Could this be the start of the END of Southwest Airlines?

[tankerhead]

Hey old-timer, your oxygen bottle is running low. Switch it out.

 

[slaquer5]

So what's the big deal GL?

They posted an operating profit. I remember when we posted a 2 Billion (Dr. Evils' voice) dollar loss for writeoffs.

Oh well, I better quit posting or they are going to think I'm you again.....

Bill

I have called you alot of things, but I would never call you GL.

 

[SWA Bubba]

SW was 20% plus more productive that the legacies however that is starting to change and most of the other LCCs are more productive that SW. This last quarters loss was proclaimed to be a result of fuel hedging, no mention of labor problems. However, the gains since 9/11/01 were also the result of fuel hedging. Without a gain due to fuel hedging the future profitability of SW is suspect. This could explain the attempted move into ATL and the resultant panicked moves by Kelly and Herb in regard to the SLI issues.

Maru, clearly you ARE the most ignorant person posting on FI. I originally thought it was OYS or Fubi, but I came to realize that they were just playing stupid to pick a fight. They don't actually believe most of the crap they write. You actually don't seem to really know anything about the things you pick to post about. Being retired and all, I should think you'd have plenty of time to actually look up some facts before you spout off on the forum. Please try it sometime.

SWA's gains since 9/11 are NOT solely the result of fuel hedging. Every quarter and year, there are operating profits and losses, those due to one-time charges (merger expenses, write-offs, etc), and those due to the values of holdings changing (e.g. fuel hedging). In the last 20 years (since 1991), SWA has had an operating profit in every quarter but one, and an operating profit for the entire year, for the last 38 consecutive years. That's serious money-makin' flying airplanes outside of fuel hedges. Our fuel hedges just made us more profit. Without fuel hedges, SWA's future profitability is NOT suspect, but rather just as solid as it was this past quarter.

Finally, to address your last asinine statement, our "attempted move into ATL," is not attempted at all. SWA starts flying in and out of ATL in February, before the first Airtran plane even gets painted. As the Airtran planes come over, there will be a huge SWA presence there. And Gary and Herb's "panicked moves in regard to the SLI issues" were not panicked at all. Also, despite Fubi and OYS' bellowings to the contrary, their "moves" do not spell the end of our culture. In fact, it's just the opposite. Gary believes in our culture so much that he is willing to forego some of the monetary benefits of the merger to protect it. Do you really think any of the other airline CEOs would even give a crap about this? If Delta bought Mesa, and an arbitrator said Delta gets stapled to the bottom of Mesa, the CEO would just say, so sorry. You're just employees. Get over it. (Think Doug Parker and his lack of give-a-sh!t about his AWA employees). Our boss is not like that, luckily for us.

You never did say what airline you retired from. How's its profitablitiy record? Fuel hedging record? Culture record? Oh yeah, and please name the "most of the other" airlines that are more productive than SWA. How's their profitabilty records?

Bubba

 

[Fubijaakr]

Gay Looser.

Its way more effective if you know how to spell your attempted insult...LOSER!

 

[General Lee]

So what's the big deal GL?

They posted an operating profit. I remember when we posted a 2 Billion (Dr. Evils' voice) dollar loss for writeoffs.

Oh well, I better quit posting or they are going to think I'm you again.....

Bill,

Sure, Delta used to be the king of the "one time charges." Looks like SWA might be now. And, this loss was mainly due to the hedges, and less with the merger. They might have more of those one time charges in the future, and I'll make sure I paste the articles so everyone can read industry news. No charge.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Productivity. We are an average of 25 to 30% more productive per pilot than the legacies.

Such BS, which is often presented on the News. SWA has one fleet type (well, two if you include the 717 now). That means less training because once you get your IOE done at SWA, you don't do another one until you move over to the left seat. Delta and other legacies have multiple planes, because the airlines have multiple missions. Some bigger planes only fly long haul INTL. Some smaller ones do 5 legs a day (MD88s and DC9s). One fleet can't do all that Delta wants to do. MD88s can't fly nonstop to Hong Kong from DTW. And when there is expansion or retirements, people move up and cause lots of training, which has people going to school or sims, and waiting a bit for IOE. Other than that, when a pilot is flying the plane, he/she is just as productive, flying 80 or 90 hours per month in the Summer, just like the Southwest pilots. INTL pilots can even fly 120 hours a month if they want to, with the 1000 hours per year restriction still in place. It's the cost of doing business as a Worldwide carrier vs a national carrier with one or two fleet types. You can't really compare the two.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Not just pilot productivity, as Dash Power pointed out. Everyone's productivity. SWA has something like 59 or 60 total employees per airplane while other airlines have more. Some, a lot more. A few years back, USAair's number was about 100/plane while United was actually 112/plane. They've both reduced that through restructuring since their respective BKs, but they're still in the order of 80-90 employees per plane, way above SWA's. ALL of our employees are more productive, so we can get paid more per employee.

Hope this helps.

Bubba

Again, you and Dash don't really seem to understand the difference. First off, certain planes need more pilots. 777s and 744s fly longer legs, and that means pilots get full month schedules faster (anything over 8 hours needs 3 pilots, over 12 hours needs 4 pilots onboard). Those flights overseas are usually daily, so you need more pilots for those fleets. MD88s may have less pilots per plane, just like your 737s. Then, You guys fly under the 30 in 7 rule because you only fly domestic legs. If you were flying true international flying, you could fly 45 hours in one week, or even more, because there is no 30 and 7 rule for INTL flying. I recently flew more than 40 hours in a week (ATL--Portland, next day Narita, next day SFO, next day Narita, and then home). That is a heck of a lot more productive than your 20 leg 4 day trip worth close to 30 hours. Even with these productive INTL trips, there are also certain rest and fatigue rules that go along with it too. All of which are totally different than SWA flying. But, if someone wants to do multiple leg days at Delta, all they would have to do is bid the DC9 or MD88, and a lot of those trips fit that mold. It's called variety Bubba, and when the new contract does come around (openers are soon), and the pay meets or beats yours, I would think many at the bottom of your list will consider looking elsewhere to avoid your stagnation and possible culture clash that started with your latest merger and SLI offer.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Dash Power]

Yeah. You're right GL.

You're right.

 

[General Lee]

Yeah. You're right GL.

You're right.

There you go!


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[waveflyer]

Gen- care to wager on that last sentence??
If in 1 year no swa pilot has left for a legacy, you leave FI for all time.
If just 1 swa pilot does make that choice, I will take my 4000+ posts and find better uses of my time- no more waveflyer

You game?

How confident are you?

You have to commit though, don't be like fubi reneging on his $100 bet w/ bubba

What say you?