SWA/AT traffic way off in ATL

[Flycatcher99]

ORLANDO, Fla., Jan. 5, 2011 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- AirTran Airways, a subsidiary of AirTran Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: AAI), today reported December and full-year 2010 traffic. The low-cost leader recorded all-time annual records for available seat miles, load factor and enplaned passengers.

Yeah, there was a definite trend by the end of 2010.

If AT recorded all-time annual records for ASM, load factor, and pax in 2010, then how does one make sense of this statement from the original article...

Southwest and AirTran combined carried 869,918 Atlanta passengers in November 2013. That's down more than 20 percent from AirTran's passenger count in November 2010, and down 30 percent from the more than 1.4 million passengers AirTran carried in November 2007.

Sounds from that piece like the pax count for AT in 2007 was higher than in 2010. I admit that doesn't make much sense. Did the article get the figures backwards?

 

[Luv2BFlyin]

Looking at the calendars for 2007 vs. 2010, there were more days in November after Thanksgiving in 2007 which should account for better numbers than 2010.

Figures lie and liars figure, and the press is reporting it.

 

[KarmaPolice]

This article is some biased bs. Oh the horror, fares are up 1.4 percent. You mean lower than annual inflation?

Not to mention, isn't SWA overflying Atlanta more now with their point to point model?

How about an article about how media has become pandering peddlers of biased info to capture the short term attention of any moron who will click on their overhyped headline.

 

[Flying the Line]

In 2010 AirTran did have flights that didn't go through Atlanta. They could have better overall numbers and still be down in Atlanta. See, was that so hard to figure out.

 

[wood pecker]

Face it, something big is going on behind the scenes at SW. Either another merger, code share, charge for bags, or something.

Seems at AT when everyone started feeling left out during negotiations and morale was in the tank, (strike vote = searching truck driving schools), it all made sense after a few years. Heck they even took away our 60 hour emergency sick banks at AT. Look what SW offered to other groups including ours regarding our sick banks.

AT didn't worry about losing trust with labor groups because the whole time they knew they would be done with us after the acquisition. Currently somewhere in TX in a boardroom, " how long can we drag out negotiations and collect our next 150% bonus for xyz?"

To me I think SW has tons of potential with all of the international, I just hope we are part of the equation. Coffee is ready who wants some? It's extra nutty.

 

[jackjack]

SWA is getting their butt kicked in ATL at the same rate Genital Lee is getting his butt kicked on Flightinfo! Lol

 

[freightdogfred]

Sounds from that piece like the pax count for AT in 2007 was higher than in 2010. I admit that doesn't make much sense. Did the article get the figures backwards?

The Atlanta pax was may have been down 20% for 2010 and 30% for 2007 because AT started focusing on more point to point flying to bypass the ATL hub. The airline grew, just not the ATL hub.

 

[humveedriver]

The Atlanta pax was may have been down 20% for 2010 and 30% for 2007 because AT started focusing on more point to point flying to bypass the ATL hub. The airline grew, just not the ATL hub.

Yep. After 2008, bankrupt Delta and oil prices changed AT's strategy. Can't find the Wall Street investor briefings anymore that showed the exact shift of flying, but this article from Oct 21, 2009 gives the gist of it;


By Kelly Yamanouchi

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

AirTran Airways swung to a $10.4 million profit in the third quarter, reversing a year-earlier loss, and said expansion in other cities has made it less reliant on its Atlanta hub.

The profit, which amounted to 8 cents per diluted share, compares with a $94.5 million loss in the same quarter last year. AirTran also said it had year-to-date profit of $117.6 million, a record in terms of total amount.

The profit for the quarter, which ended Sept. 30, included $6.3 million in paper losses on future fuel hedges and a $6.4 million gain by retaining deposits from a terminated contract to sell aircraft. AirTran added two Boeing 737 jets to its fleet in September that it had previously planned to sell, but the buyer's financing fell through.

AirTran, which has shrunk its flight operations as travel demand declined, saw its third quarter operating revenue fall 11.3 percent to $597.4 million, down from $673 million a year ago.

AirTran's operations in Atlanta now make up about 50 percent of its total network, down from 52 percent earlier this year. The Atlanta share may fall to about 45 percent next year as AirTran adds flights in other cities, executives said.

AirTran has about 230 daily flights in Atlanta, down from about 270 at its peak, and its Atlanta flight capacity is about 6 percent lower than it was a year ago. Meanwhile, it has expanded in other cities such as Baltimore and Milwaukee.

"We're at a level in Atlanta now that is solidly profitable, and although it's a smaller percentage and it shrunk a little bit, we're done," said AirTran's senior vice president of marketing and planning, Kevin Healy.

Healy and AirTran chief executive Bob Fornaro said during an investor conference call that travel has declined due to weakness in the corporate meetings segment.

Although meetings bookings are recovering, the improvements for airlines will not show up until later, Healy said.

AirTran also said it has made progress in labor talks with pilots and flight attendants, and that mechanics and inspectors just ratified a new 48-month contract.

 

[SWA Bubba]

The Atlanta pax was may have been down 20% for 2010 and 30% for 2007 because AT started focusing on more point to point flying to bypass the ATL hub. The airline grew, just not the ATL hub.

That's a good point, and probably a much more likely explanation than "having more days after Thanksgiving," to account for such a large change in the number of ATL passengers. Going more point-to-point.

So how come when Southwest does this to further "de-hub" ATL, you guys all jump on it like it's some sort of sign of the apocalypse? I mean why send people through ATL (or anywhere else, for that matter), when you don't have to and they're really trying to get to another destination?

Bubba

 

[Ty Webb]

I mean why send people through ATL (or anywhere else, for that matter), when you don't have to and they're really trying to get to another destination?

Bubba

More frequency, more choices of destinations.

Direct flights are great, but often you have three choices- painfully early, painfully late, or painfully absent.