SRB looks to buy Gatwick

Originally posted by willd
Interesting rumour on a.net is that CO are about to pull the plug on LGW.

Problem is that currently BAA have no reason/want to keep long haul carriers at LGW. If another company took LGW over, you can bet that they will be offering the remaining long haul carriers great deals to stay. Otherwise LGW will just become LTN on steroids.

Of course this could have a knock on effect with the CO/VS Codeshare.

CO is officially pulling almost all flights out of LGW, now, btw. I think only the flight to Cleveland (?) will stay.

I'm not so convinced that an airlines-owned LGW would be such a disaster. Presently, LGW's customers are the airlines for the transport part of their business and the passengers for the retail part. Just look at how well they treat passengers when it comes to getting us to spend in the retail areas and how badly they treat passengers when it comes to check-in, security and baggage reclaim.

An airlines-owned LGW will be incentivised to treat passengers well throughout the airport experience. From arrival, through check-in, security, waiting, boarding, departure, etc, etc.

Ian, exactly! I have to say though that VS are pretty good check in wise on the whole at LGW what with having pretty much the whole of AREA A to themselves.

Whoever takes over is going to have a whopping great bill to make LGW fit for the A380 to use it, widening taxiways, aprons and pier spacings etc.

I know there is also a plan in place to move the existing main runway further south and move the maintenance sheds to the other side of the airport so they can stop aircraft having to cross the runway to get to them thus facilitating an increase in takeoffs/landings but that again would take a huge amount of investment.

Maybe whoever buys the place wouldnt be too worried about reaching maximum capacity just yet anyway, what with CO pretty much pulling out and BA moving a lot of their flights to Heathrow T5 as well as XL's demise freeing up slots as well. Maybe VS might consider moving the odd JFK flight to LGW (I wish!!!!)[:D]

I feel the key is partownership.

If the airlines have a substantial financial interest and input into the way in which the airport is run then they must also take responsibility for the service the airport provides.
At the moment each can simply blame the other. Neither accept responsibility for any mess - just look at the T5 fiasco. Any ownership which does not include a substantial airline commitment will allow that to continue.

The airport must provide a service to both passengers and airlines. It must also be accountable.

I agree that full ownership by an airline or airlines would be a disaster. But a consortium which included extensive financial backing (eg sovereign wealth funds); a group of airlines (eg VS, BA, BMI, EZ, LH, EK, TCetc.); and an airport operator (eg MAG) could provide a service to passengers and become real competition to LHR.

Even in a part ownership someone needs to get a bang for their buck in terms of profit - each part would still be required to fund investment or find a way to back it through debt. I work with companies that are trying to extricate themselves from such messes, I still can't see it working.

Incentives, schmincentives I say with regard to providing a superior service, it all comes down to lolly and hard decisions and management focus.

We can agree to differ [}:)] - I'd prefer it if one of the good airport management groups who feature in the top ten airport experiences takes over LGW. Strangely, there aren't any airlines who are in any sense controlling in such businesses?

[Darren Wheeler]

Who will lend the money to actually buy it? Given the way things are going, unless someone can come up with £2b in cash, it could be years before the sale goes through. Then you have to find the money to do the re-branding from baggage trolleys to signage etc etc.

Whoever buys it will need deep pockets.

Maybe they'll get rid of the awful black on yellow signage - talk about making an airport look cheap. As for taking a while, well in the UK it's pretty rare for decent airports to become avalable so I wouldn't actually be surprised if a few pennies could be found - you can be pretty much guaranteed that creating extra capacity at competitor airports will take years of inquiries whereas LGW is nicely under utilised leaving a base for growth.

Originally posted by McMaddog
...whereas LGW is nicely under utilised leaving a base for growth.

Surely LGW isn't under utilised, what with it being the world's busiest single runway airport with its runway operating at near full capacity?

Originally posted by Vegascrazy

Originally posted by McMaddog
...whereas LGW is nicely under utilised leaving a base for growth.

Surely LGW isn't under utilised, what with it being the world's busiest single runway airport with its runway operating at near full capacity?

I was making an assumption based on XL, Zoom, Futura, Oasis all being LGW users and closing shop.

See what you're saying Dave but in all reality the likes of Oasis and Futura make next to no difference...I guess XL makes a tiny dent but nothing compared with the likes of BA & EZY if one of those went under.

Cheers
James

Originally posted by Darren Wheeler
Who will lend the money to actually buy it? Given the way things are going, unless someone can come up with £2b in cash, it could be years before the sale goes through. Then you have to find the money to do the re-branding from baggage trolleys to signage etc etc.

Whoever buys it will need deep pockets.

Such as this?
And DIC are not the only sovereign wealth fund.

[Darren Wheeler]

Ah yes, a Sheik. Perhaps they'll do a cheap line in fuel too?

I have a sneaky feeling that if any airport is sold, the Government have to approve it to make sure there is no threat to 'national infrastructure'.

On the matter of capacity, LGW's master plan is to grow passenger traffic from 31.2m in 2007 to 40m (already agreed by local councils) and thence to 45m by 2030. All from a single runway.
I can shed no light on how many take-offs and landings that a single runway can manage, but I presume that the displacement of smaller aircraft by larger ones accounts for some of the increase. A second runway, increasing capacity to 80m passengers, would only be considered if a third runway at LHR is undeliverable.

McMaddog, just a little aside to your signage quip [:D]

The signage was designed in 1957 by Jock Kinneir at the request of the government for LGW, he was also responsible for our road network signage. It has since been used in many other airports.

The same design has been tweeked by Paul Mijksenaar at Schiphol airport.

The only reason they use black on yellow is that it distinguishes itself easily from all other signage in the airport environment and supposedly simplifies important directions for the passenger rather than them having to interpret maps which can confuse some people.

Remember doing a bit on this at school, surprised myself that i even remebered it [:I]

Nerd bit over.

Competition Commission confirms that the BAA have to sell Gatwick, Stanstead and Edinburgh from their portfolio of airports!

Iain

quote:Originally posted by iforres1
Competition Commission confirms that the BAA have to sell Gatwick, Stanstead and Edinburgh from their portfolio of airports!



Saw this as well.

I had to laugh because BAA complained about the original findings (ie: Selling LGW off), so they had some sort of appeal process where by it was determined that BAA would have to sell off LGW, EDI and STN! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

I would imagine it will not be long before MOL is talking about buying STN.

Btw its Stansted not stanstead [|:)]

quote:Originally posted by willd
[quote]Originally posted by iforres1
Competition Commission confirms that the BAA have to sell Gatwick, Stanstead and Edinburgh from their portfolio of airports!



Saw this as well.

Btw its Stansted not stanstead [|:)]


Already doing my lines teacher[:I]

The bids are in and Virgin not part of any of the consortiums.

Article in The Times

Maybe they don't want to be seen to back what could be a losing side... notice the articles says that VS and U2 have spoken to all the bidders...

Interesting. Although IIRC 3i and Virgin Group have quite a reasonable relationship.