GSP International

[gs3]

Also buried in the idiotic comments was one very direct comment that said Southwest is already negotiating crew rooms. I had heard this rumor as well. Obviously the poster was someone in the hotel industry.

[distortedlogic]

Though sad, the article shouldn't take anyone by surprise. Actually I think we had another article a few months back that already quoted this number. In fact, I personally bet the actual leakage percentage could be higher, even as high as 75-80%. I know almost nobody (in person) that uses GSP, most people automatically seem to go straight to CLT or ATL, without even "bothering" to check out GSP. And most people that I have talked with about the airport have never even heard of Allegiant Air. Also, I wish the news media would try to get out some positive messages about the airport. The only thing you ever hear is negative news which will only serve to scare more people away from it.

[rssgvegas]

Also buried in the idiotic comments was one very direct comment that said Southwest is already negotiating crew rooms. I had heard this rumor as well. Obviously the poster was someone in the hotel industry.

Speaking to the director of sales of 6 major hotels in the area, I can confirm Southwest is not negotiating crew rooms. That is just a rumor unfortunately. And yes, I am someone in the hotel industry.

[mallguy]

Greenville and Spartanburg Counties need to step up too and provide incentives to land Southwest Airlines.

There are no better uses for those scarce tax dollars? (not even just leaving people's money in their own pockets?)

I never fly into/out of GSP unless I get an E-saver, which is rare, but I don't mind driving to and from CLT; the cheaper parking there makes up for the gas, anyhow.

[gvillenative]

The almighty "Tax Dollars" are used for everything under the sun. So, WHY NOT, put some of it to use to possibly lure them and bring some "REASONABLE" fares in here. I dont care how cheap the parking is, the tickets are, or the mocca soy latte's at Starbucks are for that matter, I wont drive to ATL, or CLT, or anywhere else when I could have a choice 15 miles down the road. Every low cost carrier that has come in here has had success here so why not help the people who dont want to drive an idiotic distance for a cheap flight. I'm for it spend my tax dollars, gotta pay them anyway we have been for the last 200 plus years obviously its not going to change anytime soon. Heaven forbid we put it to something useful, like a cheap way for people to go see thier families they only get to see once a year, or an easier way to get from point A to point B without having to go around our collective thumbs to get to the backside. So, here here spend some of my tax dollars if ya have to so I dont have to drive to the Moon to get a cheap flight.

[gman430]

There are no better uses for those scarce tax dollars? (not even just leaving people's money in their own pockets?)

Like what? I would much rather have my tax dollars go towards this than most of the things our government is currently spending them on. We give tax incentives to companies all the time to relocate/expand here. Why can't we do the same for Southwest to relocate/expand here? Oh and i'm willing to bet they are in negotiations with area hotels. Just because they didn't tell you doesn't mean they aren't. Remember, they probably aren't allowed to tell anybody about on-going negotiations due to it not being a done deal yet.

Edited September 24, 2009 by citylife

[DowntownCityGirl]

Like what? I would much rather have my tax dollars go towards this than most of the things our government is currently spending them on. We give tax incentives to companies all the time to relocate/expand here. Why can't we do the same for Southwest to relocate/expand here? Oh and i'm willing to bet they are in negotiations with area hotels. Just because they didn't tell you doesn't mean they aren't. Remember, they probably aren't allowed to tell anybody about on-going negotiations due to it not being a done deal yet.

Well said, citylife. Investing in getting SW or another strong low-fare carrier here is one of the best kinds of economic development investment there is -- because it can lead to more companies locating here, hiring more people, and so on and so on. I continue to hear a lot of talk about companies NOT relocating to the Upstate precisely because the air service options can't compete with other regions.

I also agree about the crew rooms. I don't think it means SW is definitely going to come here, but I'd guess that negotiating any number of ancilliary services would be part of their due diligence process.

Personally, I kinda think that every day we don't hear a 'no' from SW is one day closer to a yes. AND one more day for GSP to prove they're up to the challenge of landing the big fish.

[mallguy]

Like what?

Like leaving the money in people's pockets. That would have a more positive widespread effect on local people. I don't have plenty of excess cash these days for the government to take and use and I don't know many people who do.

From Southwest's route map, apart from a few places in and around its Texas home, Greenville would definitely be among the smallest metro areas that Southwest would fly to; it doesn't even go to Charlotte or tourist-heavy beach areas nearby.

http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/routemap_dyn.html

And when was the last time Southwest's type of plane- a 737- landed in regular service at GSP?

If we want to attract Southwest, we should start by getting local companies to guarantee X amount of business for it first before using people's hard-earned money to lure the airline, or try a marketing campaign or the like, paid for by existing airport revenues.

And FYI "low-fare" airlines aren't necessarily cheaper than legacy ones. I commuted between Charlotte and NYC every week for a few years and still fly the route frequently and have noticed that JetBlue was and is usually the same price as US Airways, so giving tax dollars to a "low-fare" airline wouldn't necessarily lead to lower fares.

Edited September 27, 2009 by mallguy

[gman430]

Using our tax dollars to bring in Southwest could have a big economic effect creating more jobs. It could also save people money that fly to and from GSP. Sounds like a good trade off to me. You said leaving money in people's pockets would be better. What if those people just leave it in their pockets and don't spend it? Who is it helping exactly? Surely not the economy. We pay taxes for a reason. Southwest flies to/from Jackson and Little Rock. Why not Greenville/Spartanburg? Companies like Michelin and Milliken are already saying they'll use them if they were to start GSP service.

Edited September 27, 2009 by citylife

[mallguy]

Using our tax dollars to bring in Southwest could have a big economic effect creating more jobs. It could also save people money that fly to and from GSP. Sounds like a good trade off to me. You said leaving money in people's pockets would be better. What if those people just leave it in their pockets and don't spend it? Who is it helping exactly? Surely not the economy. We pay taxes for a reason. Southwest flies to/from Jackson and Little Rock. Why not Greenville/Spartanburg? Companies like Michelin and Milliken are already saying they'll use them if they were to start GSP service.

These same arguments were made when the SC state government funded Air South, the "low-fare" carrier that my tax dollars supported.

First please tell me:

(1) Have we confirmed that giving incentives to Southwest will create more jobs than other uses of those dollars? How many jobs will be created due to Southwest? What is the dollar amount of incentives per job created?

New York State dumped money into JetBlue, as the government said that having a "low-fare" airline to upstate NY would kick-start the economy there. Didn't happen- in part because NY State has suffocatingly high tax rates and a bloated government that have driven out entrepreneurs, and US Airways ended up getting rid of most of its NYC-upstate NY service as a result.

(2) Just where are those Southwest B737s going to fly, with the airline's point-to-point route structure? Those are much larger planes than those that serve GSP now. What market surveys show that there is enough business, even with incentives, which Southwest sometimes declines?

http://www2.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories...9955&EDATE=

(3) What's wrong with getting Michelin and Milliken to guarantee X amount of business to Southwest? Try showing Southwest how it'll do a great business at GSP. Try anything- just start handing out other people's tax dollars as the last option, not the first.

(4) Google "tax cuts multiplier spending" and see the articles that come up; many of them say that giving people money back vs. spending it has a larger economic effect.

(5) And will Michelin and Milliken add jobs because of Southwest? Or will their profits just go higher, due to other people's tax dollars being used to pare those companies' travel budgets?

Edited September 28, 2009 by mallguy

[gman430]

I said it could improve the economy, not would. There is no guarantee. Numerous news articles though have said we have lost out on economic development projects due to not having a low-cost carrier. Here is an interesting article regarding GSP: http://www.goupstate.com/article/20090927/...-still-dropping Numerous market studies have been done including by Southwest Airlines themselves showing there would be enough demand to fill planes which in turn would lead to them making a profit. Obviously if there is enough demand for Southwest Airlines to serve the Jackson and Little Rock markets then surely there is in the Greenville/Spartanburg metro area. I never said anything about Michelin or Milliken adding jobs. I said those are companies that would use Southwest Airlines if they were to come to GSP. As of now, GSP along with Southwest have not asked for any tax incentives but if Southwest wants them and will start serving GSP with them then I say give it to them.

Edited September 28, 2009 by citylife

[rssgvegas]

And FYI "low-fare" airlines aren't necessarily cheaper than legacy ones.

That's true, but what they will do is drive down prices of the legacy carriers, which is what GSP needs.

[mallguy]

I said it could improve the economy, not would. There is no guarantee. Numerous news articles though have said we have lost out on economic development projects due to not having a low-cost carrier. Here is an interesting article regarding GSP: http://www.goupstate.com/article/20090927/...-still-dropping Numerous market studies have been done including by Southwest Airlines themselves showing there would be enough demand to fill planes which in turn would lead to them making a profit. Obviously if there is enough demand for Southwest Airlines to serve the Jackson and Little Rock markets then surely there is in the Greenville/Spartanburg metro area. I never said anything about Michelin or Milliken adding jobs. I said those are companies that would use Southwest Airlines if they were to come to GSP. As of now, GSP along with Southwest have not asked for any tax incentives but if Southwest wants them and will start serving GSP with them then I say give it to them.

If it won't necessarily improve the economy, then why are we itching to spend other people's tax dollars on incentives?

If Southwest's own studies show enough demand for GSP service to be profitable, then why isn't the airline coming on its own? It has done so in other areas.

If the point of using tax dollars on incentives is to help attract jobs, then it shouldn't matter whether or not existing companies that won't necessarily add jobs will use the service.

[gman430]

If it won't necessarily improve the economy, then why are we itching to spend other people's tax dollars on incentives?

If Southwest's own studies show enough demand for GSP service to be profitable, then why isn't the airline coming on its own? It has done so in other areas.

If the point of using tax dollars on incentives is to help attract jobs, then it shouldn't matter whether or not existing companies that won't necessarily add jobs will use the service.

How do you know it won't improve the economy? Even though there is demand for Southwest here, it still doesn't mean they'll come here without incentives. Actually it does matter whether large existing companies do use their service or not. It means fuller planes if they do.

Edited September 28, 2009 by citylife

[mallguy]

How do you know it won't improve the economy? Even though there is demand for Southwest here, it still doesn't mean they'll come here without incentives. Actually it does matter whether large existing companies do use their service or not. It means fuller planes if they do.

You're the one who said it "could", "not would" improve the economy, so until we're sure beyond a reasonable doubt that the incentives would improve the economy- to a greater extent than other uses of those tax dollars, I would object to using them. And if the point is to improve the economy by adding jobs- if existing companies use the service, but no new jobs are created, then all the incentives are doing would be to use other people's money to benefit those companies' profit margins.

I want a Lord & Taylor and a Filene's Basement on Main Street. I like both chains and will use them, and I won't have to shop in larger cities then; Greenville is losing retail dollars to larger markets. Surely having discount and other shopping downtown would create a better image for corporate relocations to Greenville. Perhaps that could improve the economy; the residents of Crescent Avenue will shop at Lord & Taylor. And I want your money to pay for it, by giving incentives to those retailers to open stores in Greenville.

Edited September 28, 2009 by mallguy

[gvillenative]

I understand what you are saying but we have tried using tax dollars to lure retail companies but again same thing... "I want my,and everybody else' tax dollars to go for this, not for that so I'm going to cause so much of a stink that nobody wants to come here.." blah blah, so on, and so forth.

Nobody said they are even going to use anything to lure them here. However, if they do that money has already been taken out of my pocket and I didnt even see it, so I'm definately not going to miss it. Taxes are never going to go away so I'm not going to hold my breath, so until then use it on something constructive.

As far as the argument about the size of the planes. GSP can, in more ways than one, handle Southwest 737's. The runway is long enough to handle a fully loaded Antinov which is the largest plane in the world, and yes I know the one that came was the smaller version but even that one was larger than our C 5's which frequent the airport. The jet-bridges are amazingly enough designed for planes even larger than 737's, the terminal has are you ready...unused gates... so that answers another question, where could they go? The airport could accomodate them. Just don't know if the "small" metro of only 1.5+ million could accomodate.

Here is a little tid bit I almost forgot about, I did this math off of the 55% number I had saw somewhere. I read that the bleed rate could be higher, but I digress. If they just capture 5% of that they would have enough to fill 5 flights a week for a year. Keep in mind they know and have said they can't get the whole number down, but that they know they can capture some of it.

That in and of itself should be the incentive to bring them here. Keep in mind my math was generalized I didnt do exact numbers so if I'm not exactly right don't chastize me everyone.

[vicupstate]

And FYI "low-fare" airlines aren't necessarily cheaper than legacy ones. I commuted between Charlotte and NYC every week for a few years and still fly the route frequently and have noticed that JetBlue was and is usually the same price as US Airways, so giving tax dollars to a "low-fare" airline wouldn't necessarily lead to lower fares.

The reason USAIR's rates are the same is because JET BLUE is there to provide competition. Just a few years ago, CLT had the highest fares in the nation. That was when 90% of CLT flights were US Air.

I would hestitate to use tax dollars to lure SW to GSP, but I would hope the local businesses would contribute to pay for a marketing campaign if that do add GSP.

Air South was a START-UP airline, which made it a MUCH,MUCH RISKIER investment. Not exactly an Apples to Apples comparison to this situation.

[Galley]

737s really aren't that big. They are shorter than a DC-9.

[mallguy]

Good points- yes, the runways can definitely fit 737s- but does GSP have enough business to fill all of the seats on a typical one? Not a huge plane but much larger than the E170s and the like that usually fly to GSP.

Also, in every corporation and firm I've worked in, we've had negotiated rates with airlines, which have always been "legacy" ones- a large corporation probably is already committed to giving its business to 1 or 2 majors and so having Southwest wouldn't affect it. From what I have seen, looking at Southwest operations, and on my 1 experience taking JetBlue from JFK to CLT, it was all leisure travelers- business travlers have stuck with legacy airlines.

AA, DL and CO also added CLT-LGA service to compete with US Airways, while JetBlue just added CLT-JFK flights- I'd think that the increased competition with AA, DL and CO also played a role in lowering US Airways fares from Charlotte.

[ilaustin36]

Good points- yes, the runways can definitely fit 737s- but does GSP have enough business to fill all of the seats on a typical one? Not a huge plane but much larger than the E170s and the like that usually fly to GSP.

Also, in every corporation and firm I've worked in, we've had negotiated rates with airlines, which have always been "legacy" ones- a large corporation probably is already committed to giving its business to 1 or 2 majors and so having Southwest wouldn't affect it. From what I have seen, looking at Southwest operations, and on my 1 experience taking JetBlue from JFK to CLT, it was all leisure travelers- business travlers have stuck with legacy airlines.

AA, DL and CO also added CLT-LGA service to compete with US Airways, while JetBlue just added CLT-JFK flights- I'd think that the increased competition with AA, DL and CO also played a role in lowering US Airways fares from Charlotte.

Gsp can handle any plane in the sky including the largest military planes with the expansion of the runway a few years back at that time it was the 19th longest runway in the nation.

[gs3]

737s really aren't that big. They are shorter than a DC-9.

Yep. Laughing at the notion a 737 can't be filled out of GSP.

Allegiant fills 150 seat MD-80's with all tourist from GSP to Orlando, Ft.Lauderdale, Tampa and even Punta Gorda.

Southwest can easily fill 137 seat 737-300's with a mix of tourist and business travelers.

[mallguy]

Yep. Laughing at the notion a 737 can't be filled out of GSP.

Allegiant fills 150 seat MD-80's with all tourist from GSP to Orlando, Ft.Lauderdale, Tampa and even Punta Gorda.

Southwest can easily fill 137 seat 737-300's with a mix of tourist and business travelers.

So why hasn't Southwest started B737 service? And why hasn't any other legacy carrier started flying B737s or similarly-sized planes to DFW, ORD, LGA, DCA, etc.? We know that the GSP runways are definitely long enough and the airport can handle them, as pointed out above.

[breed]

A couple comments...

Regarding the notion that Greenville would be one of the smallest markets that they would fly out of...

Not really. You have to keep in mind that Greenville would actually start competing on price with Charlotte and Atlanta, meaning people would actually start looking at Greenville as an option from out-of-market. And even in the most pessimistic scenarios, we would at least pull traffic from Asheville. At that point, the GSP market area starts to look like the Greenville DMA (the Greenville television market). The Greenville DMA is the 36th largest in the country. That does not include any of the Charlotte or Atlanta markets, neither of which Southwest flies out of... so the potential is there.

The two biggest benefits of having a discount airline...

1. Price

I think we've been all over this, and it's easy to see. Just go look at comparable flights out of Greenville, Asheville, Charlotte, Atlanta, Raleigh... just about anywhere. You are typically going to pay about 50-75% more to fly out of Greenville than out of other airports. While GSP is great to fly into and out of, it's not worth the extra cost in most situations.

2. Diversity

A common criticism of those looking to locate here is the inability to get a direct flight out of GSP. Recruiting a company from Boston or Los Angeles is tough when you have to route them through Charlotte or Atlanta just to get here. One of the biggest challenges Greenville faces is that it is generally a smaller market than the markets it competes against. We are constantly fighting the perception that it is difficult for a large company to do business as usual. Once that hurdle is overcome, the market does extremely well. The lack of flight diversity out of GSP is a fly in the ointment of fighting the small market perception. Having a greater number of destinations to choose from would be a huge asset in this regard.

At the same time, I'm as cost-conscious as anyone. It is important not to simply hand out money without strings. I think any incentives need to attached to flight or destination requirements, much like incentives to companies are attached to the creation of new jobs. Considering that Southwest does not have a huge presence in the southeast, I do think it is possible that Southwest may be examining the location's potential as a major hub. If that is the case, then we need to jump in with both feet.

On the major hub potential...

They have a significant presence in Nashville and Orlando. Other smaller locations are Raleigh and Birmingham. Obviously, they want to increase their foothold in the southeast, where the demographics are strong and continue to grow stronger. The question is... where do they expand? Atlanta is a major airport that is busy and a mess. Charlotte is a better airport, but it is pretty large and busy. Greenville is an under-utilized airport where they could very easily have their run of the place and could effectively serve both markets with a major presence. While I still think it is a long shot, I don't think it is beyond the realm of possibility.

[gs3]

So why hasn't Southwest started B737 service? And why hasn't any other legacy carrier started flying B737s or similarly-sized planes to DFW, ORD, LGA, DCA, etc.? We know that the GSP runways are definitely long enough and the airport can handle them, as pointed out above.

Ummmm....they have and still do. Northwest flew DC-9's. Delta flew MD-80's and depending on rotation still does. Back to my question....if GSP can't fill larger planes, how does Allegiant fill 150 seats to Punta Gorda of all places. I mean really, who flies to Punta Gorda on a regular basis????

As for similar sized planes....you may want to note, that many of the regional jets into GSP are the 90 and 100 seat larger size, as in the CRJ-900 which Delta flies with both coach and first.

Make no mistake, I believe GSP could have better service. But the notion that the area can't support additional service is mis-informed. The GSA "metro" has 1.2 million living in the area, right at the same size (actually a bit larger than the Birmingham metro). Birmingham's airport handles 3 million a year. GSP handles 1.5 million a year. GSP could easily grow to 2.5 or 3.0. Remember when Independence flew here, GSP was on the verge of breaking 1.9 a year.

The fliers are out there.

[mallguy]

Ummmm....they have and still do. ...Remember when Independence flew here, GSP was on the verge of breaking 1.9 a year.

Southwest does not fly B737s to GSP, which is what this whole thread is about.

Independence flew smaller regional jets with frequent flights (and went bust in part because its load factors were so low).

Gsupstate, I know you're new to town, as you've mentioned- others of us on the board have known GSP for decades- I remember when part of the airport was open-air in the 1970s and you could sit there and watch planes take off...and they weren't B737s.

Edited September 29, 2009 by mallguy