washingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1506 times:
Great articles! Not at all surprised that the North Terminal is booming. I was there a few months ago and it sounds like more stuff has opened even in the short time since then. I can't imagine what it will be like when it is fully complete (hopefully later this year!), plus with British Airways and other prestigious international airlines in the North Terminal...Even more high-end shoppers then!
As for the Cental Terminal, I don't understand why they want to do a comprehensive re-do. I continue to maintain that they should (for now) just re-build G and incorporate it into the South Terminal...Then make E or F for low-cost carriers and the few remaining carriers.
Quoting N62NA (Thread starter): I must say, with respect to the Central terminal, that someone could setup a very nice operation there. The question is... who?
Virgin? jetBlue? I suppose MIA doesn't want to undercut their largest and most important airline (AA), but I'm sure Virgin or jetBlue would jump if MIA offered them lower landing fees...
doug From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 825 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1458 times:
Quoting washingtonian (Reply 1): As for the Cental Terminal, I don't understand why they want to do a comprehensive re-do. I continue to maintain that they should (for now) just re-build G and incorporate it into the South Terminal...Then make E or F for low-cost carriers and the few remaining carriers.
American has to be factored in to what ever happens in the central terminal they will need this space for expansion in the future.Also it appears that MIA will surpass 40 million passengers this year if current trends continue.
ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 4653 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1368 times:
I haven't been to MIA in a couple of year. D was only open down to gate 21 or 20 at that point. But, while the mix of local restaurants on D was impressive and far above what you find at a lot of small and mid-sized airports, and even some larger airports. One thing struck me, however.
There was no Burger King, despite the fact that Burger King HQ is just south of MIA.
At ORD, there is a McDonald's on every councourse, plus the food court in Terminal 3. Although some critics of ORD think that there should be a greater variety of fast food restaurants, ala ATL, the City of Chicago makes the point that McDonald's HQ is a about 20 minutes away in Oak Brook. It's a no-brainer to have the local fast food giant at ORD.
Wouldn't it make sense to have a couple of Burger Kings on D, say one around D20 and the other around D40?
rOw44SeAtK From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 10 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1253 times:
The names of many of those "Concessionaires" are very well connected with The County Commission.
It takes an Act of God and a boatload of $$$$ for any newcomer to just get in the door. Probably why B.K. is absent.
If memory serves me right recent The Luggage Cart (1st time ever at MIA ) and the renewed Baggage Wrap concession took 5 or 6 years for The Commission to approve. You can't imagine the craziness that went at the public hearings. 3rd World at its best.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16260 posts, RR: 52 Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1140 times:
Quoting washingtonian (Reply 1): Then make E or F for low-cost carriers and the few remaining carriers.
Quoting washingtonian (Reply 1): Virgin? jetBlue? I suppose MIA doesn't want to undercut their largest and most important airline (AA), but I'm sure Virgin or jetBlue would jump if MIA offered them lower landing fees...
They're not going to touch MIA with a ten foot pole, with the new facilities come some of the highest fees per passenger of any major US airport. Hence why for Domestic service FLL is booming and MIA is actually losing domestic airlines. I thought I read some where that FLL's cost per passenger were around $15 and MIA's $38.
AS739BSI From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 103 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1106 times:
MIA is going to continue to lose airlines besides OW carriers due to their spending spree and their cost per emplaned pax being nearly 2.5 times FLL. Will they be able to sustain given the cost?
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31117 posts, RR: 74 Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1071 times:
Quoting AS739BSI (Reply 7):
MIA is going to continue to lose airlines besides OW carriers due to their spending spree and their cost per emplaned pax being nearly 2.5 times FLL. Will they be able to sustain given the cost?
More new airlines have began service to MIA in the past 18 months than any airport in the world. It isn't losing many airlines, and the two airlines it is losing, AirTran and Alaska, have one daily flight each.
As the fastest growing latge/medium U.S. airport, it has little to worry about right now. And, fortunately, great revenue from lease tenants and faster-than-anticipated growth are going to help keep passenger usage fees in check.
Quoting STT757 (Reply 6): Hence why for Domestic service FLL is booming and MIA is actually losing domestic airlines.
MIA traffic is up nearly 10%, a large chunk of that domestic, and FLL up only around 1.5% or so this year. MIA is losing two domestic carriers, which sucks, but they each have one flight a day. It's insignificant in the grand scheme of things. To say FLL is booming and imply MIA is not is wrong. FLL has stagnated while MIA booms.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 928 times:
It does seem like we've got more service coming down from EWR lately on UA, so that's a good sign. And maybe, finally, UA will come back on the SFO route.
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 8): FLL has stagnated while MIA booms.
That (FLL stagnation) probably is only for the short term - FLL is getting the new south runway in the next few years.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31117 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
