Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Southwest upbeat about growth after AirTran merger

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Eagle757shark

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 31, 2006
Posts
575

Southwest upbeat about growth after AirTran merger


[SIZE=-1]12:00 AM CST on Friday, December 17, 2010

[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]By TERRY MAXON / The Dallas Morning News
[email protected]
[/SIZE]


Southwest Airlines Co. wants its merger with AirTran Holdings Inc. to add up, not down.
Speaking to industry analysts Thursday, chairman and chief executive Gary Kelly said that Southwest doesn't intend to follow the path of other mergers in which the surviving carrier wound up smaller than its two predecessors.
Consolidation usually means "that you take Airline A plus Airline B, and one plus one is less than two," Kelly said. "That's not what we're contemplating here with AirTran."
Dallas-based Southwest officially is in a no-growth mode, and Kelly reiterated that that will remain the company's stance until Southwest closes its merger with AirTran, probably in the first half of 2011.
However, Southwest is already licking its chops about what it might add to its traffic and revenue by connecting Southwest's cities to AirTran's cities, even before adding airplanes to the combined fleet.
AirTran's routes are already profitable, but "most of those new markets are not fully developed and are in need of further expansion. I would point to Atlanta in particular," Kelly said. "This creates for us immediately significant growth opportunities."
In addition, "AirTran brings significant profit synergies simply by virtue of connecting our two route networks. This has the effect of creating hundreds of new itineraries. It may be a thousand new itineraries when we actually get around to doing that," he said.
Simply linking the two networks will drive hundreds of millions of dollars in new traffic, and "all of that can be done without raising fares or without adding a single airplane," Kelly said.
Southwest, which is strictly a domestic carrier, has grown tremendously since 2000 – adding 200 airplanes – even as most of its large competitors reduced their domestic networks, he said.
"As I listen to the industry talk, they're very pessimistic, and certainly very pessimistic about the opportunities domestically," Kelly said. "We have the exact opposite view."
He said he agreed with Southwest chief financial officer Laura Wright that "business travel has been the real weak spot in travel. To a large degree, the softness there has been somewhat replaced by stronger leisure travel."
About the time he was speaking to analysts in New York, American Express Business Travel issued a report that said business travel fares were almost back to pre-recession levels.
The American Express Co. division said average fares on domestic routes reached $228 in the third quarter, up from $215 in third quarter 2009 and nearly back to third quarter 2007's $231. The highest fares, $253, came in third quarter 2009, as fuel prices were peaking and the sharp drop in business travel had yet to be felt.
Wright said Southwest set a goal in 2007 to increase its revenue by $1 billion by 2010. However, that goal turned out to be too little, she said.
Southwest now expects its operating revenue in 2010 to be more than $2 billion above its 2007 revenue, with the majority brought by higher fares. Wright said more than $1 billion is coming from higher yields, or revenue charged per passenger per mile; about $700 million from carrying more passengers; and the rest from new services like the "Early Bird" fee that lets people board ahead of other passengers.
 
IF there were to be a fence around ATL (which the company might not agree to), it will only be for current AT flying (current number of positions). Future growth will be new flying and not fenced (I don't KNOW this but it'll probably go down this way).

shootr
 
Integration issues aside, I admire Southwest and AirTran. They don't use outsource providers (RJs) to fly their customers. I remember a while back Southwest had an ad campaign that poked fun at this fact. Something along the lines of a 'little plane". They need to bring it back.
 
Integration issues aside, I admire Southwest and AirTran. They don't use outsource providers (RJs) to fly their customers. I remember a while back Southwest had an ad campaign that poked fun at this fact. Something along the lines of a 'little plane". They need to bring it back.

Are you sure about that?? What about the RJs out of MKE?
 
Because that fence will protect your CURRENT positions in ATL. Growth will be realized by current SWA pilots...in ATL or anywhere else for that matter.

That is not a fence but a no bump or flush clause. A fence would do exactly as the word implies, it would fence off outsiders from positions or growth inside the fence.
 
It's said as an appeasement....

Very true, which makes me wonder why some Southwest partisans have suggested it.

That way you feel better when a staple is floated..... well at least you get to hold onto your base (well your "current" flying at your base) anyways..... :)
 
Because that fence will protect your CURRENT positions in ATL. Growth will be realized by current SWA pilots...in ATL or anywhere else for that matter.
You're Right "growth will be realized by Current SWA pilots". AirTran pilots will soon be "current SWA pilots". Both sides will gain from this merger - SWA pilots will not get their much wished for windfall. Sorry not going to happen.
 
Sorry not going to happen

Then, YOU tell us what is going to happen? Windfall = Tranny Pilots.
 
That is not a fence but a no bump or flush clause. A fence would do exactly as the word implies, it would fence off outsiders from positions or growth inside the fence.

Fences are not universally defined. They are established with specific considerations for the particular situation. Historically fences have been placed to protect a job for a stated period and then removed at different rates.

I have not seen a fence that prevents an airline adding gates or flights to a city a pilot job fence has been established. If there was a fence to keep pilot jobs in ATL, that fence would not prevent SWA from adding flights or terminating aircraft in ATL. The fence would likely just keep the company from affecting the current AT flying jobs for a period of times. I have seen fences of upwards to 10 years but can not recall the airline. NWA maybe?

It will take years to get all AT guys into training so there will be natural fences up until this can be accomplished. The Morris integration of 202 pilots took almost a year to complete. They started receiving SWA pay rates and benefits when they started class. I can imagine the same with the AT integration. It has been indicated by flight training management that the most new hires our school house can handle is about 700 pilots a year. With zero new hires that would take two and a half years to run the AT guys through the program. So with the likely hiring of new SWA pilots, it would take three, four maybe five years to get all the AT guys through training. I would think any fence agreement would fall within these lines of thinking.
 
That is not a fence but a no bump or flush clause. A fence would do exactly as the word implies, it would fence off outsiders from positions or growth inside the fence.

This is still thinking like hub and spoke... That's not what we do-
I usually don't see Vegas except for the first takeoff and last landing- even on turns- and LAS and PHX are two of the most hub like domiciles-

A standard turn is really a round robin- ie: LAS-SAN-SJC-LAS

Only a select few markets go and come right back in the same airplane

So how would this fence work w/ that?
It will all be so bojangled combined when it's all said and done- no one will have their impenetrable fortress fiefdom-

And we DO NOT WANT ANY GROUP WITHIN SOUTHWEST PILOTS TO BE ISOLATED- YOU WILL BE SOUTHWEST PILOTS FLYING IN THE WHOLE OF THE SOUTHWEST SYSTEM
 

Latest resources

Back
Top