Nobody is disputing that WN makes money.
But that doesn't make them an attractive airline to fly.

To me, WN means: zero amenities, cattle-class service, Pepsi can 737s on long-haul domestic routes, and way too many pax who oughta be flying ConAir.

I won't dispute the past tense of that statment, but it does not necesarily hold for the future.

Southwest made a profit in the 3rd quarter AFTER they received the cheque from the government. Otherwise the events of September 11th dragged them down badily too. Their President also stated at the same time as their third quarter release that Yields were so depressed that they would need a ten percent increase in fares paid to break even.

I don't mean to slander WN as I respect their ability to have found their niche. However, they are nervous about their future as is every other airline in North America

Exactly. If you want to fly Southwest to the Washington DC area, you have to fly to BWI, not IAD or DCA. Well, that's pretty inconvenient for most people and something that they're not willing to do.

They fly to second tier airports, and that's exactly why their business model works. Now, tell them to start flying in to the bigger ones, and watch them have some real problems.

They have a good business model that works for them and they know their limitations. Because of that, they don't go into the larger airports.

Thus, they are not the solution that everyone seems to think they are.

Same amount of amenities as on ASA, and that is where I wind up almost allways when I fly DL. DL also have very few amenities these days on domestic. Cattle class????? There is more room on WN then on DL in coach, and more room then on DL First Class on the new 757s. As far as Pepsi service, I take my own food, and I think we will all be doing that on DL soon as well.

Bottom line, it is nice to fly non-stop on DL vs. having to change planes on WN. But when one fare is $199 and the other is $799, I think it is time to set travel policy straight - WN is not that bad and if a middle seat means you wont fly, maybe you should not be working for me as if you are so fragile to get stuck in in the middle seat (I have never been stuck in a middle seat on WN) that you will break, you are too weak to work for my company.

WN doesn't avoid large airports. WN has a large number of flights at LAX.

WN doesn't fly to DCA because they don't want to deal with slots, and they don't fly to IAD because they never fly to other airline's hubs (e.g., ATL, CVG, MEM, MSP, DEN, DFW). Why I'm not sure, but that's their thinking.

There is no reason other airlines couldn't adopt WN's business plan, and modify it to include other's hub airports and assigned seating (of course, if all airlines did that, the problem of hub airports would go away). WN has a higher aircraft/employee utilization by not having few, large hubs with banks. Any airline can do that.

Government and private investors just announced today a rebuild/rescue package Crossair to follow SR as a national carrier to the tune of at least $ 2.5 billion. So, the airline(s) are back from death bed in the intensive care station. Still wondering, if such a bailout makes sense in a free market environment.