Originally Posted by UnitedSkies
Have you looked at housing costs in the Inland Empire lately? Costs more than Chicago!
You mean Fontucky?
BTW, if there's seemingly more "money" in the Inland Empire than in Chicago, an important question
must be asked:
"Why doesn't UA fly ONT - HKG?"
Originally Posted by Eastbay1K
SNA was Marissa's hometown airport, and when she started getting involved with the ONT crowd, all she ended up was dead. And you wonder why fares are more?
If we're making references to "The OC", it's not SNA. It's "The OC Airport":
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Jun10.html
a Southern California politician thinks that if the real Orange County changed the name of its airport from John Wayne Airport to "The O.C. Airport," more people would want to travel there
Originally Posted by UNITED959
SNA can command the prices it does because the alternative is LAX: rental car shuttles, longer lines, need to arrive earlier before flights, endure the 405 down to OC which is 45 minutes with NO traffic (rare occurrence).
Don't forget the curbside valet parking. Where else can you get out of an A320 and into your CLK 320 in less than 5 minutes?
Originally Posted by Jeeves
Both SFO and SNA are premium-priced airports. They lack the significant WN factor.
SNA does have the Alaska Airline factor. A one week advance purchase from OAK will run you about $120.
Originally Posted by mahasamatman
Is that the one in San Dimas where Bill and Ted left Napoleon?
Indeed it is. Now, let's not turn this into an ONT vs SNA and a Raging Waters vs Wild Rivers thread.
