Manair6 - it all depends on what marker in time we are using as the datum for stands gained vs lost, i.e. nett. The west gate and proposed transit shed aprons replace (roughly) stands 63-72 which were built between 1980 and 2005. Therefore no nett gain against that period. I haven't seen the numbers on the Pier 2 development but the nett gain can't be great. What we do get is a better fit of stands than we had previously - i.e. taking account of present and future aircraft characteristics rather than those designed for 20th Century fleets. That is a plus. Those other areas you mention such as near the viewing park, which are currently car parks, have been in the masterplan for a long time. As long as MAG draws so heavily on car park revenues to turn a profit and pay dividends, the business case for constructing aprons on these sites never stacks up. Diverting Runger Lane was always being kicked in to the long grass on cost grounds and the loss of car park revenue. Also, MAG is bound by planning consents dating back to the original T2 (1993) to re-model junction 6 of the M56 and construct another link road to junction 5 when a certain level of passenger traffic is reached (I can't recall the number). This would be extremely expensive and I wonder how that would affect the whole financial case for expansion. Perhaps things are changing in that regard?