DavidByrne wrote:planemanofnz wrote:Sure, but is a second runway still going to be required after this in the medium term, even so? Unlike with the GFC, which was a cyclical downturn, we are now arguably beginning a structural shift, with permanent implications for aviation demand. For example, the Finance Minister said this week that: "New Zealand will fundamentally have to reassess what is done on these shores ... we've also got to look inside ourselves a little bit more at what we do here in New Zealand. We need to be looking at what we can and should do ourselves". That may mean shifts in export and import compositions and volumes, longer-term, which currently sustain parts of flights. There may also be permanent shifts in consumer preferences around tourism, with implications for aviation. It seems right to be cautious.
Absolutely agree. There has been little reported in the NZ press of the longer-term implications of the virus, but international media have noted that the drop in global GDP will almost certainly exceed the drop in GDP that occurred during the Great Depression of the 1929-35ish period (which was only 15%). If these predictions are correct (and remember that the trillions of dollars pumped into global economies so far will have to be found from somewhere, eventually - almost certainly from you and I as taxpayers) then all bets are off re the shape of the airline industry in future. I cannot see that it will just be a matter of waiting things out and then reverting to the status quo ante in a reasonably short period. We've already seen that Virgin has announced it will not return to our skies, and there will surely be other carriers that follow suit. Some of the Chinese carriers for starters. You have to worry also about the new Samoan carrier unless the company is heavily subsidised by the Samoan government. But there will almost certainly be more who either fail or who choose to withdraw some of their furthest-flung routes.
I don't see NZ itself resuming some of its current international destinations for many years. Right now, the long-haul network has an uncanny resemblance to the long-haul network at the first stage of the DC8 age in 1965/early 1966 (that was 2x weekly to LAX, 2x weekly to HKG, period) - except with many fewer Tasman connections. Obviously there will be many routes that will resume in the medium term, but some may be lost.
And as for a second runway at AKL - that's now pie-in-the-sky for the foreseeable future. AIAL will have many more pressing concerns for a good number of years (like how to balance the books) than worrying about mega-dollar investments. And don't hold your breath for a new terminal either: that will be low priority once traffic stabilises at a lower level than 2019.
DavidByrne you like to write a lot regarding worst case scenario and quote "international media" to justify this.
We don't know how long this will or won't go on for therefore and prediction or speculations are just that.
I've read some of this, I've also read some of the positive, but unless you've got a crystal ball or believe in tarot cards let's see how and what unfolds.
To clarify a very key element of what I originally said which was doing something when things start to improve. I'm not saying build now and as I just wrote in my last reply, this will buy AIAL time, it was only a few months ago we were saying it was sooo overdue. This will allow a reset button to be pressed but only if AIAL acts at the appropriate time and doesn't wait till it's overdue again.
