Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
atrude777
Posts: 4416
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:31 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
Skywest approved for Decatur. Last STL-Decatur service is Jan 31.

https://www.wandtv.com/news/decatur-air ... ffce6.html


Man...

Sitting in good old Marion, Illinois watching just about every city get United service to Chicago while I can fly to STL or BNA on Cape Air....

Frustrating as someone who utilized both PAH and CGI flights to get back and forth to Southern Illinois from Chicago.

It takes way to long to fly ORD STL MWA which I’ve also had to do as well.

Congrats to DEC!

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
PhilMcCrackin
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:54 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Dec 18, 2019 7:25 pm

It's less about BA and more about LHR. LHR is the most important airport in the world and is a one stop connection to just about every major city in the world. Getting LHR would be a feather in STL's cap regardless of who's operating it.

Additionally, BA is the only blue chip airline looking at second tier US cities for transatlantic service right now.

It absolutely baffles me the amount of money they spent on that Loop trolley when only a fraction of it could have secured a translant flight.
 
dcaproducer
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Dec 18, 2019 8:10 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
dcaproducer wrote:
From the outside looking in, I think it's clear many airlines don't like what they see in STL. The privatization is a joke. It seems corrupt and secretive. WN deals with it because of their large presence which existed before this effort, but no new airline wants to jump in. (SY being an odd exception)

STL lacks service to Europe, while peer cities and airports with similar or lower passenger numbers have this service.
STL lacks service from B6 and NK. (NK serves IND, MCI, BNA, CMH, etc) (B6 definitely has a midwest hole, but does serve BNA, PIT, CLE)

City leaders just don't seem to see what's going on. It's amazing.
It has always amazed me how poorly run the government is in St. Louis. I didn't realize how bad it was until I moved to the DC area.


NK, I think is scared off by privitization, mainly becuase it doesn't know what fees will be and it matters to a ULCC.

I'm not convinced TATL carriers are. They have worked almost all the bidders before and fees shouldn't matter as much. Lets say CPE goes up $5, that makes a much larger hit to an airline running multiple routes and selling ticket for $40 than it does an airline running one route 5x a week and selling tickets for over a grand each. Adding $5 to a $1100 ticket isn't going to matter much.

I could be way off base on this but if that is actually being used as an excuse I don't buy it. Just like I don't buy the STL has a flat population excuse when airlines like PIT with negative population are getting BA.

I think this all comes down to incentives. We aren't offering enough for some reason.


State and local leadership are terrible, and I don’t mean the airport director, who can only do so much.
An attractive revenue guarantee would have secured service, but the city/state can’t seem to do that.

Privatization and the shroud of secrecy also make the region look corrupt in the eyes of businesses. Businesses want the best environment for growth. City and state leadership should be doing all they can to make things easy and positive for business growth. Sorry for the rant.
 
dcaproducer
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Dec 18, 2019 8:12 pm

PhilMcCrackin wrote:

It absolutely baffles me the amount of money they spent on that Loop trolley when only a fraction of it could have secured a translant flight.


Yes! Whole cow, they could have paid to fly the plane back and forth empty.
 
User avatar
TWA302
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:17 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:10 pm

dcaproducer wrote:
PhilMcCrackin wrote:

It absolutely baffles me the amount of money they spent on that Loop trolley when only a fraction of it could have secured a translant flight.


Yes! Whole cow, they could have paid to fly the plane back and forth empty.


No kidding! $51 million unreal.....
 
jplatts
Posts: 3713
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:22 pm

stl07 wrote:
Why do we need 10 WN flights to Chicago? Especially considering that the train will be upgraded soon. People connecting to/via MDW?


There are some adds that could be made by WN at both STL and MDW if the demand was there for additional WN service out of STL and MDW, including WN adding STL-BUF/CVG/PVD nonstop service, WN re-adding MDW-LIT/TUL nonstop service, and WN increasing MDW-OKC to at least 2 daily nonstops.

The main reason behind WN increasing STL-MDW to 10 daily nonstops was likely to stimulate additional O&D traffic on the STL-MDW route.
 
stlgph
Posts: 11224
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 1:31 am

Here's my question...is the frustration more with the airport authority and its performance or with the airline industry not showing more love and creativity with Lambert service?
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 2:01 am

stlgph wrote:
Here's my question...is the frustration more with the airport authority and its performance or with the airline industry not showing more love and creativity with Lambert service?

Definatly the airport authority. Charlston south carolina has BA for crying out lound.
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
dcaproducer
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 2:16 am

stlgph wrote:
Here's my question...is the frustration more with the airport authority and its performance or with the airline industry not showing more love and creativity with Lambert service?


Getting an airline to start a transatlantic route is a multi-million dollar investment for the airline. Stats show it should work from STL, but it’s up to the city to help make it work. Airlines go where they can make money, not start routes just so a city can have a route. STL is to blame for this one.
 
stlgph
Posts: 11224
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 4:01 am

stl07 wrote:
stlgph wrote:
Here's my question...is the frustration more with the airport authority and its performance or with the airline industry not showing more love and creativity with Lambert service?

Definatly the airport authority. Charlston south carolina has BA for crying out lound.


Yes they do and they earned it. The city's tourism commission had been working for years (since the 1990s) on grassroots efforts of knocking on doors of travel agencies, travel agents, media and social media outreach, radio and tv interview guest spots. They went out and basically created the market which grew into warranting nonstop service.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:54 am

stlgph wrote:
Here's my question...is the frustration more with the airport authority and its performance or with the airline industry not showing more love and creativity with Lambert service?


Out of those two it’s airport authority but I don’t entirely blame them. My only really issue with them is their lack of transparency on some things. Something is holding us back from getting a TATL flight. I really think that needs to be in the public light. I assume at this point it is incentives. If that really is the reason I would like for them to just to say it. Say we have X amount to offer and we would like to have Y amount at our disposal. STL is very tight lipped about things compared to other airports and it drives me a little crazy at times. If the airport does need more incentive money I want to know why they can’t get businesses to pitch in or the city/county/state/other entity to pitch in and what the plan for changing that is.

I wouldn’t say I am pro privatization because I think the current staff has done a great job in most areas bringing the airport back. That said, if one of the bidders says we can guarantee a TATL flight in 2 years and we still have no clue what is going on with the current administration, then my view on it could change very quickly.
 
LambertMan
Posts: 1744
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:26 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:14 am

Jshank83 wrote:
stl07 wrote:
Jshank was right. Both STL and BA have moved on.


I do have good sources on some things....

That's a ridiculous quote. St. Louis can't get its shit together and put together a reasonable incentive package and the airport is presently undergoing a potential privatization. Why would BA listen at this point in time? What intrigues them? Guaranteed that STL has not moved on.
 
acentauri
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 12:35 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:41 am

Who would be responsible for providing a financial incentive to the targeted carrier (with a hypothetical projected 100% payout) ? Is it the City, the State, or the airport profit center? I know the answer for many airports, but not St. Louis.The city of St. Louis is only behind Detroit (which is supported with a long time DL/NW hub) as the poorest 200K+ populated city in America. Spending $1.5M+/year on a pie in the sky airline flight to London would not likely be well received by the general tax base. St Louis/Missouri should consider pressuring Boeing into providing a 2 year trans-atlantic subsidy to the airport authority.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 1:55 pm

LambertMan wrote:
Jshank83 wrote:
stl07 wrote:
Jshank was right. Both STL and BA have moved on.


I do have good sources on some things....

That's a ridiculous quote. St. Louis can't get its shit together and put together a reasonable incentive package and the airport is presently undergoing a potential privatization. Why would BA listen at this point in time? What intrigues them? Guaranteed that STL has not moved on.


I think you explained it yourself. BA isn’t that interested and moved on so by default the airport is forced to move on because it can’t keep waiting around for BA. Would the airport like BA to come? Of course. But it isn’t a serious option anymore so by that they have moved on. If a bounty of incentives showed up it could be again but at this time I would be shocked if we heard BA is coming and that is the point I’m getting at. All the talk of STL would be on the short list I don’t think is true anymore for BA.
 
PhilMcCrackin
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:54 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:11 pm

dcaproducer wrote:
PhilMcCrackin wrote:

It absolutely baffles me the amount of money they spent on that Loop trolley when only a fraction of it could have secured a translant flight.


Yes! Whole cow, they could have paid to fly the plane back and forth empty.


And now it's insolvent and they can't afford to operate it any longer.

Mind boggling.
 
TNST3B
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:09 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:12 pm

acentauri wrote:
Who would be responsible for providing a financial incentive to the targeted carrier (with a hypothetical projected 100% payout) ? Is it the City, the State, or the airport profit center? I know the answer for many airports, but not St. Louis.The city of St. Louis is only behind Detroit (which is supported with a long time DL/NW hub) as the poorest 200K+ populated city in America. Spending $1.5M+/year on a pie in the sky airline flight to London would not likely be well received by the general tax base. St Louis/Missouri should consider pressuring Boeing into providing a 2 year trans-atlantic subsidy to the airport authority.


Stats like the one you just sited are a product of the city and the county being two different entities.
 
kavok
Posts: 845
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:12 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:08 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
LambertMan wrote:
Jshank83 wrote:

I do have good sources on some things....

That's a ridiculous quote. St. Louis can't get its shit together and put together a reasonable incentive package and the airport is presently undergoing a potential privatization. Why would BA listen at this point in time? What intrigues them? Guaranteed that STL has not moved on.


I think you explained it yourself. BA isn’t that interested and moved on so by default the airport is forced to move on because it can’t keep waiting around for BA. Would the airport like BA to come? Of course. But it isn’t a serious option anymore so by that they have moved on. If a bounty of incentives showed up it could be again but at this time I would be shocked if we heard BA is coming and that is the point I’m getting at. All the talk of STL would be on the short list I don’t think is true anymore for BA.



But if not BA, then who?

Sure, incentives could probably bring in a LCC like EI or FI once they get their MAX issues figured out, but is that really what STL wants? Not disagreeing with your post, but I don’t see the logic in moving elsewhere.

If STL is considering LH, DL, or one of the other legacy carriers, it becomes more complicated because BA is the obvious fit for STL. Put it this way, let’s say hypothetically DL starts STL-CDG/AMS. All of a sudden AA/BA realizes that DL is taping into one of their old frequent flyer bases with many corporate contracts still intact (and DL is stealing away some of those contracts with their new TATL service offering ). So naturally in response, a year later AA/BA then add STL-LHR and everyone is happy... except of course DL who just spent a bunch of money and effort to start STL TATL service only to see it go down the drain when STL businesses flyers jump ship back to OneWorld.

My point is that hypothetical above is not that far fetched, and Delta saw that same scenario play out in PIT not too long ago, which make things all the more difficult for STL. Point being, outside of some LCC, BA is and will continue to be STL’s best chance for TATL service.
Last edited by kavok on Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:17 pm

Load Factors for STL/BLV for September

Slower month

Over 90%
G4 - PIE
WN-OAK/PNS/SMF/SJC/SEA

Under 70%
AA-MIA
DL-CVG
UA-SFO - this is an odd one. It usually is pretty high.

Other notes:
AS SAN 83% (cut in November)

Full Spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:31 pm

kavok wrote:
Jshank83 wrote:
LambertMan wrote:
That's a ridiculous quote. St. Louis can't get its shit together and put together a reasonable incentive package and the airport is presently undergoing a potential privatization. Why would BA listen at this point in time? What intrigues them? Guaranteed that STL has not moved on.


I think you explained it yourself. BA isn’t that interested and moved on so by default the airport is forced to move on because it can’t keep waiting around for BA. Would the airport like BA to come? Of course. But it isn’t a serious option anymore so by that they have moved on. If a bounty of incentives showed up it could be again but at this time I would be shocked if we heard BA is coming and that is the point I’m getting at. All the talk of STL would be on the short list I don’t think is true anymore for BA.



But if not BA, then who?

Sure, incentives could probably bring in a LCC like EI or FI once they get their MAX issues figured out, but is that really what STL wants?

If you are talking about LH, DL, or one of the other legacy carriers, it becomes more complicated because BA is the obvious fit for STL. Put it this way, let’s say hypothetically DL starts STL-CDG/AMS. All of a sudden AA/BA realizes that DL is taping into one of their old frequent flyer bases with many corporate contracts still intact (and DL is stealing away some of those contracts with their new TATL service offering ). So naturally in response, a year later AA/BA then add STL-LHR and everyone is happy... except of course DL who just spent a bunch of money and effort to start STL TATL service only to see it go down the drain when STL businesses flyers jump ship back to OneWorld.

My point is that hypothetical above is not that far fetched, and Delta saw that same scenario play out in PIT not too long ago, which make things all the more difficult for STL. Point being, outside of some LCC, BA is and will continue to be STL’s best chance for TATL service.


Whatever the slim chance BA comes, DL is less. The best chance "at this moment" STL has at a flight is probably a non legacy. I do think STL would be happy to bring in El. Less incentives, in range for A321LR and has OneWorld ties.

Although, it makes no sense to me but I think their best legacy chance is LH. That is the one that gets talked about the most when you hear people from the airport speak, so it must at least be in the realm of possibility even though starting STL doesn't seem like a move LH would make. But maybe Bayer or someone is offering up money for that flight over others. That is the only way I can make any sense of it. Not sure how much of a chance I give that either though.
 
dcaproducer
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:32 pm

^In reference for DL, I think OneWorld fliers at STL would switch to SkyTeam if there was a focus from DL. DL is good at entering a market and gaining loyal fliers. They fought for this in SEA and BOS and they’re doing it at AUS. They offer very attractive status matches, offer a good product and there you go.

DL is focusing on other markets right now, but if they really wanted to push past AA I think they’d need to add BOS, LAX, and maybe JFK.
If STL wants DL to fly to AMS or CDG then they need to come up with $$ like PIT and IND to launch the service.

DL could move to C, open a SkyClub and be off and running as the dominant legacy carrier. A gates could then be available to any new carriers, such as NK, etc.

It all comes down to $$. STL needs to offer attractive incentives that allow a carrier to start a flight with minimal risk.
 
jplatts
Posts: 3713
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:44 pm

There was an article on the Dallas Business Journal's website that said that WN partnering with an European carrier is a possibility, and the possibility of a WN TATL partner serving STL might be there since Airbus plans to offer the A321XLR model that would likely have the range to reach STL nonstop from Europe.
 
User avatar
TWA302
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:17 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:07 pm

jplatts wrote:
There was an article on the Dallas Business Journal's website that said that WN partnering with an European carrier is a possibility, and the possibility of a WN TATL partner serving STL might be there since Airbus plans to offer the A321XLR model that would likely have the range to reach STL nonstop from Europe.



Here is that article https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2019/12/19/southwest-europe-andrew-watterson.html. If you refresh and then cancel the refresh the article will show.

snip of key points:
"Right now, we do not have any European expansion plans," Watterson said. "We do have the right within our collective bargaining agreement with our pilots to have some limited amount of codesharing."

The codesharing would work both ways. A foreign carrier could use Southwest's domestic network to get flyers to their final U.S. destination. And Southwest could sell a ticket on a foreign carrier to get its passengers to Europe.

"By that manner, we could give an option to our customers to get to Europe through a Southwest sale," Watterson said, adding that any potential agreement would be modest in nature.

Watterson said this idea is something Southwest leadership has been talking about for awhile, but any plan would be "a number of years in the future."
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:15 pm

When Jplatts is the only one talking sense regarding an STL TATL :lol:
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 5:34 pm

Went thru March WN MAX cuts at STL.

Down 71 flights a week over the original schedule.

Down 9 mon-fri
Down 12 on saturday
Down 14 on Sunday

32 less than the March schedule last year (before the grounding)
6 less than 2018

WN dependent airports are in for some hurt next year until the MAX is up and going. We will see if other airlines try to pick up some capacity at them.
 
stlgph
Posts: 11224
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:00 pm

I think Aer Lingus on the 321XLR would be great for Lambert, and probably the most feasible discussion link for right now. The problem - if they arrive on time, it's still three full years plus away. I could also see a number of cities on the radar for Aer Lingus ahead of St. Louis.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:26 pm

BIG NEWS

St. Louis is halting their airport privatization process.

No RFP will be issued.

https://twitter.com/jeremykohler/status ... 67780?s=20
 
stlgph
Posts: 11224
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:33 pm

......AND

there's a sale at Penney's!


(((i just had to)))


Nice news to hear and nice to hear the current mayor is putting it to bed. Hopefully the next mayor leaves it be.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
 
reednavy
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:41 pm

Hopefully it’s the somewhat “final” say in the argument and airlines will start to look into STL again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:44 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
BIG NEWS

St. Louis is halting their airport privatization process.

No RFP will be issued.

https://twitter.com/jeremykohler/status ... 67780?s=20

Timing is too suspicious and it is too sudden. They had to have had an airline say no (Spirit, ect) due to privatization. People working at the airport were hinting at this. I doubt it was BA because they work with those operators out of Gatwick but it may have been.
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:47 pm

reednavy wrote:
Hopefully it’s the somewhat “final” say in the argument and airlines will start to look into STL again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It should be the end of it. There is a board of 3 that has to vote to advance it. One is a hard no and the mayor makes it 2-1 no.

I listened to her interview on the radio. Said the airport is going to be a priority in 2020 and they learned about the airport thru this process. So we will see if it is more than words and the airport gets put as a priority or not.

I do think there finally are some people in different branches of government and business that are getting serious about going after a TATL flight so hopefully that amounts to something. And it isn't just the airport trying to do everything by itself.
 
dcaproducer
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:25 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
reednavy wrote:
Hopefully it’s the somewhat “final” say in the argument and airlines will start to look into STL again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It should be the end of it. There is a board of 3 that has to vote to advance it. One is a hard no and the mayor makes it 2-1 no.

I listened to her interview on the radio. Said the airport is going to be a priority in 2020 and they learned about the airport thru this process. So we will see if it is more than words and the airport gets put as a priority or not.

I do think there finally are some people in different branches of government and business that are getting serious about going after a TATL flight so hopefully that amounts to something. And it isn't just the airport trying to do everything by itself.


Boy the timing is funny.
I think this is exactly what I meant with my earlier post. I think the privatization talk was scaring away airlines. Airlines, like all businesses, want to know as much as possible when investing (which is what route planning is). No one wants to spend money in an uncertain situation when it's completely a new concept (minus SJU) in the U.S. market.

I also guarantee someone in the city or big business was pissed about the BA announcement this week.
 
User avatar
TWA302
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:17 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:43 pm

dcaproducer wrote:
Jshank83 wrote:
reednavy wrote:
Hopefully it’s the somewhat “final” say in the argument and airlines will start to look into STL again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It should be the end of it. There is a board of 3 that has to vote to advance it. One is a hard no and the mayor makes it 2-1 no.

I listened to her interview on the radio. Said the airport is going to be a priority in 2020 and they learned about the airport thru this process. So we will see if it is more than words and the airport gets put as a priority or not.

I do think there finally are some people in different branches of government and business that are getting serious about going after a TATL flight so hopefully that amounts to something. And it isn't just the airport trying to do everything by itself.


Boy the timing is funny.
I think this is exactly what I meant with my earlier post. I think the privatization talk was scaring away airlines. Airlines, like all businesses, want to know as much as possible when investing (which is what route planning is). No one wants to spend money in an uncertain situation when it's completely a new concept (minus SJU) in the U.S. market.

I also guarantee someone in the city or big business was pissed about the BA announcement this week.



Imagine the amount of money we could have used if we took The Loop trolley $ PLUS the $ spent of the privatization charade and actually used it for something of substance! :banghead:
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:02 am

TWA302 wrote:
dcaproducer wrote:
Jshank83 wrote:

It should be the end of it. There is a board of 3 that has to vote to advance it. One is a hard no and the mayor makes it 2-1 no.

I listened to her interview on the radio. Said the airport is going to be a priority in 2020 and they learned about the airport thru this process. So we will see if it is more than words and the airport gets put as a priority or not.

I do think there finally are some people in different branches of government and business that are getting serious about going after a TATL flight so hopefully that amounts to something. And it isn't just the airport trying to do everything by itself.


Boy the timing is funny.
I think this is exactly what I meant with my earlier post. I think the privatization talk was scaring away airlines. Airlines, like all businesses, want to know as much as possible when investing (which is what route planning is). No one wants to spend money in an uncertain situation when it's completely a new concept (minus SJU) in the U.S. market.

I also guarantee someone in the city or big business was pissed about the BA announcement this week.



Imagine the amount of money we could have used if we took The Loop trolley $ PLUS the $ spent of the privatization charade and actually used it for something of substance! :banghead:

But but but that would mean Rex wouldn't get all of his money and he would lose the ability to participate in corruption
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:16 am

dcaproducer wrote:
Jshank83 wrote:
reednavy wrote:
Hopefully it’s the somewhat “final” say in the argument and airlines will start to look into STL again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It should be the end of it. There is a board of 3 that has to vote to advance it. One is a hard no and the mayor makes it 2-1 no.

I listened to her interview on the radio. Said the airport is going to be a priority in 2020 and they learned about the airport thru this process. So we will see if it is more than words and the airport gets put as a priority or not.

I do think there finally are some people in different branches of government and business that are getting serious about going after a TATL flight so hopefully that amounts to something. And it isn't just the airport trying to do everything by itself.


Boy the timing is funny.
I think this is exactly what I meant with my earlier post. I think the privatization talk was scaring away airlines. Airlines, like all businesses, want to know as much as possible when investing (which is what route planning is). No one wants to spend money in an uncertain situation when it's completely a new concept (minus SJU) in the U.S. market.

I also guarantee someone in the city or big business was pissed about the BA announcement this week.

:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:
Not to mention SJU has a huge tourist appeal which makes the airlines put up with privatization. Same with LGA, there are news articles stating how they hate it, but it is LGA so they can't complain or they'll end up out at EWR.
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
LambertMan
Posts: 1744
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:26 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:41 am

I have been one of the last people to give Lyda Krewson credit for virtually anything - probably because she lacks a certain bravado and/or charisma seen in most city leaders - but I will here. This whole charade undoubtedly was hampering air service development, particularly with regard to securing a new route to Europe (which is a substantial investment). I hope her sentiment about focusing on the airport in 2020, including a European link, is true. I partially wonder if the timing has something to do with the Portland announcement (only a guess).

I also do not believe in the idea that St. Louis has moved on from British Airways. Securing a 4 or 5x weekly flight, along with developing a long-term solution for its decaying concourses, should be absolutely priority number one for 2020. I flew LAX-STL for thanksgiving and used C24. I walked back to C28 and it had the distinctive "smell" of the TWA days (I can't describe it) and any investment in A, B, C, or D is short sighted. The region needs a better entry point without question.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:00 am

I would guess this had a lot to do with today. The airlines weren’t on board. If they aren’t on board, no reason to continue.

She said she almost pulled the plug in October so I doubt the BA news had anything to do with it.

https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... yptr=yahoo
 
User avatar
TWA302
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:17 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sun Dec 22, 2019 3:41 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
I would guess this had a lot to do with today. The airlines weren’t on board. If they aren’t on board, no reason to continue.

She said she almost pulled the plug in October so I doubt the BA news had anything to do with it.

https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... yptr=yahoo


Can you copy and paste the full story? When I login, all I see is this below the picture.

Currently, airlines are "very much in control" of what happens at Lambert. "They don't have that same kind of relationship with private operators of the airports in Europe," Mayor Krewson said.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sun Dec 22, 2019 4:37 pm

TWA302 wrote:
Jshank83 wrote:
I would guess this had a lot to do with today. The airlines weren’t on board. If they aren’t on board, no reason to continue.

She said she almost pulled the plug in October so I doubt the BA news had anything to do with it.

https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... yptr=yahoo


Can you copy and paste the full story? When I login, all I see is this below the picture.

Currently, airlines are "very much in control" of what happens at Lambert. "They don't have that same kind of relationship with private operators of the airports in Europe," Mayor Krewson said.


Yea. For some reason business journal is weird on mobile. I can only see it on desktop.
__________________

In killing the Lambert airport privatization process Friday, St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson said her chief reason was a lack of support from residents and businesses.

But there was another factor.

The airlines at Lambert — Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV) and American Airlines (NASDAQ: AAL) being largest — had to approve any lease of operations. It took them more than a year to agree to a preliminary framework for privatization, allowing the city to issue a request for qualifications in October for firms interested in leasing Lambert.

But still, "they remain pretty skeptical," Krewson said of the four airlines at the table in privatization talks.

"Currently the airlines are very much in control of what happens at the airport," Krewson said. "One of their points is that they don't have that same kind of relationship with private operators of the airports in Europe. They don't have that close relationship" that happens with the city of St. Louis and all other U.S. airports operated by municipalities.

Southwest, in a statement issued Friday afternoon, reaffirmed Krewson's suggestion that the airline had yet to fully embrace privatization.

"We want to thank Mayor Krewson and her team for the collaborative process to better understand what a privately run airport would mean for the city," the airline said in the statement. "We remained objective and worked with the city as they worked through this process. We were not a point where could make a decision about whether this would have been beneficial for the airlines serving Lambert St. Louis."


Krewson said that, as it works now, "the airport puts forward what we'd like to do, and the airport and airlines agree on what the capital spend will be or the things that need to be approved."

"It's a much more collaborative management experience," Krewson said.

Lambert airlines, though, agree that the facility needs to be improved, Krewson said.

"We're virtually at capacity in Terminal 2," home to Southwest, she said. "And Terminal 1 is fairly empty. We have way more gates than we need. We've got to get to a methodology where we can make the improvements we need at the airport, to keep our airline and business partners happy. We've got to look at other alternatives."

One hindrance is some $600 million in Lambert debt, which currently inhibits land development and major capital improvements. Krewson didn't address how that issue could be solved.
 
User avatar
TWA302
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:17 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sat Dec 28, 2019 6:26 pm

What a disaster this would have been. I can see consolidated rental car but throwing all airlines in one terminal would have been horrible.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/consultants-proposed-dramatic-changes-to-st-louis-airport-as-part/article_0b6d32bc-08aa-59a1-aeeb-1dd547513ec2.amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sat Dec 28, 2019 6:39 pm

TWA302 wrote:
What a disaster this would have been. I can see consolidated rental car but throwing all airlines in one terminal would have been horrible.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/consultants-proposed-dramatic-changes-to-st-louis-airport-as-part/article_0b6d32bc-08aa-59a1-aeeb-1dd547513ec2.amp.html?__twitter_impression=true


I don’t agree with all of the ideas but some I think are good. If they put everyone in T1 they would need to rebuild it.
 
N383SW
Posts: 126
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sat Dec 28, 2019 7:57 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
TWA302 wrote:
What a disaster this would have been. I can see consolidated rental car but throwing all airlines in one terminal would have been horrible.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/consultants-proposed-dramatic-changes-to-st-louis-airport-as-part/article_0b6d32bc-08aa-59a1-aeeb-1dd547513ec2.amp.html?__twitter_impression=true


I don’t agree with all of the ideas but some I think are good. If they put everyone in T1 they would need to rebuild it.


I’ve always thought that reopening B and D while closing A ( or repurposing A) would be a good idea. Leave some room on D for WN to grow and move UA and DL off of A. It would take 3 security checkpoints down to 2 and would seem (at least to me) to make for efficient use of the gates while still having room for growth and moving everything closer together. AS, SY, and maybe even F9 with their utilization could operate out of 2 gates combined. And please by all means get that HMS out of there! That is truly an embarrassment, horrible, slow, very unfriendly service and I can’t see that getting any better. Just my .02 cents worth but it was an eye opening read to say the least.
 
User avatar
symphonicpoet
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:57 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sun Dec 29, 2019 5:38 am

^If nothing else I think that tidily explains why the idea crashed. Southwest alone probably would have killed it to prevent consolidation to T1. Honestly, I think it's an idea with merit: there's plenty of capacity there and it would be more efficient and should bring down fees for everyone. But it's long been known and the time to do it would have been with the reopening of C. If the primary tenant doesn't want it, and by all accounts they really don't, then it doesn't happen.
TW AA MU JL KE DL UA LOF GJS SKW WN VN
STL JFK FRA GVA CDG IAD ORD PVG SGN NRT ICN ATL SFO HKG MDW LGA BNA DTW LHR
L1011 MD82 83 88 B737 738 741 744 762 763 772 773 777 A320 330 350 E175 C700
 
dcaproducer
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:26 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sun Dec 29, 2019 2:57 pm

Wave a magic wand and build a new terminal sounds great, and if the airport can get back to 20mil annual passengers I think something will happen, but not right now.
One of the airports greatest assets is that it has space and costs are coming down.

B really isn’t that big. But if you consolidated T1 airlines into C and then reopened D for WN you could have a connection between the two and consolidate security in T1.
This would also allow the airport to create a new FIS that is convenient for both other carriers and WN.

The airport should follow SLC’s lead. Their new facility is looking great. But a new terminal is years away.
 
pmanni1
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:17 am

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Sun Dec 29, 2019 9:08 pm

Looks like Alaska will start using A320's to SEA starting in May. A slight reduction in seats from the 739's they've been using. Seems like this could be a response to WN adding the additional evening flight.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11137
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2019

Tue Dec 31, 2019 3:54 pm

Please continue discussion in St. Louis Aviation Thread - 2020

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1437999
Forum Moderator

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos