WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
UA transfers its two DAL (Love Field) gates to Southwest; Is DL out?
- Thread starter FWAAA
- Start date
- Status
robbedagain
Veteran
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
nope.
I just told you and others 18 months ago the rules that applied and you and a bunch of people argued I was wrong
I knew what I was talking about and all of the people including you that argued DL would be kicked out and WARA superseded airport access rules would be proven wrong.
Given that DL is staying as long as it takes to sort the case out and WN is now "willing" to allow DL to expand in accordance with DL's accommodation request, it sure looks like WN will be wrong and DL will increase its presence at DAL on a long-term basis as I predicted.
I just told you and others 18 months ago the rules that applied and you and a bunch of people argued I was wrong
I knew what I was talking about and all of the people including you that argued DL would be kicked out and WARA superseded airport access rules would be proven wrong.
Given that DL is staying as long as it takes to sort the case out and WN is now "willing" to allow DL to expand in accordance with DL's accommodation request, it sure looks like WN will be wrong and DL will increase its presence at DAL on a long-term basis as I predicted.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
according to the agreement and as reported by the Dallas News, DL has the right to add the 8 additional flights that were part of the accommodation request DL filed long before WN announced its psot Wright schedule.
Whether DL adds the flights or not, it is clear that in one aspect of this case after another, you and WN and others were wrong.
WN wouldn't have had a TRO request filed in court and then had it overruled on the first conference call with the judge if WN and you had been right.
You and others have parroted WN's messages which reflected their economically driven need to expand their DAL operation as large as it could and yet I accurately predicted that DAL and WN would back down when faced with the threat of DAL losing federal funds.
Grow up and admit that you knew nothing about the case and just parroted someone else's talking points because they were counter to me.
WN will accommodate DL and VX will likely be told they will be a part of the process, they will realize that DAL can handle more flights than they thought, and DL will have succeeded at staring down DAL, WN, AA/US and the DOJ who were all convinced they would win in keeping DL out of DAL.
Whether DL adds the flights or not, it is clear that in one aspect of this case after another, you and WN and others were wrong.
WN wouldn't have had a TRO request filed in court and then had it overruled on the first conference call with the judge if WN and you had been right.
You and others have parroted WN's messages which reflected their economically driven need to expand their DAL operation as large as it could and yet I accurately predicted that DAL and WN would back down when faced with the threat of DAL losing federal funds.
Grow up and admit that you knew nothing about the case and just parroted someone else's talking points because they were counter to me.
WN will accommodate DL and VX will likely be told they will be a part of the process, they will realize that DAL can handle more flights than they thought, and DL will have succeeded at staring down DAL, WN, AA/US and the DOJ who were all convinced they would win in keeping DL out of DAL.
More lies here is the article no mention of your claim
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/airline-industry/20150624-truce-lets-delta-keep-flying-out-of-love-field-till-court-fight-is-settled.ece
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/airline-industry/20150624-truce-lets-delta-keep-flying-out-of-love-field-till-court-fight-is-settled.ece
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
let us know when you have read ALL of the DMN articles.
and once again, you are arguing a position not based on your knowledge but because of what someone else says.
It's no wonder you are wrong on issues when you can't personally argue then based on your own knowledge.
This topic has consumed hundreds of pages of this forum because a whole lot of people aren't smart enough to realize that WN would try to do what it can to maximize DAL's assets in light of the enormous demand that actually exists but that they would back down as soon as the legal and financial incentives went against them and that is exactly what has happened.
WN was hoping that DL would back down but DL has not and on every legal item of this case, DL has been correct.
DAL is just like every other airport in the US in far more ways that you want to admit, including that it is required to serve multiple carriers and gate squatting and any other attempts to exclude competition are not permitted.
and once again, you are arguing a position not based on your knowledge but because of what someone else says.
It's no wonder you are wrong on issues when you can't personally argue then based on your own knowledge.
This topic has consumed hundreds of pages of this forum because a whole lot of people aren't smart enough to realize that WN would try to do what it can to maximize DAL's assets in light of the enormous demand that actually exists but that they would back down as soon as the legal and financial incentives went against them and that is exactly what has happened.
WN was hoping that DL would back down but DL has not and on every legal item of this case, DL has been correct.
DAL is just like every other airport in the US in far more ways that you want to admit, including that it is required to serve multiple carriers and gate squatting and any other attempts to exclude competition are not permitted.
While I haven't been following what is going on at DAL too closely lately, could it be that WN senses that VX will go away soon and is therefore throwing DL a bone before WN makes a play for the VX gates too? Afterall, DL said that all they want is service to ATL and a couple flights to DL 'insterior' USA hubs (not coastal hubs).
WorldTraveler said:
Speaking of being wrong, remind us exactly what your prophecy was about DL winning in SEA-HND?
And what is the date that Mexico is going to tear up the aviation treaty with USA?
Oh, and still waiting for DL to sue DAL to gain access as a new entrant, too.
Spin away!
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
If that was all true, then why did WN have such an about face right after the judge held the first conference call with all of the parties?
If WN was even close to believing what you said, they would have acted before the judge spoke.
And I still believe that VX is simply squatting on gates with their AUS service and will stop them because of losses and part of their gate space will be available for DL and WN use. Even if DL adds the full 13 flights, WN might have to share its gates for about 5 of them with the rest coming from VX.
that is a very likely scenario as long as VX continues to operate from DAL - which they will likely do.
It is still very possible that if the perimeter rule is removed from LGA, VX may have to move its JFK transcon flights at least in part to LGA and will decide that some of the LGA flights it currently operates including to DAL are not worth maintaining if VX can operate to LAX and SFO instead.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
feel free to hold onto the notion that this case will turn out anything differently from DL gaining long-term access to DAL and being given the freedom to do what the market dictates, which is the same thing that happened with HND.
Decisions should and are being made in the marketplace. DL is succeeding there and other companies may well succeed in their own right because, unlike what some companies believe and fear, the marketplace supports choice
Decisions should and are being made in the marketplace. DL is succeeding there and other companies may well succeed in their own right because, unlike what some companies believe and fear, the marketplace supports choice
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
The campaign against the ME3, which all of the big 4 US airlines and many of their unions support, is based on charges of subsidies in the marketplace.
Either you clearly don't understand the situation or are trying to confuse the issue to avoid admitting that DAL is an issue between equal US airlines before the law regarding access to a federally supported airport.
and whether you understand either issue or not, DAL is a federal airport that is required to provide access to all carriers that seek to serve it within the availability that exist AT THE TIME A CARRIER SEEKS ACCESS.
DL sought access long before DAL was "full" and it is certain that DL's accommodation request will be honored.
Either you clearly don't understand the situation or are trying to confuse the issue to avoid admitting that DAL is an issue between equal US airlines before the law regarding access to a federally supported airport.
and whether you understand either issue or not, DAL is a federal airport that is required to provide access to all carriers that seek to serve it within the availability that exist AT THE TIME A CARRIER SEEKS ACCESS.
DL sought access long before DAL was "full" and it is certain that DL's accommodation request will be honored.
- Status
