"come Out And Fly With The Big Boys"

[corl737]

But please don't sit there and tell me this isn't about WN's bottom line, it's about whats best for the consumer.

[post="307211"][/post]​

Read my earlier posts. I have consistently said that I thought the Wright Amendment repeal efforts are all about furthering SWA's business model. That means seeking out the absolute lowest costs in order to provide the absolute lowest fares (what's best for the consumer) that still generate enough revenue to fairly compensate the employees and investors while also providing for the growth of the firm (what's best for the company).

SWA's cost control efforts vary: fuel hedging to offset increasing prices; more efficient and productive employees to minimize personnel expenses; repeal the Wright Amendment to permit expansion at SWA's existing facilities. (The list of cost savings actions is in truth much, much longer than I can post on a forum.)

Gary Kelly has told the public that SWA could make a profit operating from DFW. It just doesn't fit the business model. In other words, the costs of operating at DFW would not permit SWA to offer fares that allow it to meet its goals and objectives. Seeking the repeal of the Wright Amendment is correctly the company's first course of action and the one upon which the greatest benefits can be obtained.

I agree that the current mayhem in the airline industry is imposing great hardships on many, many decent people. The heartbreak is that most of these folks were caught simply because they hung their hat at a company that, under pressure, showed it cared more about its own corporate ego than the people upon which its existence depends -- its employees and customers.

 

[Human Freight]

Yes...b/c it is no longer necessary as DFW is able to stand on its own and Dallas has grown significantly enough to permit two airports to operate. I can also say that traffic doesn't have to increase...just allow through ticketing...what is the point of not allowing that? And it isn't about the WN plan...it is about reducing the cost of entry into the Dallas market thereby lowering fares but producing the same profits. Businesses and consumers win.

There...your turn. Give me something other than "DFW is fledgling" or "WN can move" or "it is law therefore it shouldn't change". Have you got anything? And can you spin it in a way so that it doesn't sound like supporting AMR?? That is a tough one...hmmmm......

[post="307106"][/post]​

Not Quite, what I wanted but good try. Tell us why it benefits the community to have WN at DAL instead of DFW. Remember your business plan does not count. The public does not care. No justification of how you do business. No low fares BS. Just tell us why it is better for WN to stay at DAL than move to DFW.

 

[corl737]

Not Quite, what I wanted but good try. Tell us why it benefits the community to have WN at DAL instead of DFW. Remember your business plan does not count. The public does not care. No justification of how you do business. No low fares BS. Just tell us why it is better for WN to stay at DAL than move to DFW.

[post="307484"][/post]​

I disagree with your premise. While the public may not provide you the perfect sound bite quotation you want of clearly enunciating "I don't care about their business plan," they do, in fact care greatly about the business plan. That plan mandates achieving the absolute lowest costs thus permitting the offering of the absolute lowest fares while maintaining a sustainable (profitable) business.

To attain the absolute lowest costs requires maximizing the return on investments. Southwest has spent millions of dollars toward the infrastructure at Love Field. To meekly move to DFW and abandon these facilities is to disregard the business model. To add DFW as a second base of operations is to incur duplication of costs is not efficient either. Inefficiency leads to higher costs which leads to higher fares to cover those costs. The consumer benefits from an efficient Southwest Airlines. (Note also that SWA consistently demonstrates the practice of fairly pricing all its fares without demanding a premium from the consumer by adding the 40% North Texas Monopoly Route Surcharge employed by a very large DFW airline.)

On the non-financial side, the community receives intangible benefits by having a viable nationwide airline at DAL simply because it provides a compact, easy-in-easy-out alternative to the expansive, frustrating, and fatiguing experience provided by the nations most mammoth airport facility.

(All this being said, if AA continues to cancel flights in the name of "cost savings" the opportunity for SWA to replace AA -- not just compete -- on some routes from DFW does make a more enticing scenario!)

And by the way, anyone who considers "low fares" as nothing more than a BS argument is ignoring the greatest force in attracting passengers and revenue. Providing "low fares" is the foundation of a highly successful business plan with a 30-year track record of profitability. Care to debate that?

 

[I'mRayFlyMe]

WN has proven decade after decade that the consumers benefit from its profits. AA has proven decade after decade that senior mgmt benefits from its profits.

[post="307296"][/post]​

No more callers... we have a winner!!!

 

[WNjetdoc]

Not Quite, what I wanted but good try. Tell us why it benefits the community to have WN at DAL instead of DFW. Remember your business plan does not count. The public does not care. No justification of how you do business. No low fares BS. Just tell us why it is better for WN to stay at DAL than move to DFW.

[post="307484"][/post]​

Take a peek at the post above yours by corl737, the answer you seek is there. I know it won't be EXACTLY what you're looking for, as you will never be happy with any answer given to you.

 

[AirwAr]

Is it possible that the true reason for Southwest changing it's mind on Wright is to keep LCCs from starting a hub operation at DFW?

 

[LoneStarMike]

Can anyone one from WN actually give a reason for the repeal of the WA that does not revolve around the justification and or protection of your business plan?

[post="307101"][/post]​

I'm not with WN, but I'll give it a go. Some of the stated goals of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 were:

(emphasis added)

(1) the maintenance of safety as the highest priority in air commerce; (2) placing maximum reliance on competition in providing air transportation services; (3) the encouragement of air service at major urban areas through secondary or satellite airports; (4) the avoidance of unreasonable industry concentration which would tend to allow one or more air carriers to unreasonably increase prices, reduce services, or exclude competition; and (5) the encouragement of entry into air transportation markets by new air carriers, the encouragement of entry into additional markets by existing air carriers, and the continued strengthening of small air carriers.

source

Keeping the Wright Amendment in place goes against what the government was trying to achieve by passing the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, IMO.

LoneStarMike

 

[Human Freight]

And by the way, anyone who considers "low fares" as nothing more than a BS argument is ignoring the greatest force in attracting passengers and revenue. Providing "low fares" is the foundation of a highly successful business plan with a 30-year track record of profitability. Care to debate that?

[post="307501"][/post]​

[/quote]


Lets see just how important low fares are. There are only 15 or so long haul markets that WN might serve from DAL. There are all ready LCC flights from DFW on 9 or so of those routes now. Just how much of a WN effect are you hoping for and you cannot deny that the same WN effect can be had at DFW that can be had at DAL. Hell even your CEO has said so.

 

[corl737]

Is it possible that the true reason for Southwest changing it's mind on Wright is to keep LCCs from starting a hub operation at DFW?

[post="307823"][/post]​

No. The purpose of seeking the repeal of the Wright Amendment is to allow SWA to integrate it's Dallas service with its nationwide network of cities. It's a keystone in the effort to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of existing facilities.

If SWA wanted to keep a LCC out of DFW they'd have shuttered Love Field and taken all 22 gates in DFW's terminal E. Southwest's business plan is focused on growing Southwest, not reducing the competition. Competition is good for the consumers and and provides incentive for Southwest to keep lean, too. Sure, SWA keeps an eye on the "enemy" but don't fixate on them at the expense of losing control of your own plan. (The recent acquisition of ATA's gates at MDW was necessary to grow SWA's Chicago presence. The fact that it was AirTran that lost the bidding war was purely a bonus!)

DFW constantly promotes it's Low Fare Airline options (AirTran, Spirit, Frontier, ATA, plus others) yet claims SWA's position on the Wright Amendment is the force keeping Low Fare Airlines out of DFW. Which is it?

Seems to me that now is the perfect time for a LCC to establish itself at DFW since SWA has made it clear that it doesn't desire to operate there. Get a good track record going and you'll own the Fort Worth market even if the Wright Amendment is repealed. Not only that, AA has started reducing flights to cut costs so they're less likely to perform their usual predatory assault on newcomers!

I still believe that the "free rent" deal is so laced with unreasonable restrictions that no sane airline will accept it. This allows AA to maintain it's ability to exact the additional 40% North Texas Airline Monopoly Surcharge and DFW gets to share in the wealth.

-- C

 

[LoneStarMike]

[post="307501"][/post]​

There are only 15 or so long haul markets that WN might serve from DAL.

[post="308095"][/post]​

15 or so nonstop markets maybe, but with the elimination of the through-ticketing restrictions Southwest would be able to serve many more additional markets with direct or connecting service.

LoneStarMike

 

[LoneStarMike]

Seems to me that now is the perfect time for a LCC to establish itself at DFW since SWA has made it clear that it doesn't desire to operate there. Get a good track record going and you'll own the Fort Worth market even if the Wright Amendment is repealed. Not only that, AA has started reducing flights to cut costs so they're less likely to perform their usual predatory assault on newcomers!

[post="308104"][/post]​

All good points and in light of the above, I wonder why DFW isn't spending the $900,000 on a campaign to lure some other LCC to DFW rather than Southwest. It seems like that would be a better use of the money instead of throwing more money away trying to lure Southwest when they've repeatedly said "No."

BTW, I know they're not an LCC and I know they're in bankruptcy right now, but I wonder if Northwest could be persuaded to move it's MEM operations to DFW.

Isn't MEM the smallest metro area in the country to have a hub? Seems like NW would do better at DFW than at MEM, but I don't know what other factors would have to be considered in making that decision.

LoneStarmike

 

[corl737]

Just how much of a WN effect are you hoping for and you cannot deny that the same WN effect can be had at DFW that can be had at DAL. Hell even your CEO has said so.

[post="308095"][/post]​

SWA's resistance to moving to DFW is all about efficiency and costs and it's a 2-part formula:
1) Provide the passenger the best possible fares. By connecting the proposed 15 nonstop cities to SWA's other 45 destinations provides ___ (a very big number) of low-fare single-ticket combinations. This effect could be achieved at DFW or DAL.

2) Provide the employees and investors the opportunity to make the best profits possible within the strict guidelines of the proven SWA business model. DFW just isn't the "best" place in the metroplex. I won't deny that Southwest probably could make a marginal profit at DFW since even Gary Kelly says this. But operating at DFW just doesn't pass the "best" screen. Thus, being successful and wise executives, Kelly and Kelleher have put their efforts into repealing the Wright Amendment.

The bottom line is this: Kelleher and Kelly are unquestionably the most successful executives in the airline industry. (Sorry Neeleman, your track record is just too short even if you do have the New York media in your pocket!) If K&K don't want to operate at DFW I'm sure there's a very solid reason underlying their decision. (Of course, they don't talk to me personally more than once or twice a year so I don't always get the latest inside scoop!)

 

[LoneStarMike]

Here's a theoretical question I'd like to throw out for discussion.

This was in a story by KHOU back in July.

Sen. Christopher Bond, R-Mo., tried to attach to a Senate spending bill a provision that would have repealed the amendment.

But Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, persuaded Mr. Bond to back off. As a compromise, she allowed Mr. Bond to attach a provision that would add Missouri to the states where Love Field flights are permissible.

The few references to this amendment that I've read indicate that it's expected to pass. If so, when would this take place?

Also, if carriers at Love Field could then begin nonstop mainline service to STL and MCI, but the rest of the Wright Amendment remained intact, would these two new destinations be enough that we might see AA start using it's three gates at Love Field?

If the Wright Amendment isn't repealed outright, but rather additional states are added piecemeal (like the Shelby Amendment added MS, KS, and AL,) how many/which additional states would need to be added to the list of states that can be served from DAL before AA finally makes good on its threat to move at least some of its operations to Love Field?

Thoughts, anyone?

LoneStarMike

 

[Ch. 12]

Here's a theoretical question I'd like to throw out for discussion.

This was in a story by KHOU back in July.

Sen. Christopher Bond, R-Mo., tried to attach to a Senate spending bill a provision that would have repealed the amendment.

But Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, persuaded Mr. Bond to back off. As a compromise, she allowed Mr. Bond to attach a provision that would add Missouri to the states where Love Field flights are permissible.

The few references to this amendment that I've read indicate that it's expected to pass. If so, when would this take place?

Also, if carriers at Love Field could then begin nonstop mainline service to STL and MCI, but the rest of the Wright Amendment remained intact, would these two new destinations be enough that we might see AA start using it's three gates at Love Field?

If the Wright Amendment isn't repealed outright, but rather additional states are added piecemeal (like the Shelby Amendment added MS, KS, and AL,) how many/which additional states would need to be added to the list of states that can be served from DAL before AA finally makes good on its threat to move at least some of its operations to Love Field?

Thoughts, anyone?

LoneStarMike

[post="308120"][/post]​

My guess is that the first states to be added to the WA would be ND, SD, and perhaps IA.

 

[Bagbelt]

The big hint from the co. is consolidation coming, perhaps they are saving opposition to WA as a trade off to oppostion to another merger