SWA Attempts To Steal Routes - Denied

[Ex737Driver]

Nice thread title.....even though it was approved and everyone (including United) knew it would be.

Title fits, no if's and's or but's. Attempting to start new service to compete works for everyone. Trying to TAKE something from another entity is what's wrong with this county, entitlement to the Nth degree. Moot point that it was approved. What would SWA do if it wasn't approved? Attempt to force the DOT to TAKE the route from UAL and GIVE it to SWA.

 

[HowardBorden]

Attempting to start new service to compete works for everyone. Trying to TAKE something from another entity is what's wrong with this county, entitlement to the Nth degree. Moot point that it was approved. What would SWA do if it wasn't approved? Attempt to force the DOT to TAKE the route from UAL and GIVE it to SWA.

Southwest Airlines has persisted in its claims the US Department of Transportation should reallocate it one of two route authorities held by United Airlines and its partner Skywest Airlines on Houston-Mexico City and Houston-San Jose Cabo routes.

Under the terms of the current United States-Mexico Bilateral Air Services Agreement, United and its affiliates hold the two authorities available between Houston and Mexico City, and two of the three authorities available between Houston and Los Cabos. Spirit Airlines holds the third available authority between Houston and Los Cabos.

"Southwest?s low-fare, large-jet, daily service will provide consumer benefits far superior to the SkyWest?s regional-jet United Express service that is duplicative of the service United already provides. Southwest?s competition will reduce fares in the four proposed Houston ? Mexico markets by an average of USD117 round-trip, 25% below current fares. These fare reductions are projected to stimulate an additional 273,000 passengers annually in the four markets," it said.

United, for its part, has rejected Southwest's claims arguing for the DOT to hold a formal carrier selection proceeding to determine whether the designations should be reallocated.
http://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/n...inst-united-for-houston-mexico-traffic-rights

 

[Flopgut]

Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-7H4 (29840/2536) N913WN taxies at John Wayne Orange County Airport (SNA/KSNA) on September 27, 2014 sporting the carriers new livery.
(Photo by Michael Carter)

Southwest Airlines maintains the US Department of Transportation (DOT) should reallocate one of United Airline’s designations for service between Houston and San Jose del Cabo and Mexico City, arguing that its service is more in the public interest than the regional jet flights operated by Utah-based SkyWest Airlines on behalf of United.

The Dallas-based low-cost carrier started its first Southwest-branded international service last year and has been signaling its intent to expand its international network through DOT filings applying for Mexico route authorities.

The terms of the current US-Mexico bilateral air services agreement limit operations between city pairs to two or three carriers from each country. United and its regional partner SkyWest Airlines currently hold the two designations for the routes Southwest is applying for.

In a filing last week, United argued that DOT precedent should require a formal carrier selection proceeding to determine whether the designations should be reallocated. United also said Southwest has not guaranteed its new international terminal at Houston Hobby Airport would be completed in time to operate Mexico flights by October, when Southwest said it plans to begin service.

Southwest refuted these claims and called them a delaying tactic. In awarding United and SkyWest the designations, DOT said it could reallocate one of the authorities if a new entrant carrier expressed interest in either of the routes, Southwest said in its filing.

“DOT should reject these transparent attempts to delay Southwest’s competitive service,” Southwest argued in its filing. United’s claim that Hobby Airport will not be ready in time is a “red herring,” Southwest said, as the terminal construction is on track.

Southwest argued the delay tactics will do it harm, as it plans to begin marketing the routes in February in order to begin operating them in October.

United also had asked DOT to grant “extra-bilateral” rights to Southwest for its proposed service. This would allow United to keep its two designations and create room for Southwest to compete.

Southwest rejected this, arguing that it does not need “extra-bilateral relief,” because as a new entrant it is entitled to the designation. The recently negotiated US-Mexico air services treaty, which removes city-pair limits, may not go into effect on Jan. 1, 2016 as United claims, so Southwest is pushing for these designations.

The city of Houston weighed in to say DOT should push Mexico into changing how it interprets the current bilateral agreement to allow mainline airlines and their regional partners to operate with one designation.

Currently, a regional carrier and the mainline airline count as two separate designations, even if the regional flights are marketed under the mainline airline’s brand.

(Madhu Unnikrishnan - ATWOnline News)

 

[Flopgut]

United also had asked DOT to grant ?extra-bilateral? rights to Southwest for its proposed service. This would allow United to keep its two designations and create room for Southwest to compete.

Southwest rejected this, arguing that it does not need ?extra-bilateral relief,? because as a new entrant it is entitled to the designation. The recently negotiated US-Mexico air services treaty, which removes city-pair limits, may not go into effect on Jan. 1, 2016 as United claims, so Southwest is pushing for these designations.

Re-quoted for emphasis. Which one of these airlines truly wants competition, and which one wants a handout?

 

[canyonblue]

Re-quoted for emphasis. Which one of these airlines truly wants competition, and which one wants a handout?

You really trust ANYTHING that come out of a United managers mouth? Boy, you really are stupid.

 

[Flopgut]

You really trust ANYTHING that come out of a United managers mouth? Boy, you really are stupid.

It appears that what did get approved is the extra bilateral rights that United lobbyed for on your behalf. As far as anything to do with SWA and competition, they've been accurate. I believe nothing else

 

[HowardBorden]

The instant 1 gate doesn't cut it, the city is going to have to force them to make another available.

Why do you continue to make outrageous and ridiculous claims with absolutely no basis in fact?


The $156 million project, which broke ground in September 2013, will feature five gates. Four of those gates will belong to Dallas-based Southwest Airlines Co. (NYSE: LUV), and one will belong to the airport for other airlines, said Bill Manning, project manager for the terminal.

In addition, there is room to add seven gates for a total of 12, but there are no current plans to begin that expansion, he added.
http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/...thwest+(Southwest+U.S.+News+from+bizjournals)

 

[Flopgut]

Howard: Competitive gate allocation is a subject not hard to find on the web. As I said before, I'm done sharing links with you or anyone else on here.

Please feel free to comment specifically to what your airline tried to make happen here. And compare it with all the preaching you (and other SWA) have done about "competition".

 

[Flopgut]

I'll share this much:

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/...m-houston-to-mexico-city-cabo-san-lucas.html/

Southwest Airlines in January lost its effort to get United Airlines or SkyWest Airlines kicked off routes from Houston to Mexico City and Houston to Cabo San Lucas. By the U.S.-Mexico bilateral treaty, the number of U.S. airlines on those routes is limited. And all the airline authorities had been handed out.

Southwest had argued that United Airlines and SkyWest Airlines were operating flights only for the benefit of one airline, United, and asked the DOT to replace one of them with Southwest. The U.S. Department of Transportation turned down Southwest?s request.

But on Tuesday, the DOT gave Southwest the necessary authority to fly from Houston to Mexico City and Cabo San Lucas after Mexican authorities indicated they would look favorably on Southwest?s request.

In doing so, they relied on the ability of both countries to approve ?extrabilateral? exemptions for more airlines than the aviation treaty allows.

?In light of the circumstances of this case, the U.S. Government asked the Mexican Direcci?n General de Aeron?utica Civil (DGAC) whether it would favorably consider an application for extrabilateral authority in the subject markets,? the DOT said in its Tuesday decision.

?In doing so, the Department noted that the United States has positively considered requests from the DGAC to grant certain extrabilateral authority to Mexican carriers. The DGAC advised the Department that it will, on the basis of reciprocity,* favorably consider an application from Southwest for Houston-Mexico City and Houston-San Jose del Cabo services,? the agency said.

Based on that, the DOT said in Tuesday?s order, ?we find that the public interest warrants our approval of Southwest?s application, and that we can proceed to such approval without needing to withdraw or otherwise place in issue the designations or authorities of any of the currently authorized U.S. carriers in these city-pair markets.?

*Based on "reciprocity" the DGAC approved it. Hmmmmm

 

[HowardBorden]

*Based on "reciprocity" the DGAC approved it. Hmmmmm

Both U.S. and Mexican authorities have made it easier for more airlines to fly to trans border destinations because ALL limits will be lifted in 9 short months.


US, Mexico to end limits on transborder airline routes

The United States and Mexico said they will end current restrictions that cap the number of passenger airlines that can fly on any one route between the nations. The agreement will become effective Jan. 1, 2016, the U.S. State Department said in a statement.
That current agreement places significant restrictions on the number of carriers permitted to fly U.S.-Mexico routes. Enacted in 2005, that agreement generally allows only two U.S. airlines and two Mexican airlines to fly on a single route between U.S. and Mexican airports. Some routes have different restriction details, but the agreement effectively caps the number of airlines that can begin service between U.S.-Mexico city pairs.
?The new agreement will remove the numerical limitations on the number of airlines that may provide passengers service in all U.S.-Mexico city pairs,? the U.S. Department of Transportation said in its own statement about the agreement.
?As a result, some city-pair markets might see the entrance of new carriers for the first time in many years, and airlines can consider offering new service in destinations that they could have never considered previously,? the DOT adds.
http://www.desertsun.com/story/mone...1/29/today-sky-travel-mexico-airbus/19653271/