Yes, it will always be the gateway to NZ and provides a perpetual positive income stream for expansion in other areas of investment.
Printable View
I don't regard airports as " cyclical " investments. The recent Covid impact/disruption is hardly a cyclical circumstance.
Rather, an airport is literally a runway of relatively stable and reliably increasing long term revenue generation as BP suggests, albeit occasionally significant capital investment is necessary to underpin growth.
Maybe ... though they are properties with quite significant fish hooks. They are lying very close to sea level ... and they are neighbouring an international airport. Obviously - you might say - global warming and sea level rise might fix both problems ;) ... and hey, they might;
But yes, I do see that property speculation is clearly the only reason for AKL's share price holding up in these levels.
The thing with speculation is .... it may work - or it might not. Not something I would hope IFT is considering :) ;
AIA elevation above sea level(current) is 7.01m
WIA 13m
SYD 9.0m
HKG 8.53m
Singapore 6.65m
Adelaide 6m
Boston 6m
Rome 5m
JFK 4m
Brisbane 4m
Vancouver 4m
Miami 3m
Schiphol -3m
An incomplete list of low lying airports - just the ones I have landed at!
We’re all doomed! We could get some Dutch engineers first.
Infratil have often said there’s better use of capital than owning airports
They sold a chunk of Auckland not that long ago and have quit their UK and German airport investments. I’m sure Wellington would have gone as well but nobody prepared to pay what they want so they hang on to it.
Maybe airports the new ‘plaything’ ……. I doubt it
Not quite sure what point you want to make ... I highlighted one risk ... but I didn't say its unique to AIA's land, didn't I?
I trust you compared as well the tide-differences at the various locations, the geological base (sand tends to erode easier than rocks) and the location (how easy is it to build seawalls) to find out whether AIA is safer or less safe than these other airports you mentioned.
But again - while this all might be interesting, if you make a choice into which of these airports to invest, I don't understand what your point is in the context of my post ...?
If I tell you that you have a x% risk of dying in a car accident and you tell me that your neighbour has a similar risk, then yes, this might well be true, but how exactly does this impact on your risk?
Given that AIA's market cap is approximately twice that of IFT I think the whole conversation is pretty academic!
I didn't started it ... but as far as I remember was the start just the idea for IFT to take over the shares City of Auckland is holding, which would be obviously less than AIA's total market cap.
I agree however, that there are as well many other reasons other than what was already raised above making this whole thing unlikely ... as a starter ... IFT prefers to control their investments - and Auckland has not a big enough stake to offer this.
I guess what some are saying is it is a great investment so far.
It is good to continue looking at a share carefully. I for one have been wrong many times over and it baffles me when share rise to certain levels when they shouldn't. In the case with Infratil it should.
Infratil has its sights set on how it can make money and governments around the world are jumping on the "Climate change" speech and throwing money at it or subsidising it. Im not disagreeing with Climate change but to be honest I don't care for now. I follow the money instead of fighting it.