Originally Posted by
PDXCWL45
With the WG people say that they shouldn't have bought and that they are intervening and that they shouldn't but governments do that all over the world, Ireland is an example with its low APD, other countries have done deals with Ryanair to expand Ukraine i believe has done such a deal as has Jordan and Israel offers airlines money for inbound passengers, US airports often offer money for international routes through state subsidies.
The Welsh government is only doing it's job by trying to give Wales an effective national airport that acts as the countries entry point for the world (a mini version of EDI in essence imo) and to give it's citizens and non citizens the opportunity to connect to as much as the world as possible from their country and for tourists and business to find travelling to Wales as easy as possible and that brings me onto Flybe. The airport needs an airline that will provide the connections on a daily basis, a partner as such and that is what Bristol has with Easyjet, an airline dedicated and happy to expand at Bristol and that has been the basis of the airports success.
Unfortunately for CWL their best option was and may still be Flybe and we all know what has happended there.Flybe at the moment don't see CWL in their plans to continue to base it seems and they've had the opportunity to change to Q400s to make that base more profitable (which makes me question why they didn't), Easyjet though do see BRS as important in their plans and no doubt will continue to expand at BRS. If the airlines don't want to operate to Cardiff it can't force them unless like SEN it's owner owns an airline! Maybe the WG should do that next!
As for value for money that i think has to be judged over a longer period in what the airport will be like in 10, 15 to 20 years and will always vary person to person, for me it's value is providing me the ability to connect to the world to another person it's value is whether there is a cheap flight to Mallorca on Saturdays!
Thanks for your considered response.
I agree that State intervention in the market is legitimate, especially when the market is unable to provide. However, the tone of some of the comments seems to be 'it's unfair that the ENGLISH airports even complain' whereas I think it's reasonable that they have concerns about State support putting them at a disadvantage. Objectively, the abolition of APD can only help the airport complete for routes against (mainly) Bristol. (Although I think the debate too often centres around there being a fixed pie which is divvied up between CWL and BRS, rather than looking at how demand in Wales might be stimulated - see all LoCo carriers for a lesson in creating demand where there was none!)
It is legitimate for the Welsh government to ensure that the airport supports its objectives around connectivity (with the investment and other financial and cultural benefits this brings). You rightly say value for money will always vary from person-to-person. But how can we establish value for money if we don't know (a) how much money is being put it and (b) what the objectives of the WG are?
The masterplan sets out how the airport will be developed (hotel, terminal, roads) but not the ultimate objectives of this development. What is the route network and connectivity the WG seeks, what are the actual, measurable benefits and how much is being put in to deliver this? When we get this info the Welsh tax-payer can decide. It just seems like its a black-hole at the moment.
What happens if in 20 years the Welsh Government has sunk in half a billion and the airport is still struggling to maintain multi-daily connections to key UK and European cities and a long-haul route to a major hub?
Maybe this information has been published.... please point me in the right direction if it has.