AA's derelict buildings at LGA: why?
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Programs: American Airlines Platinum, National Executive
Posts: 3,790
AA's derelict buildings at LGA: why?
I fly in and out of LGA pretty frequently, and AA's brown/beige brick buildings at LGA (which I'd guess are a hangar and cargo/office space, mainly) were run down-looking when I first started using that airport about 15 years ago. They appear unchanged, and they look terrible. Old, dirty signage; aging paint; air conditioners hanging out of the windows; shoddy-looking windows; etc.
Why can't someone at least give them a paint job? Is the problem the Port Authority or AA?
Why can't someone at least give them a paint job? Is the problem the Port Authority or AA?
#2
Join Date: Sep 2011
Programs: AA SPG Amex
Posts: 4,644
First off, I happen to like the huge vintage AA logo on the outside. Secondly, who cares? If it's the one I'm thinking of it looks like a cargo processing center and as long as the buildings are safe on the inside, then what does it matter? It's not like it's the Admirals Club in the terminal that appears in such disrepair and I can't honestly imagine employees quitting, passengers defecting or merchants finding other ways of shipping their cargo simply because of how the AA building facade looks.
#3
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: AAdvantage PP
Posts: 13,913
Strangely those old buildings are like a time of yesteryear when a Kettle was a movie character from the black and white era. I kind of think they are very NYC in a way. Ever see the big UPS building on Houston?
#4
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Programs: American Airlines Platinum, National Executive
Posts: 3,790
Secondly, who cares? If it's the one I'm thinking of it looks like a cargo processing center and as long as the buildings are safe on the inside, then what does it matter? It's not like it's the Admirals Club in the terminal that appears in such disrepair and I can't honestly imagine employees quitting, passengers defecting or merchants finding other ways of shipping their cargo simply because of how the AA building facade looks.
Secondly, AA should care. AA is a fine airline--certainly one of the world's premier carriers. Its brand could be diluted by highly visible, ratty-looking buildings with its logo on them. Think of the other corporate logos on high-profile locations around NYC- MetLife (MetLife Building on 44th-ish St.), GE (Rockefeller Center), Ernst & Young (Times Square), Trump (various locations)--how many of those are run-down?
If I ran a company and my logo were highly visible on a derelict building in a flagship location, I'd do something about it, at least to protect the brand. Even a paint job on those buildings and replacing some of the windows would be a big improvement.
ETA: I looked up the UPS building on W. Houston on Google Maps street view, using 320 W. Houston as the address that shows the UPS logo; I don't view it as a high-profile, visible location (I'd never seen it before, in years of living in NYC. It's a 2-story building near the Hudson, and while it's not stunningly beautiful, it doesn't look as derelict as the AA buildings.
Last edited by ibrandsguest; Jan 28, 2012 at 4:45 pm
#5
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NYC
Programs: AA EXP (LT Plat), HH DIA, Hyatt DIA
Posts: 456
I do. NY is my home and LGA in general and those buildings in particular create a poor image for people arriving in NY- just as Penn Station, the Port Authority Bus Terminal, etc. all do.
Secondly, AA should care. AA is a fine airline--certainly one of the world's premier carriers. Its brand could be diluted by highly visible, ratty-looking buildings with its logo on them. Think of the other corporate logos on high-profile locations around NYC- MetLife (MetLife Building on 44th-ish St.), GE (Rockefeller Center), Ernst & Young (Times Square), Trump (various locations)--how many of those are run-down?
If I ran a company and my logo were highly visible on a derelict building in a flagship location, I'd do something about it, at least to protect the brand. Even a paint job on those buildings and replacing some of the windows would be a big improvement.
Secondly, AA should care. AA is a fine airline--certainly one of the world's premier carriers. Its brand could be diluted by highly visible, ratty-looking buildings with its logo on them. Think of the other corporate logos on high-profile locations around NYC- MetLife (MetLife Building on 44th-ish St.), GE (Rockefeller Center), Ernst & Young (Times Square), Trump (various locations)--how many of those are run-down?
If I ran a company and my logo were highly visible on a derelict building in a flagship location, I'd do something about it, at least to protect the brand. Even a paint job on those buildings and replacing some of the windows would be a big improvement.
Last edited by SafeFlyer; Jan 28, 2012 at 4:50 pm
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Programs: American Airlines Platinum, National Executive
Posts: 3,790
Agreed. At least from a physical appearance perspective (I have no idea about operations of planes), if I had my way, I'd clean house on the management of ALL of NY's airports and bring in the people who run CLT and plenty of other airports. Milwaukee, John Wayne, Las Vegas, etc. all are nicer.
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SJC
Programs: AA EXP, BA Silver, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton diamond, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 33,533
Cheers.
#8
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Programs: American Airlines Platinum, National Executive
Posts: 3,790
I guess it's a question of perspective. I'm a born-and-raised New Yorker who hasn't lived there for the past 30 or so years. But I'm still a New Yorker. I'm not as aware of the LGA building you mention since I generally fly into JFK. But I like the PABT, Penn Station, Grand Central, etc. just the way they are. They feel like "New York" to me. If they were all new and glass and gleaming and such (for example) it would look nice, but it wouldn't have the New York feel...to me.
Cheers.
Cheers.
I am crazy about Grand Central; it is a very, very attractive, pleasant building, and I think the main concourse is one of America's greatest public spaces; it creates a great first impression of NY.
It's the run-down condition of the other structures that I find disturbing--particularly the Port Authority and LGA. Penn Station isn't run-down; it's just poorly-designed and unappealing. Give me Grand Central, Union Station in Washington, 30th Street Station in Philadelphia or South Station in Boston (all built about 100 years ago) any day over that (versus, say, the Charlotte Amtrak station, built in the '60s, which is pretty unappealing).
Even some Third World countries that I've been to had airports in better condition than LGA--particularly those AA buildings.
#10
Moderator: American AAdvantage
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
I'm guessing they have more pressing issues on their plate right now.
#11
Join Date: Sep 2011
Programs: AA SPG Amex
Posts: 4,644
I do. NY is my home and LGA in general and those buildings in particular create a poor image for people arriving in NY- just as Penn Station, the Port Authority Bus Terminal, etc. all do.
Secondly, AA should care. AA is a fine airline--certainly one of the world's premier carriers. Its brand could be diluted by highly visible, ratty-looking buildings with its logo on them. Think of the other corporate logos on high-profile locations around NYC- MetLife (MetLife Building on 44th-ish St.), GE (Rockefeller Center), Ernst & Young (Times Square), Trump (various locations)--how many of those are run-down?
If I ran a company and my logo were highly visible on a derelict building in a flagship location, I'd do something about it, at least to protect the brand. Even a paint job on those buildings and replacing some of the windows would be a big improvement.
ETA: I looked up the UPS building on W. Houston on Google Maps street view, using 320 W. Houston as the address that shows the UPS logo; I don't view it as a high-profile, visible location (I'd never seen it before, in years of living in NYC. It's a 2-story building near the Hudson, and while it's not stunningly beautiful, it doesn't look as derelict as the AA buildings.
Secondly, AA should care. AA is a fine airline--certainly one of the world's premier carriers. Its brand could be diluted by highly visible, ratty-looking buildings with its logo on them. Think of the other corporate logos on high-profile locations around NYC- MetLife (MetLife Building on 44th-ish St.), GE (Rockefeller Center), Ernst & Young (Times Square), Trump (various locations)--how many of those are run-down?
If I ran a company and my logo were highly visible on a derelict building in a flagship location, I'd do something about it, at least to protect the brand. Even a paint job on those buildings and replacing some of the windows would be a big improvement.
ETA: I looked up the UPS building on W. Houston on Google Maps street view, using 320 W. Houston as the address that shows the UPS logo; I don't view it as a high-profile, visible location (I'd never seen it before, in years of living in NYC. It's a 2-story building near the Hudson, and while it's not stunningly beautiful, it doesn't look as derelict as the AA buildings.
#12
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,916
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-PIidaqCyU
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
That describes a fair amount of New York City outside of the Disneyfied portions. I tend to like it and hope it never changes.
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: AA EXP / LT PLT / 3MM, Marriott LT Gold
Posts: 35,388
#15
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: New York, NY, AA 4MM PLT, BA Gold, VS Gold, Hilton Gold, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold, Hyatt Platinum, IHG Platinum, CC Gold
Posts: 1,098