KANSAS CITY ELITE TINKER WITH KCI TERMINALS FOR FUN AND PROFIT!!!
In the pages of Kansas City's mainstream media so many dumb ideas about screwing around with KCI are given undue consideration because they come from people with a great deal of cash.
Today's example before I think too much about Candice Swanepeol as a sessy stew:
Airport architects call for a new KCI terminal
Meanwhile . . . Few residents think this is a good idea and most political insiders snicker at the obviously big money play. Don't worry, Kansas City voters won't get a choice on it . . . Drastic and costly renovation plans will be hidden in a nearly fixed vote like the toy train or the upcoming water taxes.
DEVELOPING. . .
Posts
11 Comments:
More like a new opportunity for architects, engineers, general contractors and subcontractors, labor unions, attorneys, et. al. to feed on the hundreds of millions in fees courtesy of Washington DC.
So of course Kivett, Berkebile et. al. would say that. They want a piece of the action for themselves and their buddies in the business.
Fuck, Lynn, when you gonna stop writing these puffy PR pieces for the swells and actually do a little work and use your brain?
I don't care what Kivett's nephew thinks about a new airport.
I want to know- what does Kyle think?
The last time they came begging for money, I seem to recall the Aviation Department pulled a major bait and switch. Before the vote on the tax for upgrades, they promised people-movers from the parking lots. As soon as the tax passed, they dumped the people-movers and gave us frigid or frying bus shelters serviced by shitty busses driven by surly drivers. I trusted them once. I'll not make that mistake again.
Heaven forbid the people who actually pay for and use these facilities should ever have any say-so in their development. We're fortunate to have conflict-of-interest "Experts" to tell us what we really want and need. The voters put the politicians in office, so we deserve what we get.
What is needed is a toy train from downtown to the airport. Yeah, that's the ticket! To hell with the water mains and sewers.
Think Braniff or TWA will turn this into a major midwestern hub if they spend a bunch of money redoing the terminals again? No?
What they NEED to do is fire about half of the terminal cops whose only job is to inconvenience people picking up their relatives.
You guys are missing the point. It's nice that folks love our simple little airport. The fact is the airlines hate it, and it's the airline bucks that sustain the place. The terminal with Southwest is hopping, but the other two terminals are dying. Airlines are cutting flights in and out of KC and KCMO is missing out on airline route expansion. If we want to have at least a decent amount of direct flights and pay a decent amount of money for them, we are going to have to modify/update our airport's design.
2:41PM, that may well be true. But the Star's adage that "architects who designed the building say it's time for a new terminal" flows like a headline reading, "The guy who sold you your car says it's time to buy a new one."
2:41, you're full of shit.
Southwest only occupies 2/3 of Terminal B. Delta has the rest.
And I didn't see a single quote in the article from an airline official saying a) that they hated KCI or b) that they would increase their service if there were a new terminal.
If KCI is missing out on service expansion, it's because geographically, KCI is in the middle of nowhere and because marketwise, KCI serves a market where there is already a glut of options- Chicago, Minneapolis, St. Louis, DFW.
Besides, "expanded service" was the sorry ass line used with the last airport tax. And we all see how that worked out.
No, changing the airport is about one thing and one thing only- lining the pockets of architects, engineers, contractors, attorneys, and big labor with federal money.
7:16, YOU are full if shit.
Southwest would like more gates but can't get them because Delta doesn't want to move, and it's inefficient to be located in more than one terminal.
And of course if you didn't see information in The Star, it must not exist! Brilliant thinking.
KCI misses out on service expansion because of the crappy airport. Look at airports like Charlotte, a major airport in a small market surrounded by busy airports in other nearby markets.
It's too bad you rely on the information, or lack thereof, printed in The Star.
1:11- More drivel.
You and the Star are the ones belly-aching for a new airport. Prove your points.
YOU made the assertion that service would expand with a new airport. Prove it. Show one - just one- published source from an airline official where they say they would expand service at KCI but for the crappy terminal design. KCBJ, KCCoC pimp material, trade rag, annual report or prospectus. Prove it, asshat.
Of course, I say we've heard it before (fix this or that at the airport and service will expand). And it was a lie then and it's a lie now. And there IS a record of performance to prove THAT.
I have a solution for the Delta logjam. MOVE THEM. KCI puts $20M a year on the bottom line. If there's so much demand for new gates from Southwest, pay to move Delta to one of the other two largely empty terminals. I bet that's a much less expensive and more efficient solution. But the swells won't get their federal dough.
Charlotte, you say? Charlotte is the second largest finance center in the US (behind NYC). Do ya think maybe, just maybe, they have a differing demand for air service than here in flyover country?
If there's anything shitty about the airport, it's the way it's been managed and operated by the City. And apologists like you who want to give them the keys to a new airport won't change that. Just like you can't induce the airlines to stop in a place where it doesn't make any financial or operational sense for them to stop.
Where's your brilliant thinking now, dickweed?
Post a Comment