The same. Got to pay for that airport somehow, and the easiest tax to 'justify' is a user tax. -----Original Message----- From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jon Wright Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 10:17 PM To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Airport official: replacement for United may be necessary Denver suffers from thunderstorms in Summer and snow in Winter. But how different is that than say, MDW or BWI? DIA has adequate spacing between runways so they don't suffer low-visibility capacity restrictions like SEA or SFO do today (or like Stapleton did). And yes, the landing fees are currently extremely high. But how high would they be if United folded and the folks in Denver were desperate to land a major carrier? Regards, Jon -- Jon Wright mailto:jwright@xxxxxxxxxxx 425-635-0338 ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Ross" <damiross2@xxxxxxxxx> To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 6:44 PM Subject: Re: Airport official: replacement for United may be necessary > Perhaps JetBlue but not Southwest. WN use to fly to DEN. The weather > sucks - this destroys flights being on time. They also have extremely high > landing fees.