SWAPA gets it!

[Flopgut]

Your argument here is like Swiss cheese. I believe the US government (your taxes and mine) are paying for the Middle East facility, right? Apples and oranges my friend.

Look, I realize swapa is a joke when it comes to PAC, so you're generally poorly informed. But at least read what I linked for you. Abu Dhabi is paying a full 85% of the cost of this facility. That's in large part why it was approved. It's just like what SWA did to get their own FIS. You think they didn't get that idea from swa?! Frankly Abu Dhabi is probably paying more of the total percentage of their bill than SWA is at Hobby. You like to rationalize that the parking garage is somehow separate from the airport, but that's BS. What's happening here is the market is being spoiled and certain airlines are being favored. There is no way in hell Abu Dhabi ought to have a pre clearance facility. But it is no less wrong that SWA be granted an FIS in a municipality where the taxpayers built an airport venue intended for all airline competition to take place. What SWA has done is no less bad than what Abu Dhabi has. You've both exploited the market.

 

[redflyer65]

Again Flop, one more time (because I'm done with your delusional argument).....

Who should be able to build a facility on there own dime within the US and operate internationally? Anyone? Only UCal?

You get how crazy your argument is right?

We'll be operating out of Hobby, FLL, ATL and most likely STL and PHX. You okay with that, or should we check with you first?

PS - Denver might be in play as well. You see our new terminal expansion in Concourse C?

I'm out brother. You can see black helicopters all you want.

 

[Flopgut]

Bye Red. Hey, why don't you read some stuff instead of mouth on here all day. Come back with at least a functional knowledge of the Abu Dhabi facility.

 

[redflyer65]

Haha. Thanks for evading the basic question, again and again. Abu Dhabi has nothing to do with Southwest. You're not answering the question because you don't have a rational answer.

See ya.

 

[BILL LUMBERG]

So angry........

 

[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?