ahh. The classic case of spillage. Airlines like Frontier live off it, Spirit used to. Southwest does in some city pairs in places like ATL. IAD and ORD were all spillage. Load factors don’t tell the whole financial story. Yields do.That’s revenue management 101. In SLC’s case, Delta chose not to compete on that connection. Delta already made their money so the fares became uncompetitive. So some decide to fly on SWA. Another words those thirty passengers flew on SWA because Delta decided to let them. Not the other way around. They are not loyal to Delta BUT if Delta decided to match SWA dollar for dollar, those connections going to Hawaii would evaporate. Delta chooses not to play but they could. Airlines that have the market share have the pricing power. In this case Delta dictates how many will board on SWA to Hawaii. You can take out SLC and plug any city that SWA dominates and it’s the same thing to its competitors. I’d rather see SWA beef up where they have a competitive advantage. Delta has a 56% market share vs SWA’s 10%. That’s not including regionals. PDX is the same thing. If UAL does it, good for them. Almost all of SWA red eyes are set up for connections. I don’t see many connection opportunities in PDX. Having a third competitor in the mix to a low yielding destination like Hawaii would almost certainly be a failure economically. Those airplanes can be used for places where SWA can dictate the fares.