-
28-01-2010, 12:38 PM
#801
Member
Billy Boy and Rainey,
Consider this:
AIA will work with the airlines to promote new routes via Cairns. They have people specifically engaged for this purpose. So say for example, the create a route Auckland, Cairns, Singapore they will be able to influence Cairns airports pricing for landing charges for planes heading to Auckland. Without the stake in Cairns this would be an uphill battle.
New routes = more passengers in both airports = higher landing charges = $.
It's all about getting more planes landing more often at each airport - routes are developed by the Airlines AND the Airports. Jetstar coming to NZ is an example of this sort of deal.
PF.
-
28-01-2010, 12:44 PM
#802
I have heard that the CEO is going to be on the Breakfast program tomorrow, 29/1/10, on TV1.
-
28-01-2010, 02:03 PM
#803
Remember the Canadian Pension Fund one of their reasons for buying was to use AIA's expertise in developing airport land & airport retailing for other airports they held shares in or were considering buying into.
-
28-01-2010, 02:14 PM
#804
Originally Posted by PhaedrusFollower
Billy Boy and Rainey,
Consider this:
AIA will work with the airlines to promote new routes via Cairns. They have people specifically engaged for this purpose. So say for example, the create a route Auckland, Cairns, Singapore they will be able to influence Cairns airports pricing for landing charges for planes heading to Auckland. Without the stake in Cairns this would be an uphill battle.
New routes = more passengers in both airports = higher landing charges = $.
PF.
I hear what you are saying.
But it is the airlines that dictate where they fly.
If the passengers dont want the option you suggest
then the airlines wont use it regardless of the landing fees.
eg If I am in Singapore, I want to fly direct to Ak with no
stopovers. [ Maybe]
Now this debate can be batted all round the park from
different angles. The risk is .... will the gamble work and
for how long. (compeditors etc...) There's gotta be more to it.
BB
-
28-01-2010, 02:29 PM
#805
I'm with Rainey and BB on this...i can't see how they'll boost traffic to NZ, particularly as junior 25% shareholders. I'd say that the majority of travellers perceptions of airports is that they are a drag, why they would want to stop into another one to get here, well...i can't see it.
I also wonder why the need for a capital raise for what seems a relatively minor purchase...i wonder if this was in fact a bank stipulated requirement suggesting that the numbers may not look so good on the inside.
Moi :-)
-
28-01-2010, 03:38 PM
#806
All to do with airlines utilising aircraft.Airline routes.ie Emirates fly from asia to sydney to chCH then ch ch to sydney then asia.means they have added tasman route .that's another route using the same aircraft. should auck get more airlines to do cairns auck as an add on means more landings.A lot of airline routes try to get business traveller.flight may start at melbourne ,then sydney then auck then sydney then back to melbourne.
-
28-01-2010, 05:31 PM
#807
Member
I remember when John Banks was the one who tried to sell off all AIA shares and he said that the council is to look after Auckland city and not be running a big share holding in AIA. Now Mr. Banks is saying that it is a "critically important" piece of infrastructure. Comments.
-
28-01-2010, 06:12 PM
#808
Yes, the fear was that the Canadians would sell off the airport land for housing!
Or worse, pick it up and take it away!
Enough said.
-
29-01-2010, 10:06 AM
#809
Hasn't MCC said they need to maintain a over 10% holding to stop a takeover. Are they forgetting they wont exist in a year and combined with ACC, they will have a over 10% holding without further purchase.
Did they use their 'strategic holding' to voice concern over the expansion into Australia. If not, why not, and if it is because they would ahve been ignored, is it really a strategic holding.
-
29-01-2010, 10:21 AM
#810
TROUBLE with COUNCIL SHAREHOLDERS IS :-
They have just realised they own something "GOOD" and have nearly frown it out many times they are not investors and run by public servants who have own nothing personally
in the stock market the worst of it they are borrowing the money for the rate payers to suffer WITH for a long time...
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks