^ yeah i mean i didnt care.  I still dont.  I think its great CLE got it and i dont care PIT got it first, but even without the European service, i still saw the new administration working.  I think i made my point that i dont think the airport is a finished product.  Just like all aspects of our city, we are striving to improve. Again, i think its directionally correct,

 

 

Look Believeland, you bring up very cogent arguments and I get where you are coming from. We agree to disagree about airport administration but I have no beef with you at all. Pontiac on the other hand......

 

OK, so what does the new administration have to do to earn your praise?

 

^ yeah i mean i didnt care.  I still dont.  I think its great CLE got it and i dont care PIT got it first, but even without the European service, i still saw the new administration working.  I think i made my point that i dont think the airport is a finished product.  Just like all aspects of our city, we are striving to improve. Again, i think its directionally correct,

 

 

Look Believeland, you bring up very cogent arguments and I get where you are coming from. We agree to disagree about airport administration but I have no beef with you at all. Pontiac on the other hand......

 

OK, so what does the new administration have to do to earn your praise?

 

 

Please, please, please fix the FIS. How many times do I have to repeat this!

^That's it? I'm sure that's coming. Let me grab you some Pom poms

CLE's Europe traffic number has been about 200-250 per day. 

 

I'm surprised it's that small.

 

the obvious question is....do those numbers take the new Iceland routes...or stick with their frequent flyer airline.  Heres to hoping that the new airlines also stimulate demand...if we can see those climb to 300 per day, that would be significant. 

 

I'm one of the 250-300 who would (while somewhat grudgingly) stick with United for a lie-flat bed and FF miles courtesy of my employer paying the fare.  It's worth the extra hour flight and layover at EWR or better yet, IAD.

It's quite obvious that you're just making stuff up!! According to an article in cleveland.com, airport officials were after Icelandair long before PIT got WOW. They just didn't get serious about overseas service last year; they've been serious since 2009 when Continental ended the London flight. So for you to suggest that the airport officials were motivated solely because of PIT shows what kind of grade-school reasoning you have!!

 

I believe it's only since January that CLE has had a position called Manager, International Air Service Development (filled by John Hogan). Susan Glaser of the PD and Alison Grant before her both reported that GCP, TeamNEO, etc., as well as local businesses were more interested in restoring lost domestic routes than international; there was little recognition of the value of international routes to the region.  I believe that has changed drastically and quite recently, i.e., since Robert Kennedy took over as Director of Port Control. There may have been previous efforts, but they were half-hearted (my opinion) and obviously ineffective.

 

 

CLE's Europe traffic number has been about 200-250 per day. 

 

I'm surprised it's that small.

 

That number was Continental Airlines' working estimate prior to the recession. By 2011, the number had fallen to about 150-175 a day by DoT data and has since slowly recovered. The 2011 low may have understated the market since there is always "data leakage" when there is no direct service in a market The nifty thing about the Icelanders is they will boost the tourist part of that number with new passengers faster than somebody like British or American would boost the business traveler share. 

 

More and faster is better; it will get the attention of other airlines, which then will be more likely to add a flight to a traditional Euro-hub.  The local spiff for a flight to London, for example, could probably be more in the form of ticket purchase guarantees than actual cash.

CLE's Europe traffic number has been about 200-250 per day. 

 

I'm surprised it's that small.

 

the obvious question is....do those numbers take the new Iceland routes...or stick with their frequent flyer airline.  Heres to hoping that the new airlines also stimulate demand...if we can see those climb to 300 per day, that would be significant. 

 

I'm one of the 250-300 who would (while somewhat grudgingly) stick with United for a lie-flat bed and FF miles courtesy of my employer paying the fare.  It's worth the extra hour flight and layover at EWR or better yet, IAD.

 

I will be doing the opposite, unless I have enough miles for a free flight

CLE's Europe traffic number has been about 200-250 per day. 

 

I'm surprised it's that small.

 

the obvious question is....do those numbers take the new Iceland routes...or stick with their frequent flyer airline.  Heres to hoping that the new airlines also stimulate demand...if we can see those climb to 300 per day, that would be significant. 

 

I'm one of the 250-300 who would (while somewhat grudgingly) stick with United for a lie-flat bed and FF miles courtesy of my employer paying the fare.  It's worth the extra hour flight and layover at EWR or better yet, IAD.

 

I will be doing the opposite, unless I have enough miles for a free flight

 

To each his own.  As a veteran overseas traveler, I prefer the layover here followed by a direct to destination in a more comfortable aircraft, than a direct to Reykjavik, a layover then another flight to my final in Europe.  But I suppose if the price was right for a leisure traveler, this flight would be the way to go.

I can also envision myself staying a night or two in Iceland every time I go to Europe, get rest, eat, drink and get back on a plane. I love that model

I can also envision myself staying a night or two in Iceland every time I go to Europe, get rest, eat, drink and get back on a plane. I love that model

 

If you can afford the time, by all means do it.  It's a great little country.  Also I'm not poo-pooing this for CLE.  Glad we got it. 

  Also I'm not poo-pooing this for CLE.  Glad we got it.

 

I think it's a great test of the market. Success of the Iceland route will attract more.

In other news Cleveland-Hopkins received a $19 million FAA infrastructure grant to, "correct the geometry of various taxiways at the airport. These improvements are part of the FAA’s Runway Incursion Mitigation or RIM program to enhance safety at the airport."

 

https://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/grantapportion_data/media/FY17-AIP-Grants-Announced-2017-09-14.pdf

Not a goofball. It still took a decade to restablish a Euro link to Iceland. Still think Hopkins is going to have trouble direct service to places like London, Paris and Frankfurt because of the facility until narrowbodies can make the leap.

 

Took a decade - yes, but I don't think CLE management were really serious until WOW picked PIT over CLE last year. I know it was not an urgent goal for the civic promotion groups like GCP.

 

It will be interesting to see how much new traffic the Icelandic lines generate.  CLE's Europe traffic number has been about 200-250 per day.  If the new carriers capture half that number and generate an equal number of new bargain-seeking travelers, that will still leave room for a third carrier to offer a flight 3 or 4 times a week to a traditional European hub.

It's quite obvious that you're just making stuff up!! According to an article in cleveland.com, airport officials were after Icelandair long before PIT got WOW. They just didn't get serious about overseas service last year; they've been serious since 2009 when Continental ended the London flight. So for you to suggest that the airport officials were motivated solely because of PIT shows what kind of grade-school reasoning you have!!

 

They were so serious it took 8 years (!!) to get Iceland service and it was after PIT landed WOW! service to Iceland which already had a non-stop to Paris. I know you're in love with the current administration but think how silly it makes the city look if true! Thanks for making my point.

So are the STL airport officials incompetent because it took 16 years to replace their overseas service? How about the BNA officials? It only took over 25 years to replace their overseas service!! You are obviously in love with the PIT officials, but are they incompetent because there is very little service to the west coast? Are the IND officials incompetent because it took them like forever to establish overseas service? On the other side of the spectrum, are the MIA officials incompetent because while there is obviously an abundance of overseas service, there is none to East Asia, which they've been trying to get for years? We can play this nickel and dime game all day long!! Are airports like JFK, YYZ and EWR the only ones that meet YOUR standards?

 

The bottom line is that your coming across like someone who has an ax to grind with the city of Cleveland!! It's obvious you know very little about the airline industry. You need to stop embarrassing yourself!!!

You need to stop embarrassing yourself!!!

 

Follow your own advice.

You guys are fighting over... airline flights? Man, pick your battles.

So, Frontier will now be flying from Cleveland to Austin, 4 times a week.  Yawn... still holding out for the nonstop flight to MCI.

Frontier Airlines adds Cleveland-to-Austin route; fares start at $39 one way

http://www.cleveland.com/travel/index.ssf/2017/09/frontier_airlines_adds_clevela_1.html

 

From the article -- The new destination gives Frontier 19 nonstop routes from Cleveland - more than any other airline - though many are seasonal and most are not daily.

Austin isn't a route to yawn at...better than Allegiant a service there.  We need frontier to hold these route they have. They flip flop too much

JD Power lists Hopkins in last place for satisfaction among airports its size:

http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/2016-north-america-airport-satisfaction-study

 

Time for the city of Cleveland to do what Nashville and other cities are considering -- lease the airport to a private operator and raise substantial funding for public transit capital improvements/expansion and to clean/clear/combine dirty, lien-shrouded, vacant industrial sites near existing transit routes.

 

Hmmmm.  I question their criteria, any list that shows Orlando (a disgusting cesspool), that far ahead of San Francisco (modern and clean), would make me think there is something wrong. I don't know, maybe people are just silly.  Maybe everyone is in a good mood becuase they are going to Disney world, and in a bad mood because they are cleveland. Which that would be a whole level of sad

Hmmmm.  I question their criteria, any list that shows Orlando (a disgusting cesspool), that far ahead of San Francisco (modern and clean), would make me think there is something wrong. I don't know, maybe people are just silly.  Maybe everyone is in a good mood becuase they are going to Disney world, and in a bad mood because they are cleveland. Which that would be a whole level of sad

 

Just because you think CLE is great airport doesn't mean everyone has to agree with you and clearly many don't.

 

CLE's FIS is a very old, cramped and dumpy compared to Orlando. Maybe that's part of it.

 

Also, Orlando is getting a major expansion so it's being improved upon as we speak.

 

You guys are fighting over... airline flights? Man, pick your battles.

 

So it's OK to endlessly argue about Trump/Obama on here? Why even comment?

I think Orlando is a beautiful airport, be it the interiors or the accessways into the airport grounds.

Time for the city of Cleveland to do what Nashville and other cities are considering -- lease the airport to a private operator and raise substantial funding for public transit capital improvements/expansion and to clean/clear/combine dirty, lien-shrouded, vacant industrial sites near existing transit routes.

 

 

A lot of these privatization schemes (for parking, turnpikes, etc) get criticized for being bad deals for taxpayers, KJP - I haven't looked into the issue enough but does that concern you?

I think Orlando is a beautiful airport, be it the interiors or the accessways into the airport grounds.

 

Well, to each their own. I'm pretty sure I walked out of there with a virus

Hmmmm.  I question their criteria, any list that shows Orlando (a disgusting cesspool), that far ahead of San Francisco (modern and clean), would make me think there is something wrong. I don't know, maybe people are just silly.  Maybe everyone is in a good mood becuase they are going to Disney world, and in a bad mood because they are cleveland. Which that would be a whole level of sad

 

Just because you think CLE is great airport doesn't mean everyone has to agree with you and clearly many don't.

 

CLE's FIS is a very old, cramped and dumpy compared to Orlando. Maybe that's part of it.

 

Also, Orlando is getting a major expansion so it's being improved upon as we speak.

 

You guys are fighting over... airline flights? Man, pick your battles.

 

So it's OK to endlessly argue about Trump/Obama on here? Why even comment?

 

 

You have to admit there is probably some psychological weight applied here. People go to Orlando for vacation. They get off the plane and they are happy, they don't care how scuzzy the airport is.  Conversely, the stigma with Cleveland is bad, so they get off the plane and already looking for reasons to complain

Hmmmm.  I question their criteria, any list that shows Orlando (a disgusting cesspool), that far ahead of San Francisco (modern and clean), would make me think there is something wrong. I don't know, maybe people are just silly.  Maybe everyone is in a good mood becuase they are going to Disney world, and in a bad mood because they are cleveland. Which that would be a whole level of sad

 

Just because you think CLE is great airport doesn't mean everyone has to agree with you and clearly many don't.

 

CLE's FIS is a very old, cramped and dumpy compared to Orlando. Maybe that's part of it.

 

Also, Orlando is getting a major expansion so it's being improved upon as we speak.

 

You guys are fighting over... airline flights? Man, pick your battles.

 

So it's OK to endlessly argue about Trump/Obama on here? Why even comment?

 

 

You have to admit there is probably some psychological weight applied here. People go to Orlando for vacation. They get off the plane and they are happy, they don't care how scuzzy the airport is.  Conversely, the stigma with Cleveland is bad, so they get off the plane and already looking for reasons to complain

 

I don't know, I didn't conduct the survey. But again just because you like the airport doesn't mean that it's ranking is somehow invalid. CLE does have real issues even beyond the terminal. The rental car location is nuts for a mid-sized airport. Takes about as long get to there as it does to pick up a car at JFK. That's insane.

 

I don't know, I didn't conduct the survey. But again just because you like the airport doesn't mean that it's ranking is somehow invalid. CLE does have real issues even beyond the terminal. The rental car location is nuts for a mid-sized airport. Takes about as long get to there as it does to pick up a car at JFK. That's insane.

 

Agree 1000%.  I'll never understand why they didn't take the two bottom floors of the short term parking and lease to rental cars, then build a brand new long term ramp where the old one used to stand.  Gotta have acres of surface lots!

Ok, fair. The rental car thing stinks just like it does at Denver , Baltimore and others. But dead last? Come on.  I don't hate Hopkins, I know it's not the best, but it's also not the worst. I've been to just about every airport. It's certainly not the worst.

 

So let's look at the criteria:

 

terminal facilities; need improved Customs, but mostly only local people use those. Not sure that's the driver of poor ranking. Terminal C is clean, not carpeted, has good options and quick to get to your gate. Terminal B is even easier to get to your gate for delta/SW and is clean.  terminal A probably the least maintained but not terrible.

 

airport accessibility; can take train which I use often, Uber drops off at door, rental car sucks, on and off site parking pretty easy TBH

security check; never waited longer than 15 minutes. Terminal A sucks with that skinny hallway

baggage claim; no issues

check-in/baggage check; no issues

food, beverage and retail: acceptable. Nice blend of fast casual options and local spots like Great Lakes and Bar symon. No five star restaurants but airports with 5 star restaurants are silly and a waste of talent anyway

 

So all of this adds up to worst? I just think there is something else going on

 

Ok, fair. The rental car thing stinks just like it does at Denver , Baltimore and others. But dead last? Come on.  I don't hate Hopkins, I know it's not the best, but it's also not the worst. I've been to just about every airport. It's certainly not the worst.

 

So let's look at the criteria:

 

terminal facilities; need improved Customs, but mostly only local people use those. Not sure that's the driver of poor ranking. Terminal C is clean, not carpeted, has good options and quick to get to your gate. Terminal B is even easier to get to your gate for delta/SW and is clean.  terminal A probably the least maintained but not terrible.

 

airport accessibility; can take train which I use often, Uber drops off at door, rental car sucks, on and off site parking pretty easy TBH

security check; never waited longer than 15 minutes. Terminal A sucks with that skinny hallway

baggage claim; no issues

check-in/baggage check; no issues

food, beverage and retail: acceptable. Nice blend of fast casual options and local spots like Great Lakes and Bar symon. No five star restaurants but airports with 5 star restaurants are silly and a waste of talent anyway

 

So all of this adds up to worst? I just think there is something else going on

 

 

If you think there's a grand conspiracy against CLE in this survey you should JD Power know.

Maybe they need another question for criteria : "how happy are you to be at this destination?"  Try to weight that score and get some objectivity

Ok, fair. The rental car thing stinks just like it does at Denver , Baltimore and others. But dead last? Come on.  I don't hate Hopkins, I know it's not the best, but it's also not the worst. I've been to just about every airport. It's certainly not the worst.

 

So let's look at the criteria:

 

terminal facilities; need improved Customs, but mostly only local people use those. Not sure that's the driver of poor ranking. Terminal C is clean, not carpeted, has good options and quick to get to your gate. Terminal B is even easier to get to your gate for delta/SW and is clean.  terminal A probably the least maintained but not terrible.

 

airport accessibility; can take train which I use often, Uber drops off at door, rental car sucks, on and off site parking pretty easy TBH

security check; never waited longer than 15 minutes. Terminal A sucks with that skinny hallway

baggage claim; no issues

check-in/baggage check; no issues

food, beverage and retail: acceptable. Nice blend of fast casual options and local spots like Great Lakes and Bar symon. No five star restaurants but airports with 5 star restaurants are silly and a waste of talent anyway

 

So all of this adds up to worst? I just think there is something else going on

 

 

I'd agree with all this except baggage claim and rental cars.  The later you land at CLE the more skeleton the crews.  I've taken 40 minute flights from ORD that I have to wait 50 minutes for my luggage.  The rental car situation is just unusual for a market/facility this size.  I would expect a bus ride at JFK, DEN or other huge domestic/intl hub.  Not in Cleveland.

 

The other thing I hate about CLE is the tiny cramped restrooms on all concourses--this should have been addressed in renovations but they left them intact, apparently to save space for empty gates. 

Ok, fair. The rental car thing stinks just like it does at Denver , Baltimore and others. But dead last? Come on.  I don't hate Hopkins, I know it's not the best, but it's also not the worst. I've been to just about every airport. It's certainly not the worst.

 

So let's look at the criteria:

 

terminal facilities; need improved Customs, but mostly only local people use those. Not sure that's the driver of poor ranking. Terminal C is clean, not carpeted, has good options and quick to get to your gate. Terminal B is even easier to get to your gate for delta/SW and is clean.  terminal A probably the least maintained but not terrible.

 

airport accessibility; can take train which I use often, Uber drops off at door, rental car sucks, on and off site parking pretty easy TBH

security check; never waited longer than 15 minutes. Terminal A sucks with that skinny hallway

baggage claim; no issues

check-in/baggage check; no issues

food, beverage and retail: acceptable. Nice blend of fast casual options and local spots like Great Lakes and Bar symon. No five star restaurants but airports with 5 star restaurants are silly and a waste of talent anyway

 

So all of this adds up to worst? I just think there is something else going on

 

 

If you think there's a grand conspiracy against CLE in this survey you should JD Power know.

 

I think all of your points are valid and there probably is some "destination bias" in the survey.  However, I have been to about 70% of the airports on the list and in terms of the airport itself, CLE would rank near the bottom for me (probably the only one lower would be LGA - obvious for anyone who has ever been there!).  CLE is functional and generally easy to move through, but the simple fact is that it does not look that nice and I think that may greatly influence people's assessment of their satisfaction.

Ok, fair. The rental car thing stinks just like it does at Denver , Baltimore and others. But dead last? Come on.  I don't hate Hopkins, I know it's not the best, but it's also not the worst. I've been to just about every airport. It's certainly not the worst.

 

So let's look at the criteria:

 

terminal facilities; need improved Customs, but mostly only local people use those. Not sure that's the driver of poor ranking. Terminal C is clean, not carpeted, has good options and quick to get to your gate. Terminal B is even easier to get to your gate for delta/SW and is clean.  terminal A probably the least maintained but not terrible.

 

airport accessibility; can take train which I use often, Uber drops off at door, rental car sucks, on and off site parking pretty easy TBH

security check; never waited longer than 15 minutes. Terminal A sucks with that skinny hallway

baggage claim; no issues

check-in/baggage check; no issues

food, beverage and retail: acceptable. Nice blend of fast casual options and local spots like Great Lakes and Bar symon. No five star restaurants but airports with 5 star restaurants are silly and a waste of talent anyway

 

So all of this adds up to worst? I just think there is something else going on

 

 

I'd agree with all this except baggage claim and rental cars.  The later you land at CLE the more skeleton the crews.  I've taken 40 minute flights from ORD that I have to wait 50 minutes for my luggage.  The rental car situation is just unusual for a market/facility this size.  I would expect a bus ride at JFK, DEN or other huge domestic/intl hub.  Not in Cleveland.

 

The other thing I hate about CLE is the tiny cramped restrooms on all concourses--this should have been addressed in renovations but they left them intact, apparently to save space for empty gates. 

 

In fairness, your experience in receiving your bags late has more to do with the airline than the airport unless there was a malfunction on the belt itself.

Time for the city of Cleveland to do what Nashville and other cities are considering -- lease the airport to a private operator and raise substantial funding for public transit capital improvements/expansion and to clean/clear/combine dirty, lien-shrouded, vacant industrial sites near existing transit routes.

 

 

A lot of these privatization schemes (for parking, turnpikes, etc) get criticized for being bad deals for taxpayers, KJP - I haven't looked into the issue enough but does that concern you?

 

Depends on how they're done and what protections for taxpayers are built into the deal. For example, look at the conditions the local NAACP urged for St. Louis' proposed leasing of Lambert International. They were well thought out and productive conditions that restricted how the lease proceeds could be used and overseen.

Hmmmm.  I question their criteria ...

 

I'm convinced that J D Power awards can be bought. Have you noticed that entities that hire JDP as a consultant always perform well in their surveyts?

Here's an article about the conditions which the St. Louis NAACP has proposed for City Council to include in such a lease....

 

http://www.stlamerican.com/news/local_news/pruitt-vows-the-naacp-will-monitor-privatization-process-at-st/article_801e632c-5cf0-11e7-a649-4b34df58040e.html

So airports, most of which are underfunded for existing capital projects and maintenance, are using spare cash to pay off JD Power.

 

Here's my question: If CLE were #1 in the mid-sized airport list would we be having this conversation? I don't think so.

So airports, most of which are underfunded for existing capital projects and maintenance, are using spare cash to pay off JD Power.

 

Here's my question: If CLE were #1 in the mid-sized airport list would we be having this conversation? I don't think so.

 

Honestly, as much as i like hopkins...probably be having this conversation...because its not the best! I am just saying its not the worst EVERY year.  Actually, i would listen a few years back, when there was nothing to eat, the ceilings were gutted and exposed, the exterior was not modernized, and it was a pretty nasty place.  But i mean just to throw hopkins back down to last year after year, i just dont agree with it

Hmmmm.  I question their criteria ...

 

I'm convinced that J D Power awards can be bought. Have you noticed that entities that hire JDP as a consultant always perform well in their surveyts?

 

Have Sam Allard from Scene look into it. Dude shreds every award/ranking Cleveland ever receives.

Did the JD Power survey interval for 2016 include any of the ticketing level construction period?  Also don't forget the parking crunches caused by the covering of two lots, and the movement of shuttle pick up and drop-off to the other side of the terminal roadways.  If so, I would wait until this year's survey before getting too anguished  Also, lol, it's not as though Cleveland scored 320 compared to others in the 700's.  That said, there's only so far you can take a 1950's era terminal.  I do question certain things though like the locations and utilization of the security screening checkpoints for TSA-pre vs.standard.  Also, that cattle chute screening passage to Concourse A is an embarrasment.  I am with those who favor considering a stewardship for the airport broader than just the (much smaller than when the airport opened) City of Cleveland.

A few things:

 

1. This study was conducted during the final phase of the terminal refresh project, and I'm sure the inconvenience of the construction impacted the results.

"The study was fielded from January through October 2016."

 

2. I agree with the far flung car rental location, just seems far, especially with the abundance of surface lots near the terminal now.

 

3. The shuttle bus location is also far flung.  I understood the need to move them during construction to keep traffic moving, but is traffic on the terminal roadway really so bad that the shuttle buses have to remain in that awkward location as well

 

4. It's interesting Hopkins is a full 20 points below the next lowest airport, and thats the biggest "spread" between one airport and the next on the list in the entire mid-sized category.

 

IMO Hopkins is nice an is functional...and is way better than it has been in the past (better food options, more pleasant decor, etc.)  But it's still an airport that hasn't had a major update since the 1980's when concourse C was rebuilt (Not counting D since it's closed, and the recent $20M was a refresh in my mind, not a comprehensive renovation or rebuild). 

 

The question is can the city live with an adequate, functional airport that won't win any awards but gets you where you're going, or does the city/region see value in investing in this asset as an economic generator, and seriously begin discussions about a comprehensive rebuild of the existing terminal and concourses, or construction of a new terminal.  Either will be hundreds of millions of dollars, not a $20M facelift.  I personally think we should invest in the next 50+ years, using the excess capacity at D (as the lease permits) to close concourses and remake the airport completely in phases.  Maybe they will consider this when United's lease ends, if that's an impediment to this idea.  We've invested in the convention center, stadiums, arenas and hotels, and I think the airport is due some serious love. 

I think you are going to see some really great things coming out of the airport as an economic generator for the region and as a center for scientific discover...on Tuesday

I think you are going to see some really great things coming out of the airport as an economic generator for the region and as a center for scientific discover...on Tuesday

 

The positive tone on this makes me wonder if it's actually NASA. Would be interesting if SpaceX were to "rent" the NASA Glenn facility for their new rockets.

Agreed that a discussion for a new passenger terminal should be in the near future. But with the cost probably being well over 1 billion dollars other options need to be considered.  My thought would be to use the existing IX Center as the new passenger terminal. It's an empty shell that could be converted for probably a third of a new build. And it has a Ferris wheel! Anyway below is something I did a couple of years ago.

If they were going to build a new terminal I would rather see them build it where you have the northerly new parking garage on your sketch. Maybe design it so it has concourse of equal size lined up similar to Atlanta's layout. Then they could demolish the IX center and put in a new runway, which was planned about 15 years ago.

 

On the other hand the IX is our defacto large convention center that hosts our bigger conventions. What kind of economic impact dies that place have? Where would a replacement go?

Well the idea for using an existing building as the terminal would be to save costs. If you look around the cost of a new passenger terminal is astronomical. So using the IX Center could save a lot of money. Let's face it that building stands to host the Auto Show, other smaller ones could be moved downtown. We would just need to find a home for the Auto Show.

I think you are going to see some really great things coming out of the airport as an economic generator for the region and as a center for scientific discover...on Tuesday

 

The positive tone on this makes me wonder if it's actually NASA. Would be interesting if SpaceX were to "rent" the NASA Glenn facility for their new rockets.

 

Or the previously discussed Plasm Energy Group.

If it was an announcement for the Plasma Energy Group, then why was it posted in the Cleveland Hopkins Airport thread? I would presume it would be more airport related.

^ I can't read the poster's motive, but PEG's business plan calls for near-total reliance on air freight for distribution. The proximity of Hopkins north and south cargo ramps was a large part of the appeal of the old Ford plant as a production site.