I can fully undestand MAG'S stance in utilising every last stand to maximum effect although I would exercise a degree of caution.
If Manchester can be seen to be a major conduit of economic prosperity in the same way as Heathrow is there not a more significant opportunity to draw in taxpayer investment in the same way that Heathrow has done ?
Heathrow is rightly or in some minds wrongly viewed as a "national asset", this enables the potential of government investment with little resistance, maybe MAGs clarion call s/b a similar message ?
If MAG is seen to look beyond its own balance sheet might they reap the benefits of more government support especially if they explain in detail the benefits of inward passenger flows across the wider region and beyond.
I would still be nervous with the view that the airlines see Manchester as so investable that they will come at any cost and at any time. There are lots of competing opportunities see Jet2 STN and RYR and its developing hub concepts!
Whilst away movements fill up gaps this cannot be compared to the benefits of an additional based aircraft in the morning and the knock on effect of 3 x per day 7 days a week.
A dozen extra stands to compliment TP is surely needed ?
I do feel from the outside looking in that
Heathrow is thee airport for London, but maybe with no rw3 Manchester should start re branding itself as the airport for the rest of the UK ?
If that is the case "sweating the assets" may be somewhat outdated.
Ps The new aviation minister doesn't appear to know about Manchester doubling capacity. Is this not where Manchester fails to be heard ?
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/lord-callanans-keynote-address-to-abta-travel-matters-conference
Last edited by Navpi; 29th Jun 2017 at 06:05.