klm617 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

It certainly is a problem maybe not in your eyes but it's lost revenue for the airport. I was just posting this there has been much more evidence if you have been following this thread I speak to people all the time and talked to my travel agent who books many people out of YQG and YYZ. For your information DTW is on the short list when EI gets the A321 so I do know what I'm talking about.

Revenue? Maybe.
Profit? No. And that's the point. Flying the most people does not equate to the WCAA and the airlines making the most money.

For your information, there is spill traffic in this real world of ours, from which I presume your statement on EI comes from. If airlines started a race to the bottom on fares to catch it locally, DTW would not be on anyone's shortlist.

Spill is not an issue at YYZ and ORD and who's to say that EI or DY wouldn't turn a profit if they served Detroit. The WCAA is not there to protect the profit of airlines it is there as a public entity to get the most for the people who use the airport. EI has a fare base and of course it will maintain that fare base to make any route worth while which with a 321 and connections on the DUB side without a doubt very viable should they chose to operate it.

If EI did an RFP and it included DTW in a shortlist, then you might be right about them adding DTW for next summer. The IAG seems to influence a "pre-determined" network if you will. There's always minor changes along the way, however that's mostly from larger RFP's. If you remember, CT offered a lot to EI. That's not necessarily economical for DTW when you include the possibility of other international carriers needing the incentives to enter the market too. Of course they'll shake down the airport's for as much incentive they could get, that's how international airlines work. I was given an assignment by my mentor recently to analyze cities in range of DUB using the A321LR, does it make sense for them to go to a market like BUF or an unserved, guaranteed market like DTW? If DY, D8, DI whatever it is, shortlisted DTW too, it only makes it more likely EI adds DTW because as you see the IAG either wants to destroy DY through acquisition or duplicating their network.

n2dru wrote:

Quick question, how were fares prior to the merger? I don't recall DTW being awash with a foreign tails.

Fares we always pretty much inline with the national average anther words DTW, YYZ and ORD basically had the same level of pricing. Only since Delta has taken over have the fares skyrocked. Remember during the 80s and 90s there were always summer charters that kept fares at a lower rate but with no formal completion Delta can charge pretty much what they want. in the 80's you had PA, SN, NW, DE, MP, JU, FI for 2 years only and BA with SN, MP, PA and JU dropping out in the 90's all competing for the same passengers but now you only have Skyteam and LH.

Looks like the BJX and MTY flights landed within one minute of each other today. Right now there are 3 AM planes parked at the McNamara terminal. How many flights per week does AM offer to MEX and MTY? I can't find any flights from AM on Sundays to MEX.

3 AM tails, especially side by side if the plotter did it that way would look sweet. DTW really needs KL and VS in that tail lineup =-(

I am feeling confident DTW will get more service both from DL and a few new carriers in 2019 because the recent activity of adding routes for the most part has overlooked the D and that cant continue. Rock Ventures/Dan Gilbert, The Mayor and the pathetic Governor have all been on major missions to add service to DTW lately , so the WCAA appears to be failing but corporate leaders might even have better luck.
I just read that LinkedIn leased 80k sq ft downtown, and is now one of nearly 30 tech firms with large positions either in downtown or coming to downtown. They will need to travel, and younger companies are more likely to seek options other than DL or at least be low hanging fruit for other carriers to snag.

NWADTWE16 wrote:

3 AM tails, especially side by side if the plotter did it that way would look sweet. DTW really needs KL and VS in that tail lineup =-(

I am feeling confident DTW will get more service both from DL and a few new carriers in 2019 because the recent activity of adding routes for the most part has overlooked the D and that cant continue. Rock Ventures/Dan Gilbert, The Mayor and the pathetic Governor have all been on major missions to add service to DTW lately , so the WCAA appears to be failing but corporate leaders might even have better luck.
I just read that LinkedIn leased 80k sq ft downtown, and is now one of nearly 30 tech firms with large positions either in downtown or coming to downtown. They will need to travel, and younger companies are more likely to seek options other than DL or at least be low hanging fruit for other carriers to snag.

It’s not that the WCAA isn’t failing on their part, it’s the airlines that don’t believe them. Single handedly, every airline you talk to that doesn’t serve the airport will try to tell you that Detroit is a wasteland full of murder, crime, and bombed out houses. The impression of Detroit in other countries is crazy.

flymco753 wrote:

NWADTWE16 wrote:

3 AM tails, especially side by side if the plotter did it that way would look sweet. DTW really needs KL and VS in that tail lineup =-(

I am feeling confident DTW will get more service both from DL and a few new carriers in 2019 because the recent activity of adding routes for the most part has overlooked the D and that cant continue. Rock Ventures/Dan Gilbert, The Mayor and the pathetic Governor have all been on major missions to add service to DTW lately , so the WCAA appears to be failing but corporate leaders might even have better luck.
I just read that LinkedIn leased 80k sq ft downtown, and is now one of nearly 30 tech firms with large positions either in downtown or coming to downtown. They will need to travel, and younger companies are more likely to seek options other than DL or at least be low hanging fruit for other carriers to snag.

It’s not that the WCAA isn’t failing on their part, it’s the airlines that don’t believe them. Single handedly, every airline you talk to that doesn’t serve the airport will try to tell you that Detroit is a wasteland full of murder, crime, and bombed out houses. The impression of Detroit in other countries is crazy.

Again that rests on the shoulders of the WCAA. Take these airlines execs to downtown take the to places of interest. Let me just ask this how many times has the WCAA brought Aer Lingus official to Michigan and how many times have WCAA officials been to Ireland. Dublin Airport and Aer Lingus have mentioned Detroit so all the WCAA has to do is close the deal they have already said they want to be here publicly so that being said it's the failure of the WCAA if it doesn't happen. Their job is to effectively market the airport to perspective airlines and if they can't do it maybe they need to hire a marketing firm to effectively do the job they can't seem to get done.

NWADTWE16 wrote:

3 AM tails, especially side by side if the plotter did it that way would look sweet. DTW really needs KL and VS in that tail lineup =-(

I am feeling confident DTW will get more service both from DL and a few new carriers in 2019 because the recent activity of adding routes for the most part has overlooked the D and that cant continue. Rock Ventures/Dan Gilbert, The Mayor and the pathetic Governor have all been on major missions to add service to DTW lately , so the WCAA appears to be failing but corporate leaders might even have better luck.
I just read that LinkedIn leased 80k sq ft downtown, and is now one of nearly 30 tech firms with large positions either in downtown or coming to downtown. They will need to travel, and younger companies are more likely to seek options other than DL or at least be low hanging fruit for other carriers to snag.

KLM for sure to me VS is not a real airline anyway.

flymco753 wrote:

NWADTWE16 wrote:

3 AM tails, especially side by side if the plotter did it that way would look sweet. DTW really needs KL and VS in that tail lineup =-(

I am feeling confident DTW will get more service both from DL and a few new carriers in 2019 because the recent activity of adding routes for the most part has overlooked the D and that cant continue. Rock Ventures/Dan Gilbert, The Mayor and the pathetic Governor have all been on major missions to add service to DTW lately , so the WCAA appears to be failing but corporate leaders might even have better luck.
I just read that LinkedIn leased 80k sq ft downtown, and is now one of nearly 30 tech firms with large positions either in downtown or coming to downtown. They will need to travel, and younger companies are more likely to seek options other than DL or at least be low hanging fruit for other carriers to snag.

It’s not that the WCAA isn’t failing on their part, it’s the airlines that don’t believe them. Single handedly, every airline you talk to that doesn’t serve the airport will try to tell you that Detroit is a wasteland full of murder, crime, and bombed out houses. The impression of Detroit in other countries is crazy.

You don't think airlines have their own marketing and planning departments that are constantly evaluating new service(s)? It really has very little to do with the WCAA. They can market themselves all they want, but they are not going to get a flight from DTW-NBO (as a totally unrealistic example) if there's not a market or a potential market identified by the airlines. If an airline sees a market to add DTW or add service to DTW, they will do it. They all know that Detroit is not a wasteland, but they do have to see a potential market that is currently not being exploited, or better yet, one where resources could be better allocated over somewhere else. Airlines exist to make money, if they felt there was more money to be made at DTW, you don't think they would be taking advantage of that?

Jeremy

RDU-DTW on F9, 3x weekly A320 starting in August

SESGDL wrote:

flymco753 wrote:

NWADTWE16 wrote:

3 AM tails, especially side by side if the plotter did it that way would look sweet. DTW really needs KL and VS in that tail lineup =-(

I am feeling confident DTW will get more service both from DL and a few new carriers in 2019 because the recent activity of adding routes for the most part has overlooked the D and that cant continue. Rock Ventures/Dan Gilbert, The Mayor and the pathetic Governor have all been on major missions to add service to DTW lately , so the WCAA appears to be failing but corporate leaders might even have better luck.
I just read that LinkedIn leased 80k sq ft downtown, and is now one of nearly 30 tech firms with large positions either in downtown or coming to downtown. They will need to travel, and younger companies are more likely to seek options other than DL or at least be low hanging fruit for other carriers to snag.

It’s not that the WCAA isn’t failing on their part, it’s the airlines that don’t believe them. Single handedly, every airline you talk to that doesn’t serve the airport will try to tell you that Detroit is a wasteland full of murder, crime, and bombed out houses. The impression of Detroit in other countries is crazy.

You don't think airlines have their own marketing and planning departments that are constantly evaluating new service(s)? It really has very little to do with the WCAA. They can market themselves all they want, but they are not going to get a flight from DTW-NBO (as a totally unrealistic example) if there's not a market or a potential market identified by the airlines. If an airline sees a market to add DTW or add service to DTW, they will do it. They all know that Detroit is not a wasteland, but they do have to see a potential market that is currently not being exploited, or better yet, one where resources could be better allocated over somewhere else. Airlines exist to make money, if they felt there was more money to be made at DTW, you don't think they would be taking advantage of that?

Jeremy

But again as far as EI goes that's on the airport if it don't happen Detroit is listed as one of the three cities for the initial A321 routes.

SumChristianus wrote:

RDU-DTW on F9, 3x weekly A320 starting in August

Guess we know now why ISP-DTW is ending. Really not an add at all just a capacity shift

klm617 wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

RDU-DTW on F9, 3x weekly A320 starting in August

Guess we know now why ISP-DTW is ending. Really not an add at all just a capacity shift

DL is already all mainline, so their response will probably be increased frequency.
Back to 5x daily?

SumChristianus wrote:

klm617 wrote:

SumChristianus wrote:

RDU-DTW on F9, 3x weekly A320 starting in August

Guess we know now why ISP-DTW is ending. Really not an add at all just a capacity shift

DL is already all mainline, so their response will probably be increased frequency.
Back to 5x daily?

RDU is a top domestic monopoly, so actually this is a good add. I expect this service to do well.

With this being said if Aer Lingus does not chose Detroit the burden of blame rests totally on the WCAA for not doing their home work and selling the airport effectively to bring them into this market.

"Aer Lingus has launched a Request for Information for Commercial Support for Transatlantic Network Development (RFI). The process presents a unique opportunity for North American airports and their local communities to invest alongside Aer Lingus in the introduction or expansion of Aer Lingus service. Multiple studies have shown the economic multiplier benefits of international air service. Aer Lingus would operate to Dublin, Europe’s fastest growing transatlantic hub, offering both US Customs and Border Protection pre-clearance and extensive onward connectivity throughout Europe."

"The process is extended to both airports not yet served by Aer Lingus for new route opportunity and those already served by Aer Lingus, for increased capacity/frequencies. The process applies to both the A321LR aircraft as well as existing A330 aircraft, as wide-body capacity may become available by substitution with the new A321LR aircraft."

SESGDL wrote:

...
You don't think airlines have their own marketing and planning departments that are constantly evaluating new service(s)?

Jeremy

On the ATF prices thread mham001 compared DTW-LHR fares with JFK-LHR. DTW pax pay $300 more.

Last year China Southern/Eastern offered JFK-India RT for $478. Cheapest DTW-India is $900+, averages $1300 peaks at $1700.

If you strictly go by PDEW and yield management there should be more competition, yet DTW is considered a niche market not worth service.

There is truth to what flymco753 said.

dtw2hyd wrote:

SESGDL wrote:

...
You don't think airlines have their own marketing and planning departments that are constantly evaluating new service(s)?

Jeremy

On the ATF prices thread mham001 compared DTW-LHR fares with JFK-LHR. DTW pax pay $300 more.

Last year China Southern/Eastern offered JFK-India RT for $478. Cheapest DTW-India is $900+, averages $1300 peaks at $1700.

If you strictly go by PDEW and yield management there should be more competition, yet DTW is considered a niche market not worth service.

There is truth to what flymco753 said.

Point is, airlines do what they want. They purposely exclude cities from their growth plans. Lets say ABC Airlines is looking to expand their operations from ABCville. They compare 3 markets; XYZ, WXY, and CBA. XYZ has a reasonable amount of travel but is a dangerous city with corruption, the rest have maybe as much if not a tad bit more travel to ABCville. They exclude XYZ simply because it has a bad image across the globe. Essentially, that's where Detroit lies. Flew up a few days ago and went to Downtown Detroit last night and spoke to a German couple at the ball game and they said that their image of the city is much different than what they are shown by media and documentaries in Germany.

flymco753 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

SESGDL wrote:

...
You don't think airlines have their own marketing and planning departments that are constantly evaluating new service(s)?

Jeremy

On the ATF prices thread mham001 compared DTW-LHR fares with JFK-LHR. DTW pax pay $300 more.

Last year China Southern/Eastern offered JFK-India RT for $478. Cheapest DTW-India is $900+, averages $1300 peaks at $1700.

If you strictly go by PDEW and yield management there should be more competition, yet DTW is considered a niche market not worth service.

There is truth to what flymco753 said.

Point is, airlines do what they want. They purposely exclude cities from their growth plans. Lets say ABC Airlines is looking to expand their operations from ABCville. They compare 3 markets; XYZ, WXY, and CBA. XYZ has a reasonable amount of travel but is a dangerous city with corruption, the rest have maybe as much if not a tad bit more travel to ABCville. They exclude XYZ simply because it has a bad image across the globe. Essentially, that's where Detroit lies. Flew up a few days ago and went to Downtown Detroit last night and spoke to a German couple at the ball game and they said that their image of the city is much different than what they are shown by media and documentaries in Germany.

There you go and that's what the WCAA needs to play up the false image that is projected of the region. Every time somebody posts something negative about this area it should be refuted and the real truth put out there. But when people here play into the negative perception things will never change. The crime in Detroit is no worse than the crime in Chicago plus our state has so much to offer as far as hiking and the like not to mention the draw it can potentially have from Ontario but if the airport plays it low key not to offend Delta we can never expect to have any growth or options in this market.

If you are talking about the WCAA needing to be more proactive like PIT or IND, you are talking about offering airlines $$ to fly to a given city. The problem is, who pays for said subsidy?

If it is the state/general public paying for it, it can be a real tough sell. Especially in a place like Michigan where there is no money for roads and the City of Detroit needs $ for probably a million other things more important than increased DTW service.

If it is the airport authority directly paying for it, then you are essentially using the DTW service charge every Delta/UA/AA/NK/etc. pax pays... and using their money to help pay for some other airlines service. Also a tough sell.

kavok wrote:

If you are talking about the WCAA needing to be more proactive like PIT or IND, you are talking about offering airlines $$ to fly to a given city. The problem is, who pays for said subsidy?

If it is the state/general public paying for it, it can be a real tough sell. Especially in a place like Michigan where there is no money for roads and the City of Detroit needs $ for probably a million other things more important than increased DTW service.

If it is the airport authority directly paying for it, then you are essentially using the DTW service charge every Delta/UA/AA/NK/etc. pax pays... and using their money to help pay for some other airlines service. Also a tough sell.

It is not a tough sell, Michigan is one of the top states dishing out subsidies to US corporations. DFW is very active with their Air Service Incentive Program. City of Detroit is out of state supervision and has $38 Million surplus budget this year. It will be couple of hundreds surplus next year. For a state with GSDP close to VA,GA we always get the short-end of the stick, no question about it.

dtw2hyd wrote:

kavok wrote:

If you are talking about the WCAA needing to be more proactive like PIT or IND, you are talking about offering airlines $$ to fly to a given city. The problem is, who pays for said subsidy?

If it is the state/general public paying for it, it can be a real tough sell. Especially in a place like Michigan where there is no money for roads and the City of Detroit needs $ for probably a million other things more important than increased DTW service.

If it is the airport authority directly paying for it, then you are essentially using the DTW service charge every Delta/UA/AA/NK/etc. pax pays... and using their money to help pay for some other airlines service. Also a tough sell.

It is not a tough sell, Michigan is one of the top states dishing out subsidies to US corporations. DFW is very active with their Air Service Incentive Program. City of Detroit is out of state supervision and has $38 Million surplus budget this year. It will be couple of hundreds surplus next year. For a state with GSDP close to VA,GA we always get the short-end of the stick, no question about it.

I disagree. I can’t see this one getting any political backing. First, no dollars are coming from the city or county. Evans and Duggan are both politically savvy enough to know spending County/City money on subsidizing air service would go over about as well as Dao joke on a UA corporate call.

That leaves the state, which could happen, but someone needs to grease the legislatiors wheels. Sadly, there is no big business that really stands to gain by Aer Lingus adding service. Premium traffic is not flying Aer Lingus to Dublin. Thus there is no one to pay off the legislators to make it happen.

kavok wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

kavok wrote:

If you are talking about the WCAA needing to be more proactive like PIT or IND, you are talking about offering airlines $$ to fly to a given city. The problem is, who pays for said subsidy?

If it is the state/general public paying for it, it can be a real tough sell. Especially in a place like Michigan where there is no money for roads and the City of Detroit needs $ for probably a million other things more important than increased DTW service.

If it is the airport authority directly paying for it, then you are essentially using the DTW service charge every Delta/UA/AA/NK/etc. pax pays... and using their money to help pay for some other airlines service. Also a tough sell.

It is not a tough sell, Michigan is one of the top states dishing out subsidies to US corporations. DFW is very active with their Air Service Incentive Program. City of Detroit is out of state supervision and has $38 Million surplus budget this year. It will be couple of hundreds surplus next year. For a state with GSDP close to VA,GA we always get the short-end of the stick, no question about it.

I disagree. I can’t see this one getting any political backing. First, no dollars are coming from the city or county. Evans and Duggan are both politically savvy enough to know spending County/City money on subsidizing air service would go over about as well as Dao joke on a UA corporate call.

That leaves the state, which could happen, but someone needs to grease the legislatiors wheels. Sadly, there is no big business that really stands to gain by Aer Lingus adding service. Premium traffic is not flying Aer Lingus to Dublin. Thus there is no one to pay off the legislators to make it happen.

But again this goes back to a few dollars spent now could bring back a lot of return later. Just like a stadium or the q-line this will bring dollars back into the area. The more people that use DTW the more money they have to work with. So again adding Aer Lingus may cost a few buck now but could bring returns later. The writing is on the wall Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit. But if Aer Lingus comes in here and can give passenger a 33% relief on fares that Delta is charging I guarantee you people will be on board with it. My question is why do so many poopooing any idea of expanding Detroit service options outside of Delta who is doing nothing to bring more revenue to the airport.

klm617 wrote:

kavok wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

It is not a tough sell, Michigan is one of the top states dishing out subsidies to US corporations. DFW is very active with their Air Service Incentive Program. City of Detroit is out of state supervision and has $38 Million surplus budget this year. It will be couple of hundreds surplus next year. For a state with GSDP close to VA,GA we always get the short-end of the stick, no question about it.

I disagree. I can’t see this one getting any political backing. First, no dollars are coming from the city or county. Evans and Duggan are both politically savvy enough to know spending County/City money on subsidizing air service would go over about as well as Dao joke on a UA corporate call.

That leaves the state, which could happen, but someone needs to grease the legislatiors wheels. Sadly, there is no big business that really stands to gain by Aer Lingus adding service. Premium traffic is not flying Aer Lingus to Dublin. Thus there is no one to pay off the legislators to make it happen.

But again this goes back to a few dollars spent now could bring back a lot of return later. Just like a stadium or the q-line this will bring dollars back into the area. The more people that use DTW the more money they have to work with. So again adding Aer Lingus may cost a few buck now but could bring returns later. The writing is on the wall Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit. But if Aer Lingus comes in here and can give passenger a 33% relief on fares that Delta is charging I guarantee you people will be on board with it. My question is why do so many poopooing any idea of expanding Detroit service options outside of Delta who is doing nothing to bring more revenue to the airport.

Spirit would disagree with that, they’ve grown the most YoY and are on track to do so again this year.

KLM your spot on, except the qline is not a good investment, real rail would be, and VS is a real carrier lol

Both you and flymco bring up good, valid points, and frankly I am tired of the same lame responses too. DL is not expanded DTW, they are serving it well but holding it financially hostage. So many people want to travel more from DTW metro and Ontario but just cant because of cost. Corporate contracts not locked into DL are also open, so there will be some premium on these flights, why? because companies also make their travelers go for the LLA in a market and if EI or DY becomes that they will get the business, simple as that.

so much money is already flowing into downtown, with hundreds of millions more in deals that are stamped and in build stage, it's just a matter of will right now and I don't see who has it. I said before the state needs to get involved and market MICHIGAN not just Detroit, do it all over Europe and they will come, not in droves, but they will, especially from Germany. Sadly the Governor is a criminal who just hides and stores money, he does not serve the people.

Anyway, good convo and yeah go F9, I had hoped ISP would be a hit with people wanting to get to the NYC area cheap but I think Detroiters didn't figure that out fast enough, RDU has an immediate following and is recognizable, should succeed very well.

NWADTWE16 wrote:

KLM your spot on, except the qline is not a good investment, real rail would be, and VS is a real carrier lol

Both you and flymco bring up good, valid points, and frankly I am tired of the same lame responses too. DL is not expanded DTW, they are serving it well but holding it financially hostage. So many people want to travel more from DTW metro and Ontario but just cant because of cost. Corporate contracts not locked into DL are also open, so there will be some premium on these flights, why? because companies also make their travelers go for the LLA in a market and if EI or DY becomes that they will get the business, simple as that.

so much money is already flowing into downtown, with hundreds of millions more in deals that are stamped and in build stage, it's just a matter of will right now and I don't see who has it. I said before the state needs to get involved and market MICHIGAN not just Detroit, do it all over Europe and they will come, not in droves, but they will, especially from Germany. Sadly the Governor is a criminal who just hides and stores money, he does not serve the people.

Anyway, good convo and yeah go F9, I had hoped ISP would be a hit with people wanting to get to the NYC area cheap but I think Detroiters didn't figure that out fast enough, RDU has an immediate following and is recognizable, should succeed very well.

That's OK we don't have to agree just as long as we hold the same vision they are many ways up the mountain not just one but we must remain as one with the same goal in mind to get more options into DTW so that everybody can afford to take their family on holiday not just those grossing $100,000 a year. WOW is a good start we just need to keep the ball rolling. What many fail to realize and are short sighted about is the asset of having links that connect Detroit to the world and airport is one of the biggest economic machines that generates revenue in any given metropolitan area. If Detroit and Michigan are smart they will partner with Aer Lingus and bring them into this market.

The time is now to land as much of this low coast European service as it can it's not next year or five years from now because we don't want to see history repeat itself like with the ME3 bubble 5 years ago . Every major city in the United States landed at least one ME3 carrier except Detroit and the airport let that opportunity slip away and now other cities are benefited from Detroit not having an ME3 carrier because Detroit based passengers are now flowing over those cities to get to the destinations on an ME3 carrier.

klm617 wrote:

The time is now to land as much of this low coast European service as it can it's not next year or five years from now because we don't want to see history repeat itself like with the ME3 bubble 5 years ago . Every major city in the United States landed at least one ME3 carrier except Detroit and the airport let that opportunity slip away and now other cities are benefited from Detroit not having an ME3 carrier because Detroit based passengers are now flowing over those cities to get to the destinations on an ME3 carrier.

I actually agree with your points on this. I think it SHOULD happen, and I think to make it happen there needs to be an incentive. I think the incentive needs to come from the state level, and let’s face it, if we are taking about international travel, DTW serves the majority of the state population as far as intl flights are concerned.

My earlier comments are more focused on what I believe WILL happen. The city and the county aren’t going to be offering $, and honestly as much as I would like to see the service, I cannot honestly say that given all of the city and county’s needs, that flight incentives are at the top of the list. It would be beneficial to the region, but I don’t think it would be MORE beneficial than other needs at this point.

At the state level, I do think the opportunity is there. I do think there is also statewide benefits to the incentives. However I don’t think it will happen because there is no group to champion the effort. To me, that is the real issue.

kavok wrote:

klm617 wrote:

The time is now to land as much of this low coast European service as it can it's not next year or five years from now because we don't want to see history repeat itself like with the ME3 bubble 5 years ago . Every major city in the United States landed at least one ME3 carrier except Detroit and the airport let that opportunity slip away and now other cities are benefited from Detroit not having an ME3 carrier because Detroit based passengers are now flowing over those cities to get to the destinations on an ME3 carrier.

I actually agree with your points on this. I think it SHOULD happen, and I think to make it happen there needs to be an incentive. I think the incentive needs to come from the state level, and let’s face it, if we are taking about international travel, DTW serves the majority of the state population as far as intl flights are concerned.

My earlier comments are more focused on what I believe WILL happen. The city and the county aren’t going to be offering $, and honestly as much as I would like to see the service, I cannot honestly say that given all of the city and county’s needs, that flight incentives are at the top of the list. It would be beneficial to the region, but I don’t think it would be MORE beneficial than other needs at this point.

At the state level, I do think the opportunity is there. I do think there is also statewide benefits to the incentives. However I don’t think it will happen because there is no group to champion the effort. To me, that is the real issue.

Like I have said so many times this all rests on the shoulders of the WCAA to be creative in making this a reality. The ball is totally in their court with DY and EI. With QR it was a bit different as the aircraft was much larger and the distance much longer but theses are proposed as narrow body routes and DTW-LGW 4 times weekly in the summer and 3X in the winter should not be a hard sell as well as EI. I think we are better off with EI because with WW and DY we don't know how long it's going to last because of their rapid growth and how financially vulnerable they are with EI you can pretty much bet they are not folding anytime soon. For the same reason FI would have been better than WW

klm617 wrote:

Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit.

Please provide a source or data for that claim.

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit.

Please provide a source or data for that claim.

At the end of summer we will review passenger numbers and that will be your data.

klm617 wrote:

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit.

Please provide a source or data for that claim.

At the end of summer we will review passenger numbers and that will be your data.

.... so you made a claim based on what you think the data is going to show you months from now? Are you serious?

Also, passenger numbers will provide passenger data. What you were referring to is capacity, so I'll ask again - please provide a source for your claim that "Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit". Surely you wouldn't have made that claim without a source or data to back it correct?

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

winginit wrote:

Please provide a source or data for that claim.

At the end of summer we will review passenger numbers and that will be your data.

.... so you made a claim based on what you think the data is going to show you months from now? Are you serious?

Also, passenger numbers will provide passenger data. What you were referring to is capacity, so I'll ask again - please provide a source for your claim that "Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit". Surely you wouldn't have made that claim without a source or data to back it correct?

Just look at the Delta passengers carried through Detroit from 2016 to 2017 and you will see that Delta is shrinking the market. Also all Asia flying is reduced and DTW-AMS as well as there are no longer 4 dailies the last flight of the day only operates 6 days a week. All that reduced traffic has been shifted to ATL and MSP respectively. Passenger numbers and total departures are the only numbers that matter to me because those two are the units of measure when it comes to airport rankings. Spirit went through the last winter carrying 30 departures and the same this summer and when fall and winter roll around I suspect that will be the same.

klm617 wrote:

Just look at the Delta passengers carried through Detroit from 2016 to 2017 and you will see that Delta is shrinking the market.

A nonsensical statement. So even if they're growing capacity, if Delta is carrying less passengers they're 'shrinking' in the market? Wrong. And for the record, since it's apparent you have no data whatsoever to back any of your claims, Delta grew capacity in and out of Detroit from 2016 to 2017, and they're growing capacity again in 2018:

YE2016: 30.6M seats
YE2017: 30.8M seats
YE2018: 31.2M seats

Your claims are, as usual, bogus and devoid of factual backing.

klm617 wrote:

Also all Asia flying is reduced

Obviously - they've replaced 747s with industry-leading A350s. What would you have them do buy A380s?

klm617 wrote:

Passenger numbers and total departures are the only numbers that matter to me because those two are the units of measure when it comes to airport rankings.

Rankings? What are you talking about? Who cares about rankings? Be specific, because the metrics that should matter are capacity and revenue that, by the way, in many ways goes directly to the city of Detroit.

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Just look at the Delta passengers carried through Detroit from 2016 to 2017 and you will see that Delta is shrinking the market.

A nonsensical statement. So even if they're growing capacity, if Delta is carrying less passengers they're 'shrinking' in the market? Wrong. And for the record, since it's apparent you have no data whatsoever to back any of your claims, Delta grew capacity in and out of Detroit from 2016 to 2017, and they're growing capacity again in 2018:

YE2016: 30.6M seats
YE2017: 30.8M seats
YE2018: 31.2M seats

Your claims are, as usual, bogus and devoid of factual backing.

klm617 wrote:

Also all Asia flying is reduced

Obviously - they've replaced 747s with industry-leading A350s. What would you have them do buy A380s?

klm617 wrote:

Passenger numbers and total departures are the only numbers that matter to me because those two are the units of measure when it comes to airport rankings.

Rankings? What are you talking about? Who cares about rankings? Be specific, because the metrics that should matter are capacity and revenue that, by the way, in many ways goes directly to the city of Detroit.

Capacity doesn't matter passengers and aircraft movements are the rule of thumb in this business. Yes but that reduced Asia capacity was moved away from Detroit. They should have added a second flight at Detroit just like they did at ATL on the ICN route. They have moved so much traffic to Asia from Detroit to Atlanta by adding PVG and ICN when they down gauged from the 747 to the A350 again all hurting the bottom line at Detroit. You can chose capacity if you like but I chose aircraft movements and passenger counts do you happen to have those numbers. Capacity doesn't mean anything if your not committed to putting people in those seats

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit.

Please provide a source or data for that claim.

To be fair, Spirit does have a tendency to do this a lot. Not just at DTW, though. They've added and reduced LAX flights (i.e. dropped LAX-PDX, LAX-SEA while adding a couple transcon flights). It's the dart-board approach, similar to Frontier's...

FA9295 wrote:

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit.

Please provide a source or data for that claim.

To be fair, Spirit does have a tendency to do this a lot. Not just at DTW, though. They've added and reduced LAX flights (i.e. dropped LAX-PDX, LAX-SEA while adding a couple transcon flights). It's the dart-board approach, similar to Frontier's...

Not necessarily. The only move that did this recently was ending ACY to make PHL work. Other then that it’s been all adds. Naturally the next and most logical adds for the winter are either MBJ or PUJ (would be nice if it was both), PBI, and PHX.

klm617 wrote:

Capacity doesn't matter passengers and aircraft movements are the rule of thumb in this business.

What on god's green earth are you talking about? I sure hope you don't work in this business, because PROFIT is the singular rule of thumb in this business and all businesses. In the case of commercial aviation that's followed by revenue expressed as RASM and cost. Want evidence of that? Read through Delta's most recent earning's call transcript. See any mention of the specific number of passengers carried or aircraft movements? You don't, but what you do see are countless mentions of CAPACITY

klm617 wrote:

Yes but that reduced Asia capacity was moved away from Detroit. They should have added a second flight at Detroit just like they did at ATL on the ICN route. They have moved so much traffic to Asia from Detroit to Atlanta by adding PVG and ICN when they down gauged from the 747 to the A350 again

Clearly that capacity was better deployed out of ATL, and ever wonder why that might be? For starters, let's look at WCAA's 2017 Approved Budget, Page 33: Cost per Enplanement to the Airlines



See where ATL is on WCAA's own graph compared to DTW? And you're blaming Delta for moving that capacity? Get real, read up, wise up, and direct your whining appropriately.

klm617 wrote:

all hurting the bottom line at Detroit. You can chose capacity if you like but I chose aircraft movements and passenger counts do you happen to have those numbers.

I do have those numbers via MIDT, but since you've mentioned that those are the metrics you choose to base your claims on I assume you do as well right? Or is it, as I suspect, that while those are the metrics you choose to benchmark against you don't even have access to them and thus just make claims without any data?

klm617 wrote:

Capacity doesn't mean anything if your not committed to putting people in those seats

Probably the most staggering comment of your entire post, which is saying something. To think that Delta, or any airline for that matter, isn't targeting 100% paid load factors at yields that are profitable is just further evidence that you have virtually no experience or insights into this industry.

FA9295 wrote:

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Delta is not expanding in Detroit and Spirit just moves capacity from one market to another not really add many extra seats out of Detroit.

Please provide a source or data for that claim.

To be fair, Spirit does have a tendency to do this a lot. Not just at DTW, though. They've added and reduced LAX flights (i.e. dropped LAX-PDX, LAX-SEA while adding a couple transcon flights). It's the dart-board approach, similar to Frontier's...

And if they have a tendency to do that, it can be proven... with data as requested.

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Capacity doesn't matter passengers and aircraft movements are the rule of thumb in this business.

What on god's green earth are you talking about? I sure hope you don't work in this business, because PROFIT is the singular rule of thumb in this business and all businesses. In the case of commercial aviation that's followed by revenue expressed as RASM and cost. Want evidence of that? Read through Delta's most recent earning's call transcript. See any mention of the specific number of passengers carried or aircraft movements? You don't, but what you do see are countless mentions of CAPACITY

klm617 wrote:

Yes but that reduced Asia capacity was moved away from Detroit. They should have added a second flight at Detroit just like they did at ATL on the ICN route. They have moved so much traffic to Asia from Detroit to Atlanta by adding PVG and ICN when they down gauged from the 747 to the A350 again

Clearly that capacity was better deployed out of ATL, and ever wonder why that might be? For starters, let's look at WCAA's 2017 Approved Budget, Page 33: Cost per Enplanement to the Airlines



See where ATL is on WCAA's own graph compared to DTW? And you're blaming Delta for moving that capacity? Get real, read up, wise up, and direct your whining appropriately.

klm617 wrote:

all hurting the bottom line at Detroit. You can chose capacity if you like but I chose aircraft movements and passenger counts do you happen to have those numbers.

I do have those numbers via MIDT, but since you've mentioned that those are the metrics you choose to base your claims on I assume you do as well right? Or is it, as I suspect, that while those are the metrics you choose to benchmark against you don't even have access to them and thus just make claims without any data?

klm617 wrote:

Capacity doesn't mean anything if your not committed to putting people in those seats

Probably the most staggering comment of your entire post, which is saying something. To think that Delta, or any airline for that matter, isn't targeting 100% paid load factors at yields that are profitable is just further evidence that you have virtually no experience or insights into this industry.

We can all pull out facts to support what ever argument we chose to put our energy behind. First of all the Asia traffic was perfectly fine connecting through Detroit for 10+ years so why move it to Atlanta now because Delta needs to make sure that it can run that "Busiest Airport in the world" moniker up the flag pole as long as it can. Secondly with that graph you showed why would Delta then build up SEA and BOS when they bot have higher per passenger costs Delta has control over that cost it could have that same figure here at DTW if it chose to replicate the ATL operation at DTW it has nothing to do with the airport it has to do with the mass. Once again Delta went bankrupt with Atlanta being a hub back in 2005 the only reason these airlines are turning profits now is because of the lack of competition in the market place not because their CEOs are some sort of financial wizards they are just at the point where they can manipulate the market to suit their needs rather than the needs of the customer.

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Capacity doesn't matter passengers and aircraft movements are the rule of thumb in this business.

What on god's green earth are you talking about? I sure hope you don't work in this business, because PROFIT is the singular rule of thumb in this business and all businesses. In the case of commercial aviation that's followed by revenue expressed as RASM and cost. Want evidence of that? Read through Delta's most recent earning's call transcript. See any mention of the specific number of passengers carried or aircraft movements? You don't, but what you do see are countless mentions of CAPACITY

klm617 wrote:

Yes but that reduced Asia capacity was moved away from Detroit. They should have added a second flight at Detroit just like they did at ATL on the ICN route. They have moved so much traffic to Asia from Detroit to Atlanta by adding PVG and ICN when they down gauged from the 747 to the A350 again

Clearly that capacity was better deployed out of ATL, and ever wonder why that might be? For starters, let's look at WCAA's 2017 Approved Budget, Page 33: Cost per Enplanement to the Airlines



See where ATL is on WCAA's own graph compared to DTW? And you're blaming Delta for moving that capacity? Get real, read up, wise up, and direct your whining appropriately.

klm617 wrote:

all hurting the bottom line at Detroit. You can chose capacity if you like but I chose aircraft movements and passenger counts do you happen to have those numbers.

I do have those numbers via MIDT, but since you've mentioned that those are the metrics you choose to base your claims on I assume you do as well right? Or is it, as I suspect, that while those are the metrics you choose to benchmark against you don't even have access to them and thus just make claims without any data?

klm617 wrote:

Capacity doesn't mean anything if your not committed to putting people in those seats

Probably the most staggering comment of your entire post, which is saying something. To think that Delta, or any airline for that matter, isn't targeting 100% paid load factors at yields that are profitable is just further evidence that you have virtually no experience or insights into this industry.

Would you like me to post the new Spirit timetable every time it comes out so you can see that the departures are at the same level rather than showing any growth. Departures have been from 25 to 30 daily for well over a year now Real growth would be going from 20 to 40 in the span of a year. Where is ACY that was a route that was operated for years but now is gone they just switched that destination to something else

klm617 wrote:

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Capacity doesn't matter passengers and aircraft movements are the rule of thumb in this business.

What on god's green earth are you talking about? I sure hope you don't work in this business, because PROFIT is the singular rule of thumb in this business and all businesses. In the case of commercial aviation that's followed by revenue expressed as RASM and cost. Want evidence of that? Read through Delta's most recent earning's call transcript. See any mention of the specific number of passengers carried or aircraft movements? You don't, but what you do see are countless mentions of CAPACITY

klm617 wrote:

Yes but that reduced Asia capacity was moved away from Detroit. They should have added a second flight at Detroit just like they did at ATL on the ICN route. They have moved so much traffic to Asia from Detroit to Atlanta by adding PVG and ICN when they down gauged from the 747 to the A350 again

Clearly that capacity was better deployed out of ATL, and ever wonder why that might be? For starters, let's look at WCAA's 2017 Approved Budget, Page 33: Cost per Enplanement to the Airlines



See where ATL is on WCAA's own graph compared to DTW? And you're blaming Delta for moving that capacity? Get real, read up, wise up, and direct your whining appropriately.

klm617 wrote:

all hurting the bottom line at Detroit. You can chose capacity if you like but I chose aircraft movements and passenger counts do you happen to have those numbers.

I do have those numbers via MIDT, but since you've mentioned that those are the metrics you choose to base your claims on I assume you do as well right? Or is it, as I suspect, that while those are the metrics you choose to benchmark against you don't even have access to them and thus just make claims without any data?

klm617 wrote:

Capacity doesn't mean anything if your not committed to putting people in those seats

Probably the most staggering comment of your entire post, which is saying something. To think that Delta, or any airline for that matter, isn't targeting 100% paid load factors at yields that are profitable is just further evidence that you have virtually no experience or insights into this industry.

Would you like me to post the new Spirit timetable every time it comes out so you can see that the departures are at the same level rather than showing any growth. Departures have been from 25 to 30 daily for well over a year now.

Even if we pretend the difference between 25 and 30 is negligible (it's not), we still have to remember that there are more A321s these days. That's growth too.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

klm617 wrote:

winginit wrote:

What on god's green earth are you talking about? I sure hope you don't work in this business, because PROFIT is the singular rule of thumb in this business and all businesses. In the case of commercial aviation that's followed by revenue expressed as RASM and cost. Want evidence of that? Read through Delta's most recent earning's call transcript. See any mention of the specific number of passengers carried or aircraft movements? You don't, but what you do see are countless mentions of CAPACITY



Clearly that capacity was better deployed out of ATL, and ever wonder why that might be? For starters, let's look at WCAA's 2017 Approved Budget, Page 33: Cost per Enplanement to the Airlines



See where ATL is on WCAA's own graph compared to DTW? And you're blaming Delta for moving that capacity? Get real, read up, wise up, and direct your whining appropriately.



I do have those numbers via MIDT, but since you've mentioned that those are the metrics you choose to base your claims on I assume you do as well right? Or is it, as I suspect, that while those are the metrics you choose to benchmark against you don't even have access to them and thus just make claims without any data?



Probably the most staggering comment of your entire post, which is saying something. To think that Delta, or any airline for that matter, isn't targeting 100% paid load factors at yields that are profitable is just further evidence that you have virtually no experience or insights into this industry.

Would you like me to post the new Spirit timetable every time it comes out so you can see that the departures are at the same level rather than showing any growth. Departures have been from 25 to 30 daily for well over a year now.

Even if we pretend the difference between 25 and 30 is negligible (it's not), we still have to remember that there are more A321s these days. That's growth too.

FLL went to all A321, the last MCO arrival is an A321, IAH is now an A321, LAX morning flight will be an A321, DEN will be an A321, LAS has a late morning A321, even OAK has grown to an A321. I expect if they add PHX, that'll be a 321 as well.

klm617 wrote:

Would you like me to post the new Spirit timetable every time it comes out so you can see that the departures are at the same level rather than showing any growth. Departures have been from 25 to 30 daily for well over a year now Real growth would be going from 20 to 40 in the span of a year. Where is ACY that was a route that was operated for years but now is gone they just switched that destination to something else

You know I was curious, so I went ahead and looked at the actual data for NK's operations in and out of DTW. For a brief recap, your claim was that year over year "departures are at the same level rather than showing any growth". As per usual, you showed no facts to support your claims and as per usual, you. are. wrong.

The below is straight from OAG, and shows NK's departures, seats, and ASMs in/out of Detroit for the last four years ending in August:

2015: 15,592 Flights, 2.6M Seats, 2.7B ASMs
2016: 17,457 Flights, 3.1M Seats, 3.1B ASMs
2017: 19,077 Flights, 3.5M Seats, 3.6B ASMs
2018: 21,125 Flights, 3.9M Seats, 4.3B ASMs

That's staggering growth, and once again proves you have no idea what you're talking about even with regard to your own beloved airport.

winginit wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Would you like me to post the new Spirit timetable every time it comes out so you can see that the departures are at the same level rather than showing any growth. Departures have been from 25 to 30 daily for well over a year now Real growth would be going from 20 to 40 in the span of a year. Where is ACY that was a route that was operated for years but now is gone they just switched that destination to something else

You know I was curious, so I went ahead and looked at the actual data for NK's operations in and out of DTW. For a brief recap, your claim was that year over year "departures are at the same level rather than showing any growth". As per usual, you showed no facts to support your claims and as per usual, you. are. wrong.

The below is straight from OAG, and shows NK's departures, seats, and ASMs in/out of Detroit for the last four years ending in August:

2015: 15,592 Flights, 2.6M Seats, 2.7B ASMs
2016: 17,457 Flights, 3.1M Seats, 3.1B ASMs
2017: 19,077 Flights, 3.5M Seats, 3.6B ASMs
2018: 21,125 Flights, 3.9M Seats, 4.3B ASMs

That's staggering growth, and once again proves you have no idea what you're talking about even with regard to your own beloved airport.

So help me out with these numbers. According to those numbers Spirit added 18 flights from 2015 to 218 here is my problem now Spirit is at around 30 departures a day that would mean that before 2015 Spirit was operating only about 10 to 12 flights a day out of Detroit and to my best recollection they were always at around 20 flights a day before this build up. I am guess those numbers are flights in and out of Detroit not just out of Detroit so you would have to divide those numbers all in half to get a more accurate picture but I could be wrong.

Good gosh.... I’ve been gone for the past week and when you think this thread can’t get any worse, it does.

Just ignore the troll that has made DTW the biggest joke of a.net and all will be fine.

Anyways, a few random tidbits from today to change the subject.

1. Landed on 27L today, for the first time in years. Due to the high winds they were landing on 27L, landing and departing from 27R, and sending some departures off 22R. Didn’t seem to be causing delays. Kind of interesting vectoring to final over Amhertburg and then coming in so low from the east.

2. A whole bunch of diversions from YYZ around 7pm. Saw a whole bunch of extra AC aircraft, condor, and a BA aircraft was on the gate over at the North terminal.

3. Is there a automated aircraft parking signal system installed now on gate A50?

4. The McNamera terminal ground transportation center is and continues to be a giant cl#%^*~*+k during peak arrival banks.

5. It will be interesting to see how they landscape the new entrance area off i94 this spring now that the road is finally reconstructed. The front door of the airport had been a disgrace for decades.

6. They need to rebuild all the frickin ramps of i94, but then again Michigan is a joke when it comes to condition of our roads.

side note: what in the world is this site? if this is run by any government entity its shameful, as that is clearly a Wardair 747

http://www.detroitmetro.com/departures/

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

Good gosh.... I’ve been gone for the past week and when you think this thread can’t get any worse, it does.

Just ignore the troll that has made DTW the biggest joke of a.net and all will be fine.

Anyways, a few random tidbits from today to change the subject.

1. Landed on 27L today, for the first time in years. Due to the high winds they were landing on 27L, landing and departing from 27R, and sending some departures off 22R. Didn’t seem to be causing delays. Kind of interesting vectoring to final over Amhertburg and then coming in so low from the east.

2. A whole bunch of diversions from YYZ around 7pm. Saw a whole bunch of extra AC aircraft, condor, and a BA aircraft was on the gate over at the North terminal.

3. Is there a automated aircraft parking signal system installed now on gate A50?

4. The McNamera terminal ground transportation center is and continues to be a giant cl#%^*~*+k during peak arrival banks.

5. It will be interesting to see how they landscape the new entrance area off i94 this spring now that the road is finally reconstructed. The front door of the airport had been a disgrace for decades.

6. They need to rebuild all the frickin ramps of i94, but then again Michigan is a joke when it comes to condition of our roads.

Yes 50 has an automated parking guidance system.

NWADTWE16 wrote:

side note: what in the world is this site? if this is run by any government entity its shameful, as that is clearly a Wardair 747

http://www.detroitmetro.com/departures/

That’s not an official website for DTW. My guess is it is someone who bought or obtained that domain and is using it for traffic or advertising. Like said it’s meant to fool people to drive traffic probably for clicks and also very amateur.

How about OneJet coming to DET (Detroit-City)? With their recent purchase of Ultimate Air Shuttle, if any carrier is ever able to restart services there (IF), they would seem the most likely to make it work.

MDW, (Cleveland-Burke), CVG or LUK, NYC (somewhere), and a few other buisness destinations.

Is DET permanently unable to take commercial traffic though?

Was just a thought...

last I heard the city was turning the DET property into a drag race track. However, Dan Gilbert has also mentioned that he would like to see the property turned into a full service FBO for corporate and business clients. I could see the small terminal in that case being perfect for OneJet and perhaps Porter as well. I wonder also if Onejet would like to use Pontiac for ops, there is so much business traffic already at that airport. The caviat there is that businesses are moving downtown more and more, and away from Pontiac catchment.

Interesting times, so didn't the Aer Lingus proposal ask all airports to submit by 4/30 with an announcement this week or next?

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

Good gosh.... I’ve been gone for the past week and when you think this thread can’t get any worse, it does.

Just ignore the troll that has made DTW the biggest joke of a.net and all will be fine.

Anyways, a few random tidbits from today to change the subject.

1. Landed on 27L today, for the first time in years. Due to the high winds they were landing on 27L, landing and departing from 27R, and sending some departures off 22R. Didn’t seem to be causing delays. Kind of interesting vectoring to final over Amhertburg and then coming in so low from the east.

2. A whole bunch of diversions from YYZ around 7pm. Saw a whole bunch of extra AC aircraft, condor, and a BA aircraft was on the gate over at the North terminal.

3. Is there a automated aircraft parking signal system installed now on gate A50?

4. The McNamera terminal ground transportation center is and continues to be a giant cl#%^*~*+k during peak arrival banks.

5. It will be interesting to see how they landscape the new entrance area off i94 this spring now that the road is finally reconstructed. The front door of the airport had been a disgrace for decades.

6. They need to rebuild all the frickin ramps of i94, but then again Michigan is a joke when it comes to condition of our roads.

Yes indeed I will try my best not to respond to the trolls who spread negativity and untruths about Detroit. Those who support the status quo as acceptable because we all know that when any organization or business that operates at near zero growth is doomed to fail and be over shadowed by forward thinking more progressive organizations and businesses that are always looking for new and innovative ways to grow their market share and viability.