sdsearch

Even here it depends where you're based and where you fly as to what decision you may come to.

Me, based in LAX, for example Southwest can't get me (nonstop or otherwise) to Huntsville or Jackson at all (any more). Meanwhile, other airlines aplenty can get me to those cities with connections, or nonstop to Nashville (just over 2 hours drive from Huntsville) or New Orleans (about 3 hours drive from Jackson). (In fact, AA just started a nonstop LAX to MSY, but in case I didn't like its schedule, DL has plenty of frequency.) And on those two nonstops, Southwest does not have consistently better prices, in fact often worse.

And as an AA LT Plat, on comfort AA wins for me because I can reserve MCE or exit rows for free, while on Southwest I have to "hope" that one the handful of seats equivalent to those will still be available by the time I board. So to me AA seems more Premium even on domestic nonstops.

But of course, LAX is a hub for AA, and at least a main focus city for DL, UA, and Southwest.

However, I can see how at MCI, which is neither a hub nor a major focus city for any of the 3 legacies, you'd come to a completely different conclusion than I would at LAX. (And OTOH even at LAX, someone who flies mostly intra-California might come to a completely different conclusion then me too.)

Here's another diving point: Somewhere between 2 and 3 hours. That's the point at which the 3 legacies start having food for sale much more substantive than Southwest's snacks. That's more premium for me. But again, there's way more flights over that length from LAX than from MCI. So again the home airport bias strikes.

worldwidedreamer

For what it is worth, I recently flew BOG-PTY-SFO on CM 737s, and could have flown EZE-PTY-SFO on non ETOPS, all-737 Copa. I've also flown on AS to Hawaii on 737s.

The proposed 737-ERX flies 4,000nm which would allow WN to fly from MHT to most of Europe, and flights from ANC to much of East Asia. This said, my PTY-SFO flight was quite long for such a small plane and I doubt that the business logic of an Asian hub at a low originating pax market like ANC.

That said, I'd be quite surprised if WN did not serve much of the UK (whatever that means), Ireland, and Netherlands (i.e. the English speaking countries in Europe) ten years from now. This said, I'm still surprised that WN does not serve Canada, northern Mexico or quite a few medium US markets like Wisconsin's Fox Cities, Fresno, Colorado Springs, Rochester (MN), Burlington (VT), or indeed Anchorage. ETOPS Hawaii makes more sense, although rumors have percolated for years.

pinniped

WN not flying to Canada surprises me too. Seems like low-hanging fruit with high yields for the taking. There must be some political resistance to WN opening up a bunch of transborder routes...it would no doubt slash a lot of AC fares in half.

Kevin AA

too seasonal and high airport fees

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ticle20493147/

sdsearch

Keep in mind that Southwest Airlines is based in Texas, so Canada may be "too foreign" for them. They know how to speak Spanish, not French. What I mean is: Despite only Quebec province being French speaking, there's some sort of nationwide law that any product provided in Canada has to have both English and French documentation. I'm not sure what dual-language implications there might be for airlines, though (perhaps a French-language reservation website? perhaps French-language customer service?), even if they don't choose to fly to Quebec province.

Of course, none of that explains why no Hawaii.

rsteinmetz70112

Canada's air transport systems is very expensive for users. They likely would not be able to offer fares similar to the US fares and there are additional regulatory issues.

toomanybooks

They don't have to be similar to US fares; they just have to be less than Canadian ones.

Like that old joke about the two guys running from a bear.

I think it's got to be a regulatory thing. Likely a high PITA quotient for the potential return.

joshua362

Two men were walking through the woods when a large bear
walked out into the clearing no more than 50 feet in front of them.
The first man dropped his backpack and dug out a pair of running
shoes, then began to furiously attempt to lace them up as the bear
slowly approached them. The second man looked at the first,
confused, and said, "What are you doing? Running shoes aren't
going to help, you can't outrun that bear." "I don't need to," said
the first man, "I just need to outrun you."

rsteinmetz70112

That's quite possible.

sdsearch

Why would they be less than Canadian ones? There's already non-premium competition in Canada, with WestJet plus the Rouge subservice of Air Canada, and probably more.

And haven't you heard? Southwest for years is no longer necessarily the lowest fare carrier in many markets. (Remember, the "low cost" in "low cost carrier" [LCC] refers to low operating cost for the airline, not anything about fares for the passengers. While low operating cost may make lower fares possible in some cases, it does not guarantee them.)

suranyi

Indeed it depends where your home airport is. My closest airport is OAK, which is a focus city for WN, so they fly nonstop to many of the places I fly domestically. SFO is not too far so I will sometimes fly from them on another airline if they have a better fare or schedule. I have no status on any airline so I have to add the additional costs of reserving seats, checking bags, or EBCI, if I want any of those, to get a true cost comparison.

Of course I can't fly WN for any long haul international trips.

As a result I would guess I fly WN about half the time.

As for the original question, without first class they can't be the premium air carrier. However, they are often my preferred airline for a particular trip.

xliioper

Was going to mention WS as well. They seem to have added a lot of US destinations in recent years and are putting pressure on AC. I suspect the window of opportunity in Canada for WN may have closed and WS has become Canada's LCC airline.

sdsearch

Hence Rouge. AC's solution seems to be to make the whole plane resemble a WS plane, rather than just the fare.

catsfroggy1

I used to despise Southwest. Especially before the numbered boarding. And people would be lined up on the floor hours before the flight. I live in Baltimore so if you are flying domestic and want a direct flight they are the only choice.

One time I flew from Baltimore to Los Angeles with a stop in Phoenix. We circled Phoenix in the air for an hour and then circled the runway in Los Angeles for an hour. Was on the plane for 9 hours the only food I got was a slim jim.

Lets see:

No assigned seats.
No TVs in the seats
No Airplanes big enough to fly to Europe or Asia.
No code sharing so hence it makes it impossible for me to fly almost anywhere in Europe, Aisa, or South America from BWI.
Food is appalling even by airplane standards.

Here is the positive:
It is cheap

I consider Southwest the Greyhound of the sky. If you consider that premium I am not sure your standard. I mean even flying Norwegian was a step up from Southwest.

catsfroggy1

How is not charging for everything premium? That is pricing. Tell me how it is premium? Having a bunch of old 737 airplanes and not having assigned seats, or seat back tv's premium? How is not having meals on the plane premium?

Man I just flew American Airlines and they had 2 meals on a 6 hour flight with 3 beverage servings. And the Flight Attendants were very friendly.

At least on Norwegian they allow you to buy meals.

Like I said the one positive about Southwest is cost.