Persons willing to tie up capital in (Air)Ports and to embrace the ongoing drain, pain and fuss, do so out of no love for transport. It was the commercial property development potential of the space above/alongside terminals that was of interest in the unloading of the Railtrack entity. Associated British Ports was an investment proposition solely for the handling fees cashflow of containers in transit. BAA is a landlord of warehousing/retail space. The freight and warmware content of aircraft are of no investment relevance, except in being a potential liability, moaning about delays. Most landlords care not a jot for the business of their tenants, they just want their monthly stipend.
Port owners can grow revenue either by pillage of tied tenants (see BAA consistently, owned by the State, the City, or by one infrastructure-phile), or by partnering tenants to share incremental revenue from seizing market from others, and/or by creating fresh market: see every obscure Ryanair port, owned by whomsoever. Aircraft, freight and pax handling fees scarcely cover daily running expense: payoff on £NBillions capital comes from landlord's take from the shopping Mall. If A.N.Other were to takeover LGW that of itself would benefit tenants and cargo/pax Users not one tittle. Nor would the mere act of dividing ownership of clutch ports.
Better, cheaper facilities is what we all want, and won't get until and unless a Buyer cares to pour in more investment for later/slower return, and/or manage it more User-friendly than Ferrovial. Why do you assume, say, MAN Authority's shareholders would settle for a lower hurdle rate on their capital? F won in 2006 precisely because they modelled lower yield than did other Bidders.
We can't undo Ports privatisation because the bow-wave of impending investment equates to measurable pennies on income tax. We do not vote for tax increases. We could have a User co-operative (see NATS, the CRSs) if the carrier industry had ample capital capacity. So, F will unload burdensome dross and enjoy LHR's ongoing revenue with little net acquisition capital. Who's a clever boy, then?
Last edited by tornadoken; 18th Aug 2008 at 09:53.