The Master Negotiator

[lowecur]

Gary Kelly continues to turn up his nose at DFW. He knows darn well that the Wrong Amendment will never get overturned until DFW has a secure future to fund the airport. What he is doing is holding out for a great financial pkg from DFW. The paultry $22M offered for 24 gates is a disgrace. Hell, tiny little towns ante up $3M to Airtran for service at one gate. DFW will have to do alot better, and they will. Stay turned.



Mayors urge Southwest to fly from D/FW


[size=+1]Miller says adding service there would offer fliers more choices
[/size]

[size=-1]08:46 PM CST on Monday, January 17, 2005[/size]

[size=-1]By SUZANNE MARTA / The Dallas Morning News[/size]

The mayors of Dallas and Fort Worth on Monday asked Southwest Airlines Co. to reconsider flying from Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, either by partnering with another airline or by launching service there.

"It's yet another simple way to get more low-fare travel choices for our hometown fliers," said Dallas Mayor Laura Miller.

Last Thursday, Southwest officials said they excluded ATA Airlines Inc.'s eight D/FW flights from a marketing agreement to share passengers because they want flight restrictions lifted at Southwest's home airport, Dallas Love Field.

"We don't want to confuse the need to change the Wright amendment in any way," Southwest chief executive Gary Kelly said Thursday.

A Southwest spokesman said Monday that because ATA already flies from D/FW, the airport already benefits from the Indianapolis carrier's low-fare service.

Kevin Cox, D/FW's chief operating officer, criticized the Dallas airline's decision, saying it was "truly unfortunate for North Texas travelers."

In November, Southwest reignited a decades-old debate when it called for the repeal of the Wright amendment, which limits flights from Love Field to Texas and nearby states.

Opening Love Field would come at a bad time for D/FW, which is seeking tenants for 24 gates that will be vacated by Delta Air Lines Inc. on Jan. 31.

D/FW is offering up to $22.2 million to carriers willing to expand there.

Industry consultants said that although the incentive package was generous, few airlines could make such a commitment.

Southwest spokesman Ed Stewart said the airline had received the proposal but had not contacted the airport to express interest.

 

[chase]

Some thoughts

The offer consisted of 2 different offers, one for 10 gates at a set price with the first year free & another for 25 gates at a set price with the first year free (I'm sure an offer would've been modified if desired)....some observations:

1. SWA has never gone into a place with 10 gates initially...it isn't realistic to think they could utilize that many gates immediately with the committments they currently have already announced or promise...we're only starting with 1 gate at PIT, started with 5 in PHL & after a year of the best growth in the history of a new city we won't exceed 10 gates

2. What would opening flights at DFW due to flights out of Love...no one knows for sure but it is unlikely service would remain the same, in fact a strong argument could be made service would decrease....folks fly out of Love right now despite the WA & make the necessary connections...this would lower productivity at Love & increase costs per flight most likely, not smart

3. The WA is wrong simply put...backing away from this concept isn't the best thing to do for the resident of N Texas & to now change the direction of the focus would be to say SWA was barking up the wrong (no pun intended) tree from the beginning.

4. Nothing has been done to solve the issue of AA flying 800 flights a day out of there...why would a company want to go into the teeth of the competition...why doesn't AA come to fly out of Love with the same rules we do? I don't see Laura Miller encouraging more airlines to fly out of Love like she is for DFW.

5. It will become a moot point shortly once Congress gets back in session.....individual congressmen will be lobbied by local airport officials/elected officials to say why their cities can't be included in an opportunity to increase revenues at their airports in light of the reduced flights, type aircraft (landing fees are reduced w/RJs) & improve the business opportunities (cost savings) for local businessmen to fly directly into Love for less money....momentum is slowly building, the push is only 3.5 months old...this is a slow battle & the dam is holding now but 2 yrs from now my prediction is the WA will be gone & the cards will fall where they may

6. SWA is committed to MDW, PIT, PHL (my thoughts on where the priorities are in terms of growth, certainly not SWA's...I'm just judging by announced flights & growth potential)....SWA has all the time to wait for the "natural process to work"....in some ways having the WA taken away now would make for some corporate decisions to be made...too many opportunities , what a nice dilemma.....let the ATA/MDW issue resolve itself, open up PIT, continue to grow PHL & get a good handle on all of those areas & then let '06 be the year more emphasis is made on the WA when resources & energy won't be so diluted.....again just my speculation.

I believe the Dallas mayor is going to find herself on the wrong side of argument & will face tremendous local pressure to change her view...she's pretty stubborn & I don't think she will but it won't matter in my opinion....SWA is the 5th largest taxpayer to the city of Dallas, hard to imagine she will continue to poke her finger in the eye of this taxpayer but as I said she has a reputation for being rather stubborn.....we'll see how it plays out but SWA has time to sit back & let the WA crumble under the weight of attacks by others. Agains some worthless $.02 drivel

 

[lowecur]

The offer consisted of 2 different offers, one for 10 gates at a set price with the first year free & another for 25 gates at a set price with the first year free (I'm sure an offer would've been modified if desired)....some observations: Negotiations take time, Chase.

1. SWA has never gone into a place with 10 gates initially...it isn't realistic to think they could utilize that many gates immediately with the committments they currently have already announced or promise...we're only starting with 1 gate at PIT, started with 5 in PHL & after a year of the best growth in the history of a new city we won't exceed 10 gates. You have 14 or so at DAL.

2. What would opening flights at DFW due to flights out of Love...no one knows for sure but it is unlikely service would remain the same, in fact a strong argument could be made service would decrease....folks fly out of Love right now despite the WA & make the necessary connections...this would lower productivity at Love & increase costs per flight most likely, not smart Time to close DAL.

3. The WA is wrong simply put...backing away from this concept isn't the best thing to do for the resident of N Texas & to now change the direction of the focus would be to say SWA was barking up the wrong (no pun intended) tree from the beginning. Too much invested in DFW at this point.

4. Nothing has been done to solve the issue of AA flying 800 flights a day out of there...why would a company want to go into the teeth of the competition...why doesn't AA come to fly out of Love with the same rules we do? I don't see Laura Miller encouraging more airlines to fly out of Love like she is for DFW. This will be solved when AMR/UAL start consolidation talks. These two carriers will only receive approval once the Sherman Anti-Trust concerns are addressed. Among those will be their monopolistic presence at ORD/DFW. Look for the start of talks once UAL jettisons their pensions.

5. It will become a moot point shortly once Congress gets back in session.....individual congressmen will be lobbied by local airport officials/elected officials to say why their cities can't be included in an opportunity to increase revenues at their airports in light of the reduced flights, type aircraft (landing fees are reduced w/RJs) & improve the business opportunities (cost savings) for local businessmen to fly directly into Love for less money....momentum is slowly building, the push is only 3.5 months old...this is a slow battle & the dam is holding now but 2 yrs from now my prediction is the WA will be gone & the cards will fall where they may I thought I was the only prognisticator on this board.

6. SWA is committed to MDW, PIT , PHL (my thoughts on where the priorities are in terms of growth, certainly not SWA's...I'm just judging by announced flights & growth potential)....SWA has all the time to wait for the "natural process to work"....in some ways having the WA taken away now would make for some corporate decisions to be made...too many opportunities , what a nice dilemma.....let the ATA/MDW issue resolve itself, open up PIT, continue to grow PHL & get a good handle on all of those areas & then let '06 be the year more emphasis is made on the WA when resources & energy won't be so diluted.....again just my speculation. Good luck!

I believe the Dallas mayor is going to find herself on the wrong side of argument & will face tremendous local pressure to change her view...she's pretty stubborn & I don't think she will but it won't matter in my opinion....SWA is the 5th largest taxpayer to the city of Dallas, hard to imagine she will continue to poke her finger in the eye of this taxpayer but as I said she has a reputation for being rather stubborn.....we'll see how it plays out but SWA has time to sit back & let the WA crumble under the weight of attacks by others. Agains some worthless $.02 drivel 5th largest tax payer, huh. How do you think that compares with what it will cost the taxpayers (including SWA) if DFW fails?

Wasn't Gary listening very intently to DFW about an offer before the "repeal the WA" lobbying? It was probably just a professional courtesy. On Oct 18, 2004 he said the following: "Before Delta's announcement, we would have said we had no interest in being at DFW," Southwest chief executive Gary Kelly said. "Obviously, if we find ourselves with more and more competition for customers that use Southwest out of Dallas and thought serving DFW was a way to defend against that . . . we just couldn't ignore that."

 

[Cyclone]

This just in...Lowerturd decides to go into business for herself and open a bait shop...will name it
"MASTER'S" after her favorite past time.

 

[chase]

Low,

A one year freebie doesn't do any good if you're not going to use 10 gates...yes we have 14 gates at DAL but we don't ask for 10 gates anywhere initially...we're certainly not going to move DAL ops to DFW....kind of waste to even discuss that option...anyway, GK's previous statements from last year was a courtesy, don't step on their toes type of statement before the Nov announcement (my guess)....the dye has been cast & SWA isn't backing down I believe....again we have time on our side so I'll be happy to have this conversation in 24 months....see ya then

 

[Lear70]

5th largest tax payer, huh. How do you think that compares with what it will cost the taxpayers (including SWA) if DFW fails?

DFW fail? Not bloody likely.

Even if by some miracle AA and UAL merge despite anti-trust issues AND large overlapping service areas (can you say another 15,000 people on the street?), why would AA reduce any service at all to DFW? It's still one of the best connecting gateways between the East and West Coasts and provides a nice alternative should one want to avoid ORD/MDW (I avoid them like the plague when non-revving and hear pax saying the same thing), not to mention there's just not enough space at DAL to accomodate the Dallas/Ft Worth community.

Someone WILL fill the void in DFW, passenger loads were always fairly high both on AA and DAL for the three years I lived there and I think you'll be surprised when several other airlines announce more DFW service - takes a few months for us Legacy Carriers to figure out there are new opportunities and act on them - kind of like a big boat with too small a rudder ("ICEBERG, RIGHT AHEAD!").

As far as getting the WA reppealed, I always thought that was just a matter of time and SWA will be poised to take advantage of it with the vast majority of gate space in their posession. The question is, how will the mayor THEN defend against communities demanding an expansion of DAL since the WA is gone? This is NOT going to be a pleasant term for her... d*mned if she does, d*mned if she doesn't.

Hiya Chase, whassup?

 

[lowecur]

DFW fail? Not bloody likely. Are you British?

Even if by some miracle AA and UAL merge despite anti-trust issues AND large overlapping service areas (can you say another 15,000 people on the street?), It's better than 60,000 if UAL goes 7. Merging just has so many synergies because of the extreme overlap, that it cannot be avoided. why would AA reduce any service at all to DFW? Sherman Anti-Trust It's still one of the best connecting gateways between the East and West Coasts and provides a nice alternative should one want to avoid ORD/MDW (I avoid them like the plague when non-revving and hear pax saying the same thing), not to mention there's just not enough space at DAL to accomodate the Dallas/Ft Worth community.

Someone WILL fill the void in DFW, passenger loads were always fairly high both on AA and DAL for the three years I lived there and I think you'll be surprised when several other airlines announce more DFW service Yes, I see FL is looking hard at the incentive offer, but DFW will need to adjust as FL cannot get all 10 gates up and running from the getgo. FL and B6 will need a bigger break on the costs(than $22M) in order to make it competitive with DAL/SWA if WA is purged, plus it's the only way to entice anyone into competing with AMR takes a few months for us Legacy Carriers to figure out there are new opportunities and act on them - kind of like a big boat with too small a rudder ("ICEBERG, RIGHT AHEAD!").

As far as getting the WA reppealed, I always thought that was just a matter of time and SWA will be poised to take advantage of it with the vast majority of gate space in their posession. The question is, how will the mayor THEN defend against communities demanding an expansion of DAL since the WA is gone? This is NOT going to be a pleasant term for her... d*mned if she does, d*mned if she doesn't. Close DAL, and give SWA a cash moving pkg

Hiya Chase, whassup?

.....

 

[lowecur]

DAL is dying

Short haul traffic at DAL is not what it used to be. SWA is cutting flts at DAL because of an inability to fill seats above BELF. They plan to move these a/c to PHL (if they can get more gates), MDW, and PIT. These short flts are a big reason that SWA is able to keep it's RASM numbers high. Even if flts fall to around 100 per day, this type of operation is a necessary part of the SWA plan to keep RASM high.

Lets see, give SWA what it wants(repeal of WA) and they quickly grab 10 more gates at DAL, leaving very few for anyone else. Costs are low, so any LCC going to DFW is already at a disadvantage. Any LCC want to line up against AMR in DFW, and SWA in DAL?....I don't think so.

SW exec: Love flights to be cut if amendment stands

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]By Margaret Allen [/font]
[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Dallas Business Journal[/font]
[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Updated: 7:00 p.m. ET Jan. 16, 2005[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Dallas-based Southwest Airlines Co. will further cut flights at Dallas Love Field if lawmakers don't lift federal restrictions that limit long-haul service from the close-in airport. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Without long-haul flights, the airline's Boeing 737s from Dallas to its 13 short-haul destinations are underutilized, Ron Ricks, vice president of Southwest, told the Dallas Business Journal. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Ricks declined to say how many flights could be cut, or how soon. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The airline last trimmed its Dallas schedule by seven flights, from 130 to 123, in October of 2004. It normally makes such decisions on a semi-annual basis, he said. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The warning comes as Southwest has announced it will fight to get the federal Wright Amendment lifted. The 1979 law -- meant to protect Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport from competition -- limits scheduled, commercial service at Love Field to short-haul flights to nearby states. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Southwest CEO Gary Kelly shook a bitter 20-year truce in December when he announced the airline was no longer neutral on the law and would lobby legislators. Ricks said the turning point was Southwest's inability to revive short-haul traffic after recession and 9/11 stalled the nation's airline traffic. [/font]

Short-haul suffers [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Southwest operates 123 flights from 14 gates at Love Field, which falls below the 10-flights-per-gate national average. Before 9/11, Southwest operated 147 flights from Love. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"After 9/11, short-haul traffic was decimated and it hasn't come back," he said. "The most aggressive marketer in airline history with the lowest fares cannot grow at Love Field. If we can't grow at Love Field, no one can." [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The airline has tried everything, Ricks said, but the automobile has re-emerged as a serious competitor on short-haul flights. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Southwest must use its planes where they can generate the most revenue, and that's not Love Field, Ricks said. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"There is no point in continuing to invest, or grow at Love Field, and hence in Dallas, absent change in the Wright Amendment," he said. "Stasis at Love Field, combined with significant growth elsewhere, means that, over time, Dallas becomes less important to our business plan. As that continues, Dallas becomes less competitive for future investment in terms of planes, people and capital investment." [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Southwest began more than 35 years ago as a short-haul carrier serving Texas. It then picked up its low-cost, quick turnaround model and applied it to long-haul flights in 60 markets. Since 9/11, Southwest has been the only consistently profitable carrier among the major airlines. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If Southwest flew long-haul flights from Love, the competition could drive down D/FW's fares by up to 70%, Ricks said. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]D/FW Airport has declared war against eliminating the Wright Amendment. The airport is deeply in debt with the cost of a new multibillion-dollar international terminal, built primarily for fortress carrier American Airlines Inc. (NYSE: AMR). Delta Air Lines Inc.'s massive flight cuts have also freed up more than 20 gates."We are reluctantly being brought into this battle," said Kevin Cox, D/FW's chief operating officer. "It will be costly and inevitably a divisive battle." [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the past, Kansas and Tennessee sought to repeal the Wright Amendment, seeking lower air fares for their cities. Also, Southwest's arrival usually increases traffic up to five times. Ricks hopes Texas will lead. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]But U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, didn't have encouraging words for Southwest. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"The Texas delegation might be split," Hutchison said. "Members in some areas are concerned about high fares. So they could have support for repeal in some areas. But North Texas members would be concerned about any kind of (revenue bond) default at D/FW because it would have such ramifications on our taxpayers." [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Some say Southwest should be forced to move to D/FW. Hutchison said that wouldn't be right. During the previous legal battle over flights from Love Field, federal courts refused eight times to evict Southwest from city-owned Love. Keep reducing flts, and federal courts just may evict them.[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]After having fought for years to win the right to fly from Love, Ricks said the airline will now wage a grass-roots battle. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"We're very patient. It may take many years," Ricks said. "This is not about Southwest. It's about the freedom to fly." That is a Krok. [/font]

 

[J32driver]

This will be solved when AMR/UAL start consolidation talks. These two carriers will only receive approval once the Sherman Anti-Trust concerns are addressed. Among those will be their monopolistic presence at ORD/DFW. Look for the start of talks once UAL jettisons their pensions.

Hey Barkeep... bring me what he's having!!!!

 

[MedFlyer]

Once again, why can't the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area support two unrestricted airports?

Miami-Fort Lauderdale have two airports.
Houston has two airports.
San Francisco-Oakland have two airports.

Why should WN be punished for DFW's OVEREXPANSION? The folks at DFW had been warned for years that DL's hub at DFW was dying. They foolishly chose to expand knowing the DL was going to pull the plug someday.

 

[chase]

This makes perfect sense...if we had flights from other cities that weren't making money, SWA would move the airplanes with no hesitation. The Mayor of Dallas needs to realize this along with other elected officials. If folks don't believe Dallas could shrink more they are wrong.....even as somone would be adversely affected by losing more flights from DAL I applaud the effort to make money with the airplanes we have.

I also believe it is about the "right", freedom to make choices. Let the market place make the choices, not the legisilators. Nothing would get folks more riled up in N. Texas than to see more low cost advantages go away because of the WA staying....does anyone think AA will lower their prices to the OKC, TUL, MSY of the worlds if we reduce flights? Personally I don't believe SWA will cut back in a draconian fashion because they wish to maintain a large enough presence to thwart off other folks coming into DFW but again that is about choiced made by the market places, businesses, people in the airline industry...."does it make economic sense, can I make money at it" versus passing laws saying one can't.

Regardless I'm confident time & the consumer will win out. If however the PBGC, bankruptcy judges GE & other vendors keep allowing inefficient airlines to remain running when their operations & proposals for future operations are inadequate to turn a profit then the future will continue to look uncertain for the airline industry and employees/familiies in the industry IMHO.

I wish no harm to those employees who are employed by any carrier who is impacted by the current economic situation...I, along with many readers know many who are feeling the strain & stress...our prayers are with you & your family. Good luck to you all....

 

[N1atEcon]

LowerIQ. You post a lot of good info on this board. Why do you have to ruin it by posting it with your added B.S?

You were way off on MDW, and your way, way off on this "This will be solved when AMR/UAL start consolidation talks."

I think you post this BS so your post stay on top for a day or two?????

Is this your way of getting attention in your lame A$$ Insurance man existance?

P.S. I took off from BUF to LAS the other night. We were crusing at 390. Winds were 273 at 119. I said "man it is going to be a long night". I then looked at my watch. "Yes! It was 7:59 pm. the clock struck 8:00. I looked back at the PFD. What do ya know. The winds were gone. The jetstream died down just like you said insurance boy. I could imagine all the west bound EMBs launching into the calm night air. They were now able to make their flights because the "LOWER" factor had kicked in as promised...

 

[lowecur]

Once again, why can't the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area support two unrestricted airports?

Miami-Fort Lauderdale have two airports.
Houston has two airports.
San Francisco-Oakland have two airports.

Why should WN be punished for DFW's OVEREXPANSION? Yeah, that was stupid planning, but there are a handful of hubs that are just as guilty. Now it's time to clean up the mess. The folks at DFW had been warned for years that DL's hub at DFW was dying. They foolishly chose to expand knowing the DL was going to pull the plug someday.

If DFW can afford a multi-billion dollar expansion, then they can certainly afford a cash package to close DAL, and move SWA to DFW. This could be a $500M one-time moving incentive package, that would include a travel bank of $250M funded by local corporations, that would be continually paid until SWA is making money at the airport.

An analogy would be the Cleveland and Houston NFL franchises. It would have been much cheaper for those cities to have ante'd up the $$$ before they left. Look what it cost to finally get a new team. Sitting with empty gates where DL used to be, and having a "white elephant" multi-billion dollar international terminal is expensive. Having a monopoly like AMR at DFW is costing the flying public probably 3/4 Billion dollars per year in ticket prices. I just read where a study was done at MSP, and for just 1/4 of a year, the NWA monopoly cost the flying public $120M.

Everyone has their price.

 

[lowecur]

LowerIQ. You post a lot of good info on this board. Since when? Why do you have to ruin it by posting it with your added B.S?

You were way off on MDW, and your way, way off on this "This will be solved when AMR/UAL start consolidation talks."

I think you post this BS so your post stay on top for a day or two?????

Is this your way of getting attention in your lame A$$ Insurance man existance? It's a good living.

P.S. I took off from BUF to LAS the other night. We were crusing at 390. Should have dropped to 280. Winds were 273 at 119. I said "man it is going to be a long night". So after 4 hrs, were you still in BUF? I then looked at my watch. "Yes! It was 7:59 pm. the clock struck 8:00. I looked back at the PFD. What do ya know. The winds were gone. The jetstream died down just like you said insurance boy. I could imagine all the west bound EMBs launching into the calm night air. They were now able to make their flights because the "LOWER" factor had kicked in as promised...

See, I'm alot smarter than I look.

 

[mach zero]

I flew out of DFW for 10 years and have witnessed first hand the inefficiencies inherent in its bad design. Believe me when I say that SWA wants no part of it. The last thing we need to do is spend money on fuel for 30 minute taxi times. DFW Doesn't F*#$ing Work for our business model no matter what Laura Miller, Kay Bailey, or Lowely say. DAL will NOT be closed. Give this a rest...Lower

 

[SWAdude]

I flew out of DFW for 10 years and have witnessed first hand the inefficiencies inherent in its bad design. Believe me when I say that SWA wants no part of it. The last thing we need to do is spend money on fuel for 30 minute taxi times. DFW Doesn't F*#$ing Work for our business model no matter what Laura Miller, Kay Bailey, or Lowely say. DAL will NOT be closed.

Mach is right. DFW is not within our business model to do the kind of business that is being courted. And honestly we don't need it. The only traffic we are missing out on is the origination traffic to go beyond the connecting states. There many other markets that we can use our assets for now that are more towards our model.

SWAdude

 

[HalinTexas]

This most recent debacle continuing in DFW is just another case of, "when things go bad, with governemt help, they get worse with more government help." Dallas and Ft. Worth spent a bunch of money over the years beating each other up over local political and economic issues. Ft. Worth built two airports to compete with Dallas' one, Greater Southwest.

There was a "meeting of the minds" to consolidate the three commercial airline airports into one, DFW. They had to bang heads to make the minds meet, but they forced all the airlines into DFW, except SWA. They continue to but heads and lie to each other and the public. There's no way one airport can serve the needs of a city of any appreciable size. Dallas kept DAL alive and Ft. Worth opened up AFW to AMR, who built a huge hangar, and FEDEX who put a sorting center there. This violated the contract Dallas and Ft. Worth had in the 1960's.

Fast forward to 2004. Deregulation, Braniff is no longer "the" home town airline, AMR came to town, DAL expanded and is now running, and SWA successfully fought off the competition, local govt. and the federal goverment to operate at DAL. The City of Dallas gave SWA a bunch of tax breaks to expand their HQ, MX, and Training facilities on Denton Dr., not to mention the expansion of parking there. Ft. Worth has done nothing. Cities and governments accross the country are clammering for SWA service. DFW is still whinning that SWA exists at DAL, and certain folks still think SWA should be forced to move to DFW, so that DFW can cover their a$$.

It's politics and PR. Let the market work. It works quite well.

 

[vc10]

The Bay Area has three airports---SJC, SFO and OAK, and each competes with the others to some extent.

Dallas can easily support two unrestricted airport.

Once again, why can't the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area support two unrestricted airports?

Miami-Fort Lauderdale have two airports.
Houston has two airports.
San Francisco-Oakland have two airports.

Why should WN be punished for DFW's OVEREXPANSION? The folks at DFW had been warned for years that DL's hub at DFW was dying. They foolishly chose to expand knowing the DL was going to pull the plug someday.

 

[lowecur]

Well then, get business' to ante up $250M for a travel bank at DFW. Give the money to AirTran, Jetblue, and any other LCC that wants to come to town. Watch how fast AMR and SWA start to whine.

 

[lowecur]

Mach is right. DFW is not within our business model to do the kind of business that is being courted. And honestly we don't need it. The only traffic we are missing out on is the origination traffic to go beyond the connecting states. There many other markets that we can use our assets for now that are more towards our model.

SWAdude

According to the release today for the first 11 months of 2004, 5 airports you serve are behind DFW as far as departure time delays: PHL - 75.37, MDW - 78.33, LAS - 78.50, PHX - 80.06, BWI - 80.99 are worse than DFW with 81.19.

Arrivals were even worse: PHL - 74.65, FLL - 76.72, LAS - 78.17, MCO - 78.50, MDW - 79.67, TPA - 79.89, PHX - 80.84, SAN - 81.00, STL - 81.03, BWI - 81.19 are worse than DFW with 81.41

If they would approve the new perimeter taxiway, the numbers would be even better. Sorry guys, not a very good argument.