PIK

[TonyM90]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me. Infact I would go as far to say that the presence of the terminal and the FR flights are a barrier to the airport's progress at this point.

[bill]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me.

Infact I would go as far to say that the presence of the terminal and the FR flights are a barrier to the airport's progress at this point.

Quite agree. It's a distraction and a money drain PIK doesn't need. Remove this and let the airfield flourish doing the things it's good at whilst making good money. If only the politicians in this neck of the woods could grasp this eh?

[Bearsden]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me.

Infact I would go as far to say that the presence of the terminal and the FR flights are a barrier to the airport's progress at this point.

Quite agree. It's a distraction and a money drain PIK doesn't need. Remove this and let the airfield flourish doing the things it's good at whilst making good money. If only the politicians in this neck of the woods could grasp this eh?

But are passenger ops a net cash outflow? With the indirect income from car parking, fueling etc on the revenue side and seasonal / part-time / flexi working on the cost side, I suspect it is cash generating on a marginal cost basis - remember a lot of airfield costs are fixed

[Clive]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me.

Quite agree. It's a distraction and a money drain PIK doesn't need. Remove this and let the airfield flourish doing the things it's good at whilst making good money. If only the politicians in this neck of the woods could grasp this eh?

But are passenger ops a net cash outflow? With the indirect income from car parking, fueling etc on the revenue side and seasonal / part-time / flexi working on the cost side, I suspect it is cash generating on a marginal cost basis - remember a lot of airfield costs are fixed

Noticed you didn’t include the terminal building and upkeep thereof, or insurance and regulatory costs that hosting pac ops necessitates. The true comparison which would tell us if the limited pax ops are a boon or a burden on the overall business would be to compare the business with pax ops to how the business would be without pax ops in the entirety of what that means. I think the business would be stronger without and that’s without the caveat that Ryanair are the only customer and as such can play god over this whole question. That’s not any kind of business plan for new owners.

[Clive]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me. Infact I would go as far to say that the presence of the terminal and the FR flights are a barrier to the airport's progress at this point.

Yes PIK is a military base in all but name. The Canadian Air Force have a forward operational base at PIK with based aircraft and crew. But they are there for good reasons, not bad. Unlike the RAF and USAF they are not supporting Israel or their genocide but are carrying out humanitarian ops for Ukraine and reconnaissance work for NATO over by Latvia and Finland. Here’s more info on this https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

[Bearsden]

Quite agree. It's a distraction and a money drain PIK doesn't need. Remove this and let the airfield flourish doing the things it's good at whilst making good money. If only the politicians in this neck of the woods could grasp this eh?

But are passenger ops a net cash outflow? With the indirect income from car parking, fueling etc on the revenue side and seasonal / part-time / flexi working on the cost side, I suspect it is cash generating on a marginal cost basis - remember a lot of airfield costs are fixed

Noticed you didn’t include the terminal building and upkeep thereof, or insurance and regulatory costs that hosting pac ops necessitates. The true comparison which would tell us if the limited pax ops are a boon or a burden on the overall business would be to compare the business with pax ops to how the business would be without pax ops in the entirety of what that means. I think the business would be stronger without and that’s without the caveat that Ryanair are the only customer and as such can play god over this whole question. That’s not any kind of business plan for new owners.

PIK's passenger income in 2023-24 was £5m, the same as its FBO income

[Clive]

But are passenger ops a net cash outflow? With the indirect income from car parking, fueling etc on the revenue side and seasonal / part-time / flexi working on the cost side, I suspect it is cash generating on a marginal cost basis - remember a lot of airfield costs are fixed

Noticed you didn’t include the terminal building and upkeep thereof, or insurance and regulatory costs that hosting pac ops necessitates. The true comparison which would tell us if the limited pax ops are a boon or a burden on the overall business would be to compare the business with pax ops to how the business would be without pax ops in the entirety of what that means. I think the business would be stronger without and that’s without the caveat that Ryanair are the only customer and as such can play god over this whole question. That’s not any kind of business plan for new owners.

PIK's passenger income in 2023-24 was £5m, the same as its FBO income

It’s a shame we don’t know the true costs of hosting the pax, but maybe with an income of £5m there is no loss from doing so.

[pushingtinonceagain]

Making low-mid single figure £m profits each year is admirable given where PIK was a decade ago. Here’s the big BUT

The minute they need to do any significant runway or taxiway resurfacing, or upgrading AGL or ILS systems that profit will be absolutely annihilated.

Newark - 3048m runway - $81m in 2021
RAF Northolt - 1687m - £23m in 2019

If you believe the murmurings in the industry EDI’s will start with a 3, possibly 4x million quid.

So, I hope the prospective new owners have real deep pockets.
Terminal or not the whole place is still on life support as far as I’m concerned. If the relationship with the US deteriorates further then I can see revenue from the USAF dropping as well. PIK is between a rock and a hard place and it’s beyond time that GLA was ruthless and went in for the kill.