flynryan692, on Aug 14 2009, 08:43 PM, said:
βцziεł-411, on Aug 14 2009, 06:11 PM, said:
flynryan692, on Aug 14 2009, 07:26 PM, said:
βцziεł-411, on Aug 14 2009, 10:16 AM, said:
flynryan692, on Aug 14 2009, 11:16 AM, said:
βцziεł-411, on Aug 14 2009, 09:11 AM, said:
flynryan692, on Aug 14 2009, 01:16 AM, said:
The part about only employing only a small fraction of F9 employees, selling off all the aircraft, and making Frontier nothing more than history.
I see you can't answer a simple question without reeking of anti-Southwest and Frontier fanboyism.
I answered
his exact question...wth?
He asked why we thought SWA would do that and I told
him..
I see you can't make a simple post without reeking idiotism.
I asked the question.
You did answer it, but your tone and the "mellow" emoticon made it took like you were saying, "This is why, you idiot."
I put the mellow emoticon becasue of the part where I said "Nothing more than history". I would be happy with that is all.
@ Bill and Alaska, yes, in size. Not revenue, passengers etc. Southwest has had the least amount of profit in Denver for sometime
*Cough*
Low prices and no baggage fees
*Cough*
*cough*
Southwest effect doesn't work in Denver
*cough*
your a southwest fan boy so quit acting like your not
*cough*
I'm a fanboy?
I was a Southwest fanboy last summer, I sounded just like you. I wanted competing airlines shut down and didn't care about the employees, I could see no wrong in what they did, and if anyone dared put them down, I was ripping them to shreds.
Ask Independence76. He knows.
I've said multiple times they looked like a decent airline and I really don't care if they get bought out or not, the thing that bothers me is your vicious attitude and hate of SWA just because they succeed in many routes.
If Frontier "raped routes", I would imagine you wouldn't have a problem with it.