Discussion:
SWA to buy AirTran for $1.4billion
(too old to reply)
A Guy Called Tyketto
2010-09-28 07:18:56 UTC
Permalink
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


It's all over the media: FlightGlobal, FlightAware, NPR, NY
Times, etc. So SWA picks up TRS at a good price. However, it brings a
lot of pros and cons (yes, this is going to be long):

Generally SWA wouldn't do something like this unless it smelled blood
somewhere, but I'm not entirely sure which 'blood' they smelled. But
there are a number of things I can see that come into play.

Atlanta. With SWA's model of avoiding the major hubs of other (legacy)
airlines, I'm wondering if they would go straight into KATL. Is there
another airport capable of handling a B737, B717, or DC9? If so, could
they move shop to there, similar to how KDAL is to KDFW?

This creates a HUGE advantage to SWA over FFT/MEP/RPA at KMKE. That is
MEP's hub, and SWA started up service there, because they smelled blood
from MEP being bought by RPA. MKE is also TRS' hub, so with SWA landing
this deal, they are going to have a huge presence there. Could this be
the battleground between Republic and Co. and SWA from the fallout of
SWA being the loser in the bidding for FFT?

New York. SWA obviously gets more service to LGA from this, but how
would this adversely affect their EWR service that they will be
starting? we know that SWA got a huge deal on the EWR gates (basically
handed on a silver platter) as UAL/COA had to give them up for that
deal to go through, but would more service from either one positively
or negatively affect the other? Remains to be seen.

Aircraft. Sorry, ladies and gents, but expect the B717s to go. SWA is
still receiving B737-700s they ordered, and still have some on the
books to receive. I can see those replacing the B717s they have, since
they will be gaining 50something B737-700s from TRS. I believe SWA has
enough B737s on order still to offset the B712s they'll be getting. But
over time, those will go, and go for another reason outright (see
below).

Destinations. We already know that the -700 has the range for it, but
this gives SWA the access to Mexico and the Caribbean that they've
wanted. MKJP, MMUN, TJSJ, MYNN, etc. Perhaps TNCM could be started?
Either way, like with WJA, expect their deal with VOI to fall through.

SWA and DAL/NWA: AirTran has been a thorn in DL's ATL/MCO hubs
for years now... LCC with 2 class service, pre-assigned seating, etc,
etc... a real viable DL alternative for the biz customer. Also, SWA has
said they will eliminate the dual cabin and eliminate the
the pre-assigned seating... so the biz customers in ATL that have been
using AirTran can wave bye bye to their free upgrades.

SWA and AAL: AirTran services DFW (rather small) but services
DFW with flights to MKE, BWI, ATL, and MCO, offering again, legacy
style services at cheaper fares, which drives yields down. SWA and AAL
were 2 members signing the "Five Party Agreement" concerning the
Wright Amendment, which had provisions stating that SWA nor any of
their subsidiaries may operate at DFW. So TRS' DFW service will be
gone. The 5 Party Agreement also stipulates SWA is restricted to 16
gates at KDAL and NO intl. service to any airport including KDAL within 80
miles of Love Field except DFW, which they can't fly from without giving
up some of the 16 gates at KDAL. So KDFW (and AAL) get a huge boost out
of this. The only way SWA could get around it would be interlining with
VOI, which like I mentioned above, will probably fall through.

Like I said.. I don't know whose blood they smelled: TRS being in
trouble (which nothing really indicated that they were), DAL/NWA having
issues (once again, nothing indicated), response to UAL/COA (once
again, nothing, since that merger was just approved), out of spite with
RPA for losing FFT, or simply "just because".. Either way, this helps
SWA out a lot, especially with winter vacation season coming up, and
even more so if this gets DOT/DOJ approval.

To this, I'll add that I'd see some routes going away completely, let
alone some destinations:

ROC is about an hour's drive from BUF.
ACY is 45 minutes from PHL.
PNS? Maybe an hour from PFN, which SWA is starting service to.
CRW? nothing really out there at all.
BMI? Maybe, just to keep an eye on how AAY does in Peoria, but even
that is chartered. MLI? I don't think they could fill enough seats on
either of those routes to stay profitable. Though I think it would be
nice if they tried; it would provide a go-between for MDW/STL or
MDW-OMA, so pax wouldn't have to drive as far.

DSM? See BMI.
BBG? Maybe 2 hours to LIT, 3 to TUL. If the tourist trap doesn't dry up..

UTA? gone. SWA will use MEM instead.
GPT? hour from MSY.
AVL? see CRW.
FNT? Hour and a half to DTW.
Expect SWA to close up shop at KDCA. They already have a huge base at
KBWI, and with them taking in TRS (who is also hubbed there), plus
having service to KIAD, KDCA doesn't look profitable.


Tough call on those routes. The one that would be really interesting
though, would be EYW. IIRC, TRS uses their B712s on that route from
ATL. Seeing that that runway is less than a mile long (somewhere around
4800ft), a B737 would need to be rather light to take off there. I
could see it being of use though, as it is the closest US port of call
to MMUN (and Havana). Anyone know what the minimum TODA a -700 needs?
- From what I can tell, the shortest runway SWA uses is at KSNA, which is
5701ft, so I would think it would be around 1 mile.

***

SWA just mentioned that they plan to keep the B712s instead of
sell them off (HAL would have been a potential buyer), so I could see
them being used of ferry flights to smaller destinations.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email: ***@sbcglobal.net
Unix Systems Administrator, | ***@ozemail.com.au
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFMoZbYyBkZmuMZ8L8RAiFHAJ93ZkXGVTWzzx+/BwRs1nG+WmhUMACdFiy4
BOiGF8Zpxd6LNF9omrekxf8=
=GFUq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
matt weber
2010-09-28 19:37:07 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:18:56 +0000 (UTC), A Guy Called Tyketto
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
Tough call on those routes. The one that would be really interesting
though, would be EYW. IIRC, TRS uses their B712s on that route from
ATL. Seeing that that runway is less than a mile long (somewhere around
4800ft), a B737 would need to be rather light to take off there. I
could see it being of use though, as it is the closest US port of call
to MMUN (and Havana). Anyone know what the minimum TODA a -700 needs?
- From what I can tell, the shortest runway SWA uses is at KSNA, which is
5701ft, so I would think it would be around 1 mile.
Depends on the engines, how far you want to go, and the weather.
For example a number of operators of the 735 equipped them with 3C1
engines, given them outstanding high/hot and short field performance.


On a +27F day with 7B22 engines, they can get to about 135,000 pounds
TOW with 4800 feet of runway.
OEW on a 737-700 84,400 pounds
With 140 units of 30,800 pounds
self loading cargo
That leaves about 20,000 pounds left for fuel, so
the range would be limited to about 1300 miles or so.

So EYW-ATL is easily within range.
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
***
SWA just mentioned that they plan to keep the B712s instead of
sell them off (HAL would have been a potential buyer), so I could see
them being used of ferry flights to smaller destinations.
BL.
- --
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
John Levine
2010-09-29 06:33:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
Atlanta. With SWA's model of avoiding the major hubs of other (legacy)
airlines, I'm wondering if they would go straight into KATL. Is there
another airport capable of handling a B737, B717, or DC9? If so, could
they move shop to there, similar to how KDAL is to KDFW?
Probably not. The nearest commercial airport appears to be Athens, 62
miles away, which only has a pair of 5000 ft runways. Macon is 85 miles
away with a 5K and 6.5K runway. Columbus is 90 miles away with a 7K
and a 4K, which might work, but it's still pretty small.
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
Jeff Hacker
2010-09-29 12:06:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
It's all over the media: FlightGlobal, FlightAware, NPR, NY
Times, etc. So SWA picks up TRS at a good price. However, it brings a
Generally SWA wouldn't do something like this unless it smelled blood
somewhere, but I'm not entirely sure which 'blood' they smelled. But
there are a number of things I can see that come into play.
Atlanta. With SWA's model of avoiding the major hubs of other (legacy)
airlines, I'm wondering if they would go straight into KATL. Is there
another airport capable of handling a B737, B717, or DC9? If so, could
they move shop to there, similar to how KDAL is to KDFW?
My thoughts are that Southwest isn't automatically avoiding hubs these
days - they serve SFO, LAX, DEN, PHX, PHL, IAD, for example. I think
they're large enough that they can compete with the legacies. They don't
want to serve DFW basically on principle these days; there really isn't any
reason they couldn't continue AirTran's flights to ATL, BWI, and MKE for
example, but they probably won't just because it is Dallas. So I think that
ATL is a major plus for them as it gives them an entry into a major airport
dominated by one other carrier, and with delay factors they can easily
compute - look at what it is now.
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
This creates a HUGE advantage to SWA over FFT/MEP/RPA at KMKE. That is
MEP's hub, and SWA started up service there, because they smelled blood
from MEP being bought by RPA. MKE is also TRS' hub, so with SWA landing
this deal, they are going to have a huge presence there. Could this be
the battleground between Republic and Co. and SWA from the fallout of
SWA being the loser in the bidding for FFT?
I don't think Southwest would worry about Republic. The current FFT/MEP/RPA
is different from the previous Frontier/Midwest operations in that it relies
much more heavily on regional jets than the original. Denver still likes
Frontier and Milwaukee to a degree will continue to support the company as
their home-town carrier, too. But I think that MKE is too small a station
to really matter.
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
New York. SWA obviously gets more service to LGA from this, but how
would this adversely affect their EWR service that they will be
starting? we know that SWA got a huge deal on the EWR gates (basically
handed on a silver platter) as UAL/COA had to give them up for that
deal to go through, but would more service from either one positively
or negatively affect the other? Remains to be seen.
Maybe
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
Aircraft. Sorry, ladies and gents, but expect the B717s to go. SWA is
still receiving B737-700s they ordered, and still have some on the
books to receive. I can see those replacing the B717s they have, since
they will be gaining 50something B737-700s from TRS. I believe SWA has
enough B737s on order still to offset the B712s they'll be getting. But
over time, those will go, and go for another reason outright (see
below).
Destinations. We already know that the -700 has the range for it, but
this gives SWA the access to Mexico and the Caribbean that they've
wanted. MKJP, MMUN, TJSJ, MYNN, etc. Perhaps TNCM could be started?
Either way, like with WJA, expect their deal with VOI to fall through.
SWA and DAL/NWA: AirTran has been a thorn in DL's ATL/MCO hubs
for years now... LCC with 2 class service, pre-assigned seating, etc,
etc... a real viable DL alternative for the biz customer. Also, SWA has
said they will eliminate the dual cabin and eliminate the
the pre-assigned seating... so the biz customers in ATL that have been
using AirTran can wave bye bye to their free upgrades.
SWA and AAL: AirTran services DFW (rather small) but services
DFW with flights to MKE, BWI, ATL, and MCO, offering again, legacy
style services at cheaper fares, which drives yields down. SWA and AAL
were 2 members signing the "Five Party Agreement" concerning the
Wright Amendment, which had provisions stating that SWA nor any of
their subsidiaries may operate at DFW. So TRS' DFW service will be
gone. The 5 Party Agreement also stipulates SWA is restricted to 16
gates at KDAL and NO intl. service to any airport including KDAL within 80
miles of Love Field except DFW, which they can't fly from without giving
up some of the 16 gates at KDAL. So KDFW (and AAL) get a huge boost out
of this. The only way SWA could get around it would be interlining with
VOI, which like I mentioned above, will probably fall through.
Like I said.. I don't know whose blood they smelled: TRS being in
trouble (which nothing really indicated that they were), DAL/NWA having
issues (once again, nothing indicated), response to UAL/COA (once
again, nothing, since that merger was just approved), out of spite with
RPA for losing FFT, or simply "just because".. Either way, this helps
SWA out a lot, especially with winter vacation season coming up, and
even more so if this gets DOT/DOJ approval.
To this, I'll add that I'd see some routes going away completely, let
ROC is about an hour's drive from BUF.
ACY is 45 minutes from PHL.
PNS? Maybe an hour from PFN, which SWA is starting service to.
CRW? nothing really out there at all.
BMI? Maybe, just to keep an eye on how AAY does in Peoria, but even
that is chartered. MLI? I don't think they could fill enough seats on
either of those routes to stay profitable. Though I think it would be
nice if they tried; it would provide a go-between for MDW/STL or
MDW-OMA, so pax wouldn't have to drive as far.
DSM? See BMI.
BBG? Maybe 2 hours to LIT, 3 to TUL. If the tourist trap doesn't dry up..
UTA? gone. SWA will use MEM instead.
GPT? hour from MSY.
AVL? see CRW.
FNT? Hour and a half to DTW.
Expect SWA to close up shop at KDCA. They already have a huge base at
KBWI, and with them taking in TRS (who is also hubbed there), plus
having service to KIAD, KDCA doesn't look profitable.
Tough call on those routes. The one that would be really interesting
though, would be EYW. IIRC, TRS uses their B712s on that route from
ATL. Seeing that that runway is less than a mile long (somewhere around
4800ft), a B737 would need to be rather light to take off there. I
could see it being of use though, as it is the closest US port of call
to MMUN (and Havana). Anyone know what the minimum TODA a -700 needs?
- From what I can tell, the shortest runway SWA uses is at KSNA, which is
5701ft, so I would think it would be around 1 mile.
***
SWA just mentioned that they plan to keep the B712s instead of
sell them off (HAL would have been a potential buyer), so I could see
them being used of ferry flights to smaller destinations.
BL.
- --
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFMoZbYyBkZmuMZ8L8RAiFHAJ93ZkXGVTWzzx+/BwRs1nG+WmhUMACdFiy4
BOiGF8Zpxd6LNF9omrekxf8=
=GFUq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
JF Mezei
2010-09-30 00:33:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
SWA just mentioned that they plan to keep the B712s instead of
sell them off (HAL would have been a potential buyer), so I could see
them being used of ferry flights to smaller destinations.
It is expected that they would say this. But it doesn't mean that this
is really their plans.

How the 717s will be deployed is the big question. Will they be
deployed throught WN's territory where they are the right size, or will
they remain near Airtran's maintenance facilities ?

I would be pretty sure that the long term goal is to eliminate the 717s.
How quickly and how they do this will likely depend on the economics of
the 717 versus Southwest's oldest 737s.

Anyone know wheter the 717s are leased or owned ? If leased from
various lessors, WN might be able to renegotiate leases with some
lessors and not others, so part of the 717s might be returned.

And it also depends on how much rationalisation they do as they
incorporate Airtran into their operations. If they find themselves with
a surplus of aircraft, the 717s might be taken out of service first.

Would WN abandon its strong 737 religion and accept mixed fleet as a
permanent philsophy ?



With regards to large airports. My feeling is that Southwest may have
reached a certain level of saturation covering "rural" airports and
knows that it now needs to tackle the major centres it had avoided so
far. Business travellers want access to those.


Westjet in Canada started "friendships" with overseas airlines to act as
a connector/feeder in Canada. Lufthansa is buying into Jetblue.

Wouldn't be surprised to see Southwest strike some friendship with some
foreign airlines to act as their feeder into/out of the USA.
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
John Levine
2010-09-30 05:17:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
Wouldn't be surprised to see Southwest strike some friendship with some
foreign airlines to act as their feeder into/out of the USA.
They tried a deal with Westjet. Doesn't seem to have worked out.

It is my impression that Southwest isn't likely to do codeshares
other than an experiment to either buy the airline they're sharing
with (that was ATA) or perhaps see whether they want to start flying
where it flies themselves.

R's,
John
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
JF Mezei
2010-09-30 05:33:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Levine
They tried a deal with Westjet. Doesn't seem to have worked out.
Fell through when they found out through the newspapers that Westjet was
also talking to Delta about similar deal.

However Westjet's deals with overseas airlines isn't code sharing. It is
interlining and cross-selling. Basically, Cathay Pacific can sell a
ticket from Hong Kong to Calgary, with a Vancouver-Calgary leg provided
by Westjet.

(Not sure if the reverse is implemented but it was part of the discussions).

With legacy carriers having lowered domestic services down to what LCCs
provide, LCCs become viable alternatives.

In Canada, where Air Canada only wants to deal with Star Alliance
carriers, Westjet is the only option for non-Star carriers who wish to
provide transportation to cities other than their canadian destination(s).

I wouldn't be surprised to see Southwest accept some interlining with
overseas airlines. But to do that, Southwest needs to serve majro
airports that act as gateways for those airlines. LAX is definitely one.
EWR could be another one. Atlanta another.
Post by John Levine
It is my impression that Southwest isn't likely to do codeshares
other than an experiment to either buy the airline they're sharing
with (that was ATA) or perhaps see whether they want to start flying
where it flies themselves.
There is no point in doing codeshares domestically. And even with an
international partner, interlining is sufficient and far simpler. No
need for a WN flight to bear 15 flight numbers, and for a passenger it
is also simpler to know where to go to catch the connecting flight since
their ticket would say "Southwest". Not obvious you have to go to the
southwest terminal if your ticket says you are travelling on Cathay
Pacific to Las Vegas.


This purchase of Airtran will allow WN to get a more national footprint
and thus a better potential for it to act as a feeder for overseas airlines.

Of course, this may take a few years until Southwest has done the
assimilation of Airtran.
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
matt weber
2010-09-30 21:33:20 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:33:04 -0400, JF Mezei
Post by JF Mezei
Post by A Guy Called Tyketto
SWA just mentioned that they plan to keep the B712s instead of
sell them off (HAL would have been a potential buyer), so I could see
them being used of ferry flights to smaller destinations.
It is expected that they would say this. But it doesn't mean that this
is really their plans.
How the 717s will be deployed is the big question. Will they be
deployed throught WN's territory where they are the right size, or will
they remain near Airtran's maintenance facilities ?
I would be pretty sure that the long term goal is to eliminate the 717s.
How quickly and how they do this will likely depend on the economics of
the 717 versus Southwest's oldest 737s.
Anyone know wheter the 717s are leased or owned ? If leased from
various lessors, WN might be able to renegotiate leases with some
lessors and not others, so part of the 717s might be returned.
It is a safe bet that they are financed one way or the other.
According to the 2009 annual report, 100 of their aircraft are leased
(22 B737 and 78 717). The rest of the fleet (38 aircraft) is heavily
financed (about $700 million) in notes.
Post by JF Mezei
And it also depends on how much rationalisation they do as they
incorporate Airtran into their operations. If they find themselves with
a surplus of aircraft, the 717s might be taken out of service first.
Would WN abandon its strong 737 religion and accept mixed fleet as a
permanent philsophy ?
It has in fact operated a mixed fleet in the past. For several years
they had 727-200A's in the fleet. however in the long term the 717's
don't have a bright future with WN (or anyone else for that matter)...
The corollary is because the outlook for the 717's is so poor, they
probably have a lot of leverage in negotiating lease prices, so the
cost of operating them could make them attractive, just as NW/DL
continues to operates D9's...
Post by JF Mezei
With regards to large airports. My feeling is that Southwest may have
reached a certain level of saturation covering "rural" airports and
knows that it now needs to tackle the major centres it had avoided so
far. Business travellers want access to those.
Westjet in Canada started "friendships" with overseas airlines to act as
a connector/feeder in Canada. Lufthansa is buying into Jetblue.
Wouldn't be surprised to see Southwest strike some friendship with some
foreign airlines to act as their feeder into/out of the USA.
WN has actually done it once before, with Icelandic...
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
JF Mezei
2010-10-04 07:03:26 UTC
Permalink
This is somewhat OT, but may be a sign in trends for LCCs.


Westjet has announced that its interlining agreement with Cathay will be
stepped up a notch to real code shares with CX flight numbers added to a
number of Westjet flights that go to the CX canadian gateways of Toronto
and Vancouver.

As LCCs mature and gain a certain image of quality, they become
candidates to become feeders for large oversears carriers, especially
where there is an alliance void (such as Canada whether neither Oneworld
nor SkyTeam have a canadian partner).

In the USA, I am somewhat curious on why Lufthansa struck a deal with
Jetblue. Is it because it feared losing United to SkyTeam ? Or because
Jetblue ends up having better presence and better reliability from JFK ?

With Southwest having grown to a large national carrier, is it
inevitable that it will strike interlining and/or code-sharing deals
with foreign carriers to act as feeder within the USA, or can Southwest
continue to exist as a purely domestic carrier ?

Does the lack of premium class and seat pre-selection really hinder
Southwest's potential in the business (and interlining) markets ? or
have the legacy's premium domestic products lagged so much that WN's
coach-only product is no longer such a liability ?
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
A Guy Called Tyketto
2010-10-04 07:37:05 UTC
Permalink
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Post by JF Mezei
This is somewhat OT, but may be a sign in trends for LCCs.
Westjet has announced that its interlining agreement with Cathay will be
stepped up a notch to real code shares with CX flight numbers added to a
number of Westjet flights that go to the CX canadian gateways of Toronto
and Vancouver.
As LCCs mature and gain a certain image of quality, they become
candidates to become feeders for large oversears carriers, especially
where there is an alliance void (such as Canada whether neither Oneworld
nor SkyTeam have a canadian partner).
In the USA, I am somewhat curious on why Lufthansa struck a deal with
Jetblue. Is it because it feared losing United to SkyTeam ? Or because
Jetblue ends up having better presence and better reliability from JFK ?
I would say the latter more than anything. With UAL being a
Star Alliance founding member, losing UAL definitely wouldn't have
happened. On top of that, the only threat for UAL to drop SA would have
been the merger with COA, but since COA dropped SkyTeam to join SA,
that wouldn't have been a problem either. However, it does seem rather
odd that DLH would interline with an LCC than use an SA partner, such
as UAL/COA, or USA.
Post by JF Mezei
With Southwest having grown to a large national carrier, is it
inevitable that it will strike interlining and/or code-sharing deals
with foreign carriers to act as feeder within the USA, or can Southwest
continue to exist as a purely domestic carrier ?
I think it could do it, but it would have to come over time,
and depending on who wants to court them. The funny thing is that if it
were to happen, it would come from an airline that is already part of
some codesharing alliance (SkyTeam, OneWorld, Star Alliance). Every
other airline either that could either doesn't have a big enough
presence to court SWA, or already has options available to them. So
while I think SWA has the ability to get an interlining deal, it would
come at some price of the foreign carrier having some friction within
their alliance. JBU being the exception here, because there hasn't been
much of any talk about how DLH is doing with it.
Post by JF Mezei
Does the lack of premium class and seat pre-selection really hinder
Southwest's potential in the business (and interlining) markets ? or
have the legacy's premium domestic products lagged so much that WN's
coach-only product is no longer such a liability ?
I wouldn't think so. If anything, the other LCCs' advantage
over SWA outside of pre-assigned seating would be the option to pay for
additional legroom. JBU and FFT/MEP offer that, but other than that,
there isn't much difference.

Another thing that would come into play would be where the
interline would begin, and where said foreign carrier would have to fly
to meet SWA. JFK is out. I don't know how many carriers fly into BWI..
MIA is out. ORD is out. DFW is out, per the 5 Party Agreement.. LAX and
SFO are options.. If SWA decides to take up shop where TRS lives at
ATL, that would be another option. But location would be key here.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email: ***@sbcglobal.net
Unix Systems Administrator, | ***@ozemail.com.au
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFMqYQZyBkZmuMZ8L8RAhWJAKDTqkIkDgNwfH73EfU/qxGvusV3lgCg0RtO
wQbJCthApo/E3nPk/FQdKr8=
=RRY9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
John Levine
2010-10-04 19:04:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
In the USA, I am somewhat curious on why Lufthansa struck a deal with
Jetblue. Is it because it feared losing United to SkyTeam ? Or because
Jetblue ends up having better presence and better reliability from JFK ?
I'm sure it's the latter. LH wants connecting traffic feeding its
international flights from JFK, and JetBlue has it. The only other
airline who has an interesting amount of JFK feeder traffic is Delta,
and they sure won't.
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
Jeff Hacker
2010-10-05 02:21:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by JF Mezei
This is somewhat OT, but may be a sign in trends for LCCs.
Westjet has announced that its interlining agreement with Cathay will be
stepped up a notch to real code shares with CX flight numbers added to a
number of Westjet flights that go to the CX canadian gateways of Toronto
and Vancouver.
As LCCs mature and gain a certain image of quality, they become
candidates to become feeders for large oversears carriers, especially
where there is an alliance void (such as Canada whether neither Oneworld
nor SkyTeam have a canadian partner).
In the USA, I am somewhat curious on why Lufthansa struck a deal with
Jetblue. Is it because it feared losing United to SkyTeam ? Or because
Jetblue ends up having better presence and better reliability from JFK ?
JetBlue is turning into something akin to Alaska, with interline deals with
numerous airlines - lately, AA added to Lufthansa. The fact that LH
actually bought into JetBlue is due to JetBlue's large volume of flights
into JFK.
Post by JF Mezei
With Southwest having grown to a large national carrier, is it
inevitable that it will strike interlining and/or code-sharing deals
with foreign carriers to act as feeder within the USA, or can Southwest
continue to exist as a purely domestic carrier ?
With the AirTran acquisition, they will be adding some Mexican and Caribbean
destinations, and they also have an interline deal in the works with Mexican
LCC Volaris.
Post by JF Mezei
Does the lack of premium class and seat pre-selection really hinder
Southwest's potential in the business (and interlining) markets ? or
have the legacy's premium domestic products lagged so much that WN's
coach-only product is no longer such a liability ?
Many people today believe WN's coach product is superior to the legacy
carriers. The question really ought to be whether WN's lack of assigned
seating is a liability. Based on intra-California and intra-Texas routes,
it appears that all coach is working for them. They plan to remove FL's
Business Class product when that acquisition is completed.
Post by JF Mezei
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.
Loading...