Masthead
One of my photos

I, for one, welcome our new private equity fund overlords

October 22nd, 2009 · Posted by Skuds in Life · No Comments · Life

I’m feeling a bit sorry for the Crawley Observer.  It hit the streets today with a story on page 19 (right next to the one with the wonderful headline of ‘The squirrel whisperer’) about Gatwick airport.  The headline was “Gatwick sale could take some time yet” and it started by saying:

BAA’s owners have scotched rumours that the sale of Gatwick Airport could be imminent.

Before I had even opened the paper there were headlines on the screens at work, which display a tickertape of the BBC RSS feed, saying that the sale of Gatwick had been agreed. Oops :) This could be a good thing for Gatwick and consequently for all the local businesses that are dependent on it one way or another.  BAA have never really made any secret of the fact that they see Heathrow as their flagship, and it has always been obvious that Heathrow is their priority.

This is not just about expansion, but also about contraction.  With falling demand for air travel, you just know BAA would want to make sure Heathrow kept its critical mass and so would make sure that Gatwick suffered more.  At the very least it has always seemed to encourage the impression that Heathrow is for serious business travel and Gatwick is for lower-priced, lower-margin holiday flights.

In other words, exactly the sort of monopolistic, anti-competitive behaviour that led to the demand for BAA to sell off some of its airports.

This may mean that the new owners of Gatwick will press for a second runway, even if Heathrow and Stanstead build new runways – BAA would have hated the idea of a new runway at Gatwick if it made another one at Heathrow less likely – but that is another matter, and probably not a pressing issue the way civil aviation is at the moment.

What it could mean is that Gatwick will actively try and get more operators to shift routes from Heathrow which would be a boost here, and may even lead to a more balanced division of air traffic, which in turn could lead to less demand for an extra runway altogether.

Or not.  What do I know?   Whatever GIP’s agenda is for Gatwick at least it will not be such a hidden one.

Tags: ··

Spread the word!
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter

No Comments so far ↓

There are no comments yet... Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word

 

 
Comments Policy:

  • Comments from anyone who is unknown (ie who has not commented before) will go into a moderation queue to be approved. This is to prevent spam/advertising comments and there may be a delay before such comments appear.
  • As far as possible I will not reject moderated comments or delete published comments, even if I disagree with them or if they are criticising me.
  • I intend only to delete/reject comments which are offensive, racist, homophobic, sexist or similar or if they are in any way illegal/libellous.
  • If you think a comment meets those criteria and I might have missed it, let me know.
  • Although technically I am able to edit comments I will not do so unless it is to remove embedded code which is causing problems.
  • If it is ever necessary to edit a comment it will be made clear that it has been edited.
  • Certain words in comments will cause the whole comment to be automatically consigned to the dustbin (Aavaisha, hmmegatest, cognitive, phentermine, xanax, pharmacy, viagra, vicodin, casino, ultram, tamiflu, valium, tramadol, levitra, carisoprodol) for obvious reasons.