SWA plan for 15% ROIC

[Phlintstone]

But....we would ALL be SWA pilots at that point. That could be interpreted either way...

Phred

 

[slaquer5]

I believe all furloughs will be FAT until one year after full integration... AAI gave up one- for-one protection btw SL9 and SL10...blame ur MEC and the blowhards on this forum...

There will be no furloughs .


On a sidebar, FAR 117 starts 2014

 

[GhettoBeechjet]

There will be no furloughs .


On a sidebar, FAR 117 starts 2014

Slaquer I would love to share your optimism. To avoid fuloughs we need more airframes and to get more airframes we need more flying for those airframes to do than we have now. Expalin where either come from and I'll be on board. I have asked SWAPA and management and right now no one has given me an answer.

 

[humveedriver]

Slaquer I would love to share your optimism. To avoid fuloughs we need more airframes and to get more airframes we need more flying for those airframes to do than we have now. Expalin where either come from and I'll be on board. I have asked SWAPA and management and right now no one has given me an answer.

I'm right there with you. Here is what I know. SWA really has alot of pride in not furloughing and is on record for not furloughing during this integration short of a war with Iran or whatever. So i ask myself; Why would SWA buy a competitior and then dump most of their planes? I mean they created this. It isn't like they are trying to react to a sudden grounding of the fleet. It could be insanely poor management. That is possible. They have a better track record than that so, I will give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. I'm on the otherside of this problem. As an AT pilot we all said WTH when they said the 717 was going away. Now you guys are saying WTH, because you realize the numbers aren't adding up and it's not just about capturing seats (per the SWAPA letter,which was shortsighted). My brain just won't accept that SWA management said let's keep the classics, dump the 717's and plan on furloughing hundreds of pilots right about time the integration is complete. I see SWA management getting tougher, but not quite ready to go full on burn SWA to the ground yet!

 

[slaquer5]

Slaquer I would love to share your optimism. To avoid fuloughs we need more airframes and to get more airframes we need more flying for those airframes to do than we have now. Expalin where either come from and I'll be on board. I have asked SWAPA and management and right now no one has given me an answer.

Trust me, No way.


JMO

Gary and Co. Are setting themselfs up for a lot of contract negotiations .
AT flys to some small cities , w/ just a few flights a day. SWA would like to do the same. It is hard to justify a full staff of SWA employees for a handfull of flights.
I will not even get into the F/A s and what they want.

I am sure he will want the pilots to play ball also.( Not in pay cuts , but in other ways)

Yes, I am optimistic . I think once Gary gets his ducks in a row,this place will be like it was back in the early 90s.

 

[Phlintstone]

s5, I hope so too.

Phred

 

[humveedriver]

So I guess the only remaining question is will it be Alaska or JetBlue?

 

[maxblast72]

Last month, Gary Kelly and crew conducted an Investor Day. The transcript and slide presentation associated with their presentation is available at southwest.com. At that presenation, Gary Kelly and Tammy Romo walked investors how they get to 15% ROIC in 2013.

First, Tammy walked through Southwest's expected 2013 unit revenue performance. Historically, Southwest has been able to produce unit revenue increases approximately 2-3 times what the United States experiences in GDP growth. For 2013, Southwest is expecting unit revenue growth of 4-5%.

Second, you must know capacity and fuel consumption. Tammy stated that Southwest intends to grow 2013 capacity by 2%. Gary stated that unit fuel consumption is getting better in 2013. This due to 2 reasons, the addition of 6 seats in all 737-700s and some 737-300s and the continued addition of 175 seat 737-800s. So even though capacity will grow by 2% in 2013, Gary is not expecting total fuel consumption to grow by 2%.

Third, you must make a fuel price assumption and non-fuel cost performance assumption. Gary Kelly is expecting 2013 all in fuel prices to be about the same as 2012 ($3.25-3.30/gallon). Tammy stated that Southwest expects non-fuel unit costs to increase by 1% (again the increased seats per departure helps ease the unit cost pressures associated with rising labor, maintenance, and airport costs).

So using the above information you can get to the following numbers:

2012 Capacity: 128 billion ASMs
2013 Capacity: 131 billion ASMs (up 2%)

2012 All in Fuel Price: $3.28/gallon
2013 All in Fuel Price: $3.28/gallon (flat)

2012 Fuel Consumption: 1.85 billion gallons
2013 Fuel Consumption: 1.87 billion gallons (up 1%)

2012 Non fuel CASM: 7.93 cents/ASM
2013 Non fuel CASM: 8.01 cents/ASM (up 1%)

2012 RASM: 13.34 cents/ASM
2013 RASM: 13.94 cents/ASM (up 4.5%)

Putting these numbers together:

2013 Total Revenue: $18.3 billion
2013 Non Fuel Costs: $10.5 billion
2013 Fuel Costs: $6.1 billion

2013 Operating Profit: $1.7 billion
2013 Interest Expense/Taxes: $700 billion

2013 Net profit: $1.0 billion (excluding special items)
2013 Net profit per share: $1.35/share
2013 ROIC: 14-15% range

As you can see, Gary Kelly laid out a road map to over $1/share profits for 2013 back on December 14, 2012 at the Investor Day presentation. Over the last 30 days, 6 analysts have upped their LUV earnings estimates while 1 analyst has lowered their estimate (out of 18 total analysts).

What will affect the results we see published 1 year from today? Every 10 cents per gallon change in Jet A affects the operating profit by approximately $185 million. Every 1% RASM change affects the operating profit by approximately $180 million. Every 1% change in non fuel CASM affects the operating profit by approximately $105 million.

With respect to furloughs, remember Paragraph C to the LOA to the AirTran CBA included with SIA #2 prevents furloughs unless there are "prohibitive conditions outside the company's control" or "extreme economic conditions". Given the current profitability and forecasting for 2013 done by Gary Kelly at last month's Investor Day presentation, I am sure JM would love to unleash DK if Gary Kelly decided to try and furlough on this side of the partition.

 

[scoreboardII]

Slaquer I would love to share your optimism. To avoid fuloughs we need more airframes and to get more airframes we need more flying for those airframes to do than we have now. Expalin where either come from and I'll be on board. I have asked SWAPA and management and right now no one has given me an answer.

No furloughs.

To furlough would be a nail in the coffin of all that SWA has advertised these last four decades. SWA will only furlough if some industry stressor occurs like energy, war, or terrorism: if that happens, other will furlough long before SWA.

Second, furloughing 400, then hiring them back and retraining inside of a year or two/three is more costly than paying min guarantee to every pilot over two years.

Third, my bet is a significant number of young age wise (younger than 45) FO's see the writing on the wall and jump to other airlines which are hiring. Solving the problem well before 2015.

 

[Ace McCoy]

No furloughs.

To furlough would be a nail in the coffin of all that SWA has advertised these last four decades. SWA will only furlough if some industry stressor occurs like energy, war, or terrorism: if that happens, other will furlough long before SWA.

Second, furloughing 400, then hiring them back and retraining inside of a year or two/three is more costly than paying min guarantee to every pilot over two years.

Third, my bet is a significant number of young age wise (younger than 45) FO's see the writing on the wall and jump to other airlines which are hiring. Solving the problem well before 2015.

Fourth, how STUPID would SWA look furloughing pilots when DAL/NWA and CAL/UAL both merged with no furloughs?


Fifth, how can they justify "extreme economic hardship" while pulling down major profits?


I agree, No furloughs.

 

[PCL_128]

No furloughs.

To furlough would be a nail in the coffin of all that SWA has advertised these last four decades. SWA will only furlough if some industry stressor occurs like energy, war, or terrorism: if that happens, other will furlough long before SWA.

Second, furloughing 400, then hiring them back and retraining inside of a year or two/three is more costly than paying min guarantee to every pilot over two years.

Third, my bet is a significant number of young age wise (younger than 45) FO's see the writing on the wall and jump to other airlines which are hiring. Solving the problem well before 2015.

For once, I have to agree with scoreboardII. No furloughs to be worried about.

 

[sixlegs]

There has been a lot of speculation on this topic - The "F" word. It's interesting to speculate where we are headed. I think the poster that spoke of the influx of new jets covering the loss of the 717 was correct. What is interesting is the decline of the classics with no new jet orders to replace them.
One theory is that management has a plan and will use the fear of 500 pilots too many, to roll into a concessionary contract for the pilots. Ex. "take this contract deal, or we will have to furlough 500 of you". There is rumor of this all up and down the line I'm flying. I'm thinking this ploy would blow up in management's face. Unlike after Sept 11, when our group took a concessionary contract to prevent furlough, I think the good will of the current pilot's, on both sides of the partition, is gone. If management tries to use this tactic, the pilot group won't fall for it and there will be furloughs. I'm speculating here. What do you think?

 

[slaquer5]

I will say it again . There will be no furloughs .

Of course the company wants something in the next contract


PBS,less sick time, less use of overlap on vacation , lower the daily duty guarantee . The list goes on. GK would not not be doing his job,if he did not try to get some of this .

 

[Just thinking]

PBS,less sick time, less use of overlap on vacation , lower the daily duty guarantee .........

all part of the pretty laminated sales brochures that touted how a RSW FO makes more than a FAT Captain....... Now that gk got the captain seats for SWAPA they have no choice but to agree to the overlord's demands.....

 

[GhettoBeechjet]

Although I love the optimistic outlook I just don't see it. Let's examine the facts on the ground today and build from there. On the AAI side of the partition a huge amount of flying has been eliminated, almost half of the pilots are on reserve not flying and the airframes are being sold to another carrier. On the other side of the fence SWA will end up 10 airframes smaller at the end of 2013 then we started. Add in that management is reducing the size of headqurters staff which points to at least anecdotally that they are preparing to run a smaller airline. We also know as of right now the planned number of aircraft acquisitions is far short of the planned number of aircraft disposals. Even to an Indiana public school grad like myself less airframes in total means less need for people to fly them. Even though we are talking about SWA that does not suspend reality. The only way this changes is if there is a sudden realization of profitable ASMs which in turn would justify the need for additional airframes off the open market which would in turn mitigate the job losses. When I add this up I think we are playing musical chairs where the only real question is who ends up without a seat when the music stops.

 

[scoreboardII]

O There is rumor of this all up and down the line I'm flying. I'm thinking this ploy would blow up in management's face. Unlike after Sept 11, when our group took a concessionary contract to prevent furlough, I think the good will of the current pilot's, on both sides of the partition, is gone. If management tries to use this tactic, the pilot group won't fall for it and there will be furloughs. I'm speculating here. What do you think?

Well first, there is no rumor up and down the line of a furlough, at least not my line. Secondly, what you say about the pilots not believing much of anything management has to say if it isn't spelled out in black and white is right, show us the money, put it in writing, the trust is dead. Lastly, even if pushed into a corner, management is the side which furloughs, not the pilots, if they want to waste money and furlough shorterm, thats up to them, but like my previous post, it won't happen as the costs are to high.

 

[scoreboardII]

Although I love the optimistic outlook I just don't see it. Not being optimistic, just being realistic with the facts on the ground .

Let's examine the facts on the ground today and build from there. On the AAI side of the partition a huge amount of flying has been eliminated, almost half of the pilots are on reserve not flying and the airframes are being sold to another carrier.

Using the word Huge is not a real good factual point to reference in your argument. You (other AT pilots) have admitted to AT having almost 30-40% on reserve before SWA ever announced the purchase. Are you being paid minimum guarantee? If so, nothing to worry about.

On the other side of the fence SWA will end up 10 airframes smaller at the end of 2013 then we started.

10 airframes, thats all you got? Thats a normal swing at SWA, and less than a 1% shift of airframes, we flex about 600 pilots worth of flying from slow times to busy times every year.

Add in that management is reducing the size of headqurters staff which points to at least anecdotally that they are preparing to run a smaller airline.

Points to nothing other than GK realizing his HQ costs are the highest in the industry and needs to answer to that problem before he can begin to blame other labor groups at SWA.

We also know as of right now the planned number of aircraft acquisitions is far short of the planned number of aircraft disposals. Even to an Indiana public school grad like myself less airframes in total means less need for people to fly them. Even though we are talking about SWA that does not suspend reality. The only way this changes is if there is a sudden realization of profitable ASMs which in turn would justify the need for additional airframes off the open market which would in turn mitigate the job losses. When I add this up I think we are playing musical chairs where the only real question is who ends up without a seat when the music stops.

Your numbers are not what we are seeing on this side, all indications point to flat fleet through 2015, with 2-3% growth per year into the 2015-2017 range. If we for one second thought they would be furloughing on either side we would be shouting from the roofs. Yes, we will all be flying min contract for a year or two at times, which is much better than any other merger I know of save the new Delta-Uniteds(bankrupt exit debt free) which is still TBD.

Yes, the classics are going, but at a reduced rate, and are being replaced with new iron at a reduced rate, why? Who wants to buy 100 new 700's when if all we need to do is wait two years into 2017 and we could get the NEO/MAX airframe which saves us 8% on operating costs?[/QUOTE]

Lets not get spooled up on this again....

 

[PCL_128]

On the AAI side of the partition a huge amount of flying has been eliminated, almost half of the pilots are on reserve not flying

We've been told that the flying is picking back up in a month or two, and reserves are going to drop back down to normal days off with higher utilization. This is just a temporary situation with reduced utilization during the winter, supposedly.

 

[SWA Bubba]

PBS,less sick time, less use of overlap on vacation , lower the daily duty guarantee .........

all part of the pretty laminated sales brochures that touted how a RSW FO makes more than a FAT Captain....... Now that gk got the captain seats for SWAPA they have no choice but to agree to the overlord's demands.....

Actually, we don't have to agree to jack squat. The union's position is that we've already done our part to help save money (a rapid agreement to flying -800s with no override, a rapid agreement on near-international with no override). These are things that the company wanted to help lower unit costs moving forward to achieve its goals. Basically, we already gave at the office. If we don't agree to anything different, we'll still get our pay levels and perks.

Wait... I'm sorry--if you just wanted to bitch, then sorry about answering your concerns. Carry on.

Bubba

 

[slaquer5]

PBS,less sick time, less use of overlap on vacation , lower the daily duty guarantee .........

all part of the pretty laminated sales brochures that touted how a RSW FO makes more than a FAT Captain....... Now that gk got the captain seats for SWAPA they have no choice but to agree to the overlord's demands.....

Thanks

Nice to see both sides slinging mud.I hope you don't speak for the majority over there.