Pretty impressive when even a titan like WN is timid about going against an 84% market share held by one awfully vicious competitor. AA's stranglehold on the airport mean that every market is already dominated by them (therefore HIGH cost of entry...do we need to go through this every time?) and that they will get favorable rulings from DFW governance whenever there is a conflict. I sure don't want to piss off my customer that brings me nearly all of my revenue...do you?
Dja Notice
- Thread starter DFWCC
- Start date
Pretty impressive when even a titan like WN is timid about going against an 84% market share held by one awfully vicious competitor. AA's stranglehold on the airport mean that every market is already dominated by them (therefore HIGH cost of entry...do we need to go through this every time?) and that they will get favorable rulings from DFW governance whenever there is a conflict. I sure don't want to piss off my customer that brings me nearly all of my revenue...do you?
corl737
Veteran
- Jun 13, 2005
- 565
- 6
Ahh, if it were so simple. There are a plethora of conditions and restrictions associated with that "FREE RENT" deal. (I still haven't received the entire proposal from DFW -- I wrote asking for it months ago!) What I have learned from other news sources*, however, indicate that to accept the move in, the airline must:
1) Make a long-term commitment to take over 22 gates.
2) Within the first year, offer service from 10 gates.
3) Devote much of the new service to markets not already being served.
Needless to say, DFW is only publicizing that SWA is turning down "free rent!" But you'll notice that no other airline is jumping at this highly conditional offer, either.
To put it in perspective regarding SWA's current route structure and operations:
Based on SWA's preferred usage rate, this would require starting with over 100 flights per day! There are only seven cities in SWA's entire route structure that have that many flights -- and that's after 34 years of growth! (Even Dallas Love only handles 117 flights/day!)
Only at 3 of its airports does SWA operate more than 20 gates: Phoenix, Chicago Midway, and Baltimore.
We've already seen AA's response to competition through its handling of Vanguard:
1) Slash fares and increase frequency on the compting route. The rest of the system will pay for the short-term losses incurred while the competition is destroyed.
2) Once the competition is gone, reduce service and raise fares back to the original status.
*"Suzanne Marta and Eric Torbenson on Wright Amendment, Dallas Morning News,
Thursday, June 9, 2005
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
Yet WN just announced that it's going back to DEN, which is even higher cost than DFW...
Funny that AA's dominance in so intimidating in WN's hometown city, yet they aren't blinking at the chance to challenge UA's dominant position at DEN.
The City of Dallas is scared sh**less about WN leaving. They're even taking sides in the Wright Amendment battle by selling WN advertising space on the city busses which advocate repealing Wright, which is a dangerous precedent.
I'm sure if AA wanted to pay for rental space the city would sell as well
- Thread Starter
- #35
So tell me again.
AA has 84% of DFW loads and WN has 100% of DAL loads.
AA will go against WN at DAL if the WA is repealed.
Will WN come to DFW? NOOOOO!!!
What is WN afraid of????
They say they could make money at DFW, but it doesn't fit the business plan. They wouldn't have 100% control of gates.
What is WN afraid of?
AA has 84% of DFW loads and WN has 100% of DAL loads.
AA will go against WN at DAL if the WA is repealed.
Will WN come to DFW? NOOOOO!!!
What is WN afraid of????
They say they could make money at DFW, but it doesn't fit the business plan. They wouldn't have 100% control of gates.
What is WN afraid of?
OK...I'll bite even though I'm sure you can see that you really stretched to create your exaggerated post.
AA has 84% of the DFW traffic and they serve places like CHI, NYC, LON, LAX, CDG, MIA, etc, etc, etc.
WN DOES NOT have 100% of DAL service because CO has hourly + (1/2 hourly mid-day) service to IAH...many flights. That leaves WN with 93% of the flights out of DAL to places like AMA, ELP, and LIT. Hardly the caliber of markets that AA is allowed to serve (and that they CONTROL through monopolies or oligopolies) from DFW.
Please stop posting incorrect information as WN does not control all of the gates at DAL and please think a little bit about the destinations served from each airport. Pretty ridiculous argument...but that is what the pro-WA's worship.
- Thread Starter
- #37
Ok I stand corrected on the 100% to 93%. If CO can survive at 93 % then WN can come to DFW where only 84% of traffic is controlled by AA. That leaves 16% for WN. Hey and guess what their are NO RESTRICTIONS as to where they can fly. Gee if WN came in with 22 gates and AA has about 66 gates that looks like they can start with 33% of the traffic. Given WN 's legendary short turn time they could effectively increase their gate space visa-vise AA. With such a wonderful product they would run AA out of DFW and soon control 84% of DFW traffic. Maybe someone should inform WN.
What is WN afaid of??
It's not even worth it if you cannot even read the posts here and if you are going to play as naive as you are playing. It's called "AA has a tremendous stranglehold on all of the major markets from DFW". As I point out over and over...it doesn't matter what is currently happening at Love b/c you cannot fly anywhere worthwhile. On the other hand...moving to DFW means every move you make would be against AA's already-strong market presence and that just isn't a sound business decision...for anybody...this isn't even a WN issue.
Just like OneFlyer (are you one in the same?) I am done with you until you can quit pretending to be so naive about the market conditions and barriers to entry. And I'm definitely done with you until you can learn to read through a post and respond to the whole post in context. I already answered your question...why do I need to type it again in this post (as I did anyways).
corl737
Veteran
- Jun 13, 2005
- 565
- 6
CO's flights do not compete with WN: ExpressJet service goes to IAH while WN only goes to HOU. If AA will agree to not compete on that other 16% out of DFW we'll have a deal, but we get to choose the destinations!
Go read Mitchell Schnurman's column in the Star-Telegram titled"Why Airlines Avoid D/FW". This is the most reasonable explanation about why DFW presents such an unattractive place to do business for new entrants. You may need to register (free) for the S-T website.
- Thread Starter
- #40
Just as I figured. With all the "we s" you have admitted that you corl737 are a WN implant coming over to the AA forum to stir up trouble. I will never agree to any of your diatribe as it is right from the WN PR room.CO's flights do not compete with WN: ExpressJet service goes to IAH while WN only goes to HOU. If AA will agree to not compete on that other 16% out of DFW we'll have a deal, but we get to choose the destinations!
Go read Mitchell Schnurman's column in the Star-Telegram titled"Why Airlines Avoid D/FW". This is the most reasonable explanation about why DFW presents such an unattractive place to do business for new entrants. You may need to register (free) for the S-T website.
You are now exsposed.
"Dja notice that everytime there is a mention of the WA.... Wn sends its PR people to this site to poo poo AA and DFW.
OK, Geraldo...thank you for the FoxNews update. Welcome back to reality. I'm not a WN person. I am not affiliated with any of the parties involved in the WA dispute and that is probably why I can view it more objectively than those in the middle of it.
And is there any point to your posts? We try to have an intelligent debate (that can be interesting if you use facts, etc), but you always try to divert from the issue by throwing in nonsense BS. It is really an insult to all of us (whether pro or anti WA) that wish to discuss this issue intelligently.
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
Please keep in mind that throughout the history of the airline industry, many an airport was built to accommodate a large, anchor tenant airline. Those airports were expanded and much revenue was taken in.
Be it United at ORD, SFO, and DEN, Delta at ATL, DFW. and SLC, then Eastern AIrlines at MIA and ATL, Northwest at DET and MSP, PanAM at JFK and MIA, American at DFW, ORD, MIA, and then RDU and BNA.
TWA at STL and JFK, USAIR/Piedmont at PIT, CLT, Continental at IAH and EWR.......................All the legacy airlines were instrumental towards the success of many an airport.
Then the LCC's were created and set out to destroy the legacies. Now they move in to these airports which were developed and expanded by the older carriers throughout the good and bad times of aviation.
Of course they are successful! Lower costs because some airline that they are trying to put out of business footed the bill.
Kind of like buying a used car! Depreciation absorbed by the first owner!
Be it United at ORD, SFO, and DEN, Delta at ATL, DFW. and SLC, then Eastern AIrlines at MIA and ATL, Northwest at DET and MSP, PanAM at JFK and MIA, American at DFW, ORD, MIA, and then RDU and BNA.
TWA at STL and JFK, USAIR/Piedmont at PIT, CLT, Continental at IAH and EWR.......................All the legacy airlines were instrumental towards the success of many an airport.
Then the LCC's were created and set out to destroy the legacies. Now they move in to these airports which were developed and expanded by the older carriers throughout the good and bad times of aviation.
Of course they are successful! Lower costs because some airline that they are trying to put out of business footed the bill.
Kind of like buying a used car! Depreciation absorbed by the first owner!
Hopeful-
The cost burdens for infrastructure that belong to the legacies were more than paid for during regulation. The costs that the legacies face now are typical of any aged company...labor and pensions. For a young company, labor is relatively cheap b/c everybody is on the lower end of the payscale. But as a good company, you offer pensions (future obligations) and find ways to retain your workforce b/c it is cheaper in the near term. As time goes on, though, a larger % of your workforce tops out and the pay range creeps up for the bottom tier through negotiations...AND...you have to start paying out more and more on your pensions. The legacy costs are NOT related to the airports as they were (and continue to be) paid for through the pax carried at the present time. Sure...some carriers built their own terminals and facilities but those are either paid for long ago or have slowly been acquired by the airports.
corl737
Veteran
- Jun 13, 2005
- 565
- 6
One error in your otherwise good job of sleuthing --- I wasn't "sent" here as an implant. I came here as a person who has a deep interest in the aviation industry, and the outcome of the DFW/DAL feud. Believe it or not, I do have a brain and a keyboard and I'm not afraid to use them! I've noticed that some AA folks can present opinions that don't come with an AA Public Relations department date stamp, too.
I'm not here to stir up anything. I try my best to provide references to any comments or allegations I make so you can reply or rebut it accurately. It's important for us all to learn what we don't know and while I am clearly and admitedly leaning in my allegiance, I do gain a lot of insight from your perspectives.
You are never required to agree with any the words I write nor do you even have to make an effort to read them. Likewise, it is my option whether I read what you write ... but I do because I learn from it. Thanks!
Come on over to the SWA forum anytime. Just be prepared that there are a few folks there, like here, who consider it trespassing and treason to talk to the competition. In my book, however, you are always welcome.
-- Corl
By the way, I'm just curious what "outed" me? Was it my earlier post on this forum that stated "... I believe, as a SWA employee, ..."?
Similar threads
