What if SWA was to Move from Dallas? Pt 1

[erj-145mech]

I do know about the Wright Ammendment, and what it means. Its a law, not a debate. A little history lesson. Way back in the late 60's, Dallas Love Field was land locked, still is. No room for growth. Neither the cities of Dallas or Forth Worth could afford to build a replacement airport. In order to insure the growth of the new airport, the entities had to be sure that the tennents moved to the new facility, and instilled restrictions. Good old Herb started this intra-state airline that went from Dallas to San Antonio to Houston, and didn't have a problem with these restrictions. He wanted to go to Love becasue it was closer. Now Southwest is crying that it can't fly direct to Albuquerque or Little Rock from Dallas Love. All of the other carriers have stuck to the rules. The rules say that if you want to fly to ABQ or LIT from the metroplex, you have to do it from DFW.

So, if WN can't pitch, it'll throw a fit, take its ball and go home?

 

[flyhi92]

The Wrong Amendment

"And clearly leading the intra-Texas informal poll we did this week was San Antonio."



Chase, we would welcome you and the entire operation to San Antonio, the rising star of Texas.

 

[chase]

Bozt45,

Thanks for the kind words...not sure if the reputation is deserved but thanks. As for the quote you use below....I don't believe I used that phrase but I think you are saying that is the tone of the approach that SWA is using, am I correct?

I believe Southwest has taken a very thoughtout & respectful approach for working within the system to get the point across that the WA is unfair (in the eyes of Southwest) & should be repealed, i.e. making presentations to local officials, lobbying elected officials in DC, making public appeals through advertisements & explaining our point of view. Southwest isn't asking for handouts from the government for good reasons, we're healthy but what they have asked for is a level playing field. The merits of which have been debated on here for months....lots of sane discussions, pros & cons...I respect them all quite frankly but those who have vested interests (me included) aren't going to agree anytime soon. So what is the solution?

If a negotiation with someone over your house isn't going well even after months/years of doing it, does one finally capitulate & give in to a solution one doesn't prefer or should one have the legal & moral right to look after one's own interest & simply say, "maybe I'll exercise a third option". I'll rent the house or lease it out & move somewhere else....maybe your neighbors don't like the idea of having renters next door or the value of the property may decrease due to the rental unit in a nice neighborhood but isn't within my right to exercise this option if it is in the best interest of my family? Is that extortion? I'd say it is looking after one's family & doing what is in the best long term interest of the folks closest to me.

Southwest is trying everything...if DFW said tomorrow, "we'll phase it in"....I'd bet SWA would go for it? Would AA? Who knows but I haven't heard that option. Yes we could move to DFW but that makes the issue dead forever in my view.

Folks complained about DAL leaving DFW but no one said it was extortion...it was a good business decision on their part & everyone understood that. Would SWA need to lose money for several quarters/years to justify to some folks "it wasn't a good idea & now we'll let you fly out of Love...our mistake, sorry"....I'm sure you would agree that isn't realistic & wouldn't happen either.

This gets down to a business decision. I don't blame AA at all to going to all the little cities around DFW & other places & telling the airport officials that if the WA goes away these small airports may lose air service....is that extortion? I don't believe so, it is simply telling folks that things won't remain the same & we don't know what will happen....it is simply a business decision on the part of SWA & AA to take the stances they are taking. SWA took what some may seem is extortionist action against El Paso when they raised their landing fees 8 years ago....we reduced service...was that extortionist? I don't believe so, it was a business decision. The same goes for KCI, SEA or DFW & Love....if the local officials don't wish to respond I believe the company has an obligation to its shareholders, employees & customers to look at every option when it comes to finding ways to save money & keep fares low....I believe no one will judge us guilty of extortion if that happens.

I hope the length of my reply doesn't give the impression I've taken offense at your comment....it is a valid concern you've stated & is worthy of consideration. We're trying to work through elected officials but if that doesn't work we'd rather control our own destiny than relying on a bankruptcy judge or a crisis to force us into decisions. My apologies in advance if my tone is over the top....I hope my reputation isn't too tainted with my reply....thanks for the comment.

Chase,
You have the distinction here as being one of the more rational and level headed posters on flightinfo.com. But, I have to say that the opening post has a bit of an extortionist ring to it...

"Repeal the WA, ...or else!"

Is this really the tone Southwest Airlines wants to take in this debate? Threatening the city and citizens of Dallas with leaving if you don't get your way, rather than through gaining public support and taking it to the elected officials to INSPIRE a change, is more to my liking. JMHO.

 

[NEDude]

So, now what if the Wright Amendment is upheld? Will Southwest refuse to fly to the Dallas market? What will Southwest gain from moving from DAL to SAT? The Wright Ammendment is nothing new and Southwest knew about it from the get go.

Ummm, Southwest began operations in 1971, the Wright Ammendment was enacted in response to de-regulation in 1978. Southwest DID NOT know about if from the get go.

 

[SWA/FO]

WA is gone!!!! Or SWA moves to DTW....and moves into a new terminal that Northwest recently built for us.

 

[Wingsweep]

This isn't rocket science

I say run the buisness like you fly the airplane: If you can save one mile, one gallon of gas, one minute, or one dollar, while keeping the customers happy, then do it if it's safe and legal. If I were a Texas legislator, I'd spend about 5 minutes on the same calculations SWA management is looking at. Then, I would do the right thing...so to speak...

 

[SWAnnabee]

Chase,
Yes, it was just a question of the tone. Thanks for not comming out with both barrels blasting. It was an honest question. I think that it would be ill advised to bring this issue up as a "repeal or we will leave" platform. Just wanted to illustrate how it was sounding. Regardless of anyone's position on the WA, please help SWA keep its integrity. It's one of the few carriers that hasn't compromised that.

 

[NTXPilot]

Not counting any crazy incentive being offered like the article talks about, if you had to guess at this point, what do you think the order for new cities would be? If SWA did move just curious if they would stay in Texas.

1)SAT
2)HOU
3)MDW

 

[chase]

Botz45,

I would agree the tone or I should say, the approach that SWA is taking in this endeavor is definitely different & some would say, aggressive in how it has been marketed....SWA has developed over the years a reputation of good will & being an honest broker with a smile on their face whenever they have dealt with difficult issues. I hope our customer service is done with a smile but as illustrated with the recent incident with the lady who was removed from the flight for wearing an obscene shirt, SWA isn't afraid to wave the "logic test" flag to say...this doesn't make sense....sorry if we offend you but you've got to get off our airplane.


To some that would appear to be "non-luvish" when in reality it staying true to what the company believes in...the golden rule (no we're not puritanical & holy-than-though I believe)......I wouldn't want my mother to see me wearing a shirt like that so why would I want my customers to see it!!!!

We're trying our best to work with the local folks/companies to come around to our view but at the end of the day Southwest will do what it has to do to honor its shareholders, employees & customers....I'm glad they do have the courage & not be "blackmailed" by the city of Dallas into doing something that doesn't make economic sense.

We'd still fly out of Dallas & DFW would grow, Love would shrink & more LLC would go into DFW but what happened then if we decided to move into Alliance Field...does anyone think for a moment that Ross Perot wouldn't love to have a major airline out there? What would Dallas say then? We let the Cowboys get away & now SWA? What were we thinking? (BTW, I'm not for public spending to keep the Cowboys inside of Dallas, many are)...the bottom line is that the city of Dallas & the residents of North Texas need to keep all of this in mind...would you prefer to depend on AA to continue providing air service to everywhere in the US with some marginal LLC flying out there or would folks rather have a healthy LLC like SWA flying out Love to all over, have other carriers out of Love & probably in turn have more competition & lower air fares at DFW in the long run to points around....the choice will be made for them if they don't speak up & out....the sad thing is that folks in other parts of the country who fly into DFW don't realized they are being taken...they aren't even aware they are paying some of the highest fares in the country.

Sorry for the long windedness & thanks again for taking my comments the right way....I believe most of us at SWA are very grateful & thankful for the fortunate situation we're in...we are constantly reminded of it & recognize the blessing I believe. I think we'd just like to be left alone to do what we do best, compete with as few restrictions as possible.....if that is unfair to AA I'd like to understand why if it is wrong to change the rules now, why they didn't feel that way years ago when the rules were "changed" to benefit them? Seems a return to status quo would be a "fair" thing to do but that argument is still going on....good luck to you in your aviation pursuit & thanks for the open & honest debate...cheers,

 

[erj-145mech]

Ummm, Southwest began operations in 1971, the Wright Ammendment was enacted in response to de-regulation in 1978. Southwest DID NOT know about if from the get go.

They were bound by the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) regs until de-regulation which happened in 1978. The Wright Ammendment is an extension of the CAB.

Some people love the taste of company kool aid.