SWAPA gets it!

[Flopgut]

I thought you left Red?

I've evaded nothing. It's fundamentally wrong to build a second FIS in a city that does not need another. It is especially wrong to build/approve something like this because one operator is paying for (part of) it. It's bad business. It creates problems. Do you not see that?

Look, you're basically uninformed. A couple posts ago you thought the US taxpayer was building the Abu Dhabi facility. Go learn some stuff.

 

[General Lee]

OMG! Did you know Shannon (EINN) also has one of these facilities.... In other words, who cares! Abu Dahbi having one of these really doesn't affect us much. US pax will not go out of their way and reroute themselves to save 30 min in customs. There may be some pax from India and Pakistan who may want to clear customs there, but that's about it. Will US pax go there to go to Europe via AUH? Nope. How about to Asia? Nope, too far. Does it make sense to have US Customs in AUH? Not really, but it really doesn't affect US pax except to India. It is a great talking point, though!


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[SWA Bubba]

I thought you left Red?

I've evaded nothing. It's fundamentally wrong to build a second FIS in a city that does not need another. It is especially wrong to build/approve something like this because one operator is paying for (part of) it. It's bad business. It creates problems. Do you not see that?

Look, you're basically uninformed. A couple posts ago you thought the US taxpayer was building the Abu Dhabi facility. Go learn some stuff.

The facility in Abu Dhabi is partially being funded by the US taxpayer (something like 15%). However, the biggest gripe is that since no US carrier services the affected routes, that basically the US government is pushing business away from US carriers and to a foreign one. Even if they didn't use a dime of taxpayer money, it still hurts US commerce.

Building a second international facility in a US city is nothing like this. Plenty of US cities have multiple international gateways (Miami, NYC, LA, Chicago, etc), especially as metroplexes grow. You referring to Houston by saying, "... in a city that doesn't need another..." is just a red herring. The people who actually live in Houston would love increased international opportunities and competition. This HOU growth will allow international competition between US carriers, and spur more growth of US flying in the Houston area. The fact that it cuts into Unical's virtual international monopoly in Houston bears no relation, and Unical's (and your) pathetic argument against Southwest flying international out of HOU is just an attempt to keep your monopoly at the expense of the flying public.

Hey, your airline is welcome to fly out of Hobby if it wants to, Flop. It was also welcome to expand internationally out of Hobby. The big difference was, that if it was Unical who offered to build a facility at HOU, we wouldn't have whined to high heaven about it. We probably would have just smiled, then leased the available gate that you paid for, and when our business grew, we would have expanded the facility into whatever size we needed. And that's the main difference between your airline and mine, Flop: we compete by putting our product against other airlines', and servicing the customers who like us better. You "compete" by attempting to hobble and obstruct other airlines, and service the customers who use you because they have no other choice.

Bubba

 

[scoreboardII]

HOU to Bush Intercon= 30 miles
LAX to SNA=40 miles

I'm not seeing how 10 miles makes or breaks weather a metroplex needs another FIS, it's airport dependent, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Flopgut]

The facility in Abu Dhabi is partially being funded by the US taxpayer (something like 15%). However, the biggest gripe is that since no US carrier services the affected routes, that basically the US government is pushing business away from US carriers and to a foreign one. Even if they didn't use a dime of taxpayer money, it still hurts US commerce.

Building a second international facility in a US city is nothing like this. Plenty of US cities have multiple international gateways (Miami, NYC, LA, Chicago, etc), especially as metroplexes grow. You referring to Houston by saying, "... in a city that doesn't need another..." is just a red herring. The people who actually live in Houston would love increased international opportunities and competition. This HOU growth will allow international competition between US carriers, and spur more growth of US flying in the Houston area. The fact that it cuts into Unical's virtual international monopoly in Houston bears no relation, and Unical's (and your) pathetic argument against Southwest flying international out of HOU is just an attempt to keep your monopoly at the expense of the flying public.

Hey, your airline is welcome to fly out of Hobby if it wants to, Flop. It was also welcome to expand internationally out of Hobby. The big difference was, that if it was Unical who offered to build a facility at HOU, we wouldn't have whined to high heaven about it. We probably would have just smiled, then leased the available gate that you paid for, and when our business grew, we would have expanded the facility into whatever size we needed. And that's the main difference between your airline and mine, Flop: we compete by putting our product against other airlines', and servicing the customers who like us better. You "compete" by attempting to hobble and obstruct other airlines, and service the customers who use you because they have no other choice.

Bubba

Listen Bubba, it's hardly a red herring description at all. There were and are 6 gates open at IAH. Perfectly situated right in the IAB international terminal. All funded by users and taxpayers that understood that would be the market. Nuff said.

Much more fitting a red herring description is how you characterize Houston's support of the new terminal. Houston wants the promise that was made. 1.6 billion boost to the economy, 10,000 jobs, and a $130 ticket to Bogota. Fail to make those things happen in the not too distant future and we'll see how much support remains for your terminal. Beyond that, what a lot of Houston fliers want to know is where else might the City benefit from SWA's new found interest here? Answer: No where; No where it's needed for sure. They get it. You're here to cash checks and that's it. Apparently you only read things here, because enthusiasm for SWA in Houston has already started to wane.

Unical competes for international customers at IAH with about a dozen airlines. And we built gates for even more competition. You guys? Yea, you've fled the competitive market and stacked the deck in your own favor. We don't "hobble" competition. Another red herring on your part.

Speaking of Bogota, looks like we have to wait for that. SWA isn't straying too far from what the Air Tran guys have already done. Good start IMO, I really would prefer to not see any screw ups. It will become a lot more interesting when Hobby routes including Mexico are announced. Because your Hobby terminal is literally worse for Mexico's airlines (in particular) than the Abu Dhabi facility is for all US airlines. (Do you actually think it's ok to say to the competition they can fight over 1 gate, or build their own?!)

We've had all these discussions before*. What continues to amaze me is how SWA pilots think their airline can do anything it wants, and others should abide by rules? These things have a cost and a reaction. We couldn't expect that advantaging SWA in Houston, because they got out their checkbook, would go unnoticed. Now there's a C&BP pre clearance facility in Abu Dhabi. Thanks guys!

*Can we maybe keep this to under 40 pages? Maybe stick with just the questions: Should SWA be treated special? Did something change when we chose to put aviation interests up for sale?

 

[canyonblue]

*Can we maybe keep this to under 40 pages? Maybe stick with just the questions: Should SWA be treated special? Did something change when we chose to put aviation interests up for sale?

Should SWA be treated special?

Yes, dumb question.

Did something change when we chose to put aviation interests up for sale?

Yes. If airlines were your relatives, Southwest is the only family member you would actually trust loaning money to.

 

[Flopgut]

Yes. If airlines were your relatives, Southwest is the only family member you would actually trust loaning money to.

Every airlines' had their first 40 or so years go smooth...

 

[LiveFreeorDie]

Nice thread hijack... What is a bigger threat SWA with unionized American pilots or a foreign, state owned, non union airline?

So here I am looking for good info and instead I get the expected, useless, my airline is better than yours, school yard, bull sh!t.

Well done,

LFoD

 

[redflyer65]

I thought you left Red?

I've evaded nothing. It's fundamentally wrong to build a second FIS in a city that does not need another. It is especially wrong to build/approve something like this because one operator is paying for (part of) it. It's bad business. It creates problems. Do you not see that?

And this Flops main argument, which is ridiculous.

Bad for business? Yea, if your United I guess.

Creates problems? Yea, if your United I guess.


See a pattern?

 

[Flopgut]

Red: I've thought about this a long time, and I really doubt you're that bad for UAL. And I've kinda had to stop caring about where I work so much (UAL is a different animal). You've been around Houston since day 1 and haven't amounted to much locally. You didn't end up doing much to DAL in ATL (to say the least). I do think you're bad for the City of Houston, and bad for the profession. I think there is a connection between the Hobby terminal and how the Abu Dhabi facility got passed.

Trade between multiple countries is a delicate balance.

 

[Flopgut]

Nice thread hijack... What is a bigger threat SWA with unionized American pilots or a foreign, state owned, non union airline?



So here I am looking for good info and instead I get the expected, useless, my airline is better than yours, school yard, bull sh!t.



Well done,



LFoD

I don't have the least bit of a fraternal feeling toward SWA. Zip, zilch, nada. Person to person? Yeah absolutely, we are countrymen. But the corporation SWA? I have no doubt a foreign airline could be relied upon to compete more responsibly than SWA.

Let's just say this: I don't go anywhere in the world where one airline builds a terminal with only one gate for ALL other airlines to use?! Where almost every radio transmission is an attempt to game the system by the local airline. Where it's a redneck race to the active runway or gate. That's the nicest part of flying outside the US. NO SWA. I doubt the rest of the world is going to tolerate the BS.

 

[redflyer65]

Red: I've thought about this a long time, and I really doubt you're that bad for UAL. And I've kinda had to stop caring about where I work so much (UAL is a different animal). You've been around Houston since day 1 and haven't amounted to much locally. You didn't end up doing much to DAL in ATL (to say the least). I do think you're bad for the City of Houston, and bad for the profession. I think there is a connection between the Hobby terminal and how the Abu Dhabi facility got passed.

Trade between multiple countries is a delicate balance.

Oh Good Lord Flop.

Need me to get the Houston O&D traffic for you? One thing I know about the Southwest operation is this.....

It wouldn't be a hub/base if it wasn't a big money maker. If you think otherwise your delusional...oh wait maybe that's true.

Some connection between SW terminal in Hobby and one in the Middle East is in your head. These things aren't even close to the same. I'm sorry your hatred for everything Southwest has completely clouded your judgment, but it clearly has.

 

[Flopgut]

http://m.chron.com/news/houston-tex...n-adds-10-000-jobs-Southwest-says-3456993.php

This is a good Houston reporter. Here he's quoted actual SWA people making the claims they made to get the deal they wanted. He'll hold your feet to the fire if you don't deliver.

 

[redflyer65]

Flop,

I'm starting the see the problem here. YOUR the one that's either uninformed or just chose to be.

The article is flawed from the beginning, with a headline that says 'Hobby Expansion adds 10,000 jobs, Southwest says'. Followed by the first line...

Opening Hobby Airport to commercial international flights will create 10,000 jobs, bring 1.6 million more air travelers through Houston annually and inject an additional $1.6 billion a year into the local economy, according to a Southwest Airlines executive who has seen city-commissioned studies on the matter.

So the reporter decides to quote a Southwest official that's seen a report that he had nothing to do with? That's reporting? Please.

That's like a reporter saying 'Flop has seen a report that IAH could bring in 5 billion in extra revenue'. Should we focus on you looking at a report......or focus on the report itself? Jeez.

If you had even bothered to watch the city council meeting (which I did), you would have seen Gary Kelly tell them time and time again, what he (Southwest Airlines) is bringing to the table. He was honest and factual. He REFUSED to list any other numbers because (wait for it)....he's not in control of any of company or vendor.

Would he like there to be 10,000 added jobs like the CITY REPORT (the one the city paid for) states? Sure. Can he guarantee it? Hell no. The only company he controls is SW. You understand that right?

Your supposed article to hold SW feet to the fire is complete BS....and you don't even see it. See how partisan you are in this ridiculous argument?

 

[Flopgut]

Houston considers him a top notch reporter who calls balls and strikes. No slant. He has accurately recorded what GK and Ron Ricks (2 SWA execs) thoroughly attached their claims to in order to get the ball across the goal line. As you correctly point out, GK is/has backed away from the data since then. (Hmmmm)

In addition the article shows it's funded by debt backed by SWA, but will be paid for thru use fees. So it's really not funded much different than any other airport deal.