Bob Nemeth story below in today's paper.
Typically 85 to 90 percent full, how can you say that?? I translate this to mean the "major" announcements coming in the future will be General Aviation related, not commercial air service. Not saying this is a bad thing, but if anyone expects to be flying out of ORH on a commercial airline this winter think again. Also it looks like Steve F's comment yesterday is quite true---"Obviously, the administration feels it's a problem with Allegiant, not something with Worcester, so it's unlikely that the city will change anything."
Looking aheadAirport effort proceeds on several fronts
The city manager’s report to the City Council tonight on passenger load levels on Allegiant Air flights to Florida offers more evidence that there is a healthy demand among area air travelers for commercial service at Worcester Regional Airport. Equally encouraging is the updated information on efforts to pursue corporate and general aviation opportunities. When Allegiant bailed out this month, nine months into its five-year contract, company officials suggested that unprofitably low passenger loads were a factor leading to the decision. The day-by-day list of load figures, from December through August, tell a different story: Typically, inbound and outbound flights were 85 percent to 90 percent full, even in the traditionally slow summer months. The report also allays concern about the effect of weather on service at the airport. Weather forced cancellation of Allegiant flights on only three days.
The strong passenger demand and reassuring reliability figures vindicate the belief of city officials and Massport, which operates the airport, that the facility can play a vital role in the region’s air transportation network. The figures constitute a valuable marketing tool for the airport as Massport and the city administration court commercial airlines. The report also reaffirms the administration’s commitment to expand general aviation, already a significant presence at the airport. Next month, Massport and the city plan to advertise formal “requests for proposals” for aviation-related development on two airport parcels. The intent, said City Manager Michael V. O’Brien, is “to capture the demand for hangar development and aviation-related business opportunities.” Seven companies already have inquired about the parcels, indicating the demand is brisk. Meanwhile, officials are pursuing another promising revenue source: corporate and charter jet services. A single large corporate jet based at the airport would generate hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue annually, and Mr. O’Brien estimates that the total economic impact — including jobs, fuel purchases, maintenance and other support services — could exceed $1.5 million a year. The efforts are welcome. For city residents and policymakers to give up on the airport because of Allegiant’s disappointing retreat would be a mistake.
WRRB/Telegram District City Council Forum 10/18
-
This forum is for all district council candidates; all candidates are here
today. Format: 14 total questions, 4 questions across districts (for all
candida...
6 months ago
6 comments:
Maybe I have missed something, but I was unaware there was a 5 yr contract in place.
Has anyone besides City Hall and Alleg. ever seen this contract?
I am a bit surprised it was a 5 yr deal. Is it uNUSUAL THAT a business would commit for that long of period given the ups & downs of comm. air travel?
Are there any penalties for pulling out? I am not advocating to punish Alleg., but if there were penalties what are they and are they being enforced.? Did one party or both paries violate the contract. Why is Murray verbally bashing Alleg. when one could assert that if Alleg. did violate the contract the City could sue them to perform ( provide service). Again , I dont advocate this , but is nothing done b/c maybe the City screwed up and Alleg said good bye.
Let's get a copy of that agreement and all correspondenace between Alleg. and the City or are we to believe this was all done over the telephone?
This is analogous to an employee taking on a new job and then leaving the company after 9 months b/c the pay is lacking. Most likely the employee left for other reasons????
Allegiant had worked out a 5 year deal with ORH, but it was a one-sided agreement. ORH agreed to do certain things for Allegiant over 5 years to lure them to ORH. Allegiant made no guarantees back so we are able to walk w/o penalty.
we are able to walk w/o penalty?
bILL, i AM NOT ADVOCATING for any punishment to be meted out. I just am curious what the contract said and if City failed to live up to its oblighations, resulting in Alleg leaving???
Have we actually seen the contract? What exactly was the City to do and did we do it as agreed?
Allegiant may have tried to be diplomatic when they said the loads were just not there, rather than embarass the City for failure to keep up their end of the deal?
When parting ways, it is always best to give the losing party (city) aa plausible excuse so they can save face ????
I.e. The City Blew it but we arent going to say that.
E.g. Just look at the restaurant RFP.....it's been how long and still nothing???? Timely execution is always good business.
Just reread the piece. When talking about Allegiant words like "bailed" and "retreat" are used.
Allegiant left because they were not making money. This is not a "bailing" or "retreating" but business. Until someone runs ORH like a business, we are going to keep losing millions.
The RFP they are talking about was supposed to be out 5 years ago. But lets not go there. They said the RFP would be in the spring, then it was May, then it June, then it was July, then it was August, then it was end of September. Now I guess it's next month according to the article. Lets see when they say it will be in October. I bet it won't be out.
Post a Comment