Author Topic: Kansas City things  (Read 1007552 times)

0 Members and 25 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4800 on: April 27, 2016, 03:06:19 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.

please explain what you mean here

I mean if the time it takes to get from A to B, wherein KC is either A or B, were less (and I assume it would be less if there was a direct flight from A to B, instead of having to connect A to C to B) that would be more beneficial to consumers of the airport and Kansas City as a business environment in general.

Online mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39170
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4801 on: April 27, 2016, 03:07:58 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.

please explain what you mean here

I mean if the time it takes to get from A to B, wherein KC is either A or B, were less (and I assume it would be less if there was a direct flight from A to B, instead of having to connect A to C to B) that would be more beneficial to consumers of the airport and Kansas City as a business environment in general.

are you talking about southwest airlines specifically? because no other airline could or would add more nonstop destinations from mci. but you mentioned a european destination which obviously excludes southwest.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4802 on: April 27, 2016, 03:12:55 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.

please explain what you mean here

I mean if the time it takes to get from A to B, wherein KC is either A or B, were less (and I assume it would be less if there was a direct flight from A to B, instead of having to connect A to C to B) that would be more beneficial to consumers of the airport and Kansas City as a business environment in general.

are you talking about southwest airlines specifically? because no other airline could or would add more nonstop destinations from mci. but you mentioned a european destination which obviously excludes southwest.

I wasn't talking about any airline specifically, just referencing a real life example where having a direct flight would have been beneficial. 

Offline Skipper44

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7566
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4803 on: April 27, 2016, 03:14:00 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.

please explain what you mean here

I mean if the time it takes to get from A to B, wherein KC is either A or B, were less (and I assume it would be less if there was a direct flight from A to B, instead of having to connect A to C to B) that would be more beneficial to consumers of the airport and Kansas City as a business environment in general.

are you talking about southwest airlines specifically? because no other airline could or would add more nonstop destinations from mci. but you mentioned a european destination which obviously excludes southwest.
the city of Indianapolis put up a $1.5 million guarantee to get a United to do a direct to SFO so we could get like over 60 more nonstops to cool places :party:

Online mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39170
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4804 on: April 27, 2016, 03:15:09 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.

please explain what you mean here

I mean if the time it takes to get from A to B, wherein KC is either A or B, were less (and I assume it would be less if there was a direct flight from A to B, instead of having to connect A to C to B) that would be more beneficial to consumers of the airport and Kansas City as a business environment in general.

are you talking about southwest airlines specifically? because no other airline could or would add more nonstop destinations from mci. but you mentioned a european destination which obviously excludes southwest.

I wasn't talking about any airline specifically, just referencing a real life example where having a direct flight would have been beneficial.

i think it would be beneficial if we could just imagine a place and be there instantly, but i didn't post it in this thread about kansas city things

Online mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39170
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4805 on: April 27, 2016, 03:16:35 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.

please explain what you mean here

I mean if the time it takes to get from A to B, wherein KC is either A or B, were less (and I assume it would be less if there was a direct flight from A to B, instead of having to connect A to C to B) that would be more beneficial to consumers of the airport and Kansas City as a business environment in general.

are you talking about southwest airlines specifically? because no other airline could or would add more nonstop destinations from mci. but you mentioned a european destination which obviously excludes southwest.
the city of Indianapolis put up a $1.5 million guarantee to get a United to do a direct to SFO so we could get like over 60 more nonstops to cool places :party:

all the major carriers already fly to all their domestic hubs from mci (including SFO). also how does a nonstop from indianapolis to SFO get you 60 more nonstops?

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64050
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4806 on: April 27, 2016, 03:59:46 PM »
He's talking about buying 60 more direct routes for 1.5 mil each
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15309
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4807 on: April 27, 2016, 04:02:05 PM »
I remember a town hall about the single terminal proposal that happened at the central library like 2-3 years ago....
2) Pretty much everyone there, insane or not were firmly, and I mean firmly, against making it be a single terminal

Quite a LOT of info and research has been done in that time frame.  Including buy-in from airlines now.

Quote
Now that time has passed, there would be a lot better things for KC to spend $1 billion on

This isn't a "airport or sewers" or "airport or schools" discussion.  Money for any airport improvements is raised from fees and airline payments to the airport and can't be distributed to other areas in the city.  Same as the city general fund isn't used to pay for airport improvements.  It's a closed loop.

Offline KCFDcat

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2432
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4808 on: April 27, 2016, 04:02:57 PM »
Nice. I guess Voltaire owns it.

the brewery? false.

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15309
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4809 on: April 27, 2016, 04:03:49 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.  I'm talking like MCI > Amsterdam or something.  (Not that the volume could/would ever justify actually having those flights.)   My old company literally moved their executives to Chicago because the Danes hated getting on that extra flight.

Actually the volume is there
http://www.kmbc.com/news/kci-eyes-flights-to-europe-in-potential-international-expansion/27843684

Quote
Meyer said about a plane full of people leave Kansas City International Airport every day for international destinations. He said some mid-sized markets are already drawing the expanded international flights.

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64050
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4810 on: April 27, 2016, 04:04:37 PM »
If we could just spend one billion on anything I think it'd be cool to have a christ the redeemer statue replica but bigger
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15309
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4811 on: April 27, 2016, 04:05:49 PM »
If we could just spend one billion on anything I think it'd be cool to have a christ the redeemer statue replica but bigger

Huger version of this thing

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64050
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4812 on: April 27, 2016, 04:07:48 PM »
Maybe change it a little and call it moose the donger
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4813 on: April 27, 2016, 04:08:52 PM »
Nice. I guess Voltaire owns it.

the brewery? false.
That's what my coworker said, when I asked if they had food. Told me to go across the street, since they owned it.

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64050
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4814 on: April 27, 2016, 04:09:11 PM »
Cain the leaner
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4815 on: April 27, 2016, 04:09:33 PM »
I obviously believe you instead KCFD

Online mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39170
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4816 on: April 27, 2016, 04:11:48 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.  I'm talking like MCI > Amsterdam or something.  (Not that the volume could/would ever justify actually having those flights.)   My old company literally moved their executives to Chicago because the Danes hated getting on that extra flight.

Actually the volume is there
http://www.kmbc.com/news/kci-eyes-flights-to-europe-in-potential-international-expansion/27843684

Quote
Meyer said about a plane full of people leave Kansas City International Airport every day for international destinations. He said some mid-sized markets are already drawing the expanded international flights.

that will never happen

Offline KCFDcat

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2432
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4817 on: April 27, 2016, 04:13:20 PM »
Nice. I guess Voltaire owns it.

the brewery? false.
That's what my coworker said, when I asked if they had food. Told me to go across the street, since they owned it.

nope. Voltaire owners are re-opening the golden ox, but are not affiliated with the brewery.

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15309
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4818 on: April 27, 2016, 04:18:10 PM »
We'd be better off with more direct flights than we would with a new terminal.  I'm talking like MCI > Amsterdam or something.  (Not that the volume could/would ever justify actually having those flights.)   My old company literally moved their executives to Chicago because the Danes hated getting on that extra flight.

Actually the volume is there
http://www.kmbc.com/news/kci-eyes-flights-to-europe-in-potential-international-expansion/27843684

Quote
Meyer said about a plane full of people leave Kansas City International Airport every day for international destinations. He said some mid-sized markets are already drawing the expanded international flights.

that will never happen

Yeah seems like a longshot.  A new terminal that can handle widebodies and better international arrival setup could help...it's happened in other similarly sized non-hub airports...Austin as the article mentions.

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15309
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4819 on: April 27, 2016, 04:18:54 PM »
Nice. I guess Voltaire owns it.

the brewery? false.
That's what my coworker said, when I asked if they had food. Told me to go across the street, since they owned it.

nope. Voltaire owners are re-opening the golden ox, but are not affiliated with the brewery.

The stockyards team seems very well funded.

Online mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39170
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4820 on: April 27, 2016, 04:19:45 PM »
Austin has an F1 track

Offline KCFDcat

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2432
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4821 on: April 27, 2016, 04:21:42 PM »
Nice. I guess Voltaire owns it.

the brewery? false.
That's what my coworker said, when I asked if they had food. Told me to go across the street, since they owned it.

nope. Voltaire owners are re-opening the golden ox, but are not affiliated with the brewery.

The stockyards team seems very well funded.
Correct. Don't know where they got $. I think wealthy family.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4822 on: April 27, 2016, 04:27:31 PM »

Offline kitten_mittons

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 4587
  • Clawing at your furnitures.
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4823 on: April 27, 2016, 04:36:55 PM »
I would like a direct flight to/from austin.  Although I think they had one and recently got rid of it.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk


Online mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39170
    • View Profile
Re: Kansas City things
« Reply #4824 on: April 27, 2016, 04:37:22 PM »
 :D