Scandalrag

The other problem with all these armchair airline business specialists complaints is the destination. United feels there is a market for 12 daily flights to IAH. If they need to make more flights, these flights need a destination. United has 1: IAH. Do they start flying to ORD or DEN or EWR? Wouldn't they already fly to those hubs if they thought DAL flights were warranted?

cmd320

I don't see ExpressJet on ATL-DFW at all. It's all mainline with a mix of S80s and 757s. I'm sure DL could use those 717s elsewhere to further accelerate removal of CRJs.

Tamino

According to today´s Dallas Morning News, Delta is being forced out of Love because Southwest is going to use one of UA´s 2 gates. Southwest now controls 16 of DALs 20 gates, UA has 2 and AA has 2 which will be transferred to Virgin Oct 13.

Apparently, DL has been leasing the AA gates being transferred to Virgin. Effectively, UA has nothing to do with DL leaving DAL.

MrMan

Not sure why the eye rolling. DAL was a hub for Braniff and flew daily 747 to HNL. Airforce 1 is a frequent patron. Not sure why it should be leveled. Add plenty of tax base to Dallas, Lots of wide bodies fly in for maintenance from all over world. Adds competition with more choices. And this from someone who lives 14 blocks from the end of the runway.

I suspect the City has a use it or loose it clasue in the gates.

MrMan

I take it you have not been there in the last year

readywhenyouare

I'm glad none of you are my coworkers. Apparently most of you approve of doing anything to get ahead no matter who you hurt along the way. One of my friends who is a navy officer had a roommate who disabled his alarm clock to try and make him miss a flight activity. He did to try and edge him out of a flight spot. Guess some of you have no problem with that sort of behavior.

UA is behaving no differently. They had ample time to notify DL but instead waited until two weeks before the new service was to start.

Phoenixtinct

DAL is quite a decent airport - I've only been there once - June 2013 but it's fairly small with the amount of gates it has to offer competing service on multiple airlines. Dallas is a huge metropolitan area, so it requires flights to various destinations.

Based on the restrictions, I think that Southwest should be given use of all available gates, however, that would mean that fares would skyrocket as it will be the only carrier serving the airport. Thus, a few token gates have been awarded to other carriers to create the illusion that there is competition out ot DAL.

DAL with the limited number of gates it has cannot accommodate AA, DL, UA and an extensive WN operation. With the Wright Amendment going away in a few weeks, WN is adding a lot of additional flights, so it further provides challenges for gate space.

If DL wanted to provide some type of service out of DAL - it should have fought hard to get the 2 gates it leases from AA. Unfortunately, they lost to VX. To play the blame game now that UA is supposed to accommodate DL because they don't have another alternative is ridiculous.

VX is moving its DFW flights to DAL, so it will free up gates at DFW for more DL flights. And if US consolidates to the AA terminals, even more gate space will open up for DL to add as many flights as it wants.

bmchris

It's also very convenient for those in the Park Cities area who fly private, including our ex-President. Addison is less convenient, let alone DFW and McKinney. I've heard that McKinney is better than DAL for those in Plano/Frisco, since traffic on the tollway can be unpredictable, and it's better to hop 121 to McKinney.

pbarnette

Because it competes with another airport nearby. Times have changed and the Wright Amendment has probably served the purpose of ensuring that DFW could thrive, but Love Field should have been torn down when DFW was built.

ClipperDelta

Delta didn't just waltz in now to serve DAL; they've been in the market since
at least 2008.
And you do realize don't you, that UA only publicly published its plans for DAL-IAH at 11-12x daily this week for loading into GDS this weekend, for a start in January 2015, even though DL is being evicted in October. UA and WN agreed to have WN sub-lease its gates between Oct and Jan (when the UA flights start) instead.
And up until now, UA has been serving DAL badly, severely underutilizing those two gates it inherited from CO, with only 6x daily flights between DAL and IAH. Even DL has been running 5x daily DAL-ATL already....From the linked article below:

".....United’s schedule shows 10 nonstops between Houston Intercontinental and Love Field beginning in early January. The current schedule through late December shows six or fewer flights per day.

“United has done a historically poor job of utilizing its gates,” council member Philip Kingston said. “United has provided the city with assurances the city has accepted that it will fully utilize the gates. We need to make sure we’re holding United to its assurances.”


http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/2...ve-field.html/

Beckles

How would 'tearing' down Love have not created scarcity and not been picking and choosing winners?

scottsam66

US has 90% of CLT flights

SCEflyer

You are really missing the point. Our's is a free market economy. These slots belong to UA and they can do whatever they choose with them, so long as it is not illegal.

pbarnette

Are you suggesting that there were or are capacity constraints at DFW? At worst, leveling Love would accelerate the building of terminal F by a couple of years. And DFW has the capacity to add another hundred gates.

I accept the role of the government in providing public goods, and I think an airport qualifies. But the history of Southwest at Love has been one of opposition to the goals of government (a successful international airport). They had to sue to stay there. They then spent the next quarter century trying to undo the plans of the democratically-elected governments of Dallas and Fort Worth. And they get rewarded with a monopoly at an airport that competes against a very real economic engine like DFW? Excuse me if I think they should have to pay for it.

If I'm wrong, and WN isn't receiving a de facto subsidy, then nobody will bid any appreciable amounts for the gates and nothing changes. The only potential loser in my proposal sure ain't the consumer or the city or the FAA.

FWIW, I think the same thing about how DL was able to buy a public asset (LGA slots) from someone other than the public.

readywhenyouare

I'm as pro free market economy as anyone (probably much more) but that doesn't mean ethics go out the window. UA could and should have given DL ample notice that they would pull the gate. What if your doctor knew you were terminally ill but didn't bother to tell you until two weeks before you were expected to die?