Letter in Today's The Herald

[Bearsden]

I don't get the print edition of The herald so maybe I've missed it, but as far as I can see there has been no response from GLA to the letters that were published last week.

An organisation like AGS should have a PR/media team who are monitoring the press for any mention of their airport. As such these letters should have been flagged to the management team and Johnston or provan should have written a response letter to the herald ASAP.

If we don't see something in the next few days then that's just more evidence that the management are completely at sea and have taken their eyes off the ball - and that individual departments like PR/media are not operating properly.

And GLA doesn’t even have a bus to Edinburgh, one of Europe’s tourism hotspots. The world’s airlines won’t like that when it comes to trying to find a USP for using GLA over EDI for serving the Scottish inbound or outbound markets. Been saying it for years. It’s crazy mental schoolboy stuff.

Absolutely, to me it's just absolutely inexplicable! How any business can tolerate something like that that blatantly targets the absolute centre of their catchment area and sucks their business and market share dry - and do nothing to try to counter it- is absolutely beyond me.

To draw a parallel - if Tesco started a bus to their store from the car park of the local Asda, would the management team at Asda just sit back, ignore it, do nothing for over a decade and let it suck more and more customers out of their store? Of course not - they'd immediately put on a competing bus to their store from Tesco's car park and offer lots of ASDA discount vouchers to passengers who used it for good measure!

I think I read somewhere that the Queen Street to Edinburgh train services are going down to half hourly for much of the day, so any argument about people travelling by train between Edinburgh and GLA is well and truly sunk!

Not only that but we have the Buchanan Street to EDI bus operating through the night whereas the last airport bus from GLA to the city centre is at 11pm. Ubelievably embarrassing stuff!

Iirc I think I remember you hinting two or three years ago before covid that maybe something was in the offing regarding a bus, but obviously it's never come to fruition. I don't know if you can tell us what you'd heard at the time?

I very much doubt AGS will respond . . . it is like 'hanging out their dirty washing' although the non-COVID issues affecting ABZ, GLA & SOU are different

The facts are indisputable - the fall in passenger numbers, the impact on its financial performance

I quick look at AGS Airports Holdings Limited's accounts shows the £ numbers - the book value of assets less liabilities acquired for £282m back in 2014 was (£204m) . . . that's right, liabilities exceeded assets

A creative (in my view) Right to Operate (the fair value of the permission to levy charges for the use of its infrastructure) Intangible Asset of £477m (ABZ £206m, GLA £269m) was created on acquisition and has remained since thus creating a positive value for Net Assets

The Net Assets as at end December 2020 were down at £162m (£43m lower than 2015) still with the £477m noted above

AGS has over £900m of debt of which over £700m is external bank debt

[Iain]

I very much doubt AGS will respond . . . it is like 'hanging out their dirty washing' although the non-COVID issues affecting ABZ, GLA & SOU are different

Whilst it was indeed a different owner and management team, I have seen those in charge at GLA responding to such critical letters before. Indeed they responded to one I wrote previously, although it was many years ago.

I'd suggest that failure to respond and defend their record suggests to the reader that what has been claimed in the letters - including the questions about the abilities of the management team - is correct!

Tbh, I think any lack of response is probably more to do with being completely unaware of the criticism in the first place!

[Bearsden]

Well, today there is a response in The Herald . . . now let's wait for the comments

THE Glasgow city region is Scotland’s economic powerhouse and Glasgow Airport has always been proud to be the region’s principal gateway. The success of the airport and the city are intertwined, with the connectivity we provide playing a vital role in driving prosperity, supporting our tourism industry and helping our businesses compete on the world stage.

We have a strong track record of working hand-in-hand with our city and national partners to develop compelling propositions for airlines to choose Glasgow over competing European cities. Prior to Covid, this team approach delivered tangible results, with Glasgow Airport recording the busiest year in its history in 2017 when almost 10 million passengers travelled through our doors.

In the same year, Glasgow Airport exported more than £1.7 billion worth of goods, more than any other Scottish airport, and we remain second only to Grangemouth when it comes to the value of goods exported from Scottish ports.

Like every part of society, our airports were brought to an almost complete standstill by the coronavirus pandemic. It impacted livelihoods, it impacted airlines, with many sadly going out of business, and it impacted the connectivity we had spent years building up. It is no understatement to say this pandemic has set us back decades. However, at Glasgow Airport we are firmly focused on plotting our recovery and I’m pleased to say we are already seeing positive signs.

Within the past month we have welcomed the new Flybe, Jet2.com has confirmed it will add a seventh based aircraft, TUI has announced expansion plans for Glasgow and one of our longest-serving airlines, Icelandair, has come back on board. In May, WestJet will relaunch flights to Halifax and introduce a new service to Toronto which is also served by Air Transat. Airlines such as easyJet, Lufthansa, Vueling and Transavia are all adding European cities back on to our destination map and Emirates is once again providing daily flights to Dubai.

There is news on all this in our High Flyer magazine.

This is all hugely encouraging but there is no escaping the fact the aviation landscape has changed. As we emerge from the pandemic there are fewer airlines with fewer aircraft; however, there are the same number of airports across Europe. This means, as a city, we will need to work even harder to sell Glasgow as an attractive destination and restore the connectivity that will drive our recovery.

It is widely accepted that a region with strong connectivity can expect to enjoy increased levels of trade, tourism and prosperity. It is also the case that airlines fly to cities, not airports. Now, more than ever, is the time to reinvigorate our team approach to route development and destination marketing.

By doing so, we can reposition our city, put it back on the map and ultimately attract investment, visitors and airlines back to Glasgow.

Derek Provan, Chief Executive, AGS Airports.


I'll pick up on a few of his phrases . . .
'economic powerhouse'

The whole of the second paragraph is questionable and what relevance is 2017 now - over 1m passenger drop between 2017 & 2019 after Ryanair closed its base and Thomas Cook went under with the full impact on 2020 masked by COVID

'Glasgow Airport exported more than £1.7 billion worth of goods' . . . but how much of that is trucked rather than belly cargo?

'with many sadly going out of business' . . . but which airlines operating to Glasgow went out of business due to COVID?

'hugely encouraging' . . . I don't think I would have added 'hugely', only Vueling & Transavia are 'new' and both are operating to a city already served by easyJet and previously, and more significantly, Air France

'fly to cities, not airports' . . . now there is the key issue, two relatively small cities less than 50 miles apart, in effect one market for any flight over the North Sea, English Channel or North Atlantic

[Allen McL]

2017 was five years ago, and Covid 19 didn't have any impact until 2020. Trading on past glories isn't going to help the situation now. No mention of routes lost or airlines shifting entire operations east to a rival airport that also had to contend with the whole sale effects of Covid 19 on the airport trade. People may well fly to cities not airports, but not if they can't. Hey even the US president didn't and he could have.

The rot as we know it is there and well established. He's either in denial, doesn't perceive the problem or is heading a deliberate wind down and sale on the part of AGS, if not a wind down and sale of AGS itself.

[Clive]

2017 was five years ago, and Covid 19 didn't have any impact until 2020. Trading on past glories isn't going to help the situation now. No mention of routes lost or airlines shifting entire operations east to a rival airport that also had to contend with the whole sale effects of Covid 19 on the airport trade. People may well fly to cities not airports, but not if they can't. Hey even the US president didn't and he could have.

The rot as we know it is there and well established. He's either in denial, doesn't perceive the problem or is heading a deliberate wind down and sale on the part of AGS, if not a wind down and sale of AGS itself.

Surely if you were preparing for a sale you’d not be winding it down but getting it ship shape?

Airlines and people DO fly to cities and regions, not airports.

There has been a wholesale consolidation of flights and it’s obvious that when it comes to GLA or EDI they will consolidate at EDI. Frankly it’s more desirable for the airlines and their customers. That’s what GLA and us have to deal with.

That said, only securing a Ryanair base could create the kind of growth in destination links and pax numbers for a speedy return to previous levels.

Letting Delta, Virgin and United go was almost certainly outwith the control of GLA management. Otherwise they’d still be here.

So just as Provan has to be realistic and smell the coffee, so do we IMO.

[egpffqtv]

Well, today there is a response in The Herald . . . now let's wait for the comments

THE Glasgow city region is Scotland’s economic powerhouse and Glasgow Airport has always been proud to be the region’s principal gateway. The success of the airport and the city are intertwined, with the connectivity we provide playing a vital role in driving prosperity, supporting our tourism industry and helping our businesses compete on the world stage.

We have a strong track record of working hand-in-hand with our city and national partners to develop compelling propositions for airlines to choose Glasgow over competing European cities. Prior to Covid, this team approach delivered tangible results, with Glasgow Airport recording the busiest year in its history in 2017 when almost 10 million passengers travelled through our doors.

In the same year, Glasgow Airport exported more than £1.7 billion worth of goods, more than any other Scottish airport, and we remain second only to Grangemouth when it comes to the value of goods exported from Scottish ports.

Like every part of society, our airports were brought to an almost complete standstill by the coronavirus pandemic. It impacted livelihoods, it impacted airlines, with many sadly going out of business, and it impacted the connectivity we had spent years building up. It is no understatement to say this pandemic has set us back decades. However, at Glasgow Airport we are firmly focused on plotting our recovery and I’m pleased to say we are already seeing positive signs.

Within the past month we have welcomed the new Flybe, Jet2.com has confirmed it will add a seventh based aircraft, TUI has announced expansion plans for Glasgow and one of our longest-serving airlines, Icelandair, has come back on board. In May, WestJet will relaunch flights to Halifax and introduce a new service to Toronto which is also served by Air Transat. Airlines such as easyJet, Lufthansa, Vueling and Transavia are all adding European cities back on to our destination map and Emirates is once again providing daily flights to Dubai.

There is news on all this in our High Flyer magazine.

This is all hugely encouraging but there is no escaping the fact the aviation landscape has changed. As we emerge from the pandemic there are fewer airlines with fewer aircraft; however, there are the same number of airports across Europe. This means, as a city, we will need to work even harder to sell Glasgow as an attractive destination and restore the connectivity that will drive our recovery.

It is widely accepted that a region with strong connectivity can expect to enjoy increased levels of trade, tourism and prosperity. It is also the case that airlines fly to cities, not airports. Now, more than ever, is the time to reinvigorate our team approach to route development and destination marketing.

By doing so, we can reposition our city, put it back on the map and ultimately attract investment, visitors and airlines back to Glasgow.

Derek Provan, Chief Executive, AGS Airports.


I'll pick up on a few of his phrases . . .
'economic powerhouse'

The whole of the second paragraph is questionable and what relevance is 2017 now - over 1m passenger drop between 2017 & 2019 after Ryanair closed its base and Thomas Cook went under with the full impact on 2020 masked by COVID

'Glasgow Airport exported more than £1.7 billion worth of goods' . . . but how much of that is trucked rather than belly cargo?

'with many sadly going out of business' . . . but which airlines operating to Glasgow went out of business due to COVID?

'hugely encouraging' . . . I don't think I would have added 'hugely', only Vueling & Transavia are 'new' and both are operating to a city already served by easyJet and previously, and more significantly, Air France

'fly to cities, not airports' . . . now there is the key issue, two relatively small cities less than 50 miles apart, in effect one market for any flight over the North Sea, English Channel or North Atlantic

I hope someone (from this forum) replies to Mr Provan's letter, making the points above.

[Iain]

There has been a wholesale consolidation of flights and it’s obvious that when it comes to GLA or EDI they will consolidate at EDI. Frankly it’s more desirable for the airlines and their customers. That’s what GLA and us have to deal with.

But that goes against the argument that airlines flight to cities - By that argument, if an airline wanted to fly to Glasgow then they would fly to GLA, but all too often they don't. The fact they're flying to EDI to serve Glasgow shows they actually don't fly to cities and they can be persuaded to fly to one city to serve another - Which is something GLA definitely aren't capitalising on!

Similarly, if airlines fly to cities, then why is anybody flying to PIK? Is Ayr an overwhelmingly popular and attractive destination? Of course not. FR fly there to serve Glasgow and the reason they don't fly to GLA is nothing to do with PIK being an attractive "city", it's to do with it being cheap!

Even if we accept the cities argument, the question still remains how come cities like Leeds, Bristol and Liverpool have (growing) Ryanair bases and all too often city/inbound routes we don't have, despite having at best the same - or in many cases markedly less - inbound tourists.

Finally, if we're saying airlines fly to regions then it should be just as possible to persuade an airline to fly to GLA to serve Edinburgh as vice versa, but we don't see that happening. I wonder why.

I'm sorry , but Provan deploying the "airlines fly to cities not airports" argument is simply yet another attempt to make an excuse and shift the blame to an external cause/organisations, which is very much his MO. Additionally, if believes Glasgow to be Scotland's "economic powerhouse", then it should be easy to attract airlines to attract flights to such a "city" - but they aren't. Why not?

How many other cities in the UK last year hosted euro championship games and as well probably the biggest conference event of the year which was attended by why a vast array of world leaders including the US president and was heavily reported on news channels globally for several days? The answer is none. Including Edinburgh. And yet Glasgow's not getting marketed enough and not getting enough exposure (and that's other people's fault). Yeah, sure.

I suspect the Herald will now see that letter as closing the matter for the time being so they might not publish a response, but I'll maybe try to fire something off if I get time.

I'm surprised he raised the successes of earlier, because that just invites people to point out it happened under his predecessor and that since he's come in he's lost all those advances!

He also doesn't address the issue of no scheduled USA flights at all!

[Clive]

There has been a wholesale consolidation of flights and it’s obvious that when it comes to GLA or EDI they will consolidate at EDI. Frankly it’s more desirable for the airlines and their customers. That’s what GLA and us have to deal with.

But that goes against the argument that airlines flight to cities - By that argument, if an airline wanted to fly to Glasgow then they would fly to GLA, but all too often they don't. The fact they're flying to EDI to serve Glasgow shows they actually don't fly to cities and they can be persuaded to fly to one city to serve another - Which is something GLA definitely aren't capitalising on!

Similarly, if airlines fly to cities, then why is anybody flying to PIK? Is Ayr an overwhelmingly popular and attractive destination? Of course not. FR fly there to serve Glasgow and the reason they don't fly to GLA is nothing to do with PIK being an attractive "city", it's to do with it being cheap!

Even if we accept the cities argument, the question still remains how come cities like Leeds, Bristol and Liverpool have (growing) Ryanair bases and all too often city/inbound routes we don't have, despite having at best the same - or in many cases markedly less - inbound tourists.

Finally, if we're saying airlines fly to regions then it should be just as possible to persuade an airline to fly to GLA to serve Edinburgh as vice versa, but we don't see that happening. I wonder why.

I'm sorry , but Provan deploying the "airlines fly to cities not airports" argument is simply yet another attempt to make an excuse and shift the blame to an external cause/organisations, which is very much his MO. Additionally, if believes Glasgow to be Scotland's "economic powerhouse", then it should be easy to attract airlines to attract flights to such a "city" - but they aren't. Why not?

How many other cities in the UK last year hosted euro championship games and as well probably the biggest conference event of the year which was attended by why a vast array of world leaders including the US president and was heavily reported on news channels globally for several days? The answer is none. Including Edinburgh. And yet Glasgow's not getting marketed enough and not getting enough exposure (and that's other people's fault). Yeah, sure.

I suspect the Herald will now see that letter as closing the matter for the time being so they might not publish a response, but I'll maybe try to fire something off if I get time.

I'm surprised he raised the successes of earlier, because that just invites people to point out it happened under his predecessor and that since he's come in he's lost all those advances!

He also doesn't address the issue of no scheduled USA flights at all!

People trying to argue that it is not an economic powerhouse are defeating their own argument so they may want to think that through a bit more.

To your point about airlines wanting to fly to Glasgow - they don’t or they would. My point was about when an airline wants to consolidate two nearby services to only land at one facility of course they are going to choose the one at which they see the highest returns.

I know it’s not what we want to hear but that’s the hard nosed facts of business.

And to further upset those who were cock sure he wouldn’t respond - he did.

The gist of Provan’s statement was that a joined up region-wide approach is required like they used to have, only better.

Finally you mentioned the promotion of Glasgow and the west to a global audience. That is indeed the remit of the relevant business and tourism bodies in the region and for Scotland as a whole at government level. GLA can’t do that alone and Provan is asking for a joint effort by all those concerned like that which had some relative success in years gone by.

When folk write responses to the newspaper it’s important they don’t sound like plane spotters who are missing their favourite livery or are jealous of all the frames at Turnhouse. This is serious economics.

[Iain]

People trying to argue that it is not an economic powerhouse are defeating their own argument so they may want to think that through a bit more.

I'm not trying to argue Glasgow is not an economic powerhouse - it is and afaik the statistics show that. The person who is contradicting their own argument is Mr Provan, because he states at the beginning of his letter that the city is an "economic powerhouse" and then later implies nobody wants to fly to the city because of some kind of economic/promotional inadequacy.

To your point about airlines wanting to fly to Glasgow - they don’t or they would.

If we're applying that point consistently then that would mean that FR want to have their base at PIK and not at GLA, so there is no point in attempting to persuade them up the M77.

My point was about when an airline wants to consolidate two nearby services to only land at one facility of course they are going to choose the one at which they see the highest returns.

But the evidence from elsewhere in the UK is that this consolidation does not have to happen and is not unavoidable - particularly when we're talking about FR. If it was then they wouldn't operate (and be expanding) LBA and LPL bases alongside MAN and similarly wouldn't operate EMA alongside BHX either. How come these airports are managing to carve out business that GLA can't, despite having MAN down the road, an airport that has a route network and transport links that Gordon Dewar can only dream about?

I'm purposely NOT comparing to EDI here, I'm comparing to cities like Leeds, Bradford, Liverpool, Newcastle and Nottingham. They don't have a castle, or a parliament, or a medieval old town, they didn't host Euro2020 or COP26, they don't have an international conference business like Glasgow, they have less hotel rooms, the official statistical fact is that they have less (in most cases far less) foreign inbound visitors than Glasgow etc etc - but they're bringing in business to their airports that GLA management say is unattainable.

Go and count the number of Int departures from the likes of LBA and NCL over the next week and compare them to GLA and you'll see what I mean.

If we're to take Mr Provan's argument then presumably this must mean that the likes of Newcastle, Leeds and Bradford are promoting themselves better than Glasgow and as such are more attractive than Glasgow for inbound visitors - and resultingly airlines. I'm sorry but that doesn't stand up one bit (have you ever been to Bradford?!).

I know it’s not what we want to hear but that’s the hard nosed facts of business.

The hard nosed Statistical FACTS are that Glasgow has far more international visitors - and a greater international profile - than Newcastle or Leeds, but it's attracting less international flights than these airports.

The hard nosed statistic is that almost certainly over a million international pax who are travelling to and from the Glasgow catchment area are flying from airports other than GLA. These people are already coming TO GLASGOW, so the problem is nothing to do with promotion or marketing of the city by tourism authorities - it is all to do with the fact that those in charge at GLA are failing to compete effectively for those pax and losing their business to rival airports.

As such, you could successfully promote Glasgow till the cows come home and bring lots of new business and visitors to the city, but the beneficial effect of that on GLA would probably be muted because they would fail to compete effectively for the new business and many of the extra pax would end up flying through EDI.

And to further upset those who were cock sure he wouldn’t respond - he did.

As I said earlier in the thread, I did expect AGS to respond and would be very surprised if they didn't - but if they didn't it would raise questions. Thankfully it would appear that their Media/PR department aren't totally asleep!

The gist of Provan’s statement was that a joined up region-wide approach is required like they used to have, only better.

But Provan's letter essentially implies that other un-named agencies are not providing the joined up approach and thus everything is (conveniently) their fault. I don't see any evidence to support that.

Finally you mentioned the promotion of Glasgow and the west to a global audience. That is indeed the remit of the relevant business and tourism bodies in the region and for Scotland as a whole at government level. GLA can’t do that alone and Provan is asking for a joint effort by all those concerned like that which had some relative success in years gone by.

Again, what evidence is there that this joined up approach has been abandoned, or is not being followed, by other agencies?

The point is is that Glasgow has had two events in the last 9 or 10 months that have provided it with a level of international, indeed global, exposure that it will struggle to match again in the foreseeable future, no matter how "joined up" things are. So the people in charge at GLA should have been making a lot of hay whilst that particular sun shines, but instead they're going nowhere and bleating about the city not being promoted enough/properly! Please!

COP26 led to the city being shown globally on TV news for over a week - but apparently that's insufficient and of no use! Well, I'm sorry if this is news to them, but it'll be a long time before another opportunity of that magnitude comes along, so if they can't capitalise the blame squarely lies with them imo.

When folk write responses to the newspaper it’s important they don’t sound like plane spotters who are missing their favourite livery or are jealous of all the frames at Turnhouse. This is serious economics.

A broadsheet newspaper simply wouldn't publish a letter about plane spotting envy - that's why my letter clearly framed it's arguments in terms of the economic and tourism impact on the city region.

[Clive]

People trying to argue that it is not an economic powerhouse are defeating their own argument so they may want to think that through a bit more.

I'm not trying to argue Glasgow is not an economic powerhouse - it is and afaik the statistics show that. The person who is contradicting their own argument is Mr Provan, because he states at the beginning of his letter that the city is an "economic powerhouse" and then later implies nobody wants to fly to the city because of some kind of economic/promotional inadequacy.

To your point about airlines wanting to fly to Glasgow - they don’t or they would.

If we're applying that point consistently then that would mean that FR want to have their base at PIK and not at GLA, so there is no point in attempting to persuade them up the M77.

My point was about when an airline wants to consolidate two nearby services to only land at one facility of course they are going to choose the one at which they see the highest returns.

But the evidence from elsewhere in the UK is that this consolidation does not have to happen and is not unavoidable - particularly when we're talking about FR. If it was then they wouldn't operate (and be expanding) LBA and LPL bases alongside MAN and similarly wouldn't operate EMA alongside BHX either. How come these airports are managing to carve out business that GLA can't, despite having MAN down the road, an airport that has a route network and transport links that Gordon Dewar can only dream about?

I'm purposely NOT comparing to EDI here, I'm comparing to cities like Leeds, Bradford, Liverpool, Newcastle and Nottingham. They don't have a castle, or a parliament, or a medieval old town, they didn't host Euro2020 or COP26, they don't have an international conference business like Glasgow, they have less hotel rooms, the official statistical fact is that they have less (in most cases far less) foreign inbound visitors than Glasgow etc etc - but they're bringing in business to their airports that GLA management say is unattainable.

Go and count the number of Int departures from the likes of LBA and NCL over the next week and compare them to GLA and you'll see what I mean.

If we're to take Mr Provan's argument then presumably this must mean that the likes of Newcastle, Leeds and Bradford are promoting themselves better than Glasgow and as such are more attractive than Glasgow for inbound visitors - and resultingly airlines. I'm sorry but that doesn't stand up one bit (have you ever been to Bradford?!).

According to FR24 the following is the case

Airport Routes Countries served
GLA 76 24
NCL 61 21
LBA 57 21

So GLA wins.