Case in point: The St. Louis Americanstlcardsblues1989 wrote:http://www.stlamerican.com/news/local_n ... 002e0.htmlShanghai is also the hub for China Cargo Airlines, an airline studying St. Louis-Lambert International Airport as a potential cargo hub for new Chinese-U.S. trade. Airline representatives will visit St. Louis on Feb. 20 to study and negotiate possible air routes and schedules. China Cargo Airlines recently merged with other companies to make it China’s largest cargo airline and one of the largest in Asia.
While Shanghai students are graduating from Webster and Chinese business leaders are traveling to St. Louis, many local residents remain unaware of these changing global relations, stubbornly focused on local racial tensions.
- 2,932
^ The rest of the article is more engaging than that one paragraph.
The author does have a point, in that this is a city (and country) where newspapers were recently polling their readers online if they were giving too much coverage to the Egyptian Revolution, hands-down the most important story in the world and critical to the US near-term and long-term, because most people would rather read about Charlie Sheen than Hosni Mubarak. Likewise, some people are so caught up in their own concerns that they don't have the availability, let alone desire, to learn of global relations & related matters.
Still, that article could've been worded so much better. I respectfully wonder if the author could point to Shanghai on a map.
The author does have a point, in that this is a city (and country) where newspapers were recently polling their readers online if they were giving too much coverage to the Egyptian Revolution, hands-down the most important story in the world and critical to the US near-term and long-term, because most people would rather read about Charlie Sheen than Hosni Mubarak. Likewise, some people are so caught up in their own concerns that they don't have the availability, let alone desire, to learn of global relations & related matters.
Still, that article could've been worded so much better. I respectfully wonder if the author could point to Shanghai on a map.
- 1,364
Good news
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news ... -2010.htmlMissouri exports increased 36 percent in 2010, according to data released Monday by the World Trade Center Saint Louis.
Last year, the total dollar value of Missouri exports was $12.9 billion, up from $9.5 billion in 2009.
China is now the third-largest buyer of Missouri products with 43 percent export growth last year, totaling nearly $1 billion in sales,” Nowak said.
- 284
Case in point: The St. Louis American[/quote]the count wrote:http://www.stlamerican.com/news/local_n ... 002e0.htmlstlcardsblues1989 wrote:
While Shanghai students are graduating from Webster and Chinese business leaders are traveling to St. Louis, many local residents remain unaware of these changing global relations, stubbornly focused on local racial tensions.
Seriously. "Local businessman goes to China" is news? Did we get transported back to 1920?
- 11K
Ha! With any luck he'll bring back some exotic spices and tales of the elusive "panda" bear!
- 8,915
As talks continue with Chinese airlines to land cargo flights at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport, state and local officials have proposed authorizing up to $256 million over eight years to help make the region a hub for international trade, including up to $60 million in air export tax credits.
On March 1, Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt of Glendale introduced Senate Bill 390, which would authorize tax credits for airlines and developers to encourage foreign trade in a designated “gateway zone,” including around Lambert as well as other airports in the state. The bill was a months-long collaboration by the senator, Mayor Francis Slay’s office, St. Louis Development Corp. and Lambert officials, according to Jeff Rainford, the mayor’s chief of staff.
Missouri exports increased 36 percent in 2010, according to data from World Trade Center Saint Louis. Last year, the total dollar value of Missouri exports was $12.9 billion, up from $9.5 billion in 2009.
China is now the third-largest buyer of Missouri products with 43 percent export growth last year, totaling nearly $1 billion in sales, according to Tim Nowak, executive director at World Trade Center Saint Louis.
However, some doubt the effectiveness of creating a cargo hub at Lambert for planes to or from China, including Mike Boyd, president of aviation consulting firm Boyd Group International, based in Evergreen, Colo. Still, Boyd said offering incentives to export more goods from any airport could be beneficial for economic development. “To incentivize people to move is great, but it depends on what you’re exporting,” he said. “Air cargo is obscenely expensive, so it has to be time-sensitive goods that would go on air cargo to make up for the cost.”
Read more: Bill offers $60 million in tax credits to aid exports | St. Louis Business Journal
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/prin ... edits.html
On March 1, Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt of Glendale introduced Senate Bill 390, which would authorize tax credits for airlines and developers to encourage foreign trade in a designated “gateway zone,” including around Lambert as well as other airports in the state. The bill was a months-long collaboration by the senator, Mayor Francis Slay’s office, St. Louis Development Corp. and Lambert officials, according to Jeff Rainford, the mayor’s chief of staff.
Missouri exports increased 36 percent in 2010, according to data from World Trade Center Saint Louis. Last year, the total dollar value of Missouri exports was $12.9 billion, up from $9.5 billion in 2009.
China is now the third-largest buyer of Missouri products with 43 percent export growth last year, totaling nearly $1 billion in sales, according to Tim Nowak, executive director at World Trade Center Saint Louis.
However, some doubt the effectiveness of creating a cargo hub at Lambert for planes to or from China, including Mike Boyd, president of aviation consulting firm Boyd Group International, based in Evergreen, Colo. Still, Boyd said offering incentives to export more goods from any airport could be beneficial for economic development. “To incentivize people to move is great, but it depends on what you’re exporting,” he said. “Air cargo is obscenely expensive, so it has to be time-sensitive goods that would go on air cargo to make up for the cost.”
Read more: Bill offers $60 million in tax credits to aid exports | St. Louis Business Journal
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/prin ... edits.html
"matter of time"=7 months....ahh isn't capitalism great!soulardx wrote:[the July 27, 2010] STLBJ story on Lambert's high landing fees quotes Michael Boyd, president of Boyd Group International, an aviation consulting firm in Evergreen, CO. Boyd basically shoots down this whole Chinese cargo idea.
It's behind the suscriber wall, but I'll quote his section.
http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... tory1.html
Boyd:
...a St. Louis-China freight connection is impractical given the cost of transporting cargo via air.....It's very expensive to move something by air, and it's only worth it to move cargo to a market where it's immediatly produced or consumed....Unless you have an immediate generator of cargo demand in St. Louis, the idea of putting a cargo hub there doesn't make sense...
Sounds like it's only a matter of time until serious MO/STL tax subsidies are offered for this idea.
Interesting write up regarding STL choosing to "snub" Fedex 25 years ago and how they are trying to make up for it today.
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... d-airport/
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... d-airport/
- 641
STL's past arrogance plus lack or forsight raises my blood pressure through the roof. Who are these people that made such idiotic decisions?
- 1,610
Well it's very easy to call a decision idiotic after having 20 years of data to analyze. Not as easy to make 20 years ago. I'd assume that if the "arrogant idiots" who made the decision knew that TWA would fold, the airport would be empty & FedEx would be as huge in Memphis as it is, the might have chosen a different path.sirshankalot wrote:STL's past arrogance plus lack or forsight raises my blood pressure through the roof. Who are these people that made such idiotic decisions?
That being said, would FedEx be as successful if it set up shop in STL rather than Memphis? St. Louis has/had lots of major companies; Memphis has FedEx. I don't know that St. Louis would be able to provide the amount of support/incentives/tax breaks to one company like FedEx has been given in Memphis. So even if the "idiotic" decision hadn't been made and FedEx was a major tenant at Lambert, would it be the same type of presence as we're used to in Memphis?
- 641
Read it closer Rick. We were offered the seconday hub that ultimately went to Indy. This seconday hub housed in Indy has produced 20,000 jobs. Lesson to the arrogant idiots: NEVER TURN DOWN BUSINESS.ricke002 wrote:Well it's very easy to call a decision idiotic after having 20 years of data to analyze. Not as easy to make 20 years ago. I'd assume that if the "arrogant idiots" who made the decision knew that TWA would fold, the airport would be empty & FedEx would be as huge in Memphis as it is, the might have chosen a different path.sirshankalot wrote:STL's past arrogance plus lack or forsight raises my blood pressure through the roof. Who are these people that made such idiotic decisions?
That being said, would FedEx be as successful if it set up shop in STL rather than Memphis? St. Louis has/had lots of major companies; Memphis has FedEx. I don't know that St. Louis would be able to provide the amount of support/incentives/tax breaks to one company like FedEx has been given in Memphis. So even if the "idiotic" decision hadn't been made and FedEx was a major tenant at Lambert, would it be the same type of presence as we're used to in Memphis?
- 1,610
Point is still valid. They did it to protect TWA. Why risk ticking off TWA? At that time, TWA was still a monster airline & passenger air was still somewhat of a viable revenue stream for an airport. Again, its much easier to critique the decision after seeing it play out.sirshankalot wrote:ricke002 wrote:Well it's very easy to call a decision idiotic after having 20 years of data to analyze. Not as easy to make 20 years ago. I'd assume that if the "arrogant idiots" who made the decision knew that TWA would fold, the airport would be empty & FedEx would be as huge in Memphis as it is, the might have chosen a different path.sirshankalot wrote:STL's past arrogance plus lack or forsight raises my blood pressure through the roof. Who are these people that made such idiotic decisions?
That being said, would FedEx be as successful if it set up shop in STL rather than Memphis? St. Louis has/had lots of major companies; Memphis has FedEx. I don't know that St. Louis would be able to provide the amount of support/incentives/tax breaks to one company like FedEx has been given in Memphis. So even if the "idiotic" decision hadn't been made and FedEx was a major tenant at Lambert, would it be the same type of presence as we're used to in Memphis?
Read it closer Rick. We were offered the seconday hub that ultimately went to Indy. This seconday hub housed in Indy has produced 20,000 jobs. Lesson to the arrogant idiots: NEVER TURN DOWN BUSINESS.
- 641
We'll just disagree then. The cow-towing to our major business pillars is a theme that has been repeated over and over. Memo to Civic Regress: businesses are temporary...
- 115
I imagine there's an alternate reality in which Saint Louis did become a FedEx hub instead of Indianapolis & American Airlines still bought TWA. Present-day critics in alterna-STL are blaming the city leaders of the mid-80s who welcomed FedEx w/ open arms & lost us our TWA hub, along w/ XX,000 jobs. "Sure, the FedEx jobs are great, but not worth the loss of our passenger hub. Now we're so small town, like Indy."
I also think Brett Hull & Adam Oates won several Stanley Cups together for the Blues in this reality, while once-promising young QB, Peyton Manning, just announced his retirement from the NFL after a disappointing career w/ the Saint Louis Stallions, who are now threatening to move to Jacksonville. Ryan Leaf & the Los Angeles Rams just won another Super Bowl to put the cherry on top of a decade-long dynasty.
I also think Brett Hull & Adam Oates won several Stanley Cups together for the Blues in this reality, while once-promising young QB, Peyton Manning, just announced his retirement from the NFL after a disappointing career w/ the Saint Louis Stallions, who are now threatening to move to Jacksonville. Ryan Leaf & the Los Angeles Rams just won another Super Bowl to put the cherry on top of a decade-long dynasty.
Well, no. That's tremendously revisionist. TWA moved its headquarters to St. Louis as part of a bankruptcy reorganization. It was damaged goods. It was financially tenuous from the moment it moved here.ricke002 wrote:Point is still valid. They did it to protect TWA. Why risk ticking off TWA? At that time, TWA was still a monster airline & passenger air was still somewhat of a viable revenue stream for an airport. Again, its much easier to critique the decision after seeing it play out.
But the Great White Fathers were (and basically still are) just like the woman who thinks it's just bad luck that she keeps dating creeps. "I can change him," she always thinks.
"Just a few more incentives and they'll be a success," they always think.
The TWA courtship set off a chain of events under which we spent $2B for a runway we didn't need before TWA met its inevitable demise.
Here's an article from 1993, right before TWA graced us with its presence. Excerpted, italics mine.
Trans World Airlines Inc. and the city of St. Louis were pushing Tuesday to seal a deal that would give the carrier badly needed cash and perhaps bring its headquarters here.
TWA hoped to have an agreement by today, when executives will appear in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Del., to seek confirmation of their reorganization plan. "My understanding is that everything's reasonably on track, " said Don Fleming, a company spokesman.
TWA has resolved nearly every other issue related to the reorganization, which would transfer ownership from New York-based financier Carl Icahn to creditors and employees.
People familiar with the talks between TWA and the city said the airline wants to raise as much as $70 million through a deal involving its hub at Lambert Field.
Under the plan, TWA would sell its gates, jetways, baggage systems, hangars and other assets around Lambert to the city. The city then would lease them back to the airline.
75 percent of the traffic that flows through Lambert and a similar percentage of the gates.
As part of its reorganization, TWA plans to move its headquarters from Icahn's base in Mt. Kisco, N.Y., to St. Louis, Kansas City or New York - the homes of the airline's main operations.
The airline has said it will base its decision partly on economic incentives each candidate would provide.
Those familiar with TWA's reorganization said the aid that St. Louis would provide through the Lambert deal would give St. Louis the edge in the competition, if not assure it victory.
TWA remains in negotiations with officials in Kansas City and New York.
The cities have been less than enthusiastic about waging a bidding war for the headquarters because of the risks the airline still faces.
But the winner will still wind up with 300 or more jobs, plus added prestige as a corporate center.
Fleming, of TWA, said he was uncertain whether executives would announce their decision on a headquarters site at today's hearing on the reorganization plan.
To win confirmation, TWA must demonstrate to U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Helen Balick that the plan is fair to creditors.
TWA also must show that its business plan is reasonable and that the airline has a good chance of surviving - a dicey proposition without additional financing.
Industry analysts say that although TWA would emerge from bankruptcy with lower debts, lower operating costs and a new spirit, it still faces a difficult fight for survival.
TWA filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of the federal bankruptcy code in January 1992, after failing to keep up with payments on its aircraft leases and its crushing debt load, which doubled under Icahn.
- 1,610
Apologies for my misinformation, but again; the main point is being overlooked. It's very easy to look back and critique the decision. Get over it. Move on. Didn't happen.
Bonwich, for more context, how about you pull up some coverage of FedEx and the "cold shoulder" STL civic leaders gave the company 25 years ago. I assume you have access to the PD's entire database. Be intersting to read. Thanks.
Just saw your avatar. Domer? Domers are never wrong. (This coming from the offspring of a SMC chick and a class of '48 who spent 10 years on the faculty when I was a kid. Oh, yeah, I also have two relatives buried on campus.ricke002 wrote:Apologies for my misinformation.
)Oddly enough, for all the memories I have about bad decisions locally, I don't remember that one in the least. I'll look, probably closer to the end of the week as I'm pretty swamped right now.soulardx wrote:Bonwich, for more context, how about you pull up some coverage of FedEx and the "cold shoulder" STL civic leaders gave the company 25 years ago. I assume you have access to the PD's entire database. Be intersting to read. Thanks.
- 1,610
Nope, just a lowly SIUe Cougar. I have no problem being wrong (when I am, which is rare). Grandpa was ND class of '48, also, I believe. Left in the middle for WW2 and came back to finish up.bonwich wrote: Just saw your avatar. Domer? Domers are never wrong. (This coming from the offspring of a SMC chick and a class of '48 who spent 10 years on the faculty when I was a kid. Oh, yeah, I also have two relatives buried on campus.
You are correct.ricke002 wrote:Point is still valid. They did it to protect TWA. Why risk ticking off TWA? At that time, TWA was still a monster airline & passenger air was still somewhat of a viable revenue stream for an airport. Again, its much easier to critique the decision after seeing it play out.
Here are some airlines that filed for bankruptcy. Some more than once: US Airways, Delta, Frontier, United, Northwest, Air Canada, the list goes on. Some of them merged, some reorganized. The cities that invested in them are now reaping the benefits. TWA was close but just didn't make it. Nobody at that time could've imagined they would cease to exist.bonwich wrote:Well, no. That's tremendously revisionist. TWA moved its headquarters to St. Louis as part of a bankruptcy reorganization. It was damaged goods. It was financially tenuous from the moment it moved here.
If I am not mistaken the total cost of the new runway was $1.1 billion. Inevitable? I don't think you would have made that statement in 1993.bonwich wrote:The TWA courtship set off a chain of events under which we spent $2B for a runway we didn't need before TWA met its inevitable demise.
Deals like this were made and are still being made between cities and airlines everywhere else in the USA. TWA didn't make it in the end but St. Louis' economy profited from their huge presence with 700+ daily domestic and international flights, hundreds of jobs downtown and thousands more in the region. Even when American took over, not all was lost. The real dismantling started as a result of September 11th and who could've foreseen that to happen.bonwich wrote:Here's an article from 1993, right before TWA graced us with its presence. Excerpted, italics mine.
Trans World Airlines Inc. and the city of St. Louis were pushing Tuesday to seal a deal that would give the carrier badly needed cash and perhaps bring its headquarters here.
TWA hoped to have an agreement by today, when executives will appear in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Del., to seek confirmation of their reorganization plan. "My understanding is that everything's reasonably on track, " said Don Fleming, a company spokesman.
TWA has resolved nearly every other issue related to the reorganization, which would transfer ownership from New York-based financier Carl Icahn to creditors and employees.
People familiar with the talks between TWA and the city said the airline wants to raise as much as $70 million through a deal involving its hub at Lambert Field.
Under the plan, TWA would sell its gates, jetways, baggage systems, hangars and other assets around Lambert to the city. The city then would lease them back to the airline.
75 percent of the traffic that flows through Lambert and a similar percentage of the gates.
As part of its reorganization, TWA plans to move its headquarters from Icahn's base in Mt. Kisco, N.Y., to St. Louis, Kansas City or New York - the homes of the airline's main operations.
The airline has said it will base its decision partly on economic incentives each candidate would provide.
Those familiar with TWA's reorganization said the aid that St. Louis would provide through the Lambert deal would give St. Louis the edge in the competition, if not assure it victory.
TWA remains in negotiations with officials in Kansas City and New York.
The cities have been less than enthusiastic about waging a bidding war for the headquarters because of the risks the airline still faces.
But the winner will still wind up with 300 or more jobs, plus added prestige as a corporate center.
Fleming, of TWA, said he was uncertain whether executives would announce their decision on a headquarters site at today's hearing on the reorganization plan.
To win confirmation, TWA must demonstrate to U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Helen Balick that the plan is fair to creditors.
TWA also must show that its business plan is reasonable and that the airline has a good chance of surviving - a dicey proposition without additional financing.
Industry analysts say that although TWA would emerge from bankruptcy with lower debts, lower operating costs and a new spirit, it still faces a difficult fight for survival.
TWA filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of the federal bankruptcy code in January 1992, after failing to keep up with payments on its aircraft leases and its crushing debt load, which doubled under Icahn.
Indeed, hindsight is 20/20.
the count wrote:Here are some airlines that filed for bankruptcy. Some more than once: US Airways, Delta, Frontier, United, Northwest, Air Canada, the list goes on. Some of them merged, some reorganized. The cities that invested in them are now reaping the benefits. TWA was close but just didn't make it. Nobody at that time could've imagined they would cease to exist.
You just proved your own point. The airline industry as a whole was in drastically poor shape. Any "investment" in them was questionable; any city that did "reap the benefits" was basically lucky, since there many more that got screwed.
Kinda depends on how you count, pun intended. Add in the interest charges on the debt, and I bet you come closer to $2B.the count wrote:If I am not mistaken the total cost of the new runway was $1.1 billion. Inevitable? I don't think you would have made that statement in 1993.
As for 1993, I actually did make that statement then. First of all, I was working for a local company that had grown from about $2M to more than $10M in about a decade, and eventually topped out at $40M. Folks like us always used to bristle a little when the local "leadership" threw massive subsidies around.
More specifically, however, we were doing close to $1M annually in travel, and a huge portion of it was air. TWA had soem glaring problems with its business model, not to mention that effective monopolies almost always end badly for the consumer one way or another, as was the case for dear old T-Dub and the Lou.
Your recital of the RCGA line is impeccable. How would you measure that "profit"? Did it mean that the local job-growth rate being well below the national average would have been much worse without TWA, or did it mean that the opportunity cost of not using those subsidies for, say, more small businesses meant that the stagnant job growth might have been improved measurably?the count wrote:Deals like this were made and are still being made between cities and airlines everywhere else in the USA. TWA didn't make it in the end but St. Louis' economy profited from their huge presence with 700+ daily domestic and international flights, hundreds of jobs downtown and thousands more in the region. Even when American took over, not all was lost. The real dismantling started as a result of September 11th and who could've foreseen that to happen.
Indeed, hindsight is 20/20.
Hindsight can also be a fascinating exercise, with multiple potential outcomes. As for just "moving on," what's that they say about those who don't heed the past?
- 1,610
Heeding the past is much different than complaining about the past. We're basically in a thread concerning the second-chance of the missed FedEx opportunity. No need to complain about leadership that messed up 20 years ago. Let's applaud those who are working to get the China hub moving along.bonwich wrote: Hindsight can also be a fascinating exercise, with multiple potential outcomes. As for just "moving on," what's that they say about those who don't heed the past?
the count wrote:Here are some airlines that filed for bankruptcy. Some more than once: US Airways, Delta, Frontier, United, Northwest, Air Canada, the list goes on. Some of them merged, some reorganized. The cities that invested in them are now reaping the benefits. TWA was close but just didn't make it. Nobody at that time could've imagined they would cease to exist.
I love to prove my own points!bonwich wrote: You just proved your own point. The airline industry as a whole was in drastically poor shape. Any "investment" in them was questionable; any city that did "reap the benefits" was basically lucky, since there many more that got screwed.
I think most didn't get screwed. Look at Delta at Atlanta, United at Denver and Chicago or Northwest (now Delta) at Minneapolis, Memphis and Detroit. the count wrote:If I am not mistaken the total cost of the new runway was $1.1 billion. Inevitable? I don't think you would have made that statement in 1993.
The total cost to build the runway was $ 1.1 billion. How it was financed is a different subject. When you buy a $ 20,000 car do you tell your family it cost $ 40,000 because you financed it?bonwich wrote:Kinda depends on how you count, pun intended. Add in the interest charges on the debt, and I bet you come closer to $2B.
I would love see some proof of that. Not saying you didn't but how sweet that would be.bonwich wrote:As for 1993, I actually did make that statement then.
the count wrote:Deals like this were made and are still being made between cities and airlines everywhere else in the USA. TWA didn't make it in the end but St. Louis' economy profited from their huge presence with 700+ daily domestic and international flights, hundreds of jobs downtown and thousands more in the region. Even when American took over, not all was lost. The real dismantling started as a result of September 11th and who could've foreseen that to happen.
Indeed, hindsight is 20/20.
No idea I was reciting an RCGA line. If so, it's purely coincidental. TWA was a powerhouse for St. Louis, provided us second-tier city status, connected us to the world and provided thousands of jobs. Every world-class city understands that having an international airport hub is an engine for economic development. How do you measure it? I don't know. I am not an economist. Some claim we lost 20-25,000 jobs regionally as a direct effect of losing TWA.bonwich wrote:Your recital of the RCGA line is impeccable. How would you measure that "profit"? Did it mean that the local job-growth rate being well below the national average would have been much worse without TWA, or did it mean that the opportunity cost of not using those subsidies for, say, more small businesses meant that the stagnant job growth might have been improved measurably?
It sounds good but I am not quite sure what you're trying to say and how it relates to this particular discussion.bonwich wrote:Hindsight can also be a fascinating exercise, with multiple potential outcomes. As for just "moving on," what's that they say about those who don't heed the past?
Good conversation, though.
A variety of random points:
- I could give you my former CEO's phone number, but he's having surgery in the morning. In any event, he'll corroborate that we talked frequently about TWA, especially in the context that he's a pilot.
- One other element that hasn't been mentioned about the whole TWA/airport/"world-class city" issue is that it's not a supply-side issue. You don't build/expand an airport hoping the business will come to you; you do so because you have the business to support it.
The invisible elephant in the room was, and will continue to be, the region's anemic population and job growth. The conventional wisdom around here (and in many major cities, but we seem to make the wrong decisions almost always) is that you build it and they'll come. Build a stadium, pay out the nose for a football team, voila, we'll be a world-class city again. Build an overcapacity of concentrated retail downtown, voila, we'll be a world-class city again. Build a $1.1B/$2B runway (on top of a completely unused $500M airport about 40 miles away), and everyone will fall all over each other rushing to do business here.
We could fake it during spoke-and-hub because enough people from outside the region were passing through the airport to keep passenger counts viable. As spoke-and-hub broke down, that had as much to do with the precipitous drop in local flights as did the consolidation in the industry and our location on the bad side of it.
Anyway, try this on for size: Economic development is the engine for achieving an international hub.
- I wouldn't tell my family that the car cost $24,000 (what kind of terms did you get on your last car, anyway?), but I damn sure would tell my wife that we had to budget $650 a month for three years to make the payments. You also may have noticed that mortgage companies tout the amount you'll save if you convert a 30-year mortgage to a 15. There's also the whole current debate about city, state and federal debt. Somebody is going to end up paying out about $2B for that grossly underused runway, and the payments on the debt are going to be opportunity cost for not financing something else.
PS: Is anyone else having any problems with data entry in the reply window? Mine keeps jumping up and down, and it won't let me select text, frequently going in the opposite direction I'm trying to move the cursor.
- I could give you my former CEO's phone number, but he's having surgery in the morning. In any event, he'll corroborate that we talked frequently about TWA, especially in the context that he's a pilot.
- One other element that hasn't been mentioned about the whole TWA/airport/"world-class city" issue is that it's not a supply-side issue. You don't build/expand an airport hoping the business will come to you; you do so because you have the business to support it.
The invisible elephant in the room was, and will continue to be, the region's anemic population and job growth. The conventional wisdom around here (and in many major cities, but we seem to make the wrong decisions almost always) is that you build it and they'll come. Build a stadium, pay out the nose for a football team, voila, we'll be a world-class city again. Build an overcapacity of concentrated retail downtown, voila, we'll be a world-class city again. Build a $1.1B/$2B runway (on top of a completely unused $500M airport about 40 miles away), and everyone will fall all over each other rushing to do business here.
We could fake it during spoke-and-hub because enough people from outside the region were passing through the airport to keep passenger counts viable. As spoke-and-hub broke down, that had as much to do with the precipitous drop in local flights as did the consolidation in the industry and our location on the bad side of it.
Anyway, try this on for size: Economic development is the engine for achieving an international hub.
- I wouldn't tell my family that the car cost $24,000 (what kind of terms did you get on your last car, anyway?), but I damn sure would tell my wife that we had to budget $650 a month for three years to make the payments. You also may have noticed that mortgage companies tout the amount you'll save if you convert a 30-year mortgage to a 15. There's also the whole current debate about city, state and federal debt. Somebody is going to end up paying out about $2B for that grossly underused runway, and the payments on the debt are going to be opportunity cost for not financing something else.
PS: Is anyone else having any problems with data entry in the reply window? Mine keeps jumping up and down, and it won't let me select text, frequently going in the opposite direction I'm trying to move the cursor.
- 8,915
bonwich wrote: PS: Is anyone else having any problems with data entry in the reply window? Mine keeps jumping up and down, and it won't let me select text, frequently going in the opposite direction I'm trying to move the cursor.
YES
Hey 'maybe' the whole cargo thing will pan out and the runway will be put to good use.