While I agree entirely witn nsx's points--heck, I agree with him about 99.7% of the time--I think we're all influenced greatly by the number of nonstops from our home bases to the places we need to go.

Here in Sacramento, SWA has around 85 nonstops per day FROM Sacramento (and, of course, 85 flights per day TO Sacramento). This makes using SWA a no-brainer for me most of the time. None of the legacies has more than about 15 flights per day in and out of Sacramento; most have around 6 to 8.

On my nonstop flight to Chicago last week, my wife and I had row 7 (DEF) to ourselves, even though there were 113 pax on board. No infants or small children on the flight. But what I really appreciated were the comfortable leather seats and the leg room--as nsx stated, better than anyone else's in coach except UALs E-Plus and Jet Blue. Sitting on the right-hand side of the plane in row 7, I had FOUR INCHES of room between my knees and the row in front of me! That simply doesn't occur on NWA, USAir, AA or DL in coach, only on UALs E-plus and on Jet Blue. It's a result of the layout of SWAs 737-700s in rows 1-10 (?) on the right side of the plane, and the fact that their leather seats, while very comfortable, are actually thinner than the seats on some other carriers.

Sure, if I were traveling a lot on business, I'd prefer a carrier with an airline lounge--but NO carrier has such a lounge in Sacramento, to my knowledge, and it's just not that high a priority for me.

I also appreciate SWA's on-time departures and arrivals, the result both of the attitude of their employees and of their business model.

However, my main point is, we all fly the carrier that works best for us. It amuses me, and puzzles me sometimes, to see others slamming an airline that works very well for a lot of people (more than any other airline, if I'm not mistaken), often as a result of outdated and erroneous assumptions.

 

Please continue to arrogantly avoid those of us on that great big greyhound in the sky.

I'll take the CP, non-surly FAs, awards you can actually use when you want, no change fees, and your choice of seats.

Did I mention the no change fees? That alone has probably saved me 2 grand this year, and since I own my company, I'm paying for the travel.

But again, please keep flying CO and UA. I like all the extra room.

 

I feel the same way, but I feel that's what WN fanatics do about those who fly so-called legacy airlines. UA works best for me because they have International routes, First Class, lounges, free standby, and (gasp!) seat assignments. WN fanatics seem to dismiss those as not important, but I hate musical chair seating, and I avoid WN precisely for the lack of things that are important to me.

Thankfully most of my travel is discretionary, so I will probably find a new hobby if I have to contend with WN! My two flights on VX have shown me that VX will be a good alternative if they can survive.

 

as long as its possible to get longhaul F awards, ill stick with regular FFPs.

for those who dont want that, id agree its silly not to stick with the LCCs, if you can.

 

I don't fly WN, because I don't fly domestically, but for what it is worth:

Most businesses can't afford to do it now. Those companies that allow paid F for anything less than a transcon are distinctly in the minority. This reality is reflected in the decrease in F fares we have seen over the past 5 years or so.

I'm not so sure about that. I just don't see the market for "real" F. I mean, ALL of the evidence suggests the market is not that big, nor that profitable. To whit, I offer:

1) The Euro carriers long ago got rid of it.
2) None of the US carriers offering it make money.
3) The US carriers have scaled back the quality of domestic F.
4) WN makes money and does not offer it.
5) Space available upgrades should be expected to reduce demand for domestic F, yet are still offered, suggesting that demand is far below supply, perhaps even negligible on a vast number of routes.

In short, I just don't think it brings enough incremental revenue to both offset the loss of seating and the additional costs in operating two classes. It has application on very few routes, perhaps 20 to 25 city pairs.

Why would you question their ability to make money? They have been profitable for, what, 20 years now? Many of those years did not see expensive fuel. The fact of the matter is that WN is just better run than any of the legacy carriers.

While I agree that the WN fanatics can be as annoying as any of the legacy fanatics, I do question whether things like International routes, F, and the like are actually important enough. It is not clear at all that these things translate into a revenue premium for the carriers. It isn't clear that they translate into higher load factors. Everyone professes to care but this isn't reflected in macro-level trends. Either those that care are disproportionately represented on FT (likely) or they are overstating their ability and/or willingness to pay a premium for it (also likely). My guess is that it is a combination of both.

 

MDW is about 25 minutes from downtown on the train, while ORD is 45 minutes away. The Kennedy Expy is also a much more time-consuming nightmare than the Stevenson Expy. And don't forget the chronic delays at ORD.

 

But I live and work 15 minutes from O'Hare, so why would I want to go to Midway?

 

I would say the number one irritation for me is the "festival" seating on Southwest. Those of you who attended rock concerts in the '70s and '80s know what I am talking about. While standing outside the coliseum all day to get a decent seat to see my favorite band may not have bothered me when I was in high school, I have not done so for a long time and I don't want to do that when I fly. Just give me an assigned seat and be done with it.

In regard to the frequent flyer programs, no matter how bad the "saver" availability, at least you can usually get a seat at the double miles (non-saver) rate. I have had pretty good luck and have always have had the flexibility to use miles at the saver rate. Since I do not fly that often, any credits earned in the Southwest ff program would be useless to me. With the other carriers, you can keep the miles indefinitely as long as you have some activity in the account.

As far as the pricing goes, if Southwest is significantly cheaper than any of the other carriers, I will fly them. In my experience, the other carriers have tended to match or beat the price on flights I have taken the last few years so I have not had to fly Southwest.

 

I agree with most of nsx's points, but I think he's overlooking two other advantages that the legacies have over WN:

1. Many travellers have to fly internationally a fair bit. Obviously they have to do so on one of the legacies. So then it makes sense for them to stick to that legacy for their domestic travel -- they don't want to fly WN for all their domestic travel and thus not have status on their international trips, which can be miserable.

2. WN simply doesn't make much sense for longer domestic flights, where you'll have to connect once or often twice as compared to nonstops offered by the legacies.

 

It has been pointed out probably hundreds of times lately on FT that this dreaded "standing-in-line cattle-call system" no longer exists on Southwest.

There is no need to stand more than 1-2 minutes.

 

Pretty sure that there are no two-connection itineraries anywhere in Southwest's published schedule.

 

There are a large number of two stop itin's in WN's schedule. Just plug in random trans-con routes. BOI-CMH, ALB-LAX, ABQ-MCO, TUS-ALB. You used to even be able to pull up three stop routes.

 

I think that you are going to see the LCCs operate domestic travel with a connection to the remaining Legacies for the international segment.

 

Fair enough, but IMHO there's a significant difference between two stops and two connections.

 

Allow me to give my perspective, based on about 120K BIS miles in the last six months on "legacy" carriers, primarily AC, NW, CO and KL.

1. I have received a free upgrade to F on every domestic flight this year on NW and CO that has F. And that's in spite if my company's lowest-fare policy.

2. I have no trouble booking award tickets, either domestic or international. International J can be challenging, but then I don't think SW offers that, either.

3. The quality of domestic Y is irrelevant if you sit in F. And on AC (where I more often sit in Y), the Y quality is just fine. (As a business traveler, I really don't care a whit about IFE, either.)

4. I can board first, and get either an upgrade to F or preferred seating on any of the airlines I fly.

Beyond that, my status gets me access to both *A and ST lounges, with a quiet, comfortable environment, free wi-fi, and free snacks and drinks.

You have not convinced me, at least. Maybe SW works better for you, but I still get "real" benefits from flying a "real" airline.