They would still be using all the money that could be spent there on investing at Heathrow instead!
Worth remembering LHR went to the dogs to pay for the Norman Foster palace at Stansted, it was paid for from LHR profits! T2 closed 15 years later than it should have because BAA thought STN was the future focus. It wasn't. Anyway that's how groups work, STN profits may well be funneled to pay for MAN investment going forward.
EasyJet fairly minimally, with GIP owned Edinburgh being their main Scottish airport. Says it all really!
EZY at EDI are the same size as under BAA and not much bigger than GLA. You mixing up behavioral attributes with ownership. EDI is much more business focussed and legacy carrier focussed than GLA which remains with more bucket and spade.
much more cost efficient operator.
What does this mean? Of you mean have lower operating costs that's true but then they make less money amd handle less traffic.
I see no reason why under separate ownership and fairer competition, Stansted cannot continue to enjoy growth once again.
The market doesn't like STN, it's that simple. Any major carrier who tried left and moved out or went bust. Really. I won't list them, oh wait I will.
American, Eos, Maxjet, Air Asia X.
SAS, Lufthansa, Air UK, Air Berlin, BMI Baby etc
Who's left with a major presence? Ryanair and easyJet. That's the free market showing a preference.