Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Wright Fight Update zzzzzzzzzzzz

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
If that is the case, why did SWA's PR department not respond when asked about it by the media? The article says the flights were diverted "from the airport." That does not sound at all like they simply landed on a parallel runway. If SWA is going to win over their case in the media on the Wright Amendment, the PR department can't afford to be asleep at the wheel. Especially when competeing with AMR, whose PR capabilities are as good as it gets in this industry.
 
This is what SWA PR department has said......

"American never lets the facts get in the way of a good scare tactic,"
SWA spokesman Ed Stewart.
[SIZE=-2] Quote Source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram, "American uses scare tactics", Authors: Banstetter & Recio, Feb. 22, 2005) [/SIZE]
 
J3CubCapt said:
This is what SWA PR department has said......

"American never lets the facts get in the way of a good scare tactic,"
SWA spokesman Ed Stewart.
[SIZE=-2]Quote Source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram, "American uses scare tactics", Authors: Banstetter & Recio, Feb. 22, 2005) [/SIZE]

Sort of reminds me of SWA threatening the City of Chicago a few years back when there was lots of talk about the third airport at Peotone. Threats, scare tactics.... of leaving MDW and the Chicago market.
 
Last edited:
Mugs said:
Sort of reminds me of SWA threatening the City of Chicago a few years back when there was lots of talk about the third airport at Peotone. Threats, scare tactics.... of leaving MDW and the Chicago market.

Got a reference on that? Seems J3 Cub had a date and reference.

Tejas
 
Tejas-Jet said:
Got a reference on that? Seems J3 Cub had a date and reference.

Tejas


Of course, Tejas. Do you guys have a selective memory when it comes to the history of your own company?

From the Chicago Tribune Archives.


Documenthttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gif[URL="http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/main/art/search_tab.gif"]http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/main/art/search_tab.gif[/URL]http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gif[URL="http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/main/art/saved_tab.gif"]http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/main/art/saved_tab.gif[/URL]http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gif[URL="http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/main/art/help_tab.gif"]http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/main/art/help_tab.gif[/URL]http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifStart a New Search | Previous Results http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gif Buy Complete Document: http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/i/abs2USD.gif Abstract [URL="http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/i/ft2USD.gif"]http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/i/ft2USD.gif[/URL] Full Text http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifFLIGHT, NOT FIGHT, SOUTHWEST VOWS TOP DISCOUNT CARRIER SEES PEOTONE BID AS COMPETITION[NORTH SPORTS FINAL Edition]http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifChicago Tribune - Chicago, Ill. Author:John Schmeltzer, Tribune Staff Writer.Date:Apr 8, 1998Start Page:1Section:BUSINESSDocument Types:NewsText Word Count:991http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gif Abstract (Document Summary)http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/art/null.gifRaising the ante in the debate over a third major airport for the Chicago area, the head of Southwest Airlines said in an interview that he would pull out of Midway Airport if another major airport is built.
Moreover, Southwest CEO Herb Kelleher told the Tribune in an interview Monday at his corporate office in Dallas that he would demand a refund of the millions Southwest has invested in the renovation of Midway.
Pulling out of Midway is an option that is expressly reserved for Southwest and American Trans Air, the two largest discount carriers operating at the Southwest Side airport, in the contracts they have with the Chicago aviation department.
 
Last edited:
Mugs said:
Southwest CEO Herb Kelleher told the Tribune in an interview Monday at his corporate office in Dallas that he would demand a refund of the millions Southwest has invested in the renovation of Midway.
That is not a Scare Tactic, it is the truth.
IF Love was closed as many Pro-Wright (Stop-and-Think) people want, SWA would demand a refund from the City of Dallas for all of the capitol improvments invested by SWA.

J3

Oh yea, you forgot to mention this part of the story....

"Pulling out of Midway is an option that is expressly reserved for Southwest and American Trans Air, the two largest discount carriers operating at the Southwest Side airport, in the contracts they have with the Chicago aviation department."
 
Last edited:
DAL landing fees raised/Wright meetings
Council raises Love landing fee


[SIZE=+1]Miller meets with Hutchison on Wright amendment
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]08:26 PM CST on Wednesday, February 22, 2006

[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]By EMILY RAMSHAW / The Dallas Morning News[/SIZE]
Dallas City Council members raised landing fees at Love Field by 57 percent Wednesday, shutting down a substitute motion that would have quadrupled the fees.
The move came the same day Mayor Laura Miller lunched privately in her office with U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison to discuss Wright amendment flight restrictions at Love. They declined to reveal details of their hourlong meeting.
"We just continued our ongoing discussion about the Wright amendment," Ms. Miller said. "We always have good conversations, and this was no different."
The approved landing fee increase – from 35 cents to 55 cents per 1,000 pounds – will go into effect April 1, and bring in another $952,000 to the city annually. The money will be used to offset the airport's $3 million 2006 budget deficit.
Still, for three City Council members, 55 cents wasn't enough. They argued for raising the landing fee to $1.40, which they said is the average landing fee for mid-size airports.
"I find it absolutely astounding, given the fact that over the last six years our airport has run at a deficit between $11 million and $13 million, that we have not raised landing fees for 20 years," council member Angela Hunt said.
In the mid-1980s, Love Field landing fees were 45 cents. In an effort to reduce plane noise, the council offered 35-cent fees for quieter aircraft and penalized louder planes with 55-cent landing fees. By 2000, Federal Aviation Administration officials required all aircraft to meet lower-noise standards.
Council members Mitchell Rasansky and Pauline Medrano joined Ms. Hunt in voting for the $1.40 landing fee.
District 3 representative Ed Oakley, who voted for the 55-cent fee, was the only council member to address the underlying issue: the Wright amendment, the federal law that limits most commercial flights from Love to Texas and eight nearby states. Southwest Airlines Co. wants to lift Wright. American Airlines Inc. opposes any changes to the law.
"The issue of the Wright amendment is something that has to be dealt with," he said. "It is beyond our total control what happens to it."
Ms. Miller said she didn't inform her colleagues about her lunch with Ms. Hutchison – which was arranged on Monday.
The mayor said she simply "carried in two plates of food" to her private conference room from the council's lunchroom: one for her, one for Ms. Hutchison.
Ms. Hutchison met with Fort Worth Mayor Mike Moncrief last Friday; Ms. Miller said she's set to meet with him today.
While the mayor said there isn't "anything secret" about her meetings, she wouldn't say where or when she's scheduled to visit with Mr. Moncrief.
"Both of the talks were productive," said Chris Paulitz, Ms. Hutchison's spokesman.
"They talked about the Wright amendment along with other local issues. They are continuing to discuss this so that Congress does not intervene without input from the local community geared toward a local solution."

OK. You forgot to mention this part of the story. I think you should make up this deficeit first, with interest. Then lets recalculate airport fees to what they should have been the last 20 years and get that money out of your hide too!
 
The issue is not closing Love Field. The issue is keeping the Wright Amendment in place.


So SWA's had the right to protest Peotone based on their investment in MDW. They also point out the right they have to terminate their lease based on the contract with the City if they don't like what is happening. Certainly, investment decisions were based on the content of that contract and the expectation that Chicago would not build another airport to compete with MDW. I don't see any fault with the position SWA took on this matter back then.

However, AMR has no right to protest the repeal of the Wright Amendment in SWA's view. Even though that Law was the basis for AMR (and other airlines to a lesser extent) making a massive investment in DFW that SWA did not participate in. SWA's MDW investment is peanuts in comparison.

Both AMR and SWA reacted similarly to an unexpected challenge to the conditions that warranted their investments in the first place. Of course, SWA paints AMR as a bully even though SWA has behaved the same way in a similar situation. The hypocrisy is obvious.
 
Just out of curiosity I went to the AA and SWA websites and priced flights from Love to St. Louis departing June 2 returning June 4th.

AA - $474 round trip
SWA - $274 round trip

What's a couple hundred bucks among friends right?

Gup
 
Medrano, who also sits on the board of DFW International -- Love Field's main rival -- wants Congress to keep the 1979 Wright Amendment in place.

I really dont have a dog in this fight but........a BOARD MEMBER from DFW has a press conference about too much noise at DAL and that's news? Did any of these idiot reporters think to mention that the airport he works for stands to gain a great deal by keeping this amendment in place? It would have been news if he were coming out in favor of repealing the amendment. This is almost as ridiculous as the TOGETHER WE ARE BETTER signs on the back of the shuttle buses at DFW. Get a laugh out of them every time I have a layover there.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top