Houston Airports: Welcome to Houston...Side Boob!

News that all of the Hudson News stores within the Houston Airport system would be shutting drew a collective sigh. To be honest, the stores themselves are fairly nondescript retail outlets that charge large amounts for bottled water, sodas, junk food and almost every magazine that you have no desire to read.

What is replacing them could prove to be a little bit more interesting....

CultureMap to take over Hudson News Shops at Houston Airports. Danielle Abril, Houston Business Journal

The CultureMap stands will similarly offer convenience items as well as concierge services, which will be powered by CultureMap content. This means customers will be able to see content about where to eat, shop and visit while they are in a specific city. All of the content will come from CultureMap.

I would imagine that the store-fronts themselves would be an improvement over the old Hudson News outlets (wouldn't take much). And while I'm slightly concerned that "(a)ll of the content will come from CultureMap" having concierge services at the airport could be a boon to travelers arriving at Houston.

One hopes that they stay away from the obvious click-bait trolling stories such as this and focus instead on their more straight-forward review reporting such as can be found here. The HBJ article did go on to say that CultureMap would be changing their reporting staff and methods on reporting some news, so hopefully this means more of the latter and less of the former going forward.

An ideal situation would be for CultureMap to supplement their own content with that from other publications through licensing agreements and other avenues. I realize that their goal is to increase their page hits but, if you really want to give visitors an overview of Houston, there are other news outlets that need to be included.  Off hand I'd suggest that it would be journalistic malpractice to exclude the restaurant review section of the Houston Chronicle given that they pump out consistently better material than does CultureMap.

For Houstonians traveling through the HAS I doubt this is going to have much, if any, impact. One would guess that bottled water and sodas will still be overpriced, the snacks on offer will still be nutritionally suspect, and the magazine selection will continue to be abysmal.  To be fair, there's little on offer at any airport in stores of this type.

This has the possibility of being an improvement for the HAS. Time will tell if CultureMap: Houston has the organizational chops to pull it off however.  The overriding concern, as noted in the post title, that visitors come into the shop looking for a place to have a cocktail in Houston, and end up being directed to a slide-show titled "Best places in Houston to see some side-boob."

Houston Area Leadership Vacuum: What's not being said about Houston tourism.

Yesterday I posited the theory that throwing more money at Houston's supposed tourism 'problem' is not the say to fix said 'problem'. I realized, later, that this doesn't answer the dual questions of a.) whether or not there is a problem at all and b.) what can be done to address it. So, from that perspective, today I'm offering up a rather simple solution to something that is being overlooked, but that I don't see as a 'problem' per se.

First off, Houston does not draw its "fair share" of tourists.  In the behind-the-pay-wall HoustonChronicle.com article I linked to this was clearly spelled out.

(Hopefully, the Houston Chronicle takes no issue with my fair use quoting from their story but, to be safe, here's the full link again)

Tourism Board offers aggressive agenda for drawing visitors. Erin Mulvaney, LM Sixel, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

Already, most of the visitors to Houston are classified as leisure travelers. Of the 14.8 million who came to Houston last year, about 9 million were leisure travelers while the others came on business. The majority of visitors come from inside Texas, including Dallas/Forth Worth, Austin and San Antonio.
By comparison, Chicago gets 42 million visitors annually, New York City attracts 54 million and San Antonio 31 million.

Clearly, there is a gap. I believe this gap is driven, in large part, by Houston steadfastly failing to recognize the attractions that it does have in a continually blind effort to make itself into something it is not.  The facts are these. San Antonio has the Riverwalk, the Alamo and El Mercado. Chicago has the El, Wrigley Field and a host of Frank Lloyd Wright homes among other things. New York has Times Square, Rockafeller Plaza, Central Park and (to be honest) most of the City including Long Beach.  Houston has none of these things, and it's improbable to think that throwing additional money to "build attractions" (as some in the comments suggest) is ever going to build 'stuff' that has near the tourism appeal that the comparison cities do.

Let's face it, the New York Library has more tourist appeal than does anything Houston can offer. The library for goodness' sake.

What Houston does have, as I've mentioned before, is a business climate that brings in business travelers, the Galleria that brings in leisure travelers (primarily, as mentioned in the article, from Mexico) and conventions which bring in business travelers as well.

What I think Houston is missing is a viable marketing push to tie all of this together.  Here's the rub. Tourists are not going to flock to Houston to check out Mongoose vs. Cobra no matter how edgy we presume their manifesto to be. The fact is, in most major cities, there are bars just as hipster as this popping up almost everywhere. Nor are they going to spend their vacation dollars to check out Miller Outdoor Theatre or, unless they're from somewhere really small, The Houston Zoo. You can up the Houston advertising budget to a Million Billion Dollars, bring back Jordy Tollett in his prime and it's just not going to happen. I don't care what squishy marketing campaign you dream up or how many celebrities you have working (for a fee) to sell the City.

However, what the people at Houston First seem to be chronically missing is that the true driver for families coming to Houston lies in the fact that they have something to do while the bread-winner is in business meetings.  In other words: Houston: Where business gets done and families have fun.

(OK, I'm sorry, I'm an accountant not an ad designer.)

Let's face it. All of the things we LIKE about Houston are things that people would like to, were a family to come along on a business trip.  Their are museums and parks and shopping and outdoor markets and educational opportunities for the kiddies and brewery tours and (with a small drive) boardwalks and amusement rides and battlefield memorials and the Strand and Space Center: Houston and a host of other things that would allow a family to while away the hours why Mommy or Daddy spend the day cooped up in an office attending meetings with bad coffee and dry, catered chicken with some almost identifiable sauce.

If one partner is in meetings then the other partner can go shopping in the Galleria, or they can go take a brewery tour, or (on most Thursdays) catch the early afternoon Astros game. If they have kids they can visit the museums and go shopping in the Galleria, at night after the meetings they can go out and dine and (if the kiddies are taken care of) hit up bars like Mongoose vs. Cobra or the Anvil or a host of other locations.  They might even have so much fun that they can stay through Saturday and drive out to visit Kemah, or NASA.

The important thing to realize is that all of this is on top of their primary reason for visiting Houston in the first place i.e. getting business done.

Yes, the numbers in the study suggest that a majority of travelers through the Houston Airport System are here on leisure. I'm willing to bet that many of them are here specifically to either shop the Galleria, or rent a car and drive somewhere else. How many people do you see in Houston, especially downtown Houston, just hanging around wishing that some attractions would be built so they would have something touristy to do?  The answer? Not many.  And there are even less that come here to ride the DangerTrain, although they don't realize that they could be missing out on one of the most Houston of things: Dodge Train.

Here's the thing. None of what I'm talking about here involves 'increasing the budget' or 'making a bigger push' to try and get people to come to Houston.  The City already has the resources and existing attractions in place.  Granted, this might mean that many of the Houston First employment positions and consulting contracts would suddenly become redundant, but there's plenty of work to go around.

Maybe some of those consultants could be persuaded to bring the family along next time as well?

Houston Area Leadership Vacuum: Throwing more money at the 'problem' won't fix the 'problem'

Here we go again.

Tourism board unveils aggressive agenda for drawing visitors. Erin Mulvaney and L.M. Sixel. HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

About once ever two to three years, Houston is hit with a bone-headed proposal of this type in "increase the number of tourists" driven by the ill-thought out idea that we're just not branding our city properly.

The solution has always been 'more money' and, to be honest, it just hasn't worked in the past and there's little reason to believe that it's going to work this time either.

First, the fallacies:

1. Houston is a hidden tourist "gem" that people don't know about because we have an identity as a business city.

It's true. Houston is viewed as a place where people come to get business done.  There's a reason for that and it's because Houston is a place where people come to get business done. No amount of branding, or catchy slogans, is going to change that.

2. There are a lot of fun things to do in Houston.

This is also true.  But it's only true if you happen to live here. In fact, outside of NASA there are few things in Houston that can't be done better elsewhere. The Kemah Boardwalk?  It's a decent place to visit if you live here but if you're thinking about spending your travel dollars Coney Island or (still, despite their financial worries) the Jersey Shore offer much better boardwalks with many more tourist attractions.  Galveston?  Again, if you live in Houston it's the closest beach area.  If you're a tourist however you'd be much better served heading down to either Corpus Christi or South Padre Island. Washington Avenue is a decent bar and entertainment district for locals, but it's not going to ever, ever be a tourist draw. Perhaps the only truly touristy thing that Houston has going for it, outside of Space Center Houston, is the Galleria. And it's hard to convince people to spend a week in town during their vacation walking around the inside of a very large shopping mall.

The fact is that Houston is just not a destination city. It never has been and it never will be, no matter how much money the unelected, quasi-public agency Houston First decides they want to throw down the rabbit hole in an ill-fated effort to convince people otherwise.

I've often thought that the only possible concept that would save the Astrodome is to convert it into a giant hotel/casino. However, casino gambling (and most other gambling besides the State-ran scam that is the lottery) is outlawed in Texas and the Texans and Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo would never agree to a venue that would utilize parking spaces and resources when they're operating so that's a moot point as well. Ironically, it could be casino gambling (or, expanded gambling options at horse and dog tracks) that could, potentially, bring in tourists. However, we live in Texas where the government's main objective seems to be to save us from ourselves while lining their pockets so those ideas are really a non-starter.

Instead, Houston is going to, once again, waste Millions of Dollars in an attempt to make the tourist board feel important, and to try and compete with other cities to which it is not comparable. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it and all of that.

Unsurprisingly, the comments on this pay-walled Chron story are focusing on Downtown (the Central Business District) and public transportation, as if adding a bar or two and building a rail from the airports will be the elixir that cures all ills. It's thoughts like these, and people who say that the Astrodome, Kemah and Galveston induce sprawl, that are why Houston cannot have nice things and why we're doomed to one of Dante's Circles when it comes to visitor planning.

Houston Tourism Planning: Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.

Social Media: Give us back our gun emoji and we spare the horse!

Last night, minutes before beating the Dallas Mavericks and closing out the series 4 games to 1 the Houston Rockets Twitter account released this bomb:

Cue outrage.

What few people are saying is that most of this outrage was from what's now being known as "butthurt" Maverick's fans.  Given the holier-than-thou attitude that follows all decent jokes these days, the Dallas Maverick's Twitter folks responded thusly:

If any team has no room to speak on what is 'classy', it's the Dallas Mavericks.  From articles on how to 'troll' Rockets fans to Mark Cuban's statement that the Rockets "were not a very good team" this series has seen boorish behavior from the Mavericks at all levels of the organization.

To which I say fine. This silly idea that fans and staffers and owners of a team have to live up to some imaginary set of 'unwritten rules' when rooting either for their team or against the other team in professional sports is a silly one.  If you can't poke fun at your rivals then why even try?  Furthermore, for all of the talk in the Houston Chronicle about the "Houston/Dallas rivalry" this series of events, and the fact that the Mayors of Houston and Dallas apparently didn't have a bet on the game, illustrates that the rivalry is dead, except in insipid Houston Chronicle slide-shows.

All of this wailing and gnashing of teeth illustrates a larger point.  In short: We've become a Nation full of sore losers and hyper-sensitive concern-mongers who aren't even capable of accepting the fact that our side has 'lost' and the other side is allowed their moment in the gloating sun.

I blame outrage culture, which has convinced us that it's OK to be angry to the point of incoherence about even the slightest perceived slight. What outrage culture has done is replace "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" with "you said mean things and turned me into a simpering pile of human goo". If anything, America needs to grow a spine again. We need to rediscover our steely determination and sense of purpose and inform the concern-mongers that they may politely take their hurt feelings and jump off a cliff.

You see, the Houston Rockets were never going to shoot a real horse last night. An emoji gun only can fire emoji bullets which are nothing but pixels really. Nor was any harm going to come to any of the Maverick players. Or Mavericks fans for that matter. I realize that losing sucks and that, in today's age of participation trophies and leagues that don't keep score, our younger generations are typically incapable of coping with loss. In fact, we are rearing a generation that thinks there are no losers. That 'fat shaming' is found in an ad for a weight loss company and bullying has been expanded to people saying anything about you that is not 100% flattering.

Kirk Schlichter is right when he says that It's time to unleash the power of no.  Now, granted, he's speaking from a political perspective while I'm speaking from a societal one. I don't care whether or not you are liberal or conservative or somewhere outside that or in between, if you are grousing about the other side taking a victory lap, if your feelings are hurt when someone gets one over on you to the point you lash out, or if you just can't handle the concept of losing then you are the problem.

The sad offshoot of this is that we are giving away our right to free speech by turning on one another and demanding censure. The American public seems to have forgotten that free speech was designed to protect us from the government, we now seem to think that it should be limited to protect us from hurt feelings. Have we grown as soft and flabby mentally as we have physically?

Apparently yes, we have.  Because if the losing side is going crazy over a fake gun fake shooting a fake horse then what's going to happen when they lose on something really important?  How far is it from throwing a temper-trantrum over electronic horse murder to calling for the silence and arrest of those who hurt our feelings in real life?  Are we guaranteed the right to never be offended by the Constitution?  Of course not.  What we are guaranteed is the right to fire back verbally, to try and win the argument with wit and wisdom instead or through forced censure caused by whining and false outrage.

In other words, if your response to being out-witted is to cry foul then not only have you already lost, but you've outed yourself as being somewhat gormless and dim-witted as well.

Things Bad Media do: If you're reporting on something, it's best to know the facts

The Chron's new NorthEastern transplant doesn't understand the State he covers all that well.

If you're going to cover something, and expect us to believe that you are an authority on the issues. It might help to understand what it is that you are covering.

Here are a few friendly links:

Texas State Guard Home Page

Texas Government Code Authorizing State Military

Texas State Guard History and Federal Authorization

You're welcome.

Nothing close to this car is ever going to see production.

Photo courtesy of GM

It's a pretty thing, the Chevy FNR and it's designed to try and make us imagine what automotive design can be.

And....You'll never, ever, see anything like it anywhere on the road.  Which is too bad because it is a pretty thing, the clear side panels and the angular, sweeping lines.  The problem is that concept cars such as this skew the average motorists idea regarding what is possible.

First, there appears to be no storage, so this would not be a practical car then. It also appears that the car will only have wheel engines only so it will move slower than you currently move in rush hour traffic.  Yes, the car will drive itself, but possibly not much faster than you can make the walk.

Oh, and the ride. With those paint on tires it's a given that by the time you reach the office you will be shaken so much as to be homogenized.

My last problem with this is that it's got the power source all wrong.  All electric cars just aren't working in the real world. Neither are hybrids despite their sales success.  The future of automotive fuel is hydrogen gas.  Yes, as nay-sayers continually point out, hydrogen production is currently very thirsty in terms of fuel. I predict this will get better.  As will hydrogen fuel-cell technology.

It's not fair for me to say that electric-drive technology won't improve at the same time, but the floor for hydrogen cells are much higher and it appears that the ceiling is as well.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that GM shouldn't have built the thing, I'm just suggesting that it's wise to temper our expectations based on a concept that's clearly not designed to be be brought to the mass market.

These futuristic car designs don't excite me, as pretty as they may be.  What excites me are concept cars that are fairly close to being ready to hit the mass market. That's more of a future vision than a pipe dream and what we should focus on to begin with.  Treat these as what they are......



Sci-Fi.

Houston Area Leadership Vacuum: Wi-Fi at NRG Stadium

For all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth over proposed Wi-Fi upgrades at NRG Stadium, I'm surprised our "conservative county leaders" haven't embraced the one, most simple, solution...

NRG Stadium Ponders Joining Wi-Fi World. Gabrielle Banks, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

The Chron doesn't want you to read their journalism, so I'll oblige and just quote a very small piece for discussion's sake.

Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Steve Radack said he believes the county does "not need to go in there and spend money" on the Wi-Fi.

Precinct 4 Commissioner R. Jack Cagle reviewed background materials for the bid and "noted he needs to know the source or sources of funding," said his spokesman, Mark Seegers.

How about trying this on for size?

If the tenants at NRG, and the NFL, feel that Wi-Fi service in and around the complex is a priority then let them pay for it and recoup the cost as part of a "connectivity fee" included in the price of event tickets?

This allows the market to work, only those who feel the service is of value will ultimately be paying for the service, and it removes the thorny political issue of having citizens who can not, or will not, attend functions at NRG paying for the service.

Of course, I get that the Houston Texans and the Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo aren't too keen on this idea. The feeling of entitlement by venue tenants (note to Chris Tomlinson, THIS is what entitlement looks like) is something that was quick to take hold and has been hard to shake. The Texans especially are sensitive to perceived high-ticket prices for a middling product. When you think about the sheer volume of patrons that attend activities at NRG however you're really only looking at a $1-$2 charge per ticket. For the Houston Texans this would equate to $10-$20 per season for the average fan (not counting playoffs *snort*).

Before you get all hot and bothered by that remember that the Houston Chronicle's New Mrs. White and a host of other local politicians often snipe at homeowners in Harris County for being upset about new taxes that will "only" increase the tax burden on the average citizen by $300-$400 per year. In the grand scheme of things this is a fairly small price to pay for having the ability to take a selfie with a Texans Cheerleader and transmit it out over Twitter and Facebook to remind the world that, when normal folks take pictures with cheer leaders, it really just makes them look a little creepy.

Would such a thing like this have a chance at passing?  Probably not. For one thing the Texans have to answer to the NFL, which is never in favor of teams picking up the cost of anything they can pressure local governments to pass on to taxpayers. The HLS&R has never been keen on spending money that can otherwise be directed toward improving their fancy offices in Downtown Houston. Finally, people only REALLY like Wi-Fi service when they think it's free. Having a ticket surcharge for this would probably generate more complaints than would a tax.

And, sadly, they're complaints that the Chronicle, and other news outlets, would take seriously. There would be a ton of stories penned about "World Class(y) Houston" and the things we need to do to keep up with cities in the Northeast (which are looking down the bankruptcy barrel) while encouraging us to go ahead and pay for this through an expansion of the hotel occupancy tax. They would then mean that this means "Houstonians never pay for it" unless you use a local hotel or have relatives in town for the Holidays, then you would.

The solution above is the fairest and most transparent of all proposed solutions, which is why, given Houston's current leadership vacuum, it has a 100% chance of never even being seriously considered.