Thursday, February 09, 2006
I do not think those words mean what you think they mean.
The Wright Amendment, an odious remnant of the era before airline deregulation, has been under considerable fire for some time now (see previous blog entry here).
Now, Senators Cornyn and Hutchinson are asking DFW and Love field to
Figure out a solution that is acceptable to the region, or Congress might overturn the Wright amendment in a fashion that could be distasteful to almost everyone.Huh? "Distasteful to almost everyone?"
Maybe -- if by the term "everyone", you mean "Everyone except members of the flying public who currently pay far more to fly out of the DFW area than any other comparable metropolitan area in the country."
What is the worst that could happen?" Last year, Congress expanded the Wright Amendment's reach to include Missouri. The result? Passengers flying from DFW to Missouri airports in Kansas City and St. Louis saved hundreds of dollars.
In fact the disparity between American Airlines' inflated rates out of DFW and Southwest's lower fares is such that the addition of Missouri to the list of "approved" states under the Wright Amendment is such that many travelers between Omaha, Nebraska and DFW find it much cheaper to drive an extra 180 miles from Omaha's Eppley field to Kansas City's airport and hop on a Southwest flight to Love field.
Why would anyone do this? Simple:
Airfare for a nonstop round trip to Dallas from Kansas City is running about one-fourth or less of the cost of flying nonstop from Omaha to Dallas. In one example, the difference was more than $450. The disparity is greater for some trips, such as those returning the same day as departing.Some examples:
The first scenario: An overnight trip reserved seven days ahead, with travel any time in the morning and evening. The best Internet fare was $128 from K.C. and $584 from Omaha.Okay, so flying out of KC makes more sense economically. It can also hurt Eppley's business.
Scenario 2: Overnight, reserved seven days in advance, with both the departure and the return flight booked during rush hours. The best fare was $156 from K.C. and nearly $1,200 from Omaha. A World-Herald check found a fare of $644 from Omaha.
Scenario 3: Booking one-day in advance with departure and return on the same day, the best fares were $184 from K.C. and $704 from Omaha.
Don Smithey, executive director of the Omaha Airport Authority, said that over a year, the difference could add up to at least $18 million more in air fare to fly from Omaha, if the same number of passengers continued to fly from Omaha to Dallas on American.And why is there such a disparity?
American Airlines spokesman Tim Smith said the low fares are due to competition.Tim and Stan are both right. Competition benefits the consumer. Kansas City passengers are enjoying the benefits of competition. American Airlines wants to make sure that those benefits are not expanded to any other markets, because, absent competition, American Airlines and DFW can fatten themselves on the pocketbooks of passengers who have no alternatives available.
"This is perhaps no solace," he said, "but there is perhaps no other market in the country right now that is going through the extreme competition of the DFW-to-Kansas City market."
Stan Kathol, finance and administration director of the Omaha Airport Authority, said American's Omaha fares display a lack of competition.
"When they lack competition, they charge whatever the market will bear," he said.
Of course, given that the lowered fares in KC Given has probably taken business away from Eppley, Nebraska congressmen are now seeking another expansion of the Wright Amendment. ""The repeal of the Wright Amendment could provide better fares and air travel opportunities for Nebraskans," [Rep. Lee Terry, R-NE, said]. "Recent analysis shows this antiquated law is hindering economic competition and not providing Nebraskans with the best travel options.
And once Nebraska has it's exemption, South Dakota will certainly want one, too. After all, Sioux City is about as far from Omaha as Omaha is from Kansas City.
The real answer, of course, is to give the public what they want, and what worked so well in the past: deregulation. The Wright Amendment needs to go away.
Some say that eliminating the Wright Amendment would kill DFW International Airport and/or American Airlines. Nonsense. What it would do is force DFW and American to engage and compete in the marketplace, just like every other company and organization. I am supremely confident that both American and DFW will not only survive Wright's demise, but thrive.
Comments:
<< Home
Hear Hear!!
I didn't realize you were so close to me. I'm in Las Colinas (Irving).
I used to work for American back in the days of Crandall the idiot. We constantly heard about the supportive culture at Southwest. They were actually nice to their employees.
I didn't realize you were so close to me. I'm in Las Colinas (Irving).
I used to work for American back in the days of Crandall the idiot. We constantly heard about the supportive culture at Southwest. They were actually nice to their employees.
The opening line to this blog is very interesting. Just the same kind of wording hit me in 1997 when I was doing my dissertation.
Lord Woolf: "Litigation will be avoided whenever possible" in a report entitled "Access to Justice". Ironic if you don't litigate you don't access justice.
What he meant was the "opposite" - "Access FROM Justice".
It wasn't a "reduction in litigation", it was an "avoidance of justice".
My blogspot should be interesting reading for you concerning high profile judicial corruption in the UK and an academic cover up which may potentially impact in Europe - 24 out of 25 Member States are processing the Directive on Mediation - Denmark have abstained (probably because they are more intelligent than others or may be they got my research earlier!). The Directive contains the same fundamental flaw as the Woolf Report.
Anticipating you are interested in some Jurisprudence and politics.
Regards.
Lesley
Lord Woolf: "Litigation will be avoided whenever possible" in a report entitled "Access to Justice". Ironic if you don't litigate you don't access justice.
What he meant was the "opposite" - "Access FROM Justice".
It wasn't a "reduction in litigation", it was an "avoidance of justice".
My blogspot should be interesting reading for you concerning high profile judicial corruption in the UK and an academic cover up which may potentially impact in Europe - 24 out of 25 Member States are processing the Directive on Mediation - Denmark have abstained (probably because they are more intelligent than others or may be they got my research earlier!). The Directive contains the same fundamental flaw as the Woolf Report.
Anticipating you are interested in some Jurisprudence and politics.
Regards.
Lesley
I love your blog. This is a cool site and I wanted to post a little note to tell you, good job! Best wishes!!!
what is mediation omaha
Post a Comment
what is mediation omaha
<< Home