More covered parking for WRWA

[Pete]

Our new airport director finally speaks... And doesn't say much of anything.



Today's Q&A is with Oklahoma City's director of airports.

Construction is ongoing at Will Rogers World Airport.

What construction remains unfinished? Will travelers notice it?

We are in the final stages of the expansion project. Currently, work is under way on the last three gates of Phase II, which will be the final home for Delta Airlines, the second security checkpoint and the last two baggage claim and makeup areas. Fortunately for travelers, all of this work is happening out of their view and, more importantly, out of their way.



Are there plans to expand parking at the airport?

As air travel has rebounded, so have our parking needs. We have definitely outgrown our existing facilities. In response, we have just finished the design for the expansion of the five-story garage. This expansion will provide another 1,200 covered spaces. In addition, we are in the process of designing a lot north of our existing shuttle lot that will provide over 1,000 new parking spaces. This 1,000-space parking lot will ensure that the airport can maintain its current capacity during the expansion of the five-story garage, as well as meeting future needs.




Is Easter weekend typically a busy time at the airport?

The Easter holiday is not traditionally a heavy "flying weekend." Most people tend to stay home or drive to nearby relatives. We definitely do not see as much leisure travel as we do on other holidays.



Should travelers expect to spend extra time finding a parking space or getting through security?

Since we are not anticipating an extremely busy weekend, travelers should not have to spend extra time to find a parking space. They should keep in mind, though, that the five-level garage is the one parking area that fills up quickly. There should be plenty of available shuttle and semicovered shuttle parking.

As far as getting through the security checkpoint, there are certain times of the day that are busier, such as early morning or late afternoon/early evening, and travelers should allow a bit more time to pass through.


Here's some good photos from the architect's website:

[Patrick]

Final stages? Where's the East Concourse?

New parking? Sounds like the same thing Luther Trent boasted about during his reign.

Are these folks even trying to go after Southwest Airlines? Southwest has already expressed a desire to leave Love Field.

[venture]

East Concourse obviously won't be needed until traffic demands it - it doesn't. There is still a lot of capacity left in the existing terminal - and now with 3 more gates coming online, that'll increase it. We are talking the ability to have an additional 30+ flights operate from the airport...we don't have that kind of growth coming.

The additional parking is good and will definitely be appreciated.

As far as Southwest...why should it matter to the Airport Director? Any HQ type is something for the City, County, State, Chamber, etc to work on. Having the HQ is DOES NOT mean any increase in air traffic - I really wish people would get that through their skulls here. Southwest is not going to eliminate flights from Dallas if they move their HQ, they simply want it in a location that their employees can get to without too much hassle. The best cities are going to be Phoenix, Kansas City and St. Louis - maybe even Chicago. Oklahoma City is small potatoes in the WN world.

[HOT ROD]

Venture, just because the airport director does not traditionally reach out to headquarters, I agree with Patrick et al that he should champion anything aviation related in Oklahoma City. that is what we are paying him for??

I think it is disgusting that during his first big city interview all he can discuss is a parking lot and expanded garage. What about the city pair connections via direct service? What about the COMPLETION of the terminal (the East Concourse is part of the original project, why did it get dropped and when will it get completed)? What about improved public access to the terminal? What about being held accountable for the lack of information on and about airport operations???

To me, this is what I am responsible for at my company. Its my job to report the financial health of my company division and to make decisions that help my company become more profitable.

Isnt the airport trust a business? Isnt the airport director the CEO of that business? Then why shouldnt the airport director care about the relocation of a Fortune 500 company, nonetheless an AIRLINE!!!!, to Oklahoma City - especially when the city should be an OBVIOUS choice.

I also disagree with you on the fact that WN would not want to relocate here. OKC is only 150 miles from those current exec's homes in the DFW area, they could easily hop a flight here and work during the week and hop a flight back and be at home during the weekends. There is also AMTRAK, and their CARS! All feasible with an OKC move.

Add to that, OKC's recently upgraded terminal facility. If the airline decided to realize its dream of a central hub point, OKC is a no brainer. The airport currently has just less than 200 commercial flights a day and WN is already the bulk of that. Increasing to 350 or 400 flights would be hardly a problem at WRWA, plus the advantage of the East Concourse and the fact it could/should be able to be constructed in less than 2 years - makes the city another attraction.

OKC is already a major reservation center for WN, so the headquarters operation could draw on that synergy. Of course, I would like the airline to locate its hq operation downtown vs. the airport - but any way we could get them, well surely take it.

The final attraction for OKC - is its business and civic culture. I lumped the two together because it seems that in OKC they go hand in hand. Look at MAPS, that was civic culture serving as an incubator for business - with businesses leading the charge on the investment. Now, OKC has a quality of life that is rival'd by many much larger cities and the future looks even brighter.

You might say, OKC does not have the o/d numbers to support a hub - but last time I checked, most hub ops have low o/d numbers as they are transfer points. Also, hub airports have created cities and markets - look at Atlanta. While the city already had businesses before making the decision to create a mega air field, Hartsfield is by far the biggest reason Atlanta is the capitol of the South and a city to be respected around the world. Chicago Ohare is the largest employer in the state of Illinois - and is a MAJOR reason all of those gleaming skyscrapers are full of executives are along Lake Michigan instead of the Hudson river or the Potomac! Heck, even Salt Lake can attribute its growth to its airport (ditto Phoenix), as who the hell in their right minds would want to locate there - in the middle of nowhere!!!???

By no means am I expecting WRWA to become Ohare or anything close, but a SLC type model would be nice!! We now have 3.5-4M pax a year (all O/D). I dont anticipate that would change, but wouldnt it be nice to add in another 3M transient, giving us a 7M pax per year operation?

I think WN could help us in that area, we dont have any restrictions. They could synergize their ops significantly by mini-hubbing here. The same could be said for USAirways, especially with a maintenance facility at WRWA or PWA.

Why can we think of these things, but our PAID airport director shouldn't??? Cant???

Am I missing something here?

[venture]

Okay I'm going to address each point you made. Your text will be in bold. This is going to go off of my past and current experience with airport directors and the aviation industry as a whole.

Venture, just because the airport director does not traditionally reach out to headquarters, I agree with Patrick et al that he should champion anything aviation related in Oklahoma City. that is what we are paying him for??

He is being paid to run the airport and ensure its viability. He is doing this. The relocation of an airline HQ, all though has aviation written on it, has little to do with WRWA unless it also involved either additional flights, hangar capacity, or land required for the HQ building.

I think it is disgusting that during his first big city interview all he can discuss is a parking lot and expanded garage.

You should be grateful he even did the interview. Very few airport directors take the time out of their day to talk to the press - that is what the Communications/PR Directors are for.

What about the city pair connections via direct service? What about the COMPLETION of the terminal (the East Concourse is part of the original project, why did it get dropped and when will it get completed)? What about improved public access to the terminal? What about being held accountable for the lack of information on and about airport operations???

All good questions. I think getting some feedback on the additional Trans States (United) service would be great, although I am hearing it is doing well though the 2nd flight to San Antonio has been scrubbed indefinitely. I would like to see their mind set on the east concourse, but I feel you'll hear EXACTLY what I've been saying - capacity is not a problem here for demand. Public access to the terminal? You mean letting nonticketed persons beyond the checkpoints? If that is the case, take it up with the TSA. There are some studies that have been looked at about going back to pre-9/11 security, but it would be a strain on security check points. Especially when you have the OKC TSA morons that demand everyone take off their shoes - WHICH I might add is NOT required. Lack of information about the airport? I don't think it is really that hard to get it. I feel the main reason we don't hear much is because it is a non-story in OKC. A lot of cities have dedicated reports that follow nothing but the airports, seaports, and other transportation areas - I don't see that same commitment here.

I also disagree with you on the fact that WN would not want to relocate here. OKC is only 150 miles from those current exec's homes in the DFW area, they could easily hop a flight here and work during the week and hop a flight back and be at home during the weekends. There is also AMTRAK, and their CARS! All feasible with an OKC move.

Yes an OKC move would be much better moving wise for WN execs...but that is not the point. Their concern is getting their employees from OUTSIDE Dallas to the HQ. Right now their employees even have to do the Texas-two step to get there. However, you move it to a city like PHX that has nonstop flights to nearly every city in the network, problem solved. OKC would never see this level of service.

Add to that, OKC's recently upgraded terminal facility. If the airline decided to realize its dream of a central hub point, OKC is a no brainer. The airport currently has just less than 200 commercial flights a day and WN is already the bulk of that. Increasing to 350 or 400 flights would be hardly a problem at WRWA, plus the advantage of the East Concourse and the fact it could/should be able to be constructed in less than 2 years - makes the city another attraction.

The only one dreaming of OKC being a hub is OKC. Its not going to happen. I'll touch on this more in a sec. The current facility would easily handle additional air traffic more than the 120 or so daily outbound commercial flights, but with that level we still have plenty of room for additional operations at the airport. WN is not the bulk of the flying, they may be one of the larger players - but with their 19 flights...they only make up 15-17% of the daily flights.

OKC is already a major reservation center for WN, so the headquarters operation could draw on that synergy. Of course, I would like the airline to locate its hq operation downtown vs. the airport - but any way we could get them, well surely take it.

The OKC Res Center is one of the smaller ones in the company. Yes it would be nice, but you dont see other companies with call centers here moving their HQ.

The final attraction for OKC - is its business and civic culture. I lumped the two together because it seems that in OKC they go hand in hand. Look at MAPS, that was civic culture serving as an incubator for business - with businesses leading the charge on the investment. Now, OKC has a quality of life that is rival'd by many much larger cities and the future looks even brighter.

I'll agree with you that the business culture here is amazing compared to most cities...but...

You might say, OKC does not have the o/d numbers to support a hub - but last time I checked, most hub ops have low o/d numbers as they are transfer points.

BINGO. Last *I* checked, the hubs that are focused on O&D are being pulled down or eliminated. Airlines are NOT looking for more expensive hub operations. Let's look at the past few years.

Pittsburgh - US Airways mecca but was 80% connecting traffic, is now about 25-30% of its former self as flights are now focused on O&D markets.

St. Louis - American bought TWA and planned to use STL as a relief spot for ORD and DFW. Didn't happen. They have eliminated roughly 40% of the flights there since the merger and one whole concourse now is sitting completely empty. Reason - low O&D.

Cincinnati - Delta has looked at this hub which has been reported to be over 80% connecting traffic. It has eliminated a slew of flights to nearly every market, drawing down 40% in some cases. Talk is now increasing that this hub is in serious danger as it continues to be very weak on an O&D standpoint. No one would have thought CVG would ever fall below Salt Lake City in the Delta network, but its a possibility.

New York JFK - Delta has announced a new "hub" here...but guess what, NYC is essentially king of O&D markets. Hmm.

Nashville, Raleigh, San Jose - American axed all of these hubs due to low O&D.

Do I really need to go on? Sure you can throw a flight or two to major business markets out of OKC, that is great - but that is it.

Also, hub airports have created cities and markets - look at Atlanta. While the city already had businesses before making the decision to create a mega air field, Hartsfield is by far the biggest reason Atlanta is the capitol of the South and a city to be respected around the world.

Atlanta has always been one of the leading cities in the Southeast...and this is why overtime airlines such as Delta, Eastern, TWA, and AirTran have picked it to be a hub at one point or another.

Chicago Ohare is the largest employer in the state of Illinois - and is a MAJOR reason all of those gleaming skyscrapers are full of executives are along Lake Michigan instead of the Hudson river or the Potomac!

Chicago's main driver has been being the gateway to the Midwest and the major Ag business. Yes O'Hare has helped...but the hub never would have happened if business didn't push to grow Chicago first.

By no means am I expecting WRWA to become Ohare or anything close, but a SLC type model would be nice!! We now have 3.5-4M pax a year (all O/D). I dont anticipate that would change, but wouldnt it be nice to add in another 3M transient, giving us a 7M pax per year operation?

I think WN could help us in that area, we dont have any restrictions. They could synergize their ops significantly by mini-hubbing here. The same could be said for USAirways, especially with a maintenance facility at WRWA or PWA.

Why can we think of these things, but our PAID airport director shouldn't??? Cant???

Am I missing something here?

The SLC model won't work here because SLC is first and foremost a connection point for the western US. Delta and before it Western, have long used this as a way to connect people in Montana to those in California. Southwest never dreamed of SLC being as it is until they bought out Morris Air.

Yes any additional air service for OKC would be great, and I think we can continue to grow the local market. HOWEVER, it will not be done via the opening of a hub. You will see more operations such as Trans States to SAT and MSY, but nothing much more than that. I am excited by their market targets for the year, which could bring in additional airlines or expanding current ones.

As far as our airport director's train of thought...it is unfair to say he hasn't thought of these things, but also keep in mind we don't have access to all the resources he does.

Finally on US Airways. Do not expect a maintenance facility here anytime soon. They already have plenty of hangar space in CLT, PIT, and PHX. PIT is being ramped back up a bit and will likely be the home to the Embraer 190s when they come online. Let's not forget US Airways is a hard core union company, which will make it an issue to open up any facility outside of their "home turf"...but also means they will look to any possible way to go around them - hence the outsourcing to Central America and Canada.

[HOT ROD]

couldnt they "outsource" to OKC?? Alaska Air does.

And what I meant about "public access at the terminal" is not beyond the checkpoints - but improving the meeting areas, having people go downstairs to meet and having a better area for that. Also, a cell phone waiting area outside the field would be nice and more public amenities before the checkpoint.

[John]

I saw a Fly OKC commercial on tv a couple days ago. From the looks/sounds of it, it was a national ad. Pretty decent exposure.

[BDP]

Very good points, Venture. It seems the hub model has lost a lot of favor in recent years, anyway.

How familiar are you with PHX's growth in the last 10-15 years? Did that city's leadership and/or airport's leadership do anything specific that increased their America West and Southwest traffic, or was this merely the result of corporate strategy from these two organizations? Obviously, Phoenix itself experienced tremendous growth during that time, as well. So, I guess my question would be if PHX's growth was just a function of service expanding to meet growing O/D or was the result of strategy by the airlines, by city leadership, or a combination of both?

[brianinok]

FYI: There is a cell phone waiting area. It is across the roadway (west) from the shuttle parking. It has been there at least a couple months.

I do agree that people waiting to meet people at security checkpoint need a different place to do it. There is simply not enough room by the ticket counters to do it.

[venture]

couldnt they "outsource" to OKC?? Alaska Air does.

And what I meant about "public access at the terminal" is not beyond the checkpoints - but improving the meeting areas, having people go downstairs to meet and having a better area for that. Also, a cell phone waiting area outside the field would be nice and more public amenities before the checkpoint.

The CBA's of both the IAM (US) and TWU (ex HP) restrict outsourcing. They probably could eliminate several contractors to bring it back into the States, but we may see restrictions get tighter. The Air Canada financing agreement has some Airbii going up there. Whereas the CBAs really make sure, essentially, all narrowbody work is down in PIT, CLT or PHX.

I agree a better waiting area for families is needed.

Very good points, Venture. It seems the hub model has lost a lot of favor in recent years, anyway.


The hub and spoke model is EXTREMELY expensive to maintain. If the O&D numbers aren't there to justify it, the airline is in a heap of trouble when things get tight. See Cincinatti.

So, I guess my question would be if PHX's growth was just a function of service expanding to meet growing O/D or was the result of strategy by the airlines, by city leadership, or a combination of both?

From what I understand the PHX area is rapidly growing thanks to the great biz community there. What you see now, and for the last few years, are the airlines pushing to meet the demand.

[BDP]

And it does seem that connecting traffic has grown with it. It makes sense. Hubs are a pain for them, but they have to do it to serve and compete in multiple markets. They can aprlay their O/D with connectors and keep all their operating plains full, which obviously is the #1 goal.

The truth is that the reduction of hub and spokeing, along with the embrarer jets. is good for OKC in terms of non-stops. It seems to me that for a hub to work in OKC, they'd have to monopolize the O/D traffic and eventually charge a lot for it (kind of like United in Denver). I think if we can get a couple more non-stops to our bigger markets, like LA and DC, we'd be doing well. I know people hate those embrarer jets, but I'll fly on anything without a prop if it cuts my travel time by half.

[OUman]

The truth is that the reduction of hub and spokeing, along with the embrarer jets. is good for OKC in terms of non-stops. It seems to me that for a hub to work in OKC, they'd have to monopolize the O/D traffic and eventually charge a lot for it (kind of like United in Denver). I think if we can get a couple more non-stops to our bigger markets, like LA and DC, we'd be doing well. I know people hate those embrarer jets, but I'll fly on anything without a prop if it cuts my travel time by half.

That's EXACTLY why a hub will not be possible at OKC. Only last year did traffic increase to above 3.5 million, virtually all of it is O&D. Our airport is strictly an O&D airport. No one carrier at OKC can have a monopoly, the traffic's just too small for that too happen. You're talking about DEN, which has upwards of 40 million passengers a year. Enough O&D to support a hub, heck two hubs (Frontier's hub there). Is it all O&D? No, but if there weren't decent O&D traffic, I bet you UAL would have downsized it quite a bit. A hub cannot thrive on connecting traffic alone.

As for the RJ's, yeah, they can be a pain to people who are tall, but that's the jet that has made it possible for nonstop flights to be profitable (even though they're quite expensive to operate). The ERJ's are less expensive though. And the new EMB 170/190 models are actually quite comfortable from what I know so far.

There are nonstop flights to 20 cities from Oklahoma City. All things considered, I think we've come a long way from where we were. Should we have more nonstops? Absolutely, D.C. is one city to whch we should have gained nonstops to when every other city was getting those, LA included. Hopefully we'll also get nonstops to San Francisco and Seattle/Tacoma as well. The research and marketing team hired by the airport trust did find that an average of 106 passengers fly to San Fancisco everyday from Oklahoma City.

OUman

[venture]

The research and marketing team hired by the airport trust did find that an average of 106 passengers fly to San Fancisco everyday from Oklahoma City.

At least they have interest access.

http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/index.html

There is the link for all the O&D stats out of every airport in the US with more than 10 pax per route.

We obviously still have some big ones to name in the O&D market out of OKC, that are well ahead of SFO. LAX (#9 at 210 pax), Baltimore (#10 at 204 pax), Seattle (#12 at 195 pax), Washington (#15 at 180 pax), etc. United could knock out two right now with LAX and IAD, and Alaska can come in for Seattle.

[HOT ROD]

The research and marketing team hired by the airport trust did find that an average of 106 passengers fly to San Fancisco everyday from Oklahoma City.

OUman

Sounds like a United Airlines Airbus 319 flight to me!!! (at above margin). And would give us access to United SFO Hub/Int'l Gateway-likely increasing the daily o/d from OKC to SFO!!

[venture]

Keep in mind when it comes to opening nonstop service in a new O&D market, you are looking at the new carrier getting about half of the available market. The rest will remain with their respective airlines...though the routes typically grow over time. I would expect, as is typical nowadays, we'll see any new routes with either regional jets or small jets (Embraer family).

[brianinok]

With the number of people that travel between OKC and the LA metro area and the DC metro area, I figure when service is added to those cities it will be on RJs a couple times daily. If we get service to SFO or SEA, it could be once a day. But, airlines geniouses, wouldn't you figure that flights to LA and DC would eventually become more frequent and maybe on some mainline jets? Not only would there be all the O&D traffic, but they are also large hubs-- a number of people would start flying there and changing planes.

I could eventually see 2 daily RJs to SEA and SFO, and 4 daily to LAX and IAD, 1 or 2 mainline. That seems plausible by 2010 to me.

[HOT ROD]

works for me brian

[venture]

SEA would probably be the odd ball case and start out with mainline service just because of the range issue. Alaska would be the main player, but if they went the route of Horizon the CRJ-700 would be the only option and it would be close. More than likely we'll see an Alaska 737 or MD-83 (before they are gone) on any such route.

Everyone else would be able to go the RJ route with the players that would be involved.

[OUman]

Sounds like a United Airlines Airbus 319 flight to me!!! (at above margin). And would give us access to United SFO Hub/Int'l Gateway-likely increasing the daily o/d from OKC to SFO!!

Not to pick on you, but a 319 is in the 120-130 seat range which makes it not so feasible for a market that has an avg of 106 pax a day. Rather, one or two RJ's would be better option and that also gives more frequency.

OUman

[HOT ROD]

Not to pick on you, but a 319 is in the 120-130 seat range which makes it not so feasible for a market that has an avg of 106 pax a day. Rather, one or two RJ's would be better option and that also gives more frequency.

OUman

I understand that an A319 is in the 120-130 seat range. That is precisely why I said OKC's 106 pax average to SFO is worthy of one. Given the 81%-88% load factor at present, such a flight might be worthy. Calculation (106/120 or 106/130).

Arent airlines profitable on load factors above 80%? Such a flight would be that and then some, as other pax fly the route to connect internationally and conduct business/tourism in San Fran (or OKC).

:respect:

[OUman]

These days, airlines have become very particular about empty seats. Even 5-10 seats being empty consistently and you can bet that the aircraft will be downgraded. It is the case that while airplanes have been getting full more often, airlines are still losing money because of high fuel costs. Also, you have to realize that 106 pax a day is an average, could be that at times there are a whole bunch of passengers headed west, and at times there aren't that many, so the airline has to look into all that, it can't just put in a 319 and expect it to be profitable. Then there's operating cost, and RJ's still beat mainliners in that category. And again, if you can provide two daily roundtrips with an RJ instead of one with a mainliner, that's another reason to fly RJ's instead of mainliners on a route because people like having atleast two options in a day. All this I've learned from reading material and from posts in other forums.

OUman

[HOT ROD]

Thanks for the analysis, OUman.

[HOT ROD]

Okay I'm going to address each point you made. Your text will be in bold. This is going to go off of my past and current experience with airport directors and the aviation industry as a whole.

Venture, just because the airport director does not traditionally reach out to headquarters, I agree with Patrick et al that he should champion anything aviation related in Oklahoma City. that is what we are paying him for??

He is being paid to run the airport and ensure its viability. He is doing this. The relocation of an airline HQ, all though has aviation written on it, has little to do with WRWA unless it also involved either additional flights, hangar capacity, or land required for the HQ building.

I think it is disgusting that during his first big city interview all he can discuss is a parking lot and expanded garage.

You should be grateful he even did the interview. Very few airport directors take the time out of their day to talk to the press - that is what the Communications/PR Directors are for.

What about the city pair connections via direct service? What about the COMPLETION of the terminal (the East Concourse is part of the original project, why did it get dropped and when will it get completed)? What about improved public access to the terminal? What about being held accountable for the lack of information on and about airport operations???

All good questions. I think getting some feedback on the additional Trans States (United) service would be great, although I am hearing it is doing well though the 2nd flight to San Antonio has been scrubbed indefinitely. I would like to see their mind set on the east concourse, but I feel you'll hear EXACTLY what I've been saying - capacity is not a problem here for demand. Public access to the terminal? You mean letting nonticketed persons beyond the checkpoints? If that is the case, take it up with the TSA. There are some studies that have been looked at about going back to pre-9/11 security, but it would be a strain on security check points. Especially when you have the OKC TSA morons that demand everyone take off their shoes - WHICH I might add is NOT required. Lack of information about the airport? I don't think it is really that hard to get it. I feel the main reason we don't hear much is because it is a non-story in OKC. A lot of cities have dedicated reports that follow nothing but the airports, seaports, and other transportation areas - I don't see that same commitment here.

I also disagree with you on the fact that WN would not want to relocate here. OKC is only 150 miles from those current exec's homes in the DFW area, they could easily hop a flight here and work during the week and hop a flight back and be at home during the weekends. There is also AMTRAK, and their CARS! All feasible with an OKC move.

Yes an OKC move would be much better moving wise for WN execs...but that is not the point. Their concern is getting their employees from OUTSIDE Dallas to the HQ. Right now their employees even have to do the Texas-two step to get there. However, you move it to a city like PHX that has nonstop flights to nearly every city in the network, problem solved. OKC would never see this level of service.

Add to that, OKC's recently upgraded terminal facility. If the airline decided to realize its dream of a central hub point, OKC is a no brainer. The airport currently has just less than 200 commercial flights a day and WN is already the bulk of that. Increasing to 350 or 400 flights would be hardly a problem at WRWA, plus the advantage of the East Concourse and the fact it could/should be able to be constructed in less than 2 years - makes the city another attraction.

The only one dreaming of OKC being a hub is OKC. Its not going to happen. I'll touch on this more in a sec. The current facility would easily handle additional air traffic more than the 120 or so daily outbound commercial flights, but with that level we still have plenty of room for additional operations at the airport. WN is not the bulk of the flying, they may be one of the larger players - but with their 19 flights...they only make up 15-17% of the daily flights.

OKC is already a major reservation center for WN, so the headquarters operation could draw on that synergy. Of course, I would like the airline to locate its hq operation downtown vs. the airport - but any way we could get them, well surely take it.

The OKC Res Center is one of the smaller ones in the company. Yes it would be nice, but you dont see other companies with call centers here moving their HQ.

The final attraction for OKC - is its business and civic culture. I lumped the two together because it seems that in OKC they go hand in hand. Look at MAPS, that was civic culture serving as an incubator for business - with businesses leading the charge on the investment. Now, OKC has a quality of life that is rival'd by many much larger cities and the future looks even brighter.

I'll agree with you that the business culture here is amazing compared to most cities...but...

You might say, OKC does not have the o/d numbers to support a hub - but last time I checked, most hub ops have low o/d numbers as they are transfer points.

BINGO. Last *I* checked, the hubs that are focused on O&D are being pulled down or eliminated. Airlines are NOT looking for more expensive hub operations. Let's look at the past few years.

Pittsburgh - US Airways mecca but was 80% connecting traffic, is now about 25-30% of its former self as flights are now focused on O&D markets.

St. Louis - American bought TWA and planned to use STL as a relief spot for ORD and DFW. Didn't happen. They have eliminated roughly 40% of the flights there since the merger and one whole concourse now is sitting completely empty. Reason - low O&D.

Cincinnati - Delta has looked at this hub which has been reported to be over 80% connecting traffic. It has eliminated a slew of flights to nearly every market, drawing down 40% in some cases. Talk is now increasing that this hub is in serious danger as it continues to be very weak on an O&D standpoint. No one would have thought CVG would ever fall below Salt Lake City in the Delta network, but its a possibility.

New York JFK - Delta has announced a new "hub" here...but guess what, NYC is essentially king of O&D markets. Hmm.

Nashville, Raleigh, San Jose - American axed all of these hubs due to low O&D.

Do I really need to go on? Sure you can throw a flight or two to major business markets out of OKC, that is great - but that is it.

Also, hub airports have created cities and markets - look at Atlanta. While the city already had businesses before making the decision to create a mega air field, Hartsfield is by far the biggest reason Atlanta is the capitol of the South and a city to be respected around the world.

Atlanta has always been one of the leading cities in the Southeast...and this is why overtime airlines such as Delta, Eastern, TWA, and AirTran have picked it to be a hub at one point or another.

Chicago Ohare is the largest employer in the state of Illinois - and is a MAJOR reason all of those gleaming skyscrapers are full of executives are along Lake Michigan instead of the Hudson river or the Potomac!

Chicago's main driver has been being the gateway to the Midwest and the major Ag business. Yes O'Hare has helped...but the hub never would have happened if business didn't push to grow Chicago first.

By no means am I expecting WRWA to become Ohare or anything close, but a SLC type model would be nice!! We now have 3.5-4M pax a year (all O/D). I dont anticipate that would change, but wouldnt it be nice to add in another 3M transient, giving us a 7M pax per year operation?

I think WN could help us in that area, we dont have any restrictions. They could synergize their ops significantly by mini-hubbing here. The same could be said for USAirways, especially with a maintenance facility at WRWA or PWA.

Why can we think of these things, but our PAID airport director shouldn't??? Cant???

Am I missing something here?

The SLC model won't work here because SLC is first and foremost a connection point for the western US. Delta and before it Western, have long used this as a way to connect people in Montana to those in California. Southwest never dreamed of SLC being as it is until they bought out Morris Air.

Yes any additional air service for OKC would be great, and I think we can continue to grow the local market. HOWEVER, it will not be done via the opening of a hub. You will see more operations such as Trans States to SAT and MSY, but nothing much more than that. I am excited by their market targets for the year, which could bring in additional airlines or expanding current ones.

As far as our airport director's train of thought...it is unfair to say he hasn't thought of these things, but also keep in mind we don't have access to all the resources he does.

Finally on US Airways. Do not expect a maintenance facility here anytime soon. They already have plenty of hangar space in CLT, PIT, and PHX. PIT is being ramped back up a bit and will likely be the home to the Embraer 190s when they come online. Let's not forget US Airways is a hard core union company, which will make it an issue to open up any facility outside of their "home turf"...but also means they will look to any possible way to go around them - hence the outsourcing to Central America and Canada.

Hmm, seems that SFO's airport director thinks his job IS to go after a airline corporate headquarters. I wish we had him as the airport director for WRWA, then perhaps we could have gotten WN.

So you say that going after an airline headquarters is not the job of the airport director? Well John Martin of SFO disagrees with you.

Will he succeed? Most likely, NO - as United will move to downtown Chicago. But at least Martin is DOING SOMETHING, UNLIKE - what's his name?? (OKC airport director).


= = = = =

from SSP.com

United seeking a new world HQ
- David Armstrong, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, May 11, 2006

The parent company of United Airlines, the dominant airline at San Francisco International Airport, is considering moving to a new corporate headquarters, the airline confirmed Wednesday.

Reports of a possible move surfaced in Crain's Chicago Business, which said UAL Corp. is considering downtown Chicago, Denver and San Francisco as possible locations. United is headquartered near O'Hare International Airport in suburban Elk Grove Township, outside Chicago.

"We are looking at all of our facilities to see where we could benefit from consolidation,'' said United spokeswoman Jean Medina, who emphasized that no decisions about moving have been made.

"Looking at this is something corporations do all the time,'' Medina said, allowing that UAL -- which spent nearly three years in bankruptcy and has not made a profit since 2000 -- is looking at reconfiguring its physical plants as a way to reduce its operating costs.

Medina said UAL has retained the Staubach Co., -- a real estate firm headed by its namesake, former Dallas Cowboys quarterback Roger Staubach.

"We would be delighted to have United here in the Bay Area,'' said John Martin, director of San Francisco International Airport, which United uses as a hub.

Martin said he plans to get in touch with the airline to discuss the situation with executives.
Martin said United and the Bay Area would be a natural fit. "United is a major employer in the Bay Area, and Asian traffic is the fastest-growing market,'' Martin said of SFO.

Martin also cited the Bay Area's highly educated workforce and its entrepreneurial spirit as additional reasons UAL should consider relocating here.

At Local 9 of the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association, which represents United's union mechanics, the local's vice president, Brian McKeenan, said his members had only just become aware of the news and had no information about a move.

"I think it is unlikely,'' McKeenan said. "Executives always complain about the cost of living here. I've been to their world headquarters. They have a plush arrangement in Elk Grove, with the low cost of living and the cost of gas and so on.''

Peter Ragone, press secretary for San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, did not immediately return a phone call asking City Hall to comment.

United has 53,000 employees, with about 3,500 at its corporate headquarters. The company employs 11,000 people in Northern California, down from 20,000 before the high-tech slump, nationwide economic recession and Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks reduced demand from travelers and curtailed corporate travel budgets.

UAL has been headed since autumn 2002 by Glenn Tilton, who lived in San Francisco when he served as a senior executive at Chevron Corp. prior to taking the top job at United.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

i doubt united will relocate its headquarters anywhere. they're remaining in illinois.


__________________
SAN FRANCISCO Rundown: Recently Completed, Under Construction, Approved, Proposed, Never Built:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...threadid=24868

learn everything you ever wanted to know about the city by the bay's recent skyscraper developments!
first page updated on 3/8/2006

[venture]

Airline headquarters are rarely on the air field and terefore, why should the airport director get involved?

The only ones that come to mind are Southwest (Love Field) and Delta (Hartsfield). US Airways is in an office park in Tempe, United in Elk Grove, Northwest in St. Paul, etc. Unless the relocation includes property on the airport grouds, only then should the director be involved. At that point, he is there to assist in any land use planning or leasing that needs to take place to ensure the property is properly suited (and abides by FARs) for the project.

[OUman]

To add to Venture's post, the airport is underway on a plan to develop and make use of the empty space surrounding the airfield. Work on a hangar for ARINC has started, that will be a big boost in business at the airport and add about 100 jobs. More businesses are on the way.

OUman