PP, rents at airports can only be valued alongside other rents on the same airport, not the value of nearby industrial land, for the reasons already mentioned plus the fact that an aviation business cannot chose to move to a cheaper area. IT HAS to be at the airport.
There is a set procedure for disputing rent increases. I hired a commercial property valuer to do it on my behalf, afraid I just didn't have the stomach to sit in an office with our "landlords".
The rollover under the FAC leases was to compensate for the fact that the tenants could not get freehold. Otherwise, who would have invested in developing the airport? The tenants did the business development.
The world may not "revolve around Ray and Aminta", but we are at a point where important precedents are going to be set. If they lose everything to BAL then god help the rest of us. IF R and A get their hangar back, the industry has a chance against those who would close it all down for short term greed and the pendulum may swing the other way at last.
Who knows one day we may be able to get finance for development on our leases at federal airports again!!!!
PS this privatisation was Keating's Labor government's idea, so we can't expect Rudd's lot to care. How can they can say it is not thier concern, it is THIER responsibility to ensure that the airport leases are held by "fit and proper" people and they ARE accountable for this.