The only reason for UA to give up gates is if they think they'll never, ever, need them again. The cost of getting new gates is so very much higher than any gain from selling them off that they do better to sit on them. Not to mention that lowering a barrier to entry of a competitor in a down market would be fiscally irresponsible. --On Tuesday, August 26, 2003 7:46 -0700 clay.wardlow@xxxxxxxx wrote: > Well, I remember reading in the Denver Post that UA is just barely meeting > the minimum requirements for their lease for the gates on the A Concourse. > They could afford to give up a few gates on A, but because they are too > stubborn, they aren't going to. -- | Kenton A. Hoover / Private Citizen / shibumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |