I guess no doesn't mean no for Delta

[bluesideup1]

No, I blew your ridiculous statement that Southwest couldn't add gates at DCA and LGA, but was only able to get gates at DCA and LGA by having them taken away from competing airlines.

You advocate forced divestitures when it favors Southwest, but oppose forced divestitures when it's Southwest whose ox is getting gored.


Southwest currently has greater than 80% of all flights and passengers in/out of Love field. If they are able to get Delta out of Love, they will have more than 90% of all flights and passenger traffic. Even if Southwest wins in a court of law, I would expect the DoT to force divestitures to lower Southwest's monopoly at Love.

I love how you deflect on how it is now my ridiculous argument even though I am sure that over the past 30 years NO ONE HAS tried to add gates to those places I mean what a stupid idea to add more gates to places that are slot restricted and have enormous revenue potential. The fact that you are trying to double down on Southwest responsibility to adding gate space to two of the most coveted places to fly is ludicrous.

If it had been possible to add more gate space it would have been done long before the mergers of Delta, American, America West and Northwest and the slots being opened up to the highest bidders. You know if they really wanted to keep those gates all they would have done is not merged but I guess they found it more profitable to merge the airlines and give up the gates.

This still doesn't answer the question of why you think it is right for Delta to come in and abrigate an agreement that was forged between all the airlines involved, cities and Federal government.

 

[Flopgut]

This still doesn't answer the question of why you think it is right for Delta to come in and abrigate an agreement that was forged between all the airlines involved, cities and Federal government.

Because that is exactly what SWA did 40 years ago. Not kind of, or similar, or close. Exactly what SWA did. They're no less a bystander to all of this recent change than SWA was a bystander to the initial deal to open DFW. AND: Love Field rules have always been written in pencil (mostly for SWA), where DFW rules have always been carved in stone for legacies. Why shouldn't they have the right to attempt to get (or expect) the same obviously favorable treatment that Love Field affords?

 

[Flopgut]

Yes, if you quit spreading fiction and calling it fact!

Keep clinging to your story. My views are no different than a growing number of industry watchers, voters, and travelers. The whole thing is BS.

Btw: How is what Delta is trying to do at Love right now more agregious than SWA attempting to bogart United's Mexico routes a few months ago?! Delta also has "expensive assets that have to be flown". Do you remember those words?

 

[HowardBorden]

Keep clinging to your story. My views are no different than a growing number of industry watchers, voters, and travelers. The whole thing is BS.

Btw: How is what Delta is trying to do at Love right now more agregious than SWA attempting to bogart United's Mexico routes a few months ago?! Delta also has "expensive assets that have to be flown". Do you remember those words?

I don't blame Delta for attempting to fly out of Love, I just don't understand why they didn't attempt to lease a gate from United rather than pronounce they would refuse to leave a gate legally leased and controlled by SWA.

It will be worked out in the courts and I'm fine with that. I can assure you if Delta wins the case I will not chalk it up to favoritism but will instead trust that the courts did their job. Can you say the same?

 

[Flopgut]

I don't blame Delta for attempting to fly out of Love, I just don't understand why they didn't attempt to lease a gate from United rather than pronounce they would refuse to leave a gate legally leased and controlled by SWA.

It will be worked out in the courts and I'm fine with that. I can assure you if Delta wins the case I will not chalk it up to favoritism but will instead trust that the courts did their job. Can you say the same?

Why should Delta be the airline that follows rules? Or doesn't try to force their own rules? Esp at Love Field AND when challenging SWA? Idk why SWA didn't just wait a few months and apply for their own routes to Mexico instead of insisting they be given United's?! (Actually, I do) How are these different?

Say the same? We'll see how it plays out. If SWA hadn't received the Mexico routes I'm pretty sure the golden army would have been dispatched to jiggle and wail about the unfairness of it. That's something you both can't deny, and something Delta won't stoop to.

 

[HowardBorden]

It's called capitalism ladies and gentlemen! Delta had every opportunity to outbid SWA for those gates but they chose not to. Now SWA controls the gates through a sublease from United.



Delta Air Lines today detailed its many potential losses from revenue to customer satisfaction if it's not allowed to continue flying at Dallas Love Field.
"It's going to come down to our brand, our reputation, Joe Esposito, Delta's vice president of network planning for the Americas, said in federal court in Dallas. "There are two parts to the damage: What happens to the airline and what happens to the market. There won't be competition."
On their second day of a federal court hearing, Atlanta-based Delta and Dallas-based Southwest Airlines are fighting over whether Delta should keep flying at the city owned airport.
Delta operates five daily flights to Atlanta from Love Field using a gate under a licensing agreement with Southwest that was set to expire tomorrow. It can continue to fly there until U.S. District Court Judge Ed Kinkeade rules on the case. (Delta also flies out of Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.)
Delta says the city of Dallas' policies require it to make room for the airline at Love Field. Southwest says its lease with the city of Dallas gives it "preferential use" of its gates.
Delta's current flying arrangement at Love Field is the third temporary agreement with an airline since October, when federal flying restrictions lifted there. Since then, Delta has been trying to gain a permanent foothold at the airport.
Esposito confirmed that Delta has gained 1,798 customers who shifted from flying out of D/FW Airport to Love Field, accounting for around $230 million in revenue a year.
"The flying public is going to have less options," Esposito said. If Delta can't fly out of Love Field, "we're going to have some pretty unhappy customers."
However, Southwest's lawyers repeatedly pointed out that Delta previously has shifted passengers without any problems from flights at Love Field to flights at D/FW Airport.
Delta officials yesterday said the airline sees D/FW Airport and Love Field as two separate markets. Today, Esposito said Delta cannot serve Dallas business, leisure and international customers from D/FW Airport.
For example, Delta created a map showing that 13 of 19 Fortune 500 companies in the Dallas-Fort Worth area are closer to Love Field than D/FW Airport.
Kinkeade said it looked like most of the Fortune 500 companies were located in Irving, which was about half way between the two airports. He asked why Delta didn't consider the largest employers in the area, not just the largest companies by revenue.
Delta also did a "gate plot" analysis fitting its five flights plus its plan to offer eight more flights into Love Field gates based on Southwest's published flight schedule, assuming at least 30 minutes of ground time between flights.
"We concluded there was plenty of space at Love Field," Esposito said. "It all fit."
However, he acknowledged that 10 slots did not provide enough ground time and where schedules would have to be tweaked.
Earlier this year, both Southwest and Delta vied to sublease two gates from United Airlines, which left Love Field, to expand their operations at the airport. Then, United talked with four airlines about its Love Field gates Delta, Southwest, Spirit Airlines and Virgin America, Kate Gebo, United's vice president for corporate real estate, said in videotaped testimony showed today by both Southwest and Delta.
Spirit wasn't interested and Southwest's offer ended up being better than Delta's or Virgin America's, she said.
Southwest revealed yesterday in court that it paid $120 million plus monthly rent to United to sublease the gates.
Delta claims the $120 million payment was "illegal."
United also offered a gate deal to Delta in September 2014 and Delta didn't want it, Gebo said.
When asked by a Delta lawyer, Southwest's vice president of airport affairs Bob Montgomery today said the airline did not tell the city of Dallas, the U.S. Department of Transportation or the Federal Aviation Administration about the $120 million payment.
"I didn't see it as illegal or against [the city's] competition plan or the lease," he said. "And I wasn't required to tell them."
However, Montgomery did tell the U.S. Department of Justice because it was required to under anti-trust laws.
"Would you agree this is about as sharp-elbow a deal as can be?" Kinkeade asked Montgomery. This is a pretty sophisticated deal."

 

[nimtz]

This board really needs a LUV Field Section. Stunning how we see all this blabbering given that 99% of us could not give two shats.

 

[Andy]

Approaching Thanksgiving and Delta's still using the gate with no ruling - which Delta says they'll appeal IF there's an adverse ruling. Looks like Delta will have flights to Love field through 2016 as a minimum. http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/...ted-to-the-dallas-love-field-gate-fight.html/

 

[maru657]

As long as it keeps Southwest from having a no competition base with public support, it's all good.

 

[canyonblue]

As long as it keeps Southwest from having a no competition base with public support, it's all good.

Yeah, it's funny how we had no competition in Dallas for over 30 years and no one cared. Now every clown airline shows up and demands we should have competition. Where ya been all these years?