Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
WN: Why No 738, IFE, And More Markets?  
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5573 times:

Perhaps it's been discussed before but after a recent trip on WN I couldn't help but wonder why they didn't have at least some 738's given that they are the same flight deck and type rating for the pilots, i.e. still relatively all one aircraft type. I can't help but wonder if a littler larger 738 might not give them additional revenue and even allow them to save them some cycles on some of their shorter hops?

I'm still amazed that they serve as few markets as they do with as many aircraft as they have, no ANC or Mexican vacation spots?! While we all know that the M.O. of WN is to be highly selective of where they go and that they like to avoid the larger airports like they argue about in DFW versus DAL with the Wright Amendment issue, but I think DEN shows that they are at looking outside of the bun right now!

Also, with all of the new 73N's that they are taking delivery of now and in the near future, why cannot they invest in a little IFE a la DirectTV like F9 does, even charging $5 per flight to watch 24 channels at the passengers discretion!? I'd hate to think that they would launch the 73N replacement from Boeing and not even put in IFE then, that tech really needs to be standard issue in modern aircraft!

I really like F9's modern fleet, comfortable seats, IFE, and even their route map over the WN product, so what's WN's gameplan?

43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWakeTurbulence From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1297 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5561 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
so what's WN's gameplan?

Making more money....
-Matt



Jetwash Images - Feel the Heat!!!
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5549 times:

WN had a chance to pick up some of TZ's B-737-800s (with winglets) when they assisted TZ early in their bankruptcy. But, WN did not want the bigger airplanes.

User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5702 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5528 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
still relatively all one aircraft type. I can't help but wonder if a littler larger 738 might not give them additional revenue and even allow them to save them some cycles on some of their shorter hops?

Because the frequent cycles are what attracts the business flyers which is what is giving SWA the money.

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
I couldn't help but wonder why they didn't have at least some 738's given that they are the same flight deck and type rating for the pilots

the 738 requires an additional F/A one that SWA was a bit defensive about in the early times.

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
I really like F9's modern fleet, comfortable seats, IFE, and even their route map over the WN product, so what's WN's gameplan?

Wihtout sounding mean or anything, then fly F9,. why fly SWA then if your more happy with F9 and you prefer them over SWA?

Modern Fleet? WN's plane are just as new as the Airbuses....comfy seats? Both are 33 inches of pitch, no ife on WN, but its charged on F9, route map? They fly to far more places then SWA does in the United States.

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlineDc10s4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5528 times:

The 738 in an all Y configuration I believe will require an additional flight attendant, thus adding cost and complexity. As far as IFE, I believe WN did study this and survey passengers. Todays passengers carry their own IFE for the most part so it is not that important, especially for the shorter flights that WN flies. In other words to answer both questions. K.I.S.S.

Keep
It
Simple
Stupid

If it aint broke dont fix it.


User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5511 times:

Additional FA also big plane means you cant use it on every WN route, thus less fleet flexibility

IFE would be expensive and most of WN flights are still quite short.

As for more markets, they are growing pretty quickly.


User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3768 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5493 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
I really like F9's modern fleet, comfortable seats, IFE, and even their route map over the WN product, so what's WN's gameplan?

WN transported more domestic pax last year than anyone. Obviously most people don't view IFE as a necessity like yourself. So in short, why mess with what works? People are ultimately driven by price, not by the fact that there's an idiotbox sitting in front of your face to keep you entertained. WN adds IFE, they raise prices, and ultimately lose revenue. It's simple cost competition, whomever has the lowest costs has the potential to make the most money.

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
I'm still amazed that they serve as few markets as they do with as many aircraft as they have, no ANC or Mexican vacation spots?! While we all know that the M.O. of WN is to be highly selective of where they go and that they like to avoid the larger airports like they argue about in DFW versus DAL with the Wright Amendment issue, but I think DEN shows that they are at looking outside of the bun right now!

WN doesn't avoid larger airports as a matter of course, there are a lot of factors that go into airport selection. International routes cost more money. As long as WN still has room to expand domestically, I don't see them even considering international travel.

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
Perhaps it's been discussed before but after a recent trip on WN I couldn't help but wonder why they didn't have at least some 738's given that they are the same flight deck and type rating for the pilots, i.e. still relatively all one aircraft type. I can't help but wonder if a littler larger 738 might not give them additional revenue and even allow them to save them some cycles on some of their shorter hops?

More cycles = more pax. More pax = more money. Why do you think WN's record turnaround times have been so crucial to their success?

[Edited 2006-08-27 06:18:52]


PHX based
User currently offlineStyle From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 267 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5452 times:

Simple strategy. They make money with only one aircraft type. No downgrades or any of the sort when maintenance happens. The goal is to get you from point a to point b. Thats it. Its not about entertaining you or making you feel more comfortable.

This is why they have countless quarters of profit. (That and a good oil hedge program)


User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5599 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5336 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
... why cannot they invest in a little IFE a la DirectTV like F9 does... to watch 24 channels at the passengers discretion!?

I've got to say something here. As someone who used to have to "endure" airline flights back before American first installed ASTROVISION, I just thought I might offer an old-fashioned opinion that might surprise the modern, younger crowd out there.

Lots of us baby boomers (and others) are quite capable of sitting for, oh I don't know, 8 hours WITHOUT being entertained by an electronic device with a screen of some kind. There are all kinds of reading materials available, conversation, my own i-pod, gazing out the window at clouds, terrain below, stars, etc., and of course, sleep that can be amazingly effective at helping pass time. You might call it boring; I call it making-do.

In fact I personally really like the absence of video displays once in a while.

I'm not faulting people for enjoying modern conveniences but just remember that there are lots of us out here that will happily fly on an airplane that doesn't provide us with television at 34K feet!

I would be shocked and even disappointed if WN decided to put TVs on their planes. That would be a very unnecessary expense and in direct opposition to their business model; it would be like them providing full (hot) meal service! It just ain't gonna happen.

bb


User currently offlineMtnWest1979 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 2485 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5277 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 3):
Modern Fleet? WN's plane are just as new as the Airbuses....comfy seats? Both are 33 inches of pitch, no ife on WN, but its charged on F9, route map? They fly to far more places then SWA does in the United States.

Well F9 to just under 50 airports (F9 and QX F9 Express) in US, WN will be up to 63 in Oct. So...... I hope you aren't including the ZK semi code share towns as well.



"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5264 times:

738, IFE and more markets are not in WN's long established game plan. However, I can see why those questions are being asked, since WN seems to have stalled. Their fares are rising and they are still an operational loss. They can either sit and wait for the industry to consolidate and raise fares or change the way they do business. I think they will wait it out.

Since nearly all airlines are operating in an unsustainable way, and WN is in the strongest financial shape they can just hang in and wait it out. Spending too much and growing too fast is a risk too. There are a lot of destinations where WN does not fly but there is a limited number of airports that meet the criteria: population base of 1.5 million or so, and low landing fees.


User currently offlineCF-CPI From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5212 times:

Quoting Style (Reply 7):
Its not about entertaining you or making you feel more comfortable.

There's no entertainment, but having recently spent over 4 hours in a competitor's 757 with 31" pitch, I appreciate the extra 2" WN provides. I also like the texture and padding provided on their leather seats and think WN made a positive choice when selecting seat supplier and design.


User currently offlineGEG2RAP From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 853 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5024 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 3):
I really like F9's modern fleet, comfortable seats, IFE, and even their route map over the WN product, so what's WN's gameplan?

Wihtout sounding mean or anything, then fly F9,. why fly SWA then if your more happy with F9 and you prefer them over SWA?

cause they want WN low fares and great ff program with f9 entertainment......


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26795 posts, RR: 75
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5001 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 3):
They fly to far more places then SWA does in the United States.

No they don't

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
I really like F9's modern fleet, comfortable seats, IFE, and even their route map over the WN product, so what's WN's gameplan?

Their route map? I don't know how anyone can say that unless they live in Denver. As far as comfort, both airlines have the same pitch and WN's seats are actually newer and quite comfortable. I really don't see what isn't modern about WN's fleet, particularly given that they have something like NINE TIMES as many aircraft as F9.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 8):
I would be shocked and even disappointed if WN decided to put TVs on their planes. That would be a very unnecessary expense and in direct opposition to their business model; it would be like them providing full (hot) meal service! It just ain't gonna happen.

Actually, WN's service levels have grown incrementally as most carriers have slashed theirs. At the same time as carriers were first charging for meals, WN put free snackboxes on medium-long haul flights. WN's seats offer more pitch in economy than other airlines and are all leather. Putting some sort of IFE on their aircraft would definately not be a stretch, though I don't think it would be that wise to add the weight of the LiveTV system. Signing a massive contract with Sirius to launch their airline product would be more along WN's model.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4962 times:

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 3):
Wihtout sounding mean or anything, then fly F9,. why fly SWA then if your more happy with F9 and you prefer them over SWA?

Usually when a company chooses to rest on their laurels they often find their competition catching up and even passing them. Most companies try to give their customers what they think they want but a smart company will actually give the customers what they want because they know that sooner or later if their not meeting the demands of the customer, one of their competitors will. I've never met anyone who after flying on a 2 year old commerical airliner with a comfy 33' pitch seat and IFE who said they rather have had less.

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 3):
Modern Fleet? WN's plane are just as new as the Airbuses....

F9's fleet, (albeit 1/10 the size of WN's) has an average age of just two years. According to WN's website they still have 219 737-400/500 aircraft and those are all older than 2 years, so it's not like all of them are 'brand-new." The 735 I rode last week made some sounds I've never heard before!

Quoting Dc10s4ever (Reply 4):
The 738 in an all Y configuration I believe will require an additional flight attendant, thus adding cost and complexity.

Just out of curiosity, how well do WN FA's get compensated and how does that compare to the industry?

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 5):
IFE would be expensive and most of WN flights are still quite short.

Which again begs the question - is using a 737 on a a 30 minute flight really worth the wear and tear (cycle) on the aircraft when you multiply that by numbers it accumulates over a few short years?

Quoting MtnWest1979 (Reply 9):
Well F9 to just under 50 airports (F9 and QX F9 Express) in US, WN will be up to 63 in Oct. So...... I hope you aren't including the ZK semi code share towns as well.

No ZK, but still 50 airports with 55 aircraft versus 63 airports and 453 aircraft - how many more flights to each city can they add?!

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 10):
Their fares are rising and they are still an operational loss.

That's my point - what is WN's gameplan given their current situation and the fact that they still have a lot of 73N's on order?

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 10):
there is a limited number of airports that meet the criteria: population base of 1.5 million or so, and low landing fees.

But as far as I'm concerned they threw that set of criteria out the window when they went into DEN and their landing fees. So how many gates do they really need to go into MSP and even ATL? I thought WN was more aggressive than that, what better time than to bust NW and DL hubs than when they are in Ch11?!


User currently offlineERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6789 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4946 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 14):
No ZK, but still 50 airports with 55 aircraft versus 63 airports and 453 aircraft - how many more flights to each city can they add?!

Well, they do fly to RDU, BDL, PVD, JAX, PIT, MHT, PHL, ISP, and a lot of other East Coast cities the F9 have no service to.. so I would say WN is probably ahead of F9 as far as marketing capabilities.



Aiming High and going far..
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 16, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4926 times:

Quoting Style (Reply 7):
(That and a good oil hedge program)

Oil was the major reason they didn't post losses. It wasn't a small factor, but the biggest factor. During that time, WN was an oil hedge fund that just happened to run an airline with the profits. They might have made more money by not flying ANY planes and instead selling lower cost jet fuel to other airlines after cashing in their heating oil options...

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 14):
No ZK, but still 50 airports with 55 aircraft versus 63 airports and 453 aircraft - how many more flights to each city can they add?!

But this is F9s problem. They don't have enough frequencies, even to major airports like LAX, and it makes it hard for me, who loves F9, to fly them when I am going east.

WN is mostly a short hop carrier, and things like IFE aren't that important on short hops. They have more transcons now (a change to their business model), and I do think if they had a fleet of 738s for transcons, equipped with AVOD, it might work, but they'd need to have a fleet of 40 or so immediately. Introducing them piecemeal into the fleet would not work, and that's likely why they don't bother.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineCentPIT From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 990 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4846 times:

Quoting ERJ170 (Reply 15):
so I would say WN is probably ahead of F9 as far as marketing capabilities.

I don't think there is any question here. WN is way ahead of F9.



Pittsburgh International: US Airways---160 daily departures! (52 destinations)
User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4744 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Thread starter):
I'm still amazed that they serve as few markets as they do with as many aircraft as they have, no ANC or Mexican vacation spots?!

International flights don't gel with WN's policy of turns being 30 minutes or less. A plane doesn't make money sitting on the ground. WN strives to get the most number of flights a day that they can from each and every a/c, which is why nonstop transcons and redeyes are rarer on WN than on any other airline. WN uses the overnight hours to clean and maintain their a/c.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31414 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4663 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 14):
I've never met anyone who after flying on a 2 year old commerical airliner with a comfy 33' pitch seat and IFE who said they rather have had less.

Unless you informed them they now had to pay more, of course.  Smile

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 14):
Just out of curiosity, how well do WN FA's get compensated and how does that compare to the industry?

As I understand it, they are some of the best-compensated in the industry, but they also handle a number of jobs (including cabin cleaning) that are handled by seperate staffers at the majors. So you need less head-count which means less managers and less support staff (payroll, HR, IT, etc.) which means lower overall labor costs, even though your staff are better paid.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 14):
Which again begs the question - is using a 737 on a a 30 minute flight really worth the wear and tear (cycle) on the aircraft when you multiply that by numbers it accumulates over a few short years?

A common saying is "a plane only makes money when it's in the air", so even though you have accelerated wear and tear on the airframe due to multiple daily cycles, you also have multiple daily revenue streams which more then cover the extra operating costs.

While aggressive manufacturer and lessor financing means that older planes don't "trickle-down" into the second and third-hand market as much as they used to, even if the plane is formally scrapped after a decade or so of use, it's already paid for itself and generated a profit many times over, probably.


User currently offlineATCme From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 304 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4657 times:

I don't find a problem with any of Southwest's policies or business practices. I'm 15 and even I can do without a TV in front of me for 4 hours, which is about the max time on a WN flight. The weight of an IFE outweighs the benefits for WN. I did a research project for my marketing class on WN last semester. They have an excellent marketing department and their business model is amazingly successful in an airline world where virtually everybody loses money.
That said, I have also flown F9 and enjoy their service and airplanes. I also like their marketing campaigns (Flip to Mexico!) and such. They do have more non-stop service from DEN than WN, but then WN has more non-stop from Love field...
WN only enters markets that it deems to have the high potential for profit. International won't happen because it costs money. They have added the capacity for international flights to their booking system though.
As for the reason they entered the DEN market, I'm going to state my THEORY: DEN is the only major airport within miles of Cheyenne, Northern Colorado, the rest of Wyoming, parts of Kansas, and possibly New Mexico. I'd say that the market has plenty of people to offset the landing fees at DEN.
As others have said, a larger plane (738) means more money for another FA. The cycles don't matter much to WN, they have plenty of planes and plenty of overnight time for maintenance. What matters is frequency, especially along the coasts and in Texas.

ATCme

Edit: I forgot to add that after seeing WN turn their planes in 25 minutes I was appalled to see NW jets sitting on the ground for over an hour between flights, for a DC-9. I could understand maybe an hour for a larger jet, not a DC-9. And I had to say WN's FA's are so much happier and more fun than NW's FAs. I was disgusted at NW when I flew on it this summer. But enough ranting...prepare to be flamed!

[Edited 2006-08-28 00:58:57]


I'm from the FAA, and I'm here to help. Really. Yes I'm serious, I'm here to help you.
User currently offlineGarri767 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4630 times:

Quoting SANFan (Reply 8):
8 hours WITHOUT being entertained by an electronic device with a screen of some kind.



Quoting SANFan (Reply 8):
i-pod

umm isnt an ipopd an electronic device with an electronic screen? Big grin

Quoting MtnWest1979 (Reply 9):
ZK semi code share towns as well.

i live in one (AMA) and am proud of it!

NOT, i wish F9 or UA would step it up and provide express instead of ZK Sad




Garri767


User currently offlinePhatty3374 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4579 times:

With all the new 73G's that WN is getting, are the 735's going to be/in the process of being replaced, or are they just adding more capacity/routes?

User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25693 posts, RR: 85
Reply 23, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4546 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ATCme (Reply 20):
WN only enters markets that it deems to have the high potential for profit. International won't happen because it costs money.

Um - sorry, but Southwest's CEO Kelly has said that Mexico and/or Canada will happen.

Here's the latest on it, from a long (terrific) piece in the RMN about Frontier in Mexico:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm.../0,2777,DRMN_23912_4928783,00.html

"Southwest Airlines, for instance, has said publicly that entering Mexico is not a matter of if but when."

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5702 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4521 times:

Quoting MtnWest1979 (Reply 9):

Well F9 to just under 50 airports (F9 and QX F9 Express) in US, WN will be up to 63 in Oct. So...... I hope you aren't including the ZK semi code share towns as well.



Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):

No they don't

Sorry Folks, big typo made, I had meant WN flies to far more places then F9 does in the US. Sorry again!!

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 14):
I've never met anyone who after flying on a 2 year old commerical airliner with a comfy 33' pitch seat and IFE who said they rather have had less.

Nice to meet you!! I would be one of them  Wink

And it isn't less in a way...

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 14):
According to WN's website they still have 219 737-400/500 aircraft and those are all older than 2 years, so it's not like all of them are 'brand-new." The 735 I rode last week made some sounds I've never heard before!

They have 25 737-500's thats it, and absolutely no -400's I am sure you meant -300 which in that case they have 194, and they have 234 737-700's according to southwest.com, making the -700 much newer then the -300's.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 14):
Just out of curiosity, how well do WN FA's get compensated and how does that compare to the industry?

WN F/A are one of the highest paid in the Industry.

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 10):
more markets are not in WN's long established game plan. However, I can see why those questions are being asked, since WN seems to have stalled. Their fares are rising and they are still an operational loss. They can either sit and wait for the industry to consolidate and raise fares or change the way they do business. I think they will wait it out.

HUH? More markets? Recently, SWA added DEN, PIT, PHL, RSW. By recent I mean within 2 years. WN's fares are rising but ever so slightly and usually are STILL cheaper then most other carriers. If they are operating at an operational lost how are they posting profits quarter after quarter?

Quoting Phatty3374 (Reply 22):
With all the new 73G's that WN is getting, are the 735's going to be/in the process of being replaced, or are they just adding more capacity/routes?

Don't expect the -500's to be retired anytime soon, they are being used to replace the exisitng old -200 routes. And yes they are just adding more capacity and routes!

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
25 Post contains images ATCme : Sorry, my bad, I meant in the near future. If you read later on in my post I did say that they added Int'l capability to their booking system. I don'
26 WNCrew : We are THE highest paid in the industry considering EVERYTHING we get compensated for, duty rigs and work rules. I do beleive w ehave the higest top o
27 FlyDeltaJets87 : Because Southwest, unlike many other airlines, has learned that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Unless they start to expand to markets where IFE be
28 Mariner : Just for the record: Frontier charges $5 for their Direct TV programmes. They give the "Wild Blue Yonder Channel" for free. They have reported no pass
29 WNCrew : From what I've heard IFE equipment (all of the parts required) weigh quite a bit and with fuel the way it is I don't see it coming anytime soon. That
30 MCOflyer : Heres how I look at WN. WN wants to SAVE cost while MAKING profits. Direct TV would add weight and weight REDUCES range for trans continental flights.
31 SLCUT2777 : They also keep track of what they need to do to improve as well. WN knows that IFE isn't a big thing for their customers nor will it be a feature tha
32 OOer : No, not quite...but close to!!! From 6 am to about 8 pm there are an average of 8-10 flights per gate in MCO.
33 777STL : I'd fly them in a second if I could pick my own seat. Otherwise, if you don't get an "A" boarding card, standing in line for two hours doesn't appeal
34 Wjcandee : AirRyan, here's the bottom line, simply put: "Every air carrier doesn't have to be like every other one." WN has a target demographic that works for t
35 SLCUT2777 : How many other airlines have adopted the "cattle-herd" seating method WN is so famous for? The DL Shuttle doesn't count since it is proceedurely much
36 Mymorningsong : Really? That surprises me. I think F9's model is great charging $5 per flight. With the amount of passengers that WN carries, I'd be surprised if the
37 Atrude777 : Northwest Airlines so far, and before you say assigned seating, at least WN boards in groups, NW seriously boards in a one for all type of thing, and
38 AY104 : I still don't really understand why people need IFE at every single seat, on every single aircraft, of every single airline, all over the world. Quite
39 WNCrew : Actually we have some loooong ones: PHL-OAK 06:10 BWI-LAX 05:25 MAN-LAS 05:30 PHL-LAX 06:00 BWI-OAK 05:50 ....and there are quite a few more. But, ye
40 AirRyan : Since NW still utilizes assigned seating, all they are doing differently now is simply allowing passengers to board the plane in any order, but they
41 AY104 : Sorry, I should have done more research on your routes. However, I still believe in WN and how they operate. I am sure when the company sees the need
42 AY104 : I agree with everything you say. Maybe I should reword and say that in a lot of respects they keep things such as seating, no f-class, no internation
43 Pe@rson : I hate that saying so much: everything can always be improved.
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...
Why No 738 Winglets? posted Sun Jun 5 2005 01:42:41 by ChiGB1973
Why No 738 Logojets At FR? posted Mon Feb 14 2005 00:03:13 by A340600
Why No Atlas, Polar, And/or Evergreen MD-11's? posted Mon Jan 19 2004 02:52:17 by B6A320
Why No MUC-NRT And MUC-BOS By Lh? posted Tue May 1 2001 23:57:02 by Dellatorre
Why No DC9-60 And DC-9-70? posted Tue Sep 26 2000 00:29:42 by Fjnovak1
El Al:why No More 777s And 744s To CDG? posted Tue Oct 3 2006 15:56:51 by LY777
Why No WN At LGB? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 18:02:18 by 28L28L
Why No Alliance For EK, EY, MP And LT? posted Sat Oct 21 2006 17:50:21 by RicardoFG
Why No More Tu-154 Freighter Conversions? posted Thu Sep 21 2006 20:54:56 by A342
Why No RJ And Commuter Terminals In Europe posted Tue Sep 19 2006 12:10:05 by Konrad