Maybe we can learn from Meigs??? This was the airport that was actually closed three years ago.. To be honest, I do not know how much about their history but I will look into it.. I did, however, find a great website (Friends of Meigs Feild) that has a detail of the airport.
CHECK IT OUT!! We do not want to be here 10 years from now tryining to re-open ORH. Sell it now or give long-term lease (99 years) to MassPort ( or another entity).
4 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Bill,
As you will find, what happened at Meigs was a disaster, it's going to cost the city of Chicago money no matter what. A poor decision was made that led to the closure of Meigs. Again, I don't think that closure would benefit Worcester at all. Beside the city does not appear to even have any intention of looking at that option for several more years. I don't know too much about what Massport's role is at the airport, but I was under the impression that they were managing airport operations. If this is their role, how come they have not stepped in more to help increase business? After all that's what they do. They run Logan and look how busy that is, in fact Logan is too busy. They would benefit in the end especially if they ended up taking over the airport at the end of the contract.
Good point. Again, I have no debate on it, I just wasn't 100% sure on what Massport's role exactly was. Personally, I think we should be grateful to Massport for, but what are they getting out of this? They've made quite an investment in the airport and what are they going to get in return?
I agree whole-heartedly... MassPort has basically bought us some time to get our act together and we have not. At the same time we can not expect MassPort to invest the time and money, under 3 year extensions.
They need to see the potential rewards of their work, which can only be realized under a long-term lease (99 years) or an outright sale).
Same Time Next Year
-
It’s been nearly a year since I wrote about the problems that come from
having 11 bosses who are not on the same page about anything, as well as
suggestion...
Freakonomics Radio Network’s 2022 Staff Picks
-
To celebrate a wonderful year of production on all of the shows in our
network, we asked our staff to choose their favorite episode of the year.
Lyric Bo...
Please Visit Me Elsewhere!
-
Hi Reader,
I've stopped posting to this blog and have deleted most of the old posts,
but I would be honored to connect with you on my Facebook Fan Page. Jus...
Sprout has closed.
-
I just want to confirm what many of you know, it is with deep sadness and
regret that we have closed Sprout. Cathy's cancer has returned and it is no
longe...
4 comments:
Bill,
As you will find, what happened at Meigs was a disaster, it's going to cost the city of Chicago money no matter what. A poor decision was made that led to the closure of Meigs. Again, I don't think that closure would benefit Worcester at all. Beside the city does not appear to even have any intention of looking at that option for several more years. I don't know too much about what Massport's role is at the airport, but I was under the impression that they were managing airport operations. If this is their role, how come they have not stepped in more to help increase business? After all that's what they do. They run Logan and look how busy that is, in fact Logan is too busy. They would benefit in the end especially if they ended up taking over the airport at the end of the contract.
Dave
Dave:
I would make the analogy that when you rent an apartment, as a tenant at will, would you spend money building a back deck, paint the halls, etc..
On the other hand, if you had a 99 year lease or if you actually owned the apartment, you would right...
Right now MassPort is a merely a tenant at will who is simply buying us some time.
Bill,
Good point. Again, I have no debate on it, I just wasn't 100% sure on what Massport's role exactly was. Personally, I think we should be grateful to Massport for, but what are they getting out of this? They've made quite an investment in the airport and what are they going to get in return?
Dave
Dave:
I agree whole-heartedly... MassPort has basically bought us some time to get our act together and we have not. At the same time we can not expect MassPort to invest the time and money, under 3 year extensions.
They need to see the potential rewards of their work, which can only be realized under a long-term lease (99 years) or an outright sale).
Post a Comment