Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
SWADawg wrote:AS will still have a steep hill to climb to match what WN does in CA. That's not to say they can't eventually, but it will be far more bloody for AS than WN and WN is 3 times the size of the combined AS/VX with much deeper pockets. It will no doubt keep the fares in CA rock bottom for years to come. So, good for the consumer no doubt about that.
phluser wrote:jplatts wrote:Will Southwest Airlines expand from LAX to Florida?
There is also LAX-SEA which is notably missing, that is shorter stage length and supports more business traffic. It's the fifth busiest destination from LAX. WN would rather be on SEA-LAS or PHX, and on the LAX side, keep gates for flights to smaller destinations like IND. So WN avoided directly competing on LAX-SEA where it was too competitive.
If WN is confident that it stands against AS and the legacies in onboard experience, then it should have no qualms about competing on this 3 hour competitive route. The AS VX merging actually removes a competitor. No excuses for WN to not be on it, especially given WN's massive LAX operation and FF support in So Cal.
jplatts wrote:phluser wrote:jplatts wrote:Will Southwest Airlines expand from LAX to Florida?
There is also LAX-SEA which is notably missing, that is shorter stage length and supports more business traffic. It's the fifth busiest destination from LAX. WN would rather be on SEA-LAS or PHX, and on the LAX side, keep gates for flights to smaller destinations like IND. So WN avoided directly competing on LAX-SEA where it was too competitive.
If WN is confident that it stands against AS and the legacies in onboard experience, then it should have no qualms about competing on this 3 hour competitive route. The AS VX merging actually removes a competitor. No excuses for WN to not be on it, especially given WN's massive LAX operation and FF support in So Cal.
The question about whether Southwest would add SEA-LAX nonstop service was already asked, and the question and some responses to that question could be found at https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1358391.
amcnd wrote:SWADawg wrote:AS will still have a steep hill to climb to match what WN does in CA. That's not to say they can't eventually, but it will be far more bloody for AS than WN and WN is 3 times the size of the combined AS/VX with much deeper pockets. It will no doubt keep the fares in CA rock bottom for years to come. So, good for the consumer no doubt about that.
What AS has that WN doesn't is Hawaii, and more Mexico..and First class service..
amcnd wrote:SWADawg wrote:AS will still have a steep hill to climb to match what WN does in CA. That's not to say they can't eventually, but it will be far more bloody for AS than WN and WN is 3 times the size of the combined AS/VX with much deeper pockets. It will no doubt keep the fares in CA rock bottom for years to come. So, good for the consumer no doubt about that.
What AS has that WN doesn't is Hawaii, and more Mexico..and First class service..
airplaneboy wrote:amcnd wrote:SWADawg wrote:AS will still have a steep hill to climb to match what WN does in CA. That's not to say they can't eventually, but it will be far more bloody for AS than WN and WN is 3 times the size of the combined AS/VX with much deeper pockets. It will no doubt keep the fares in CA rock bottom for years to come. So, good for the consumer no doubt about that.
What AS has that WN doesn't is Hawaii, and more Mexico..and First class service..
And? WN has the Caribbean AND Mexico AND Belize AND Costa Rica. Lol. If someone flies to Hawaii frequently, then that's not the customer WN is chasing. Nor are they chasing someone who only flies (domestic) first class. They've made it clear they plan on remaining a one class airline for the foreseeable future. Not flying to Hawaii is a strategic decision that Southwest believes allows them to place their aircraft where there is MORE money to be made. Not flying to the Hawaiian Islands hasn't hurt their business. Look at all the other destinations they fly to already.
hiflyeras wrote:amcnd wrote:SWADawg wrote:AS will still have a steep hill to climb to match what WN does in CA. That's not to say they can't eventually, but it will be far more bloody for AS than WN and WN is 3 times the size of the combined AS/VX with much deeper pockets. It will no doubt keep the fares in CA rock bottom for years to come. So, good for the consumer no doubt about that.
What AS has that WN doesn't is Hawaii, and more Mexico..and First class service..
And a proper frequent flier program that takes you more places (like the entire world) versus WN.
hiflyeras wrote:AS pilots are not naïve enough to think that they're going to fly AS metal any time soon to SYD, DUB, HKG, etc. AS has their own mini-alliance with 16 international carriers, offering the ability of AS Mileage Plan members to book award tickets to pretty much every major city in the world. I'd call that a 'proper' mileage plan compared to WN who have....uh...no partners. If you want a free trip to LUB though then good for you.
airplaneboy wrote:hiflyeras wrote:AS pilots are not naïve enough to think that they're going to fly AS metal any time soon to SYD, DUB, HKG, etc. AS has their own mini-alliance with 16 international carriers, offering the ability of AS Mileage Plan members to book award tickets to pretty much every major city in the world. I'd call that a 'proper' mileage plan compared to WN who have....uh...no partners. If you want a free trip to LUB though then good for you.
Definitely an added benefit for AS fliers, I'm not discounting that. But don't knock on WN's frequent flier program when it is not identical to AS. Does AS' program reward points based based on mileage accrued or dollars spent? Does AS offer 100% of seats for reward redemption? One program offers access to the world on other airlines- and another is focused on domestic and near international destinations on their own metal (which is is still a large market). If someone travels overseas frequently, the. Alaska's program would be more beneficial to be a part of. For those who travel domestically or to any of the near international destinations Southwest serves, then their program is the most consumer friendly and beneficial. That's the difference.
airplaneboy wrote:hiflyeras wrote:AS pilots are not naïve enough to think that they're going to fly AS metal any time soon to SYD, DUB, HKG, etc. AS has their own mini-alliance with 16 international carriers, offering the ability of AS Mileage Plan members to book award tickets to pretty much every major city in the world. I'd call that a 'proper' mileage plan compared to WN who have....uh...no partners. If you want a free trip to LUB though then good for you.
Definitely an added benefit for AS fliers, I'm not discounting that. But don't knock on WN's frequent flier program when it is not identical to AS. Does AS' program reward points based based on mileage accrued or dollars spent? Does AS offer 100% of seats for reward redemption? One program offers access to the world on other airlines- and another is focused on domestic and near international destinations on their own metal (which is is still a large market). If someone travels overseas frequently, the. Alaska's program would be more beneficial to be a part of. For those who travel domestically or to any of the near international destinations Southwest serves, then their program is the most consumer friendly and beneficial. That's the difference.
airliner371 wrote:It seems to be missed by everyone here but as a Rapid Rewards credit card holder, I can use my Rapid Rewards points to go basically anywhere in the world too. WN allows booking using points on international carriers like BA, EI, AF even DL, AA and UA.
http://www.qrttravel.com/search.jsp#/air
intotheair wrote:airliner371 wrote:It seems to be missed by everyone here but as a Rapid Rewards credit card holder, I can use my Rapid Rewards points to go basically anywhere in the world too. WN allows booking using points on international carriers like BA, EI, AF even DL, AA and UA.
http://www.qrttravel.com/search.jsp#/air
Which card are you talking about? Your link didn't go anywhere for me. I'm aware of unbranded cards that can transfer into a number of programs — I hold the Chase Sapphire card which transfers into UA, AF, BA, WN, and many others — but I didn't think any WN-branded card or RR points themselves could be used on OALs.
jplatts wrote:Will Southwest Airlines expand from LAX to Florida? Southwest does have nonstops from San Diego to Orlando and nonstop service to Florida destinations from Phoenix and Las Vegas, but currently does not operate any nonstops to Florida from Seattle, Portland, SF Bay Area, Sacramento, or the Greater Los Angeles Area?
n471wn wrote:Let us hope that since AS has decided to come and play in the WN sandbox that WN returns the favor. And they can start at PDX where AS can be wounded. For instance when AS started flying PDX to SLC about. 3 years ago WN inexplicably pulled out. They had flown this route for 25 years and their pullout from this market was a shock. Go back in there WN and other AS markets out of PDX and teach them a lesson
n471wn wrote:Let us hope that since AS has decided to come and play in the WN sandbox that WN returns the favor. And they can start at PDX where AS can be wounded. For instance when AS started flying PDX to SLC about. 3 years ago WN inexplicably pulled out. They had flown this route for 25 years and their pullout from this market was a shock. Go back in there WN and other AS markets out of PDX and teach them a lesson
ASFlyer wrote:You could argue that WN definitely has greater frequency on many of the intra-California routes now, but this flying wasn't something that WN created - they filled a void left by consolidation
SFOtoORD wrote:ASFlyer wrote:You could argue that WN definitely has greater frequency on many of the intra-California routes now, but this flying wasn't something that WN created - they filled a void left by consolidation
WN certainly backfilled the service of other carriers, but they did dramatically increase both the network and frequency for intra-CA. They drove prices down to a place where you could connect just about any two points in key NorCal and SoCal cities. Business travelers can do virtually any business trips within the state as a day trip now.
SFOtoORD wrote:ASFlyer wrote:You could argue that WN definitely has greater frequency on many of the intra-California routes now, but this flying wasn't something that WN created - they filled a void left by consolidation
WN certainly backfilled the service of other carriers, but they did dramatically increase both the network and frequency for intra-CA. They drove prices down to a place where you could connect just about any two points in key NorCal and SoCal cities. Business travelers can do virtually any business trips within the state as a day trip now.
airplaneboy wrote:It makes no sense for WN to enter the yield bloodbath that exists on LAX-SEA, or in other SEA markets now that DL and AS are aggressively competing for local market share. Why would WN want to waste its resources to fly planes in heavily competitive markets charging super cheap fares when the same aircraft be placed elsewhere with a higher financial return?
MIflyer12 wrote:airplaneboy wrote:It makes no sense for WN to enter the yield bloodbath that exists on LAX-SEA, or in other SEA markets now that DL and AS are aggressively competing for local market share. Why would WN want to waste its resources to fly planes in heavily competitive markets charging super cheap fares when the same aircraft be placed elsewhere with a higher financial return?
WN is one of six carriers flying LAX-DEN. With AS' acquisition of VX, there are now five carriers on LAX-SEA. Sure, DEN is a Southwest focus city. What defines too much competition on a route? Is WN scared off LAX-SEA because Spirit has already sucked up the low fare flyers and WN doesn't have Y+ or F cabins to compete with DL, UA, AA, and AS?
ASQXSMFJETTER wrote:Quite Frankly,
In regards to the E-175 it is actually quite a beautiful aircraft inside, quiet, comfortable and reliable. I think AS is actually a big contender in this west coast battle. Either way this is win for consumers!
KentB27 wrote:ASQXSMFJETTER wrote:Quite Frankly,
In regards to the E-175 it is actually quite a beautiful aircraft inside, quiet, comfortable and reliable. I think AS is actually a big contender in this west coast battle. Either way this is win for consumers!
If I have the choice to fly with on an E Jet with AS or a WN 737 I'm going to pick the E Jet every time. Way more comfortable and no middle seats.
SFOtoORD wrote:KentB27 wrote:ASQXSMFJETTER wrote:Quite Frankly,
In regards to the E-175 it is actually quite a beautiful aircraft inside, quiet, comfortable and reliable. I think AS is actually a big contender in this west coast battle. Either way this is win for consumers!
If I have the choice to fly with on an E Jet with AS or a WN 737 I'm going to pick the E Jet every time. Way more comfortable and no middle seats.
Since everyone here likes to tout the financial soundness of AS, my guess is that WN has a meaningful cost advantage on the routes where they compete with AS on an ejet.
KentB27 wrote:SFOtoORD wrote:KentB27 wrote:
If I have the choice to fly with on an E Jet with AS or a WN 737 I'm going to pick the E Jet every time. Way more comfortable and no middle seats.
Since everyone here likes to tout the financial soundness of AS, my guess is that WN has a meaningful cost advantage on the routes where they compete with AS on an ejet.
That's not necessarily true. I booked a round trip with AS on E175s from MCI to PDX and AS had better prices. WN serves that route as well. Hell it costs less to fly first class on Alaska for that trip than it does to book a business select or anytime ticket on WN. The notion that WN always has the best prices is laughable.
SFOtoORD wrote:KentB27 wrote:SFOtoORD wrote:
Since everyone here likes to tout the financial soundness of AS, my guess is that WN has a meaningful cost advantage on the routes where they compete with AS on an ejet.
That's not necessarily true. I booked a round trip with AS on E175s from MCI to PDX and AS had better prices. WN serves that route as well. Hell it costs less to fly first class on Alaska for that trip than it does to book a business select or anytime ticket on WN. The notion that WN always has the best prices is laughable.
I was referring to AS's cost to operate the flight vs WN's. Not your cost. Given two identically priced tickets WN is likely getting better margins assuming good loads.
SFOtoORD wrote:KentB27 wrote:SFOtoORD wrote:
Since everyone here likes to tout the financial soundness of AS, my guess is that WN has a meaningful cost advantage on the routes where they compete with AS on an ejet.
That's not necessarily true. I booked a round trip with AS on E175s from MCI to PDX and AS had better prices. WN serves that route as well. Hell it costs less to fly first class on Alaska for that trip than it does to book a business select or anytime ticket on WN. The notion that WN always has the best prices is laughable.
I was referring to AS's cost to operate the flight vs WN's. Not your cost. Given two identically priced tickets WN is likely getting better margins assuming good loads.
SFOtoORD wrote:I was referring to AS's cost to operate the flight vs WN's.
EA CO AS wrote:SFOtoORD wrote:I was referring to AS's cost to operate the flight vs WN's.
It's important to remember that AS has successfully lowered their costs every year for the last ten, with CASM ex-fuel and special items at AS actually lower than WN, and AS continues moving costs downward while WN's are steadily rising.
SFOtoORD wrote:EA CO AS wrote:SFOtoORD wrote:I was referring to AS's cost to operate the flight vs WN's.
It's important to remember that AS has successfully lowered their costs every year for the last ten, with CASM ex-fuel and special items at AS actually lower than WN, and AS continues moving costs downward while WN's are steadily rising.
Even when comparing an E-Jet and a 73G/738?
amcnd wrote:SWADawg wrote:AS will still have a steep hill to climb to match what WN does in CA. That's not to say they can't eventually, but it will be far more bloody for AS than WN and WN is 3 times the size of the combined AS/VX with much deeper pockets. It will no doubt keep the fares in CA rock bottom for years to come. So, good for the consumer no doubt about that.
What AS has that WN doesn't is Hawaii, and more Mexico..and First class service..
BMWdrvr75 wrote:amcnd wrote:SWADawg wrote:AS will still have a steep hill to climb to match what WN does in CA. That's not to say they can't eventually, but it will be far more bloody for AS than WN and WN is 3 times the size of the combined AS/VX with much deeper pockets. It will no doubt keep the fares in CA rock bottom for years to come. So, good for the consumer no doubt about that.
What AS has that WN doesn't is Hawaii, and more Mexico..and First class service..
WN and the Kool Aide drinkers think they do not need Hawaii or a premium cabin....status quo on board the aircraft....but the flight attendants have hip new gray Cintas couture uniforms with red accents.
BMWdrvr75 wrote:amcnd wrote:SWADawg wrote:AS will still have a steep hill to climb to match what WN does in CA. That's not to say they can't eventually, but it will be far more bloody for AS than WN and WN is 3 times the size of the combined AS/VX with much deeper pockets. It will no doubt keep the fares in CA rock bottom for years to come. So, good for the consumer no doubt about that.
What AS has that WN doesn't is Hawaii, and more Mexico..and First class service..
WN and the Kool Aide drinkers think they do not need Hawaii or a premium cabin....status quo on board the aircraft....but the flight attendants have hip new gray Cintas couture uniforms with red accents.
airplaneboy wrote:amcnd wrote:What AS has that WN doesn't is Hawaii, and more Mexico..and First class service..
And? WN has the Caribbean AND Mexico AND Belize AND Costa Rica. Lol.
CalTex wrote:airplaneboy wrote:amcnd wrote:Meanwhile, AS serves Alaska (via SEA), Hawaii (via SFO, LAX, SAN; also SMF-Maui), and 9 destinations south of the border (via LAX).