Thanks United! Southwest increases Love Departures

[SWA Bubba]

Ya gotta LUV more handouts to Southwest.....monopoly doesnt translate well into Texan[/QUOTE]

Actually, "monopoly" does translate into Texan...at least in Dallas. In the Dallas metroplex, the word "monopoly" essentially means "American Airlines." American's operation at DFW translates to the fact that they operate and control about 88% of ALL the flights into and out of the Dallas area, DFW and Love Field combined. And you're gonna whine about Southwest?

Besides, the "handout" you spoke of, as previously mentioned, was actually a business deal between Southwest and United, and not a handout of any sort. Either we offered United more money for their gates, or they had some other reason to prefer us using them rather than Delta. You might want to take your complaint up with Flopgut's airline's Department of Anti-Competitiveness. They're the ones who kept you out of Love Field, not us. Maybe Flop can get them to change their minds and lease them to you instead--he's always telling us what a beacon of free competition he and his airline are.

Bubba

 

[HowardBorden]

It's an agreement. Solid agreements (binding even) are part of the "functional relationships" called for in an advisory circular the FAA provides municipalities. Both Dallas and Houston are ignoring this guidance with regard to SWA. doj is ignoring it as well.

Please, by all means tell us exactly which circular you are referring to and exactly what "guidance" is being ignored.

I can't wait to hear this one.

 

[Flopgut]

I'll be linking plenty of people to it Howard, but you won't be one of them.

You and I completely disagree, so wants the point?

 

[HowardBorden]

I'll be linking plenty of people to it Howard, but you won't be one of them.

You and I completely disagree, so wants the point?

In order to scrutinize the veracity of your claim.

Most of your conclusions lack supporting evidence and are completely refuted by published expert opinions.

 

[Flopgut]

And yet the the opposition to your airlines' efforts still manage to win a few battles...

It could use interpretation, so I'll send it up the flagpole. Hard to imagine that 18 of 20 gates for a single airline, at a tightly controlled airport, doesn't violate something.

 

[HowardBorden]

And yet the the opposition to your airlines' efforts still manage to win a few battles...

It could use interpretation, so I'll send it up the flagpole. Hard to imagine that 18 of 20 gates for a single airline, at a tightly controlled airport, doesn't violate something.

Southwest controls 80% of the gates at DAL.

United controls 78% of the gates at IAH.

 

[FlyinGuy]

Stop Howard!!!

It makes him look bad.

 

[Flopgut]

Southwest controls 80% of the gates at DAL.

United controls 78% of the gates at IAH.

Any airline that wants to can come to IAH. DAL is tightly controlled and limited. It's apples to oranges.

This AC suggests that all gates be common use at secondary airports (that are not slot controlled). Why has that never been discussed in Texas?? Specifically Dallas??!! But it would pertain to Hobby also, since you're trying to build your way into limiting competition. Which is interesting because there's another faa doc (that I have posted on here in another thread) that specifically states gate space should not be something an airline can build for itself in a way that locks out competition. Bubba remembers that. He wrote an 11 million word tome-like response to it, and I made the mistake of considering his opinion. I think a lot of this stuff has been swept under the rug, and needs to be aired again. Just not here.

 

[Flopgut]

Go thru all that crap on two gates stripped from American, then SWA gets a doj rubberstamp?! Hmmmm

 

[SWA Bubba]

Go thru all that crap on two gates stripped from American, then SWA gets a doj rubberstamp?! Hmmmm

You don't actually read about any of this, do you Flop?

Two gates were "stripped" from American (along with other gates/slots) as part of their deal with the DOJ to approve their merger. They agreed to it, because they wanted the merger much more than they wanted those gates. And I wouldn't be surprised if it was Ameican themselves who suggested divesting the Love Field gates, since they weren't using them anyway, and had no plans to use them. That way it looked like American was "giving up" more things than they actually did, and the DOJ could say they "did more" to ensure a competitive balance. Pure face-saving by the DOJ, since it basically consisted of American "giving up" a bunch of crap they weren't using, and didn't care about anyway.

Speaking of "all the crap," after American offered up the gates, the DOJ's process ensured that Southwest didn't get them, despite what the city and airport wanted. I thought you always claimed that the government was always doing Southwest's bidding.... What happened there, Flop?

And as far as the two recent gates, there no DOJ "rubber stamp" required. The gates are still controlled by United; they just chose to sublease them to Southwest. That is to say, YOUR airline made this call, all by themselves. YOUR airline wanted Southwest to have these gates, Flop--so go bitch at yourself, if you don't like the arrangement.

Are you really now arguing the position that the DOJ should overrule what YOUR airline chose to do, just to make it "fair" to YOUR airline? United needs to be "saved" from itself? Do you even read the crap that you write before you post?

Bubba