Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Delta Air Lines' started by BABABOOY, Jan 8, 2016.
Just call me Laura.
A negative vote for a joking post? Is WT back?
Wouldn't surprise me if he's still lurking under new ID's and giving people down-votes as revenge.
But, the moment he opens his mouth and starts typing, he gives himself away and the mods have to go clean up the mess...
He was removed again, air superiority 717 was WT.
The mods have been running IP address and canceling duplicate accounts.
He has been removed three times now.
And Jim I gave you a green.
I personally like the yellows. Sometimes the blues. Never the browns.
Sure, but that is how this world works. WN doesn't want DL at DAL then they should just move to DFW and let Dallas shut down Love field. (that remember, DL/AA/BN and others invested in well before WN came along....)
DL/AA and BN built the airport for WN to come in because they were to scared to go to DFW.
see we can spin this all day. I don't think WN wants to play that game though, the legacies have built a hell of a lot more than 3 airports WN used to avoid those legacies. WN can fly between DAL/HOU and MDW, legacies get the rest? Something tells me Delta would drop this love field case in a second.
and FWIW DL came in before the WA version 1 ended. Flying CRJs to ATL and MEM for a little bit. They kept ATL and upgraded it to CR9/717s once they could. They went in because DL doesn't like airlines flying routes from Atlanta they don't fly. Notice WN moves ATL-SFO to OAK and DL plans to start flying ATL-OAK again.....
If DAL was so important to DL, can you explain why DL never secured their own lease?
The facts and timelines indicate DL had no serious interest at DAL until they learned AA's settlement with the DOJ. Even then, they passed on offers from UA to take over their gates.
The whole lawsuit is sour grapes over bad planning on DL management's part. They should have secured their own lease instead of always counting on subleasing from others.
I say open up DAL to the original 32 gates and let other airlines move in, even bring AA back.
Year 1 after Wright: a win-win for both North Texas airports
Exactly. Delta could have been a signatory airline had it planned ahead.
I think there's a good argument that Delta isn't a new entrant deserving of accommodation; any airline that was flying in 2006 could have secured gates at DAL and signed the "five-party agreement," and that includes B6 and, obviously, Delta. VX and other airlines that began flying after the compromise are "new entrants" deserving of some consideration, but DL sat on its hands when it could have obtained a lease for gates.
There's a zero chance of DFW Airport agreeing to more gates at DAL, and the five-party agreement gives each party veto power over amendments. What would motivate DFW (or AA, for that matter) to grant its consent and agree to allow 32 gates?
This line of argument is not only pointless but self serving . Both of you know the facts and the history. NO airline at the time of the Original Wright amendment was interested in flying intra Texas . THAT was all wn was allowed to do....period. Then latter then Wright amendment was adjusted to allow an airline (wn) to fly outside of Texas only if they landed and served a city boardering Texas. Only airlines that that would be helped by that change was guess who ...wn.
AA for competitive reasons added a few flights out of DAL. CO had flights and gates for intra Texas (lah) it was not UA like you are trying to make it look. DL and no other airline was interrested in that arangement. Now the law has been adjusted again to allow airlines to fly to any domestic airport . But in the mean time all the gates are monopolized by one airline. When the rules changed the whole airport should have been opened and the gates owned by the city should have been reallocated . I know that disappoints the aa and wn fans but fair is fair. By the way. WN 's passengers and taxpayers were the real purchasers of dal's inprovements. But all of you know this already
You're forgetting that Delta began flying from DAL to ATL and MEM with 50-seaters in 2009, more than five years before they were allowed to fly mainline planes from DAL. Delta didn't show its first interest in DAL in 2014 with the lifting of the mainline restrictions - Delta was interested three years after the five-party agreement was signed, and it's unfortunate for DL that it didn't plan ahead, in the 1970s or 1980s or 1990s when it could have signed a lease for a gate or two. AA held onto its real estate at DAL - but Delta didn't.
Delta was interested in DAL back in 2009; too bad it waited until 2009. Had DL planned ahead and signed a lease before the 2006 five-party agreement, then DL could have had some gates of its own in the 2006 agreement.
Exactly. I have said this from the very beginning. Delta should have moved a long time ago to secure gates at DAL Love Field. Now they are paying the price. They had their chances for a long time and failed to move at the right time...
Major airlines were not allowed to .The only way for DL to fly to Atlanta was for a commuter airline to it. DL had a hub there but only AA was a hometown airline so their motive was to protect their home turf .If this situation had happened in atl then DL would have done the. Same as AA. Similar to why AT couldn't fly to dal prior to the merger and wn couldn't fly to atl from dal. Then the law changed.
Major airlines WERE allowed to fly to DAL, they just had to follow the restrictions.
AA reconfigured the F100 to less seats to meet the restrictions and drove Legend out.
So I hope you realize the F100 was a mainline AA aircraft.
So try again and don't let the facts get in your way.
Too much DL koolade?