My point exactly.

Gracias!

I never said the start up costs were large, and that isn't really the discussion. The discussion is about performance of branded excluding start up costs. Pointing out that start up costs were low only makes the actual results look worse.

Aren't you a MAG pilot?

Hmm...

The only reason an airline survives is because SWA lets them survive. However, comparing XJT to SWA is like comparing apples to oranges. ASM's, cities served, aircraft used, etc.

SWA is gonna kill Frotnier out of DEN (I think). I don't think SWA gives a rats a$$ about a city pair that has a demand for 37 seats. However, if XJT was running 4 airplanes a day between Bakersfield, CA andSpokane, WA filling all 50 seats on all four flights... SWA would put a plane on that route and be successful.

As long as XJT stays in their niche markets they will do just fine. I don't work for XJT... but I'd like to see them be successful as I have a few friends over there. It seems like a lot of people on this site are waiting for them to fail so they can say "I told you so." Personally, I'm rooting for Skybus to bite the dust!

I'm sure United and Continental feel nothing but gratitude towards SWA for their benevolence.
Then again, SWA would have a pretty hard time competing with UAL on that IAD-LHR leg.

I agree, if we start to oversell every flight, SWA might beat us down with a bat. However they are slowing growth and deliveries of a/c so I would imagine it would be a while before they started to jump on our routes, although If your going to kill the "competition" as I am sure SWA is well aware, you do it quickly................. Its a shame that the either we didn't have bigger airplanes or people were willing to pay more becuase the "branded" experience is a lot more enjoyable then the "farm animal" mentality that SWA has............(pax experience wise that is)


And the comment about SWA letting airlines survive is ridiculous, not everybody that flies are "financially challenged", they actually enjoy first class and traveling to cities without 5 stops, as well as flying internationally, last time I was in Rome I hadn't seen any SWA 767-400's there

Nevermind... that doesn't deserve a response.

No offense, but petty attacks like this do nothing to serve your purpose, and actually only make you seem like a little child in an argument. Can't get your way? Well, just gradually resort to attacks on peoples personalities and jobs! I mean, hell, I didn't know that even if he/she DOES work for MAG, that automatically meant stupidity.

Learn to look at the bigger picture, and that just because you work for one of the better regionals means that it's good. Most major pilots would never touch ANY regional again with a 10 foot pole. Not much distinction between them, so why try the bullying game and try to bring eachother down, because on this same argument that you're going on in this post, 100 men and women from SWA could come on and say "Aren't you an XJet pilot? Hmmm......".

All that being said, I'm sincerely rooting for XJet to succeed (there are very few airlines that I don't root for, just for the overall health of the industry), but to say that they don't have significant challenges to overcome. Myself and others have talked about some of these challenges before, but they're seemingly ignored (or insulted). What about the base root of the whole problem: the 50 seat jet? The 50 seat jet is becoming less and less economically viable in this day and age, with most airlines trying to reduce their dependence on them. Trying to make an economically viable model using only them is going to be a challenge to say the least.

How's this relevant? Especially coming from a GoJet pilot. LOL!

Hmmmm?

Nope, I never even applied to Mesa. Try again.