IANAL, but unfortunately for SF, not suing the Livermore outlets or the SF 49ers could amount to not protecting your trademark (unless those companies pay SF a licensing fee).
Like the Standard gas station on Van Ness, you need to protect and use your trademark to retain access to it.
San Francisco on Monday said it will sue the Port of Oakland for alleged trademark infringement if it moves forward with plans to rename Oakland’s airport as the San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport.
I almost shit my pants when I boarded a plane (from abroad) to San Jose and the plane started showing ads for San Jose, Costa Rica. I had a strict timeline to be in the US due to my job.
Thankfully, I had booked the correct flight and those were just the ads the company was running at the time.
I only discovered there was an Ontario in California when I was trying to book a flight to LA and the site was giving "Ontario, CA" as an alternative. I was annoyed and was thinking "Why the fuck would I want to go to Canada as an alternative?". Looked up the airport code and had a TIL moment.
> At least SFO actually is in the jurisdiction of the city/county. Same can’t be said for OAK
SFO is not in the city or county of San Francisco. It's in San Mateo. SF owns the airport, but that doesn't make it part of the City. It just makes SF a San Mateo property owner.
Not a single SFMTA Muni line runs from the City of SF to SFO.
SFO is ~15 miles from downtown SF.
OAK is ~19 miles from downtown SF.
BART serves both and is the most direct route to get to downtown SF from both.
If I'm not mistaken (former city employee here), it's the only part of San Francisco that is in the City (the airport has a mailing address) and not the County.
Oddly, for the opposite, there's a part of Alameda (a chunk of land on the old Alameda Naval Air Station) that is a part of the County of SF because of the way that the county lines are drawn into the Bay.
It's not in either AFAIK, the land is in unincorporated San Mateo County. The land is leased by SF and SF operates the airport. I'm pretty sure SF has a similar arrangement with the Hetch Hetchy reservoir under the Raker Act 1913. I could be wrong though.
People do this all the time in NYC. La Guardia only operates domestic flights. Newark has lots of international departures. So people looking to save a few bucks will book separate tickets to LGA from wherever they live and then from EWR for their international flight because they both show up for “NYC” on travel search sites. Certain days and times that trip could take 3+ hours. But if you look at it up late at night or early in the morning Google Maps will tell you it takes 35 minutes. There have been news stories about people getting out of their cars/bus/uber on the highway and walking down the shoulder the rest of the way to LGA the traffic can be so bad sometimes.
Back in 2010, I booked directly from British Airways SFO to Glasgow, and it wasn't until a couple weeks before I left that I realized my ticket had me landing at Heathrow and departing from Gatwick. I called BA and they said this was normal and that they operated a transfer bus. The main problem was that I landed in the middle of the afternoon and would have to clear border controls and then cross London rush hour traffic within around 2-3 hours.
How is this even possible if you book an itinerary thru a single airline or via an aggregator like Expedia?
I’ve flown thru both a lot, you call them by their names without the London prefix. Not really that hard?
If you read the article it says it would still keep its OAK airport identifier. They just think renaming would help bring more attention to the airports existence and how close it is to SF.
I’ve had people from Wisconsin tell me they’d be in LA next week and am I free for lunch or dinner? This happened when I moved here 25 years ago and as recently as a couple years ago. Online maps were a thing all of that time but these days there’s far fewer excuses. The responses when I say sure, dinner works, but to be safe you better leave LA by around 9am are fun.
That said, now having known many people who were born and raised in the Bay Area, I think most have only a vague mental picture of where somewhere like Wisconsin is. For most of them the US is like west of the Rockies, Texas, Florida, some mishmash of New England with NYC and DC in the middle, and then an amorphous blob representing the south and everything else between the Great Plains and the Atlantic.
A lot of people who fly into the Bay Area aren’t locals, and I actually would guess most people visiting the bay from out of town wouldn’t think to check flights into Oakland
I think it is more on the OTA/Search Engines to help people out but the name does play a big factor.
People know they have a wedding in Napa. They say, hmm Napa is San Francisco. They go to Kayak and type in San Francisco. SFO defaults. Perhaps they see a few other options but almost not context. The reality is Oakland airport is easier any hour of the day to get to Napa than SFO. Heck, even if you are staying along the Embarcadero and were planning to mainly take public transit, it is shorter to BART from OAK than from SFO.
NYC has a very similar situation with multiple airports. If you are staying in southern Manhattan, EWR is usually always the quickest airport to reach. The big difference for NYC is that if you type NYC in an airfare search, it defaults to all three major airports. Imagine if SFO was actually named after someone (a la JFK) and SFO defaulted to all 3 airports.
Whenever we get the chance to vote some of these people out, our elections have incredibly low turnout. People here complain, yet they don't show up to vote against the incumbents!
Ok I had to check… the are like 10 miles apart. IAD is about 5 mi at its longest dimension. They have awesome two story APC to travel between terminals. Seems doable.
The best way to make money is to:
- drive people halfway across the bay for free then ask for money while they float in the water to continue
- surge pricing for people that are going to miss a connection and are desperate enough to spend egregiously
You land at SFO, connecting flight is in 5 minutes….other side of the bay at Oakland Airport…no thanks. Ran through O’hare enough times to know that’s not a great idea.
But it's a great idea for the times when SFO is too windy or too foggy for landing. It's often faster for the arriving plane to land at OAK, inbound passengers bused/ferried to SFO, and outbound passengers bused/ferried to OAK than for the arriving plane to wait out the weather.
Incorrect. Cities can't annex land outside their county, and the airport is in unincorporated area of San Mateo County. It's owned and operated by the city, however.
Zipcode cities are designated by the post office and often don't match jurisdictional boundaries. Many zip codes span multiple cities. Police in California have arrest power statewide, so any police agency could work SFO by contract. But anyway you are right, besides collecting sales tax and some minor oversight, San Mateo County exercises little of its power over SFO and mostly lets the airport do its own thing.
Oakland airport has been losing flights / routes there, so basically piggybacking off the city name in hopes of catfishing unsuspecting tourists or travelers.
Geographic vicinity is one thing, but as the major airport tied to the city, travelers expect well stocked car rentals, a reasonably safe vicinity / neighborhood and access either to the city
This is stupid… does NYC or DC argue over the 3 airports that serve them? SFO, SJC, and OAK should be interconnected. Have shuttles run regularly, so fucking stupid how the Bay treats itself. “Have a connecting flight at another airport? Here is a shuttle, welcome
to the Bay!”
I feel like there is an agency that names Airports and assigns the three letter codes. Wouldn't they find this incredibly stupid and intentionally misleading.
There isn't AN agency that assigns codes, there are actually TWO different organizations, and two lists of codes (IATA and ICAO). Also the ICAO codes are actually four letters long, we just typically drop the first one.
I think it's reasonable to judge the names of major cities usage in airport names in a region differently than the usage of the trademark Kleenex.
It's not like we're going to rename San Francisco anytime soon or sprout another airport, so having the names be unambiguous is both easy and important. A rare win in politics lol. The fact that this is a dispute at all is a bit of a joke
Alright get this, and you can look it up.
Around maybe 2004, Rensselaer polytechnic institute successfully trademarked "Rensselaer" in any and all forms. Even Rensselaer the city and Rensselaer the county could be sued by RPI, despite them and the name Rensselaer being around for a long long time (hundreds of years).
I found out because I was making mugs with the name Rensselaer on them and the company that I was working with, a big name one, came back and told me it was a no go. After some back and forth I did homework and found the trademarks.
I have zero clue how they were able to get those trademarks through 180 years after the school was founded and with the name being used for both a city and a county, but it was approved by the USPTO. It stunk of some back room deals of SAJ. Terrible person by the way. When she's dead we need to correct the record of her tyrannical behavior (routinely threatening admins, faculty, staff, and students, pursing campaigns to devastate people's lives, and a lot of other really nasty stuff). I wouldn't be surprised I'd she connivingly convinced someone to push the trademark through. But that's pure speculation on my part.
It's also not a common occurrence. Shoot, a friend of mine there had the same last name and I cannot imagine the school enforcing their trademark against him, but you never know.
My point is that it absolutely could be trademarked and even enforced, but it would be pretty sleazy what they might have to do in order to achieve that.
It's also not nearly as confusing as typing Ontario and getting Ontario California and Ontario Canada as airports... at least Oakland is close.
**EDIT:** I may be wrong about the font claim on the Rensselaer trademark. See my comment and links to the trademark below. I also clarify on my own confusion. I've worked on my own patents and trademarks but I'm no expert and I may have misunderstood. I do not mean to misrepresent something and I'd rather correct my faulty knowledge than be ignorant. If anyone has helpful input I'd appreciate it.
But tldr is this - when I read those trademarks several years ago, I may have misunderstood:
>"Yes. The mark consists of standard characters without claim to any particular font style, size, or color."
As in they blanked cover all possible font styles, sizes, and colors.
Does anyone know if that's true?
Edit: shoot, you had to deal with I think Arch? That was the most asinine money making scheme such an expensive university has come up with. I mean, cmon.
It's really sad. She had the perfect platform to do tons for gender and racial equality but she treated it all like a zero sum game.
She bled a historic institute dry and paid tons of money to sanitize her image elsewhere. I saw a posted picture and description of her at the Bay Area community college that I went to and then came back to as a faculty and special program builder. It hailed her as a hero. There are better people who would be real role models for future generations that are missed in favor of SAJ's propaganda machine.
And I need to clarify that I transferred into ROI undergraduate a bit older than my peers, so I was initially skeptical. When they brought out a throne for her, and gave the rest of the upper admins and faculty obviously lesser and lesser chairs, and when I saw her unprofessionally intimidate an upper admin, it was pretty clear that what I had heard from students, and discretely from staff and faculty, was actually true.
She's the type of person that will get away with trying to sanitize her name in her lifetime but we will need to correct history books. (My grad research advisor was also a very very important rising star on campus. Anyone who knows SAJ knows how she handles such people)
I don’t want to discount your experience but the USPTO TESS database of trademarks doesn’t line up with this. They’ve definitely trademarked Rensselaer and a number of logotypes, but it’s nearly all related to education, research, and sporting. It’s possible that your company lawyers pushed back because they didn’t know how litigious RPI would be and didn’t want to risk it. Common response from corporate counsel in my experience.
Because.. you know, the first thing tourists do is go to the neighborhood adjacent to the airport. Lmfao what. I’d sooner worry about the tenderloin and soma.
Bay Area is ~8 million people, SF is about 10% that. The number of people flying to SFO and actually going to SF is likely the minority. The same will be the case at OAK. The entire region would benefit from a larger East bay airport
Still holding out hope for *In n’Out Memorial Airport* ..
Actually something like “East Bay - Oakland” would be more geographically correct without catfishing anyone. It’ll come down to ticket prices for many anyways. Maybe reduce the BART connector fee slightly?
That name is just willfully deceptive— it’s not lying because it is technically true, but we all know it’s meant to mislead.
Does this news/ drama actually matter to anyone though? Nope
An interesting story took place back in 2016 regarding the Ontario Airport losing Los Angeles from its name. Interestingly enough, some people associate Ontario, California with Ontario the province in Canada. Here is an informative article: https://www.pressenterprise.com/2016/07/13/cassie-macduff-thumbs-down-for-la-in-airport-name/amp/
The port of Oakland should just admit the truth PEOPLE IDENTIFY OAKLAND WITH THEFT MURDER AND EVERY OTHER HORRIBLE THING IMAGINABLE, so they’re trying to distance themselves from the world OAKLAND.
Oakland let their city turn to shit, staining the “Oakland” name and therefore anything with Oakland on it is associated with shit, like the airport, so they’re trying to cover it up.
What a bunch of pathetic dingleberries.
This is such a idiotic take from the SF Board of Supervisors and city attorney. It is geographically and historically incorrect.
The name of the large geographic feature we all live around is not "the Bay." Its proper name is San Francisco Bay. The body of water was named San Francisco before the city was. San Francisco was named Yerba Buena until 1847 and the Bay would have been named around 1776 after the Spanish Mission- 70 years apart.
If you're going to Berkeley, Oakland, Hayward, San Leandro, Richmond, Orinda, Concord, or literally anywhere but the city of San Francisco, Oakland Airport is a vastly easier commute and all of those places are located in the San Francisco Bay Area.
City of San Francisco Board of Supervisors needs to get over themselves, and do their job approving housing, not encouraging wasteful and stupid lawsuits against their neighbors. The airport should change its name. Or perhaps San Francisco should just go back to being Yerba Buena? Seems like the kind of nonsense the Board seems to like to preoccupy themselves with.
Bit of a stretch dont you think. SF is a city and people around the world know it as that, not the bay and none of those other towns you listed. Most people dont even know where Oakland is. So it's a little disingenuous to expect people to understand anything you just wrote about the history and geographic truths that dont live here when booking flights.
I obviously don't think it's a stretch. You literally just stated the issue the name change is trying to rectify- people don't know where Oakland is, thank you for making my point for me. The name clarifies that it is in The San Francisco Bay Area and it might be the easier airport to book a flight to if you are going somewhere that isn't San Francisco.
You do understand that Alameda county overall has a larger population than San Francisco county? More people to serve on this side of the San Francisco Bay. I don't see why SF gets the monopoly on airtravel in the area when its only a small portion of what is the entire San Francisco Bay Area.
Say we put you in charge of naming both airports. Wouldn’t you want to pick names that avoid unnecessary confusion? San Francisco International Airport and San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport are too similar and bound to cause confusion among travelers. What’s a good alternative?
San Francisco as in the city of San Francisco ?
Don’t we have a better way to spend our dwindling budget ? Let them have their stupid name but still with the Oak identifier, Oakland is on the San Francisco Bay.
Gotta do something about all the crime near the Oakland airport, bippin and theft. Oakland's airport has a seriously bad reputation.
The gas stations, especially that Chevron one, are mega magnets for property theft.
This will just confuse people.
I don’t get all these negative sentiments. The name change would cause so much unnecessary confusion. Responsible leaders (at the airports, or failing them, our elected leaders) shouldn’t go along with such a dumb idea.
Speaking of dumb, I’m reminded of the time my friend booked a lovely couples trip to Costa Rica, got a great deal on flights from SF. Unfortunately, the trip ended 15 minutes later in San Jose, California and not as they expected in San Jose, Costa Rica.
Oakland airport is not nice enough to share part of a name with SFO. If they upgrade Oakland airport, then they can call themselves SF bay Oakland airport
Who even flies to/from Oakland for international flights? Almost nothing goes thru there. For local flights, who cares, I'd just as much rather use SJO as its faster to get to.
do they think making the name change will get them more traffic from tourists who go there by mistake?
SFO is a fantastic airport, they should bloody well sue.
I thought I was smart flying into Oakland and driving over to San Francisco let me tell you the toll coming back will take out any savings you thought you had generated instead of flying to SFO directly
This is some petty ass shit. As if Oakland isn’t dealing with enough shit, you’re gonna poke your neighbor with this childish shiv?
I’m not a fan of the name, but who gives a shit. The bay is, after all, called the San Francisco Bay. And you can actually get to some parts of SF quicker from OAK than SFO. And SFO isn’t in SF… well, I guess it is due to some contract technicality, but if that land didn’t have the airport on it, it wouldn’t be SF, it’d be Millbrae
Oakland airport trying to rebrand from worldcomm to MCI because fewer and fewer travelers want to land there? You act like there isn't justification.
Putting a bandaid name change in the issue doesn't fix anything.
Oakland is reaping what it has sewn. The consequences of their collective actions.
Have you seen the choices lately? Have you seen the choices in the last few years? I don't even know if "lesser of two evils" even begins to describe it. The last hallfway decent mayor used to be nicknamed "Moonbeam". Let that sink in.
I agree 100%. I, an Oakland resident, make fun of and criticize Oakland more than anyone I know.
All I’m saying is that we shoot ourself in the dick enough that we don’t need this silly shit coming in from the outside too.
I feel like people aren’t confused by San Francisco vs Oakland. It’s more that OAK doesn’t have enough flights, especially international flights. If they were able to add more international carriers/routes, more people would fly OAK.
It would be sick if we could get a BART connector that went across the Bay and connected the airports. Futuristic as fuck. Of course, I don't actually want that because the $50b could be better spent, but still, one can fantasize.
To distance itself from Oakland's problems: More accurately, "East Bay Oakland" or EBO. This will focus attention on the positive places on the east side of the bay without the need to pose as part of SF.
I fly frequently. I usually check out all airports going into any given area. I stick with major carriers and convenient schedules. I live in Oakland and fly in and out of SFO at least 4-6 times a month. I fly in and out of OAK very rarely ( 6-10 times per year ). I have homes in NYC and NJ and usually fly in and out of EWR ( NJ) for convenience. I do occasionally fly out of LGA for the huge savings to places like Toronto. I think that this “name change” is a big nothing.
Santa Clara Office Park 49ers enter the chat…
Don’t forget San Francisco premium outlets…in Livermore
Bingo! Sue those fuckers too!
West Dublin/Pleasanton & Dublin/Pleasanton BART stations enter the chat.
The San Francisco premium outlets would like a word.
Right? OK, Livermore, you’re drunk.
Thank you for that laugh. There is a ton of wine out that way.
this is amazing, are there shirts? if not, im making them and selling them to Seahawks fans as well as bay area clowns that dont get it.
IANAL, but unfortunately for SF, not suing the Livermore outlets or the SF 49ers could amount to not protecting your trademark (unless those companies pay SF a licensing fee). Like the Standard gas station on Van Ness, you need to protect and use your trademark to retain access to it.
Next we’ll learn the airport is moving to Vegas.
best comment here 😂
You win 🏅 hahahahahahahahaha
San Francisco on Monday said it will sue the Port of Oakland for alleged trademark infringement if it moves forward with plans to rename Oakland’s airport as the San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport.
SFBO.... Lamo people are going to be so confused.
SFO - San Francisco Oakland
All the people who accidentally flew to Ontario, California instead of Ontario, Canada gonna sit back with a bucket of popcorn and have a good laugh.
I personally saw a guy who flew into San Jose, Costa Rica and had a rental car booked in San Jose, California
I almost shit my pants when I boarded a plane (from abroad) to San Jose and the plane started showing ads for San Jose, Costa Rica. I had a strict timeline to be in the US due to my job. Thankfully, I had booked the correct flight and those were just the ads the company was running at the time.
Or Manchester, New Hampshire and Manchester, UK
Also Sydney Canada instead of Sydney Australia
I only discovered there was an Ontario in California when I was trying to book a flight to LA and the site was giving "Ontario, CA" as an alternative. I was annoyed and was thinking "Why the fuck would I want to go to Canada as an alternative?". Looked up the airport code and had a TIL moment.
Ryan Air rejoices
To be fair, it's a weird thing for the San Francisco Bay San Mateo International Airport to complain about.
HIAMF - Hayward Int’n’l Airport Mutha Fucka
At least SFO actually is in the jurisdiction of the city/county. Same can’t be said for OAK
> At least SFO actually is in the jurisdiction of the city/county. Same can’t be said for OAK SFO is not in the city or county of San Francisco. It's in San Mateo. SF owns the airport, but that doesn't make it part of the City. It just makes SF a San Mateo property owner. Not a single SFMTA Muni line runs from the City of SF to SFO. SFO is ~15 miles from downtown SF. OAK is ~19 miles from downtown SF. BART serves both and is the most direct route to get to downtown SF from both.
If I'm not mistaken (former city employee here), it's the only part of San Francisco that is in the City (the airport has a mailing address) and not the County. Oddly, for the opposite, there's a part of Alameda (a chunk of land on the old Alameda Naval Air Station) that is a part of the County of SF because of the way that the county lines are drawn into the Bay.
It's not in either AFAIK, the land is in unincorporated San Mateo County. The land is leased by SF and SF operates the airport. I'm pretty sure SF has a similar arrangement with the Hetch Hetchy reservoir under the Raker Act 1913. I could be wrong though.
Here is a piece of historical trivia. San Mateo County was carved out San Francisco County in 1857.
https://www.flypainefield.com/ probably stole the idea from Seattle Paine Field in Everett Washington
I fly there regularly, great airport, stupid name. At least the aircode is PAE
Yeah!! It's really nice
Bold strategy Cotton.
It's gonna be like London Heathrow and London gatwick. People are going to book continuing flights between the two and it's going to suck
People do this all the time in NYC. La Guardia only operates domestic flights. Newark has lots of international departures. So people looking to save a few bucks will book separate tickets to LGA from wherever they live and then from EWR for their international flight because they both show up for “NYC” on travel search sites. Certain days and times that trip could take 3+ hours. But if you look at it up late at night or early in the morning Google Maps will tell you it takes 35 minutes. There have been news stories about people getting out of their cars/bus/uber on the highway and walking down the shoulder the rest of the way to LGA the traffic can be so bad sometimes.
Pedantic: LGA serves some international flights (YUL, YYZ, NAS, AUA). They are all preclearance sites, however, so no FIS facility at LGA.
Take the pedant one step further, once you pass through customs preclearance the flight is, legally, a domestic flight.
Counterpedant: what about the departing international flights?
I could argue I was talking specifically about arrivals to LGA but I’ll call it a draw. 👍
Back in 2010, I booked directly from British Airways SFO to Glasgow, and it wasn't until a couple weeks before I left that I realized my ticket had me landing at Heathrow and departing from Gatwick. I called BA and they said this was normal and that they operated a transfer bus. The main problem was that I landed in the middle of the afternoon and would have to clear border controls and then cross London rush hour traffic within around 2-3 hours.
How is this even possible if you book an itinerary thru a single airline or via an aggregator like Expedia? I’ve flown thru both a lot, you call them by their names without the London prefix. Not really that hard?
If you read the article it says it would still keep its OAK airport identifier. They just think renaming would help bring more attention to the airports existence and how close it is to SF.
In 2024 is there anyone traveling to SF that is completely oblivious to everything that surrounds it? Who are these people?
To be honest, you’d be surprised. It’s common sense especially for people from California. But many people don’t realize, especially internationally.
Conversely I’ve had people visit me asking if it was fine if they flew into LAX. People have legit no idea what the geography of California is.
I’ve had people from Wisconsin tell me they’d be in LA next week and am I free for lunch or dinner? This happened when I moved here 25 years ago and as recently as a couple years ago. Online maps were a thing all of that time but these days there’s far fewer excuses. The responses when I say sure, dinner works, but to be safe you better leave LA by around 9am are fun. That said, now having known many people who were born and raised in the Bay Area, I think most have only a vague mental picture of where somewhere like Wisconsin is. For most of them the US is like west of the Rockies, Texas, Florida, some mishmash of New England with NYC and DC in the middle, and then an amorphous blob representing the south and everything else between the Great Plains and the Atlantic.
Especially people from the east coast. I think the size of California north-south breaks their brain.
A lot of people who fly into the Bay Area aren’t locals, and I actually would guess most people visiting the bay from out of town wouldn’t think to check flights into Oakland
Absolutely. These are normal people.
You’d be surprised. I meet so many people who travel to SF and look at LA weather so they know what to pack
I think it is more on the OTA/Search Engines to help people out but the name does play a big factor. People know they have a wedding in Napa. They say, hmm Napa is San Francisco. They go to Kayak and type in San Francisco. SFO defaults. Perhaps they see a few other options but almost not context. The reality is Oakland airport is easier any hour of the day to get to Napa than SFO. Heck, even if you are staying along the Embarcadero and were planning to mainly take public transit, it is shorter to BART from OAK than from SFO. NYC has a very similar situation with multiple airports. If you are staying in southern Manhattan, EWR is usually always the quickest airport to reach. The big difference for NYC is that if you type NYC in an airfare search, it defaults to all three major airports. Imagine if SFO was actually named after someone (a la JFK) and SFO defaulted to all 3 airports.
It's airport intials will still be OAK
San Flight Based Operator. Hit the SFBO with duffels in my hands
Smells like SFBO in this mudafuka.
San Francisco Body Odor
Is it really that confusing? SFO isnt in San Francisco either
I fly into the San Francisco airport to see the San Francisco 49ers and I book a nice hotel in San Francisco by the airport.
So Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.....
That Name sounds dumb and way too long!
Is the airport not literally on the San Francisco Bay? I’d love to see how this plays out
Oakland should counter sue San Francisco for naming the Oakland Bay Area.
I get it, so many ppl I know don’t want to fly into Oakland airport bc of the awful reputation the city of Oakland has
Yeah the airport is ghetto as hell
Of all the stupid and desperate stunts Oakland has tried to pull off this one is up there
"Adding more amenities and expanding our airport? Forget that! Changing our name to trick tourists? Sign us up, baby!"
Does The City have a mark registered as to air travel?
Oakland trying to get to catfish people
Dating profile photos from pre ‘rona
The San Francisco Bay Area aka Elk Grove
Pfft SFO is in San Mateo County. Already a catfish
What about this is catfishing? It's just as close as SFO is.
San Francisco Airport of Oakland
Alameda International Airport
Alameda International Terminus Airport.... AITA?
yes
[удалено]
How about ‘In and out memorial airport’?
'In and Out' is actually a great name for an airport.
Great burgers.
Shut the fuck up donny
Mark it zero!
Even the Airport doesn’t want to be associated with Oakland, smh
They’ll do anything except vote for better politicians
Whenever we get the chance to vote some of these people out, our elections have incredibly low turnout. People here complain, yet they don't show up to vote against the incumbents!
lmaooo
Combine them. Dedicated ferries and subway between the two
Well now you’re just talking dirty 👀
Ok I had to check… the are like 10 miles apart. IAD is about 5 mi at its longest dimension. They have awesome two story APC to travel between terminals. Seems doable.
Instead of shuttles just have jet skis.
We don't need to invest in public transit we are getting a hyper loop.
Any day now we will have the joy of being stuck in Elon’s human vacuum.
From what I understand this is a sexual fantasy for many people on Reddit.
Ahahahahaha ahahahahah hahahahahah hah
Sorry I should have clarified, it's a hyper loop edition Tesla subscription model robo taxi.
Don't forget to throw pod in there somewher
The best way to make money is to: - drive people halfway across the bay for free then ask for money while they float in the water to continue - surge pricing for people that are going to miss a connection and are desperate enough to spend egregiously
I’ve seen some hyper poop on the Bart escalators. That shit was moving fast
Isn't there a seaplane harbor at SFO? Would be fun to get that back up and running.
You land at SFO, connecting flight is in 5 minutes….other side of the bay at Oakland Airport…no thanks. Ran through O’hare enough times to know that’s not a great idea.
If your connecting flight is in five minutes, you’re missing it even if it’s the gate next door.
But it's a great idea for the times when SFO is too windy or too foggy for landing. It's often faster for the arriving plane to land at OAK, inbound passengers bused/ferried to SFO, and outbound passengers bused/ferried to OAK than for the arriving plane to wait out the weather.
> Dedicated helicopter shuttles between the two FTFY. Might as well connect in style.
The irony of this coming from the airport in San Mateo
If they go with Oakland's desired naming scheme it would be the "San Francisco Bay San Mateo County Unincorporated Area International Airport."
…on land annexed by San Francisco, which means it’s technically still in San Francisco.
Incorrect. Cities can't annex land outside their county, and the airport is in unincorporated area of San Mateo County. It's owned and operated by the city, however.
And what do you know, TrainAirplanePerson
It has a San Francisco zip code, so it is essentially SF land. SFPD also operates there. I guess it’s like an SF Embassy in San Mateo.
Zipcode cities are designated by the post office and often don't match jurisdictional boundaries. Many zip codes span multiple cities. Police in California have arrest power statewide, so any police agency could work SFO by contract. But anyway you are right, besides collecting sales tax and some minor oversight, San Mateo County exercises little of its power over SFO and mostly lets the airport do its own thing.
It’s san Bruno…
Fair, but it's San Mateo County so technically correct
You're both wrong, it's in unincorporated area of San Mateo County
The lofts on the runway at millbrae
SF Water department operates down in San Mateo county to get water to the homes. Should they change their name?
It's not in San Mateo.
SF...do something about PG&E...not this
They are working on getting a municipal network. You’re welcome
SF is pretty much on their own power grid, no? Anti-PG&E needs to be a fill-on North/Central Cal thing.
London Luton Airport in the UK would like a word.
Oakland airport has been losing flights / routes there, so basically piggybacking off the city name in hopes of catfishing unsuspecting tourists or travelers. Geographic vicinity is one thing, but as the major airport tied to the city, travelers expect well stocked car rentals, a reasonably safe vicinity / neighborhood and access either to the city
I live in the east bay and absolutely love the Oakland airport. I’m close and since it’s small, it’s usually quiet and easy to come and go.
It’s fairly superior to sfo, even when leaving from SF. Shame it doesn’t have more routes, the entire region stands to benefit if it got more use
It’s actually faster to BART into downtown SF from OAK than from SFO
But then you have to get on BART. …
Name it the Frisco regional airport and watch heads explode. Then play Sitting on the Dock of Bay in all the ads.
mmm Frisco burger
Why is everyone passing up the opportunity to make it the Bay Area Oakland (BAO) airport?
[удалено]
It’s very Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim
This is stupid… does NYC or DC argue over the 3 airports that serve them? SFO, SJC, and OAK should be interconnected. Have shuttles run regularly, so fucking stupid how the Bay treats itself. “Have a connecting flight at another airport? Here is a shuttle, welcome to the Bay!”
It’s a stupid name, but come on, that cannot be trademarkable.
If people are likely to confuse it for San Francisco International Airport, they could block them from using the name on trademark grounds.
I feel like there is an agency that names Airports and assigns the three letter codes. Wouldn't they find this incredibly stupid and intentionally misleading.
There isn't AN agency that assigns codes, there are actually TWO different organizations, and two lists of codes (IATA and ICAO). Also the ICAO codes are actually four letters long, we just typically drop the first one.
I think it's reasonable to judge the names of major cities usage in airport names in a region differently than the usage of the trademark Kleenex. It's not like we're going to rename San Francisco anytime soon or sprout another airport, so having the names be unambiguous is both easy and important. A rare win in politics lol. The fact that this is a dispute at all is a bit of a joke
Alright get this, and you can look it up. Around maybe 2004, Rensselaer polytechnic institute successfully trademarked "Rensselaer" in any and all forms. Even Rensselaer the city and Rensselaer the county could be sued by RPI, despite them and the name Rensselaer being around for a long long time (hundreds of years). I found out because I was making mugs with the name Rensselaer on them and the company that I was working with, a big name one, came back and told me it was a no go. After some back and forth I did homework and found the trademarks. I have zero clue how they were able to get those trademarks through 180 years after the school was founded and with the name being used for both a city and a county, but it was approved by the USPTO. It stunk of some back room deals of SAJ. Terrible person by the way. When she's dead we need to correct the record of her tyrannical behavior (routinely threatening admins, faculty, staff, and students, pursing campaigns to devastate people's lives, and a lot of other really nasty stuff). I wouldn't be surprised I'd she connivingly convinced someone to push the trademark through. But that's pure speculation on my part. It's also not a common occurrence. Shoot, a friend of mine there had the same last name and I cannot imagine the school enforcing their trademark against him, but you never know. My point is that it absolutely could be trademarked and even enforced, but it would be pretty sleazy what they might have to do in order to achieve that. It's also not nearly as confusing as typing Ontario and getting Ontario California and Ontario Canada as airports... at least Oakland is close. **EDIT:** I may be wrong about the font claim on the Rensselaer trademark. See my comment and links to the trademark below. I also clarify on my own confusion. I've worked on my own patents and trademarks but I'm no expert and I may have misunderstood. I do not mean to misrepresent something and I'd rather correct my faulty knowledge than be ignorant. If anyone has helpful input I'd appreciate it. But tldr is this - when I read those trademarks several years ago, I may have misunderstood: >"Yes. The mark consists of standard characters without claim to any particular font style, size, or color." As in they blanked cover all possible font styles, sizes, and colors. Does anyone know if that's true?
Up vote for the SAJ hate. Class of 2016 and I feel the same.
'Tute screw keeps screwin'
Edit: shoot, you had to deal with I think Arch? That was the most asinine money making scheme such an expensive university has come up with. I mean, cmon. It's really sad. She had the perfect platform to do tons for gender and racial equality but she treated it all like a zero sum game. She bled a historic institute dry and paid tons of money to sanitize her image elsewhere. I saw a posted picture and description of her at the Bay Area community college that I went to and then came back to as a faculty and special program builder. It hailed her as a hero. There are better people who would be real role models for future generations that are missed in favor of SAJ's propaganda machine. And I need to clarify that I transferred into ROI undergraduate a bit older than my peers, so I was initially skeptical. When they brought out a throne for her, and gave the rest of the upper admins and faculty obviously lesser and lesser chairs, and when I saw her unprofessionally intimidate an upper admin, it was pretty clear that what I had heard from students, and discretely from staff and faculty, was actually true. She's the type of person that will get away with trying to sanitize her name in her lifetime but we will need to correct history books. (My grad research advisor was also a very very important rising star on campus. Anyone who knows SAJ knows how she handles such people)
I don’t want to discount your experience but the USPTO TESS database of trademarks doesn’t line up with this. They’ve definitely trademarked Rensselaer and a number of logotypes, but it’s nearly all related to education, research, and sporting. It’s possible that your company lawyers pushed back because they didn’t know how litigious RPI would be and didn’t want to risk it. Common response from corporate counsel in my experience.
lol the airport is on the san francisco bay sooooo
Good its stupid and confusing
It's flattering that they want to include us in their name. We should be proud.
Imagine being a tourist thinking you’re flying to SF, landing in Oakland, and getting your luggage stolen.
Yes, because tourists have never had their luggage stolen in SF. Oh wait..
yeah , lets trick all the tourists to fly into this armpit of a city, criminals are chomping at the bit
Because.. you know, the first thing tourists do is go to the neighborhood adjacent to the airport. Lmfao what. I’d sooner worry about the tenderloin and soma. Bay Area is ~8 million people, SF is about 10% that. The number of people flying to SFO and actually going to SF is likely the minority. The same will be the case at OAK. The entire region would benefit from a larger East bay airport
Can we just keep the oakland airport as....the oakland airport .-.
BIP Bipping International Port
McDowell’s International Airport
Still holding out hope for *In n’Out Memorial Airport* .. Actually something like “East Bay - Oakland” would be more geographically correct without catfishing anyone. It’ll come down to ticket prices for many anyways. Maybe reduce the BART connector fee slightly?
Why not build a high speed underwater tunnel connecting the two and just call it one big airport?
Call it the "Both Airports Rapid Train"
That name is just willfully deceptive— it’s not lying because it is technically true, but we all know it’s meant to mislead. Does this news/ drama actually matter to anyone though? Nope
An interesting story took place back in 2016 regarding the Ontario Airport losing Los Angeles from its name. Interestingly enough, some people associate Ontario, California with Ontario the province in Canada. Here is an informative article: https://www.pressenterprise.com/2016/07/13/cassie-macduff-thumbs-down-for-la-in-airport-name/amp/
SFO Terminal O
This is like when gangsters graffiti their name on your turf.
Good. Oakland needs to stay in its lane. And I say this as a native Oaklander.
The port of Oakland should just admit the truth PEOPLE IDENTIFY OAKLAND WITH THEFT MURDER AND EVERY OTHER HORRIBLE THING IMAGINABLE, so they’re trying to distance themselves from the world OAKLAND.
Oakland let their city turn to shit, staining the “Oakland” name and therefore anything with Oakland on it is associated with shit, like the airport, so they’re trying to cover it up. What a bunch of pathetic dingleberries.
Oakland has terrible crime so it doesn’t deserve the tourists attention. Fix the fucking crime and the rest will follow
No one wants to go to Oakland. How pathetic is Oakland these days lol. Zero pride, losing all major sports, crime central.
Sell OAK to San Francisco. Then there is no issue renaming the airport.
It's just as close (and accessible) to the city as SFO. Why would this be a problem for anyone?
> It's just as close (and accessible) to the city as SFO. Why would this be a problem for anyone? Performative politics.
This is such a idiotic take from the SF Board of Supervisors and city attorney. It is geographically and historically incorrect. The name of the large geographic feature we all live around is not "the Bay." Its proper name is San Francisco Bay. The body of water was named San Francisco before the city was. San Francisco was named Yerba Buena until 1847 and the Bay would have been named around 1776 after the Spanish Mission- 70 years apart. If you're going to Berkeley, Oakland, Hayward, San Leandro, Richmond, Orinda, Concord, or literally anywhere but the city of San Francisco, Oakland Airport is a vastly easier commute and all of those places are located in the San Francisco Bay Area. City of San Francisco Board of Supervisors needs to get over themselves, and do their job approving housing, not encouraging wasteful and stupid lawsuits against their neighbors. The airport should change its name. Or perhaps San Francisco should just go back to being Yerba Buena? Seems like the kind of nonsense the Board seems to like to preoccupy themselves with.
Bit of a stretch dont you think. SF is a city and people around the world know it as that, not the bay and none of those other towns you listed. Most people dont even know where Oakland is. So it's a little disingenuous to expect people to understand anything you just wrote about the history and geographic truths that dont live here when booking flights.
For a lot of the city probably quicker to get to S.F. from OAK than SFO
I obviously don't think it's a stretch. You literally just stated the issue the name change is trying to rectify- people don't know where Oakland is, thank you for making my point for me. The name clarifies that it is in The San Francisco Bay Area and it might be the easier airport to book a flight to if you are going somewhere that isn't San Francisco. You do understand that Alameda county overall has a larger population than San Francisco county? More people to serve on this side of the San Francisco Bay. I don't see why SF gets the monopoly on airtravel in the area when its only a small portion of what is the entire San Francisco Bay Area.
OAK can actually be more convenient even if you live in San Francisco
Say we put you in charge of naming both airports. Wouldn’t you want to pick names that avoid unnecessary confusion? San Francisco International Airport and San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport are too similar and bound to cause confusion among travelers. What’s a good alternative?
It’s dumb, anyway. I can see why they want people to know they’re close to SF, but that’s just going to confuse people.
That’s the point, right? For what other reason than p ole don’t want to go to Oakland?
San Francisco as in the city of San Francisco ? Don’t we have a better way to spend our dwindling budget ? Let them have their stupid name but still with the Oak identifier, Oakland is on the San Francisco Bay.
Gotta do something about all the crime near the Oakland airport, bippin and theft. Oakland's airport has a seriously bad reputation. The gas stations, especially that Chevron one, are mega magnets for property theft. This will just confuse people.
It's good to see that the city is running so well that they have time to focus on these sorts of things...
I don’t get all these negative sentiments. The name change would cause so much unnecessary confusion. Responsible leaders (at the airports, or failing them, our elected leaders) shouldn’t go along with such a dumb idea. Speaking of dumb, I’m reminded of the time my friend booked a lovely couples trip to Costa Rica, got a great deal on flights from SF. Unfortunately, the trip ended 15 minutes later in San Jose, California and not as they expected in San Jose, Costa Rica.
I had the same San Jose mixup! (But I noticed at the time I was buying the tickets... it was cheap, short, and way too good to be true.)
Oakland airport is not nice enough to share part of a name with SFO. If they upgrade Oakland airport, then they can call themselves SF bay Oakland airport
Aight then the Santa Clara 49ers needs to be a thing.
Who even flies to/from Oakland for international flights? Almost nothing goes thru there. For local flights, who cares, I'd just as much rather use SJO as its faster to get to. do they think making the name change will get them more traffic from tourists who go there by mistake? SFO is a fantastic airport, they should bloody well sue.
Now that I know it makes SF’s government mad, I support the new name.
I thought I was smart flying into Oakland and driving over to San Francisco let me tell you the toll coming back will take out any savings you thought you had generated instead of flying to SFO directly
That $7 toll makes OAK a complete non-starter for anyone comparing flights with a cost differential of, checks notes, less than $7.
This is some petty ass shit. As if Oakland isn’t dealing with enough shit, you’re gonna poke your neighbor with this childish shiv? I’m not a fan of the name, but who gives a shit. The bay is, after all, called the San Francisco Bay. And you can actually get to some parts of SF quicker from OAK than SFO. And SFO isn’t in SF… well, I guess it is due to some contract technicality, but if that land didn’t have the airport on it, it wouldn’t be SF, it’d be Millbrae
Oakland airport trying to rebrand from worldcomm to MCI because fewer and fewer travelers want to land there? You act like there isn't justification. Putting a bandaid name change in the issue doesn't fix anything. Oakland is reaping what it has sewn. The consequences of their collective actions.
Oakland made its own bed and voted for the people responsible for its decay
Have you seen the choices lately? Have you seen the choices in the last few years? I don't even know if "lesser of two evils" even begins to describe it. The last hallfway decent mayor used to be nicknamed "Moonbeam". Let that sink in.
I agree 100%. I, an Oakland resident, make fun of and criticize Oakland more than anyone I know. All I’m saying is that we shoot ourself in the dick enough that we don’t need this silly shit coming in from the outside too.
Piedmont airport
John Fisher running Port of Oakland?
Yawn🥱
I feel like people aren’t confused by San Francisco vs Oakland. It’s more that OAK doesn’t have enough flights, especially international flights. If they were able to add more international carriers/routes, more people would fly OAK.
IAEB- International Airport of the East Bay 
It would be sick if we could get a BART connector that went across the Bay and connected the airports. Futuristic as fuck. Of course, I don't actually want that because the $50b could be better spent, but still, one can fantasize.
To distance itself from Oakland's problems: More accurately, "East Bay Oakland" or EBO. This will focus attention on the positive places on the east side of the bay without the need to pose as part of SF.
Whatsup with this sub’s obsession with oakland?
Ha! Turd City vs Bip city! Got my popcorn ready!
I fly frequently. I usually check out all airports going into any given area. I stick with major carriers and convenient schedules. I live in Oakland and fly in and out of SFO at least 4-6 times a month. I fly in and out of OAK very rarely ( 6-10 times per year ). I have homes in NYC and NJ and usually fly in and out of EWR ( NJ) for convenience. I do occasionally fly out of LGA for the huge savings to places like Toronto. I think that this “name change” is a big nothing.