Union hints of acquisition
03-27-2024, 09:05 AM
#201
SDQ Base Chief
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 320 CA
Posts: 5,588
Originally Posted by DrSmacFum
Ditto... but how likely do we all think that JetBlue IS the main airline in question here? This was picking up steam, before the union comms went out
If SWA wanted to just diversify fleet then someone like F9/NK or even Breeze would make sense.
Someone else commented that SWA never pays full price for a carrier, so while JB is by no means dominating things financially it is still much healthier than some of the other options.
03-27-2024, 02:45 PM
#202
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: DOWNGRADE COMPLETE: Thanks Gary. Thanks SWAPA.
Posts: 6,613
Originally Posted by Flyby1206
I think that if SWA wanted to merge with a carrier purely for network expansion gap filling then JB would be the best bet. Although we do come with considerable fleet complexity even with just the multiple A320 family variants.
If SWA wanted to just diversify fleet then someone like F9/NK or even Breeze would make sense.
Someone else commented that SWA never pays full price for a carrier, so while JB is by no means dominating things financially it is still much healthier than some of the other options.
If SWA wanted to just diversify fleet then someone like F9/NK or even Breeze would make sense.
Someone else commented that SWA never pays full price for a carrier, so while JB is by no means dominating things financially it is still much healthier than some of the other options.
I don’t know, I just can’t see the geniuses in Dallas being able to take on three different fleet types. You guys at JBA have a really nice product and I hope it survives. Best of luck to you.
03-27-2024, 03:36 PM
#203
At your mom's house
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: cpt 737
Posts: 2,661
It's the route structure and how they use pilots.
right now if a plane if pilot goes down its plug and play. With another type they couldnt substitute as effectively.
The only way another type works is if that plane does something very specific, ie long haul.
You couldnt put 100 Airbus into the network it wouldn't make sense, dollars.
50 220s island hoping? Maybe but that's a big cost for something different.
they'll wait on the max 7. They are pot committed
right now if a plane if pilot goes down its plug and play. With another type they couldnt substitute as effectively.
The only way another type works is if that plane does something very specific, ie long haul.
You couldnt put 100 Airbus into the network it wouldn't make sense, dollars.
50 220s island hoping? Maybe but that's a big cost for something different.
they'll wait on the max 7. They are pot committed
03-27-2024, 05:32 PM
#204
SDQ Base Chief
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 320 CA
Posts: 5,588
Originally Posted by WHACKMASTER
Yeah, but neither was AirTran when they acquired us. We weren’t in dire straits but weren’t setting the world on fire. In about the same relative financial position as JBA right now (basically holding their own).
I don’t know, I just can’t see the geniuses in Dallas being able to take on three different fleet types. You guys at JBA have a really nice product and I hope it survives. Best of luck to you.
I don’t know, I just can’t see the geniuses in Dallas being able to take on three different fleet types. You guys at JBA have a really nice product and I hope it survives. Best of luck to you.
03-28-2024, 04:48 AM
#205
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: FIRE ALPA
Posts: 3,082
Originally Posted by hoover
It's the route structure and how they use pilots.
right now if a plane if pilot goes down its plug and play. With another type they couldnt substitute as effectively.
The only way another type works is if that plane does something very specific, ie long haul.
You couldnt put 100 Airbus into the network it wouldn't make sense, dollars.
50 220s island hoping? Maybe but that's a big cost for something different.
they'll wait on the max 7. They are pot committed
right now if a plane if pilot goes down its plug and play. With another type they couldnt substitute as effectively.
The only way another type works is if that plane does something very specific, ie long haul.
You couldnt put 100 Airbus into the network it wouldn't make sense, dollars.
50 220s island hoping? Maybe but that's a big cost for something different.
they'll wait on the max 7. They are pot committed
03-28-2024, 05:58 AM
#206
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 273
Originally Posted by Avroman
Then SWA will be out of business in 20-25 years when they are forced to replace the oldest Max 8's with some new fleet type unless they can convince Boeing and the FAA to certify a new type with 1950's tech.... good luck.
03-28-2024, 12:52 PM
#207
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,845
Originally Posted by Avroman
Then SWA will be out of business in 20-25 years when they are forced to replace the oldest Max 8's with some new fleet type unless they can convince Boeing and the FAA to certify a new type with 1950's tech.... good luck.
03-28-2024, 01:48 PM
#208
At your mom's house
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: cpt 737
Posts: 2,661
Originally Posted by Avroman
Then SWA will be out of business in 20-25 years when they are forced to replace the oldest Max 8's with some new fleet type unless they can convince Boeing and the FAA to certify a new type with 1950's tech.... good luck.
03-28-2024, 07:20 PM
#209
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by flyguy81
Thats a long time to get a clean sheet design tested and approved. Based on their track record, Boeing should prob start in the next 5-10 years.
03-28-2024, 08:42 PM
#210
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,443
Originally Posted by jetset
you mean they should have started 5-10 years ago
They have basically mismanaged their way into this situation. Time will tell if they manage their way out.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
