PIK

[Clive]

An employee at PIK mentioned to me today that there is talk of a party looking at the airport with a possible view of buying.

Don't know if fact or fiction.

Anyone heard anything?

https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport ... nt-4261298

Looks like its true

Can anyone see beyond the paywall? Be interesting to see what is being said about this.

[Clive]

An employee at PIK mentioned to me today that there is talk of a party looking at the airport with a possible view of buying.

Don't know if fact or fiction.

Anyone heard anything?

https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport ... nt-4261298

Looks like its true

Can anyone see beyond the paywall? Be interesting to see what is being said about this.

Embdy? Is it a new article? I can’t even see the date

[ADIG]

Article

https://archive.is/NCIhM

[Clive]

Article

https://archive.is/NCIhM

Thank you.

No hint as to what the interested party would intend to do with it.

Hope remains that new owners close the terminal and Ryanair move pax ops to Glasgow’s main airport.

[TonyM90]

You'd be talking millions to demolish an old asbestos filled terminal to replace it with a brand new one surely, to then probably still risk running it at a loss for a small amount of passengers?

To be fair, I wouldn't put it past someone doing that given all the silly money that gets thrown around in aviation, i.e. Flybe 2.0.

Prestwick has done better recently expanding the business beyond commercial travel but I'll wait and see what happens in the next few years as long as it still has that terminal to operate which won't be cheap given its age and size with little through traffic and the airport was a big base of operations through things like the pandemic and COP26 which brought in a lot of money that will somehow need replaced. That land space surely would be far more valuable if it was repurposed for the other things that have done alright and don't have the same running costs, i.e. maintenance ops etc.

[Bearsden]

As we all know the biggest revenue earner is its military operations (in particular fuelling) with of course a significant spin-off in the local community for accommodation etc

Prestwick is running at a profit

The SG still see Prestwick as an airport ie with passengers and not an airfield so I see any 'forced' move of Ryanair's passengers operations highly unlikely - the argument will be put forward that the passenger flights lessen the need for positioning flights for maintenance

Yes the terminal building is expensive to run per sq ft used but that is largely irrelevant if the contribution from car parking, duty & tax free sales and other passenger income exceeds direct passenger costs (a lot of contracts are seasonal, part-time or split-shift) - asbestos only becomes an issue if you disturb it so 'let sleeping dogs lie'

[Clive]

As we all know the biggest revenue earner is its military operations (in particular fuelling) with of course a significant spin-off in the local community for accommodation etc

Prestwick is running at a profit

The SG still see Prestwick as an airport ie with passengers and not an airfield so I see any 'forced' move of Ryanair's passengers operations highly unlikely - the argument will be put forward that the passenger flights lessen the need for positioning flights for maintenance

Yes the terminal building is expensive to run per sq ft used but that is largely irrelevant if the contribution from car parking, duty & tax free sales and other passenger income exceeds direct passenger costs (a lot of contracts are seasonal, part-time or split-shift) - asbestos only becomes an issue if you disturb it so 'let sleeping dogs lie'

The question will be what the eventual buyers intend to do with their facility. Hopefully they’ll be of the opinion that keeping pax ops with one unpredictable customer and no prospect of additional airline customers is a costly burden on the core business activities, which are clearly going to be similar to now. We don’t need me to list them - but they might see scope for expansion in global air freight and military staging. They might have a major partner wanting to build a hub such as Fed Ex, UPS or the likes. If pax ops don’t cover their own costs or if Ryanair don’t like the new owners attitude then all bets would be off in a trice.

[Bearsden]

As we all know the biggest revenue earner is its military operations (in particular fuelling) with of course a significant spin-off in the local community for accommodation etc

Prestwick is running at a profit

The SG still see Prestwick as an airport ie with passengers and not an airfield so I see any 'forced' move of Ryanair's passengers operations highly unlikely - the argument will be put forward that the passenger flights lessen the need for positioning flights for maintenance

Yes the terminal building is expensive to run per sq ft used but that is largely irrelevant if the contribution from car parking, duty & tax free sales and other passenger income exceeds direct passenger costs (a lot of contracts are seasonal, part-time or split-shift) - asbestos only becomes an issue if you disturb it so 'let sleeping dogs lie'

The question will be what the eventual buyers intend to do with their facility. Hopefully they’ll be of the opinion that keeping pax ops with one unpredictable customer and no prospect of additional airline customers is a costly burden on the core business activities, which are clearly going to be similar to now. We don’t need me to list them - but they might see scope for expansion in global air freight and military staging. They might have a major partner wanting to build a hub such as Fed Ex, UPS or the likes. If pax ops don’t cover their own costs or if Ryanair don’t like the new owners attitude then all bets would be off in a trice.

But is it a 'costly burden'? I suspect marginal passenger income exceeds marginal passengers costs eg ATC is 24/7 anyway so the marginal cost for passenger operations is NIL

[Clive]

As we all know the biggest revenue earner is its military operations (in particular fuelling) with of course a significant spin-off in the local community for accommodation etc

Prestwick is running at a profit

The SG still see Prestwick as an airport ie with passengers and not an airfield so I see any 'forced' move of Ryanair's passengers operations highly unlikely - the argument will be put forward that the passenger flights lessen the need for positioning flights for maintenance

Yes the terminal building is expensive to run per sq ft used but that is largely irrelevant if the contribution from car parking, duty & tax free sales and other passenger income exceeds direct passenger costs (a lot of contracts are seasonal, part-time or split-shift) - asbestos only becomes an issue if you disturb it so 'let sleeping dogs lie'

The question will be what the eventual buyers intend to do with their facility. Hopefully they’ll be of the opinion that keeping pax ops with one unpredictable customer and no prospect of additional airline customers is a costly burden on the core business activities, which are clearly going to be similar to now. We don’t need me to list them - but they might see scope for expansion in global air freight and military staging. They might have a major partner wanting to build a hub such as Fed Ex, UPS or the likes. If pax ops don’t cover their own costs or if Ryanair don’t like the new owners attitude then all bets would be off in a trice.

But is it a 'costly burden'? I suspect marginal passenger income exceeds marginal passengers costs eg ATC is 24/7 anyway so the marginal cost for passenger operations is NIL

I guess the biggest costs directly attributable to handling commercial pax will be the terminal building running costs and upkeep, rates if any and staff wages. But the bigger question is will the new owners see Ryanair as the sole operator a sound investment when it comes to making a sustainable business plan. A new carpet in the terminal might cost as much as 2 years profit generated from the pax who wear it out (profit, not income for those who might not separate the two), but can they guarantee pax will still be there in 2 years, for example.

Personally I’ve just got to hope the buyers have every intention of building on all of the good and unique things PIK does and no intention of providing pax handling facilities for Ryanair. Or Ryanair don’t like the charges they will get from the new owners or GLA seals the deal by providing an alternative base with massive growth potential.

[Iain]

https://x.com/seanm1997/status/17223579 ... lOa6GAi2Ew

Ryanair REMOVE 39 routes across their network including:

Glasgow Prestwick - Marseille

Shame EZY rolled over so easily and dropped GLA-MRS.