Well, not so much, hence the buyout of FL. It's quite obvious, even to the most obtuse, that they didn't want Atlanta, (it's been cut in half) they didn't want the 717's, they (and SWAPA) damn sure didn't want the pilot group. They bought them to rid themselves of competition.
Well, Howard beat me to it as far as the reasons for downsizing Atlanta (changing AirTran's hub-and-spoke system changed to our point-to-point), but overall, I'm gonna have to give you about a D+ on your shotgun response, throwing upeverything you could think of, hoping something stuck.
1. Southwest most certainly DID want Atlanta, since we talked about getting into Atlanta before the acquisition (it was the largest US metropolitan area that we didn't serve). I'm not sure how that wasn't obvious to "even the most obtuse." Buying AirTran was the fastest and easiest way to do so. And now that it's finished being dehubbed, it's slowly expanding again.
2. Southwest didn't want the 717s, but as Howard said, so what? They saved money subleasing them and replacing them with 737s.
3. What has SWAPA "not wanting" the AirTran pilots got to do with the company's strategic plans? Red herring. The company could give a crap where the pilots come from, as long as there's the proper number. And of course, any pilot union would rather hire guys new off the street, than try to intergrate an existing group.
4. You forgot all about international. That was a big part of the reason as well.
But for Bubba to state SWA welcomes competition and you to chime in is asinine. No company wants pressure on yield.
As far as eliminating competition goes, get it right. I never said that SWA "welcomes competition," I said that we don't have a problem with it. If the Love Field law was changed, and more gates were built for other airlines, then as long as we got all the gates we paid for, you wouldn't hear crap in protest from Southwest. Unlike other airlines. They'd do their thing, and we'd continue to do ours.
And there's a world of difference between buying a smaller airline for multiple objectives (and from an owner who was just dying to sell it to us, for that matter), and mounting a sustained, meritless legal attack, followed by all other kinds of obstructionism, legal or otherwise, just to keep from having to compete in the first place.
Was competition any part at all of the reason for the acquisition? I'm sure it was. A small part of a multifaceted reason. Hell, we didn't compete with AirTran head-to-head on that many city-pairs to begin with. But for you to ignore everything else, and pretend that's the main or only reason, for your own bitter personal reasons, .... well, in your own words, that's just "asinine."
Hey, good to hear from you again, Fred.
Bubba