Kansas City things

[Mikeyis4dcats]

Anyone who would pick mci in that situation would be dumb.

I live slightly closer to MHK than MCI, I don't have to park and ride a shuttle, and I can get home sooner.   Yeah, dumb.

hey mikey, did you read that post that you just quoted or nah?

lol, apparently not well.   thanks for pointing it out.  sorry lib, I'm a dummy.     My day job gets in the way or goEMAW sometimes!

[pissclams]

everything at and about the new airport will be more expensive.  this extends beyond takeoff & landing fees.

imagine a world where instead of charging whatever we will be at the  new airport for parking and taking off and landing and rent, etc and spending it on a $1B terminal, instead we took half of that proposed income and renovated MCI.  then, we took the other $500M and spent it on schools and police and streetcars and all the crap the city actually needs.

unlike some, i'm not dumb enough to believe that the option presented is the least cost alternative

this city is going down the literal sewer and the new airport will do nothing to fix that

Spending 100 billion at KCI wouldn't decrease KCMO ability to spend all the money we want on sewers or schools. You can cross the streams.

note- we don't have all the money we want to spend on sewers or schools or police or other necessary infrastructure.  what we are doing is considering diverting money that could be spent on those things, towards a $1B airport terminal.  why can't you figure out that our city is poor?

Not diverting one penny from city needs to an airport with a yes vote in August.

unlimited money and unicorns, kc is truly a special place

[KCFDcat]

everything at and about the new airport will be more expensive.  this extends beyond takeoff & landing fees.

imagine a world where instead of charging whatever we will be at the  new airport for parking and taking off and landing and rent, etc and spending it on a $1B terminal, instead we took half of that proposed income and renovated MCI.  then, we took the other $500M and spent it on schools and police and streetcars and all the crap the city actually needs.

unlike some, i'm not dumb enough to believe that the option presented is the least cost alternative

this city is going down the literal sewer and the new airport will do nothing to fix that

Spending 100 billion at KCI wouldn't decrease KCMO ability to spend all the money we want on sewers or schools. You can cross the streams.

note- we don't have all the money we want to spend on sewers or schools or police or other necessary infrastructure.  what we are doing is considering diverting money that could be spent on those things, towards a $1B airport terminal.  why can't you figure out that our city is poor?

This is 100% not how it works. But keep believing it.

[pissclams]

everything at and about the new airport will be more expensive.  this extends beyond takeoff & landing fees.

imagine a world where instead of charging whatever we will be at the  new airport for parking and taking off and landing and rent, etc and spending it on a $1B terminal, instead we took half of that proposed income and renovated MCI.  then, we took the other $500M and spent it on schools and police and streetcars and all the crap the city actually needs.

unlike some, i'm not dumb enough to believe that the option presented is the least cost alternative

this city is going down the literal sewer and the new airport will do nothing to fix that

Spending 100 billion at KCI wouldn't decrease KCMO ability to spend all the money we want on sewers or schools. You can cross the streams.

note- we don't have all the money we want to spend on sewers or schools or police or other necessary infrastructure.  what we are doing is considering diverting money that could be spent on those things, towards a $1B airport terminal.  why can't you figure out that our city is poor?

This is 100% not how it works. But keep believing it.

of course it isn't.  maybe you missed the fact that my post was a hypothetical.  focus on the word "imagine" at the beginning of my 3rd sentence.
i'll keep believing you can read and comprehend but instead just skimmed my post in this instance.

[KCFDcat]

everything at and about the new airport will be more expensive.  this extends beyond takeoff & landing fees.

imagine a world where instead of charging whatever we will be at the  new airport for parking and taking off and landing and rent, etc and spending it on a $1B terminal, instead we took half of that proposed income and renovated MCI.  then, we took the other $500M and spent it on schools and police and streetcars and all the crap the city actually needs.

unlike some, i'm not dumb enough to believe that the option presented is the least cost alternative

this city is going down the literal sewer and the new airport will do nothing to fix that

Spending 100 billion at KCI wouldn't decrease KCMO ability to spend all the money we want on sewers or schools. You can cross the streams.

note- we don't have all the money we want to spend on sewers or schools or police or other necessary infrastructure.  what we are doing is considering diverting money that could be spent on those things, towards a $1B airport terminal.  why can't you figure out that our city is poor?

This is 100% not how it works. But keep believing it.

of course it isn't.  maybe you missed the fact that my post was a hypothetical.  focus on the word "imagine" at the beginning of my 3rd sentence.
i'll keep believing you can read and comprehend but instead just skimmed my post in this instance.

Sorry man, I misread it. Pissclams extra pissy today.

[Panjandrum]

You can cross the streams.

I think the Missouri Religious Freedom law says otherwise.

I may be wrong.

[pissclams]

everything at and about the new airport will be more expensive.  this extends beyond takeoff & landing fees.

imagine a world where instead of charging whatever we will be at the  new airport for parking and taking off and landing and rent, etc and spending it on a $1B terminal, instead we took half of that proposed income and renovated MCI.  then, we took the other $500M and spent it on schools and police and streetcars and all the crap the city actually needs.

unlike some, i'm not dumb enough to believe that the option presented is the least cost alternative

this city is going down the literal sewer and the new airport will do nothing to fix that

Spending 100 billion at KCI wouldn't decrease KCMO ability to spend all the money we want on sewers or schools. You can cross the streams.

note- we don't have all the money we want to spend on sewers or schools or police or other necessary infrastructure.  what we are doing is considering diverting money that could be spent on those things, towards a $1B airport terminal.  why can't you figure out that our city is poor?

This is 100% not how it works. But keep believing it.

of course it isn't.  maybe you missed the fact that my post was a hypothetical.  focus on the word "imagine" at the beginning of my 3rd sentence.
i'll keep believing you can read and comprehend but instead just skimmed my post in this instance.

Sorry man, I misread it. Pissclams extra pissy today.

i'm just glad i kept believing you could read, son

[KCFDcat]

everything at and about the new airport will be more expensive.  this extends beyond takeoff & landing fees.

imagine a world where instead of charging whatever we will be at the  new airport for parking and taking off and landing and rent, etc and spending it on a $1B terminal, instead we took half of that proposed income and renovated MCI.  then, we took the other $500M and spent it on schools and police and streetcars and all the crap the city actually needs.

unlike some, i'm not dumb enough to believe that the option presented is the least cost alternative

this city is going down the literal sewer and the new airport will do nothing to fix that

Spending 100 billion at KCI wouldn't decrease KCMO ability to spend all the money we want on sewers or schools. You can cross the streams.

note- we don't have all the money we want to spend on sewers or schools or police or other necessary infrastructure.  what we are doing is considering diverting money that could be spent on those things, towards a $1B airport terminal.  why can't you figure out that our city is poor?

This is 100% not how it works. But keep believing it.

of course it isn't.  maybe you missed the fact that my post was a hypothetical.  focus on the word "imagine" at the beginning of my 3rd sentence.
i'll keep believing you can read and comprehend but instead just skimmed my post in this instance.

Sorry man, I misread it. Pissclams extra pissy today.

i'm just glad i kept believing you could read, son

Thanks pops!

[The Big Train]

Body bags everywhere

[pissclams]

#zapped

[Panjandrum]

Body bags everywhere

Mean streets.

[eastcat]

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

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.

Kansas City isn't getting direct Europe ever.

New Orleans doesn't have direct Europe. STL doesn't have direct Europe, Memphis doesn't have direct Europe.

In this 'new world' of airline consolidation, more and more travel will be through hubs. The board at United is already talking about axing their hub in Denver and Delta is drawing down their hub at MSP. Both cities will lose quite a bit of international service, if not all of it just like STL lost all of it when AA bought TWA.


I'm pro MKC btw, we don't need a big airport.

[mocat]

Delta is drawing down their hub at MSP. 

Do you mean MEM?

[Dugout DickStone]

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

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.

Kansas City isn't getting direct Europe ever.

New Orleans doesn't have direct Europe. STL doesn't have direct Europe, Memphis doesn't have direct Europe.

In this 'new world' of airline consolidation, more and more travel will be through hubs. The board at United is already talking about axing their hub in Denver and Delta is drawing down their hub at MSP. Both cities will lose quite a bit of international service, if not all of it just like STL lost all of it when AA bought TWA.


I'm pro MKC btw, we don't need a big airport.

Lambert is a huge POS

[Asteriskhead]

Man, I love the ridiculousness that is this thread.

[pissclams]

Man, I love the ridiculousness that is this thread.

kansas city things

[michigancat]

I don't think United is getting rid of their Denver hub any time soon.

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/earth_to_power/2014/08/united.html

[star seed 7]

I don't think United is getting rid of their Denver hub any time soon.

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/earth_to_power/2014/08/united.html

Keep in mind this information came from someone who thinks mkc is sufficient for kc (I don't think a 737 can even take off from mkc)

[Asteriskhead]

Man, I love the ridiculousness that is this thread.

kansas city things

I would like to start a public access television show, with that as the name, that is just you, Phil, and kcfd arguing about crap and drinking with Emo and Wacky randomly interjecting their stupid rough ridin' opinions. It would entertain me greatly.

[420seriouscat69]

Man, I love the ridiculousness that is this thread.

kansas city things

I would like to start a public access television show, with that as the name, that is just you, Phil, and kcfd arguing about crap and drinking with Emo and Wacky randomly interjecting their stupid rough ridin' opinions. It would entertain me greatly.

Ouch

[Emo EMAW]

Still not over the Ethan Hawke thing huh?

[420seriouscat69]

Still not over the Ethan Hawke thing huh?

He holds grudges. Super weird and random.

[Emo EMAW]

Still not over the Ethan Hawke thing huh?

He holds grudges. Super weird and random.

He really was pretty good in White Fang.  Training Day, too.

[Asteriskhead]

I am entertained.

[420seriouscat69]

They've been test running the crap out of the street car downtown. How many rough ridin' test runs do they have to have, before opening it up? It just seems pointless now. They've been testing it for two months.