New 1500 hour rule first affected

[scoreboardII]

Question: Is Southwest ready to build its own terminals in other countries?

Yep.

added for content.

 

[Flopgut]

You mean like United has?

What's your point Flop? Are you angry that SW is paying for this terminal in Houston instead of fleecing he local citizens with long term bonds and then bailing to Chicago?

SWA has done its share of fleecing. Fought high speed rail. Griped about Denver giving United better rates, fighting a low cost terminal project at Austin. AND forcing taxpayers to come up with 55 million for your parking garage WHILE you boast about paying for "it all."

As proposed, this terminal most likely does not meet the standards required in bilateral airport agreements between countries. This has been an issue before. You might remember that only United American had access to Heathrow? Continental could only use Gatwick. Other countries tend to be more restrictive (territorial) than the US. And what your building at Hobby is a huge slap in the face to any country we have an agreement with.

 

[flythere]

He has a life, its called being a F/I troll and living in his moms basement. You can tell when Mrs Pee is having a visit with "Uncle Steve", the genny's posts become more hostile and disjointed, seems he has a problem with his mom being sodomized in the living room, and enjoying it.
Pretty sure he will snivel to the admins about this one.

You know his goal is now to hit 20K posts! And you guys are helping him! If you would just ignore him!

 

[scoreboardII]

SWA has done its share of fleecing. Fought high speed rail.

Really, do tell, what airline wouldn't?

Griped about Denver giving United better rates, fighting a low cost terminal project at Austin.

Doing exactly what you are doing then? Hardly, they are asking for a level playing field, that is all.

AND forcing taxpayers to come up with 55 million for your parking garage WHILE you boast about paying for "it all."

I didn't see a gun to the heads of the HOU airport board when they gladly voted to accept our offer.

As proposed, this terminal most likely does not meet the standards required in bilateral airport agreements between countries. This has been an issue before.

Do tell, what international building standards are there? Please describe how a building in HOU is going to be of a lower standard than one built in Mexico?

You might remember that only United American had access to Heathrow? Continental could only use Gatwick. Other countries tend to be more restrictive (territorial) than the US. And what your building at Hobby is a huge slap in the face to any country we have an agreement with

Your joking? Look at PIT or PHL, those pass some type of international standard? The terminal SWA builds will be leaps and bounds beyond PIT or PHL. Capacity drove those decisions in the UK, not the color of the carpet in a terminal.

You arguments fail again.

 

[General Lee]

You know his goal is now to hit 20K posts! And you guys are helping him! If you would just ignore him!

Ahahahaha! This chump just can't stand that I'm always right, and he has absolutely nothing to add to any subject. No wonder he is jealous. Funny stuff.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Flopgut]

Do tell, what international building standards are there? Please describe how a building in HOU is going to be of a lower standard than one built in Mexico?

Your joking? Look at PIT or PHL, those pass some type of international standard? The terminal SWA builds will be leaps and bounds beyond PIT or PHL. Capacity drove those decisions in the UK, not the color of the carpet in a terminal.

You arguments fail again.

I'm not talking about exits, fire extinguishers, or how the concrete is poured. Bilateral agreements have to do with equal access to airport facilities between countries. Yeah, it capacity driven. SWA has created a capacity issue by only building one gate for competition at Hobby. When the issue of access to Hobby is raised SWA, HAS, and the mayor will point to open space at IAH. But that's exactly the situation bilateral agreements are meant to prevent. In fact, if the terms of a bilateral agreement were overplayed onto the Love Field/WA debacle, you would have lost that 40 years ago. Hopefully this becomes an issue when you start shopping for space at the international airports you want to fly to. When you propose your flights from Hobby, the other country will want to look at flights to Hobby. It's not going to look good for them.

 

[slaquer5]

Total price tag for Southwest's own terminal: $150 million. Southwest claims to be paying for it, but the City pays $55 million for the parking garage.

http://m.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2013/02/05/hobby-international-expansion-plans.html?r=full

Folks: Every airline ends up paying more for their airport needs than that. To say SWA is funding this in some unique way, is wrong.

Flop

Tell you what. You get the city of Houston to agree, and I am sure SWA would love to build the parking garage. Hell SWA will even give the city 5 cents per car they collect revenue on .

All your doing is coming off as a very bitter person. Worse than Dan R.

 

[scoreboardII]

I'm not talking about exits, fire extinguishers, or how the concrete is poured. Bilateral agreements have to do with equal access to airport facilities between countries. Yeah, it capacity driven. SWA has created a capacity issue by only building one gate for competition at Hobby. When the issue of access to Hobby is raised SWA, HAS, and the mayor will point to open space at IAH. But that's exactly the situation bilateral agreements are meant to prevent. In fact, if the terms of a bilateral agreement were overplayed onto the Love Field/WA debacle, you would have lost that 40 years ago. Hopefully this becomes an issue when you start shopping for space at the international airports you want to fly to. When you propose your flights from Hobby, the other country will want to look at flights to Hobby. It's not going to look good for them.

It's going to look fine for them, if they want access, they want a gate, I am confident the HOU airport authority will let them build a terminal all their own, just like they let SWA build their own terminal. . This is private enterprise succeeding where government meddling has failed.

 

[slaquer5]

SWA has done its share of fleecing. Fought high speed rail. Griped about Denver giving United better rates, fighting a low cost terminal project at Austin. AND forcing taxpayers to come up with 55 million for your parking garage WHILE you boast about paying for "it all."

.

Like I said before

Please take a a class or 2 at Houston CC

I truly think that you do not believe what you are writing .
There is NO WAY.

 

[Flopgut]

Like I said before

Please take a a class or 2 at Houston CC

I truly think that you do not believe what you are writing .
There is NO WAY.

Well, I disagree guys. I think the opposite is true. I don't think you all understand the rules that exist between countries. I'll admit I'm not expecting this thing not get built or that you don't operate outside the US. My hope is that you can do it without screwing IAH, or the rest of the industry. It's not right that all the competition take place at IAH and you guys are excused. Bilateral agreements are in place to make sure that international airports are the marketplace, and not the advantage. I'll get you a link in a few hours.