Study Finds Opening Love Field to Long-Haul flying would have Serious Conserquences

[Dangerkitty]

OK, I've been reading this long enough. DangerKitty you sound like the democrats trying to shoot down Chief Justice Roberts in the senate confirmation hearings. If you don't care about AA or SWA, go away. It is obvious you have some emotion over this issue. While you are busy throwing stones here you should remember that AA has always been the king of dirty pool! They don't have an ethical bone in their managerial body. Don't even try to justify the Legend thing. What goes around comes around and it's time to lower fares in North Texas. At least you have Eddie Berniece Johnson or whatever her name is in your corner!

It's time to lower Fares in North Texas? Have you seen what AA is charging to fly out of DFW. Cheaper than Greyhound.

 

[enigma]

My turn to call BS!

AA never flew 56 eat MD80s out of DAL - they were 56 seat F100s, that can only seat 86 in normal configuration. Just like Legend's DC9s that could seat 100+.

AA's MD80s can't even seat 172, we only have 136 seats.

Fairness and equity? Dude, are you in the airline industry?

It really doesn't matter whether AA brought Fokkers or Douglas's into Love, what matters is that AA came in, ran another airline out, then left.

As for the MD80's into Love, that came from an article I read in Aviation Week back at the time. Apparently, AA initially used Maddogs, then switched to the little Fokkers.

As for fairness and equity, OF COURSE AA isn't interested in fairness and equity, so why does all of the pro WA crowd try and force SWA to be interested in something that they themselves disregard?

enigma

 

[Dangerkitty]

It really doesn't matter whether AA brought Fokkers or Douglas's into Love, what matters is that AA came in, ran another airline out, then left.

As for the MD80's into Love, that came from an article I read in Aviation Week back at the time. Apparently, AA initially used Maddogs, then switched to the little Fokkers.

As for fairness and equity, OF COURSE AA isn't interested in fairness and equity, so why does all of the pro WA crowd try and force SWA to be interested in something that they themselves disregard?

enigma

AA did fly 140 seat S-80's in an out of DAL for some time. I know they did the AUS-DAL route for awhile.

However, they respectfully flew under the rules of the Wright Amendment.

 

[enigma]

I have no problem with SWA trying to make money and protecting their flying in their backyard. However, if SWA wants to fly beyond the boundries of the WA then why can't they do it out of DFW? Just like every other airline is required to do?

What would you say to SWA moving to, say, Grand Prairie? Arlington? Maybe Denton? How about Waxahachie? If SWA was willing to build their own terminal at Seattle, what makes you think that they can't do the same thing at a non-DFW metroplex airport? How would your distaste for SWA reveal itself in that scenario? BTW, every other airline is not required to fly out of DFW. To my knowledge there is nothing stopping AA or anyone else from serving the other metroplex airports.

 

[aa73]

It really doesn't matter whether AA brought Fokkers or Douglas's into Love, what matters is that AA came in, ran another airline out, then left.

kinda like what SWA was doing in PHL, PIT, etc...

As for fairness and equity, OF COURSE AA isn't interested in fairness and equity, so why does all of the pro WA crowd try and force SWA to be interested in something that they themselves disregard?

enigma

NO airline in this country, or the world for that matter, is interested in fairness and equity. That is the nature of corporate America. It is all about pleasing the shareholders and making money... yes, even SWA!

 

[Dangerkitty]

What would you say to SWA moving to, say, Grand Prairie? Arlington? Maybe Denton? How about Waxahachie? If SWA was willing to build their own terminal at Seattle, what makes you think that they can't do the same thing at a non-DFW metroplex airport? How would your distaste for SWA reveal itself in that scenario? BTW, every other airline is not required to fly out of DFW. To my knowledge there is nothing stopping AA or anyone else from serving the other metroplex airports.

I have no distaste for SWA. I am not going to re-type my arguments why SWA should either come to DFW or stay at DAL and fly under the restrictions of the WA. My opinion is here on this thread for you to read. No sense in going round and round with this.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

Dangerkitty,

You suffer from a lack of vision. Many of those open gates will get filled soon. I don't know when, but sooner than most of us think. The airspace will get busier and busier. The delays will worsen. The last thing we need to do is limit North Texas to one airport.

BTW, why did DFW build so many gates if they knew they would be hard to fill? Now they need to fill them so you can pay for them. Why do we have to pay for DFW's poor planning and waste?

I don't reward government waste if I can help it. I'm reminded of that knights of the round table commercial where they want to build a huge catapult and place a giant bag of gold on it. "Do you propose we throw money at the problem?"

 

[enigma]

kinda like what SWA was doing in PHL, PIT, etc...

You failed your debate course in college didn't you? If you'll please revisit my post, you'll see that I said that AA ran out a competitor then left. Vamoosed, ran, vacated the market, left the customers high and dry. He##, even WalMart has the decency to stay in an area after they kill off all of the mom and pop shops. (Just to be sure, I just checked southwest.com and found that they still fly out of both Philly and Pittsburg.) There is no comparison between SWA in Pennsylvania and AA at Love. Please show me one market that SWA has entered just to bury a competitor to their (SWA's) fortress hub.

Observation shows me that SWA enters markets in which their management believes money can be made, they don't appear to enter markets solely for the purpost of squashing competitors.

NO airline in this country, or the world for that matter, is interested in fairness and equity. That is the nature of corporate America. It is all about pleasing the shareholders and making money... yes, even SWA!

Absolutely, but the main argument most of you pro WA apologist seem to be making is based upon morality, ie fairness. There has not been a cogent argument made for business sense, the best most can come up with is the old "a deal is a deal" bit. BTW, I wish flopgut would substantiate his allegations about Herb making a deal with Ladybird Johnson, because I would be willing to rethink this if that were true, but for now I stick to this position. A deal is not a deal if you didn't make it. The written history of the WA does not show that SWA agreed to the deal. Until then, let's do the best for the metroplex, not just the best for the DFW airport board and by extension, AA.

enigma

 

[Dangerkitty]

Dangerkitty,

You suffer from a lack of vision. Many of those open gates will get filled soon. I don't know when, but sooner than most of us think. The airspace will get busier and busier. The delays will worsen. The last thing we need to do is limit North Texas to one airport.

BTW, why did DFW build so many gates if they knew they would be hard to fill? Now they need to fill them so you can pay for them. Why do we have to pay for DFW's poor planning and waste?

I don't reward government waste if I can help it. I'm reminded of that knights of the round table commercial where they want to build a huge catapult and place a giant bag of gold on it. "Do you propose we throw money at the problem?"

If I suffer from a lack of vision then maybe I can be the CEO of a Legacy Airline!! I will make millions!!

 

[aa73]

You failed your debate course in college didn't you? If you'll please revisit my post, you'll see that I said that AA ran out a competitor then left. Vamoosed, ran, vacated the market, left the customers high and dry. He##, even WalMart has the decency to stay in an area after they kill off all of the mom and pop shops. (Just to be sure, I just checked southwest.com and found that they still fly out of both Philly and Pittsburg.) There is no comparison between SWA in Pennsylvania and AA at Love. Please show me one market that SWA has entered just to bury a competitor to their (SWA's) fortress hub.



Observation shows me that SWA enters markets in which their management believes money can be made, they don't appear to enter markets solely for the purpost of squashing competitors.

R-i-ight, they never before considered PHL or PIT until, gee, some big airline there seemed to be on there last breath. Then suddenly they decide there's "money to be made"? Gimme a break, if USAir had died at PIT/PHL, SWA would've bailed at the first chance.

Absolutely, but the main argument most of you pro WA apologist seem to be making is based upon morality, ie fairness. There has not been a cogent argument made for business sense, the best most can come up with is the old "a deal is a deal" bit. BTW, I wish flopgut would substantiate his allegations about Herb making a deal with Ladybird Johnson, because I would be willing to rethink this if that were true, but for now I stick to this position. A deal is not a deal if you didn't make it. The written history of the WA does not show that SWA agreed to the deal. Until then, let's do the best for the metroplex, not just the best for the DFW airport board and by extension, AA.

enigma

I'm not the one that subscribes to the "moral, ethical issue" - this is corporate America and any airline will do what's in their best interest.

SWA has enjoyed a windfall out of DAL because of the WA while everyone else had to move, and now they're once again up to their dirty old tricks trying to change the law so they can have their way. You can't expect this not to go to a big fight. AMR is just trying to keep the playing field level and open to all competition. What's SWA so scared about - after all, competing with AMR shouldn't be that big of a deal, right?