Because you guys keep going around tooting your own horns about how great you guys are domestically,and continuing to compare WN to the the Legacy Carriers when there is no comparison.Why are you guys so stuck on wanting to see the downfall of the Legacies and making light of the results this will have on many peoples livelyhoods :down: :down: :down:Ch. 12 said:
Swa Reports 1q05 Profit Of $76m
- Thread starter ngneer
- Start date
Red Tail Bear said:
I've never been stuck on "wanting to see the downfall of the Legacies and making light of the results this will have on many peoples' livelihoods". Please don't accuse me of something I NEVER said. My impression of why this thread was started is because it is amazing to have such a profit in an industry that is almost entirely made up of significant losses right now. Do you not agree? I have never praised or looked forward to the downfall of carriers because I have been a victim. Unlike many on these boards, I have walked the walk and for you to derive baseless conclusions on my stance is insulting.
Back to the topic...WN and NW...and all carriers for that matter...are in the same industry. Their business plans dictate where they will fly and WN chooses domestic only while the legacies also include int'l. I still stand by my statements that it is ONLY the int'l routes that are keeping the legacies from losing millions more as they can still command enourmous yields and RASM is not affected since there are no low fares to take away market share. W/O these int'l routes which you make it sound like they are the devil that is dooming the legacies, these legacies would not as numerous as they are today. And even if your stance is that int'l flights are dooming the legacies (which I don't agree with), then that is where wise business decisions should come into play and these routes should be abandoned.
I would say that for a carrier such as WN to be the most profitable while ONLY serving domestic speaks volumes as it is the domestic market that is seriously hurting the industry.
...and please...as I do not make assumptions about you...don't make them about me. Read any post I've ever made...I've NEVER sought the downfall of ANY airline.
Red Tail Bear said:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I don't see "ALL" WN supporters on here, , wishing for the "total implosion" of the legacy's.
HOWEVER, when one reads WNforlife(s) post about everyone else "going down the tubes", it's easy to rationalize that he's comparing a WN, to a AA, or NW.
He's(WNforlife) is obviously right about the 1st qtr/05 $$earning's, but much wiser industry people than himself(like a HERB, or KELLY) know FULL WELL, that those 2 carriers(AA + NW) are not too far away from returning to profit.
(In regard to Big Red), WN is not a "shy" company. But it's VERY clear to me, that they're weak presence in DTW, and they're NON -Existance in MSP "speak's volumes" !!!!!
(With Regard to AA), IMHO, if Crandall had been at the helm, before AA/TWA, to present, AA would have already, "turned the $$ Corner"
Perhaps the Next "lesson" I'll get from WNforlife will be a "lecture" on the "injustice" of the Wright Amendment ????
NH/BB's
I don't think any of the nimbers are going to be pretty for the legacy carriers for this quarter that just ended.
For Luv to make a profit like they did in the domestic market and with loads averaging 75-76% speaks volumes. If their loads go to 82-85% then Luv would have been over 100M in profit for the quarter.
The legacies all tout the international markets, how great they are how much money they make on them ect ect ect. Do they really? If so why aren't we at Ua profitable?
For Luv to make a profit like they did in the domestic market and with loads averaging 75-76% speaks volumes. If their loads go to 82-85% then Luv would have been over 100M in profit for the quarter.
The legacies all tout the international markets, how great they are how much money they make on them ect ect ect. Do they really? If so why aren't we at Ua profitable?
Well, since SWA was only able to triple their year over year first quarter profits, it's obvious to me that we (and OPEC) finally have them on the ropes! 
Red Tail Bear said:
You seem to have picked up the wrong end of the stick. I didn't say that WN was going to start transoceanic. (I agree with the poster who said that WN stick to their knitting -- but Kelly is pretty creative.)
However, there are plenty of start-ups in early stage funding (see the threads on these boards about Skylink), and you'll see more. For a long time people said that LCCs wouldn't work transcon. Then B6 and WN started doing that and hitting transcon yields of AA, UA et al. The Atlantic will be next (you could argue that Aer Lingus is almost there.)
SVQLBA said:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SVQLBA,
I would,nt go so far as to say that NO one might start a llc to europe. (I remember "sir" Freddy Laker). But Transatlantic, and Trans Pacific are 2 different animals !! I mean a 757 can make it over the (atlantic) pond.
In the case of NW, a lot of Trans Atlantic flying is done by KLM(Yes NW does some of their own)
The Pacific, is another story. Just the thought of going LAX-HNL in a "crummy" 757, gives me the willy's (ETOPS "MY A$$")
Any start up trying to fly the Trans Pacific would face ENORMOUS competition, let alone all the start up $$$$$$$ they'd need for "JJ,s"(Jumbo jets) !!!!!!!!
AND,
EVERYONE on this WN board can/will/should, agree that BIG RED was/is, and always will be KING of the Trans Pacific !!!
They've survived very nicely during the "lean times" off of that "Crown Jewel" of a hub named "NRT" !!!!!!!!!!!
NH/BB's
I've never had the chance to fly them but, I hear AQ's West Coast-Hawaii service is impeccable and they use the 73G.
If we were to start naming now defunct carriers that once wore the "Was/Is, and Always Will Be" Crown, we would be up all night.
WNjetdoc
Veteran
jbguppy said:SWA recently cut back their hiring and growth plans significantly, they are able to turn a profit due to paying half price for fuel.
It is all about the fuel hedge. That is the only difference. Kudos to SWA for being able to use their long term credits in the hedging game to make a profit. ALso cool that they were able to raise fares and you guys are applauding....
Low expectations, low results...
Pass me that bag of peanuts, it is going to be a long flight,
Does anyone think this is going to last forever?
JBG
[post="262251"][/post][/quote
I was waitng for the first bitter pathetic post from an employee from another airline to try and piss in our Wheaties. "If it were not for fuel hedging", blah, balh, blah. You know what? If it were not for us having fleet commonality, if it were not for having the best employees in the industry, if it were not for having the best management team in the industry, if it were not for......Its enough to make me want to hurl I tell you, STFU already.
BTW, Im sure there are others that had negative things to say, I just stopped at the first one I saw, my comments apply as needed.
WNjetdoc
Veteran
Red Tail Bear said:
What does flying overseas have to do with anything? We board more people domestically than any airline in the USA. We fly folks from point A to point B, safely, on time and at a fair price. Our passengers are happy, we are happy and we make money at it, as we have for the past 30plus years.
I can understand how you're not happy, neither is NHBB and a lot of other folks at other airlines, but don't hate us, don't hold it against us that we are good at what we do, it shows a lack of class on your behalf.
If it gives you comfort to throw in the international card then do so, Im happy for you, but to give you a little tip, its not a issue for us at SWA as most of us have worked at other carriers that, as you say, "can actually fly transoceanic". Its not whats its all cracked up to be, lol. We do however need you guys to stay in business as thats how we non-rev overseas while on vacation...thank you very much, LMAO.
KCFlyer
Veteran
NewHampshire Black Bears said:Perhaps the Next "lesson" I'll get from WNforlife will be a "lecture" on the "injustice" of the Wright Amendment ????
NH/BB's
[post="262466"][/post]
No Papa Bear....that lecture would come from me.
Ch.12 Sorry for including you in the generalization-(you guys) it should have read (alot of you guys) It was not aimed at YOU personally. We all know WN is doing really well, but do you not admit that some of the posts on this board take a direct shot at the downfall of the Legacies?Ch. 12 said:
Neither did I. What I said was let us know when THEY (Long Haul Lcc's in the planning stages) get planes that can fly T.O.SVQLBA said:
NewHampshire Black Bears said:+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Perhaps the Next "lesson" I'll get from WNforlife will be a "lecture" on the "injustice" of the Wright Amendment ????
NH/BB's
[post="262466"][/post]
OK, NH. Let's have it. Why should the Wright Ammendment stay in place?
NewHampshire Black Bears said:Perhaps you might have heard of places like HONG KONG, and NEW YORK, or REALLY BIG AIRPORTS, with 14,000'+ runways like JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ???
Well, they are the largest carrier, with nearly 200 daily departures, at an airport with a 14,500'+ runway -- Las Vegas McCarran International Airport. LAS has over 10% more passenger traffic than JFK as well.
