PIK

[TonyM90]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me. Infact I would go as far to say that the presence of the terminal and the FR flights are a barrier to the airport's progress at this point.

[bill]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me.

Infact I would go as far to say that the presence of the terminal and the FR flights are a barrier to the airport's progress at this point.

Quite agree. It's a distraction and a money drain PIK doesn't need. Remove this and let the airfield flourish doing the things it's good at whilst making good money. If only the politicians in this neck of the woods could grasp this eh?

[Bearsden]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me.

Infact I would go as far to say that the presence of the terminal and the FR flights are a barrier to the airport's progress at this point.

Quite agree. It's a distraction and a money drain PIK doesn't need. Remove this and let the airfield flourish doing the things it's good at whilst making good money. If only the politicians in this neck of the woods could grasp this eh?

But are passenger ops a net cash outflow? With the indirect income from car parking, fueling etc on the revenue side and seasonal / part-time / flexi working on the cost side, I suspect it is cash generating on a marginal cost basis - remember a lot of airfield costs are fixed

[Clive]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me.

Quite agree. It's a distraction and a money drain PIK doesn't need. Remove this and let the airfield flourish doing the things it's good at whilst making good money. If only the politicians in this neck of the woods could grasp this eh?

But are passenger ops a net cash outflow? With the indirect income from car parking, fueling etc on the revenue side and seasonal / part-time / flexi working on the cost side, I suspect it is cash generating on a marginal cost basis - remember a lot of airfield costs are fixed

Noticed you didn’t include the terminal building and upkeep thereof, or insurance and regulatory costs that hosting pac ops necessitates. The true comparison which would tell us if the limited pax ops are a boon or a burden on the overall business would be to compare the business with pax ops to how the business would be without pax ops in the entirety of what that means. I think the business would be stronger without and that’s without the caveat that Ryanair are the only customer and as such can play god over this whole question. That’s not any kind of business plan for new owners.

[Clive]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

Appears its not just the Americans. Article about the Canadian Air Force's presence at Prestwick and how it has expanded in recent years. I don't care if its political or military activity from foreign lands, if this is what returns a profit (amongst other things) to the Scottish tax payer from a continued loss making position then that is good enough for me. Infact I would go as far to say that the presence of the terminal and the FR flights are a barrier to the airport's progress at this point.

Yes PIK is a military base in all but name. The Canadian Air Force have a forward operational base at PIK with based aircraft and crew. But they are there for good reasons, not bad. Unlike the RAF and USAF they are not supporting Israel or their genocide but are carrying out humanitarian ops for Ukraine and reconnaissance work for NATO over by Latvia and Finland. Here’s more info on this https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/canadas ... k-airport/

[Bearsden]

Quite agree. It's a distraction and a money drain PIK doesn't need. Remove this and let the airfield flourish doing the things it's good at whilst making good money. If only the politicians in this neck of the woods could grasp this eh?

But are passenger ops a net cash outflow? With the indirect income from car parking, fueling etc on the revenue side and seasonal / part-time / flexi working on the cost side, I suspect it is cash generating on a marginal cost basis - remember a lot of airfield costs are fixed

Noticed you didn’t include the terminal building and upkeep thereof, or insurance and regulatory costs that hosting pac ops necessitates. The true comparison which would tell us if the limited pax ops are a boon or a burden on the overall business would be to compare the business with pax ops to how the business would be without pax ops in the entirety of what that means. I think the business would be stronger without and that’s without the caveat that Ryanair are the only customer and as such can play god over this whole question. That’s not any kind of business plan for new owners.

PIK's passenger income in 2023-24 was £5m, the same as its FBO income

[Clive]

But are passenger ops a net cash outflow? With the indirect income from car parking, fueling etc on the revenue side and seasonal / part-time / flexi working on the cost side, I suspect it is cash generating on a marginal cost basis - remember a lot of airfield costs are fixed

Noticed you didn’t include the terminal building and upkeep thereof, or insurance and regulatory costs that hosting pac ops necessitates. The true comparison which would tell us if the limited pax ops are a boon or a burden on the overall business would be to compare the business with pax ops to how the business would be without pax ops in the entirety of what that means. I think the business would be stronger without and that’s without the caveat that Ryanair are the only customer and as such can play god over this whole question. That’s not any kind of business plan for new owners.

PIK's passenger income in 2023-24 was £5m, the same as its FBO income

It’s a shame we don’t know the true costs of hosting the pax, but maybe with an income of £5m there is no loss from doing so.

[pushingtinonceagain]

Making low-mid single figure £m profits each year is admirable given where PIK was a decade ago. Here’s the big BUT

The minute they need to do any significant runway or taxiway resurfacing, or upgrading AGL or ILS systems that profit will be absolutely annihilated.

Newark - 3048m runway - $81m in 2021
RAF Northolt - 1687m - £23m in 2019

If you believe the murmurings in the industry EDI’s will start with a 3, possibly 4x million quid.

So, I hope the prospective new owners have real deep pockets.
Terminal or not the whole place is still on life support as far as I’m concerned. If the relationship with the US deteriorates further then I can see revenue from the USAF dropping as well. PIK is between a rock and a hard place and it’s beyond time that GLA was ruthless and went in for the kill.

[Iain]

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/251 ... te-forbes/

Kate Forbes yesterday highlighted the Scottish Government’s “very clear lines” that it wants Prestwick Airport to continue to operate as an airport after any sale.

The Deputy First Minister said the Scottish Government continued to “make progress” in terms of its aspirations to return Prestwick Airport, which it rescued in 2013 by buying the airport from Infratil of New Zealand for £1, to the private sector.

However, she said she was unable to provide an update on an “active bid” for Prestwick Airport which was confirmed late last month by First Minister John Swinney - declaring the matter was “so commercially sensitive”.

Asked in late March by Scottish Parliament economy and fair work committee convener and South Scotland Labour MSP Colin Smyth if he was aware of an active bid, Mr Swinney replied: “I am. That’s a matter that’s currently under very active consideration.”

The First Minister added: “I cannot quite recall exactly the stage those discussions are at, but if there is more information I can share with the group, I will write to the Presiding Officer and Mr Smyth on that.

“But these are very active and live issues at the present moment.”

Asked by The Herald yesterday if she could provide any update on the “active bid” for Prestwick Airport acknowledged by Mr Swinney - regarding the progress of discussions with the potential buyer or its intentions - Ms Forbes replied: “Not at this stage, unfortunately. I can’t go into that level of detail - it is so commercially sensitive.”

She added: “Our aspirations to return Prestwick to the private sector remain and we continue to make progress in [achieving] that.”

Asked about the importance of the jobs at Prestwick Airport and the employment supported by the airport, in the context of any potential sale, Ms Forbes replied: “We have obviously saved Prestwick Airport more than a decade ago, precisely because of its strategic importance to the Scottish economy...

“If and when Prestwick is sold, it will be for the new owner to develop a business case.”

Ms Forbes, who highlighted Prestwick Airport’s cargo operations, added: “We have set out very clear lines that we want Prestwick to continue to operate as an airport.”

She added: “My view is Scotland is small enough to be able to support multiple airports but for those airports to be complementary to one another.”

Prestwick Airport forecast in February that its direct workforce would rise from 354 to around 400 with expansion plans for its cargo operations.

The airport puts the number of jobs that it supports in the aerospace cluster in and around it at about 4,000.

[TonyM90]

Nothing we haven't already known for a while now. Still going round in circles on the sale, no mention if they aren't prepared to sell without safeguarding passenger flights. How much infrastructure work does the place need going forward? If someone is buying the airport are they going to have to invest in a mountain of things beyond the buying price to keep it operational for the long term? If you want to keep the status quo going you're just going to damage commercial aviation in this country, you are not going to have airports acting as "complimentary to one another".