BearX220

Few Americans are "global travelers." Most don't care about international networks. Southwest boards the most US domestic passengers of any airline. Southwest is also the seventh largest airline in the world by revenue, fifth by ASMs, and fourth by fleet size.

Sometimes FT values lead people to dismiss WN as a rinky-dink operation on the periphery because its doesn't serve NRT or CDG and doesn't have a lounge network. But Southwest is firmly among the most influential and important airlines on earth.

Flamenguista

Southwest has much more in common to the big 3 than it does with the other carriers in the US. I don't think of them as "low cost" at all. It is very far from a spring break airline.

gglave

As a tax-paying Canadian I have to take issue with this - AC is not taxpayer-subsidized.

They're publicly traded on the TSX.

http://web.tmxmoney.com/quote.php?qm_symbol=AC

LondonElite

I should be more precise. Ch 11 is a government bailout, that's quite clear. It is a process whereby a company gets protection from a court from its creditors, while continuing to run its business as if nothing happened. Whatever you want to call it, it's a government (my imprecise use of the word taxpayer) bailout/subsidy. I'm not disputing that other creditors bear the more significant financial hardship (labor, banks, suppliers, etc).

BearX220

Creditors bear all financial hardship in a Ch11 action. There are no government funds in play. The law affords protection from creditors but the government doesn't pay creditors on behalf of the affected firm. Creditors just get soaked. It's not a "government subsidy / bailout." It is a statutory wrinkle that enables companies to abandon obligations, thereby hurting other companies but not taxpayers.

LondonElite

Ch 11 is a government-enabled restructuring process in which creditors should bear all losses, but that is not always the case. GM is probably the most obvious example of a Ch 11 process that cost the taxpayer something like $12bn I think.

BearX220

A very isolated and anomalous case, amid a national financial crisis, that literally required an act of Congress. No airline warrants similar treatment. The closest they ever came to that situation was some handout money post-9/11 to cover operating losses until traffic rebounded. And that action was not linked to Ch11 moves. They came later (and despite the handouts).

mapu

No first class cabin.

LondonElite

Not having a 'go' at you, but what exactly does this mean?

ClimbingCook

They don't offer a comparable product to AA/DL/UA, it isn't a question of revenue or passenger count. I don't think anyone is dismissing Southwest as a rinky-dink operation. There are an awful lot of us who need to bring a passport when we fly, Southwest doesn't have anything useful for us.

BearX220

As operator of the world's largest 737 fleet (715 on strength, 500+ orders / options, launch customer for MAX 7 and MAX 8), Southwest wields outsize influence over Boeing aircraft design and pricing.

As pioneers of a successful hub-free point-to-point network model, Southwest provided the operational blueprint for numerous other important carriers, from EasyJet to RyanAir to Air Asia to Fly Dubai to Azul.

As resistors of US cartel lockstep conventions in areas from passenger fees to inflight product design, Southwest provides the only meaningful comprehensive alternative to the majors in the US domestic market. And when Southwest breaks ranks with a new initiative (dollar-based loyalty rewards, for example), it often influences the majors to fall in line.

And with 129,087,000 pax boardings in 2014 per IATA, Southwest is the second largest passenger carrier on earth -- just a blip behind Delta at 129,433,000. That is influence.

Something like 64% of Americans do not hold passports. And that hardly means 36% are flying overseas; in truth, less than 5 percent of Americans -- 14.6 million -- travel abroad for business or leisure, optimistic estimate. See this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/willia...b_1920287.html

So while Southwest may not have anything useful for you (or whomever "us" is), that hardly makes them irrelevant. In truth, it is you that are a minority / peripheral cohort of the traveling public. The FT worldview is spectacularly out of sync with real-world priorities and conditions.

Again, most people don't care as they're never getting up there. And having seen my share of UA/AA/DL/AS F cabins the past few years, I now care a lot less, too.

mapu

Most of the people I know who travel for business (myself included) book F. If there is no F class cabin to begin with, I won't even consider flying that particular airline.

Don't get me wrong, I have flown Southwest myself on quick weekend getaways with my family. Or on the occasional DisneyWorld trip for a kids birthday. It's a fine airline, but on a business trip, I need space for my laptop and don't want to be bothered with paying for drinks and food and having to invoice it all later.

That's why Southwest is in a different league for me.

gglave

I would say you're in very small (and shrinking) minority. Of all the friends, associates, colleagues and family I know who travel for business, none of them get to book F (or J for that matter) - Including me.

I would argue the shrinking F and J-class cabins on the legacies reflect this.

Some get up there via upgrades, but more and more those upgrades require the purchase of fare classes that aren't beancounter-approved either.

Proudelitist

Well it's certainly leading the race to the bottom.


Volume and revenue are indicators of a company's financial success, but not necessarily of quality. McDonalds has only had a few losing quarters in it's history, but it still serves an unhealthy, substandard product.

WN used to offer a cheaper fare than legacies, in exchange for a lack of amenities, aka "no frills". This combined with it's fuel hedges made them very profitable and earned them market share. The question of their surviving the next 25 remains open, IMO. As their prices now seem to be matching the legacies, they risk losing that market share. Why pay 250 for a flight on WN when you can pay the same on a legacy and get to pick your seat in advance, earn miles with real rewards, and apply them internationally? They will have to find a new way to compete, and 25 years is a long time for the market to change.

cbn42

Because many non-frequent fliers consider the ability to get on the plane and sit where you want to be a benefit, and the legacies have been scaling back their loyalty programs recently to the point where even people on Flyertalk are concluding that it's not worth it anymore. Every major US legacy has had a devaluation recently, and no doubt there will be more.