XPost: rec.travel.air, alt.travel   
   From: johnl@iecc.com   
      
   >I think that the point is that if they (US Airways) pays they pretty much   
   >do have the airport, but if they don't pay the county wants to evict them.   
   >Free rent is a good deal for the tenant, but landlords don't seem to agree.   
      
   The problem here is that if the tenant leaves, there aren't a whole   
   lot of other tenants eager to get in.   
      
   Granting that US's lousy financial shape is largely their own fault,   
   in this case both US and the airport would probably be better off with   
   US staying and paying a reduced rent than US leaving and retreating to   
   Philadelphia.   
      
   If US had to pick one hub in Pennsylvania, it'd have to be Philly   
   because of its much greater O/D traffic, even though there's more   
   competition.  Pittsburgh is a swell place to change planes, but it's   
   not much of a local market.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)