Delta leaving Lansing airport

NateMarcie Sheridan MI wrote:

Thank you Bush Administration and Oil Speculators as if we haven't lost enough jobs already. Twenty Six jobs that we didn't need to loose. Gas Prices + Bush,Speculators = Greed
and we are paying for Greed.

Yup everything is Bush's fault. I got a flat tire today and I am very upset at Bush for causing this. I demand a tax rebate and Bush should be impeached.

Maybe Obama can come in and fix my tire since he knows everything and Granholm can stand on the side of the road and wave her arms frantically since she seems to be so adept at doing that and not much else.

Deb wrote:

This is a huge disappointment for my family. We use the Delta Connection thru Cincinnati every chance we can. It was always soooo much easier than going through Detroit and all the back ups. Cincinnati was a great connection point.

I feel exact the same. Cincinnati is a great place for a stop over.

Yikes wrote:

<quoted text>
Clearly, you are working in or have great knowledge of this arena. I remember when someone of authority was trying to explain away the reasoning for it being more expensive to fly out of GRR than Lansing, Detroit, etc. I believe whomever it was threw in the parking ramp as part of the reasoning...do you remember that?...

I remember that as well, I was that guy that explained why GR lacked a low cost carrier. Partly because of Northwest and because of GRR's rediculously high landing fees to name a few.

GRR was sued by 7 airlines in 87 and 92 because of its landing fees. They kept raising fees despite a more than 9 million dollar surplus. At the time, it was for improvements. Let's see what the improvements were:
New windows, some metal look paneling walls / ceiling tiles / and some new windows in the lobby area. Oh, and our new parking ramp.

Unfortunately for travelers, this downturn in the aviation business is the best business for GRR. GRR is served by a major freeway system and is more centrally located that the other 2 smaller airports. You can get to these areas in about an hour, which is identical to what it'd take to drive from O'Hare into Chicago many times of the day.

A lack of service to AZO and LAN will only feed more passengers to GRR. And actually, this makes the business case for a low cost airline to now move into LAN or AZO. Luckily, I work about 2 miles from the airport park my car at the office and get a ride in or someone picks up my car.

I think we should all come to expect everything will be more expensive nowadays and we'll be offered fewer services...and this doesn't just apply to the airline business.

Is this more of holding the course and we'll blow them away?

smitty wrote:

this is a sad time in our lives....we can thank bush and the oil people for this one...sold us down to where bush thinks we should be....your shoes are next, they are for the better people

What does Bush have to do with this??? The 'oil people' you refer to are the people who own stock in the oil companies. If you have a 401k, IRA, or any other Mutual Funds, you are one of the 'oil people' demanding that the companies turn profits. The real cause of the higher oil prices is the low dollar on the world market. This is being caused by the huge trade deficit caused by past administrations who opened the doors to China.

If you stop and think about it, it's not in the oil company's best financial interest (and thus the stockholders') to drill for oil when they can buy it overseas. It costs billions to drill and that's money they won't get a return on for many years to come. When they buy the oil, they profit right away.

The real reason the airlines are leaving Michigan is there's nobody flying with them. The businesses are leaving and the people are following close behind. Why should they stay? To lose MORE money?

tom wrote:

i'm a pilot and I know these FBO's could lower prices if they wanted

The FBOs have NOTHING to do with commercial passenger air service, which is what this story is about!

Clipped Wings wrote:

<quoted text>
I remember that as well, I was that guy that explained why GR lacked a low cost carrier. Partly because of Northwest and because of GRR's rediculously high landing fees to name a few.
GRR was sued by 7 airlines in 87 and 92 because of its landing fees. They kept raising fees despite a more than 9 million dollar surplus. At the time, it was for improvements. Let's see what the improvements were:New windows, some metal look paneling walls / ceiling tiles / and some new windows in the lobby area. Oh, and our new parking ramp. Unfortunately for travelers, this downturn in the aviation business is the best business for GRR. GRR is served by a major freeway system and is more centrally located that the other 2 smaller airports. You can get to these areas in about an hour, which is identical to what it'd take to drive from O'Hare into Chicago many times of the day. A lack of service to AZO and LAN will only feed more passengers to GRR. And actually, this makes the business case for a low cost airline to now move into LAN or AZO. Luckily, I work about 2 miles from the airport park my car at the office and get a ride in or someone picks up my car. I think we should all come to expect everything will be more expensive nowadays and we'll be offered fewer services...and this doesn't just apply to the airline business.

You couldn’t be more clueless!! Please let me set the record straight before readers start to believe and repeat your misinformation!

First of all GRRs landing fees are NOT ridiculously high & make up a small percent of the airlines’ operating costs. Allow me to give an example: An A319 (150 passenger capacity) flies from IAH (Houston) to GRR. The fare paid by the 1st passenger to board pays for all of the fees associated with that flight that will be payable to GRR. The fares paid by the next 30 – 40 passengers will pay for the fuel for them to make that one-way trip. The fares paid by the remaining passengers will cover airline staffing and personnel costs, aircraft maintenance, cleaning services, terminal costs at IAH, etc.

As for the lawsuit (it was only 1)…the airlines at GRR filed a lawsuit against the airport because they thought that they had a right to take revenues generated through non-airline-related means (e.g., parking fees, food & beverage concessions, etc.). The lawsuit went all the way to the US Supreme Court (every lower court found in favor of the airport). The USSC also decided in favor of the airport. They found that the rates charged by the airport were determined by fair and equitable practices and that the methodology used by the airport was legal and fair.

Now, onto your “improvements” list...In 1999 and 2000, the airport completely remodeled the terminal building and both concourses. New floor, wall, and ceiling coverings were installed. New technology upgrades were done. Utility upgrades were completed. New seating and dining facilities were installed. New restroom facilities were installed. And, yes, new windows were installed (you were finally right about something!).
As for the current market being “good” for GRR, you are crazy! GRR is already underserved by its existing airlines.(We need more and/or bigger planes than we currently have!) The upcoming influx of passengers from these two markets will only make it more difficult to buy a seat out. It will possibly also make it more expensive. And, no way does this make either LAN or AZO appealing to a LCC. There are airports out there right now that have received grant money to recruit air service that can’t BUY IT! During this economic time, both for the airline industry and the State of MI, no carrier is going to start up new air service in a new market. It’s just too risky.

So, next time you decide to go shoot off your mouth, please be sure it isn’t loaded with blanks, because you sure missed every mark in this post!

Clipped Wings wrote:

<quoted text>
I remember that as well, I was that guy that explained why GR lacked a low cost carrier. Partly because of Northwest and because of GRR's rediculously high landing fees to name a few.
GRR was sued by 7 airlines in 87 and 92 because of its landing fees. They kept raising fees despite a more than 9 million dollar surplus. At the time, it was for improvements. Let's see what the improvements were:
New windows, some metal look paneling walls / ceiling tiles / and some new windows in the lobby area. Oh, and our new parking ramp.
Unfortunately for travelers, this downturn in the aviation business is the best business for GRR. GRR is served by a major freeway system and is more centrally located that the other 2 smaller airports. You can get to these areas in about an hour, which is identical to what it'd take to drive from O'Hare into Chicago many times of the day.
A lack of service to AZO and LAN will only feed more passengers to GRR. And actually, this makes the business case for a low cost airline to now move into LAN or AZO. Luckily, I work about 2 miles from the airport park my car at the office and get a ride in or someone picks up my car.
I think we should all come to expect everything will be more expensive nowadays and we'll be offered fewer services...and this doesn't just apply to the airline business.

You couldn’t be more clueless!! Please let me set the record straight before readers start to believe and repeat your misinformation!
First of all GRRs landing fees are NOT ridiculously high and are a small percent of the airlines’ operating costs. Let me give an example: An A319 (150 passenger capacity) flies from IAH (Houston) to GRR. The fare paid by the FIRST passenger pays for all of the fees associated with that flight payable to GRR. The fares paid by the next 30 – 40 passengers will pay for the fuel for that one-way trip. The fares paid by the remaining passengers will cover airline staffing and personnel costs, aircraft maintenance, cleaning services, terminal costs at IAH, etc.

As for the lawsuit (there was only 1)…the airlines at GRR filed a lawsuit against the airport because they thought they had a right to take revenues generated through non-airline-related means (e.g., parking fees, food & beverage concessions, etc.). The lawsuit went all the way to the US Supreme Court (every lower court found in favor of the airport). The USSC also decided in favor of the airport. They found the rates charged by the airport were determined by fair and equitable practices and the methodology used by the airport was legal and fair.

Now, onto “improvements”...In 1999 & 2000, the airport completely remodeled the terminal building and both concourses. New floor, wall, and ceiling coverings were installed. New technology upgrades and utility upgrades were completed. New seating and dining facilities were installed. New restroom facilities were installed. And, yes, new windows were installed (you were finally right about something!).

As for the current market being “good” for GRR, you are crazy! GRR is already underserved by its existing airlines (needs more and/or bigger planes than currently here)! The upcoming influx of passengers from these 2 markets will only make it more difficult to buy a seat out. It will also possibly make it more expensive. And, no way does this make either LAN or AZO appealing to a LCC. During this economic time, both for the airline industry and the State of MI, no carrier is going to start up new air service in a new market. It’s just too risky.

So, next time you decide to go shoot off your mouth, please be sure it isn’t loaded with blanks, because you sure missed every mark in this post!

Where oh where will the sexy Delta Jet go now?

Moncia wrote:

<quoted text>
I feel exact the same. Cincinnati is a great place for a stop over.

Is Cinci where they have the cool "flying Pigs" artwork? If so, they were doing some serious renovations a couple years ago and I'll bet it really looks good now! Nice hub to fly in and out of.

flylady500 wrote:

<quoted text>
Interesting that you claim a cost of $15 per day to park at GRR when the Board hasn't even opened discussions on rates once the deck is constructed!?! Is your crystal ball working overtime?
The parking deck will be ONE OF MANY parking options available. If you want to park outside and schlep your bags through the snow to save a couple bucks, be my guest! I, for one, am looking forward to decent parking at a Michigan airport other than DTW!

Actually, when news FIRST broke that GRR was building a parking garage, estimates were THEN that it was going to cost upwards of $15 a day. That was back when planning began.

I will NOT pay that much to park my car. I'll find rides or other alternatives to paying that kind of a ridiculous amount when I fly. To each his own.