Airport garage opens ahead of schedule, under budget
Airport’s parking garage debuts ahead of schedule, under budget
Friday, August 8, 2008 San Antonio Business Journal - by Tamarind Phinisee Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Mexican low-cost airline interested in SAT
Just saw this regarding Interjet, a Mexican low-fare carrier. Near the bottom of the story it noted:
Quote:
above image from www.anna.aero Toluca is near Mexico City. |
FINALLY! I knew this was going to happen eventually with Austin getting Aerobus. This market needs this and sounds like it will finally get it!
|
Woohoo! Toluca!
So SAT international destinations now include Mexico City Monterrey San Luis Potosi Toluca |
Quote:
Article says they 'want to' start service. And that's if the other route (Houston-Toluca) gets regulatory approval. Then they can pursue a SAT-Toluca route. I would imagine there's some paperwork involved in that route as well. Will they come here eventually? Hope so. But it's premature to say Toluca is a new international destination from SAT. Cause it's not. Not meaning to go off on ya, but this is a pet peeve of mine (in addition to tools on the internets who like to make up cool-sounding knock-off names for urban neighborhoods/developments that exist only on paper). Follow this process; you skimmed the clip of the article and missed the detail where it said they wanted to come here after and if they get the fed's approval on their Houston route. You subsequently post that we now have a new international destination (which we don't). Others see your post and believe it is true. Two months from now I'm having dinner with friends and they start talking about how cheap the new service to Toluca is and that we should all take a trip. I chime in that said direct service does not exist. They disagree and claim it's a fact because their ex girlfriend's brother offices with a guy who's father-in-law read about it online so it has to be true. Then I'm the a$$hole of the night for starting an argument and bringing everybody down, when all I was trying to do was avoid a fruitless two-hour impromptu vacation planning discussion on a trip we won't take because the inexpensive airline doesn't even serve SA. It's the same issue seen elsewhere here. Speculation enthusiasm somehow morphs into fact, causes confusion, then arguments ensue. It culminates with somebody making a post about the speculated project's viability in San Antonio anyway, then one of us gets all defensive of San Antonio and makes a derogatory post about that posters 'attacks' on San Antonio, and that poster responds by saying people who post in SA threads are too defensive and claims to speak for all of the other registered posters are allegedly in agreement that we're just not mature in SA threads. The whole ugliness ends with 8 pages of posts comparing census bureau data going back to 1983 on who's MSA is growing faster then some other MSA, with someone usually claiming the data is not correct cause it's off by 0.0031% and Junction/Utopia/Karnes City should/should not have been included. The entirety of it all could be avoided by people not posting speculation or hearsay as fact. |
Glad to see this project underway. To be honest my entire time living in SA I never flew to/from the old terminal, so i don't really know what it looked like on the inside. But it was obviously dated and had outlived its life in a post 9/11 airline industry where terminals need more room for security and there's a heavy empahsis on retail as an economic generator.
Can't wait to see the fiinished product. |
I've used terminal 2 the past couple of times I've flown to/from SA, but I had previously never been in there, not that I could remember anyway. To be honest, its really not as horrible as I had heard, but on the other hand it isn't much better than "adequate". And for folks who are used to that being their first glimpse of SA, I really wouldn't be surprised if the new terminal changes a lot of their basic perceptions about SA all by itself.
|
Quote:
The article I posted above is a little misleading (to me anyway) because it makes it sound like Interjet has only applied for two routes (Ontario-Toluca and Houston-Toluca) Having read the article, it left me with the impression that once those routes had been approved, then and only then would Interjet go back and apply for San Antonio-Toluca, Houston-Guadalajara and Houston-Monterey flights. Having done a little more research, that is not the case. Interjet has applied for all 5 routes (including San Antonio-Toluca) in their initial filing with the Department of Transportation. The filing was done on June 17. link to DOT filing Link to exhibits concerning the DOT filing (After going to the above links, you can click on the icon to the left of "Views" to view the actual document.) Fast forward to August 7, 2008. The DOT has given it's tentative approval for Interjet to start these routes. Link Quote:
7. Our action with respect to this foreign air carrier permit should, unless disapproved by the President of the United States under §41307 of Title 49 of the U.S. Code, become effective on the 61st day after its submission for §41307 review, or upon the date of receipt of advice from the President or his designee under Executive Order 12597 and implementing regulations that he or she does not intend to disapprove this portion of the Department’s decision under that section, whichever occurs earlier. It notes that other parties have until August 28, 2008 to file comments and/or objections. If there are no objections received by August 28, I believe that is when DOT would submit the application for §41307 review and if approved, it would be effective 61 days after that date, which would be around the end of October. Although Interjet and Viva Aerobus are both ultra-low cost carriers, Interjet's been around a little bit longer. They started operations in December 2005, while Viva Aerobus started operations in November of 2006. From a customer service standpoint, Interjet appears to be head and shoulders above Viva Aerobus. Just one example is the fleets used by each carrier. Viva Aerobus currently has 9 737-300's that have an average age of 21.6 years Viva Aerobus fleet information After going to the above link, you see delivery dates from 2006 to 2008, but those are the dates the planes were delivered to Viva Aerobus. If you click on each of the 9 registration numbers you can see when the planes was actually manufactured. They were all built between 1985 and 1988 and most of them came to Viva Aerobus from US Airways. Compare that to Interjet's fleet They have 13 Airbus A320 jets with an average age of 4.7 years. The oldest one was built in 1999. Six others were built in 2000. These 7 planes were previously owned by other airlines. Of the remaining six aircraft, four were built in 2007, and the last two were built in 2008. Back in 2005, Interjet signed an agreement with Airbus with 10 firm orders and 10 more options. The first of the firm orders were to be delivered in the second quarter of 2007. These are the six newer aircraft built in 2007 and 2008 and four more remain to be delivered. Although this promotional video is in Spanish, part of it shows the interiors of Interjet's planes. Looks pretty nice to me. Another tidbit - Interjet mainly flies out of Toluca, which I believe is about 50 miles from Mexico City. But recently (as in the last two weeks) I've read articles that they now have the right to fly out of Mexico City. Here's one of them. Interjet Buys Rights To Use Mexico City Airport - Chairman Quote:
|
We need a direct flight to Guadalajara, I was there two weeks ago and there were plenty of people connecting to GDL in Monterrey, hopefully InterJet will apply for a flight route.
|
Hopefully the city will be smart enough to focus on adding flights to Mexico, since the domestic market is. . . well, you know.
|
Quote:
Have they filed the app with the feds? Yep. Have they received initial approval from the feds for the Toluca-SAT route? Yep. Has the federal approval process concluded yet? No. Has the city of San Antonio or department of aviation made any type of announcement regarding the route or airline yet? No. (and there is a reason for that - having to do with counting eggs before they hatch). Does Interjet have a single employee on the ground here in SAT? No. I haven't looked at the data to see what percentage in a given period of initial route approvals that translate into actual serviced routes, so I cant counter with a over/under likelyhood on this. But there is a HUGE difference between, in your second post "a very real possibility" and the actual addition of Toluca as new international destination as you claimed in your first post; that difference at this point is still speculation- regardless of how sexy the interiors of their newer planes are, age of fleet, etc. At the end of the day, tentative route approvals and boisterous press releases all count for $hit until they have signed gate lease agreements with SAT, staff assigned here, and have planes on the tarmac here. I wouldn't trust the $16 in my nephew's piggy bank to any airline right now, foriegn or domestic. There's not a damn one of them in fantastic shape (not even southwest- which has about 22 months left on it's current fuel hedge contracts and then will be paying the same price the rest of the airlines are for fuel. If fuel prices stay high past that point, they'll be in the same damn boat as the rest of the industry and no amount of folksy home-spun charm or alleged unique management style will save them, and their CEO has even said that they will start losing money this fall - for the first time since 1991.) These new international startups arent any different- they arent immune to fuel prices. They are able to expand now because it's all investor and venture capitalist funds paying the bills. New money dosen't mean $hit in business- cause it's always borrowed money and says nothing about sustainability. But I'm on a tangent here... Back to the lecture at hand.... It's still speculation, no matter how it's dressed up or how cool we think it would be. Cause wishing something doesnt make it so. If it did, the second Vidorra tower would have started already. At this point, that $hit just be speculation too. |
Quote:
Quote:
I just added more info that cleared up some mis-perceptions in the original article I posted, as well as some additional info about the airline itself. |
Quote:
I come from a belief system that says there should be a breathalyzer/ignition interruption device on three things; cell phones to prevent regrettable booty calls; ATM machines to stop me from blowing my budget when I'm out for a nite on the town with my boys havin beers somewhere or at the *cough* gentleman's club; and computers to prevent unfortunate IM chats and -now- posts on here. My bad... |
|
Sounds like SAT is staying strong in the face of being dissed by AT&T. Kinda like getting dumped by a girl, then spending every day in the gym for three months until you get really big arms and chiseled abs and then bust back onto the market better than ever.
Yeah, its kinda like that. |
Is that article any kind of surprise to me? No. Ive been saying this for a while now that Jetblue would be out of its mind to ignore the San Antonio market as a viable destination. Not at all surprised about Interjet either....its just a big ol' DUH in my book.
Ive said my peace. |
Construction at airport goes on at robust pace
Guillermo X. Garcia - Express-News Despite the troubled economy and rapidly escalating costs, construction continues on schedule on the decade-long, $636 million San Antonio International Airport expansion project. The City Council, without comment, approved paying nearly $7 million to a number of vendors on Thursday as it bid farewell to Aviation Director Mark Webb, who has overseen the massive construction project. In 2005, when planning began, the price tag was $425 million, although plans have been refined and more projects added. Escalating fuel, material and labor costs also contributed to the rising cost, airport officials said. In June, ground was broken on an eight-gate Terminal B, which will replace an aging Terminal 2. Its cost has risen from $100 million to $138 million, according to airport officials. Construction began around the same time on an elevated roadway to handle the increased vehicular traffic into the airport generated by the new terminals. Its cost rose from $38 million to $41 million. Both of those projects are scheduled to be finished in 2010. By 2015, when the dust has finally settled and all construction is completed, the city will have transformed what was once a sleepy regional airport into a sleek, three-terminal facility, said Webb, whose 14-year career with the city ended Thursday. The project is funded entirely through airport revenue rather than local tax dollars. One of the items approved Thursday was a $5 million payment with 3D/International for construction documents and design work on the planned Terminal C, which Webb said could be built starting next spring or summer “if market conditions allow.” The cost of that terminal has risen from $91 million to $110 million, airport officials said. The additional terminal would add five to 11 more passenger gates, as needed. The additional gates would bring the total to 35. Currently, there are 39 nonstop markets served out of San Antonio. As more nonstop flights have been added and San Antonio has grown, the number of passengers using the facility has increased. The airport topped 8 million passengers in 2007, the third record in a row, and while airport traffic nationally has fallen, traffic here between January and July is running nearly 6 percent higher than the same period in 2007, according to airport spokesman David Hebert. In July alone, airport passenger traffic increased 11 percent over July 2007. “We have a high level of optimism that the trend of record growth we have experienced in 2005-06-07 will continue,” Hebert said. The council also approved a $1.2 million payment for design of furniture, fixtures and equipment at Terminals B and C; design of a baggage screening system for Terminals 1 and B and apron paving or regrading for Terminals B and C. Also completed this summer was the last of 2,800 spaces in a five-level parking garage, bringing total airport parking to 9,000 spots. Appointed director in 2006 after a stint as interim head, Webb begins his new job Friday as vice president of facilities and project management at University Health System, where he will oversee a $900 million capital improvements program. |
San Antonio fastest growing non hub Airport in the country through 2016
Just happened to come across this story....it was for the NO airport, but saw that it mentioned SATIA! This is good news considering SA is adding two new terminals! lol
NO airport third fastest-growing in nation | Print | E-mail Only two other large non-hub airports, San Antonio, Texas, and Lexington, Ky., will grow faster than New Orleans' Louis Armstrong through 2016, according to a study by lead aviation consulting firm Boyd International. By Leslie Turk Wednesday, October 15, 2008 Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport is the third fastest growing airport in the United States. Only two other large non-hub airports, San Antonio, Texas, and Lexington, Ky., will grow faster through 2016, according to a study by lead aviation consulting firm Boyd International. The number of passenger boardings at the airport (located in Kenner) is expected to climb 9.5 percent from 2008 to 2014. While airlines across the country are cutting back on air capacity to save money in a tight economy, the local airport -- still recovering the service it lost following Hurricane Katrina -- hasn't been as impacted by those cuts. In the report, Boyd analyzed 147 airports with a focus on population, economic factors, airline service trends and extraordinary local factors. I tried to find the actual study, but couldn't seem to find it on the Boyd Group website. |
Thats awesome! Especially since our new terminal will be done!
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 1:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.