Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What City Will Southwest Announce Next  
User currently offlineSunValley From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3614 times:

Southwest announced PHilly as their next city, but prior to that announcement a couple of Southwest officials stated that Southwest will announce several new cities before the end of the 2nd quarter of 2004. They are taking delivery of additional aircraft, and with these additions there will probably be another city announced before June of 2004. Will it be Charlotte, or what does everyone think?

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3513 times:

IF, and that is a big if, they added another city in 2004 it would not be until 4th quarter. I think they will be beefing up PHL and connecting the dots in there route map. Tho who ever thought PHL would be part of the route map, so only time will tell.


You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineUsairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3326 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3486 times:

Yeah, they won't be adding a new city for a while. They will concentrate on increasing PHL to an eventual 40 flights a day.

User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5327 posts, RR: 53
Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3500 times:

I still think CAE might get WN. They've been in negotiations for 2 years now, the airport is undergoing infrastructure upgrades and, most importantly, it's served by no LCCs - only

US going to CLT, PIT, PHL, DCA, and LGA
DL going to ATL, CVG, DFW, LGA, and CO / KMCO), USA - Florida">MCO
UA going to IAD and ORD
CO going to IAH and EWR
NW going to DTW

Further, something like 50% of our gates aren't normally used, (6 out of 13 gates unused), so there's definitely space for another airline. Combine that with CAE being a college town, meaning people seeking cheap fares out during breaks and what not, the fact that we have the National Advocacy Center and Fort Jackson (meaning gov't could book cheap into CAE out of some cities). To me it seems like a market begging for an LCC.



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineFlyABR From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 637 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3473 times:

one could only hope MSP is on SW's list!!

User currently offlineAtcboy73 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3419 times:

Im still surprised they don't go to COS.

I have thought that one would come for some time now, but I wouldn't be shocked to see IAD before COS.


User currently offlineSWAFA30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3361 times:

I have thought that one would come for some time now, but I wouldn't be shocked to see IAD before COS.

The A Concourse construction at BWI is scheduled for completion in 2005. At the time, WN plans to expand operations there to upwards of 300 daily departures. Southwest has spent a great deal of time and money building up the BWI focus city making service to IAD or even DCA doubtful at best.


User currently offlineAA7573E From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 475 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3307 times:

@SWAFA30

Upwards of 300 daily departures from BWI? Where did you get that number? No way that is right. Think about it.

For the month of September 2003, BWI had 20,875 commercial flights. For simple math, divide that by 30 days to get an average daily number of flights totaling 695. You are telling me that WN is going to increase overall daily operations at BWI by 43%? I am calling BS. My numbers come from the BWI statistical database.

WN will expand operations at BWI, I will give you that. Just come up with a more realistic number.



[Edited 2003-11-26 15:33:09]


See you up front!
User currently offlineSWAFA30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3302 times:

Southwest announced PHilly as their next city, but prior to that announcement a couple of Southwest officials stated that Southwest will announce several new cities before the end of the 2nd quarter of 2004. They are taking delivery of additional aircraft, and with these additions there will probably be another city announced before June of 2004. Will it be Charlotte, or what does everyone think?

Interesting topic. Southewest's infamous internal rumormill is pretty quiet right now. I think we are still recovering from the "shock" of the Philly announcement. Every once in awhile you will hear the "We're gonna buy Aloha" rumor pop up again but none us are really think that one is credible.

As you ponder this subject, you have to remember that with the Philly announcement, SWA made a major shift in strategy. Our leadership as much as admitted that we went into Philly to establish a foothold on the market before jetBlue could beat us to the punch. From now on you have to keep in mind that the "jetBlue factor" could play a major role in the markets we enter in the coming years. Secondary markets may be off the table for the time being. The focus may likely shift towards entering major markets to fend off jetBlue and connecting the dots to shore up and protect the markets we already serve.

So the real question is...."Where does jetBlue plan to go next and can SWA get there first?"


User currently offlineSWAFA30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3282 times:

Upwards of 300 daily departures from BWI? Where did you get that number? No way that is right. Think about it.



For the month of September 2003, BWI had 20,875 commercial flights. For simple math, divide that by 30 days to get an average daily number of flights totaling 695. You are telling me that WN is going to increase overall daily operations at BWI by 43%? I am calling BS. My numbers come from the BWI statistical database, where do your numbers come from?

WN will expand operations at BWI, I will give you that. Just come up with a more realistic number.



Actually, I am based at BWI and I had a conversation with a manager from BWI Ground Ops just last night. He was the last person to throw out a number that large but he certainly was not the first. Now, I have no inside information, I'm just a flight attendant. But, it is no secret that BWI is the engine that drives our entire east coast operation and that the northeast is where the company placing much of it's focus. When the A concourse is completed we will occupy all of A and all of B essentially doubling our capacity at BWI. What exactly do you think we are going to do with all of those gates??? 300 flights? 275 flights? 250 flights? We won't know until the new concourse is open and the schedule is announced but the people who will have to hire, train, and manage the BWI station are anticipating doubling capacity when the new concourse is opened. Southwest is all about frequent flights. It is one thing we do have to offer the business traveler. That is why our systemwide load factors are so comparitively low. In the interest of making sure some markets have frequent flights we fly around alot of empty seats. PVD, MHT, and BDL have many flights but these are popular markets and could always use more. ISP is in the midst of a 4 gate expansion and will also likely receive additional BWI service. RDU and ORF could use a few extra non stops. Then there are the Florida markets. STL expansion with service to BWI? Likely. The transcons are doing quite well and there is no reason there won't be additional capacity on these routes. The list gones on. By the end of 2005 SWA will have taken delivery of 64 aircraft giving a net gain of 42 when you factor in -200 retirments. The demand is there, we will have the aircraft, we will have the gates and facilities. Unless the BWI airport is phyiscally incapable of handling that much traffic, there is no reason to believe the projections are very far off base. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Meet you back here in 2 years.


[Edited 2003-11-26 16:09:20]

User currently offline727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5952 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3243 times:

They'll have 25 gates at BWI, so yeah I think 300 sounds about right. That would put them ahead of PHX and LAS. Also, if you look at BWI geographically, do you think there will be an attempt to HUB it?


Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineAA7573E From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 475 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3254 times:

@SWAFA30

You clearly have access to better information and gossip than I do, so I will give you the benefit of that doubt. That being said, I am not sure that the strutural economic economics of it work out.


  • A 43% increase in flight operations for the entire facility would be unmatched in DC Metro aviation history. Not saying it can't be done, just that it has never been done before.

  • Can the area handle that much more capacity? It seems that with increases of that magnitude, WN could be making some of the same mistakes that the Network carriers have made throughout their history. The simple fact that gates exist, does not in its own right mandate that you must increase flights. How many nonstops can WN economically make work out of BWI?

    They already have 7 to ALB, 1 to ABQ, 2 to AUS, 4 to BHM, 7 to BUF, 8 to MDW, 5 to CLE, 2 to CMH, 9 to BDL, 2 to HOU, 3 to IND, 2 to JAN, 3 to JAX, 3 to MCI, 1 to LIT, 9 to ISP, 2 to LAX, 5 to SDF, 11 to MHT, 9 to BNA, 1 to MSY, 7 to ORF, 9 to MCO, 5 to PHX, 12 to PVD, 6 to RDU, 1 to SLC, 2 to SAT, 2 to SAN, 1 to SJC, 7 to TPA, and 4 to PBI. That is a total of 152 current nonstops. How many more can the market handle? Its not 1995, this is 2003(4), and there is not that much demand out there. I would love to know what load factors are like out of BWI on the heavily saturated markets.

    I just don't want to see WN shoot themselves in the foot by using the old if we build it they will come philosophy. 300 new flights seems like a huge, illogical amount to add. Only time will tell. Oh yeah, and FYI, any station that operates that many flights a day is most clearly a hub, regardless of what WN wants to call it!

    [Edited 2003-11-26 16:08:00]


See you up front!
User currently offlineSunValley From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3090 times:

SWAFA30, I must concur with you. The "jetBlue factor" is apparantly what will be one of the factors WN researches and considers whenever they procceed with growth. However, I also believe that WN is a sly hunter looking for prey,(oportunistic-as they should be) and I do believe that the wounded (US) are very vulnerable to their advances. It seems to me that WN will (as they have in the past) keep their sites on the goings on at US in Charlotte. It's interesting that the evolution of the WN philosphy, takes very abrupt turns (very in frequently though) when it changes.
Remember how WN said they were at war when United Shuttle & Continental Lite came into existance.


User currently offlineSWAFA30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3096 times:

A 43% increase in flight operations for the entire facility would be unmatched in DC Metro aviation history. Not saying it can't be done, just that it has never been done before.

I think where I made the mistake was in giving the impression that we intend to use each and every gate on the new A concourse to max capacity as soon as they become available. I think a more accurate statement would have been..."When the A concourse is completed SWA will have the facilities in place to eventually operate upwards of 300 flights per day" We are opening PHL with 4 gates but with only 14 flights projected when we initiate service. However, we will have the potential to operate up to 40 daily flights from those 4 gates at the PHL station. However, if you look at our BWI operations over the past few years, we have grown exponentially, year over year. We will continue to slowly build flights as the A concourse nears completion. By 2005 when the new facilities are finished we have have eased up from 152 flights to 180 or 190.


Can the area handle that much more capacity?

I simply don't know...that is outside of my area of expertise. How would ops at BWI/DCA/IAD considering the numbers we are kicking around here compare to JFK/LGA/EWR?

It seems that with increases of that magnitude, WN could be making some of the same mistakes that the Network carriers have made throughout their history. The simple fact that gates exist, does not in its own right mandate that you must increase flights. How many nonstops can WN economically make work out of BWI?

If have to think that both SWA and the Maryland Aviation Administration looked at this issue long and hard before even breaking ground. I have to assume that this kind of capital expenditure was based on reasonable expectation that these new facilities were necessary.




They already have 7 to ALB, 1 to ABQ, 2 to AUS, 4 to BHM, 7 to BUF, 8 to MDW, 5 to CLE, 2 to CMH, 9 to BDL, 2 to HOU, 3 to IND, 2 to JAN, 3 to JAX, 3 to MCI, 1 to LIT, 9 to ISP, 2 to LAX, 5 to SDF, 11 to MHT, 9 to BNA, 1 to MSY, 7 to ORF, 9 to MCO, 5 to PHX, 12 to PVD, 6 to RDU, 1 to SLC, 2 to SAT, 2 to SAN, 1 to SJC, 7 to TPA, and 4 to PBI. That is a total of 152 current nonstops. How many more can the market handle? Its not 1995, this is 2003(4), and there is not that much demand out there. I would love to know what load factors are like out of BWI on the heavily saturated markets.

In lieu of other amenities SWA's main appeal to the business flyer is price and frequency. If we can't offer this all important segement of the traveling public anything else we try to give them frequent flights between key markets. At some points during the day we push 3 flights from DAL to HOU within a 45 minute time span. Our emphasis on flight frequency is partly to blame for our comparitively low system load factors. We fly around a lot of empty seats in the interest of maintaining frequency. This has been the foundation on which our intra-Texas and intra-California "house" has been built. The same scenario is now playing out in BWI. The beauty of BWI is that is a great mix of both O&D and connecting traffic. Some of the markets are indeed saturated or at least at adequate frequency levels. Others are still in need of additional service. In the wake of Midway's departure from the market, BWI-RDU-BWI is always full and could use additional flights. ISP is in the midst of an expansion and will likely add additional frequency. As additional markets continue to come on line they will likely be on the east coast and as such will feed into BWI. STL is expected to expand as AA continues to shrink and BWI may get a flight or two. SDF currently has a 5hr 25minute gap in service in the middle of the day that could easily be filled. Additionally, there are other key long haul markets that have yet to be tapped, such as OAK and SEA. The decision to retrofit the entire -700 fleet(144 jets) with the blended winglet can be taken as an indication of the company's commitment to long haul markets.

Doubtless SWA is looking pretty far down the road. We often hear management speak about positioning SWA to take advantage of an opportunity if one presents itself. What if US goes under and PIT, CLT, and LGA suddenly find themselves in desparate need of service? There is also the RJ factor to consider. It is no secret that they are under consideration and their integration into the fleet could and would open up multiple smaller east coast markets that could feed into BWI.

I just don't want to see WN shoot themselves in the foot by using the old if we build it they will come philosophy. 300 new flights seems like a huge, illogical amount to add. Only time will tell. Oh yeah, and FYI, any station that operates that many flights a day is most clearly a hub, regardless of what WN wants to call it!

I don't want to see SWA shoot themselves in the foot either. The money I earn working for them pays my rent. We are not talking about 300 additional flights...we are talking about building BWI up to 300. As you said....only time will tell. Our resistance to the term "hub" comes from the fact that we operate a mix of point to point and connecting routes rather than placing all of our "eggs" in one or two hub "baskets". Small markets like JAN or TUS don't just feed into a single hub...they operate a flight or two into other key markets.



[Edited 2003-11-26 18:19:40]

User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4011 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2991 times:

We get 11 BWI nonstops, and I can't see a need for more...even though it's my home airport. But Burlington and Portland (perhaps even Bangor) come to mind as possible eventual New England additions out of BWI. And despite there being all sorts of roadblocks to starting such service, Southwest would mint money on starting service to the Canadian Maritimes...Halifax, St. Johns, St. John, et al. How DO people up there get to places like Orlando, Tampa, etc? That would be an awesome market to crack. And before someone says that 'nobody lives up there,' keep in mind that Southwest flies to a whole lot of 'nobody lives there' kind of places.

Chris in NH


User currently offlineScottb From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6573 posts, RR: 32
Reply 15, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2995 times:

Currently, BWI is up to 159 daily WN departures (there are also 4 daily to FLL, 2 to LAS, 3 to STL). If you look at the numbers of flights and destinations, it's obvious that there are a large number of destinations from BWI which are still underserved or unserved with respect to non-stop service on WN from BWI. For example, UA runs 7 daily non-stops between IAD and LAX; it's clear that there is room for more BWI-LAX service. BWI-LAS could also likely support more than two daily non-stops, given that BWI-PHX supports 5, while BWI-MSY can support more than one daily non-stop with over 500 daily O&D passengers. With AA's pulldown of STL, there's clearly an opportunity to add more BWI-STL flights. BWI-OAK, BWI-SEA, BWI-PDX, and BWI-ONT (and maybe even BWI-TUS) all could probably manage daily non-stops to BWI. Just by "connecting the dots" WN could increase service at BWI to nearly 200 daily departures.

Then you start adding new cities -- and I think this is where adding service to PHL could end up being a stroke of genius in the long term (especially if US Airways were to fail). Many smaller cities in the Northeast and Southeast (think PWM, CAE, GSP, CHS, SYR, RIC, GSO, ROC, DAY, RSW, etc.) probably couldn't support 10-12 daily non-stops to focus cities in WN's existing network. But add three or four dailies to PHL (along with a similar number to BWI, one or two each to some of MDW/CO / KMCO), USA - Florida">MCO/TPA/BNA/LAS/PHX) and a lot of those cities end up being prime expansion opportunities for WN. Ten additional cities in the east probably means anywhere from 50 to 100 additional BWI flights. And again, in the event of a UAIR liquidation, a PIT or CLT focus city opens up even more cities in the east for expansion. While replicating the US Airways network in the east doesn't seem like a great strategy at first glance, I'd argue that much of that airline's problems are due to inefficient operations and a broken pricing scheme.

As for the next new city after PHL (the original topic of this thread), I honestly have no clue. COS and FAT are good contenders out west, while there are at least a dozen in the east which are possible. RIC service was sort of pre-announced when ORF was added. Before PHL was announced, I would have said that any new city would have to support several dailies to BWI, but clearly that's not true of PHL (which is a strong market in itself). And if WN can make PHL work, I can't see why they couldn't make BOS work as well. Gates at BOS will become more plentiful once DL (and possibly CO & NW) move into the new Terminal A, and US has 18 gates in Terminal B.


User currently offlineB747Skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2848 times:

What is next...?
xxx
Ouagadougou, in Burkina Faso, Africa...
Non-stop daily service from Podunk, Anystate - USA...
xxx
(s) Skipper  Big grin


User currently offlineGalvanair777 From United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2779 times:

Southwest is announcing daily non-stop service to the Moon in the Second quarter of 2004...


GalvanAir now Serving Airliners.net!
User currently offlineUAL777CONTRAIL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2772 times:

Who cares where they go next, no doubt it will be the east coast? No brainer.


UAL 777 CONTRAIL


User currently offlineB764 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 752 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2725 times:

The Jetblue factor could definitely do Charlotte some good in bringing WN here. JetBlue has stated they want to start service to Charlotte in 2005 with EMB-190s. Southwest probably has a spare 737 or two they could easily bring into Charlotte before JetBlue gets their 190s. Since it appears US Airways continues to struggle with $$$$ and a solution isn't in the works, why wouldn't Southwest go after US Airways second biggest market?

This may not be a problem, but I believe there is only one open gate here in Charlotte.


User currently offlinePVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3406 posts, RR: 17
Reply 20, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2736 times:

The PHL announcement killed my ABE theory, and clearly shows the changing of the times at WN. Given that, I think that they will likely go to larger markets where they can fend off Jetblue. WN already serves many of the larger cities I can think of off hand, but here are some that they don't that could possibly be next: (I admit to not knowing the populations of these cities, as they are just guesses)

no particular order

MSP
den via COS?
CLT
GSO
GSP
CHS
RIC
MEM
FAT
RSW

As far as some of the other posts here: I'm not going to debate the economics of, probability/practicality of, nor the timing when any new WN city MIGHT be announced. This is just a topic of discussion and again, if you don't like it...don't read it, never mind post an arrogant message.


User currently offlineAA7573E From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 475 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2696 times:

@SWAFA30

I used to live near DAL, and I know the frequency you guys run out of there to cities like SAT, HOU and AUS. However, my assertion is that the model might not work that much longer. I know, who am I to say that? I bet you dimes to dollars that the heads of Brannif, PanAm, TWA, National (old National) and Eastern were quite confident that their model would never break...but they did. And mind you those were some of the largest and most widespread carriers of their times.

Flooding the market with capacity, and flying a large volume of empty seats does not, in the long run, make good sense. It is a misallocation of resources and in some sense, a waste of money. If demand in the NE picks up to the point where all those extra seats are needed, the WN looks like a bunch of very smart business people. However, if that demand stays where it is, there will be NO need for anywhere near that much capacity and then WN has a problem on their hands. Again, I am not saying I think they are headed for 11 or anything like that, just that all business plans have to change.

The deal with the Maryland Aviation Authority was researched based on PRE 9/11 demand and traffic flow. I guess that is my biggest concern. That the basic underpinnings of the deal, no longer exist, and the level of demand that was previously in that market, is no longer there.

And a hub is a hub is a hub. Any station manager will tell you, that 300 flights a day equals a hub!

Listen, I am a loyal AA flyer, but I have always been a WN fan. I don't like the way you guys board, but I have been impressed with the business side of the airline, and always like to see the gambles you guys take payoff! I just don't want you to think I am a WN basher, I am really more interested in the economics of this huge expansion.

Cheers, and Happy Thanksgiving!

AA7573E





See you up front!
User currently offlineJAL From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 5078 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2664 times:

A Canadian city would be great!


Work Hard But Play Harder
User currently offlineSWAFA30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2667 times:

I used to live near DAL, and I know the frequency you guys run out of there to cities like SAT, HOU and AUS. However, my assertion is that the model might not work that much longer. I know, who am I to say that? I bet you dimes to dollars that the heads of Brannif, PanAm, TWA, National (old National) and Eastern were quite confident that their model would never break...but they did. And mind you those were some of the largest and most widespread carriers of their times.

You have named some truly great carriers that have sadly, indeed come and gone. Each airlines' situation was unique and had myriad factors that contributed to their demise. We're talking everything from mismanagement, labor troubles, and deregulation, to terrorist bombings, union troubles and in some cases plain old fashioned arrogance. Historically, Southwest has been exceedingly well managed. The only thing I could see working against that tradition of success would be complacency fueled by arrogance. Our recent announcement of service to PHL can be viewed as proof that management is not unwilling to step away from the traditional business plan. We have always been known for our fondness for smaller, secondary airports that we can get in and out of quickly and easily. From all accounts PHL is neither of those things. The reality is that a very fierce competitor(B6) had their eye on the market and settling for ABE was just not going to keep us in the game. We had to "break the mold" and show some flexibility in order to remain competitive. In recent years we have also branched out into long-haul service up to and including transcontinental flights. This is another departure from the high frequency short-haul model that we adhered to for years. Obviously, we have not abandoned the short hauls but the -700 has allowed us to stay flexible and expand the kinds of routes we fly. The folks in the big offices earn their money by knowing what of SWA's storied business model can and must change and what must be preserved at all cost. For the time being I think they have a handle on maintaining that delicate balance.

Flooding the market with capacity, and flying a large volume of empty seats does not, in the long run, make good sense. It is a misallocation of resources and in some sense, a waste of money. If demand in the NE picks up to the point where all those extra seats are needed, the WN looks like a bunch of very smart business people. However, if that demand stays where it is, there will be NO need for anywhere near that much capacity and then WN has a problem on their hands. Again, I am not saying I think they are headed for 11 or anything like that, just that all business plans have to change.

I'm not an airline analyst but I believe our CASM are low enough that we can in a sense "afford" to fly some empty seats in the interest of maintaining frequency as part of our overall business plan. In the retail world I think they refer to it as a "loss leader". You sell a 'Finding Nemo" DVD for $9.95 just to get people in the door even though the going rate is $15.95. As a retailer you are gambling on the customer spending 3x the $6 you lost on the DVD once they are in the store. Likewise, we understand that in order to get the prized business traveler on your full 7am flight from HOU to DAL you have to offer return flights at 2PM that will go out half full because he is a full fare passenger and he wants the flexibility to jump on a earlier flight if his meeting gets out early. I do not have the figures on our BELF in front of me but I beleive it is around 55 to 60%. That means we can operate a 137 seat jet on a route with only 75 to 80 passengers on board and still turn a profit. Additionally, while there are many high frequency routes that have low load factors, they are balanced by many others that operate at or just below capacity day in and day out. For every DAL-MAF flight we push with only 50 people we push 2 BWI-RDU flights or PHX-LAX flights that are oversold by 2 seats. The theory is that the profit margins are so high on many of our routes, they in turn support the less popular city pairs. That is how SWA can operate a 737 into a market where the other majors have been forced to downsize to RJ service and we still turn a profit.

History has shown though that if a route does not work...we will bite the bullet and pull out. ISP-PVD comes to mind. When analysis shows that our movable assets can be put to better use elsewhere...we move em.

The deal with the Maryland Aviation Authority was researched based on PRE 9/11 demand and traffic flow. I guess that is my biggest concern. That the basic underpinnings of the deal, no longer exist, and the level of demand that was previously in that market, is no longer there.

A brief perusal of the BWI airport's website shows passenger enplanements for BWI in general and SWA in particular have continued to rise year over year even in the post 9/11 marketplace. See attached link:

http://www.bwiairport.com/6pressro/09sept/in_09_12_03.shtml

The demand may not currently exist to support an overnight doubling of capacity at BWI but, there is certainly no decline in demand and as new markets are added, there is no reason to believe that an increase in demand will not come with them.

And a hub is a hub is a hub. Any station manager will tell you, that 300 flights a day equals a hub!

On man's hub is another man's focus city.  Wink/being sarcastic


Listen, I am a loyal AA flyer, but I have always been a WN fan. I don't like the way you guys board, but I have been impressed with the business side of the airline, and always like to see the gambles you guys take payoff! I just don't want you to think I am a WN basher, I am really more interested in the economics of this huge expansion.

No harm done. I can always tell the WN bashers from the people who are really trying to have an intelligent dialogue....you definitely don't come across as a WN basher. I go back and forth on our boarding process. I am a commuter crew member so I fly SWA as a passenger hundreds of time per year. This gives me a unique perspective as both an employee and a "customer". As a flight attendant I see the benefits of the dreaded cattle call and open seating. For our operation, it just seems to get the butts in the seats and the planes off the gates faster. As a non-rev passenger I fly standby so open seating is the only thing that saves me from an endless string of middle seats. However, when I do get stuck in that seat it's not that big a deal. It does not cost me a penny to occupy that seat. I forget sometimes that my Customers often pay hundreds of dollars for that very same middle seat. Under those circumstances I can see how their opinions would be much stronger than mine. Despite managements repeated protestations to the contrary I firmly believe that seat assignments are coming. Other LCCs have proved that you CAN assign seats and still get your aircraft off the gate. It is only a matter of time.

Cheers, and Happy Thanksgiving!
Thank You and likewise to you and yours.

SWAFA30



User currently offlineSwacle From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 368 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2567 times:

Not starting any rumors here, but there was a -700 here in CLE this morning (27 Nov) with thre life rafts in the overheads...

Don



Aircraft Flown: SF3 DH8 DH4 328 ERJ CRJ CR7 CR9 E70 E75 D9S M80 712 72S 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 752 318 319 32
25 SprxflySWA : I was in Fresno last month, and looking at the facilities, the gates are OK,with added jetways at gates 16 and 17. However,the ticketing area left a
26 Post contains images Roadrunner165 : I Would Love To See Southwest In MSP! Adam AS ROCKS!!!
27 Expressjetphx : They'll have 25 gates at BWI, so yeah I think 300 sounds about right. That would put them ahead of PHX and LAS. Also, if you look at BWI geographicall
28 Sjc>sfo : I somewhat doubt that Southwest will significantly increase the number of transcons it has... while those flights fill up VERY WELL, it seems like rel
29 Ssides : Wasn't WN supposed to complement its ORF service with flights to RIC? I think they dropped those plans post-9/11.
30 AWA22 : "The transcons on packed 73Gs just aren't pleasant." The A319/320 is not any better.
31 Pilottim747 : Southwest Airlines has said before (quoted in newspapers) that COS will not be served for at least the next 10 years. pilottim747 Thanks, Chris B. for
32 Mikey711MN : RoadRunner, I've personally thought that MSP would be a very attractive place for WN or another airline wishing to kick-start significant operations o
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Technoloy Will ATC Use Next? posted Sun Jun 13 1999 04:28:18 by William
Any Guess On What The Next Southwest City Will Be. posted Thu May 17 2001 08:32:50 by US Air/TWA Fan
What Will Branson Announce In Chicago posted Mon Dec 4 2006 03:47:35 by PanAm_DC10
What City Pairs/service Will The New US Drop? posted Mon Sep 26 2005 20:30:59 by Laxtwin
Olympic Airways-What Will They Order Next? posted Wed Jul 6 2005 23:37:40 by HighFlyer9790
What Will BMI Do Next? posted Tue May 10 2005 16:34:53 by Gkirk
What Will Boeing Announce At The Paris Air Show? posted Thu Apr 28 2005 16:28:51 by NYC777
What Will Airbus Announce At Paris Air Show? posted Wed Apr 27 2005 20:40:16 by MrComet
What Will Be The Next U.S. Carrier? posted Sun Oct 3 2004 03:58:27 by BoeingPride800
What Airplanes Will Be On My Southwest Flights? posted Tue Apr 6 2004 07:51:00 by Unmlobo