View Full Version : Dallas loses big... Finally

09-08-2004, 06:02 PM
Delta Airlines has announced as part of their restructring, their Dallas hub will close in 2005.

That makes a huge gap in the traffic in and out of DFW. With this announcement I really celebrate!

Will it effect Will Rogers? Maybe. But if it does, only in a small way. Dallas get the biggest hit... Finally.


09-08-2004, 07:08 PM
Delta Airlines has announced as part of their restructring, their Dallas hub will close in 2005.

That makes a huge gap in the traffic in and out of DFW. With this announcement I really celebrate!

Will it effect Will Rogers? Maybe. But if it does, only in a small way. Dallas get the biggest hit... Finally.


Sorry to burst your bubble, but with Air Tran already expanding there, and Jetblue and a few other carriers looking for an east-west hub, those gates just might get filled pretty soon, unless conditions dictate otherwise.

But not immediately of course, so better celebrate while you can!

Delta will only have 21 daily departures to 3 cities (most likely its Atlanta, Cinicinnati and Salt Lake City hubs) from DFW, essentially turning it into one of its spoke city airports.

Oh well, we'll lose the DL Conn flights to DFW, but then there's American and Eagle. They might jump in and add a few more flights to DFW. Should be interesting how the next few years pan out for OKC.

09-08-2004, 07:27 PM
If the Oklahoma City airport distrust will get off their lazy rumps, Will Rogers should be able to gain both Air Tran and JetBlue as hubs. Both are small enough that only the new east concourse should be enough for now to accomodate them.

No matter what happens. Delta's closing Dallas as a hub is still a victory. It is not often they lose something. Let alone something bug like a hub. Try to the tune of about 200 or so flights a day. That would be like closing Will Rogers entirely.

Plus, the loss of the Delta flights to DFW may open the way for another carrier to take the slots. Either that or American has all large jet service from here. Maybe 757 or 767's. That would make up for the loss.

Although American would be counter productive (I HATE that airline), it would still make up for the loss. Our loss is small compared to Dallas. They are the big losers in the Delta plan.

09-08-2004, 09:06 PM
I agree mranderson. Dallas is still an overly crowded market. Afterall, American pretty much dominates DFW and SW dominated Love Field. With DFW already being overcrowded with American, if I were another airline, I'd look at another location for a central hub. SW already has KC, so why not OKC for Jet Blue or Air Tran? Our airport trust needs to get off their lazy butts and start trying to attract an anchor for their east concourse! Hmmmm....this is starting to sound like leasing a mall or filling Bricktown!! Find an anchor to fill your space! Ha!

09-08-2004, 10:22 PM
I don't see anything amusing about Dallas losing this. Dallas is still considered a regional city and supplies many things for OKC and Tulsa and OKC and Tulsa supply many things for Dallas. Why celebrate a downfall for an important city to Oklahoma's economy, even though its in Texas?

As far as OKC landing a hub for those two airlines over Dallas...don't count on it. JetBlue and Air Tran don't give a crap what hubs are at Dallas airport, they are going to want to go where there is the biggest crowds. It is just like Citgo moving to Houston, airlines want to be where other airlines are.

09-09-2004, 08:06 AM
Nuclear: Your comments are one reason Oklahoma City is really NOT growing. Citizen apathy.

The citizens need to realize that this city CAN be a hub. We must convince the airlines of the true facts. Oklahoma City is the most central located MAJOR city in the country, thus reducing fuel costs to the other destinations. Oklahoma City has one of the lowest costs of living in the country, thus reducing the airlines wage requirements (although the wages should still be high, companies do not look at it that way, thus greed), land prices are low, and more.

The citizens, for the most part, think the airport distrust is doing fine. Most have a blue collar mentality and will not realize that you must invest to make money and sell the city on the positive side. Negitivity may have a role in our city's lack of true growth.

Oklahoma City needs to hire a heavy hitting outside salesperson with a mega reputation to solicit not only airlines, but other corporations as well. That would be his or her only job function.

We need to re-educate the citizens and erase these "can't do it" tapes from their brains. I, for one, am sick of hearing "Oklahoma City can't do that. We are too small." We CAN support a hub. We CAN support a major league franchise... Really more than one. We CAN gain REAL jobs and not just low wage telemarketing and retail jobs.

The comments about airlines liking to go "where other airlines are" makes no sense. We HAVE airlines here. Drive down Portland or thru the drive at Will Rogers. Those big aluminum things that look like Cigars are not just ornimants. They are JETS with AIRLINE logos.

Personally, I hate Dallas. I can not stand the place. That place is full of rednecks, rude prima-donna's, and VERY racist people. Do they have some ncie people? Yes. But not many. Dallas seems to ALWAYS gain the jobs and the corporate headquarters. Why? I really have not figured that one out. SO, when they lose something I rejoice. It is a moral victory to Oklahoma City. I celebrate big time. I gloat. The bigger the loss, the better.

09-09-2004, 09:28 AM
Ok, I can understand your frustration about Dallas and the sorrounding area.

But go to and check out how many new good-paying jobs we have landed in recent months. Yes, we didn't gain the Dell center as planned, but Albon of the UK is going to build a new plant right here in Norman.

They didn't choose North Texas for their first U.S. plant, they chose us. That in and of itself is saying something about Oklahoma. We are getting worldwide recognition.

The North Texas Economic Zone is way bigger than ours is. That's one factor in them getting more jobs than we do. But with DL leaving DFW, you're right, we have to capitalize on this as much as possible.

OKC won't become a true hub, but a mini-hub is definitely not out of the question. Then again, just because the east concourse is built doesn't mean that airlines will start service. Unless we get a major passenger influx at the airport, that won't happen anytime soon.

And there's another reason for us not getting a hub. Passenger traffic. Do you really think our traffic's gonna support a hub? We only have a little more than 3 million passengers a year going through the terminal. We're sorrounded by hubs. DFW, Intercontinental, Memphis, Salt Lake City, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Cincinnati... the list goes on and on.

Airlines know now that there will be a huge gap at DFW, and all those Delta passengers will be left to search for other flights out of DFW. Air Tran has already been expanding there. It knows that if it wants to, it can expand there more easily, because the passenger base is already there.

When the expansion plan for OKC was laid out in 1998, the projection was for about 6 million passengers a year going through our terminal by the time it would be complete. We're still stuck below 4 million.

And I wouldn't blame the airport trust completely. I think the major airlines have ignored OKC and TUL up to an extent. We still don't have regular daily nonstop service to ANY Florida city. Not one! Why, is it because Oklahomans don't flock to Florida for vacationing or any other purpose like the rest of the nation does? I don't think so. Every major city in the U.S, excepting Oklahoma City and Tulsa has nonstops to atleast Orlando, if not other Florida cities. Now even Little Rock will be getting nonstops to Orlando. OKC definitely has enough traffic to support at least regional jet flights to FL, if not mainliners.

The highest number of departures we've ever had was in '99, I believe, when we used to have 97 daily departures. (Unless, historically, it's been higher)

Well, with the Delta Connection flights to DFW gone early next year, and Southwest taking out two flights to Love Field, the airport trust should take advantage of that and convince airlines to start nonstops to more cities. We have way too many flights to DFW and DAL. Sure, it maybe an important community for us, but 23 a day? 90% of those passengers are connecting passengers anyway, if you give them nonstops to where they are going, I bet they'll be willing to use them.

Ok, I'm done ranting lol. Just felt like pitching in with a few cents.


09-09-2004, 10:21 AM
A hub is possible, the FAA is really cracking down and trying to lower delays. DFW is overloaded today, and the new terminal they are building isnít going to help, they just fly too many planes out of there, OíHare and Atlanta. So the sales pitch should be that there is plenty of capacity and the planes will be on time.

But is not likely, even beyond the lack of passengers a bigger issue is that the main line carriers are dying. My guess is that they all will die with the exception of American and maybe Delta. United, USAir, and AmericaWest are all toast and donít even really seem to have a chance. That means that the hub at Denver will be available and there already are empty hubs in Kansas City and St Louis and now Dallas.

An even bigger problem is that the profitable airlines donít really use hubs. Southwest, AirTran, JetBlue donít use the traditional hub and spoke system.

Itís highly likely that not only will there not be any new major carrier hubs, there will be a lot fewer in the near future. Air service is going to be dependant on how many people you put on planes and Will Rogers has always been hurt itís proximity to DFW. Tulsaís recent drop in passengers isnít even really mostly due to the economy, itís because of the new NW Regional airport in Arkansas. People in that part of Arkansas use to have to come to Tulsa, and now Tulsans sometime go there for cheap fares on USAir since they donít come into Tulsa. Neither city is likely to get a major hub, both cities should try to get a hub for a regional carrier that is linked to a major, like what Cincinnati has.

Tulsa has an outside hope of American placing a hub here if DFW becomes too overloaded and the FAA mandates cutting flights like they did in Chicago. It makes sense since American has such a huge presence in Tulsa with the maintenance base and the accounting offices here, but, American has an unused hub in St Louis, so that is a really long shot. American is the only main line carrier that is even close to profitable right now so none of the others are really in expansion mode.

09-09-2004, 11:06 AM
What do you mean we didn't gain the Dell center as planned? When did this happen? I thought it was a done deal.

09-09-2004, 12:32 PM
DALLAS LOSES BIG! SO DOES OKC AND TULSA. This is why I say that it is not good to wish bad things on Dallas.

OKC and Tulsa are losing all Delta flights to Dallas. IM SO HAPPY THAT DALLAS LOST!

No, I don't think that OKC will never get become a hub. Salt Lake did it when it was about the size of OKC. My point is that now with a huge gap in the Dallas airport from Delta, and all the construction Dallas is doing to get more flights, it will be hard for OKC, only 200 miles away, to get a hub over Dallas. OKC's airport is going to be extremely nice once it's done, but so is Dallas's and all the rest.

And Dallas filled with rednecks??? I guess you've never heard what people think about all Oklahomans. I would say Dallas is far from being a redneck community...usually redneck cities aren't considered cosmopolitan cities.

Anyway, again, I am so glad Dallas lost Delta!

09-09-2004, 12:37 PM
Sorry okcpulse, what I meant to say was the location of the Dell Center was to be changed, it's not gonna be built in the originally chosen place. Bad wording on my part, my bad. We're still getting it though. Dell was thinking of another site in the city, some kind of an abandoned field. Dunno exactly which site it is though.

Btw, America west is a no-frills airline, it was in trouble but is doing well now (from what I've been hearing). Southwest is the only no-friller that doesn't have hubs. All the others-Frontier, Air Tran, Jetblue, Spirit etc have hubs. Kansas City only has one airline hubbing there, which is Midwest. And it's more of a focus city, not a hub.

Again, sorry about that! I'll be more careful from now on :)


09-09-2004, 02:17 PM
"And Dallas filled with rednecks??? I guess you've never heard what people think about all Oklahomans. I would say Dallas is far from being a redneck community...usually redneck cities aren't considered cosmopolitan cities."

I lived in that hickhaven for eight years. Nearly all I saw and heard were people who were proud of the Longhorn Cattle they raised, their Barbques, their pickups, skol and Coors, and the Dallas Cowboys. All signs of hickhood.

In addition, I personally witnessed several city council members getting into fist fights with each other ON THE COUNCIL HORSESHOE, usually a black member with a white member after the black called the white one racial slurs and "bigot" because the white guy would not vote for the new business or street in the drug infested area near the state fair.

The legislature always meets in odd years. Funny. NOT ONE even year went by withOUT a special session. Plus, a lot of the bills passed were quite backward.

Also. Many of these people were very self centered prima-donna's. Other than that, try an average of one cop shot dead every two months, and crime all over the place.

The only positive in legislation is that Dallas gives people the right to buy and posess adult materials. Oklahoma City has the self centered religious people that think just because THEY do not think it is right, they will not allow YOU to do it. It is YOUR choice... Not theirs.

Yes. Oklahoma City has more than our share of hicks, racists, criminals and prima-donna's. However, at least most of our legislative action is quite innovative... And they meet every year... And get paid 20 times more than their counterparts in Texas.

All I wanted was to get out of that weird place. Was Oklahoma City my first choice? No. Eureka California was. However, no decent jobs at all.

So. When Dallas loses, Oklahoma City wins. six or seven flights is a small price to pay for the privlidge of seeing Dallas squirm.

09-09-2004, 08:18 PM
Actually guys, we are gaining big from Delta closing their Dallas hub. News Channel 9 reported this evening, that in place of flights to Dallas on their small regional carrier (Atlantic Southeast Airlines- prop planes), Delta will replace many of these flights with larger "Delta" planes to the western hub, Salt Lake City. So anyone flying out west will now go to Salt Lake instead of Dallas, on "larger" jets. Atlantic Southeast Airlines will still fly some flights to Dallas for those wanting to go just to Dallas or needing to make connections with American or other airlines, but there won't be any connections there for Delta. So basically we're gaining more and better flights from this. Not only will we still have the Atlantic SE flights to Dallas, but we'll also have new, and more Delta flights to Salt Lake on larger planes, to cover the western United States. All of the eastern US will be still be covered by larger jets to Atlanta.

09-09-2004, 08:27 PM
Oh, and airlines don't always want to be where other airlines are. DFW has been overcrowded for years. Sure there's plenty of space at the terminal, but the runways are a mess with all of those planes. OKC or Tulsa, offers a central location for a hub, without all of the traffic mess at DFW.

Personally, with the success of low cost airlines, I can see the hub system going by the wayside in the near future, so we may not even have to worry about it. The way Southwest is running business seems to have made them big profits for many years now. I see more and more low cost airlines going to their system.

09-09-2004, 09:24 PM
OK I have to say something here.

Delta dropped DFW because there was no demand. Period!

DFW pax did not fly Delta and no one connected through there except passengers from Tulsa (mainly). Seriously.

So Delta, wanting to save costs, decided to drop an UNDERPERFORMING city! DALLAS FORT WORTH!!!

OKC did not lose with Delta leaving DFW, we only had four flights and surely ASA, American, and American Eagle will absorb the DFW-OKC loss. Tulsa is the biggest loser because DFW is Tulsa's #1 Destination!

Many of your comments on this thread treat Dallas like the Mecca of aviation when in fact, Dallas is a HUB. Being a HUB requires passengers to connect THRU you from other cities to other cities. If passengers chose direct and nonstop options, then they avoid HUBs!

You can be a hub without having a large local traffic. This was the case for Delta, not many from Dallas were flying Delta. DFW was a hub not because of the huge, tremendous flying population in Dallas - but was a hub because of the cities connected to DFW (primarily OKC and recently TUL).

this is why Dallas was dropped. There was NO HUGE DEMAND from passengers living in Dallas! So DFW will ONLY have 21 flights a day!

Why have it as the number 2 hub when cities like OKC (which previously depended upon DFW as a HUB) chose to avoid DFW in favour for Atlanta - a business destination for OKC anyways.

You guys dont believe me, but Delta used to use DFW as a HUB primarily for OKC! We were the biggest customer base for DFW and their connecting flights! Tulsa now is the biggest but that is not filling planes at DFW, so hey - too bad.

All of this talk about OKC not being a hub is ludacrist. Airlines want to hub where it is economically feasible. They do not want to hub with other airlines - why have direct competition (reduced profits!!!). This is why no one hubs out of Denver except United and its low fare competition, Frontier (Frontier also is based out of Den). Chicago Ohare is unusual, because everyone wants a presence there. But take Atlanta, same thing; Delta is the major hub operation, and Air Tran is the low fare comp. No one else hubs out of Atlanta!

DFW was unusual because it had American and Delta both as major hubs, but as you can see it does NOT make sense to hub where other airlines hub.

Other HUB examples
Phoenix - America West major hub, Southwest low fare comp
SLC - Delta hub, nobody else
Seattle - Alaska major hub, Horizon subsidiary hub; Northwest and United Pacific Gateway [shared with PDX]
Memphis - Northwest southern hub, no one else
Houston - Continental major hub, many international gateway airlines
Portland - no major hub, Northwest and United Pacific Gateway [shared with SEA] - by the way, PDX used to be a Pacific Gateway for Delta, but was moved to HUB Salt Lake.
San Fran - United major hub and Principal Pacific Gateway, no other major hubs but many international gateways
LAX - Major presence from every airline but NO HUBS, Principal Pacific, Latin American Gateway
Miami - Major presence from nearly every airline but NO HUB, Principal Latin American Gateway
Wash Dulles - United major hub, presence from most airlines, European Gateway

Get my point? OKC can surely support a hub op as there is NO competition here. Just because OKC has over 3.5 mil pax a year means nothing about a HUB OP, as HUBS get pax from connecting airports! Honestly, I imagine DFW [rated 52 mil pax a year] only gets about 14 mil pax a year locally (from DallasFt Worth). While that number is three times larger than OKC, most of them fly American and International Airlines! Not Delta!

We have to get our marketing department and airport trust to get out there and spread the word. If nothing else, it may land us flights. But that may actually be harder than getting a hub; because point-to-point flights require the influx of passengers you all are talking about. Hub airports serve as connecting points and pax come from other cities!

Lets build Renaissance at Will Rogers World Airport!

09-09-2004, 09:49 PM
Here's the article from Newsok:

"Delta move aids Oklahoma travelers?

By Kia Malone

The following is a script from a NEWS 9 broadcast
For the third time in the past month, an airline is making major changes.

Delta Airlines is getting rid of its Dallas hub, and all flights from Oklahoma City to Dallas have been grounded.

The company claims it's actually good news for Oklahoma travelers. Delta just released more information this afternoon to travel agents saying there will be more flights and larger planes for passengers flying out of Oklahoma City.

Threre are only three hubs for Delta travelers out of Oklahoma City: Dallas, Cinncinnati and Atlanta.

With Dallas gone, there was concern about how passengers would get to the West Coast. This afternoon, Delta announced it will convert Salt Lake City to become it's gateway to the West Coast.

Delta is Bentley Hedges travel agency's preferred airline. Agents say the airlines will add more flights to Atlanta for Oklahoma passengers in hopes of saving $5 billion by 2006 while streamlining underperforming cities like Dallas. Only one percent of their customers connected on Delta through DFW.

Agents say Delta's changes will give Oklahoma passenger more options.

Passengers will still be able to take those smaller ASA flights to Dallas. But they are not connected to Delta Airlines.

The flights to Dallas will be cut starting Jan. 1."

09-09-2004, 09:51 PM
By the way, Hot Rod, Amen to everything you said. Why not send your post to Karen Carney.......Her email:

09-10-2004, 07:05 PM
Hot Rod...I don't find the excitement you do in TULSA IS THE BIGGEST LOSER. Wasn't one of the biggest deals on this forum and TulsaNow that OKC and Tulsa should work together not against each other. I don't see that in your post.

Anyway, I'm glad OKC is benefiting from this. At first I thought it was going to hurt OKC, but am glad to see it will not.

I have another question now though. After all of us have seen Delta move away from their HUB in Dallas, and several on here have talked about HUBS not being a good thing because airlines are moving away from them, why should OKC push to be a HUB? Why not markey OKC to attract many different flights from many different airlines. That way if an airline ever did back down, it wouldn't be such a big blow. I'm sure DFW is going insane right now trying to figure out how they are going to fill the gap.

09-10-2004, 07:43 PM
"You can be a hub without having a large local traffic. This was the case for Delta, not many from Dallas were flying Delta. DFW was a hub not because of the huge, tremendous flying population in Dallas - but was a hub because of the cities connected to DFW (primarily OKC and recently TUL).

this is why Dallas was dropped. There was NO HUGE DEMAND from passengers living in Dallas! So DFW will ONLY have 21 flights a day!"

Every hub city has more out of town traffic than in town traffic. That is obvious. So the quote makes no sense.

DFW was Delta's smallest hub being nearly one quarter the size of Atlanta Hartsfield/ The latter will have over 1,000 daily departures on Delta, vs. DFW has less than 300. Cincinatti is the next largest followed by Salt Lake City. So, due to it being the easiest to close, DFW was chosen.

No matter what, I celebrate. Dallas now squirms for a change while WE come out the winner.

Finally. To the people of the DFW area... NEENER, NEENER, NEENER WE WIN YOU LOSE! :D :cool:

09-13-2004, 12:37 PM
Nuclear I think you make some great points.

And by the way, I don't think Tulsa will lose from this, at least I hope not. In my opinion, I think Tulsa will reap the same benefits we are getting.......more flights on larger planes to Salt Lake City, the hub for the western US. The main reason so many Tulsans were flying to Dallas via Delta was to make cnnecting flights elsewhere, not to just go to Dallas. With how close Tulsa is to Dallas, it would be senseless to fly to Dallas if you're not making a connecting flight, especially with increased delays and hassles post-911.

Also, Nuclear, I'm beginning to agree with you. I think we should go after low cost regional airlines to fill our airport and forget about the larger airlines. Afterall, they're going broke anyways. I think in the future you'll see low cost airlines begin to dominate the market. That's get a head start on attracting these to our market.

I think Great Plains was a great move, unfortunately, 9-11 caused them to bite the dust. That's unfortunate. If it wasn't for 9-11 they probably would've survived and expanded.

Anyways, I think this statement is smart: "Why not market OKC to attract many different flights from many different airlines.......That way if an airline ever did back down, it wouldn't be such a big blow. I'm sure DFW is going insane right now trying to figure out how they are going to fill the gap."

Yes, DFW is going insane....while they still have American filling most of their airport, they've taken a big loss from Delta leaving. Sure DFW wasn't Delta's largest hub, but it was still a hub, nonetheless. They'll be missing out on millions of dollars ever year from Delta.

In the meantime we won't be hurt as bad.

Maybe we should go ahead and build the East Concourse specifically to attract more low cost airlines. We can use the West Concourse and main terminal for the major airlines like Delta, American, United, US Air, SW, NW, etc.

09-14-2004, 02:29 PM
Hot Rod...I don't find the excitement you do in TULSA IS THE BIGGEST LOSER. Wasn't one of the biggest deals on this forum and TulsaNow that OKC and Tulsa should work together not against each other. I don't see that in your post.

Nuclear: I think you may have gotten the wrong impression from my post. I was simply reminding everyone that Delta's decision really does not impact OKC because we removed our dependence upon DFW as a hub.

I certainly support the Renaissance effort which includes OKC and Tulsa working together. I was only stating that Tulsa was the biggest loser with regard to the DFW Delta announcement because Tulsa had taken OKCs spot as DFWs largest base of commuters. Tulsa would have a threefold or more impact on Delta-DFW than OKC due to TULs dependence on DFW as a hub. OKC is too close, and we dropped our dependence as soon as Delta and American dropped the large planes/direct flights on to other cities. That was the point of my post.

Maybe a bit of excitement due to OKC finally winning something, but hey, how often did Tulsa do this to OKC years ago? It is nice to see OKC getting its due! Especially at the expense of Dallas!!!

[although it possibly hurts our little sister a bit :-(]

09-14-2004, 02:37 PM
"You can be a hub without having a large local traffic. This was the case for Delta, not many from Dallas were flying Delta. DFW was a hub not because of the huge, tremendous flying population in Dallas - but was a hub because of the cities connected to DFW (primarily OKC and recently TUL).

this is why Dallas was dropped. There was NO HUGE DEMAND from passengers living in Dallas! So DFW will ONLY have 21 flights a day!"

Every hub city has more out of town traffic than in town traffic. That is obvious. So the quote makes no sense. HUH? :mad:


I dont know if you meant that as a personal attack or not (because I wrote that to back up what you said earlier as the thread starter)

but I think your lack of comprehension is clear - if you think my quote makes no sense. What the heck did you start the thread for, if you think my quote makes no sense. Perhaps you should read and comprehend first before you start a pissing match, knocking what people say as incompetent or ignorant.

You only prove your own!

09-14-2004, 02:48 PM
No. It was not a personal attack, nor a "pissing match." I can not see how anyone would view the message as a personal attack. This board has better safty nets than to revert to the methods of past boards. Plus, I do not attack. I defend when neccessary and this is not one of those times in either case.

My reasoning is quite clear. You have an airline with 250 flights a day, say 150 passengers per flight on average. That is 37,500 passengers a day. Many, in fact the majority of those people arrived on flights from other cities and are only connecting.

I have flown into 90 percent of the hubs in the United States, and many several times. Very seldom do I see a lot of people from the local area. The majority are connecters.

Many people will fly some of the non hub airlines and leave the hub for the passers through.

This information comes from a great deal of flying experience plus logic. In addition. The people of Dallas are sold on American, not Delta because American made the stupid decision of locating their headquarters in near by Grapevine.

DFW was the smallest Delta hub, therefore making it much easier to close than the rest. Had it been number two or three, I bet it would have survived.

09-14-2004, 03:40 PM
Hey Hot Rod, I didn't really view it as an attack either. I'm sorry that you did.

Actually I had a little trouble comprehending the quote as well, so that may have been the problem that mranderson had. It seemed like, in the first part of the quote you stated (paraphrased) that hubs don't have much local traffic, then you stated that the reason DFW was dropped by Delta was because there was no local demand. I got a little lost in all of that (and maybe mranderson did too) because it seemed like the two statements contradicted each other. So I don't think mranderson was trying to attack the position, more he was jsut saying that the quote didn't make sense because it was contradicting.

After that mranderson just stated his opinion on the matter, which I tend to agree with.
I think it is true that the majority of the people that pass through hubs are not locals. Hubs are used for connections from other cities. Although some may be from the hub city itself, most probably are not.

I don't think Delta dropped DFW dropped because there was a lack of local traffic. I think it had more to do with the fact that Delta's eastern (Atlanta) and western (Salt Lake) hubs were pretty much taking care of all of the business Delta had, thus there was really no use in having a central hub at DFW open. Delta was just trying to streamline their hub system down to cut costs.

At this point, maybe it would be a good idea for you to both clarify your points on the issue.

Just from looking at your posts, these are the opinions I get:

1. Hot Rod: Hot Rod claims that one of the reasons Delta left DFW was because there was no local demand for flights.

2. mranderson: mranderson favors the notion that local demand really has no impact on hubs because hubs mostly have out-of-towners trying to make connections. Thus, mranderson would feel that this issue had no impact on Delta's departure. mranderson blames Delta's departure more on DFW being its smallest hub.

Would I be correct in those assessments? Yes, those are two very different opinions of the hub system in general, but that's cool! You're entitled to your opinions.

My attempt in this post was to try to get back to what your actual opinions were, because it seemed a little confusing trying to tweeze out all of the details.

Hot Rod, do hubs really depend on local traffic that much? I was just curious why you felt that way, because it seems to me like everytime I go to DFW, the travelers are mostly from other cities making connections, not locals.

09-14-2004, 03:53 PM
Actually, I favor Delta leaving Dallas because I put the entire state of Texas on the same level as Cancer. It is a cancer on the rest of the nation mostly due to these companies not looking at more central parts of the country... Namely the 29th largest city in the nation.

Will Dallas feel an impact? Yes. Think of the jobs lost. There are flight crews based there, maintance people based there, several ramp and flightline personnel, ticket agents, and more. I would guess realisitically at least 1,000 jobs lost.

Plus a terminal that will be nearly a ghost area in the near future, let alone some Delta hangers that will not be in use. That means lost tax revenue. Combine all that and the area will see a small reduction in spending which might mean some layoffs in other areas.

However. To me, that is alright. Maybe those laid off are the few nice Dallasites and will relocate here. Others may be transfered to other hubs while others may be hired by other airlines.

Regardless, when you lose a large part of your business community, or artery, you have a "snowball' effect.

If I felt Texas was worthy of being called a state, let alone a haven for intellegence and forward thinking, I would be giving another opinion.

Now. Does local demand have an impact on hubs? Not much. There are, however, exceptions.

09-14-2004, 04:48 PM
Well, although I'm not fan of Texas, I don't wish lost jobs on anyone, not even Texans. As a result of this, there are going to be families struggling to survive, in an economy that's still recovering from recession.

I just hope that most of the workers can find new jobs.

Anyways, I think the impact this is having on Dallas is a good reason to go after smaller discount and more carriers, and maybe minihubs, instead of looking for a major hub. Nuclear was right in his assessment.

09-14-2004, 04:54 PM
Patrick: Granted. Job loss is worrysome and stressful. Believe me when I say I have had more than my share of it over the years. Mostly greedy employers who care more about themselves and the all mighty dollar than a working stiff.

However. I really can not describe my hatred of the Dallas area, let alone Texas.

The people who are rude and pompus I hope they suffer. The others I hope it is a short unemployment.

09-14-2004, 05:06 PM
I agree....I even had a similar feeling after 9-11. Granted it was sad what our country faced on that day and the loss of life was sad, but not all of the people lost in the WTC were sweet little angels like the media would like you to believe. A few of those stock brokers were yuppies, sticking people in the back on a daily basis.

09-14-2004, 06:40 PM
Good to see that OKC is still such a cosmoplotian city embracing people from all walks of life from every corner of the nation and world. This really is reinforcement of the cow town image of OKC that is so pervasive here here in Tulsa. Please think about what you are saying and stop, it's bad for the whole state. Rooting for people to lose jobs? Not all that were killed were losses becuase they were yuppies? WHAT?? Get a grip and grow up.

Real question, why so much hatred for Texas? I don't like Dallas, I truly don't know anyone that does and that includes friends who live there. It's a mess. But OKC, will never be a world class city so long as it is obsessed with Dallas. Better to look at what Dallas has done well, and what they have done wrong and build your own city on that knowledge.

09-14-2004, 06:50 PM
Why all the hatred? I have answered that question already.

Once again. Too many hicks (yes we have them also, more than our share), rude people (yes we have them also, not as many), snobbish people, VERY high crime rate that the police do not want to control, a racist city council (I have seen fist fights on the horseshoe). Plus, the fact that all they think of is their cows, their barbques, and their hickhood.

It seems as we are always losing to that hickhole down south. I am tired of it. Our city council needs to get on the ball and find out why these companies are passing us by. Do they like hickvilles? Do they like backward legislautres? What? We need to know, then convince these people that WE are better.

I lived in that place for eight years. I did not want to move there in the first place, however, a job was better than poverty. I left and they can still smell the rubber on the tires from when I squeeleed out of there.

You can think Dallas is the greatest place on the Planet. However, I would rather go to cool places. You can think Padre Island is the greatest beach on earth, but I would rather go to cool places.

I am sick of Dallas this and Dallas that. If you like it, I am sure they would welcome you. I will hate that place and celebrate every time they lose. No matter how many jobs are lost. Their loss can be OUR gain.

09-14-2004, 07:37 PM
swake you're right. We shouldn't wish bad on Dallas. That isn't right, and it's not fun to see people lose their jobs, or lives. Instead we should probably just use the selling points we have as a city and try to create our own individual identity. I agree that so many times we try to compete with Dallas. While competition is good, we shouldn't lose the notion that we are a unique separate city, and we should strive for something completely different from Dallas. By no means would I want OKC to resemble Dallas.

But at the same time I really see no difference between this and the competition between NY and Boston, Seattle and Tacoma, Minneapolis and St. Paul, San Francisco and Oakland, etc.

09-15-2004, 02:08 AM
I really dont understand why you guys [Patrick, MR Anderson] dont understand what I was saying.

I said, hub cities tend not to have persistent local traffic - they mostly have transient commuter traffic. Few exceptions are Chicago, Wash DCA, SFO, and LAX.

Then I said, that Dallas was dropped because it had little local demand.

Demand is synonomous with traffic, that is the correlation in my two statements. local demand was low, so traffic was low at DFW DELTA. Combine that with the drop-off of transient OKC pax using DFW Delta as a hub, that is the biggest reason why it is closing.

Should we PM about this?

I know I am an attorney and an MBA, but hey - we are supposed to be able to communicate effectively to everyone. I know I have an ability to sway opinions through dialog,

but I was just stating a few facts that needed to be interjected. People on this forum were talking about the VOID at DFW, and that OKC had no chance of becoming a hub because of the VOID at DFW - and I stated that there is NO VOID, DFW was overkill; hence the reductions.

Rob, I accept your apology. I guess you are not a bit pragmatic when you criticize other's posts. I was supporting your position on DFW with a superlative set of facts about HUB airports in general and you shot me down; called my logic uncomprehensible - you killed your support.

SWAKE: I dont think we are obsessed with Dallas, we are just happy to see things go a little bad for them once in a while. Dallas has prospered at the expense of OKC (and TUL to an extent) as many of our companies (and residents) have trucked down I-35 over the past 20 something years as Dallas was the so-called New York of the South. Its nice to see them suffer!

Im sure Tulsa would feel the same way about the bohemouth - Houston! If companies pulled out of there.

09-15-2004, 07:26 AM
To be immature, I despise Dallas and do enjoy some economic misfortune of theirs. DFW has carted off half of my college buddies and half of my sisters'. I can't blame them, because they have to pursue their lives as they see fit. In addition, I rarely hear a kind word on the part of Dallasites (or other Texans, for that matter) for OKC. On travel forums and other discussions, they are always dismissive of Oklahoma City and Oklahoma, no matter what gains we make. They would rather die than admit we do anything better than they do. That's why Mack Brown will be gone if he doesn't win next month.

Okay, I may be overstating on those last statements, but if Texans enjoy sticking it to us, I see no reason why we shouldn't return the same. I do not wish to see workers lose their jobs, but to see Texas' arrogant business leaders, writers, and opinion leaders eat their words is priceless.

09-15-2004, 08:06 AM
In all honesty, I believe it is Oklahoma City's unique opportunity to be the "bigger person" when it comes to other cities' misfortunes. Offer assistance or work with officials in neighboring cities on job losses or revenue loss... that is... if they looked to us. But swake, this is something you will never catch any city, including Dallas, doing. We are in fierce competition for jobs, and Dallas, being the cosmopolitan city they are, do not treat us well in the arena of competition. Nor have they ever been courteous or cordial, especially when it came to making business decisions.

I have no "obsession" with Dallas. To me, Dallas is just another city. I believe Houston has had more of an impact on the Tulsa area than Dallas on OKC. And I do recall some Houston bashing on the Tulsa forum. But really, I don't blame the Tulsa forum for the bashing, either. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing your good paying jobs leave your city for another.

I believe the feelings on this thread reflect a simple expression "Oh my gosh, Dallas can lose? I didn't think that was possible!" However, Delta dropping Dallas as a hub is only one less member of the club. Dallas is still an American Airlines hub.

I don't despise Dallas, or any other city for that matter. I depise the airline industry. They literally determined the growth in this country by setting up the hub system to begin with.
The hub and spoke system is by far the dumbest concept ever concieved by the human race in the travel category. I believe there should only be connections where needed, like the east and west seaboard cities when flying over seas. What is the point of flying to, say, Phoenix to get to Seattle? I can see stopping in Denver on the way. I also don't get the feasability of the OKC-Atlanta-New York connection either. Hubs take you out of the way from where you need to be.

09-15-2004, 10:25 AM
Hot Rod, let's just forget about it and move on. I think your points are clear. I'll go ahead and just PM you and we can discuss it off the board, because I'd really like some clarification. But I don't think it's really worthwhile to go on an talk about it here.

On to the other topic,

Well, Dallas has the growing economy to help these displaced workers, so it's not like they'll be out of work for long. And as many of you have said, Dallas has hurt our economy by stealing jobs (and skilled workers) away from our market. So, it's easy to find myself being a tad bit jovial about Dallas' loss.

swake, it's not that we wish bad on Dallas, it's more that for years now Dallas has been growing at our expense. It's about time that the tables were turned.