Gary Kelly announces the next SWA city is...

[JetDude]

Not really what I think but I'm just filling in for Lowecur until he replies. :smash:

You forgot to add that SWA won't turn a profit at SFO until they begin E-190 service!!!

Just another bone to the still absent Lowecur.

 

[Jon Rivoli]

The Sargent at Arms is appointed by the speaker, he'll say what she wants him to say. No other speaker has ever made such a request. If not Fox News somebody need to do you're thinking for you.

 

[MountainFreak]

The Sargent at Arms is appointed by the speaker, he'll say what she wants him to say. No other speaker has ever made such a request. If not Fox News somebody need to do you're thinking for you.

This particular "Sargent" at Arms has been at his post through all of Bush's administration. Other similar requests have been made, and since 9-11 security is (and should be) much more of a concern.

Like her or not, she never made the request.

p.s. "you're" spelling is about as good as those interns who write the scrolling tickers on Fox News.

 

[Flydaplane]

As the keeper of the purse she should have turned down his request as being too extravagant and she should tell Murtha to back off blackmailing the military. What happened to her promise to wipe out corruption...oh yeah it doesn't apply to her heighness and friends. Same old same old with Congress, get a little power and then abuse it.
Good luck to SWA sorry to participate in the h-jacking of this thread.

 

[IXLR8]

Why wasnt this a big deal when former House Speaker Dennis Hastert used a military a/c?

 

[vixin]

What does any of this have to do with SWA going into SFO?

Someone needs to start a politicians that steal from you thread.

 

[chase]

Some observatons from others and myself about the decision:

1. Last 3 new cities announced have been UAL hubs....coincidence? Things that make one go hmmmm

2. Previously to 911, low cost carriers weren't courted by SFO airport authorities....fast forward to now and as GK said, new management, more cost conscious, LOTS OF PEOPLE with access to large sums of money and that won't come across the bay to OAK or SJC to fly....they would like us now and in a big way...other LCCs are in the mix and that generates more revenue for the airport....they are relearning the value of the SWA effect that has been created by other LCCs coming into their airport...wise move..."make SWA a deal" and I think they have.... ...we'd be foolish to ignore such a large population base.

3. Weather/ATC delays were problems in PHL....those have been minimized when folks said they couldn't....the same challenges exist in SFO...are they fixed? We'll see but obviously folks with a lot more information on the "big picture" than anyone of us believe it is worth the risk....we're getting more gates in PHL and I suspect there are some options for further growth in SFO if SWA needs it.

4. SWA needs places to put airplanes...we have more on the way and the more options in terms of cities and city pairs to choose from, well it makes sense.

5. We are limited in growth at OAK right now....with the new gates it could be argued it won't grow much beyond that....not to mention to relieve some of the dependence on one airport to handle such large traffic requirements....SJC is the only relief....now SFO can fill that bill as will OAK & SJC in return for SFO

6. How many passengers of the 10 million a month that visit the website don't buy because we don't fly into one of the most popular airports around? You and I don't because we know they don't fly there now....many folks aren't that connected & now that revenue will stay with SWA instead of going to UAL or other places...the most visited airline site in the world.

7. As someone said, this makes the backers of Virgin America realize that coming out of the gate there will be tough competition for the US customer with multiple LCC...this will alter their loads no matter how you look at it and may discourage some investings from continuing to sit there and do nothing

8. Lets Wall Street know GK isn't sitting still...did they say there were to be no new cities this year? Just unlikely he said but always a possiblity....this keeps the competition on their toes..."what will those boys at SWA do next? You can never say die with those guys."

9. Competition is good...even among airports in close proximity...SJC has been talking about jacking up landing fees...quite significantly due to some new construction bonds they wish to float the voters, expansion, etc. Guess who will have to pay the bill....when that got floated at SEA SWA fought back...talked about moving, talked about other airports, demanded accountability....what better way to keep those increases reasonable vs. exorbitant than to have a new airport, SFO to wave in SJC's face to say..."be careful...we have options guys." GK is adamant at holding down costs...landing fees are a part of that...we now have SFO lowering landing fees to a point that they are now attractive...are they lower than SJC? I suspect they may be but it would be interesting to find out.

10. Less traffic in to SFO than before....maybe not be significant but departure/arrival delays for SFO are below, with PHL immediately below those numbers. Interesting in the comparison in 2006.

Departures
Airport On time % Delay %
SFO 75.77 22.43
PHL 72.20 26.0

Arrivals
Airport On time % Delay %
SFO 70.43 27.55
PHL 70.42 27.59

Interesting nums...we make money at PHL...I think we'll do OK in SFO.

I think SWA will do just fine...again, so far GK and the gang are keeping us in the black and progressing well....oh, BTW, happy Valentine's Day to the employees from GK...every employee received $150 (minus uncle sam's share) from SWA as a way to say thanks for beating Lowcur's projection that we would not meet our goal of 15% return on investment....You'll be receiving your's in the mail LC...thanks! Just joking my friend but the $150's going toward the wife for allowing me to post on FI...happy luv to all.

 

[DH2WN]

PHL's delays have improved ever since SWA entered the market. Mmmmm.....Wonder who is responsible for that? I hope that guy never retires.

Thanks Patrick D.!!!!

 

[Juvat]

Amen to that. Patrick D. is the "horse whisperer" of ATC. Friggin' good dude to have on your side...

 

[Schiphol]

I don't like Nancy Pelosi....BUT....let us not forget that she is THIRD in line to be leader of the free world. No matter how much you hate her (and I'm on the hate side), her flying on secure military transport is a matter of national security. I would be surprised if other House Speakers were told to fly commercial.

Just a thought.

 

[mach zero]

I don't like Nancy Pelosi....BUT....let us not forget that she is THIRD in line to be leader of the free world. No matter how much you hate her (and I'm on the hate side), her flying on secure military transport is a matter of national security. I would be surprised if other House Speakers were told to fly commercial.

Just a thought.

Here's a thought...why don't all of you hijackers start another thread on politics somewhere else. This was supposed to be about SWA and KSFO but despite requests from myself and others it continues to be about Pelosi.

 

[ivauir]

What gov't aircraft can't make it from Andrews to SFO? I am pretty sure that the G-IV's and 737's can. Am I missing something?

A C-130 can make it, and hold her entourage, and a staff car. Shoot, I bet we can find a "comfort pallet" around here somewhere.

 

[Esprit]

Do you think we can get back to talking about Nancy Pelosi?

Thank you.

Esprit

 

[Ex737Driver]

more than six years after pulling out of SFO because of what the airline said were unacceptable flight delays, high costs and curbs on growth.
Finally, those issues have been resolved, Southwest Chief Executive Officer Gary Kelly said Thursday, prompting the airline to return to SFO

What planet is he living on?

 

[Spooky 2]

SFO

Southwest today announced our intent to resume service at San Francisco International Airport. While we have not released specific service details or a timeline, we are currently in discussions with the Airport, and we aim to return to the West Bay in a meaningful way in the early fall.
“San Francisco International is the only major Bay Area airport we don’t currently serve, having made a very difficult decision in 2001 to cease service there after nearly 20 years,” said Gary. “Today, SFO has improved operationally and is a more cost-efficient airport, and Southwest is a far larger airline than it was in 2001 and better able to support this type of operation.”
We initiated service at SFO in October 1982 with four nonstop flights to LAS, with direct or connecting service to cities like HOU, ELP, ABQ, and AUS. At the time we ceased service on March 4, 2001, we had 14 nonstops to SAN and PHX.
“The business reasons for leaving San Francisco in 2001 were clear,” said Gary. “Back then, facility and runway constraints meant we could not compete and be profitable, and there was no growth potential beyond the 14 flights we had at the time. Frankly, we had demand at our other California airports that we knew would be successful. It made more sense to leave.
“The Airport Commission, under the leadership of Mayor Gavin Newsom and Commission President Larry Mazzola, has made SFO a more attractive venue for true low-fare carriers like Southwest. Working closely with SFO Director John L. Martin, Southwest was excited to learn of the constructive changes at SFO, so now it makes even more sense to return.”
Today’s announcement does not affect our commitment at OAK, where we have 142 daily departures; or SJC, where we have 76 daily departures.
“Similar to the Washington, D.C., metro area where we serve BWI and IAD; or the Los Angeles area where we serve LAX, ONT, BUR, and SNA; or the Boston metro area where we serve from PVD and MHT; the Bay Area is large enough to support complementary service from three airports. We’ve never questioned that.”
Stay tuned! We will release more details of our future service to SFO in the coming months.

This is great news. Delta has been hosing down the public between SLC and SFO for the last year or so. Out of sight fares for a ride in the RJ. Nothing bigger than an RJ between SLC and SFO. Can't count the times I have gone over to OAK to catch SWA for a mere $160 walk up rate compared to DAL's $645.

 

[FlyDouglasJets]

1. Last 3 new cities announced have been UAL hubs....coincidence? Things that make one go hmmmm
3. Weather/ATC delays were problems in PHL....those have been minimized when folks said they couldn't....the same challenges exist in SFO...are they fixed? We'll see but obviously folks with a lot more information on the "big picture" than anyone of us believe it is worth the risk....we're getting more gates in PHL and I suspect there are some options for further growth in SFO if SWA needs it.

UAL has a marketing staff fresh w/ MBAs that are still popping pimples. They are fairly big push overs these days. Other than the INTL flts to Asia and a few to EU, the domestic pig is stuffed. SWA knows that. It's easy pickens and the yields @ IAD/DEN/SFO are still low-hangin' fruit.

SFO now has an improved PRM approach, arrival rate is about 20% higher these days w/ similar cig/vis.

 

[LeonPhelps]

Yeah, Ummmmm....

....so when is SWA going to ATL? And how? I mean, there are a lot of ladeeth down there that are in desthperate need for Leon!! And asth far asth Nanthee Pelothee...I would need to be at least half a bottle of courvossier down for that one!

 

[REK]

As soon as we buy Airtran.

 

[Murphy]

As soon as we buy Airtran.

now play nice

 

[chase]

The hole in the SWA system in the ATL area is a glaring weakness but iit is fixable, but some questions need to be answered. I spoke to a former pilot who flew out of ATL routinely and filled me in on some observations that makes sense, please comment with what you know.

1. The new runway is completed in ATL, the new terminal that would feed that runway is nearing completion. Originally it was designed for the RJs; now the majors want to keep the RJs closer because they feed so many paxs to the mainline.

Question: Can anyone confirm that observation and has any airlne been promised the new facility there adjacent to the new runway?

2. If the above answer is "no one has spoken for it", the answer would pretty much open up the opportunity for SWA to operate independent and autonomously out of a new facility and off a runway they could use nearly exclusively....a large leap of faith I know so please spell out the error of my logic.

If the above does occur then SWA could find itself in ATL in the near future. Airports worthy of our entry are still out there but nothing would be as enticing as to fill our current hole in our map as it would be to go into ATL with that type of insulation against the other delays at other terminals and runways. Would DAL allow that to happen without a major fight? Absolutly not....certainly the Hartsfield folks will listen very closely to the complaints of favoritism toward SWA (not really but I'm sure DaL would raise the flag regardless).

Don't know about landing fees or costs there but I would think there would be some nice incentives that both sides might like to see in order to both get something they'd like; SWA into a ATL and Hartsfield to get the largest lowcost leader in the country flying from its airfield. The growth potential would be huge....not sure what fares have been doing in ATL in the last year but Chicago latest results show that even large airports can have declines in fares to major points if they open their doors widely to SWA...the last numbers show this has happened in MDW but not in any other markets closes to that size.....Hartsfield would luv to have the same thing said of them in 18 months if SWA was to go in there, albiet under the conditions of operating from a separate terminal (new) and a runway that would be dedicated to their operations.
We'll see what happens, it will be interesting.

 

[mad691]

There is no new terminal near the new runway. After Delta went bankrupt the city said no. There is an expansion of the international terminal but I don't when that will be finished. Only suppose add a few gates I think 8. The new terminal at the earliest would be built decade from now. But there is no reason why SWA can't build the terminal themselves and fly out of ATL. I can guarantee you the city would LUV them in ATL.

 

[Heavy Set]

The hole in the SWA system in the ATL area is a glaring weakness but iit is fixable, but some questions need to be answered. I spoke to a former pilot who flew out of ATL routinely and filled me in on some observations that makes sense, please comment with what you know.

1. The new runway is completed in ATL, the new terminal that would feed that runway is nearing completion. Originally it was designed for the RJs; now the majors want to keep the RJs closer because they feed so many paxs to the mainline.

Question: Can anyone confirm that observation and has any airlne been promised the new facility there adjacent to the new runway?

2. If the above answer is "no one has spoken for it", the answer would pretty much open up the opportunity for SWA to operate independent and autonomously out of a new facility and off a runway they could use nearly exclusively....a large leap of faith I know so please spell out the error of my logic.

If the above does occur then SWA could find itself in ATL in the near future. Airports worthy of our entry are still out there but nothing would be as enticing as to fill our current hole in our map as it would be to go into ATL with that type of insulation against the other delays at other terminals and runways. Would DAL allow that to happen without a major fight? Absolutly not....certainly the Hartsfield folks will listen very closely to the complaints of favoritism toward SWA (not really but I'm sure DaL would raise the flag regardless).

Don't know about landing fees or costs there but I would think there would be some nice incentives that both sides might like to see in order to both get something they'd like; SWA into a ATL and Hartsfield to get the largest lowcost leader in the country flying from its airfield. The growth potential would be huge....not sure what fares have been doing in ATL in the last year but Chicago latest results show that even large airports can have declines in fares to major points if they open their doors widely to SWA...the last numbers show this has happened in MDW but not in any other markets closes to that size.....Hartsfield would luv to have the same thing said of them in 18 months if SWA was to go in there, albiet under the conditions of operating from a separate terminal (new) and a runway that would be dedicated to their operations.
We'll see what happens, it will be interesting.

Chase,

As the above stated, no new terminal at ATL. SWA will have a very hard time finding any new gates at Hartsfield, period. Try Macon.

 

[ASADFW7]

Charlie Brown?

 

[Saluki Dawg]

I agree with the no new gates at ATL anytime soon. I think the same could be said for CLT as well. SWA would like to fly to both of those cities, but is unable to find any suitable gate space. There are available gates to be had at both BOS and MIA if I'm not mistaken. I'm not saying that we will fly to these cities in the near future, but you do have to go where you can get available gates. These 2 large cities fit the bill in that regard. Time will tell I guess.