Originally Posted by
commit aviation
Navpi
The logistics around moving freight have been covered by others already but I wanted to pick up on a couple of other statements
Dressing this up as a finance issue is absolutely ludicrous.
How so? Are you are advocating that MAG accommodate this as some kind of goodwill gesture whether there is money in it or not? (Maybe not an inappropriate sentiment in these times and potentially good PR.) Otherwise, I know these are not normal times but MAG surely needs to turn a profit?
In fact, later you state
Gtr Manchester taxpayers are subsidising the airport to the tune of £250m, quite right, over the years they have benefited enormously from millions in dividends
Which suggests that MAG must be doing something right if the Manchester taxpayers see a return from their investment in normal circumstances. Surely now, you would expect the board to make the best return on the councils / taxpayers £250m? If handling freight through MAN is not the best return on that investment, why do it? As stated, you can’t have it both ways.
From what I can see, aviation right now is not making money – it is doing its utmost to minimise the losses and I imagine MAG is in the same position. In my mind that feels more like striking the right balance and not an excuse.
How do you know that the freight company involved doesn't want to use an airport other than MAN. It may get better cargo (not airport) charges from other handling agents at other airports such as EMA, CWL, BHX. It may be the NHS themselves that selected these airports from a list that included MAN.
How much revenue do you think MAN would receive from, say 1 wide body flight a day on a quick turn? Is it feasible that contracts with partners such as NATS could have been temporarily renegotiated and it would cost MAN more than this charter revenue if they went beyond X additional movements or they arrive out of specified hours?