FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Oct 29, 2003
- 2,931
- 3,341
it is sure starting to look like itWorldTraveler said:
South West wants D.C. slots!
- Thread starter MCI transplant
- Start date
robbedagain
Veteran
would that be shakin rattlin and rollin type of shakin lol 
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
first, DL pulled down their HUB at DFW but still managed to retain the majority of the local market which they had at the time. DL's financial performance in the local market is stronger than it has ever been.LD3 said:
second, where does it say that any carrier is prohibited from refining its strategies and trying again in a market? should we write AA off in RDU, BNA, STL, and SJC because AA had hubs there and let other carriers take over the market? I've never said they should - because they shouldn't. AA is fighting for its presence particularly in RDU and they should.
third, no one has yet to answer the question as to why AA and WN want so hard to keep DL out of their largest markets and why both carriers have given up so much of the market to DL. If AA and WN were really as certain as they are about their ability to win in the marketplace, they wouldn't be working overtime to keep DL out. And let's not blame it on the DOT... the asset divestiture process was a negotiated process that AA and WN participated in.
fourth, AA still has enormous downside with all of the increased competition that will come into the market. If DL picked up service from DCA to a few unserved markets from DCA, they might have been content to take what they they can get and be happy. But they are now forced to fight to get anything - and there is no assurance they will. But no one has explained why DL should just roll over and accept a process that shuts them out.
When someone can explain those key points, perhaps we can get to some agreement here. But, it very much appears that DL is pushing behind the scenes and at the same time minimizing the possibility that the slots can be used this summer in any effective manner. If a carrier has to start a boatload of new service without the benefit of the heavy loads of the summer season, the chances of rapid success are much lower.
WT, I raised a simple fact that a certain issue has come up with Delta during the on going talks about the 2 gates at LF and you go into several other topics that had nothing to do with the issue I raised, and you wonder why people do not respond to you, pretty sure it is self explanatory and your not seeing or getting the idea. Now I will address one of your wishful thinking assumptions. You claim or insinuate that WN is afraid or wants to keep Delta out do to afraid of competition. That is 100% the exact opposite. SWA loves going into markets and lower fares and creating competition. In ALT SWA is revamping that airport to the likes of how they run most all their hubs and airports, once this is said and all done then you will see ALT grow, however, this will not be a focus for a few years until all is done with other "priority" cities and growth as well as international. ALT will be on the back burner for awhile. As far as the 2 gates at LF. It has nothing to do with trying to keep Delta out do to competition, and has everything to do with the fact that SW very badly needs those gates since there are restrictions on the number of gates at LF. Again, it has nothing to do with being afraid of DL. DL is the one that ran away from the DFW area and drastically reduced it's presence, not AA and certainly not SW...
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
the US airport system is limited. WN may very well need the gates but so do other airlines and so do consumers in order to provide viable competition. You have tried to make the same point over and over again as if it provides a valid reason for WN to have a monopoly at yet another airport.
And, yes, WN has run from competition with other carriers from the beginning. That is the whole reason why the whole fuss between DAL and DFW and AA and WN exists. WN didn't want to move to DFW and has fought for years to be able to control an airport where they had little to no competition instead of competing at DFW against other carriers, including AA.
With the exception of DEN, AA's largest focus markets are in cities where it has the dominant market position - and that is precisely why they have pulled down ATL. you can tell us how much WN will grow in ATL but the people of ATL have been underwhelmed by what WN has done for them.... cut flights, failed to lower prices. FL had lower fares than WN and that is born out by DOT data and was exactly what I predicted would happen based on WN's higher costs.
Further, as much as you want to believe that WN will grow ATL, they simply have too many markets they can fly from airports which they do dominate. With a CASM advantage that is in the single digits, they simply do not have the advantage to push on other carriers in their hubs like they once did - and DEN is proof that they can't resolve the 3 way standoff the way they thought they could when they went marching in there with their fuel hedge advantage.
US shut down WN's ambitions at PHL and simply proved to DL how easy it would be for DL to do the same thing at ATL.
WN will end up with the same 15% market share and an average fare disadvantage that FL has had in ATL and in most directly competitive other carrier hubs. WN simply doesn't have the product appeal and cost advantage to become a major force in any legacy airline hub.
You and anyone else can throw up DL's hub at DFW all day long but what DL pulled down wasn't the local market but rather the connecting hub. DL took the connecting capacity, moved it to NYC and ATL where DL strengthened its position relative to AA and FL and now WN respectively. DL's revenue performance at DFW since the hub pulldown has improved at a far faster rate than AA has. DL is obtaining revenue parity or premiums in the markets in which it competes with AA, something that did not exist at the time DL had a hub at DFW.
Now that AA is faced with an onslaught of new competition in N. Texas and likely at DFW as a result of the fall of the Wright Amendment and the asset divestitures from the merger, it will be even harder for AA to hold onto its share in N. Texas that it has had.
You can keep talking about DL selling tickets for flights on which you say they have no lease. You may be right but you've said the same thing for several weeks. If it were such a slam dunk, the case would be closed.
You, like WN during the entire time the WA has been an issue has been looking for one loophole after another to get an advantage. You can't seem to grasp that DL may not be as willing to roll over and give WN or any other carrier an advantage and that DL can use the same legal system that WN has used to its advantage for years. And the heart of the issue is that, unlike the slots at DCA and LGA, there is no basis for arguing that WN should be able to dominate an airport in the interests of consumers is really a goal. WN can't run into DCA and say how it is disadvantaged and then run back home to DAL and argue that it should get gates and DL should not when it is DL who is disadvantaged.
WN will fall by its own arguments.
And I also hear that DL is accelerating acceptance of the 717s from WN in part because of the RJ pilot shortage and in part to be able to use them to open up more and more routes like AUS-LAX where AA and WN are now the two largest carriers and where DL has had virtually no participation in the market.
DL knows what it has to do to win in the market and will use the resources it has, including the 717s which WN didn't want, in order for DL to achieve its strategic objectives.
And, yes, WN has run from competition with other carriers from the beginning. That is the whole reason why the whole fuss between DAL and DFW and AA and WN exists. WN didn't want to move to DFW and has fought for years to be able to control an airport where they had little to no competition instead of competing at DFW against other carriers, including AA.
With the exception of DEN, AA's largest focus markets are in cities where it has the dominant market position - and that is precisely why they have pulled down ATL. you can tell us how much WN will grow in ATL but the people of ATL have been underwhelmed by what WN has done for them.... cut flights, failed to lower prices. FL had lower fares than WN and that is born out by DOT data and was exactly what I predicted would happen based on WN's higher costs.
Further, as much as you want to believe that WN will grow ATL, they simply have too many markets they can fly from airports which they do dominate. With a CASM advantage that is in the single digits, they simply do not have the advantage to push on other carriers in their hubs like they once did - and DEN is proof that they can't resolve the 3 way standoff the way they thought they could when they went marching in there with their fuel hedge advantage.
US shut down WN's ambitions at PHL and simply proved to DL how easy it would be for DL to do the same thing at ATL.
WN will end up with the same 15% market share and an average fare disadvantage that FL has had in ATL and in most directly competitive other carrier hubs. WN simply doesn't have the product appeal and cost advantage to become a major force in any legacy airline hub.
You and anyone else can throw up DL's hub at DFW all day long but what DL pulled down wasn't the local market but rather the connecting hub. DL took the connecting capacity, moved it to NYC and ATL where DL strengthened its position relative to AA and FL and now WN respectively. DL's revenue performance at DFW since the hub pulldown has improved at a far faster rate than AA has. DL is obtaining revenue parity or premiums in the markets in which it competes with AA, something that did not exist at the time DL had a hub at DFW.
Now that AA is faced with an onslaught of new competition in N. Texas and likely at DFW as a result of the fall of the Wright Amendment and the asset divestitures from the merger, it will be even harder for AA to hold onto its share in N. Texas that it has had.
You can keep talking about DL selling tickets for flights on which you say they have no lease. You may be right but you've said the same thing for several weeks. If it were such a slam dunk, the case would be closed.
You, like WN during the entire time the WA has been an issue has been looking for one loophole after another to get an advantage. You can't seem to grasp that DL may not be as willing to roll over and give WN or any other carrier an advantage and that DL can use the same legal system that WN has used to its advantage for years. And the heart of the issue is that, unlike the slots at DCA and LGA, there is no basis for arguing that WN should be able to dominate an airport in the interests of consumers is really a goal. WN can't run into DCA and say how it is disadvantaged and then run back home to DAL and argue that it should get gates and DL should not when it is DL who is disadvantaged.
WN will fall by its own arguments.
And I also hear that DL is accelerating acceptance of the 717s from WN in part because of the RJ pilot shortage and in part to be able to use them to open up more and more routes like AUS-LAX where AA and WN are now the two largest carriers and where DL has had virtually no participation in the market.
DL knows what it has to do to win in the market and will use the resources it has, including the 717s which WN didn't want, in order for DL to achieve its strategic objectives.
