Decade long rumor of SWA buying Q400's back

[PCL_128]

Legacy created reality that has never been cheap.
By that logic we should have been bag sharing, code sharing, and on travelocity this whole time

There are certainly arguments to be made for all of those things. But they are a different subject, and totally unrelated. We're talking about real economics. I'm sorry, but you can't ignore them. You can't operate an aircraft at 300% higher costs than your competition. I don't care how good you erroneously believe you are, you simply can't overcome that cost difference.

 

[SWA Bubba]

As always, your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired. You seem to be quite adept at typing incredibly long posts, but quite incompetent when it comes to reading for comprehension even the shortest posts of others.

Notice that I never said that you redefined the word "thug." I said that you labeled union members as "union thugs." You took ordinary, everyday union members and labeled them as thugs when they peacefully demonstrated after the real thugs like Scott Walker took away their basic rights. So in response, peaceful and ordinary union members across the country decided to proudly wear the moniker. Call us what you will. You're the real thugs.

Talk about comprehension issues: -I- labeled nobody as a "thug," nor have I ever labeled union members as "union thugs." You took that name upon yourself all by your lonesome. In fact, I took issue with associating "everyday union members" as "thugs"--because it makes us look bad to the general public. Good God--do you even read the stuff you type? It's right there above your avatar.

Bubba

 

[PCL_128]

Riiigght, because you and your buddies over on Faux haven't been calling ordinary union members "thugs." Just give it a rest, Bubba. We just don't see eye to eye on much of anything. That won't change.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Riiigght, because you and your buddies over on Faux haven't been calling ordinary union members "thugs." Just give it a rest, Bubba. We just don't see eye to eye on much of anything. That won't change.

Like I said, I haven't. You just haven't been paying attention.

And I'm sure this comes as a shock to you, PCL, but just because you're as far to the left as it's possible to be, and blindly agree with and defend anything proposed by a left-wing politician regardless, doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is that far to the right of center. They're probably just right of you, which really isn't much of a qualifier. I'm actually somewhat right of center on some issues, and somewhat left of center on other issues. That's why I talk about things like "balance," rather than being like you insisting that one side (labor, in your case) should have all the power.

Make no mistake, PCL--you're an extremist. And I'll be the first to say that right-wing extremists are just as dangerous as left-wing extremists. People like you--especially those in positions of power--are dangerous to the majority of Americans who live somewhere near the middle.

Bubba

 

[waveflyer]

There are certainly arguments to be made for all of those things. But they are a different subject, and totally unrelated. We're talking about real economics. I'm sorry, but you can't ignore them. You can't operate an aircraft at 300% higher costs than your competition. I don't care how good you erroneously believe you are, you simply can't overcome that cost difference.

And I'm not??

For an economics hopeful, you'll have to explain to me how Horizon operates Q's for 1/3 the price

Care to detail ?

 

[waveflyer]

Hey, thanks for the input! But I generally prefer to actually explain my differences in opinion during a discussion/argument, rather than to just exclaim, "F**k You!"

But I suppose you could go that way too. You know, Po-TAY-toe, Po-TAH-toe. :beer:

Bubba

Brevity is an art and requires more thought.

Or you could just vomit on the internet with a keyboard in a stream of consciousness. You know,... you say Po-Tay-Tow, I say -get the point across

pretty funny considered the upheaval I've thrown on this board over the years-
Maybe if you actually took issue with something important to say- but you put up a definition of thug and made an 8th graders point

 

[pilotpm]

Actually, no.

We had quite a relationship with ATA when they went through BK, and that included not only buying some assets from them, but actually lending them money in a secured loan. I'm not sure whether there was actually any discussion about potential codeshare or not, but if there was, it never came to fruition. And then ATA liquidated shortly thereafter when they lost their government/military contracts. At that point, we bought some more assets at the court's BK liquidation sale.

Bubba

Um, yes SW did have an agreement with ATA. How do I know? Because I had tickets to Hawaii that were part SW AND part ATA when they went out of business stranding me and my family in Maui.

Here's a link to the story. In it SW says it's sad to end its code share agreement with ATA.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/03/news/companies/ata_bankruptcy/

 

[SWA Bubba]

Um, yes SW did have an agreement with ATA. How do I know? Because I had tickets to Hawaii that were part SW AND part ATA when they went out of business stranding me and my family in Maui.

Here's a link to the story. In it SW says it's sad to end its code share agreement with ATA.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/03/news/companies/ata_bankruptcy/

Well, there you go. I guess it was so short-lived, I didn't even remember it.

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

Brevity is an art and requires more thought.

Oh yeah? Sez you!

Or you could just vomit on the internet with a keyboard in a stream of consciousness. You know,... you say Po-Tay-Tow, I say -get the point across

Wow. That's deep.

pretty funny considered the upheaval I've thrown on this board over the years-
Maybe if you actually took issue with something important to say- but you put up a definition of thug and made an 8th graders point

I know you are; what am I?




-- How was that, Wave? Any better?

Bubba

 

[waveflyer]

Much

 

[waveflyer]

So back to it

Would you fly the Q bubba?

 

[pilotpm]

Well, there you go. I guess it was so short-lived, I didn't even remember it.

Bubba

Sorry Bubba, but you're wrong again. ATA and SW entered the code share agreement in December of 2004. It lasted until the demise of ATA in 2008. I should know, I flew several thousand SW pax to Hawaii in those 4 years. Shows a pretty self centered existence if you worked there during this time and you didn't even know it was going on. I seem to remember a couple of SW shareholder reports showing how they were happy with the operation and it was making SW money. I didn't even work for SW and I read those reports.

 

[PCL_128]

Like I said, I haven't. You just haven't been paying attention.

And I'm sure this comes as a shock to you, PCL, but just because you're as far to the left as it's possible to be, and blindly agree with and defend anything proposed by a left-wing politician regardless, doesn't mean that anyone who disagrees with you is that far to the right of center. They're probably just right of you, which really isn't much of a qualifier. I'm actually somewhat right of center on some issues, and somewhat left of center on other issues. That's why I talk about things like "balance," rather than being like you insisting that one side (labor, in your case) should have all the power.

Make no mistake, PCL--you're an extremist. And I'll be the first to say that right-wing extremists are just as dangerous as left-wing extremists. People like you--especially those in positions of power--are dangerous to the majority of Americans who live somewhere near the middle.

Bubba

Bubba, I've never claimed to be anything other than far-left. And I'm proud of it. Your refusal to admit your own far right views is your business.

And I'm all about balance in labor/management relations. We just don't have any in this country. Management has all of the power.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Sorry Bubba, but you're wrong again. ATA and SW entered the code share agreement in December of 2004. It lasted until the demise of ATA in 2008. I should know, I flew several thousand SW pax to Hawaii in those 4 years. Shows a pretty self centered existence if you worked there during this time and you didn't even know it was going on. I seem to remember a couple of SW shareholder reports showing how they were happy with the operation and it was making SW money. I didn't even work for SW and I read those reports.

Thanks for setting the record straight.

Sorry; didn't mean to insult you by not remembering much about your airline. While just over three years isn't a huge amount of time, I guess "short-lived" may not have been the best description. Perhaps I should have said "relatively small" instead, and that it wasn't all that visible to me where I was based at the time. According to Wikipedia, at the peak of the agreement, ATA "offered 70 flights per week" shared out of Southwest focus cities, out of over 2,000 flights per day that Southwest flew back then.

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

So back to it

Would you fly the Q bubba?

Personally, I'd prefer not to.

Not that I have anything against it, but I like flying the 737, and don't particularly want to transition to a different plane. I've got over 3000 hours in turboprops, and I prefer flying jets. Also, if I understand correctly, using your "blended rates" plan would result in a pay decrease for the majority of the current pilots to support the addition of a smaller plane.

Having said that, if our company's survival depended on flying them to serve smaller markets, I wouldn't be against it. I don't think that's the case, though--at least not anytime in the forseeable future.

Bubba

 

[waveflyer]

Well, you know business.
You're either growing or declining. There's very little stand still. Market forces just don't work that way once you become a publicly traded company. Your business motive goes from 'profit motive' to 'shareholder wealth maximization'
And that is an important distinction.
We'll grow internationally- but we don't serve an awful lot of america-
Do you see that as a problem or are you ok with not serving them?

The biggest question for you and all SWA pilots is if management wants to have a Q serve the fresno, Knoxville, Montana type markets and the Q is the answer
Would you allow outsourcing to keep from flying that airplane.

My stance has been clear- SWA logo= SWAPA
Thank you for being honest about turboprop flying, but where do you stand? And do you see the slippery slope?

And another- have you been on a Q?

Saab, jet stream - and I'd be with you.
86 seat Q noise canceling with that speed and avionics suite- and mixing in the real type flying- non precision, radio calls, etc- I haven't flown it, but it seems like a great plane pilot wise-
Not sure if prefer a classic over that-
I do really enjoy NG 73 flying- but it's also ILS to ILS- kinda boring

To me though, that's just preference-
It's about unity and not poaching our own flying- bc as I said earlier- the biggest potential benefit would be to keep frequency higher in borderline stations and PRESERVE SWA JOBS.
Mostly our own

 

[scoreboardII]

SWAPA pilots flying leased/contracted Q's... Removes the liability of ownership, fixed costs, etc.

I bet Bombardier would have a wet dream if they had a chance to loan SWA some Q's for a test period.

 

[rumrnr78]

What your "stance" is is irrelevant. Your CEO ain't gonna allow it, and your union is weak. You'll fly -900s for the same rate and you'll like it, and if Qs ever come along, you'll outsource those just like everyone else has, and you'll like that too. Why? Because Gary says so, and you lick his boots.

Didn't you buy your way in to the industry? What a scumbag. Yes, you maybe a SWA pilot now but you can never be honest of your past enjoying the 3/2/1 offering at the bar.

 

[PCL_128]

Didn't you buy your way in to the industry? What a scumbag. Yes, you maybe a SWA pilot now but you can never be honest of your past enjoying the 3/2/1 offering at the bar.

I've never denied my past. And no, I'm not a SWA pilot. I'm an AirTran pilot, and proud of it.

 

[Luv2BFlyin]

I'd fly a 1900 if it was owned and operated by main-line. If you wouldn't, you're no better than any legacy pilot responsible for shiny jet syndrome. If Q400's work into WN's plans and SWAPA held firm on keeping all flying in house, we all should be for it. Now, the question would be, do you get a Q400 type or a 737 type? If you buy the Q400 type, will WN give you the 73 type, or do you have to buy that as well?