SWA wants to fly from HOU to MEX and SouthAmerica

[SKC]

This time the underdog is UCAL and this close call needs to go our way on Hobby. It's the right thing to do.

So, which way is it going to be, Flop? You can't tout both lines.

Is United the underdog, weaker carrier that will suffer greatly if things don't go their way? OR Are they a bigger carrier with a much more robust intl operations in Houston that really doesn't have anything to worry about?

You claim that Unitental has spent Billions of dollars at IAH and that there's no way SWA can compete at that level, and Unitental will demolish them. If that's true, why the two-faced argument? If UA is that great, why the fear that the city of Houston will allow intl ops from a secondary airport?

Don't spout "it's the right thing to do", or "gentlemen's agreement" non-sense, just tell me why you're afraid if UA is as great as you say?

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Is the Majority of Mexico flying for Continental still done by Expressjet? That makes the CASM comparison even more dramatic. Only destination I did not fly to in Mexico was Cancun in the ERJ. What percentage of the seat miles is even done by UAL/CAL pilots out of Houston into Mexico?

 

[Flopgut]

So, which way is it going to be, Flop? You can't tout both lines.

Is United the underdog, weaker carrier that will suffer greatly if things don't go their way? OR Are they a bigger carrier with a much more robust intl operations in Houston that really doesn't have anything to worry about?

You claim that Unitental has spent Billions of dollars at IAH and that there's no way SWA can compete at that level, and Unitental will demolish them. If that's true, why the two-faced argument? If UA is that great, why the fear that the city of Houston will allow intl ops from a secondary airport?

Don't spout "it's the right thing to do", or "gentlemen's agreement" non-sense, just tell me why you're afraid if UA is as great as you say?

As I have said throughout this thread, if you come to IAH and beat us, good for you!

I'm in favor of a fair fight. Handing SWA another broadly anit-competitive construct like was used to launch them out of the crib is the wrong thing to do.

Go back and read the thread...

 

[SKC]

As I have said throughout this thread, if you come to IAH and beat us, good for you!

I'm in favor of a fair fight. Handing SWA the another broadly anit-competitive construct like was used to launch them out of the crib is the wrong thing to do.

Go back and read the thread...

Got it. You don't have a real answer.

 

[redflyer65]

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.

ERJ,

Here's his statement. He says Southwest hasn't gone through bankruptcy and you see that as arrogant? Kind of a stretch I'd say.

 

[humveedriver]

As I have said throughout this thread, if you come to IAH and beat us, good for you!

I'm in favor of a fair fight. Handing SWA another broadly anit-competitive construct like was used to launch them out of the crib is the wrong thing to do.

Go back and read the thread...

Flop, that's your definition of a fair fight. There are other opinions. What United has in IAH is a fortress hub. That is not fair fight. The city has a hand in developing airports and fortress hubs for airlines. If that's what they want, that's what they will get. See pages 9 and 10 of the link below. I think the Ual/Cal merger strengthens SWA's argument.

http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/abaair1.pdf

 

[FlyinGuy]

This is what gets me. "Free Hobby". Now let's take a look at the timeline here. After 9/11, SWA expanded at a rapid pace taking advantage of the plights AA/UAL/CAL/DAL/NWA/US/MEH/ATA all had. Employees were giddy with the rapid expansion that came at the expense of employees the airlines mentioned above.

This is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read on FI (and that is saying a lot). Will you please explain the plights of CAL/DAL/NWA/US/MEH/ATA? If I recall AA and UAL were the ones that suffered significant damage after 9/11. Please tell us once again how you were effected any differently than SWA? All the airlines you listed were in trouble because of their style of management.

Your comment about rapid expansion shows that you are a socialist. SWA expanded their market share where they determined that they could make a profit. Please tell what poor old SWA should have done during the past 10 years? Sat back? Given money to other airlines? Frozen growth until you could get your finances in order? SWA did not take jobs from other airlines. They were taken by their own management!!!

Get a clue!!! If you don't want SWA to fly international out of Hobby just say so and quit making such idiotic comments.

 

[FlyinGuy]

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...

I love how guys say that the entire pilot group is arrogant because of a few on FI. FWIW, every pilot I know will gladly open up their js to any pilot of another airline.

The comment about it being out of your hands is the best comment that you have made. It is out of all our hands. We can only do our best at what we are tasked to do and the rest is up to someone else.

 

[Flopgut]

Flop, that's your definition of a fair fight. There are other opinions. What United has in IAH is a fortress hub. That is not fair fight. The city has a hand in developing airports and fortress hubs for airlines. If that's what they want, that's what they will get. See pages 9 and 10 of the link below. I think the Ual/Cal merger strengthens SWA's argument.

http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/abaair1.pdf

That's a cool link. Good info. I need to read it more. But, answer me this: In those pages 9 and 10, it speaks to what the hub and spoke landscape has resulted in post de-regulation. And then seems to suggest that something should be considered to mitigate what has come to be a fortress hub "problem". My question is, how is it not wrong to make a correction to mitigate the fortress hub "problem" by gifting a previoulsy non-existent competitive advantage to a discount competitor?(are we de-regulated or not?) Or maybe at this point we should just say Southwest? Because it seems clear they have been ordained as the single carrier that should benefit from de-regulation and be used to destroy the fortress hubs?

Additionally, it's certainly in poor form for any airline to first provide 2/3rds+ of the funding for the fortress hub, and then break it up as soon as the discounter [Southwest] feels they deserve it? I know this: CAL would have made do just fine with zero updates to IAH if we knew this was coming. Houston got a heck of front door to the world, and now they are set to shoot us in the back...

 

[humveedriver]

If we go down your path flop. It's regulation without federal government oversight. It's the largest carriers regulating their own airlines as they see fit with municipal approval.