AA to cancel 30 DFW flight to serve Love with 16

[corl737]

Facing the possibility of losing all credibility with the public following it anti-Wright Amendment repeal doomsday propaganda AA must carry out its self-defeating prophecy.

The sky isn't falling in AA's "chicken little" scenario, their ability to maintain a grip on reality is. I especially like the line where AA says "they were forced to counter Southwest." No. They decided to counter Southwest. There's a big difference.

Here's the excerpt from the Associated Press article:

DAVID KOENIG
Associated Press

DALLAS - The first Southwest Airlines Co. flight from Dallas to Missouri left Love Field on Tuesday morning, opening a new front in the battle between the low-cost carrier and American Airlines.

The 8:10 a.m. flight to St. Louis was followed 40 minutes later by a flight to Kansas City, marking Southwest's first new nonstop service from Love Field in more than 20 years, according to spokeswoman Brandy King.

A few hours later, American, the nation's largest airline, announced that American and regional affiliate American Eagle would begin 16 daily flights from Love Field on March 2 to St. Louis, Kansas City, Austin and San Antonio.

Officials with American, a unit of Fort Worth-based AMR Corp., said shifting flights to the downtown facility would weaken Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport but that they were forced to counter Southwest. The airline told DFW Tuesday that it would cancel about 30 daily flights there.

"It's better to move those flights to Love Field than leave them here (at DFW) and let Southwest eat away at us," said Dan Garton, American's executive vice president. American and Eagle operate about 800 daily departures at DFW.

Garton said American would end service from DFW to several cities, including Long Beach, Calif., Rochester, N.Y. and Toledo, Ohio, and reduce flights to others, including Cincinnati, College Station and Tyler. American says about two-thirds of its passengers at DFW are just passing through on connecting flights, so moving Missouri-bound flights to Love Field is expected to have a ripple effect.

[...]

 

[goingboeing]

SWA had better be careful of what it wishes for because they might just get it and a little bit more.

Merry Christmas to all SWA employees and a Happy New Year.

 

[corl737]

SWA had better be careful of what it wishes for because they might just get it and a little bit more.

That's one of the stated risks of persuing a free and open Love Field. Still, Dallas was going nowhere in the scheme of SWA's growth so the risk was worth taking.

Merry Christmas to all SWA employees and a Happy New Year.

Thanks! Same to you and yours, too!

 

[luver41]

I read somewhere that the flights that AA is adding to STL and KCI will use MD-80's, the loudest plane in their fleet. I'm sure American hopes to stir up the NIMBY's by doing so, but, I can't help think that the strategy will backfire when AA's noise is compared to Southwest's 737-700s.

AA is completely shameless.

 

[FWAAA]

I read somewhere that the flights that AA is adding to STL and KCI will use MD-80's, the loudest plane in their fleet. I'm sure American hopes to stir up the NIMBY's by doing so, but, I can't help think that the strategy will backfire when AA's noise is compared to Southwest's 737-700s.

AA is completely shameless.

I agree that AA will stir up the NIMBYs; I disagree that the residents will be willing to differentiate between the relatively quiet WN 737s and the old, loud JT8Ds on the MD-80s. All they will complain about is noise, noise and more noise. Perhaps AA is trying to stir up some grass roots/groundswell support for a more restrictive Wright Amendment - say, no airplanes over 56 seats flown to any points outside the State of Texas.

That may be Evil AA's ultimate goal. B)

 

[WNrforlife]

Hey - no one is forcing any of the NIMBY's to live near an airport. They can move any time they wish.........

 

[CruelSummer]

That's one of the stated risks of persuing a free and open Love Field. Still, Dallas was going nowhere in the scheme of SWA's growth so the risk was worth taking.
Thanks! Same to you and yours, too!

Thanks for the article...this will definitely be interesting to watch. Not surprising at all that flights won't just be added but are being shifted away from DFW, which will lessen DFW flight coverage...curious to see how this will turn out. Hope the risk is worth it to SWA.

 

[coolflyingfool]

I love the fact that DFW-LIM was pulled. SWA doesn't even fly out of the 48 contiguos states. AA will blame that on the lack of connecting traffic now that a couple of flights have to be pulled from DFW. just my thoughts.........

 

[Ch. 12]

I love the fact that DFW-LIM was pulled. SWA doesn't even fly out of the 48 contiguos states. AA will blame that on the lack of connecting traffic now that a couple of flights have to be pulled from DFW. just my thoughts.........

In AA's defense, Former Moderaator pointed out that the AA press release (on their website) actually blamed only economics and it was just the meshing of the DFW and AA releases into an AP release that made it sound like it was WN's fault.

But I will say that AA did choose an interesting time to cancel those other markets. It seems that the written word of AA (that not many other than those of us in the industry pay attention to) is a CYA but the timing was meant to plant a seed in the public that it was as a result of the WA (since it was predicted by NostrAAdamus). But all we can go on is the true AA press release stating economics as the reason. Interesting, though............

 

[Barbell]

- say, no airplanes over 56 seats flown to any points outside the State of Texas.

That may be Evil AA's ultimate goal. B)

Seriously, do we really need that much capacity in and out of TX? Who wants to go there, anyway? :down:

 

[CruelSummer]

In AA's defense, Former Moderaator pointed out that the AA press release (on their website) actually blamed only economics and it was just the meshing of the DFW and AA releases into an AP release that made it sound like it was WN's fault.

But I will say that AA did choose an interesting time to cancel those other markets. It seems that the written word of AA (that not many other than those of us in the industry pay attention to) is a CYA but the timing was meant to plant a seed in the public that it was as a result of the WA (since it was predicted by NostrAAdamus). But all we can go on is the true AA press release stating economics as the reason. Interesting, though............

Well, everyone has noted that it'll definitely cost AA to move flights to Love, whether they like the move or not. Not surprising that the economics would cause cuts somewhere else. Repealing Wright would also definitely have economic results on AA, which would have to come from somewhere...its not just speculation...

 

[Ch. 12]

Well, everyone has noted that it'll definitely cost AA to move flights to Love, whether they like the move or not. Not surprising that the economics would cause cuts somewhere else. Repealing Wright would also definitely have economic results on AA, which would have to come from somewhere...its not just speculation...

AA was talking about the economics of the cancelled routes...not of added costs. That was obvious. No need to over-interpret that one and stretch the point.

 

[CruelSummer]

AA was talking about the economics of the cancelled routes...not of added costs. That was obvious. No need to over-interpret that one and stretch the point.

I don't think it is an issue of added costs, just that all economics for the airline are interconnected. When money is lost from somewhere (i.e. less passengers flying into an airport), cuts have to be made somewhere else to compensate (like cutting a flight route). It's not a conspiracy...it is a balancing act that goes on as companies try to stay viable. I was just saying that repealing Wright would cause significant adjustments as AA would have to rebalance quite a bit...

 

[Ch. 12]

I don't think it is an issue of added costs, just that all economics for the airline are interconnected. When money is lost from somewhere (i.e. less passengers flying into an airport), cuts have to be made somewhere else to compensate (like cutting a flight route). It's not a conspiracy...it is a balancing act that goes on as companies try to stay viable. I was just saying that repealing Wright would cause significant adjustments as AA would have to rebalance quite a bit...

I cannot agree with you more regarding AA will (though not necessarily "have to") make many adjustments upon a full repeal of the WA. I am just saying that we shouldn't read more into AA's economic decision to get rid of unprofitable routes. They have stated and I will take it at face value that the markets just weren't profitable. The minor addition of STL to the DAL perimeter has not caused the demise of LGB, ROC, TOL, LIM, etc. There hasn't been any time to start generating a loss due to the additions (as AA has not begun their DAL operations) and don't be fooled into thinking that they are anticipating the demise of these markets now that STL flights will be going out of DAL. I would be surprised if there were many ROC/TOL pax flowing through DFW to get to STL and I don't think ROC/TOL/LGB/other markets cancelled are what will make or break your international routes. These routes were just not profitable. Don't get me wrong...I DO see the point you are making about future changes but that isn't the cause of these recent market cancellations.