Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

SWA/ATA codeshare ending?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
SWA/FO said:
You are just mad at Southwest Airlines for not hiring you./quote]

News Flash........ Not everyone wants to work for SWA! ATA was a great place to work before the call to Jihad. I'm afraid the wheels started coming off when John Tague wanted to have shiny new equipment and get away from the charter market. It's too bad all the bad blood has to start as any of you at SWA could be in the same shoes someday.
 
I still think it's too early to define the ATA/SWA relationship. The SWA business model moves slow, and steady, which is hard if you want news today. The only facts so far are SWA is paid back, a 7 year code share agreement is in place, good people have suffered, and ATA is no longer in bankruptcy. Anything else is up in the air. Just when you think your sure it goes the other way. Richmond or Charlotte, bam Philly. MSP or BOS, bam Denver. Okay MSP for sure this time, bam Dulles. None of us have a clue. I'll have to say I was truely excited when the ATA deal was first announced. I didn't think of scope, or who was going to fly what. I was thinking about an opportunity to connect the globe by whatever means. Now that seems completely remote, and there will be tons of other scenarios before this finally plays out, but the way things go my first thoughts will probably closer to the truth than all of the speculation that goes on this forum.
 
mdf said:
I still think it's too early to define the ATA/SWA relationship. The SWA business model moves slow, and steady, which is hard if you want news today. The only facts so far are SWA is paid back, a 7 year code share agreement is in place, good people have suffered, and ATA is no longer in bankruptcy. Anything else is up in the air. Just when you think your sure it goes the other way. Richmond or Charlotte, bam Philly. MSP or BOS, bam Denver. Okay MSP for sure this time, bam Dulles. None of us have a clue. I'll have to say I was truely excited when the ATA deal was first announced. I didn't think of scope, or who was going to fly what. I was thinking about an opportunity to connect the globe by whatever means. Now that seems completely remote, and there will be tons of other scenarios before this finally plays out, but the way things go my first thoughts will probably closer to the truth than all of the speculation that goes on this forum.

Very well said, mdf!
 
mdf said:
I still think it's too early to define the ATA/SWA relationship. The SWA business model moves slow, and steady, which is hard if you want news today. The only facts so far are SWA is paid back, a 7 year code share agreement is in place, good people have suffered, and ATA is no longer in bankruptcy. Anything else is up in the air. Just when you think your sure it goes the other way. Richmond or Charlotte, bam Philly. MSP or BOS, bam Denver. Okay MSP for sure this time, bam Dulles. None of us have a clue. I'll have to say I was truely excited when the ATA deal was first announced. I didn't think of scope, or who was going to fly what. I was thinking about an opportunity to connect the globe by whatever means. Now that seems completely remote, and there will be tons of other scenarios before this finally plays out, but the way things go my first thoughts will probably closer to the truth than all of the speculation that goes on this forum.

Second that!! Very well stated.
 
OffHot said:
Halintexas where do you get your information on our scope. First we have very little if anything about codesharing in our scope. It was talked about after the fact. Additionally, The 5% ASM I don't beleive exists either. The only thing that exists is that SWAPA pilots will fly SWA airplanes. The question was, and why SWA sold its shares of ATA, was mostly because we brought up the fact that we had some ownership and we were not flying the jets. The company knew this going in and approached us about this temporary situation and promised to sell out as soon as it made sense. Guess what they did. The issue of overlapping routes came up with FT Myers, we didnt like it, but nothing in our contract prevented it. The company just said let this one happen and we will talk about the rest.

A few members of our MEC met with some of SWAPA's leadership last month.

the chairman of their
Bargaining Committee and was told that codeshare revenues provided to ATA
are directly linked to Southwest's performance and cannot exceed more
than 5.5 percent of SWA's available seat miles. We can only grow the
codeshare as their ASMs grow.

This is out of the codeshare agreement. It's been relayed to ATA pilots through various sources, usually SWA pilots, that (paraphrased) all flying for SWA owned or partially owned shall be done by SWA pilots. We've been told all along that we will not be able to overlap or codeshare into any cities that SWA serves. We've pulled back from every city that SWA serves and pulled out of cities that SWA expanded into, namely RSW and DEN.
 
I don't really think it's too early to define the relationship. ATA is a place marker for SWA. SWA will move in when they can do it themselves with little effort or expense.

Just because we're out of bankruptcy, doesn't mean we're safe or profitable. There is little growth in the charter market. We've sold or fired all of the charter companies and employees we had in our charter department, save for a few to handle the military. You're right we were pretty d@mn good at charter. With fares so low, and airlines selling their own vacation packages, there aren't many deals to be had in the charter market.

There were a couple of union guys last fall, after we conceded our contract, stating that they saw a controlled liquidation of ATA. I wasn't so sure I believed them then, but I do now. FL's deal would have had us down to about 400 pilots from 1100 as of last May. We're now under 700 and furloughs are continuing. Many voluntarily. There is no planned growth of ATA. We're looking at WB lift for the military, that's it. I predict in my crystal ball that ATA will re-enter BK next year and be fragmented out. Even if we don't go bankrupt again, Matlin-Patterson will sell us off to make a buck. They have no interest in running an airline, and no one want to buy us as is. Managment mistakes and culture of denial continues at ATA.
 
I predict in my crystal ball that ATA will re-enter BK next year and be fragmented out.
Our bleeding has stopped, we are breaking even with scheduled service and the Military is making some money. Our balance sheet looks good, our CASM is the lowest in the industry, the codeshare markets will be increasing, despite what you think. Management is actively searching for additional wide bodies.

Why are you convinced that ATA will liquidate just because we aren't expanding at a rate acceptable to you? Matlin-Patterson didn't buy ATA and then roll the dice hoping things work out. In the very beginning they said what they were going to do and they have followed the script to the tee. SWA not only has kept their end of the bargain, they have sweetened the deal to include many things they didn't have to.

Even if we don't go bankrupt again, Matlin-Patterson will sell us off to make a buck.
MP has their exit strategy planned out and it may include selling to the highest bidder. Remember ATA's pieces aren't as valuable as the whole operating airline including ETOPS and international operating authority so your idea of controlled liquidation doesn't make sense to me.
 
SWA/FO said:
You are just mad at Southwest Airlines for not hiring you.

.

Uh, sorry to break to you but I got over that when UPS hired me.....nice try though.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top