<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Beckles:
Why the heck wouldn't Allegheny County extend the current lease for another year, that doesn't make any sense ... there's no way they're going to get more rent under a new lease than the current lease. On one hand I understand that they don't want to drag this out, but if it were me running the airport I'd be more than happy to let US keep paying it's current rent for another year knowing they are going to be paying a lot less once the lease is renegotiated (either because of lower rent or a lot less flights).</font>
I don't think that ACAA can do it even if they wanted to. The following was explained to me by an ACAA employee who has nothing at all to do with the leases:
There are two kinds of leases at PIT, the "signatory tentant" kind and the "month to month" or "as used" variety.
The former requires something like a multiyear commitment to one or more gates, which then become exclusive use for the signatory airline.
The latter means you lease what happens to be available on an "as needed" and "available gate" basis.
US was a signatory tenant, but broke that lease. The rates charged to "non-signatory" tenants are about %20 higher than what the "signatory tenants" pay.
If ACAA gave US a break on a "non-signatory" basis, the signatory tenants would be howling at the moon because US gets to have it's cake (lower lease payments) and eat it too (still being able to walk away whenver). The non-signatory tenants would also be howling at the moon because US gets the same benefits and pays less.
This is a situation of US' own making. I'd still like to know exactly where else they plan on hubbing 100+ RJs and the 30-40 mainline aircraft currently assigned to the PIT hub. If they try to run it all thru PHL, you could sell tickets and popcorn and put it on cable. It'd be better entertainment than "punk'd" or "jack@$$."
------------------
Don't feed the trolls.