Hi Mr. Kotyk.

It's no secret I am in awe of your research abilities and I have praised you on this blog and in personal correspondence several times.

So, a man of your abilities and integrity points out 2 negative comments from business writers but neglects to mention positive comments from other business writers.

Fabrice Taylor - Globeinvestor-VOX - Apr 26: "And I think investors in Porter Airlines’ initial offering will also fare well.
... But Porter's real advantage, apart from not being bound by ruinous union contracts, is those Toronto island airport slots, which it appears to have sewn up for a long time. It's easy to see why the airline doesn't stress that benefit too loudly but it's a great – indispensable even – advantage for shareholders."

In the Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation site, they point out that "More positively though, in its fourth quarter (2009) Porter reported a net profit of CAD455,000, a significant achievement compared with the 31-Dec-2008 period's losses of CAD11.2 million."

Let's move on to another subject that Mr. Freeman was previously unable to answer for me - the notion that "Opposition to the airport and its expansion is growing." While there is proof that in 1 year Porter has carried almost 1 million customers (most of that at the Island), where is the Proof that opposition is growing? Despite having an anti-airport Mayor for the last 8 years, this airport is doing much better than when I worked there in 1999. Do you have ANY proof to back up your claims of opposition?
This desperate claim has been made many times but NEVER backed up by any data to support it.

On a related matter, what is the basis for this claim "The expanded island airport has been imposed by the Toronto Port Authority against the wishes of the majority of the people of Toronto."

How was this majority calculated?
Is it based on the electoral victories of Mayor David Miller? I'm always happy to debunk that argument. The average voter turnout for his 2 "victories" was 35%. Therefore, his mandates were supported by a whopping 18-21% of the electorate - hardly a majority no matter what brand of calculator CAIR uses. Again, one 'could' argue that this type of unsubstantiated statement is the product of a "desperate" movement trying to gain traction and scare undecided people into agreement.

I think we need to get to the bottom of this issue of support / opposition for the airport in it's current iteration. The mayoral candidates are generally Mum on the subject except for nice guy & Miller puppet Pantalone.

I don't have any statistics to back up that the airport is supported by most people - therefore, I have never made that claim. Coincidentally, I have also never claimed that Union Station has a large carbon footprint due to an abundance of idling vehicles but somehow Mr. Freeman attributed that to me. Please re-read my posting - I was asking 'GEM' a question.

Joe