Sure, they can be stupid like Allegheny County, and lose a viable hub operation with international connections, or they can be smart like CLT, and realize that too much SWA is not always a good thing for an airport.
Well, the problem with this reasoning is that US was unwilling to give any guarantees at all to Allegheny County and Pennsylvania regarding the PIT hub. US's standpoint was "give us what we want or we'll close the hub." The state and county wanted the company to commit to maintaining the hub before giving away the store. And if the company had truly intended to keep a hub at PIT, they probably would have made a commitment to do so. US chose to dismantle the hub and end transatlantic service from PIT at least six months before Southwest announced that it would enter the market, so you certainly can't blame SWA for what US did at PIT.
You been to BNA lately...? Not much of a hub anymore, and nowhere as many direct or international flights anymore. How about riding on something other than a RJ in and out of CLE lately. What had been a nice little hub for CAL is now devoid of all but a few mainline CAL flights...
Not in a few years, but let's compare PIT as a US "focus city" and BNA as a Southwest "focus city":
Daily flights to LAX: PIT - 2; BNA - 4 (3 on WN, 1 on AA, plus 1 on WN to ONT)
Daily flights to SAN: PIT - 1; BNA - 2
Daily flights to SEA: PIT - 1; BNA - 1
Daily flights to SFO/OAK: PIT - 2; BNA - 1
Daily flights to LAS: PIT - 2; BNA - 3
Daily flights to PHX: PIT - 3 (2 on US, one on HP); BNA - 4
Daily flights to HOU/IAH: PIT - 5 (5 on CO); BNA - 14 (7 each on WN and CO)
Daily flights to AUS: PIT - 0; BNA - 2
Daily flights to MCI: PIT - 0; BNA - 4
Granted, BNA does not have non-stop service to exciting places like AOO, BFD, LNS, JHW, PKB, AVP, MGW, SHD, etc. But it does have more O&D traffic than PIT, in spite of only having a bit over half of Pittsburgh's population.
No, as long as U gets out costs in-line, we can price the market like we plan to even in places we dominate. Trading high yeild for high volume... Then the last thing PHL will want to do is kill the golden goose, just for additonal frequency to MDW... No such thing as "hogging" if we just keep what we already had, and even increase use of those very same gates.
Well, US needs PHL as much as or more than PHL needs US. Without the Philadelphia market, US Airways' transatlantic ambitions simply don't work, and the Caribbean network is substantially weakened. And it is in PHL's best interest to have Southwest stimulate more markets from PHL in order to drive up passenger counts (and it makes passengers happy because the fares are lower).
Until US adopts GoFares in markets that don't compete directly against WN or FL, the city can't count on US to increase volume.
IMO SWA views jetBlue as threat number one, not because of size, or because of style, but rather jetblue is doing what SWA did to everyone else in the past, and is redefining the industry. Gien their size, age, and operating enviorment, jetBlue has more than proven itself in the eyes of smart observers, and smart competitors.
Ever wonder why SWA now has leather seats...? Changed their seating configs to add more room, moving directly into major markets rather than cherry picking them from the outside...?
I agree that Southwest will continue to maintain a watchful eye on jetBlue, but Southwest's priority number one is maintaining the company culture. Southwest was offering roomier seating on the -700 fleet over two years before jetBlue took flight. And they've been serving major markets like LAX, SEA, SAN, SLC, MCO, TPA, STL, CLE, DTW, PHX, and LAS for years.
JetBlue would probably still be shut out of BOS if 9/11 hadn't happened and if Mitt Romney and Neeleman weren't pals. BOS wouldn't have been an option for Southwest at the time that they entered PVD or MHT because they wouldn't have had access to the number of gates they would have wanted.
SWA is in no danger of going out of business, but they sure as heck are paying close attention to, and adapting their business plan to react to jetBlue. It is obvious. And it will be a very long time until the many advantages that SWA alone had enjoyed, no longer apply to jetBlue...
I think Southwest pays close attention to all of its competitors. And if it becomes necessary to add TV's or assigned seating to the product, they will. If anything, Southwest has historically shown a remarkable ability to adapt to changes in the industry.
If SWA was not concerned about jetBlue, and their ability to fly out of the city, instead of a secondary airport an hours drive away, they would have gone into Allentown, Trenton, or both rather than deal with PHL.
TTN was off the table due to NIMBY issues. To be honest, I think Southwest went into PHL versus ABE because of the long-term expansion opportunities -- especially if they think thought that the chances of US going out of business were significant. PHL has the long-term potential (ten years out) to be one of their largest cities, and ABE simply doesn't as a reliever airport.
I don't think there was great urgency to get into PHL before jetBlue simply because they'd likely only overlap in flying to Florida and the West Coast at first. And you can see that that is only a small part of what Southwest has chosen as its markets from PHL.
We already had this discussion. But I will bring it up again in this light. Why would you drive to MHT or PVD when you can fly for the same low fare on jetBlue from BOS...? Why go all the way out to ISP when you can go on jetBlue from JFK for the same...?
You wouldn't. But why would you deal with the hassle of Logan if you live in the Boston suburbs (Rte. 128/495 areas) and the travel time to MHT or PVD is actually shorter? The parking is cheaper, there are fewer delays, and the terminals are nicer in RI and NH. Why would you fight with the awful traffic on the Van Wyck if you are one of the couple of million folks who live closer to ISP? These reliever airports are actually more convenient to a heck of a lot of people.
And the "hypothetical question of the night": Why drive all the way up to CLE to fly on WN, when you could go out of PIT on jetBlue and get the same fare...? THAT is why WN is coming to PIT, not because is is some supposed jewel that US is throwing into the trash.
I would frame their rationale for going into PIT in a different way. The dominant carrier at PIT has cut service by roughly 60% in the past four years, and has essentially given the middle finger to much of its workforce and the taxpayers of the region. The dominant carrier has reduced schedules to a level at which a new entrant can come in and rapidly become competitive, and many of its formerly loyal customers have become somewhat disenchanted. Fares are still high, in spite of promises of lower fares some day. PIT is primed for low-fare stimulation.
And if WN were so worried about jetBlue coming to PIT, don't you think they would have added service to LAX, FLL, ISP, PVD, or MHT in the first wave (since the likely jetBlue cities would be JFK, FLL, and BOS)?
(Sorry, I'm not trying to inflate my post count but the board software seems to choke on too many quotes...)