I went through the first few pages of threads and did not see this posted but The Motley Fool is reporting that the airline is looking at the A220 as a replacement for their Boeing 737-700. They still are in talks with Boeing for the 737-7 which most of us know hey ordered 30 of that model. This is put out there to get a better deal on more of the 737-7's, What say you guys?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/uh-oh-boeing-southwest-considering-an-airbus-plane/ar-BB1akR0k?ocid=msedgntp

Cheers,
Des

eraugrad02 wrote:

What say you guys?

1. They definitely will get it, it’s the lowest CASM machine around and WN are sick of being screwed and want to teach Boeing a lesson because of the MAX.
2. They have to demonstrate to the shareholders that they are showing due diligence and have approached airbus as a way to extract the best price from Boeing, they will never leave Boeing.

Delete as appropriate.

Fred


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It's always intriguing to throw out stuff like this, but until Airbus can get A220 costs under control and actually build the planes to fill the ample back-order book (which of all current types seems to be the most secure), if I am Boeing I am unconcerned, and thinking "Cool story bro".

flipdewaf wrote:

eraugrad02 wrote:

What say you guys?

1. They definitely will get it, it’s the lowest CASM machine around and WN are sick of being screwed and want to teach Boeing a lesson because of the MAX.
2. They have to demonstrate to the shareholders that they are showing due diligence and have approached airbus as a way to extract the best price from Boeing, they will never leave Boeing.

Delete as appropriate.

Fred


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Seriously, you think that's how big business works? They want to teach Boeing a lesson....?

TaniTaniwha wrote:

flipdewaf wrote:

eraugrad02 wrote:

What say you guys?

1. They definitely will get it, it’s the lowest CASM machine around and WN are sick of being screwed and want to teach Boeing a lesson because of the MAX.
2. They have to demonstrate to the shareholders that they are showing due diligence and have approached airbus as a way to extract the best price from Boeing, they will never leave Boeing.

Delete as appropriate.

Fred

Seriously, you think that's how big business works? They want to teach Boeing a lesson....?

I have certainly seen that happen, yes. Observed a company make 3 acquisitions which among other objectives allowed them to fire the same guy 4 times and drive him out of the industry. And I've certainly seen big-dollar (hundred million US) purchasing decisions that were within a reasonable percentage of equivalence made "because it is Company D's turn" and "we need to teach Company C a lesson".

But as usual in this case I suspect this is just a headache for the CFO of Boeing who has to figure out how to move around the numbers to accommodate the huge discount Sales is going to have to offer on those MAX-7s.

Not surprising after the MAX disaster. They probably are just exploring options at this point; it would be massively expensive for them to switch. But just talking to Airbus is putting Boeing on notice that things are not satisfactory. How Boeing responds will probably determine what WN does. Boeing can still salvage it, IMHO, but they will have to convince WN that things have changed, as well as eating a large portion of crow.

Southwest will get the deal of the century on some Max 7s. If they do the A220 order, they’re probably going to dive in.

Of course Southwest is considering an Airbus order. I'm certain that they also considered (and rejected) a Comac order. Not doing so world be negligence.

The 737 is dead after the MAX program. WN will have to eventually fly something other than a 737. And for short thin routes and longer range routes from small markets this is a new airplane that will be around for a very long time. I think they will pull the trigger on this. Gone are the days of old WN thinking, route strategy, and flying only a 737.

I'm guessing Boeing will allow any WN 737-7 that hasn't already been produced to be switched to the 737-8 at no charge. The A319neo and 737-7 are not popular at all and it seems the smallest type anyone wants is the A320neo or 737-8.

TTailedTiger wrote:

I'm guessing Boeing will allow any WN 737-7 that hasn't already been produced to be switched to the 737-8 at no charge. The A319neo and 737-7 are not popular at all and it seems the smallest type anyone wants is the A320neo or 737-8.

... and A220

I don't see them ordering anything other than MAX until NSA shows up. Having two pilot pools raises their costs as I doubt the pilots union would allow the pay scale to be any different from the 737 as well as limiting crew and route flexibility. Now a Max-10 order I could definitely see happening.

nine4nine wrote:

The 737 is dead after the MAX program. WN will have to eventually fly something other than a 737. And for short thin routes and longer range routes from small markets this is a new airplane that will be around for a very long time. I think they will pull the trigger on this. Gone are the days of old WN thinking, route strategy, and flying only a 737.

LUV doesn't do long thin routes because they are inherently high cost, even with a very low CASM aircraft like the A220. The fuel savings of an A220 probably aren't worth the higher acquisition costs and headaches of operating a second type on short routes. Also, LUV can get 737-7's or A319's far cheaper than the A220-300. You can pay for an awful lot of cheap fuel with the price difference. Unless Airbus can reduce costs immensely on the A220, this program has some serious issues. No one will get Delta launch pricing again, since Airbus will never make money on the A220 at Delta launch pricing.

TTailedTiger wrote:

I'm guessing Boeing will allow any WN 737-7 that hasn't already been produced to be switched to the 737-8 at no charge.

Boeing might even let them out of any 737-7s that have been built. There must be plenty of -8s built for carriers that find themselves with no money or financing.

flipdewaf wrote:

1. They definitely will get it, it’s the lowest CASM machine around and WN are sick of being screwed and want to teach Boeing a lesson because of the MAX.

Funny, considering the whole mess with the MAX is because of WN's (and AA's) demands. If it wasn't for that, we probably could have gotten a clean sheet design.

It will be a cold day somewhere when Southwest orders Airbus. We all know it’s just a bluff to get what they want out of Boeing

I can dream, right?

Boeing will give them the deal of a lifetime on 737-7

Its easy to talk about the low CASM of the A220. However, I would expect very significant cost to induct a completely new model into Southwest's business model. Additionally, I keep reading the the magic potion for Airline X is A220s. Seriously, A220s are at a very low production rate. I believe it will get better but it is not around the corner.

catdaddy63 wrote:

I don't see them ordering anything other than MAX until NSA shows up. Having two pilot pools raises their costs as I doubt the pilots union would allow the pay scale to be any different from the 737 as well as limiting crew and route flexibility. Now a Max-10 order I could definitely see happening.

Agreed. And it seems like I heard of some kind of 737-9 package being offered that would include the landing gear of the -10. Would that be capable of MDW ops?

Jetport wrote:

nine4nine wrote:

The 737 is dead after the MAX program. WN will have to eventually fly something other than a 737. And for short thin routes and longer range routes from small markets this is a new airplane that will be around for a very long time. I think they will pull the trigger on this. Gone are the days of old WN thinking, route strategy, and flying only a 737.

LUV doesn't do long thin routes because they are inherently high cost, even with a very low CASM aircraft like the A220. The fuel savings of an A220 probably aren't worth the higher acquisition costs and headaches of operating a second type on short routes. Also, LUV can get 737-7's or A319's far cheaper than the A220-300. You can pay for an awful lot of cheap fuel with the price difference. Unless Airbus can reduce costs immensely on the A220, this program has some serious issues. No one will get Delta launch pricing again, since Airbus will never make money on the A220 at Delta launch pricing.

WN also avoided place like MIA/ORD and other major markets opting for secondary Airports, they avoided service to stations with a only a few daily flights (PSP, COS etc...)they avoided contracting ground personnel (which they do with stations under 8 daily flights)......the WN we’ve all known no longer exists. Within a few years they will have 220 on property, guaranteed.

Getting more concessions from Boeing when Boeing is practically already giving planes away in their current state Out of desperation, I don’t think they could really get much more of a discount given Boeing’s current standing with the MAX debacle without breaking dumping laws so I highly doubt they are trying to squeeze Boeing for more concessions. They got royally screwed with the MAX and taught them a lesson in operating a single fleet type. If they were solely reliant on the MAX they’d be history.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

flipdewaf wrote:

1. They definitely will get it, it’s the lowest CASM machine around and WN are sick of being screwed and want to teach Boeing a lesson because of the MAX.

Funny, considering the whole mess with the MAX is because of WN's (and AA's) demands. If it wasn't for that, we probably could have gotten a clean sheet design.

And more so because Boeing had to quickly offer something to avoid losing customers to the A319/320/321 NEO program. WN and AA’s requests were all justifiable - they never asked Boeing for MCAS or to quickly develop a plane that wasn’t safe to fly... it was up to Boeing to execute the design and testing with more transparency and honesty. No airline operator of NG 737s would have wanted the MAX if it required significant training and/or different type rating. Doing so would have caused those carriers to look more closely at Airbus.

They might get a great offer from Airbus as a launch operator for the A225. WN is large enough to have critical mass allowing for a second type to be efficiently operated.

The MAX event has shown having all of your eggs in one companies basket is inherently risky. Just from a good corporate governance and ability to operate no matter what unforeseeable issues occur they would be smart to have a goal of a 50-50 Airbus & Boeing fleet. What if the issues with the MAX and the findings had resulted in all Boeing AC grounded and Boeing having to re-certify as a FAA approved company?

The 737 MAX 7's successor would probably have enough range to be able to reach AUS, DAL, GUM, HOU, and MCI nonstop from Hawaii as
(a) HNL-AUS/DAL/GUM/HOU/MCI are all within a 4,000 mi radius of HNL,
(b) the published range of the Boeing 737 MAX 7 is 4,430 mi, and
(c) the range of 737-700-sized aircraft has increased from 2,595 mi with the 737-300 to 3,461 mi with the 737-700 to 4,430 mi with the 737 MAX 7.

UpNAWAy wrote:

The MAX event has shown having all of your eggs in one companies basket is inherently risky. Just from a good corporate governance and ability to operate no matter what unforeseeable issues occur they would be smart to have a goal of a 50-50 Airbus & Boeing fleet. What if the issues with the MAX and the findings had resulted in all Boeing AC grounded and Boeing having to re-certify as a FAA approved company?

Would you make the same recommendation to Spirit, Frontier, and JetBlue?

nine4nine wrote:

Within a few years they will have 220 on property, guaranteed.

What's a 'few years', and what do you suggest as a friendly wager?

Airbus doesn't have a high volume manufacturing operation (not even Mirabel + Mobile), and Southwest isn't going to mess around with another type and pilot contract negotiations for one a month.

Perhaps someone can educate me on this one. Before COVID, WN only ran the MAXs for four legs a day, typically legs like BWI- LAS, etc. From my understanding the MAXs engines are that durable to do 5+ legs a day. Lastly the economics of some of the shorter routes (LAS- RNO, ISP-BWI, DAL-HOU) favor the A220 as cheaper to operate than a MAX7. Again if someone could educate me on both of those issues, that would be great... Although I’d luv to see a WN A223

sphealey wrote:

TaniTaniwha wrote:

flipdewaf wrote:

1. They definitely will get it, it’s the lowest CASM machine around and WN are sick of being screwed and want to teach Boeing a lesson because of the MAX.
2. They have to demonstrate to the shareholders that they are showing due diligence and have approached airbus as a way to extract the best price from Boeing, they will never leave Boeing.

Delete as appropriate.

Fred

Seriously, you think that's how big business works? They want to teach Boeing a lesson....?

I have certainly seen that happen, yes. Observed a company make 3 acquisitions which among other objectives allowed them to fire the same guy 4 times and drive him out of the industry. And I've certainly seen big-dollar (hundred million US) purchasing decisions that were within a reasonable percentage of equivalence made "because it is Company D's turn" and "we need to teach Company C a lesson".

But as usual in this case I suspect this is just a headache for the CFO of Boeing who has to figure out how to move around the numbers to accommodate the huge discount Sales is going to have to offer on those MAX-7s.

You make it sound far more childish than it actually is. It's not about "teaching Boeing a lesson", it's about creating leverage to use in future negotiations.

At any rate, Southwest is figuring out that relying on one airplane is a potentially dangerous way to do business regardless of who builds it.

tootallsd wrote:

Its easy to talk about the low CASM of the A220. However, I would expect very significant cost to induct a completely new model into Southwest's business model. Additionally, I keep reading the the magic potion for Airline X is A220s. Seriously, A220s are at a very low production rate. I believe it will get better but it is not around the corner.

I agree with this. Not only would WN bringing in an A220 involve a brand-new airframe, but a new training program, a 2nd engine type, new simulators, new maintenance facilities (and/or vendors) and a bifurcated bid list (which was one of the key reasons they let go of Airtran's B717's). They would also have to establish A220 crew bases around the country. So the up-front costs would be substantial.

And as someone further up the thread pointed out, it would be unlikely that Airbus could offer A220's to WN at the below-cost prices that Bombardier sold them to Delta. There are few white tail A220's available since production was still in the early stages of ramping up at YMX and just getting started at BFM before the pandemic struck. Could WN get a good price? Maybe, but they would have to commit to a large order at a time when WN's credit rating it at an ebb.

I imagine that WN is having buyer's remorse with the MAX 7's and would prefer just to have MAX 8's. Somehow I think Boeing will find a way to correct that problem for WN to keep them happy. There are only seven MAX 7's built and waiting for delivery out of an order for 30. I'm sure that Boeing could find a way to re-market them. Then it is possible that WN could be convinced to take deliveries of the numerous white tail MAX 8's jamming up the ramps for the same, or even better prices.

I think the A220 is obviously the best suited new build for their needs.

Yeah, adding a fleet has costs... for ANY airline. This would be bare minimum a 100 jet fleet. More likely 200. Fleet costs are basically NOTHING in a 200 member fleet. That fleet by itself would be one of the largest, most efficient airlines in the world.

.

Boof02671 wrote:

Boeing will give them the deal of a lifetime on 737-7

Totally agree.

Airbus will sell the A220 aggressively. But they won't fight with the blind rage that Boeing likely will in this situation.

Lots of cheap 737-7 won't stop the inevitable need at SW to buy a plane beyond the 737. Beyond the 737 the only planes Boeing can offer are the 777 & 787 which SW doesn't need until they, if ever, fly to Europe and Asia. The odds of SW doing something Airbus are extremely high, They have the A220 & A320 which fit all the different missions SW has.

SW will continue to fly 737 for years to come. The surprise is they have flown only 737 for the last 48 years from a Texas intrastate airline to a coast to coast one. Southwest has reached the point where their needs can't be met by one airplane. What fills that need will be very interesting to watch.

If A220 is 20,000 pounds lighter than MAX7, and I am not positive of exact amount, and LAX charges $8.20 per 1000# on landing fee.. that saves $164 per flight plus fuel savings... it all makes a difference when multiplied by thousands of flights. There are also certain cities that just are not going to fill 175 seats all day long. CRP HRL AMA LBB MAF and others come to mind. Plus I believe that the 220 could bring more cities and routes in to play. EYW EUG DRO LNK SUX all come to mind with 3-4 flights a day.... heck even SWF

A.net seems to have this fetish for the A220 that it is a “game changer”.

OTOH, it’s 2020 and anything and everything is possible.

That said the source link is a very low quality source and lacks any credibility. Motley Fool is not a credible trustworthy source and should be taken for what it is.

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

A.net seems to have this fetish for the A220 that it is a “game changer”.

OTOH, it’s 2020 and anything and everything is possible.

That said the source link is a very low quality source and lacks any credibility. Motley Fool is not a credible trustworthy source and should be taken for what it is.

This. MF’s articles are usually pure conjecture at best. On top of that...people “guaranteeing” that SWA goes A220. Lol. I’ll have some of whatever you’re smoking. Correlation is not causation; Expansion into new markets like ORD and IAH might be new for SWA at face value but is really no different than their strategies in the LA basin, NorCal, etc. I can’t see a SWA under Gary and Mike’s leadership deciding to take on an entirely new fleet and manufacturer, much less convincing their pilots to fly it.

Boeing will pay SWA to take -7s before letting them take the A220. Next step for SWA is going to be the -10 if anything. Doubt any of this happens before 2025.

DaCubbyBearBar wrote:

If A220 is 20,000 pounds lighter than MAX7, and I am not positive of exact amount, and LAX charges $8.20 per 1000# on landing fee.. that saves $164 per flight plus fuel savings... it all makes a difference when multiplied by thousands of flights. There are also certain cities that just are not going to fill 175 seats all day long. CRP HRL AMA LBB MAF and others come to mind. Plus I believe that the 220 could bring more cities and routes in to play. EYW EUG DRO LNK SUX all come to mind with 3-4 flights a day.... heck even SWF

There's no reason WN can't start any of those markets right now if they want to. The 73G handles EYW just fine.

nine4nine wrote:

I don’t think they could really get much more of a discount given Boeing’s current standing with the MAX debacle without breaking dumping laws so I highly doubt they are trying to squeeze Boeing for more concessions.

Anti-dumping laws only apply when the transaction is over an international boundary. Since both WN and Boeing are US companies those laws don’t apply.

PhilMcCrackin wrote:

sphealey wrote:

TaniTaniwha wrote:

Seriously, you think that's how big business works? They want to teach Boeing a lesson....?

I have certainly seen that happen, yes. Observed a company make 3 acquisitions which among other objectives allowed them to fire the same guy 4 times and drive him out of the industry. And I've certainly seen big-dollar (hundred million US) purchasing decisions that were within a reasonable percentage of equivalence made "because it is Company D's turn" and "we need to teach Company C a lesson".

But as usual in this case I suspect this is just a headache for the CFO of Boeing who has to figure out how to move around the numbers to accommodate the huge discount Sales is going to have to offer on those MAX-7s.

You make it sound far more childish than it actually is. It's not about "teaching Boeing a lesson", it's about creating leverage to use in future negotiations.

At any rate, Southwest is figuring out that relying on one airplane is a potentially dangerous way to do business regardless of who builds it.

And sometimes the leverage negotiation works. B6 was going to be a 737 operator but they went to Airbus just to get leverage over Boeing and discovered that yeah, the Airbus is actually a good plane.

Sometimes other issues play into this as well. 1990’s US had a falling out with Boeing over 737 rudder issues, which is part of the reason AA is now the worlds largest operator of A320 family airplanes.

9252fly wrote:

They might get a great offer from Airbus as a launch operator for the A225. WN is large enough to have critical mass allowing for a second type to be efficiently operated.

Exactly. Given their size, it would be irresponsible for their management not to evaluate all options. The art of strategy is knowing when it needs to change. Just because WN has always been an "all-737" operator doesn't mean that will always be the right strategy in the future.

TTailedTiger wrote:

I'm guessing Boeing will allow any WN 737-7 that hasn't already been produced to be switched to the 737-8 at no charge. The A319neo and 737-7 are not popular at all and it seems the smallest type anyone wants is the A320neo or 737-8.

MIflyer12 wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

I'm guessing Boeing will allow any WN 737-7 that hasn't already been produced to be switched to the 737-8 at no charge.

Boeing might even let them out of any 737-7s that have been built. There must be plenty of -8s built for carriers that find themselves with no money or financing.

Quote from Kelly

"We absolutely still need the smaller airplane," CEO Gary Kelly said. "We'll need a large number of the smaller gauge."

https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/10/ ... bus-plane/


There is no argument that the A220 smokes both the A319neo and Max 7. What worries me is the acquisition costs associated with a new type. Airbus has a once in a lifetime opportunity to have a serious shot of putting an Airbus model in Southwest colors. Airbus must bring the whole kitchen to the bargaining table with Southwest. I believe Southwest should not only looking a smaller aircraft but larger one as well. By larger aircraft I mean a 200 seater airplane. A 200 seat Max 9/10 . A 200 seater at WN should be able to be done with minimal cost increase but provide revenue increase of 25+ seats. (In a post covid world). The pilot's contract only covers airplanes of 175 or less, anything more requires pay negotiation. There are several high frequency routes where a 200 seater would benefit Southwest. The A321 would only be competitive if Southwest takes on 319/320NEO for the 73G replacement. That is an extremely long shot.

Can the 319NEO fit 150 seats in Southwest’s configuration? My gut tells me no, but there better versed people who know better than I here

sadde wrote:

Boeing will pay SWA to take -7s before letting them take the A220. Next step for SWA is going to be the -10 if anything. Doubt any of this happens before 2025.

Letting them...? interesting choice of verbiage

but Boeing doesnt own WN, in fact, this whole debacle proves its the other way around. WN demands for a small training cost sent Boeing into subservient behaviour for them and they cut corners which ended with many dead and billions lost. WN needs to provide themsleves, their passengers and those with equity in their operations, another alternative. Thats smart business, and WN has gone along time riding their own coattails of "smart business" from the 80s/90s. Time to play smart ball again and get that beautiful A220 we see in their scheme above. Wow that is a good looking plane. I like the discounts for being the A225 launch customer too, very SMART!

USAirKid wrote:

And sometimes the leverage negotiation works. B6 was going to be a 737 operator but they went to Airbus just to get leverage over Boeing and discovered that yeah, the Airbus is actually a good plane.

It wasn’t really for leverage. Neeleman was at Southwest and he knew what Southwest paid for their 737s. He wanted the same price for JetBlue, Boeing said no. He went to Airbus and they were willing to play ball.

I firmly believe WN can make great use of the A220 family. I even more firmly believe this is just to get a better deal from Boeing for more MAXs and nothing more.

NWADTWE16 wrote:

sadde wrote:

Boeing will pay SWA to take -7s before letting them take the A220. Next step for SWA is going to be the -10 if anything. Doubt any of this happens before 2025.

Letting them...? interesting choice of verbiage

but Boeing doesnt own WN, in fact, this whole debacle proves its the other way around. WN demands for a small training cost sent Boeing into subservient behaviour for them and they cut corners which ended with many dead and billions lost. WN needs to provide themsleves, their passengers and those with equity in their operations, another alternative. Thats smart business, and WN has gone along time riding their own coattails of "smart business" from the 80s/90s. Time to play smart ball again and get that beautiful A220 we see in their scheme above. Wow that is a good looking plane. I like the discounts for being the A225 launch customer too, very SMART!

"Smart business". Would you make this same recommendation to Spirit, Frontier, JetBlue?

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

flipdewaf wrote:

1. They definitely will get it, it’s the lowest CASM machine around and WN are sick of being screwed and want to teach Boeing a lesson because of the MAX.

Funny, considering the whole mess with the MAX is because of WN's (and AA's) demands. If it wasn't for that, we probably could have gotten a clean sheet design.

Wrong.
1 - Even if WN or AA demanded it rather than Boeing offering it (do we have any proof of who initiated that?), Boeing accepted the deal
2 - It's Boeing's job to create a safe aircraft, not WN or AA

jplatts wrote:

The 737 MAX 7's successor would probably have enough range to be able to reach AUS, DAL, GUM, HOU, and MCI nonstop from Hawaii as
(a) HNL-AUS/DAL/GUM/HOU/MCI are all within a 4,000 mi radius of HNL,
(b) the published range of the Boeing 737 MAX 7 is 4,430 mi, and
(c) the range of 737-700-sized aircraft has increased from 2,595 mi with the 737-300 to 3,461 mi with the 737-700 to 4,430 mi with the 737 MAX 7.

Remember the added reserve fuel for west coast Hawaii are larger due to no airport between them. HNL-GUM would have multiple locations to land allowing more relaxed ETDO.

TaniTaniwha wrote:

flipdewaf wrote:

eraugrad02 wrote:

What say you guys?

1. They definitely will get it, it’s the lowest CASM machine around and WN are sick of being screwed and want to teach Boeing a lesson because of the MAX.
2. They have to demonstrate to the shareholders that they are showing due diligence and have approached airbus as a way to extract the best price from Boeing, they will never leave Boeing.

Delete as appropriate.

Fred


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Seriously, you think that's how big business works? They want to teach Boeing a lesson....?

Lol, it’s too funny. Planes aren’t the only thing going over a.netters heads these days.

What made my facetiousness even funnier is that the thread did exactly as predicted.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TTailedTiger wrote:

NWADTWE16 wrote:

sadde wrote:

Boeing will pay SWA to take -7s before letting them take the A220. Next step for SWA is going to be the -10 if anything. Doubt any of this happens before 2025.

Letting them...? interesting choice of verbiage

but Boeing doesnt own WN, in fact, this whole debacle proves its the other way around. WN demands for a small training cost sent Boeing into subservient behaviour for them and they cut corners which ended with many dead and billions lost. WN needs to provide themsleves, their passengers and those with equity in their operations, another alternative. Thats smart business, and WN has gone along time riding their own coattails of "smart business" from the 80s/90s. Time to play smart ball again and get that beautiful A220 we see in their scheme above. Wow that is a good looking plane. I like the discounts for being the A225 launch customer too, very SMART!

"Smart business". Would you make this same recommendation to Spirit, Frontier, JetBlue?

That's the second time you're saying this in this thread.
But you seem to forget that JetBlue has E190s on property and A220s on order (who will replace the former); so, they are not tied to a single aircraft type, like Southwest is.

WayexTDI wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

NWADTWE16 wrote:

Letting them...? interesting choice of verbiage

but Boeing doesnt own WN, in fact, this whole debacle proves its the other way around. WN demands for a small training cost sent Boeing into subservient behaviour for them and they cut corners which ended with many dead and billions lost. WN needs to provide themsleves, their passengers and those with equity in their operations, another alternative. Thats smart business, and WN has gone along time riding their own coattails of "smart business" from the 80s/90s. Time to play smart ball again and get that beautiful A220 we see in their scheme above. Wow that is a good looking plane. I like the discounts for being the A225 launch customer too, very SMART!

"Smart business". Would you make this same recommendation to Spirit, Frontier, JetBlue?

That's the second time you're saying this in this thread.
But you seem to forget that JetBlue has E190s on property and A220s on order (who will replace the former); so, they are not tied to a single aircraft type, like Southwest is.

JetBlue will still be tied to just one manufacturer. Not exactly good for competitive bids. And you ignored Frontier and Spirit. I'm asking why is it acceptable to have an all Airbus fleet but not an all Boeing fleet. I've never claimed that either an all A or all B fleet is the wrong way to go. So I'm curious why someone else would think it's an issue. We've had lots of threads about WN and FR needing to introduce a new fleet type. But we don't seem to get those kinds of threads for easyJet, Spirit, Allegiant, etc. So far no one has given me an answer and that leads me to believe that it is based on emotion rather than logic. Especially when phrases like "look how beautiful X would look in that livery" enter the conversation.

Southwest said they need to renegotiate their MAX pricing. This is the logical next step, setting up some second option to make the bargaining more credible. Boeing can not afford to lose Southwest as a MAX customer for sure. But could Southwest afford to lose their single type 737 fleet? A bit like Ryanair and Airbus it seems. I believe it when I see them signing it.

I don't see them flying anything but a 737 derivative for quite some time.

That said, I kind of wonder about a strategy where they start a new, separate network in (for example) Europe or South America on the same basic concept as the US network (all one aircraft type, etc.) and when they hit critical mass, then establish a new "division" that flies long range aircraft to bridge/connect the separated networks (thus boosting traffic on both isolated networks). For example - 737 networks in the US and Europe, and then a dedicated 787 operation to bridge the two networks.

Just random, uninformed, "think different" speculation.