SWA Plans Adding 25 International Flights from FLL

[SWA Bubba]

I've never been outraged about you going South of the border, just the way you propose to do it. You should have had to use IAH and compete with us. Used the FIS that the taxpayers built. Not short circuited lawful, fair competition by building your own terminal at an airport separate from almost all competition.

And we don't have monopoly routes. We code share with other airlines and abide by all bilateral agreements that are part of a level playing field between Countries. What SWA feels entitled to is a Hobby monopoly. You want your own terminal, you'll code share with no one, and you're absolutely sure another Country should accommodate you with space wherever you want. That's about as a-hole-esque as you can get.

Btw: For anyone lurking, you know you're right when SWA guys start assailing your mental health. There's a reason the required reading for working there is a book called "nuts". They're all nuttier than squirrel turds.

Wait; lemme get this straight...

You're defending code-sharing? And as a union airline, somehow you think we're doing something wrong by NOT code-sharing with others? By NOT allowing the company to make money by having another, cheaper airline do flying that we can and should do? Is that really what you think? What kind of backwards-ass logic is that?

Southwest abides by all laws, regulations and agreements. Please stop randomly spouting off BS that we don't, since you can't seem to actually list a single friggin' one that we don't.

As far as a Hobby monopoly goes, again you're mistaken. There are plenty of airlines who fly out of Hobby. And the reason we're building a new terminal there is not for any sinister reason, but because we want to provide service that no other airline currently does or wanted to do. We're expanding its abilities. How is that a bad thing (I mean other than to challenge United's Houston international monopoly)? And as far as monopolies go, you should check your facts. If you add up all the air service in Houston (IAH and HOU combined), you'll find that United controls more than 75% of the combined total. That includes Southwest's "piddly" operation at Hobby. If you are really concerned about monopolies, you should probably complain to your own management, and get them to cut it out. They're the ones with a total Houston monopoly.

Bubba

 

[General Lee]

Wait; lemme get this straight...

You're defending code-sharing? And as a union airline, somehow you think we're doing something wrong by NOT code-sharing with others? By NOT allowing the company to make money by having another, cheaper airline do flying that we can and should do? Is that really what you think? What kind of backwards-ass logic is that?

Southwest abides by all laws, regulations and agreements. Please stop randomly spouting off BS that we don't, since you can't seem to actually list a single friggin' one that we don't.

As far as a Hobby monopoly goes, again you're mistaken. There are plenty of airlines who fly out of Hobby. And the reason we're building a new terminal there is not for any sinister reason, but because we want to provide service that no other airline currently does or wanted to do. We're expanding its abilities. How is that a bad thing (I mean other than to challenge United's Houston international monopoly)? And as far as monopolies go, you should check your facts. If you add up all the air service in Houston (IAH and HOU combined), you'll find that United controls more than 75% of the combined total. That includes Southwest's "piddly" operation at Hobby. If you are really concerned about monopolies, you should probably complain to your own management, and get them to cut it out. They're the ones with a total Houston monopoly.

Bubba

Hobby is a dump, but it's your dump!



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[labatt]

Hobby is a dump, but it's your dump!



Bye Bye---General Lee

It was. Completely redone and is as nice a terminal you'll find anywhere. Much nicer than terminals t-d in ATL. More importantly, it is absolutely packed.

 

[General Lee]

It was. Completely redone and is as nice a terminal you'll find anywhere. Much nicer than terminals t-d in ATL. More importantly, it is absolutely packed.

You mean like "$1.3 billion profit in one quarter" packed? If so, fantastic!


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Mach 80]

Too bad everyone in the industry wasn't able to shred contracts, retirements, dump debt, and screw over creditors and bond holders.

 

[waveflyer]

Flop,
You definitely are not anywhere as cool as the other side of the pillow man.

Fellas, unless you're talking with him to entertain yourself- like when I call GL a sellout for fun and because he is- why chat with the guy?

If you are entertained, by all means proceed- but this has got to be as boring as any general dominated stuck on repeat anti SWA thread as I've seen.

Haters gonna hate fellas.
Take it as the compliment it is-

 

[tankerhead]

Go to sleep!

 

[waveflyer]

In Hawaii!
About to go out my man not even 11 here yet if the woman would hustle I wouldn't be playing on iPad
Love me some lahaina!

 

[General Lee]

Too bad everyone in the industry wasn't able to shred contracts, retirements, dump debt, and screw over creditors and bond holders.

Anyone is free to do so in America. It's the land of second and third chances. If you don't like it, move to the ME, where not paying a debt may lead to dire consequences. BK is not fun for any employee except BK attorneys. But, it's better than the alternative. Some creditors do get some money back, btw. The USAir attempt at grabbing DL in BK got the creditors (including pilots) a lot more money back.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Flopgut]

Flop,
You definitely are not anywhere as cool as the other side of the pillow man.

More than any group on here, the SWA guys can not take any negative criticism. I am not only not flipping out angry, I also often freely admit that I would not want anything negative to happen to your company. (That's something rarely offered by SWA pilots about others). Im adverse to the anti competitive advantages that have been given to SWA since 1967, that's all. And I'm posting now because I smell another rat on SWA routes and how the relate to normal treaties and bilateral agreements that all airlines have had to abide by. Seems obvious to me you guys will be gaming those.

 

[Cometman]

You sound like a very insecure individual. You need to get a life. You are sounding more like General Lee. I ignore him and now I will ignore you. No need to answer because I will not be able to read it. But, really, you need to get some professional help.

 

[Flopgut]

Wait; lemme get this straight...

You're defending code-sharing? And as a union airline, somehow you think we're doing something wrong by NOT code-sharing with others? By NOT allowing the company to make money by having another, cheaper airline do flying that we can and should do? Is that really what you think? What kind of backwards-ass logic is that?

Bubba

Code share is an affiliation strategy that meets the requirements of a bilateral agreement. It's not always a bad thing. Routes are between airports, not cities. Awarded routes are never given to only one side of the equation. Often both sides bilateral concerns are answered with a code share, if not that, then the route airports generally offer plenty of gates so at least two airlines can participate. SWA is NOT offering that. No equal gate space, and if course no code share. It's apparent you don't intend to be burdened with the prevailing rules. I'm guessing you're working on some Houston only caveat like the WA.

 

[BILL LUMBERG]

Too bad everyone in the industry wasn't able to shred contracts, retirements, dump debt, and screw over creditors and bond holders.

Everybody is able....give it a whirl sometime.

Too bad not everyone in the industry was given a chance to bid on slots after the AA/US merger.

See Mach? It all balances out.

 

[Flopgut]

As far as a Hobby monopoly goes, again you're mistaken. There are plenty of airlines who fly out of Hobby. And the reason we're building a new terminal there is not for any sinister reason, but because we want to provide service that no other airline currently does or wanted to do. We're expanding its abilities. How is that a bad thing (I mean other than to challenge United's Houston international monopoly)? And as far as monopolies go, you should check your facts. If you add up all the air service in Houston (IAH and HOU combined), you'll find that United controls more than 75% of the combined total. That includes Southwest's "piddly" operation at Hobby. If you are really concerned about monopolies, you should probably complain to your own management, and get them to cut it out. They're the ones with a total Houston monopoly.

Bubba

Airlines that fly out of Hobby: SWA/AirTran, JetBlue, Delta, American.

Airlines that fly out of IAH: AeroMexico, AirCanada, AirChina, AirFrance, Alaska, American, British Airways, Frontier, Delta, Emirates, KLM, Lufthansa, Qatar, Turkish, Singapore, Spirit, TACA, VivaAerobus, USAir, and United.

75% of Houston because we have a hub there. Compare that to SWA has 95% of Love Field, and is more than likely going to be given more by DOT. And about 90% of Hobby. So Bubba, who has a monopoly? Who competes more?

 

[surplus1]

Yes, other countries and their cities want air service to the US. Are you really disputing this? Whether it's us or any other airline. Whether or not any particular countries service the US "in return" is up to them, and the particular airport that they want to serve. NOT the airline. Do you expect Volaris to somehow provide the ability for United to serve Mexico because Volaris flies here from Mexico? That's between the airline and the served airport (and of course, appropriate national aviation regulations). If any Mexican or South American airline wants to serve Houston to "get back" at us for daring to serve their country from Houston, then they're welcome to do so. They can use IAH or HOU, depending on their wants and needs. I would presume they would want to use IAH, due to more room (not to mention code-sharing with IAH airlines), but if they really want to serve Hobby, then they can do that as well. There'll already be one gate ready for them, and if they want or need more, then the Hobby administration will build more to meet the demand. Why do you have so much trouble understanding that?

While all of what you say there is probably true. But, I'm sitting here wondering why anyone from the Caribbean or South America would possibly want to go to HOU or IAH on ANY airline. People don't go to airports they go from places to other places. Why would anyone from the Caribbean or SA want to go to Texas (unless it's some dude from Venezuela selling oil)?

There's nothing in Texas but bubbas. Who would leave paradise for that? Nothing personal, just saying.