Hey folks!

In the recent news there were talks of Southwest acquiring another airline, most likely Jetblue or Alaska.

I started to think if WN acquiring either AS or B6 would be feasible.

As Jetblue is almost all Airbus and they have tons of flights into these big major airports that WN likes to steer clear of like JFK, BOS, and EWR. JFK being Jetblue's main hub, it wouldn't be good for Southwest to take JFK and all these airbus planes because then it would be more expensive for the airline.

Alaska has a lot of transcons, Hawaii, and Alaska flights, and Southwest just recently started HI flights so I don't think they'd wanna expand like that so fast.

Not to mention that Alaska Airlines really helps out the people of rural Alaska so I don't think the government would allow an Alaska acquisition.

Then it hit me that Sun Country is all Boeing and Southwest operates all the planes Sun Country has, and Southwest could absorb MSP, and take over these cities that Sun Country flies to.

Again this is all my opinion, and I believe this would work way better than an Alaska or Jetblue take over.

Southwest taking over any airline is bad news for competition.

Remember what they did to Atlanta after AirTran?
If they bought SY, it could go the same way.

AS is a good option in my opinion. Because Alaska has many Boeing 737 fleet than Airbus.

aviationMCO8 wrote:

Hey folks!

Not to mention that Alaska Airlines really helps out the people of rural Alaska so I don't think the government would allow an Alaska acquisition.

The government wouldn't allow it for a lot of reasons, but that's probably not at the top of the list. The size of the airline and the massive market share in California would seem like bigger reasons to me.

Theoretically speaking If WN did buy AS, who would take over the InterAlaska routes? I wonder if we could see a new carrier being launched that would be similar to Alaska Airlines back in the '70s mainly running flights out of Anchorage to Alaskan cities with limited service outside of the state.

SierraPacific wrote:

Theoretically speaking If WN did buy AS, who would take over the InterAlaska routes? I wonder if we could see a new carrier being launched that would be similar to Alaska Airlines back in the '70s mainly running flights out of Anchorage to Alaskan cities with limited service outside of the state.

Why wouldn’t Southwest continue to fly them?

aviationMCO8 wrote:

Then it hit me that Sun Country is all Boeing and Southwest operates all the planes Sun Country has, and Southwest could absorb MSP, and take over these cities that Sun Country flies to.

Again this is all my opinion, and I believe this would work way better than an Alaska or Jetblue take over.

Sun Country has ~30 aircraft and ~350 pilots. WN could certainly buy planes and hire pilots in that quantity and not worry about integration hassles. There's nothing special about Sun Country. At least AirTran had LGA and DCA slots.

maps4ltd wrote:

Remember what they did to Atlanta after AirTran?
If they bought SY, it could go the same way.

It's still one of the biggest cities in the WN system...

MIflyer12 wrote:

aviationMCO8 wrote:

Then it hit me that Sun Country is all Boeing and Southwest operates all the planes Sun Country has, and Southwest could absorb MSP, and take over these cities that Sun Country flies to.

Again this is all my opinion, and I believe this would work way better than an Alaska or Jetblue take over.

Sun Country has ~30 aircraft and ~350 pilots. WN could certainly buy planes and hire pilots in that quantity and not worry about integration hassles. There's nothing special about Sun Country. At least AirTran had LGA and DCA slots.

MSP slots but those 30 planes are good to take up for the 30 MAX jets that are out rn

gunsontheroof wrote:

aviationMCO8 wrote:

Hey folks!

Not to mention that Alaska Airlines really helps out the people of rural Alaska so I don't think the government would allow an Alaska acquisition.

The government wouldn't allow it for a lot of reasons, but that's probably not at the top of the list. The size of the airline and the massive market share in California would seem like bigger reasons to me.

i totally agree! but i also thought about the military stuff they do in Alaska too

Why would Southwest want to buy Sun Country??????????? Sun Country offers Southwest nothing. Southwest has NO need for Sun Country......

NWAROOSTER wrote:

Why would Southwest want to buy Sun Country??????????? Sun Country offers Southwest nothing. Southwest has NO need for Sun Country......

i only thought of them gaining aircraft and MSP slots

It may be good in the short term, but not in the long term.

aviationMCO8 wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

aviationMCO8 wrote:

Then it hit me that Sun Country is all Boeing and Southwest operates all the planes Sun Country has, and Southwest could absorb MSP, and take over these cities that Sun Country flies to.

Again this is all my opinion, and I believe this would work way better than an Alaska or Jetblue take over.

Sun Country has ~30 aircraft and ~350 pilots. WN could certainly buy planes and hire pilots in that quantity and not worry about integration hassles. There's nothing special about Sun Country. At least AirTran had LGA and DCA slots.

MSP slots but those 30 planes are good to take up for the 30 MAX jets that are out rn

MSP is not a slot controlled airport.

WN buying SY seems pointless.

This makes no sense. The most recent round of speculation about a Southwest aquisition was fueled by a highly speculative article that Southwest could diversify it's fleet away from the troubled 737MAX quickly by acquiring an existing Airbus operator as the order book for the A320neo family is pretty full for the next few years. In this context, JetBlue and Alaska make more sense as both have big Airbus fleets (the latter by way of Virgin America).

Your contention that Southwest avoids big airports is flawed. They just gave up on EWR but have been flying at LAX for years and returned to SFO after a several year absence.

I agree with the other posters that Sun Country brings little to the table for Southwest.

SY as whole brings no economic value to WN.
Their shoe string seasonal network is pointless.
JetBlue and AlaskaAir bring in lucrative market share in key destinations. If SY had any real value someone would have gobbled them up years ago.
Even At DL MSP strategic value is low on it's own battle plan.
Basically SY isn't seen as a real threat in there current condition.
WN has plenty of ample gate space in MSP to grow organically if wanted to.
Flyguy

Typical airliners.net...

"They have 737s too, they're the perfect merger partner!"

Why would Southwest want to merge with SY? They don't need any more 737s, quite the opposite actually. Route structure - they fly mostly MSP to vacation destinations - who cares? SY doesn't have any valuable real estate or access to routes and airports that WN doesn't.

What value would WN see in a tie up like this?

At least WN probably wouldn't strand passengers in Mexico and tell them to find a way home.

aviationMCO8 wrote:

NWAROOSTER wrote:

Why would Southwest want to buy Sun Country??????????? Sun Country offers Southwest nothing. Southwest has NO need for Sun Country......

i only thought of them gaining aircraft and MSP slots

There's no slots to gain, and MSP isn't even close to being in danger of being a slot controlled airport.

SY offers nothing to Southwest. They are running the ULCC route, but at the same time haven't really hit their niche. Charters have been a nice revenue source for them, but with their expansion something has to give. The network is pretty lean, they aren't running high frequency on many (any?) routes. They're just trying to find where they fall in the pecking order.

The only thing they gain by buying SY is a few more aircraft and pilots and an increased presence in MSP, which they don't really need. Everyone seems to run to the MAX grounding as something that can be remedied by WN by buying an airline. Even if they bought someone the day the MAX was grounded those planes STILL wouldn't be flying under their brand or on their certificate. It's a short sighted decision with long term pain (debt).

The entire WN buying someone is pointless! Give it a rest!

I suggested this a week ago in the original thread. It is their best choice, but are we really going to allow WN to liquidate a viable LCC competitor just to provide temporary aircraft because of the MAX? What a horrible precedent if yes.

PhilMcCrackin wrote:

Typical airliners.net...

"They have 737s too, they're the perfect merger partner!"

No kidding, I’m surprised no ones suggested that WN try to buy Ryanair.

“But they both have 737s!”

Dominion301 wrote:

Southwest taking over any airline is bad news for competition.

Yet after all these mergers, fares are still lower than they were pre-deregulation. And the remaining airlines are not going thru boom/bust/bankruptcy cycles. Healthy competition is better than plain old "competition".

%Operational Revenue of USA aviation industry in first half of 2019
19.0% Delta Air Lines Inc.
18.5% American Airlines Inc.
17.3% United Air Lines Inc.
09.1% Southwest Airlines Co.
03.4% Alaska Airlines Inc.
03.3% JetBlue Airways
01.5% Spirit Air Lines
01.1% Hawaiian Airlines Inc.
01.0% Frontier Airlines Inc.
00.7% Allegiant Air
00.3% Sun Country Airlines
75.3% mainline airlines
24.7% regional and cargo airlines

aviationMCO8 wrote:

Then it hit me that Sun Country is all Boeing and Southwest operates all the planes Sun Country has, and Southwest could absorb MSP, and take over these cities that Sun Country flies to. Again this is all my opinion, and I believe this would work way better than an Alaska or Jetblue take over.

Why? Sun Country has 29 old leased B737s and less than 1/3% of the industry. I think they should acquire UAL.

When trying to answer if company A should acquire company B, one should first answer what is the intended goal of the acquisition. Then one must answer if the created value of the acquisition outweighs the cost. In this case, if the intended goal is to expand, the created value does not outweigh the cost. WN could more easily and efficiently order more aircraft, gates, employees, etc. organically vs. acquiring SY. A WN/SY merger might look nice on a route map, however WN can easily add all the routes it would acquire from SY without the cost of a merger.

STLflyer wrote:

PhilMcCrackin wrote:

Typical airliners.net...

"They have 737s too, they're the perfect merger partner!"

No kidding, I’m surprised no ones suggested that WN try to buy Ryanair.

“But they both have 737s!”

How about Ryanair buying SY and creating "Ryanair USA"?

catiii wrote:

SierraPacific wrote:

Theoretically speaking If WN did buy AS, who would take over the InterAlaska routes? I wonder if we could see a new carrier being launched that would be similar to Alaska Airlines back in the '70s mainly running flights out of Anchorage to Alaskan cities with limited service outside of the state.

Why wouldn’t Southwest continue to fly them?

A lot of them are heavy cargo based. WN is more passenger based. Passenger numbers into many Alaskan cities are subsidized by the cargo ops.

As others have said, SY offers nothing that WN can not create themselves. adding some gates at MSP & PDX would be possible for WN. SY has leased aircraft & their system is mostly less than daily in many markets.

They are better off alone & I mean SY. they enter low hanging fruit markets to capture vacation travelers that are not brand loyal. That is a good niche to be in & they make $ doing just that.

There is nothing SW could gain here in PDX with buying SY that they could not already have. SY calls PDX a hub, but it is just some less than daily point to point routes, with virtually no connectivity. The gate they typically use is controlled by an outsourced contractor and is now being used by Jet Blue most days. SW plans to move into the new E concourse addition next year, and should have plenty of space.

737max8 wrote:

maps4ltd wrote:

Remember what they did to Atlanta after AirTran?
If they bought SY, it could go the same way.

It's still one of the biggest cities in the WN system...

Atlanta no longer has AirTran’s selection of nonstop destinations or prices. That said, Southwest did seem to temper prices in markets not served by FL. Because prices did go up in so many cases, you would have to do an analysis to determine whether customers truly benefited from the merger.

KLMatSJC wrote:

STLflyer wrote:

PhilMcCrackin wrote:

Typical airliners.net...

"They have 737s too, they're the perfect merger partner!"

No kidding, I’m surprised no ones suggested that WN try to buy Ryanair.

“But they both have 737s!”

How about Ryanair buying SY and creating "Ryanair USA"?

Against Federal Law.

usdcaguy wrote:

737max8 wrote:

maps4ltd wrote:

Remember what they did to Atlanta after AirTran?
If they bought SY, it could go the same way.

It's still one of the biggest cities in the WN system...

Atlanta no longer has AirTran’s selection of nonstop destinations or prices. That said, Southwest did seem to temper prices in markets not served by FL. Because prices did go up in so many cases, you would have to do an analysis to determine whether customers truly benefited from the merger.

They may not have the selection on WN they once had, but let’s not pretend you couldn’t get to almost any point in the US N/S out of ATL.

SY does now own aircraft. In the past, this was not true as they leased 100%.
Too many posts on here saying they lease all...it’s some.

Since when does Southwest "steer clear" of Boston?

globalflyer wrote:

The entire WN buying someone is pointless! Give it a rest!

How was Southwest buying AirTran pointless?

No merger by anyone at this point is good. We need competition to keep the marketplace fair. Since mergermania we’ve seen higher fares even with low oil prices, record corporate profits, fees galore, more seats crammed into planes, reduced service standards, lower frequencies and smaller aircraft on routes. No more mergers!

jetblueguy22 wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

737max8 wrote:

It's still one of the biggest cities in the WN system...

Atlanta no longer has AirTran’s selection of nonstop destinations or prices. That said, Southwest did seem to temper prices in markets not served by FL. Because prices did go up in so many cases, you would have to do an analysis to determine whether customers truly benefited from the merger.

They may not have the selection on WN they once had, but let’s not pretend you couldn’t get to almost any point in the US N/S out of ATL.

KFTG wrote:

globalflyer wrote:

The entire WN buying someone is pointless! Give it a rest!

How was Southwest buying AirTran pointless?

WN is able to offer 1-stop connecting service to smaller Texas markets not served by DL (and that weren't served by FL) such as AMA, CRP, LBB, and MAF from ATL through DAL and HOU.

WN was also able to stimulate additional demand to ATL from markets that still have nonstop service to ATL on WN since WN had a much larger FF base than FL did in most of the markets that were served by WN prior to the WN-FL merger.

The WN-FL merger also got WN into some other additional domestic markets that weren't served by WN prior to the WN-FL merger such as CLT, DSM, GRR, MEM, PNS, PWM, RIC, ROC, and ICT.

WN also gained a much bigger presence at MKE subsequent to the WN-FL merger than it did prior to the WN-FL merger.

usdcaguy wrote:

737max8 wrote:

maps4ltd wrote:

Remember what they did to Atlanta after AirTran?
If they bought SY, it could go the same way.

It's still one of the biggest cities in the WN system...

Atlanta no longer has AirTran’s selection of nonstop destinations or prices. That said, Southwest did seem to temper prices in markets not served by FL. Because prices did go up in so many cases, you would have to do an analysis to determine whether customers truly benefited from the merger.

Maybe those routes are gone because they were not money-makers. WN makes money. AirTran got acquired. Perhaps WN is making better decisions than AirTran did. Routes don't have a "right to exist" if they aren't good business choices.

Yes WN acquiring Sun Country is good,

if your definition of good is: reducing air travelers choices.

WN is in the process of turning over 20 737-700s to UA, which is about the size of SY's fleet. If they wanted to add planes then why would they be divesting to UA those 737-700s.

They're balancing their fleet and network, they've been cutting a lot of routes lately. I think part of it is the Max groundings, the other part believe is they foresee tough times in the industry ahead.

We shall see, but I don't think fleet commonality is as great of importance as it was prior to the Max groundings.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

PhilMcCrackin wrote:

Typical airliners.net...

"They have 737s too, they're the perfect merger partner!"

Why would Southwest want to merge with SY? They don't need any more 737s, quite the opposite actually. Route structure - they fly mostly MSP to vacation destinations - who cares? SY doesn't have any valuable real estate or access to routes and airports that WN doesn't.

What value would WN see in a tie up like this?

Quite the contrary, WN is divesting 20 737-700s to UA.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

WN isn't buying AS, B6, or SY, people. Go bark up another tree.

toltommy wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

Southwest taking over any airline is bad news for competition.

Yet after all these mergers, fares are still lower than they were pre-deregulation. And the remaining airlines are not going thru boom/bust/bankruptcy cycles. Healthy competition is better than plain old "competition".

Agreed, but the US has had plenty of consolidation to the point where everyone is making investment grade returns money.