Given that Southwest only has 737s, they'd be very limited in the destinations they could serve, both in Europe and the US.

Certainly possible, but very unlikely.

Let's get them to Hawaii first, then we'll see....... but personally, I don't see it happening.

With LCC's like Wow, and Norwegian flying from the U.S. to Europe could Southwest do the same?

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

could they do it? sure. but TATL seems way outside WN's core business model of identifying underserved and low competition markets and reaping high margins thru low cost structure and high frequency. doesn't sound like TATL to me. I think its quite doubtful.

Given they only recently started international flights and don't even serve Hawaii yet, probably not anytime soon.

Is it just me or are the posts in this thread all out of order?

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

could they do it? sure. but TATL seems way outside WN's core business model of identifying underserved and low competition markets and reaping high margins thru low cost structure and high frequency. doesn't sound like TATL to me. I think its quite doubtful.

Agreed. Southwest doesn't even serve all the transcon markets / with a lot of frequency. Hawaii will be the first step in going to longer stage length. More 738s will allow them to earn more revenue/flight. I could see 7310s down the road to fill out the transcon markets.

WN doesn't need Europe or the partner feed. Partner feed will happen first.

Don't think so. Bet they will fly Alaska-Hawaii long before East Coast-Europe could happen.

I don't think it's even possible because I think it's not the market that Southwest try to fill. I think Southwest will mainly expend in Hawaii + the caribbean and eventually the South America but not Europe because they don,t have any reputation in Europe.

Also, I think that airlines like Jetblue have a lot more chance to go in Europe, maybe it will happen in the next maybe 10 - 15 years.

They don't need to. There a lot of capacity being added TATL. IMO, not all will make it. WN can go lots of places without Europe.

I think that ship has sailed, or at the very least, it would require a fundamental shift in WN's business model.

What I'd like to see is perhaps some sort of codeshare with DY.

What they need to do is start code sharing with foreign carriers to connect the WN network to the rest of the globe.

Thank you everyone for answering my question. I was just thinking way outside of the box.

No.

I’m not sure the bulk of the loyal Southwest customer base has any interest in going to Europe - for business or pleasure.

Just different customers than some of the other legacy airlines.

In 20 years? Maybe, who knows, but, not in the next 10.

jeffrey1970 wrote:

With LCC's like Wow, and Norwegian flying from the U.S. to Europe could Southwest do the same?

Their network isn't designed in a way that would be conducive for TATL flying, and with only 737s in their fleet they could only reach Europe from the Northeast. Their presence in the Northeast is quite weak, so the best thing they have is BWI but its too far South and west. They would need a hub somewhere in the Northeast to feed connections through....

I don't see WN wanting to hop into TATL either, I think you will see B6 do that first.

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

By just about every typical standard, WN is indeed an LCC.... what they are not, is a low FARE carrier anymore, for anything other than last-minute purchases.

BlatantEcho wrote:

I’m not sure the bulk of the loyal Southwest customer base has any interest in going to Europe - for business or pleasure.

Just different customers than some of the other legacy airlines.

I don't believe this. I just think they have a large amount of customers at airports that WN is the biggest airline so people are kind of forced to fly them if they want non stops. It is true with my home airport. I would love if the biggest airline at my home airport was a legacy that flies to Europe but it isn't so I fly Southwest. I as well as lots of people I know fly Southwest domestic and then DL/UA/AA/etc a couple times a year to Europe because that is just the options we have.

Saying all this, I like flying Southwest so saying I/others are "forced" to fly them isn't to mean I don't enjoy it, it is just the best option from our home airports.

Can we change the thread title? Reads more like news, could simply add a question mark at the end.

I guess this is just the new "When will Southwest begin Hawaii?"

Lets see crews are not allowed redeyes, they don't have a plane with the range, and their intl ops (sans CUN) are not really doing all that great... I will say No

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't..

They are as LC as I'll ever go. The ultra-LCCs are absolutely horrible.

santi319 wrote:

Lets see crews are not allowed redeyes, they don't have a plane with the range, and their intl ops (sans CUN) are not really doing all that great... I will say No

There is nothing in the Pilot’s contract or the Flight Attendent’s contract that prevents WN from doing redeyes. In fact the Pilot’s contract has a section concerning redeyes including how the pilots will be paid extra for doing them.

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

could they do it? sure. but TATL seems way outside WN's core business model of identifying underserved and low competition markets and reaping high margins thru low cost structure and high frequency. doesn't sound like TATL to me. I think its quite doubtful.

How are they not an LCC if their strategy is low cost structure. That's literally the first two letters of LCC.

LCC doesn't imply low fare carrier, in fact keeping relatively normal fares with low costs is what has allowed them to be so profitable.

LAX772LR wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

By just about every typical standard, WN is indeed an LCC.... what they are not, is a low FARE carrier anymore, for anything other than last-minute purchases.

LupineChemist wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

could they do it? sure. but TATL seems way outside WN's core business model of identifying underserved and low competition markets and reaping high margins thru low cost structure and high frequency. doesn't sound like TATL to me. I think its quite doubtful.

How are they not an LCC if their strategy is low cost structure. That's literally the first two letters of LCC.

LCC doesn't imply low fare carrier, in fact keeping relatively normal fares with low costs is what has allowed them to be so profitable.

for you and our most prolific pendant: this is easy - because outside of a.net (ie, the real world), LCC/low cost carrier, does in fact, strongly imply a "low cost" to the consumer (ala "fares"), even if to the industry or avgeek it more specifically means "low cost" structure to the operator.

all you have to do is google "what is a low cost carrier", as I just did, to see what most of the world believes the expression to mean; I think the very 1st/wiki entry sums it up best: "A low-cost carrier or low-cost airline is an airline without most of the traditional services provided in the fare, resulting in lower fares and fewer comforts."

so without devolving into the validity of wikipedia, or even into the accurate meaning of LCC, right or wrong, most of the world *expects to fly more cheaply, as a consumer, by booking with an "LCC"* . Thus, LCC has evolved to equate to "low fare carrier".

Maybe we need to coin yet another acronym: NMC..... "high margin carrier" ?

But please, back to the topic at hand, WN, and why they will or won't fly to Europe.

benbeny wrote:

Don't think so. Bet they will fly Alaska-Hawaii long before East Coast-Europe could happen.

Forget Hawaii. Canada doesn't need ETOPS and they still don't fly there. WN in Europe? Never in my lifetime and I expect to live another 50 years.

Jshank83 wrote:

BlatantEcho wrote:

I’m not sure the bulk of the loyal Southwest customer base has any interest in going to Europe - for business or pleasure.

Just different customers than some of the other legacy airlines.

I don't believe this. I just think they have a large amount of customers at airports that WN is the biggest airline so people are kind of forced to fly them if they want non stops. It is true with my home airport. I would love if the biggest airline at my home airport was a legacy that flies to Europe but it isn't so I fly Southwest. I as well as lots of people I know fly Southwest domestic and then DL/UA/AA/etc a couple times a year to Europe because that is just the options we have.

Saying all this, I like flying Southwest so saying I/others are "forced" to fly them isn't to mean I don't enjoy it, it is just the best option from our home airports.

This is spot on. I’ll bet indeed most people fly WN because it is their only option for most nonstops. At my home airport (BNA), that is exactly the case. I don’t mind WN at all, but what frustrates me about them is their lack of international flying and lack of codeshares with foreign carriers, which makes it very inflexible for people who require travel outside of the lower 48. I’d rather have a legacy for those reasons.

This also is the reason I say DL could put a focus city in AUS and they’d be fine.

It'll be jetBlue first.

I will answer the question this way, how much money is WN leaving on the table by NOT flying to Europe?
If we decide on a number, can they make up that number elsewhere in their operation, say by starting to charge for all bags?

I am trying to come at this from a financial perspective versus a fan.

If WN ever decides to fly to Europe, I think BWI would be an excellent jumping off point. There's a large O&D base since they'll pull from the DC metro, and connecting opportunities from over 50 cities. It would also offer an alternative to all the IAD haters. That said, the 737 (any variant) is not the right equipment. They'd also have to shift their business model drastically for the TATL ops (premium cabin, hot meals, seat assignments, etc.). Yeah, not going to happen anytime soon.

airbazar wrote:

benbeny wrote:

Don't think so. Bet they will fly Alaska-Hawaii long before East Coast-Europe could happen.

Forget Hawaii. Canada doesn't need ETOPS and they still don't fly there. WN in Europe? Never in my lifetime and I expect to live another 50 years.

To be totally honest, I'm actually surprised they haven't touched down in ANC yet.

Jshank83 wrote:

BlatantEcho wrote:

I’m not sure the bulk of the loyal Southwest customer base has any interest in going to Europe - for business or pleasure.

Just different customers than some of the other legacy airlines.

I don't believe this. I just think they have a large amount of customers at airports that WN is the biggest airline so people are kind of forced to fly them if they want non stops. It is true with my home airport. I would love if the biggest airline at my home airport was a legacy that flies to Europe but it isn't so I fly Southwest. I as well as lots of people I know fly Southwest domestic and then DL/UA/AA/etc a couple times a year to Europe because that is just the options we have.

Saying all this, I like flying Southwest so saying I/others are "forced" to fly them isn't to mean I don't enjoy it, it is just the best option from our home airports.

I absolutely agree. In markets where WN is the biggest airline (some I'm familiar with are ABQ and many secondary California airports), there are lots of relatively affluent people who fly WN. Many of those people have even grown to prefer WN to other airlines. If WN flew to Europe from those markets, or codeshared/connected on an airline with a similar style of transparent, reasonable fares (I know WN's fares aren't the lowest, but not exorbitant or fluctuating wildly) with included baggage, etc., they would do well.

I suspect WN's clientele is different in markets where they aren't the dominant airline.

donindc wrote:

If WN ever decides to fly to Europe, I think BWI would be an excellent jumping off point. There's a large O&D base since they'll pull from the DC metro, and connecting opportunities from over 50 cities. It would also offer an alternative to all the IAD haters. That said, the 737 (any variant) is not the right equipment. They'd also have to shift their business model drastically for the TATL ops (premium cabin, hot meals, seat assignments, etc.). Yeah, not going to happen anytime soon.

I agree with most of the above posts saying they will not be flying to Europe for various reasons, but the last part of your post is not really a requirement anymore for TATL. See: WOW, Norwegian, Level, soon to come Primera, and the stripped down fares of TAP and Aer Lingus.

Premium cabins and Hot meals are not a requirement for TATL....A lot of Legacy carriers don't even offer free seat assignments. (BA, TAP, AF, KLM...list goes on)

donindc wrote:

If WN ever decides to fly to Europe, I think BWI would be an excellent jumping off point.

According to repeated local rumors, WN has looked at BWI-Europe more than once; but they're not in any hurry to undertake it for all the reasons mentions by other posters.

737tanker wrote:

santi319 wrote:

Lets see crews are not allowed redeyes, they don't have a plane with the range, and their intl ops (sans CUN) are not really doing all that great... I will say No

There is nothing in the Pilot’s contract or the Flight Attendent’s contract that prevents WN from doing redeyes. In fact the Pilot’s contract has a section concerning redeyes including how the pilots will be paid extra for doing them.

IIRC it has to do with their reservation system, which seems to be causing a lot of problems. For their system to work, there needs to be a break period to 'reset the day' or something like that. It is something like 4am local time, which makes it pretty much impossible to do redeyes.

Janj wrote:

Given they only recently started international flights and don't even serve Hawaii yet, probably not anytime soon.

Is it just me or are the posts in this thread all out of order?

I've noticed this happening in many other threads, too.

As far as TATL and international, seems like they have a lot of opportunities in Caribbean, Central and South America, and Canada first. But if other airlines are doing it with the MAX they probably could, too.

Why are we still hearing it's brand new reservations system not working right? It's been how long? Just how big is the problem I wonder. Seems like Southwest is not being open to shareholders about this issue if it is still preventing red eye flights and long haul codesharing.

Also, I think BWI will be a connection point for Southwest passengers to Europe, just not on Southwest metal. Who will their partners be and let's get on with it and start expanding the network again.

If WN wants to codeshare for European flights, a good partner would be BA, considering they fly into almost every market where WN has a focus city/large station.

However, because of AA’s JV with BA, I doubt it would happen. Which is a shame.

czek6 wrote:

Why are we still hearing it's brand new reservations system not working right? It's been how long? Just how big is the problem I wonder. Seems like Southwest is not being open to shareholders about this issue if it is still preventing red eye flights and long haul codesharing.

Also, I think BWI will be a connection point for Southwest passengers to Europe, just not on Southwest metal. Who will their partners be and let's get on with it and start expanding the network again.

Right. I think a codeshare/JV with any long-haul European (or even Asian) carrier, LCC or not, would jumpstart daily service on that airline to BWI. This would be a lot easier for WN, rather than having to organize a whole plan to begin TATL routes.

Could they? Yes. Should/Will they? Probably not for the foreseeable future.

Once the 797 arrives...sure.

And I don't think redeyes have anything to do with the res system or crews...

czek6 wrote:

Why are we still hearing it's brand new reservations system not working right? It's been how long? Just how big is the problem I wonder. Seems like Southwest is not being open to shareholders about this issue if it is still preventing red eye flights and long haul codesharing.

Also, I think BWI will be a connection point for Southwest passengers to Europe, just not on Southwest metal. Who will their partners be and let's get on with it and start expanding the network again.

That new reservations system is an absolute joke, full of flaws.

A reasonable partner for Southwest could be Norwegian. Norwegian doesn't have any feeder agreements in America, so all their flights rely on strictly local demand at the American end. In Europe they got their own feeder flights and a deal with EasyJet, in America Southwest could play that role.

I don't think there is a demand for WN to fly to Europe, not when there is a large chunk of passengers in numerous cities all over the country that would rather see them take their legendary service to Hawaii.

I think the issue with WN to Europe is that its against what there model currently is.

Right now, WN is all about frequency and increasing the number of routes at airports.

Why: The 737 is limited to what 150 -189 passengers? Give or take.

After the cost of fuel, crew, and so on, the total net flight incomes might actually not be a ton of money. But when you have a 737 that can turnaround pretty quickly for the next flight and all about frequency, the income from those flights starts to add up to a lot of money.

When flying to Hawaii or Europe / longer distances- Cost per flight goes up for the crew, fuel, and so on, flight frequency with the plane goes down due to flight times / distance, and the PROBLEM- 737 still has 150-189 passengers. A plane that small, you can only make a certain amount of money with rising costs.

BWIAirport wrote:

737tanker wrote:

santi319 wrote:

Lets see crews are not allowed redeyes, they don't have a plane with the range, and their intl ops (sans CUN) are not really doing all that great... I will say No

There is nothing in the Pilot’s contract or the Flight Attendent’s contract that prevents WN from doing redeyes. In fact the Pilot’s contract has a section concerning redeyes including how the pilots will be paid extra for doing them.

IIRC it has to do with their reservation system, which seems to be causing a lot of problems. For their system to work, there needs to be a break period to 'reset the day' or something like that. It is something like 4am local time, which makes it pretty much impossible to do redeyes.

Indeed. GDS/ops software issue

Not before BOG, LIM, CTG, PTY and then some.

FlyHappy wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

By just about every typical standard, WN is indeed an LCC.... what they are not, is a low FARE carrier anymore, for anything other than last-minute purchases.

LupineChemist wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

could they do it? sure. but TATL seems way outside WN's core business model of identifying underserved and low competition markets and reaping high margins thru low cost structure and high frequency. doesn't sound like TATL to me. I think its quite doubtful.

How are they not an LCC if their strategy is low cost structure. That's literally the first two letters of LCC.

LCC doesn't imply low fare carrier, in fact keeping relatively normal fares with low costs is what has allowed them to be so profitable.

for you and our most prolific pendant: this is easy - because outside of a.net (ie, the real world), LCC/low cost carrier, does in fact, strongly imply a "low cost" to the consumer (ala "fares"), even if to the industry or avgeek it more specifically means "low cost" structure to the operator.

all you have to do is google "what is a low cost carrier", as I just did, to see what most of the world believes the expression to mean; I think the very 1st/wiki entry sums it up best: "A low-cost carrier or low-cost airline is an airline without most of the traditional services provided in the fare, resulting in lower fares and fewer comforts."

so without devolving into the validity of wikipedia, or even into the accurate meaning of LCC, right or wrong, most of the world *expects to fly more cheaply, as a consumer, by booking with an "LCC"* . Thus, LCC has evolved to equate to "low fare carrier".

Maybe we need to coin yet another acronym: NMC..... "high margin carrier" ?

But please, back to the topic at hand, WN, and why they will or won't fly to Europe.

Yeah, I strongly disagree.

Just because most people, including a lot of people on this website, fail to comprehend what the real definition of "low cost carrier" means, doesn't make its erroneous usage any more correct.

And since we're quoting Wikipedia, let's include the full quote, including the part you left out that contradicts you:

"The term originated within the airline industry referring to airlines with a lower operating cost structure than their competitors. While the term is often applied to any carrier with low ticket prices and limited services, regardless of their operating models, low-cost carriers should not be confused with regional airlines that operate short flights without service, or with full-service airlines offering some reduced fares."

LAX772LR wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

By just about every typical standard, WN is indeed an LCC.... what they are not, is a low FARE carrier anymore, for anything other than last-minute purchases.

Where do they have cheap last minute fares? For the places I want to go, they seem to have to have high fares except possibly for advance purchase. I recently flew AUS-DAL-BOS for $98, but that required purchase at least 3 weeks in advance.

santi319 wrote:

Lets see crews are not allowed redeyes, they don't have a plane with the range, and their intl ops (sans CUN) are not really doing all that great... I will say No

Laugh at post of the day, starting with "Let's see crew are not".

LupineChemist wrote:

FlyHappy wrote:

can we first dispense with the myth that WN is an LCC ? they aren't.

could they do it? sure. but TATL seems way outside WN's core business model of identifying underserved and low competition markets and reaping high margins thru low cost structure and high frequency. doesn't sound like TATL to me. I think its quite doubtful.

How are they not an LCC if their strategy is low cost structure. That's literally the first two letters of LCC.

LCC doesn't imply low fare carrier, in fact keeping relatively normal fares with low costs is what has allowed them to be so profitable.

Do you know what LCC stands for? WN has you and a lot of people fooled into thinking they have the lowest fare. They have not been an LCC for a long time.

Keith2004 wrote:

donindc wrote:

If WN ever decides to fly to Europe, I think BWI would be an excellent jumping off point. There's a large O&D base since they'll pull from the DC metro, and connecting opportunities from over 50 cities. It would also offer an alternative to all the IAD haters. That said, the 737 (any variant) is not the right equipment. They'd also have to shift their business model drastically for the TATL ops (premium cabin, hot meals, seat assignments, etc.). Yeah, not going to happen anytime soon.

I agree with most of the above posts saying they will not be flying to Europe for various reasons, but the last part of your post is not really a requirement anymore for TATL. See: WOW, Norwegian, Level, soon to come Primera, and the stripped down fares of TAP and Aer Lingus.

Premium cabins and Hot meals are not a requirement for TATL....A lot of Legacy carriers don't even offer free seat assignments. (BA, TAP, AF, KLM...list goes on)

I agree those service levels are not a requirement. I guess in my own mind I don't see WN stooping to the bargain basement WOW or Norwegian models. Despite the lack of a premium cabin or seat assignments, WN's domestic service levels are on par, and often exceed that of US legacies (better leg room, no bag fees, no change fees, free Wi-Fi, no "Basic Economy" ridiculousness, etc.).