Why not airport X?

[ARS]

As I indicated in another thread 14 out of the 47 listed were already
free. Why aren't Atlanta, LAX, Chicago, Philadelhia, or Newark on the
list? My guess is that the companies providing the paid access at
these airports either ask too much money from Google to do this, or
they do not want people to get used to free Wifi at these airports.
Either way it is probably a business decision.

[Daniel Cross]

People seem to expect ubiquitous free wifi everywhere they go. It's
weird. Like people feel entitled to it.

But I bet they don't run an open wireless network to afford the same
convenience to neighbors and passers by? :)

[RBearSAT]

There is a difference. Wifi is a part of business service amenities
and can be leveraged as a way to attract customers. Personal wifi is
much different in that it's a part of my personal experience and
something I don't plan to offer to my neighbors or strangers.
Regarding the 14 out of 47, I almost feel Google is taking advantage
of existing capabilities and paying for branding only. Because of
their promotion they make out like Santa Claus when in reality they
are just getting some good PR for a minimal investment.

Regarding ATL, LAX and others, it's time these airports joined the
rest of the nation in providing service to people who pay for these
facilities through taxes and fees by using them.

> > Either way it is probably a business decision.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Adam & Katie Chappelle]

On Nov 11, 12:04 pm, RBearSAT <rbear...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is a difference. Wifi is a part of business service amenities
> and can be leveraged as a way to attract customers.

> Regarding the 14 out of 47, I almost feel Google is taking advantage
> of existing capabilities and paying for branding only. Because of
> their promotion they make out like Santa Claus when in reality they
> are just getting some good PR for a minimal investment.
>

Wifi is a business service if you're a restaurant, coffee house, etc.
You're talking about an airport. What "leverage" does, say, Chicago
Midway hold over O'Hare if they had free wifi? None. Airports don't
attract customers. Airports are temporary stops for people who
(generally) have no choice to be there or not, especially if traveling
on business. I don't know anyone who would pay a higher fare simply to
fly into/out of an airport with free wifi.

If Google is taking advantage of existing capabilities, so what?!? It
IS good PR for a minimal investment. It's called a successful business
model. I fly out of either GSO or CLT at least 3-4 times a month.
Could I even tell you if they have free wifi? No. I use a mobile
broadband card anyway, however, now I at least know that I have one
less thing to plug into a USB port when I fly out of my two home
airports.

[Bear_Ryan]

I think they are doing fee WiFi at airports that already have free
Wifi so that more people will be able to donate and have it be matched
by Google.

On Nov 12, 12:35 pm, "Adam & Katie Chappelle" <adamnka...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Nov 11, 12:04 pm, RBearSAT <rbear...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > There is a difference. Wifi is a part of business service amenities
> > and can be leveraged as a way to attract customers.
> > Regarding the 14 out of 47, I almost feel Google is taking advantage
> > of existing capabilities and paying for branding only. Because of
> > their promotion they make out like Santa Claus when in reality they
> > are just getting some good PR for a minimal investment.
>
> Wifi is a business service if you're a restaurant, coffee house, etc.

> You're talking about anairport. What "leverage" does, say, Chicago

> Midway hold over O'Hare if they had free wifi? None. Airports don't
> attract customers. Airports are temporary stops for people who

> (generally) have no choice to be there ornot, especially if traveling

> on business. I don't know anyone who would pay a higher fare simply to

> fly into/out of anairportwith free wifi.