Looks Like AA wants back into Love Field
- Thread starter Hope777
- Start date
- Status
Yes Hope. This came out a while back when AA stepped and answered one of the original suits filed either by COD or SWA. It threw me off too as I was under the impression that AA was not to serve DAL by agreement in order to merge with US. I was also thinking (on my own here) that maybe if they are restricted from flying out of DAL that this move by AA is being done thru the legal system as a step around the agreement of leaving DAL in the first place. Quite possibly a smart move by AA to get back into DAL by legal determination. It may be done with exceptions tied to it just like SWA has if they were to open a gate at DFW, but I don't think any other airline has this type of restriction held upon them, it is only held towards SWA for the removal of the W/A restrictions. This will get interesting over the next couple months as we get closer to the Sept 30 date...
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
Even if AA can get the DOJ to change its requirement that AA not serve DAL as part of the merger agreement (which is a challenge since there were other requirements to the merger agreement including slot divestitures and bidding requirements for them that affected other parties) it is still not clear that AA can reclaim its space at DAL even in 10 years given that DOT airport access laws require that all carriers currently serving an airport be able to remain there even if leases change hands.
The lawsuit involving the City of Dallas, WN, and DL will clarify a lot but it is not at all certain there will be space even if AA wants to resume flights either now or 10 years after the merger.
according to the article, DL's filing in the lawsuit was due yesterday but there is no word on what they said. Other parties are due to file their responses later but AA does not appear to be listed as one of the parties in the suit.
The lawsuit involving the City of Dallas, WN, and DL will clarify a lot but it is not at all certain there will be space even if AA wants to resume flights either now or 10 years after the merger.
according to the article, DL's filing in the lawsuit was due yesterday but there is no word on what they said. Other parties are due to file their responses later but AA does not appear to be listed as one of the parties in the suit.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
that is a DL related discussion but nowhere was there a requirement that they be added that day.
Let us know when AA succeeds at getting flights back into DAL. That's what this topic is about and amounts to a far bigger goal.
Let us know when AA succeeds at getting flights back into DAL. That's what this topic is about and amounts to a far bigger goal.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
only one airline has met the DOT's requirements for being able to serve DAL even without a lease. It isn't AA who isn't participating in the lawsuit and has also not filed a formal request for accommodation with DAL.
It is very possible that AA might finally be able to return to DAL in 10 years and there is no gate space left because federal airport access laws just might trump lease laws that so many in Texas seem to think are the basis of the way airports work even though the DOT says otherwise.
we'll see soon enough who is right.
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 2,931
- Reaction score
- 3,341
WorldTraveler said:
Following the DOT rule(s) quoted by you, what is stopping AA/US from getting everything back that they were required to divest by DOJ?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
AA/US divested what it did voluntarily as part of the merger agreement.
I didn't like seeing AA/US forced to give up the equivalent of the entire PMAA slot portfolio at DCA - which was also about equal to what US acquired from DL in the slot swap at DCA - but that is what AA/US agreed to - and they got the merger approved because of it.
perhaps AA could get those slots back - and undo the merger in the process... that's the logic that you are saying would have to apply
I didn't like seeing AA/US forced to give up the equivalent of the entire PMAA slot portfolio at DCA - which was also about equal to what US acquired from DL in the slot swap at DCA - but that is what AA/US agreed to - and they got the merger approved because of it.
perhaps AA could get those slots back - and undo the merger in the process... that's the logic that you are saying would have to apply
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
the issue is whether an airline can lease its gates out at an airport, return years later after the airport is completely full, and force out other carriers that have maintained service.
If VX or any other carrier continues to operate from those gates, the DOT says that maintaining service by non-leaseholders is more important than allowing a carrier with a lease to push other carriers out.
Feel free to let us know if AA's situation at DAL has ever existed at another airport but I don't think it has; it is also very possible that the DOT will succeed at getting DAL to convert any gates that come available to common use.
The courts will rule on the airport access issue that currently affect DL but they do give some indication of what will happen with AA down the road. The difference is that AA doesn't serve DAL and didn't at the time DAL moved from having gate space available to where it is now which is really full.
and as much as some here want to see AA back at DAL even before the 10 year period, they have not requested accommodation which is the first step to regaining its space; since the DOJ required AA to divest its gates and AA signed a contract to do so, AA has no legal claim to be at DAL that is any different from where DL is right now.
and since DAL has no common use gates, one of the very few large airports in the country to do so and DL and the DOT strongly encouraged DAL to create common use gates from the AA and then the UA gates, it is very likely that the DOT will continue to push on DAL to require accommodation of non-lease holding airlines like DL or any other carrier that comes along if/when there is any gate space available.
Given that a ruling favoring WN at DAL would set off a whole series of gate grabs across the country that could lock competitors out of gate constrained airports, it is highly doubtful that the DOT will back off its position and that a judge will recognize the value of what the DOT requires and dictate that DOT regulations are just as valid at DAL as they are at scores of other airports.
Given that the chances of DAL activity declining to the point where DAL space is available for another carrier, it is very likely that this case will just involve DL and it will be WN that will have to accommodate DL on part of the 2 ex-UA gates unless VX pulls down its schedule.
If VX or any other carrier continues to operate from those gates, the DOT says that maintaining service by non-leaseholders is more important than allowing a carrier with a lease to push other carriers out.
Feel free to let us know if AA's situation at DAL has ever existed at another airport but I don't think it has; it is also very possible that the DOT will succeed at getting DAL to convert any gates that come available to common use.
The courts will rule on the airport access issue that currently affect DL but they do give some indication of what will happen with AA down the road. The difference is that AA doesn't serve DAL and didn't at the time DAL moved from having gate space available to where it is now which is really full.
and as much as some here want to see AA back at DAL even before the 10 year period, they have not requested accommodation which is the first step to regaining its space; since the DOJ required AA to divest its gates and AA signed a contract to do so, AA has no legal claim to be at DAL that is any different from where DL is right now.
and since DAL has no common use gates, one of the very few large airports in the country to do so and DL and the DOT strongly encouraged DAL to create common use gates from the AA and then the UA gates, it is very likely that the DOT will continue to push on DAL to require accommodation of non-lease holding airlines like DL or any other carrier that comes along if/when there is any gate space available.
Given that a ruling favoring WN at DAL would set off a whole series of gate grabs across the country that could lock competitors out of gate constrained airports, it is highly doubtful that the DOT will back off its position and that a judge will recognize the value of what the DOT requires and dictate that DOT regulations are just as valid at DAL as they are at scores of other airports.
Given that the chances of DAL activity declining to the point where DAL space is available for another carrier, it is very likely that this case will just involve DL and it will be WN that will have to accommodate DL on part of the 2 ex-UA gates unless VX pulls down its schedule.
bob@las-AA
Veteran
Why would AA fly to DAL in the first place?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
