User avatar
OzarkD9S
Topic Author
Posts: 4765
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:49 pm

http://www.ajc.com/business/southwes...-to-transform-airtran-1165665.html

As the article states, which requires subscription which I do not have, WN intends to turn FL's ATL hub into a "Megacity".

Nice way of getting around the "WN has no hubs" terminology but lets not split hairs on what WN will have there.

Can anyone with an AJC subscription shed more light on the article's contents?

Brett Snyder, our resident Cranky Flyer, sees this as not good for some of FL's smaller markets, which has been speculated on here and has already come to fruition for the folks in PHF and ACY, with more to come I'm sure.
Coast to Coast and Border to Border, Ozark Flies YOUR Way!
 
tommy767
Posts: 4658
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:18 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:23 pm

Quoting OzarkD9S (Thread starter):

Call me crazy but I think WN would actually do well in ACY if ever launched.
"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
 
swa4life
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 11:20 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:35 pm

Southwest has been calling it's large cities "megacities" for years. Nothing "new" about ATL being referred to as such.
 
vatveng
Posts: 1094
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:49 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:13 pm

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
 
billreid
Posts: 737
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:04 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:16 pm

So lets guess which cities will be dumped?
Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
 
QANTAS747-438
Posts: 1660
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 7:01 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:24 pm

Quoting OzarkD9S (Thread starter):
As the article states, which requires subscription which I do not have, WN intends to turn FL's ATL hub into a "Megacity".
Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 1):
Southwest has been calling it's large cities "megacities" for years.

No, Southwest does not call them "Megacities". We call them "Megastations". Those are cities with over 100 flts per day. There's also LAS and MDW with over 200 flts per day. They're called "Super-Mega". The article tried to be cute, but got it wrong.
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:27 pm

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 1):
Call me crazy but I think WN would actually do well in ACY if ever launched.

Maybe in years past ACY could have supported a small WN operation. And I mean small as in fewer than 20 flights daily and probably closer to 10.

Not anymore. WN is chasing business travel more and more - gone are the days of Southwest sustaining itself on leisure fares. ACY is still a leisure destination above all.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:15 pm

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 1):
Call me crazy but I think WN would actually do well in ACY if ever launched.

Agreed. Especially since most of the draw is from shorter haul markets (people aren't going to go from the West Coast to ACY), which are higher yield.

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 6):
Not anymore. WN is chasing business travel more and more - gone are the days of Southwest sustaining itself on leisure fares. ACY is still a leisure destination above all.

1 code - LAS.

WN seems perfectly happy to fly to leisure destinations.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Topic Author
Posts: 4765
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:46 pm

So what is the future for WN in ATL? Rolling hub? Flights to WN cities and to hell with the FL ones or what?

My thinking is WN glossed over this "we are interested in serving most, if not all" FL markets. Well we see what happened to ACY, PHF was a given due to RIC and ORF but can WN live on P2P and whatever connections they can serve out of ATL?

The Boyd Group (love 'em or hate 'em) has stated that ATL is overserved in relation to local traffic thanks to the DL hub. Is WN capable of de-hubbing ATL and grooving on the mix traffic? I for one have flown FL many times thanks to the low fares and I'm a "get where I wanna go" person who doesn't mind oddball routes and weird connections to get where I wanna go.

Will this work for WN in ATL?
Coast to Coast and Border to Border, Ozark Flies YOUR Way!
 
congaboy
Posts: 258
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:48 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:56 pm

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 5):
No, Southwest does not call them "Megacities". We call them "Megastations". Those are cities with over 100 flts per day. There's also LAS and MDW with over 200 flts per day. They're called "Super-Mega". The article tried to be cute, but got it wrong.

Sorry, that's goofy QANTAS...if they want to attract business fliers, think of something just a bit more sophisticated. I am super-mega disappointed, being a resident of suburban ATL...and will only fly WN when my options run out. Call me elitist, but I have a choice, and while I think it's entertaining that WN flight attendants can recite the safety announcement with a hip-hop back beat, some days I just want some discretion.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7):
WN seems perfectly happy to fly to leisure destinations.

There is a growing convention/conference market in LAS...and while alot of these attendees probably dont have much of a choice other than WN, they would do even better by trying to be a little more clever...stop dumbing-down what has become a pretty amazing operation.
"Joey, you like movies about gladiators?"
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:08 pm

Quoting congaboy (Reply 9):
There is a growing convention/conference market in LAS

That's always been there. ACY has the same, just on a smaller scale. Just like everything else.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
atrude777
Posts: 4258
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:12 pm

Quoting congaboy (Reply 9):

Sorry, that's goofy QANTAS...if they want to attract business fliers, think of something just a bit more sophisticated.

Do you really think Business People are looking up to see what Airlines like Southwest are calling before they book an airline? Absolutely not. WN has always been and will continue to attract Business Passengers because of their schedule and prices, not because of what WN calls their stations.

Quoting congaboy (Reply 9):
I am super-mega disappointed, being a resident of suburban ATL...and will only fly WN when my options run out. Call me elitist, but I have a choice, and while I think it's entertaining that WN flight attendants can recite the safety announcement with a hip-hop back beat, some days I just want some discretion.

That is totally fine, and you're right, but if you are NOT booking WN on the basis of what they call their stations that's just slightly weird.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7):

1 code - LAS.

WN seems perfectly happy to fly to leisure destinations.

Happy Maybe..but it is NOT their Business Plan nor has it ever been. WN does fly to Leisure destinations absolutely, as do every single airline in the country, WN is no exception. Also like every other airline in the country they are catering to Business Passengers only, WN is no exception either.

Quoting vatveng (Reply 3):
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Then it is a Platypus!  

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
QANTAS747-438
Posts: 1660
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 7:01 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:44 pm

Quoting congaboy (Reply 9):
Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 5):
No, Southwest does not call them "Megacities". We call them "Megastations". Those are cities with over 100 flts per day. There's also LAS and MDW with over 200 flts per day. They're called "Super-Mega". The article tried to be cute, but got it wrong.

Sorry, that's goofy QANTAS...if they want to attract business fliers, think of something just a bit more sophisticated.

Uhhh, ok. That's an INTERNAL Company term, so if you find it "goofy" then take it up with Gary. It's not really meant for the public to be familiar with it.
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 1043
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:47 pm

The word 'hub' as applied to airline operations is a tertiary metephor. And as such can mean what ever you or anyone else should insist. As commonly understood an airline hub receives a tranche (flock?) or planes at a particular time, and sends most of the passengers to one of several planes leaving shortly thereafter. Dropping only a modest percentage of the flights can make the entire groups of planes unprofitable. WN relies on frequent departures so someone incoming does not have to wait for a long time for the outgoing flight to ultimate destination. There is obviously almost an infinite gradation between the two systems. Norita is kind of an extreme on one side, the WN model on the other.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:51 pm

On a related note, from today's AJC:

Southwest to link network with AirTran

Quote:
Southwest Airlines, which is launching service at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport in February, plans to also link its route network with merger partner AirTran Airways early next year, opening up more connecting flight options to and from Atlanta.

Southwest Chief Executive Gary Kelly acknowledged, though, that some of AirTran’s less-frequent routes and subsidized routes don’t fit into Southwest’s model.

Kelly mentions JAN, BNA, SLC, CLE, ECP, SDF and PDX. I always wondered why FL didn't offer service to PDX and SLC, as they have long been DL monopoly routes.

Quoting billreid (Reply 4):
So lets guess which cities will be dumped?

They've already announced the closure of PHF, ACY, MLI, AVL, plus they are forced to close DFW due to the Wright Amendment. Here's my top five guesses:

MIA (Highly likely since FL offers one RT a day into/out of MIA, service to/from BWI.)
BMI
ABE
MDT
CRW
 
mrskyguy
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 7:13 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:08 am

Frankly I'm really looking forward to the connecting options that ATL will provide. On that note, however, ATL always felt like a really big Love Field to me. While it's relatively efficient design is efficient for the airlines, ATL's a madhouse of people..
"The strength of the turbulence is directly proportional to the temperature of your coffee." -- Gunter's 2nd Law of Air
 
QANTAS747-438
Posts: 1660
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 7:01 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:15 am

Quoting srbmod (Reply 14):
So lets guess which cities will be dumped?

They've already announced the closure of PHF, ACY, MLI, AVL,

I'd say Knoxville, Huntsville, Rochester, Flint, Lexington, etc...

Quoting srbmod (Reply 14):
Here's my top five guesses:

MIA (Highly likely since FL offers one RT a day into/out of MIA, service to/from BWI.)

I don't know... I really think WN could make MIA work. I can totally picture MIA having 20-30 flts per day and doing very well.
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
 
Jonathanxxxx
Posts: 328
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:48 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:21 am

Quoting srbmod (Reply 14):
MIA (Highly likely since FL offers one RT a day into/out of MIA, service to/from BWI.)

Actually the rumor is that WN will expand at MIA.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 16):
I don't know... I really think WN could make MIA work. I can totally picture MIA having 20-30 flts per day and doing very well.

While not necessarily that much I can expect an operation similar to EWR or LGA where it's a nice small presence to key markets. With a behemoth like AA already the largest, DL already trying to start a battle there's only so much room left.. Especially when you have a 50 daily flight station about 25 miles up I-95...
 
sccutler
Posts: 5583
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:17 am

Quoting congaboy (Reply 9):
Sorry, that's goofy QANTAS...if they want to attract business fliers, think of something just a bit more sophisticated. I am super-mega disappointed, being a resident of suburban ATL...and will only fly WN when my options run out. Call me elitist, but I have a choice, and while I think it's entertaining that WN flight attendants can recite the safety announcement with a hip-hop back beat, some days I just want some discretion.

Have you ever, like, flown on Southwest?

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 6):
WN is chasing business travel more and more - gone are the days of Southwest sustaining itself on leisure fares.

The days of which you speak never were - Southwest started itself, defined itself, built its essential model on business travelers - hence its general refusal to open up stations and pairs with limited flight counts.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
kcrwflyer
Posts: 2535
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 11:57 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:26 am

Quoting srbmod (Reply 14):
They've already announced the closure of PHF, ACY, MLI, AVL, plus they are forced to close DFW due to the Wright Amendment. Here's my top five guesses:

MIA (Highly likely since FL offers one RT a day into/out of MIA, service to/from BWI.)
BMI
ABE
MDT
CRW

C'mon man! That's not creative reasoning, you just picked the FL stations with the least amount of service. Throw in a wildcard or two.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 16):
I'd say Knoxville, Huntsville, Rochester, Flint, Lexington, etc...

See that's the spirit. Throw a ROC, HSV, or FNT into the cauldron of guesses.


Though I figure WN could make ROC work.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:14 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7):
1 code - LAS.

WN seems perfectly happy to fly to leisure destinations.

I never said they weren't. LAS and ACY are light years apart in terms of popularity, traffic and importance in just about every way. LAS isn't exactly thriving at the moment either, in any case.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 10):
That's always been there. ACY has the same, just on a smaller scale. Just like everything else.

Exactly. LAS has also been a part of the WN system for a long, long time and stations with that kind of tenure and that amount of flights tend to sustain themselves to a point. ACY would be a brand new station for WN and I just don't believe they are interested in spending the capital to open new stations without being fairly sure of profitability.

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 8):
The Boyd Group (love 'em or hate 'em) has stated that ATL is overserved in relation to local traffic thanks to the DL hub.

Pretty much like every major airline hub. Thanks, Captains Obvious (directed at the Boyd Group, not you Ozark).

Quoting srbmod (Reply 14):
Kelly mentions JAN, BNA, SLC, CLE, ECP, SDF and PDX. I always wondered why FL didn't offer service to PDX and SLC, as they have long been DL monopoly routes.

PDX/SLC-ATL would be nice but...eh, I want to see something new. Like MKE-PDX.

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 18):
The days of which you speak never were - Southwest started itself, defined itself, built its essential model on business travelers - hence its general refusal to open up stations and pairs with limited flight counts.

Limited flight counts don't have anything to do with the targeted group of passengers. What does "limited" mean, anyway? Less than 50? Less than 20? It has more to do with what WN thinks is the right number to be able to fill the flights and not have too many planes and not enough pax to go around. That's why, for the most part, smaller cities have fewer flights.
Sorry, but WN has not always been as wholeheartedly business-oriented as you claim. Intra-Texas it's probably the case, but outside that, business pax often will be flying F or Plus, and that family headed to Disneyland or the group of bros going to Vegas will be looking to book on Southwest.
 
Valorien
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:39 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:35 am

Omg, you guys are funny.

I work for WN and I don't have any idea what they call the "bigger" stations, so I wouldn't get caught up too much in what the company "codewords" are.

WN has no defined hubs; however, they do use cities between the origination and destination city as a "connecting point". If the connecting city is one of WN's "busier" cities, it will most likely be the connecting point because of its size, hence, the "hub" effect. WN will probably never use the term "hub", even though its bigger stations behave like them already.

As for ATL, well, I think we all know that ATL is already home to a LCC (AirTran). When AirTran goes away, they're pretty much going to step into its place rather than "create something new" especially with the sorry state the economy is in right now.

Will ATL act like a "hub" city as WN's other big stations like LAS, BWI, and MDW? Given the size of the station, it probably will.
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3552
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:19 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 7):
1 code - LAS.

2 codes - -LAS & MCO
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:40 pm

On any thread that involves the mention of Southwest and Hub, the count on quotation marks goes through the roof. Nobody's completely comfortable with stating the obvious.
"hub"
"connection point"
"megacity"
"bigger"
"new"
"duck"
"goofy"

Go ahead, count 'em up!  

-Rampart
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3552
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:00 pm

Quoting rampart (Reply 23):
On any thread that involves the mention of Southwest and Hub, the count on quotation marks goes through the roof. Nobody's completely comfortable with stating the obvious.
"hub"
"connection point"
"megacity"
"bigger"
"new"
"duck"
"goofy"

You forgot "intentional connecting opportunity"  
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
PHLBOS
Posts: 6504
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 6:38 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:37 pm

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 1):
Call me crazy but I think WN would actually do well in ACY if ever launched.

Given the fact that they're cutting back PHL and focusing their sites elsewhere in the country; I don't see them coming to ACY anytime soon unless they either:

a. Completely abandon PHL (I don't think they will).

b. Decide that it's time to finally push NK (now ACY's only carrier) over the edge.
"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
 
GentFromAlaska
Posts: 2666
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:21 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:04 pm

Quoting OzarkD9S (Thread starter):
WN intends to turn FL's ATL hub into a "Megacity".

Megacity tells me they want their own terminal. Keeping with the humor theme I saw on a WN flight a few days ago at BNA which read "Bags Fly For Free Here" with a down arrow pointed to the baggage hold.

WN should install new terminal signage at ATL for travelers entering the airport which would read "Airlines Who Charge Baggage Fee's" and one to the WN terminal which would read "Airlines Who Don't Charge Baggage Fee's" It would PO the other airlines, but all if fair in love and war. The airlines charging fee's annoy the flying public.
Man can be taken from Alaska. Alaska can never be taken from the man.
 
canyonblue17
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 12:22 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:09 pm

Cities like ATL, BWI, MDW may be "megastations" but we need some perspective here. We are talking about stations with roughly 200 flights a day. These are tiny in comparison to true "hubs" like UA at O'Hare, Delta at ATL and AA at DFW, where each airline offers more than 600 flights a day.
negative ghostrider the pattern is full
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:27 pm

Quoting canyonblue17 (Reply 27):
Cities like ATL, BWI, MDW may be "megastations" but we need some perspective here. We are talking about stations with roughly 200 flights a day. These are tiny in comparison to true "hubs" like UA at O'Hare, Delta at ATL and AA at DFW, where each airline offers more than 600 flights a day.

WN distributes its hubs more for the size of the airline, whereas those you cite by UA, DL, and AA are truly fortresses (and including legions of regional jets). For that matter, how many departures did FL have at ATL or MCO? Or B4 at JFK? Medium sized airlines with a couple hubs but not much over 200 departures per hub, I'm guessing. A hub is still a hub, scaled to the airline and number of hubs.

I'm getting sucked in. Here's my requisite quotation marks: " ".

-Rampart
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 6497
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:11 pm

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 1):
Call me crazy but I think WN would actually do well in ACY if ever launched.

They already fly to EWR/PHL/BWI so there really is no point in flying to ACY. Sorry!

Quoting billreid (Reply 4):
So lets guess which cities will be dumped?
Quoting srbmod (Reply 14):
MIA (Highly likely since FL offers one RT a day into/out of MIA, service to/from BWI.)
BMI
ABE
MDT
CRW
Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 16):
I'd say Knoxville, Huntsville, Rochester, Flint, Lexington, etc...

I think ROC might survive.
I think if they were sue about closing MIA it would already be closed. They are clearly considering it.
I think they might try HSV with BWI/HOU before deciding whether to close it.

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 8):

So what is the future for WN in ATL? Rolling hub?

No hub. I think they will just have a lot of flights. I don't expect a connecting structure. That will hurt Florida.
 
canyonblue17
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 12:22 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:13 pm

Quoting rampart (Reply 28):
WN distributes its hubs more for the size of the airline, whereas those you cite by UA, DL, and AA are truly fortresses



Exactly my point...."Fortresses" versus "Megastations." And I would find it hard to call WN a "medium" sized airline and compare them to FL or B6. WN does almost 3000 flights a day and carries almost 100 million pax a year. These numbers are much more comparable to UA, DL and AA than FL and B6, especially domestically speaking.
negative ghostrider the pattern is full
 
Air1727
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 10:57 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:37 pm

It will be interesting to see how Southwest plays the Atlanta market and which cities get the boot.

As for mega-city, super-mega-city, megastation, etc etc - Southwest can polish the terminology turd all day long, but they have hubs in the purest definition of the word in regards to airline operations. They have for many years, in-spite of this perplexing denial. Folks can spin it all they want, but they have hubs - plain and simple.
In the Alaska bush I'd rather have a two hour bladder and three hours of gas than vice versa.
 
canyonblue17
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 12:22 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:47 pm

Quoting Air1727 (Reply 31):
Southwest can polish the terminology turd all day long, but they have hubs in the purest definition of the word in regards to airline operations



Seeing as how informed and advanced the readership is on Anet. Can't someone do a statistical breakdown of each airline - putting the total number of direct and non-stop flights offered in one category and connections offered in another. That would provide a decent (not perfect) perspective on hub versus non-hub.

Just a thought....and no I am not smart enough to do this myself.
negative ghostrider the pattern is full
 
SANFan
Posts: 3696
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:10 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:04 pm

Quoting Valorien (Reply 21):
WN has no defined hubs

I disagree. In the last couple of years, WN has indeed talked about their "hubs" even though the term itself is still rarely used. WN does have hubs and these days it would be very silly for them to bother denying it -- and they have in fact stopped doing so.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 14):
Kelly mentions JAN, BNA, SLC, CLE, ECP, SDF and PDX.

Well, I guess I was wrong again. It seems that my belief that SAN would be one of the first non-AirTran stations to see ATL service was based on the hope that our city was still considered an important and major WN station. Looks like our status as a Top-Ten (or Eleven) station is becoming a memory of a better past.

bb
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:37 pm

Quoting canyonblue17 (Reply 30):
Exactly my point...."Fortresses" versus "Megastations." And I would find it hard to call WN a "medium" sized airline and compare them to FL or B6. WN does almost 3000 flights a day and carries almost 100 million pax a year. These numbers are much more comparable to UA, DL and AA than FL and B6, especially domestically speaking.

I agree with you, I think we're talking around the same point. WN is by no means a medium sized airline. If you divide WN into 7 to 9 regional sectors with an associated hub, each of those regions approximates the traffic of a medium-sized airline's hub. By contrast, divide (pre-CO) UA by 3 + 2 half* hubs. Divide (pre-UA) CO by 2 + 1 half* hub. Divide (pre-NW) DL by 3 + 2 half* hubs, and NW (pre-DL) into 3 hubs. Divide AA by 5 hubs. WN is less concentrated, the other large airlines are more concentrated with fewer hubs, and the smaller airlines still have hubs at their appropriate scale, size doesn't matter with function. >150 flights is substantial in any measure.

*For lack of anything better, I'm considering the lesser hubs, those that are diminished, as half-hubs, knowing of course that the term is not equivalent to 50%.

-Rampart
 
goomba
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 11:55 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:59 pm

I see WN doing an ATL to BDL non stop to make this route competitive. DL is the only game in town on that nonstop and the price reflects this (usually about $400 rt). AirTran stopped doing that route a long time ago.

If anything WN will keep DL's prices in check and make flying DL more affordable. That's not a bad thing from a passenger perspective.
 
kcrwflyer
Posts: 2535
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 11:57 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:07 pm

Quoting goomba (Reply 35):
I see WN doing an ATL to BDL non stop to make this route competitive. DL is the only game in town on that nonstop and the price reflects this (usually about $400 rt). AirTran stopped doing that route a long time ago.

You've got a two hour flight between business markets ant 400r/t is the monopolistic price??? It's double that from CRW and we've got a 55 minute hop down to ATL. I'd say your prices are great and DL has been very forgiving if they're only charging 400. WN won't do much for your prices if the jump on that route.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5272
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:20 pm

Quoting kcrwflyer (Reply 36):
You've got a two hour flight between business markets ant 400r/t is the monopolistic price??? It's double that from CRW and we've got a 55 minute hop down to ATL.

The $400 is for advanced purchase. Try flying BDL-ATL for 9/26 (return 9/29) and you get a fare of $1,123!!

Quoting enilria (Reply 29):
No hub. I think they will just have a lot of flights. I don't expect a connecting structure.

But you don't need a connecting structure to generate a lot of connections. Once you have a large enough mass of flights with decent frequency, you're bound to get a lot of connections....which is exactly why "hubs" like BWI/MDW/DEN have 30-50% of their traffic being connections.
 
goomba
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 11:55 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:22 pm

You've got a two hour flight between business markets ant 400r/t is the monopolistic price??? It's double that from CRW and we've got a 55 minute hop down to ATL. I'd say your prices are great and DL has been very forgiving if they're only charging 400. WN won't do much for your prices if the jump on that route.

Yes, but if you fly to BDL by connecting through ATL on DL (especially from Florida), the price is exponentially lower than the $400 rt (usually around $250 rt). I can fly rt to SFO from ATL for $350 regularly, yet I pay more to go to BDL.

If WN starts doing this rt (ATL to BDL) I'm willing to be they'll do it for less than $400 rt and DL will be forced to compete. The competition on the route should drive the price down. It used to be much lower when FL used to have the route with DL. I expect the same thing if and when WN does take it on.
 
goomba
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 11:55 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:32 pm

The $400 is for advanced purchase. Try flying BDL-ATL for 9/26 (return 9/29) and you get a fare of $1,123!!

My point exactly...DL owns this route. They are the only game in town and they know it and their prices reflect it. WN will most certainly make the less than 7 day fare less expensive.
 
roguetrader
Posts: 1404
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:14 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:50 pm

Quoting OzarkD9S (Thread starter):
Nice way of getting around the "WN has no hubs" terminology
Quoting vatveng (Reply 3):
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
Quoting rampart (Reply 23):
Nobody's completely comfortable with stating the obvious
Quoting Air1727 (Reply 31):
but they have hubs in the purest definition of the word in regards to airline operations.

WRONG!

The legacy apologists' never-ending obsession with announcing that WN has hubs - as if that puts Southwest in the same boat with the perpetual money-lossers, is just a continuing part of their same sickness that makes reliable profits so elusive.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF WN PASSENGERS DO NOT CONNECT, in the mid 2000s the exact number was put at around 15% connections only, sure its risen now, but its the lesser part of their model. Thus WN is not a hub and spoke airline, and calling the relatively few and minor (in terms of WNs overall operations) places where WN passengers do connect a hub IS misleading as it suggests WN operates the failed business model of relying entirely on connections in fortress cities as their primary customer offering.

The airport where WN connects the most of its passengers, MDW, is just barely connecting 40% of the pax - even there most people are flying point to point. Compare to ATL for DL or DFW for AA and the number is well north of 80% connecting. This big difference in business style means its necessary to differrentiate between an airport that is built for connections with p2p incidental (a hub).... versus WN-style operations in a city that is built primarily for p2p ...with connetions incidental...(a megacity or whatever, but not a legacy type hub)

This reminds me a lot of people in South America calling themselves Americans and resenting that the USA in effect owns that term, except its in reverse, the legacy apologists want to expand their sickly hub designation and attach it to WN so presumably we might all get confused and think both WN and legacies are doing the same thing.

NEWSFLASH: People don't like connecting. For WN this is the secondary part of their business model and everyone should correctly call places where SOME passengers connect something else besides a hub - because hub is so closely identified with the HUB AND SPOKE business model.

RT

[Edited 2011-09-20 11:56:47]

[Edited 2011-09-20 11:58:42]

[Edited 2011-09-20 11:59:36]
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:11 pm

Quoting roguetrader (Reply 40):
THE VAST MAJORITY OF WN PASSENGERS DO NOT CONNECT, in the mid 2000s the exact number was put at around 15% connections only, sure its risen now, but its the lesser part of their model. Thus WN is not a hub and spoke airline, and calling the relatively few and minor (in terms of WNs overall operations) places where WN passengers do connect a hub IS misleading as it suggests WN operates the failed business model of relying entirely on connections in fortress cities as their primary customer offering.

Quack.  

Quick question: why are their recent growth and reinforcements (DEN, MDW, PHX, BWI, BNA) built to enhance connections? Starting DEN with 20-30 flights is making a solid station. Growing DEN to 200+ in 2 years sounds like a major part of their model is gearing toward connections. ATL may be next. Heck, it is, they inherit FL. A hub.

I have no dog in the race, not apologizing for anyone.

-Rampart
 
roguetrader
Posts: 1404
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:14 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:21 pm

Quoting rampart (Reply 41):

Rampart, there's no doubt WN tries to catch connecting traffic. But it is the smaller (much smaller) part of their model...even in the cities that connect the most PAX it is less than half the passengers connecting. Their model isn't built on hub and spoke, therefore for precision's sake it is better to have a different term for a city where MOST of the passengers aren't connecting.

Example: AA at LGA is not a hub, although its large flight volume alone might indicate otherwise, but since it is not built for connecting neither AA nor anyone else I'm aware of calls it a hub.

Really, how hard is this to understand? And why so defensive about it? To WN, and any non-legacy-apologist, a hub is a city where MOST pax connect, anything else is not a hub. When and if they build a station that connects more than 50% of the pax, that might very well be a hub...but it indicates that they have something else in mind for ATL by dropping the weaker spokes of the old airtran hub.

RT
 
unmlobo
Posts: 144
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 2:33 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:25 pm

Quoting goomba (Reply 38):
If WN starts doing this rt (ATL to BDL) I'm willing to be they'll do it for less than $400 rt and DL will be forced to compete. The competition on the route should drive the price down. It used to be much lower when FL used to have the route with DL. I expect the same thing if and when WN does take it on.


WN has already filed fares for ATL-BDL since they will be flying it as a 1-stop through BWI (direct, no plane change) beginning in February. On southwest.com advanced purchase fares including taxes are $366.80 rt, $734.80 for full fare Y (+$40 for Business Select).

Obviously the biggest savings is on walkup fares.
The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of Southwest Airlines its Directors or its Employees
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11517
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:28 pm

Quoting roguetrader (Reply 42):
Their model isn't built on hub and spoke, therefore for precision's sake it is better to have a different term for a city where MOST of the passengers aren't connecting.

Most aren't connecting, but in many cases in the largest cities, most aren't local either. And there are plenty of flights (BHM-BNA or LIT-STL or RSW-MCO) where the overwhelming majority of passengers are connecting.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
roguetrader
Posts: 1404
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:14 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:36 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 44):
Most aren't connecting, but in many cases in the largest cities, most aren't local either. And there are plenty of flights (BHM-BNA or LIT-STL or RSW-MCO) where the overwhelming majority of passengers are connecting.

No dispute there.

For the sake of accuracy among investors and the flying public, it is quite right to refer to a place where WN is NOT connecting most of its passengers as something other than a hub = mainly to differentiate from the hub and spoke business model (for investors) and the expectation of not having to change planes (for WN's flying public, the vast majority of which are p2p.)

RT
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11517
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:40 pm

Quoting roguetrader (Reply 45):
For the sake of accuracy among investors and the flying public, it is quite right to refer to a place where WN is NOT connecting most of its passengers as something other than a hub = mainly to differentiate from the hub and spoke business model (for investors)

The trouble, though, is that not all legacy hubs are majority connecting. Aren't AA/ORD and UA/ORD both around the same connecting to not connecting ratio as WN/MDW? I remember seeing some numbers to that effect a couple of years ago.

Perhaps we need a continuum of "hubness" with CVG or MEM circa 2005 on one end, ORD or SFO somewhere in the middle, LGA or LAX further down the scale, and many of WN's large stations somewhere below those. AA and UA both call LAX a hub, but I bet it has a similar mix of local and connecting traffic to WN/MDW.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
737tdi
Posts: 1116
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:05 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:50 pm

Quoting Valorien (Reply 21):
WN has no defined hubs; however, they do use cities between the origination and destination city as a "connecting point". If the connecting city is one of WN's "busier" cities, it will most likely be the connecting point because of its size, hence, the "hub" effect. WN will probably never use the term "hub", even though its bigger stations behave like them already.

You work for WN but may not understand the difference in "hub and spoke" and the way WN works it's flights.

I.E. AA, DFW to AUS, an aircraft takes off in the morning, flys to AUS, sits there for an hour or more then returns to DFW. This aircraft will be much less utilized then WNs.

I.E. WN, DAL to AUS, and aircraft takes off in the morning and ends it's day at RNO with 8 stops in between never returning to DAL.

Basically WNs flights continue on to other stations where alot of the legacy carriers fly roundtrips between thier stations with the same equiptment.

I have worked at WN for a while and this is my opinion on the difference. The same will work in ATL. Orginate the equiptment in ATL to BWI to MDW to .....etc.. The others just don't work this way.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11517
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:56 pm

Quoting 737tdi (Reply 47):
Basically WNs flights continue on to other stations where alot of the legacy carriers fly roundtrips between thier stations with the same equiptment.

I'm confused.

WN most certainly operates turns, especially in the corners of the country.

Legacies most certainly operate ATL-BNA-DTW or ORD-STL-DEN.

The only difference is that WN has more "hublets" so fewer turns. On F9 pre-merger, almost everything was a turn. On a pure p2p carrier, there would be no turns.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: WN's New Not-A-Hub Term For ATL: "Megacity"

Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:01 pm

Every time I enter one of these threads, raw nerves are touched, and I don't know why. Not mine, I don't own an airline nor work for one. Of the times I've flown WN, and this goes back to the late 80's, unless I was flying PHX to LAX or LAS, I often connected, to get to SEA, or PDX, or OAK, or STL, or MCI, or MDW, or IND.. . This airline customer, me, always assumed WN was built for connections, and more often than not these connections happened at STL, MDW, LAS, OAK, you know, hubs, with lots of flights and options. At least that's what most customers would think of them, those who weren't able to p2p.

WN's fact sheet states 27% connect presently, out of their entire network, and they state that this number is growing. Because WN is so rich with p2p routes with nonstops or through-planes available, it would make sense that the airline-wide connection ratio is low. I wish other airlines would try more of this. DL and UA sometimes make little stabs at it, NW tried in a defensive way, B6 does, F9 should do more. What I can't find, but have seen somewhere, is the figure for the percentage of WN passengers flying to DEN, or MDW, or DAL, or PHX, that are connecting rather than using these cities as their origin or destination. It's quite a bit higher than the airline average, as one would anticipate with a hub.

-Rampart