Ferrovial half year figures

[Ian]

Taken from the Southampton section of Pprune is a note that on July 30th 2020, SOU airport owners (Ferrovial) - which own AGS (Aberdeen Glasgow and Southampton Airports), issued their First Half results for 2020:

https://static.ferrovial.com/wp-content ... tion-1.pdf

AGS is on page 11

If you copy and paste the link it should work.
Ian

[Clive]

Taken from the Southampton section of Pprune is a note that on July 30th 2020, SOU airport owners (Ferrovial) - which own AGS (Aberdeen Glasgow and Southampton Airports), issued their First Half results for 2020:

https://static.ferrovial.com/wp-content ... tion-1.pdf

AGS is on page 11

If you copy and paste the link it should work.
Ian

Ferrovial are only part owners of AGS.

[G-WATP]

Ferrovial are only part owners of AGS.

Indeed, but their part equals a half and anyway the information they've published relates to all of AGS. Under the heading 'AGS response to Covid-19' they refer to "Shrinking operations & redesigning the organization". They don't sound like the words of a company that's intending to add another airport to its portfolio. Presumably their mooted purchase of PIK (assuming the reports of them being the preferred bidder were true) will no longer be proceeding?

On a related point, here's Derek Provan (the Chief Executive Officer of AGS Airports Ltd) saying "AGS Airports carried almost 14 million passengers in 2019 and, unfortunately, I believe it will take at least three years for us to build back to those levels."

https://www.aoa.org.uk/wp-content/uploa ... r-2020.pdf

[Clive]

Ferrovial are only part owners of AGS.

Indeed, but their part equals a half and anyway the information they've published relates to all of AGS. Under the heading 'AGS response to Covid-19' they refer to "Shrinking operations & redesigning the organization". They don't sound like the words of a company that's intending to add another airport to its portfolio. Presumably their mooted purchase of PIK (assuming the reports of them being the preferred bidder were true) will no longer be proceeding?

On a related point, here's Derek Provan (the Chief Executive Officer of AGS Airports Ltd) saying "AGS Airports carried almost 14 million passengers in 2019 and, unfortunately, I believe it will take at least three years for us to build back to those levels."

https://www.aoa.org.uk/wp-content/uploa ... r-2020.pdf

Yep, 3 years if we’re lucky.

Whoever was buying PIK I’m sure the sale is now off. I wouldn’t expect the SG to put much effort into selling it until after Covid and even then it’s hard to imagine any company wishing to avail themselves of it.

[G-WATP]

Whoever was buying PIK I’m sure the sale is now off. I wouldn’t expect the SG to put much effort into selling it until after Covid and even then it’s hard to imagine any company wishing to avail themselves of it.

Indeed, I can't imagine anyone buying it anytime soon. Even the one revenue stream that was increasing pre-Covid - that of military fuel and tech stops - has almost evaporated with Global Trek taking an ever-increasing share of that traffic through BFS and CWL. Seems that even the RCAF, loyal users of PIK since the second world war, now seem to route increasingly through BFS rather than PIK as does much of the USAF C130 and KC135 traffic (the former having been the case for some years now).

Presumably the SG will come to the view soon that the 'what about the jobs' argument for keeping PIK open is increasingly specious, with only the Ryanair and Chevron hangars actually needing a runway. Many of the other on-airport jobs (cargo and passenger handling etc) could be absorbed in GLA or EDI if Ryanair, Cargolux and Air France cargo were to decamp. The off-airport associated jobs (e.g. Spirit, Goodrich, GE Caledonian) don't need on-site access to a runway and could truck their goods to and from GLA or even MAN/EMA/LHR if required. So the actual number of jobs saved at PIK per pound of SG funding to keep it going is relatively low and the SG might think that more jobs could be saved elsewhere if their money earmarked for PIK was spent somewhere else. Presumably, though, no such decision would be made until after May's Holyrood elections.

[Clive]

Whoever was buying PIK I’m sure the sale is now off. I wouldn’t expect the SG to put much effort into selling it until after Covid and even then it’s hard to imagine any company wishing to avail themselves of it.

Indeed, I can't imagine anyone buying it anytime soon. Even the one revenue stream that was increasing pre-Covid - that of military fuel and tech stops - has almost evaporated with Global Trek taking an ever-increasing share of that traffic through BFS and CWL. Seems that even the RCAF, loyal users of PIK since the second world war, now seem to route increasingly through BFS rather than PIK as does much of the USAF C130 and KC135 traffic (the former having been the case for some years now).

Presumably the SG will come to the view soon that the 'what about the jobs' argument for keeping PIK open is increasingly specious, with only the Ryanair and Chevron hangars actually needing a runway. Many of the other on-airport jobs (cargo and passenger handling etc) could be absorbed in GLA or EDI if Ryanair, Cargolux and Air France cargo were to decamp. The off-airport associated jobs (e.g. Spirit, Goodrich, GE Caledonian) don't need on-site access to a runway and could truck their goods to and from GLA or even MAN/EMA/LHR if required. So the actual number of jobs saved at PIK per pound of SG funding to keep it going is relatively low and the SG might think that more jobs could be saved elsewhere if their money earmarked for PIK was spent somewhere else. Presumably, though, no such decision would be made until after May's Holyrood elections.

It’s a loan, mind, not an outlay. The land alone will reimburse the government if no purchase of the airfield as a going concern ever takes place.

But yes, presumably the PIK management can only string everyone along for so long.

PS: I don’t think the May election has any bearing on any of this.

[G-WATP]

It’s a loan, mind, not an outlay. The land alone will reimburse the government if no purchase of the airfield as a going concern ever takes place.

But yes, presumably the PIK management can only string everyone along for so long.

PS: I don’t think the May election has any bearing on any of this.

Three points:
a) the 'loan' of c.£39m was impaired by c.£33m in recent accounts, so presumably they think they'll be getting at most c.£6m back.

b) Consultation on the Council's second Local Development Plan closed yesterday. Once adopted that'll guide development until the middle of the next decade. Unsurprisingly, the airport continues to be designated as an airport in the LDP. Someone buying it with the intent of redeveloping it for some other use would have little chance of getting planning consent until the third LDP and even then they'd have an uphill struggle getting the council to designate it as anything other than an airport, thus the value of the land for an alternative use is limited.

c) The Conservative MSP for Ayr has a majority over the SNP of 750 votes. The latter won the equivalent Westminster seat in December and will be hopeful of winning the Holyrood seat in May. I would therefore be surprised if they didn't factor in political considerations in any sale. Imagine they sold it to AGS (for the sake of argument) next month who promptly closed the terminal and shifted FR to GLA. Clearly that would hinder the SNP's hope of regaining the Ayr seat, so political considerations will almost certainly have a bearing on the timing of any sale.

[Clive]

Isn’t the Tory MSP for South Ayrshire a result of the regional list vote? If so the same will happen again if the SNP get the predicted landslide on the constituency vote. The Scottish Parliament voting system is designed to prevent a monopoly.

Anyway, that besides, it’s your opinion that if the airport’s funding stopped and the site inevitably closed as a result it would lie dormant forever unless someone wanted to rebuild an airport there?

Difficult to see to be honest. Planning would change appropriately.

[Billyboeing]

Many new appointments at AGS

https://www.heraldscotland.com/business ... ointments-
pandemic-spurs-closures-start-ups/

[Clive]

Many new appointments at AGS

https://www.heraldscotland.com/business ... ointments-
pandemic-spurs-closures-start-ups/

I wonder what this means for Francois and Paul?