Very true, and too bad that the airport facilities are crappy.

I'd love it if they had a PC, but CO hasn't exceeded 20 flights a day in years and available space in the secure zone is non-existant. I don't see how Delta is going to keep the SC open with the reduced traffic since it always seems that most of the visitors are PC members.

CO was going to build a PC at MSY several years ago when they were in the other terminal. CO was actually going to build a new building next to the gate area. This never happened and CO then moved over by DL.

SAN was also planned - but no space.

Back in the late 90's CO even surveyed PC members about new club locations. MSY and SAN were on the top of the list - but as I indicated above - they never happened - then DL clubs substituted. I can even recall the CO newletter discussing the plans to open new clubs at SAN and MSY.

At BWI UA and CO are right next to each other - I would love to see that vacant UA RCC (closed about 2 years ago) reopen.

Does anyone know if the tram to A at IAH will connect to the entire terminal, or just the north or south sections?

The TerminaLink station for Terminal A is attached to the North Concourse. There's a connection, behind security, also under construction to allow passegners to walk to the Terminal A South Concourse.

What are the odds of CO taking over the spot where UA had a RCC?

Thank goodness...it will be good that both ends are connected behind security. I'm not sure what logic went behind having them like they are now....where one couldn't transit from one side to another.

I actually prefer UA stays at A than moving to B,C,D, and E. It's not as busy comparing to other terminals (except early morning departure). Parking at terminal A is a breeze. I like the proximity of runway to terminal A. Taxi time to take off is short once the plane departs. Arrival is easy too. You don't walk BFE like C,D and E to claim your baggage.

I'm assuming that UA and DL/NW will just switch sides at A, that will give UA flyers access to the PClub.

Looks like the SLC gate moved:

Gate re-aligns are over rated. A few months ago on a NWA-NWA connection in the Detroilet, it took me 41 minutes to get from 1 gate to the next, and even in Charlotte it was about 30 minutes to get a US-US connection (granted my shoulder bag weighed 50+ pounds which slowed me a bit)

In PIT, CO is looking for another gate, and is surrounded by DL/NW on all sides. It's possible that DL may give up a few of those, but I wouldn't be surprised to see CO and UA consolidate in either the A or B wings. A would be closer to the center core, but B would be next to US.

Then again, for a lot of these outstations, it's not as if anyone is ever going to be connecting from one carrier to another.

Well, those are two hubs that have particularly long piers on their terminals. But those are not the examples being bandied about for the most part inthis thread where the ecpectation is that there will be benefits from such alignment. One could run a couple laps around SLC in 40 minutes, for example. And having the SLC gates together, for example, does actually make for some efficiencies that will benefit folks.

It isn't only about the passengers connecting. If CO and UA share ground operations at stations with limited frequencies they cut headcount and save money.

Well, it's not just about connecting passengers. CO and UA are planning to consolidate a lot of their activities — sharing gate agents, ground personnel, ticket counters, etc. At non-hub outstations it makes a lot of sense to do this, and sharing those services is made even more efficient if the two airlines are operating out of adjacent gates.

If CO and UA want to be adjacent--which I am sure they will whenever possible, I'm sure that there's plenty of space that they could find for them ;)