b777a340fan
Topic Author
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:42 am

Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 2:55 pm

I did a search on this topic but couldn't find a real answer. We've all seen airlines having dominant presence at closely distanced airports, so I was wondering why WN never attacked the ORD market. Is it because of slot availabilities, etc? Or is it more of a market strategy? Does anyone know? I think ORD would definitely make WN more viable and profitable in the long run.
 
luv2fly
Posts: 11056
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:57 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:01 pm

WHY? They serve Chicago market just fine via MDW!

Come on they do not serve DFW, nor MIA or CVG or MSP, why do they have to be all things to all people.
You can cut the irony with a knife
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11144
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:09 pm

That is correct. There is no sense WN serving two airports in the same market. They don't serve BOS because they serve MHT and Provodence.
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:12 pm

1. They have an awesome niche at MDW and I am sure they received some incenttives to serve MDW from the city
2. There are two airlines hubbed at ORD to compete with
3. Slots and gates, they cant grow at ORD
4. Congestion: Far from making WM profitable, ORD would hamper WN profits with delays and cancellations
 
MKENut
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:34 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:16 pm

Why not MKE? Milwaukee has been asking that question for years now.
 
b777a340fan
Topic Author
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:42 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:56 pm



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 3):
2. There are two airlines hubbed at ORD to compete with

I don't think they're scared of competition.... they entered IAD, LAX, SFO just fine.
 
LGAtoIND
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:32 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:02 pm

1. They have an awesome niche at MDW and I am sure they received some incenttives to serve MDW from the city
2. There are two airlines hubbed at ORD to compete with
3. Slots and gates, they cant grow at ORD
4. Congestion: Far from making WM profitable, ORD would hamper WN profits with delays and cancellations

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 

The bigger question(s) is/are why no WN at MSP/CVG/MKE/NYC.
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:20 pm



Quoting B777A340Fan (Reply 5):
I don't think they're scared of competition.... they entered IAD, LAX, SFO just fine.

1. LAX isnt a hub
2. Only 1 airline is hubbed at SFO and IAD
3. They serve DEN but they have no choice in using DIA if they want to erve DEN, they do in Chicago



I think CVG, possibly along with MEM, is the most overserved market in the USA: ie daily seats versus population. Given WN serves SDF and CMH, there probably isnt much stimulation they could do at CVG. MKE might be nice as for MSP. I dont think WN does all that well in DTW
 
b777a340fan
Topic Author
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:42 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:32 pm



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 7):
2. Only 1 airline is hubbed at SFO and IAD

SFO is a hub for both UAL and VX
LAX is a hub for UAL, AS, and DL
 
mycrj17
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:08 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:44 pm

But why serve both IAD and BWI. What other cities do they serve besides MDW from IAD?
GO CUBS GO!!!!!
 
atrude777
Posts: 4355
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:55 pm



Quoting Mycrj17 (Reply 9):
But why serve both IAD and BWI. What other cities do they serve besides MDW from IAD?

To cover markets in Virginia and Maryland, it is no different from the legacies, AA, NW, US, DL, UA...to serve from all 3 DC Airports, DCA, BWI and IAD.

WN serves MDW, TPA, LAS, and MCO from IAD.

Everyone pretty much covered it. From the start WN had no intention of entering the Chicago Market, not at ORD at the least. But then a HUGE opportunity arose, Midway Airlines filed for BK and Liquidation, so WN immediatly within hours set up shop at MDW to grab the gates and such. If Midway had not liquidated there is no telling if WN would be in chicago now, much less at ORD, perhaps they may have gone to MKE instead.

Plus MDW is much closer to downtown chicago then ORD is, so in a way WN IS serving the better folks of chicago via MDW, not ORD.

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
b777a340fan
Topic Author
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:42 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:55 pm



Quoting Mycrj17 (Reply 9):
But why serve both IAD and BWI

They also serve DCA. So it's three airpots within a 50 mile radius.
 
mycrj17
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:08 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:00 pm

Makes sense thank you very much...
GO CUBS GO!!!!!
 
atrude777
Posts: 4355
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:03 pm



Quoting B777A340Fan (Reply 11):
They also serve DCA. So it's three airpots within a 50 mile radius.

WN does NOT serve DCA, ATA does, through a code share, but even then that will cease to exist.

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:13 pm



Quoting B777A340Fan (Reply 8):

SFO is a hub for both UAL and VX
LAX is a hub for UAL, AS, and DL

SFO isnt a serious hub yet for VX....I would not call LAX a true hub for either AS or DL...even UA doesnt purposely build connections there. DL has just built up LAX, when WN moved into CA in a big way back in the 1990s DL wanst much of a player
 
iaddca
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:36 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:27 pm



Quoting B777A340Fan (Thread starter):
so I was wondering why WN never attacked the ORD market.

glad they didn't, barley made my last flight from MDW because of a long meeting in the Loop, never would have made it had I flown out of ORD
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14234
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:28 pm



Quoting MKENut (Reply 4):
Why not MKE? Milwaukee has been asking that question for years now.

WN isn't that strong in the upper midwest. To open a city, they generally need a decent handful of short (<500 mile) flights that they can successfully operate. Where would they go from MKE?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8504
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:36 pm



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 16):
Where would they go from MKE?

They would go to the usual suspects.

PHX,BWI,LAS,MCO,TPA,BNA,STL,MCI,IND...that's about 25 flights right there.
"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14234
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:44 pm



Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 17):
PHX,BWI,LAS,MCO,TPA,BNA,STL,MCI,IND...that's about 25 flights right there.

You've only listed 4 cities within 500 miles, and STL and IND are pretty marginal, as they don't have a whole lot of destinations or demand.

Outside of that radius, I'm not sure why WN would want to get involved with the YX/FL bloodbath to PHX or Florida, and that doesn't leave very much. Like it or not, MKE is fairly well-served now, especially considering that ORD is only an hour down the road.

When it comes down to it, I think MDW will keep WN out of MKE. There are plenty of WN loyalists in the north suburbs of Chicago. Those are the people that FL hoped to tap at MKE, and they are the same people WN would have to tap to make a decent-sized operation work. The difference, obviously, is that WN would be competing with itself, while FL was (primarily) aiming to compete with WN.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:46 pm



Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 17):
PHX,BWI,LAS,MCO,TPA,BNA,STL,MCI,IND...that's about 25 flights right there.

not sure I agree with IND and BNA, serving BNA doesnt get you anything that either MCO, BWI or STL gets you. Im also not sure I would see the need to serve both STL and MCI. Both are gateways to HOU and the west. MCI gets you DEN, STL gets you BHM and LIT. I think WN would want to connect MKE to DEN via somewhere. An HOU nonstop would be good to connect MKE to AUS, SAT and the rest of south Texas.

I think when WN plans a new route, they think about the maximimum number of potential cities that can connected via that route as well as firstly the local market.. I know they arent true hub and spoke, but adding city XYZ without being able to conenct somehow to city ABC would eventually leave lots of holes in the network

MKE to:
BWI
MCO
STL or MCI
HOU
PHX
LAS
TPA but possible to connect via STL or nonstop if no STL nonstop
 
atrude777
Posts: 4355
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:54 pm



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 18):
You've only listed 4 cities within 500 miles, and STL and IND are pretty marginal, as they don't have a whole lot of destinations or demand.

STL is not marginal at all, 76 daily flights, to 23 Markets, STL serves more markets, and has more number of daily flights then MCI or really ANY City in the midwest, exception MDW of course. I would say STL is an exception, not a marginal.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 19):
also not sure I would see the need to serve both STL and MCI. Both are gateways to HOU and the west.

MCI does not have a n/s to HOU (one thing STL has over MCI), as for gateways to West, MCI has the upperhand in that, by a long shot, STL only having service to LAX.

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14234
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:56 pm



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 19):
not sure I agree with IND and BNA, serving BNA doesnt get you anything that either MCO, BWI or STL gets you.

I think the combination of BNA and MCI would be preferable to STL, and it gets every connection that STL does, plus a few more, many of which are accessible over BWI or other cities but not nearly as convenient (JAX, RDU, MSY, DEN, PDX, SEA, SMF, SAN).

WN also avoids the massive amount of CHI-STL competition that way, as well. While AA and UA do fly to BNA and MCI from ORD, they fly far fewer seats and frequencies.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:16 pm



Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 1):
That is correct. There is no sense WN serving two airports in the same market. They don't serve BOS because they serve MHT and Provodence.

I agree that WN has a great situation at Midway, no reason to move or dilute. But, WN does serve multiple airports in one market: e.g. Los Angeles area, Boston area, San Francisco Bay, Washington area.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 14):
DL wanst much of a player

DL merged with Western, who had LAX as a hub for years. DL is in fact "returning" to LAX.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 7):
3. They serve DEN but they have no choice in using DIA if they want to erve DEN, they do in Chicago

COS markets itself, and has been used as, an alternative to DEN. COS tried mightily to get WN service, but to no avail. Like Manchester and Providence to BOS, COS serves the DEN market only peripherally. However, F9 may use COS as an alternative point to DEN if they start p2p service associated with their new maintenance facility at COS. Just as B6 flies out of EWR while hubbed at JFK. It could work. I still think WN is better off staying with Midway, as I can't see that whthey have much demand for OHare.

-Rampart
 
WNbob
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:36 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:36 pm



Quoting B777A340Fan (Thread starter):
I did a search on this topic but couldn't find a real answer. We've all seen airlines having dominant presence at closely distanced airports, so I was wondering why WN never attacked the ORD market.

I guess following the basic WN principle: Secondary Airports - lower landing/gates fees - High Frequency Quick turn-around (tough at ORD).

Having said that, if there is an overriding reason, they will. But they seem to be "taking over" MDW so I dunn see what ORD will bring them at this time.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26542
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:43 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2):
There is no sense WN serving two airports in the same market.

WN serves 4 airports in the L.A. market, 3 in the Bay Area and 2 near D.C.

Quoting MKENut (Reply 4):
Why not MKE? Milwaukee has been asking that question for years now.

Actually, that is a good question. Then again, with their presence at MDW, they may well be set with that.

Quoting B777A340Fan (Reply 5):

I don't think they're scared of competition.... they entered IAD, LAX, SFO just fine.

Single airline hub at each airport, and they entered LAX 25 years ago, so it really isn't a consideration.

Quoting LGAtoIND (Reply 6):


The bigger question(s) is/are why no WN at MSP/CVG/MKE/NYC.

MSP is an absolute fortress hub, and the airport authority there would likely do NW's bidding in making things hard for WN. NYC, specifically JFK, was a huge mistake for WN, and jetBlue is proof of that.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 7):

1. LAX isnt a hub

Yes it is.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
EXAAUADL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:48 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:47 pm



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 21):
think the combination of BNA and MCI would be preferable to STL, and it gets every connection that STL does, plus a few more, many of which are accessible over BWI or other cities but not nearly as convenient (JAX, RDU, MSY, DEN, PDX, SEA, SMF, SAN).

that's a good point.
 
Boston92
Posts: 2603
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:56 pm



Quoting N1120A (Reply 24):
Single airline hub at each airport,

And that airline is a common one at all three.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26542
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:58 pm



Quoting Boston92 (Reply 26):

And that airline is a common one at all three.

And also tends to be the one that has peacefully coexisted with WN the most, even if the competition has been slightly indirect for some of the time.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
Boston92
Posts: 2603
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:56 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:00 pm



Quoting N1120A (Reply 27):

I don't see UA's frequent flyers ever wanting to switch to WN. UA offers too much to their elites for the elites to abandon.
 
BR715-A1-30
Posts: 6525
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:30 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:02 pm

MKE would not be viable, because of the close distance to MDW. Besides, FL is already starting to create a focus city/mini-hub in MKE, and WN would end up having to compete with FL and YX. Not to mention NW which is minimal, but still has a very small presence in MKE. These 3 airlines would eat WN for lunch, and spit them out onto 19R.
Puhdiddle
 
luv2fly
Posts: 11056
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:57 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:06 pm



Quoting BR715-A1-30 (Reply 29):
MKE would not be viable, because of the close distance to MDW. Besides, FL is already starting to create a focus city/mini-hub in MKE, and WN would end up having to compete with FL and YX. Not to mention NW which is minimal, but still has a very small presence in MKE. These 3 airlines would eat WN for lunch, and spit them out onto 19R.

PLEASE, NW is fresh out of bankruptcy and is in bed with YX, who is not the most financially solvent entity if at all. Now FL has already lost to WN at MDW, so it might be more of level playing field then you make out.
You can cut the irony with a knife
 
N1120A
Posts: 26542
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:20 pm



Quoting Boston92 (Reply 28):

I don't see UA's frequent flyers ever wanting to switch to WN. UA offers too much to their elites for the elites to abandon.

Actually, a fair number of UA's elites (including both my boss and me) use a blend of the two carriers to meet their needs.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14234
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:21 pm



Quoting BR715-A1-30 (Reply 29):
Besides, FL is already starting to create a focus city/mini-hub in MKE, and WN would end up having to compete with FL and YX.

I think WN could probably run FL out of MKE if they wanted to (they have their way with FL at BWI...), but with YX there, maybe it's not worth it.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
BooDog
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:44 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 9:30 pm

Here's the real answer B777A340 fan.

Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 10):
From the start WN had no intention of entering the Chicago Market, not at ORD at the least. But then a HUGE opportunity arose, Midway Airlines filed for BK and Liquidation, so WN immediatly within hours set up shop at MDW to grab the gates and such. If Midway had not liquidated there is no telling if WN would be in chicago now, much less at ORD, perhaps they may have gone to MKE instead.

That's kinda right. (factual errors though.)



Midway Airlines filed for bankruptcy in November 1990; Southwest already had a large presence at MDW at that time.
Southwest started serving Midway in 1985 with five flights a day to St. Louis. By 1989, Southwest averaged 40 departures a day at MDW. MDW was definitely their hub/focus city/whatever for their midwest market. I believe that Southwest was maxed out at MDW at this time due to gate constraints.

When Midway airlines went belly up, Southwest spent $20 million to acquire Midway Airline's 18 gates at MDW.

If that had never happened, Southwest would not have the 200+ departures at MDW that it has today. IMO, it's definitely possible that Southwest could have hubbed/focused/whatevered at Milwaukee instead.

But why no ORD? in 1986, Southwest was only interested in serving airports with low congestion; fifteen-minute turnarounds were crucial to Southwest's profitability at that time. (And still are....)
B1B - best looking aircraft ever.
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:10 pm



Quoting BR715-A1-30 (Reply 29):
MKE would not be viable, because of the close distance to MDW. Besides, FL is already starting to create a focus city/mini-hub in MKE, and WN would end up having to compete with FL and YX. Not to mention NW which is minimal, but still has a very small presence in MKE. These 3 airlines would eat WN for lunch, and spit them out onto 19R.

I can't see how this is plausible given WN's entry to places like DEN, BWI, and SFO, where low cost and other competition exists. They are seeing some stiff competition at DEN, and SFO may be the same, but they've done well at BWI, I think. In any case, I don't see gnawed carcasses of 737s on any runway at these locations. I doubt they'd suffer the same fate at MKE.

-Rampart
 
glydrflyr
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 12:41 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:36 pm

At one point, one of my clients was a personal friend and business associate of Herb Kelleher, so I got the opportunity to speak to Kelleher several times. The marketing strategy was to serve large markets from outlying airports in order to avoid delays, landing charges and other hassles at large metropolitan airports. It worked very well for many years, but now that Herb and Colleen are no longer involved in the daily operations, the thinking and market strategy may have changed. They looked for airports with unused capacity, good terminal buildings, adequate car parking lots, good access for cars and public transportation, and yet were close enough to major cities to draw heavily from that market. In one of our discussions, Trenton, N J was being considered as a WN site, but the powers that be did not offer adequate incentives to WN to get them to set up shop there. Many of the airports that WN serves give the airline tax and fee charge breaks in order to induce them to serve the area, knowing that any breaks will be more than made up by revenue from the passengers, parking lots, shops, etc.
if ya gotta crash, hit something soft and cheap!
 
BR715-A1-30
Posts: 6525
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:30 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:50 pm



Quoting Rampart (Reply 34):
I can't see how this is plausible given WN's entry to places like DEN, BWI, and SFO, where low cost and other competition exists. They are seeing some stiff competition at DEN, and SFO may be the same, but they've done well at BWI, I think. In any case, I don't see gnawed carcasses of 737s on any runway at these locations. I doubt they'd suffer the same fate at MKE.

The 3 airports you mentioned are also considerably bigger than MKE. Working at MKE, it was medium sized, but I doubt it could support 4 airlines making focus cities there. Having lived in MKE, and talking to many people, Midwest IS their hometown airline, and NW is their connection to MSP, and DTW, and AirTran is their connection ATL, and soon, a lot of other places. If WN came in, it would draw too much competition and leave the customer "scratching their heads"

If someone REALLY wants to fly WN, MDW is not THAT FAR of a drive. I counted about 1.5 hours.

This is just my opinion, and I could be wrong, but my opinion is based on the people I have talked to, and my own thoughts.
Puhdiddle
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:02 am



Quoting BR715-A1-30 (Reply 36):
The 3 airports you mentioned are also considerably bigger than MKE. Working at MKE, it was medium sized, but I doubt it could support 4 airlines making focus cities there. Having lived in MKE, and talking to many people, Midwest IS their hometown airline, and NW is their connection to MSP, and DTW, and AirTran is their connection ATL, and soon, a lot of other places. If WN came in, it would draw too much competition and leave the customer "scratching their heads"

I see your point. Could be, and maybe WN sees that, too. I think if they had to, they could take on NW, probably FL, but Midwest (like Frontier in Denver and JetBlue in NYC) may well draw plenty of local following.

-Rampart
 
jetdeltamsy
Posts: 2688
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 11:51 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:49 am



Quoting B777A340Fan (Thread starter):
I think ORD would definitely make WN more viable and profitable in the long run.

I think 30 plus years of profitability prove Southwest knows what it's doing...including using Midway instead of O'Hare.
Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26542
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:18 am



Quoting Rampart (Reply 34):
BWI

They entered BWI more than a decade ago.

Quoting Rampart (Reply 34):
They are seeing some stiff competition at DEN, and SFO may be the same, but they've done well at BWI,

They are apparently doing extremely well at DEN.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:26 am



Quoting MKENut (Reply 4):
Why not MKE? Milwaukee has been asking that question for years now.

Ever heard of the term OHareitis? Everyone in MKE, RFD, CMI, GYY, MSN etc etc. always asks...and the answer is always the same.


This is the same thing....except Midwayitis  Wink
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:15 am



Quoting N1120A (Reply 39):
They entered BWI more than a decade ago.

Yes. Can you expand on that? I don't get the relevance.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 39):
They are apparently doing extremely well at DEN.

I had heard that they were expanding, but the growth and load factors were not as hot as they had in other entries, like BWI or some of the California cities, and that both UA and F9 weren't taking the large hits predicted earlier. Different sources, I suppose.

-Rampart
 
N1120A
Posts: 26542
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:23 am



Quoting Rampart (Reply 41):

Yes. Can you expand on that? I don't get the relevance.

Different time, different market. Not a really good comparison.

Quoting Rampart (Reply 41):
and that both UA and F9 weren't taking the large hits predicted earlier.

Anyone who has followed WN should have known this would be the outcome. The Southwest Effect benefits everyone's numbers.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
rampart
Posts: 1800
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:37 am



Quoting N1120A (Reply 42):
Different time, different market. Not a really good comparison.

OK. But they entered Midway nearly a decade before that. It's what the whole thread has been comparing. I wasn't the first to come up with the comparison, and all things being equal, it takes several years, perhaps a decade, to solidify a market, so in that sense they would be comparable.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 42):
Anyone who has followed WN should have known this would be the outcome. The Southwest Effect benefits everyone's numbers.

Not entirely true. US has not benefited from WN's presence at BWI or PHL. Does LAX see enhanced traffic on other airlines after the arrival of WN, or were the other airlines busy and successful anyhow? Have other airlines proliferated or declined at Midway? More likely, they've declined as WN gains share. I'm aware of the Southwest Effect. I don't know if it applies equally well in larger airports. DEN would be an interesting exception. Of course, the mere fact that you have decent competition between 2 airlines hubbed at DEN, a new entrant and a legacy, stimulates traffic even before the arrival of WN.

-Rampart
 
SkyexRamper
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 12:17 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:19 am



Quoting MKENut (Reply 4):
Why not MKE? Milwaukee has been asking that question for years now.

Because when Midway Airlines went bankrupt and terminated the company overnight, Southwest worked a sweet deal with Midway Airport to acquire all of the old Midway Arline's space. The following morning of the deal, with the airport, Southwest had flights leaving from Midway Airport. MKE had designed a gate to the exact specs of Southwest, but once they moved into MDW, MKE was left in the past.
Good Luck to all Skyway Pilots! It's been great working with you!
 
siromega
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:57 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:21 am



Quoting Atrude777 (Reply 10):

Plus MDW is much closer to downtown chicago then ORD is, so in a way WN IS serving the better folks of chicago via MDW, not ORD.

Exactly. I flew into MDW on WN this summer, and it was nice to get from the airport to our hotel on Michigan Ave in about 30 minutes. I talked to the cab driver and he said ORD would be 45-60 minutes. Not only that, but WN had my bags out on the carousel right as I got to the baggage claim area. Being from LAS thats a huge difference to what I'm used to (it takes forever for the bags to come out at the baggage claim).
 
N1120A
Posts: 26542
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:46 am



Quoting Rampart (Reply 43):
US has not benefited from WN's presence at BWI or PHL.

I don't see how they have been hurt at PHL, as they have kept expanding. As far as BWI goes, that is an example of bad management and a failed merger, not WN's entry into the market.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
qslinger
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:14 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:16 am

How many planes does WN have? Where are the MX locations?
Raj Koona
 
atrude777
Posts: 4355
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:08 am



Quoting Qslinger (Reply 47):
How many planes does WN have? Where are the MX locations?

516 planes as of Nov 26th

MX locations I am assuming you mean by Maintenance? Should be PHX, HOU, DAL, MDW and BWI?

Might be leaving a couple of others out?

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
2175301
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

RE: Why No WN At ORD?

Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:30 pm

Keep in mind Southwest's marketing strategy. Their key market is to fly people point to point - generally without connecting flights. So people principally fly from Chicago to somewhere else, or from somewhere else to Chicago (and the same can be said for their other cities).

All they need is an airport in Chicago. They do not need to be in O'Hara.

They got a good deal at Midway airport; and truth be told. Midway airport is a lot more convenient for many people in the Chicago area as it is centrally located for the metropolitan area and a bit East of downtown. O'Hara is on the far north end of the Chicago area - which allows it to draw down some people from Northern Illinois and Southern Wisconsin.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos