How the Southwest merger could affect Tulsa

[dbacks fan]

 Check out Allegiant Airlines out of NWA for some great deals.   Its a short drive and can save you a ton of money.   It cost about $250 for two of us to fly round trip, non stop flights, to Orlando/Sanford.  

I actually did since I am about 6 miles from Williams/Gateway (the former Williams AFB) and found that if I flew from Williams to Springfield/NW Arkansas/Wichita KS, as opposed to Tulsa on Southwest, including a rental car from Alamo, the savings was only $20 to $30 for flying in before Thanksgiving. And actually I can only get a flight and a car if I fly into Wichita or Springfield. If I fly into NW Arkansas, XNA, there is no car rental availlable. Also with Allegiant, if you are not at the gate more than one hour before departure, your ticket is void, and there is no refund, and no exchange. You purchase and fly at the appointed times, and arrive at their tmes or your purchase is void.

[Conan71]

The Wright Amendment, which is being phased out anyway, only applies to flights to/from DAL.

It affects flights originating in the four neighboring states to Texas going to DAL or going to neighboring states out of KDAL which we know is the base for Southwest.  Though I'm rather confused after further reading what has and has not been affected as of the 2006 compromise in repealing the Wright Amendment.  My understanding is, we would still be about 3+ years away from a shot at direct flights to AUS or SAT if they are even economically feasible for SWA.   

[Oil Capital]

It affects flights originating in the four neighboring states to Texas going to DAL or going to neighboring states out of KDAL which we know is the base for Southwest.  Though I'm rather confused after further reading what has and has not been affected as of the 2006 compromise in repealing the Wright Amendment.  My understanding is, we would still be about 3+ years away from a shot at direct flights to AUS or SAT if they are even economically feasible for SWA.   

The Wright Amendment does not now and has never restricted nonstop flights between Tulsa and AUS or SAT or anywhere else other than DAL.

[inteller]

Expressjet had direct flights to Ausin and San Antonio from Tulsa during their brief existence.  The Austin-Tulsa route was the least viable out of all their legs according to the guy who set up their Tulsa operations.

The San Diego-Tulsa direct flight via ExpressJet had to have been the most enjoyable flights I've ever been on.  That was on an ERJ, so taking 737s to LA is no big deal.

[nathanm]

It affects flights originating in the four neighboring states to Texas going to DAL or going to neighboring states out of KDAL which we know is the base for Southwest.  Though I'm rather confused after further reading what has and has not been affected as of the 2006 compromise in repealing the Wright Amendment.  My understanding is, we would still be about 3+ years away from a shot at direct flights to AUS or SAT if they are even economically feasible for SWA.   

There's nothing stopping Southwest or anyone else flying TUL-AUS or TUL-SAT nonstop today, or at any time in the past 30 years. They just can't do TUL-DAL-AUS or TUL-DAL-SAT. Also, there is no restriction on flights using aircraft with 56 seats or less. Legend was doing all-business service DAL-JFK for a while. American, of course, reconfigured a few of their own aircraft to 56 seats and launched a competing service to drive Legend out of business.

The changes to the Wright Amendment, when they fully take effect, amount to a strict limitation on gate space at DAL in exchange for unrestricted flights. Everybody gets what they have now, leaving Southwest with all but four gates there. I'm not sure that's a whole lot better for Dallas, even if it is better for Southwest's customers.

[Conan71]

That's funny Nate, in the past few years I've flown Tul-Dal-Aus and Tul-Dal-Sat and round trip legs. Am I on acid or is there a possibility you are flat donkey wrong?

[nathanm]

That's funny Nate, in the past few years I've flown Tul-Dal-Aus and Tul-Dal-Sat and round trip legs. Am I on acid or is there a possibility you are flat donkey wrong?

Late evening posted, so had a brain fart. I meant TUL-DAL-BHM or TUL-DAL-ABQ (pre-2006) or TUL-DAL-SAN sort of flights. We're in the Wright Amendment area, so through ticketing is allowed to other points within the Wright Amendment area. You couldn't fly MCI-DAL-SAT on a single ticket, since Missouri was, until 2006, not in the Wright Amendment area.

My main point was that nothing has ever been stopping Southwest from flying from Tulsa to anywhere they please anyway.

[SXSW]

Expressjet had direct flights to Ausin and San Antonio from Tulsa during their brief existence.  The Austin-Tulsa route was the least viable out of all their legs according to the guy who set up their Tulsa operations.

The San Diego-Tulsa direct flight via ExpressJet had to have been the most enjoyable flights I've ever been on.  That was on an ERJ, so taking 737s to LA is no big deal.

That's interesting.  You would think there would be more demand to fly to all of the big Texas cities (Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Austin) from both Tulsa and OKC due to shared commerce and especially family connections.  I am going to Austin to visit family soon and will just drive the 7 hours instead of flying and stopping in Dallas or Houston.  A non-stop would be an easy hour and 10 min. flight.

[Conan71]

That's interesting.  You would think there would be more demand to fly to all of the big Texas cities (Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Austin) from both Tulsa and OKC due to shared commerce and especially family connections.  I am going to Austin to visit family soon and will just drive the 7 hours instead of flying and stopping in Dallas or Houston.  A non-stop would be an easy hour and 10 min. flight.

If adequate demand existed, someone would be flying those routes. 

[tulsa1603]

Expressjet had direct flights to Ausin and San Antonio from Tulsa during their brief existence.  The Austin-Tulsa route was the least viable out of all their legs according to the guy who set up their Tulsa operations.

The San Diego-Tulsa direct flight via ExpressJet had to have been the most enjoyable flights I've ever been on.  That was on an ERJ, so taking 737s to LA is no big deal.

I believe that.  From 2006-2008 I was dating someone who lived in Austin, which meant weekly flights to Austin - when ExpressJet started up, it was like a dream come true for me since it was DIRECT.  I swear, half the time my flight was empty except for me and the flight attendants.  Nice for me, but I can see why they weren't into it. Besides being a direct, they were also about $20 cheaper than Southwest or American.  I also flew Express Jet to LA Ontario - and I agree, it was fine for a longer haul flight, as long as you are in seat 12A.

[SXSW]

I believe that.  From 2006-2008 I was dating someone who lived in Austin, which meant weekly flights to Austin - when ExpressJet started up, it was like a dream come true for me since it was DIRECT.  I swear, half the time my flight was empty except for me and the flight attendants.  Nice for me, but I can see why they weren't into it. Besides being a direct, they were also about $20 cheaper than Southwest or American.  I also flew Express Jet to LA Ontario - and I agree, it was fine for a longer haul flight, as long as you are in seat 12A.

Interesting because the numerous daily flights to Dallas and Houston (both airports) are always full.  However that could be due to Dallas and Houston being hubs for flights to other cities.  Austin is not a hub though.  I still would think there would be enough business/leisure travel between Tulsa and Austin for a non-stop but I guess not.  I am more surprised there is not a Tulsa-Kansas City non-stop.  Maybe if (when?) Frontier returns they can offer non-stops to Kansas City (where they are building a hub) as well as their primary hub, Denver.

[swake]

Interesting because the numerous daily flights to Dallas and Houston (both airports) are always full.  However that could be due to Dallas and Houston being hubs for flights to other cities.  Austin is not a hub though.  I still would think there would be enough business/leisure travel between Tulsa and Austin for a non-stop but I guess not.  I am more surprised there is not a Tulsa-Kansas City non-stop.  Maybe if (when?) Frontier returns they can offer non-stops to Kansas City (where they are building a hub) as well as their primary hub, Denver.

I'm not surprised there isn't.

There was a Southwest flight for many years on that route, I even flew it several times for work. But after 9/11 with the pain that air travel has become and with the improved highway to Kansas City I wouldn't fly it today even for work. 169 to Kansas City has been improved over the years so that you can drive there in under 4 hours, usually about 3.5 hours. That's a heck of a lot easier than driving 25 minutes to TIA to be there an hour and a half early, then take my shoes off and searched and body scanned to fly for seriously under 40 minutes to get off the plane and spend 30 minutes getting bags and renting a car and ending up at MCI 30 minutes north of Kansas City.  And that's if the plane is one time which unless you are flying first thing in the morning is getting pretty rare.

At best the flight only saves you like 30 minutes and is a lot more hassle and cost and at worst can take a lot longer than driving.  I go to KC quite a bit and I would not fly there. I wouldn't fly to Dallas either. Both are just too close and flying is too painful anymore.

[Conan71]

I had no idea Southwest had dropped the TUL-MCI route.  Like you said, Swake, for all the post 9/11 time hassle on both ends it's so much simpler to drive.  I used to run to the SW gate a few minutes prior to push-back as the MCI flights were seldom a sell out and I could still get a decent seat. 

When it came to Dallas, if I was going to be in Dallas for the week, I'd drive so I'd have a car and not be dependent on a hotel shuttle or depending on a ride from someone at HQ.  It was around 250 miles from my front door to HQ in Irving.  If I left at 5:30 to 6am, I'd miss most of the traffic on 75 and the LBJ and could get there in under 4 hours.

If I was going to corporate HQ in Irving for a few hours for a meeting, I'd fly even though it might only save me an hour total on round trip from door to door.  If the driver was late getting me at the airport in Dallas, then it was break even on time or even slower.

[SXSW]

I'm not surprised there isn't.

There was a Southwest flight for many years on that route, I even flew it several times for work. But after 9/11 with the pain that air travel has become and with the improved highway to Kansas City I wouldn't fly it today even for work. 169 to Kansas City has been improved over the years so that you can drive there in under 4 hours, usually about 3.5 hours. That's a heck of a lot easier than driving 25 minutes to TIA to be there an hour and a half early, then take my shoes off and searched and body scanned to fly for seriously under 40 minutes to get off the plane and spend 30 minutes getting bags and renting a car and ending up at MCI 30 minutes north of Kansas City.  And that's if the plane is one time which unless you are flying first thing in the morning is getting pretty rare.

At best the flight only saves you like 30 minutes and is a lot more hassle and cost and at worst can take a lot longer than driving.  I go to KC quite a bit and I would not fly there. I wouldn't fly to Dallas either. Both are just too close and flying is too painful anymore.

Good point.  However a non-stop could be useful if you are connecting on another Frontier flight to the Midwest, for instance.  KC just gives you another option, and could be convenient for business travelers between the two cities.