Will SWA buy, or merge with another airline in the near future?

[eolesen]

Enough on Wright. You already have two or three threads running on that topic...


I suspect Gary left the door to AS open intentionally. Why box yourself into a statement made based on the current environment? I don't see DOJ approving anything with any of the Big Four just because of the relative market share each of them holds. If WN were to somehow shrink below 15%, or if AS were to be on the ropes financially, maybe there'd be an argument for merger approval. But WN isn't shrinking and AS isn't on the ropes.

 

[swamt]

no it didn't.

Tell me when the Wright Amendment was challenged by other airlines over THEIR access to DAL or DFW.

AA and WN fought plenty but the assumption ALWAYS was that the federal government would preserve the interests of non-Texas airlines.

UP until the AA/US merger, non-Texas airlines had no reason to get involved in the mess at DAL and DFW.

that might well be changing.

WN is trying to squat on as much of DAL as possible before they find that a judge rules that they overstepped their bounds.

There is no legal justification for saying that DAL told airlines to accommodate DL and then have them all decide to make deals among themselves to keep DL out.

You might find how well DL can put together NATIONWIDE support for reopening the whole Wright Amendment and everything related to it and strip WN of the gates it does have at DAL and the gates they have until every carrier that wants to serve DAL has the right to be accommodated.

The best laugh will come when AA, DL, and UA all serve DAL along with VX and WN is forced to split its N. Texas oprations between DFW and DAL or settle for the same size operation it had at the time WN's first schedules were published.

WN doesn't want to and hasn't competed against carriers if they can avoid it.

You don't need to keep arguing with me.

I am just telling you what is coming.

You really need to get a clue.  It's not what is coming, it's what is leaving, and that is Delta from LF!!!

 

[swamt]

how about you recount the legislative efforts that DL has engaged in and tell us their track records on them.

I'm not saying they will go that far but I can assure you that DL didn't start its campaign to get access to DAL only to turn around when the opposition told them to take a hike.

and Q, I know it is a big concept for you but air lines have two ends - and in this case only one of them is in Texas. legislators all over the country can grasp the value in having increased access to their city via a 2nd airport.

Correct.  Airlines have 2 ends. And one of Delta's ends are puckering soooo bad right now.  LOL...

 

[swamt]

Enough on Wright. You already have two or three threads running on that topic...


I suspect Gary left the door to AS open intentionally. Why box yourself into a statement made based on the current environment? I don't see DOJ approving anything with any of the Big Four just because of the relative market share each of them holds. If WN were to somehow shrink below 15%, or if AS were to be on the ropes financially, maybe there'd be an argument for merger approval. But WN isn't shrinking and AS isn't on the ropes.

Like we said before, right now they are just rumors.  But that's how everything starts, isn't it?

 

[robbedagain]

Swamt or wn what cities do AS and WN overlap if any if they were to merge

 

[WNMECH]

Swamt or wn what cities do AS and WN overlap if any if they were to merge

 
I don't know where to see that info easily, but you can compare these two route maps.
Just view non stop flights.
 
http://www.southwest.com/flight/routemap_dyn.html
 
 
http://www.alaskaair.com/content/route-map.aspx

 

[WorldTraveler]

E is right. There will be no merger between WN or any of the big 4 and any other airline without significant divestitures.

the biggest overlap is at LAX in terms of facilities.

As long as the DAL issue remains open, WA will be a topic.

The WN people want to pretend it is a shut case, but it is not.

WN best have a plan for where to pullback its schedule to accommodate DL because there is a real good chance that they and UA will be forced to do so.

 

[robbedagain]

Thanks wn

 

[jimntx]

Swamt or wn what cities do AS and WN overlap if any if they were to merge

When it comes to anti-trust/anti-monopoly concerns, it's not always an issue of route overlap.  For instance, if Airline A has a near monopoly over a considerable area west of the Mississippi (even if it's just a case of no one else wants to fly those routes--see also, the state of Alaska itself -- and Airline B has a good grip on a major percentage of the flying east of the Mississippi, there might still be objections to a merger between the two.

 

[WorldTraveler]

that is correct, jim, and that is why any mergers involving the big 4 at all - and WN is absolutely in the same class domestically as the big 3 legacy carriers - will only decrease.

When there is ample evidence that WN's average fares are growing faster than any of their peers and they eliminated a low cost carrier in the FL merger, the chances that they will be given free reign to buy anyone else is between slim and none.

and the same argument will be true with DAL, DCA, and LGA where WN is coming in with cheap fares but will raise them to levels as high as or higher than AA - but by that point they want to have access locked up so no one else can get in.

The difference is that there are mechanics at LGA and DCA for new entrants to get into the market; DAL has to either follow the rules they filed with the government.

regardless of what WN did in its early days, it is building its route system to the great extent possible around markets which it can serve free from competition or where it has such a large share of the market that no other carrier can reasonably expect to be significant.


that is why UA - which won't take on WN in the same markets - and VX which is way too small are no real competitive challenge to WN at DAL.

 

[swamt]

The WN people want to pretend it is a shut case, but it is not.

 

Nobody has or is pretending that this is a shut case-NOBODY!!!   This is your way to try to say I told you so later on when all this continues to fall apart and NOT in what you said would happen.  In other words you are already twisting up what people have said.  Right now Delta is fired from LF by the COD, not SWA, not UAL, not Virgin.  As of all my postings I speak of the NOW, which is Delta is gone and they have not filed a suit as of now.  NEVER have I or WN or anyone else has ever said that there will never be s suit either, so don't even try to go there.  What is odd is Delta has not done anything so far and the time is winding down, a week has past since the COD's announcement, and a week remains and still haven't heard a word from Delta except for the threat and only that Delta has "threatened" a suit.  Means nothing until they file it, anyone can threaten a suit all they want to.  I actually fully expect Delta to try and do something, but I am pretty sure that the rules and regs surounding the W/A, DOJ's requirements as well as the 5 parties involved agreement will prevail over any suit filed by Delta, and that is why I say Delta will indeed waste their money on a suit.  Yes, this is a very different situation all around compared to any other city out there, and there are very different rules and regs that must be followed and prevail over other regulations.  Like WN and E has said and told you over and over again, "YOU NEED TO READ ALL THE RULES AND REGS concerning the Dallas two airports, they are very different than any other city pair out there, period...

 

[WNMECH]

Nobody has or is pretending that this is a shut case-NOBODY!!!   This is your way to try to say I told you so later on when all this continues to fall apart and NOT in what you said would happen.  In other words you are already twisting up what people have said.  Right now Delta is fired from LF by the COD, not SWA, not UAL, not Virgin.  As of all my postings I speak of the NOW, which is Delta is gone and they have not filed a suit as of now.  NEVER have I or WN or anyone else has ever said that there will never be s suit either, so don't even try to go there.  What is odd is Delta has not done anything so far and the time is winding down, a week has past since the COD's announcement, and a week remains and still haven't heard a word from Delta except for the threat and only that Delta has "threatened" a suit.  Means nothing until they file it, anyone can threaten a suit all they want to.  I actually fully expect Delta to try and do something, but I am pretty sure that the rules and regs surounding the W/A, DOJ's requirements as well as the 5 parties involved agreement will prevail over any suit filed by Delta, and that is why I say Delta will indeed waste their money on a suit.  Yes, this is a very different situation all around compared to any other city out there, and there are very different rules and regs that must be followed and prevail over other regulations.  Like WN and E has said and told you over and over again, "YOU NEED TO READ ALL THE RULES AND REGS concerning the Dallas two airports, they are very different than any other city pair out there, period...

Exactly.
 
Anyone can file a lawsuit. This is America.
Delta may get a little mileage from the United gate sublease. We don't know what they were promised, and by whom.
 
But if they go after the Wright Amendment Reform Act of 2006, my prediction is it will be ultimately upheld.
 
But this should stay in the Delta thread.

 

[WNMECH]

I suspect Gary left the door to AS open intentionally. Why box yourself into a statement made based on the current environment? I don't see DOJ approving anything with any of the Big Four just because of the relative market share each of them holds. If WN were to somehow shrink below 15%, or if AS were to be on the ropes financially, maybe there'd be an argument for merger approval. But WN isn't shrinking and AS isn't on the ropes.

 
You must factor in that WN is the only low cost airline in the big 4 and is the smallest of them.
The DOJ has always been biased to help low cost completion over the legacies.
The WN and Alaska networks do not over lap very much, and a good case could be made the this merger is a good counterweight to the biggest 3.
The same argument can be made as others have used, that WN needs it to compete more effectively with the 3 giants.
The DOJ and others solidly believe that low cost carriers are essential to keeping a check on fares.
 
The mergers of the big 3 have been seen as BAD for competition, so the divestitures of gates and slots were ordered.
I contend that a larger and stronger WN will be viewed as GOOD for the traveling public.
And I believe it would be seen that way by many, many people in power.

 

[eolesen]

You must factor in that WN is the only low cost airline in the big 4 and is the smallest of them.

Uh, no.

First, WN is a low fare airline, not low cost.

Second, there's no way you can claim they're the smallest when they're the #1 carrier in domestic enplanements.
 

The WN and Alaska networks do not over lap very much, and a good case could be made the this merger is a good counterweight to the biggest 3.

Yeah, another not quite.

WN is present in what I'd guess is probably 80% of the core AS network in the Lower 48.

 

[robbedagain]

If WN and AS were to merge... how wld that affect B6, NK and VX?