The grants were based on traffic, so American got the most, followed by United, and so on down the line.

I am not a fan of unions, either, but for God's sake, if you want to rant about them, at least get your facts straight.

I still do not think 9/11 changed anything. People were afraid to fly during the Gulf War and the airlines went into a nose dive. They lost more money then they had made in the previous 50 years combined!. Doom and Gloom was everywhere and people were saying the airlines were not going to make it. Some did not but most did and they enjoyed a very healthy 90's. As the economy improves, so will the airline fortunes.

I disagree about Southwest forever changing the landscape of things. Just becuase Southwest is offering $99 specials, does not mean that every seat on the aircraft is being sold for $99.00. Yield management insures that only a fraction of these seats are sold at these prices. Some people refuse to fly Southwest and Southwest will not enter expensive markets. Southwest is only a domestic airline and the international fares is where the United's and American's make most of their profit. South America is a good example of this. The main reason people fly between the US and South America is family or business and therefor the prices tend to be higher then fares to Europe that has a higher tourist mix. American is now operating flights out of MIA (their main hub to Latin America) above pre 9/11 levels.

The one difference between the Gulf War and 9/11 is that the Gulf War was oversees and 9/11 was on U.S. of A soil. We continue to have "threats" issued and the public still has a lingering fear of flying. We can not predict what the economy will be like over the next year or even the next month for that matter but suffice to say that UA continues to lose money under the current system and will continue to lose even more money with a new contract.(Assuming one can be achieved) Not only is all the negative publicity about a possible strike hurting the company with people booking away from UA but with all the different unions fighting for a piece of the sinking ship no one is interested in plugging the hole or bailing water to keep it afloat.

You really can't see the forest for the trees, can you? On one hand, you say that United can't fail as PanAm did, because of their domestic flying to support the Int'l flying. Yet then you turn around and say that United and American can survive without the domestic flying because of the profits the Int'l flying generates! So which is it?

True, WN doesn't put every seat on the airplane at $99. But the seats they do, they make money on when they sell. Therein lies the major difference. WN has the cost structure which allows them to pay among the highest wages in the industry, yet still turn profits during economic downturns. Even if you look at the highest fares in competetive markets, you'll see that WN Y fares average 50% below UA Y fare.

True, WN doesn't enter expensive markets. There will come a point when those expensive markets will have to review their cost structures to become competetive with other nearby airports. New traffic simply will not go to high cost airports. Look at how WN gets people to drive out of their way to fly them? Ryanair and EasyJet in Europe do the same. VirginBlue is taking advantage of the collapse of Ansett to offer service to new cities in Australia, in exchange for lower ground costs.

People didn't fly overseas during the Gulf War because they were afraid of being targets in foreign countries. While that is happening to a lesser extent today, people are afraid to fly because AIRPLANES WERE USED AS WEAPONS! The nervous flyer is staying home, or driving. Domestic flying didn't take the hit during the gulf war that it has taken since 9/11. The new "security" has made frequent travellers (myself included) less apt to fly. All this is a scenario previously unseen in the industry. So what is the industry doing? Nothing. Hoping to ride this out, with some help from the American taxpayer.

I'll put money on this one... 2 years from now, at least 2 of the current mainline carriers will either be gone completely, or less than 50% of their pre-9/11 size. I'll even go so far as to say that I suspect UA and US will be those 2 carriers. I'll also bet that WN is in the top 3 or better in terms of both Revenue Passenger Miles and Passengers carried.

What happens if, for example, the US and EU negotiate a true open skies agreement? Lets say David Neeleman of JetBlue and Sir Richard Branson decide to raise $200 million dollars to start the Southwest of Int'l carriers. Low fares between major US and European cities. The yields on domestic flying don't cover UA's costs. The Europe flights take the hit, how long can they survive with their current biz model?

They can't. And the first mainline carrier to see that will be the one best positioned to survive. UA sure isn't that carrier right now....

Duxfan: Here we go again. . . .

It does not take a rocket scientist to predict that US airways is on the ropes. I do not consider US airways to be one of the big players---that is reserved for UA, AA and Delta. If any two airlines are going to go under then it would be US and HP.

I never stated UA did not need its domestic routes. It is the domestic routes that feed into the profitable international markets that makes the whole thing work. Please do not misquote me here. PanAM never had a domestic feeder operation and that is what sank the ship.

Many people will drive out of their way to fly southwest buy many others are not willing to do so. Southwest will only go into city markets where they know they can make money. Southwest is unlikely to start international service becuase the cost is too high.

The landscape is littered with bankrupt airlines. Some were very noble such as Pan Am and others were no frill like people's express. The common reason why these airlines went down was lousy management (yes I did say Pan AM went down becuase they did not have a domsetic feeder route system but the reason they did not have one is becuase Management did not pursue one).

Good management will ensure an airlines survival. Southwest has great management. United needs another make over.