As much as subsidising other airports in a monopoly maybe common practise, its fair to say that LHR and STN is an extreme case. It's very likely, almost definite for example that MAN is helping to pay for the £12 terminal investment at EMA, likewise the new terminal MAG built at BOH, but they are all much smaller scale.
No airports however in Europe, certainly in the UK, other than STN have been so severely exposed to the posibility of its owners using it to fund some of the largest, most complex and most ongoing investments in the industry at the largest international airport in the world.
Like you (Skipness One Echo) say, it's common practise for airport monopolies to do things to help subsidise investments, for instance, hike prices and cross subsidise developments. Ultimately, airport monopoloies are damaging to healthy competition and restrict growth for this reason.
Therefore, the general practice of cross-subsidising is not the issue here, since it is common practice. What's more the concern is the extent of it in this case since investment at LHR, unlike in most cases, is constant. In order for BAA to want such dramatic price increases at LHR now STN is being sold off really does say a lot about what STN really did for them! Because it certainly wasn't in their intentions to operate it as a fast growing, friendly, low-cost alternative gateway to London!!!
Last edited by FRatSTN; 12th Feb 2013 at 22:03.