Taking off from intersections with 5000 feet of runway behind them is another way they save money............. (Saw that in AUS two days ago). My FO and I were both kinda shocked to see that....................but, whatever. I'm sure they'll have a great reason for doing that when they reject at high speed and go barreling off the end. Many on here don't seem to understand that flying from EWR, JFK, ORD, etc., are totally different than flying from FLL. It's a fortune in takeoff and landing fees, gate leases, employee costs, etc., and SWA doesn't have to recoup that overhead, do they? They also don't fly to Beijing, Narita, or Paris in a B-777, do they? Had any first class meals on them lately? How about having a bag checked to a foreign destination? Flown first class on a 15 hour flight on them? How much foreign income have they brought into the USA? Don't get me wrong, SWA is a brilliant airline (I still have the letter Herb Kelleher sent me, personally signed, thanking me for buying ten shares of his stock back in 1980!), but they are NOT a full service carrier. You can ride in a VW with all your friends for cheap, or in a Mercedes if you want the bells and whistles. Yes, they are both transportation, but are two totally different animals. Many on here still don't understand that..........................

 

Well, it's not an argument. It's my opinion that time will tell what happens.

Lots of folks on here that have more #'s than I do. However, I do believe that it is a fact that if it were not for their hedges they would be losing $$$ right now. That is based on their last couple of quarterly results minus the hedge amounts and you have a loss.

If this is wrong I apologize and pls show me the #'s.

Then again, I don't follow the business management of airlines very closely.

 

SWA provides a particular service that seems to meet or exceed the desires of many, many consumers. If they were to get into the other markets you speak of above, they would have to find a way to provide the service in an acceptable manner to the consumers at a price that allowed them to profit, or they would fail at it. How can you dislike a company for doing well at what they do. Now, if other airlines found a way to do what they do profitably, then they would be as popular and profitable as SWA.

If it costs more to provide first class, you have to charge more. If it costs more to fly into different areas, charge more or figure out a way to lower the cost. If the market was allowed to operate freely, the inefficient airlines/companies would fail, and the efficient ones would succeed.

Either way, your argument does not make any sense. SWA is providing a service at a price that people are paying. If people wanted more leg room or first class service, etc, they would not frequent SWA as much. Until you stop calling your customers idiots for paying for what they want, you will just be a failing industry.

 

You're right that you can't book first class on WN. But that's the minority of the people that get carried by CO, so what's the point of bring that up? You take the majority of the business models and compare them to the majority of the business models of the other company to get the comparison. I could sit here all day and make the same argument that you make using city pairs that CO doesn't serve. Yes, WN doesn't do international service, but that's the profitable part of most legacy carriers models, so why does it seem like that's always brought up as a negative? I mean, good for CO that they provide it, it's SUPPOSED to be the most profitable part of their business.

 

Is it "full service" or just "different service"? You just can't compare SWA to Legacies.........you'll sleep better at night not worrying about the differences. The only thing they have in common is they both fly airplanes.......and it pretty much ends there.

 

You are correct in your assessment. However, Southwest also isn't designed to do any of that. Their business model is designed from the beginning to be different from every other airline. And as you mentioned and as I agree, Southwest is a brilliant airline.

 

Airline management study is essentially required with my involvement at our union. It is voluntary, believe it is beneficial for our pilot group since we can counter management opinions/proposals with more information, etc.

Google "SWA profit reports" and enjoy the read. It is diverse, your opinion is correct and supported by some articles. If you stay micro and not macro, certainly you will feel vindicated, but it doesn't mean the opinion is correct <g> over the history of the company. It is a narrow view about the ability of SWA to make a profit. Know you are smart so will let you read how SWA management works diligently to lower cost all the time (even when profitable) unlike most carriers managements who are not interested in the long haul profitability since they know they will not be at said airline <ng>.
Hedges are usefull, work both ways (witness UAL hedge play). Airlines are inherently massive energy users, makes good business sense in the business plan to reduce the energy costs. Historically, SWA does hedging and a thousand of other management programs exceedingly well with their pilots, F/A's, mechanics, travel agents, etc.

 

>>>>>Take those away and they will not be any different than many of the legacies. <<<<<

Yes they would be, just as they were in the past before all the fuel hedging. They operate much more efficiently. They do more with fewer people, they have more flights with fewer gates (due to point to point flying and not needing huge amounts of gates for hub surges that then sit unused for hours), one type of aircraft (not paying pilots to sit in ground school and sims for 5 weeks for a/c changes), and many other efficiencies including much lower debt loads to serve (very low debt/equity ratio).


>>>They too would be losing $$$ right now if it wasn't for the hedges. <<<<

Everyone says that but in fact, if not for hedges, SWA would have simply increased fares much more. Instead, they are able to keep fares lower and make it tough on the competition.

 

From an employee point of view (which is the only one that matters to me as a professional pilot), let's see: (1) I was just furloughed by CAL for no good reason other than contract negotiation malevolence (2) just interviewed by SWA for a job despite the oil debacle of this summer (3) if I am hired by SWA my pay will double (from what I was making at CAL) the day I step on the property plus I get medical. Enough said if you ask me.

 

Not to mention how much better the culture/morale is at SWA compared to basically everywhere else. How much is that worth?