GSP International

[gs3]

Allegiant announced today that they are moving out of Orlando-Sanford and flying into Orlando International starting Feb 8th. What's funny is they announced a special deal of rates as low as $45 each way to start the service. Right now the rates are $27 each way to Orlando, so obviously this move comes with a price increase. Still not a bad deal though.

http://www.wyff4.com/news/21776736/detail.html

A more overall article on Allegiants Orlando operations. Sanford will stay as the base for 21 city connections. Only 10 city connections are moving to Orlando International, and it looks like only the 10 best performing cities (Knoxville is included and it performs very well like Greenville).

I like this move. During Allegiants daily service seasons, I would think Delta would lower fares on the GSP to MCO via ATL and USAirways would lower fares on the GSP to MCO via CLT.

http://orlando.bizjournals.com/orlando/stories/2009/11/30/daily14.html

[RiverWalker]

Interesting opinion piece in today's Greenville News concerning the impact of Greenville's downtown airport on the local economy, growth in the midtown area and the success and growth of GSP:

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20100106/OPINION/1060320/1016/Downtown-airport-is-crippling-Greenville-s-economy/Downtown-airport-is-crippling-Greenville-s-economy

Though some may view some of the ideas as controversial, they should spark a lively debate.

[gs3]

After reading the article, I just can't shake the feeling that the author possibly owns some land in the area? The author is off in several ways.

-I'm no expert on the subject, but as a weekly flier, the part about the downtown airport being in the way of GSP's flight path and causing airlines to not locate here is bogus. GSP has all major legacy carriers and one low fare airline serving 1.5 million a year. The flight paths into GSP come no where near the downtown airport. These flight paths are set. His claim on that is off base.

- As for a huge midtown park, isn't that what Verdae and its Legacy Park is supposed to be? Why would we need another one so close?

- The downtown airport actually helps draw industry. The fact that a corporation can have their plane based at a convenient airport other than the major airport, is a real plus.

- The height restrictions on Pleasantburg? Shouldn't we fill the downtown skyline, before we try to start building highrises on Pleasantburg?

I really found his article "off" in numerous ways. Again, IMHO, seems he may own some related real estate he wants to develop.

Edited January 6, 2010 by gsupstate

[gs3]

Check out the comment section of this article in the GV News. Some pilots have weighed in. Most seem to agree that the writer of the article is not just off base, but possibly hasn't even made it into the ballpark.

[mallguy]

All I can say about that article- Huh?!

Pleasantburg Drive was thriving for years with the Downtown Airport there, and Haywood Road was built right nearby. Those areas' current problems have little to do with the airport.

And a monorail to Haywood Mall? That makes no sense- monorails are slow; existing mass transit doesn't do well anyhow; and a park is not a mass transit destination in any city I've lived in (including the one with the real Central Park).

Greenville News, stop publishing this garbage..

[Greenville]

If the author wants to use the GMU land for something besides an airport, that's his prerogative - but his justifications for doing so seem off-base to me. I don't see how this would help economic development, because there doesn't seem to be too much demand for highrises and other class A office space as it is. Has he not noticed the highrise projects proposed for downtown the last 5 years that haven't materialized? Moving those proposals to the edge of his "Central Park" along I-385 are unlikely to change anything.

I agree with gsupstate about the importance of GMU for local corporations as well as companies flying to do business in the area. Its location is a real asset, and not having to share space with the big boys at GSP is a plus as well.

Let's focus on cleaning up the area around GMU first. Making progress on projects such as the Pleasantburg Drive/Convention Center master plan, including the multi-modal transit center, would go a long way toward improving that area (much more so than eliminating GMU).

Edited January 7, 2010 by Greenville

[gman430]

Wylie said he has lined up several sponsors to support the legislation, which would include a fund of approximately $15 million to reimburse certain losses for up to 24 months based on an agreement the airport and a carrier believe is equitable for both sides.

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20100111/NEWS/1110310/1004/NEWS01/Startup-funding-may-help-lure-Southwest-here--officials-say

Oh and Delta Airlines, why do you charge for bags? http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/01/12/delta.baggage.fees/index.html Why do they hate bags? At Southwest, bags fly for free.

[GVLbikeNboard]

I admittedly thought it seemed like a decent idea...briefly...but after thinking about it and reading comments posted here and there I can't see the sense in it. Parks are good. Well, parks are actually great! (probably why he got me at first) But there are plenty of parks already. I have always viewed Falls and Cleveland Parks as our "Central Park." They're downtown like a central park should be! I would love to see a big fixer-upper on Cleveland Park. Extend what was done in Falls Park there and it would be that much better. More trees, flowers, and paths, landscaping along the river, a nicer connection between Falls and Cleveland...why build another huge park when there is already one in place?

I don't have much to say on the downtown airport because i'm not in that area too much so I can't really comment on noise and all, but if it brings in $35mil and is the busiest GA airport in the state leave it! If someone moves into the area they have to realize that planes will be flying over. It's like living beside a train track...why on earth would you move there and then complain about it? Surely you knew it was there.

(what does GA stand for? General Aviation? not too sure...)

[mallguy]

Wylie said he has lined up several sponsors to support the legislation, which would include a fund of approximately $15 million to reimburse certain losses for up to 24 months based on an agreement the airport and a carrier believe is equitable for both sides.

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20100111/NEWS/1110310/1004/NEWS01/Startup-funding-may-help-lure-Southwest-here--officials-say

Got to oppose Wylie- with a government that's rolling in debt, $15M of hard working citizens' tax dollars- which have plenty of other uses (such as staying in people's wallets) to subsidize an airline (presumably Southwest, which I will not take) is just not OK.

[gman430]

I'm for it myself. $15 million is chump change compared to the trillions of dollars our government spends every year on defense, healthcare, bailouts, etc. Think of all the economic opportunities that could be sought if we did land Southwest Airlines. It has already been mentioned in numerous news articles that the upstate has lost out on economic development projects due to the high airfares out of GSP. If we could get a true low-cost carrier in here and help lower costs, we could land more economic development projects and build the taxbase with more jobs/corporate investment. You want to talk about wasting taxpayers dollars on something stupid, check out this boondoggle: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/34831732#34831732

Edited January 13, 2010 by citylife

[gvillenative]

I would much rather pay taxes for something that is useful even if I might not use it, which I just may, however I'm currently and since 1997 have been paying property taxes for a hole in the ground downtown that ya'll seem to be high on but nothing has happened in 12 years. My tax dollars can go to anything that is going to be useful for many many people,ie Southwest Airlines, but no we all would rather pay for a hole in the ground with a hope that one day the tallest skyscraper any of us have seen in this city would be built there.

[vicupstate]

I assume you are referring to the Old Auditorium site, which is now in PRIVATE hands, and is paying taxes.

[mallguy]

It has already been mentioned in numerous news articles that the upstate has lost out on economic development projects due to the high airfares out of GSP. If we could get a true low-cost carrier in here and help lower costs, we could land more economic development projects and build the taxbase with more jobs/corporate investment. You want to talk about wasting taxpayers dollars on something stupid, check out this boondoggle: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/34831732#34831732

Rather than using the $15M on Southwest, which businesses might or might not use, give the businesses a $15M tax cut (or a tax credit for economic development investments that they do), which they will definitely use.

Upstate New York also had high airfares (by US Airways) and a sluggish economy. The government dumped money into getting JetBlue to fly to upstate New York. Result? US Airways is basically pulling out of the state, except for some operations at LaGuardia; the upstate economy is still sluggish; and JetBlue now dominates upstate New York but has expanded most to other areas of the country. Total waste of money.

Edited January 15, 2010 by mallguy

[gman430]

19 airports in the country today received federal grants to attract low-cost carriers. The funds are supposed to be given to airports that have very expensive airfare costs like GSP, but the airport did NOT receive any of them. Huntsville, Alabama did though: http://blog.al.com/b...al_airpo_2.html Talk about a joke. More proof GSP and elected officials in this state are a useless bunch and have no clue what they're doing.

Edited February 19, 2010 by citylife

[gs3]

19 airports in the country today received federal grants to attract low-cost carriers. The funds are supposed to be given to airports that have very expensive airfare costs like GSP, but the airport did NOT receive any of them. Huntsville, Alabama did though: http://blog.al.com/b...al_airpo_2.html Talk about a joke. More proof GSP and elected officials in this state are a useless bunch and have no clue what they're doing.

Actually, it is more proof that our tax dollars should not be going to an already bloated federal government to distribute to other states, welfare moms, and an ill conceived health care plan.

Edited February 19, 2010 by gsupstate

[GvilleSC]

Actually, it is more proof that our tax dollars should not be going to an already bloated federal government to distribute to other states, welfare moms, and an ill conceived health care plan.

correct.

[RiverWalker]

The compelling need for expanding air travel options at GSP was brought home recently in a Greenville News article concerning the effort undertaken to land Proterra at CU-ICAR. Damian McKinney, who is said to have represented Proterra with eRealty Companies, Inc., is quoted as saying that what ICAR has is the "exceptional" collaboration of government figures and private companies, while what it lacks is direct and easy airline access. McKinney described that as a “big hurdle” for corporate figures. I wish the same team that pulled together to land the Proterra project would come together again to improve the situation at GSP.

Here's a link to the article: http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20100207/BUSINESS/2070322/Proterra-drives-into-Greenville-thanks-to-teamwork-incentives

Edited February 23, 2010 by RiverWalker

[Spartan]

One of our members posted about the history of GSP International in the Spartanburg section. I debated moving it to this thread, but it's intentionally posted with a Spartanburg slant- not the facts themselves, but more how the facts dispel some Spartan's typical perceptions (myself included) about how the airport got off the ground.

[gman430]

Word on the street is that if the incentives package currently in the state legislature passes, GSP will land Southwest Airlines. That's part of the deal for them to come here. Things are looking very encouraging.

[Sonrise]

Word on the street is that if the incentives package currently in the state legislature passes, GSP will land Southwest Airlines. That's part of the deal for them to come here. Things are looking very encouraging.

G-man, on city-data you said it was a done deal; if it doesn't pass, I'm coming to your house. lol

[gman430]

G-man, on city-data you said it was a done deal; if it doesn't pass, I'm coming to your house. lol

lol. I said it was pretty much a done deal dependent on if the state legislature passes the incentives package.

[gs3]

lol. I said it was pretty much a done deal dependent on if the state legislature passes the incentives package.

G-man, your accuracy rate is above average, about 60/40, but if this news were Vegas, I'd be betting on the quarter machine and not in the high roller room. I hope to be proved wrong.

[gman430]

G-man, your accuracy rate is above average, about 60/40, but if this news were Vegas, I'd be betting on the quarter machine and not in the high roller room. I hope to be proved wrong.

H 4343 General Bill sponsors: Wylie, Harrell, Cooper, Stringer, Merrill, Allen,

Allison, Ballentine, Bannister, Bedingfield, Bowen, Cato, Cole, Daning, Dillard,

Erickson, Forrester, Gunn, Hamilton, Hardwick, Hearn, Hiott, Horne, Huggins,

Kelly, Kirsh, Littlejohn, Loftis, Millwood, Mitchell, Nanney, Norman, Owens,

Parker, Scott, G.R. Smith, Sottile, Umphlett, White, Willis, T.R. Young, Lucas,

Neilson, Bales, Clemmons, Weeks, Stavrinakis, Hutto and Viers

This bill would add Chapter 19 to Title 55 to establish the South Carolina Air Service Incentive and Development Fund (Fund) within the South Carolina Aeronautics Commission (Commission). The General Assembly would provide or appropriate monies to the fund not to exceed $15,000,000 per fiscal year. All expenditures from the fund shall be for a program to provide more flight options, more competition for air travel, and more affordable air fares for this State. The funds would be disbursed as grants by the commission to the regional economic development entities or air service development task forces as established by law. Each grant would be matched by the grantee on the basis of 75% from the fund and 25% from the grantee or local jurisdiction in which it is located. At the beginning of each regular session of the General Assembly, the commission shall present a report on the effectiveness of the program to the House Ways & Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee. Monies in the fund may be carried forward from fiscal year to fiscal year and the interest earnings of the fund shall remain a part of the fund. In making annual awards, the secretary of the commission must give highest priority to maintaining affordable airfares to eastern and western United States destinations. High priority must be given to United States owned, publically-traded network carriers. Priority also must be given to proposals that impact a majority of South Carolinians.

01/14/10 House Introduced and read first time HJ-552

01/14/10 House Referred to Committee on Ways and Means HJ-553

02/16/10 House Member(s) request name added as sponsor: Lucas

02/17/10 House Committee report: Favorable with amendment Ways

and Means HJ-2

02/18/10 House Member(s) request name added as sponsor: Neilson, Bales

02/23/10 House Member(s) request name added as sponsor: Clemmons

02/24/10 House Member(s) request name added as sponsor: Weeks

02/25/10 House Member(s) request name added as sponsor:

Stavrinakis, Hutto, Viers

02/25/10 House Amended HJ-57

02/25/10 House Read second time HJ-60

02/25/10 House Unanimous consent for third reading on next

legislative day HJ-60

02/26/10 House Read third time and sent to Senate HJ-5

02/26/10 Scrivener's error corrected

03/02/10 Senate Introduced and read first time SJ-18

03/02/10 Senate Referred to Committee on Transportation SJ-18

Link: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess118_2009-2010/bills/4343.htm

[mallguy]

Why not just eliminate any state or local taxes on airport users (airlines and passengers)?

That would cause less market distortion than the current scheme- taxing people, and then using their money for purposes that the people may not want. (I'd never fly Southwest so it does me no good.)

[vicupstate]

Why not just eliminate any state or local taxes on airport users (airlines and passengers)?

That would cause less market distortion than the current scheme- taxing people, and then using their money for purposes that the people may not want. (I'd never fly Southwest so it does me no good.)

The legislation is designed to eliminate any business losses. Tax elimination would not do that.