Local 514 President Tell Members Aa Headed For Bk

[Ch. 12]

Have you ever actually been to DFW? DFW is much less of a longhaul airport than LAX. It sits in the damn middle of the country, no place domestically, is truelly long haul. Of course, I guess AA's flights to austin, waco, tyler, longview, abilene, lubbuck, SAT, Houston, El paso, OKC, TUL, LIT, XNA, SHV, COS, ABQ, and on and on don't count? Are crazy. On a caomparison basis to other large and even medium sized airports DFW is cheap, Southwest can make money there, they know it, and they've even said it.
Really? Since AA depeaked its schedule I don't see this as being a problem. Especially, when WN flies into places like PHL and LAX that get even more crowded.
You're missing the point. My point was that all the low cost carriers already opperate out of DFW, there is no reason Southwest can't.

[post="308361"][/post]​

Yep...lived in Dallas and practically lived at DFW for a time. Well let's see. Yes...of course there are the short mkts out of DFW but that is not the bulk of the traffic. I think we can ignore international b/c when you are flying over a pond, the distance difference of DFW or LAX as an origin is not that different. Domestically, though, the real high frequency and LARGE markets out of Dallas are CHI, NYC, DC, BOS, MIA, LAX, etc, etc. Look at LAX and you will see that they actually have very close LARGE markets like SFO, SAN, LAS, PHX, FAT, SMF, SEA, PDX, etc. There is extremely high frequency on many of these routes b/c of HP (sorry...do they go by US now?), AS, AA, and UA up and down the west coast. The Dallas markets, though, are much further from Dallas (b/c Fayetteville, AR and the others you mentioned aren't really the bread-and-butter of DFW). You see...that is the beauty of the WA. It keeps all real markets just out of reach of DAL.

To say the Airtran stopped growing because Delta pulled out is about the stupidist thing i've ever heard, the logic doesn't work. Airtran won, so they stopped growing? Come on. Airtran executives have already said in interviews that they want to expand in Dallas but they are waiting to see how the WA debate plays out.

[post="308361"][/post]​

Really?! How stupid is that? Why did American stop growing in RDU or STL or RNO when they put airlines out of business in those cities? It's b/c the competition they were focused on no longer operated in those cities. I think FL was wise to stop expansion in DFW b/c they obviously were affecting DL and are a major part of why they are now in BK. Why should FL give DL a break and keep expanding somewhere where it won't affect the company they want to go away? They have since added long hauls from ATL and more point to point in direct competition with DL. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand FL's motives in stopping their DFW expansion. You are just stretching to try to fit that into your arguement but my guess is that if FL has been bold enough to go against the world's largest single hub operation in ATL, they wouldn't really be concerned about WN trying to get legislation repealled that we all know will not go away for a LONG time. It is this kind of ignorant propoganda that will keep the legislation in place.

 

[Ch. 12]

If you repeal the WA, growth at DFW will be stopped permantly, no airline will fly into DFW, when they can fly out of Love field and given that Love field is has parallel runways it can acomodate a lot more growth than places like Hobby or Midway. In 5 year you'd have a much smaller AA at DFW and everyone else at Love Field which would be jam packed, old, rundown, and extremely congested. You can forget about the international flights, but hey we'll all be able to get to New York for $99 each way via Islip with stops in Little Rock, Nashville, and a plane change in Baltimore. I flight that used to take 3 hours will take 3 days.

[post="308365"][/post]​

Unsubstantiated speculation with a heaping cup of exaggeration. Let's stick to FACTS.

 

[Bob Owens]

Well thats a twist.

A union thread turned into an AA vs SWA thread!

 

[Ch. 12]

Well thats a twist.

A union thread turned into an AA vs SWA thread!

[post="308377"][/post]​

Ha! Yeah...I would have never bet on that happening. Is that possible??

 

[Oneflyer]

LARGE markets out of Dallas are CHI, NYC, DC, BOS, MIA, LAX, etc, etc. Look at LAX and you will see that they actually have very close LARGE markets like SFO, SAN, LAS, PHX, FAT, SMF, SEA, PDX, etc. There is extremely high frequency on many of these routes b/c of HP (sorry...do they go by US now?), AS, AA, and UA up and down the west coast. The Dallas markets, though, are much further from Dallas (b/c Fayetteville, AR and the others you

Did you just throw out Fresno and the term large, excuse me LARGE market?

You threw in Portland and Sacramento for good measure?

I guess you didn't realize that DFW to Chicago is a shorter distance than LAX - seattle or LAx - Portland?

I guess no one flies LAX - JFK/EWR anymore? I guess AA's hourly widebody service is just my imagination?

What you are doing is exactly what Southwest wants everyone to believe, that there isn't any short haul serivice out of DFW and maybe that was the case 20 years ago.

But quite frankly its just not true, Denver, ABQ, St. louis, BMH, Montgomery, Nashville, Mcallen, Tulsa, Wichita, Wichita Falls, Springfield, and on and on and on.

Why do you think its a damn hub? BECAUSE ITS CLOSE TO EVERY PLACE!!!!

I think FL was wise to stop expansion in DFW b/c they obviously were affecting DL and are a major part of why they are now in BK. Why should FL give DL a break and keep expanding somewhere where it won't affect the company they want to go away? They have since added long hauls from ATL and more point to point in direct competition with DL. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand FL's motives in stopping their DFW expansion

I would say its a bit of an exageration to say that Airtrans 20 flights a day ran Delta out of DFW. Much more likely it was AA's 900. By the time Airtran came to DFW, Delta was running a regional jet hub and that couldn't keep any of the local sales contracts, because all the business travelers were complaing about flying to Oakland on a 50 seater when they could fly AA on a MD-80 and upgrade. Delta lost money at DFW every year between 1993 and 2004 except 2 (aproximately). They had been downgrading DFW since the early 1990s when AA and Delta had aproximately the same number of flights. So slow down on your talk about Airtran.

 

[Connected1]

Well thats a twist.

A union thread turned into an AA vs SWA thread!

[post="308377"][/post]​

Cats and dogs living together, I tell ya.

 

[Ch. 12]

Did you just throw out Fresno and the term large, excuse me LARGE market?

You threw in Portland and Sacramento for good measure?

I guess you didn't realize that DFW to Chicago is a shorter distance than LAX - seattle or LAx - Portland?

I guess no one flies LAX - JFK/EWR anymore? I guess AA's hourly widebody service is just my imagination?

What you are doing is exactly what Southwest wants everyone to believe, that there isn't any short haul serivice out of DFW and maybe that was the case 20 years ago.

But quite frankly its just not true, Denver, ABQ, St. louis, BMH, Montgomery, Nashville, Mcallen, Tulsa, Wichita, Wichita Falls, Springfield, and on and on and on.

Why do you think its a damn hub? BECAUSE ITS CLOSE TO EVERY PLACE!!!!
I would say its a bit of an exageration to say that Airtrans 20 flights a day ran Delta out of DFW. Much more likely it was AA's 900. By the time Airtran came to DFW, Delta was running a regional jet hub and that couldn't keep any of the local sales contracts, because all the business travelers were complaing about flying to Oakland on a 50 seater when they could fly AA on a MD-80 and upgrade. Delta lost money at DFW every year between 1993 and 2004 except 2 (aproximately). They had been downgrading DFW since the early 1990s when AA and Delta had aproximately the same number of flights. So slow down on your talk about Airtran.

[post="308392"][/post]​

FAT et al are high frequency (though FAT may not be anymore) and that adds significantly to the CASM when you are flying shorter hauls. I never said that short hauls aren't served out of DFW...I said that they aren't the preferred routes where alot of cap is thrown. LAX-SAN/SFO/PHX/LAS/etc are MUCH larger markets than any of the minis you mentioned and therefore get alot more seats flying between them. So while you cannot open your eyes to it...there are obvious reasons (stage length, hint, hint) why DFW COULD have a lower CASM but you never did mention where you pulled those numbers from. Speaking of...how did you get your hands on DL's P&Ls out of DFW. That is pretty amazing that you know their profits on specific routes! Wow! I will not "slow down" my talk on FL b/c you tried tieing their ceased expansion at DFW to the WA battle. How friggen obvious is it that it was b/c of DL. Did I say that FL ran them out?! NO! Quit twisting people's arguments just b/c you don't have one. I said that they stopped expanding at DFW when and b/c DL pulled out. That sure doesn't sound like I said that FL chased them out, does it? Please keep responding b/c you are only weakening your credibility by spinning and exaggerating.

 

[Oneflyer]

I never said that short hauls aren't served out of DFW...I said that they aren't the preferred routes where alot of cap is thrown. LAX-SAN/SFO/PHX/LAS/etc are MUCH larger markets than any of the minis you mentioned and therefore get alot more seats flying between them.

You are naming 4 cities. I named 20, several of which have almost hourly service by AA. Your argument is beyond absurd. Essentially what you are saying is that there is more LAX is primarily a short haul airport serving California, PHX, and LAS, while DFW which sits less than a 1000 miles from 10 major cities and countless medium sized cities is a long haul market focusing on Boston, Miami, and New York? Tell you what I'll take a quick look at AA's 2006 schedule out of DFW and tell you how many flight AA has within 1000 miles of DFW and outside. Will that convince you?

how did you get your hands on DL's P&Ls out of DFW. That is pretty amazing that you know their profits on specific routes! Wow!

Delta basically came out and said it. There were several articles in the local papers about it at the time.

I will not "slow down" my talk on FL b/c you tried tieing their ceased expansion at DFW to the WA battle. How friggen obvious is it that it was b/c of DL. Did I say that FL ran them out?!

So Airtran is after Delta, they don't have much of a presence in either Cincy or Salt Lake? They just used that strategy in DFW? Airtran is on the record as saying they would be interested in flying out of love field if the WA was removed, so why would they take on more gates and leases at DFW until is resovled? If you notice most LLCs don't operate like that, one of the most successful strategies developed by WN is that they grow not to drive someone else out of the market but to make money, WN uses it, Airtran, Spirit, and Jetblue have all bee successfull using the same model.

All you are doing is taking outdated late 80s airline logic & information and trying to apply it to today. It doesn't work.

 

[Garfield1966]

The first several paragraphs are basically ok, but this last paragraph is completly at odds with reality. WN was NOT already at DAL when the decision to build DFW was made. And nobody "agreed" to shut down DAL. Airlines in existence all signed on to moving to DFW, but WN didn't exist then. So it didn't "agree" to anything. Braniff was the big player then, along with Texas Air. The WA wasn't a "variance" allowing WN to fly at DAL, it was a restriction placed upon an airline at the request of AA, Braniff and others.

[post="308258"][/post]​

According to

http://www.dallas-lovefield.com/lovenotes/lovechrono.html

WN was there in 1971 and the WA was not passed till 1979? Are hese dats wrong?

By staying in Love, they agreed to it. I]If they wanted to come play with everyone else they were more than welcome to.

They were protected in termsof hving built a niche and excelling at it. With out Love and the WA who knows if WN would even be around.

My understanding is that there was an agreement to shut the two regionals down but I still need to find a source for that. Maybe it was just to remove all the major carriers from them (the link has that info as well) and WN decided to stay.

WN knew the rules going into it. They need to live with it now. They want to fly to LAX non stop, come to DFW and do it. Not want to come to DFW, they you can't fly to LAX non-stop.

 

[AMFAMAN]

http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/airborne.html


The history and timeline of SWA

 

[FWAAA]

According to

http://www.dallas-lovefield.com/lovenotes/lovechrono.html

WN was there in 1971 and the WA was not passed till 1979? Are hese dats wrong?

Read my post again. WN was not operating in 1968 when the airlines all agreed to move to DFW when it opened (in 1974). WN never signed that agreement (since it did not exist in 1968). Your post above does not refute mine.

By staying in Love, they agreed to it. I]If they wanted to come play with everyone else they were more than welcome to.

They were protected in termsof hving built a niche and excelling at it. With out Love and the WA who knows if WN would even be around.

Now that's revisionist history. WN litigates DFW, Dallas, Fort Worth and AA in court for more than four years to begin flights in 1971 and then operates for eight years prior to the WA (1979), and you have the audacity to claim that the WA "helped" WN? Keep 'em coming.

My understanding is that there was an agreement to shut the two regionals down but I still need to find a source for that. Maybe it was just to remove all the major carriers from them (the link has that info as well) and WN decided to stay.

WN knew the rules going into it. They need to live with it now. They want to fly to LAX non stop, come to DFW and do it. Not want to come to DFW, they you can't fly to LAX non-stop.

[post="308507"][/post]​

Uh huh.

HOU doesn't seem to bother CO over at IAH, and MDW doesn't seem to be a big problem for UA or AA. OAK is within sight of SFO yet the SFO legacies aren't whining about WN at OAK. ISP and PVD don't even seem to be on AA's radar. But poor AA - it can't have the brown bus flying unrestricted from DAL. The sky would fall; cats and dogs would lie together. AA would have to dismantle its DFW hub and move it to DAL.

I thought that Dallas and Fort Worth had entered the big time, you know - big cities. I guess I was wrong. Nothing more than a couple of scared small towns. Small towns that have overinvested in a very large (and expensive) airport. Not unlike those small towns in the Pac Northwest - Seattle and Tacoma - that have built a Taj Air Mahal.

 

[Ch. 12]

You are naming 4 cities. I named 20, several of which have almost hourly service by AA. Your argument is beyond absurd. Essentially what you are saying is that there is more LAX is primarily a short haul airport serving California, PHX, and LAS, while DFW which sits less than a 1000 miles from 10 major cities and countless medium sized cities is a long haul market focusing on Boston, Miami, and New York? Tell you what I'll take a quick look at AA's 2006 schedule out of DFW and tell you how many flight AA has within 1000 miles of DFW and outside. Will that convince you?
Delta basically came out and said it. There were several articles in the local papers about it at the time.
So Airtran is after Delta, they don't have much of a presence in either Cincy or Salt Lake? They just used that strategy in DFW? Airtran is on the record as saying they would be interested in flying out of love field if the WA was removed, so why would they take on more gates and leases at DFW until is resovled? If you notice most LLCs don't operate like that, one of the most successful strategies developed by WN is that they grow not to drive someone else out of the market but to make money, WN uses it, Airtran, Spirit, and Jetblue have all bee successfull using the same model.

All you are doing is taking outdated late 80s airline logic & information and trying to apply it to today. It doesn't work.

[post="308435"][/post]​

Perhaps this will convince you that there really aren't major markets within the same radius of DFW as there are of the LA, CHI, and NYC airports. Again...that is the beauty of the WA. We all know that. And I named 4 MAJOR cities. You didn't even mention one so please stop with the distortion. And PLEASE, don't tell me what my arguments were b/c I did NOT say that there are no short hauls from DFW. I said they aren't major markets like they are from ORD, LAX, LGA, etc. I don't consider ABI the same as BOS (LGA) or STL (ORD) or SAN (LAX). Are you actually going to argue with me about that?! You're wasting our time by making me restate arguments that you have twisted b/c you don't have a leg to stand on.

Now...can you please tell me how you first said that FL is afraid to expand anymore in Dallas b/c they feel threatened since WN wants to repeal the WA and then you turn around and say that FL does indeed want the WA repealled? You also say that the other LCCs don't want to go to DAL over DFW but then you say that FL wants to go to DAL. You can't even get your stories straight.

And yes. I am saying that FL was going up against DL in DFW and apparently everybody but you knows that. FL only has so much capacity so why should they go to mini-hubs (in demand...not ops) like SLC or CVG when DL can do themselves in in those cities by even having as much cap as they do in them. I would say that it is pretty ironic that FL stopped expanding in DFW as soon as DL pulled out. Now that doesn't mean that FL won't expand there in the future but why waste cap there when you can throw it up to bolster your head to head markets that you already serve against DL?

You are only spinning this in circles b/c you cannot admit that you are wrong that 1) there are more large markets in close proximity to LAX, ORD, and LGA than there are in DFW (this is fact, man, I'm done argueing it) and 2) FL's major competition is DL so they adjust their plan accordingly (this, too, is fact. You are the last one on earth to realize it, apparently). I'm done argueing about this unless you can actually throw a real arguement (rather than propoganda) out there. And stop already with trying to twist what I have written in black and white into something that I never stated. Maybe you should read my posts two or three times before replying b/c I've never dealt with anyone quite as misleading as you on these boards. :down:

 

[AMFAMAN]

Imagine that, I went to a AMFA vs. TWU match and a Wright Amendment fight broke out. Can't you guys keep your non-union fights to yourselves.

 

[Ch. 12]

Imagine that, I went to a AMFA vs. TWU match and a Wright Amendment fight broke out. Can't you guys keep your non-union fights to yourselves.

[post="308711"][/post]​

We sure are making the union arguments seem like the minor leagues! I think a new hot union thread needs to be started to jumpstart the AMFA/TWU battle again!

 

[Wretched Wrench]

Attempting to drift the thread back to the topic-----bankruptcy...................

http://www.rednova.com/news/technology/259...ce=r_technology