Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think a lot of you are greatly overestimating the impact. Houston has the second most Fortune 500 HQs in the nation behind New York. Houston doubles Dallas, which is third.
Chicago is all the way down to #6 with only nine Fortune 500 companies. Houston will now lose one of their 25 or so Fortune companies. Chicago doesn't even gain one, as United is already on the list.
As for transport hub, as long as we have th #2 port in the nation, we will be considered a transport hub. You have to have major air presences to move all those goods.
I agree, although Metro Houston only has one more Fortune 500 company than the DFW Metroplex. If this goes through, I guess they will be tied.
I dont think Houston really loses that much beyond the HQ itself. People arent going to percieve it any differently. Dallas was already the transportation and logistics hub for this area of the country (for air and land), so that doesnt change. IAH will have pretty much the exact same amount of service, so that wont change.
The only thing that changes is that Houston loses HQ and some jobs.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,195 posts, read 3,916,954 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by kittyhawk
The effects of this are going to be really bad for Houston in the long-run. While there will be some job losses, the real effects are the lack of an airline HQ here and the perception that we are no longer a player in big business and a transport hub. Ultimately, Houston will lose domestic flights and with them, an increased perception that we are behind other southern cities like Dallas and Atlanta in terms of tangible offerings. Why move a company HQ to a city like Houston over DFW or Atlanta now?
I believe that in the long run this relegates Houston to a second or third tier US city in terms of business. Not in energy of course, but in everything else.
This is a sad day for Houston.
I disagree with much of what you're saying.
New York may have JetBlue for low cost airline, but LA doesn't have any airline companies, and it's still a great city. So what? Houston lost a HQ, imagine what Seattle felt when they lost Boeing, and what the Northeast and Miswest have been feeling when they were losing their companies to the Sunbelts.
Houston will manage, it's not dropping to second OR third tier because of this. IAH still has room for expansion, think about this positively, this might possibly lead to IAH not being monopolized by Chicago's United now, and there might be other large airliners to have a bit more presence there. Remember IAH truly is one of the fastest growing airports in America. We'll be fine. IAH probably will be a secondary hub for United after O'Hare, and I'm sure other airlines will see this as an opportunity to reach out to Houston and expand their services here at IAH, I mean one of the fastest growing airports by air traffic is a VERY large asset for any airlines. That's why Continental/United are going to prioritize IAH above all other airports (exceptions O'Hare).
Plus you never know, anything can happen in the future.
By the way, the airline industry REALLY reminds me of the soft drink industry, there were MANY brands, and now there's only two, Coke and Pepsi, because all other brands were bought out/merged with these two larger brands. I'm sure that's EXACTLY where the airline industry is headed as well. The next move, I feel US Airways and American are going to team up. US Airways and American are at the position where they both need to improve to survive against United and Delta, especially US Airways. I'm not a rocket scientist, but I honestly feel this is the direction our major airline industries are headed into.
New York may have JetBlue for low cost airline, but LA doesn't have any airline companies, and it's still a great city. So what? Houston lost a HQ, imagine what Seattle felt when they lost Boeing, and what the Northeast and Miswest have been feeling when they were losing their companies to the Sunbelts.
Houston will manage, it's not dropping to second OR third tier because of this. IAH still has room for expansion, think about this positively, this might possibly lead to IAH not being monopolized by Chicago's United now, and there might be other large airliners to have a bit more presence there. Remember IAH truly is one of the fastest growing airports in America. We'll be fine. IAH probably will be a secondary hub for United after O'Hare, and I'm sure other airlines will see this as an opportunity to reach out to Houston and expand their services here at IAH, I mean one of the fastest growing airports by air traffic is a VERY large asset for any airlines. That's why Continental/United are going to prioritize IAH above all other airports (exceptions O'Hare).
Plus you never know, anything can happen in the future.
By the way, the airline industry REALLY reminds me of the soft drink industry, there were MANY brands, and now there's only two, Coke and Pepsi, because all other brands were bought out/merged with these two larger brands. I'm sure that's EXACTLY where the airline industry is headed as well. The next move, I feel US Airways and American are going to team up. US Airways and American are at the position where they both need to improve to survive against United and Delta, especially US Airways. I'm not a rocket scientist, but I honestly feel this is the direction our major airline industries are headed into.
And that is exactly why this merger is bad. I suggest this country invest into a decent and efficient rail system because only the rich will be able to afford to fly.
In 20 years; us average Americans will be traveling across the country horseback.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,195 posts, read 3,916,954 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by jluke65780
And that is exactly why this merger is bad. I suggest this country invest into a decent and efficient rail system because only the rich will be able to afford to fly.
In 20 years; us average Americans will be traveling across the country horseback.
Jluke, I've been reading a lot on Bullet Trains lately, like the ones they have throughout Europe, and Asia especially Japan, and China. None of those countries heavily rely on planes, because of the cost and their airlines being a monopoly. So they invested in creating Bullet Transit Trains for passengers, and these trains are VERY fast, some like the ones in France top out at 340 MPH.
BosWash is already leading the way with rail service, it's not as popular yet, but it's popularity is increasing, they'll soon be building faster trains, the bullet transit trains are very much coming to America now, it's inevitable!
I read somewhere that the BosWash corridor is already increasing demand for bullet transit trains with high speed service, and California is already proposing to build some for the future. It'll be a revolutionary movement, because I feel our country will turn into a rapid transit bullet train system. Airlines like Southwest, JetBlue, AirTran are going to be loving service after that, for long distance travel they'll be amongst the first to be accessed by the public.
Large company airlines have been in trouble since the 90's, and they're striving hard to survive, but it's getting harder and harder for them by the day.
Jluke, I've been reading a lot on Bullet Trains lately, like the ones they have throughout Europe, and Asia especially Japan, and China. None of those countries heavily rely on planes, because of the cost and their airlines being a monopoly. So they invested in creating Bullet Transit Trains for passengers, and these trains are VERY fast, some like the ones in France top out at 340 MPH.
BosWash is already leading the way with rail service, it's not as popular yet, but it's popularity is increasing, they'll soon be building faster trains, the bullet transit trains are very much coming to America now, it's inevitable!
I read somewhere that the BosWash corridor is already increasing demand for bullet transit trains with high speed service, and California is already proposing to build some for the future. It'll be a revolutionary movement, because I feel our country will turn into a rapid transit bullet train system. Airlines like Southwest, JetBlue, AirTran are going to be loving service after that, for long distance travel they'll be amongst the first to be accessed by the public.
Large company airlines have been in trouble since the 90's, and they're striving hard to survive, but it's getting harder and harder for them by the day.
Pretty cool looking huh? This is going to be our future soon enough!
Very nice!
340 mph??!? This could really work in Texas; especially considering how spread out the cities are.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,195 posts, read 3,916,954 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by jluke65780
Very nice!
340 mph??!? This could really work in Texas; especially considering how spread out the cities are.
The Texaplex region (Texas Triangle) could really take advantage of that, and it'll be a very convenient source of transportation, ESPECIALLY for those with a phobia of heights on planes. A very good alternative.
Sadly, I think we have a bit of waiting to do before we get this though.
High speed rail for short hauls, where several cities can be connected along a line instead of the usual hub-and-spoke model of airline service, just makes sense. Flying would then be for international and other long haul travel. So to connect from, say, Houston to Des Moines (not a big moneymaker for airlines) you might fly from here to Chicago and then go aboard a bullet train to Des Moines which might travel onward to Omaha or Kansas City or Denver. Rather than replacing flying, it would compliment it.
Take a look at this...VERY interesting. The sooner we can get started on this, the better. I honestly feel like this issue should be right up there with Healthcare and what not. Just building this kind of infrastructure would employ SOOO many people...assuming we don't outsource ALL of the work...
Take a look at this...VERY interesting. The sooner we can get started on this, the better. I honestly feel like this issue should be right up there with Healthcare and what not. Just building this kind of infrastructure would employ SOOO many people...assuming we don't outsource ALL of the work...
Lol, I think we should have started in the 90's. The evidence was when all the major airline industries first started filing for bankruptcies then.
We're just so far behind everyone else in the world when it comes to public transportation (Rapid Transit Rail).
But this is good news! Thank Vertigo.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
