What's Really Wrong With The Airline Industry - And Can It Be Fixed? 44 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Anyone flying in today’s environment does not need the media or statistics to know that the industry has terrible customer service, packed and dirty aircrafts and the worst on-time performance since data has been recorded.
There is nothing simple about putting hundreds of lives into an aluminum tube using jet engines to propel it 35,000 feet above the ground, traveling close to the speed of sound, to eventually land safely on a stretch of concrete most anywhere in the World. US airline employees assume responsibility for the safe operation of over 20,000 flights each and every day which routinely deal with any type of weather and mechanical failure imaginable.
Make no mistake about it, flying is dangerous. It is made less dangerous by the dedicated men and women who always put the safety of their passengers as their number one priority. When an unexpected in-flight emergency occurs, there is no shoulder on the road to pull over and call 911 and wait for help. It won’t make the media headlines today, but like every day, some pilot will use his/her training and experience to deal with an in-flight emergency that will save hundreds of lives. Every day licensed mechanics use their experience to repair some part of an aircraft to prevent a future tragedy. Like every day, flight attendants will use their training, experience and on board medical safety equipment to keep passengers alive after a heart attack and deal with a multitude of other in-flight emergencies.
I’m not here to defend major airlines' employees, but I can tell you in addition to compensation and benefits, nearly all labor contracts have rules and limitations that often exceed FAA minimums which, is in large part, the reason we have the safest airline system in the world. Over the past 7 years, in order to make up for the tremendous increase in fuel expense and financial losses from 911, employee labor contracts have been under brutal and incessant attack.
Never before in the history of the airline industry have airline employees been under more pressure to have zero tolerance for issues from “in flight security” to “safety of flight”. Yet, these same dedicated airline employees have seen their wages and work rules conceded to the standards of the early 90s, or eliminated entirely due to labor reductions.
It’s common to hear about the success of the Southwest (LUV) business model as compared to the rest of the airline industry. There should be no argument that Southwest is a well organized airline with great customer service. It’s also true without fuel hedging, Southwest would be losing money no less than many other airlines. Importantly, if all airlines copied the Southwest model, there would be no way to fly a US airline across any mainland border. Southwest operates primarily from lower cost outlying airports, often with no same airport connections for international travel. A considerable portion of the more productive Southwest business model comes from flying one type of aircraft in one class (coach) service providing minimal in-flight and connecting amenities, all while avoiding the high cost of international operations.
The US airline industry has seemingly become a mass transit system, frequently offering airfares that cost less than driving your car between the same two airports. If airline customers want a return to the times when aircrafts were new and operated with more empty seats, well rested and happy friendly employees and great customer service, it can only come at some financial cost. Most airlines now compete simply to stay alive as they are forced to provide competing and unprofitable air fares offered by a continuous rotation of new entry low cost airlines that show a constant history of failure. Unfortunately, in order to survive, capturing low fare market share has become a higher priority for airlines than customer service and new modern aircraft.
Below are some startling statistics comparing year 2007 to year 2000 for the 7 largest US major airlines. [American (AMR), United (UAUA), Delta (DAL), Continental (CAL), Northwest (NWA), US Airways (LCC) and Southwest (LUV) control 71% of the US market share.]
- Total Operating Revenue was nearly the same at around $95 billion.
- Capacity as measured by Available Seat Miles [ASMs] decreased by 7% (Southwest capacity increased by 66%).
- In the past 7 years, the average one-way passenger fare has only increased by $18 (+11%) going from $153 to $171. (Note: This is the passenger revenue kept by the airlines and does not include large increases in taxes, fees security charges etc. that airlines are required to charge but do not keep.)
- Fuel Expense increased by $15.5 billion (+128%) going from $12.1 billion to $27.6 billion.
- Employee wage/salary expense decreased by $7.6 billion (-30%).
- Employee wage/benefit percentage of operating revenue decreased by 22% going from 35% to 27%.
- The labor cost of the average one-way passenger fare decreased by $25 (-41%) going from $60 to $35.
- The fuel cost of the average one-way passenger fare increased by $34 (+154%) going from $22 to $56.
- In the last 7 years over 162,000 jobs (-38%) have been eliminated from the largest 6 major airlines as they went from 430,000 to 268,000 employees. (Southwest had an increase of 5,000 employees ending 2007 with 34,378 employees).
- While fuel costs rapidly increased and labor costs and total employment rapidly decreased, the average passenger ratio to airline employee increased by 430 (+36%) going from 1,198 to 1,628. In other words, that reservation or ticket agent or flight attendant must now, on average, resolve issues and provide customer service to 36% more passengers than they did seven years ago.
- During this same time period the average revenue productivity per employee increased by an astounding $107,442 (+52%) going from $206,370 to $313,812.
Data is for mainline operations and does not include contracted affiliates. Source is SEC and BTS reports. (Some data may be estimated for 2007.)
While discussions address the question regarding what the problem is with the airline industry, itseems like a rather easy question to answer after you understand what has actually occurred.
Related Articles
|
Find People on SA
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largest
increase in followers
in the last 7 days-
1
David Fry
-
2
Bill Gross
-
3
TraderMark
-
4
Peter Schiff
-
5
Serge Hagopian
Fastest Climbers » -
1
-
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most activeSee all
Instabloggers.
Top Instabloggers » -
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 44 comments:
The airlines need to stop selling their product for less than it costs.
Why they can't figure that out is beyond me.
Please continue to write articles that share the truth. Thank you.
I would also like to point out that "the airlines" are separate companies that have to compete against each other while having to comply with federal, state, and local laws. At the same time, they must pay a multitude of taxes and fees levied at them from the federal to the local level.
Bankruptcy laws further complicate the picture, allowing inefficient companies to continue. The normal laws of "free enterprise" don't work because poorly run companies continue to drain business away from more efficient companies.
So, grouping airlines together and pointing a finger at the entire industry for problems beyond their control is an overly simplistic view that is unfortunately held by most of the public.
The airlines are out of business and just dont realize it!
Also, nothing about the FAA which operates the airway system as well as the airline oversight. Ticket taxes have raised about $10 billion in the time frame mentioned with noine of it spent to impove the ATC system, and most gping to non-airline expenditures. That is what cuases these horrible delays that the press is too lazy to report correctly. No crew wants to have their passengers sitting on the runway
Southwest operates one aircraft type because that is the most cost effective method of operating an airline. That is their plan which can be copied by anypne. Southewest also operates in many airports that have inetrnational service. Examples are Baltimore, St Louis, Seattle, Washington, San Francsico, Los Angeles, Pittsburg, Orlando, Phoenix, Detroit etc. They are able to operate more cost effectively because they have the strong balance sheet that enables them to hedge fuel where most post bancruptcy major airlines cannot. Fuel cost IS the business. Their "Minimal" service is usually better than the major carriers. They undersell their service and the other guys oversell.
There was never a good reason for Delta or others to operate 7-10 different aircraft types. If they had used the Southwest philophy, they could have handles most domestic flights with one or two types and most international also with one or two types.
One phenomenon the article does not discuss is the dramatic rise in private flying. It's pretty expensive compared with mass airline travel, but professionally flown private aircraft are taking a bigger and bigger bite out of the premium customers the airlines used to depend on for a lot of their revenue (and the majors are striking back by trying to increase the cost burden on these flights). Companies like Dayjet, FlightOptions and Berkshire Hathaway's Netjets offer point-to-point flights to many more airports without the hassles of long lines, surly fellow passengers, no food, and all the other unpleasant hassles of modern mass air transit.
We're going to see more capacity cuts and pretty soon, we're going to see sharp fare increases. As a consumer I'm happy to fly from California to Florida for less than I paid in 1978 but as a business person, know that's not sustainable at current fuel prices.
Traffic will fall but so long as profitability rises, investors should cheer. If profitability also leads to better service, the best customers will stick around, too.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, they fly 2 aircraft types: 737-300/500 ("737 Classics") and 737-700 ("737 Next Gen"). Just because both types have "737" in the name doesn't mean they're the same type, any more than a 2008 Corvette shares anything other than name with a 1972 Corvette.
Southwest also is heavily unionized and has high labor costs, it's just that their management works WITH their unions to get the highest productivity out of their employees - and with a smile.
Southwest connects a lot more traffic than people think. Go sit at BWI any afternoon and watch how many pax are connecting. And while conventional wisdom is that Southwest is a "point-to-point" carrier, they have several stations that can be called hubs by anyone's definition of the word.
Southwest is a profitable fuel speculation company, that happens to also run a money-losing airline.
Still, a great article that is very well researched.
Not "aircrafts".
Was the writing of this article farmed out to Bangalore?
The fact your money has not been spent on upgrading our ATC from the Commodore 64 era is a major reason for many of the delays that pax and airline employees endure. Trust me, as a 15 year airline pilot, we detest delays more than the passenger does.
The problem with regulation is the bankruptcy laws. If a true free market is to prevail then the weak must be allowed to fail. But they are not. More than one "Legacy" carrier was allowed to operate in bankruptcy for more than 2 years. This negates the primary concept of the "free market".
Labor and fuel are the largest part of an airlines expense.
When fuel goes up 130% and labor cost go down 30%, but revenues over the same period remain the same, there is your explanation.
We enjoyed your article and put a brief synopsis on our blog at
blog.parksleepfly.com/
Best wishes,
Stephen Hartshorne
steve@gonomad.com
Year after year, cities and states, banks and businesses hand over money and enticements to start-up airlines with no real business plans in hopes of obtaining "cheap fares."
Several months later these same companies are bankrupt. The "management" usual leaves in the middle of the night with money in their pocket stranding thousands of passengers in the process. So much for "cheap fares." Eventually someone is going to pay. Usually it's tax payers.
Doubly insulting is the fact that it's being paid for by employees of solvent companies who are being asked to take concessions to compete with the fly-by-night operations.
Thus the downward spiral results as airline management chases its tail in a game it can't win without a booming economy. This industry needs a new economic model or genius entrepeneur with a new take on generation of profits. Otherwise, the "golden age" is over.
Because they will be the only airline left operating. And then they will charge what it costs them to provide the product, plus a decent profit. Remember those fuel hedges decrease significantly over time.
And I can promise you those tickets wil be much, much, much more expensive.
Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it
Government controlled industries are regulated to serve the public. Industries exposed to free market capitalism serve their shareholders. We need to stop expecting the airlines to do both. The airline industry needs to be sensibly regulated, or, deregulated to allow airlines to operate in a free market.
The airline I work for raised the minimum fare on any ticket $12 dollars. These are the bargain basement fares, and forward bookings on those markets decreased by 12%. When you are already operating at a loss, as a business you cannot afford to lose that kind of numbers.
The travelling public is ultra price sensitive. The reason a'la carte pricing is coming into play is because this has worked for European carriers for quite some time and the public here somehow isn't quite as wary to this type of price increase as a straight fare increase.
Ticket prices will rise and capacity will be cut. Perhaps customer satisfaction will then rise and will be a competitive issue in the future.
Timjet
The comment about Southwest and hedging is, by its very nature, speculative. No one can say definitively how Southwest would perform if it didn't hedge.
The industry has a number of structural issues; I just want to mention a few.
There are basically two marketing strategies: a company can compete on price or on some sort of differentiation. Companies that try to do both aren't successful. Southwest competes on price: to be successful with this strategy, the airline has to be the low cost producer--for many years there was no question that Southwest had dramatically lower costs than its rivals. It was and is successful in its niche with a clearly defined and relatively flawlessly executed strategy.
Look at all the legacies: on one hand they try to differentiate themselves with frequent flyer programs, elite status for frequent fliers and premium services in the business or first class cabin. At the same time, the carriers signal low price guarantees and all kinds of saver fares. The hotel industry has it right--or at least the message is clearer: it's pretty easy to differentiate, say, Motel 6 from Hilton based on how they advertise their respective products. Legacies send the same message as those carriers that compete on price, but they also signal differentiation. It's really no wonder that passengers complain more vocally about legacy carriers than, say, a Southwest Airline. At least look at the Department of Transportation website--the section that focuses on consumer complaints. Southwest promises nothing and delivers what it promises. Legacies, in my opinion, send confusing marketing messages and receive more complaints as a result.
The legacies also have two types of customers: those that shop on price and those that make a purchase determination on other criteria. This latter group is more important to the airlines in that if they can pretty much fill the front cabin and sell a few full fare coach seats, everything else is pure profit. (The next most important group is cargo then passengers who base a purchase decision on price!) The majority of people traveling in a given plane are flying at less than cost. It is a crazy industry.
However, the legacies are stuck: the low cost carriers too for that matter. As I stated elsewhere, they're stuck between a highly inelastic commodity, fuel that happens to be a major expense and the highly elastic behavior of airfares: raise the fares and consumers find a substitute. Raising fares is not a panacea to solve lack of profitability.
The industry is highly capital intensive--aircraft are expensive to own and operate--and, consequently, the industry has a high breakeven point. Once that breakeven point is reached, everything else is gravy. Like any capital intensive industry, competition on price ensues when profits start to vanish. It happens in the chemical, steel even the auto industry: big capital sinks must be kept humming. That situation won't change--unless some carrier can come up with a magic formula to attract all of its customers on something other than price.
While some of your comments can be argued you are wrong in your conclusion that SWA fuel hedging cannot be reconciled (due to speculation).
Each airline reports somewhat detailed fuel and derivative information via SEC filings.
Here is a quick summary of each airlines 1st qtr 2008 average fuel cost per gallon and gallons used: (gallons are in millions)
AA.. 680 gallons at $2.732/gallon.
UAL.. 556 gallons at $2.833/gallon.
DAL.. 500 gallons at $2.85/gallon.
CAL.. 375 gallons at $2.7965/gallon.
NWA.. 367 gallons at $2.7974/gallon.
JBLU.. 117 gallons at $2.65/gallon.
SWA.. 373 gallons at $2.01/gallon.
Without their aggressive and very successful fuel hedging, SWA would have paid at least .75 cents more per gallon (see other airlines fuel cost noted above);
Without fuel hedging, SWA would have increased 1st qtr fuel expense by at least ~$280 million.
That ~$280 million -fuel hedge savings- was considerably more than SWA's 1st qtr 2008 Operating Income of $88 million or the $34 million in net profit.
Regarding the "drama" of the industry; I'd like to point out there is virtually no industry I am aware of that by it's very operation has such potential for risk (I.e., hundreds of thousands of human beings being carried at high altitude at hundreds of miles per hour in a very complicated man-made machine completely under the control of just two individuals albeit they are well trained Captains and Co-Pilots.)
I can assure you on a daily basis there are a number of in flight emergencies that you will never hear about only because airline employees on those aircraft have used their experience and training to land that aircraft somewhere safely.
Regards,
Robert Herbst
AirlineFinancials.com
If the proportion of profits increased at oil companies is relative to the losses at airlines, lets have government close this gap.
Problem solved.
I am not arguing that hedging doesn't have an effect on the profitability of Southwest Airlines, my thesis is that no one can make a definitive statement about the state that the industry might be in had Southwest not hedged. No can say for certain. To state that Southwest would may or may not be profitable is speculation--there's no way to know. That's the point. If Southwest didn’t hedge, it would seek to remain profitable in other ways, most likely through raising some or all fares. If Southwest were to do that, it’s unclear what the effect on the overall industry would be.
I think that everyone can accept that safety is a concern in the airline industry. There is a smaller margin for error and that catastrophic events can occur. The fact is that the industry has processes and procedures to mitigate the problems. The fact is that, based on objective criteria, airline travel is the safest mode of transportation. It's safer than using a toaster, a hedge clipper, even owning a dog. My comment isn't that there is no danger; it's that danger is successfully and predictably contained. Any danger associated with airline travel is basically a non issue for investors.
A little international competition might weed out the inefficient operators and actually help get US airlines back on their feet, assuming that such American companies are still able to compete. In the long run, it will lead to a more efficient domestic air travel market.
If the airline is offering a level or service and fails to deliver--regardless of price--the passenger has a right to complain.
Reregulation is, in my opinion, a dumb idea. There's too much capacity. Letting one of the big guys go under (I vote for NWA :) ) would help.
Safety isn't an issue--that argument is a canard.
It keeps within the greater part of our modern culture (unfortunately). I truly believe that we as a nation are standing at some very serious crossroads. We've been steadfastly heading in this direction.
So, the average American Joe, or Jane, is pretty much ignorant of the thousands of things which must go right for them to rush to a gate, and hop aboard XYZ Airlines seat, and safely be wisped from any city USA to any city USA. They are unconcerned.
They are equally as unconcerned with anything and everything that is not directly associated with their direct world, business, or lives. Not for a second do they take a moment to think of the simple element of FLIGHT in of itself. Moving a machine through such a dynamic, and harsh environment. The demands upon the very machine which they are so unconcerned to even bother to know it's type.
The machine upon which their very lives depend. The operators of those machines. The persons who are responsible for maintaining those machines, scheduling them, and cleaning them. All the passenger is concerned with is...."Are we going to be on time?" And, "the price of a ticket!"
So many times I have observed people as they sit in a boarding gate area, stood in the line in the loading bridge, and even sat in their seats. I listen to the small talk...It's appalling for the most part.
"I think that Southwest is better then XZY..." "Can't believe they don't even feed us anymore!" "I'll NEVER fly XYZ Airlines again, they ALWAYS lose my bags!" It goes on and on, like incessant babble with no thought, no reason.
Passengers seemingly fail to realize that in almost any and every way, even with the overloaded planes, weather delays, lost bags, and the occasional mechanical delay, that they are getting a better deal than the deal that whatever industry, job, or service that they themselves are providing.
When was the last time that a Medical Doctor worked for you at a price where his or her bill did not cover the expense of his practice? Even more so with an Attorney...When did your attorney "GUARANTEE" that he would win your case? Convict a bad guy, resolve a conflict, or do anything other than generating a bill with his hours, and looms of paper? When was the last time that you purchased an item...any item, a car, computer, cellular phone, printer, or anything in which the sales person passed on their commission to you the customer, so that you received a good deal?
Ever call for warranty service for any product? How many times were you satisfied with the customer service, or the manufacturer solidly standing behind the product that was sold to you? That is a long gone concept these days. These are the people, the salespersons, attorneys, doctors, managers, distributors, and so forth who are climbing aboard, and complaining about the airlines. Do they ever stop to think; "what sort of product am I producing?" What sort of service am I providing?
At least in the airlines industry, I know that for the past 20 years I have safely gotten each and every one of my passengers from their point of departure, to their destination. Day, night, bad weather, wind, snow, low visibility, etc. Each and every single time. They are unaware of life threatening emergencies. A calm PA announcement from me explaining to them why we had to turn around and go back to the airport has been made three times in 20 years. And, of those three times, nothing worse than a short delay to correct the problem, and have them on their way.
Been back and forth to the Hawaiian islands no less than 1440 times in the past 10 years. One thousand four hundred forty transpacific crossings, with takeoff's equaling landings. That's 3,268,800 nautical miles (3,759,120 "statue" miles - as in car driving miles) and 360,000 human soles I have been personally been responsible for. They are all alive ( or were when entrusted to me at the time of their flight).
That's a pretty typical record. Can you say that about your field? Is there a technical rep out there who has satisfactorily resolved 100% of the calls about Windows XP crashing? Or, an attorney who's had a 100% satisfaction of whatever their clients retained them and paid them for? I would love to hear from them.
We are a very critical times here in this great nation of ours. We are living during times of record greed, and the lowest amount of ethics. The founding fathers would be spinning in their graves if they ever knew of what is going on, and practiced as savvy business. False advertising, bait and switch, and down right fraud are the tools implemented today.
We fail to teach our children even how to behave, much less the math and science skills required to continue to lead the world as we once did. We produce little of nothing, importing nearly everything from China, and other Asian Country's. We ship all (or as many as we possibly can) jobs overseas, leaving American employees out of jobs.
Greed? "Greed is Good" as stated by Gordon Gecko, in the movie Wall Street. I think that the basics of Capitalism works as intended by the founding fathers. However, we were intended to produce. To stand behind what we produced. Pride was had in the craftsmanship.
Unfortunately, I see this only as the beginning. On our present course and heading, it's going to hurt a lot more than it is today.
The Airlines as bad a condition as they are today, will get worse. Quite possibly we will see what happened to the Steam Ship Industry here in America. No more large ships are built, operated, or registered here. We may very well lose the entire Airline Industry to overseas carriers.
At very least, I am able to sleep (well) at night (for the time being)...I am employed with the responsibility of the safe carriage of human beings, to and fro across thousands of miles, at nearly the speed of sound. My promise is to get you there, alive well, and in one piece. That's my guarantee and promise to you.
I did it for twice what I am paid today. Even with a 50% cut in pay, and total loss of pension, I still give you the same exact service. Just as much Safety! I don't just do half of an emergency checklist due to the fact that I am receiving half as much pay.
America truly needs to wake up. We need to THINK again. We need to smell the coffee before it's too late, if it already isn't too late to turn this nation around.
I certainly do not wish to ridicule or put down any profession, job or position, but, I do wish to be provocative of THOUGHT!
The vast majority of people don't understand how a cell phone works; they don't know how cars operate; people are clueless about how electricity reaches their homes; the inner workings of a television is a mystery to most; heck an explanation of the very computer you're using is beyond the ability of most people. If you want to continue the appeal to emotion: life depends on the function of the Sun--I bet 99.9% of people can't explain how the Sun works. How about the biochemistry of the liver or an explanation of how the heart functions? The world we live in, loaded with deadly microbes, is a scary place--how do we survive from day to day? Just like the air travel system, it doesn’t matter to most people--nor should it--how it works.
The following cuts to the heart of the comment: just because there's danger doesn't mean that something is dangerous. Air travel is safe. Air travel is very safe. Passengers pay professionals to make it safe. If they do their jobs, why should people care the details of how its accomplished? There are literally thousands of complex things that occur every day to make society function and to sustain life. I listed a few above. None of us really needs to know how each works. Put another way, when we buy an airline ticket, we're outsourcing worry to someone else.
The argument about a doctor is kind of silly! The argument about an attorney is really poor analogy: it doesn't work. As for passing on a commission--come on--you're talking apples and oranges! Air travel differs from each of the professions and activities listed; the analogy doesn’t hold. The market sets the price for air travel. Right now, the market has set a price, in aggregate, for airline travel that is lower than the cost. Airlines can't raise fares without reducing capacity. There was another announcement of capacity reduction today. Cutting back on capacity is the answer.
The reason jobs move overseas has got to do with comparative advantage. Having said that, when the figures are analyzed, outsourcing overseas doesn't have a major influence on domestic employment. The economy is moving on to things that have more value add.
I agree that things will get worse for the airlines in the sense that there will be capacity reductions and more costs taken out of the system. It's tough to suffer a pay cut, but that's what the market is telling employees they're worth. I don't see it getting better.
Hub and Spoke - this is to 'Drive' traffic so supposedly you can collect all the pax
from smaller markets and efficiently transport them to major markets. Trouble is this is NOT efficient unless you happen to be an accountant who is only looking at collecting ALL the revenue from a pax because everytime you take off or land there are fees to be paid to the government and airport authorities etc.
Also you might notice that equipment from the legacy carriers flies east to west in the AM and west to east in the PM through a limited number of hubs. So in the event of a ground stop at ANY hub you then have cascade effects which ripple througout the system for hours/days/weeks as there is no equipment to service the 'feeder' airports. Contrast this to SWA and many of the regionals who fly point to point or a multi-leg route.
In the event of a ground stop at a airport the equipment to fly the route is merely delayed as it is servicing a fixed set of destinations and the pax can continue as soon as the ground stop is cleared. with hub and spoke flights need to be cancelled and pax reaccomodated or told to lump it.
Equipment airlines are required to maintain a set of spares for each of the aircraft types they fly many of these parts are expensive and pretty much handcrafted (think engines) so the airlines must maintain at their expense a set of spares which will handle any conceivable need as many of these parts have leadtimes measured in YEARS there is no going to 'Joe's aircraft parts' to get the part you need. So each type of aircraft needs potentially tens of billions of dollars in spare parts stocked at the airlines expense. Also Pilots and A/P (Airframe and PowerPlant) technicians need to be certified to work on specific aircraft so if you hold a cert for a 737 you are not allowed to fly/repair a 757 unless you hold a cert for that aircraft as well.
So the SWA model saves billions in fixed costs and the crews are always ready to fly and maintain the aircraft on the ramp as many times the delay for network carriers stems from they have crews available but they are not certified for the aircraft on the ramp and a crew needs to be flown in (taking up revenue space) to fly/repair the airplane.
The fuel hedging certainly helps SWA but flawless execution of their business plan helps more SWA has ALWAYS operated at a profit even during the 80's when the airlines were imploding before. Also SWA has the HIGHEST labor cost of ANY airline as their employees are well paid.
The lesson of SWA should be taken by many US businesses the company is run by people who know their BUSINESS not the finance department who is only interested in cutting costs and the BOTTOM LINE.
SWA and the Japanese industrial firms always remembered Deming's mantra
"If you manage for the bottom line, soon you will not have a bottom line"
One last bit of SWA's success they get you to your destination ON TIME, EVERY TIME. This is why the former first class PAX are flying Private or SWA the most important product any transportation company provides is getting you to your destination safely and ON-TIME.
I am no longer a airline HQ employee I am just a regular business travleler but I fly SWA so I can make my meetings with vendors and clients. I can buy a sandwich which I LIKE at the airport I can't buy on time performance which the legacy carriers have forgotten about.
There certainly is a diversity of equipment among legacy carriers. Part of the reason is that these companies serve many different markets. It's a small point, but Southwest really flies two different pieces of equipment: the -700 and -300 series aircraft aren’t identical. There's no question that the minimization of diversity practiced by Southwest is one of the factors that leads it to consistent profitability.
I don't think that knowing a business and focusing on financial issues are mutually exclusive by any means: Southwest does both.
Southwest has consistent, stellar results, but the carrier wasn't always burdened by high labor costs. In the 80s, LUV had a much more favorable labor cost than its competitors and certainly than it does today. Southwest is no longer a growth stock in that it participates in the business cycle: high labor costs are one reason for the comparatively lackluster performance of the company.
Unfortunately, when you start to talk about on-time performance, a credibility gap starts to open! The statement about Southwest getting to the destination on time, every time is just nonsense. Southwest has its share of delays. Consistent delays were the reason that Southwest pulled out of Denver well over ten years ago, and why it left San Francisco a few years back. It’s now back in both markets. Southwest does well in on-time performance, but others have done better. The Department of Transportation statistics released for March showed that Southwest ranked number 5 in the US. You can check out www.dot.gov or here's a link to a newspaper article on the topic: www.bizjournals.com/bi... Southwest did much better in April, beating all th legacies (check here www.bizjournals.com/wi...). Actually, here's a link to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics of the DOT: www.bts.gov/press_rele....
The comment about former first class passengers flying Southwest because of on-time performance is just nonsense. Certainly, the industry pioneered by companies such as NetJets competes to some extent with the premium services offered by legacy carriers. Southwest does not.