DOJ stipulates Love Field gates auctioned only to LCC's

[SWA Bubba]

Total BS. First paragraph: I don't think anyone remembers that at first you only flew in Texas. That was your excuse/basis for staying at DAL. (Texas only operator meant federal rules did not apply) Somehow that agreement seemed to get updated thru the years in a way that conveniently matched what SWA was ready to expand to next. But NOT so much that it would have been a legit option for a legacy to move into.

You seriously believe this?

The only "updating" to the Wright Amendment occurred in 1997 and 2005. In 1997, the Shelby Amendment to the WA added Mississippi, Alabama, and Kansas, none of which really mattered to Southwest. It was an attempt by an Alabama senator to spur our service to his state. We only recently started DAL-BHM service, and we've never flown DAL-anywhere in MS. We've never even flown to anywhere in the state of Kansas until 2013, when we absorbed AirTran's routes to ICT. Seeing as how by 1993, Southwest was the largest intra-California carrier, are you really claiming that it was only in 1997 that we were finally "ready" to fly to Mississippi, Alabama, and Kansas--states that we didn't really care about?

In 2005, the Bond Amendment to the WA added Missouri, which allowed us to fly DAL to STL and MCI. Seeing as how long before then, we were flying to all corners of the contiguous US, including transcons, are you really claiming that it was only in 2005 that we were finally "ready" to fly from Dallas to Missouri? Really?

Second paragraph: UAL isn't worried about competing with SWA. In fact, we want to compete directly! Side by side. Line yours up and we'll line up ours. That's the purest form of competition there is, and we wanted it. We were rolling out the red carpet. Of course this is usually where you say "you fly from the airports you want, we'll fly from the ones we want", right? Let's examine that, because DL wants a piece of you in DAL. Is DL going to get to fly from the airport they want to?! You starting to see a pattern here!?

The only "pattern" I see is your onerous repetition of crap. Dallas Love is an interesting exception to most rules, as it is the most highly restricted and purposefully limited commercial airport in the country. And those restrictions have been squarely aimed at limiting Southwest Airlines. As I pointed out earlier, Southwest already lines up, "side by side," directly competing with UAL and everyone else at nearly every important airport in the country. That's a fact. Three cities' airports, where we can save time and money because they're more convenient, out of nearly 100 that we fly to, doesn't make a "pattern."

Hey btw: interesting choice on international destinations. You seemed to really tiptoe around the Countries that probably want to see their airlines get equal access to Hobby. Hmmmmm

Don't know what you're talking about here. I assume you're making this up as well, since again, it's an unsupported argument that nobody else knows about. By the way, our "choice" of international destinations is the result of where AirTran chose to fly before we acquired them. And doesn't Mexico (3 SW/AT destinations, as opposed to only 1 for other countries) have the largest amount of reciprocal traffic into the US? So much for that latest theory of yours.

Jeez, Flop, if you don't want to do even any rudimentary research, at least look on Wikipedia--you'll save yourself a lot of time and embarrassment later.

Bubba

 

[DUBLINFLYER]

Look at the logistics for customers - downtown to IAH is 21.6 miles and from downtown to Hobby is 11.2 miles - depends on your loyalties and timing

 

[HowardBorden]

Of course this is usually where you say "you fly from the airports you want, we'll fly from the ones we want", right? Let's examine that, because DL wants a piece of you in DAL. Is DL going to get to fly from the airport they want to?!

Delta owned no gates at DAL before the divestiture and it will own no gates at DAL after the divestiture. If they want a continued presence at Love they will need to attempt to lease the gates from the new owner whomever that might be, just like they did previously.

 

[Flopgut]

What the hell do you think RA is trying to do!? DAL is there and they want to stay. How's that any different than what SWA wanted back 40 years ago!? Back then the govt stepped in and made sure SWA could stay and ALL other airlines were OUT. Its the exact opposite of what was done previously, so it's abundantly clear the doj's goal is to help SWA. DAL had a huge base there for a long time. If they want back in, to either airport, the DOJ ought to get out of their way. I think the citizens of Dallas would like the competition. Of course "competition" in this business is only used as reasoning to aid SWA. It doesn't go the other way.

Btw I thought maybe this was a dead thread? Why stir the pot? You know what I'm going to say.

 

[SWA Bubba]

What the hell do you think RA is trying to do!? DAL is there and they want to stay. How's that any different than what SWA wanted back 40 years ago!? Back then the govt stepped in and made sure SWA could stay and ALL other airlines were OUT. Its the exact opposite of what was done previously, so it's abundantly clear the doj's goal is to help SWA. DAL had a huge base there for a long time. If they want back in, to either airport, the DOJ ought to get out of their way. I think the citizens of Dallas would like the competition. Of course "competition" in this business is only used as reasoning to aid SWA. It doesn't go the other way.

Btw I thought maybe this was a dead thread? Why stir the pot? You know what I'm going to say.

Then you probably know what -I'm- going to say:

You should probably stop saying ludicrous, stupid, untrue stuff (bolded above), when it's already been demonstrated to you that you're wrong. Just for a change, why don't you make claims that can be proven?

Jes' sayin'.

Bubba

 

[Flopgut]

Actually the way I stated it, it's absolutely true. You've referenced it yourself. Braniff American signed agreements to use DFW. And even more importantly what you can't defend is why DOJ would prohibit Delta from staying now. You're just trying to pull attention from that FACT.

Go spend your whole evening on Wikipedia and look it up. I know you want to, you apparently have no life other than to wait here and see if I post. Let me guess, Howie and you set this up? You texted each other? Or FB buddies?

 

[HowardBorden]

What the hell do you think RA is trying to do!? DAL is there and they want to stay. How's that any different than what SWA wanted back 40 years ago!? Back then the govt stepped in and made sure SWA could stay and ALL other airlines were OUT.
Btw I thought maybe this was a dead thread? Why stir the pot? You know what I'm going to say.

Boy you are delusional! It's called the rule of LAW. Everyone wanted SWA to leave like the others however, they never signed a contractual agreement to leave like the others. The others wanted to leave for newer expanded facilities and voluntarily signed an agreement to do so. There was no legal basis to hold SWA to a contractual agreement they were not a signatory of. The government had no legal maneuver to force SWA out so consequently they were allowed to remain at Love.

Similarly, current U.S. law gives the DOJ powers to regulate monopolistic practices. No one forced an AA/US to merge, but after that deal was announced it was subject to DOJ review. If you honestly think SWA has the power to influence US antitrust statutes and influence how that department regulates airline mergers you are just a flat out loony conspiracy theorist!

No pot stirring, just debunking the diatribe of misinformation you enjoy spewing.

 

[Flopgut]

Similarly, current U.S. law gives the DOJ powers to regulate monopolistic practices. No one forced an AA/US to merge, but after that deal was announced it was subject to DOJ review.

SWA has 95% of the flights out of Love. How is that not a monopoly? How is it even remotely reasonable for DOJ to state no legacy can have Love gates? Delta wants in, they want to compete. Unical wanted direct competition in Houston. SWA cries and bawls enough til whatever govt steps in and let's you keep your Texas airport monopolies.

You guys have no leg to stand on.

 

[Flopgut]

You two on a layover together somewhere punching each other's clown?

 

[HowardBorden]

SWA has 95% of the flights out of Love. How is that not a monopoly? How is it even remotely reasonable for DOJ to state no legacy can have Love gates?

You guys have no leg to stand on.

Attempt to actually read something for a change instead of simply making things up off the top of your head. The DOJ has made it quite clear why they think the Love gates need to be divested by the New American. Let me remind you of the DOJ's justification on this matter:

"The proposed Final Judgment also includes divestitures at Dallas Love Field, an airport near American's largest hub at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport ('DFW'). Gates at DFW are readily available, but Love Field, which is much closer to downtown Dallas, is highly gate-constrained. The divestitures will position a low-cost carrier to provide vigorous competition to the New American's nonstop and connecting service out of DFW. "

You can't honestly believe that the DOJ is simply a "puppet" governmental department with the strings being pulled by Gary Kelly can you? The DOJ has simply stated that they want a LCC owning the gates at Love in order to spur competition with the legacy domination at DFW.

There, I gave you a factual and verifiable leg to stand on. Now I suspect you will undermine my factual presentation with your own opinion and further outpourings of half truths and innuendo. Please refute this with verifiable factual information gathered from any source other than your own conspiracy riddled brain box.