Guide to the Milwaukee Airport
Feb 16, 2015, 5:46 am
#751
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
With DL adding Boston, WN adding Dallas, and AS adding Seattle, ten of Milwaukee's 20 largest markets will have at least two nonstop carriers. Not bad at all considering MKE's size and situation.
Feb 16, 2015, 8:52 am
#753
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
01 . WN DL UA … New York/Newark
02 . WN …………… Washington/Baltimore
03 . WN F9 DL ... Orlando
04 . F9 WN UA … Denver
05 . WN …………… Las Vegas
06 . WN US ……… Phoenix
07 . DL WN ……… Atlanta
08 . WN …………… Los Angeles
09 . WN …………… San Francisco
10 . WN …………… Tampa
11 . WN DL ……… Boston
12 . DL WN ……… Minneapolis/St Paul
13 . AA WN ……… Dallas/Fort Worth
14 . WN …………… Miami/Fort Lauderdale
15 . WN F9 ……… Fort Myers
16 . US ……………. Philadelphia
17 . WN …………… Kansas City
18 . US ……………. Charlotte
19 . WN AS ……… Seattle
20 . WN …………… San Diego
Feb 16, 2015, 10:16 am
#754
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
My guess is that Alaska probably isn't going to go with a lot of partners like the big guys do, so Republic is probably out of luck an AS E175 flying.
Feb 20, 2015, 9:39 am
#755
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: TPA-MKE-PHX
Programs: Ex DL-DM. MM. TWA-Aviator Plat. HHonors-DVIP, MR-Gold. Nat-Emerald. Avis Chairmn.
Posts: 1,925
I miss the competition on the MKETPA run. It really helped keep ticket prices lower. As soon as the competition stopped, prices went up. Since I fly mostly Delta, I am always looking for someone to keep them honest. 
Feb 20, 2015, 7:49 pm
#756
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MKE/MSN
Posts: 239
I still ask myself why Concourse E still exists, considering UA only has 3 gates in there
Frontier has at least 10 gates plus a few lower level gates, IMHO they only really only need 2 of them considering they only go to DEN plus a couple seasonal routes. For the remaining gates, AS will probably operate in one of them, the 2 AA gates from C would move D getting WN a great opportunity to have more flights in and out of MKE, and have UA move its 3 gates to D getting E out of the picture.
Frontier has at least 10 gates plus a few lower level gates, IMHO they only really only need 2 of them considering they only go to DEN plus a couple seasonal routes. For the remaining gates, AS will probably operate in one of them, the 2 AA gates from C would move D getting WN a great opportunity to have more flights in and out of MKE, and have UA move its 3 gates to D getting E out of the picture.
Feb 23, 2015, 9:12 pm
#757
Join Date: Oct 2010
Programs: My opinions are my own and not that of my employer(s)
Posts: 1,411
I still ask myself why Concourse E still exists, considering UA only has 3 gates in there
Frontier has at least 10 gates plus a few lower level gates, IMHO they only really only need 2 of them considering they only go to DEN plus a couple seasonal routes. For the remaining gates, AS will probably operate in one of them, the 2 AA gates from C would move D getting WN a great opportunity to have more flights in and out of MKE, and have UA move its 3 gates to D getting E out of the picture.
Frontier has at least 10 gates plus a few lower level gates, IMHO they only really only need 2 of them considering they only go to DEN plus a couple seasonal routes. For the remaining gates, AS will probably operate in one of them, the 2 AA gates from C would move D getting WN a great opportunity to have more flights in and out of MKE, and have UA move its 3 gates to D getting E out of the picture.
MKE has new Management. Hopefully he'll see the way through leases for concessions moving to C or D and mothball E. Removing all power and water from E would mean it wouldn't even have to be heated.
But as a Manager that's like admitting defeat. He'll hold out until any deal for a new airline to use them falls through. Best guess for a possible is Jet Blue.
Last edited by traveller001; Feb 23, 2015 at 9:29 pm
Feb 24, 2015, 10:33 am
#758
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,653
The current gate locations are a matter of leases. Everybody is paying for their obligations and swaps are at the discretion of the airlines involved. If (for example) Frontier and United both agreed to swap space nothing would stop them, but the airport can't readily force them.
That being said, I think most leases (maybe all?) expire later this year. At that point the airport can take the E gates off the block and have United relocate. I could see Frontier not renew anything and instead have their flights handled by another carrier. That's what they did in KC a year or two back-- the Frontier gate complex was compeltely dumped and Frontier flights use American gates.
My gut has AA consolidating on the south hammerhead on D. United could move into former AA/UA gates on C.
Assuming AA is on D there are three possible ways for United to move to D, but each has stumbling blocks:
--The ground boarding gates D27-29 are least likely, as I can't imagine anyone choosing ground boarding if they can avoid it.
--The jetways D34/D36/D38 are not RJ-compatible. Someone would need to pony up money to put mobile jetways there for United to move there.
--If Frontier dumps all of their gates that would leave three close gates with mobile jetways (D39, D41, D42) open for United. However (a) who knows if Frontier will do that (b) the airport may want to box Delta in should they ever need more space, and (c) D42 is actually fairly far away from D39/D41 for ground crews, which United may not like.
I think the airport likes the idea of moving international arrivals to E once it is vacated, however money would need to be budgeted for the capital improvements needed. So it will take time if this is the direction things go.
The new airport director mentioned a desire for a single TSA checkpoint which would be a notable capital expenditure. Mothballing E would make that goal a notch easier, but it still would be a project. I get that closing E might seem like a white flag, but airports around the country have excess real estate due to fewer airlines and fewer flights with larger planes. I think there's a pretty good chance we'll have a new airline a year from now to challenge JetBlue in some leisure markets. But nobody new is going to need more than a gate or two. Look at the showy expansions announced recently in Atlanta, Cleveland and Cincinnati. Most markets are 1x/day, many are seasonal, and the airlines which fly them only use perhaps 2 gates. If someone like Allegiant, JetBlue or Spirit were to come to Milwaukee it's hard to imagine a plausible situation where they'd need more than two gates. I don't see a need for E in any reasonable situation.
Here's how I mentally allocate gates which includes room for significant expansion well above current levels.
C
14 jetway gates
10 Southwest
4 United/Air Canada
D
18 jetway gates (including the one planned for the south hammerhead)
7 Delta
4 American
1 Alaska
1 Frontier
5 open (two mobile jetways, three fixed jetways)
So even if E closes and every airline expands significantly there are still 5 open jetway gates available for newcomers.
It will be interesting to see how the airport changes with a new person at the top. There's only so much an airport can do to try to lure new service with so few airlines. Probably the best thing they can do is continue to push for more people to use Mitchell because growing demand can fuel new service. Mitchell loses a lot of traffic to O'Hare in markets without nonstop flights, but it's hard to convince airlines those passengers will return if nonstop flights are added.
That being said, I think most leases (maybe all?) expire later this year. At that point the airport can take the E gates off the block and have United relocate. I could see Frontier not renew anything and instead have their flights handled by another carrier. That's what they did in KC a year or two back-- the Frontier gate complex was compeltely dumped and Frontier flights use American gates.
My gut has AA consolidating on the south hammerhead on D. United could move into former AA/UA gates on C.
Assuming AA is on D there are three possible ways for United to move to D, but each has stumbling blocks:
--The ground boarding gates D27-29 are least likely, as I can't imagine anyone choosing ground boarding if they can avoid it.
--The jetways D34/D36/D38 are not RJ-compatible. Someone would need to pony up money to put mobile jetways there for United to move there.
--If Frontier dumps all of their gates that would leave three close gates with mobile jetways (D39, D41, D42) open for United. However (a) who knows if Frontier will do that (b) the airport may want to box Delta in should they ever need more space, and (c) D42 is actually fairly far away from D39/D41 for ground crews, which United may not like.
I think the airport likes the idea of moving international arrivals to E once it is vacated, however money would need to be budgeted for the capital improvements needed. So it will take time if this is the direction things go.
The new airport director mentioned a desire for a single TSA checkpoint which would be a notable capital expenditure. Mothballing E would make that goal a notch easier, but it still would be a project. I get that closing E might seem like a white flag, but airports around the country have excess real estate due to fewer airlines and fewer flights with larger planes. I think there's a pretty good chance we'll have a new airline a year from now to challenge JetBlue in some leisure markets. But nobody new is going to need more than a gate or two. Look at the showy expansions announced recently in Atlanta, Cleveland and Cincinnati. Most markets are 1x/day, many are seasonal, and the airlines which fly them only use perhaps 2 gates. If someone like Allegiant, JetBlue or Spirit were to come to Milwaukee it's hard to imagine a plausible situation where they'd need more than two gates. I don't see a need for E in any reasonable situation.
Here's how I mentally allocate gates which includes room for significant expansion well above current levels.
C
14 jetway gates
10 Southwest
4 United/Air Canada
D
18 jetway gates (including the one planned for the south hammerhead)
7 Delta
4 American
1 Alaska
1 Frontier
5 open (two mobile jetways, three fixed jetways)
So even if E closes and every airline expands significantly there are still 5 open jetway gates available for newcomers.
It will be interesting to see how the airport changes with a new person at the top. There's only so much an airport can do to try to lure new service with so few airlines. Probably the best thing they can do is continue to push for more people to use Mitchell because growing demand can fuel new service. Mitchell loses a lot of traffic to O'Hare in markets without nonstop flights, but it's hard to convince airlines those passengers will return if nonstop flights are added.
Feb 24, 2015, 4:38 pm
#759
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MKE/MSN
Posts: 239
The current gate locations are a matter of leases. Everybody is paying for their obligations and swaps are at the discretion of the airlines involved. If (for example) Frontier and United both agreed to swap space nothing would stop them, but the airport can't readily force them.
That being said, I think most leases (maybe all?) expire later this year. At that point the airport can take the E gates off the block and have United relocate. I could see Frontier not renew anything and instead have their flights handled by another carrier. That's what they did in KC a year or two back-- the Frontier gate complex was compeltely dumped and Frontier flights use American gates.
My gut has AA consolidating on the south hammerhead on D. United could move into former AA/UA gates on C.
Assuming AA is on D there are three possible ways for United to move to D, but each has stumbling blocks:
--The ground boarding gates D27-29 are least likely, as I can't imagine anyone choosing ground boarding if they can avoid it.
--The jetways D34/D36/D38 are not RJ-compatible. Someone would need to pony up money to put mobile jetways there for United to move there.
--If Frontier dumps all of their gates that would leave three close gates with mobile jetways (D39, D41, D42) open for United. However (a) who knows if Frontier will do that (b) the airport may want to box Delta in should they ever need more space, and (c) D42 is actually fairly far away from D39/D41 for ground crews, which United may not like.
I think the airport likes the idea of moving international arrivals to E once it is vacated, however money would need to be budgeted for the capital improvements needed. So it will take time if this is the direction things go.
The new airport director mentioned a desire for a single TSA checkpoint which would be a notable capital expenditure. Mothballing E would make that goal a notch easier, but it still would be a project. I get that closing E might seem like a white flag, but airports around the country have excess real estate due to fewer airlines and fewer flights with larger planes. I think there's a pretty good chance we'll have a new airline a year from now to challenge JetBlue in some leisure markets. But nobody new is going to need more than a gate or two. Look at the showy expansions announced recently in Atlanta, Cleveland and Cincinnati. Most markets are 1x/day, many are seasonal, and the airlines which fly them only use perhaps 2 gates. If someone like Allegiant, JetBlue or Spirit were to come to Milwaukee it's hard to imagine a plausible situation where they'd need more than two gates. I don't see a need for E in any reasonable situation.
Here's how I mentally allocate gates which includes room for significant expansion well above current levels.
C
14 jetway gates
10 Southwest
4 United/Air Canada
D
18 jetway gates (including the one planned for the south hammerhead)
7 Delta
4 American
1 Alaska
1 Frontier
5 open (two mobile jetways, three fixed jetways)
So even if E closes and every airline expands significantly there are still 5 open jetway gates available for newcomers.
It will be interesting to see how the airport changes with a new person at the top. There's only so much an airport can do to try to lure new service with so few airlines. Probably the best thing they can do is continue to push for more people to use Mitchell because growing demand can fuel new service. Mitchell loses a lot of traffic to O'Hare in markets without nonstop flights, but it's hard to convince airlines those passengers will return if nonstop flights are added.
That being said, I think most leases (maybe all?) expire later this year. At that point the airport can take the E gates off the block and have United relocate. I could see Frontier not renew anything and instead have their flights handled by another carrier. That's what they did in KC a year or two back-- the Frontier gate complex was compeltely dumped and Frontier flights use American gates.
My gut has AA consolidating on the south hammerhead on D. United could move into former AA/UA gates on C.
Assuming AA is on D there are three possible ways for United to move to D, but each has stumbling blocks:
--The ground boarding gates D27-29 are least likely, as I can't imagine anyone choosing ground boarding if they can avoid it.
--The jetways D34/D36/D38 are not RJ-compatible. Someone would need to pony up money to put mobile jetways there for United to move there.
--If Frontier dumps all of their gates that would leave three close gates with mobile jetways (D39, D41, D42) open for United. However (a) who knows if Frontier will do that (b) the airport may want to box Delta in should they ever need more space, and (c) D42 is actually fairly far away from D39/D41 for ground crews, which United may not like.
I think the airport likes the idea of moving international arrivals to E once it is vacated, however money would need to be budgeted for the capital improvements needed. So it will take time if this is the direction things go.
The new airport director mentioned a desire for a single TSA checkpoint which would be a notable capital expenditure. Mothballing E would make that goal a notch easier, but it still would be a project. I get that closing E might seem like a white flag, but airports around the country have excess real estate due to fewer airlines and fewer flights with larger planes. I think there's a pretty good chance we'll have a new airline a year from now to challenge JetBlue in some leisure markets. But nobody new is going to need more than a gate or two. Look at the showy expansions announced recently in Atlanta, Cleveland and Cincinnati. Most markets are 1x/day, many are seasonal, and the airlines which fly them only use perhaps 2 gates. If someone like Allegiant, JetBlue or Spirit were to come to Milwaukee it's hard to imagine a plausible situation where they'd need more than two gates. I don't see a need for E in any reasonable situation.
Here's how I mentally allocate gates which includes room for significant expansion well above current levels.
C
14 jetway gates
10 Southwest
4 United/Air Canada
D
18 jetway gates (including the one planned for the south hammerhead)
7 Delta
4 American
1 Alaska
1 Frontier
5 open (two mobile jetways, three fixed jetways)
So even if E closes and every airline expands significantly there are still 5 open jetway gates available for newcomers.
It will be interesting to see how the airport changes with a new person at the top. There's only so much an airport can do to try to lure new service with so few airlines. Probably the best thing they can do is continue to push for more people to use Mitchell because growing demand can fuel new service. Mitchell loses a lot of traffic to O'Hare in markets without nonstop flights, but it's hard to convince airlines those passengers will return if nonstop flights are added.
However JetBlue wouldn't be a bad idea at MKE
Feb 26, 2015, 1:00 am
#760
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,800
Haven't looked at this thread in awhile so it's interesting so see how things are changing at MKE.
As for expansion, I'm curious as to why so many think JetBlue would have an interest in MKE. The BOS market is (or will soon be) well covered by Southwest and Delta. If JetBlue were to enter, Delta would likely retaliate. JFK, MCO and FLL are highly unlikely to be added. Over the past 10 years or so, JetBlue has had several good windows of opportunity to enter the MKE market but declined to do so for whatever reason. I suspect they see little opportunity or profit potential in the short to medium term. Plus, they have struggled to make ORD work.
IMO, the best bets for new service are:
-Allegiant
-Alaska (upguaged SEA service and/or PDX)
-American (flights to MIA or LAX)
-Delta (LAX and perhaps another try at SLC)
-Icelandair (seasonal service - I think this is far more realistic than many may think)
-Southwest (BNA and expansion of the current 1x/week SAN service is a priority for the airport, but it would not be a total shock to see HOU or even seasonal PDX added at some point).
Spirit and Frontier are wild cards but I can't realistically see much more than what I outlined above.
As for expansion, I'm curious as to why so many think JetBlue would have an interest in MKE. The BOS market is (or will soon be) well covered by Southwest and Delta. If JetBlue were to enter, Delta would likely retaliate. JFK, MCO and FLL are highly unlikely to be added. Over the past 10 years or so, JetBlue has had several good windows of opportunity to enter the MKE market but declined to do so for whatever reason. I suspect they see little opportunity or profit potential in the short to medium term. Plus, they have struggled to make ORD work.
IMO, the best bets for new service are:
-Allegiant
-Alaska (upguaged SEA service and/or PDX)
-American (flights to MIA or LAX)
-Delta (LAX and perhaps another try at SLC)
-Icelandair (seasonal service - I think this is far more realistic than many may think)
-Southwest (BNA and expansion of the current 1x/week SAN service is a priority for the airport, but it would not be a total shock to see HOU or even seasonal PDX added at some point).
Spirit and Frontier are wild cards but I can't realistically see much more than what I outlined above.
Mar 9, 2015, 11:27 pm
#761
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: United Mileage Plus
Posts: 1,159
Haven't looked at this thread in awhile so it's interesting so see how things are changing at MKE.
As for expansion, I'm curious as to why so many think JetBlue would have an interest in MKE. The BOS market is (or will soon be) well covered by Southwest and Delta. If JetBlue were to enter, Delta would likely retaliate. JFK, MCO and FLL are highly unlikely to be added. Over the past 10 years or so, JetBlue has had several good windows of opportunity to enter the MKE market but declined to do so for whatever reason. I suspect they see little opportunity or profit potential in the short to medium term. Plus, they have struggled to make ORD work.
IMO, the best bets for new service are:
-Allegiant
-Alaska (upguaged SEA service and/or PDX)
-American (flights to MIA or LAX)
-Delta (LAX and perhaps another try at SLC)
-Icelandair (seasonal service - I think this is far more realistic than many may think)
-Southwest (BNA and expansion of the current 1x/week SAN service is a priority for the airport, but it would not be a total shock to see HOU or even seasonal PDX added at some point).
Spirit and Frontier are wild cards but I can't realistically see much more than what I outlined above.
As for expansion, I'm curious as to why so many think JetBlue would have an interest in MKE. The BOS market is (or will soon be) well covered by Southwest and Delta. If JetBlue were to enter, Delta would likely retaliate. JFK, MCO and FLL are highly unlikely to be added. Over the past 10 years or so, JetBlue has had several good windows of opportunity to enter the MKE market but declined to do so for whatever reason. I suspect they see little opportunity or profit potential in the short to medium term. Plus, they have struggled to make ORD work.
IMO, the best bets for new service are:
-Allegiant
-Alaska (upguaged SEA service and/or PDX)
-American (flights to MIA or LAX)
-Delta (LAX and perhaps another try at SLC)
-Icelandair (seasonal service - I think this is far more realistic than many may think)
-Southwest (BNA and expansion of the current 1x/week SAN service is a priority for the airport, but it would not be a total shock to see HOU or even seasonal PDX added at some point).
Spirit and Frontier are wild cards but I can't realistically see much more than what I outlined above.
I disagree slightly. I can see Norwegian adding service to London Gatwick before Icelandair
MKE-SAN should go daily for the summer then back to once a week
MKE-HOU makes sense
MKE-MIA I wonder why AA hasn't done it already. MKE-FLL can run on a mainline jet year round plus AA could take traffic away from Delta on flights to Latin America.
As a proud member of team (star alliance) I think United should add MKE-LAX and MKE-SFO. I think they may be able to do it with an Embraer class rj
I agree MKE is not a good fit for JetBlue and MKE is not in Virgin America's league.
Spirit is a wildcard MKE-FLL, MKE-DTW, MKE-LAS could be profitable for them
Alaska may go mainline but that's it. I can't see MKE-PDX working even in the summer. MKE-LAX would be a better fit for Alaska
I really don't think Delta has much interest in MKE. They failed at JFK and SLC (although they fly from Madison to SLC now). The MKE-SEA market is too crowded with Alaska and WN maybe they should try and feed their LAX hub from MKE.
What I would like to know is where do most MKE passengers fly to when connecting to international flights (besides driving to Chicago?
Last edited by Tim34; Mar 9, 2015 at 11:34 pm Reason: more info
Mar 10, 2015, 1:11 am
#762
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Here today gone tomorrow
Programs: *G, ow Saph
Posts: 2,865
I'm sure LA/SF/NY would be the other usual suspects, with a bit of IAH/MIA for those bound towards the south, but a lot of your question is also influenced by where they can get to on the same airline or alliance--so really it would be DTW/MSP/ATL with a little bit of DFW thrown in, since those are the only viable options without buying conjoined tickets.
I do Chicago if I think I may throw away the final segment, or because an open jaw out of MKE and into ORD is ideally priced. Occasionally I do DFW to get mainline into MKE, and that's about it. Everywhere else requires either an absurdly long connection, a long-haul RJ, or Delta
Mar 10, 2015, 7:11 am
#763
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MKE/MSN
Posts: 239
I haven't been on the thread in months either
I disagree slightly. I can see Norwegian adding service to London Gatwick before Icelandair
MKE-SAN should go daily for the summer then back to once a week
MKE-HOU makes sense
MKE-MIA I wonder why AA hasn't done it already. MKE-FLL can run on a mainline jet year round plus AA could take traffic away from Delta on flights to Latin America.
As a proud member of team (star alliance) I think United should add MKE-LAX and MKE-SFO. I think they may be able to do it with an Embraer class rj
I agree MKE is not a good fit for JetBlue and MKE is not in Virgin America's league.
Spirit is a wildcard MKE-FLL, MKE-DTW, MKE-LAS could be profitable for them
Alaska may go mainline but that's it. I can't see MKE-PDX working even in the summer. MKE-LAX would be a better fit for Alaska
I really don't think Delta has much interest in MKE. They failed at JFK and SLC (although they fly from Madison to SLC now). The MKE-SEA market is too crowded with Alaska and WN maybe they should try and feed their LAX hub from MKE.
What I would like to know is where do most MKE passengers fly to when connecting to international flights (besides driving to Chicago?
I disagree slightly. I can see Norwegian adding service to London Gatwick before Icelandair
MKE-SAN should go daily for the summer then back to once a week
MKE-HOU makes sense
MKE-MIA I wonder why AA hasn't done it already. MKE-FLL can run on a mainline jet year round plus AA could take traffic away from Delta on flights to Latin America.
As a proud member of team (star alliance) I think United should add MKE-LAX and MKE-SFO. I think they may be able to do it with an Embraer class rj
I agree MKE is not a good fit for JetBlue and MKE is not in Virgin America's league.
Spirit is a wildcard MKE-FLL, MKE-DTW, MKE-LAS could be profitable for them
Alaska may go mainline but that's it. I can't see MKE-PDX working even in the summer. MKE-LAX would be a better fit for Alaska
I really don't think Delta has much interest in MKE. They failed at JFK and SLC (although they fly from Madison to SLC now). The MKE-SEA market is too crowded with Alaska and WN maybe they should try and feed their LAX hub from MKE.
What I would like to know is where do most MKE passengers fly to when connecting to international flights (besides driving to Chicago?
Mar 11, 2015, 10:37 am
#764
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,638
TSA Pre✓™ Enrollment Center relocated
Per Mitchell Memo's March 2015 edition:
The new location is in a building owned by a non-profit, job-training organization. It's not located near the airport, and is in a marginal neighborhood of Milwaukee.
The former location was nothing special, but it was 5 minutes away from the airport, with sufficient free parking.
IMO, what a horrible move!
PreCheck Enrollment Center Relocates
If you're looking to sign up for the TSA Pre✓™ expedited screening program, please note that the Milwaukee Enrollment Center has moved. The new enrollment center, managed by IdentoGO, is located at 3841 W. Wisconsin Avenue in Milwaukee. TSA Pre✓™ provides registered passengers with expedited security screening at more than 120 airports nationwide. MKE has TSA Pre✓™ lanes on all three concourses.
If you're looking to sign up for the TSA Pre✓™ expedited screening program, please note that the Milwaukee Enrollment Center has moved. The new enrollment center, managed by IdentoGO, is located at 3841 W. Wisconsin Avenue in Milwaukee. TSA Pre✓™ provides registered passengers with expedited security screening at more than 120 airports nationwide. MKE has TSA Pre✓™ lanes on all three concourses.
The former location was nothing special, but it was 5 minutes away from the airport, with sufficient free parking.
IMO, what a horrible move!
Last edited by mke9499; Mar 12, 2015 at 10:23 pm
Mar 14, 2015, 9:13 pm
#765
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: MKE, formerly the closest FT-er to LAX
Programs: Marriott Gold. Usually WN or DL if in the air.
Posts: 704
Per Mitchell Memo's March 2015 edition:
The new location is in a building owned by a non-profit, job-training organization. It's not located near the airport, and is in a marginal neighborhood of Milwaukee.
The former location was nothing special, but it was 5 minutes away from the airport, with sufficient free parking.
IMO, what a horrible move!
The new location is in a building owned by a non-profit, job-training organization. It's not located near the airport, and is in a marginal neighborhood of Milwaukee.
The former location was nothing special, but it was 5 minutes away from the airport, with sufficient free parking.
IMO, what a horrible move!
