Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Copenhagen Airport To Buy New Airports  
User currently offlineWindshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2330 posts, RR: 11
Posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1738 times:

Copenhagen has announced, that it is going to buy Newcastle International airport.

There has also been talks about bying Sydney Intl. which has been set on sale, by the Sydney government.
Copenhagen airport states, that it is highly interrested in bying Sydney intl. But so are all other privatized airports around the world.

Talks about a settlment for the buy of Omans two major airports, which will demand an investment of just under one bilion DKK (105 mill US$)

Copenhagen already own and run airports in Norway and Mexico, and has high hopes on a continuation of the succes story.

That's all for now folks, I will keep you updated.


"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineWishihadalife From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1702 times:

I hope they move Sydney airport to Copenhagen.

That way, CPH spotters will get to see "Nalanji Dreaming" regularly!


User currently offlineWindshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2330 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1677 times:

Yeah that would be nice:O)


"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24936 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1675 times:

Copenhagen Airport will buy 49% of Newcastle Airport.
That would be great!! I would think NCL would become even better than it is just now. Probably more flights would start between NCL and CPH as well I think.



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineBilly From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2000, 895 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1649 times:

The other bidder for NCL was Zurich. CPH was the preferred bidder. Why should this start extra CPH services from NCL? CPH own Mexican airports but I do not see any services from CPH to MEX. FRA have a management contratc at Lima in Peru and Aer Rianta own part of BHX. BAA own Melbourne and BA pulled the flight (since re-instated). Rome owns part of Jo'burg and Alitalia are canning the service.

Ownership does not imply new routes, it means that they want to make money out of the business. Remember that CPH will not be owning a controlling stake in NCL, that still lies with the council.


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6451 posts, RR: 54
Reply 5, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1639 times:

This automatically raises the question, is it really sensible that more and more airports become privatised?
Or should they rather be a public service controlled in a democratic way through the political systems in order to give its customers the best service at cost price.
There is of course only one reason for Copenhagen Airport to buy other airports - to maximize their profit to their stakeholders.
Competition is the only sensible regulator of private enterprices. Therefore we have several airline companies competing against each other.
But we cannot have several airports at the same destination competing against each other.
I could fear that privatised airports will give the same result as the privatisation of for instance British Rail - no new investments, continued use of worn out, outdated and unsafe equipment, sky-high prices and disasterously bad customer service. And accidents, accidents and more accidents.
I don't want to see good old airports go "down the drain" the same way as British Rail. Especially not my local airport.
Since CPH was privatised no dramatic changes have been made for the ordinary users. But prices have gone up considerably, and I shouldn't wonder that it's the reason why it over the same time frame has evolved from the absolutely leading Scandinavian airport to number two behind Arlanda. While the minor Danish, publicly run, international airports are prospering.
On the other end of the scale CPH has changed from a slightly taxpayer subsidized service into a real cash cow for its stakeholders.
What do you think?
Best regards, Preben Norholm



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineWindshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2330 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1629 times:

I sadly and totally disagree, I have only seen improovements in my dearest airport.
Over the years CPH has gone from a 70's dinosaur to a 90'/00's hightech designer masterpiece, it has the most astounding design, I have ever witnessed at an airport.

The best thing has yet to come:
Several postal airlines has made CPH their nothern Europe or Scandinavian hub (TNT/FEDEX) and with the huge cargo terminal it also looks like it.

The growth does not stop here, they are far from finished with CPH, a new family area has been build in Term2 along with designer chairs at a relaxment area in Term2 ( if that isn't to the benifit of the consumer then?!!).

The building of a fourth terminal is undergoing at the moment not to mention the nearly finished Hilton.

I can't see where you think it has slowed down or lost it's quality, after all it has gotten so many awards, both by pros and consumers.

I hardly think that their interrest in better stocks, are the sole or at least dominating reasons for buying and running other airports. They invest huge amounts of money (in Mexico they investet 400mill DKK) in what they feel will either improove or convien the airports.

I can't see why you see the CPH as being a money horny capitalisitc hog, who's sole interrest is to earn and ruin, because I feel that that's the complete oppisition to what CPH is...

Gkirk I'am glad that you see it as something positive, but I have to agree with Billy, how could it have an effect on the routes from or to CPH, after all it's not SAS or Maersk who's running Newcastle.


Preben one last remark, when has CPH gone from being the dominating airport of Scandinavia, to a second rankone?!!!
I don't know where you see this decline, I can only see improovements, and it is the one and only dominating airport in Scandinavia.
After all El Al cancled their routes to Finland and Stockholm, but they increased their traffic to CPH, hmmm

I can not and will not let say that it's importance or dominans has changed or decreased, because it's the perfect contrast to what's it's status is today!!!



"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24936 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1620 times:

Point taken. I just thought that maybe if CPH had a stake in NCL that they would try and get more people to use CPH as a gateway rather than say AMS,CDG,LHR etc.


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineBilly From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2000, 895 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1613 times:

I am being pedantic here, but El Al is cutting its CPH flights.

However, the issue facing governments is that they can no longer provide money for airport developments. NCL suffered from massive underinvestment (until recently)because the local government took all of the profit to support local schools, police etc. This is very nice for the local government, but you are left with a second rate airport that cannot move with the times. It took private money to buiold the new Bristol Airport as well as the Stansted airport we know today. At least private operators know that they have to invest profits into the airport. Perhaps this is getting off-message, but it is an interesting issue.


User currently offlineSAS767 From Denmark, joined Dec 1999, 417 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1608 times:

Billy - I wrote it to you under the Manchester thread!

EL AL is not cutting their route to Copenhagen, they just cut one of the weekly flights due to the situation in Israel.

SAS767
Copenhagen, Denmark


User currently offlineWindshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2330 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1596 times:

Em, thanx SAS767 for the savior from an outbreak of strange, and untrue story's.
Well my father is from Israel, and has worked for El Al for some years, he always prefers to fly with them, and still knows people from the Danish headquarters here in Copenhagen.

My father nor I have ever heard of a story, like that they would end their routes to CPH.
Flying on overbooked fligts in the summer, with 742's, and dealing with the traffic from Stockholm, it would be a major "forehead slap" if they suddenly decided to cancel their routes to CPH?!!!

Where have you gotten such false information from?!!
I really can't imagine a worst and devistating decision, for an airline to make, stopping their routes to CPH would mean cutting off any traffic (except SAS) going to and from Scandinavia?!! Major bomber!!!!

Well hope me and SAS767 didn't slap you too hard in the face, but sometimes logic thinking, can serve you well:O)



"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
User currently offlineBilly From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2000, 895 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1592 times:

Got the info from Reuters. Thanks for keeping the civil in aviation. Apologies if it was not entirely accurate. Possibly El Al is not accurately briefing people.

SAS - keep your uncivil attitude to yourself.


User currently offlineSAS767 From Denmark, joined Dec 1999, 417 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1589 times:

Hi Billy

Suppose this was meant for me:

"SAS - keep your uncivil attitude to yourself."

I'm sorry! It wasn't my intention to be impolite.

Unfortunately sometimes when you write in a foreign language things is seen as being impolite by the people who have this particularly language as their native language even though it's not meant this way. That's the case in this situation and again I'm sorry!

BTW Windshear they will use the 777 on the Monday flight to CPH this summer. The Wednesday flight will be a 747-200.

Kind rgds
SAS767
Copenhagen, Denmark



User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6451 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1577 times:

From "Inside SAS":
Arlanda - Scandinavia's largest airport.
Stockholm-Arlanda had last year [2000] 18.3 million passengers - up 1.1 million (6.6%) and is now the largest airport in Scandinavia...


Dear Windshear,
So it is a fact that during its "private" period CPH dropped from 1st to 2nd place.

It can only partly be blamed on the new Great Belt road bridge - it opened almost three years ago on 13th June 1998. And the train had the bridge-tunnel combination one year earlier in 1997. Still CPH was the larger one in 1999.

I really do hope that you are right, that there is no reason to worry for CPH in the future. But technically the same thing happened to CPH as happened to British Rail a few years earlier. And just see what a mess has come out of what was once the world's greatest railway system. It is no more than a joke compared to railways in France and Germany.

There are a few services which cannot be "controlled" by ordinary business competition, and therefore they should be public. Some of them are roads and streets, fresh water distribution, waste water systems - and airports.

Well, in some cases, for instance when a city is large enough for four or five large international airports, then it's a different thing. The private London Stansted is therefore maybe not a perfect example when judging the prospects of CPH. Copenhagen is after all ten times smaller than London and will never get more than one large international airport.

It is really not impressive that 400 million Danish Kr. ($50 million) are invested in Mexico. That's probably roughly the price of refurbishment of one runway. Never ever has CPH invested so little in one year in "historic time".
If Mexico was badly misstreated (I've never been there) then $50 million can of course give it a much needed lift. But CPH was never misstreated, it has always been a fairly well functioning airport which has been updated, rebuilt and enlarged as necessary for the money which it earned itself.
There used to be a rather strange bookkeeping system with a rather low calculated interest rate on state investments which resulted in a "profit" to the state. While on the other hand if state investments had been calculated on "market interest rates", then CPH sometimes ended a year with a minor loss.
But in general the system worked very well and gave its users a splendid service at very close to price of cost, to demanding business travellers as well as budget laisure travellers. I am afraid that it won't continue. That the stakeholders will profit on the non-existing competition, screw up prices, and ignore needed investments as trafiic grows.

Best regards, Preben Norholm



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineWindshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2330 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1573 times:

First I have to say freaking great to the 777 El Al comming to CPH this summer, I sure look forward to going to Israel now:O)

Billy well they did infact stop flying for a week or so, but they now fly with only one less flight a week, due to the situation in Israel.

PrebenNorholm, I do not know and coprehend why you are so pessemistic about the whole thing!!!!!
It's hard to see and understand why, you keep looking the awards and positive response CPH Intl. has gotten, as being a sign of decay or closure.

Have you heard that it wan the best airport, for travellers award?!!!

400millDKK is a lot in Mexico!!!!!!!!! And you would get more than a newly pulished runway for that kind of money!!!

The airports expenses has dropped this year and last year, simply because of the large number of finished projects, not so many things are missing from the big scheme.

I really think that you have to reconsidder, your harsh thoughts on privatized airport and CPH.
CPH is the center of cargo and I do think that the passenger numbers are higher than Arlanda!!!!!!!!

Where does all the major SAS fligths go to and from?!!! CPH!!!!!

You need to calm your fears down, cuz the future of CPH looks bright:O)

Many spring joy filled greatings from blooming Copenhagen.



"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
User currently offlineSAS767 From Denmark, joined Dec 1999, 417 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1566 times:

Preben Norholm wrote ----------------------------------------------------
From "Inside SAS":
Arlanda - Scandinavia's largest airport.
Stockholm-Arlanda had last year [2000] 18.3 million passengers - up 1.1 million (6.6%) and is now the largest airport in Scandinavia...

Dear Windshear,
So it is a fact that during its "private" period CPH dropped from 1st to 2nd place.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree that seen in number of passengers CPH have dropped from 1st to 2nd place. But seen overall I will state that CPH is a clearly number 1 in Scandinavia.

The large different between to two airports are the traffic pattern. Sweden is a large country compared with Denmark and due to this a large amount of the passengers going through ARN is Swedish domestic passengers - for the year 2000 about 40% of the passengers where domestic. The same number for CPH where 10%.

It's also interesting to compare the number of intercontinental destinations from the two airports (nonstop or one-stop):

ARN have 7, CPH have 17

Lets do the same with European destinations excluding destinations in the Nordic countries:

ARN have 44, CPH have 65

I think these figures states that CPH is the dominating of the two seen in an international perspective!

To support this conclusion you can have a look at the growth rate for international passengers year 2000.

ARN had a growth rate at 7% to 11.503.799 international passengers.

CPH had a growth rate at 8% to 16.116.458 international passengers.


Preben Norholm wrote ----------------------------------------------------
It can only partly be blamed on the new Great Belt road bridge - it opened almost three years ago on 13th June 1998. And the train had the bridge-tunnel combination one year earlier in 1997. Still CPH was the larger one in 1999.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1996 - The last year before the opening of the Great Belt Bridge for train traffic - CPH had 3 million domestic passengers. For the year 2000 these figures have dropped to 2 million. It's pretty easy to calculate that this is a lost of 1 million passengers!!!!!!!

Without the Great Belt Bridge the number of domestic passengers would probably still have been around the 3 millions - it's therefore a fact that without the bridge CPH would still have been the largest airport in Scandinavia, with almost 1 million passengers more then ARN.

In my opinion it's therefore completely wrong when you state that it can't be blamed on the bridge


Preben Norholm wrote ----------------------------------------------------
I really do hope that you are right, that there is no reason to worry for CPH in the future. But technically the same thing happened to CPH as happened to British Rail a few years earlier. And just see what a mess has come out of what was once the world's greatest railway system. It is no more than a joke compared to railways in France and Germany.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this a very bad comparison! You simply can't compare British rail with Copenhagen Airport.


Preben Norholm wrote ----------------------------------------------------
There are a few services which cannot be "controlled" by ordinary business competition, and therefore they should be public. Some of them are roads and streets, fresh water distribution, waste water systems - and airports.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my opinion another bad example...


Preben Norholm wrote ----------------------------------------------------
Well, in some cases, for instance when a city is large enough for four or five large international airports, then it's a different thing. The private London Stansted is therefore maybe not a perfect example when judging the prospects of CPH. Copenhagen is after all ten times smaller than London and will never get more than one large international airport.

It is really not impressive that 400 million Danish Kr. ($50 million) are invested in Mexico. That's probably roughly the price of refurbishment of one runway. Never ever has CPH invested so little in one year in "historic time".
If Mexico was badly misstreated (I've never been there) then $50 million can of course give it a much needed lift. But CPH was never misstreated, it has always been a fairly well functioning airport which has been updated, rebuilt and enlarged as necessary for the money which it earned itself.
There used to be a rather strange bookkeeping system with a rather low calculated interest rate on state investments which resulted in a "profit" to the state. While on the other hand if state investments had been calculated on "market interest rates", then CPH sometimes ended a year with a minor loss.
But in general the system worked very well and gave its users a splendid service at very close to price of cost, to demanding business travellers as well as budget laisure travellers. I am afraid that it won't continue. That the stakeholders will profit on the non-existing competition, screw up prices, and ignore needed investments as trafiic grows.

Best regards, Preben Norholm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overall I think you are very pessimistic about the future prospect for CPH. I totally disagree - especially seen in the light of the expansion plan there include building of the new terminal 4 with around 40 jet-bridges. Construction of new taxiways (including a taxiway over Englandsvej parallel to runway 22R/04L) there will raise the maximum number of operations per hour from 70 to 90. Building of a new cargo terminal next to the DHL terminal. New Control tower, etc...

Also take a look at the SAS expansion plan with the introduction of the new A330's/A340's. The centre for this expansion plan will be CPH and first step is as you probably know opening of the new service to Washington in May.

No I think the future looks bright for Copenhagen Airport, but it's without doubt very difficult to predict the future - we can just wait and see, but I will be very surprised if it goes so pessimistic as you forecast Preben.

Best regards

SAS767
Copenhagen, Denmark


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Guatemala To Get New Airports posted Fri Jul 7 2006 05:17:49 by Carmenlu15
Berlusconi To Buy A New Jet, A BBJ For 30 Mln Euro posted Mon Jun 12 2006 14:21:11 by Koper
American Not Eager To Buy New Boeing Jet..yet posted Wed Jun 8 2005 23:01:59 by NYC777
Czech Government To Buy New Planes posted Tue Feb 1 2005 20:45:34 by Checo77
Iran To Buy New Planes posted Fri Sep 17 2004 13:52:30 by Flying-Tiger
SAS To Buy New Long Hauls? posted Fri Jul 23 2004 02:12:52 by Windshear
Eithiad To Buy New Widebodies posted Wed Jun 30 2004 21:43:45 by Nyc777
Armstrong Airport To Get New N.Y., Philly Flights posted Sat Mar 27 2004 03:45:11 by Cmckeithen
Colombia To Buy A New Presidential Plane In 2004 posted Sat Jan 10 2004 03:20:53 by Wimpycol
MAS In Talks To Buy New Boeing Planes posted Sat Jan 25 2003 01:59:54 by OdiE