Is this why SWA makes money and AA cannot?

Hackman

Veteran
Sep 30, 2003
3,997
892
From: "The Baumert Report" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: The Baumert Report
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 09:00:10 -0500


The Baumert Report November 1, 2006
LUV the Spendthrift
Contrary to what some may believe, Southwest Airlines spends a substantially higher percentage of their operating expenses on wages, salaries and benefits for their workers than American Airlines.
According to both companies’ third quarter SEC filings, for the nine months ending September 30, Southwest Airlines’ wages, salaries and benefits comprised 37.6% of their expenses, while at American Airlines it made up only 28.3% of expenses.
Even neutralizing Southwest’s vast fuel hedging advantage won’t narrow the difference over the nine months. In fact, it widens it. After factoring out fuel for both airlines, the cost of wages, salaries and benefits are 50.9% of Southwest’s expenses and only 38.9% of American’s.
Despite spending such a high percentage of their operating costs on their workers, Southwest somehow manages to turn annual profit after annual profit. In fact, one could say the very reason they turn annual profit after annual profit is because they spend such a high percentage of their costs on their workers.
Perhaps that’s something for AMR and the APFA, TWU and APA to consider in future contract negotiations.
By the Way: In the month of October, three AMR senior executives, perennial seller Dan Garton, Robert Reding and Gary Kennedy, exercised and sold a combined total of 72,240 options - netting them hundreds of thousands of dollars in pretax profits.
Sources: American Airlines 10Q; Southwest Airlines 10Q; AMR Form 4 filings
Steven Baumert
To receive The Baumert Report email [email protected].
 
Ah, Steven the flight attendant who pretends to be an independent analyst. Not quite as entertaining as John McCorkle or Chip Munn, though. He's right about the difference as a percentage of expenses, but I think he's glossed over the facts just a bit.

LUV = 2,273B for 32,144 employees = $94.3K per employee annualized
AMR = 5,103B for 86,400 employees = $78.8K per employee annualized

Point of order, though. AMR's results include 13,400 Eagle employees, who earn less and have fewer benefits than their AA counterparts. Without a breakout of expenses and employees by subsidiary, it's a little difficult to determine how large the gap between AA and WN employees really is, but I'll guess that it's probably between $5K and $10K.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
Ah, Steven the flight attendant who pretends to be an independent analyst. Not quite as entertaining as John McCorkle or Chip Munn, though. He's right about the difference as a percentage of expenses, but I think he's glossed over the facts just a bit.

LUV = 2,273B for 32,144 employees = $94.3K per employee annualized
AMR = 5,103B for 86,400 employees = $78.8K per employee annualized

Point of order, though. AMR's results include 13,400 Eagle employees, who earn less and have fewer benefits than their AA counterparts. Without a breakout of expenses and employees by subsidiary, it's a little difficult to determine how large the gap between AA and WN employees really is, but I'll guess that it's probably between $5K and $10K.
Why of course. How could I have been so wrong as to post something other than the ATA management groups(Air Transport Assc, not the airline) favorite doom and gloom anal-ist??? Ray Neidl??? "As far as Blaylock & Partners airline analyst Ray Neidl is concerned, "There's no profits, they're still losing money." :down: :down:

"We he talks....people listen" Flush....... :rolleyes:
 
Given that Southwest's overall expenses are much less per ASM than AA's (CASM has always been lower), isn't it logical that its employee wages would be a higher proportion of WN expenses?

Yes, generally, the WN employees are paid more than AA's employees.

Maybe that's why WN is always profitable. Maybe not.

Their planes have always been orange and brown (and now add blue to the mix). Maybe THAT's why they are always profitable and AA isn't always profitable.

Their employees often wear shorts and their FAs engage in hokey schtick on board. Could that be it?

Maybe the profitability secret lies in handing out peanuts to all pax. Dunno.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
Given that Southwest's overall expenses are much less per ASM than AA's (CASM has always been lower), isn't it logical that its employee wages would be a higher proportion of WN expenses?

Yes, generally, the WN employees are paid more than AA's employees.

Maybe that's why WN is always profitable. Maybe not.

Their planes have always been orange and brown (and now add blue to the mix). Maybe THAT's why they are always profitable and AA isn't always profitable.

Their employees often wear shorts and their FAs engage in hokey schtick on board. Could that be it?

Maybe the profitability secret lies in handing out peanuts to all pax. Dunno.
Well FWAAA, AA management loves to use certain SWA stats when it suits them in the selling of concessions in meetings and presentations. However, it is true that the management at SWA is also paid much less at the ever profitable airline. SWA management doesn't whine in the news how they're leaving if they don't get huge bonuses to stay. I wonder if they have a laughable Pull it together......to come together turn around plan? :huh:

Could it be the mostly friendly employee relations and the fact employees are rewarded for their dedication and hard work? Dunno? Nah, it couldn't be. :rolleyes:
 
Why of course. How could I have been so wrong as to post something other than the ATA management groups(Air Transport Assc, not the airline) favorite doom and gloom anal-ist??? Ray Neidl??? "As far as Blaylock & Partners airline analyst Ray Neidl is concerned, "There's no profits, they're still losing money." :down: :down:

"We he talks....people listen" Flush....... :rolleyes:

On this I think we agree -- Ray is a moron. He calls up the media offering to give them quotes so that people will believe he's really credible.

Jamie Baker and Gary Chase, on the other hand, are usually sought out by the media because they're credible, and both are very selective in who they'll talk to.

On the subject of LUV, there was some interesting discussion in today's Plane Business Banter about Southwest, and how their latest Media Day left a lot of people wondering if Southwest's magic has started to wear off.

Oh, and if you really think management at WN is paid less, pay a little closer attention to their stock options.
 
Oh, and if you really think management at WN is paid less, pay a little closer attention to their stock options.

No kidding - IIRC, last year (or maybe in 2004) Herb cashed in something like $27 million or so from his accumulated options.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top