That's standard for Ryanair, what's your point?
I suspect that closure won't be a likely option as the airfield is seen as something of a strategic asset. As to the new owners, I do wonder.

If Prestwick loses money for Infratil, what prevents Infratil closing some or all of the airport, apart from having to take a further impairment charge to their accounts (ie not real cashflow) ?

Just because Prestwick Airport hasn't been sold doesn't mean to say that it is going to close as some people desperately wish for. There have been a few companies that have shown interest in Prestwick Airport. Maybe now the price has been lowered it will attract more interest and a sale.

I guess the land has to be worth more than the airport as it will be classed as a brown field site. I hope the airport gets turned around. The terminal might be out of the 60's but it seems OK to me.

I think the "price" being lowered is more an issue of writing down the book value as an accounting trick - If anyone had come along with even a semi-decent offer thus far I think Infratil would've bitten their hand off, whether it matched the price or not.

Even if the airport's sold for £1 I think there's a legitimate question as to how the new owner will make money. FR quite obviously are unprepared to pay their way and successive managements over the last 10-15 years have failed to persuade any other significant operator to come in. I agree that the airport closing totally is very unlikely due to its strategic value, but people have to face the possibility that, if pax ops are the main source of losses, closing the terminal may be a way that Infratil/future owners will attempt to stem the losses. Either that or MOL pays more and we all know that's unlikely.

Who specifically are you referring to? I can't see why anybody would "wish" for a complete permanent closure. I would like to see Prestwick Airport grow, with more Ryanair traffic and from other carriers, especially Wizz Air whoes 4 weekly flights is almost like a piss take considering any other secondary airport which is comparable to Glasgow-Prestwick like Paris-Beauvais, Oslo-Torp or Stockholm-Skavsta has several routes and several flights daily, not 3 or 4 a week! But then you have to ask yourself, why do Wizzair operate so little from Prestwick?? Ryanair competition is not the answer, Prestwick has become one of Ryanair's smallest bases and they get a lot more competiton from them at virtually any other city that they serve. There must be some other more complex reason, perhaps the lack of investment/old facillities is the reason or may be low demand, which like it or not, for a small airport like Prestwick, could well be fatal, especially if the investment to improve it and get people to use it is not there in the first place!

Believe me there are some sad people here who are desperate for Prestwick Airport to close and Ryanair to move lock, stock and barrel up the road to Glasgow. I, like you, would love to see Prestwick Airport get used a lot more. But I don't want to see Glasgow close either. Both airports provide jobs.
I read on here a while ago that Infratil copied its charging structure from its airport in Wellington. As a result it cost more to land at Prestwick. Infratil haven't exactly made a success of their European Airports. Maybe its time they pulled out and let another operator take over that could do the job better.

GDN and WAW remain but KTW and POZ were dropped as the massive influx of Eastern Europeans slowed down.
As for Ryanair, they have five based aircraft in the summer at PIK which is still a Hell of a lot more than when I was growing up. The core issue, alongwith many other FR dominated airfields across Europe is that allowing FR to use the facilities almost gratis allows no money for investment in facilities, so no ability to attract other airlines.
The old terminal at PIK is archaic but the rest of the airfield is thriving. Two runways, plenty pf parking and two succesful FBOs with traffic variety other airfields would die for, all count for little on the balance sheet as so much is geared around FR. Tis a tricky one.

Yes, the airport terminal is archaic (some places more so than others), however it is functional. I remember when I was growing up the terminal buildin used to shut down for the winter and even during the summer there were only a few flights to Canada and America. Even with the downturn in traffic it is much busier now than it was then.

I'm fairly certain that it was only four and that is not a particularly large base. It had six aircraft only a couple of years ago and since then, Prestwick has lost aircraft whilst other bases have been getting more aircraft which effectively results in Prestwick going from one of Ryanair's largest UK bases to one of their smallest in only a couple of years. I now make Prestwick the third smallest out of their eleven UK bases with only Leeds and Bournemouth being smaller. Go back to 2009 or 2010 for instance and Prestwick was probably their fourth or fifth biggest base in the UK. If Ryanair are shrinking at Prestwick than what chance is there of any major growth in the longer term? I hope that somebody can prove me wrong because like I say, it would be great for Prestwick to succeed and am sure that it will but I'm only saying what is happening and the risks that are caused by it.

But really?? Is that not just Wizz Air's explanation for cancelling those routes? Reality is that airlines don't often cancel routes simply for the reason they give to the public, it's often something much more complex and internal than that. Also, why would only the Prestwick/Glasgow area be effected by basically a fall in demand whilst every other European city, plus the other three UK airports Wizz Air fly from have managed to sustain and build further connections with Wizz Air.

Wizzair
 

You have to remember that FR moved a couple of Poland flights to EDI and that they still have WAW and WRO from PIK so coupled with a definite downturn in Polish workers it is actually a surprise that Wizz are still here.

Quote:

---

FlyGla - you're !!!!-stirring and potentially embarressing yourself.:=

---

ScotsSLF>>>


Almost as embarrassing as your spelling! It was a genuine question hence the question mark at the end of the post title. I will be more than happy to see it be kept open and given a face-lift; I have flown from the airport many times as a passenger and operationally so there is some affinity there. BUT let's be honest here, it is in a shocking state, I am surprised those who get off their Wizz Air flight don't turnaround and head straight home!

FlyGla, apologies for my spelling mistake but come on ...whilst I agree that PIK needs an upgrade, to talk about passengers turning around and heading home whilst 'tongue in cheek' is quite pathetic. I use the majority of UK airports and PIK is in need of repair but it is no worse than GLA's low cost pier which is shabby, GLA's middle pier which in places reeks of damp, CWL's drab and forlorn looking terminal, BHX's FlyBe terminal which is tatty, LHR's terminal one which us a shambles. EDI has its issues as well so what is needed is investment across a number of UK airports from a passenger's point of view - and I don't mean investment in shopping centres! PIK will survive and will remain a strategic asset in some form or other. Slow death? Time will tell but I'm convinced that the airport will remain to provide various aviation related activities and services including a passenger operation as well as ensuring that there is continued competition to both GLA and EDI. This can only be good for the consumer and for business in general. We are indeed very fortunate to have three good airports within the central belt.

ScotsSLF

FlyBe does not have a terminal at BHX, there is only one terminal. What you mean is that the check-in and boarding areas used by FlyBe aren't the best. Ryanair also use that part of the terminal which goes some way to explaining it's alleged condition, but I must say I've never found it to be particularly obnoxious - whereas Prestwick is an unadulterated dump - again probably as a result of it's principal airline customer being the undisputed parasite of the european airline industry.

ScotsSLF..

For your info,

Birminghams old Eurohub terminal you refer to was built for British Airways, then they pulled out.Its now part of "One terminal" Their are plans to refurbish it inside, so should look a bit better.

BHX has probably spent more money than any other airport in the UK for its size on improvements in last 3 years;

1.One Terminal connection big improvements in security, lighting .space etc apart from old Eurohub.

2.New 3 storey International Pier with airbridges can take up to 7 Widebodies including A380.

3.New ILS both ends

4. Runway extension, being constructed at present.

5. New ATC tower

6. New Primary Radar and tower

7. New Biz Jet hangar including VIP accommodation.

8. New major project to be announced shortly.

Nigel

Thanks for that update Nigel - I realise that BHX is making big efforts and recently flew from the newly refurbished 'international' bit to Berlin. Very nice. I call the other bit the FlyBe bit because I regularly fly into there with FlyBe and couldn't remember whether it was called 1 or 2. It does need refurbishing and Im glad to hear that this will happen. Just to put things onto context if you compare the majority of our airport terminals with the likes of Vienna , Barcelona El Prat or Schipol then IMHO were still way behind in terms of passenger ease of use and comfort.

Worth remembering PIK's terminal was taxpayer funded and built for long haul. It's not really ideal for the Ryanair operation which could be run from a much smaller purpose built tin shed.
If the money was there the whole terminal could be demolished along with the old cargo bays and a much smaller modern building put in it's place attached to the rail link. However the return on that investment may well be near zero as the main tennant would never agree to it. The interior of the terminal looks fine landside, however the exterior is utterly lamentable and shabby, with airside facilities that were built in the mid 60s and haven't been changed since.

To say that Prestwick Airport is an "unadulterated dump" is rather harsh and I'd say very exaggerated. I'm the first to admit that it does need a bit of work done on it but it is still a very functional airport. I arrived two weeks ago today from Barcelona. Within ten minutes of getting off the plane we had gone through passport control, picked up our luggage and got into my car. Compare that with when I flew into Gatwick at the end of August. I had to get a bus to the terminal, everyone was told to wait at the wrong conveyor belt for luggage of which I had to wait one *******hour!! I then had to queue to get into a lift, I had to wait for a train to take me to the other terminal where I got a train for St Pancras. That really was a tortuous journey. Give me Prestwick anyday!

PIK is a dump and is the worst in terms of passenger experience, facilities, and infrastructure for regular pax ops in the UK now. It, at a push, serves a very minimal purpose but thats it. It will not be in its current form within 2 years is my prediction.
Your local support and enthusiasm is admirable, but should look a lot different with the rose coloured spectacles off. Harsh reality is often not pleasant.