Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
WN/FL merger not going as planned, eh? >

WN/FL merger not going as planned, eh?

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

WN/FL merger not going as planned, eh?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-19-2012, 08:08 AM
  #91  
The Brown Dot +1
 
scambo1's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Default

Originally Posted by 1Seat 1Engine
If we look at all the airline mergers that have happened in the last decade, I would argue that none of them have gone "as planned".

When comparing the other relevant data points, I think that the SWA/AT merger is moving along at an above average pace.
SWA has said publicly that it will take them about 2 years to get everything sorted and straightened out. That sounds about right. From a business perspective, having the SL done and the employee piece done (while not necessarily pretty from the perspectives of individual employees), SWA is ahead of the power curve compared to other companies. That part alone is huge and will enable swa to continue to be a player for emerging opportunities.

So, I am not a regular basher and agree, SWA is generally ahead of the game.
scambo1 is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 08:12 AM
  #92  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: 737 F.O.
Posts: 180
Default

Originally Posted by scambo1
No, it never did.

Have another sip of the koolaid. I don't want your head to explode.
The alternative to the plan that is in place is to decide to NOT purchase AirTran until a later date when all the needed infrastructure is in place to provide an immediate and seamless transition of all AT flying to the SWA side. With this scenario a competitor is allowed to compete and win profits therefore denying Southwest the ability to earn those profits. If you think that is a more solid plan then more power to you and I suggest you start your own airline and operate it as you see fit. What you see as Kool-Aid drinking I see as understanding and supporting the company's business plan.

Last edited by johnso29; 04-19-2012 at 08:26 AM.
CRJAV8OR is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 08:15 AM
  #93  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: 737 F.O.
Posts: 180
Default

Originally Posted by upndsky
People are seeing it very clearly. You, apparently, do not. They're not arguing about who gets the money (it all goes to SWA). It's the fact that instead of an integrated network and reservation system that allows a passenger to fly one leg on SW and another on AT, you will still be operating as two separate (and, in a way, competing) airlines. No exactly what a merger (or acquisition) is supposed to provide.

Ie, a passenger wants to go from A to B. There are no direct flights. AT flies from A to C and SW flies from C to B. They won't be able to book it, so they'll go to DL/UA/AA/US. That's lost revenue for you.

Are you seeing it now?
See the post above. Are you seeing it now?
CRJAV8OR is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 09:41 AM
  #94  
Gets Weekends Off
 
newKnow's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Default

Originally Posted by CRJAV8OR
The alternative to the plan that is in place is to decide to NOT purchase AirTran until a later date when all the needed infrastructure is in place to provide an immediate and seamless transition of all AT flying to the SWA side. With this scenario a competitor is allowed to compete and win profits therefore denying Southwest the ability to earn those profits. If you think that is a more solid plan then more power to you and I suggest you start your own airline and operate it as you see fit. What you see as Kool-Aid drinking I see as understanding and supporting the company's business plan, blindly. Never considering that the developers of said plan are humans, who make mistakes, just like the rest of us, and might have underestimated some of the potential problems created by this merger. I am so happy to work for the airline created by God, and therfore never have to consider the possibility that its managers may be fallible.
I fixed your post CRJ. (all in fun)
newKnow is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 09:43 AM
  #95  
Gets Weekends Off
 
upndsky's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Bebe Bus De L'Air Assistant Aerial Conveyance Facilitator
Posts: 351
Default

Originally Posted by CRJAV8OR
See the post above. Are you seeing it now?
No one is arguing the merits or the reasons for the merger. Considering what is going on with the legacies and the regionals, consolidation within the LCCs was inevitable.

What is being argued is that the process itself is not going as smoothly as your management had hoped and what they have you believe. Will those issues get resolved? Of course... eventually. But having gone through our own merger -- with its own issues -- and from the outside looking in, it appears that the management you flaunt so proudly has made some missteps or at least some miscalculations that, in the near term, will hit your bottom line.

That's the way I and some of the others who have posted here see it. You obviously have a different perspective, but don't discount what others outside your sphere have to say.
upndsky is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 10:08 AM
  #96  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: CA
Posts: 1,207
Default

Originally Posted by upndsky
No one is arguing the merits or the reasons for the merger. Considering what is going on with the legacies and the regionals, consolidation within the LCCs was inevitable.

What is being argued is that the process itself is not going as smoothly as your management had hoped and what they have you believe. Will those issues get resolved? Of course... eventually. But having gone through our own merger -- with its own issues -- and from the outside looking in, it appears that the management you flaunt so proudly has made some missteps or at least some miscalculations that, in the near term, will hit your bottom line.

That's the way I and some of the others who have posted here see it. You obviously have a different perspective, but don't discount what others outside your sphere have to say.
Mistakes on the part of SWA have obviously been made in the past as well as the present and will most definitely continue in the future. Nobody is infallible and SWA is not and never immune to that undeniable fact. However, the tone of this thread is that SWA has completely dropped the ball and is in way over their head in this case. The speculation has been that they have bitten off more than they can chew and never saw the potential pitfalls of a merger scenario. There is the possibility that they saw all the potential problems going forward but weighed that with the opportunity costs of.not going forward.
shoelu is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 12:12 PM
  #97  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2011
Posts: 166
Default

Every merger is different--in this case there are some pretty large differences in the two brands. In the earning call today, Gary made it clear that each side would run by it's own rules rather that trying to mix the streams and wind up with a confusing customer experience. (Business class/no business class, assigned seating/no assigned seating, bag fees/no bag fees, etc) Let's face it--some current AirTran customers will hate flying Southwest and a short-term "Southwestification" of the AirTran experience might only hasten their exit to other airlines. It seems the plan is to keep people happy with what flavor they like rather than mixing the two and winding up with a flavor that even less people like.

Will it work? Gary Kelly has spent his whole career at SWA and was a CFO before becoming the CEO. He has a staff of bean counters at his disposal to look at data points from 4,000 flights a day. At most I see the world from the soda straw of 6 flight a day. I'll put my money on the tall guy from UT to figure this thing out.
V169 is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 02:06 PM
  #98  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MatthewAMEL's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 756
Default

SWA completely dropped the ball. Not having a reservations system that can handle:

1) 'overnight' flights
2) assigned seats
3) international operations

in 2012 is laughable.

Having a home-built res system that runs on home-built PCs in 1990 is 'pioneering'.

Now it's incompetence.
MatthewAMEL is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 07:14 PM
  #99  
Gets Weekends Off
 
blakman7's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 270
Default

Originally Posted by shoelu
Mistakes on the part of SWA have obviously been made in the past as well as the present and will most definitely continue in the future. Nobody is infallible and SWA is not and never immune to that undeniable fact. However, the tone of this thread is that SWA has completely dropped the ball and is in way over their head in this case. The speculation has been that they have bitten off more than they can chew and never saw the potential pitfalls of a merger scenario. There is the possibility that they saw all the potential problems going forward but weighed that with the opportunity costs of.not going forward.
I happen to agree with Shoelu here guys. Not everything will go as planned and obstacles will have to be cleared. Even though I'm not a fan of the way that SWA has gone about a few things in this acquisition, I think that it is going rather smooth compared to some other mergers that we have all seen....gee.....some are still not making progress.
blakman7 is offline  
Old 04-19-2012, 07:39 PM
  #100  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: CA
Posts: 1,207
Default

Originally Posted by MatthewAMEL
SWA completely dropped the ball. Not having a reservations system that can handle:

1) 'overnight' flights
2) assigned seats
3) international operations

in 2012 is laughable.

Having a home-built res system that runs on home-built PCs in 1990 is 'pioneering'.

Now it's incompetence.
Well, I really hope your ready to learn how to attempt to do more with less, 'cause if you're not, you are setting yourself up for some serious disappointment. At times, it is annoying, at others it's comical!
shoelu is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TheManager
Major
9584
07-28-2015 12:15 PM
sl0wr0ll3r
United
114
11-22-2010 03:40 PM
SD3Dog
Mergers and Acquisitions
142
03-04-2009 06:15 AM
SWAjet
Major
8
03-26-2008 05:00 AM
joel payne
Hangar Talk
1
10-14-2006 03:18 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices