mattyt36

Worth noting:

(1) DFW international traffic is more seasonal, with multiple seasonal European routes.  Therefore, it should be expected that IAH's numbers look "better" relative to DFW in other months.

(2) International traffic growth at both airports has been strong, but looking forward DFW is still growing faster than IAH.  Percent change in international scheduled seats versus the same month in 2023:

Month: DFW/IAH

Jan: 15.9%/15.2%

Feb: 20.7%/18.0%

Mar: 17.7%/11.6%

Apr: 16.1%/11.8%

May: 14.8%/12.4%

Jun: 9.3%/6.7%

New international routes for DFW served in 2024 not served pre-COVID:

AKL (long haul), BCN (long haul), HEL (long haul), HND (long haul), IST, LTO, MEL (long haul), MID, TQO, XPL, ZLO

New routes for IAH in 2024:

GEO, HND (long haul), NLU, TQO, XPL

New airlines for DFW: Finnair, Iberia, Turkish

New airlines for IAH: Volaris El Salvador

I believe both DFW and IAH are in India now (or were earlier in the week) on a trade mission with the governor and other state officials.  (Guess the border crisis can't be that bad!)  Air India has announced intentions to begin service to DFW.

Who would you rather be?  Context remains key.

35 minutes ago, IntheKnowHouston said:

Based on documentation submitted to the Planning Commission, it seems the name of the proposed Hyde Park Blvd Hotel may be Gossamer.

The name is referenced in the Academic Business Project's preliminary scope statement. Academic Business Project is a collaborative program between University of Houston Hilton College Graduate Program and Mighty Equities.

The possibly named Gossamer Hotel is planned for 704 Hyde Park Blvd.

Strange name for a hotel considering what the word means 🤣

Gossamer Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

1: a film of cobwebs floating in air in calm clear weather
2: something light, delicate, or insubstantial

Seems like one would not want to associate a hotel with cobwebs!

14 minutes ago, trymahjong said:

oh my, Gossamer, you say.....?

hmmm I'm wondering if there is a signifant number of kids from looney tunes Saturday mornings in the 60's that see that word and think oh.....

 

BTW, I heard Mighty  Equity purchased another property north of Fairview for additional parking.

not sure of location.

And this association doesn't make much sense, either!

Cool that the Hilton School is involved, however.

2 hours ago, editor said:

If you're going to make statements of fact like that, it would be helpful if you linked to a campaign finance report showing how much the Pappas family donated.  Otherwise, it's just rumor-mongering.

It's no secret--simply Google "Pappas Family Whitmire" and this is the first return.  Much easier than accusing someone else of "rumor-mongering."

Whitmire, Pappas oppose Turner's plan to amend $1B airport contract (houstonchronicle.com)

Below heading in big, black, bold letters "The decadeslong relationship between Whitmire and Pappas"

 A recent Chronicle story highlighted a number of past instances when Whitmire has blurred the line between his public and private roles, taking consulting, lobbying and legal jobs that raised some ethical questions. Among his former clients was Four Families of Houston, which included the Pappas family of restaurateurs.

1 hour ago, LosFeliz said:

Follow the money. Tilman was a big Whitmire supporter. He's got lots of interests downtown that could suffer with a bigger and better Post. 

If true, that's what I suspected, more or less.

Which means Whitmire is crying about political favoritism while doling out his own political favors.

He sort of set the stage of his campaign that way, so I'm not surprised. 

Canceling the airport concession contract awards in favor of his political benefactors the Pappas family is probably next.  I'm sure there will be plenty of cries of "corruption" when, at the end of the day, he'd be doing the same thing. 

Wouldn't it be nice if political leaders could just be above board?

It's difficult for me to parse what is going on here.

It seems HoustonFirst (perhaps at the behest of Turner) wanted a new, smaller type of convention space to offer.  I suppose that makes sense and would be good in attracting more people to the Post.  One can imagine how, if done correctly and fully incorporated into the Post development, it could be pretty unique and high profile. 

Since the "convention center" would be City-owned, the City is financing it with tax rebates--I guess similar conceptually enough to how the Marquis got built.  Some of these subsidies may extend to the hotel, although the extent to which is unclear.  I guess Whitmire is saying if you rebate some of the taxes for this development, it works against the funds available to renovate the Convention Center--although $1.8 billion in taxes sure seems to be more than enough for that.  (I suspect a lot of this money will go to the cap park.)

It shouldn't be a surprise that Kashani wants some free money, too, for his development.  I'd say an argument could be made that an additional 20K square feet in a generic W Hotel may not be the same as 20K square feet in the Post.  In the absence of Whitmire having another plan to point to, it's difficult to tell how much of this is just political like the airport concessions contracts, as I assume Frank Liu has been a big supporter of Turner?  Just because one development gets the incentives, does not mean there is a legal obligation for other ones as well, no matter what Whitmire insinuates.  There's the Hilton and the Marriott, of course, and then there are plenty of other hotels that have been built without public financing.

Admittedly, the buyout does strike me as really strange, at least if it's solely at the option of Lovett (mutual option would be different, not sure what is the case as it is not mentioned in the article).  If you want access to a unique convention space today, one would think you wouldn't want that pulled out from under you in the future.

One would think the Chronicle and BisNow could distill this stuff for us because I doubt the way it's being publicly presented is entirely "above board."  The Chronicle mentions the following public comments:

East downtown resident Amber Boyd-Cora asked for more transparency over the real estate transaction, and questioned whether it would benefit the developer or residents more. Al Kashani, a real estate developer behind the proposed W Hotel downtown, asked that more hotels be eligible for similar tax incentives.

Kashani has a direct interest.  And while Amber Boyd-Cora may be a "East downtown resident," she's also a real estate lawyer.  I suspect she was speaking in that capacity and wouldn't be surprised if she had a client with a direct interest.

On 12/14/2023 at 2:37 PM, hindesky said:

What is that Bridge of Minor Champions?!

20 hours ago, nolaboy said:

Why isn't there an option to trench/cap the Pierce, and leave I-45 in its current path of the west side of downtown? Considering that nearly half of I-45 will still remain in place on that side for the the downtown connector and the ROW is already there. The cap would still allow downtown/midtown to be integrated, as opposed to a much wider cap on the east side.

11 minutes ago, samagon said:

I hate to have this conversation again.

so in midtown, even if the freeway were trenched as @nolaboy suggests, it would still be a barrier between downtown and midtown.

however, doing double wide in east end, that's just fine!

I hate this argument and wish people would come up with something better, for example "the rich people don't like the freeway cutting through land they want to use" seems a lot more accurate.

I know conspiracy theories are cool and all, but I think if you take 15 seconds and think about constructability, the answer is wildly obvious.

Kate Cox is 31 year old pregnant Dallas woman whose fetus has been diagnosed with Trisomy 18 and has no chance of survival. She sued the State and was granted a restraining order to be allowed to have an abortion for what can only he described as humanitarian causes. Ken Paxton’s response? Send a letter threatening anyone who even comes close to her during the process with criminal prosecution, including a letter to Houston Methodist, which I can only presume means had agreed to performing the procedure, further confirming Ken Paxton is a special brand of special that can be described only as categorically evil.

I have zero idea why State politics continue to overcompensate to allow individuals with zero common sense, nevermind empathy, run the place. These moral degenerates need to be shown the door before they screw us all.  Even if Ken Paxton’s religious views justify his reasoning (I highly doubt they do, as the guy is transparently an awful person, so whatever religion he subscribes to can’t be the same one in which I was brought up), they should—and objectively so—have zero bearing over the particulars of Kate Cox’s case.

A new level of embarrassment for the State to have this transparent criminal threaten charges against people who are trying to handle the situation with some degree of humanity.

1 hour ago, Blue Dogs said:

Turner needs to SHUT UP.

Now that’s some charged language, especially without further exposition as to why he needs to “SHUT UP,” some may even say threatening. Do you find yourself using such language often when it comes to disagreements with people of color?

11 hours ago, wilcal said:

Yikes. I just noticed the border lines between the two countries is dotted on Google Maps. 

There's a chance that the Dynamo will play a game in Suriname next February, so maybe that'll satisfy my hunger for checking out a lesser-known northern coast of SA country. 

 

You’d def be on a very (relatively) short list of people in the entire history of the world who have visited Suriname! 
 

5 hours ago, asubrt said:

Wow! Didn't see these mentioned, but United is also adding 2x daily service to the new Tulum airport beginning March 23, and 1x weekly service to Santa Fe, NM beginning March 9. It's still a few cry from the way they'll add 7 long haul routes out of SFO at a time (for example), but this is an absolute bounty of new routes for IAH considering the way United has shafted us over the past several years.

You made my evening with the SAF news!

43 minutes ago, wilcal said:

UA adding 4x weekly IAH-GEO flights.

I would def go if the price ever got cheap!

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-expands-in-houston-with-2-6b-terminal-project-state-of-the-art-baggage-system-new-club-and-thousands-of-new-jobs-302002015.html

Just in time for you to join the fight!

Rumors of Venezuela Invasion Plans Put Oil-Rich Guyana on Edge | OilPrice.com

But definite good news.

36 minutes ago, Blue Dogs said:

Cabinet position in the Biden administration. 

As a quid pro quo for endorsing Sheila Jackson Lee?!  Another fanciful theory.

In any case, glad you acknowledge there will be another Biden administration.

6 hours ago, august948 said:

One hand washing the other is probably one of the oldest elements of politics, my friend.  Let's see where Mayor Turner turns up next.

Or having complete policy disagreements and a multi-decade personal relationship, maybe?  Not everything is a conspiracy. 🙄

12 hours ago, august948 said:

 I have to wonder what Mayor Turner was promised to induce him to endorse SJL.

I'm sure not a darned thing.  C'mon, augie, you know Turner and SJL are part of the "same" Democratic Party with a long history.  John Whitmire was essentially hand-picked by the State GOP.  Why on earth would Turner even think of endorsing him?  I thought you understood politics . . . 

@Houston19514

1) Yes, you have established multiple times that the C-North club is close to D-West.  Not sure why you think that is in dispute.  

2) The problem, once again, is the size of the club.  It's way too crowded as it stands now.  (I must ask, have you ever even been in it?  Because this is pretty self-evident.)  It goes without saying it's not optimal (a generous description) to serve either 3 additional widebody or 6 narrowbody flights.  

3) You should hope that UA uses the D gates WAY more than the 3 gates they have preferential rights to because (1) that would imply they are expanding international service here; and (2) it keeps rates for the other airlines in check.  Do you want to risk some airlines operating at the margin to leave, either to go to HOU or leave the market altogether?  

4) Yes, UA can operate more international flights from E once the B gates open and domestic operations can be transferred off of E.  HOWEVER, you seem to not understand how hubs work.  E is ALREADY at capacity at peak times, so UA is ALREADY overflowing to D as it stands today.  If UA is going to add new markets, you add them at the peak times to maximize connectivity.  Therefore, if UA is not using any more than the 3 gates in D that they are close to using today at the peak, it implies UA is not expanding international service from IAH.  I'm not sure why that would be desirable.

So I find it very difficult to understand how someone who is purportedly in favor of expanded air service to continue making such arguments.  Maybe you aren't in favor of expanded air service--maybe your interests simply align more with (what you think) UA's are. 

If one does have the interest of the region at heart, it seems to me that the following argument is just not very logical:

1) HAS is about to open the first new international gates at the airport in two decades.  They hired an airport "starchitect" (Fentress) to design it. 

2) If it were to be a "signature" facility (like essentially any new international terminal in the country would be), you would hope the hub airline (or a consortium of the airlines in the same alliance) would install appropriate facilities to serve its passengers conveniently and signal the importance of IAH in their global networks and UA's continued expansion opportunities.

3) Yes, the C-North club is in close proximity to the new pier, but it is way too crowded as it stands today (I can only assume you haven't stepped foot in it) and not anywhere near on par with international clubroom standards.

4) Yes, there will be a new club opening with the new gates, maybe even as soon as 2 years from now (but I'm not holding my breath).

5) Yes, people will be able to walk to it--but is that what you would ideally want, or would you, say, prefer one of the only Star Alliance lounges in the world?  Maybe you are just being contrarian, or just rationalizing whatever decisions UA makes as OK for them (trust me, they have made plenty of boneheaded decisions in the past).

6) Yes, B gates will provide room for UA to expand at IAH, but they will not be internationally capable.  If UA is not using D at a higher degree 5 years from now than it is today, I can only interpret that as indicative of a world in which UA is not expanding internationally from Houston. 

Your argument essentially boils down to, "All is good if UA doesn't intend to use Terminal D."  Why on earth would you be arguing "in favor" of that?  

1 minute ago, Houston19514 said:

However it came about, United indeed has a contractual claim to preferential rights to use those 3 (6) gates, so one imagines those will be the Terminal D gates they primarily use. 

It's not a contractual "claim," it is a contractual "right."  I don't know how relevant it is to the discussion here, however.  They got half of the gates on the new concourse as a legacy of an agreement negotiated more than two decades ago.  Most of the gates will be empty for most of the day, as they are today.  Does that sound good to you?

4 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

There is also little doubt that the bulk of their international arrivals will continue to be run through Terminal E.

No flurf?  (Are you arguing with yourself again?)

4 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Also, I guarantee they will remodel (and maybe expand) the existing C-North (D West) club.

Well (1) we'll see; (2) remodeling won't solve the main problem, which is space; and (3) thinking (and unfoundedly so) that they "may expand it" because it helps your argument today also doesn't help the problem today.  I guess I can take your "guarantee" only to the extent that, assuming UA stays in business, all clubs will eventually get remodeled, renovated, or expanded--solid "death and taxes" reasoning there, I guess. 

5 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

C-North (D West) club.

You're the only one calling it that, but go right ahead.

6 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Not sure why THAT is so hard to understand.

Well, usually when one makes a "guarantee," they have something to back it up besides what can only be described from reading your responses as your "gut feel."  I'll accept that as a supposition because, hey, we all suppose, I suppose.

8 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

I AM surprised they haven't undertaken the remodel

Because they just remodeled less than 10 years ago.  Why would they remodel it over the one on C-South, which is legacy 1990s?  If they were planning a multimillion-dollar renovation and expansion of the C-North (oh, I'm sorry, D-West) club, why wouldn't they invest in an entirely new and purpose-built lounge in D-West?  I mean, it really makes one scratch one's head.

13 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

I imagine they are waiting until they have the additional capacity of the "largest in the system" club in Terminal B, to which, by the way, C-North gate passengers will have easy access.

I don't believe your definition of "easy access" is the same definition as others, especially at widely accepted planning standards and service levels in the industry, but we've been over this before.  Whatever UA does seems to be good enough for you because one can always fallback on finding examples of decidedly crappier facilities elsewhere.  Other people disagree.  It's all a matter of preferences and taste. 

(While we're on the topic of the UA Club in Terminal B, it's a great time to point out that UA never built out the new lounge shell space that they build on B South, even though they "guaranteed" it in press releases when the project was announced.)

29 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

It looks like United's use of Terminal D will primarily be in the new D West pier I surmise that because that is the only part of Terminal D for which United has claimed preferential rights -- the three gates on the west side (or 6, depending if you count Wide-Body gates or narrow-body equivalents).  There is already a United Club at the base of that new pier (formerly known as the C North Club -- perhaps they will rename it as the Terminal D Club.

Several things:

-The three preferential use gates is a legacy of the old D agreement and really has nothing to do with the new gates on D West other than HAS took them back when international growth was strong early in the 2010s and said they would give them back when additional gates were built.  (An airline doesn't have any "claim" on preferential use rights in a common use terminal, they're negotiated and may be granted.)  Since there will be no FIS built in B, the D gates will really be the heart of UA's future international growth--and we should hope UA uses the gates as much as possible or else the rates could be prohibitively high for the foreign flag airlines (this was a problem when Terminal E opened in the early 2000s, but UA provided traffic guarantees).  And if these gates are going to be the "nicest" at the airport, one would think UA would be interested in a new club there, especially since the Polaris Lounge reduced the size of the E club.  

-The C-North United Club is a renovation of a decades-old club and not appropriate or competitive to serve multiple widebody international flights in addition to the new C-North gates--not sure why that is so difficult to understand.  It's horribly overcrowded today.  If the gates will be appreciably "nicer" than the other international gates, one would assume that UA would want to depart their more highly competitive flights from there (e.g., LHR and AMS).  If they're little better than the new C-North gates, well, I guess it doesn't matter.  The gates will certainly be a long haul from the Polaris Lounge, so maybe they don't care.

Still, there may be a Star Alliance Gold lounge on the new pier that UA intends to use in common with other airlines--I believe that was proposed at one point, but I haven't read anything recently.  The only Star Alliance Gold eligible lounges at IAH (able to be used by a passenger flying on any Star Alliance airline) were the UA lounges as LH and BR used the common use lounge.  SQ, NH, and NZ used the UA lounge in E.  Usually when you invest $1.5 billion in a new signature "front door" international facility, you would make an investment in this sort of thing to elevate the passenger experience.  

On 11/10/2023 at 3:25 PM, mkultra25 said:

She's a Republican political consultant/PR flack who is currently a staffer in the Texas Senate. So I wouldn't expect her to be favorably inclined toward Hollins, to say the least.

The more important question, of course, is who she has endorsed, as I'm told it's all about endorsements.

United and HAS jointly released this summary of the Terminal B redevelopment project today.

It will, as suspected, include a new United Club, which will be the new largest in the system.  That said, I remain surprised they won't have one in Terminal D for purely competitive reasons.  (Actually, I guess if LH builds a club, many UA passengers would have access to it as Star Alliance Gold as they do in DTW or IAD, for example, so maybe that's it, but I haven't seen anything one way or the other.)

The middle pier of B-South to be demolished with parking positions added in the "bottom of the U" between the east and west piers. It doesn't look to me from the renderings that they intend to redo the piers, so I guess there will be no individual holdrooms and loading bridges up from the apron level like with Southwest in A.  Security will now be on a level above the ticketing level, I believe in an entirely new building.  I'm sure the new club will be between the two new piers.  As drawn, they look a little more "flavorful" than "New C North."  $2 billion is a pretty big chunk of change, so good for them.

The Controller did not approve the most recent legislative request to appropriate $150MM in City funds for the project, but UA and HAS would not be putting this out if they did not expect to iron out those issues.

United, Houston Airport System Invest more than $2B in Terminal B Transformation

1 hour ago, kennyc05 said:

I wish the plans were rail instead of BRT to IAH.

You can put me in the camp of being glad they're not lighting money on fire to "check a box."

On 11/2/2023 at 10:21 AM, ChannelTwoNews said:

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2023/11/01/iah-viva-aerobus-new-flights-destination-mexico.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_27&cx_artPos=5#cxrecs_s

"The new nonstop flight to Queretaro, which begins on Dec. 2, will be offered four days per week on Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays and Sundays. Queretaro be the airline's fifth nonstop connection from IAH to Mexico.

Also starting in December, Viva Aerobus will increase the number of flights it offers from Houston to four of its popular destinations:

• IAH-Leon/Bajio will increase from four flights per week to five flights per week.
• IAH-Guadalajara will increase from four flights per week to daily service.
• IAH-Mexico City will increase from six flights per week to daily service. IAH is the only U.S. airport that has a direct flight to Mexico City's new Felipe Angeles International Airport, according to Houston Airports.
• IAH-Monterrey will increase from 13 flights per week to 19 flights per week."

It really should be taken as a great sign that VB is expanding service with the new international gates about to open as a sign that the higher fees associated with the additional gates are not deterring service from a ULCC. It also says everything about the strength of the Mexican business market to Houston, which is way, way stronger than it was even 10 years ago. Houston has become front-of-mind in Mexican business in a way that it wasn’t even in 2015. It’s no mistake the first US destination connected to NLU was IAH. 

15 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Sept 2023 Airport International Traffic Report:

SEPTEMBER

• Bush Intercontinental: 889,141 (up 21.5% from 2022)
• Hobby International:  61,279 (up 0.6% from 2022)
• Houston Total:  950,420
• DFW:                  840,895  (up 6% from 2022)
• San Antonio:         43,183  (up 19.6% from 2022)

2023 YTD through September:

•    Bush Intercontinental:  8,706,464 (up 23.9% from 2022)
•    Hobby International:        764,746 (up 8.9% from 2022)
• Houston Total:                  9,471,210
• DFW:                                 8,340,410  (up 15.9% from 2022)
• San Antonio:                       444,271  (up 6.5% from 2022)

https://app.powerbigov.us/view?r=eyJrIjoiMDE3ZWI1YmEtOTZiOS00NjZjLWEzZTAtNjRmZmM1NWY2OGU3IiwidCI6IjU3YTg1YTEwLTI1OGItNDViNC1hNTE5LWM5NmM3NzIxMDk0YyJ9

https://flysanantonio.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/2023-SEPT-Stats.pdf

https://assets.ctfassets.net/m2p70vmwc019/5aTzmr0CeIWORQNEJJjNWS/6f1680729bfc8f8c8ba997e5534254fb/Sep_2023_Pax_Report.pdf

@Houston19514

(1) There is no airport called "Hobby International," it is called "William P. Hobby Airport"

(2) Take a look at the long-term trends

25 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Not WRONG.  What I posted is factually correct and I reported the numbers given by the airports.

The statement "continues to hold on to (and in fact slightly widen relative to DFW) its lead in international air traffic among Texas cities" is, indeed, factually wrong.

You presented data for a 10-month period with no comparison for the prior year, so how can you say what you posted shows that it has "widened its lead"?  "Widened its lead" relative to last year for 10 months, maybe, but the long-term trend shows quite the opposite.  At best, your post is unintentionally misleading because you did not present a complete picture.  Which is fine, as you probably don't have access to the data, but for those that do the trend is very clear . . . the most recently available 12 month period for which "apples-to-apples" data are available from the same source show that FY 2023 was the second worst on record for Houston international traffic relative to Dallas.  

"continues to hold on to" = "still has the lead, but it's slipping"

"slightly widen relative to DFW" = since 2010, DFW has increased its share of traffic from 61.5% to 91.0%.  In the 12 years since 2010, DFW has increased its share relative to IAH in all but 4 years, including 2023.

I certainly wouldn't put money on IAH being the busiest international airport in Texas in 2030.

On 10/10/2023 at 12:54 PM, Houston19514 said:

Houston continues to hold on to (and in fact slightly widen relative to DFW) its lead in international air traffic among Texas cities.

2023 YTD through August:

•    Bush Intercontinental:  7,817,323
•    Hobby International:      703,467
• Houston Total:             8,520,790
• DFW:                            7,505,999
• San Antonio:                  401,088

WRONG . . . the long-term trend is horrible, and definitely not something I'd be crowing about.  In fact, 2023 was a degradation from 2022 and the second worst year on record.

Enplanements* for the 12 months ended 6/30, source U.S. DOT:

Long haul (i.e., excluding Canada, Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean) trends are much worse and DFW surpassed in 2018:

* - This is how these things are measured in the U.S., as we don't count passengers twice, i.e., once when they leave and once when they come back.

7 minutes ago, august948 said:

One themed after this guy?

A-OK with me