Southwest breaks ground

[scoreboardII]

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-t...e-was-last-straw-in-3600712.php?cmpid=twitter

SWA doesn't really look for opportunity. It just follows the ambulance.

You have an amazing ability to miss the facts and spin your own agenda of hypocrisy.

From the article:

The vote this week to expand Hobby Airport over objections of United Airlines, and United's subsequent announcement of layoffs was, in some ways, the end of an affair.
Continental Airlines and Houston had a decades-long relationship in which the hometown airline sponsored art exhibits, sent students on free trips, bought tables at charity events, and, of course, seeded local politicians' campaign accounts with tens of thousands of dollars - more than $50,000 to controller and Mayor Annise Parker alone in the past five years. It helped bankroll Parker's 2010 inauguration.
Continental was so influential at City Hall that former CEO Gordon Bethune recently recalled a brazen request he made in the 1990s of then-Mayor Bob Lanier: "Move out the airport director and give us someone who's business friendly." And Lanier did.

Everything that's wrong with America today is contained in the bolded red items above and practiced by your beloved airline. Payoff's, slush funds, cronyism, outright bribes. Yet you say SWA chases ambulances, hypocrisy.

And the airline, now folded into United, responded within hours of the vote by announcing that this fall it will start making good on its threat to eliminate 1,300 Houston jobs if the council chose another suitor.

In the real world, this is called blackmail.

"We should have just had Enron and Continental submit their wish list at the beginning of the year so we could just concentrate on the people's business for the other 11 months,"

Very astute, compare CAL to ENRON

"Continental, or United, has been very concerned about job losses in Houston. They weren't so concerned about job losses when they moved their headquarters to Chicago," Hobby said.

DING DING DING, we have a winner. Put it to bed, stay off our threads, use your own advise.

 

[SWA Bubba]

You're ignoring the part about doing a lot for Houston, which CAL did do. We got a lot because we did a lot. I don't know how you can be in a city for more than 40 years and do less than SWA has.

Huh? We do all the same sort of stuff (charities, etc.) that are referenced in that article. The thing we don't do that Continental did was to bribe politicians to give us special favors. Why? Are you proud of that?

Can you explain that one to me? SWA carries on like they are some special group... What have you done to get special treatment? You've done nothing, and Houston is allowing you to split the FIS. Unbelievable.

For the thousandth time, we're not looking for "special treatment." We're looking for the same shot at making our business model work as anyone else. Flying OUR model from the airports WE want to fly from.

And by the way, Houston isn't "allowing us to split the FIS." Where do you get this crap? It's the FAA's friggin' obligation to provide those services at any airport where they're needed. It's in their damn charter. It's what they do. If you wanted to fly your Unical airplanes out of Manassas Regional, then the FAA, TSA, etc. would be obligated to provide services there. The passenger fees would be used to pay the government for it. That's how it works.

*Beyond all this stuff, hopefully Houston has a new mayor on Nov 5th. It's not real likely, but perhaps. I hope the former CAL employees get out and vote.

Really? Hoping for a new politician you can bribe? Get him to do you special favors? Personally, I don't think anyone in Houston trusts you anymore.

Also, I believe we're going to start to hear of some other airlines that want in on Hobby. That's coming according to HAS. That's all any of us really want in the end. You shouldn't simply win on a decision in a council meeting.

Good. C'mon down. We're not afraid of head-to-head competition. Just like we're happy to do it at Love, although most people who have come there have left on their own accord. Personally, I don't believe you'll do it, because you wouldn't want to split your operation. You remember that, right? Splitting one's operation? That's what YOU though would be "fair," to force us to do.

You ought to have to go fly and deliver and earn the win.

Dude, that's all we've ever asked. Let us do it without Unical's management trying to tell us how to run our airline, and what airports we should be "allowed" to fly out of. Geez--you're making my point now. Thanks!

Bubba

 

[Flopgut]

And by the way, Houston isn't "allowing us to split the FIS." Where do you get this crap? It's the FAA's friggin' obligation to provide those services at any airport where they're needed. It's in their damn charter. It's what they do. If you wanted to fly your Unical airplanes out of Manassas Regional, then the FAA, TSA, etc. would be obligated to provide services there. The passenger fees would be used to pay the government for it. That's how it works.

Bubba

Completely false, and you know it. As I pointed out in the longer thread on this topic 6 or 8 months ago. The FAA is perfectly within its right to decline to open a second FIS in a certain municipality. Denver was the example. Houston's mayor wanted it, so the FAA went along. If CAL was still around, or even more correctly, if it was another airline other than SWA, this wouldn't be happening. CAL did nothing that was not above board. We participated thoroughly in all manner of civic and political support.

 

[Flopgut]

You have an amazing ability to miss the facts and spin your own agenda of hypocrisy.

From the article:


Everything that's wrong with America today is contained in the bolded red items above and practiced by your beloved airline. Payoff's, slush funds, cronyism, outright bribes. Yet you say SWA chases ambulances, hypocrisy.




In the real world, this is called blackmail.





Very astute, compare CAL to ENRON

DING DING DING, we have a winner. Put it to bed, stay off our threads, use your own advise.

I'd say the same about you're airline. It's what is wrong with the industry and the world, really. You don't do anything but thrive in another's aftermath. Be it Braniff or Continental or even 911. If something awful doesn't happen to someone else you don't make a move. You're the first to plant your flag in the ashes.

And look at your own posts and this thread: you want me to stay off SWA threads? I pretty much was for 3+ pages. One quick post meant to de-escalate, and then I get called out specifically. If you look at my behavior I don't post on every SWA thread. This issue effects me so I read the thread. Don't want me to post? Do go looking for me. Seems to me that's what wrong with this web site. SWA guys dish it out, but can't take it.

 

[PCL_128]

Every day that goes by is one more closer to the day SWA gets a bad CEO

They already have one.

 

[Flopgut]

Dude, that's all we've ever asked. Let us do it without Unical's management trying to tell us how to run our airline, and what airports we should be "allowed" to fly out of. Geez--you're making my point now. Thanks!

Bubba

Observations I've seen in the last 6 months or so indicate that HAS is less comfortable with the possibility that Hobby becomes a Love situation. Honestly I think the big celebration at the council meeting hurt you guys. Members got bullied into that vote by the mayor in the first place. And then she doesn't gavel out the celebration... Houstonians don't like that sort of thing. The council thought they were giving you a business opportunity, not a guarantee. Your uproar left them second guessing. I think the council came to understand our concerns only after the vote.

If there is healthy competition out there and you guys do well, I'll be the first to congratulate you. You game the gates or use political pressure to keep airlines out (or force them to IAH) you can give me the same acknowledgment. Deal?

 

[Flopgut]

They already have one.

I would dearly love to be writing a check for a fat ALPA assessment going toward Aitran legal fees.

 

[scoreboardII]

Completely false, and you know it. As I pointed out in the longer thread on this topic 6 or 8 months ago. The FAA is perfectly within its right to decline to open a second FIS in a certain municipality. Denver was the example. Houston's mayor wanted it, so the FAA went along. If CAL was still around, or even more correctly, if it was another airline other than SWA, this wouldn't be happening. CAL did nothing that was not above board. We participated thoroughly in all manner of civic and political support.

You are rewriting history again, the FIS in DEN Stapleton became NA the second the bulldozers demolished the runways.

 

[scoreboardII]

I'd say the same about you're airline. It's what is wrong with the industry and the world, really. You don't do anything but thrive in another's aftermath. Be it Braniff or Continental or even 911. If something awful doesn't happen to someone else you don't make a move. You're the first to plant your flag in the ashes.

And look at your own posts and this thread: you want me to stay off SWA threads? I pretty much was for 3+ pages. One quick post meant to de-escalate, and then I get called out specifically. If you look at my behavior I don't post on every SWA thread. This issue effects me so I read the thread. Don't want me to post? Do go looking for me. Seems to me that's what wrong with this web site. SWA guys dish it out, but can't take it.

Your picture must be placed next to the definition of hypocrite!

SWA didn't kill NWA, TWA, Pan Am, Braniff or any other airline. Braniff as an example, how often can a 747 flying empty make money? Does a 737-200 compete with a 747? Do the math before you spout childish drivel please, for your own good.

SWA flourished in our niche airports, those others failed long after SWA was successful, not as a result of failures of those airlines.

Sure, SWA jumped in to provide a service, just like in any industry when a player folds. Just like AA took over TWA, like Delta absorbed NWA, UAL combined with CAL.

YGBFSM, your blaming airlines being unable to compete after 911 on SWA?

You need to go read an economics and business management book flopster.

Flop, post what you want, when you want, I'm just going to be here every time to ensure you are not lying about it.

 

[Flopgut]

You are rewriting history again, the FIS in DEN Stapleton became NA the second the bulldozers demolished the runways.

Well, there are actually two examples. Denver is the precedent and the airport was mot Stapleton. The other example is Dallas. The agreement you eventually could not wiggle out of stated it would be in Dallas' best interest to have only one FIS. So you come to Houston knowing full well you've got nothing but problems for everybody but your own airline.

 

[scoreboardII]

Well, there are actually two examples. Denver is the precedent and the airport was mot Stapleton. The other example is Dallas. The agreement you eventually could not wiggle out of stated it would be in Dallas' best interest to have only one FIS. .

Dallas is just like HOU, an airport authority, they are the ones demanding no international, and we comply. HOU has no restriction, or if it did, CAL/UAL pissed them off enough to allow a second airport to have it.

So you come to Houston knowing full well you've got nothing but problems for everybody but your own airline

Problems? You really do have a problem with the way our US economy is structured don't you?

 

[Flopgut]

Problems? You really do have a problem with the way our US economy is structured don't you?

WRT airlines? hells yes I do!!! Are you kidding me!? We're deregulated, but have more regulation now than we did regulated!? This [deregulation] in place of a national air transportation policy has put legacy US airlines on the ropes. Braniff, an airline that went to hundreds of worldwide destinations and operated the Concorde, gets scuttled in favor of a discount airline that only flies to 50 some cities after 40 years in business. (Yeah, that makes sense). 9-11 happens and our industry can't get a little help?! Uncle Sam can bail out GM and Lehman and every stinking financial institution, but UAL can't even get a loan guarantee. This BS in Houston is foolish governance at its worst. CAL was assured that the same funding precedent that precluded Denver having two FIS was in place for us and Houston took our billions. Then one marginal mayor can't manage emotion or (more importantly) keep the airline in town so she throws a fit. Grasps for the quickest deal she can to save face... The aforementioned discounter who comes in with a "deal" that would have never passed an actual public necessity test. FIVE gates!? A FIS for FIVE whole gates...YGTBSM. Any other airline but SWA and the FAA would have torpedoed it. But hey, you're you, so whatever you need.

I'd rather see a couple strong US legacies out there in the world instead of Emirates and company. I imagine you don't agree with any of this... Is there anyone, other than SWA pilots, that actually approves of how our economy is structured toward airlines??

 

[PCL_128]

The SWA pilots will only approve as long as it benefits them. Their comeuppance is only a matter of time, and then their outlook will change.

 

[madjack]

"The SWA pilots will only approve as long as it benefits them. Their comeuppance is only a matter of time, and then their outlook will change."

Wow, just wow...anyone who wishes another pilot group ill, should not be in our world...As much as the AAI pilots come on here and complain about getting screwed...the reality they were poorly governed and it cost them...

 

[redflyer65]

He's never liked SW or SWAPA...and the purchase just threw him over the edge. Now he has to spew his anti-SW rants wherever possible. He's just added Gary (a horrible CEO apparently) to his mix. Maybe it would be best if he never were to come over. Very interesting at the very least.

I guess in Flops world, Southwest has gotten any and everything they've wanted. But yet he selects and article that talks about how Continental greased the Houston skids year after year to get what they needed. Not really an article that paints Continental in a good light, but whatever. Continental gave Houston the finger on the way to Chicago, so in the end..there's no love loss there.

 

[PCL_128]

Wow, just wow...anyone who wishes another pilot group ill, should not be in our world...

Tell it to your own Tom Winsor. From what I hear, this was part of his testimony at the DRC arbitration:

Attorney: Is it not true that the Southwest pilots would have been thrilled if the AirTran pilots wouldn't have been integrated?

Winsor: Oh yeah! Probably so.

Save your sanctimony about not wishing ill on other pilot groups. The SWA pilots and their "union" have done nothing but wish ill on us since this whole process started.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Well, there are actually two examples. Denver is the precedent and the airport was mot Stapleton. The other example is Dallas. The agreement you eventually could not wiggle out of stated it would be in Dallas' best interest to have only one FIS. So you come to Houston knowing full well you've got nothing but problems for everybody but your own airline.

Sorry, but you're wrong again.

The FAA declined to allow a second DEN airport to open to international traffic, due to airspace saturation and limitations alone (the TCA ends abruptly at the mountains). There simply isn't enough airspace to maneuver the expected international traffic for two separate airports. It was not a matter of "splitting" any FIS. It's not as if there can only be so many people in uniform. The government will just hire more employees for these additional needs, as it is paid for by the additional passenger charges. As many FIS's as needed or required, no problem.

No such airspace issue exists in Houston. I believe I already pointed this out to you from FAA materials that you provided way back when, when you mistakenly thought it supported your claims. It has nothing to do with the wishes of the mayor. Either for or against. The FAA is obligated to provide service when requested by an airline, as long as there is no legitimate airspace issue like there was in Denver.

For your other example, as far as Dallas Love goes, once again you're wrong with your attempted history rewrite. No surprise there. The prohibition on international flying out Love in the 2006 compromise has NOTHING to do with the "best interests" of the cities. Nothing whatsoever. Nobody even pretended that, or "stated" that in in the agreement. Southwest's agreeing to forego international flying from DAL was purely a political concession to American Airlines to achieve the compromise that finally ended the Wright Amendment. The only entity whose "interests" were protected was that of American Airlines, because while they would now have to compete head-to-head with us domestically in Dallas, they were spared having to also compete with us internationally.

This is kind of what Unical tried to do in Houston. Straight political maneuvering, while pretending it was for the "good" of the city. Unfortunately, you guys didn't buy a powerful enough politician, like American did. They had the Speaker of the House in their pocket in 1979, who snuck in a federal law that hobbled Southwest, to prevent us from competing with them. The Wright Amendment cost Dallas citizens untold millions in higher airfares, by preventing competition.

Any more questions or ridiculous assertions? I'll be happy to set you straight!

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

Tell it to your own Tom Winsor. From what I hear, this was part of his testimony at the DRC arbitration:

Attorney: Is it not true that the Southwest pilots would have been thrilled if the AirTran pilots wouldn't have been integrated?

Winsor: Oh yeah! Probably so.

Save your sanctimony about not wishing ill on other pilot groups. The SWA pilots and their "union" have done nothing but wish ill on us since this whole process started.

Really? You're relying on hearsay now? Didn't you scold someone else on this forum for that very thing?

And there's a big difference between negotiating your own interests over your adversaries, and wishing some other group ill will just on general principles. With your logic, your negotiators wanting relative seniority also equates to "wishing another pilot group ill will."

Besides, wishing we hadn't bought AirTran is not "wishing you ill." Heck, most of the AirTran posters on this board profess to wish the same thing.

Bubba

 

[madjack]

No, ill will would be hoping something bad happened to another group, like lets say their company struggles, bankruptcy and concessions follow...something I expect you would love to see happen to SWA and it's pilots, which sounds odd coming from a former AAI/ALPA official...I mean you would be wishing I'll will toward ur former constituents, oh, I forgot, they r just cowards...u really are something...

 

[PCL_128]

Really? You're relying on hearsay now?

You'll just have to trust me on this one. It was said.

With your logic, your negotiators wanting relative seniority also equates to "wishing another pilot group ill will."

Not that I agree with your premise, but our negotiators never asked for relative.

Besides, wishing we hadn't bought AirTran is not "wishing you ill."

Agreed, but that wasn't his testimony. His testimony was about "plan B" and non-integration after the purchase had already happened. It wasn't about not being bought in the first place.