Will you fly Southwest? (Atlanta, Washington: credit, live, prices)

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

This is key, but rare. You can fly Delta all you want, but chances are, you aren't flying to another hub.

I flew Delta to Chicago a couple of years ago. The amount of BS we put up with NEVER would have happened at Hartsfield, but O'Hare isn't a Delta hub. So flying Delta does eliminate half the problem, but unless you are flying to another Delta hub, you still take the risk of putting up with small player garbage.

Domestic Delta hubs are:

Atlanta
Cincinnati
Detroit
New York (Kennedy, not LaGuardia)
Salt Lake City

How often do you use those airports?

Even if you are a Delta fan, competition is key to keeping Delta's fares competitive.

I think you're missing the point about a hub.

There will be more flight options between Chicago and Atlanta on Delta, because one of the two is a Delta hub vs. two equal sized major cities that are non-hubs that have direct flights.

Cities over a few million often have direct flights between non-hubs on a few airlines, but there might only be 2 or 3 a day. Whereas a hub airline will have 10 a day.

I would say Chicago and Atlanta are more competitive, because Chicago is a hub for American and United and Atlanta is a hub for Delta. Each of these airlines will run a few more flights a day from each of these cities to allow for connecting passengers. They aren't just shuttling the market between Atlanta and Chicago, but all of those connecting at either airport on the way to Atlanta or Chicago (depending which direction you're flying)

The only caveat that stops competition... is some of the larger airports are at capacity. You can't get more gate space at JFK as example.

[toll_booth]

Yes. I've already flown Southwest a couple times since they arrived. Absolutely love them. They actually know what this thing called "customer service" is, something that Delta may never understand.

BTW, Southwest's boarding process is determined primarily by the order of check-in, not arrival at the gate. They changed it years ago. And for people who really really wanna be near the front of the pack, you can get in the very first group for an extra $10 per ticket.

[dblackga]

The other major consideration for us is legroom -- both my husband and my son are TALL, and in regular coach seats, they arrive cramped and miserable. Southwest generally has more legroom for free than Delta, so sometimes it can be a juggling between a Southwest seat and what an upgrade on a Delta seat would cost.

I think I liked air travel better when you dressed up to fly on a plane, they fed you on china and the only thing you carried onboard was your jewelry case. Ah, those were the days . . . :-)

[testa50]

RIP AirTran.

Actually, as the de-hub process goes along Airtran is really nice. The planes are nearly empty. I've flown to Akron and Pittsburgh recently--I got a row to myself both times. On Delta, that happens basically never.

But I'll fly Delta 100% of the time if the price is the same. No comparison. The only time it's tempting to choose another airline is going to Asia, when I'd much rather fly Korean Air. You have to connect no matter what (unless you're going to Tokyo or Seoul), and KE service is far superior to flying Delta with a layover in Detroit or Seattle. But since Delta gutted the KE partner mileage, I'll begrudgingly fly on their metal.

I just hope Southwest maintains service to enough major markets to keep Delta honest and R/T fares in the $500-$600 range. Delta is quick to yank prices up to $800-900 when they're the only carrier on a route. To places like Louisville!

[Staysean23]

Yes I do all the time just got Free round trip ticket with the points I accumulated from flying with them... plus I like not having to pay for my bags

[space cadet]

I will fly Southwest. The open seating does not bother me, except when you screw up and get a bad position (i.e. C group). However, early check-in or small extra fee can avoid that. Their customer service is the best I've seen in the industry. I did like them a lot more a few years ago when they were always the cheapest fare. Their rise in fares in the past few years has been a little drastic, and makes me like them a little less. They were lucky enough to lock in a fuel hedge before fuel skyrocketed about ten years ago. They were the only airline in that position, so they were always able to undercut prices. However, that fuel contract has obviously expired, and they are not always the cheapest fare anymore.

[JC84]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

It's pretty irrelevant to me as the flight routes will be the same.

However, I have noticed that for an airline that is known as a low cost carrier, Southwest is very often more expensive than Delta. Oh well, that's the beauty of capitalism...if someone can do it better, cheaper, they will.

I wonder if someone can clear a couple things up for me that Southwest's boarding and baggage policies invoke:

1) When you have reserved seating (I know Southwest doesn't, but work with me here), why is it considered a privilege to board first? Shouldn't the people who pay the most and have the best status board last? It seems to me that more time you can spend in an airport instead of a tight airplane is the real luxury. Why is it considered a good thing to spend more time on the airplane? To me, the ultimate luxury is last one on, first one off.

2) I swear I don't understand checked bag fees. Carry-on bags make boarding and disembarking very time consuming. It used to be that the airlines always wanted you to check bags. To me, this makes a lot more sense. In my mind, fees should be assessed on carry-on bags. This would make getting on and off a lot smoother, nevermind shorter lines at airport security. Why doesn't the TSA insist on this? Also, when you check a bag, you are accepting risk that the airline may lose or delay your bag. You have much more control with a carry-on bag. Why would a passenger want to pay money to accept more risk? The whole system is backwards! Charge to carry-on, and encourage as much as possible to be checked!

The reason for 1. Is limited overhead space. More people are bringing carry ons instead of checking a bag, so on a full flight if you board last, your bag is the one getting gate checked. Plus even if it's not gate checked, it will probably be 15 rows behind you since that's likely the only open overhead space.

Secondly, airlines make their profits on fees, not really on the ticket price itself. The checked bag fees in particular are to discourage people from bringing anything and everything with them, because all of that extra weight costs mre in fuel. That's why you see insane overweight and oversize fees.

[Psykomonkee]

Originally Posted by ATLTJL

This is key, but rare. You can fly Delta all you want, but chances are, you aren't flying to another hub.

I flew Delta to Chicago a couple of years ago. The amount of BS we put up with NEVER would have happened at Hartsfield, but O'Hare isn't a Delta hub. So flying Delta does eliminate half the problem, but unless you are flying to another Delta hub, you still take the risk of putting up with small player garbage.

Domestic Delta hubs are:

Atlanta
Cincinnati
Detroit
New York (Kennedy, not LaGuardia)
Salt Lake City

How often do you use those airports?

Even if you are a Delta fan, competition is key to keeping Delta's fares competitive.

This is going to suck for me...
I don't use those airports often.
My most common airports are:

Atlanta
Phoenix
Baltimore
Washington Reagan
Los Angeles LAX
San Diego

AirTran provided me great service to all of those cities that I need frequent.

This kind of makes me a little upset with Southwest for choosing to remove Atlanta as a Hub city instead of adding it as a new Southwest Hub city. Jerks.

Oh well, Delta & US Airways provides me good service between those cities, so I guess I'll stick with those guys and bid Southwest/AirTran farewell...

[Psykomonkee]

On second thought...
Is it REALLY going to make a difference with Southwest removing Atlanta as a hub???

I don't know the effects, so can someone please explain?

[testa50]

Originally Posted by Psykomonkee

On second thought...
Is it REALLY going to make a difference with Southwest removing Atlanta as a hub???

I don't know the effects, so can someone please explain?

Yes. Any route that AirTran used to serve, Delta would typically match their fare (or come close). If they didn't serve the route, Delta's fares would jump dramatically. For instance, one-way nonstop fares from Atlanta to Cincinnati on Jan 8 are currently $322. One-way fares to nearby Dayton, however, are $166-$197. That's because AirTran flies to Dayton, but not Cincinnati.

AirTran's business model depended on people taking cheap vacations from the Northeast and Midwest to Florida. Period. (So does Delta's, actually, but to a lesser degree.) Atlanta happens to be a perfect location to make these connections. That's largely why we're the busiest airport in the world.

Southwest heavily favors point-to-point operations, which is less focused on filling each and every plane and more focused on capturing origin & destination traffic. They don't like massive hub operations.

As a result, we're losing a lot of routes to smaller markets that don't have enough origin & destination traffic to maintain service, especially with two airlines (such as Buffalo, Rochester, Flint, etc). These markets will all be much more expensive in the near future, if they aren't already.

On the plus side, Southwest started nonstop service from Atlanta to San Diego, which AirTran never served to my knowledge. There's enough O&D between Atlanta and San Diego to justify the route, apparently. So fares on that ought to go down dramatically. We will tend to see Southwest serve large cities from Atlanta, rather than a combination of large cities and small markets that need connecting vacation traffic. The loss of the latter hurts if you travel up and down the east coast a lot, even if you seldom use AirTran.