Comments on: More about airports

By: Nick

Nick — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 04:59:30 +0000

“Alright Mandrake, but you’ll have to answer to the Coca-Cola Company.”

By: Ben

Ben — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:38:35 +0000

They have a deal with the Coca-cola company. It’s pretty simple, I’d say.

By: Brad

Brad — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:51:35 +0000

Also, I’ve done the “Mountain Dew?” “No, Sprite,” “Ok, Coke” routine before…but you’d think someone who likes Mountain Dew enough to know that they don’t want Sprite would know that A: Mountain Dew=Pepsi, Sprite=Coke, and B: so many McDonalds have Coke that it’s almost futile to even ask. You’ve got to be in a building large enough to have an exclusive contract with Pepsi AND important enough to need a McDonalds that is ballsy enough to deal with the Pepsi exclusivity.

By: Brad

Brad — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:46:44 +0000

Having gone through Rockford’s pitifully tiny airport, then Denver International (which blows my mind; not just Canada, mind you, but places like Amsterdam. There is no way I would fly non-stop from Denver to Amsterdam.), on a recent family brouhaha, it seems rather odd that there are chain restaurants of familiarity – your Burger King and Taco Bell and the like – pre-security, and brandless shops – mere glorified vending machines – post-security. I suppose the airports enjoy the idea of a monopoly, albeit on a tiny market (the hour-or-so before the flights leave).

By: Jonah

Jonah — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 04:41:06 +0000

I assume that airport restaurants that are post-security have certain security measures applied to everything brought in. Perhaps smaller airports tend to eschew the preferable location in favor of greater convenience to the restaurants themselves?