Fool reiterates the falling SWA model

[lowecur]

Motley Fool has been a staunch supporter of Jetblue, but really never a basher of WN. They take a swing at the incumbant king in this article, but do they really know what they are talking about?....a little.

Kelly knows that in order to continue their success they must grow by at least 10% per year. Gordon Bethune reiterated this many years ago. In other words they have to keep bringing in newbies to subsidize the bourgeoisie. Sounds a little like the Social Security System today. He hasn't sought to change the business model proactively, the system is dictating a new business model to him where he must seek high cost stations to place the expanding fleet in the next few years. Sound like a winner? :laugh: :laugh:

imp:

http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2006/commentary06032104.htm?source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y

 

[Whataburger]

I don't believe the model is falling. It's evolving. Lets see if Jblue and AirTran's 35% annual growth or SWA's 10% growth over the next few years works out better. Hopefully both will work, but the proven horse is usually a good bet.

 

[ACAFool]

I can already see this article annoying a lot of SWA guys. How dare anyone question the mighty SWA. But hey, someone had to take over that arrogant swagger after Delta lost it.

 

[SWA/FO]

attn: the sky is falling, repeat the sky is falling...effective immediately.

 

[canyonblue]

Fool reiterates the falling SWA model

I thought this headline was speaking of Lowecur.uke:

 

[Dave Benjamin]

There sure are a lot of airlines that would love to be failing just like WN is. I think the Motley Fool is....welll.....a fool. WN is well run by some smart folks and they enjoy good employee relations. Their business model works. The company has been profitable for decades. There may be a chink or two in the armor but my money is on WN staying in the game long term.

 

[SWA/FO]

ACAFool,

I think the

arrogant swagger

title doesn't even belong to a Pax carrier anymore.

 

[ACAFool]

ACAFool,

I think the title doesn't even belong to a Pax carrier anymore.

You might have a point there.

 

[firstthird]

[FONT=&quot]Okay, I just can't let it go. Moteley Fool is still pumping jet blue stock after their less than stellar 4th quarter (CY). Okay. But at least get your facts straight.

I especially like the leather seats comment. "and Jet Blue has smartly presented an attractive alternative to peanuts and cloth seats." I'm pretty sure that every one of our 440+ 737s has leather seats now and has for some time.

This mention of David Neelman's fourth quarter comments is precious, see if you can spot the missing fact "While the ticket prices may be rising $5 to $10 in the short term, as Neelman indicated in the wake of last quarter's earnings report, their prices should still be quite competitive relative to the industry pricing."
How about disappointing 4th quarter results, or first loss in 5 years, or something of that nature in a column where you are pumping how great a stock is. Something like, 'despite the surprising and atypical 4th quarter loss, blah, blah, blah.'.

Now, please don't get me as bashing Jet Blue, they seem like a great company that hit a little oil price bump (which thankfully SWA was somewhat insulated against by our prescient and declining hedges) but the Fool's continual pumping of a stock with anecdotal evidence vice actual facts and information is a disservice to jet blue and their potential investors.

"By mocking the Southwest model quite nicely with lower-cost hubs, no union affiliation, and more cost-effective planes, Jet Blue added a little sizzle to the steak." Okay, something right and something wrong in this quote. At least this writer recognizes that JFK is a hub of sorts, but to call Jet Blue's planes low cost when they had to get a second aircraft type because the bus was just a little too big for some markets, may be low cost in Lowecur's opinion but the rest of us know better. It was a reasoned business decision that probably was taken with great wringing of hands, it isn't every day that you bet the company on an unproven airplane. Hopefully the bet works out for Jet Blue but to call a dual plane fleet 'more cost-effective' is something only Lowecur could love (no offense intended, but you do love your E190s Lowecur)

and finally, Mr. prognosticator Steven Ellis says "And I wouldn't be surprised if Southwest also raised its fares, since its hedges don't present a solution to the chronic threat that continuously higher fuel costs present." Wow, get that man a job picking and pumping stocks, seeing as it was industry wide news that SWA led a fare raise on the 14th of March, and here this genius is on the 21st of March predicting what already happened a week ago. He's doing the Johnny Carson bit with the envelope, answer "Southwest," question "who led a fare increase last week?"

Okay, rant complete. And please, as I stated earlier, this rant isn't aimed at Jet Blue or their employees, in fact some of my best friends work for Jet Blue (a little humor there, although it is true); but at the MF column for shoddy reporting and irresponsible speculation. There are plenty of reasons to see positives for Jet Blue down the road, but I'm not sure any of them were pointed out in that column.[/FONT]

 

[Aubie]

You know, Lowecur, since you are such an economic and aviation industry expert, why aren't you out there making tons of cash will all your insight instead of sitting in front of a computer 24/7? Just curious.