Wright fight getting ugly!

[aa73]

Here's the summary: AA wants SWA to come to DFW. SWA wants AA to come to Love. Neither wants to do it. But SWA wants to get rid of a limitation. Does AA get to get rid of a limitation, too?

I think if the Congress gives SWA what it wants, it ought to also throw AA a bone too. Compromise with both airlines, give each airline a little perk. Otherwise, it'll be an unfair advantage to SWA - a windfall, if you will.

And don't come to me with the argument that AA has been enjoying perks for years with the WA in place - SWA has been doing just fine, apparently. AA's been struggling.

 

[AA717driver]

I heard Rich Daley is running for mayor of Dallas... TC

 

[CitationLover]

First of all, SWA is not the only airline at DAL (CO EX).

they serve one market correct? quite the competition.

 

[Flopgut]

["American Airlines would be far more effective in lobbying if they talked directly to members of Congress rather than blindsiding them with veiled threats of service cutbacks in our districts," said Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco.

[/QUOTE]

Excellent tactic for AA to take. Votes are what put these people in office and this goes straight to the source. What else can AA do? We have reached an incredible point of absurdity when governmental policy considers lifting the WA for SWA and AA (and other legacy airlines) can't even get thier concerns aired over changing daylight savings time! It is amazing...What's next? Is the government going to let SWA draw from the SPR and force AA to buy from the pump?

DFW was built to be the venue for competitive air commerce. SWA gets relief from the agreement because they are a small operator. Now, because they are huge--the antithesis of the reasoning that got them the exemption in the first place--the agreement should be lifted? How can that possibly make any sense? Conversely, AA and all other legacy/international airlines can't even get a break on something so semmingly inflexible as the number of hours in a day! (DLST) There is certainly some sinister karma or wicked prevailing, sub-atomic sentiment at work here. I think this goes well beyond SWA just shirking a true, straight-up airport battle, afterall, thats simply what they do best. The new SWA leadership knows they have the momentum and they want to sieze upon it. Every single market (and non-market) issue that is negative for a legacy is a positive for SWA. It is inversly proportional, the more something is a detriment to a legacy the more it is benefitial to SWA. So, here is the SWA plan: Because DFW was built to perfectly suit the entire metroplex, lifting the WA for SWA will leave DFW about half empty. It won't take long for people to start wondering what to do with 50% of one of the worlds best large airports. It will be large airplanes coming from very long distances that are not operated by US airlines (look for the SWA spin machine to start promoting this shortly after the WA is lifted). SWA has a plan alright...bring on the cabotage!

 

[canyonblue]

The sky is falling!, The sky is falling! Maybe with DFW at 50%, airplanes could be ontime 50% of the time. Boy how the roles have reversed, AA going to the lawmakers to help it stay alive. Only problem is, the people outside of the Metroplex don't give a damn about AA. What have they ever done for the good of the passenger. Pathetic.

It will be large airplanes coming from very long distances that are not operated by US airlines

Ever been to LAX? Do you actually fly in the US?

 

[aa73]

The sky is falling!, The sky is falling! Maybe with DFW at 50%, airplanes could be ontime 50% of the time. Boy how the roles have reversed, AA going to the lawmakers to help it stay alive. Only problem is, the people outside of the Metroplex don't give a dang about AA. What have they ever done for the good of the passenger. Pathetic.



Ever been to LAX? Do you actually fly in the US?

I don't understand your logic/reasoning. I don't think any passengers at any hub give a dang about any airline, SWA included. All they care about is getting from point A to B on time, cheaply. Something both AA and SWA do remarkably well, given their respective sizes. Bringing up on time performance is a weak defense to use, since every airline including SWA roller-coasts from good to ugly to good.

 

[Flopgut]

Ever been to LAX? Do you actually fly in the US?

Ever been outside the US?

What is your point?

My point is your airline needs to move to DFW for the overall good of the entire system. Or at least live with the WA.

Secondly, I think your airline wants to add to the list of things that are causing decline in leagcy airline business without getting their hands dirty.

PS: I have been to nine countries this year

 

[Flopgut]

Ever been outside the US?

Of course you haven't (with SWA at least). I did not mean to be as glib and spiteful as that sounds. I am not going to delete or edit though, I'm going to qualify it. Other countries (non third world) that have transportation systems take national pride in them. They do actually, it is really not too much of a stretch, especially when you contrast that with what we do with them in this country. In this country we have taken an airline system that is the envy of the entire planet and ravaged it. The SWA/King County Airport thing is a good example. If we let your airline short-circuit what Alaska does in the Seattle area it is bound to have profound effects (eventually) on the vital service that airline is able to provide to all of Alaska. That is tough work up there, it is a real hard place to fly and there is no easy money so your airline is not going to do it.

Now of course some version of deregulation was inevitable. However, there should be some baseline for all of our own good. For instance, if SWA manages to kill off all legacy airlines how will it continue to exist? There can be no low cost carrier if there is no high cost carrier. This will just propagate the same pattern of failed endeavors that has made up the last 30 years of this business. I'm going to conclude that point for now, I'll continue it if I have to later.

Lastly, an open question to any SWA pilot (tech guy too, if you want), rank the following:

In what order does your airline value the following:

1 Your pay
2 Your job security
3 Stock performance
4 The SWA family touchy feely stuff
5 The SWA brand

 

[canyonblue]

If we let your airline short-circuit what Alaska does in the Seattle area it is bound to have profound effects (eventually) on the vital service that airline is able to provide to all of Alaska.

Who is we? The Legacy carriers? Sorry you don't own the system, the people do, and if we have to figure out ways to make money in this industry without the tactics that other carriers employ, than I am glad Gary Kelly is starting to think outside the box. It is only because we are now considered such a huge threat, that the other airlines are starting to whine. Allegiant flies out of Rockford, maybe Kelly should get a "Daley Amendment" in place to protect Midway from extinction. The reality is not saving DFW, it's saving American Airlines. DFW would still be the same airport it has always been, maybe more so with less of an AA presence. If you pay rent to a landlord and the landlord wants to double your rent, would you leave, or just pay higher rent so your neighbors in the apartment are happy that they can count on you to keep their apartment building in the splendor the are accustomed to, even though you just live there 8% of the month. Time to make big decisions, even if they are unpopular, to save this airline from the swath of cuts that other airlines employ. I would rather DFW and Sea-Tac eat the losses, before I would. And that is how a great CEO thinks, Arpey and others could take a lesson.

And lastly, In what order does your airline value the following:

1. Themselves, and why wouldn't they. If they take care of themselves, I am therefore taken care of by default.

 

[FlyGuppies]

Flopgut ... "PS: I have been to nine countries this year"

If that's how you measure your manhood, I'm amused and sorry at the same time. Some of us put family and quality of life ahead of the size of our aircaft or how many countries we visit.

You probably support retaining Age 60 too!