Thanks, America!

wrote in message
oups.com...
You really should check snopes.com before you post.



WOW!! How profound!

*******************************
Sophomoric response.

Kiss my ass.


Nothing "profound" in what I wrote, and not intended to be. Just
trying to point out that the stuff you get by chain emails isn't always
to be swallowed as factual and then passed along as if it is.

Well, you might check your assumptions because I didn't get it through a
chain e-mail. I got it from a magazine several years ago.

So, as above.

("Jay Honeck" wrote)
And I, as the mere driver of the convertible (Mary gets the place of
honor, seated on the retracted top, waving to the crowd and whacking me on
the head when I accelerate too fast!), had to dress up like SOMEONE.
Since I sure don't look like Charles Lindbergh -- even after losing 25
pounds -- Fred Noonan was the only logical choice...


For 2006, how about Howard Hughes - aviator/hotel magnet.

Mary could be Ava Gardner. Oo-la-la!!

"No flight suit this year honey. Instead, slip into this little sequin
number for our ride down Main Street"


Montblack

Interesting. I was relying largely on your statement, back when you first
contemplated buying the hotel, that "Surprisingly, not very many visitors
are pilots, according to my friend. I chalk this up to a simple lack of
advertising/marketing to the pilot crowd--which Mary and I would rectify
quickly". But if your expectations didn't pan out, then I stand corrected.

The simple fact is that for every pilot, there are 99 (or more) wannabes.
You know who I mean:

....The folks who took a lesson, and ran out of money or gumption, but love
airplanes...

....The folks whose father/husband/brother flew F-51/86/104/15s in World War
II/Korea/Viet Nam/The Gulf War...

....The folks who never put together the $3500 it cost to become a pilot, but
can spring $99 to be surrounded by luxury and aviation...

....And, yes, the folks who love the *thought* of aviation, but never had the
guts to get out there and do it...

Bottom line, Gary: We're vastly outnumbered by the non-flying public, and
they stay at hotels just as often (or even more often) as than pilots do.
Do the math, and you'll see that pilots will NEVER be more than 5% of our
annual income, unless -- God help us -- the rest of the non-flying public
decides to stay somewhere else.

That said, when you figure that pilots are far less than 1% of the public,
yet 5% of our business comes from pilots, you can see that we're doing a
good job of attracting a LOT of pilots. It's a rare day that I don't have
someone to hangar fly with -- and THAT, my friend, is why we're doing it.

One thing still puzzles me, though. An argument you've made in favor of
the airport's government subsidy is that the airport is good for local
business. But if even an *aviation-themed hotel* has its business
*diminished by a factor of three or four* by having the airport next door,
then I have trouble understanding how the airport's net economic effect
could actually be positive. (I'm not saying it couldn't be so--just that
it's hard to understand offhand.)

I'm always arguing in favor of the airport because it brings a huge return
to the city ($5.7 million) for a tiny annual investment ($180K).

See:

http://alexisparkinn.com/Iowa%202000...n_aviation.pdf

Does that mean that turning the airport into condos and apartments wouldn't
bring MORE money into the city coffers? Perhaps not. But that same
argument can be used on every piece of municipal land, including parks,
parking garages, and 4-lane roads. EVERYTHING would bring in more tax
revenue if the Sears Tower were built on top of it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

You really should check snopes.com before you post.

WOW!! How profound!


******************************=AD*
Sophomoric response.


Kiss my ass.=20

Geeze, Matt . . . how old are you? Fourteen?

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
Well, you might check your assumptions because I didn't get it through a
chain e-mail. I got it from a magazine several years ago.

You got it from "a magazine"? Was it called Chain Email Digest?

Seriously though, I'd be interested to know what magazine you rely on that
prints recycled urban legends without bothering to fact-check.

--Gary

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:H3iye.120998$x96.101044@attbi_s72...
.... snip...
Does that mean that turning the airport into condos and apartments
wouldn't bring MORE money into the city coffers? Perhaps not. But that
same argument can be used on every piece of municipal land, including
parks, parking garages, and 4-lane roads. EVERYTHING would bring in more
tax revenue if the Sears Tower were built on top of it.
--

Careful.

The Kelo decision has opened the way to do just that, for your *private*
property. It will be only a matter of time before lobbyists will convince
someone that it should be extended to *public* property as well.


And your previous post:

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:eifye.132369$xm3.97873@attbi_s21...
....snip...
.... The best thing that could POSSIBLY happen to my business would be
for the airport to be bulldozed, and that land developed into homes and
businesses. I would probably see an immediate 300% to 400% increase in
business, and the value of the hotel would absolutely skyrocket.

And we would get out of the business as fast as possible,....


.... amazed me.

I am pleased that you recognize that in some cases, unfettered "free
enterprise" may actually be detrimental to one's quality of life!!! You are
going to be accused of starting to sound like one of those damn-socialist
Canadians! ;-)

Hope your Holiday celebrations went safely and well.

Matt Barrow wrote:

"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...

The reason God gave politicians two more brain cells than a horse is so

that

they wouldn't poop on the streets in a parade. I hope you don't have any
horses or retarded politicians in front of you either.

{;-)



Well that finally explains Teddy Kennedy!!




Yes, now we know why he poops in the street during parades! :-)

Matt

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:H3iye.120998$x96.101044@attbi_s72...

The simple fact is that for every pilot, there are 99 (or more) wannabes.

Ok, but even *they*, if they're responding to your aviation theme, are
probably enticed by the view of the next-door airport, aren't they? Would
wannabe pilots really flock to a hotel just because it has some airplane
pictures hanging on the walls?

Does that mean that turning the airport into condos and apartments
wouldn't bring MORE money into the city coffers? Perhaps not.

Whoa, that's quite a distinction. So the airport is economically valuable by
comparison to a *vacant lot*! But compared to the most efficient use of the
property, the airport *stifles* nearby economic activity by a factor of
*four*, according to your estimate (unless there's some reason that an
*aviation-themed hotel* would be *more* adversely affected by an airport
than would most other businesses).

But that same argument can be used on every piece of municipal land,
including parks, parking garages, and 4-lane roads. EVERYTHING would
bring in more tax revenue if the Sears Tower were built on top of it.

Precisely Jay! Market forces are very efficient, but very inhumane in the
goals that they efficiently pursue. That's why we often need government
interventions (such as the airport subsidy you advocate) in order to
*thwart* market forces and promote *quality of life* rather than unfettered
economic growth.

But the thing is, there's often much more at stake than the enjoyment of
General Aviation. Just as we need to thwart market forces in order to
promote access to recreational flying and other GA, we also--but much more
urgently--need to thwart market forces in order to promote expanded access
to education, medical care, and other prerequisites to being able to work
hard and enjoy the fruits of one's efforts.

Happy fourth of July.

--Gary

...... (Not that I object to the socialism involved here.....

Gary, what do you think the word "socialism" means?

vince norris

Geesh it could have been CBS evening news!

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
Well, you might check your assumptions because I didn't get it through a
chain e-mail. I got it from a magazine several years ago.

You got it from "a magazine"? Was it called Chain Email Digest?

Seriously though, I'd be interested to know what magazine you rely on that
prints recycled urban legends without bothering to fact-check.

--Gary