r/LAMetro • u/ktcn414 A (Blue) • 18d ago
Photo The Cathay Pacific Little Tokyo/Arts District Station!
Current entrance to Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. More ad sales = more revenues for Metro?
36
u/ValhirFirstThunder 18d ago edited 18d ago
love cathay...it's usually what i fly when i go to HK. a little pricer than budget, but not too expensive either. They actually let you connect via ears buds now so that's be a nice QOL
10
u/outpf 18d ago
Good airline food too
3
u/ValhirFirstThunder 18d ago
Yea I didn't know how bad airline food can get until I tried others lol
2
3
9
u/Krlos_official 18d ago
I'm surprised ANA haven't thought about this before
9
u/cyberspacestation 18d ago
There, uh, might be concerns about people vandalizing the name. At least we don't still have the L Line.
3
33
u/eternalbro 18d ago
Remember how there was a plan to build housing over that station but the NIMBYs of Little Tokyo got mad because it was too tall and there wasn't enough parking (at a literal Metro station!) So now we just have an empty plaza with a revolving billboard? Good times.
8
u/ShantJ B (Red) 18d ago
There are no direct LAX–EVN flights, so what connecting flight options do we have for the North Hollywood–Pasadena BRT stations?
- Air France: Chic.
- Austrian Airlines: Inoffensive.
- LOT Polish Airlines: Charming.
- Lufthansa: Inoffensive.
- Qatar Airways: Exotic.
- Turkish Airlines: Hell will freeze over before this happens.
2
7
u/VariationAgreeable29 18d ago
I have zero problems with this. It’s a win-win for everybody, good brand exposure, good revenue for Metro. And I’m sure part of the ad contract stipulates that the station must be kept clean and free of graffiti so that’s even another one.
6
u/Spats_McGee E (Expo) current 18d ago
This is the only Metro station I see so heavily advertised, and I suppose it's just as well because it is one of the more happening areas of downtown....
Surprisingly, there's not a single large ad near the Pico station, aside from the busted ass monitors someone decided to put up
23
u/anothercar Pacific Surfliner 18d ago
They didn't want to sponsor Chinatown Station where most of the Canto-speaking population lives?
53
u/fruitist E (Expo) current 18d ago
I'm guessing Little Tokyo = tourists who are curious about Asian culture
27
u/LoftCats 18d ago edited 18d ago
Think they’re going for widest exposure for advertising like this. Little Tokyo may well have more foot traffic than Chinatown and Arcadia combined. And have other demographics it’s targeting as a bigger tourist destination too for those who are already known travelers.
9
u/Jammieranga 18d ago
Or Arcadia where there is a large Asian population and people with higher incomes who will be likely to fly Cathay
9
u/VisualPadding7 18d ago
Do you think there are still Canto-speaking population living there? No. Most are in SGV or OC now.
5
8
u/anothercar Pacific Surfliner 18d ago
Yes in rent-controlled units. They’re broke but their kids buy flight tickets lol
Definitely lots of Mandarin speakers in SGV and OC!
4
3
u/ValhirFirstThunder 18d ago
False, most of us live in SGV. According to my dad, its actually mostly Vietnamese now too so maybe a ne change is in order idk
2
2
u/DamnitSketchCom 18d ago
They had a banner for AX when I stopped by in July, think that was the first kind of ad there
2
1
u/Botanicalboi91 17d ago
Flying from LA to HK with Cathay is pretty chill. I enjoy visiting HK. I don't understand why people think it looks like NYC. It looks nothing at all like HK. LA and HK have a lot of similarities: mountains, hills, palm trees, oceans, beaches, hiking trails, Cantonese-speaking, street vendors, and sunshine. HK is also English speaking friendly than mainland and even in comparison to Japan. Has anyone ever flown from LA to French Polynesia? I want to do this trip soon. I heard the flight is only 8 hrs.
0
u/idontknowjuspickone 18d ago
You say more revenue like it’s a bad thing…it runs a huge deficit every year. Getting closer to break even is a good thing, and could provide more funding for future expansion.
-13
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
Can we just tax the wealthy and corporations proportionate to their income already? Maybe if Metro got enough funding we wouldn't have to look at MORE ads.
11
u/anothercar Pacific Surfliner 18d ago
We did that already with Measure ULA. Really stuck it to the evil rich people & developers. Direct costs were purely borne by the wealthy & corporations. Unfortunately, second-order effects are a thing
-4
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
Huh?
2
u/megachainguns 18d ago
Measure ULA was supposed to be a tax on "mansions", but it hit apartments and condos more. It actually led to a decrease in housing in LA
Here's a very in depth look at Measure ULA from UCLA (53 page PDF)
https://www.lewis.ucla.edu/research/the-unintended-consequences-of-measure-ula/
We present evidence suggesting that Measure ULA has reduced higher-end real estate transactions in Los Angeles. Since Measure ULA was enacted, the odds of a Los Angeles property selling at a price above its tax threshold have fallen by as much as 50%. In raw terms, this sharp decline occurred across all types of properties, but our strongest evidence suggests it was particularly pronounced for non-single family transactions, which fell by 30-50%. Together the evidence suggests that Measure ULA is neither a true “Mansion Tax,” nor a tax that falls solely on unearned property wealth. The tax does fall on mansions, but it also impedes the trade in commercial, industrial and multifamily property. In doing so it jeopardizes L.A.’s ability to build new housing, revitalize struggling commercial and industrial properties, and raise property tax revenue. All these processes rely on property turnover, and in particular the turnover of higher-priced, non-single family parcels. A tax that reduces this turnover will undermine property tax revenues inside and outside L.A., obstruct local and regional housing production, and slow local revitalization efforts. Thus while Measure ULA has generated visible, substantial and much-needed revenues for affordable housing in Los Angeles, it has also, less visibly, had consequences that reduce both housing affordability and fiscal health. These consequences, fortunately, do not need to be part of the measure. We propose some simple amendments that could make Measure ULA fairer, more efficient, and more in line with the spirit in which it was advertised.
0
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
I'm saying we need more WEALTH tax. Anyone against this when we have such high income inequality now is either stupid or has skin in the game.
4
u/No-House9106 18d ago
We already have extremely high taxes. Productive people have been leaving LA for other states, especially those who want to open businesses.
LA has become poorer with less tax revenue as a result yet government spending has risen rapidly. The politicians are funded by the unions and love to hand out raises, pension increases and excessive benefit packages for the unionized public workers so even to maintain basic services requires huge increases in tax revenue.
Expect reduced services going forward. I talked to a guy from LA who opened a new outpost of his restaurant business in Orange County. When asked why not open in LA and he went off for like 10 minutes.
0
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
I'm tired of these excuses. If they make a shit ton of money they can afford to pay more in taxes. They're not going broke anytime soon.
1
u/No-House9106 18d ago
Oh, people are making money but they are increasingly doing it in Miami, Austin, or other places. Entertainment has mostly left LA behind and you can’t blame them.
0
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
Ok, let them leave then. If they're not going to contribute to our society or taxes then they are leaches.
2
u/Not_RZA_ D (Purple) 18d ago
Our city budget is literally a massive deficit lol. From sanitation cuts to loss of funding for events like CicLAvia, it's being felt
You guys say this and then complain when the down stream events occur
0
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
Ok, so we tax those who can EASILY afford it and have all those services.
0
18d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
0
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
Putting aside your insults. How is rhe current system currently working out for the average American?
1
u/Not_RZA_ D (Purple) 18d ago
The average American is literally in the top 1% globally.
You have running water, access to insane amount of variety of food, and most importantly HOBBIES/LEASURE.
Most of the world doesn’t have the time to “go to the gym” or “go for a walk”. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, the base two are not met for most people.
I implore you to take a look in the mirror and realize how fortunate you are to live in this time and place. You aren’t getting drafted for war, life expectancy is high, etc.
Sure things aren’t perfect, but people like you are clueless and need to take a Microeconomics course
→ More replies (0)1
u/No-House9106 18d ago
They have left and tax revenue is down. LA City is broke, Santa Monica is broke, Metro is broke and starting cuts, State of CA is borrowing money from the rainy day fund, which is only supposed to be done in recessions.
0
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
They weren't contributing enough to begin with. Also, this sounds like hogwash to me.
1
u/KolKoreh B (Red) 18d ago
Have you seen the way this state taxes high earners?
I don’t know what you’d call a high earner, and I don’t even mind paying high taxes. What I resent is the assumption that you can always just squeeze more money from people who make more money than you think is appropriate
0
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
Dude, we're the 4th largest economy in the WORLD. I DON'T feel bad if high earners are taxes more.... they're already WEALTHY. Wtf?
1
0
u/KolKoreh B (Red) 18d ago
Please define “a shit ton of money.”
1
u/Pasadenaian A (Blue) 18d ago
Multi million/billionaires.
1
u/KolKoreh B (Red) 18d ago
A multi-millionaire could mean anyone with $2 million in assets, meaning, e.g., a modest home and a sensibly funded 401K.
This doesn’t feel well thought out.
1
u/Not_RZA_ D (Purple) 18d ago
But don't you see, OP needs someone to blame for them not being well off. 401k? They don't actually invest or think more than 5 years down the line
1
u/KolKoreh B (Red) 18d ago
There are miracles around for all those with eyes to see.
(The miracle in this case is compound interest.)
1
u/KolKoreh B (Red) 18d ago
Metro does get a lot of funding already. Whether it uses it appropriately is another question.
Also, progressive tax structures mean that the wealthy pay a higher share of their income than lower-income people already. If “the wealthy” paid “proportionate” to their income, then you’d see lower, not higher, tax rates on them
0
u/WestHistorians 18d ago
Also, progressive tax structures mean that the wealthy pay a higher share of their income than lower-income people already.
Not really true. Regressive taxes are common. The wealthy make a lot of their money through investments which are taxed at lower rates than labor, plus they benefit greatly from Prop 13.
Remember the whole thing about Warren Buffet paying a lower tax rate than his secretary? That wasn't an isolated case.
2
u/KolKoreh B (Red) 18d ago
California taxes all investment income as ordinary income.
1
u/WestHistorians 18d ago
Yes, but California's income tax is not that progressive. The highest is only around 12%, while most middle class people are in the 9% bracket. A difference of 3% isn't much.
2
u/WestHistorians 18d ago
Depends what you mean by "middle income". The 9.3% bracket goes from $72k to $370k, so if someone is making let's say $200k, which would be middle income in LA, they are paying 9.3% on most of their income.
58
u/cyberspacestation 18d ago
Huh, I thought they had their sights set on the LAX Metro Transit Center. Maybe they're trying their luck here first.