FA's promoting end of Wright Amendmant
Aug 21, 2005, 12:12 pm
#16
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Nashville, TN USA
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by JS
Well, it beats "I am here for your safety ONLY" any day. 
Aug 22, 2005, 3:30 pm
#18
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 235
AA and the DFW Airport Board have given a pile of cash and benefits to a whole host of local politicians, so they've pretty much got things "wired," notwithstanding overwhelming public sentiment for repeal. (Just to be sure, AA is encouraging uniformed FAs to pack constituent meetings for Reps. Marchant and Burgess planned for later this month, even if the FAs aren't actually constituents.)
The only way WN is going to be able to get moronic law repealed is to galvanize public support. In contrast, AA doesn't really need to do anything except to keep up the "care and feeding" of a handful of local politicians. It's also would be tough for AA to come up with a catchy in-flight campaign; "Save our monopoly!" "Let the gouging of DFW travelers continue!" or "Protect politically wired airport contractors!" don't really pack the same kind of punch.
Aug 22, 2005, 3:40 pm
#19
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: AA PLT; UA Gold
Posts: 5,378
Originally Posted by PT737SWA
The repeal effort is just getting under way. Wait and see. 
Aug 22, 2005, 5:19 pm
#20
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas
Programs: AA PLT/5MM; AS MVP GLD 75K; DL DM; EK SLV; HHonors DIAM; Marriott GLD
Posts: 4,092
Originally Posted by GoBears99
HKG---you asked me to identify some of your anti-AA venom/vitriol, and this is it. I mean come on, do you believe for a minute that WN is not also encouraging people to pack constituent meetings for local elected officials?
This isn't vitriol. Here's what Rob Steiner had to say in a recent communication to AA employees:
Here's how you can help support AA's position to keep the Wright Amendment. During the month of August, Congressmen Burgess and Marchant will be holding constituent meetings. Please pick a meeting place convenient to you from the list on the Flight Service website and plan to attend. All you need to do is say thanks to the Congressmen for supporting DFW Airport and American Airlines. If possible, please wear your AA uniform or other AA paraphernalia. These meetings are open to all employees regardless of base, so if you're in or near the DFW area please try to attend on of these important events.
I don't know whether Southwest is encouraging employees to pack constituent meetings even if they aren't constituents, but nothing of the sort has come to my attention. If it did, I wouldn't approve... I don't think it's appropriate. General meetings, yes. Constituent meetings should be for constituents.
Aug 22, 2005, 5:57 pm
#21
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: GSP (Greenville, SC)
Programs: DL Gold Medallion; UA Premier Executive; WN sub-CP; AA sub-Gold
Posts: 13,393
You wouldn't approve of Southwest employees lobbying members of Congress outside their own district. Having read a few of your thousands of posts blaming AA (on whom you don't mind flying 
) for everything under the sun, I seriously doubt that.
) for everything under the sun, I seriously doubt that.
Aug 22, 2005, 6:41 pm
#22
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas
Programs: AA PLT/5MM; AS MVP GLD 75K; DL DM; EK SLV; HHonors DIAM; Marriott GLD
Posts: 4,092
Originally Posted by JS
You wouldn't approve of Southwest employees lobbying members of Congress outside their own district.:
What part of my post did you not understand? I said that I wouldn't approve of Southwest employees attending constituent meetings outside their district. I also said I thought it would be fine for them to attend "general meetings," in other words, meetings open to the general public.
Originally Posted by JS
Having read a few of your thousands of posts blaming AA (on whom you don't mind flying ) for everything under the sun, I seriously doubt that.
) for everything under the sun, I seriously doubt that. Care to be more specific? I believe the Wright Amendment is highly protectionist, anti-consumer, corporate welfare which now serves primarily to benefit American Airlines and a handful of contractors associated with DFW Airport at the expense of nearly everyone else.
AA does a lot of things well. In this situation, they are behaving rationally, doing everything they can to preserve a cozy monopoly. Why wouldn't they?
That doesn't mean I have to develop a pathological hatred towards them. I do, however, feel compelled to correct falsehoods and distortions of the truth. To the extent I'm paying several thousand dollars more per year in air fares than I otherwise would under a free market system, I'm highly motivated to get the law changed. I'm acting in my rational best interest as well.
Where's the confusion?
AA does a lot of things well. In this situation, they are behaving rationally, doing everything they can to preserve a cozy monopoly. Why wouldn't they?
That doesn't mean I have to develop a pathological hatred towards them. I do, however, feel compelled to correct falsehoods and distortions of the truth. To the extent I'm paying several thousand dollars more per year in air fares than I otherwise would under a free market system, I'm highly motivated to get the law changed. I'm acting in my rational best interest as well.
Where's the confusion?
Aug 22, 2005, 8:04 pm
#23
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 235
What part of my post did you not understand? I said that I wouldn't approve of Southwest employees attending constituent meetings outside their district. I also said I thought it would be fine for them to attend "general meetings," in other words, meetings open to the general public.
Care to be more specific? I believe the Wright Amendment is highly protectionist, anti-consumer, corporate welfare which now serves primarily to benefit American Airlines and a handful of contractors associated with DFW Airport at the expense of nearly everyone else.
AA does a lot of things well. In this situation, they are behaving rationally, doing everything they can to preserve a cozy monopoly. Why wouldn't they?
That doesn't mean I have to develop a pathological hatred towards them. I do, however, feel compelled to correct falsehoods and distortions of the truth. To the extent I'm paying several thousand dollars more per year in air fares than I otherwise would under a free market system, I'm highly motivated to get the law changed. I'm acting in my rational best interest as well.
Aug 22, 2005, 8:15 pm
#24
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 6,359
Originally Posted by GoBears99
Name something you think AA does well, because you haven't named one in any of the posts I've read.
Aug 22, 2005, 8:58 pm
#25
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: GSP (Greenville, SC)
Programs: DL Gold Medallion; UA Premier Executive; WN sub-CP; AA sub-Gold
Posts: 13,393
Flying exclusively AA on Southwest-matching fares...
That type of consumer behavior is precisely what has given AA the ammunition to fight off would-be competitors at their DFW hub. For example, Vanguard offers discount flights to MCI, AA drops their fare to match Vanguard's, and everyone flies AA on the Vanguard-matching fare. Then Vanguard pulls out due to lack of customers, AA jacks the fare back to its original level, and everyone wonders why the competition left, and why don't more competitors throw away millions of dollars trying to do the same thing.
Criminy, even the 800 pound gorilla, Southwest Airlines, won't fly out of DFW to compete with AA. Maybe if people put their money where their mouths are, competition would be a lot more effective.
That type of consumer behavior is precisely what has given AA the ammunition to fight off would-be competitors at their DFW hub. For example, Vanguard offers discount flights to MCI, AA drops their fare to match Vanguard's, and everyone flies AA on the Vanguard-matching fare. Then Vanguard pulls out due to lack of customers, AA jacks the fare back to its original level, and everyone wonders why the competition left, and why don't more competitors throw away millions of dollars trying to do the same thing.
Criminy, even the 800 pound gorilla, Southwest Airlines, won't fly out of DFW to compete with AA. Maybe if people put their money where their mouths are, competition would be a lot more effective.
Aug 22, 2005, 10:00 pm
#26
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by JS
Flying exclusively AA on Southwest-matching fares...
That type of consumer behavior is precisely what has given AA the ammunition to fight off would-be competitors at their DFW hub. For example, Vanguard offers discount flights to MCI, AA drops their fare to match Vanguard's, and everyone flies AA on the Vanguard-matching fare. Then Vanguard pulls out due to lack of customers, AA jacks the fare back to its original level, and everyone wonders why the competition left, and why don't more competitors throw away millions of dollars trying to do the same thing.
Criminy, even the 800 pound gorilla, Southwest Airlines, won't fly out of DFW to compete with AA. Maybe if people put their money where their mouths are, competition would be a lot more effective.
That type of consumer behavior is precisely what has given AA the ammunition to fight off would-be competitors at their DFW hub. For example, Vanguard offers discount flights to MCI, AA drops their fare to match Vanguard's, and everyone flies AA on the Vanguard-matching fare. Then Vanguard pulls out due to lack of customers, AA jacks the fare back to its original level, and everyone wonders why the competition left, and why don't more competitors throw away millions of dollars trying to do the same thing.
Criminy, even the 800 pound gorilla, Southwest Airlines, won't fly out of DFW to compete with AA. Maybe if people put their money where their mouths are, competition would be a lot more effective.
Vanguard undercuts AA's fares
AA forced to match Vanguard to avoid loss of share
Lower fares increase demand, forcing AA to add flights
Consumers choose AA over Vanguard, Vanguard fails
AA returns fares/output to its previous pre-entry equilibrium
It's not AA that drove prices down here, it's Vanguard. Vanguard was simply a poorly run airline.
In contrast, WN is an extraordinarily well run airline, with more capital and lower costs than AA. WN was able to take on and demolish US in PHL. WN was able to largely drive AA and UA out of the intra-CA market. If you don't think WN could take on AA at DFW, you're nuts.
Aug 23, 2005, 4:14 am
#27
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: Globalist, Marriott Plat, various sundry
Posts: 984
Originally Posted by GoBears99
It's not AA that drove prices down here, it's Vanguard. Vanguard was simply a poorly run airline.
In contrast, WN is an extraordinarily well run airline, with more capital and lower costs than AA. WN was able to take on and demolish US in PHL. WN was able to largely drive AA and UA out of the intra-CA market. If you don't think WN could take on AA at DFW, you're nuts.
There are other possible events that could occur, like an airline bunching up traffic, for example, that makes competing in another airline's hub very difficult.
PS - I'm curious on your sources of WN "harassing" Joe Barton and others.
Aug 23, 2005, 7:37 am
#28
Join Date: Aug 2004
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards
Posts: 134
Originally Posted by gmax58
PS - I'm curious on your sources of WN "harassing" Joe Barton and others.
Aug 23, 2005, 8:09 am
#29
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas
Programs: AA PLT/5MM; AS MVP GLD 75K; DL DM; EK SLV; HHonors DIAM; Marriott GLD
Posts: 4,092
Originally Posted by GoBears99
Maybe Vanguard was undercapitalized and expanded too quickly. Another way to look at it is this:
Vanguard undercuts AA's fares
AA forced to match Vanguard to avoid loss of share
Lower fares increase demand, forcing AA to add flights
Consumers choose AA over Vanguard, Vanguard fails
AA returns fares/output to its previous pre-entry equilibrium
It's not AA that drove prices down here, it's Vanguard. Vanguard was simply a poorly run airline.
In contrast, WN is an extraordinarily well run airline, with more capital and lower costs than AA. WN was able to take on and demolish US in PHL. WN was able to largely drive AA and UA out of the intra-CA market. If you don't think WN could take on AA at DFW, you're nuts.
Vanguard undercuts AA's fares
AA forced to match Vanguard to avoid loss of share
Lower fares increase demand, forcing AA to add flights
Consumers choose AA over Vanguard, Vanguard fails
AA returns fares/output to its previous pre-entry equilibrium
It's not AA that drove prices down here, it's Vanguard. Vanguard was simply a poorly run airline.
In contrast, WN is an extraordinarily well run airline, with more capital and lower costs than AA. WN was able to take on and demolish US in PHL. WN was able to largely drive AA and UA out of the intra-CA market. If you don't think WN could take on AA at DFW, you're nuts.
The U.S. Department of Justice had a slightly different take on the Vanguard situation at DFW:
American’s actions on the Wichita-DFW route are illustrative. In February 1994, American announced that it would terminate its jet service between Wichita and DFW and serve the route only with turboprops -- explaining that it was making the change because it had been “losing money” on the route. Dave Higdon, Wichita Air Service Called Healthier, WICHITA EAGLE, Feb. 12, 1994, at B7; see Dave Higdon, Seeking Jets for Wichita; Officials May Put Up Money to Replace Turboprop Service, WICHITA EAGLE, Feb. 6, 1995, at 1D. American then told the Wichita Airport Authority that it would maintain three jet flights only if the Authority provided a subsidy guarantee to American. In the fall of 1996, Vanguard, which had introduced jet service between Wichita and DFW in April of 1995, announced an expansion of its service at DFW. American quickly responded by beginning five daily jet flights (expanding its seating capacity by 35%) between Wichita and DFW -- two more jet flights than it had been willing to put in even with the subsidy. American’s costs of adding that capacity exceeded its revenues. In December 1996, Vanguard announced that it was leaving Wichita. Shortly thereafter, American decreased seating capacity by 30% and its average fares increased from approximately $60 to over $90, an increase of more than 50%.
Summary
American’s actions on the Wichita-DFW route are illustrative. In February 1994, American announced that it would terminate its jet service between Wichita and DFW and serve the route only with turboprops -- explaining that it was making the change because it had been “losing money” on the route. Dave Higdon, Wichita Air Service Called Healthier, WICHITA EAGLE, Feb. 12, 1994, at B7; see Dave Higdon, Seeking Jets for Wichita; Officials May Put Up Money to Replace Turboprop Service, WICHITA EAGLE, Feb. 6, 1995, at 1D. American then told the Wichita Airport Authority that it would maintain three jet flights only if the Authority provided a subsidy guarantee to American. In the fall of 1996, Vanguard, which had introduced jet service between Wichita and DFW in April of 1995, announced an expansion of its service at DFW. American quickly responded by beginning five daily jet flights (expanding its seating capacity by 35%) between Wichita and DFW -- two more jet flights than it had been willing to put in even with the subsidy. American’s costs of adding that capacity exceeded its revenues. In December 1996, Vanguard announced that it was leaving Wichita. Shortly thereafter, American decreased seating capacity by 30% and its average fares increased from approximately $60 to over $90, an increase of more than 50%.
Detailed Complaint
1. Vanguard Airlines (“Vanguard”), which began operations in late 1994, commenced nonstop service from DFW to Kansas City with three daily round trips in January 1995. At the time, American operated eight round trips, carrying 65% of the passengers in the market at an average one-way fare of $108. Delta offered six round trips. In response to Vanguard’s entry, American matched Vanguard’s fares on all of its DFW-Kansas City flights, reducing its average one-way fare to $80 by April 1995, at which time Vanguard cut back its service to one round trip. Delta withdrew all of its service in May 1995. From May to July 1995, American added six more round trips. American’s documents indicate that it intended its additional flights "to drive [Vanguard] from the market.”
2. In December 1995, Vanguard withdrew its remaining nonstop DFW-Kansas City service. American immediately began reducing its service, going from 14 to 11 daily round trips in February and to 10 by July, and increasing its fares. During the ensuing six months, American’s average one-way fare ranged from $112 to $147, as much as 80% higher than in the prior year when Vanguard was providing nonstop service.
3. After Vanguard’s ceased its nonstop service, American made substantial profits on the DFW-Kansas City route. Indeed, according to American’s documents the route went from being one of American’s “worst performer[s]” when American added flights in response to Vanguard to being the “best in the west” after Vanguard withdrew its nonstop service.
4. In September 1996, Vanguard announced that it would expand its DFW operations on October 1 by introducing nonstop service between DFW and Kansas City, Cincinnati, and Phoenix. Vanguard’s announced service represented a significant expansion of its DFW operations, with new nonstop service to three cities (Kansas City, Phoenix, and Cincinnati), continued nonstop service to Wichita (which Vanguard had inaugurated in 1995), and potential connecting service via Kansas City to eight cities (Chicago, Minneapolis, Des Moines, Denver, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Seattle, and Los Angeles).
5. Within days of Vanguard’s announcements, American planned the following schedule changes and service additions:
7. Vanguard quickly abandoned its plans, pulling out of DFW-Cincinnati and DFW-Phoenix in November 1996. In DFW-Kansas City, Vanguard reduced its service to a single daily nonstop flight in one direction, with a single daily one-stop flight in the opposite direction. Vanguard exited DFW-Wichita in December 1996.
8. After Vanguard announced that it would be exiting the three DFW spoke routes, American promptly increased its fares on those routes. By June 1997, American’s seating capacity in DFW-Wichita had decreased by 30%, returning to the level American had maintained before it learned of Vanguard’s planned DFW expansion, and its average local one-way fare had increased by more than 50 percent, to over $90 from approximately $60. In DFW-Phoenix, American’s average fares, which had fallen by roughly 30% during Vanguard’s brief appearance in the market, increased quickly to pre-existing levels after Vanguard exited. American’s fares in Cincinnati rose by 60%-80% after its first month of operation.
9. Unable to sustain its proposed DFW operations, Vanguard subsequently pulled back to Kansas City, where it began to establish a mini-hub. Today, Vanguard serves DFW only from its Kansas City hub; it no longer provides nonstop service on any other DFW city pair.
As a postscript, Vanguard Airlines ultimately filed bankruptcy and no longer serves DFW.2. In December 1995, Vanguard withdrew its remaining nonstop DFW-Kansas City service. American immediately began reducing its service, going from 14 to 11 daily round trips in February and to 10 by July, and increasing its fares. During the ensuing six months, American’s average one-way fare ranged from $112 to $147, as much as 80% higher than in the prior year when Vanguard was providing nonstop service.
3. After Vanguard’s ceased its nonstop service, American made substantial profits on the DFW-Kansas City route. Indeed, according to American’s documents the route went from being one of American’s “worst performer[s]” when American added flights in response to Vanguard to being the “best in the west” after Vanguard withdrew its nonstop service.
4. In September 1996, Vanguard announced that it would expand its DFW operations on October 1 by introducing nonstop service between DFW and Kansas City, Cincinnati, and Phoenix. Vanguard’s announced service represented a significant expansion of its DFW operations, with new nonstop service to three cities (Kansas City, Phoenix, and Cincinnati), continued nonstop service to Wichita (which Vanguard had inaugurated in 1995), and potential connecting service via Kansas City to eight cities (Chicago, Minneapolis, Des Moines, Denver, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Seattle, and Los Angeles).
5. Within days of Vanguard’s announcements, American planned the following schedule changes and service additions:
a.In DFW-Kansas City, American would add two new round trips as of October 1 (advancing the commencement date of two round trips that had already been scheduled for November in order to undercut the viability of Vanguard’s one-stop DFW-Kansas City service via Wichita) and a third as of November 1, for a total of 13 round trips in the market.
b.In DFW-Wichita, where American had operated nine round trips with small commuter aircraft, American would substitute five new jet round trips for four of its commuter flights -- the largest introduction of jet service by American in any market since at least 1994, increasing its seating capacity on the route by 35%.
c.In DFW-Cincinnati, a route American had abandoned as unprofitable in 1994, American would begin nonstop service on December 1, with three round trips.
d.In DFW-Phoenix, American would accelerate the addition of two planned seasonal frequency increases, from November 1 and November 27 to October 1.
6. In addition to carrying out this plan, American also matched Vanguard’s fares on selected flights in DFW markets (DFW-Chicago and DFW-Des Moines) that Vanguard served only on a connecting basis, even though American’s service was nonstop. The flights on which American offered the matching fares operated at times that “bracketed” the flight times of the Vanguard connecting flights.b.In DFW-Wichita, where American had operated nine round trips with small commuter aircraft, American would substitute five new jet round trips for four of its commuter flights -- the largest introduction of jet service by American in any market since at least 1994, increasing its seating capacity on the route by 35%.
c.In DFW-Cincinnati, a route American had abandoned as unprofitable in 1994, American would begin nonstop service on December 1, with three round trips.
d.In DFW-Phoenix, American would accelerate the addition of two planned seasonal frequency increases, from November 1 and November 27 to October 1.
7. Vanguard quickly abandoned its plans, pulling out of DFW-Cincinnati and DFW-Phoenix in November 1996. In DFW-Kansas City, Vanguard reduced its service to a single daily nonstop flight in one direction, with a single daily one-stop flight in the opposite direction. Vanguard exited DFW-Wichita in December 1996.
8. After Vanguard announced that it would be exiting the three DFW spoke routes, American promptly increased its fares on those routes. By June 1997, American’s seating capacity in DFW-Wichita had decreased by 30%, returning to the level American had maintained before it learned of Vanguard’s planned DFW expansion, and its average local one-way fare had increased by more than 50 percent, to over $90 from approximately $60. In DFW-Phoenix, American’s average fares, which had fallen by roughly 30% during Vanguard’s brief appearance in the market, increased quickly to pre-existing levels after Vanguard exited. American’s fares in Cincinnati rose by 60%-80% after its first month of operation.
9. Unable to sustain its proposed DFW operations, Vanguard subsequently pulled back to Kansas City, where it began to establish a mini-hub. Today, Vanguard serves DFW only from its Kansas City hub; it no longer provides nonstop service on any other DFW city pair.
Last edited by HKG_Flyer1; Aug 23, 2005 at 8:15 am
Aug 23, 2005, 8:16 am
#30
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: GSP (Greenville, SC)
Programs: DL Gold Medallion; UA Premier Executive; WN sub-CP; AA sub-Gold
Posts: 13,393
Originally Posted by HKG_Flyer1
[indent]The U.S. Department of Justice had a slightly different take on the Vanguard situation at DFW:
1. Vanguard Airlines (“Vanguard”), which began operations in late 1994, commenced nonstop service from DFW to Kansas City with three daily round trips in January 1995. At the time, American operated eight round trips, carrying 65% of the passengers in the market at an average one-way fare of $108. Delta offered six round trips. In response to Vanguard’s entry, American matched Vanguard’s fares on all of its DFW-Kansas City flights, reducing its average one-way fare to $80 by April 1995, at which time Vanguard cut back its service to one round trip. Delta withdrew all of its service in May 1995. From May to July 1995, American added six more round trips. American’s documents indicate that it intended its additional flights "to drive [Vanguard] from the market.”
blah blah blah
blah blah blah