Wouldn't £0.75m/month go a decent way to invest in new local non-PIK-dependent jobs, along with a deal with GLA to take a big chunk of employees across there? At least then the Government would be investing in something that has a long term future; we have to recognise that the world moves on and PIK has no justification for public funds pouring into it, when they can be put to better use, and when GLA sits just up the road able to take the flying. Why does the Govt feel it should use public funds to compete against a privately owned GLA for a small slice of Ryanair's business??
Otherwise we should have kept going with state-owned Leyland, British Coal, British Rail, BA, British Transport Docks Board, British Gas, BT, CEGB....
Governments have no right and no experience running businesses which can stand on their own two feet and should be in the private sector.

I think you have to understand the difference between investment and subsidy. The two are quite different.

Investment, e.g. the A9 dualling, is a one off cost that (ideally) will deliver a permanent improvement with long term associated benefits – reduced journey times, fuel consumption, accident rates, that kind of thing.

Subsidy is an ongoing cost that props up an enterprise that would otherwise be commercially unviable. It’s benefits are normally temporary and short term since they cease to exist as and when the subsidy is withdrawn. Subsidy can be justified in some circumstances, but not when commercially viable alternatives are available.

Prestwick is not a “strategic asset”. If it shut down tomorrow the aviation industry would not collapse. I think the more objective amongst us recognise that the Scottish Government chose to prop up PIK for blatantly political rather than strategic reasons.

I would actually not like to see Prestwick close and lose one of the UK's longest runways (I can think of only 6 civil runways in the UK longer than PIK's) but I think it is time to give up pretending that it is still a viable passenger airport and save a load of money by closing the terminal. However, I am not a Scottish tax payer so don't really get a say in the matter.

Well I am a Scottish tax payer but I don't get a say in the matter either. However, there really is no justification for persisting with the Prestwick funding as there is clearly no realistic strategy to bring it back towards anything approaching self-sufficiency. For me it would be very useful as a fully functional airport in terms of ease of use and distance from my house (I live roughly half way between PIK and GLA) but the reality is that it is a massive financial drain and a waste of public money at this stage.


However, I think there is a lot of political will to see the airport remain open, which seems to go all the way to the top, so I expect the current setup to continue for the foreseeable future.

Its all down the Sturgeon's links to the area and nothing more.

Whatever keeping it "open" means.

If they decide they want to close it without looking responsible for doing so this would be easy to engineer. Try to charge Ryanair a bit more when it comes to renewal of the contract and Bob's yer uncle.

Or just do what the SNP do with everything else, find a way to blame it on the English.

Chevron to establish maintenance facility headquarters at Glasgow Prestwick Airport

They also have a facility at Kemble.

Prestwick for many years has always had military activity, particularly the US. Don't know the financial issues with this but it may be politically difficult to close a site
which has an element of military strategic importance, no matter how small.

And very unlikely to close a site where a 10 year deal has just been signed. An example to you detractors that you know little of what you talk about as you are ever blinded by Ryanair. Even this week Spirit opened a new build £5M facility, and more such investments can be expected. But I guess that does not fit the normal agenda here.

Excellent News, not going to sit well with most on here but! Knew about this months ago was just waiting for news to be released, onwards and upwards! Well done to all concerned...

Good news for Prestwick and the local economy!! Some folk here want Prestwick closed because they think it might help them compete with the busier airport next door, let's just say what some folk are clearly thinking. Even though this is a Prestwick thread....

I don't understand the "them v us" competitive attitude that develops on these threads, particularly re marginal or failing airports.

Nobody is hoping for the death of Prestwick. They're just noticing it has serious long term problems.

Deals like Chevron are exactly what PIK needs allowing it to stay open without the cost of providing unprofitably for a small number of pax services.

I don't think people do want PIK closed - they just want it to run without having to be funded by the government.

Pull the tax payers money and let it stand on its own two feet. If it has all this business coming its way then no issue.

Stop putting words into peoples mouths. I would like to see them downsize loss making parts of the business which will never make money, i.e. passenger ops from that huge transatlantic gateway building.
This Kemble or St Athan sort of business model may yet save PIK. One landing fee and a rental agreement, all good. All of which revenue is p***ed away trying to compete with GLA on passenger services.

PIK3141 and DC-10-Col what airline do you see coming to PIK in the next five years to make passenger ops viable? Right now they're driving huge losses wiping out all the other positives.

Agreed. Next, how about a commercial training centre, combining simulators and live line training opportunities, building on what they already do?

S1E. Why can't you just say 'Well done Prestwick, Good News' ? Instead you just go off again......

And further to the strategic importance and longevity of Prestwick Airport, the MoD Defence Infrastructure Organisation report which was briefly in the public domain last week refers to a £10M spend on HMS Gannet.