The frustrating economics of aviation

Greg wrote:

Jack wrote:

Congratulations on your ability to extract meaning from a clear statement.

Which clearly suggested that an airport should be a less appropriate use than
something else.

Let's not be too imaginative. An airport certainly could be a less
appropriate use for a given property. I did not use the word "should".


Something like 50 airports disappear forever every year, is that
not enough?

Maybe. If you need one, build it -- or drive a little further -- or
better yet move closer to where the airport is, or even buy a piece of
an airport and live on it. There are plenty of solutions that don't
involve paranoia, but do require an unbiased look at the world around you.


Tampa is about to lose a jewel of an airport this fall.

Yes, economics is a bitch, isn't it? The market works.



Jack