737 successor for SWA???

[SWAPoolie]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002490629_southwestbiz13.html

 

[satpak77]

Interesting to note is Gary Kelly's comment about fuel prices

I think SWA's hedges run out in 2006 (not positive)

addressing the fuel price situation will be a serious challenge even to SWA

 

[check6]

Interesting. . .especially the part about moving operations to Boeing Field. Anything to save a buck!

 

[Biatch5]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002490629_southwestbiz13.html

The successors are the 170/190/195

 

[Skater]

fuel hedges

from a previous post....

We remain 85 percent hedged for second half 2005 at $26per barrel; 65 percent in 2006 at $32 per barrel; over 45 percent in 2007 at$31 per barrel; 30 percent in 2008 at $33 per barrel; and over 25 percent in2009 at $35 per barrel

 

[Singlecoil]

"We are now facing energy prices that no airline can make money at, at least with today's [ticket prices]," Kelly said. "So we're anxious to partner with Boeing to find a successor aircraft" to the 737-700.

Then raise the fares, moron.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

Just read an article that Asian airlines will post a profit this year, European will basically break even and American airlines will lose $6-7 Billion. The reason, capacity.

And that capacity is there because of airlines getting a free lunch in BK. GECAS and other financiers are giving cash payments, cutting lease deals, and getting equity for loans to keep airplanes on lease. And they are leasing new airplanes too. GECAS is running the show and forcing wages down to pay for the glut of airplanes on the open market.

 

[h25b]

Then raise the fares, moron.

For the last time... It's not that simple. At least not yet. There's too much competition to sustain significant fare hike and any airline that does would simply give away market share.

SWA's success is based largely on a set of competitve advantages: single fleet type, incredibly high worker productivity, fuel hedging, and (believe it or not) competent management...

Fares will raise when the hedging starts to fade, but it looks like SWA is trying to get ahead of even that.

 

[AchilleLauro]

"We are now facing energy prices that no airline can make money at, at least with today's [ticket prices]," Kelly said. "So we're anxious to partner with Boeing to find a successor aircraft" to the 737-700.

Then raise the fares, moron.

Who's the moron? Someone doesn't understand the principles of supply and demand. Throw in heavy competition in an oversupplied market and, voila, you can't raise prices. Or are you suggesting collusion amongst select carriers? I love it when pilots throw out this catch all fix to the industry. Just fly the plane.

 

[mdf]

"We are now facing energy prices that no airline can make money at, at least with today's [ticket prices]," Kelly said. "So we're anxious to partner with Boeing to find a successor aircraft" to the 737-700.

Then raise the fares, moron.

How about a little respect for GK. No other manager in america is worthy of carrying his breifcase IMHO!!

AND GO FIND SOME REAL PICKUPS!!

 

[ivauir]

How about a little respect for GK. No other manager in america is worthy of carrying his breifcase IMHO!!

AND GO FIND SOME REAL PICKUPS!!

Hey now, talk about having respect. Anybody can sound good with a humbucker. Those early pickups have soul.

 

[race#53]

How about a little respect for GK. No other manager in america is worthy of carrying his breifcase IMHO!!

MDF,
Refreshing to hear a positive about mgmt on this forum and per
your avitar from an airline pilot with an eye for classic good lines.

 

[mdf]

Hey now, talk about having respect. Anybody can sound good with a humbucker. Those early pickups have soul.

They have soul as long as you run them through a tube screamer first! Otherwise way to thin for taste. I like the sound chuncky.......like my women.

 

[ultrarunner]

Or are you suggesting collusion amongst select carriers?

I'd support that. There needs to be some price fixing going on. Heck, the oil company's are doing it.

Struggling airlines don't want to increase prices to offset an increase in costs..well, that's just tough $hit for them.

Pass on the costs...folks are NOT going to stop flying, anymore they the are going to STOP going to the gas station.

btw, just went RT to the west coast from the east for under 4 bills. I think I bought the ticket two days out. I think I got ripped off...hehe.

Stupid carriers.

 

[cumulus]

Singlecoil,

As most of us moron pilots think, all we do is raise fares and that fixes revenue. I am by no means an economist, all I am is a pilot.

I too thought that at one time, but we were told while in training that there is a FINE line between what people will pay for an airline ticket. For instance, if the fare is advertised at 99 bucks, if you raise the ticket price one stinking dollar to 100 dollars, that can decrease the sales volume for that market and price by upwards of 40%. It's a psychological thing. $499.99 is a lot cheaper in our minds than 500.00. Southwest is no dummy. They are masters of the low cost pricing science.

 

[Flechas]

Who's the moron? Someone doesn't understand the principles of supply and demand. Throw in heavy competition in an oversupplied market and, voila, you can't raise prices. Or are you suggesting collusion amongst select carriers? I love it when pilots throw out this catch all fix to the industry. Just fly the plane.

So if the airlines can't raise the prices, who do you think should pay for the increase in fuel price? The employees?

That kind of reasoning is what's killing the industry and our profession. I think you are the moron!

 

[THUGLIFE]

Im hedged with food stamps. I don’t even mind having management paycheck deducting 50$ to help with fuel cost, so Billy bob can fly across the country for 49$

 

[Singlecoil]

My point is that Southwest generally sets the fares in the markets they serve and other airlines are forced to come down to their prices or lose market share to them. I don't think for a minute that if Southwest raised fares by $10 that other airlines wouldn't do the same. Nobody is stupid enough to try to undercut Southwest as they have made it clear that they won't be undersold.

Does it seem totally unreasonable to assert that if they have the lowest fares in a market and aren't earning a profit, that they should raise fares? I know, they are hedged through 2006 (2007?) and won't be forced to do that for a while, but if I worked there I would surely like to see them try to raise fares before asking me for a paycut.

 

[FlyBarneyJets]

We don't necessarily always have the lowest fares in any given market.

For instance:

SEA-OAK 10/4/05 (20 day advance) with return to SEA on 10/5 (lowest available fares):

SWA: $228.40
Alaska: $178.40

Both fares include all applicable taxes.

How about you guys raise YOUR fares?

I think that when you look at the facts, it's kind of pointless getting into a whizzin' contest about this, really.

 

[Swerpipe]

A 787 successor?

An all electric airplane (no bleeds, pneumatic air etc...), mostly composite with high bypass turbofan engines while keeping the same type or at least set it up so that SWA pilots can fly both types with minimum training requirements, a 797 I guess or a 737e so that it still sounds like a 73. I'll be interesting. I'm sure Boeing has already started looking into moving 787 technology into the best seeling aircraft. The out of control fuel prices will probably expedite Boeing's efforts plus having yet another chance of hitting Airbus with yet another "challenge".