What if SWA was to Move from Dallas? Pt 1

[Rex Kramer]

Chase,

I appreciate all your insight. You are a voice of reason in a world gone awry.

C

 

[chase]

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

Some people love the taste of company kool aid.

ERJ-145mech,

I saw your comment and find it puzzling but it brings up an opportunity for me to learn something....I went off & did some research (thanks for the motivation) and found the clip I posted below. Yes the CAB remained in existence until 1984 when it was finally dissolved since it was no longer regulating anything (amazing it took nearly 6 years for a government entity to finally go out of existence even when it was legislated out 6 years earlier!).

However your statement that the restrictions imposed by the WA were an extension of the CAB governance is not completely true I believe. The intent of what the Deregulation Act was suppose to do is stated below along with some history (I highlighted in red the key phrase).

In late 1978, Congress passed the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, legislation that had been principally authored by Senators Edward Kennedy and Howard Cannon. There was stiff opposition to the bill—from the major airlines who feared free competition, from labor unions who feared nonunion employees, and from safety advocates who feared that safety would be sacrificed. Public support was, however, strong enough to pass the Act. The Act appeased the major airlines by offering generous subsidies and it pleased workers by offering high unemployment benefits if they lost their jobs as a result. The most important effect of the Act, whose laws were slowly phased in, was on the passenger market. For the first time in 40 years, airlines could enter the market or (from 1981) expand their routes as they saw fit. Airlines (from 1982) also had full freedom to set their fares. In 1984, the CAB was finally abolished since its primary duty, that of regulating the airline industry, was no longer necessary.
(source http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Commercial_Aviation/Dereg/Tran8.htm )

Deregulation was going to occur and freedom to fly around the country was going to occur without the previous restrictions except for ONE airline, and this was to implemented via the WA which was anathema to the Deregulation Bill of 1978...seems odd wouldn't you think? The Deregulation bill passed & became law in 1978, the WA was passed in 1979 & was in effect on 1 Nov 1979, a year after the Deregulation Bill became law...they were two very separate issues I believe. I didn't want you to leave the reader with the view they were "linked" together or were contained within the same law/bill...they are clearly not. If you weren't trying to link them then my apologies.

It does seem rather ironic that a bill that was to deregulate flying around the country was the impetus to restrict SWA...SWA did have to apply to the CAB prior to 1978 for each route they flew & get prior approval. After that period of time until today we don't have to but a "law" that was passed as a favor to Jim Wright, Speaker of the House & a favor to AA, Braniff & other carriers prevented a carrier from flying to states beyond those touching its border is somehow OK alludes me.....history is what it is but SWA & certainly the consumer didn't think this up on its own as a part of sound business plan or a way to save money.....call it what it is...a restriction to commerce....please don't try to convince the reader this was something that was in place & agreed to by all parties as being something "good" and "fair"....it was forced upon SWA & we had no choice in the matter...now we do & we're exercising "your free to move around the country" theme. If that is company koolaid then I would say it is based upon historical fact vs. what others may recall from poor memory banks (such as mine or others)....thanks again for getting me to learn a little more about what an arcane law this is & further testament of why it needs to go...cheers,

 

[Tejas-Jet]

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.

Actually, SWA was bound by the Texas Aeronautics Commission, not the CAB as SWA was not a "certificated" airline....meaning, they did not get or need approval from the CAB since SWA only flew within the state of Texas(=Tejas, ahem)

The CAB was dissolved with the implementation of Deregulation in 1978....the Wright Amendment was imposed in 1979, when the CAB no longer had any authority.

Tejas

 

[erj-145mech]

Thanks, I forgot about that one. At the time, I was working for Rio Airways and we were TAC also, although we serviced Texarkana, and the airport is in Arkansas. Don't remember how that worked. Reciprocal agreement maybe?

 

[vc10]

Not true at all. Jim Wright (then Speaker of the House---a very powerful position) represented Ft Worth (and DFW and AMR). When it became clear that deregulation would permit Southwest to fly from DAL to anywhere in the US, Ft Worth, DFW and AMR pitched a fit. Wright's first move was to restrict SWA from flying out of state from DAL. He "compromised" at restricting DAL flying to the surrounding five states.

It was a piece of blatantly protectionist legislation in favor of Ft Worth, DFW and AMR.

DFW has grown to the point where it's not in danger from DAL competition. The only party here that would be hurt by repealing the Wright Amendment is AMR, which would make less money on tickets to places outside of the current 8 state Wright Amendment area.

Even DFW would benefit from elimination of the Wright Amendment, it's just too stupid to realize it. There's no room for significant AMR flights from DAL and AMR is not going to dismantle the second largest hub in the world at DFW. Permitting flights to the rest of the US from DAL would drop fares into the Metroplex, which would goose traffic in/out of the Metroplex. There's limited room for additional traffic at DAL, so most of the stimulated traffic has to go into DFW...

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.

 

[FastCargo]

SWA to SAT

Personally, I'd think I would be great if SWA moved it's HQ down here to SAT. Besides what was mentioned in the article, Washington Mutual just moved it's HQ down here, and of course Clear Channel is based here.

However, there wouldn't be much expansion at SAT airport though...it's pretty land locked as well. I think you could add maybe one more runway on the 12/30 axis. That would be about it.

Unless all us freight guys started flying out of Kelly Annex....

FastCargo

 

[flyhi92]

SWA to SAT

FastCargo, isn't there a plan to extend 12L at SAT? Would there be room for a third, or was the extension what you meant?

In any case, bring 'em down - what a great match SWA and SAT would be.

 

[hoover]

Let's cut to the chase shall we?

DFW and AMR want the Wright Amendment to remain in place, because it protects them from having to compete for business. (BTW this is the way AMR has always operated: It turns to the government for solutions to its problems)

SWA want's the Wright Amendment repealed so it can more effectively compete for business (This is how SWA has always operated: It competes in the market place)

The Wright Amendment should be repealed, if for no other reason, to remove government restrictions to allow for free market competition (Which, BTW is how the United States of America has always operated)

Debate settled. On to the next!

 

[SWAnnabee]

Let's cut to the chase shall we?

DFW and AMR want the Wright Amendment to remain in place, because it protects them from having to compete for business. (BTW this is the way AMR has always operated: It turns to the government for solutions to its problems)

SWA want's the Wright Amendment repealed so it can more effectively compete for business (This is how SWA has always operated: It competes in the market place)

The Wright Amendment should be repealed, if for no other reason, to remove government restrictions to allow for free market competition (Which, BTW is how the United States of America has always operated)

Debate settled. On to the next!

But aren't they competing now? Same city, just different fields. And they want SWA to move to DFW, even offering deals on the gates. So wouldn't THAT also be competing? Sorry, but there are many sides to the WA, both pro and con, but the assertion that "AMR doesnt want to compete" is a bit thin and inacurate, considering the above stated facts.

As far as government restrictions to allow free competition, what would you consider the US anti-monopoly laws?

 

[414Flyer]

Ironically DFW airport is built almost on top of the old greater southwest airport.

 

[GravityHater]

I can't believe such a law passed. I know the government has a sad history of meddling in business resulting in unfortunate outcomes - but the WA takes the cake.
Smacks of trade restriction -> monopolies/combines to me.
If any of us tried to control a competitor's business activities like that, we would be in jail!

They never should have messed with it. If a new airport was needed, they should have let normal market forces control what happens - let the airlines patrons pay for new facilities through higher fares.

 

[Benhuntn]

I want SWA to build their hdqtrs in my backyard and for Mobile to build their refinery across the street. Can I get an AMEN

 

[flyinglow]

I can't believe such a law passed. I know the government has a sad history of meddling in business resulting in unfortunate outcomes - but the WA takes the cake.
Smacks of trade restriction -> monopolies/combines to me.
If any of us tried to control a competitor's business activities like that, we would be in jail!

They never should have messed with it. If a new airport was needed, they should have let normal market forces control what happens - let the airlines patrons pay for new facilities through higher fares.

Apparently you don't haven't read the history on the WA. I am so sick of hearing SWA whine, I used to have a lot of respect for the company. SWA made it's bed at LUV the whole time knowing that the Wright Amendment was in place. Now sleep in it and quit bitching, SWA has done pretty well at Love with the restricitons in place. This in nothing more than SWA trying to gain an advantage, in an unscrupulous way. Just leave DFW and go down to San Antonio.

 

[NEDude]

Apparently you don't haven't read the history on the WA. I am so sick of hearing SWA whine, I used to have a lot of respect for the company. SWA made it's bed at LUV the whole time knowing that the Wright Amendment was in place. Now sleep in it and quit bitching, SWA has done pretty well at Love with the restricitons in place. This in nothing more than SWA trying to gain an advantage, in an unscrupulous way. Just leave DFW and go down to San Antonio.

Sir, you are the one who did not read the history of the WA. Southwest began operating in 1971, the WA restrictions did not take effect until 1979. SWA DID NOT KNOW (!!!) that the WA was in place. And AFTER de-regulation took effect, they did begin expanding outside of TX with NO WA RESTRICTIONS. It was AFTER(!!!) de-regulation, and AFTER(!!!) SWA began expanding outside of TX, that the WA was passed into law.

Please re-read your history and look at a calendar before you make such grand and false pronouncements.

 

[sf260pilot]

Today in the Dallas Morning News the American Airlines study came out and guess what......It supports the WA. Big surprise. This WA thing is not about Dallas. It will be overturned when the rest of the U.S. Congress finally decided to back a successful business model in the U.S. airline industry and quit being scared of the Sky Nazis. This is a federal thing. Now that being said. Dallas really sucks!!! They need to see the writing on the wall and put their support behind the abolition of the WA. The talk of SWA moving it's HQ is nothing new, and it has always been because of restrictions in place at KDAL because of the WA. Our fine U.S. congressman from Ellis County is the biggest two faced liar around. He supported repealling Wright when legend was an upstart but now that American Airlines pads his pockets he is for the anyi-competitive amendment. Then he tells the telecom folks in Richardson that if they want him to support anti-competitive legislation, the he is not their man. COME-ON!!!!! When will the Airlines Deregualtion Act of 1978 be finalized?

 

[ivauir]

Apparently you don't haven't read the history on the WA. Nor have you I am so sick of hearing SWA whine, I used to have a lot of respect for the company. SWA made it's bed at LUV the whole time knowing that the Wright Amendment How is that possible? There was no WA in 1971 - our guys are smart, but not clairvoient was in place. Now sleep in it and quit bitching, SWA has done pretty well at Love with the restricitons in place. This in nothing more than SWA trying to gain an advantage, in an unscrupulous way. Unscrupulous? Everything is above board in the public eye. I guess it is unscrupuless becasue you don't agree. Just leave DFW and go down to San Antonio.

I'll tell you what is unscrupuless: paying off your political pals to pass laws to get an airport bullt that the market won't support, paying off your political pals to put restriction on commerce that favor you, and finally using these advantages gained in backrooms of courthouses and the senate (not in the market place) to gouge the consumer.

You talk about being tired of bitching - maybe you shouldn't do it so much.

 

[flyinglow]

Sir, you are the one who did not read the history of the WA. Southwest began operating in 1971, the WA restrictions did not take effect until 1979. SWA DID NOT KNOW (!!!) that the WA was in place. And AFTER de-regulation took effect, they did begin expanding outside of TX with NO WA RESTRICTIONS. It was AFTER(!!!) de-regulation, and AFTER(!!!) SWA began expanding outside of TX, that the WA was passed into law.

Please re-read your history and look at a calendar before you make such grand and false pronouncements.

I am sorry the point wasn't clear. I meant to point out that SWA was a very small airline when the WA was put in place. They made the decision to build up LUV and HDQ with the WA in place. They knew about it when they made there investment decisions to build there. They could have put HDQ or a bigger base somewhere else in Texas if they did not like the WA, or simply gone over to DFW. That is what I meant by they made their bed now they should sleep in it.

 

[Spudbud]

Another voice from the "SWA signed up for the WA so they should live with it forever . . ." crowd chimes in. (Along this line of thinking..."Our founding fathers signed up to come over to this land as English colonists--how unethical of them to try and change the rules and declare their independence when they weren't happy with the arrangement!!!") How can a rule which limited the flying of an airline with three airplanes be rationally applied to one with over 400?! Texas politics at its best! The next great sucking noise you might hear will be that of $15 million SWA tax dollars leaving Dallas!

 

[erj-145mech]

The next great sucking noise you might hear will be that of $15 million SWA tax dollars leaving Dallas!

Followed by the sound of the same $15M going into the Bexar County coffers. And Austin still gets the same cut. And what will it cost Colleen to move all the exec offices to SAT? And the managers and office staff aren't going for free either. Whats it cost to move all of those families? A transfer is on the companies dime. And after SWA moves, the flights out of DAL have the same restrictions.

Bottom line, SWA loses.

 

[canyonblue]

Don't you have a grease monkey board to go play on?:laugh: