NLP

City of Kannapolis twitter account tweeted at me this morning that they are in talks with Amtrak about commuter service to Charlotte. If this came to pass (and overcame your aforementioned scheduling and ticket price challenges) I'd absolutely ditch driving to work every morning.

Any thoughts on the Chiquita merger in the context of the new anti-inversion rules the Obama administration is introducing? If enacted will this thwart Chiquita's plans to merge with the European (or rival Brazilian) firm?

    Oldish quote but relevant to my question. Is the bottleneck in both directions of 85 at the turbine interchange under construction temporary or will it always be 3 lanes in both directions briefly at the interchange? Looks like there's room Southbound to just restripe and pave the shoulder for the fourth lane but the Northbound side looks like it'd need additional cement poured.

I think that's very sound thinking, particularly when dealing with Doug Parker who I'm sure everyone knows ad naseum is a proponent of airline industry consolidation. It's interesting at least to me how US Airways post merger with AWE initially attempted to brand itself as a low cost carrier yet seemingly every move Parker has made or advocated would lead/has led to increased costs.

To add to this post, since government projects always go over deadline/budget: https://apps.dot.state.nc.us/traffictravel/progloc/ProgLocSearch.aspx Contract #C202522, the 85 widening project. Estimated completion is now mid-March 2014 and it's 2.29% over budget. That doesn't seem like much, but it's a $125M budget. As for finishing 485, the half that runs from 85 to 115 (Contract #C202521) is about 2 months behind schedule and 4% over budget. The east part that syncs up the existing part of 485 (Contract #C202523) is currently on budget and on schedule (knock on wood, jinx doesn't count). Not really a gripe post because as stated previously, the benefits will be amazing.

monsoon, where you at? Don't you want to talk Charlotte Football?

This thread hasn't seen any action in about 7 months so I add: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/breaking/...50222.html#none I'm disappointed in this figure, as a lot of people are, since we had such a large number of pledges. HOWEVER, given the absolute horror of an economic situation the country and this region has been facing, I'm not all that surprised. This, though, gives me a lot of encouragement: Since the end of July or so sales had been going at about a 9-10/day clip. To sure to around 50 a day for the last few days is nice indeed. A lot of credit should also be given to the volunteer sales force mentioned in the article. Without them there's a chance football at UNC Charlotte dies.

I saw that article in the O today and was pleased with the ridership numbers. One thing I am wondering about is how revenue has been. Last time I saw a story about ridership along with revenue there was a very large discrepency. Granted some is due to bus transfers and monthly passes, but there was a huge gap in revenue and expected revenue based on the number of people riding.

I actually think the number will be less as Mac's study lowballed donations in particular and possibly game revenue. And it's not a tax, you can choose where you send your child to school. It's a fee as it's described. If the education at Charlotte is so expensive, I want to see the uproar over the funding inequities. I'm so tired of the hypocrisy. The funding gap between Charlotte and the system average is a multiple of the proposed fee. Where is the uproar if Charlotte is so expensive? (It's still cheap compared to other schools in the system and remains a fantastic value regardless of the proposed fee)

Concerning Spangler's remarks, I don't require qualifications. Dubois himself refuted them on "The Mac Attack" show on WFNZ. Not so pleased he went on that particular program, but his words are his words. The segment is probably still archived on wfnz.com if you want to listen for yourself. I highly question the motives for CD Spangler's presence and statements. However I do not at all question the sincerity of Bill Friday's position. He has long crusaded against sports and their increasing costs since his days with the Knight Commission. While I don't agree with him, I respect his position, much like with Mary Schulken at the Observer. I have one question to anyone (including you monsoon but not limited ) who thinks football would drain from academics: How? Legally how would that be accomplished?

.aussie, unless somehow you can convince this person of the fallacy that football is a 'drain on resources that could be better spent elsewhere' you're wasting your time. There's some strange belief that football raids the coffers of money that would otherwise be going to academics. The reality is there is a ton of money on the sideline by prospective alumni and donors like myself that will remain on the sidelines until we have a football program. It's not as if my donations to the English Department are being deviously re-directed towards football. Give us a break here. If anyone wants to argue the burden on the students for the $300 fee, fine, do it. But don't create strawmen arguments that football is a drain on the school's resources. The drain on the resources is the shoddy allocation Charlotte gets from the state as the post by rworkman points out. If Charlotte got equitable funding (at the UNC SYSTEM average -I couldn't care less that UNC-CH and NCSU get so much) the positive impact on the students would be greater than the negative impact of the football fee from a purely economic perspective. So for anyone who wants to boo hoo about money, I will gladly drop my support of Charlotte football when you step up your letter writing campaigns to the entire NC GA to get Charlotte the funding it deserves.

It's the latter, not the former. Just one in a series of committee meetings being held to explore the possibility of football at Charlotte. They have brought in a variety of speakers as well as their own information gathering. They will continue having these meetings until early '08 and end with a recommendation either for or against establishing a permanent football program. Then of course it's up to the Chancellor and BOT to make the ultimate decision. Here's the link to the story in the Observer as well: http://www.charlotte.com/colleges/story/219386.html Apparently Fox News Edge did a story on it but I missed that last night. Personally, I think the recommendation of starting football to the BOT/Chancellor is approaching near lock status.

Thanks for mentioning that. Also, Mike Persinger (Observer Sports Editor) just told us David Scott was at the meeting and there will be a story in tomorrow's paper.

Based at feedback gathered from the football committee meetings held downtown at the Chamber of Commerce it's sounding like it's becoming more of a certainty than a possibility. Quite a departure from the pipe dream days. Anyways, the guest speaker was the AD of USF responsible for implementing football. They're considered by most to be a model of how to move from no football through D-1AA to D-1A. Charlotte AD Judy Rose also acknowledged the changing landscape of college sports and the power that BCS schools are gaining. She's seem to have moved to the position of football being a requirement to protect the basketball program at Charlotte.

I was a little wrong in my numbers. The election turnout was 20 times greater than the previous and also the highest EVER in any school in the state. Niner Online story These numbers may not have impressed you, monsoon, but they have impressed the Board of Trustees at the University. Personally I have no problem with you not being for football. I expect opposition. I'm just suprised at your suggestion of dismissal of the topic as if there was no support.