Austin & San Antonio

[LoneStarMike]

Originally Posted by PTSA

I think Portland Oregon has 65 gates. Eighty gates is a good number to look at. You may not build them to their full extent right away but you will have the capability in place. There is a lot of space in Texas last time I was there.

Austin -already- has the capacity to add gates to give it a maximum of 112, as well as a third parallel runway. Austin doesn't need get rid of what we already have just so we can build another airport miles away from the city center.

Originally Posted by PTSA

You are creating demand by combining the demand from two airports too close to each other into one.

That may work in Dallas/Fort Worth, but those two cities are only 30 miles apart, whereas SAT/AUS are about 70 miles apart.

A large chunk of the existing flights from SAT and AUS go to other nearby cities like Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, Harlingen, etc. Traffic on those flights already dropped after 9/11 due to the increased times needed to go through security. Although some of that short-haul traffic has recovered, none of those short-haul city-pairs to/from AUS/SAT have fully recovered to the levels they were before 9/11.

If the two cities were to build a joint airport halfway between the two, even more of that short haul traffic would drop. Why would someone from SAT want to drive 45 min to an hour just to get to the airport and still have to arrive at least an hour early, just to take a 40 minute flight to Houston or Dallas? Might as well drive the whole way.

And what about all the convention business San Antonio gets? I've always heard that one of the many reasons
San Antonio is popular as a convention city is because its' airport is close to downtown, which makes it convenient.

What convention attendee is going to want to fly into San Marcos and have to take a 45 minute (at least) shuttle ride down I-35 just to get to the city. An airport much farther away from each city's downtown is not going to help either city's convention business.

Of course, I'm sure the folks in San Marcos/New Braunfels would love it and benefit financially from it.

[LoneStarMike]

Originally Posted by PTSA

I think Disney in San Antonio now is a rumor but with some legs to stand on. The airport is a problem. They need one desperately to make it work. Thirty Five gates is a problem. Am I correct that it will have 35 gates when complete?

The current phase (Contructing Terminals B and C and tearing down Terminal 1) would give SAT 35 gates. But there is a future phase calling for a 21 gate Terminal D which would give SAT 55 gates.

[Major AWACS]

Originally Posted by PTSA

Capt AWACS

I know it is a little hard to think abstractly beyond the normal everyday response but you see that is the response that is needed here. When central park was proposed in New York City people like you came out of the woodwork everywhere to say it was unrealistic. Imagine Manhattan without central park now. Quite foolish!

It is not hard to think abstractly, it is hard for some to think financially and not think in a vacuum.

It is a bruise to both Austin and San Antonio. Think a little more, corporate board rooms think a bit more beyond what they read in a local paper. I know for a fact that research is being done constantly on market areas to gain an economic edge.

I’m on a corporate board, and as a registered Lobbyist I meet with more politicians than I would ever care too. I can tell you that is not how we think.

Austin and San Antonio together represent at least the same level of significance as Dallas. Apart they do not. If the mayor of San Antonio wants San Antonio to be a global player then those things that make a global city need to be done.

Half of the things you mention don’t exist in New York, Tokyo, London, Mexico City, or Sao Paulo. All global cities

Both airports are not global airports. Improvements are good but in the end they are only improvements.

And they will not become global airports but building a useless 80 (love that random number) gate airport between both cities. Sorry but this is not how aviation works. Part of it is even a Geography problem. As the Boeing 787 comes along you will see more int’l point to point service in medium markets, but not SAT and AUS. This is just simply not how airlines work. You can hope all you want but unless SAT starts running its own airlines you are out of luck.

Ciities do tremble. Yes they do! You are very wrong. There have been many improvements made, many incentives made, and many deals struck to keep employers within cities and states. To think otherwise is foolish. Metroplex, whatever, I am sure you know what I mean.

Give me one example of a city “trembling”. I’ve lived in many on 4 different continents and never seen one tremble. Even the early 80s days in Detroit or Cleveland wasn’t a tremble. Governments of smaller towns can tremble if a government base closes or plant dries up, but big cities do not tremble at each other. I’d love to see your samples of when they have.

The new always beats the old in the end because the old dies. The time lines may be short or long. Dallas and Houston are booming so was LA. It's called critical mass. What happens after you reach that is the item to focus on.

Which is not what you are talking about doing with SAT and AUS.
And last time we all checked on this board LA was still growing and the second biggest metro in the US.

Gas prices will not go down in the long run.

I know, I agree. Working with oil biz before I know it will go up before coming down.

I think Portland Oregon has 65 gates.

I thought it was 43 with jet bridges and commuter parking for a few more (as most airports do with air taxi and commuter service.

Eighty gates is a good number to look at. You may not build them to their full extent right away but you will have the capability in place. There is a lot of space in Texas last time I was there.

You don’t know the geography nor people of the hill country and central Texas.
An airport of the size you suggest would eat up at least 8 square miles of space (at a bare minimum) So finding a spot would be either fare west or east of IH-35 and then you have to get the locals and environmentalists to agree on building it. Central Texans are not big on paving that much land. It would be a hard sell. Then you wouldn’t have transport links and it would take much more time to get to downtown Austin and San Antonio (DFW is 35 miles DT to DT; Austin San Antonio 75) . Now you still haven’t said how you are paying for this roughly 350 billion dollar project (rail airports and infrastructure minimum). I’m all about “dreaming” but you have to have a plan when you throw this stuff out there.

Yes, central Texas is not Dubai, (the US should be ashamed of itself to loose the tall building lead to Dubai)

We haven’t had the tall building “lead” in years. It has been in Asia. Kuala Lumpar, Taipai, Dubai.

but what makes you think Texas can not become a Dubai in the future as far as wealth is concerned. Don't place limitations on your self before you start. Actually the light rail serving PDX proved to be one of the better lines but I rather see heavy rail here to the airport. Oh and yes the corporate individuals we are talking about will find a way to get there in comfort. Yes they can even start using a heliports like in some other urban areas.

So you want heliports and more money spent on oil, when Helos eat more gas than airplanes? So my companies travel budget triples because of the airport between Austin and San Antonio? Ok, good sell. Then you make San Marcos and New Branfels grow more… One is not placing limitations. The “limitations” you speak of are already in place. You have failed to address how you get by them and were this money comes from.

NASA is still now in a exploratory mode. This will change.

Not even sure what that is supposed to mean? NASA was chartered in an exploratory mode. It will never change unless funding is stopped by congress. Cities have no say in the matter.

Landings are going to become more common and private companies will start a new industry. I think you summarized it well when you stated that it is very expensive to move the shuttle. All your regions stated are more remote than central Texas.

Well Moron is 10 miles from Seville, not exactly a small town, but remote enough to be safe. Hydrazine is not a pretty chemical, ask any F-16 driver. NASA doesn’t want it spraying over cities if there is a problem. But you are correct in that private companies will work the rockets for space tourism. West Texas already has a Space Port being built. And at 5-20 million a ride it is not coming to city near you anytime soon, so no need to build a runway with today’s technology in hopes that in 40 years it will be useful.

Try $200 a barrel and going up. Plan now be ready later. It sure makes it easier to talk to NASA when it is already there.

I own one well in Kansas and partner on two in Oklahoma, 200$ makes me happy, though I am not so sure it will go that high unless an outside force comes along like War, gulf storm destroying platforms etc etc.

Of course Dallas will not let American Airlines just move (city will tremble). Yes its hard. Who said life was easy. That is the competition you are up against. If you can not take the heat then you need to be in the back rows of the movie theater. HA HA

Being in the back row at the moves is not a bad thing, you get blow jobs in the back row and sit and make out the whole time. Don’t sell it short. DFW will not AA because AA does not have the money or means to move. We are talking about BILLIONS of dollars here, in an industry barely getting by. SAT or AUS could attract a regional focus city (for reasons I have discussed in other threads) but AA is not moving unless you pay them literally over 70-80 BILLION dollars (minimum) because it costs that much to move an operation. I can expand on why if you like. The question becomes who pays to move them. AA won’t move unless someone else pays (AT&T got incentives from Dallas for example) Do you think the taxpayers of central Texas want to pay that much? That is a massive amount of new taxes.

You are creating demand by combining the demand from two airports too close to each other into one.

No you are inconveniencing people that want to go to either city by making them spend an extra hour travelling to their destination. Why do you think the airports are two close?
Are Hobby and Intercontinental too close? Newark, La Guardia, and JFK? Love field and DFW? LAX, Burbank, Ontario, etc? No of course not. Look at south Florida, MIA, FLL, PBI. Having multi airport options is a GOOD thing in central Texas, not a negative as you seem to say.

From there you are building up the economic structure of the area to further add demand. You do not have to offer everything Dallas's airport does now but you want to make sure you can provide the direct service. When the direct service is available that service will be cut back in the other airports. From there you are creating new services not available at the other airports to attract further demand.

I suggest some airline marketing texts. This is just not how it works.

Ultimately you will rival and then surpass the other airports but you must have the space now to do it later. Dollars spent now are cheaper than dollars spent later so you develop a lead in the money race by acting sooner rather than responding later.

And where are these dollars coming from?

The globe is not there yet at Texas' doorstep. Perhaps to some extent in Dallas. You are fooling yourself.

Actually here is where you show you don’t know anything about Texas. Houston is the much more international city. Over 80 foreign consulates, the largest foreign port in tonnage in the USA, the 8th largest (bigger than Dallas) US foreign Airport gateway with the largest FIS USCIS facility. Houston has more foreigners as well and a more diverse population per the US Census. But both Houston and Dallas are large well known International cities. Trust me, I’ve lived all over the world and see it first hand both in Texas and business overseas. You can read the online information of the organisations I mentioned as well.

Oil companies if they do not diversify will go away in a century type changing event just as other companies have done in the past.

Oil companies are diversified into all types of Energy they are not going anywhere, and until something other than plastic is developed they will be here, even if cars run on water.

We are talking about solar companies, research, production, corporate headquarters not residences with photocells on their roofs.

Production would not be in San Antonio, it again would be in a place with more sunny days per year. This is how the solar business works. Just like the wind industry (which is being run out of Houston and Austin BTW)
[quote]
El Paso does not have the necessary prerequisites to keep this kind of a industry going. San Antonio does. There is however competition out there for this industry so sleeping is not a good trait.[/quote[
Really what are those prereqs?

You are correct it takes a lot more but if you think about it you will realize that the East coast has Disney in Florida, the West Coast has Disney in Anaheim, and were does the Midwest have Disney? Negotiations are a rough business and don't get me wrong but you do have to start somewhere. When you have a head start in that industry it only makes common sense to continue the lead.

Central Texas does not have a head start in the industry, thus your first problem.
Yes they could work to bring Disney to SA. That would be huge but it still wouldn’t mean people would want an airport in the middle of nowhere to serve their needs. Don’t forget not everyone loves Disney. There is 6 Flags, Sandusky and plenty of other theme parks to go around.

I think it was actually some one from a country neighboring yours that said it, but of course he lost in the end.

Funny as I google it I see Jack Dempsey said it, but then again Yogi Berra mangled it up a few times to.

If we all grounded our selves in reality we would not get much accomplished in the end, would we.

Dreaming big is great, but sadly this world has constraints (like money). You don’t even advocate a building block approach, and you seem to think this is all happening in a Vacuum. Just for fun lets say SAT and AUS combine an airport as such. Do you think DFW, IAH, ATL, STL, DEN and PHX are going to stand by and let it happy? They won’t tremble but they will fight back as you might say, and work to expand and keep services. None of what you speak of happens in a vacuum, save a private deal with someone like Disney, and even then they could make towns compete.

You would be surprised how some decisions are made in the board rooms of corporations and on what petty items.

No I wouldn’t. I see it each time I go to The Woodlands for mine. In the end it boils down to money.
Ciao,
AWACS

[PTSA]

Deduction is great. You guys are hilarious, but I am about 2,000 miles away from San Antonio.

No one said Dallas or Houston is bad. They are great cities. Although try not looking at San Antonio as your little brother. You know brothers do grow up.

Who said there is no room for another global city. That is just an opinion.

Why can't you have a global city and a great society at the same time.

Is this not our goal in the long run. Visions create our reality or we would not have the wheel, car, plane, etc.

What is the purpose of taunting that goes on between Austin and San Antonio? Would this energy be used better in a common cause?

I just think both San Antonio and Austin need to work together and put aside their differences to accomplish something greater then they can do alone.

[alexjon]

Originally Posted by PTSA

What is the purpose of taunting that goes on between Austin and San Antonio? Would this energy be used better in a common cause?

Wow, you really aren't from Texas, are you? Texas is all about smack-talking and trying to look bigger than life. We're also about moving at our own pace. One thing we don't do is screw eachother over so I don't know why you're so utterly fascinated with the idea that Austin and San Antonio have to conspire to move into a place they really couldn't care to get to in such a heated rush.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by PTSA

Deduction is great. You guys are hilarious, but I am about 2,000 miles away from San Antonio.

No one said Dallas or Houston is bad. They are great cities. Although try not looking at San Antonio as your little brother. You know brothers do grow up.

But SA will never be larger than Houston or Dallas.

Who said there is no room for another global city. That is just an opinion.

There just isn't. Look at California.

Why can't you have a global city and a great society at the same time.

What?

Is this not our goal in the long run. Visions create our reality or we would not have the wheel, car, plane, etc.

What is the purpose of taunting that goes on between Austin and San Antonio? Would this energy be used better in a common cause?

I just think both San Antonio and Austin need to work together and put aside their differences to accomplish something greater then they can do alone.

k.

[oldmanshirt]

Since solar power came up, here's an article from SA E-N I thought I'd share (its pretty long, btw):

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/environment/stories/MYSA062908.01A.Solar.3fee0cb.html

[M1EK]

Paul and PTSA, hate to break it to you, but in terms of business, Austin has a lot more in common with Dallas and Houston than with San Antonio. The only time we even think about San Antonio is when we're going to Sea World (and one time when I flew out of SAT because I got a great deal on airfare).

[Paul in S.A TX]

Originally Posted by M1EK

Paul and PTSA, hate to break it to you, but in terms of business, Austin has a lot more in common with Dallas and Houston than with San Antonio. The only time we even think about San Antonio is when we're going to Sea World (and one time when I flew out of SAT because I got a great deal on airfare).

Wrong! San Antonio has a diversified economy as does Houston and Dallas. Austin to a much lesser degree.

[PTSA]

Thanks for the SA airport information.

Capt A
We just disagree. Yes the building block option should be used for the airport I am for that. Never said it was not. I was told 65 gates at PDX by a port official and I am just quoting him. We can not compare proximity of airports in urban areas of 17 million population to SA and Austin. Florida cities are not good comparisons due to high retirement and holiday travel. Money is a difficult item to secure I agree but you have to start with a vision first. Yes Houston is cosmopolitan I agree. But when you think gateways New York, Chicago, LA come first as far as the image is concerned. SA does have a head start in the tourism industry. The river walk is a very attractive and unique destination. I have never talked to anyone that did not like it.

Others
It was not very long ago that the Dallas and Houston began competing and surpassed some of the major US cities in population. SA can do it also so do not count it out. What I am telling you guys is that in various research databases and abstracts SA looks really good not to be notice. It is something that has just occurred in the last ten years.

Alexjon
No, I am not from Texas but you are not doing a good job of marketing it either. Your other remarks do not even justify an answer. Why are you in Seattle anyway.

Others
Sad to see there is such a negative obstacle between Austin and San Antonio. I always thought it was there but not to such an extent.

[alexjon]

Originally Posted by PTSA

Alexjon
No, I am not from Texas but you are not doing a good job of marketing it either. Your other remarks do not even justify an answer. Why are you in Seattle anyway.

Because it's hot in Texas. Why do you care so much about South and Central Texas?

It's no lie when they say Texas is like its own little country.

[sakyle04]

Originally Posted by alexjon

Because it's hot in Texas. Why do you care so much about South and Central Texas?

It's no lie when they say Texas is like its own little country.

if my company offered me a job in seattle, portland, or any place in between, i would be gone in a heartbeat.

alexjon is my hero and the source of all of my envy.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX

Wrong! San Antonio has a diversified economy as does Houston and Dallas. Austin to a much lesser degree.

Could you elaborate? To me, it seems like M1EK is right. There is a reason why Houston, Austin, and Dallas made the "Best Cities for College Graduates" list and not San Antonio. It seems to me that SA's economy is mostly tied to blue-collar industries (much more than the other three cities). Nothing wrong with that at all.

[Paul in S.A TX]

San Antonio has a diversified economy moreso than Austin's by a good margin. Austin is more Tech and Government. San Antonio's economy swings it's bat in every direction. The largest Finance, Governement National Defense, Manufaturing, Healthcare Biomedical. Then there is convention and tourism, which is enormous. Austin can't touch San Antonio on those strengths. Austin wins in High Tech industry and that would be it.

The article below is dated Oct, 2005, right before the San Antonio boom. I'm sure it has gotten even better.


http://www.sanantonio.gov/news/NewsMayorCouncil/nrfinanceindustry.asp?res=1280&ver=true



Finance industry emerges as San Antonio's leading economic generator

- Committee presents initial findings of study of finance industry in San Antonio -

A new economic impact study shows that San Antonio’s financial industry is the city’s leading economic engine, generating more than $20 billion a year in jobs that earn an average annual salary of $52,612.

The numbers were compiled as a result of a study led by Finance San Antonio, the ad hoc committee created last July by the San Antonio City Council at the request of District 8 City Councilman Art A. Hall, which has the task of assessing the city’s finance industry.

Terry Brechtel, Finance San Antonio committee chair, said that the data compiled by the city’s Economic Development Department along with representatives from the Federal Reserve Bank asserts that the finance industry is the largest economic generator for San Antonio and the study is conservative and comparable to other previous industry studies.

Sectors included in the study are banking and credit, investment activities, insurance, funds, trusts and other financial vehicles, accounting and bookkeeping.

The total economic impact of the finance industry is $20.5 billion and it provides 50,469 jobs with total wages at $2.66 billion. The average annual wage for the industry is $52,612 compared to the average wage in San Antonio of $33,911. This data was compiled using data from 2004.

When compared to the aerospace, healthcare, hospitality and information technology industries, the finance industry:

registers the largest economic impact by almost double the second-ranked industry (healthcare)
pays the highest average wages
pays the second highest amount of total wages
employs the third largest number of people, and
this study further substantiates that San Antonio has a diversified economy.
In addition, San Antonio’s employment numbers in finance and insurance top other major Texas cities including Dallas/Ft. Worth, Houston and Austin.

“It is time for us to look at the finance industry in a different way and focus on its strengths to help further solidify other economic generators such as the bioscience technology, hospitality, information technology, telecommunications, automotive manufacturing, logistical/distribution, and aircraft maintenance industries,” said Brechtel.

The committee will continue to conduct research on the economic impact of the finance industry in San Antonio. They will also hire a consultant to conduct a gap analysis and provide input regarding methods for encouraging the growth of the industry. A final presentation and additional findings will be presented to the mayor and city council in December.

“For years San Antonio has sold itself short in terms of perception of quality of employment and range of wages, but recent studies including this one, are helping to reshape our view of San Antonio,” said District 8 City Councilman Art A. Hall. “There is much to be done, but by developing an action plan to help strengthen the finance and insurance sector of our economy, and help build the rest of our economy through increased resources, we have the chance to truly impact, for the better, the future of San Antonio.

“These results put us in a different class of city. By having finance as our leading industry changes the way we and others will view San Antonio.”

Members of the Finance San Antonio Ad Hoc Committee are:

Terry M. Brechtel, Chair
Michael Burke, MDB Capital Ventures
Alan Chesler, Ehrenberg Chesler
Karen Diaz, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
Randy Goldsmith, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
Don Gonzales, Estrada Hinojosa & Co.
Jim Greenwood, Valero
Doug Heath, SBC
Mario Hernandez, San Antonio Economic Development Foundation
Bill McCartney, USAA
Lanham Napier, Rackspace Managed Hosting
Alex Perez, Cox Smith and Matthews
Keith Phillips, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
Laura Powell, UBS Paine Weber
Carlos Resendez, Presidio Asset Management
Jorge Rodriguez, Coastal Securities
Raul Rodriguez, North American Development Bank
Robert Rodriguez, Southwestern Capital Markets
Mickey Roth, Intercontinental Asset Management
Floyd Wilson, Frost Bank
Ramiro Cavazos, City of San Antonio Economic Development Department, Ex Officio
Milo Nitschke, City of San Antonio Finance Department, Ex Officio
Staff members supporting this committee include:

Dr. Steven Nivin, City of San Antonio Economic Development Department
Albert Garza, City of San Antonio Economic Development Department
Marina Sifuentes, City of San Antonio Economic Development Department
About Finance San Antonio Ad Hoc Committee

On July 14, 2005, the San Antonio City Council, at the request of District 8 City Councilman Art A. Hall, created the Finance San Antonio Ad Hoc Committee, whose purpose is to make recommendations to the city council on actions that could be taken to increase the attractiveness of San Antonio to the financial industry and further promote the development of this sector of the city’s economy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX

San Antonio has a diversified economy moreso than Austin's by a good margin. Austin is more Tech and Government. San Antonio's economy swings it's bat in every direction. The largest Finance, Governement National Defense, Manufaturing, Healthcare Biomedical. Then there is convention and tourism, which is enormous. Austin can't touch San Antonio on those strengths. Austin wins in High Tech industry and that would be it.

Wait what?

Austin: Government (I mean it is the state capital), high-tech, and entertainment (movies, gaming, etc.).

San Antonio: service military, healthcare, and tourism.

And I would lean more to giving Austin finance and banking than I would San Antonio.

The difference in each city's economies can be seen in the demographics of the metro areas of both places.

[Paul in S.A TX]

Originally Posted by Trae

Could you elaborate? To me, it seems like M1EK is right. There is a reason why Houston, Austin, and Dallas made the "Best Cities for College Graduates" list and not San Antonio. It seems to me that SA's economy is mostly tied to blue-collar industries (much more than the other three cities). Nothing wrong with that at all.

Trae and Mike sorry but you're bubbles have bursted.

[alexjon]

Well, San Antonio's economy is growing faster and SA has a bigger GDP, but the population difference changes wealth distribution and since it's a small difference in GDP (2 billion or so diff at this point), it's very noticeable. San Antonio also has a smaller amount of visibly wealthy professions, preferring to distribute wealth to CEOs and CFOs and COOs in the Dominion.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX

Trae and Mike sorry but you're bubbles have bursted.

How?

[alexjon]

Originally Posted by Trae

How?

Probably using raw facts (like the GDPs) without any backing or grounding in reality.

Unless the Per Capita Income of the two cities changed overnight...

[Trae]

PTSA, you say you are 2,000 miles away from SA. What city do you live in?