Ryanair to buy Stanstead Airport.

roundymac

There was a report in the business section of the Irish Examiner (31/7) about Ryanair planning to buy a 25% share in Stanstead Airport. (sorry no link) Ryanair Stansteads biggest customer is prepared to make a modest commitment as anchor tenant at the airport and has been examining proposals from five or six groups from which one or two serious bids are likly to emerge according to Michael Cawley deputy CEO. Bid groups would welcome Ryanair because it's involment would bring security and a guarantee of future airport growth according to Ryanair.

coylemj

Given the way Ryanair manipulate the media time after time for the purposes of their own spin, I really don't think that a report that they are 'planning to buy 25%' of Stanstead warrants the misleading title you've given to this thread.

Cessna_Pilot

Stansted

L1011

Good. They might finally realise that the rates they try to extract from airports across Europe are unsustainable and that the DAAs charges aren't even close to as bad as they constantly cry in the media.

Turbine

CAPA have a great article on it today: http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/financials/ryanairs-profits-fall-as-it-ponder-stakes-in-aer-lingus-and-london-stansted-79361

roundymac

Cessna_Pilot wrote: »

Stansted

Oh me bad, must do a hundred lines as punishment.:rolleyes:

bkehoe

roundymac wrote: »

Oh me bad, must do a hundred lines as punishment.:rolleyes:

You must spend 100 minutes locked in a room listening to Ryanair ads for scratch tickets, cheese burgers and smokeless cigarettes... oh wait, thats just like flying somewhere

homerjay2005

MYOB wrote: »

Good. They might finally realise that the rates they try to extract from airports across Europe are unsustainable and that the DAAs charges aren't even close to as bad as they constantly cry in the media.

have you figures to back up this?i cant see any reason why Ryanair would lie here, seen as if they did, the DAA could produce the figures instantly to prove them wrong.

ian_m

http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/ryanair-planning-to-purchase-25-stake-in-londons-stansted-airport-202549.html

Ryanair planning to purchase 25% stake in London’s Stansted Airport
By Vincent Ryan
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Ryanair is planning to buy a 25% stake in London’s third largest airport, Stansted, according to its deputy CEO, Michael Cawley, who said they were hoping to make a bid within months.
Ryanair, Stansted’s biggest customer, is prepared to make "a modest commitment" as "anchor tenant" at the airport and has been examining proposals from five or six groups, from which one or two serious bids are likely to emerge.

The Competition Commission in 2009 ruled the British Airports Authority had too large a market share by owning three London airports and ordered it to sell Stansted and Gatwick.

The BAA plans to appeal to the Supreme Court, but is coming close to exhausting its options through the UK legal system.

Mr Cawley said the BAA "appear to be running out of road and we would hope that it will be a matter of months, not years before a deal is done".

Other interested parties being linked with a possible bid for Stansted include South Korea’sIncheon International Airport Corp. It could face competition from Manchester Airports Group, owner of Britain’s busiest airport outside London, which has been seeking outside investment to fund purchases.

Bid groups would welcome Ryanair because its involvement would bring security and a guarantee of future airport growth, according to Ryanair, which has clashed with BAA over access fees.

Ryanair’s stock price increased by 2% despite the company announcing that profits were down after the airline flew into the headwinds of higher oil prices and Europe-wide austerity measures.

Mr Cawley said there should have been no surprises for any one who read beyond Ryanair’s headline figures. He said the airline had announced last year it expected profits to decline in this quarter.

Announcing the results for the first quarter which ended on Jun 30, Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary said the company had warned it would be hit by rising fuel prices this year.

"As we previously guided, significantly higher fuel costs causedfirst quarter profits to fall by €40m [from €139m last year] to €99m.

"Our 6% traffic growth, combined with a 4% rise in average fares, led to an 11% increase in revenues. Ancillary sales grew by 15% to €286m [outpacing traffic growth] accounting for 22% of total revenues."

He said that the cost of running the airline, in particular fuel costs, ate into the company’s profits.

"Operating unit costs rose 10% as fuel increased 27% [by €117m] to €544m.

"Fuel amounted to 47% of total operating costs," he said.

runway16

homerjay2005 wrote: »

have you figures to back up this?i cant see any reason why Ryanair would lie here, seen as if they did, the DAA could produce the figures instantly to prove them wrong.

The figures have been produced several times comparing DUB to similar sized airports in Europe. And yes, they are at the cheaper end. Ryanair counter by comparing charges to the various airfields they frequent which are located in some far flung places. These are not a fair or valid comparison.

Trust me - when it comes to charges, Ryanair lie. A lot.

L1011

homerjay2005 wrote: »

have you figures to back up this?i cant see any reason why Ryanair would lie here, seen as if they did, the DAA could produce the figures instantly to prove them wrong.

Why would the DAA bother engaging with what is effectively an offline troll?

Compare the published figures (on the DAA website) with those published by other airports Ryanair use. Dublin is not an expensive airport. It is actually a very cheap airport for a main city airport.

ballooba

TheJournal wrote:

The DAA said the proposed passenger charge for 2012 is 17 per cent lower than the average €12.50 passenger charge levied in 2009 by comparable European airports such as Stansted, Gatwick, Brussels, Copenhagen, Lisbon, Zurich, Vienna, Munich, and Oslo.

http://www.thejournal.ie/ryanair-hits-out-at-lack-of-change-in-dublin-airport-fees-277395-Nov2011/

I wonder what the criteria for selecting those airports for comparison was.

EDIT: It seems that the figures were two years out of date. :rolleyes:
http://www.daa.ie/gns/media-centre/press-releases/2011/11-11-11/Dublin_Airport_Charges_To_Remain_Flat_in_2012.aspx

L1011

ballooba wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/ryanair-hits-out-at-lack-of-change-in-dublin-airport-fees-277395-Nov2011/

I wonder what the criteria for selecting those airports for comparison was.

Because they are core city airports, like Dublin.

Ryanair compare charges to subsidised, below-cost fees they get from sheds in fields.

As goes 2 years out of date - I suspect you'd find that the average would have increased at the sample airports in the timeframe. If you look at any airlines annual results you'll see that airport fees have increased heavily.

ballooba

MYOB wrote: »

Because they are core city airports, like Dublin.

Are they the full set of core city airports? Or are they cherry picked?

L1011

ballooba wrote: »

Are they the full set of core city airports? Or are they cherry picked?

If you believe they've been cherry picked, why don't you go find another set? Core city airports, western european countries. Go ahead, prove your suspicion or stop airing it. These figures are publicly available.

ballooba

MYOB wrote: »

If you believe they've been cherry picked, why don't you go find another set? Core city airports, western european countries. Go ahead, prove your suspicion or stop airing it. These figures are publicly available.

Airing my suspicion is enough for me, thanks. I don't have the ample resources of the DAA.

L1011

ballooba wrote: »

Airing my suspicion is enough for me, thanks. I don't have the ample resources of the DAA.

Airing your suspicion and refusing to do even five minutes research to try and support it does nothing other than make your claim look ridiculous and biased. This isn't something in any way complex to check.

ballooba

MYOB wrote: »

Airing your suspicion and refusing to do even five minutes research to try and support it does nothing other than make your claim look ridiculous and biased. This isn't something in any way complex to check.

My disposition towards DAA is coloured by experience. T2 alone is a ridiculous white elephant. I wouldn't trust them any more than O'Leary.

IRLConor

ballooba wrote: »

I wouldn't trust them any more than O'Leary.

Based on the content of your posts I'm starting to believe you are O'Leary. :pac:

L1011

ballooba wrote: »

My disposition towards DAA is coloured by experience. T2 alone is a ridiculous white elephant. I wouldn't trust them any more than O'Leary.

T1 was at capacity when T2 began construction. Would you prefer they'd built it and left it empty?

I wouldn't trust O'Leary to watch my pint.

ballooba

MYOB wrote: »

T1 was at capacity when T2 began construction. Would you prefer they'd built it and left it empty?

I wouldn't trust O'Leary to watch my pint.

I'd prefer they'd built something a little less bling if anything.

L1011

ballooba wrote: »

I'd prefer they'd built something a little less bling if anything.

If you think a properly sized terminal is "bling", you've definitely been Ryanaired in to accepting crap.

T2 is a modern terminal - that's all. T1 is likely to resemble a lower-roofed version of it once its refit is finished.

ballooba

MYOB wrote: »

If you think a properly sized terminal is "bling", you've definitely been Ryanaired in to accepting crap.

T2 is a modern terminal - that's all. T1 is likely to resemble a lower-roofed version of it once its refit is finished.

Nothing to do with size, I'm talking about the fitout.

urajoke

ballooba wrote: »

Nothing to do with size, I'm talking about the fitout.

I unlike you prefer my airports to be somewhere nice to spend the few hours I'm there not a shed in a field.

It was designed I'm sure to attract airlines who's passengers are like myself not airlines who want sheds in fields for their passengers, Emirates and Etihad are those and more will follow I'm sure.

If you don't like the terminal well tough. Others do.

L1011

ballooba wrote: »

Nothing to do with size, I'm talking about the fitout.

The fitout? The perfectly normal and indeed quite spartan fitout?

ballooba

urajoke wrote: »

ballooba wrote: »

Nothing to do with size, I'm talking about the fitout.

I unlike you prefer my airports to be somewhere nice to spend the few hours I'm there not a shed in a field.

If you're spending hours there, then you're doing it wrong. Go to the mall.

L1011

ballooba wrote: »

If you're spending hours there, then you're doing it wrong. Go to the mall.

Never flown to the US, then? Wait, Ryanair don't fly there...

ballooba

MYOB wrote: »

ballooba wrote: »

If you're spending hours there, then you're doing it wrong. Go to the mall.

Never flown to the US, then? Wait, Ryanair don't fly there...

Funny. If I recall correctly, the reason for arriving early for US flights is to clear immigration. What are the facilities like post immigration? It must be like the Four Seasons based on these comments.

L1011

ballooba wrote: »

Funny. If I recall correctly, the reason for arriving early for US flights is to clear immigration. What are the facilities like post immigration? It must be like the Four Seasons based on these comments.

They're better than what your average Ryanair shed provides.

T2 is a perfectly average terminal - nothing more. Anyone who buys in to the "gilt-edged" bollox spewed by O'Leary has either never used another proper terminal, or has never actually used T2.

tigershould

MYOB wrote: »

They're better than what your average Ryanair shed provides.

T2 is a perfectly average terminal - nothing more. Anyone who buys in to the "gilt-edged" bollox spewed by O'Leary has either never used another proper terminal, or has never actually used T2.

fair comment that its an average terminal, i quite like the design but average terminals should not cost €1.2 Billion to build

L1011

tigershould wrote: »

fair comment that its an average terminal, i quite like the design but average terminals should not cost €1.2 Billion to build

Tendered at the height of the boom. The usual psyche in this country would have slaughtered them had they built for expected demand rather than when it was critically needed; just like they're slaughtered now for not expecting a sudden downturn in demand either. So it had to be tendered for at the worst possible time.

urajoke

tigershould wrote: »

fair comment that its an average terminal, i quite like the design but average terminals should not cost €1.2 Billion to build

You spend too much time listening to big mouth it didn't cost that much it cost just over half that. In fact let me be pedantic pat for a second it cost less than €400m to BUILD. One third of what you wrongly claimed the rest was spent on the fit out which is not building.

See this is why MoL keeps spouting absolute rubbish because people will lap it up without doing any research and if they disagree with him he just shouts them down like a bully boy. You just have to look at some of the comments around on other forums, such as get Michael in to run the country he will sort it out or get Michael in to fix the health service he will sort it out. Really would you want him waiting at A&E with a clip board saying now would you like painkillers ? How about oxygen ? There is an extra charge for all these ! Etc etc etc etc.

n.catenthusiast

tigershould wrote: »

fair comment that its an average terminal, i quite like the design but average terminals should not cost €1.2 Billion to build

The '€1.2 Billion' argument has been repeated so many times that I think at this stage it has just been accepted as fact, despite being completely incorrect.

T2 cost €395m to build. The €1.2 billion you're referring to covers the entire 'Transforming Dublin Airport' project. T2 is a part of this, but so is Pier D, Area 14, the T1 airside extension, a new multi-story car park and extensive road works on the airport campus.

http://www.dublinairport.com/gns/about-us/airport-development.aspx

Earlier posters wondered why Ryanair wouldn't be honest about airport charges. Airport charges (and the capital expenditure that influences those charges) are an extremely political issue. Under current system there is very little incentive for any party to be entirely honest and constructive.

For example, the notion that T2 cost €1.2 billion has been pushed consistently by Ryanair for the last few years, despite it being quite clearly untrue.

listermint

I wish they spent an extra few thousand putting the multiple laser ticket scanners into T2 like T1.

tigershould

@urajoke, @n.catenthusiast

thanks for filling the blanks

i thought 1.2 billion sounded excessive (still does tbh)

a quick look at your link shows that "The total cost of the project was just over €600 million." and "The overall T2 project includes an improved internal campus roads network at Dublin Airport, a major utilities upgrade, a new multi-storey car park and the provision of sites for a new ground transportation centre and a future metro station."

so where's the other €600 million gone?

for the record, i'm not a fan of ol' big mouth, and i'm not a fan of the DAA - i just dont like to see money spent badly.

and i fly aerlingus, ryanair, ba (whoever fits the best schedule, destination, price etc) - its just air travel at the end of the day.

lord lucan

tigershould wrote: »

so where's the other €600 million gone?

The initial €600m was spent on T2,the T2 short term car park and the road network in front of T2 and the new T1 access road that runs underneath T2.

The other €600m goes on Pier D,T1X,Area 14 check in area and some T1 road works. Area 14 was a short term fix to relieve the overcrowding in the T1 check-in hall and is currently idle. There's also some other smaller bits and pieces that have been undertaken in T1 like the consolidation of passenger security into one area,the auto pass ticket scanners,Pier B and The Street retail areas being upgraded and expanded.

n.catenthusiast

lord lucan wrote: »

The initial €600m was spent on T2,the T2 short term car park and the road network in front of T2 and the new T1 access road that runs underneath T2.

The other €600m goes on Pier D,T1X,Area 14 check in area and some T1 road works. Area 14 was a short term fix to relieve the overcrowding in the T1 check-in hall and is currently idle. There's also some other smaller bits and pieces that have been undertaken in T1 like the consolidation of passenger security into one area,the auto pass ticket scanners,Pier B and The Street retail areas being upgraded and expanded.

Was the second runway meant to be part of the €1.2bn too?

I think I remember it being part of the publicity surrounding 'Transforming Dublin Airport' programme but a quick search didn't throw up any mention of it in this context...

Tenger

n.catenthusiast wrote: »

Was the second runway meant to be part of the €1.2bn too?.....

Oh no. The 2nd runway was always seen as a separate issue to the overall T2 project.

MoL is very quiet that part of the overall E1.2Bn cost was compensation to FR over the takeover of the old FR hanger and the required refurbishment of their replacement hanger (I think they are now in H1?) as well as the development of Pier D as a low cost departure zone.

lord lucan

n.catenthusiast wrote: »

I think I remember it being part of the publicity surrounding 'Transforming Dublin Airport' programme but a quick search didn't throw up any mention of it in this context...

It was part of the overall plan but not in the €1.2BN spend. If you ever look at the FIDS around DUB you'll notice the Transforming Dublin Airport montage that appears at the bottom with images of T2 and Pier D and also has a representation of the airfield with a parallel 28/10.

brandon_flowers

MYOB wrote: »

They're better than what your average Ryanair shed provides.

T2 is a perfectly average terminal - nothing more. Anyone who buys in to the "gilt-edged" bollox spewed by O'Leary has either never used another proper terminal, or has never actually used T2.

From every thread I have ever seen you have a seriously wicked dislike of Ryanair and a grá for Aer Lingus.

Just wondering, have Ryanair f***ed you around before or is it just O'Leary?

Personally I dislike both EI and FR as much as each other, DUB is not my home airport but obviously I prefer T2 anyone that doesn't is the typical myopic "lets not build anything for the future because it might be too dear" type of person.

And my on topic post is... Ryanair probably contribute more than 25% of revenue generated by Stansted so it would make sense for them to buy a share in it regardless if it is spin or not. O'Leary is not stupid when it comes to business decisions like this, if the chance is there he will take it.

L1011

brandon_flowers wrote: »

From every thread I have ever seen you have a seriously wicked dislike of Ryanair and a grá for Aer Lingus.

Just wondering, have Ryanair f***ed you around before or is it just O'Leary?

Personally I dislike both EI and FR as much as each other, DUB is not my home airport but obviously I prefer T2 anyone that doesn't is the typical myopic "lets not build anything for the future because it might be too dear" type of person.

And my on topic post is... Ryanair probably contribute more than 25% of revenue generated by Stansted so it would make sense for them to buy a share in it regardless if it is spin or not. O'Leary is not stupid when it comes to business decisions like this, if the chance is there he will take it.

Where in my post do I mention Aer Lingus? I have no "grá" for them - although I do defend them, and any other airline, against the ridiculous attacks that get levelled against them on here occasionally. Coincidentally they happen to usually be from myths and lies perpetrated by MOL.

The "T2 cost 1.2Bn" myth comes from only one source - Ryanair. Hence its entirely valid to mention them.

And yes, Ryanair have ****ed me - and the travelling public of Europe for that matter - enough that I would rather walk than ever darken their door again. The day that their dead-end business model fails and they have to reform is one I'm looking forward to.

brandon_flowers

MYOB wrote: »

Where in my post do I mention Aer Lingus? I have no "grá" for them - although I do defend them, and any other airline, against the ridiculous attacks that get levelled against them on here occasionally.

The "T2 cost 1.2Bn" myth comes from only one source - Ryanair. Hence its entirely valid to mention them.

And yes, Ryanair have ****ed me - and the travelling public of Europe for that matter - enough that I would rather walk than ever darken their door again. The day that their dead-end business model fails and they have to reform is one I'm looking forward to.

I didn't say you mentioned EI in this thread, just noticed it on other threads. I have no qualms with your opinion, I was just wondering how it was formed, that's all.

Fortunately I haven't been on the end of the famous Ryanair treatment, only use them when I know I can play by the rules and there aren't other options.

Edit: Agree re: the €1.2b, that's a joke number. Same as the joke numbers used for the Port Tunnel and other projects to create a little media sh1t storm.

dubdaymo

T2 cost €395m to build

...and passengers have to sit on extremely uncomfortable cold metal seats - the same seats that were installed in the cheapo Pier D. It's like having to sit on the grill before the barby is lit.

n.catenthusiast

brandon_flowers wrote: »

And my on topic post is... Ryanair probably contribute more than 25% of revenue generated by Stansted so it would make sense for them to buy a share in it regardless if it is spin or not. O'Leary is not stupid when it comes to business decisions like this, if the chance is there he will take it.

Good call getting back on topic. Especially cause it's such an interesting one! I would also take M'OL's proposal seriously. Ryanair have never been afraid to try something new to see if it works, and they may be more interested in investing surplus cash rather than paying out more dividends.

Think the real challenge may be finding a credible partner who is willing to get into bed with Ryanair on this deal. Airport investors are typically cautious folk - e.g. teacher pension funds - and I would imagine would be fairly hesitant about making a deal with a company who controls such a significant share of Stansted traffic - to say nothing of FR's reputation!!

ballooba

n.catenthusiast wrote: »

Airport investors are typically cautious folk - e.g. teacher pension funds - and I would imagine would be fairly hesitant about making a deal with a company who controls such a significant share of Stansted traffic - to say nothing of FR's reputation!!

Macquarie Bank buy airports AFAIK and they're not known for being cautious. They also have investments in infrastructure projects in Ireland (Port Tunnel?).

EDIT: Looks like Mac Bank have been divesting, but you never know... http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/financial-services/macquarie-keen-to-sell-stake-in-sydney-airport/story-fn91wd6x-1226341210918

n.catenthusiast

ballooba wrote: »

Macquarie Bank buy airports AFAIK and they're not known for being cautious. They also have investments in infrastructure projects in Ireland (Port Tunnel?).

EDIT: Looks like Mac Bank have been divesting, but you never know... http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/financial-services/macquarie-keen-to-sell-stake-in-sydney-airport/story-fn91wd6x-1226341210918

Don't know much about Macquarie Bank as a whole, but like any investment bank it will want a balanced portfolio which is exposed to different levels of risk & return. Infrastructure (like airports & the Port Tunnel) brings back consistently steady but usually not spectacular returns over a long time frame and so is considered a safer class of asset.

While Macquarie as a whole may not be a risk averse organisation, you can bet that whatever division deals with airports will take a pretty cautious long-term outlook.

Worth noting too that when Macquarie got rid of their stakes in Brussels and Copenhagen Airports, they were snapped up by the Ontario Teacher's Pension Plan - another group who would have an interest in long-term safer returns.

ballooba

n.catenthusiast wrote: »

While Macquarie as a whole may not be a risk averse organisation, you can bet that whatever division deals with airports will take a pretty cautious long-term outlook.

Mac Bank bought up the airports, set up a fund to bring in investors and then gouged them for management fees. Meanwhile, at least in SYD, crippling the airport with their management style.

EDIT:

Price gouging:
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/accc-slams-price-gouging-at-sydney-airport-20100311-q1lj.html
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/mac-banks-airport-rip-off/story-e6frewt0-1111116764756
Management fees:
http://www.couriermail.com.au/spike/columnists/macquarie-bank-wants-345-million-to-end-airport-management/story-e6frergx-1225778329852
More background:
http://www.themonthly.com.au/monthly-essays-gideon-haigh-who-s-afraid-macquarie-bank-story-millionaire-s-factory-571