Cranky Flier: SWA continues Cutting ATL, DL must be thrilled

[Lear70]

Heh heh...

Not hating or bashing, just stating a true fact: AirTran had a loyal fan base based on our product and we competed with Delta successfully with that product, and it was one that I liked and was proud to help produce.

SWA has a different product and a different target audience and will lose that business traveler who wants business class. Just the way it is.

 

[redflyer65]

I get where your proud of your past business product Lear. I agree it was a fine setup. But, I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss the Southwest business model. We, a lot of times offer direct flights between cities that Delta can't even compete with. Raliegh to Nashville? We go direct. Tampa to Nashville, Raliegh, Louisvillle, Columbus, etc, etc. No connection required.

Delta, and it's passengers, have to deal with the friction of the hub and spoke, and that friction also irritates the business passenger when they HAVE TO connect in Atlanta for every damn flight. The Atlanta hub has been a joke over the years (not the city or people) but the Delta insistance that you go through ATL. Remember 'If you go to Hell, you have to connect in Atlanta'. Very similiar to the DFW hub in Dallas.

Connecting in Atlanta to go international? Makes perfect sense. Sometimes it doesn't for the business guy who wants to bypass the hassle and go direct...then get home direct for dinner.

Add to the fact that we have Southwest Business software in place at these businesses for these guys to book their own travel. There's plenty going on behind the scenes that really never gets discussed. And SW route planning has been firing on all cylinders when it comes to revenue per city pair. I guarantee it's being looked at from every possible angle.

I wish we knew what the Atlanta service would look like in 1,3, and maybe 5 years. To be honest, I'm not sure Gary and route planning know that far out.

Think about it this way..

When Jetblue tried to come into Atlanta from Long Beach, Delta just flooded that one route with more planes and FF miles and drove them out...easily. How does Delta compete with Hundreds of direct flights that fly right past Atlanta? That's a little harder. Delta will have to charge less for a connecting flight that actually cost MORE to operate. Not saying it's a slam dunk against Delta (because they are a good airline), but there are alot of moving parts that sometimes get dismissed.

It's the 'being in the dark' that causes articles like this to be written. As if the writers know better than the airline at how to run things. But you hit it on the head when you said it's really about two different models. Both excellent, but in and Apples and Oranges kind of way.

RF

 

[ATLplt]

Good post Red.

 

[scoreboardII]

DEN was considered a crapshoot by most here, today they own the C concourse.

 

[KNOTS]

I get where your proud of your past business product Lear. I agree it was a fine setup. But, I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss the Southwest business model. We, a lot of times offer direct flights between cities that Delta can't even compete with. Raliegh to Nashville? We go direct. Tampa to Nashville, Raliegh, Louisvillle, Columbus, etc, etc. No connection required.

Delta, and it's passengers, have to deal with the friction of the hub and spoke, and that friction also irritates the business passenger when they HAVE TO connect in Atlanta for every damn flight. The Atlanta hub has been a joke over the years (not the city or people) but the Delta insistance that you go through ATL. Remember 'If you go to Hell, you have to connect in Atlanta'. Very similiar to the DFW hub in Dallas.

Connecting in Atlanta to go international? Makes perfect sense. Sometimes it doesn't for the business guy who wants to bypass the hassle and go direct...then get home direct for dinner.

Add to the fact that we have Southwest Business software in place at these businesses for these guys to book their own travel. There's plenty going on behind the scenes that really never gets discussed. And SW route planning has been firing on all cylinders when it comes to revenue per city pair. I guarantee it's being looked at from every possible angle.

I wish we knew what the Atlanta service would look like in 1,3, and maybe 5 years. To be honest, I'm not sure Gary and route planning know that far out.

Think about it this way..

When Jetblue tried to come into Atlanta from Long Beach, Delta just flooded that one route with more planes and FF miles and drove them out...easily. How does Delta compete with Hundreds of direct flights that fly right past Atlanta? That's a little harder. Delta will have to charge less for a connecting flight that actually cost MORE to operate. Not saying it's a slam dunk against Delta (because they are a good airline), but there are alot of moving parts that sometimes get dismissed.

It's the 'being in the dark' that causes articles like this to be written. As if the writers know better than the airline at how to run things. But you hit it on the head when you said it's really about two different models. Both excellent, but in and Apples and Oranges kind of way.

RF

Regardless of everything you just said... if SWA is being driven out of ATL... SWA will miss out on the O and D traffic in ATL... which is BIG.

And your logic wouldn't apply to folks going to florida through atlanta who don't care if they stop in atl once on the way to disney world, or a cruise ship, etc..

 

[redflyer65]

Regardless of everything you just said... if SWA is being driven out of ATL... SWA will miss out on the O and D traffic in ATL... which is BIG.

And your logic wouldn't apply to folks going to florida through atlanta who don't care if they stop in atl once on the way to disney world, or a cruise ship, etc..

We do a TON of flying out of TPA, MCO, and......wait for it....FLL. We carry full planes daily to all three destinations, without ever setting foot in ATL. We feed Florida with all Northeast cities. DIRECT.

And yes, I think we will get our share of O&D traffic in Atlanta. It's a different model than pretty much any other airline.

 

[Rough67]

Delta, and it's passengers, have to deal with the friction of the hub and spoke, and that friction also irritates the business passenger when they HAVE TO connect in Atlanta for every damn flight. The Atlanta hub has been a joke over the years (not the city or people) but the Delta insistance that you go through ATL. Remember 'If you go to Hell, you have to connect in Atlanta'. Very similiar to the DFW hub in Dallas.



RF

http://www.aviationpros.com/news/10836182/delta-earns-business-travel-news-top-rating-for-2012

Corporate travel managers again rated Delta Air Lines No. 1 in this year's Business Travel News Annual Airline Survey. The airline ranked first among all carriers in key categories including: Value of Relationships with Account Managers and Sales Representatives; Distribution Channels; Complaint/Problem Resolution; Quality of Customer Service; and Networks, Airline Partnerships and Frequencies. It was stated in the press release issued here today.

Delta also earned the distinction of being the first carrier in the survey's 15-year history to be rated No. 1 in all 10 categories.

 

[redflyer65]

Rough, et al

Not trying to say Delta isn't a great airline. The SW model is 180 degrees different from both AAI and DL when you look at a route map. Delta is going to continue to do well. I have no doubt. I'm not sure I agree with the Customer Service part of what you post and don't feeling like debating it anyway.

 

[Rough67]

Rough, et al

Not trying to say Delta isn't a great airline. The SW model is 180 degrees different from both AAI and DL when you look at a route map. Delta is going to continue to do well. I have no doubt. I'm not sure I agree with the Customer Service part of what you post and don't feeling like debating it anyway.

Fair enough

 

[Just thinking]

Atlanta hub? AT has flown plenty of direct flights to and from Florida destinations. Never a need to go through Atlanta. Even with the dreaded "hub" AT's on time performance and baggage handling was something that SWA would LUV to have.

Speaking of hubs.....this is the 8 December flight schedule to fly from ATL to MCO on SWA:
1 stop
Change Planes BWI 4:35
1 stop
Change Planes BWI 5:05
9:00 AM 3:05 PM 2192/1540
1 stop
Change Planes ORF 6:05
10:25 AM 3:45 PM 1417/2972
1 stop
Change Planes HOU 5:20
12:05 PM 6:00 PM 4857/2275
1 stop
Change Planes HOU 5:55
12:55 PM 6:25 PM 1716/17
1 stop
Change Planes BWI
Brilliant!

I would venture to guess that you have more flights that have to "connect" through another city and don't fly direct.... stop over enroute.....
Look at your MDW operation...... nothing but a hub and spoke operation.... BWI...same

If you look at the link that SWA provides it looks like you can fly direct to PHX from CHS...... that is until you try to book it and you have to connect through BNA/MDW or HOU.

http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/routemap_dyn.html



Business class customers? Next time you happen to non rev and are enjoying the business class (that is provided by your step-siblings) ask the business class person sitting next to you what they are going to do when it is gone?
Business class customers will pay for fully refundable tickets. Not able to finish the meeting on time? Refund it, they have another ticket later. Able to finish and dart off to the airport and get to the gate 20 minutes prior to departure? Welcome aboard... your business class seat is waiting for you. On SWA they can purchase the same refundable ticket but good luck getting that "business" class seat 20 minutes before departure.

Take a critical look at the operations of SWA. Much of what they do is good. There is also a large portion that is mired in "that is the way we have always done it." Many things need to be changed to catch up to the 1990's and Gary does not have the team within the IT department to make it happen. Lost synergies between the two airlines over the past 12 months is staggering when you look at the lost revenue. For someone touting a 15% ROI he sure is leading the way at not making the changes to achieve that goal....


Don't know why the smiley faces appeared.... could not duplicate it if I tried.

 

[scoreboardII]

.I would venture to guess that you have more flights that have to "connect" through another city and don't fly direct.... stop over enroute

you realize it takes a year or two to unwind the hub into pt to pt, right?

http://www.southwest.com/travel_cent...temap_dyn.html

Thats what the IT guys have been doing for the last two years, making a map!!!

 

[Just thinking]

"you realize it takes a year or two to unwind the hub into pt to pt, right?"

So you are saying in a year or two you can fly point to point from MCI to anywhere that SWA flies? (From the route map.) Direct flights from Spokane to Jacksonville? Birmingham to Boise?

SWA has a hub and spoke operation... they just call it something else.... other operations have direct flights between markets that have the originating traffic when it warrants a direct flight. SWA would be better served at focusing on connecting the bags that are flying for free (through the non hub system) to improve that metric.

 

[OakRBust]

It is hard to charge for bags when you can't find them.

 

[scarlet]

The best thing for Southwest for buying Airtran. SW found out that they are stuck in 1980s. Might as well buy a trans am.

From their computer systems, the way they operate aircraft,

Time to get with the times !

 

[General Lee]

I get where your proud of your past business product Lear. I agree it was a fine setup. But, I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss the Southwest business model. We, a lot of times offer direct flights between cities that Delta can't even compete with. Raliegh to Nashville? We go direct. Tampa to Nashville, Raliegh, Louisvillle, Columbus, etc, etc. No connection required.

Delta, and it's passengers, have to deal with the friction of the hub and spoke, and that friction also irritates the business passenger when they HAVE TO connect in Atlanta for every damn flight. The Atlanta hub has been a joke over the years (not the city or people) but the Delta insistance that you go through ATL. Remember 'If you go to Hell, you have to connect in Atlanta'. Very similiar to the DFW hub in Dallas.

Connecting in Atlanta to go international? Makes perfect sense. Sometimes it doesn't for the business guy who wants to bypass the hassle and go direct...then get home direct for dinner.

Add to the fact that we have Southwest Business software in place at these businesses for these guys to book their own travel. There's plenty going on behind the scenes that really never gets discussed. And SW route planning has been firing on all cylinders when it comes to revenue per city pair. I guarantee it's being looked at from every possible angle.

I wish we knew what the Atlanta service would look like in 1,3, and maybe 5 years. To be honest, I'm not sure Gary and route planning know that far out.

Think about it this way..

When Jetblue tried to come into Atlanta from Long Beach, Delta just flooded that one route with more planes and FF miles and drove them out...easily. How does Delta compete with Hundreds of direct flights that fly right past Atlanta? That's a little harder. Delta will have to charge less for a connecting flight that actually cost MORE to operate. Not saying it's a slam dunk against Delta (because they are a good airline), but there are alot of moving parts that sometimes get dismissed.

It's the 'being in the dark' that causes articles like this to be written. As if the writers know better than the airline at how to run things. But you hit it on the head when you said it's really about two different models. Both excellent, but in and Apples and Oranges kind of way.

RF

No Red, it's the business model that needs work. Your management decided initially to not charge for bags, and to keep fees to a minimum. (You do have some, and do charge for multiple bags, maybe over two per pax). You then created these incredibly dumb People's Court type commercials that stated you would "Never do that" when it came to charging for bags (even though AT still does and you don't pay those guys who fly the same type planes the same money you make......). Now everyone else charges for bags, and it seems to have been accepted by most pax, which is why that policy has survived. What are you left with? Fewer fuel hedges, an old IT department that can't handle INTL flights, a dead ETOPS program to Hawaii for now, aging pilots and FAs that make more due to more longevity on average, and not the lowest fares anymore. You are getting beaten in ATL, PHL, SEA, and SLC (recent SWA route CNX support that), and you've treated the newest 1/3 of your pilot group (AT pilots) poorly, which won't soon be forgotten. Sounds like the LUV is turning into a legacy, with all of the associated problems, including a revenue one it sounds like. All of you will have to get that straightened out, including treating your new brothers better. That was just not smart treating them poorly.

But, you are correct that it ISN'T a slam dunk against DL. Thanks for that sweet 717 deal you gave DL. You know the one, that pays over $100 million to clean up the planes, paint them, install wifi, and do large MX checks, and then at the end of the "sub-lease" allow the option to buy them at "current market price" (in 10 years). That was a screaming deal, and I heard the guy over there who made the deal "got talked to." You guys have a lot if work to do to slam dunk anything right now. Start by treating your AT pilots better. And Red, stop being so cocky.



Bye Bye---General Lee