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

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

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
Jim Smyth said:
Oh my, this would mean they would have to compete?

If competition is your argument then why doesn't SWA just come to DFW. DFW has been begging for SWA to launch service there.
 
Since I am furloughed from AA and have moved to greener pastures I really could care less what happens to the whole Wright Amendment thing.

I just find it incredibly hypocritical that SWA now wants the Wright Amendment repealed when 30 years ago Herb himself signed off on the deal. The whole Wright Amendment was put into place to appease SWA so that they wouldn't have to move to DFW like everyone else. Now they are crying foul.
 
Dangerkitty said:
If competition is your argument then why doesn't SWA just come to DFW. DFW has been begging for SWA to launch service there.

Why would we want to move to DFW! I cant think of any good reasons but hey, who am I.

This is America isnt it? Americans pride themselves on competition. Cant fly more than one state away from Dallas Love Field? WTF! This is a rediculous rule from day 1 meant to stop the competition and they are still at it today.
 
Jim Smyth said:
Why would we want to move to DFW! I cant think of any good reasons but hey, who am I.

This is America isnt it? Americans pride themselves on competition. Cant fly more than one state away from Dallas Love Field? WTF! This is a rediculous rule from day 1 meant to stop the competition and they are still at it today.

It's obvious you dont know the history of the Wright Amendment do you?
 
It's a simple fact. If AA loses flying out of DFW, then there will be service cuts. The first cities to be cut will probably be those "feed" cities that would likely have no service otherwise such as Waco, Victoria, etc.

This is the decision that will have to be made- cheap fares between big cities only (i.e. point-to-point) or do we accept some of the inefficiencies of hub-and-spoke in order to provide an economic stimulus to small town America that would otherwise not have airline service and therefore become less desirable as a business location?
 
Nope, dont know a thing about it...................

Lets put the shoe on the other foot and say that tomorrow that no Airlines can take off out of DFW and fly more than 1 state away for say the next 30 years. Does this seem like a fair thing to do? Doesnt make much sense to me and I dont think AA would be standing still on the sidelines if that was the case.

Personally I kinda like it the way it is. Love field is a nice place to fly in and out of rather than going into the unprofitable meat grinders.
 
Where was fair when DFW was built and American, Braniff, Continental, Delta, Eastern, Frontier and the others that were forced to move there from Love on their own dime? I worked for a small carrier that fed mostly Delta, and it was a pain in the arse logisticly to transfer everything over there.
 
Miscellaneous Ramblings, with apologies to Tony Hogg

pianoman said:
It's a simple fact. If AA loses flying out of DFW, then there will be service cuts. The first cities to be cut will probably be those "feed" cities that would likely have no service otherwise such as Waco, Victoria, etc.

This is the decision that will have to be made- cheap fares between big cities only (i.e. point-to-point) or do we accept some of the inefficiencies of hub-and-spoke in order to provide an economic stimulus to small town America that would otherwise not have airline service and therefore become less desirable as a business location?
If you take this argument and apply it to, let's say, Chicago, one would conclude that feeder cities into ORD are underserved because of Midway. Is this a proper conclusion?

What about Los Angeles? Are there cities near to LAX, that are underserved because of the presence of competing airports?

Boston Logan?

Miami International?

Houston Bush?

Next question. Should the citizens at large, subsidize citizens of smaller communities? Obviously Waco can't generate enough originating traffic to justify service between itself and Chicago; should the citizens of Dallas be forced to pay so that BettyBaylor can shop on Michigan Ave?

For myself, I believe that the EAS program is/was justified. But it was a national program wherein each citizen of these United States paid so that said small markets could maintain air service. In case of DFW vs LUV, it is the Metroplex air travelers who are being forced to pay, with high fares, for BettyBaylors shopping trip. I find that objectionable. FWIW, Waco happens to be very near to my home, I occasionally commute from there but am willing to stick to my principles in this matter.

Maybe you should ask yourself this; Why would ACT lost service if the
WA is repealed? The AA business model is based upon feeding the hub, so why would they abandon their model just because they lost some metroplex customers? Is AA going to completely abandon the "feed the hub" model?

I think that AA's current "we're going to cut service to Waco if the WA goes down" stance is an admission that the hub passengers have been subsidizing the feeder towns, AND that they are screwing the metroplex market to do so.

I'm actually very surprised that AA has entered the fight. I really gave them credit for being smarter than they have shown these last few months.

IF AA MANAGES TO DEFEAT SWA'S ATTEMPT TO REPEAL WRIGHT, IT WILL BACKFIRE ON AA.

If I were AA, I'd be working to convince Waco, and every other DFW feeder city, that I was their only friend. I'd be wining and dining their corporations, chambers of commerce, etc, NOT in an attempt to scare them into politcal support, but in an attempt to gain their business.

Here's the bottom line to me, AA wants to have their cake and eat it too (that old saying really doesn't make, sense, but we all know what it means:))

I've said before, If I were Arpey, I'd be using this to twist DFW's arm into lower fees, not trying to enable DFW to continue its gluttony of tax money.

enigma
 
I normally would never defend a morally bankrupt company like AA, but I just can't agree with SWA on this one. The Wright Amendmend has been a around since SWA was started it is status quo. All decisiosn made by AA and SWA since then have been made with it in mind. SWA knew about the the WA when it built it's new terminals, training center, etc. What SWA is doing now is asking the government to legislate a competitive advantage for themselves. The purpose of the government is not to help one company over another especially in such a competitive industry period. (Please no comments on the bankrupcy courts, we all no that system is broke)
 

Latest resources

Back
Top