So, the plan is revealed....
Firstly, the announcement seems to play nicely into the hands of the cynics who say this was the plan all along. Yet again, the owners have failed to discredit and blow away the criticism.
I like the idea of building hangers and creating a sustainable airport future - all makes sense though one could argue the money from the BMI win could have provided the same cash to do such a thing. Moreover, if the rents from the hangers would provide such a sustainable future, then why couldn't Peel have provided a loan from their other companies? If the business plan is so sound - why not self-fund?
On another note...I don't fully understand how this protects passenger services. For the passenger services to remain, they have to be profitable in their own right; which can only happen from increased revenues and/or lower costs from that side of the operation. Does the re-structuring of the terminal and a few redundancies make passenger operations profitable?
If the answer to that last question is 'no', then all this additional investment will make for a profitable business but will simply subsidise the passenger operations. Any accountant or business person within the company though would have to ask why bother with the passenger side in the long term - let's focus on the stuff which makes money.
If the answer to my question is 'yes' - passenger operations are now profitable...then there is a chance that the airport will survive.
If not, we're looking at an airfield rather than an airport. Or worse still, simply development.
My conclusion is that Peel have created a masterplan for a sustainable business, which is good for the region. I have to question though whether this is a masterplan for a sustainable airport.