Wright Amendment proposal -- good for Flower Mound?
While I was away a few weeks ago, there were a few headlines on a compromise for the Wright Amendment. That compromise (info here) won support of the cities of Dallas, Fort Worth, and both American Airlines and Southwest Airlines.
It's no sure thing Congress will sign off on this pact, and already, other airlines are voicing objections.
Here's my question for you:
Would this new Wright Amendment compromise be good for Flower Mound? Discuss. I'll pop in with my answer in a few days.
posted by Chip Mahaney @ 12:03 AM
1 comments
1 Comments:
I hope congress immediately repeals the whole thing. I don't think that will happen with so many members of congress from Texas seemingly in support of this compromise.
Overall, I think this will be a marginal benefit to Flower Mound and all air travelers in the area.
The compromise itself is disappointing. 8 years is a long time to leave these rules in place. It does allow for a stable business plan for both airlines and airports. Then again, a complete repeal immediately would do the same thing.
The immediate through ticketing is the best news out of the whole deal, and even that is only marginal. Yeah, I'll be able to fly to New York on Southwest. But I'll probably have to stop in St. Louis to do it. It still should cut air fares quite a bit though.
The one thing I'm on the fence about is the number of gates at Love. The way this deal is structured means that Southwest will pretty much be assured of a permanent monopoly at Love. American and Continental will provide only token competition. All other airlines will be shut out and the beautiful gates that Legend built in 1999 will be torn down. What a waste.
On the other hand, I'm not sure Love could handle all the traffic if they allowed 32 gates at the airport without Wright Amendment flight restrictions.
At the end of the day, if the restrictions are repealed and competition is increased, it will cut air fares. That's really all I care about. I'd just rather see it all happen now, not part now and part later.
Post a Comment
<< Home