DFW Study Shows Consumers will Save Mega$$$

[chase]

The original report was released on 10 May in a big ceremony in the empty C Concourse at DFW. The only problem was the DFW spokeperson released only the information that would benefit the DFW airport. This report came out last week.....surprised it hadn't made it on here yet. It is a great example of how the WA spin machine to keep higher fares for North Texas residents is rather brazen in how they wish to keep competitive low fares away from local residents & folks in other cities.
_____________

Law's repeal would bring sharp reduction in airfares


Fort Worth Star-Telegram

May 27, 2005

Law's repeal would bring sharp reduction in airfares

By Trebor Banstetter


Airfares from North Texas to dozens of cities could drop as much as 50 percent if the Wright Amendment is lifted, according to a recent study commissioned by Dallas/Fort Worth Airport.

The airport, a leading proponent of the amendment, released a summary of the study two weeks ago indicating that if flight restrictions were lifted at Dallas Love Field, hundreds of flights would be shifted to Love from D/FW. The summary did not include the findings on fares.

In the full report, the consultants predicted that Southwest Airlines would begin nonstop and connecting service to more than 40 cities from Love Field if the amendment is repealed.

Average fares to most of those destinations would drop substantially as other carriers matched Southwest's fares, the study said.

The study also concluded that ticket prices could drop at D/FW if more low-fare airlines begin service at that airport, even if the Wright Amendment remains in place. But the study said the fare impact would be somewhat smaller.

Discount airlines now account for only a small fraction of D/FW's service.

"If Southwest Airlines is allowed to expand, will fares come down? Absolutely," said Christina Cassotis, the study's author and vice president of Simat, Helliesen & Eichner in Cambridge, Mass.

"But we also feel that the D/FW market is ripe for low fares, and that's not dependent on the repeal of the Wright Amendment," she said in an interview.

The amendment's effect on ticket prices has been much discussed in recent months. But the study is the first to put a dollar amount on specific destinations.

"You can go all over the United States and see what Southwest brings, which is lower fares," Herb Kelleher, the airline's chairman and co-founder, told reporters Thursday. "And that's exactly what we would see in North Texas."

D/FW Airport paid Cassotis' firm $100,000 for the study, which examined the impact of a repeal on D/FW.

The summary released by airport officials May 10 said that a repeal would shift as much as a third of D/FW's traffic to Love Field, and the region could lose service to some cities, including international destinations. Details on fares were included in statistical tables, which were not distributed to the public.

The Star-Telegram obtained the fare data this week from the airport's legal department after submitting a written request for the documents.

"We weren't trying to hide that issue," said Kevin Cox, the airport's chief operating officer. "We just didn't think anyone was interested in 160 pages of voluminous material." Yea right!

Cassotis said the impact on fares was never intended to be the report's main focus.

"The fare issue is very important to consumers, and so perhaps we should have included it," she said. (What's the number 1 factor in people picking an airline to fly...fares!!!)

The amendment is the focus of an ongoing battle that has pitted D/FW Airport and Fort Worth-based American Airlines against Southwest. The law, approved by Congress in 1979, permitted flights from Love Field only to adjacent states. It was later amended to include Kansas, Alabama and Mississippi.

In North Texas, Southwest operates from Love Field but not D/FW. Southwest is dominant at Love, while American is dominant at D/FW.

According to the report, if Love Field is opened to unrestricted service, Southwest would probably begin nonstop service to 21 cities, including Chicago, St. Louis and San Jose, Calif. An additional 23 destinations would be available through connections, the report stated.

The study compared Southwest's estimated fare to each city to the average fare at D/FW during the second quarter of 2004, the most recent figures available.

In many cases, the savings are substantial. On all the routes combined, the Southwest fares are 37 percent lower on average than the previous D/FW prices.

The largest savings could be on flights to San Jose. The current disparity suggests that fares would drop to $116 from $219 each way. The study also reports possible savings of $71 each way on flights to Kansas City, Mo., of $67 each way to San Diego, and $69 each way to Oakland, Calif.


The fare differences are less distinct to different destinations. Based on the comparisons, fares to Las Vegas, for example, would drop just $5. Discount carrier AirTran Airways already offers cheap tickets to that city from D/FW.

The report also calculated that the average fare on all airlines, flying at D/FW or Love Field, would drop 31 percent to Southwest's new destinations, as other carriers are forced to compete. (How much money would consumers save with that? Is keeping competition away from North Texas worth it to the consumers to pay that much more?

Southwest officials say those low fares are the crux of their argument for repealing the restrictions.

"Anytime you fetter competition, what you have is a penalty to the consumer," Kelleher said.

But airport officials say the debate shouldn't be about fares.

"Of course fares would go down," said Cox, the D/FW official. "But that shouldn't be the question. The question is, at what expense?" (So DFW airport & other carriers should subsidize these entities in order to keep the status quo? At least for taxes you can vote the folks out of office if you think you're being improperly taxed...in a free market system one hopes the market place will work to the benefit of the consumer, not against it.)

Cox called the fare issue "a red herring" because Southwest can fly to any destination from D/FW, without any potential damage to the airport from lifting the amendment. (Yes SWA could but why should they have to do it from DFW....where is that written other than in the WA...if other carriers wish to compete from Love that is great....competition is great.)

"Southwest is doing an excellent job of spinning this to make it look like they're helping the traveling public," he said.

In her interview, Cassotis emphasized her view that new low-fare service is inevitable, even if the Wright Amendment remains in place, as discount airlines continue to grow.

She calculated that fares to 17 markets could drop if new discount airlines come to D/FW. For example, prices to New York -- which is not served by Southwest -- could fall $113 each way, a 50 percent savings.

But D/FW hasn't had much luck recently in luring new airlines. Most discount carriers, including JetBlue and America West, say they have no plans to expand at the airport soon.

The airport is offering an incentive package worth as much as $22 million to any airline that takes the 24 gates vacated this year by Delta Air Lines, which essentially closed its D/FW hub.

So far, there haven't been any takers. Cox said Thursday that the airport is talking to one airline about possibly taking over "a couple of gates."

Still, Cox said, "The fastest way for consumers to get low fares in North Texas is for Southwest Airlines to come to D/FW, and the riskiest way would be to repeal the Wright Amendment." Kelleher countered: "When it comes to airfares, Southwest has been a bonanza for every city it serves. If we can fly unrestricted from Love, that's what would happen here."

 

[J3CubCapt]

Good on you Chase, Thanks for helping bring out the truth!

DFW paid 100K for the report and failed to tell people that fares would drop? These folks at DFW need to run for office, "SPIN, SPIN, SPIN"

Call Bill O'rielly we need the "NO SPIN ZONE" right here!

J3

 

[On Your Six]

Those blood-sucking AA and DFW management members want to delay this as long as possible. Time to allow the free market to decide who wins...

 

[Mugs]

May 24, 2005

Letters (WSJ)
Promise Unfulfilled Created A Monopoly for Southwest

I was taken aback to read the advocacy piece in your news pages
promoting Southwest Airlines' view of a dispute regarding Dallas Love
Field ("Southwest's Dallas Duel -- Discounter Attacks Old Law That
Crimps Its Operations," Marketplace, May 10).

The facts are quite simple. In the 1960s, the cities of Dallas and Fort
Worth made an agreement with the U.S. government and with the airlines
then serving the two cities. The U.S. had told the cities that it
wouldn't provide continued support for two airports, but that if they
could agree on a single airport, the government would provide help in
creating it. The cities agreed to prohibit competition with DFW from any
other airport, the airlines serving both city airports agreed to move
and to take on the financial burden of paying off the bonds with which
DFW would be built and sustained, and the new airport was built. During
construction, Southwest was created, and when the airlines moved to DFW,
Southwest found a legal loophole that allowed it to remain at Love
Field, which is much closer to the businesses, hotels and high-income
residential areas of Dallas. Thus, Southwest gained a unique monopoly
position in one of the country's premier markets and avoided bearing any
of the cost of creating and sustaining DFW.

The city of Dallas could and should have closed Love Field to fulfill
its promise to prevent competition against DFW, as Denver did when it
closed Stapleton to prevent it from competing with the new Denver
airport. Unfortunately, Dallas lacked the moral courage to fulfill its
obligation. In retrospect, it was a mistake for American and others to
agree to the compromise that the Wright Amendment represented, for
Southwest and others now mischaracterize it at every opportunity.

Robert L. Crandall
Retired Chairman
AMR Corp., American Airlines
Gloucester, Mass.

 

[Juvat]

Crandall might as well come out of the closet and admit that he's a flaming socialist. What a bunch of jibberish.

 

[chase]

Passenger Growth slowest at DFW 94-'04

From the Ft Worth Star Telegram:

"...Since 1994, air passenger traffic has grown almost 33 percent across the nation, according to the Transportation Department's statistics on originating traffic.

But D/FW is up just 8 percent by that measure, and that's before Delta pulled 200 flights this year. Love Field passengers declined 13.5 percent over the same period, as flight restrictions prompted Southwest to shrink in its hometown and expand elsewhere.

Combined, this measure of passenger traffic in the Metroplex rose just 5.4 percent from 1994 to 2004.


But that's what happens when you miss the discount revolution, when long-haul fares are almost 40 percent higher than the national average.

Miami did worse than D/FW, but at least Fort Lauderdale doubled. Together, 40 percent more people flew out of South Florida in 2004 than in 1994.

Houston's two airports were up a combined 44 percent; Chicago's two airports were up 26 percent. Atlanta was up 53 percent and Phoenix, 50 percent.

____________

Lack of competition keeps growth down....consumers in PHL have saved over $1.2B in one year of the "Southwest effect"....imagine how much money N. Texas residents & other cities would save if SWA began flying to some of the 40 cities that are likely to open up if the WA was repealed.

Whether AA competes or not isn't my concern....I suspect they will get more passengers in the long run & while some of their yields may go down, an increased number of sold seats may offset the higher yields on fewer seats being sold as is currently occurring.

There will be airlines that choose to come to DFW if circumstances occur & if the business model makes sense. Talk to your congressman & ask them to allow you to have the freedom to fly that Houston, LA, Chicago & other ciites across the country have....

 

[LUVChild]

I like this one:

"Southwest found a legal loophole that allowed it to remain at Love
Field, which is much closer to the businesses, hotels and high-income
residential areas of Dallas."

High-income residential areas? I couldn't help but laugh a little at that.

I guess he missed that Love Field is smack in the middle of the hood. "Little Mexico" (as we like to call it), is less than a mile to the south of Love Field. Much of the area around Love Field is also very low income.

While Love is near Highland Park and University Park, I would also point out that DFW is significantly closer to Grapevine, Southlake, Colleyville, and Flower Mound. All of which are notoriously high-income residential areas, with what I would guess is a significantly higher population than those communities of Highland Park and University Park (which I'm assuming Crandall is referring to).

At one point, I would have agreed with Crandall that Love Field had the advantage in terms of location. However, with the DFW being considerably closer to Ft. Worth, and with the mid-cities now having grown considerably, I can't say that Love Field has any greater advantage than DFW does in terms of location to both residential areas and businesses.

As far as hotels go...good grief. Have you seen some of the hotels around DFW? Highways 114, 121, and 183 near DFW are jam-packed with hotels, ranging from bargain to luxury. So I don't buy that argument, either.

 

[chase]

Herb to announce results of additional Study on WA

A group of Southwest’s senior Leaders will hold a press conference and webcast at 2 p.m. Central today to discuss the results of a recent study commissioned by the Company that explains the consumer penalty imposed by the Wright Amendment and the positive economic impact to be gained from its repeal.

At the event, which will be held at a hotel near Headquarters, Chairman Herb Kelleher; CEO Gary Kelly; President Colleen Barrett; and Senior Vice President of Law, Airports, and Public Affairs Ron Ricks will join Dr. Brian M. Campbell of the Campbell-Hill Aviation Group, Inc., which performed the consumer benefits study.
____________

http://www.air-econ.com/campbell.htm

Link above is to the Campbell-Hill Aviation Group website....these folks have a long history of consulting in the aviation business...of particular note is their expertise in looking at large, metropolitan airports that are near each other & how they impact each other & the surrounding community...exactly the situation they are being used for in this situation....from their website

"Throughout his career, Dr. Campbell has developed various analytical models and procedures for a broad variety of clients in all major sectors of the industry. For instance, in his airport economic forecasting practice, he led the development of the only comprehensive airport activity and passenger forecasting model that realistically accounts for inter-airport competition within a single region, such as New York/Newark, Washington/Baltimore, and San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose. He also has developed and implemented detailed costing, budgeting, and financial forecasting models for airlines. Dr. Campbell has significant experience assisting airports in their air service development and marketing programs. The firm regularly serves eight U.S. airports in this fashion. "

Yes we're in the mode of "dueling studies" between the WA opponents & supporters....I hope the FULL report from these guys will be released to the public & not just the portion that makes the case for lower fares.

For once I agree with Laura Miller & her assessment the parties involved need to sit down at the table & work out a reasonable solution....will DFW change if the WA goes away....no doubt it will, will jobs be shifted/lost? Probably so but in turn other jobs will be created & I believe expansion by others to fill whatever void will occur. If the costs are prohibitive it will take longer to stabilize but in the mean time "consumers" will benefit from the lower fares & new businesses will see opportunities to expand into an areas that can't even be imagined at this point...with artificially high prices/cost competitors are going to stay away....the free market system generally works if given an opportunity.

 

[ilinipilot]

Ok what about relaxing the WA and making SW give up half their slots, gates etc to Jet Blue, AA, Air tran. That sounds fair to me.

 

[TexaSWA]

Ok what about relaxing the WA and making SW give up half their slots, gates etc to Jet Blue, AA, Air tran. That sounds fair to me.

Why??

 

[SWA/FO]

Oh now that its a gold mine...jet blue and air tran want their piece. I say NO WAY - Love is ours!!! All ours..

 

[Ty Webb]

Airtran had plans to expand at DFW but backed off after studying the Herculean efforts necessary to comply with the Jepp updates for DFW.

The approach plates for that airport arrive by the pound. They even make up approaches there that don't exist anywhere else. "PRM Converging ILS/LOC Y" . . . . give me a break. ATL gets by for the past 20 years with one departure, four arrivals, and four approaches, and DFW needs it's own freakin' binder.

All I can say is that the guy in charge of the DFW TERPS process must have to stand pretty close to the urinal. . . . even closer than TAZMan.

 

[Doug Parker]

All I can say is that the guy in charge of the DFW TERPS process must have to stand pretty close to the urinal. . . . even closer than TAZMan.

Or maybe he's like Ty Webb and squats to pee !!!!!!!

What about the old LEGEND Airlines gates at DAL - are they still there ???



.

 

[Ty Webb]

I only squat when it's time to drop you off at the pool, Doug.

 

[Juvat]

Ok what about relaxing the WA and making SW give up half their slots, gates etc to Jet Blue, AA, Air tran. That sounds fair to me.

Dork.

 

[chase]

SWA & Campbell-Hill Release Study

Southwest Airlines and Campbell-Hill Introduce Study on Consumer Benefits
Tuesday June 7, 4:00 pm ET Campbell-Hill Study Illustrates the Consumer Penalty Imposed By the Wright Amendment

DALLAS, June 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV - News) today released results of a three-month study by an outside commercial aviation consulting firm that said the gain to local economies should the Wright Amendment be repealed would be at least $4.2 billion annually. To view the entire study, please click on this link: http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/press/050607_wright_amendment.pdf

Using a list of 15 potential new nonstop markets from Love Field, the study found that:

-- North Texas would reap an additional $1.7 billion in economic activity annually due to increased air travel to the region. -- 3.7 million more passengers would travel in the 15 markets annually due to new competition and lower fares. -- Passengers would save nearly $700 million annually compared to airfares charged by American Airlines at DFW International. -- The total Wright Amendment burden on passengers, North Texas, and cities beyond the seven-state perimeter exceeds $4 billion per year.

Southwest hired Campbell-Hill Aviation Group to demonstrate the "Southwest Effect" in real numbers. Campbell-Hill used data readily available to the public, such as passenger traffic figures from the Department of Transportation (DOT) and current air service as published in the Official Airline Guide (OAG). The Washington, D.C. consulting firm has done work for the DOT and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), in addition to working with such airports as Baltimore/Washington International, DFW International, the Houston Airport System, and Pittsburgh International.

"There have been many attempts to confuse or scare the consumer into thinking that the best course of action is to do nothing about the Wright Amendment. This issue is about the fares and the cost of doing nothing is just too great," said Gary Kelly, Southwest's CEO, at today's press conference.

Southwest said it wished to answer a question that had not been addressed in the seven months the Wright Amendment has been making headlines. Communities all over its 60-city network report record traffic figures and airfare savings for consumers, but in the 26-year reign of the Wright Amendment over the Dallas area, a comprehensive look at the positive economic impact to be gained from repealing the Wright Amendment had not been done.

"Unlike others, this story can have a happy ending," Kelly said. "It's about unrealized potential; money that could be going to area businesses; money that travelers to and from the Dallas area could be saving on airfares; and how much the entire region stands to gain in additional tourism, convention, and business travel-related dollars."

The Campbell-Hill study considered what destinations from Dallas could look like by studying Southwest's operations in similar markets. Eighty-five percent of the U.S. population lives outside the restricted seven-state Wright Amendment zone. The study assumed Southwest could add 15 new nonstop destinations from Dallas, not currently allowed by the Wright Amendment. Using Southwest's average fares to markets on a like-mile basis, C-H determined consumers would have saved $397 million in airfares from the Metroplex area alone in 2004, just in those 15 markets.

"We must never forget that it is the consumer who is penalized by the status quo and who must be set free. It is the consumer who pays the greatest price to maintain corporate bottom lines and ancient history," said Herb Kelleher, Southwest's Executive Chairman, also onhand for the Dallas press conference.

Southwest is well known for expanding markets due to its lower airfares and frequent service. Through a price elasticity model validated by the FAA, C-H determined that just these 15 new destinations from Love Field would produce 3.7 million more passengers to those markets to and from the Dallas area.

Increased air travel also generates enormous positive impact on the economies of the cities and regions involved. Philadelphia recently credited Southwest for saving citizens there about $1.2 billion on an annual basis in Southwest's first year of service in that city. C-H determined that the economic impact of allowing competitive service from Love Field in just the 15 new markets studied would provide a $1.7 billion annual gain to the Dallas- area economy. C-H estimates a 46 percent gain in new passenger traffic from nonresidents visiting the Metroplex.

"Dallas' Love Field Airport is an underutilized facility and the wobbly wheel of the economic engine which is the entire transportation infrastructure in North Texas," Kelleher said. "You might not know that Love Field is now Southwest's eighth-largest airport in terms of departures, but it is only 17th-largest in terms of passenger traffic. Dr. Campbell's view would pump much-needed air into a flattening tire for a much smoother ride overall."

"It's foolhardy to argue with prosperity," said Dr. Brian Campbell, chairman of Campbell-Hill Aviation Group." Hotel occupancy in Dallas declined drastically by 22 percent from 1996 to 2003. For a city its size, Dallas cannot afford to ignore this issue and not actively market itself to the rest of the country through healthy airline competition."

It appears that lawmakers are listening. Texas Congressmen Jeb Hensarling and Sam Johnson recently introduced "The Right to Fly Act" to immediately repeal the Wright Amendment. Kelleher praised the leadership and vision shown by that effort. The bill now has seven co-sponsors: Congressmen Jeb Bradley (NH), Lee Terry (NE), Jim Cooper (TN), Joe Wilson (SC), Butch Otter (ID), and Texans Ron Paul and John Culberson. Kelleher said he looks forward to a similar effort in the Senate.

The Nevada State Senate and the Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce are the latest in a string of community efforts and editorial positions to support repeal of the Wright Amendment, including the North Dallas Chamber of Commerce, the Wall Street Journal, Houston Chronicle, Tampa International Airport Authority, and a growing list of Dallas-area economists and academics who say the competition presented by an unfettered Love Field would lower airfares within the region.

Southwest Airlines launched a web site, http://www.setlovefree.com , as part of its education campaign. The site received thousands of registrations within the first few days. The site provides information on the Dallas Love Field Master Plan, the benefits of state-of-the-art aircraft operated by Southwest, illustrates the fare premium charged to Dallas-area travelers as a result of the Wright Amendment, and Southwest's business reasons for not choosing DFW International Airport as its next new start-up. "Herb and Colleen (Barrett) set the pace at the beginning, and Southwest Airlines has remained steadfast, in its mission of low costs, high productivity, great Customer Service, and low fares. It's why repealing the Wright Amendment is so important," Kelly said.

 

[ilinipilot]

I am not bashing SW, I think they run a great ship. If you want something sometimes you have to give stuff up to get it. Why not try an appch of giving up something to get something. Codeshares do it, mergers do it; if nothing else no one can say SW has a monopoly.

Anyone have any ideas besides name calling. All I was doing was posting a way for SW to respond to the critics who say the repeal would give them a monopoly. What would the critics have to come back with if they offered to give up some slots. NOTHING. Would quiet them right up.

D

 

[labbats]

This editorial appeared in the May 30-June 5, 2005 edition of the Fort Worth Business Press by Editor and Publisher Richard Connor.

If you were thinking that the latest fight over the Wright Amendment would not turn hostile in a hurry -- or wouldn't ignite a fight between Dallas and Fort Worth -- well, think again.

Fur is flying. Feathers are ruffled. Lines are drawn in the sand. Metaphors are mixed.

The first person in Dallas to start walking and talking backwards was Mayor Laura Miller. All of a sudden, she went from lukewarm to luke. She says repeal of the Wright amendment is inevitable and local folks had better resolve this before Washington takes control of the situation.

Repeal should not be inevitable. There has been an agreement in place since 1979. The parties in this dispute need to follow one basic rule: "Our word is our bond."

This is not about low fares for air travelers. It's about keeping your word and honoring the original agreement. It's about the economic health of D/FW Airport and the region, which will suffer if the amendment is repealed. It's about Fort Worth getting clobbered and losing jobs while Dallas gets a boost. If Wright if repealed, Fort Worth gets the shaft and Dallas gets to mine, as the song says.

The Wright Amendment, written into law by former Fort Worth Congressman Jim Wright, embodies a compromise that allows Southwest Airlines to operate our of Love Field in Dallas, but restricts where the airline can fly nonstop. If Southwest truly wants to compete and offer unrestricted nonstop flights, all it has to do is stop looking the gift horse in the mouth and give it a big, appreciative kiss on the lips. (There are times when you just can't mix too many metaphors.)

D/FW has offered Southwest $22 million in incentives and free rent for a year so that the onetime little kid on the block can live its dream and be like the big boys. But, no Southwest is big and rich now and does not want to compete on even terms with everyone else. It wants to bully folks and pretend it is on the side of "the consumer."

Does anyone really believe that Southwest offers lower fares to some cities -- some cities -- because it is a friend of the consumer?

Let's try a simple test here.

Question: How much will an airline charge its' passengers?

Answer: As much as it possibly can (read that "as much as it can get away with.")

Most people who have studied the issue seem to agree that if the Wright Amendment is repealed, fares will drop for some cities served from Dallas and Fort Worth. I am among the doubters. The fares might drop from some period of time, but I do not believe the reductions would be sustained over the long haul.

In case you haven't noticed, there is a trend in the airline industry. It is called consolidation. The most recent example is the proposed combination of American West and US Airways, which will partner an airline with a strong East Coast network with one that has a strong West Coast network.

One of the targets for the new combined airline is Southwest.

It is clear that over time we are likely to have an industry populated by a few big airline companies and several smaller ones. It will be big business and small business in the same segment, with each group finding its niche. When all of this is sorted out, every airline will charge as much for its services as it possibly can. So, fares might go down, but for how long? That's the part of the low-fare prediction that we never hear.

You will read about little else but fares in news coverage of the Wright Amendment dispute. Reporters are drawn to this issue because it's simple and it has a "populist" flavor -- the everyday flier's budget is easier to relate to and easier to understand than the long-range implications of a weakened D/FW Airport.

And if the repeal effort is successful, you can bet your life that American Airlines will be at Love Field so fast it will make your frequent flier miles spin. And then we will see how competitive Southwest is. I'd put my money on American Airlines' dynamic new chairman, Gerard Arpey, over those old goats at Southwest any day of the week.

He is young, innovative, and smart. He is honest. He is building a team across all of American's constituencies: employees, customers, bankers...

Arpey is the best airline executive in the country today. Unlike some other new CEOs of public companies he feels no need to fashion his business in philosophy around his ego. There is no bragging about his ability to reinvent himself or his organization. Arpey simply goes quietly to work each day and gets to job done. Southwest will have more than it can handle if it tangles with Arpey.

May no mistake about it. This area of North Texas is no different than any other region of the country. It cannot support two major airports. Unleashing Love would pose potential economic devastation for D/FW. Several thousand more jobs could be lost on top of the 7,000 that were eliminated when Delta pulled out of the D/FW hub. An estimated $50 million per year in revenue has evaporated. Let's imagine if D/FW is an air base and that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced he was a) shutting it down; or b) reducing employment by 7,000 jobs.

What would the North Texas congressional delegation be doing? Screaming bloody murder, of course.

But what are local members of Congress doing as a similar ax is being swung by Southwest Airlines? Some of them, at least, are inexplicably supporting the slaughter.

We have two congressmen, Republicans Sam Johnson of Plano and Jeb Hensarling of Dallas, joining in cahoots with Herb Kelleher. Johnson and Hensarling announced last week that they were filing a bill that will seek to repeal the Wright Amendment. Fortunately, others in Washington are responding by telling the Metroplex renegades to prepare for a fight. We don't need divisiveness between Dallas and Fort Worth at a time of momentous economic growth in North Texas, but we do need to preserve the Wright Amendment -- and if that means a fight, we've got the toughest fighters on our side.

Johnson and Hensarling are about to be kayoed; Sam and Jeb, say hello to the two Kays and one Joe.

That would be Kay Bailey Hutchison, the senior U.S. senator from Texas, and U.S. Reps. Kay Granger and Joe Barton. Granger is a former Fort Worth mayor and a ferocious supporter of the Wright Amendment. Barton, an Ennis Republican, is chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Barton has already told Fort Worth leaders that he will thwart any effort to repeal the Wright Amendment. Hutchison is on record as opposing repeal.

I predict that Fort Worth will win this one -- and the win will be good for the entire region, not just our city. But the victory will carry a price, monetarily and emotionally.

Meanwhile, amid this high stakes battle for the region's economic survival, most of what you will get from the local media is the same old song about lower airfares. Reporters will be focusing on getting Aunt Mabel to Des Moines or Raleigh-Durham for $150 while Aunt Mabel's four kids who work at D/FW lose their jobs.

And if the Wright Amendment is repealed, it will be a long time before anyone comes back and analyzes the ultimate impact -- on airfares and on the overall economic effect of such a drastic change in the area's approach to air travel.

 

[chase]

ilinipilot,

You're point is well taken...at one time I believe your suggestion would have been well received by SWA. If DFW airport, Dallas city officials or even AA & other carriers had come to SWA to say, "hey, lets sit down & put everything on the table & try to strike up an agreement that is a compromise but that would get us back to flying airplanes instead of dueling editorials", I believe SWA would have considered that option you described....give up some of the gates to make the elimination of the WA a certainity sooner rather than a long drawn out fight.

While it is difficult to tell if the moment has passed, some could strongly argue that the momentum of repealing the WA is gaining such strength that for SWA to now offer up the possibility of giving up gate space that has been paid for, negotiated for & is legally binding when some would argue that to remain steady & straight would result in a dominant position at Love would be shortsighted to its shareholders, employees & possibly dilute the earnings capacity of the airline when what the airline needs is badly needed revenue.

AA owns 3 gates, CAL owns 2 (AA had tried to sue CAL years earlier for keeping these gates & flying from them...CAL obviously won that battle)....the argument could be made if AA really wanted to cook SWA's goose is to sell their gates to JB, AirTran, Frontier or some other LCC & allow a true battle of LCC to occur.

Does AA expect they can win a battle of fares from Love? They've admitted already this would be a money losing venture...if so then why do it? Geez, their shareholders must be scratching their heads....imagine standing up before an annual meeting & saying, "hey we're going to lose money on these routes & we know it...any objections?"

Does CAL compete in Hobby against SWA? That is why we pulled out of IAH....we both exist at different airports & the passenger count has grown at over twice the rate in Houston that it has in Dallas....could it happen in Dallas if the WA goes away? These analysts think so & they seem to have a pretty good track record in working similar scenarios.

Just as it makes no sense for SWA to go into the lion's den at DFW, for AA to come to Love doesn't appear to make much business sense. AA will walk away after taking a beating & have to acknowledge they got their heads handed to them....more good PR, NOT!!!! They should compete on price where they have efficiency, at DFW, not Love but if they wish to...."come over in, the water's fine!" is my motto.

Illini your points are valid but I belive the tide of events have made your scenario unlikely & I personally believe SWA has nothing to apologize for or feel obligated to negotiate away an advantage that can help save money for passengers & improve the health of the only airline company that consistently makes money. Additionally this thought...if all of these other airlines are so eager to fly out of Love why haven't they come out in opposition to the WA? Are they also outraged by the WA or are they happy to have SWA carry all the water in this fight (plus expense) & then when the battle is over with come swooping in & saying "hey we were right there too, we'd like to play now".....I'd make a comparison to folks who have other folks negotiate a great deal for a group & then come in & take advantage of this same contract but some might find that a bit too much....

Thanks for the debate...

 

[Mugs]

Crandall might as well come out of the closet and admit that he's a flaming socialist. What a bunch of jibberish.

Crandall's main point is that SWA did not shoulder the substantial long term cost of financing DFW. They chose to abide by the WA so they would not have to and thus allowed the competition to foot that bill. Now that the competition has done its part, SWA wants to change the rules. If SWA was on the other side of a similar situation, they would be hollering about it too.

Nice response Juvat to Illinipilot's opinion. Did your 12 year old hijack your computer or are you just watching alot of Beavis and Buthead these days?