sharetrader
Page 109 of 175 FirstFirst ... 95999105106107108109110111112113119159 ... LastLast
Results 1,081 to 1,090 of 1741
  1. #1081
    Herbacious
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    439

    Default

    OK, I've only recently moved south of the Harbour Bridge so I haven't twigged that the highway went near Ardmore. Slight difference in scale though between Auckland and London eh? I still don't think its justified unless AIA really start to screw people on the landing charges. Seems to me that's not a big component of the ticket prices.

    They have to dredge the Waitemata regularly to get the bigger ships in so yes it had occurred to me that it was an impediment for the Manukau, but seems like it shouldn't be a big deal, they were getting the cement ships in to Onehunga until recently.

  2. #1082
    Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,831

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mondograss View Post
    OK, I've only recently moved south of the Harbour Bridge so I haven't twigged that the highway went near Ardmore. Slight difference in scale though between Auckland and London eh? I still don't think its justified unless AIA really start to screw people on the landing charges. Seems to me that's not a big component of the ticket prices.

    They have to dredge the Waitemata regularly to get the bigger ships in so yes it had occurred to me that it was an impediment for the Manukau, but seems like it shouldn't be a big deal, they were getting the cement ships in to Onehunga until recently.
    True London is a wee bit bigger - but including Luton, Stansted and City, it has five big Airports and even then, they are at close to capacity and without additional runways, will increasingly lose hub status to Amsterdam, Paris and others apparently. But AIA has expansion room so it would not make sense at this stage to enlist a second site. As long as they play fair, they should be able to avoid the regulator's ire. Although it would make sense to make sure a second site could be developed if needed in the future imo.

    The Manukau has strong currents and narrower and shallower channels, which would need a lot more dredging than in the Waitemata. I agree it could be becoming more cost effective to develop and maintain Onehunga, although Tauranga has taken a lot of former Auckland trade I guess.

    Edit: Just read this from 2015 :Holcim needed a newer site as they couldn't bring their newer ships into Onehunga because the water was too shallow.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11496775
    Last edited by Bjauck; 11-05-2016 at 07:47 PM.

  3. #1083
    Herbacious
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bjauck View Post
    Edit: Just read this from 2015 :Holcim needed a newer site as they couldn't bring their newer ships into Onehunga because the water was too shallow.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11496775
    To be fair though, it wouldn't be worth dredging the Manukau just for Holcim and they're pretty much the only one operating on that side of any scale. Plus they're right up near Mangere Bridge. If you look at the Manukau on Google Earth, you can see AIA is out in the main channel.

    The argument against moving the port usually centers on the fact that all the freight comes from Auckland and particularly via the more industrial south of the city. To my mind if the port was based on\near the AIA land you'd gain a lot of synergy with the existing logistics operations there plus because you'd need rail to the port, you'd substantially enhance the business case for bringing rail to the airport as well.

  4. #1084
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    58

    Default

    I don't see any impending need for a second runway as mentioned in the 25 year plan.

    Couple of reasons why: They are talking about building it at the latter of the 25 years, with rationalisation of routes, bigger planes and better landing technology means they won't (i believe) run out of capacity in landing slots to need it.

    The land they have set aside for the new runway will be utilized for commercial property instead, AIA is increasingly more of a property fund than a utility anyway.

  5. #1085
    Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,831

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subway View Post
    I don't see any impending need for a second runway as mentioned in the 25 year plan.

    Couple of reasons why: They are talking about building it at the latter of the 25 years, with rationalisation of routes, bigger planes and better landing technology means they won't (i believe) run out of capacity in landing slots to need it.

    The land they have set aside for the new runway will be utilized for commercial property instead, AIA is increasingly more of a property fund than a utility anyway.
    I remember reading that Heathrow, with only two runways, had been on the verge of the limit for aircraft movements several times until landing technology enabled more aircraft to be squeezed in.

  6. #1086
    Herbacious
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    439

    Default

    I guess they have to hedge their bets and plan on growth continuing in a fairly linear fashion. And if in 25 years time we're all using VTOL, then I guess they can develop the land into warehouses or whatever then.

  7. #1087
    Aspiring to be an Awesome Bear
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    In the Woods
    Posts
    1,588

    Default

    A newbie to share trading and wondered if someone could help me understand the sudden burst in AIA share price? Craig's Investment Partners rates it a Sell, which I did at $7 thinking that was a good move but it just keeps going up and up! What am I missing??

  8. #1088
    Herbacious
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    439

    Default

    Big increases in passenger movements at Queenstown, Auckland and Cairns airports (all owned by the AIA group) according to latest Op Stats. Only Mackay Airport letting the team down. Probably anticipation of a bumper FY result announcement in late August and probably very good forward guidance announcement at the same time.

    https://www.nzx.com/files/attachments/238082.pdf
    Last edited by mondograss; 21-07-2016 at 04:38 PM.

  9. #1089
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    956

    Default

    Big tourism reports + big immigration reports + John Key saying that immigration policy won't change + the above comment.

  10. #1090
    Senior Member Marilyn Munroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Hollywood
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Good to see AIA's Queensland investments are starting to show signs of improvement after some pedestrian years.

    There is a further oportunity in Queensland the AIA may chose to run the ruler over, but in my opinion should pass on.

    This is Maroochydore Airport on the Sunshine Coast north of Brisbane. This is a municipal airport with the local shire wanting some outside investor to partner and pay for the airport development they plan.

    In my opinion Southeast Queensland is already well served by airports, Brisbane, Gold Coast, the new private airport at Toowoomba and Maroochydore itself. With the new 2nd runway at Brisbane due to come on stream there is also a large capacity increase added.

    I'm not saying AIA should never invest, I'm saying wait.

    Boop boop de do
    Marilyn
    Last edited by Marilyn Munroe; 22-07-2016 at 01:25 AM. Reason: spelling
    Diamonds are a girls best friend.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •