Willy1

Dallasboi, I wasn't just making up random statistics... I was paraphrasing what I've read from multiple experts. The current predictions are that FW will eventually outgrow Dallas... How long will that take is up in the air. Some experts say it could happen in the next 20 years, other say it will take 30 or 40, but most agree that eventually it will happen. Dallas's growth has slowed. Troyboy is correct. Dallas is nearly built-out landwise, while FW still has a full 1/3rd of the land vacant and ready for development, and has extrajurisdictional territory that could easily double the foot print of the city by adding another 300 sq miles to the city limits. In addition to available land, FW is booming and Dallas is not. Sure, there is lots of construction in Dallas, but the population boom is in FW not Dallas. Last year Dallas only added 8,098 people. FW added 21.485 for a total of 618,600. But, the projections are staggering. According to the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the FW population projection for 2005 was 580,152. FW blew that out of the water. They underestimated FW by 38,448. In addition to that, the experts and trends indicate that this is just the beginning of the boom in FW as the population trends are moving toward growth on the western end of the metroplex as the eastern end builds-out. This is just a shift in where people are moving within the metroplex. Since 2000, DFW has added around 750,000 people. Whether or not it will ever happen? Only time will tell. However, FW is set to double in size in the next 20-50 years. But, that's like predicting where a hurricane will come ashore. It could fall on the lower end, or it could exceed expectation. Only time will tell. But, Dallas is slowing down and moving down the population rankings while FW continues to leap frog over cities. Ten years ago, FW was the 29th largest city in America. Today it's the 19th and on the verge of overtaking a couuple more cities in the next couple years. Don't get me wrong, Dallas will continue to grow - as always. However, it will be out-paced by other Metroplex cities. The crime and city govt in Dallas play a major role in the slowing of growth in that city. Dallas will have to re-invent itself in order to regain the momentum it once had.

I'm beginning to think that it's impossible for anyone in Houston to have a conversation about anything without that conversation eventually disolving into how much they dislike Dallas, what a joke Dallas is, how Dallas is overrated, how Dallas is snobby, how Houston is so much better than Dallas, how Dallas is ugly, how Dallas thinks it's London/Toronto when really it's Indianapolis, how Dallas isn't as urban as Houston, how Houston's Midtown is better than Dallas; Uptown, how DT Houston is bigger, better, taller than DT Dallas, how Dallas/Fort Worth somehow cheated Houston by being a larger metro population, how horrible the Dallas politicians are, how South Dallas is so mistreated, on and on and on. Has anyone else noticed that Dallas is now being bashed in the SAN ANTONIO sub-forum? Is there really THAT much hatred of Dallas in Houston? If so, then it really is the same one-sided dislike that was discussed about San Antonio's dislike of Houston.... which of course could only be justified by saying "they're all just jealous of Houston". Come on guys, Houston is a great city. It's big, it's urban, it's modern, it has great museums, new stadiums and pro sports teams, NASA - which just had a succeussful mission, and all sorts of great things to talk about. Can't Houston stand on those incredible accomplishments without looking down it's nose at other cities and bashing them for their accomplishments? It give the impression that Houston/Houstonites are jealous of the fame and recognition that Dallas has achieved. When you see a pretty girl who is standing around bad mouthing another pretty girl - the first thing that comes to mind is "oh, she's jealous of her". Well, that's the way all these anti-Dallas comments come across on HAIF. It reminds me of two small children who can't get along and start throwing sand at each other in the sand box. The HAIF Moderators are "mommy" and every once in a while they have to come in and jerk the kids out of the sandbox (aka locking a thread) because their kids - Houston and Dallas - can't play together without fighting. It's ridiculous and it's intentionally picking a fight on the Houstonian's end of things... I was just reading along about all the cool things that are going on in San Antonio and suddenly there it is a Dallas Bashing comment intended to insight an anti-Dallas forum riot. I agree that SA beats all the other Texas cities when it comes to tourism - but is it really necessary to make pointed remarks at Dallas? Are you really so preoccupied with Dallas that you're reading Dallas Tourism magazines? You have to remember - it's a tourism magazine... a promotional piece published by the city and placed in hotels to show people what there is to do while in that city.... and ALL cities publish like materials.... and they all make claims that are biased and based on "information" that supports their claims, regardless of how biased that information may be. Anyway, sorry for going off.... I just enjoy the HAIF and get sick of all the Dallas vs. Houston bickering that destroys most of the otherwise interesting topics. Surely I'm not the only one who feels this way...

I agree that FW needs more glass and glitter and that it pales in comparison to Dallas and Houston, but you're underestimating the size and number of buildings in FW a bit. But, given the "Dallas" in your handle that's not unexpected. Dallas has always looked down its nose at FW... that probably won't change anytime soon. But, FW is also growing at a pace that it will more than likely be bigger than Dallas in 20 years--according to most experts.

^I agree. FW is great the way it is, but it does need some more glass and glitter. Dallas and FW will never have the same feel to them. FW could add massive amounts of skyscrapers adn still feel very different than Dallas. I think that FW does need a few more skycrapers. They will always add the art deco buildings. But, a few new scrapers would help the city transform the image to one of a more modern city - and finally leave a little of that dang "Cowtown" image behind.

Yeah, it's kind of a blow to FW. But, downtown FW is nearly 100% occupied for Class A and B office space (98 or 99%), and most Class C space is being converted to residential. The Landmark Tower was Class C space and was slated to be converted to resedential before the 2000 tornado, but the tornado damaged the building so heavily that it was no longer feasible to convert the building. The former owner went into bankrupcy and the building was bought by XTO energy - a huge corporate citizen of dowtown FW. XTO is already occupying 4 buildings in DTFW and is restoring a historical building. They are also growing very fast and will need future office space very quickly. They've recently bought several contingous blocks of downtown office space/blocks. They considered what to do with the building and have determined that it's not financially prudent to convert/redevelop the Landmark because the building apparently is no longer structually sound due to the Tornado damage. (So, technically, the tornado actually destroyed the Landmark). XTO was considering replacing the building with a 50+ story mixed-use tower (retail, office, residential) but has decided not too right now. They may eventually build something on the site or sell it to someone who wants to develop the site. Only time will tell what kind of developments spring up on that site, muchless in the rest of DT FW... But, given the fact that FW is the fastest growing big city in the country (percentage wise) and the fact that downtown is almost 100% leased, developments have to be around the corner. Plus, DTFW is sort of preparing areas of downtown for redevelopment. The entire area around the convention center and along Lancaster - where the old I30 overpass used to be - is being redeveloped. There are 3 major buildings along Lancastar's south side that used to be seperated from DTFW by the i30 overpass; The T&P Depot, the Main Post office, and the T&P Warehouse. The T&P Depot is being converted to residential now, the Post Office is possibly going to become the new City Hall, and there are unannounced planns to convert the T&P Warehouse to mixed use. Lancaster itself is schedule for an extreme makeover and the new Convention Center Hotel is going up across the street from the convention center....

You're talking about what they call a Date Line. Cities such as NYC, Chicago, LA, Houston, Dallas and other major media markets do not have the state listed after them because they're reached a size and recognition level that the state name is considered to be unnecessary. The only time you're supposed to see the state name after say, Dallas, is when you're not talking about THE largest city named Dallas - in this case Dallas, TX. I don't know why CNN would run a label with "Houston, Texas". It's not like people don't know what state Houston is in. I do think that Dallas has reached such a level of fame, however, that it is easily the most famous city in the state. And, because it has the nickname Big D... I think some people probably assume incorrectly that it's the largest city in Texas. But, other cities suffer from similar misconceptions. For instance, many people in this forum were shocked to learn that Fort Worth is now the 19th largest U.S. city and gaining on several in the list. FW is larger than DC, Boston, Seattle, Denver, Vegas, and many other more recognizable cities. By the end of the decade FW could even jump as high as 15th largest city. According to recent predictions FW could be in the high 700's or mid 800's by 2010. Likewise, most people don't realize that San Jose California is now the 10th largest city - larger than Detroit. And, who would have thought that Jacksonville FL was one of the largest cities in the country? It's just Public Relations issues that certain city's CVB need to address and attack.

Totally agree with you on that one. I am by NO means any sort of cowboy. I grew up in Fort Worth near the Cultural District on the West Side. I was sort of in culture shock when I arrived in Lubbock for college. But, I also fell in love with Lubbock - believe it or not - because the people there are so nice and friendly and Texas Tech was so much fun. It was also an interesting study in sociology because Tech is about 70% city kids from DFW and Houston and the rest are primarily from surrounding West Texas towns. It's interesting to see the urban kids and the country kids mixing together. It's not uncommon to have a former "Tractor Queen" from Muleshoe and former "Prom Queen" from Dallas end up being sorority sisters and best friends (that's a real example where I personally knew the girls). Likewise, I had pledge brothers from places like Dumas and Sweetwater. It was a great opportunity to learn about people from different parts of the state and country. That's one thing that I really like about Texas - the fact that it really is like it's own country... It's large enough that it actually has all the different terrains of North America within the state borders and even the accents change depending on where you are. East Texas sounds very different than West Texas, and El Pasoites sound nothing like Dallasites or Fort Worthians. I love travelling to other states and letting them know I'm from Texas... There really is some sort of fascination with everything Texan... my accent gets noticed everywhere I go. I love that.

I agree that you can stil be a proud Texan without being a cowboy. I think the way to look at it is that the Cowboy lifestyle evolved over hundreds of years into what is today's modern Texas. And I love the Gene Autrey Cowboy Code. There are even fewer of those kinds of Cowboys left... But, you're right, Cowboys are Gentlemen, not dumb redneck bar brawlers and womanizers.... I think there are still real cowboys here, it's just that they are an endangered species now. Some still believe you see them on every corner and that all Texans ride horses and wear western clothing... There are some very real cowboys left in Fort Worth - but they're ranchers and wild catters, not John Wayne or John Travolta (visa vie Bud in Urban Cowboy). I went to college in West Texas and there are most certainly real cowboys out there... There is even a big national fraternity at my school that was made up primarily of guys from West Texas Cowboy Families.

Uh - first of all... I am not a "poser" so thanks for lumping me in to "the rest of you people in the industry". It's a hobby for me because I'm a film-lover and I wanted to know more about how they are made. I have been a writer in the corporate world for a long time and was urged - by a movie consultant in Hollywood who saw some of my work - to pursue screenwriting. So I took some classes from a guy here in Dallas who is a retired Writer-Producer-Director from Hollywood and has 9 Emmy's and a bookcase of other awards to his name. He recommended I study Improvisational Comedy to help with writing characters. I 've completed almost 2 years of improv training and performing at this point and the indie film I'm about to start is just for fun. Anyway, just giving out this information so that you realize I'm not "posing" to be anything. I am really what I say I am, or as you put it... I'm keeping it real. Anyway, all I was saying was that some of the Texas stereotypes put on film in Hollywood are possibly lifted from reality and inflated for entertainment purposes. It's usually done in comedy and there is a reason for that. There is a phrase that is used in improv - "Truth in Comedy" and even a book by the same name. Basically it just teached improvisors to take the truth, and put it into an extreme situation. That's all Hollywood does - they just take something everyday and blow it up into something bigger than life for entertainment purposes. The problem is, sometimes they're not responsible about it. I agree with you that Texans are totally exploited by the film and television industries. They would have you believe that life here in Texas mirrors what was portrayed in the movie Urban Cowboy - which by the way, I believe was set in Houston since it was the movie that put Gilley's on the map. Granted, it would not be impossible to go out and find a couple of people who actually are like "Bud and Sissy" in that movie. But, they are not the typical Texans as Hollywood would have you believe. However Hollywood doesn't just make the characters up - they're based on reality, even if only losely. Unfortunately the general media is just as bad. I don't know how the local media is in Houston, but every time something big happens in DFW they seem to find two or three uneducated and unpresentable people to interview about what just happened. And then there is COPS. Nothing can paint a worse picture of your city than having a few episodes of COPS on location filmed in your town. I can't believe they had the insight to think about that - but that is the reason that Dallas never would let COPS film there. I guess maybe they were worried it would steal ratings from the televised city council and school board meetings. LOL.... And, I agree with you about the STEREOTYPICAL NEW YORK YANKEE thing. I used to work for a company that had officed in Manhattan, New Jersey, Dallas, and Seattle. I had to have daily conference calls with the NYC and NJ teams and although some of them were very nice people, they suffer from the same problems Texans do. There are a few people who actually fit that Rude Yankee stereotype and they are miserable people to deal with. I love NYC, but some of the people are horrible.... Actually, the worst experiences I had were in New Jersey, not NYC.

First of all, I have worked on movie sets before... I'm a screenwriter/comedian/actor... and I'm about to start production on my own first indie... You are absolutely correct about Hollywood - it is completely ruled by money. How do you think some of the worst movies have actually gotten written, bugeted, and made... Go browse through the isles at Blockbuster and look at some of the crap - the things that you would never even rent - that are on the shelves. (I recommend starting in the Horror section). You have to realize that most small indie films even have budgets of 100K or more. I worked on a really bad childrens indie where the lead actor had a 175K paycheck - and he was only one of the stars (he was the guy that played the lead in that movie Powder). As for the stereotypes that Hollywood throws our way. It's sort of a which came first the chicken or the egg scenario. Is Hollywood creating the stereotypes, or merely playing off the bad job Texas has done advertising itself to the rest of the world? Almost every major city in Texas plays up the Cowboy/Country/Western theme to bring in tourist... So, if we really want to stop the ridiculous stereotypes then we should stop promoting ourselves that way. I think that of all the big Texas cities, Houston probably plays down the Cowboy/Country thing the most... Dallas and Fort Worth are the worst about it. Fort Worth still promotes itself as "Cowtown" for goodness sake. How ridiculous is that since FW is the 19th largest city in the country now and basically there is very little "Cowboy" left in the city's culture other than the FW Stockyards... FW is a big modern city... Dallas, a big modern city that is practically void of anything "country". San Antonio and El Paso are more "hispanic" than the are "country". Austin is more progressive/hipster. Houston is modern and has Nasa... It's just strange to me how Texas cities promote their past heritage without promoting their current modern cultures. Anyway, I think that's part of why Hollywood plays up those stereotypes. Unfortunately, they miss the mark and usually end up showing Texas as being full of redneck hicks and morons.... and they love to tie George W. to the whole backwards-arse mentality that the perceive as being "uniquely Texan". The ultra-conservative Christian movement has hurt Texas update it's image as a modern and progressive place. Most people in the North, East and West think that Texas is full of not only stupid Cowboys, but rednecks, and narrow-minded, super-religious, conservative, gun-wrack-toting, republicans which includes everyone between suburban soccer moms and white trash bubbas who appear on "COPS". The stereotypes are a much more serious thing than just a little Hollywood fun. They actually represent the way most of the rest of the country sees Texas and Texans. The only people who don't see the problem with the way Hollywood portrays Texas life are the people who actually fit into one of those really insulting stereotypes. IMPO, Texas actually has a big public image problem to overcome.

Actually, Oaklawn is a very desirable neighborhood, and improving everyday. There are parts of OL that have not transitioned yet, but there are also areas that are well into redevelopment. OL is also surrounded by either very affluent neighborhoods or by transitioning areas. From Cedar Springs - the main strip in Oaklawn - the closer you get to Maple Ave, the worse the neighborhood gets... but if you go in any other direction you're in very high dollar real estate. I was driving around OL today just checking out all the changes that are going on. Right now there is a 9 story luxery residential tower being built at Oaklawn and Prescott, I think. I noticed the sign said the condo's will be priced from $600K - $1.5 Million. I've also noticed that a the area seems to be exploding with Brownstone-like townhomes and other high dollar residential zero-lot line developments. There are also high dollar redevelopment projects springing up west of Cedar Springs and I believe the crime rate in that area is not violent crime, but more theft-type crimes... typically. Granted, it's still crime... but I don't think the murder/assault rate in OL is as bad as some on this thread have made it out to be. And, it's certainly NOTHING like the murder/assault rate in South Dallas - where the majority of Dallas' violent crimes take place. However, there are drugs and prostitution in the OL area... But that just goes with any entertainment district that caters to young party-goers. Unfortunately, the gay community in Dallas that centers around the OL community, is suffering from the same drug problems that seem to be the new plague in gay communities around the country... meth, heroin, and X and G, as well as date rape drugs, are all known to be very popular in the gay subculture and there have even been articles in the papers about it recently. Where you have recreational drug users, you will usually find other crimes - prostitution, theft, sex crimes, etc. However, OL has also increased the amount of police officers in the area due to some past problems with hate crimes, etc.... Those crimes seem to be diminishing.... Oak Lawn is the next up-and-coming area of Dallas.... 5 years from now it will be just an extension of Uptown/Turtle Creek/Highland Park.

WELL - since you never answered that question, then I'll just go ahead and assume the answer to that is YES.

713 to 214, you still never answered the question of whether or not you or someone in your family works/worked for SWA... Just curious since the two websites you offered were SWA hosted/sponsored websites. BTW, AA hasn't been "nearly bankrupt" for a couple years. They've posted lossed, but not huge losses. The last couple years they've been moving closer and closer to being int he black and yesterday - for the first time in 5 years - they posted a $58 Million profit for the quarter. It was all over the news today. I personally don't want to see the amendment repealed because I think it will actually hurt everyone involved - DFW, Love, AA, and SWA. I don't think SWA can do much to expand at Love Field - it's too limited by space and there are noise restrictions that need to stay in place that will not allow larger aircraft to fly in/out of Love... Unlike DFW the planes at Love take off and land right over residential areas that are directly across the street from Love field. That is the most overlooked part of the Wright Amendment. Another thing that a lot of people don't think about/realize is that the take off/landing patterns for Love Field are directly over downtown Dallas.... I think there are FAA regulations/restrictions governing flights around downtown Dallas as well.... I don't know how that will be affected if Wright is repealed. Another thing that I personally don't like about SWA is the security of flying in a cattle call system. I have only flown on SWA one time since 911 - and that's because I had a free voucher. The reason I don't like flying SWA post 911 is because they still offer cattle call seating on their planes. The last time I flew, I flew ticketless and just showed up at the gate with a picture ID and my voucher. They glanced at my ID and let me on board a plane that has no manifest with assigned seating. They may know who is on the plane, but in my opinion, the need to know what seat everyone is sitting in as well. How is a sky marshall going to intervene in mid air if he has a tip that there is a security threat on board, but can't tell what seat that person is in? Anyway, this debate can go on forever... It's obvious that 713/214 has some very personal reasons for wanting the Wright Amendment repealed and that's fine. It's one of those things that will never be solved on this forum. One more thing.... I don't think they should close Love Field. I'm not in favor of that at all. I think that would be a huge mistake. I don't think it would do anyone any good to put SWA and AA in the same airport. If SWA wants to stay at Love, the they should be allowed to stay there... That is where they have become so profitable after all... It would be unfair to SWA to force them to fly in/out of DFW. But, at the same time, I don't think the Amendment should be repealed because it completely screws over the City of FW.... FW is the entity that stands to lose the most in this whole ordeal. Dallas doesn't stand to lose anything. If it's repealed expect the relationship between Dallas and FW to dry up very quickly and law suits to be filed.... even if it's overturned it will be long from over....

I think Herb Kellerher has one of the best personalities of all the CEO's in the corp world. He's funny. But, I am sort of against the Wright Amendment repeal because I don't want to see SWA or AA hurt... I think the repeal will do more to hurt SWA than it will to help it. AA is going to go into "Walmart mode" if they repeal the amendment and I think that SWA is too small to compete with AA.... I know they're the underdog and everyone loves the underdog and all that. I just hate to see them forced to compete with AA and the other "big boys". I think the reason they've been so sucessful at Love is because they have filled a good niche there. I think it's a matter of "don't fix what isn't broken". I'm worried they're going to end up regretting the repeal if they actually do manage to win that battle. And, I call it a battle, because it will be the first of many in a long war if they get the Wright Amendment dumped.

A couple updates on the Wright Amendment: 1. Yesterday AA posted quarterly earnings of $58 Million, an indication that things are looking up for AA. They said the profit is due to the number of flyers finally exceeding the price of fuel. 2. State Senator John Ensign of Nevada has introduced a bill to repeal the Wright Amendment today, it's called The Right to Fly Act. 3. Meanwhile, Senators James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Tom Harkin of Iowa have introduced a bill to restrict all fights from Love Field, essentially shutting down Love Field in 3 years and requiring SWA to move to DFW. It's called the "True Competition Act". There was a story on Good Morning Texas on Channel 8 just minutes ago that detailed all these points. Additionally, there has been an independent study by The Boyd Group that throws cold water on both SWA and AA claims over the Wright Amendment, stating that both sides are blowing it out of proportion. "The first claim their study tested was that Dallas Love Field travel would expand dramatically if Wright passes. The study found the airport facility would actually limit expansion of Love Field. Location, gate limits, and street traffic will constrain Southwest's growth and in the long term put Love Field at a disadvantage. Another claim it countered was that frequent flyers would choose Love Field over Dallas/Fort Worth. The study found as the population moves north and west from Dallas, Love Field is less convenient as a gateway. While Dallas and Park Cities flyers may find the airport closer, many others do not. Researchers said when Legend Airlines and others added long distance flights in smaller jets from Love Field the experiment flopped. As for the claim that repealing Wright would hurt American Airlines, the study found that Southwest would see a boost at Love Field, but their options would be limited there too. Travelers would have more options and access at D/FW. The study found that Southwest's reliance on its shorter haul 737 fleet, would make it tough to compete with American Airlines in long haul markets. Boyd Group researchers conclude if both airlines stay put and Wright is repealed, American Airlines has the best shot at dominance." Like I've always said, SWA is waking a sleeping giant if they go head to head with AA. AA didn't become the world's largest airline by being nice and not fighting for their place in the market. Basically, it boils down to which Airline has contributed the most money to the most influential Senator's campaigns.

Well, then both of those sites are SWA sponsered sites.... They also have a tv commercial dedicated to repealing the Wright Amendment.... I saw it tonight. So, 713/214, are you a SWA employee - or have you ever been?

713 to 214, are you a SWA employee? The first website you offer is a SWA website. I'm not sure abou the sponsor of the second website, but it curiously doesn't clearly state who sponsored/posted the second site.

Thanks... the article that I quoted was actually from 1997. It also talked about the other factor in the Wright Amendment - Noise Pollution. The people around Love have been effective so far in keeping large aircraft out of Love due to the noise issue.... Fort Worth has nearly doubled in size since the late 80's and, you're right, FW is no longer easily pushed around by Dallas since it is now the fastest growing large city in DFW... The growth is focused in the Tarrant Co. side now.... It has stopped being about the cities and started being a SWA vs. AA thing. But, FW is not going to let their interest in DFW go lightly. They'll fight to the death over it, as will AA and the other carriers at DFW. SWA has been unsuccessful so far and I don't think they will ever get it over turned.... It's just too big of a battle on too many fronts.... BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION SO DON'T ATTACK ME FOR IT... FOR THE RECORD - THAT IS NOT ME SPEWING FALSE FACTS. LOL

Whoops, I mean Guardian Angels... But I like the idea of the Hell's Angels getting in on the action too....

Uh - only one problem with that theory.... China didn't sign a contract with it's residents. DALLAS signed a contract - they agreed to uphold the Wright Amendment. Point still stands that Dallas is trying to back out of a contract that they willingly entered. And, the reason they're trying to get out of it is because they're afraid SWA will leave Dallas. And, Hizzy is right.... SWA is basically on strike.... I don't know if SWA is going to win this or not. It's something they've been battling for decades to no avail so far. I hope it's never repealed because it screws over the city of FW and American Airlines - which is a MUCH larger employer in this area than SWA will ever be. I also agree with the whole Herb "Killatrain" comments. I don't like him because he whined and whined to kill the bullet trains because of what it was going to do to his precious SWA.... But, now that it's happening to him, he's pissed. I like SWA, but not the cattle call system they use. Sure, they're on time, but whoopy. I couldn't care less about that. I'd rather have good service, an assigned seat, and the service that AA offerse. Personally, I think the Cattle Call seating on SWA is a security threat.... With AA or any other airline the flight crew knows not only who is on board, but what seat they're in. On SWA, if a terrorist were to make it on board, they could never look at the manifest and tell who was in what seat. That seems risky to me...

The Cottom Bowl is going through improvements... Fair Park has been restored in the last couple years... It hasn't helped so far.... Deep Ellum is within walking distance of Fair Park and those renovations have done nothing to help the crime in the area. In fact, Deep Ellum is getting worse, not better. I think the DPD is limited in it's abilities to contain the crime in South Dallas... It's a numbers thing. There just aren't enough cops. And, recently there have been stories about how the Dallas Police Squad car fleet has been aging and they city is having to spend money on replacing literally hundreds of aging squad cars. So, the cops are limited right now in their ability to fight crime all over the city, but it's felt the most in the southern half of the city where it is most needed. On a side note - the Hell's Angels have set their sites on the crime problems in Dallas.... There was a recent new story on the fact that the Dallas Crime has caught the attention of the Hell's Angels. I'm normally not in favor of vigilanty crime fighting, but in this case.... I say go for it. I wish the community in South Dallas would start some sort of self-policing to help with the problems. The community is going to HAVE to get involved and start taking some responsibility for what's going on there. You can't tell me that they can't call in with tips on drug dealers and criminal activity. Years ago, a drug dealer moved into a rental property across the street from my sister, bro-in-law and young nephew... My dad called the police and gave them an anonymous tip... The police raided the place and they were gone for good. Why can't those sort of things take place in communities like South Dallas?

I agree that AA could do some things to be more competitive. However, that doesn't change the facts surrounding the Wright Amendment - and how Dallas is trying to backout of their agreement with FW. Hey, I'm all for free enterprise. But whatever happened to having to uphold the legal obligations that a party willingly enters into? What good is a contract if you don't have to hold up your end of the bargain? SWA should fly out of DFW to enable them to fly anywhere they want... They could do that tomorrow if their REAL interest was to increase their number of domestic destinations. They could keep their business model in place at DFW too... They may have a little trouble with the 20 minute turn around due to traffic at DFW at first, but they could adjust the way they do business to compensate for any unforeseen issues at a larger airport. But, the late flights aren't universally the problem of DFW airport... Delays at other airports, weather, traffic in and out of other airports... all those factors contribute to delays at DFW - not because it's DFW, but because of the nature of being a large international airport with world-wide destinations. SWA could fly out of DFW, see if they can keep their business model working at DFW and THEN try to repeal the amendment - if it wasn't working or their business was hurting for some reason. SWA just needs to be careful because if the Wright Amendment is repealed - just watch how fast AA opens gates at Love and drops ticket prices..... What will SWA do when AA is flying out of Love Field and they're suddenly in a price war with the World's Largest Airline in their own backyard? It's not a given that SWA will profit from the repeal of the Wright Amendment. In fact, all that will do is put them in the boxing ring with a much bigger opponent. AA may not be as profitable, but it's a lot larger and has much larger holdings to leverage if needed. They didn't become the world's largest airline by being polite.

LOL... for once I agree with you Midtowncoog. LOL South Dallas is horrible. I don't know what the solution is. But, I think one of the problems is that the city council members who represent that part of the city are not exactly representing that sector of the city well. There is one in particular - who is not a city council member anymore, I don't believe - who did nothing but raise HEL* all the time - even picketing and getting lots of TV time. He did a lot of complaining about how the city was racest and how "The Man" was keeping THEM down... all the while he's driving around town in a new Ferrarri.... He was on the city council to basically cause problems and get paid. He became known for targeting white businesses - and white individuals - and picketing them with bull horns in front of their businesses and even their homes..... He was arrested a couple times, I think... (but don't quote me on that). Anyway, it got so bad and became such a joke that a local radio station staged a prank where they sent a member of their show to picket the city councilman's house... That too made the local news... That is a prime example of what's wrong in Dallas. You have members of the communities in the southern half of the city who are blowing their horns - literally - and getting elected to the city council based on the fact that they're of the right race and have fooled their communities into believing that they're going to get on the coucil and shake things up and bring some good to the community. Meanwhile, instead of actually DOING something for their community they grab a bull horn, make the local news, and get re-elected over and over... At the same time, that kind of behavior fuels a backlash among other city council members and other areas of the city that have grown to disrespect the areas represented by these types of city council members. But, instead of the community represented by said individual recognizing the fault of their city councilman, they cry "racist" and re-elect the same guys over and over again. It's gotten a little better in the last couple years.... But, when your city council is being compared to the Jerry Springer show in local magazines (Fort Worth, Texas Magazine - Sept 2002) you know you've hit rock bottom. This is also the real reason that the Strong Mayor proposal was put on the ballot in the first place - to remove the city manager/city council form of government in Dallas and empower the mayor to make some actual decisions. Furthermore, it would have empowered the mayor to hire/fire whomever was/wasn't doing their jobs properly. Basically, the reason the strong mayor campain failed wasn't because of the "racist" claims that were made against it - you have to remember that Dallas' last mayor was a black man. The REAL reason that the Strong Mayor effort failed was because the City Council members realized they'd all be out of jobs and would be held accountable by the mayor, not the people in their districts who elect them.... The failure of the Strong Mayor proposal was the worst thing that could have happened in Dallas in recent years. Had it passed, IMHO, it would have turned things around in Dallas. Oh Well.....

The Wright Amendment was put in place by Jim Wright when DFW was built... It protected FW's intrest in DFW Airport since Dallas and FW agreed to build the world's largest airport (at that time) as a joint venture. Love Field was already in Dallas, serving as a regional airport. DFW was build to be an international airport serving all of DFW and North Texas. Dallas agreed to the Wright amendment. People seem to forget that Dallas willingly entered into the agreement. Today, DFW Airport is the largest economic engine in all of DFW and is home to American Airlines - the World's Largest Airline, which offically calls FW home. Can you really blame the city of FW for wanting to uphold the agreement they had with Dallas and to protect one of their largest employers from even more financial difficulty? If DFW does suffer from the repeal of the Wright Amendment so does the city of Fort Worth - and it's Dallas' lack of honoring their word that is potentially going to cause that problem. It is Southwest Airlines that is at the root of everything. They have been offered gates at DFW airport - which would allow them to fly to any state in the nation - or wherever they want to go. But, they're refusing that offer. Southwest Airlines is the trouble-maker here - not FW, not DFW.... If Southwest were to stay at love and fly regionally out of Love and fly to other states out of DFW it would have the same price lowering affect while still allowing them to fly whereever they want. By repealing the Wright Amendment, they are targeting DFW Airport and American Airlines - and indirectly the city of Fort Worth. SWA posted a $159 million profit for the quarter - you can't tell me they can't afford to to open a few gates at DFW to "move about the country". The former Delta gates are being offered to anyone who wants them at a huge discount from their normal rates.... SWA could pick up 10 gates at DFW (I think Love Field has less than 20 gates) and increase their footprint in the market, increase they places they fly, lower ticket prices at DFW and solve all the problems. SWA has the ability to solve the whole mess - they're just being a snotty, little, corporate brat by kicking and screaming because they're not getting their way. On a side note - it's not a bad business model that is hurting American Airlines... It's high fuel cost. They are back to pre-911 numbers in terms of the number of people flying... but the cost of fuel is what is keeping them in the red.