Not PHL but I used to O/D at LAX quite a bit on SWA. Never had any significant delays in or out of LAX on WN. One thing I did like about the LAX trips was that my company's hotel at LAX is the Courtyard which is just a short walk from WN's terminal. Much nicer than having to wait for a hotel van.
Programs: Marriott Platinum, NW Gold, UA 3P, NCL Gold
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryJ
Not PHL but I used to O/D at LAX quite a bit on SWA. Never had any significant delays in or out of LAX on WN. One thing I did like about the LAX trips was that my company's hotel at LAX is the Courtyard which is just a short walk from WN's terminal. Much nicer than having to wait for a hotel van.
One other thing to consider is that the destination airport's congestion might be cause for delay as well.
Last time my boss and I were in PIT together, both his flight (WN) and my flight (US) were delayed about the same amount due to ground stop in PHL.
I have the best of both worlds. My closest airport is OAK, where WN has a huge presence. Lots of nonstops to all my most common short-haul destinations, at very reasonable prices.
If I'm going anywhere more distant, SFO is just a little further, and over there UA (and all of *A) has a substantial presence and can take me anywhere in the world, often with a nonstop flight.
Ed
Last edited by suranyi; May 15, 08 at 11:52 pm.
Reason: grammar
No last minute equipment changes on WN. On WN, you are going to be on a 737, period. On UA, your flight could be scheduled to be on a 737 initially but you then have the pleasant surprise of seeing a CRJ pull up to your gate.
One thing that strikes me about DRONEKLAX's post (post #49) is that being a non-status member or A-list member of Southwest has a lot of the same features as being a United Premier Exec 1K -- having flown 100,000 miles on UA. No charge to use the telephone, for example. Second bag is free if you've got 2P status or better on UA. Second bag is always free on WN. The "1K" desk is in the USA. The "everybody" desk on WN is in the USA.
A lot of 1K's say that they are always upgraded. My understanding of the UA FF system is that you have to pay to be upgraded or use electronic upgrade coupons. When I was loyal to UA and UA had first class (no TED) flights, I could not keep enough free upgrades to be upgraded all the time and paying to be upgraded was expensive. Now, I do accept that 1K's may be unofficially upgraded more often than the program allows, but if they are going to give free, unlimited space available upgrades to 1K's, why not just make that part of the official program like over at NW and CO?
I'm not clear what percentage of a 1K's upgrades are free vs. paid. I'm all for free upgrades (hence my flyer talk handle). Paid? it depends on the price and the availability.
At least we both agree that United's web site is terrible and Southwest's web site works a lot better.
I'll agree that Southwest won't take you to far away lands in any class. And, if you need to go to far away lands, either for business or pleasure, then you will need to fly another airline. May I suggest Cathay Pacific if you go to Hong Kong? It is a lot better than United, and you can earn miles and upgrades on American. But, depending on your anticipated travel schedule for the next year, I can imagine that there are circumstances where United would be a better choice as your focus airline. If you've got a mix of overseas travel, travel on routes that United has first class and travel to cities that Southwest doesn't go to -- then yes, taking a TED flight now and then might make sense.
On the other hand, if your travel is primarily on TED routes, and if you are going to be flying 49 segments or less per year (United 2P vs. Southwest A-list), then I would suggest that Southwest is the better way to go.
Free trips to far away lands of course is a great benefit, but I still suggest that if you have no status with United, you are going to find free tickets at the saver rate are few and far between.
While how the airline is doing from a profit/loss standpoint may not be important in the short run, if you are building up a lot of miles/credits, you'd like the airline to stay around long enough for you to actually use them. If you had points/miles at Aloha Airlines or at ATA, are you not out of luck now?
If United goes under and nobody buys them up before they go Chapter 7, won't all of your miles be worthless? Granted, if you had miles at Reno Air, TWA or other airlines that got merged with other airlines, you had your points converted to American or the other acquiring airline. But a true Chapter 7 wipes out not just the company, but the mileage program too. If you have points/miles on deposit at the Airline's "bank" and the "bank" goes out of business, there is no FDIC insurance for your miles!
I will agree that an extra bag of Cheese-nips should not be the determining factor of who you fly with. Then again, see the posts over on United that some people worry about whether their bowl of nuts are warm or not.
You were never a 1K, so you really don't have an informed point of view to be making comparisons from that basis, and from what I've seen, many of your comparisons are already fallacious and don't capture the full extent . It's the proverbial blind man feeling the elephant.
By corollary, UA has a lot of hard-core global flyers for whom 1K is baseline. For us, hitting 100,000 miles a year is but a tick on the mileage counter shortly after the turn of a given year. It's a completely different perspective, a completely different paradigm from what the typical WN customer knows to even think about, to which the UA business model is geared.
Just as the WN flyer feels out of their league on big widebodies with seatback collateral printed in 15 different languages, the UA flyer feels out of place on WN when campfire songs break out mid-flight and cigarette-hacky laughs cackle over cabin announcement one-liners that have been circulating over the internet well before Wal-Mart started selling computers.
Don't get me wrong - UA is far from perfect, and full of problems, problems so big that you could could easily fit WN right through many one of them. While UA could be considered the most among the US international air carriers, but the least among the air carriers internationally, it stands to reason that in spite of its problems, UA ridership (and a loyal one at that) persists, and even in the face of all this "overcapacity" that the brainiac analysts keep throwing about, people are still choosing by far and wide as the numbers indicate UA over many of its competitors, WN included.
The only elephant in the room is your misplaced elitism.
I fly WN because I haven't had any perks on the other airlines that justify the costs and i haven't needed to travel internationally frequently.
I've never had anyone break out into a campfire song on WN but i have certainly dealt with rude FA's on United and they're one of the airlines I try to avoid travel on.
Programs: Marriott Platinum, NW Gold, UA 3P, NCL Gold
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by KNRG
The only elephant in the room is your misplaced elitism.
I fly WN because I haven't had any perks on the other airlines that justify the costs and i haven't needed to travel internationally frequently.
I've never had anyone break out into a campfire song on WN but i have certainly dealt with rude FA's on United and they're one of the airlines I try to avoid travel on.
In my case, 9 times out of 10 I'm able to plan my travel 2+ weeks in advance, so there is no additional "cost". In the rare instances I have a last-minute booking come up, I'll fly WN.
In many cases (long hauls in particular) WN is more expensive than the legacy airline if you are able to plan and shop and don't just book the first flight that pops up on the screen.
TalkBoard Member/Moderator: Southwest and JetBlue forums
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN CP & A-list, Interstate BBQ at MEM B17, CO Lifetime Presidents Club
Posts: 9,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by KNRG
The only elephant in the room is your misplaced elitism.
I didn't read it that way. Domestic coach is as different from international premium class is as different as a minivan is from, well, an NSX. There's no question which is more enjoyable, but they are different tools used at different times for different reasons. I'm sure John Madden's bus is nicer than WN's coach product too.
people are still choosing by far and wide as the numbers indicate UA over many of its competitors, WN included.
What numbers are you referring to exactly? Fact of the matter is that WN carries more passengers than any other airline in the world, so I'm not sure what numbers would indicate that more people are choosing UA over WN as you seem to be claiming.
Programs: UA MM 1K, WN Companion Pass and A-List, Hyatt Diamond, Marriott Silver, Hilton Silver, Hertz 5 Star
Posts: 543
I find this thread amusing since I've been both a UA 1K (over 150k flight miles last year) and a WN CP holder for quite a few years now. I generally fly UA for trans-cons and international travel (appreciate flying C and F internationally), and WN for short hauls. There's a lot I like about both airlines, including the benefits I receive for being a very frequent flyer, and that's why I use them both. But neither are perfect, and there are things that could be better on both.
As threads like this repeatedly show, FT'ers are very passionate about their travel and their choice of travel providers.
No airline provides all things to all people. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. Which airlines is right for you depends on your location, your travel patterns, and your values with respect to what's important to you. In my case, based on MY PERSONAL PREFERENCES, I happen to have 2 I like that suits my various travel needs.
To me, a lot of arguments on this thread is akin to:
"The grass is green."
"No it isn't because the sky is blue."
(Actually, it's more like:
"I think grass is better than everything else because it is green."
"You are really a moron. The sky is blue. There's no comparison")
Programs: Marriott Platinum, NW Gold, UA 3P, NCL Gold
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by richee
I find this thread amusing since I've been both a UA 1K (over 150k flight miles last year) and a WN CP holder for quite a few years now. I generally fly UA for trans-cons and international travel (appreciate flying C and F internationally), and WN for short hauls. There's a lot I like about both airlines, including the benefits I receive for being a very frequent flyer, and that's why I use them both. But neither are perfect, and there are things that could be better on both.
As threads like this repeatedly show, FT'ers are very passionate about their travel and their choice of travel providers.
No airline provides all things to all people. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. Which airlines is right for you depends on your location, your travel patterns, and your values with respect to what's important to you. In my case, based on MY PERSONAL PREFERENCES, I happen to have 2 I like that suits my various travel needs.
To me, a lot of arguments on this thread is akin to:
"The grass is green."
"No it isn't because the sky is blue."
(Actually, it's more like:
"I think grass is better than everything else because it is green."
"You are really a moron. The sky is blue. There's no comparison")
Programs: Marriott Platinum, NW Gold, UA 3P, NCL Gold
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckles
What numbers are you referring to exactly? Fact of the matter is that WN carries more passengers than any other airline in the world, so I'm not sure what numbers would indicate that more people are choosing UA over WN as you seem to be claiming.
Yes, but WN ranks 9th globally in passenger-kilometers flown, far behind American, Delta, United, etc.
Which is what a lot of us have been saying all along - for point-to-point short-haul trips, WN is the market leader.
ETA: Upon further review - it appears the passenger statistics leave out passengers carried on United Express (and US express, Delta express, etc.) The airlines serving these markets such as Skywest are counted separately from UA's passenger count. Given this fact, I have a hard time believing that WN still has the most passengers.
Yes, but WN ranks 9th globally in passenger-kilometers flown, far behind American, Delta, United, etc.
Which is what a lot of us have been saying all along - for point-to-point short-haul trips, WN is the market leader.
One person choosing WN to fly from SFO to LAX is the same as one person picking UA to fly from SFO to SYD. To claim more people are choosing UA is not accurate. Less people choose them, it just so happens those people fly them further.
Quote:
ETA: Upon further review - it appears the passenger statistics leave out passengers carried on United Express (and US express, Delta express, etc.) The airlines serving these markets such as Skywest are counted separately from UA's passenger count. Given this fact, I have a hard time believing that WN still has the most passengers.
In the first quarter WN carried 21,504,821 revenue passengers and mainline UA carried 15,250,000 revenue passengers. I don't think that there were over 5,000,000 passengers that flew on only UX (i.e., passengers flying both UX and mainline would be counted in UA's mainline total, the ones missing are those flying solely on UX).
Programs: Marriott Platinum, NW Gold, UA 3P, NCL Gold
Posts: 1,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckles
One person choosing WN to fly from SFO to LAX is the same as one person picking UA to fly from SFO to SYD. To claim more people are choosing UA is not accurate. Less people choose them, it just so happens those people fly them further. In the first quarter WN carried 21,504,821 revenue passengers and mainline UA carried 15,250,000 revenue passengers. I don't think that there were over 5,000,000 passengers that flew on only UX (i.e., passengers flying both UX and mainline would be counted in UA's mainline total, the ones missing are those flying solely on UX).
No, somebody flying UA from SFO to SYD represents thousands of seat-miles, while the SFO-LAX passenger represents only a couple hundred.
Also, with so many UA stations only operating UX flights, it would be no shock at all if 5 million passengers were on UX flights only. Remember that lanes like IAD-MIA are run via UX (at least some flights) on E190's. I could fly PIT-IAD-MIA and not set foot on a mainline UA plane, and many people do.
No, somebody flying UA from SFO to SYD represents thousands of seat-miles, while the SFO-LAX passenger represents only a couple hundred.
Also, with so many UA stations only operating UX flights, it would be no shock at all if 5 million passengers were on UX flights only. Remember that lanes like IAD-MIA are run via UX (at least some flights) on E190's. I could fly PIT-IAD-MIA and not set foot on a mainline UA plane, and many people do.
Cargojon and others, the DOT considers commuter carriers to be separate airlines (which they are). All stats for airlines like American Eagle, Skywest, Comair, ExpressJet (including their CO service) are counted separately from the "parent" carrier. It could be argued that you didn't fly UA from PIT-IAD-MIA because none of your flight crews worked for UA; many of the ground staff probably didn't work for UA; and the only contact with UA was through their reservations system.
For the first quarter of 2008, Skywest was the biggest commuter carrier, carrying a little more than 5 million passengers--the same size as jetBlue or AirTran. By the way, the correct DOT figure for SWA Customers in the first quarter was just under 25 million, not 21 million. UA's commuter carriers would have had to carry 10 million Customers to equal SWA's boarding.
