SWA wants to fly from HOU to MEX and SouthAmerica

[IAHERJ]

IAHERJ, I get your point. Yes, it is a little overdramatic to say "free Hobby," but this is politics and PR, so dramatics sometimes serve a purpose. Just like the absolutely asinine assertions that your company is making about how many UAL jobs would be lost, and how many flights UAL would have to stop running in IAH. We all know that that is a bunch of BS. But I don't begrudge them for it, because they're just playing the game.

What this really comes down to is capitalism. Either you believe in an unfettered free market, or you don't. Artificial restrictions like trying to force a carrier to operate out of one airport instead of another is not a free market.

Not a free market but you have to admit it has been a very common practice in this industry since deregulation. One can argue that the airline industry is the most regulated deregulated industry there is. Every other airline has played by these rules of the road except SWA, who seems to have a sense of entitlement, fueled by a marketing department that rallies the great unwashed to further its cause.

I hope we fight it out. If United isn't tanked by the UALALPA efforts to shut the airline down, I'd wager United could hold its own in the Central America/Mexican markets and be very secure in the South American markets. I guess our merger integration issues were probably part of SWA's decision to choose Houston as its focal point of international expansion. Hit us while we are down....

 

[redflyer65]

Yes, because "International" is the new game for SWA. All the bump your stock got in the mid 2000's as "Southwest, the domestic carrier has no exposure to the drop off in international air travel due to SARS/Iraq war/Japan nuclear accident etc.". "Southwest, which has not interest in serving the congested airports in the Northeast". I could go on but you get the picture. We have absolutely got to "FREE HOBBY" right now! Sounds like the Tea Party folks who all have little copies of The Constitution that all of a sudden needs to be to be adhered to fundamentally.

So the whole point of your post is that your angry that Southwest wants to grow into international flying? (like anyone is shocked by that) They know the risk just like all the other carriers that already do it. If our stock price goes up because we bust out the international, then so be it. If it drops because another outburst of SARS then it is what it is.

Free Hobby is just a rally cry to get behind the effort, nothing more nothing less. Just as I would expect UCAL to do the same. If they didn't, something is really wrong at the GO in Chicago.

 

[PCL_128]

Not a free market but you have to admit it has been a very common practice in this industry since deregulation.

I don't know if I'd go that far, but yes, there are certainly other examples of artificial restrictions on the market. The question is, is that a good thing? I would argue that it's not. The market should either be free, or it shouldn't. I'd personally prefer a re-regulated market, but I don't see that happening anytime soon, so if it's going to be deregulated, then make it truly deregulated. Instead, the government got rid of all the good elements of regulation (stability, service to smaller markets, competing based on service rather than just price, etc.), while keeping the bad parts, like what we're seeing in IAH/HOU and the Wright Amendment. Either let the market do its job, or bring back the CAB.

Every other airline has played by these rules of the road except SWA, who seems to have a sense of entitlement, fueled by a marketing department that rallies the great unwashed to further its cause.

The other airlines "play by these rules" because the rules were custom tailored for their business model. As waveflyer points out, IAH is perfect for your business model. It isn't for ours. We aren't flying widebodies to FRA, we're flying 737s to CUN. Thinking that we should have access to a free market isn't a sense of "entitlement," it's just common sense.

 

[canyonblue]

Every other airline has played by these rules of the road except SWA, who seems to have a sense of entitlement, fueled by a marketing department that rallies the great unwashed to further its cause.

We are also the only airline that has been around since deregulation that hasn't filed bankruptcy, and some have filed more than once. You are right, not everybody has played by the rules, most have used bankruptcy as some sort of liabilities vanishing act.

 

[IAHERJ]

Agreed. I think it is SWA's marketing campaign that gets under my skin more than the argument you are making. I worked for AirTran for 3 years. I wish nothing but the best for you and the AirTran guys. Never applied nor wanted to work for SWA but their pilots used to be a fun group. Their arrogance recently(behind computer keyboards I should add) has turned off many a good guy that used to enjoy opening up their js to a SWA pilot. I hope my company can compete going forward. The sad thing is that it is out of my hands.

Should have quoted PCL as I was responding to his post, not CanyonBlue guy who helps make my argument...

 

[IAHERJ]

We are also the only airline that has been around since deregulation that hasn't filed bankruptcy, and some have filed more than once. You are right, not everybody has played by the rules, most have used bankruptcy as some sort of liabilities vanishing act.

Point in case.....

 

[SKC]

Point in case.....

So you're saying it isn't fair that SWA wasn't a lemming and followed the other carriers off the BK cliff? That sounds like my 9 year old when her sister gets something that she doesn't.

 

[Flopgut]

So you're saying it isn't fair that SWA wasn't a lemming and followed the other carriers off the BK cliff? That sounds like my 9 year old when her sister gets something that she doesn't.

There is really only one airline that can be held up as an example that deregulation worked. And it is SWA. The govt knew that when you almost got put out of business right out of the gate, so you were given a deal at Love Field. Now you want an airport gimme again to launch international flying. GK knows that UCAL is just strong enough right now, that if we were to fly out of the same airport, you might not make it.

 

[Flopgut]

Immediate lose of 10,000 jobs if you believe them.

Just like UCAL's defense is beyond dramatic. An immmediate loss of 10,000 jobs. The horror!!

Although I'm certain it would be even more joyful to you and your SWA co-workers if it were 10,000 UCAL out of work, the number it 1300.

10,000 is the number of jobs you claim you will create in Houston.

 

[SKC]

...so you were given a deal at Love Field.

Yeah, that was an awesome deal. Severe restrictions on where and what you can fly. Yeah, that ruled!