commute. I wish you well.

regards,
enigma
.....
 
Last edited:
Arguing with Lowecur is like trying to describe color to a blind man. And he's stubborn.

I think what he is advocating is the nationalization of the airlines as well as the federalization of all airports. Of course that would require all airlines to fly Tupolev's and Antonov's.

I submit, that if he were so smart he wouldn't be posting so much on this webpage.
 

...Eagle and UAX run 6 flts each a day from SYR to ORD. What a complicated mess at ORD when they each could be flying two mainlines a day, Ibid for ROC, ALB, and BUF...

...Get the majority of rj's out of the airport, build the perimeter taxiways, reduce gate/landing fees, and watch the airport turn into all it was supposed to be 25 years ago...


Lowecur,

1) The use of mainline is not as easy as you think. If those flying on RJs have to sit at O'hare for 4 hours for their connecting flight they will lose their minds. Some might pay $20-50 less to sit at the airport, but the more frequent and valuable traveler hates it. Remember, the legacy carriers want to paint themselves as higher service airlines.

2) Get the "majority of RJs out of the airport". Uh, oh, ok....Do you know how AA and DAL fill their mainline flights between hubs?? And these hub to hub flights make MONEY!! Efficiency is necessary, but you have heard these guys say it themselves, "We are not SW". With RJs in the fleet they have to figure out the best way to use them, not park them.

You can do your point-counterpoint thing, but I'm just trying to tell you how it is. Passengers publically demand things that they will then voluntarily (and quietly) give up to gain something else (service or price, depends on the traveler and level of pain). They think they are being good negotiaters.

Hub and spoke is not dead. Mainline fleets are continuing to shrink with an emphasis on hub to hub and international flights. This will be in response to more daily service that travelers will pay (a little) extra for. I predict that RJ fleets will get bigger airplanes unless ALPA creates another B scale for new 100 seaters. We'll see what happens.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top